Search Results

Search found 30773 results on 1231 pages for 'object detection'.

Page 42/1231 | < Previous Page | 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49  | Next Page >

• How to mock a dynamic object

  - by Daniel Cazzulino

  Someone asked me how to mock a dynamic object with Moq, which might be non-obvious. Given the following interface definition: public interface IProject { string Name { get; } dynamic Data { get; } } When you try to setup the mock for the dynamic property values, you get:   What’s important to realize is that a dynamic object is just a plain object, whose properties happen to be resolved at runtime. Kinda like reflection, if you will: all public properties of whatever object happens to be the instance, will be resolved just fine at runtime. Therefore, one way to mock this dynamic is to just create an anonymous type with the properties we want, and set the dynamic property to return that:...Read full article

  Read the article

• Updating physics for animated models

  - by Mathias Hölzl

  For a new game we have do set up a scene with a minimum of 30 bone animated models.(shooter) The problem is that the update process for the animated models takes too long. Thats what I do: Each character has ~30 bones and for every update tick the animation gets calculated and every bone fires a event with the new matrix. The physics receives the event with the new matrix and updates the collision shape for that bone. The time that it takes to build the animation isn't that bad (0.2ms for 30 Bones - 6ms for 30 models). But the main problem is that the physic engine (Bullet) uses a diffrent matrix for transformation and so its necessary to convert it. Code for matrix conversion: (~0.005ms) btTransform CLEAR_PHYSICS_API Mat_to_btTransform( Mat mat ) { btMatrix3x3 bulletRotation; btVector3 bulletPosition; XMFLOAT4X4 matData = mat.GetStorage(); // copy rotation matrix for ( int row=0; row<3; ++row ) for ( int column=0; column<3; ++column ) bulletRotation[row][column] = matData.m[column][row]; for ( int column=0; column<3; ++column ) bulletPosition[column] = matData.m[3][column]; return btTransform( bulletRotation, bulletPosition ); } The function for updating the transform(Physic): void CLEAR_PHYSICS_API BulletPhysics::VKinematicMove(Mat mat, ActorId aid) { if ( btRigidBody * const body = FindActorBody( aid ) ) { btTransform tmp = Mat_to_btTransform( mat ); body->setWorldTransform( tmp ); } } The real problem is the function FindActorBody(id): ActorIDToBulletActorMap::const_iterator found = m_actorBodies.find( id ); if ( found != m_actorBodies.end() ) return found->second; All physic actors are stored in m_actorBodies and thats why the updating process takes to long. But I have no idea how I could avoid this. Friendly greedings, Mathias

  Read the article

• Meaning of offset in pygame Mask.overlap methods

  - by Alan

  I have a situation in which two rectangles collide, and I have to detect how much did they collide so so I can redraw the objects in a way that they are only touching each others edges. It's a situation in which a moving ball should hit a completely unmovable wall and instantly stop moving. Since the ball sometimes moves multiple pixels per screen refresh, it it possible that it enters the wall with more that half its surface when the collision is detected, in which case i want to shift it position back to the point where it only touches the edges of the wall. Here is the conceptual image it: I decided to implement this with masks, and thought that i could supply the masks of both objects (wall and ball) and get the surface (as a square) of their intersection. However, there is also the offset parameter which i don't understand. Here are the docs for the method: Mask.overlap Returns the point of intersection if the masks overlap with the given offset - or None if it does not overlap. Mask.overlap(othermask, offset) -> x,y The overlap tests uses the following offsets (which may be negative): +----+----------.. |A | yoffset | +-+----------.. +--|B |xoffset | | : :

  Read the article

• How to fetch only the sprites in the player's range of motion for collision testing? (2D, axis aligned sprites)

  - by Twodordan

  I am working on a 2D sprite game for educational purposes. (In case you want to know, it uses WebGl and Javascript) I've implemented movement using the Euler method (and delta time) to keep things simple. Now I'm trying to tackle collisions. The way I wrote things, my game only has rectangular sprites (axis aligned, never rotated) of various/variable sizes. So I need to figure out what I hit and which side of the target sprite I hit (and I'm probably going to use these intersection tests). The old fashioned method seems to be to use tile based grids, to target only a few tiles at a time, but that sounds silly and impractical for my game. (Splitting the whole level into blocks, having each sprite's bounding box fit multiple blocks I might abide. But if the sprites change size and move around, you have to keep changing which tiles they belong to, every frame, it doesn't sound right.) In Flash you can test collision under one point, but it's not efficient to iterate through all the elements on stage each frame. (hence why people use the tile method). Bottom line is, I'm trying to figure out how to test only the elements within the player's range of motion. (I know how to get the range of motion, I have a good idea of how to write a collisionCheck(playerSprite, targetSprite) function. But how do I know which sprites are currently in the player's vicinity to fetch only them?) Please discuss. Cheers!

  Read the article

• Java 2D Rectangle Collision? [on hold]

  - by Andreas Elia

  I am just wanting to know of another (longer OR shorter) way of getting 100% effective collisions on a 2D plat-former. The current collision system that is in place works from coords on the level and does not always work reliably. Thank you in advance for any help/support. The current system draws a rectangle and is checking to see if any two points collide. From testing, the system can sometimes "glitch" and allow the player to collide into walls etc. Player Class http://pastebin.com/2zE8vz8R Main Class http://pastebin.com/A6Utb3ti

  Read the article

• How can I convert a 2D bitmap (Used for terrain) to a 2D polygon mesh for collision?

  - by Megadanxzero

  So I'm making an artillery type game, sort of similar to Worms with all the usual stuff like destructible terrain etc... and while I could use per-pixel collision that doesn't give me collision normals or anything like that. Converting it all to a mesh would also mean I could use an existing physics library, which would be better than anything I can make by myself. I've seen people mention doing this by using Marching Squares to get contours in the bitmap, but I can't find anything which mentions how to turn these into a mesh (Unless it refers to a 3D mesh with contour lines defining different heights, which is NOT what I want). At the moment I can get a basic Marching Squares contour which looks something like this (Where the grid-like lines in the background would be the Marching Squares 'cells'): That needs to be interpolated to get a smoother, more accurate result but that's the general idea. I had a couple ideas for how to turn this into a mesh, but many of them wouldn't work in certain cases, and the one which I thought would work perfectly has turned out to be very slow and I've not even finished it yet! Ideally I'd like whatever I end up using to be fast enough to do every frame for cases such as rapidly-firing weapons, or digging tools. I'm thinking there must be some kind of existing algorithm/technique for turning something like this into a mesh, but I can't seem to find anything. I've looked at some things like Delaunay Triangulation, but as far as I can tell that won't correctly handle concave shapes like the above example, and also wouldn't account for holes within the terrain. I'll go through the technique I came up with for comparison and I guess I'll see if anyone has a better idea. First of all interpolate the Marching Squares contour lines, creating vertices from the line ends, and getting vertices where lines cross cell edges (Important). Then, for each cell containing vertices create polygons by using 2 vertices, and a cell corner as the 3rd vertex (Probably the closest corner). Do this for each cell and I think you should have a mesh which accurately represents the original bitmap (Though there will only be polygons at the edges of the bitmap, and large filled in areas in between will be empty). The only problem with this is that it involves lopping through every pixel once for the initial Marching Squares, then looping through every cell (image height + 1 x image width + 1) at least twice, which ends up being really slow for any decently sized image...

  Read the article

• Collision resolution - Character walking on ascendent ground

  - by marcg11

  I don't know if the solution to this problem is quite straight-foward but I really don't know how to handle collision resolution on a game where the player walks on an ascendent floor which is not flat. How can the player position itself on the y axis depend on the ground x and z (opengl coords)? What if the floor's slope is too much and the player can't go up, how do you handle that? I don't need any code, just a simple explanation would be great.

