And why Epic is no longer using Havok like it did in UE2? Is better to use Chaos rather than PhysX in UE5?
Epic are planning on removing PhysX, so Chaos is the better way forward.
3 Likes
Havok had a high licensing cost so was dropped for UE3, though an integration was available for studios that licensed it. UE3 had both a software character movement engine and PhysX for physics objects and vehicles (I think UE2 was the same but with Havok). At the time, PhysX was proving itself to be wildly more capable and faster than traditional software physics simulators, with hardware acceleration available on NVidia GPUs. It was the “hot thing”. (It’s also likely NVidia sponsored the integration)
UE4 reimplemented character movement on top of physics (PhysX by default). Doing this simplified a lot of interactions between characters and physics objects that caused many bugs in older titles, but dropped any Unreal own brand physics code in the process. UE4 thus required PhysX (or another integration e.g. Havok) where it was technically optional prior if you didn’t mind a lack of physics objects.
Later in UE4 work started on an animation physics engine for cheaper cloth/chains/hair etc for Epic’s games Paragon and Fortnite, which I believe evolved into Chaos Physics. Epic are moving to using Chaos exclusively, as it gives them more control and optimisation scope than using a 3rd party library. It’s likely it will still be possible to integrate of PhysX/Havok etc if a studio wants.
4 Likes