The quality of chipmunk and box2d is so incredibly good and is built off of such a depth of experience by the authors that if you want really actually do want a 2d physics engine (i.e. you're not just looking for stuff moving and hitting each other, you want stacking, joints, friction, etc) you would be utterly and completely silly in every way to even consider anything else
Between pymunk and pybox2d, personally I greatly perfer pybox2d because box2d is more feature rich, is more stable with bouncy objects and it's continuous collision detection (actually continuous collision response using binary search time of collision) makes it much more stable and predictible particularly with fast moving objects. chipmunk was branched from box2d to add a performance feature, and you can sum up it's difference from box2d as faster and easier to use provided you are doing just what it does well. seriously, in the picture of 2d physics engines, they are both super wonderful. you want stacking, friction, joints, etc, in 2d they are the only real options. You want motors and gears and fast moving objects, you probably want pybox2d. If you just want stuff moving and hitting each other though, and you want to control exactly how things move or behave, or you know you want unphysics-y stuff to happen a lot, you would probably end up struggling a lot with any physics engine to get things to work out the way you want them to. On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 6:25 PM, machinim...@gmail.com < machinim...@gmail.com> wrote: > hi, > > what 2d physics engine would you recommend for using with pygame? > > what happened to the SOC physics project? is it finished? will it be > included in pygame? >