  Read the article

• 2D Collision masks for handling slopes

  - by JiminyCricket

  I've been looking at the example at: http://create.msdn.com/en-US/education/catalog/tutorial/collision_2d_perpixel and am trying to figure out how to adjust the sprite once a collision has been detected. As David suggested at XNA 4.0 2D sidescroller variable terrain heightmap for walking/collision, I made a few sensor points (feet, sides, bottom center, etc.) and can easily detect when these points actually collide with non-transparent portions of a second texture (simple slope). I'm having trouble with the algorithm of how I would actually adjust the sprite position based on a collision. Say I detect a collision with the slope at the sprite's right foot. How can I scan the slope texture data to find the Y position to place the sprite's foot so it is no longer inside the slope? The way it is stored as a 1D array in the example is a bit confusing, should I try to store the data as a 2D array instead? For test purposes, I'm thinking of just using the slope texture alpha itself as a primitive and easy collision mask (no grass bits or anything besides a simple non-linear slope). Then, as in the example, I find the coordinates of any collisions between the slope texture and the sprite's sensors and mark these special sensor collisions as having occurred. Finally, in the case of moving up a slope, I would scan for the first transparent pixel above (in the texture's Ys at that X) the right foot collision point and set that as the new height of the sprite. I'm a little unclear also on when I should make these adjustments. Collisions are checked on every game.update() so would I quickly change the position of the sprite before the next update is called? I also noticed several people mention that it's best to separate collision checks horizontally and vertically, why is that exactly? Open to any suggestions if this is an inefficient or inaccurate way of handling this. I wish MSDN had provided an example of something like this, I didn't know it would be so much more complex than NES Mario style pure box platforming!

  Read the article

• Rotating an object about a point (2D) using box2d

  - by noob

  i just started developing using box2d on flixel and i realise the pivot point of the rotation of an object in box2d is set to the center of an object. i had read on forums and i found out that SetAsBox can change the pivot point of the object, however, i cannot seem to get it work to rotate about a point. what i would like to achieve is to rotate an object about a point like earth revolving around the sun. any one can help me with it? really thanks a lot and sorry for the bad english

  Read the article

• Is '@' Error Suppression a Valid Technique for Testing for an Optional Array Key?

  - by MikeSchinkel

  Rarst and I were debating offline about the use of the '@' error suppression operator in PHP, specifically for use to test for existence of "optional" array keys, i.e. array keys that are being used as a switch here a their lack of existence in the array is functionally equivalent to the array having the key with a value equaling false. Here is pseudo-code for this scenario: function do_something( $args = array() ) { if ( @$args['switch'] ) { // Do something with this switch } // continue on... } vs. this approach: function do_something( $args = array() ) { if ( ! empty( $args['switch'] ) && $args['switch'] ) { // Do something with this switch } // continue on... } Of course in most use-cases, suppressing errors would not be A Good Thing(tm). However in this use-case where an array is passed with an optional element, it seems to me that it is actually a very good technique but I could be wrong and would like to hear other's opinions on the subject before I make up my mind. I do know that there are alleged performance hits for using the former approach but I'd like to know how they compare with the alternative and if they performance hits really matter in real world scenarios? P.S. I decided to post this because, after debating this offline with Rarst, he asked a more general question here on Programmers but didn't actually give a detailed example of the specific use-case we were debating. And since I'm pretty sure he'll want to use the out-of-context answers on that other question as justification for why the above is "bad" I decided I needed to get opinions on this specific use-case.

  Read the article

• Camera Collision inside the room model

  - by sanddy

  I am having a problem in Calculating the camera collision for my Room model which consists of sofa, tables and other models. The users shall be moving the camera front, back, rotating so i need to make sure that the camera does not collide with any of the models with in the room. I have treated all my models inside the room by BoundingBox[] and the camera by BoundingSphere. So, far i have implemented collision by looking into the tutorial from http://www.toymaker.info/Games/XNA/html/xna_model_collisions.html which was great. But, I guess the problem lies in the Transformation part. I debugged and found some points to be at Vector(-XXX,-XXX,-XXX) where X is digit. Also i found my radius of some models where too large(in thousand, i just looked into its radius value before converting to BoundingBox). Do I need to scale the model for collision??? Below are my code:- On My LoadContent(): Matrix[] transforms = new Matrix[myModel.Bones.Count]; myModel.CopyAbsoluteBoneTransformsTo(transforms); int index = 0; box = new List<BoundingBox>(); BoundingBox worldModel = Utility.CalculateBoundingBox(myModel); foreach (ModelMesh mesh in myModel.Meshes) { Vector3[] obb = new Vector3[8]; worldModel.GetCorners(obb); Vector3[] asdf = (Vector3[])obb.Clone(); Vector3.Transform(obb, ref transforms[mesh.ParentBone.Index], obb); BoundingBox worldBox = BoundingBox.CreateFromPoints(obb); box.Add(worldBox); index++; } On CameraPosition Update: BoundingSphere bs = new BoundingSphere(this.cameraPos, 5.0f); if (RoomWalkthrough.Utility.CheckCollision(bs, bb)) { // Do Something } Please Help.

