3 ms·
Well you don't need a lot of CPU for doing AI and motion. In modern games, game logic like this usually takes not even 1% of the CPU time. And more complex stu
by irrlichthn 14y ago
Well you don't need a lot of CPU for doing AI and motion. In modern games, game logic like this usually takes not even 1% of the CPU time.
And more complex stuff than 90ies demo scene stuff is possible easily. There are lots of sophisticated 3d libraries to choose from, take a look at the demos of CopperLicht for example: http://www.ambiera.com/copperlicht/ http://www.ambiera.com/copperlicht/
But you are right: Physics is a major bottleneck. Fortunately, you don't need real rigid body physics engine in most games. In most situations, you can live with a small subset of it.
- hartror 14y agoWell you don't need a lot of CPU for doing AI and motion. Motion means collision detection and keeping the right data structures up to date. AI means things like path finding. Both sets of problems require lots of loops with lots of maths. I've looked at Copperlicht and it is nice (looks like you work on it?), but still very limited when you compare it to the non-WebGL competition. The demos are all small largely static scenes that can be loaded onto the card and left untouched in memory. I don't mean to say that WebGL isn't usable or that people shouldn't use it. I was providing a grain of salt to what was a very good write up. btw. I like the doco for Copperlicht, nice and accessible and the octtree implementation impressed me when I was reviewing Copperlicht last weekend.