Chambers <ben### [at] pacificwebguycom> wrote:
> Unfortunately, we always seem to come back to a dynamic timestep.  I
> suppose the "best" solution would be to have a range of timesteps that
> are acceptable, and to keep it as low as possible, but never out of this
> range.

Found it! Try:

http://www.gaffer.org/game-physics/fix-your-timestep

I found this article very useful a while ago when I was messing around with toy
spring-mass simulations.

Tom

Post a reply to this message