Why is collada support lacking so much?
Posted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 8:17 pm
CreateDynamics, Bullet, Blender, Scythe, and Erwin's dead project ("open physics composer") are all great ideas, but it seems like there's one tiny thing missing in all of them - proper Collada support. And that's disappointing. For example, it would be nice if I could take a rigged character from Blender, export the skeleton, load it up in CreateDynamics to automatically generate a ragdoll, and load it into Bullet without any problems. Or take a tank vehicle with a rotating parts created within Blender and load it into Bullet. But for some reason or another (lack of developers/motivation?) it's not currently possible.
I tried exporting one of the ragdoll examples included with CreateDynamics and then loaded it with the latest version of Bullet's collada viewer, but even though it actually loaded, it was obvious that the ragdoll wasn't stable. I don't know if that's because there was some export/import issue with Collada, or if because CreateDynamics uses a different physics engine (PhysX), or a combination of both. So to test this theory some more, I tried taking the same model and instead of creating a ragdoll, I created a convex decomposition and loaded that into the Collada viewer. Although it seemed to get the convex shape correctly, it looked as if there was some kind of hinge as it kept rotating back and forth. So I have no clue what was going on there, but my guess is that there was mistake in reading the Collada file. What's the point of going through the trouble to get Collada working with Bullet if I can't even load a simple convex shape?
I know that Scythe uses a variety of different physics engines, and from my understanding it's possible to view the simulation differently with each one. That seems like a good solution, although unfortunately Bullet is currently not supported. However, PAL is supported which supposedly works with both Collada and Bullet, but judging from the underwhelming support of Collada I've seen in other projects I don't have my hopes up.
Anyway, the point of all of this rambling is to ask: Why is it so challenging to provide proper Collada support? And, as a bonus question for Erwin: Do you have any plans to add Bullet to Scythe now that it's open source and has a physics plug-in system?
I tried exporting one of the ragdoll examples included with CreateDynamics and then loaded it with the latest version of Bullet's collada viewer, but even though it actually loaded, it was obvious that the ragdoll wasn't stable. I don't know if that's because there was some export/import issue with Collada, or if because CreateDynamics uses a different physics engine (PhysX), or a combination of both. So to test this theory some more, I tried taking the same model and instead of creating a ragdoll, I created a convex decomposition and loaded that into the Collada viewer. Although it seemed to get the convex shape correctly, it looked as if there was some kind of hinge as it kept rotating back and forth. So I have no clue what was going on there, but my guess is that there was mistake in reading the Collada file. What's the point of going through the trouble to get Collada working with Bullet if I can't even load a simple convex shape?
I know that Scythe uses a variety of different physics engines, and from my understanding it's possible to view the simulation differently with each one. That seems like a good solution, although unfortunately Bullet is currently not supported. However, PAL is supported which supposedly works with both Collada and Bullet, but judging from the underwhelming support of Collada I've seen in other projects I don't have my hopes up.
Anyway, the point of all of this rambling is to ask: Why is it so challenging to provide proper Collada support? And, as a bonus question for Erwin: Do you have any plans to add Bullet to Scythe now that it's open source and has a physics plug-in system?