html5物理引擎对比,主流物理引擎对比

End of the

year is proper time to gather some statictics and

summarize what PhysX SDK has archieved in past 4 years. In this

article will try to compare it with other physics engines presented

on the market not in terms of features, quality, performance or

something like that – butreleased game titles. Best

way, as we think, to understand what is really needed and adopted

by game industry.

* on counting details please refer to article

endnote. Graph and following article is related to time

periodfrom 2006 to 2009.

PhysX (PhysX

SDK)–

previously known as NovodeX. Currently owned by Nvidia, binary PC

and console versions of SDK are available for free. PhysX SDK is

only solution with fully-functional GPU/PPU physics acceleration

pipeline.

Havok– popular and reputed commercial solution. Havok

product line includes not only physics engine itself, but dedicated

tools for AI, animation and behaviour.

Open

Dynamics Engine (ODE)– developed by Russell Smith, open-source ODE

physics engine was quite popular in 2005-2006. Currently ODE’s

development seems to be suspended.

Newton Game

Dynamics– free for commercial and non-commercial use

(but closed source), Newton is well known for it’s stability and

accuracy, and bad performance as well. However, version 2.0

(currently in beta) is going to adress this issues. Has small, but

solidary community.

Bullet– open source physics simulation library,

published under free zLib licence. Developed by Erwin Coumans,

former Havok employee. Promising engine, but it’s adoption isn’t

riding with spurs.

BothHavokandPhysXhave left

competitors far behind, evenODE’slead from others

is considerable enough – so this time onlyPhysX SDK, Havok and

ODEwill participate

as subjects of our investigation, other engines simply won’t

provide enought data for statistics.

1. Titles Quality.

Rough numbers of released games

won’t show much on physics engines nature – advanced statistics is

much more demonstrative. We’ll start with quality (or ranking) of

released games, usingmetascore(bymetacritic.com)

- weighted average of all of the scores assigned

by individual critics to certain games.

Titles are devided into cathegories,

according to their metascore: Third rate or

specific(with metascore

<50 or not listed in metacritic.com database at

all),Decent(metascore 50..

70),Good(metascore 71..

85) andExcellent(metascore

>85).

Thanks to it’s free license and rich feature

setPhysX SDK, preferred by small

teams, is dominating PC market. CurrentlyPhysX SDKis widely adopted

by russian (mostly trash games) and korean (mostly specific MMOs)

developers. Not to mention, thatPhysX SDKis default physics

solution for Unreal Engine 3, used in majority of UE3 based titles

(Gears of War, Mass Effect, etc). Year 2009 has brought some

popular games, like Dragon Age: Origins, Overlord 2 or Risen,

intoPhysXlibrary.

Havokis currently best choise for AAA titles –

extensive toolset , orientation on consoles, best-in-class

developer support. Well-known titles of year

2009, like Uncharted 2: Among Thieves or Killzone 2 are based

onHavok. Surprisingly,

evenTry

Havokinitiative hasn’t

helped Havok to gain popularity at indie-developers

community.

In spite of the fact thatODEhas some good

games in it’s library, like S.T.A.L.K.E.R. series or Word of Goo

(only one with metascore > 85), 54% of all titles

are based on Chrome Engine from Techland – mainly that’s trash

shooters from CITY Interactive or russian UAZ 4×4 and it’s

countless add-ons.

Graph above is showing games quality

distribution as relative percentage ratio.

2. Dynamics of releases.

Another significant characteristic –

dynamics of game releases, that is showing adoption and demand for

certain physics engines over years. Choice of 2006-2009 timeframe

is based on equality requirement, as there were noPhysX SDKbased titles

before year 2006 (also, there is no more official list for

pre-2006Havoktitles).

Adoption ofPhysX SDKis showing

substantial growth on whole lifecycle, regardless of engine updates

absence (PhysX

SDKis staying without

major updates for several years, while all recources are

concentrated on APEX and SDK 3.0 development).

We can call situation onHavokside stable

enough, meanwhile, minimal degradation of released titles numbers

is present. (titles numbers are shown per year)

ODE’susage by gamedevs is marginal in comparison with

competitors, and it’s still lowering year by year, while engine

development is suspended currently.

Graph above shows more detailed

statistics – amount of released games per quarter (3 months) of

calendar years 2006-2009.

3. Platform destribution.

Gaming platform destribution is

interesting factor – AAA titles are mostly oriented on consoles (as

variant, multiplatform) and can afford expensive solution

likeHavok, or even development of

proprietary physics engines, while PC game developers prefer free

and/or open source engines.

Results are obvious enough

–PhysX SDKis dominating on

PC market,Havok– on console

market (reasons were described in pt. 1). Also, onlyHavokhas advanced

support for various platforms – not only PC and modern consoles,

but Xbox, PS2 and even PSP.

By the way, standalone console versions ofPhysX SDKexisted even in

2005 (even certain games from PS3 and Wii start-up line were based

onPhysX SDK), but still most of

it’s console titles are based on UE3.

In accordance with open-source

nature ofODEit was used in

several games for Wii, but majority of titles are still Chrome

engine based games for PC.

Graphical representation of relative

platform destribution is shown above.

4. Conclusion

Today situation on physics engines

market is clear enough, but we’ll return to this topic at the end

of 2010 with great pleasure – because 2010 is going to be reach on

interesting events.Havokwill try to get

hold of indie developers again – this time withIndependent Developer ProgramIn

addition,Havokis heading

omni-solution way, as it has now brand-new tools – AI, Cloth and

Destruction – in product line. What’s next – Havok Sound ? Havok

Network ?

PhysX SDK, in turn, will endeavour to conquer console

market with long-awaited SDK 3.0 (reworked architecture, new

features, extensive optimizations for Xbox 360 and PS3) and APEX

toolset.

Another topic isGPU accelerated physics,

what’s going to prevail – industry “standarts” likeOpenCL Bullet(without GPU

physics based tools and experienced developers, but working on wide

set of hardware) or proprietary developements, likePhysX(with direct

support from Nvidia, GPU physics oriented architecture and complete

toolset, team of content-developers) ?

Feel free toshare your thoughts with

usin a comment

section below, or viaour forum

5. Endnote.Details on titles count methodology. Please note that

non-commercial indie titles, games released before 2006 and games

for iPhone/iPod are not included.

PhysX – list atPhysXInfo.com(CPU, GPU, PPU and

console games included)

Havok –official titles list.

ODE –official titles

list;wiki;Chrome

Engine;UAZ 4×4 series;

Newton –official titles list;

Bullet –bulletphysics.com forum;