[Bf-committers] Gameengine - ODE and Python

[maci_ray]

 --- Patrick <saluk@flashmail.com> schrieb: > maci_ray:
> 
> >Hello out there. Has anybody tested the latest gameengine under windows?
> >Do the physics work?
> 
>     I am on windows, using a really old build of tupohuu, and the 
> physics do work.

Could you mail me a testfile, please?

>  I've been trying to compile the main tree, but can't 
> get it to compile with the game engine activated.  Are you using the 
> evil tree or the main tree?

The main tree is used.

>  Is it updated on cvs?

Yep. At home from 17.07.03 and at work a three or four day old cvs.

BTW: The ghost gameplayer .dsws seems to have been forgotten during
movement of the SND_* stuff. Can somebody fix this, please (just path
and lib stuff). On request I could post a diff.

>  If you are using the 
> main tree, can you help me figure out how to compile it with the game 
> engine enabled, cause it didn't want to work for me.

What's the problem? Which build system do you use? msvc6/7/cygwin/nanmake?
I only know something about msvc6. I haven't managed a cygwin build
for now.

> >I thought ODE would do almost the same as sumo/solid? Maybe the physics
> >simulation is a bit different and has more features.
> 
>     I think that putting solid back in when it's available would be a 
> good thing, because changing physics engines might totally throw the 
> physics off-whack for some old games.  Also, the current physics are a 
> bit more gamey, which might suit some games better than ODE.  Options 
> are a good thing.

Look at the world buttons. It's prepared for multiple physics. Just the
implementations have to be finished.

>  But I'm definately more excited about ODE now that 
> there is something going on with it.

I haven't had a look at solid, but it is only collision I guess.
That shouldn't be too hard. When my meshupdate stuff is done,
I can have a look.

> >The bounding box values are not right I think, an ODE creates
> > it's objects from it. What to do for empty objects?
> 
>     For now, I am simply using objects position for the culling, I 
> haven't thought about bounding box yet, but since I couldn't find 
> anything in the source that makes the bounding box I was going to 
> generate it myself.  But if it's already generating it it could be a 
> waste of time.  If any of you know where that function is I'd like to 
> see it:)

I think it is called my_get_local_bounds(). Grep for it. That's where
the missing OB_EMPTY is located also.

> >A question is: Should the replaced mesh appear in blender also (like my old
> >version which used NMesh directly) or is it just for gameengine?
> 
>     I'm not sure about this one.  If you make it appear in both, that's 
> bound to add a greater speed hit to the gameengine.  Also I'm not sure 
> if it will work right if a game is published and it tries to put 
> something in normal blender.  Then again it could be useful in normal 
> blender as well.  I suppose it would be easiest to make it appear in 
> both for now, and change it later if necesary. 

I'll try out through implemation. I hope for making a profiling build,
that would enable me to do some speed tuning...

I studied through the gameplayer implementation. Real nice stuff.
Especially the written runtimes. Just a blendfile in the end of the
.exe, which gets loaded. Maybe normal blender should enable the load
from end feature to reopen published games?

That's it for now. I gonna try to use EXPPYs great new API implementation
for gameengine mesh replacement.

Maci_Ray.


__________________________________________________________________

Gesendet von Yahoo! Mail - http://mail.yahoo.de
Logos und Klingeltöne fürs Handy bei http://sms.yahoo.de