Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

NovodeX Physics Engine SDK/Demo Released

Posted by simoniker on from the causing-havok dept.

JJC writes "If, like me, your favourite thing about Doom 3 is the test_boxstack demo map, you're in for a treat. To demonstrate their physics engine, NovodeX has produced a Windows program, called NovodeX Rocket, that lets you set up and manipulate a number of 3D objects and watch them collide and interact realistically. Included are ragdolls (human, deer, horse and monsters), dominoes, trebuchets and a giant Jenga tower. This coincides with the NovodeX Physics SDK v 2.1.1 becoming freely available for non-commercial use. I heard about this from David Weller's MSDN Blog."

32 comments

  1. Its all good by Phazz666 · · Score: 1, Interesting

    This would be great if could also run on linux. Maybe they could consider this.

    1. Re:Its all good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He wasn't modded down. His karma is shit.

      Check his posting history.

  2. I'm not into FPS games anymore... by OneDeeTenTee · · Score: 0

    ...so is it worth buying a new box just to run the test_boxstack map?

    --
    Stop the world; I need to get off.
    1. Re:I'm not into FPS games anymore... by Xelrach · · Score: 1

      I would pay any sum of money for a giant Jenga tower.

    2. Re:I'm not into FPS games anymore... by Associate · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I would dare to assume that this could be used to create things like virtual monster chess/ checkers/ jenga/ whatever. It could stomp a mud hole in Steam Checkers.

      --
      Someone hates these cans.
    3. Re:I'm not into FPS games anymore... by Flingles · · Score: 1

      If this was true, you would already have it. All that is needed is a crane and several incredibly huge blocks of material. I'm thinking a machine to make a block of particle board that big would have to be made too. Regardless, 'any' sum of money pays for this.

      --
      Karma: -2^0.5 . Mainly due to the imbibing of dihydrogen monoxide
    4. Re:I'm not into FPS games anymore... by JJC · · Score: 1
      ...so is it worth buying a new box just to run the test_boxstack map?
      Just in case you were serious, no, not at all. It's simply a small room with a stack of boxes in the middle. The tall Jenga tower in NovodeX Rocket is much more entertaining.
  3. And there's Open Dynamics Engine... by rgbe · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ODE (http://ode.org/) is a GNU physics engine that has a simulation where you can crash a car into a brick wall .... LOT's of fun :)

    1. Re:And there's Open Dynamics Engine... by JustinXB · · Score: 0, Troll

      Uh... Actually, it's not GNU, it's a BSD licensed engine. Says so on the frontpage. Communism license (GPL) vs a true freedom license (BSD). BSD always wins.

    2. Re:And there's Open Dynamics Engine... by Lisandro · · Score: 4, Informative

      http://jet.ro/dismount/

      If you liked the ODE demo, you'll go postal over these.

    3. Re:And there's Open Dynamics Engine... by TomorrowPlusX · · Score: 2, Interesting

      ODE is very commonly used for robotics simulation. Which is, coincidentally, what I'm using it for.

      Screenshot

      I also decided to write a Mahjong Solitaire game using ODE to box-stack it. So when you "give up" it's like a simulation of sweeping the tiles off the table. It's absurd.

      Screenshot

      --

      lorem ipsum, dolor sit amet
    4. Re:And there's Open Dynamics Engine... by breon.halling · · Score: 1

      That seems like a very cool application (the robotics simulator, I mean)! I could play with that for hours! =)

      Is it a personal / school endeavour, or is it meant to be a commercial project?

      --
      "Yeah, well, Dracula called and he's coming over tonight for you and I said okay."
    5. Re:And there's Open Dynamics Engine... by randomblast · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      *cough*BSD is dying*cough*

      --
      ...these aren't my real teeth.
    6. Re:And there's Open Dynamics Engine... by TomorrowPlusX · · Score: 1

      It's a personal endeavor, meant to get me into grad school someday. I'm also building a physical robot ( ~75% finished ) of identical properties, and the AI runtime can just switch over to the physical version when it's ready. The interfaces are all abstracted, and I've written drivers for the serial hardware.

      When I consider it to be version 1.0 quality, I'll release the program and the SDKs for free, public use. Probably GPL.

      Even though it's really geeky/technical, it's still fun, because my system is capable enough that I can develop self-driving cars, a trebuchet, a single-legged hopper, etc. I never got my simulated segway working, though. But I only spent an evening on it. it was more of a test of simulated gyro feedback.

      The catapult is a fun time waster. It throws a ragdoll at a "castle", which falls down, satisfying the child in me.

      --

      lorem ipsum, dolor sit amet
  4. Well, a glimmer of hope by jvmatthe · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I had been worried that future id Software games might not be released as Free software (like Doom, Quake, Quake 2, and soon Quake 3) because they were incorporating third party libraries for physics. Sure, John Carmack and crew ripped out some sound code from Doom to get the source released, but a whole physics engine is a completely different beast, and I doubt that Carmack would be up to coding a decent one in order to make the Doom 3 source something he could release in a workable state.

    Anyway, good to see they're at least thinking about tools that are open enough that they might be usable in a few years when Doom 3 is made Free.

    As another example: I doubt that UT2k3 could be released as anything resembling Free software when it is a true legacy product and Epic's newer tech is attractive enough to keep people licensing the new instead of going for the old. It's got a physics engine that they depend on someone else to build for them, last I heard. (Can't remember the name of it right now. Karma? Ah well.)

