Search Results

Search found 1014 results on 41 pages for 'collision'.

Page 3/41 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Moving objects colliding when using unalligned collision avoidance (steering)

    - by James Bedford
    I'm having trouble with unaligned collision avoidance for what I think is a rare case. I have set two objects to move towards each other but with a slight offset, so one of the objects is moving slightly upwards, and one of the objects is moving slightly downwards. In my unaligned collision avoidance steering algorithm I'm finding the points on the object's forward line and the other object's forward line where these two lines are the closest. If these closest points are within a collision avoidance distance, and if the distance between them is smaller than the two radii of the two object's bounding spheres, then the objects should steer away in the appropriate direction. The problem is that for my case, the closest points on the lines are calculated to be really far away from the actual collision point. This is because the two forward lines for each object are moving away from each other as the objects pass. The problem is that because of this, no steering takes place, and the two objects partially collide. Does anyone have any suggestions as to how I can correctly calculate the point of collision? Perhaps by somehow taking into account the size of the two objects?

    Read the article

  • Circle-Line Collision Detection Problem

    - by jazzdawg
    I am currently developing a breakout clone and I have hit a roadblock in getting collision detection between a ball (circle) and a brick (convex polygon) working correctly. I am using a Circle-Line collision detection test where each line represents and edge on the convex polygon brick. For the majority of the time the Circle-Line test works properly and the points of collision are resolved correctly. Collision detection working correctly. However, occasionally my collision detection code returns false due to a negative discriminant when the ball is actually intersecting the brick. Collision detection failing. I am aware of the inefficiency with this method and I am using axis aligned bounding boxes to cut down on the number of bricks tested. My main concern is if there are any mathematical bugs in my code below. /* * from and to are points at the start and end of the convex polygons edge. * This function is called for every edge in the convex polygon until a * collision is detected. */ bool circleLineCollision(Vec2f from, Vec2f to) { Vec2f lFrom, lTo, lLine; Vec2f line, normal; Vec2f intersectPt1, intersectPt2; float a, b, c, disc, sqrt_disc, u, v, nn, vn; bool one = false, two = false; // set line vectors lFrom = from - ball.circle.centre; // localised lTo = to - ball.circle.centre; // localised lLine = lFrom - lTo; // localised line = from - to; // calculate a, b & c values a = lLine.dot(lLine); b = 2 * (lLine.dot(lFrom)); c = (lFrom.dot(lFrom)) - (ball.circle.radius * ball.circle.radius); // discriminant disc = (b * b) - (4 * a * c); if (disc < 0.0f) { // no intersections return false; } else if (disc == 0.0f) { // one intersection u = -b / (2 * a); intersectPt1 = from + (lLine.scale(u)); one = pointOnLine(intersectPt1, from, to); if (!one) return false; return true; } else { // two intersections sqrt_disc = sqrt(disc); u = (-b + sqrt_disc) / (2 * a); v = (-b - sqrt_disc) / (2 * a); intersectPt1 = from + (lLine.scale(u)); intersectPt2 = from + (lLine.scale(v)); one = pointOnLine(intersectPt1, from, to); two = pointOnLine(intersectPt2, from, to); if (!one && !two) return false; return true; } } bool pointOnLine(Vec2f p, Vec2f from, Vec2f to) { if (p.x >= min(from.x, to.x) && p.x <= max(from.x, to.x) && p.y >= min(from.y, to.y) && p.y <= max(from.y, to.y)) return true; return false; }

    Read the article

  • Changing direction after collision

    - by Balint
    In the first tutorial for GameMaker (catch the clown), I want to set the direction of the clown after the collision with the wall. I want to do it by pressing the wall object with the mouse (before the collision, to set the angle parameter). For example by pressing only once the wall object it would change the clown's direction after collision by 45 degrees, twice by 90 degrees, and so on. How can I do that?

    Read the article

  • Fixing a collision detection bug in Slick2D

    - by Jesse Prescott
    My game has a bug with collision detection. If you go against the wall and tap forward/back sometimes the game thinks the speed you travelled at is 0 and the game doesn't know how to get you out of the wall. My collision detection works by getting the speed you hit the wall at and if it is positive it moves you back, if it is negative it moves you forward. It might help if you download it: https://rapidshare.com/files/1550046269/game.zip Sorry if I explained badly, it's hard to explain. float maxSpeed = 0.3f; float minSpeed = -0.2f; float acceleration = 0.002f; float deacceleration = 0.001f; float slowdownSpeed = 0.002f; float rotateSpeed = 0.08f; static float currentSpeed = 0; boolean up = false; boolean down = false; boolean noKey = false; static float rotate = 0; //Image effect system static String locationCarNormal; static String locationCarFront; static String locationCarBack; static String locationCarBoth; static boolean carFront = false; static boolean carBack = false; static String imageRef; boolean collision = false; public ComponentPlayerMovement(String id, String ScarNormal, String ScarFront, String ScarBack, String ScarBoth) { this.id = id; playerBody = new Rectangle(900/2-16, 700/2-16, 32, 32); locationCarNormal = ScarNormal; locationCarFront = ScarFront; locationCarBack = ScarBack; locationCarBoth = ScarBoth; imageRef = locationCarNormal; } @Override public void update(GameContainer gc, StateBasedGame sbg, int delta) throws SlickException { Input input = gc.getInput(); playerBody.transform(Transform.createRotateTransform(2)); float hip = currentSpeed * delta; float unstuckspeed = 0.05f * delta; if(carBack && !carFront) { imageRef = locationCarBack; ComponentImageRender.updateImage(); } else if(carFront && !carBack) { imageRef = locationCarFront; ComponentImageRender.updateImage(); } else if(carFront && carBack) { imageRef = locationCarBoth; ComponentImageRender.updateImage(); } if(input.isKeyDown(Input.KEY_RIGHT)) { rotate += rotateSpeed * delta; owner.setRotation(rotate); } if(input.isKeyDown(Input.KEY_LEFT)) { rotate -= rotateSpeed * delta; owner.setRotation(rotate); } if(input.isKeyDown(Input.KEY_UP)) { if(!collision) { up = true; noKey = false; if(currentSpeed < maxSpeed) { currentSpeed += acceleration; } MapCoordStorage.mapX += hip * Math.sin(Math.toRadians(rotate)); MapCoordStorage.mapY -= hip * Math.cos(Math.toRadians(rotate)); } else { currentSpeed = 1; } } else if(input.isKeyDown(Input.KEY_DOWN) && !collision) { down = true; noKey = false; if(currentSpeed > minSpeed) { currentSpeed -= slowdownSpeed; } MapCoordStorage.mapX += hip * Math.sin(Math.toRadians(rotate)); MapCoordStorage.mapY -= hip * Math.cos(Math.toRadians(rotate)); } else { noKey = true; if(currentSpeed > 0) { currentSpeed -= deacceleration; } else if(currentSpeed < 0) { currentSpeed += acceleration; } MapCoordStorage.mapX += hip * Math.sin(Math.toRadians(rotate)); MapCoordStorage.mapY -= hip * Math.cos(Math.toRadians(rotate)); } if(entityCollisionWith()) { collision = true; if(currentSpeed > 0 || up) { up = true; currentSpeed = 0; carFront = true; MapCoordStorage.mapX += unstuckspeed * Math.sin(Math.toRadians(rotate-180)); MapCoordStorage.mapY -= unstuckspeed * Math.cos(Math.toRadians(rotate-180)); } else if(currentSpeed < 0 || down) { down = true; currentSpeed = 0; carBack = true; MapCoordStorage.mapX += unstuckspeed * Math.sin(Math.toRadians(rotate)); MapCoordStorage.mapY -= unstuckspeed * Math.cos(Math.toRadians(rotate)); } else { currentSpeed = 0; } } else { collision = false; up = false; down = false; } if(currentSpeed >= -0.01f && currentSpeed <= 0.01f && noKey && !collision) { currentSpeed = 0; } } public static boolean entityCollisionWith() throws SlickException { for (int i = 0; i < BlockMap.entities.size(); i++) { Block entity1 = (Block) BlockMap.entities.get(i); if (playerBody.intersects(entity1.poly)) { return true; } } return false; } }

    Read the article

  • Collision Systems Implementation

    - by hrr4
    Just curious what might be a good way to implement a decent collision system. As a class inherited by a base Entity class? Currently I'm stuck and could just use a couple better ideas than my own. Any help is appreciated! Edit: Sorry, it's 2D Collisioning but honestly, I'm not looking for specific collision methods. I'm looking more about the lines of implementation. Just curious of some of the common methods of how to implement collision systems such as: Should the entire collision system be it's own class? What, if anything, should be inheritable? These are some of my questions. Sorry for the confusion.

    Read the article

  • 2D Tile Collision free movement

    - by andrepcg
    I'm coding a 3D game for a project using OpenGL and I'm trying to do tile collision on a surface. The surface plane is split into a grid of 64x64 pixels and I can simply check if the (x,y) tile is empty or not. Besides having a grid for collision, there's still free movement inside a tile. For each entity, in the end of the update function I simply increase the position by the velocity: pos.x += v.x; pos.y += v.y; I already have a collision grid created but my collide function is not great, i'm not sure how to handle it. I can check if the collision occurs but the way I handle is terrible. int leftTile = repelBox.x / grid->cellSize; int topTile = repelBox.y / grid->cellSize; int rightTile = (repelBox.x + repelBox.w) / grid->cellSize; int bottomTile = (repelBox.y + repelBox.h) / grid->cellSize; for (int y = topTile; y <= bottomTile; ++y) { for (int x = leftTile; x <= rightTile; ++x) { if (grid->getCell(x, y) == BLOCKED){ Rect colBox = grid->getCellRectXY(x, y); Rect xAxis = Rect(pos.x - 20 / 2.0f, pos.y - 20 / 4.0f, 20, 10); Rect yAxis = Rect(pos.x - 20 / 4.0f, pos.y - 20 / 2.0f, 10, 20); if (colBox.Intersects(xAxis)) v.x *= -1; if (colBox.Intersects(yAxis)) v.y *= -1; } } } If instead of reversing the direction I set it to false then when the entity tries to get away from the wall it's still intersecting the tile and gets stuck on that position. EDIT: I've worked with Flashpunk and it has a great function for movement and collision called moveBy. Are there any simplified implementations out there so I can check them out?

    Read the article

  • Fast, accurate 2d collision

    - by Neophyte
    I'm working on a 2d topdown shooter, and now need to go beyond my basic rectangle bounding box collision system. I have large levels with many different sprites, all of which are different shapes and sizes. The textures for the sprites are all square png files with transparent backgrounds, so I also need a way to only have a collision when the player walks into the coloured part of the texture, and not the transparent background. I plan to handle collision as follows: Check if any sprites are in range of the player Do a rect bounding box collision test Do an accurate collision (Where I need help) I don't mind advanced techniques, as I want to get this right with all my requirements in mind, but I'm not sure how to approach this. What techniques or even libraries to try. I know that I will probably need to create and store some kind of shape that accurately represents each sprite minus the transparent background. I've read that per pixel is slow, so given my large levels and number of objects I don't think that would be suitable. I've also looked at Box2d, but haven't been able to find much documentation, or any examples of how to get it up and running with SFML.

