Havok - Do I care?

[Chic Aeon]

LOL.

Now this may seem like a silly question, but Google is not leading me to any page that actually answers.

I just updated to Firestorm 64bit which does NOT have Havok support (liscenses). I did a super quick test and I can still upload my own physics model. Is Havok the part of the uploader (or it seems like PART of Havok may be PART of the uploader)  that decides what the physic model would be if you don't use your own file?

If so then 95% of the time I would not care.  Just need a nod or a "whoa you have it completely wrong" idea.

I realize that I could use the LL viewer if I actually need to; it is just painful to do so. Many features that I use every few minutes not there).

 

 

I guess that aside from being the 64 bit version, it is also NOW usable in both SL and on OS grids which is very nice if you are on both types.

 

Thanks.

[Drongle McMahon]

If my recollection is right, the part of Havok used by the mesh uploader is the decomposition into convex hulls that happens when you click "Analyze" on the physics tab to generate a physics shape that is a collection of convex hulls. If the viewer in question has that function, I suppose it must be using an alternative, probably open source, library. So for a particular mesh, the result may be different from that obtained with the Havok libraries.

However, the most reliable way of controlling the generation of hull-based shapes is to provide a custom physics mesh that already consists of non-overlapping hulls. In that case, the results would probably be the same whtever the library used, as it should just be the set of hulls in the provided mesh. So if you do you physics shapes that way, you should not care at all. If you don't. then you might care, but just a very little bit.

[Chic Aeon]

LOL. Thanks. You taught me well (or tried) and I do make my own physics shapes for buildings. Still sometimes using a prim for the floor though. That floating thing (even you you explained how to fix and I did! ) seems to change a lot.

I am getting a lot of mesh builds in (blogging) where I am floating high (way high) above the floor. A nice little prim works just fine thankyousomuch .

 

So hopefully I will never need to journey over to the official viewer. In IW physics just 'happens' so no worries there.

 

Thanks.

[Nalates Urriah]

Havok is implemented in different ways for mesh and Pathfinding. The Havok issue the Firestorm Team is dealing with is the Pathfinding part. Havok is used to display the NavMesh when setting up a region for path finding characters. They are not getting that much use as we are waiting on Advanced Experience Tools.

You would have to ask in the FS Support Group for what the story is with mesh upload and Havok. I think, like Dongle, that FS uses a open source alternative.

[Chic Aeon]

I just did a test on the beta grid since there was a fair amount of not too friendly chatter on the IW forums (we all know how that goes).

In effect you cannot change the default physics properties (where you would choose SOLID) or any other of those drop down boxes. So you cannot make a building with doorways (or at least not by the method that I was taught here ). 

REGULAR physics on items such as furniture etc work just as they always have. No change there. So the 64 bit Firestorm as it says will not work for PREFAB BUILDING makers. It should work for other folks.

 

Along with the "oh you can't do that" chatter happening on the other forum -- I talked to the support folks at Firestorm who told me several times it was fine to use this new viewer on both grids. I am testing that now. So far everything works fine and better than before on both grids. Not everything works in IW because it is not implemented of course, but the general overall improvement is excellent.

There may be cache issue but I have cache issue anyway when using a different IW viewer So I will "beta test" and see how it goes. Worse case scenario is a new install which is not major. 

 

Thanks for your help.