Why do most games simplify collision detection instead of using true physics simulation?

This archive doesn't really address why video games use simplified collision detection — the preprints cover high-energy physics simulations, cosmological N-body codes, and dark matter modeling, not game engine design tradeoffs.

That said, I can point to the *physics* reason lurking in these papers: the three-body problem [AG-2025.10-964] shows that even three objects with simple gravitational forces have no closed-form solution and can exhibit chaotic behavior. Real-time collision detection for many objects (dozens or hundreds in a game scene) scales even worse computationally. Large-scale simulations of celestial systems must use approximations like particle-mesh methods [AG-2025.12-078], which trade accuracy for speed — exactly what game engines do, but more aggressively, because a player notices lag far more than they notice that a bouncing ball's physics isn't perfectly realistic.

The fundamental constraint is real-time responsiveness: true physics simulation requires solving differential equations at each time step, and the cost grows steeply with object count and precision. Games sacrifice fidelity for latency — a choice that becomes clearer when you see how even purpose-built scientific codes [AG-2025.05-214] must carefully balance resolution and speed.