    Read the article

  • Help with collision detection method [on hold]

    - by derek jones
    I was wondering if any of you could spare me some time to go over some collision detection on my platform engine. i tried XNA a few years back but for reasons i wont go into online could not continue, my health is now at a state where i am ready to try again but due to my current circumstances (and age) schooling is out of the question so i turn to you guys for help. Whilst i can adapt the MS sample ok and have some great features, you will agree modifying code is not really learning. So i have spent the last couple of week going over my old MS code and lots of stuff online and decided on what i want and have ported most of it over to code that i understand 90% of. I have my player class that moves about, jumps with gravity, has animations and a bounding box that follows it around. I have my map & basic level class to load levels from text files. Its just how i handle the collisions that i am struggling with as i will want per pixel collision on some tiles(i have code for this in a pong game i made so that should be ok). I'm pretty clear in my mind on what i need to do its just putting it in code and in the right place, here's what i was thinking. I was going to do it all in layers, have a tile layer, a collision layer & an item layer this way i could make a nice map editor in Win Forms at some point. Anyway i need to read in the collision layer the assign each tile a rectangle and collision property, and this is where i get me. Would any of you be able to spare some time and go over this with me ? I will post some code later Regards Del

    Read the article

  • Using 2d collision with 3d objects

    - by Lyise
    I'm planning to write a fairly basic scrolling shoot 'em up, however, I have run into a query with regards to checking for collision. I plan to have a fixed top down view, where the player and enemies are all 3d objects on a fixed plane, and when the enemy or player fires at the other, their shots will also be along this fixed plane. In order to handle the collision, I have read up a bit on collision detection in 3d, as it is not something I have looked into previously, but I'm not sure what would be ideal for this situation. My options appear to be: Sphere collision, however, this lacks the pixel precision I would like Detection using all vertexes and planes of each object, but this seems overly convoluted for a fixed plane of play Rendering the play screen in black and white (where white is an object, black is empty space), once for enemies and once for the player, and checking for collisions that way (if a pixel is white on both, there is a collision) Which of these would be the best approach, or is there another option that I am missing? I have done this previously using 2d sprites, however I can't use the same thinking here as I don't have the image to refer to.

    Read the article

  • Trouble with AABB collision response and physics

    - by WCM
    I have been racking my brain trying to figure out a problem I am having with physics and basic AABB collision response. I am fairly close as the physics are mostly right. Gravity feels good and movement is solid. The issue I am running into is that when I land on the test block in my project, I can jump off of it most of the time. If I repeatedly jump in place, I will eventually get stuck one or two pixels below the surface of the test block. If I try to jump, I can become free of the other block, but it will happen again a few jumps later. I feel like I am missing something really obvious with this. I have two functions that support the detection and function to return a vector for the overlap of the two rectangle bounding boxes. I have a single update method that is processing the physics and collision for the entity. I feel like I am missing something very simple, like an ordering of the physics vs. collision response handling. Any thoughts or help can be appreciated. I apologize for the format of the code, tis prototype code mostly. The collision detection function: public static bool Collides(Rectangle source, Rectangle target) { if (source.Right < target.Left || source.Bottom < target.Top || source.Left > target.Right || source.Top > target.Bottom) { return false; } return true; } The overlap function: public static Vector2 GetMinimumTranslation(Rectangle source, Rectangle target) { Vector2 mtd = new Vector2(); Vector2 amin = source.Min(); Vector2 amax = source.Max(); Vector2 bmin = target.Min(); Vector2 bmax = target.Max(); float left = (bmin.X - amax.X); float right = (bmax.X - amin.X); float top = (bmin.Y - amax.Y); float bottom = (bmax.Y - amin.Y); if (left > 0 || right < 0) return Vector2.Zero; if (top > 0 || bottom < 0) return Vector2.Zero; if (Math.Abs(left) < right) mtd.X = left; else mtd.X = right; if (Math.Abs(top) < bottom) mtd.Y = top; else mtd.Y = bottom; // 0 the axis with the largest mtd value. if (Math.Abs(mtd.X) < Math.Abs(mtd.Y)) mtd.Y = 0; else mtd.X = 0; return mtd; } The update routine (gravity = 0.001f, jumpHeight = 0.35f, moveAmount = 0.15f): public void Update(GameTime gameTime) { Acceleration.Y = gravity; Position += new Vector2((float)(movement * moveAmount * gameTime.ElapsedGameTime.TotalMilliseconds), (float)(Velocity.Y * gameTime.ElapsedGameTime.TotalMilliseconds)); Velocity.Y += Acceleration.Y; Vector2 previousPosition = new Vector2((int)Position.X, (int)Position.Y); KeyboardState keyboard = Keyboard.GetState(); movement = 0; if (keyboard.IsKeyDown(Keys.Left)) { movement -= 1; } if (keyboard.IsKeyDown(Keys.Right)) { movement += 1; } if (Position.Y + 16 > GameClass.Instance.GraphicsDevice.Viewport.Height) { Velocity.Y = 0; Position = new Vector2(Position.X, GameClass.Instance.GraphicsDevice.Viewport.Height - 16); IsOnSurface = true; } if (Collision.Collides(BoundingBox, GameClass.Instance.block.BoundingBox)) { Vector2 mtd = Collision.GetMinimumTranslation(BoundingBox, GameClass.Instance.block.BoundingBox); Position += mtd; Velocity.Y = 0; IsOnSurface = true; } if (keyboard.IsKeyDown(Keys.Space) && !previousKeyboard.IsKeyDown(Keys.Space)) { if (IsOnSurface) { Velocity.Y = -jumpHeight; IsOnSurface = false; } } previousKeyboard = keyboard; } This is also a full download to the project. https://www.box.com/s/3rkdtbso3xgfgc2asawy P.S. I know that I could do this with the XNA Platformer Starter Kit algo, but it has some deep flaws that I am going to try to live without. I'd rather go the route of collision response via an overlay function. Thanks for any and all insight!

