>>106139402
>but it is a engine in a sense
a rigid body solver is in no way a game engine saar. Its just a mere physics simulator.
The repo you shared is just a bunch blocks simulated with physics for constraints like rope, rod and spring.
It doesn't even render sphere or anything else other than a bunch of cube.
And those cubes can't be controlled by other cubes at all. Physical collisions are their only interaction because its just a simulation. Stuff like one cube being able to generate hit events on another cube and that another cube responding to it is what it takes for this bland simulation to become a game engine.
I saw about that paper on 2 minute video, very interesting but assuming that this mere simulation would sell 1 mil would be too much imo. It just can't. It takes a lot more than this to be able to make 1 mil in 2025 as a game made through a game engine with this. Houdini and blender can do a lot of fancy rigid body dynamics than this.
>I think this just shows that Engine dev and game dev is basically the same in terms of LLM complexity
no?
Just because LLM takes same amount of compute resources to generate a response to any question of varying complexity doesn't mean the complexity of all the problems it gets thrown is always the same.
complexity of a problem is entirely subjective w.r.t the user giving the prompts imo.
LLMs are used to solve problems so a pro and an amateur can find the same problem to be simple and complex in their own perspective.
What makes game engines objectively more complex problem than and a video game itself is that a game engine is very low level while a video game is just a very higher level abstraction that relies on the game engine to interact with the underlying hardware.
>>106141803
skill issue