  Read the article

• How can I test if my rotated rectangle intersects a corner?

  - by Raven Dreamer

  I have a square, tile-based collision map. To check if one of my (square) entities is colliding, I get the vertices of the 4 corners, and test those 4 points against my collision map. If none of those points are intersecting, I know I'm good to move to the new position. I'd like to allow entities to rotate. I can still calculate the 4 corners of the square, but once you factor in rotation, those 4 corners alone don't seem to be enough information to determine if the entity is trying to move to a valid state. For example: In the picture below, black is unwalkable terrain, and red is the player's hitbox. The left scenario is allowed because the 4 corners of the red square are not in the black terrain. The right scenario would also be (incorrectly) allowed, because the player, cleverly turned at a 45* angle, has its corners in valid spaces, even if it is (quite literally) cutting the corner. How can I detect scenarios similar to the situation on the right?

  Read the article

• Platformer Starter Kit - Collision Issues

  - by Cyral

  I'm having trouble with my game that is based off the XNA Platformer starter kit. My game uses smaller tiles (16x16) then the original (32x40) which I'm thinking may be having an effect on collision (Being it needs to be more precise). Standing on the edge of a tile and jumping causes the player to move off the the tile when he lands. And 80% of the time, when the player lands, he goes flying though SOLID tiles in a diagonal fashion. This is very annoying as it is almost impossible to test other features, when spawning and jumping will result in the player landing in another part of the level or falling off the edge completely. The code is as follows: /// <summary> /// Updates the player's velocity and position based on input, gravity, etc. /// </summary> public void ApplyPhysics(GameTime gameTime) { float elapsed = (float)gameTime.ElapsedGameTime.TotalSeconds; Vector2 previousPosition = Position; // Base velocity is a combination of horizontal movement control and // acceleration downward due to gravity. velocity.X += movement * MoveAcceleration * elapsed; velocity.Y = MathHelper.Clamp(velocity.Y + GravityAcceleration * elapsed, -MaxFallSpeed, MaxFallSpeed); velocity.Y = DoJump(velocity.Y, gameTime); // Apply pseudo-drag horizontally. if (IsOnGround) velocity.X *= GroundDragFactor; else velocity.X *= AirDragFactor; // Prevent the player from running faster than his top speed. velocity.X = MathHelper.Clamp(velocity.X, -MaxMoveSpeed, MaxMoveSpeed); // Apply velocity. Position += velocity * elapsed; Position = new Vector2((float)Math.Round(Position.X), (float)Math.Round(Position.Y)); // If the player is now colliding with the level, separate them. HandleCollisions(); // If the collision stopped us from moving, reset the velocity to zero. if (Position.X == previousPosition.X) velocity.X = 0; if (Position.Y == previousPosition.Y) velocity.Y = 0; } /// <summary> /// Detects and resolves all collisions between the player and his neighboring /// tiles. When a collision is detected, the player is pushed away along one /// axis to prevent overlapping. There is some special logic for the Y axis to /// handle platforms which behave differently depending on direction of movement. /// </summary> private void HandleCollisions() { // Get the player's bounding rectangle and find neighboring tiles. Rectangle bounds = BoundingRectangle; int leftTile = (int)Math.Floor((float)bounds.Left / Tile.Width); int rightTile = (int)Math.Ceiling(((float)bounds.Right / Tile.Width)) - 1; int topTile = (int)Math.Floor((float)bounds.Top / Tile.Height); int bottomTile = (int)Math.Ceiling(((float)bounds.Bottom / Tile.Height)) - 1; // Reset flag to search for ground collision. isOnGround = false; // For each potentially colliding tile, for (int y = topTile; y <= bottomTile; ++y) { for (int x = leftTile; x <= rightTile; ++x) { // If this tile is collidable, ItemCollision collision = Level.GetCollision(x, y); if (collision != ItemCollision.Passable) { // Determine collision depth (with direction) and magnitude. Rectangle tileBounds = Level.GetBounds(x, y); Vector2 depth = RectangleExtensions.GetIntersectionDepth(bounds, tileBounds); if (depth != Vector2.Zero) { float absDepthX = Math.Abs(depth.X); float absDepthY = Math.Abs(depth.Y); // Resolve the collision along the shallow axis. if (absDepthY < absDepthX || collision == ItemCollision.Platform) { // If we crossed the top of a tile, we are on the ground. if (previousBottom <= tileBounds.Top) isOnGround = true; // Ignore platforms, unless we are on the ground. if (collision == ItemCollision.Impassable || IsOnGround) { // Resolve the collision along the Y axis. Position = new Vector2(Position.X, Position.Y + depth.Y); // Perform further collisions with the new bounds. bounds = BoundingRectangle; } } else if (collision == ItemCollision.Impassable) // Ignore platforms. { // Resolve the collision along the X axis. Position = new Vector2(Position.X + depth.X, Position.Y); // Perform further collisions with the new bounds. bounds = BoundingRectangle; } } } } } // Save the new bounds bottom. previousBottom = bounds.Bottom; } It also tends to jitter a little bit sometimes, I'm solved some of this with some fixes I found here on stackexchange, But Ive only seen one other case of the flying though blocks problem. This question seems to have a similar problem in the video, but mine is more crazy. Again this is a very annoying bug! Any help would be greatly appreciated! EDIT: Speed stuff // Constants for controling horizontal movement private const float MoveAcceleration = 13000.0f; private const float MaxMoveSpeed = 1750.0f; private const float GroundDragFactor = 0.48f; private const float AirDragFactor = 0.58f; // Constants for controlling vertical movement private const float MaxJumpTime = 0.35f; private const float JumpLaunchVelocity = -3500.0f; private const float GravityAcceleration = 3400.0f; private const float MaxFallSpeed = 550.0f; private const float JumpControlPower = 0.14f;

