I came to the same conclusion, with the exception that a lookahead for a
collision would be helpful in the client. If they use the same physics
engine and the client does no more than implement a collision check, I
think it could be a good thing. I'm looking at several free physics
engines atm and thought I would clear my thinking up some. Collisions
with soft bodies deform the collision mesh itself so yeah it gets a
little tricky when you split them.
--GC
On 04/07/2010 11:14 AM, Moriz Gupte wrote:
I feel you are right. Makes more sense to have it implemented client
side for many soft body dynamic behaviors... eg cloth, hair etc...
but I think in areas where rigid body behaviors impact local soft body
dynamics, there will be lots of timing and synch problems to deal with.
So there's where I think that perhaps all physics need to be done at
the same site.
R
On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 9:03 AM, Glen Canaday <gcana...@gmail.com
<mailto:gcana...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Soft body physics are best implemented in a local viewer, leaving the
rigid-body collision detection to the server, am I right in this?
--GC
_______________________________________________
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated
posting privileges
--
'Consider how the lilies grow. They do not labor or spin.'
Rameshsharma Ramloll PhD Research Assistant Professor Idaho State
University, PocatelloTel: 208-282-5333
More info at http://tr.im/RRamloll
_______________________________________________
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
