- Sir AIDS
- Nov 5, 2013
-
|
Wow whats next realistic butthole physics
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 22:53
|
|
- Adbot
-
ADBOT LOVES YOU
|
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2024 15:17
|
|
- Wormskull
- Aug 23, 2009
-
|
Wow whats next realistic butthole physics
lmao
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 22:55
|
|
- The Protagonist
- Jun 29, 2009
-
The average is 5.5? I thought it was 4. This is very unsettling.
|
Wow whats next realistic butthole physics
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fqBG2HFCLKw
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 23:10
|
|
- PantsBandit
- Oct 26, 2007
-
it is both a monkey and a boombox
|
finally, a game for the lady gamers. I approve.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2014 06:09
|
|
- Hoodrich
- Feb 4, 2011
-
by Reene
|
Lol.. Can't Wait for UnSharted Poor for the Gaystation...
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2014 06:12
|
|
- Doctor Goat
- Jan 22, 2005
-
Where does it hurt?
|
Wow whats next realistic butthole physics
Don't give the Skyrim nexus ideas.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2014 06:17
|
|
- Xaris
- Jul 25, 2006
-
Lucky there's a family guy
Lucky there's a man who positively can do
All the things that make us
Laugh and cry
|
Don't give the Skyrim nexus ideas.
-Version 5 has subtle pubic hair stubble that v6 doesn't (Am I right?). I love that feature, it feels more realistic and looks better. Plox add back pubic razor stubble in the future.
-Bellybutton. I've read some of the other comments and I agree with them that the bellybuttons look a bit too deep. This one doesn't really bother me though.
-That subtle blonde/light body hair, absolutely love that. Keep it. Realistic.
-Butthole. I felt v6 had a better looking butthole and placement. (Yes I check everything).
-Nipples/Areolas. V6 had a darker colour. This is purely subjective, but I prefer the lighter colours that v5 has. Maybe add an option to choose colours or something in the future?
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2014 06:27
|
|
- Shifty gimbal
- Dec 28, 2008
-
Hey you... I got something to tell ya
-
Biscuit Hider
|
Realistic bullhole physics is tricky because you need your cloth solver to be volumetric. Havok offers a dynamic cloth middleware that can do volumetric stuff but it's a pretty expensive package (and not that great for cheap and easy implementation), so most developers go with an in-house solution for cloth. Here's the run-down of how it works:
Simulated cloth works a lot like the springs in a mattress, only they go between all points instead of only up. Every edge of every polygon is a spring. Every update (of which can be many per frame), forces are applied to the whole system by different sources (gravity, linear velocity, angular velocity, wind, etc). To get better cloth results, you can either spend more CPU on updating spring positions per frame, or you can add springs (E.G. more polygons). That works well for a cloth surface, but a softbody volume will just limply collapse because you're only simulating the surface of the object.
A cloth spring array might look something like this:
... And will behave something like this:
If you're aiming for realistic butthole physics, you'll either need much more rigid and robust (CPU expensive) solution, or you'll need springs that pass inside of the object itself. Most in-house cloth solutions don't support that because any given vertex typically doesn't have more than a single surface to worry about -- it's not really a valid mesh, so the "inside" springs need to be created automatically. Anyway, we need to start attaching springs in between surfaces that weren't originally attached so as to somewhat preserve the volume.
A volumetric cloth mesh (a softbody) might, internally, look something more like this:
... And will behave something like this:
There's your butthole physics in action.
If you're only simulating part of a surface, there might be cheaper alternatives: You could treat the surface as your usual flat cloth, but feed in the original unsimulated surface as a collision surface. That way, it "keeps volume" while still having some of that realistic look to it, but it's tricky to pull off nicely.
Shifty gimbal fucked around with this message at 07:02 on Dec 9, 2014
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2014 06:59
|
|
- Liquid Penguins
- Feb 18, 2006
-
by Cowcaster
-
Grimey Drawer
|
hot thread,
4/5 boner
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2014 10:58
|
|
- Mach2
- Feb 28, 2014
-
|
Holy loving poo poo gimbal, 5/5
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2014 12:25
|
|
- sword_man.gif
- Apr 12, 2007
-
-
Fun Shoe
|
yowza!!! i'd lay her eggs!!!
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2014 14:26
|
|
- Scyther
- Dec 29, 2010
-
 
|
Realistic bullhole physics is tricky because you need your cloth solver to be volumetric. Havok offers a dynamic cloth middleware that can do volumetric stuff but it's a pretty expensive package (and not that great for cheap and easy implementation), so most developers go with an in-house solution for cloth. Here's the run-down of how it works:
Simulated cloth works a lot like the springs in a mattress, only they go between all points instead of only up. Every edge of every polygon is a spring. Every update (of which can be many per frame), forces are applied to the whole system by different sources (gravity, linear velocity, angular velocity, wind, etc). To get better cloth results, you can either spend more CPU on updating spring positions per frame, or you can add springs (E.G. more polygons). That works well for a cloth surface, but a softbody volume will just limply collapse because you're only simulating the surface of the object.
A cloth spring array might look something like this:
... And will behave something like this:
If you're aiming for realistic butthole physics, you'll either need much more rigid and robust (CPU expensive) solution, or you'll need springs that pass inside of the object itself. Most in-house cloth solutions don't support that because any given vertex typically doesn't have more than a single surface to worry about -- it's not really a valid mesh, so the "inside" springs need to be created automatically. Anyway, we need to start attaching springs in between surfaces that weren't originally attached so as to somewhat preserve the volume.
A volumetric cloth mesh (a softbody) might, internally, look something more like this:
... And will behave something like this:
There's your butthole physics in action.
If you're only simulating part of a surface, there might be cheaper alternatives: You could treat the surface as your usual flat cloth, but feed in the original unsimulated surface as a collision surface. That way, it "keeps volume" while still having some of that realistic look to it, but it's tricky to pull off nicely.
thankyou very interesting
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2014 14:28
|
|
- THE PENETRATOR
- Jul 27, 2014
-
by Lowtax
|
Realistic bullhole physics is tricky because you need your cloth solver to be volumetric. Havok offers a dynamic cloth middleware that can do volumetric stuff but it's a pretty expensive package (and not that great for cheap and easy implementation), so most developers go with an in-house solution for cloth. Here's the run-down of how it works:
Simulated cloth works a lot like the springs in a mattress, only they go between all points instead of only up. Every edge of every polygon is a spring. Every update (of which can be many per frame), forces are applied to the whole system by different sources (gravity, linear velocity, angular velocity, wind, etc). To get better cloth results, you can either spend more CPU on updating spring positions per frame, or you can add springs (E.G. more polygons). That works well for a cloth surface, but a softbody volume will just limply collapse because you're only simulating the surface of the object.
A cloth spring array might look something like this:
... And will behave something like this:
If you're aiming for realistic butthole physics, you'll either need much more rigid and robust (CPU expensive) solution, or you'll need springs that pass inside of the object itself. Most in-house cloth solutions don't support that because any given vertex typically doesn't have more than a single surface to worry about -- it's not really a valid mesh, so the "inside" springs need to be created automatically. Anyway, we need to start attaching springs in between surfaces that weren't originally attached so as to somewhat preserve the volume.
A volumetric cloth mesh (a softbody) might, internally, look something more like this:
... And will behave something like this:
There's your butthole physics in action.
If you're only simulating part of a surface, there might be cheaper alternatives: You could treat the surface as your usual flat cloth, but feed in the original unsimulated surface as a collision surface. That way, it "keeps volume" while still having some of that realistic look to it, but it's tricky to pull off nicely.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2014 14:29
|
|
- sword_man.gif
- Apr 12, 2007
-
-
Fun Shoe
|
i do have a question about that, if we're talking butthole physics, why are you using a sphere as your example, shouldn't it be a donut shape at the very least
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2014 14:30
|
|
- A Spider Covets
- May 4, 2009
-
|
Realistic bullhole physics is tricky because you need your cloth solver to be volumetric. Havok offers a dynamic cloth middleware that can do volumetric stuff but it's a pretty expensive package (and not that great for cheap and easy implementation), so most developers go with an in-house solution for cloth. Here's the run-down of how it works:
Simulated cloth works a lot like the springs in a mattress, only they go between all points instead of only up. Every edge of every polygon is a spring. Every update (of which can be many per frame), forces are applied to the whole system by different sources (gravity, linear velocity, angular velocity, wind, etc). To get better cloth results, you can either spend more CPU on updating spring positions per frame, or you can add springs (E.G. more polygons). That works well for a cloth surface, but a softbody volume will just limply collapse because you're only simulating the surface of the object.
A cloth spring array might look something like this:
... And will behave something like this:
If you're aiming for realistic butthole physics, you'll either need much more rigid and robust (CPU expensive) solution, or you'll need springs that pass inside of the object itself. Most in-house cloth solutions don't support that because any given vertex typically doesn't have more than a single surface to worry about -- it's not really a valid mesh, so the "inside" springs need to be created automatically. Anyway, we need to start attaching springs in between surfaces that weren't originally attached so as to somewhat preserve the volume.
A volumetric cloth mesh (a softbody) might, internally, look something more like this:
... And will behave something like this:
There's your butthole physics in action.
If you're only simulating part of a surface, there might be cheaper alternatives: You could treat the surface as your usual flat cloth, but feed in the original unsimulated surface as a collision surface. That way, it "keeps volume" while still having some of that realistic look to it, but it's tricky to pull off nicely.
Realistic bullhole physics is tricky because you need your cloth solver to be volumetric. Havok offers a dynamic cloth middleware that can do volumetric stuff but it's a pretty expensive package (and not that great for cheap and easy implementation), so most developers go with an in-house solution for cloth. Here's the run-down of how it works:
Simulated cloth works a lot like the springs in a mattress, only they go between all points instead of only up. Every edge of every polygon is a spring. Every update (of which can be many per frame), forces are applied to the whole system by different sources (gravity, linear velocity, angular velocity, wind, etc). To get better cloth results, you can either spend more CPU on updating spring positions per frame, or you can add springs (E.G. more polygons). That works well for a cloth surface, but a softbody volume will just limply collapse because you're only simulating the surface of the object.
A cloth spring array might look something like this:
... And will behave something like this:
If you're aiming for realistic butthole physics, you'll either need much more rigid and robust (CPU expensive) solution, or you'll need springs that pass inside of the object itself. Most in-house cloth solutions don't support that because any given vertex typically doesn't have more than a single surface to worry about -- it's not really a valid mesh, so the "inside" springs need to be created automatically. Anyway, we need to start attaching springs in between surfaces that weren't originally attached so as to somewhat preserve the volume.
A volumetric cloth mesh (a softbody) might, internally, look something more like this:
... And will behave something like this:
There's your butthole physics in action.
If you're only simulating part of a surface, there might be cheaper alternatives: You could treat the surface as your usual flat cloth, but feed in the original unsimulated surface as a collision surface. That way, it "keeps volume" while still having some of that realistic look to it, but it's tricky to pull off nicely.
yes but will it give me the tingles in my no no zone?
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2014 15:16
|
|
- Blackheart
- Mar 22, 2013
-
|
yes but will it give me the tingles in my no no zone?
maybe with the anal oculus rift
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2014 15:43
|
|
- Shifty gimbal
- Dec 28, 2008
-
Hey you... I got something to tell ya
-
Biscuit Hider
|
Good news for next gen butthole capture technology from Disney:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3X5OmHXa4c&t=107s
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 17:07
|
|
- Plutonis
- Mar 25, 2011
-
|
Realistic bullhole physics is tricky because you need your cloth solver to be volumetric. Havok offers a dynamic cloth middleware that can do volumetric stuff but it's a pretty expensive package (and not that great for cheap and easy implementation), so most developers go with an in-house solution for cloth. Here's the run-down of how it works:
Simulated cloth works a lot like the springs in a mattress, only they go between all points instead of only up. Every edge of every polygon is a spring. Every update (of which can be many per frame), forces are applied to the whole system by different sources (gravity, linear velocity, angular velocity, wind, etc). To get better cloth results, you can either spend more CPU on updating spring positions per frame, or you can add springs (E.G. more polygons). That works well for a cloth surface, but a softbody volume will just limply collapse because you're only simulating the surface of the object.
A cloth spring array might look something like this:
... And will behave something like this:
If you're aiming for realistic butthole physics, you'll either need much more rigid and robust (CPU expensive) solution, or you'll need springs that pass inside of the object itself. Most in-house cloth solutions don't support that because any given vertex typically doesn't have more than a single surface to worry about -- it's not really a valid mesh, so the "inside" springs need to be created automatically. Anyway, we need to start attaching springs in between surfaces that weren't originally attached so as to somewhat preserve the volume.
A volumetric cloth mesh (a softbody) might, internally, look something more like this:
... And will behave something like this:
There's your butthole physics in action.
If you're only simulating part of a surface, there might be cheaper alternatives: You could treat the surface as your usual flat cloth, but feed in the original unsimulated surface as a collision surface. That way, it "keeps volume" while still having some of that realistic look to it, but it's tricky to pull off nicely.
I loving love science!
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 17:08
|
|
- Prometheus1
- Mar 15, 2012
-
History will be kind to me, for I intend to write it
|
Realistic bullhole physics is tricky because you need your cloth solver to be volumetric. Havok offers a dynamic cloth middleware that can do volumetric stuff but it's a pretty expensive package (and not that great for cheap and easy implementation), so most developers go with an in-house solution for cloth. Here's the run-down of how it works:
Simulated cloth works a lot like the springs in a mattress, only they go between all points instead of only up. Every edge of every polygon is a spring. Every update (of which can be many per frame), forces are applied to the whole system by different sources (gravity, linear velocity, angular velocity, wind, etc). To get better cloth results, you can either spend more CPU on updating spring positions per frame, or you can add springs (E.G. more polygons). That works well for a cloth surface, but a softbody volume will just limply collapse because you're only simulating the surface of the object.
A cloth spring array might look something like this:
... And will behave something like this:
If you're aiming for realistic butthole physics, you'll either need much more rigid and robust (CPU expensive) solution, or you'll need springs that pass inside of the object itself. Most in-house cloth solutions don't support that because any given vertex typically doesn't have more than a single surface to worry about -- it's not really a valid mesh, so the "inside" springs need to be created automatically. Anyway, we need to start attaching springs in between surfaces that weren't originally attached so as to somewhat preserve the volume.
A volumetric cloth mesh (a softbody) might, internally, look something more like this:
... And will behave something like this:
There's your butthole physics in action.
If you're only simulating part of a surface, there might be cheaper alternatives: You could treat the surface as your usual flat cloth, but feed in the original unsimulated surface as a collision surface. That way, it "keeps volume" while still having some of that realistic look to it, but it's tricky to pull off nicely.
Can you simulate a sphincter ?
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2014 21:48
|
|
- Nanomashoes
- Aug 18, 2012
-
|
it sort of boggles my mind that computers nowadays can do what you just posted, in addition to everything else a game does, sixty goddamn times every second
actually they can't, but it doesn't matter because the human eye can only see 24 fps anyway
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 05:12
|
|
- Cannonballoon
- Jul 25, 2007
-
|
I hope that the next elder scrolls game has butthole customization sliders for total immersion
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 06:57
|
|
- Great Joe
- Aug 13, 2008
-
|
actually they can't, but it doesn't matter because the human eye can only see 24 fps anyway
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 21:19
|
|
- Great Joe
- Aug 13, 2008
-
|
why do we have 32-bit colour depth when the human eye can only see three colours anyway
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 21:19
|
|
- Adbot
-
ADBOT LOVES YOU
|
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2024 15:17
|
|
- Sub-Actuality
- Apr 17, 2007
-
|
humans can't look up; this is why we use horizontal screens
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2014 21:22
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 22:53