  Read the article

• How can I perform 2D side-scroller collision checks in a tile-based map?

  - by bill

  I am trying to create a game where you have a player that can move horizontally and jump. It's kind of like Mario but it isn't a side scroller. I'm using a 2D array to implement a tile map. My problem is that I don't understand how to check for collisions using this implementation. After spending about two weeks thinking about it, I've got two possible solutions, but both of them have some problems. Let's say that my map is defined by the following tiles: 0 = sky 1 = player 2 = ground The data for the map itself might look like: 00000 10002 22022 For solution 1, I'd move the player (the 1) a complete tile and update the map directly. This make the collision easy because you can check if the player is touching the ground simply by looking at the tile directly below the player: // x and y are the tile coordinates of the player. The tile origin is the upper-left. if (grid[x][y+1] == 2){ // The player is standing on top of a ground tile. } The problem with this approach is that the player moves in discrete tile steps, so the animation isn't smooth. For solution 2, I thought about moving the player via pixel coordinates and not updating the tile map. This will make the animation much smoother because I have a smaller movement unit per frame. However, this means I can't really accurately store the player in the tile map because sometimes he would logically be between two tiles. But the bigger problem here is that I think the only way to check for collision is to use Java's intersection method, which means the player would need to be at least a single pixel "into" the ground to register collision, and that won't look good. How can I solve this problem?

  Read the article

• OpenGL and gluUnProject, 3d object following mouse

  - by Robert

  i have a 3d object and i want him to "follow" my mouse position, so i use gluUnProject function to convert screen coordinates to 3d world coordinates and i translate this object with the new coordinates. Its working but i have a problem, my object can follow my mouse but he is moving extremely fast, when i move my mouse a little bit(something like 2 pixels), its moving extremly fast in the 3d world. I want something like that : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=90zS8SVUAIY (red circle following mouse). Thanks for your help.

  Read the article

• Efficient mapping layout in 2D side-scroller, and collisions between character and the world

  - by Jack

  I haven't touched Visual Studio for a couple months now, but I was playing a game from the '90s toady and had an epiphany: I was looking for something what i didn't need, and I wasn't using what I knew correctly. One of those realizations was collision, so let me tell you a bit about my project that I was working on. The project's graphics looks like Mario or Dangerous Dave, etc., you get the idea - old-school pixels. So anyway I remember trying to think of something else than AABB for character form, but I couldn't think of anything. Perhaps I could get a suggestion for this? Another thing is the world - I don't want it to be just linear world, I want mountains, etc.. My idea is to use triangles, and no idea yet what to do if I want just part of the cube, say 3/4 or 2/4 or whatever. Hard-coding such things seems inefficient. P.S. I am not looking at the precision level offered by Box2D. Actually I remember trying to implement it at first, but I failed as my understanding of C++ wasn't advanced enough, as it'll be mentioned below. P.P.S. I am programming in C++, and I haven't done it for a couple months now. I have no means of testing it either, as my PC is broken down, and this one can barely run games from late '90s, not to speak about a compiler or a program with inefficient resource management... I am also not an expert (obviously), I don't even know if I can consider myself an average programmer. In short, I am simply curious about my thoughts and my past experience when programming the game. I may come back to it when my PC is fixed, I'm already filling a note about these things.

  Read the article

• Tile map collision is not working properly

  - by Sigh-AniDe

  I am having problems setting collision between my sprite and the tiles. I have only done the code for colision for moving upwards but some places on the map it moves up and some places it doesn't. Here is what I have so far: Vector2 position; private static float scalingFactor = 32; static int tileWidth = 32; static int tileHeight = 32; int[ , ] map = { {0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, }, {0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, }, {0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 1, 1, 0, 0, }, {0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, }, {0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, }, {0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, }, {0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, }, {0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, }, {0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, }, {0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, }, {0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, }, {0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, }, {0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, }, {0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 1, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, }, {0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, }, {0, 0, 0, 1, 1, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, }, {0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, }, {0, 1, 1, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, }, {0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, }, }; // This is in turtle.update if ( keyboardState.IsKeyDown( Keys.Up ) ) { if ( position.Y > screenHeight / 4 ) { //// current position of the turtle on the tiles int mapX = ( int )( position.X / scalingFactor ); int mapY = ( int )( position.Y / scalingFactor ) - 1; if ( isMovable( mapX , mapY , map ) ) { position.Y = position.Y - scalingFactor; } } else { MoveUp(); } } private void MoveUp() { motion.Y = -1; } public bool isMovable( int mapX , int mapY , int[ , ] map ) { if ( mapX < 0 || mapX > 19 || mapY < 0 || mapY > 20 ) { return false; } int tile = map[ mapX , mapY ]; if ( tile == 0 ) { return false; } return true; } protected override void Update( GameTime gameTime ) { turtle.Update( screenHeight , scalingFactor , map ); base.Update( gameTime ); }

  Read the article

• Translating an Object to a certain Vector 3 in OpenGL and Java LWJGL

  - by aliasmk

  So after almost two hours, I got the hang of using glTranslated() (with Java and LWJGL). If I am correct, applying glTranslated on an object moves that object with the x,y,z relative to the previously moved object. I believe the correct term for this is local vs global, global being the one I want. I was wondering if there was a way to translate an object to a specific XYZ position, or relative to the origin. Thanks! (Code or other details can be supplied if it helps, just let me know. Also sorry if this is a noob comment, Im very new to OpenGL.)

