Which is a better read?

Member
Posts: 312
Joined: 2006.10
Post: #1
I going to read one of these two books (hopefully both eventually):

Physics for Game Developers

and

Game Physics Engine Development

Does anyone have any opinions about these two? My goal is to make a 2D rigid body engine which deals with collisions detection and resting contacts, joints, and springs. Then, expand that to 3D.
Quote this message in a reply
Luminary
Posts: 5,143
Joined: 2002.04
Post: #2
I'm sure both of 'em deal with 3D, which means that you may actually find the 3D case easier based on the book...

There's one physics book out there which uses absurd American units and spends most of its time converting between them, rather than getting on with the actual physics. Make sure you have a book that works in metric Wink
Quote this message in a reply
Member
Posts: 312
Joined: 2006.10
Post: #3
OneSadCookie Wrote:I'm sure both of 'em deal with 3D, which means that you may actually find the 3D case easier based on the book...

There's one physics book out there which uses absurd American units and spends most of its time converting between them, rather than getting on with the actual physics. Make sure you have a book that works in metric Wink
Would you mind telling me what the name of the book is? Rolleyes
Quote this message in a reply
Luminary
Posts: 5,143
Joined: 2002.04
Post: #4
Don't remember any more, sorry Rasp
Quote this message in a reply
Sage
Posts: 1,482
Joined: 2002.09
Post: #5
Go with the Kaufmann book, the O'Reilly book is trash.

Scott Lembcke - Howling Moon Software
Author of Chipmunk Physics - A fast and simple rigid body physics library in C.
Quote this message in a reply
Member
Posts: 100
Joined: 2006.05
Post: #6
OneSadCookie Wrote:I'm sure both of 'em deal with 3D, which means that you may actually find the 3D case easier based on the book...

There's one physics book out there which uses absurd American units and spends most of its time converting between them, rather than getting on with the actual physics. Make sure you have a book that works in metric Wink

Teaching any science in American units is a recipe for disaster... I may be American but I am quite appalled with the fact that we still use such awkward units... Sorry, a bit off topic...
Quote this message in a reply
Moderator
Posts: 522
Joined: 2002.04
Post: #7
Skorche Wrote:Go with the Kaufmann book, the O'Reilly book is trash.
I can confirm the O'Reilly book is not very good.
Quote this message in a reply
⌘-R in Chief
Posts: 1,252
Joined: 2002.05
Post: #8
Roger. The O'Reilly book is written from a very mathy perspective. It could have been written a lot clearer.
Quote this message in a reply
Sage
Posts: 1,482
Joined: 2002.09
Post: #9
It's not even that it's from a "mathy" perspective. It's a summary of a college physics text. Other than giving you some code that implements ballistics and forces on rigid bodies, you're on your own.

It doesn't teach you anything about collision detection, handling contact, or how it all fits together. You get to figure that all out on your own. (and it's the hard part.)

Scott Lembcke - Howling Moon Software
Author of Chipmunk Physics - A fast and simple rigid body physics library in C.
Quote this message in a reply
Member
Posts: 567
Joined: 2004.07
Post: #10
I dunno; I rather liked the o'reilly one. I used it for some simulation work with my sister's physics book, and together they were great.

It's not magic, it's Ruby.
Quote this message in a reply
Member
Posts: 312
Joined: 2006.10
Post: #11
Thanks for the input guys! I think I'll go with "Game Physics Engine Development" Smile
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply