I need help with alot of stuffs! please help!

The_Irrlicht_noob · Post by **The_Irrlicht_noob** » Thu Sep 29, 2005 4:43 pm

Have anyone made a good example for beginners?
Like importing fun stffs like a physic engine, with ragdoll simulations and other cool effects?
Irrlicht is totally new for me, but i know C++ and game programming.
But not with Irrlicht and a physic engine... What engine is best? (Im using Dev-C++ , and i have heard that Newton doesn't work very good in Dev-C++)
I want a good way to learn Irrlicht (an intressting way) I know that the proffesionals knows where I should start.
I am trying to make a game that will be as realistic and fun as it can be. I think the more realistic a game is the more fun, and the more cool effects it can add to the gameplay (like a good physicengine, so you can grab anything and trow anything)
So a teacher whould be awesome, but thats too much.. But can someone please tell me where to start on this path in Irrlicht?

elander · Post by **elander** » Thu Sep 29, 2005 5:14 pm

You're right don't use Newton. Use ODE instead if you are using a mingw compiler (the one that comes with devcpp). Besides ODE is older, more stable, and better suported IMO.

As for starting, compile the demos that come with the package and try to understand them.

The_Irrlicht_noob · Post by **The_Irrlicht_noob** » Thu Sep 29, 2005 8:08 pm

Ok... ODE ... I will try it.. thanx for the help elander

And yes the tutorials are great, but when i first looked at them everything looked too automatically... But I will have to modify it alot...

Electron · Post by **Electron** » Thu Sep 29, 2005 9:54 pm

(Im using Dev-C++ , and i have heard that Newton doesn't work very good in Dev-C++)

The newton tutorials dont work well with mingw. Using the engine itself is no differnt with mingw and vc++.

Besides ODE is older, more stable

Not to start an argument here, and I've never tried ODE so I'm not qualified to speak on its merits, but in my experience Newton is stable in both ways. Bugs are few and fiexed quickly. It is also physically stable, every comparison I have read shows Newton to have a more physically accurate and stable solver than ODE. The big advantage of ODE of course is that its open source and it is, I beleive, faster than Newton.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Fri Sep 30, 2005 8:06 am

But a really weird thing was that in a Newton header file they defined a static body as a body with infinite mass! That whould drag all other finite masses into its point-of-mass (or what do you call it? im from sweden...)

Electron · Post by **Electron** » Fri Sep 30, 2005 7:00 pm

gravitation is not realistically simulated. there is no attraction between masses. I know of no physics engine that does this. A body with infinte mass will be static because it will never accelerate
a=f/m

divide any force by infinite mass and you have 0 acceleration.