  Read the article

• Platform jumping problems with AABB collisions

  - by Vee

  See the diagram first: When my AABB physics engine resolves an intersection, it does so by finding the axis where the penetration is smaller, then "push out" the entity on that axis. Considering the "jumping moving left" example: If velocityX is bigger than velocityY, AABB pushes the entity out on the Y axis, effectively stopping the jump (result: the player stops in mid-air). If velocityX is smaller than velocitY (not shown in diagram), the program works as intended, because AABB pushes the entity out on the X axis. How can I solve this problem? Source code: public void Update() { Position += Velocity; Velocity += World.Gravity; List<SSSPBody> toCheck = World.SpatialHash.GetNearbyItems(this); for (int i = 0; i < toCheck.Count; i++) { SSSPBody body = toCheck[i]; body.Test.Color = Color.White; if (body != this && body.Static) { float left = (body.CornerMin.X - CornerMax.X); float right = (body.CornerMax.X - CornerMin.X); float top = (body.CornerMin.Y - CornerMax.Y); float bottom = (body.CornerMax.Y - CornerMin.Y); if (SSSPUtils.AABBIsOverlapping(this, body)) { body.Test.Color = Color.Yellow; Vector2 overlapVector = SSSPUtils.AABBGetOverlapVector(left, right, top, bottom); Position += overlapVector; } if (SSSPUtils.AABBIsCollidingTop(this, body)) { if ((Position.X >= body.CornerMin.X && Position.X <= body.CornerMax.X) && (Position.Y + Height/2f == body.Position.Y - body.Height/2f)) { body.Test.Color = Color.Red; Velocity = new Vector2(Velocity.X, 0); } } } } } public static bool AABBIsOverlapping(SSSPBody mBody1, SSSPBody mBody2) { if(mBody1.CornerMax.X <= mBody2.CornerMin.X || mBody1.CornerMin.X >= mBody2.CornerMax.X) return false; if (mBody1.CornerMax.Y <= mBody2.CornerMin.Y || mBody1.CornerMin.Y >= mBody2.CornerMax.Y) return false; return true; } public static bool AABBIsColliding(SSSPBody mBody1, SSSPBody mBody2) { if (mBody1.CornerMax.X < mBody2.CornerMin.X || mBody1.CornerMin.X > mBody2.CornerMax.X) return false; if (mBody1.CornerMax.Y < mBody2.CornerMin.Y || mBody1.CornerMin.Y > mBody2.CornerMax.Y) return false; return true; } public static bool AABBIsCollidingTop(SSSPBody mBody1, SSSPBody mBody2) { if (mBody1.CornerMax.X < mBody2.CornerMin.X || mBody1.CornerMin.X > mBody2.CornerMax.X) return false; if (mBody1.CornerMax.Y < mBody2.CornerMin.Y || mBody1.CornerMin.Y > mBody2.CornerMax.Y) return false; if(mBody1.CornerMax.Y == mBody2.CornerMin.Y) return true; return false; } public static Vector2 AABBGetOverlapVector(float mLeft, float mRight, float mTop, float mBottom) { Vector2 result = new Vector2(0, 0); if ((mLeft > 0 || mRight < 0) || (mTop > 0 || mBottom < 0)) return result; if (Math.Abs(mLeft) < mRight) result.X = mLeft; else result.X = mRight; if (Math.Abs(mTop) < mBottom) result.Y = mTop; else result.Y = mBottom; if (Math.Abs(result.X) < Math.Abs(result.Y)) result.Y = 0; else result.X = 0; return result; }

  Read the article

• How can I monitor a website for malicious changes to the files

  - by rossmcm

  I had an occasion recently where our website was compromised - a link farm was added to a couple of the pages on one occasion, and on another occasion, a large and nasty aspx file was put on the server. I won't mention the host's name (Hostway), but I was pretty annoyed that someone was able to do this. No, it wasn't a leaky password - around 10 sites hosted by HW with consecutive IP addresses got trashed. Anyway. What I need is a utility or service (preferably free) that takes a snapshot of my websites contents, and then regularly monitors the files (size and datestamp) for unauthorized changes or additions, and alerts me. I've used web services that monitor one file for changes, but I'm looking for something a bit more aggressive.

  Read the article

• SAT and then what?

  - by Marek

  I am on my way to make another Arkanoid game but this time I decided that I want it a little bit more realistic than just checking intersections between AABB and inverting one vector's component on collision. So I found SAT but I don't know how can I change direction of the ball in realistic matter. Maybe I'm wrong but it seems like knowing MTV doesn't give me much. So my question is what algorithms should I use to make it realistic? I also care about possibility of spinning ball with a pallet. I don't know how to do it exactly but I guess I will need to consider acceleration of the pallet.

