Timeline for Why does physics not behave consistently in Unity?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 19, 2016 at 2:24 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackGameDev/status/799800464065826816 | ||
| Nov 17, 2016 at 23:13 | vote | accept | Nolonar | ||
| Nov 17, 2016 at 23:08 | comment | added | Sean Middleditch | @Nolonar: you're now entering about the fun realm of numerical integration discrepancies. :) Larger integration steps produce larger inaccuracies. Small integration steps require more steps and hence more processing power to calculate the final result. A physics engine can be fast, accurate, or general purpose: pick two. :) | |
| Nov 17, 2016 at 23:00 | answer | added | Tartle Wizard | timeline score: 7 | |
| Nov 17, 2016 at 22:58 | comment | added | Nolonar | @RichardTingle. I think you're on to something. I had a look at the Time settings of my project, and decided to play around with the Fixed Timestep. Increasing it from 0.02 (50 updates per second) to 0.04 made my main PC behave more like the 3 laptops I tested on. Setting it to 0.01 made the ball land much sooner. Not sure how to deal with it, but it's definitely a start. | |
| Nov 17, 2016 at 22:46 | comment | added | Richard Tingle | My guess; the physic engine doesnt have a fixed time step leading to slightly different behaviour depending on how fast your cpu is running. Could your physics time step have become linked to your rendering time step? | |
| Nov 17, 2016 at 22:39 | history | edited | Nolonar | CC BY-SA 3.0 | deleted 20 characters in body |
| Nov 17, 2016 at 22:30 | history | asked | Nolonar | CC BY-SA 3.0 |