I’ve been following a thread outside this physics forum that somehow got the attention of one of the PhysX developers. They have been chiming in on some things regarding the Unity implementation of PhysX and it’s a bit worrisome to read.
From the outside looking in this seems like a bit of a concern. Please tell me you are working more closely with the PhysX team than this post indicates.
Sad, isn’t it?
There’s a weekly thread about inertia tensors, limited access to manipulation of collision points, etc. Hell, there was even a bug breaking something as simple as changing the physics material params through scripts during gameplay back in 5.1 I think. When even the most basic of stuff gets broken in patches supossed to fix previous issues, it only makes you worried about if the next update will break your game or not or if ‘the bug report will get addressed’ when the more basic core things are breaking in the back.
I don’t see why at least the Physics of the engine couldn’t be source access. It is PhysX after all…
I would flock to an asset store physics asset with source access in an instant. Physics is one of the things the power of community can keep rid of bug even if they can’t propel it forward in terms of new features.
Someone was integrading jitter physics (an open source physics engine) into unity and they open sourced their work so far (they stoped working on it though).
You may post your feedback to the physics engine at this official thread:
I’m aware they are getting feedback for planning the upcoming developments on physics. A common request is having more access to the underlying PhysX engine, which I believe will be addressed.
Recently UT posted a custom build featuring Collision Geometry Visualization, which extracts the information directly from the PhysX engine: