Source 1 gets a physics engine replacement.

[HMart]

 

The physics engine is open source (MIT licence) and it seems it was used on a AAA game already see here.

https://github.com/jrouwe/JoltPhysics

 

I can only dream that some day this may happen to some idtech4 based engine.

So much cool physics based gameplay would be possible in that case. 

A small glimpse at what perhaps some TDM traps could look with a better physics engine, thou I do think some of the traps in the video bellow aren't suited for TDM and or are already possible with current TDM physics. 

https://www.moddb.com/games/shadwen/videos/video-2

Edited August 30, 2022 by HMart

[AluminumHaste]

Would be nice,

 

 

[Obsttorte]

Some things I've noticed in that Shadwen video:

• The dampening of the ragdolls is much stronger than in TDM, meaning they are coming to an rest earlier on
• The objects colliding with the ai clips into the latter
• it doesn't really look as if the ragdoll physic gets updated each frame, but that may only appear so due to the framerate of the video

All of this could however potentially increase performance. In TDM, the code tries to avoid clipping as much as possible, updates the physic of each actor every frame and puts object only to a rest once they are already almost non moving.

The video in the twitter post is a different matter, though. Although I am not sure this would applyable in a TDM trap usecase scenario. I mean there aren't that many ai in the video posted by @AluminumHaste, so the performance impact is most likely not the amount of ai.

[stgatilov]

9 hours ago, AluminumHaste said:

Would be nice,

 

I watched this video and it looks great to me.
What exactly you don't like in how TDM behaves in this scenario?

I think the current engine has very bad transitivity issues.
Like you remove a table, but some things on the table don't drop.
Of when elevator goes up, some things stacked on top of each other don't behave as expected.
And etc.

[Obsttorte]

2 hours ago, stgatilov said:

What exactly you don't like in how TDM behaves in this scenario?

Probably the performance drop?!

[HMart]

12 hours ago, AluminumHaste said:

Would be nice,

...

Indeed it would  

About the video I knew something like that was already possible on TDM, the problem imo is the physics objects, behavior/speed and performance. 

And guys don't take me wrong, TDM being a Thief homage, I don't think should go crazy on physics, I just think that with a better physics engine, some doors would open to make some cool physics based stuff, in or outside the TDM/Thief lore.

Would be cool if possible but I know you can't just swap the physics engine there's a bunch of work involved, this is just a "what if" . 

[Obsttorte]

47 minutes ago, HMart said:

And guys don't take me wrong, TDM being a Thief homage, I don't think should go crazy on physics, I just think that with a better physics engine, some doors would open to make some cool physics based stuff, in or outside the TDM/Thief lore.

Well, to be honest we had discussions about physic based puzzles since I am a member of this forum (and most likely earlier on), but the restrictions of the physics engine always made such things a cumbersome undertaking. So while we may not need the ability to mess around with houndreds of moveables at the same time, a more reliably system is always welcome. And as @stgatilovmentioned, especially the lack of proper transitivity handling is really worth a look.

Personally I think puzzles (and therefore some useful physics) fit the Thief games pretty well, as they are pretty close to action adventure games. I mean, if you would have asked someone back in 1998 what game is closest to Thief, Tomb Raider would probably be on the table

[HMart]

3 hours ago, stgatilov said:

I watched this video and it looks great to me.
What exactly you don't like in how TDM behaves in this scenario?

I think the current engine has very bad transitivity issues.
Like you remove a table, but some things on the table don't drop.
Of when elevator goes up, some things stacked on top of each other don't behave as expected.
And etc.

Look how few boxes there's moving on that simple scene and already the performance feels so low. 

Next to the problems you pointed you can clearly see in the TDM video, how the physics objects move in very obvious discreet steeps, looks has if performance took a nose dive at that instant, but is that really performance going down or just how the idTech 4 physics were made to work? Instead of a continuous smooth movement they move in steeps?

[AluminumHaste]

Framerate dropped but that video is like from 2012. I should try it again

[Obsttorte]

Maybe you should hammers this time. We all know what those dudes do secretely in the confessional.

[AluminumHaste]

Well, it certainly runs better now. I'm not sure if it makes a difference, but I set jobs_numThreads to 12.

 

 

[AluminumHaste]

I can't lol, I'm done ahahaha All I hear in my head is Koolaid Man "OH YEAH!"

 

 

That's 900 bottles they're kicking over, not surprised at the poor performance.

[HMart]

The physics on that video do look better, I still think they aren't "normal" looking, i mean not similar to Havok, PhysX or more recent physics engines but I can't deny that was way better than the older video.  

Btw I knew that using a faster single core CPU, would make the idtech 4 physics engine able to calculate more objects, what I didn't knew, was that you guys made it able to use multiple cores?! Is that right?

[AluminumHaste]

Probably not, the jobs are for the renderer afaik.

The reason the bottles explode out is because they're blocking the Ai, and they impulse "kick" them out of the way.

I should have dropped a box onto them instead.