Newton vehicle endorsement :)

Share with us how are you using the powerrrr of the force

Moderator: Alain

Newton vehicle endorsement :)

Postby Aphex » Tue Oct 07, 2008 5:11 pm

Aphex
 
Posts: 144
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2004 6:08 am
Location: UK

Re: Newton vehicle endorsement :)

Postby Julio Jerez » Wed Oct 08, 2008 1:12 pm

Wow that is quite and epiphany he had.
He was using Newton 1.53 up until 8 to 10 month ago, and at the time 2.0 was not ready.
I was happy with the work he was doing and he is a bright programmer, but he decide to swith without sayon anything.
It looks like he had gone thruoght several physics engine, I hope he find what he looks for.
Julio Jerez
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 10973
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2003 2:18 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Re: Newton vehicle endorsement :)

Postby dgreen » Thu Oct 30, 2008 1:32 am

Hello there :-) Sorry for the late response, I just found out about this thread.

Yes, I'm sorry I didn't inform you about my switch..when Ageia/PhysX dropped their $50,000 license price tag I decided to make the switch. Their recent aquisition by Nvidia is just confirmation of what I saw many months ago....it seemed like a very good deal.

I really do love your work, your physics engine is amazing and I'll be taking another look at it (at the advice of my investors ;-) ) I've been wrestling with PhysX for a while now and it's NOTHING compared to what I had going on with your engine.

Can I come crawling back? :-)

I noticed you deleted all my old posts/videos from the forums a while ago, I can understand this...I guess I shoulda shot you an e-mail on my decision...like you said, I've switched engines many times...I know what's out there and IMO yours is the BEST of the 4-5 I've fully implemented [ ragdoll, objects, vehicles, world, blah blah ].

I've put $100,000s into my current project and I need to get it out there. I can't wait to see what Newton 2.0 has to offer...In retrospect it was a bad call, but I'm making the whole project on my own, funding it on my own, etc...so I guess I get to make those bad calls and keep rollin'...

The main issue I had was not in the implemtation of the complex ragdolls, vehicles, etc...but the integrator seemed to lock up in certain situations, I had to detect these situations using a heuristic algorithm, and rebuild the physics scene in real-time. This would not work for my project, since it's entirely multiplayer based...I assume these issues have been worked out in 2.0, I love your work and would like nothing other than to use Newton in my project since the physics is still the bottleneck.

Again, I'm sorry if my switch of physics engines was rude, or inconsiderate in any way....I'm going to check out your work in the coming days, if it's as smooth and similar as it was before it will save me months of [possibly fruitless PhysX] work.

- Danny Green

http://www.radioactive-software.com
dgreen
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2008 1:17 am

Re: Newton vehicle endorsement :)

Postby JernejL » Thu Oct 30, 2008 4:34 am

dgreen wrote:I noticed you deleted all my old posts/videos from the forums a while ago, I can understand this...


Actually, the forums were pruned for old posts when the forum was upgraded to phpbb V3, you'll notice that all forum sections have less topics because of this.
Help improving the Newton Game Dynamics WIKI
User avatar
JernejL
 
Posts: 1442
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 2:00 pm
Location: Slovenia

Re: Newton vehicle endorsement :)

Postby Julio Jerez » Thu Oct 30, 2008 9:58 am

dgreen wrote: The main issue I had was not in the implementation of the complex ragdolls, vehicles, etc...but the integrator seemed to lock up in certain situations, I had to detect these situations using a heuristic algorithm, and rebuild the physics scene in real-time. This would not work for my project, since it's entirely multiplayer based...I assume these issues have been worked out in 2.0, I love your work and would like nothing other than to use Newton in my project since the physics is still the bottleneck.


All of the speed issues in newt0n 1.53 had being resolve in Newton Archemedia, in fact Netwon is more stable, faster, and more accurate that all of the competing commercial engines.
It is doing that while still being a physics engine the work using the Laws of physics as oppose to other engines that uses pseudo Laws of physics like Impulses.
It is why factures in Newton behave like physics objects are suppose to work, and no like bunch of bodies colliding in an incoherence and uncontrollable way as you might had observed by now.
It is difficult for people to observe that difference because of all the misinformation that is out there from self appointed experts and dishonest engine evaluator with an agenda.
There is a lot of money put out there in dishonest propaganda.

Not that I want you to switch again I do understand your position, But you can send me a PM and I can send you the 2.0 SDK so that you can test it and see what is like, maybe in new other projects you can make a more informed decision.
There are two vehicle contatiner, and they are both open source joints, you can test and play around with then until you get the working the way you really like them
In the Newton vehicle now is even better that 1.53 and one hell of a lot faster.
Julio Jerez
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 10973
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2003 2:18 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Re: Newton vehicle endorsement :)

Postby dgreen » Thu Oct 30, 2008 1:47 pm

Delfi wrote:
dgreen wrote:I noticed you deleted all my old posts/videos from the forums a while ago, I can understand this...


Actually, the forums were pruned for old posts when the forum was upgraded to phpbb V3, you'll notice that all forum sections have less topics because of this.


Well I was referring to a long time ago when I was receiving a lot of e-mails about specifics of my Newton implementation [ vehicles / ragdolls in particular ], I came back one day and they were all gone. Which is completely fair because I switched physics engines.

It would be sweet to check out some of my old videos / posts / images from what I was doing before.

Btw. I love the look of these new forums...awesome.

- Danny Green

http://www.radioactive-software.com
Last edited by dgreen on Thu Oct 30, 2008 1:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.
dgreen
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2008 1:17 am

Re: Newton vehicle endorsement :)

Postby dgreen » Thu Oct 30, 2008 1:50 pm

Julio Jerez wrote:Not that I want you to switch again I do understand your position, But you can send me a PM and I can send you the 2.0 SDK so that you can test it and see what is like, maybe in new other projects you can make a more informed decision.
There are two vehicle contatiner, and they are both open source joints, you can test and play around with then until you get the working the way you really like them
In the Newton vehicle now is even better that 1.53 and one hell of a lot faster.


PM Sent.

- Danny Green

http://www.radioactive-software.com
dgreen
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2008 1:17 am


Return to User Gallery

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests