Can Blender do this?
can you?
>>1016388The question shouldn't be if it can, but how to do it.Would you know how to create this in Houdini? Probably not. Does it make Houdini a bad software because you are a brainlet? No.Same with Blender. You can do it, if you know how to do it. It's a matter of skill.
>>1016388>ai retards finds out about animation
>>1016393>>1016397>?probably within a week of h21's release. the mpm solver is pretty easy to use and sidefx provide example files from the demos.sometimes it is just about good software.
>>1016388yes, with 1,000,000$ in add-ons and 200 years.of just wait for the blender update that will fix everything this time...
>>1016388Why wouldn't you just enjoy the cookies in their normal glory instead of turning them into this utterly gay pulp
>>1016397There is absolutely no fucking way to do exactly that using Blender's physics. Physics module had been abandoned for many years and it's super basic. You might be able to kinda fake your way through all of this by not relying on physics but by purely simulating the looks of this with textures and maybe some particles.You'd have to be an uber pro to achieve something kinda looking like that though and even then it would probably still show that your shit isn't based on actual physics
>>1016388Yes, and faster too, just press on pulse once or twice
>>1016388>>1016409Blender has a couple of addons to do molecular simulations, I suppose that's what that is, idk how fast or easy to set up they are to do something like that, but you can try them.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ONM0wr3Kva8
>>1016412>molecular simulationslmao
>>1016413that's how they call it, they have cell fracture addons that support physics too.
>>1016413cont >>1016414 but I don't think you can get these results with that thing.
>>1016414maybe 'they' should research existing simulation methods and implement them instead of just making up cartoon names for their jank particles + some basic constraints set up for babies.
>>1016416they aren't making shit, all that is based on an addon that a guy did 15 years ago or so.
>>1016416Same shit for the fracture simulations.
>>1016417>>1016418damn, somehow it gets worse. impressive stuff.
>>1016397this, skill issue
Probably. Is it worth the effort to do it in blender? Probably not.
looks like material point methods. you can code your own numerical method to implement it if you needed to, regardless of the 3d package.
>>1016388I can do this irl I don't need blender for this dumbass
>>1016588well I do need A blender duhhh
