# Havok Vs. Euphoria



## OnyxVulpine (Apr 12, 2008)

I see many of the games coming out these days (Or some of the more.. popular ones?) are always saying we that they have either one of these engines.

I have done a little research because from what I knew of. I couldn't see much of a difference between the two engines.

From what I knew and what little I could actually dig up. Havok is just.. ragdoll and simple physics. Something pretty much all games should have. I wasn't able to dig up any vids as my net is being retarded. I'm pretty sure it goes deeper than this and has destructible environments and cloth and liquid and stuff like that.

Getting into Euphoria(Or also known as Endorphin?) adding to what I knew before and what I've seen after watching an X-Play preview of that Star Wars: The Force Unleashed game (Apparently not working) and a youtube vid showing how GTA4 will use it as well as one showing off the engine in detail with the Star Wars game. Or.. I guess this as well. It seems to be very... Well.. Awesome. It is like Havok but has an extension of behavior with AI and such.

So I'm pretty much asking which do you prefer?

Edit: The other option in the poll. It is that there are probably others but these are the only two I seem to have heard the most about. Also if you prefer an engine like Unreal. Although Unreal is used typically for different genres if you like those types of games.


----------



## Bokracroc (Apr 12, 2008)

Well Havok considering all of the Euphoria games aren't released yet and the masses haven't seen it in proper action yet.
You could always grab Endorphin Learning edition though.


----------



## ADF (Apr 12, 2008)

I was under the impression that Euphoria was an add on rather than a stand alone physics engine, the games I see it utilised tend to be bundled with another physics engine like Havok or Ageia.

Anyway Iâ€™m going to vote other; Ageiaâ€™s PhysX engine shouldnâ€™t be kept out of the picture, especially considering it is part of the Unreal 3 Engine and is soon to utilise GPUs for hardware acceleration. 

Gears of War 2 will be using PhysX just so people know.


----------



## Bokracroc (Apr 12, 2008)

The idea of those separate PhysX cards are stupid (are they still trying to push them?). They even failed at their own Tech Demo.


----------



## Rin Chambers (Apr 12, 2008)

From what I hear Euphoria will be beter.


----------



## ADF (Apr 12, 2008)

Bokracroc said:
			
		

> The idea of those separate PhysX cards are stupid (are they still trying to push them?). They even failed at their own Tech Demo.


Nvidia didn't seem to think so when they bought Ageia and is now gearing PhysX to use GPUs as dedicated processors. It is practically the same thing, a parallel processor is a parallel processor, but because Nvidia GPUs have a bigger install base more people can benefit from it.

If you think using dedicated hardware processors for physics is stupid, I'd look at what it can do before making judgements.


----------



## Hybrid Project Alpha (Apr 12, 2008)

Ah, PhysX. Made Sonic and the Secret Rings all it can be


----------



## TheGreatCrusader (Apr 12, 2008)

Like ADF said, I always thought that Euphoria was an addon to existing game physics engines. Like how GTAIV uses the RAGE engine or how The Force Unleashed is using the Ronin Engine.


----------



## OnyxVulpine (Apr 12, 2008)

Yeah seriously I don't know. I usually hear them say we are using this or that. So I couldn't really tell as all I did was watch demos and know that whatever is happening in the game I'm playing is because of what was said.

Ok trying to get more into I guess they are pretty different. Which is what I was afraid of while I was making the thread. Euphoria "game animation engine" and Havok "middleware physics engine". Also while watching more demos.. I like how physics are getting in games now.. But for some reason every time there is ragdoll physics in a game it always seems too loose. I mean in one of those demos there is a part where a guy supposedly gets shot in the chest and he flings backward onto the table and lays limp.. Now correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure you would still be living after that even if shot in the heart for a few seconds. Enough to tense up and fall to the ground or something.

Heh if I was directing a game I'd be an asshole -.-

-Onyx


----------



## Bokracroc (Apr 12, 2008)

ADF said:
			
		

> Bokracroc said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



No-one's doing anything special with physics though. Boxes and bodies tumbling in a slightly different way is hardly worth a dedicated card.


----------



## ADF (Apr 13, 2008)

Bokracroc said:
			
		

> No-one's doing anything special with physics though. Boxes and bodies tumbling in a slightly different way is hardly worth a dedicated card.


It isnâ€™t just about doing more of what we already have; it is also about opening up areas that were previously not possible due to performance constraints. 

How about characters with fully dynamic, physics reactive clothing and hair? Hydromechanics applied to game liquids and smoke so they behave like they are supposed to? Physics driven animations so they are not the same limited variety of pre made frames repeated over and over again? Procedural object damage and material deformability? Real time soft body physics?

It only takes imagination to consider how these can be applied in future games, they can be replicated on CPUs but the performance just isnâ€™t there to apply it on a wide scale. People donâ€™t have to think about it really, they already have a vector processor in their machines in the form of a GPU, they just go about their normal stuff and one day a game suddenly offers physics a modern multicore would struggle with.


----------



## Bokracroc (Apr 16, 2008)

ADF said:
			
		

> Bokracroc said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



No-one is attempting to truly push that though (at the current time). Why supply when no-one is demanding?


----------



## ADF (Apr 16, 2008)

Bokracroc said:
			
		

> No-one is attempting to truly push that though (at the current time). Why supply when no-one is demanding?


Hard to push something that is still in development, plus I wouldnâ€™t say there is no demand. Physics engines are getting quite a bit of interest lately; there hasnâ€™t been this much interest since Havok in HL2. The main selling point is moving away from looking realistic to acting realistic this generation, no point in a photorealistic character and environment when a crappy animation break the suspension of belief.

Unlike graphics physics can enhance game play; Ageia came up with some good concepts but applied them badly, will be interesting to see what a big budget games can do once the performance barrier is pushed back.


----------