    Read the article

  • Extrapolation breaks collision detection

    - by user22241
    Before applying extrapolation to my sprite's movement, my collision worked perfectly. However, after applying extrapolation to my sprite's movement (to smooth things out), the collision no longer works. This is how things worked before extrapolation: However, after I implement my extrapolation, the collision routine breaks. I am assuming this is because it is acting upon the new coordinate that has been produced by the extrapolation routine (which is situated in my render call ). After I apply my extrapolation How to correct this behaviour? I've tried puting an extra collision check just after extrapolation - this does seem to clear up a lot of the problems but I've ruled this out because putting logic into my rendering is out of the question. I've also tried making a copy of the spritesX position, extrapolating that and drawing using that rather than the original, thus leaving the original intact for the logic to pick up on - this seems a better option, but it still produces some weird effects when colliding with walls. I'm pretty sure this also isn't the correct way to deal with this. I've found a couple of similar questions on here but the answers haven't helped me. This is my extrapolation code: public void onDrawFrame(GL10 gl) { //Set/Re-set loop back to 0 to start counting again loops=0; while(System.currentTimeMillis() > nextGameTick && loops < maxFrameskip){ SceneManager.getInstance().getCurrentScene().updateLogic(); nextGameTick+=skipTicks; timeCorrection += (1000d/ticksPerSecond) % 1; nextGameTick+=timeCorrection; timeCorrection %=1; loops++; tics++; } extrapolation = (float)(System.currentTimeMillis() + skipTicks - nextGameTick) / (float)skipTicks; render(extrapolation); } Applying extrapolation render(float extrapolation){ //This example shows extrapolation for X axis only. Y position (spriteScreenY is assumed to be valid) extrapolatedPosX = spriteGridX+(SpriteXVelocity*dt)*extrapolation; spriteScreenPosX = extrapolationPosX * screenWidth; drawSprite(spriteScreenX, spriteScreenY); } Edit As I mentioned above, I have tried making a copy of the sprite's coordinates specifically to draw with.... this has it's own problems. Firstly, regardless of the copying, when the sprite is moving, it's super-smooth, when it stops, it's wobbling slightly left/right - as it's still extrapolating it's position based on the time. Is this normal behavior and can we 'turn it off' when the sprite stops? I've tried having flags for left / right and only extrapolating if either of these is enabled. I've also tried copying the last and current positions to see if there is any difference. However, as far as collision goes, these don't help. If the user is pressing say, the right button and the sprite is moving right, when it hits a wall, if the user continues to hold the right button down, the sprite will keep animating to the right, while being stopped by the wall (therefore not actually moving), however because the right flag is still set and also because the collision routine is constantly moving the sprite out of the wall, it still appear to the code (not the player) that the sprite is still moving, and therefore extrapolation continues. So what the player would see, is the sprite 'static' (yes, it's animating, but it's not actually moving across the screen), and every now and then it shakes violently as the extrapolation attempts to do it's thing....... Hope this help

    Read the article

  • Pixel Perfect Collision Detection in Cocos2dx

    - by Happybirthday
    I am trying to port the pixel perfect collision detection in Cocos2d-x the original version was made for Cocos2D and can be found here: http://www.cocos2d-iphone.org/forums/topic/pixel-perfect-collision-detection-using-color-blending/ Here is my code for the Cocos2d-x version bool CollisionDetection::areTheSpritesColliding(cocos2d::CCSprite *spr1, cocos2d::CCSprite *spr2, bool pp, CCRenderTexture* _rt) { bool isColliding = false; CCRect intersection; CCRect r1 = spr1-boundingBox(); CCRect r2 = spr2-boundingBox(); intersection = CCRectMake(fmax(r1.getMinX(),r2.getMinX()), fmax( r1.getMinY(), r2.getMinY()) ,0,0); intersection.size.width = fmin(r1.getMaxX(), r2.getMaxX() - intersection.getMinX()); intersection.size.height = fmin(r1.getMaxY(), r2.getMaxY() - intersection.getMinY()); // Look for simple bounding box collision if ( (intersection.size.width0) && (intersection.size.height0) ) { // If we're not checking for pixel perfect collisions, return true if (!pp) { return true; } unsigned int x = intersection.origin.x; unsigned int y = intersection.origin.y; unsigned int w = intersection.size.width; unsigned int h = intersection.size.height; unsigned int numPixels = w * h; //CCLog("Intersection X and Y %d, %d", x, y); //CCLog("Number of pixels %d", numPixels); // Draw into the RenderTexture _rt-beginWithClear( 0, 0, 0, 0); // Render both sprites: first one in RED and second one in GREEN glColorMask(1, 0, 0, 1); spr1-visit(); glColorMask(0, 1, 0, 1); spr2-visit(); glColorMask(1, 1, 1, 1); // Get color values of intersection area ccColor4B *buffer = (ccColor4B *)malloc( sizeof(ccColor4B) * numPixels ); glReadPixels(x, y, w, h, GL_RGBA, GL_UNSIGNED_BYTE, buffer); _rt-end(); // Read buffer unsigned int step = 1; for(unsigned int i=0; i 0 && color.g 0) { isColliding = true; break; } } // Free buffer memory free(buffer); } return isColliding; } My code is working perfectly if I send the "pp" parameter as false. That is if I do only a bounding box collision but I am not able to get it working correctly for the case when I need Pixel Perfect collision. I think the opengl masking code is not working as I intended. Here is the code for "_rt" _rt = CCRenderTexture::create(visibleSize.width, visibleSize.height); _rt-setPosition(ccp(origin.x + visibleSize.width * 0.5f, origin.y + visibleSize.height * 0.5f)); this-addChild(_rt, 1000000); _rt-setVisible(true); //For testing I think I am making a mistake with the implementation of this CCRenderTexture Can anyone guide me with what I am doing wrong ? Thank you for your time :)

    Read the article

  • Collision detection in 3D space

    - by dreta
    I've got to write, what can be summed up as, a compelte 3D game from scratch this semester. Up untill now i have only programmed 2D games in my spare time, the transition doesn't seem tough, the game's simple. The only issue i have is collision detection. The only thing i could find was AABB, bounding spheres or recommendations of various physics engines. I have to program a submarine that's going to be moving freely inside of a cave system, AFAIK i can't use physics libraries, so none of the above solves my problem. Up untill now i was using SAT for my collision detection. Are there any similar, great algorithms, but crafted for 3D collision? I'm not talking about octrees, or other optimalizations, i'm talking about direct collision detection of one set of 3D polygons with annother set of 3D polygons. I thought about using SAT twice, project the mesh from the top and the side, but then it seems so hard to even divide 3D space into convex shapes. Also that seems like far too much computation even with octrees. How do proffessionals do it? Could somebody shed some light.

    Read the article

  • Collision Detection for a 2D RPG

    - by PHMitrious
    First of all, I have done some research on this topic before asking, and I'm asking this question as a mean to get some opinions on this topic, so I don't make a decision only on my own, but taking into account other people's experience as well. I'm starting a 2D online RPG project. I am using SFML for graphics and input and I'm creating a basic game structure and all for the game, creating modules for each part of the game. Well, let me get to the point I just wanted to give you guys some context. I want to decide on how I'm going to work with collision detection. Well I'm kinda going to work on maps with a tile map divided in layers (as usual) and add an extra 2 layers - not exactly in the map - for objects. So I'll have collisions between objects and agents (players - npcs - monsters - spells etc) and agents and tiles. The seconds one can be easily solved the first one need a little bit of work. I considered both creating a basic collision test engine using polygons and a quadtree to diminish tests since I'm going to be working with big maps with lots of objects - creating both a physical and graphical world representation. And I also considered using a physics engine like Box2D for collision tests. I think the first approach would take more work on my part but the second one would have the overhead of using a whole physics engine for just collision detection and no physics. What do you guys think ?

    Read the article

  • Collision Detection with SAT: False Collision for Diagonal Movement Towards Vertical Tile-Walls?

    - by Macks
    Edit: Problem solved! Big thanks to Jonathan who pointed me in the right direction. Sean describes the method I used in a different thread. Also big thanks to him! :) Here is how I solved my problem: If a collision is registered by my SAT-method, only fire the collision-event on my character if there are no neighbouring solid tiles in the direction of the returned minimum translation vector. I'm developing my first tile-based 2D-game with Javascript. To learn the basics, I decided to write my own "game engine". I have successfully implemented collision detection using the separating axis theorem, but I've run into a problem that I can't quite wrap my head around. If I press the [up] and [left] arrow-keys simultaneously, my character moves diagonally towards the upper left. If he hits a horizontal wall, he'll just keep moving in x-direction. The same goes for [up] and [left] as well as downward-diagonal movements, it works as intended: http://i.stack.imgur.com/aiZjI.png Diagonal movement works fine for horizontal walls, for both left and right-movement However: this does not work for vertical walls. Instead of keeping movement in y-direction, he'll just stop as soon as he "enters" a new tile on the y-axis. So for some reason SAT thinks my character is colliding vertically with tiles from vertical walls: http://i.stack.imgur.com/XBEKR.png My character stops because he thinks that he is colliding vertically with tiles from the wall on the right. This only occurs, when: Moving into top-right direction towards the right wall Moving into top-left direction towards the left wall Bottom-right and bottom-left movement work: the character keeps moving in y-direction as intended. Is this inherited from the way SAT works or is there a problem with my implementation? What can I do to solve my problem? Oh yeah, my character is displayed as a circle but he's actually a rectangular polygon for the collision detection. Thank you very much for your help.

    Read the article

  • Collision with half semi-circle

    - by heitortsergent
    I am trying to port a game I made using Flash/AS3, to the Windows Phone using C#/XNA 4.0. You can see it here: http://goo.gl/gzFiE In the flash version I used a pixel-perfect collision between meteors (it's a rectangle, and usually rotated) that spawn outside the screen, and move towards the center, and a shield in the center of the screen(which is half of a semi-circle, also rotated by the player), which made the meteor bounce back in the opposite direction it came from, when they collided. My goal now is to make the meteors bounce in different angles, depending on the position it collides with the shield (much like Pong, hitting the borders causes a change in the ball's angle). So, these are the 3 options I thought of: -Pixel-perfect collision (microsoft has a sample(http://create.msdn.com/en-US/education/catalog/tutorial/collision_2d_perpixel_transformed)) , but then I wouldn't know how to change the meteor angle after the collision -3 BoundingCircle's to represent the half semi-circle shield, but then I would have to somehow move them as I rotate the shield. -Farseer Physics. I could make a shape composed of 3 lines, and use that as the collision object for the shield. Is there any other way besides those? Which would be the best way to do it(it's aimed towards mobile devices, so pixel-perfect is probably not a good choice)? Most of the time there's always a easier/better way than what we think of...

