openmw.org

I'd love to see objects been moved around like Amnesia does.
https://youtu.be/2ve0eVwjv5k?t=37s

It would need a lot of work. I once tried to enable physics for non static objects for fun. Well it was hilarious: as soon as you enter somewhere, objects start flying all over the place. The reason is that objects (books,etc) collision shapes often intersect with other objects collision shapes. It's not trouble in Morrowind as these object do not interact with each others, but as soon as you allow interactions, BOOM. Solving this would require 'cleaning' the position of every object in the game, so it's a lot of work.
And it would most likely mess with the AI too.

It seems like that could be solved by only turning on interaction when any given object is being interacted with by the player (or when an actor is given a specific action to interact with it, but this doesn't sound like 1.0). It would definitely be a more interesting way to place objects than a mod with a dialog box to move the object under the cursor by X/Y/Z amount and/or rotation.

Let's dream about the future

lysol wrote: ↑30 Aug 2018, 14:05 Now this discussion became interesting suddenly.

Agreed. What's up gus!

Regarding physics for everything, that really is a post-1.0 thing. I think the original intention of this thread was getting normal collision in the game as it stands now to be less of a mess.

raevol wrote: ↑31 Aug 2018, 00:26 Regarding physics for everything, that really is a post-1.0 thing. I think the original intention of this thread was getting normal collision in the game as it stands now to be less of a mess.

Yes, but if we decide to switch physics engine, it's kind of important that it will be able to handle physics for everything.

Don't forget the work done by cc9cii in his branch... doing work with ragdall like physics using bullet when supporting Oblivion in OpenMW.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6AfYltej0qI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mM1lE8frdYc

Even if we change whatever collision system the actor movement solver uses, we can keep bullet in for stuff like that. The biggest problem with bullet is its absolutely terrible API, though. Callback objects are one of the worst antipatterns in all of programming.

There's actually a situation where numerical precision trouble could make the problem in the OP happen even after backing out: https://i.imgur.com/5t4kKdH.png but it's super obscure and shouldn't have been happening with the geometry I was testing against (an oblique-angled concave corner, and separately, a sloped wall).

Even if we change whatever collision system the actor movement solver uses, we can keep bullet in for stuff like that. The biggest problem with bullet is its absolutely terrible API, though. Callback objects are one of the worst antipatterns in all of programming.

I believe Newton is also based on callbacks... and IIRC, PhysisX was/is too...

I agree that the documentation sucks. But to be honest, is Newton documentation that much better?

Callbacks are fine. Callback objects are bad.