Physics Engine vs Game Engine with Built-in Physics

Developers should learn and use physics engines when creating interactive applications that require realistic physical behavior, such as video games (e meets developers should use game engines with built-in physics when creating games that require realistic physical interactions, such as platformers, racing games, or simulations, as they save time and reduce complexity compared to coding physics manually. Here's our take.

Physics Engine

Nice Pick

Developers should learn and use physics engines when creating interactive applications that require realistic physical behavior, such as video games (e

Pros

• g
• Related to: game-development, 3d-graphics

Cons

• Specific tradeoffs depend on your use case

Game Engine with Built-in Physics

Developers should use game engines with built-in physics when creating games that require realistic physical interactions, such as platformers, racing games, or simulations, as they save time and reduce complexity compared to coding physics manually

Pros

• These engines are essential for projects needing consistent and optimized physics performance across different platforms, and they are particularly valuable for indie developers or small teams with limited resources, as they provide pre-tested, reliable physics systems
• Related to: unity, unreal-engine

Cons

• Specific tradeoffs depend on your use case

The Verdict

These tools serve different purposes. Physics Engine is a tool while Game Engine with Built-in Physics is a platform. We picked Physics Engine based on overall popularity, but your choice depends on what you're building.

The Bottom Line

Physics Engine wins

Based on overall popularity. Physics Engine is more widely used, but Game Engine with Built-in Physics excels in its own space.