    Read the article

  • How do i approach this collision model?

    - by PeeS
    this is the game level prototype i have already implemented. It has few objects per room to allow me to finally add some collision detection/response code into it. VIDEO As you can probably see, every object inside has it's own AABB, even the room itself has AABB. So a player is like 'inside the Room AABB'. My player will be exactly inside the room, so he would have to collide correctly with those AABBs, so that when he hits any of those objects inside he get's a proper collision response from those AABB's. Now i would like to hear from you what kind of collision approach should i choose in here? How do i approach this kind of stuff: AABB to AABB collision detection then when this is positive go with AABB - Tri to find proper plane normal and calculate response ? AABB to AABB then when positive go with AABB - AABB Side check to find proper proper plane normal and calculate response? Anything else? How do you do this ? Many thanks.

    Read the article

  • Collision with half of a semi-circle

    - by heitortsergent
    I am trying to port a game I made using Flash/AS3, to the Windows Phone using C#/XNA 4.0. You can see it here: http://goo.gl/gzFiE In the flash version I used a pixel-perfect collision between meteors (it's a rectangle, and usually rotated) that spawn outside the screen, and move towards the center, and a shield in the center of the screen(which is half of a semi-circle, also rotated by the player), which made the meteor bounce back in the opposite direction it came from, when they collided. My goal now is to make the meteors bounce in different angles, depending on the position it collides with the shield (much like Pong, hitting the borders causes a change in the ball's angle). So, these are the 3 options I thought of: Pixel-perfect collision (Microsoft has a sample) , but then I wouldn't know how to change the meteor angle after the collision 3 BoundingCircle's to represent the half semi-circle shield, but then I would have to somehow move them as I rotate the shield. Farseer Physics. I could make a shape composed of 3 lines, and use that as the collision object for the shield. Is there any other way besides those? Which would be the best way to do it(it's aimed towards mobile devices, so pixel-perfect is probably not a good choice)? Most of the time there's always a easier/better way than what we think of...

    Read the article

  • 3D Ball Physics Theory: collision response on ground and against walls?

    - by David
    I'm really struggling to get a strong grasp on how I should be handling collision response in a game engine I'm building around a 3D ball physics concept. Think Monkey Ball as an example of the type of gameplay. I am currently using sphere-to-sphere broad phase, then AABB to OBB testing (the final test I am using right now is one that checks if one of the 8 OBB points crosses the planes of the object it is testing against). This seems to work pretty well, and I am getting back: Plane that object is colliding against (with a point on the plane, the plane's normal, and the exact point of intersection. I've tried what feels like dozens of different high-level strategies for handling these collisions, without any real success. I think my biggest problem is understanding how to handle collisions against walls in the x-y axes (left/right, front/back), which I want to have elasticity, and the ground (z-axis) where I want an elastic reaction if the ball drops down, but then for it to eventually normalize and be kept "on the ground" (not go into the ground, but also not continue bouncing). Without kluging something together, I'm positive there is a good way to handle this, my theories just aren't getting me all the way there. For physics modeling and movement, I am trying to use a Euler based setup with each object maintaining a position (and destination position prior to collision detection), a velocity (which is added onto the position to determine the destination position), and an acceleration (which I use to store any player input being put on the ball, as well as gravity in the z coord). Starting from when I detect a collision, what is a good way to approach the response to get the expected behavior in all cases? Thanks in advance to anyone taking the time to assist... I am grateful for any pointers, and happy to post any additional info or code if it is useful. UPDATE Based on Steve H's and eBusiness' responses below, I have adapted my collision response to what makes a lot more sense now. It was close to right before, but I didn't have all the right pieces together at the right time! I have one problem left to solve, and that is what is causing the floor collision to hit every frame. Here's the collision response code I have now for the ball, then I'll describe the last bit I'm still struggling to understand. // if we are moving in the direction of the plane (against the normal)... if (m_velocity.dot(intersection.plane.normal) <= 0.0f) { float dampeningForce = 1.8f; // eventually create this value based on mass and acceleration // Calculate the projection velocity PVRTVec3 actingVelocity = m_velocity.project(intersection.plane.normal); m_velocity -= actingVelocity * dampeningForce; } // Clamp z-velocity to zero if we are within a certain threshold // -- NOTE: this was an experimental idea I had to solve the "jitter" bug I'll describe below float diff = 0.2f - abs(m_velocity.z); if (diff > 0.0f && diff <= 0.2f) { m_velocity.z = 0.0f; } // Take this object to its new destination position based on... // -- our pre-collision position + vector to the collision point + our new velocity after collision * time // -- remaining after the collision to finish the movement m_destPosition = m_position + intersection.diff + (m_velocity * intersection.tRemaining * GAMESTATE->dt); The above snippet is run after a collision is detected on the ball (collider) with a collidee (floor in this case). With a dampening force of 1.8f, the ball's reflected "upward" velocity will eventually be overcome by gravity, so the ball will essentially be stuck on the floor. THIS is the problem I have now... the collision code is running every frame (since the ball's z-velocity is constantly pushing it a collision with the floor below it). The ball is not technically stuck, I can move it around still, but the movement is really goofy because the velocity and position keep getting affected adversely by the above snippet. I was experimenting with an idea to clamp the z-velocity to zero if it was "close to zero", but this didn't do what I think... probably because the very next frame the ball gets a new gravity acceleration applied to its velocity regardless (which I think is good, right?). Collisions with walls are as they used to be and work very well. It's just this last bit of "stickiness" to deal with. The camera is constantly jittering up and down by extremely small fractions too when the ball is "at rest". I'll keep playing with it... I like puzzles like this, especially when I think I'm close. Any final ideas on what I could be doing wrong here? UPDATE 2 Good news - I discovered I should be subtracting the intersection.diff from the m_position (position prior to collision). The intersection.diff is my calculation of the difference in the vector of position to destPosition from the intersection point to the position. In this case, adding it was causing my ball to always go "up" just a little bit, causing the jitter. By subtracting it, and moving that clamper for the velocity.z when close to zero to being above the dot product (and changing the test from <= 0 to < 0), I now have the following: // Clamp z-velocity to zero if we are within a certain threshold float diff = 0.2f - abs(m_velocity.z); if (diff > 0.0f && diff <= 0.2f) { m_velocity.z = 0.0f; } // if we are moving in the direction of the plane (against the normal)... float dotprod = m_velocity.dot(intersection.plane.normal); if (dotprod < 0.0f) { float dampeningForce = 1.8f; // eventually create this value based on mass and acceleration? // Calculate the projection velocity PVRTVec3 actingVelocity = m_velocity.project(intersection.plane.normal); m_velocity -= actingVelocity * dampeningForce; } // Take this object to its new destination position based on... // -- our pre-collision position + vector to the collision point + our new velocity after collision * time // -- remaining after the collision to finish the movement m_destPosition = m_position - intersection.diff + (m_velocity * intersection.tRemaining * GAMESTATE->dt); UpdateWorldMatrix(m_destWorldMatrix, m_destOBB, m_destPosition, false); This is MUCH better. No jitter, and the ball now "rests" at the floor, while still bouncing off the floor and walls. The ONLY thing left is that the ball is now virtually "stuck". He can move but at a much slower rate, likely because the else of my dot product test is only letting the ball move at a rate multiplied against the tRemaining... I think this is a better solution than I had previously, but still somehow not the right idea. BTW, I'm trying to journal my progress through this problem for anyone else with a similar situation - hopefully it will serve as some help, as many similar posts have for me over the years.

    Read the article

  • Turning on collision crashes game

    - by MomentumGaming
    I am getting a null pointer excecption to both my sprite and level. I am working on my mob class, and when I try to move him and the move function is called, the game crashes after checking collision with a null pointer excecption. Taking out the one line that actually checks if the tile located in front of it fixes the problem. Also, if i keep collision ON but don't move the position of the mob (the spider) the game works fine. I will have collision, and the spider appears on the screen, only problem is, getting it to move causes this nasty error that i just can't fix. true Exception in thread "Display" java.lang.NullPointerException at com.apcompsci.game.entity.mob.Mob.collision(Mob.java:67) at com.apcompsci.game.entity.mob.Mob.move(Mob.java:38) at com.apcompsci.game.entity.mob.spider.update(spider.java:58) at com.apcompsci.game.level.Level.update(Level.java:55) at com.apcompsci.game.Game.update(Game.java:128) at com.apcompsci.game.Game.run(Game.java:106) at java.lang.Thread.run(Unknown Source) Here is my renderMob mehtod: public void renderMob(int xp,int yp,Sprite sprite,int flip) { xp -= xOffset; yp-=yOffset; for(int y = 0; y<32; y++) { int ya = y + yp; int ys = y; if(flip == 2||flip == 3)ys = 31-y; for(int x = 0; x<32; x++) { int xa = x + xp; int xs = x; if(flip == 1||flip == 3)xs = 31-x; if(xa < -32 || xa >=width || ya<0||ya>=height) break; if(xa<0) xa =0; int col = sprite.pixels[xs+ys*32]; if(col!= 0x000000) pixels[xa+ya*width] = col; } } } My spider class which determines the sprite and where I control movement, also rendering the spider onto the screen, when I increment ya to move the sprite, I get the crash, but without ya++, it runs flawlessly with a spider sprite on screen: package com.apcompsci.game.entity.mob; import com.apcompsci.game.entity.mob.Mob.Direction; import com.apcompsci.game.graphics.Screen; import com.apcompsci.game.graphics.Sprite; import com.apcompsci.game.level.Level; public class spider extends Mob{ Direction dir; private Sprite sprite; private boolean walking; public spider(int x, int y) { this.x = x <<4; this.y = y <<4; sprite = sprite.spider_forward; } public void update() { int xa = 0, ya = 0; ya++; if(ya<0) { sprite = sprite.spider_forward; dir = Direction.UP; } if(ya>0) { sprite = sprite.spider_back; dir = Direction.DOWN; } if(xa<0) { sprite = sprite.spider_side; dir = Direction.LEFT; } if(xa>0) { sprite = sprite.spider_side; dir = Direction.LEFT; } if(xa!= 0 || ya!= 0) { System.out.println("true"); move(xa,ya); walking = true; } else{ walking = false; } } public void render(Screen screen) { screen.renderMob(x, y, sprite, 0); } } This is th mob class that contains the move() method that is called in the spider class above. This move method calls the collision method. tile and sprite comes up null in the debugger: package com.apcompsci.game.entity.mob; import java.util.ArrayList; import java.util.List; import com.apcompsci.game.entity.Entity; import com.apcompsci.game.entity.projectile.DemiGodProjectile; import com.apcompsci.game.entity.projectile.Projectile; import com.apcompsci.game.graphics.Sprite; public class Mob extends Entity{ protected Sprite sprite; protected boolean moving = false; protected enum Direction { UP,DOWN,LEFT,RIGHT } protected Direction dir; public void move(int xa,int ya) { if(xa != 0 && ya != 0) { move(xa,0); move(0,ya); return; } if(xa>0) dir = Direction.RIGHT; if(xa<0) dir = Direction.LEFT; if(ya>0)dir = Direction.DOWN; if(ya<0)dir = Direction.UP; if(!collision(xa,ya)){ x+= xa; y+=ya; } } public void update() { } public void shoot(int x, int y, double dir) { //dir = Math.toDegrees(dir); Projectile p = new DemiGodProjectile(x, y,dir); level.addProjectile(p); } public boolean collision(int xa,int ya) { boolean solid = false; for(int c = 0; c<4; c++) { int xt = ((x+xa) + c % 2 * 14 - 8 )/16; int yt = ((y+ya) + c / 2 * 12 +3 )/16; if(level.getTile(xt, yt).solid()) solid = true; } return solid; } public void render() { } } Finally, here is the method in which i call the add() method for the spider to add it to the level: protected void loadLevel(String path) { try{ BufferedImage image = ImageIO.read(SpawnLevel.class.getResource(path)); int w = width =image.getWidth(); int h = height = image.getHeight(); tiles = new int[w*h]; image.getRGB(0, 0, w,h, tiles,0, w); } catch(IOException e){ e.printStackTrace(); System.out.println("Exception! Could not load level file!"); } add(new spider(20,45)); } I don't think i need to include the level class but just in case, I have provided a gistHub link for better context. It contains all of the full classes listed above , plus my entity class and maybe another. Thanks for the help if you decide to do so, much appreciated! Also, please tell me if i'm in the wrong section of stackeoverflow, i figured that since this is the gamign section that it belonged but debugging code normally goes into the general section.

