migueltk's picture

Physics engine and OpenTK

This is a small example of what can be done with the physics engine Jitter and OpenTK.

Regards, ...

Images
AttachmentSize
JitterCar.7z417.1 KB

Comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
flopoloco's picture

Yeah!!! This rocks badly.

migueltk's picture

Hi, flopoloco

Sorry, I do not really understand what you mean, I hope something positive.
I just want to prove that a world without XNA is possible. In the future try to make a better demo using Jitter and OpenTK.

Regards, ...

P.D: JitterCar.7z are the sources of the demo.

Tal's picture

Dude I'm agree with you(I guess we have the same story - XNA past).
Youv'e done a really good job!

flopoloco's picture

Yeah I said it in a good way! This example is very helpful for anyone who needs a head start in 3D game programming using OpenTK.

migueltk's picture

Thanks!!

flopoloco's picture

A friend of mine tested the example successfully on a Mac with MonoFramework.

OpenTK and JitterCar is crossplatform by default. Good job!
:D

LikeKT's picture

Anyone know how Jitter physics engine compares to Newton physics and bulletSharp?

Tal's picture

Jitter is the basic staff...
The others are bigger than Jitter, but it's unmanaged code.
Jitter's advantage is that it's fully managed code, which mean faster(not a wrapper).

LikeKT's picture

FYI: There is currently one Bulletsharp openTK basic demo, but a couples of SlimDX demo.
http://code.google.com/p/bulletsharp/

Hortus Longus's picture
Tal wrote:

Jitter's advantage is that it's fully managed code, which mean faster(not a wrapper).

That will be a hard way to make managed code faster than unmanaged code. ;-)
Under some environments (like here with .net) that can happen, but that is not the rule.