1144 replies to this topic

[icuurd12b42]

Noob question: Is ExtremePhysics compatible with Gamemaker: Studio

 

Studio already has physics. best you use it for multi-platform support

[Toxigames]

Noob question: Is ExtremePhysics compatible with Gamemaker: Studio

 
Studio already has physics. best you use it for multi-platform support

oh yes, i know that Studio has physics. I have played a bit around with it. But I was under the impression that ExtremePhysics was more effifcient/faster because it runs from a DLL written in C++ and also I got the impression that it is more versatile than Studios included physics?

[fuegerstef]

 

 

Noob question: Is ExtremePhysics compatible with Gamemaker: Studio

 
Studio already has physics. best you use it for multi-platform support

oh yes, i know that Studio has physics. I have played a bit around with it. But I was under the impression that ExtremePhysics was more effifcient/faster because it runs from a DLL written in C++ and also I got the impression that it is more versatile than Studios included physics?

 

 

Box2D is C++ (just because you don't have a dll around doesn'T mean it isn't C++, where do you get your infos?) and although it lacked a few things at start a year ago (GML to access frequency for some joints, for example) it is now as versatile as EP, if not more.

 

Not trying to promote one or the oteher engine, just stating facts. I love EP and used it. But now I switched as it exports to all platforms supported by GM and is also ported to many other languages (independant from GMS)

Edited by fuegerstef, Yesterday, 08:04 AM.

[Toxigames]

Many thanks for the explanation! The problem is probably not the info ifself but my own understanding(or lack thereof) of the info. I am pretty green in this area but your reply definately gave me the answers I needed. Using GM Studios builtin Box2D physics is just as good for me to use, I'll do that then, since I allready has a little bit of experience with it

[Maarten Baert]

@fuegerstef: True, and unfortunately there's nothing I can do since YYG refuses to create a (real) extension mechanism for iOS and Android. I know that ExtremePhysics runs fine on ARM (I've tested it on a raspberry pi, the code runs fine completely unmodified). But since YYG doesn't add the ability to actually use any native code on iOS and Android, there's nothing I or anyone else can do.

 

Box2D and EP are comparable in terms of speed. I've done comparisons and I get very similar results. There are cases where either is faster. This is no surprise since the underlying mathematics are the same, only the implementation is different. The biggest difference is probably the collision system. Box2D is optimized for worlds with little movement/change, whereas EP doesn't care about that. Box2D tends to be slightly faster when there is little movement, but slower when everything is moving all the time (e.g. the fluid simulation example). Box2D also needs more initialization time for large worlds whereas EP essentially needs none (there are no persistent data structures related to collision detection). I think Box2D also uses a bit more memory because of the more complex data structures it has to keep internally, but I haven't actually tested that. In any case, memory usage is hardly an issue these days, even for mobile.

 

In terms of features Box2D probably has more because there are lots of unofficial extensions that can be compiled in (water support is one of them I think, unless that one is official now), however you can't use these from GM since YYG didn't compile them in. From what I've heard I don't think Studio actually exposes even half of the functionality that the official Box2D has, but I don't really know as I've never used Studio.

 

EDIT: I've written a feature comparison of Box2D, the built-in engine in GM:Studio, and ExtremePhysics:

http://www.maartenba...ure-comparison/

Edited by Maarten Baert, Yesterday, 07:59 PM.