3 ms·
Same for hair and cloth. Still got miles to go.
by finnjohnsen2 11y ago
Same for hair and cloth. Still got miles to go.
- benplumley 11y agoSomething I've been meaning to find out for a while: we've all played with tearable cloth simulators in Javascript or HTML5. Surely game engines are more powerful than these, yet even modern games have cloth that doesn't move, stops bullets and can be stood on like it's concrete. Is it just not a priority/not worth the cycles?
- TheLoneWolfling 11y agoIt is easy to make something like that. It is less than easy to interface something like that with a full game engine. Things like requiring collision culling (not doing the whole O(n^2) "check if A is colliding with B" thing), doing proper shadows, being properly deterministic, being alright with variable framerates, that sort of thing. Also, I don't know what simulators you've seen, but the ones I've seen take an absurd amount of CPU time. Or occasionally GPU time. Works well for a proof-of-concept. But for a full game... Their priorities are elsewhere. Not worth the cycles. That being said, I fully agree that game focus should be shifted slightly away from straight graphics and more into gameplay.