https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F0QwAhUnpr4
What do you think about it?
(Maybe you have already watched video, but I am just too excited to not spread the word)
BEPU, have you seen this?
Re: BEPU, have you seen this?
Yup! It's pretty neat.
Incidentally, bepuphysics2 has advised using substepping and lower velocity iteration counts for the same underlying reasons (since well before the paper, if I might toot my own horn
). It's an extremely strong stabilizer and enables higher frequency responses. You could, in fact, do everything in that video within bepuphysics2!
The main difference is that the paper uses a position based formulation, while bepuphysics is velocity based. Pretty darn similar in end effect when using heavy substepping, though.
There are also some very interesting potential optimizations in this space.
Incidentally, bepuphysics2 has advised using substepping and lower velocity iteration counts for the same underlying reasons (since well before the paper, if I might toot my own horn
). It's an extremely strong stabilizer and enables higher frequency responses. You could, in fact, do everything in that video within bepuphysics2!The main difference is that the paper uses a position based formulation, while bepuphysics is velocity based. Pretty darn similar in end effect when using heavy substepping, though.
There are also some very interesting potential optimizations in this space.
Re: BEPU, have you seen this?
Then I am even more excited! I wish BEPU had a demo with a similar level of complexity to excite other people too!
Re: BEPU, have you seen this?
It would probably be worth showing what's actually possible, yes Will be a while before I get to it, though- authoring real fancy content is pretty effortful!
Will be a while before I get to it, though- authoring real fancy content is pretty effortful!