    Read the article

  • Collision Detection in Java for a game

    - by gordsmash
    Im making a game in Java with a few other people but we are stuck on one part of it, making the collision detection. The game is an RPG and I know how to do the collision detection with the characters using Rectangles, but what I dont know how to do is the collision detection for the maps. What I mean by that is like so the character cant walk over trees or water and that stuff but using rectangles doesnt seem like the best option here. Well to explain what the game maps are gonna look like, here is an example http://i980.photobucket.com/albums/ae287/gordsmash/7-8.jpg Now I could use rectangles to get bounds and stop the player from walking over the trees and water but that would take a lot of them. But is there another easier way to prevent the player from walking over the trees and obstacles besides using Rectangles?

    Read the article

  • Implementing 2D CSG (for collision shapes)?

    - by bluescrn
    Are there any simple (or well documented) algorithms for basic CSG operations on 2D polygons? I'm looking for a way to 'add' a number of overlapping 2D collision shapes. These may be convex or concave, but will be closed shapes, defined as a set of line segments, with no self-intersections. The use of this would be to construct a clean set of collision edges, for use with a 2D physics engine, from a scene consisting of many arbitrarily placed (and frequently overlapping) objects, each with their own collision shape. To begin with, I only need to 'add' shapes, but the ability to 'subtract', to create holes, may also be useful.

    Read the article

  • Unity Particle System collision detection problem

    - by Krav
    I'm using Unity 3.5.5f3 wich has the Shuriken particle system. I've made a blood particle system based on Unity's demos. (Exploding paint [Blood]) The blood is flowing and when it collides with a Plane Transform wich I've created a small pool of blood spawns as a Collision Sub Emitter. My main problem is that when I want to add another object to collide it just doesn't want to work. When I create a cube, and set it as a collision plane the collision will only occur at the half of the cube. I want this to happen: When it reaches the cube's surface the sub emmiter activates, and when the surface is horizontal it appears horizontally, and if it's vertical then vertically. Now it just appears horizontally everytime like in the picture. How could I solve it?

    Read the article

  • Detect collision from a particular side

    - by Fabián
    I'm making a platform sidescrolling game. All I want to do is to detect if my character is on the floor: function OnCollisionStay (col : Collision){ if(col.gameObject.tag == "Floor"){ onFloor = true; } else {onFloor = false;} } function OnCollisionExit (col : Collision){ onFloor = false; } But I know this isn't the accurate way. If I hit a cube with a "floor" tag, in the air (no matter if with the character's feet or head) I would be able to jump. Is there a way to use the same box collision to detect if I'm touching something from a specific side?

    Read the article

  • Solving 2D Collision Detection Issues with Relative Velocities

    - by Jengerer
    Imagine you have a situation where two objects are moving parallel to one-another and are both within range to collide with a static wall, like this: A common method used in dynamic collision detection is to loop through all objects in arbitrary order, solve for pair-wise collision detection using relative velocities, and then move the object to the nearest collision, if any. However, in this case, if the red object is checked first against the blue one, it would see that the relative velocity to the blue object is -20 m/s (and would thereby not collide this time frame). Then it would see that the red object would collide with the static wall, and the solution would be: And the red object passes through the blue one. So it appears to be a matter of choosing the right order in which you check collisions; but how can you determine which order is correct? How can this passing through of objects be avoided? Is ignoring relative velocity and considering every object as static during pair-wise checks a better idea for this reason?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >