Any good physics wrappers to use?

Blitz3D Forums/Blitz3D Userlibs/Any good physics wrappers to use?

MicroSpam(Posted 2016) [#1]
I've been searching for the last couple of hours, and I can't seem to find a free physics wrapper to use.

The posts I DO find about a physics wrapper have been posted about a decade ago, and the links in these posts tend to be dead.

Are there any abandoned ones that have been released as open source and are free to use?

RemiD(Posted 2016) [#2]
from what i remember there are :
Physx (no idea where to find it)
Newton (no idea where to find it)
Tokamak (no idea where to find it)

Rick Nasher(Posted 2016) [#3]
I personally like NVIDIA's PhysX , for which I have some unsorted wrapper stuff here:

BlitzSupport(Posted 2016) [#4]
This is about 10 years old (but then, so's Blitz3D!), but the demos mostly seemed to work very well when I tried it recently:

Newton Wrapper for Blitz3D by Itmbin

The links still work.

RustyKristi(Posted 2016) [#5]
Tokamak (Sweeney's version)

Newton Wrapper Wayback copy (not sure if latest)

I lost the link to the PhysX wrapper link but here's more info

BlitzSupport(Posted 2016) [#6]
This one was good too -- obviously, with both of these libraries, we have to accept that the posters have genuinely obtained the license keys in good faith for open distribution. (For commercial certainty, might be safest to try and contact the library authors directly.)

Free bullet physics system

BlitzSupport(Posted 2016) [#7]
Not a bad little collection here now!


Devil Engines:

See text, probably best to use 1.0, the ODE-based interface.

RemiD(Posted 2016) [#8]
I notice that the code examples of the Physx wrapper are full of weird characters, is it usable at all ?

Rick Nasher(Posted 2016) [#9]
That's probably Russian comments.
[EDIT: Yes, it is. Nevertheless a very good lib if you ask me. Used by Xors?]

RemiD(Posted 2017) [#10]

There is something i don't understand, usually, when i use a external lib, i just have to put the .decls(s)+.dll(s) in the userlibs/ directory of Blitz3d and all is ready to use, and then i only have to include the appropriate .dll(s) with my .exe. And it works well, good !

However, with Physx physics engine, there is apparently something else to do to make it work : there are some additional .dlls in the bin/ directory and i have to install a "driver" (with "PhysX(driver).exe") so, if i understand correctly, this means that the users of my program will also have to install this driver on their computers ?

Anybody has some experience about this ?


Yue(Posted 2017) [#11]

I do not remember very well, but in my case I put all those library next to the executable.

RemiD(Posted 2017) [#12]
My question was more if the user of a program using Physx has to (or not) install the driver (PhysX(driver).exe) in order to make the program work well.?

Rick Nasher(Posted 2017) [#13]
I think you need to install the PhysX drivers. But don't really know if an end user requires this in order to run an executable. I don't think so for Unreal and Unity using it too. But not tried yet to know for sure.

Download here(works on windows 10 too):

Also interesting..

PhysX SDK:

RemiD(Posted 2017) [#14]
@Rick>>thanks, but i won't use PhysX if each user has to install a driver on his computer...
I will do a test just to be sure.

@all>>i have downloaded the tokamak physics engine/wrapper linked by RustyKristi, but there are only a few code examples... Any others code examples to share ?


Rick Nasher(Posted 2017) [#15]
Isn't bullet physics the 2nd best contender(speedwise)? I thought tokamak was old and slow.

RemiD(Posted 2017) [#16]
@Rick>>not tested yet, i can't say, my favorite physics engines for the moment are JV-ODE, then Bullet, then Newton, but i have not tested Tokamak or PhysX yet...

Yue(Posted 2017) [#17]
For me the best is bullet. One point to highlight is your debugging system.