    Not that I'm waiting for Doom 3 to become Free: it's many years out and for now id's getting my cash as soon as the GNU/Linux binaries for Doom 3 are released. It's the least I can do for a developer that continues to give its source away when it's done with it. Of course, I'd like to see the new game too. ;^)

    --
    Curmudgeon Gamer: Not happy
    1. Re:Well, a glimmer of hope by waaka! · · Score: 4, Informative

      Don't be misled by the submitter's mention of Doom 3's test_boxstack map, Doom 3's physics were done in-house at id by Jan Paul van Waveren (a.k.a. Mr. Elusive), who was also responsible for bots both official and unofficial in past Quakes. Gamespy interviewed him and Robert Duffy back in 2001, although the interview doesn't go too much into the details of exactly how Doom 3's physics work.

      On the other hand, there was a press release back in late March about how Epic Games will be using NovodeX technology in future versions of the Unreal engine.

    2. Re:Well, a glimmer of hope by 0x0d0a · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Don't be misled by the submitter's mention of Doom 3's test_boxstack map, Doom 3's physics were done in-house at id by Jan Paul van Waveren (a.k.a. Mr. Elusive), who was also responsible for bots both official and unofficial in past Quakes. Gamespy interviewed him and Robert Duffy back in 2001, although the interview doesn't go too much into the details of exactly how Doom 3's physics work.

      Yes, that was my guess when I read this article. Marketroid: "People like DOOM3 right now. Hmm. Time to get a Slashdot story submitted."

      "DOOM3's physics engine is awesome! You can license [unrelated, permanently-proprietary engine] for only a small amount of money here [link]!"

      Marketroid: "Yes sir, confused people are clicking on that link like mad."

      Argh.

      --
      May we never see th
    3. Re:Well, a glimmer of hope by jvmatthe · · Score: 1

      Ah. Thanks for setting that straight. That'll teach me to post to /. right before bed. :^)

      --
      Curmudgeon Gamer: Not happy
    4. Re:Well, a glimmer of hope by _|()|\| · · Score: 2, Interesting
      I doubt that UT2k3 could be released as anything resembling Free software when it is a true legacy product

      I see no reason to think that the Unreal engine will ever be released as free software, regardless of its ties to third-party software. It's really something special for id to release the Quake engines. You see it here and there with smaller and older titles, but John has said that the Quake 3 engine (still to be found in recent games like Jedi Academy and Medal of Honor) may be released by the end of the year.

    5. Re:Well, a glimmer of hope by John+Miles · · Score: 1

      Interestingly, there's no dynamic action in Doom 3 that couldn't be handled easily by ODE. They didn't really need to roll their own physics package.

      --
      Dahlmann tightly grips the knife, which he may have no idea how to use, and steps out into the plain.
  5. great... by hookedup · · Score: 3, Funny

    it's 1am, and i'm playing jenga alone..

    some of the demos make great stress relievers... now where did i put that thumbdrive to bring this to work tommorow...

    1. Re:great... by prockcore · · Score: 2, Funny


      some of the demos make great stress relievers.

      True, but some of them create stress.. the dead horse and deer ragdolls were just disturbing.

      That didn't prevent me from throwing them high in the air just to watch them hit the ground, however.

      I need help.

    2. Re:great... by GoRK · · Score: 1

      If you really want a challenge, try to make them stand up on their own.

      I got the deer to do it, but the horse is still giving me trouble.

  6. Re:I have nothing to really "say" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's nice. it's also somewhat useless to everyone who has signatures disabled.

  7. Re:I have nothing to really "say" by vehn23 · · Score: 1

    wait.. people have signatures enabled?

  8. Re:I have nothing to really "say" by JVert · · Score: 1

    Almost as bad as people who reply to signatures.

  9. Open Source by noselasd · · Score: 0, Redundant

    For an open source physics enging, see ODE
    It also has quite a few nice demos.

  10. I don't really like the physics in D3 by 88NoSoup4U88 · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I personally don't like the physics engine that much ; In the game itself it's used in the id-way of using it : showing it off , all tech-demo-ey like (i only played through half of it)

    But when i tried the boxstack testmap, alot of times i've seen combinations, where gravity would have done its work in real life (eg. some boxes still staying upright when shooting one box halfway out).

    I really like the Havok engine, currently being used in the UT series, and also available in the HL2-Source engine (looked way more realistic than the D3 physics do)

    1. Re:I don't really like the physics in D3 by waaka! · · Score: 1

      I've noticed what you observed about test_boxstack, too, but what bothered me more was the way the stack of boxes falls once you finally knock a piece far enough out. It seems like the stack ought to sink as one, but for now it doesn't look like a box starts to fall until the box below it has moved completely out from below it. I suspect this has to do with not actually running the simulation on objects unless certain conditions are met, since the amount of contact resolution that needs to happen in order to keep a stack like that stable would use up way too much CPU time. The alternative (that is, simulating the entire stack with an amount of contact resolution to be feasible for a game) would make the stack look somewhat spongy when it's standing.

      That being said, I happen to like the way ragdolls behave in Doom 3. It seems like many other games don't use a high enough coefficient of friction for the ground, which makes bodies slide a bit in whatever direction they were moving.

      Incidentally, the Unreal games are currently using Karma. Havok is used to good effect in Max Payne 2, though, and I'm definitely looking forward to seeing what Valve has done with it in HL2.

    2. Re:I don't really like the physics in D3 by 88NoSoup4U88 · · Score: 1
      I very much liked Max Payne (allthough i prefer the original) ; the Havok engine, imho, was only used as a gimmick though ; and rarely intervened (sp?) with the gameplay.
      It looked kick-ass in bullittime though :D