  Read the article

• Calculating 2D (screen) coordinates from 3D positions in XNA 4.0

  - by NDraskovic

  I have a program that draws some items to the scene by loading their positions from a file. Now I want to place a Ray on the same location where the items are drawn. So my question is how can I calculate the position of the ray (it's 2D components) by using 3D coordinates of each particular item? The items don't move anywhere, so once they are placed they stay until the end of the programs execution. Thanks.

  Read the article

• Resultant Vector Algorithm for 2D Collisions

  - by John

  I am making a Pong based game where a puck hits a paddle and bounces off. Both the puck and the paddles are Circles. I came up with an algorithm to calculate the resultant vector of the puck once it meets a paddle. The game seems to function correctly but I'm not entirely sure my algorithm is correct. Here are my variables for the algorithm: Given: velocity = the magnitude of the initial velocity of the puck before the collision x = the x coordinate of the puck y = the y coordinate of the puck moveX = the horizontal speed of the puck moveY = the vertical speed of the puck otherX = the x coordinate of the paddle otherY = the y coordinate of the paddle piece.horizontalMomentum = the horizontal speed of the paddle before it hits the puck piece.verticalMomentum = the vertical speed of the paddle before it hits the puck slope = the direction, in radians, of the puck's velocity distX = the horizontal distance between the center of the puck and the center of the paddle distY = the vertical distance between the center of the puck and the center of the paddle Algorithm solves for: impactAngle = the angle, in radians, of the angle of impact. newSpeedX = the speed of the resultant vector in the X direction newSpeedY = the speed of the resultant vector in the Y direction Here is the code for my algorithm: int otherX = piece.x; int otherY = piece.y; double velocity = Math.sqrt((moveX * moveX) + (moveY * moveY)); double slope = Math.atan(moveX / moveY); int distX = x - otherX; int distY = y - otherY; double impactAngle = Math.atan(distX / distY); double newAngle = impactAngle + slope; int newSpeedX = (int)(velocity * Math.sin(newAngle)) + piece.horizontalMomentum; int newSpeedY = (int)(velocity * Math.cos(newAngle)) + piece.verticalMomentum; for those who are not program savvy here is it simplified: velocity = v(moveX² + moveY²) slope = arctan(moveX / moveY) distX = x - otherX distY = y - otherY impactAngle = arctan(distX / distY) newAngle = impactAngle + slope newSpeedX = velocity * sin(newAngle) + piece.horizontalMomentum newSpeedY = velocity * cos(newAngle) + piece.verticalMomentum My Question: Is this algorithm correct? Is there an easier/simpler way to do what I'm trying to do?

  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

• Draw Rectangle To All Dimensions of Image

  - by opiop65

  I have some rudimentary collision code: public class Collision { static boolean isColliding = false; static Rectangle player; static Rectangle female; public static void collision(){ Rectangle player = Game.Playerbounds(); Rectangle female = Game.Femalebounds(); if(player.intersects(female)){ isColliding = true; }else{ isColliding = false; } } } And this is the rectangle code: public static Rectangle Playerbounds() { return(new Rectangle(posX, posY, 25, 25)); } public static Rectangle Femalebounds() { return(new Rectangle(femaleX, femaleY, 25, 25)); } My InputHandling class: public static void movePlayer(GameContainer gc, int delta){ Input input = gc.getInput(); if(input.isKeyDown(input.KEY_W)){ Game.posY -= walkSpeed * delta; walkUp = true; if(Collision.isColliding == true){ Game.posY += walkSpeed * delta; } } if(input.isKeyDown(input.KEY_S)){ Game.posY += walkSpeed * delta; walkDown = true; if(Collision.isColliding == true){ Game.posY -= walkSpeed * delta; } } if(input.isKeyDown(input.KEY_D)){ Game.posX += walkSpeed * delta; walkRight = true; if(Collision.isColliding == true){ Game.posX -= walkSpeed * delta; } } if(input.isKeyDown(input.KEY_A)){ Game.posX -= walkSpeed * delta; walkLeft = true; if(Collision.isColliding == true){ Game.posX += walkSpeed * delta; } } } The code works partially. Only the right and top side of the images collide. How do I correct the rectangle so it will draw on all sides? Thanks for any suggestions!

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49  | Next Page >