Hey <img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_e_smile.gif" alt=":)" title="Smile"> Take a look about google's Box2D liquid fun hope that there is a way to integrate it with construct 2 .
http://google.github.io/liquidfun/
Wow, this looks fabulous!
But it looks like mobile cpu killer
Would love to play around with this , gotta love physics !
No way to integrate this into C2. The library is C++ not JS. So until someone converts it from C++ to JS in one way or another. Not much can be done about it. Though it would be pretty cool.
Yoyo just added this to the latest build of GMS. Would be cool to have in C2, but it it would be very performance heavy...wouldn't want to try it on mobile.
https://code.google.com/p/jsbox2d/sourc ... quidfun.js (or https://code.google.com/p/jsbox2d/sourc ... fun.min.js for minified/release version)
Some of those demos look like they're in slow motion, so other than eye candy, I can't see this being practical - although I'd be happy to be proven wrong
Develop games in your browser. Powerful, performant & highly capable.
Good find Captain. After looking at LF. It's the full on Box2D engine with Particle Liquid behaviour. This would be great a a replacement for the current Physics.
Ashley
Anyway for a review and or replacement of the current physics?
Good find Captain. After looking at LF. It's the full on Box2D engine with Particle Liquid behaviour. This would be great a a replacement for the current Physics. Ashley Anyway for a review and or replacement of the current physics?
I agree entirely , this would be a huge boost to our current physics .
We currently maintain three physics engines (CocoonJS, box2dweb, asm.js box2d). Keeping them all compatible is extremely difficult. I do not think it is practical to implement a new engine without causing major compatibility headaches.
Anyway it seems interesting.
But Ashley are there some news about the Collision Disabling in asm.js ?
SgtConti - I tried to fix it myself recently but I just cannot get asm.js to build correctly!
Ashley , ok, i hope you fix it someday, but thanks anyway for at least trying
I can understand that. However LF is built on top of Box2D already. So it's Box2D + Extras. If it's out of practicality still. That's ok. I wouldn't have even suggested for you to do it except that it would replace the current Box2D mostly because it's Box2D+.
Well in the end your call. It is extra overhead if it's an additional version.
jayderyu - I'd guess it's box2dweb + extras, so it wouldn't be supported by the CocoonJS or asm.js engines.