Bug Rigidbody and Mesh Collider Bugs

Thanks for the show stoppers, fix your F***ing engine, stop working on fancy new features that only will bring more bugs into Unity. Opimize this bugged piece of S***.

I'm tired of hitting every day a new stopper because this mickey mouse engine can't handle S***.

[Physics.PhysX] Cooking::cookConvexMesh: user-provided hull must have less than 256 vertices!

Failed to create Convex Mesh from source mesh

fix your F***ing engine
fix your F***ing engine
fix your F***ing engine
fix your F***ing engine
fix your F***ing engine

 

While I totally understand your point about Unity bugs, that problem in particular is a limitation imposed by PhysX, the underlying physics engine used by Unity. It's not new, and it has been always like that.

That message means that the mesh you're trying to make convex requires in a convex hull with more than the 256 vertices limit. This is typically because the shape of the original mesh is too smooth so adjusting a convex hull on it requires many triangles. A solution is using a simplified mesh as collider, for example a copy of the original mesh with a decimation filter (requires editing in the 3D modelling tool).

 

Yeah, that wouldn't work for that mesh and that's the fun about Unity: You have to work araound limitations, bugs and other problems, caused by lazy development and refusal to fix bugs.

The phrase: "That's a known issuse, here's a workaround", seems to be normal for Unity.

There are bugs, missing features and other problems existing for years and they won't fix this. I don't understand why they refuse to make things work properly. Why not fixing known issues before working on new stuff? Why the won't test their product, that will cost some money at some point, before throwing it at their customers?

It's not my job to compensate lazyness and incompetence from Unity Tech and we still have to live with this pile of S***.

We decidet to be honest with our player and tell them what bugs and missing features are the fault of Unity and will send them to this forum and we tell them about show stoppers and cancelled features caused by Unity.

 

Please consider your tone. Nobody makes you use Unity but yourself. As Edy said, this 256 triangle count is a limit set by Nvidia physx. So please send your customers there to complain.

I do agree that imo unity focuses on new features a bit too much instead of really fine tune older ones, but at the same time I am super happy that they do. There is no other engines that have nice access to physx articulation features for example.

 

They have there problems, Still haven't figured out how to get the rebind example to actually rebind in the new Input system, and the state of networking made me decide to release as singleplayer and figure out the networking side later.

But come on, you dont really want super complex colliders anyway just bad form for performance all round and its not hard to break objects up or simplify the meshes... Unless you paying for pro, maybe its time to move to another engine if its not working? But youl probably have similar problems.

 

Well, Unity isn't even able to make mesh colliders without doing all wrong, what i've expexcted? Having a tunnel is someting impossible? The entrys are blocked by the generated mesh collider. This engine is so great, piss off.

Yes, after completing that project, i will change the engine, Unity is complete garbage. Nothing works out of the box, on board features are buggy as hell and work most time complete random. The user friendly editor is the only good thing about unity, bust especally physics are such a pain to force working properly.

Just take Unity off the market and bury it, this engine will never work without tons of workarounds and optimaziations by the user to compensate all the bugs and lazyness from the Unity Devs.

 

It’s not Unity but Nvidia physx. UE also uses physx and you’ll still be facing the same struggle

 

Yeah, but i doubt that Unreal is such a buggy random mess. The editor is not so user friendly, but i never heard that Unreal has so much problems as Unity.

I've solved the physic problem, now are the mesh colliders the show stopper and again i have to work around and mess with other colliders or scrap the planned feature. Instead of following the mesh and generate a collider, it wraps them completely, that's absoluteley useless.

I can't believe that some's paying for Unity, the devs should be ashamed. The documentation is here and there crap, there's no real customer support and instead of bux fixes, we get more bugs and problems.

 

We'll see. Anyhow, you know there is a lot of people here that are happy to help you work around nvidias physx limitations in case you'd like to describe your problem.

 

I've described it, but these problems can only be solved by Unity. Maybe using Havok could be improve the physics and they have to rework the mesh colliders or give an alternative that does what everyone wants: no wraping around and just following the mesh.

I can solve most problems, the thing that annoys me to death is, that everything needs a work around because the board tools aren't working as expected and act like show stoppers. Bugs are of course a hell too.

If i have a specific problem, that i really can't solve on my own, i will ask the community in a friendly manner.

But the problems in this thread, can't be solved by the com.

 

But why do you need a convex mesh on a tunnel? Ive got a few in the project I am working on and its not a problem at all. Just untick convex mesh, you don't really need it anyway unless its on a rigidbody. If it is on a rigidbody for some reason just break you mesh up into section with probuilding, roof ceiling and walls and then make them convex.

 

Yes, i need a solid mesh collider because it's a bizarre structure. To make it simple, a deformed sphere with some kind of entry tunnel and i need to keep it's shape as a collider to have the effect i want.

 

Is the deformed sphere moving? Because you can have non-convex mesh colliders as long as there is no rigidbody on it, as pantang already mentioned. Just don’t tick the convex box.

 

No, i'ts just there and just have it's collider, no RBs. I've tried non convex. But my ship slipped through, this has an RB and it's movement uses the RB instead of transform. Convex or other colliders are working fine.

 

Well in my experience which is limited it would be a no convex mesh collider you should have at a guess without seeing your setup.

 

I just put together a test for you. The tunnels have 672 triangles and are obviously non-convex. They do not have "convex" ticked. The ball is also a mesh, but with "convex" ticked. This is needed because there can only be convex mesh colliders on dynamic rigidbodies. To create a non-convex dynamic rigidbody, it has to be made up from multiple convex colliders.

Collision detection on non-convex meshes is computationally hard. That's why physics engines for games usually just don't do it. Whoever is in charge of the technical aspects of a game has to make decisions about where and how to split up models into convex chunks and with a low poly count. Don't expect things to work just because you want them to work without understanding why those limitations have been put in place.

You can find the test project attached.