Hello, Unity fellows, In our game we are seriously looking into separating physics simulation and rendering completely - thus creating 2 (roughly) game objects per each actual object. The reasons are explained below. I couldn't find similar question on the Internet so please excuse me if such discussion already exists. The approach is similar to other platforms (e.g. Adobe Flash, which I used to use, maybe there are many others), where physics and rendering are completely decoupled. I do understand the benefits of having rendering and physics coupled in the same GameObject, but it also certainly leads to lots of other problems (some of which quite serious) I would love if you guys share what you think on the subject and share some knowledge if you have tried out something similar. Pros: - In a multiplayer game, in case there is a correction by the server, physics simulation may be updated instantly and reevaluate from there, but rendered game objects may be smoothly transferred to where they need to be (and not teleported) - Can use layers separately - no more mess due to the layers being used for rendering and physics at the same time - you can have objects visible but not physically represented at the same time and vice versa - occluded but interactible - big winner - Can apply some fancy "physics" to given object - e.g. the physical representation is a sphere - it rolls and stops due to drag and/or friction. But the rendered game object is a, let's say a bomb. I want the bomb to just take the position of the physical game object, but not rotate like it does (rather look like it is being dragged, or tilt slightly based on velocity, but not roll). Currently to achieve this you still need to create at least 2 GameObjects for that given object and decouple them anyway. - ...? Cons: - double the game objects count - not sure how much of an issue that is, but certainly bit problematic - in case of the server correction above, it may look like you are interacting with some object, but it may be currently interpolated, therefore you are not actually interacting with the physical representation - not much of an issue, since corrections are rarely made and are not very significant - rigid bodies need to assign the position/rotation from their physical counterparts - again not much of an issue I think - ...?