Me
TomHi, this is jhooks1 for the openmw project. I have looked into Project Aedra and in many ways it is better than openmw. I am a windows user myself and Project Aedra does look interesting.
Your physics system is superior to ours. Currently we are having problems climbing up stairs and getting stuck on certain spots. Some stairs can't by climbed up at all. Both our projects use Bullet, but yours uses a modified Bullet. What major components are modified? To get good physics do we need to use your modified bullet? Or is there a way to get it working good with the standard Bullet?
We use a btKinematicCharacterController, is that part of the problem? I noticed aedra does not use one.
Any hints for a Bullet newbie?
Thanks,
Jason
Looks like we may need to stop using btKinematicCharacterControllers, which will require a lot of reworking/recoding.I initially looked into using Bullet's kinematic character controller
for Aedra and decided that I didn't like the feel of it (plus it had
quite a few problems). So I ditched that and decided to do what I did
which is to use Bullet as a collision-detection system only and then
to do the collision-reaction system for characters, spells, etc.
in-engine instead of in Bullet. So no, you do not have to use Aedra's
modified Bullet (in fact, if you want to use Bullet for anything other
than collision detection, you'll probably want to use the unmodified
Bullet instead). Furthermore, there's still problems with the Aedra
physics code that needs to be resolved before it's ready to go -
namely that there's still random jitter that I need to get rid of,
other various physics smoothing that needs to be done, and also better
physics network synchronization. Speaking of which, I didn't modify
Bullet very much - I really just changed how a few small things worked
because I wouldn't accept that Bullet doesn't support 2-byte mesh
indices (which it now does in my version). Lemme know if you have any
other questions - I'd be glad to answer them