Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Havok Game Dynamics SDK

This topic is 5497 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

If you intended to correct an error in the post then please contact us.

Recommended Posts

Hi All, I was wondering if anyone had any documentation or experience with implementing the Havok SDK into a game. I was just wanting a little more information on the complexity and depth of the SDK. The only things I have been able to get my hand onto so far are feature lists and production notes. Supposedly this SDK is really quite simple and can easily add to the realism and dynamics of your game. Any experience or comments on the Havok SDK would be nice… Thanks, Omnipotent

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, if you are talking $10k that is a relatively small price in business terms. If you are talking $100k or up that is a fair sized purchase. At that size I would prepare a request for proposal and request a demonstration of core features you have to have. I would also request a 30 day evaluation to review that demonstration. Even at Sears where we made purchases in the tens of millions I wouldn''t have made that size purchase without that. Sales literature and customer testimonials would have only been sufficent to decide who to send rfp''s to. We could burn $100k in labor or machine resources without anyone batting an eye, but wasting just as much on software that went unused was a whole differant story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by Omnipotent
Hi All,

I was wondering if anyone had any documentation or experience with implementing the Havok SDK into a game. I was just wanting a little more information on the complexity and depth of the SDK. The only things I have been able to get my hand onto so far are feature lists and production notes. Supposedly this SDK is really quite simple and can easily add to the realism and dynamics of your game. Any experience or comments on the Havok SDK would be nice…

Thanks,

Omnipotent



You should checkout some of the downloadable tech demos (I''m pretty sure they still have them). In particular the interactive cigar/fan demo and the car[buggy] demo are very good demonstrations of the completity and stability of the engine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have checked out the demos available on their web site which all look pretty cool. I was just wondering if anyone out their had any experience with the SDK and could give me their 2 cents on how good it is and how easy or hard it is to implement. I Can’t really get that kind of information from Havok because of course ever testimony I will get from them is that they loved the SDK and it was the easiest thing to implement in the world!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Far as I know, their physics engine is the one used on the PS2 - not sure exactly how that works (a physics engine built into a console?), but I seem to recall hearing it somewhere.

I was at a talk on quaternions last week, given by the lead engineer of Havok. Impressive stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Some time ago I investigated the possibility to integrate a third party physics engine into a game that was already in development.
I evaluated both Havok and Mathengine and came to a few conclusions.

Havok seemed quite good and an overall more complete solution as they had certain features that Mathengine lacked (like cloth for example). Even though we were not thinking in using cloth in the game, I thought that this indicated a more mature and complete engine.

But when it came to implementation, I found that with Havok I would have to change or add components to our current existing game. For example, Havok has it''s own terrain format and we already had a terrain engine fully developed. To get Havok to work we would either have to change our terrain or have Havok''s terrain format along side ours.
Neither solution was good enough, because the frist would involve substancial work to redo the terrain engine, and we were not even sure that it would work because of other game features that relied on our current terrain format. The second solution would add more memory requirements which we were already strugling with on a console game.

Because of these issues I thought that if we had involved Havok from the very beginning of the game then it probably would have worked quite well, because we would have designed the terrain and other components with Havok in mind, but because we were already in the middle of the game then it became difficult to accomodate it.

Mathengine, proved to be a much more versatile solution.
I found I was able to integrate it much more easily than Havok as it didn''t impose such strict restrictions.
There was also a much higher degree of flexibility in the choice of what to use with Mathengine, because you could use only the broad phase collision detection, or just the narrow phase collision detection, or just the LCP solver, or any combination as long as we handled the rest yourself.
This level of customisation was quite useful for our purposes.

I didn''t want to turn this into a Mathengine Vs Havok thread, but this is my experience with these packages. And for my purposes Mathengine was better, but of course all cases are different and you should evaluate them for your own purposes.

Hope this helps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you use a commercial game engine, that could influence your choice. For example, the Havok engine is now quite tightly integrated with the latest version (4.2.2) of the NetImmerse engine from NDL. And the folks at Epic have worked with MathEngine to integrate portions of Karma into their Unreal engine.

Graham Rhodes
Senior Scientist
Applied Research Associates, Inc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites