Search Results

Search found 28031 results on 1122 pages for 'personal development'.

Page 435/1122 | < Previous Page | 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442  | Next Page >

  • Narrow-phase collision detection algorithms

    - by Marian Ivanov
    There are three phases of collision detection. Broadphase: It loops between all objecs that can interact, false positives are allowed, if it would speed up the loop. Narrowphase: Determines whether they collide, and sometimes, how, no false positives Resolution: Resolves the collision. The question I'm asking is about the narrowphase. There are multiple algorithms, differing in complexity and accuracy. Hitbox intersection: This is an a-posteriori algorithm, that has the lowest complexity, but also isn't too accurate, Color intersection: Hitbox intersection for each pixel, a-posteriori, pixel-perfect, not accuratee in regards to time, higher complexity Separating axis theorem: This is used more often, accurate for triangles, however, a-posteriori, as it can't find the edge, when taking last frame in account, it's more stable Linear raycasting: A-priori algorithm, useful for semi-realistic-looking physics, finds the intersection point, even more accurate than SAT, but with more complexity Spline interpolation: A-priori, even more accurate than linear rays, even more coplexity. There are probably many more that I've forgot about. The question is, in when is it better to use SAT, when rays, when splines, and whether there is anything better.

    Read the article

  • Best way to render card images

    - by user1065145
    I have high-quality SVG card images, but they drastically lose their quality when I downsize them. I have tried two ways of rendering cards (using Inkscape and Imagemagics): 1) Render SVG to high-res PNG and resize it then; 2) Render SVG to image of proper size at once. Both approaches generate blurry card images, which looks even worse than old Windows cards. What are the best way to generate smaller card images from SVG sources and not to loose their quality a lot?

    Read the article

  • Level of detail algorithm not functioning correctly

    - by Darestium
    I have been working on this problem for months; I have been creating Planet Generator of sorts, after more than 6 months of work I am no closer to finishing it then I was 4 months ago. My problem; The terrain does not subdivide in the correct locations properly, it almost seems as if there is a ghost camera next to me, and the quads subdivide based on the position of this "ghost camera". Here is a video of the broken program: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NF_pHeMOju8 The best example of the problem occurs around 0:36. For detail limiting, I am going for a chunked LOD approach, which subdivides the terrain based on how far you are away from it. I use a "depth table" to determine how many subdivisions should take place. void PQuad::construct_depth_table(float distance) { tree[0] = -1; for (int i = 1; i < MAX_DEPTH; i++) { tree[i] = distance; distance /= 2.0f; } } The chuncked LOD relies on the child/parent structure of quads, the depth is determined by a constant e.g: if the constant is 6, there are six levels of detail. The quads which should be drawn go through a distance test from the player to the centre of the quad. void PQuad::get_recursive(glm::vec3 player_pos, std::vector<PQuad*>& out_children) { for (size_t i = 0; i < children.size(); i++) { children[i].get_recursive(player_pos, out_children); } if (this->should_draw(player_pos) || this->depth == 0) { out_children.emplace_back(this); } } bool PQuad::should_draw(glm::vec3 player_position) { float distance = distance3(player_position, centre); if (distance < tree[depth]) { return true; } return false; } The root quad has four children which could be visualized like the following: [] [] [] [] Where each [] is a child. Each child has the same amount of children up until the detail limit, the quads which have are 6 iterations deep are leaf nodes, these nodes have no children. Each node has a corresponding Mesh, each Mesh structure has 16x16 Quad-shapes, each Mesh's Quad-shapes halves in size each detail level deeper - creating more detail. void PQuad::construct_children() { // Calculate the position of the Quad based on the parent's location calculate_position(); if (depth < (int)MAX_DEPTH) { children.reserve((int)NUM_OF_CHILDREN); for (int i = 0; i < (int)NUM_OF_CHILDREN; i++) { children.emplace_back(PQuad(this->face_direction, this->radius)); PQuad *child = &children.back(); child->set_depth(depth + 1); child->set_child_index(i); child->set_parent(this); child->construct_children(); } } else { leaf = true; } } The following function creates the vertices for each quad, I feel that it may play a role in the problem - I just can't determine what is causing the problem. void PQuad::construct_vertices(std::vector<glm::vec3> *vertices, std::vector<Color3> *colors) { vertices->reserve(quad_width * quad_height); for (int y = 0; y < quad_height; y++) { for (int x = 0; x < quad_width; x++) { switch (face_direction) { case YIncreasing: vertices->emplace_back(glm::vec3(position.x + x * element_width, quad_height - 1.0f, -(position.y + y * element_width))); break; case YDecreasing: vertices->emplace_back(glm::vec3(position.x + x * element_width, 0.0f, -(position.y + y * element_width))); break; case XIncreasing: vertices->emplace_back(glm::vec3(quad_width - 1.0f, position.y + y * element_width, -(position.x + x * element_width))); break; case XDecreasing: vertices->emplace_back(glm::vec3(0.0f, position.y + y * element_width, -(position.x + x * element_width))); break; case ZIncreasing: vertices->emplace_back(glm::vec3(position.x + x * element_width, position.y + y * element_width, 0.0f)); break; case ZDecreasing: vertices->emplace_back(glm::vec3(position.x + x * element_width, position.y + y * element_width, -(quad_width - 1.0f))); break; } // Position the bottom, right, front vertex of the cube from being (0,0,0) to (-16, -16, 16) (*vertices)[vertices->size() - 1] -= glm::vec3(quad_width / 2.0f, quad_width / 2.0f, -(quad_width / 2.0f)); colors->emplace_back(Color3(255.0f, 255.0f, 255.0f, false)); } } switch (face_direction) { case YIncreasing: this->centre = glm::vec3(position.x + quad_width / 2.0f, quad_height - 1.0f, -(position.y + quad_height / 2.0f)); break; case YDecreasing: this->centre = glm::vec3(position.x + quad_width / 2.0f, 0.0f, -(position.y + quad_height / 2.0f)); break; case XIncreasing: this->centre = glm::vec3(quad_width - 1.0f, position.y + quad_height / 2.0f, -(position.x + quad_width / 2.0f)); break; case XDecreasing: this->centre = glm::vec3(0.0f, position.y + quad_height / 2.0f, -(position.x + quad_width / 2.0f)); break; case ZIncreasing: this->centre = glm::vec3(position.x + quad_width / 2.0f, position.y + quad_height / 2.0f, 0.0f); break; case ZDecreasing: this->centre = glm::vec3(position.x + quad_width / 2.0f, position.y + quad_height / 2.0f, -(quad_height - 1.0f)); break; } this->centre -= glm::vec3(quad_width / 2.0f, quad_width / 2.0f, -(quad_width / 2.0f)); } Any help in discovering what is causing this "subdivding in the wrong place" would be greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Circular motion on low powered hardware

    - by Akroy
    I was thinking about platforms and enemies moving in circles in old 2D games, and I was wondering how that was done. I understand parametric equations, and it's trivial to use sin and cos to do it, but could an NES or SNES make real time trig calls? I admit heavy ignorance, but I thought those were expensive operations. Is there some clever way to calculate that motion more cheaply? I've been working on deriving an algorithm from trig sum identities that would only use precalculated trig, but that seems convoluted.

    Read the article

  • Clear edged sprite

    - by Ananth
    I am a newbie to cocos2d. I would like make user to draw similar to what a painting brush would do. I am using CCSprite for that. I almost implemented the velocity, color and opacity factors for that tool, but I couldn't get the Sprite to be as clear as it should be. I can draw only in the below image http://i.imgur.com/KBe0L.png which has blunt edges. But I want it to be harder / clear outside edges as in http://i.stack.imgur.com/GrFlv.png. I am getting no idea to make it clear edged. The piece of code Im using is glEnable(GL_BLEND); [brush.texture setAliasTexParameters]; [brush setBlendFunc:(ccBlendFunc){GL_ONE, GL_ONE_MINUS_SRC_ALPHA}]; [brush visit]; I suspect the problem would be on blending mode. I tried some blending modes, but with no expected results. I am trying this for the past five days and so confused. Can some one help me sort this out? Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Blender: How to "meshify" an object I made from Bezier curves

    - by capcom
    I made a star shape using Bezier curves, and extruded it (see pic below): What I want to do is give it a rounder look - not just around the edges by using beveling. I want it to kind of look like this (well, that shape anyway): How would I go about doing this? Please keep in mind that I am extremely new to Blender. I thought that I could somehow turn this star into those default shapes that have tonnes of squares which I could pull out, and apply a mirror to it so that the same thing happens on both sides. I really don't know how to do it, and would appreciate your help.

    Read the article

  • Most efficient AABB - Ray intersection algorithm for input/output distance calculation

    - by Tobbey
    Thanks to the following thread : most efficient AABB vs Ray collision algorithms I have seen very fast algorithm for ray/AABB intersection point computation. Unfortunately, most of the recent algorithm are accelerated by omitting the "output" intersection point of the box. In my application, I would interested in getting both the the distance from source ray to input: t0 and source ray to output of bounding box: t1. I have seen for instance Eisemann designed a very fast version regarding plucker, smits, ... , but it does not compare the case when both input/output distance should be computed see: http://www.cg.cs.tu-bs.de/publications/Eisemann07FRA/ Does someone know where I can find more information on algorithm performances for the specific input/output problem ? Thank you in advance

    Read the article

  • Per-pixel displacement mapping GLSL

    - by Chris
    Im trying to implement a per-pixel displacement shader in GLSL. I read through several papers and "tutorials" I found and ended up with trying to implement the approach NVIDIA used in their Cascade Demo (http://www.slideshare.net/icastano/cascades-demo-secrets) starting at Slide 82. At the moment I am completly stuck with following problem: When I am far away the displacement seems to work. But as more I move closer to my surface, the texture gets bent in x-axis and somehow it looks like there is a little bent in general in one direction. EDIT: I added a video: click I added some screen to illustrate the problem: Well I tried lots of things already and I am starting to get a bit frustrated as my ideas run out. I added my full VS and FS code: VS: #version 400 layout(location = 0) in vec3 IN_VS_Position; layout(location = 1) in vec3 IN_VS_Normal; layout(location = 2) in vec2 IN_VS_Texcoord; layout(location = 3) in vec3 IN_VS_Tangent; layout(location = 4) in vec3 IN_VS_BiTangent; uniform vec3 uLightPos; uniform vec3 uCameraDirection; uniform mat4 uViewProjection; uniform mat4 uModel; uniform mat4 uView; uniform mat3 uNormalMatrix; out vec2 IN_FS_Texcoord; out vec3 IN_FS_CameraDir_Tangent; out vec3 IN_FS_LightDir_Tangent; void main( void ) { IN_FS_Texcoord = IN_VS_Texcoord; vec4 posObject = uModel * vec4(IN_VS_Position, 1.0); vec3 normalObject = (uModel * vec4(IN_VS_Normal, 0.0)).xyz; vec3 tangentObject = (uModel * vec4(IN_VS_Tangent, 0.0)).xyz; //vec3 binormalObject = (uModel * vec4(IN_VS_BiTangent, 0.0)).xyz; vec3 binormalObject = normalize(cross(tangentObject, normalObject)); // uCameraDirection is the camera position, just bad named vec3 fvViewDirection = normalize( uCameraDirection - posObject.xyz); vec3 fvLightDirection = normalize( uLightPos.xyz - posObject.xyz ); IN_FS_CameraDir_Tangent.x = dot( tangentObject, fvViewDirection ); IN_FS_CameraDir_Tangent.y = dot( binormalObject, fvViewDirection ); IN_FS_CameraDir_Tangent.z = dot( normalObject, fvViewDirection ); IN_FS_LightDir_Tangent.x = dot( tangentObject, fvLightDirection ); IN_FS_LightDir_Tangent.y = dot( binormalObject, fvLightDirection ); IN_FS_LightDir_Tangent.z = dot( normalObject, fvLightDirection ); gl_Position = (uViewProjection*uModel) * vec4(IN_VS_Position, 1.0); } The VS just builds the TBN matrix, from incoming normal, tangent and binormal in world space. Calculates the light and eye direction in worldspace. And finally transforms the light and eye direction into tangent space. FS: #version 400 // uniforms uniform Light { vec4 fvDiffuse; vec4 fvAmbient; vec4 fvSpecular; }; uniform Material { vec4 diffuse; vec4 ambient; vec4 specular; vec4 emissive; float fSpecularPower; float shininessStrength; }; uniform sampler2D colorSampler; uniform sampler2D normalMapSampler; uniform sampler2D heightMapSampler; in vec2 IN_FS_Texcoord; in vec3 IN_FS_CameraDir_Tangent; in vec3 IN_FS_LightDir_Tangent; out vec4 color; vec2 TraceRay(in float height, in vec2 coords, in vec3 dir, in float mipmap){ vec2 NewCoords = coords; vec2 dUV = - dir.xy * height * 0.08; float SearchHeight = 1.0; float prev_hits = 0.0; float hit_h = 0.0; for(int i=0;i<10;i++){ SearchHeight -= 0.1; NewCoords += dUV; float CurrentHeight = textureLod(heightMapSampler,NewCoords.xy, mipmap).r; float first_hit = clamp((CurrentHeight - SearchHeight - prev_hits) * 499999.0,0.0,1.0); hit_h += first_hit * SearchHeight; prev_hits += first_hit; } NewCoords = coords + dUV * (1.0-hit_h) * 10.0f - dUV; vec2 Temp = NewCoords; SearchHeight = hit_h+0.1; float Start = SearchHeight; dUV *= 0.2; prev_hits = 0.0; hit_h = 0.0; for(int i=0;i<5;i++){ SearchHeight -= 0.02; NewCoords += dUV; float CurrentHeight = textureLod(heightMapSampler,NewCoords.xy, mipmap).r; float first_hit = clamp((CurrentHeight - SearchHeight - prev_hits) * 499999.0,0.0,1.0); hit_h += first_hit * SearchHeight; prev_hits += first_hit; } NewCoords = Temp + dUV * (Start - hit_h) * 50.0f; return NewCoords; } void main( void ) { vec3 fvLightDirection = normalize( IN_FS_LightDir_Tangent ); vec3 fvViewDirection = normalize( IN_FS_CameraDir_Tangent ); float mipmap = 0; vec2 NewCoord = TraceRay(0.1,IN_FS_Texcoord,fvViewDirection,mipmap); //vec2 ddx = dFdx(NewCoord); //vec2 ddy = dFdy(NewCoord); vec3 BumpMapNormal = textureLod(normalMapSampler, NewCoord.xy, mipmap).xyz; BumpMapNormal = normalize(2.0 * BumpMapNormal - vec3(1.0, 1.0, 1.0)); vec3 fvNormal = BumpMapNormal; float fNDotL = dot( fvNormal, fvLightDirection ); vec3 fvReflection = normalize( ( ( 2.0 * fvNormal ) * fNDotL ) - fvLightDirection ); float fRDotV = max( 0.0, dot( fvReflection, fvViewDirection ) ); vec4 fvBaseColor = textureLod( colorSampler, NewCoord.xy,mipmap); vec4 fvTotalAmbient = fvAmbient * fvBaseColor; vec4 fvTotalDiffuse = fvDiffuse * fNDotL * fvBaseColor; vec4 fvTotalSpecular = fvSpecular * ( pow( fRDotV, fSpecularPower ) ); color = ( fvTotalAmbient + (fvTotalDiffuse + fvTotalSpecular) ); } The FS implements the displacement technique in TraceRay method, while always using mipmap level 0. Most of the code is from NVIDIA sample and another paper I found on the web, so I guess there cannot be much wrong in here. At the end it uses the modified UV coords for getting the displaced normal from the normal map and the color from the color map. I looking forward for some ideas. Thanks in advance! Edit: Here is the code loading the heightmap: glTexImage2D(GL_TEXTURE_2D, 0, GL_RGBA, mWidth, mHeight, 0, GL_RGBA, GL_UNSIGNED_BYTE, mImageData); glGenerateMipmap(GL_TEXTURE_2D); //glTexParameteri(GL_TEXTURE_2D, GL_TEXTURE_MAG_FILTER, GL_LINEAR_MIPMAP_LINEAR); //glTexParameteri(GL_TEXTURE_2D, GL_TEXTURE_MIN_FILTER, GL_LINEAR_MIPMAP_LINEAR); //glTexParameteri(GL_TEXTURE_2D, GL_TEXTURE_WRAP_S, GL_REPEAT); //glTexParameteri(GL_TEXTURE_2D, GL_TEXTURE_WRAP_T, GL_REPEAT); Maybe something wrong in here?

    Read the article

  • 3D/perspective Top down shooter bullet issues

    - by Tseng
    I'm developing a top-down shooter with multiple levels (ground for ground units, middle level for buildings, top level for air unity). The problem is the collision. Though I can make the collider box of a bullet be long enough to reach the ground (and collide with it), the real issue is optical. When the bullet is fired from a aircraft and collides with some object on the ground (building, ground unit) it will be optically offset due to the perspective camera, because it looks like the shot "by-passed" the target as seen below Is there any way to make the bullets collide perspectively correct? I'm using Unity3d Engine and it offers only simple colliders (box, sphere, cylinder, mesh and wheel), though I don't think a cone-formed collider would solve this issue. I'd need a (cheap) way to check if it's overlapping a destructible object? I thought of casting a ray from the camera through the bullet and if it hits something destructible, trigger an action, but that's quite punctual and maybe to performance heavy on certain number of bullets

    Read the article

  • Fixed-Function vs Shaders: Which for beginner?

    - by Rob Hays
    I'm currently going to college for computer science. Although I do plan on utilizing an existing engine at some point to create a small game, my aim right now is towards learning the fundamentals: namely, 3D programming. I've already done some research regarding the choice between DirectX and OpenGL, and the general sentiment that came out of that was that whether you choose OpenGL or DirectX as your training-wheels platform, a lot of the knowledge is transferrable to the other platform. Therefore, since OpenGL is supported by more systems (probably a silly reason to choose what to learn), I decided that I'm going to learn OpenGL first. After I made this decision to learn OpenGL, I did some more research and found out about a dichotomy that I was somewhere unaware of all this time: fixed-function OpenGL vs. modern programmable shader-based OpenGL. At first, I thought it was an obvious choice that I should choose to learn shader-based OpenGL since that's what's most commonly used in the industry today. However, I then stumbled upon the very popular Learning Modern 3D Graphics Programming by Jason L. McKesson, located here: http://www.arcsynthesis.org/gltut/ I read through the introductory bits, and in the "About This Book" section, the author states: "First, much of what is learned with this approach must be inevitably abandoned when the user encounters a graphics problem that must be solved with programmability. Programmability wipes out almost all of the fixed function pipeline, so the knowledge does not easily transfer." yet at the same time also makes the case that fixed-functionality provides an easier, more immediate learning curve for beginners by stating: "It is generally considered easiest to teach neophyte graphics programmers using the fixed function pipeline." Naturally, you can see why I might be conflicted about which paradigm to learn: Do I spend a lot of time learning (and then later unlearning) the ways of fixed-functionality, or do I choose to start out with shaders? My primary concern is that modern programmable shaders somehow require the programmer to already understand the fixed-function pipeline, but I doubt that's the case. TL;DR == As an aspiring game graphics programmer, is it in my best interest to learn 3D programming through fixed-functionality or modern shader-based programming?

    Read the article

  • Alternatives to NSMutableArray for storing 2D grid - iOS Cocos2d

    - by SundayMonday
    I'm creating a grid-based iOS game using Cocos2d. Currently the grid is stored in an NSMutableArray that contains other NSMutableArrays (the latter are rows in the grid). This works ok and performance so far is pretty good. However the syntax feels bulky and the indexing isn't very elegant (using CGPoints, would prefer integer indices). I'm looking for an alternative. What are some alternatives data structures for 2D arrays in this situation? In my game it's very common to add and remove rows from the bottom of the grid. So the grid might start off 10x10, grow to 17x10, shrink to 8x10 and then finally end with 2x10. Note the column count is constant. I've consider using a vector<vector<Object*>>. Also I'm vaguely aware of some type of "fast array" or similar offered by Cocos2d. I'd just like to learn about best practices from other developers!

    Read the article

  • Workaround the flip queue (AKA pre-rendered frames) in OpenGL?

    - by user41500
    It appears that some drivers implement a "flip queue" such that, even with vsync enabled, the first few calls to swap buffers return immediately (queuing those frames for later use). It is only after this queue is filled that buffer swaps will block to synchronize with vblank. This behavior is detrimental to my application. It creates latency. Does anyone know of a way to disable it or a workaround for dealing with it? The OpenGL Wiki on Swap Interval suggests a call to glFinish after the swap but I've had no such luck with that trick.

    Read the article

  • Problem with DirectX scene-graph

    - by Alex
    I'm trying to implement a basic scene graph in DirectX using C++. I am using a left child-right sibling binary tree to do this. I'm having trouble updating each node's world transformation relative to its parent (and its parent's parent etc.). I'm struggling to get it to work recursively, though I can get it to work like this: for(int i = 0; i < NUM_OBJECTS; i++) { // Initialize to identity matrix. D3DXMatrixIdentity(&mObject[i].toWorldXForm); int k = i; while( k != -1 ) { mObject[i].toWorldXForm *= mObject[k].toParentXForm; k = mObject[k].parent; } } toWorldXForm is the object's world transform and toParentXForm is the object's transform relative to the parent. I want to do this using a method within my object class (the code above is in my main class). This is what I've tried but it doesn't work (only works with nodes 1 generation away from the root) if (this->sibling != NULL) this->sibling->update(toParentXForm); D3DXMatrixIdentity(&toWorldXForm); this->toWorldXForm *= this->toParentXForm; this->toWorldXForm *= toParentXForm; toParentXForm *= this->toParentXForm; if (this->child != NULL) this->child->update(toParentXForm); Sorry if I've not been clear, please tell me if there's anything else you need to know. I've no doubt it's merely a silly mistake on my part, hopefully an outside view will be able to spot the problem.

    Read the article

  • Creating practically solvable 15 puzzle inputs

    - by Ashwin
    I am now developing a 15 puzzle game. I know the method to detect unsolvable puzzles. But unlike 8-puzzle, solution for 15-puzzle takes quite long time for some input states and can be solved within 5 seconds some other set of input states. Now the problem is that I cannot give the user(the player), a problem for which the solution takes more than 10 seconds(if he/she chooses to see the solution). So what I want is that when I initially shuffle the puzzle, I want to only present those puzzles which can be solved within 10 seconds. There must be some way to determine the hardness of the puzzle. I tried searching the net but could not find it. Does anyone know a way of determining the hardness of a puzzle? NOTE : I am using A* algorithm to find out the solution on a computer with 3GB RAM and 2.27GHZ processor.

    Read the article

  • Android Swipe In Unity 3D World with AR

    - by Christian
    I am working on an AR application using Unity3D and the Vuforia SDK for Android. The way the application works is a when the designated image(a frame marker in our case) is recognized by the camera, a 3D island is rendered at that spot. Currently I am able to detect when/which objects are touched on the model by raycasting. I also am able to successfully detect a swipe using this code: if (Input.touchCount > 0) { Touch touch = Input.touches[0]; switch (touch.phase) { case TouchPhase.Began: couldBeSwipe = true; startPos = touch.position; startTime = Time.time; break; case TouchPhase.Moved: if (Mathf.Abs(touch.position.y - startPos.y) > comfortZoneY) { couldBeSwipe = false; } //track points here for raycast if it is swipe break; case TouchPhase.Stationary: couldBeSwipe = false; break; case TouchPhase.Ended: float swipeTime = Time.time - startTime; float swipeDist = (touch.position - startPos).magnitude; if (couldBeSwipe && (swipeTime < maxSwipeTime) && (swipeDist > minSwipeDist)) { // It's a swiiiiiiiiiiiipe! float swipeDirection = Mathf.Sign(touch.position.y - startPos.y); // Do something here in reaction to the swipe. swipeCounter.IncrementCounter(); } break; } touchInfo.SetTouchInfo (Time.time-startTime,(touch.position-startPos).magnitude,Mathf.Abs (touch.position.y-startPos.y)); } Thanks to andeeeee for the logic. But I want to have some interaction in the 3D world based on the swipe on the screen. I.E. If the user swipes over unoccluded enemies, they die. My first thought was to track all the points in the moved TouchPhase, and then if it is a swipe raycast into all those points and kill any enemy that is hit. Is there a better way to do this? What is the best approach? Thanks for the help!

    Read the article

  • How can I do Mouse Selection In OpenGL 3.0?

    - by NoobScratcher
    Hello I'm pretty good programmer I've made my own 2D games in SDL and made a gui in 3D using Old OpenGL and Modern OpenGL but.. I'm having problems with trying to click 3D models with opengl I have no idea what to do too be honest. Do I read the area that I've clicked? or what do I do? 100% shore this has been asked before but I just don't know what to do...?? using : OpenGL 3.0 WIN32 API C++

    Read the article

  • Problem with Ogre::Camera lookAt function when target is directly below.

    - by PigBen
    I am trying to make a class which controls a camera. It's pretty basic right now, it looks like this: class HoveringCameraController { public: void init(Ogre::Camera & camera, AnimatedBody & target, Ogre::Real height); void update(Ogre::Real time_delta); private: Ogre::Camera * camera_; AnimatedBody * target_; Ogre::Real height_; }; HoveringCameraController.cpp void HoveringCameraController::init(Ogre::Camera & camera, AnimatedBody & target, Ogre::Real height) { camera_ = &camera; target_ = &target; height_ = height; update(0.0); } void HoveringCameraController::update(Ogre::Real time_delta) { auto position = target_->getPosition(); position.y += height_; camera_->setPosition(position); camera_->lookAt(target_->getPosition()); } AnimatedBody is just a class that encapsulates an entity, it's animations and a scene node. The getPosition function is simply forwarded to it's scene node. What I want(for now) is for the camera to simply follow the AnimatedBody overhead at the distance given(the height parameter), and look down at it. It follows the object around, but it doesn't look straight down, it's tilted quite a bit in the positive Z direction. Does anybody have any idea why it would do that? If I change this line: position.y += height_; to this: position.x += height_; or this: position.z += height_; it does exactly what I would expect. It follows the object from the side or front, and looks directly at it.

    Read the article

  • Simple project - make a 3D box tumble and fall to the ground [closed]

    - by Dominic Bou-Samra
    Possible Duplicate: Resources to learn programming rigid body simulation Hi guys, I want to try learning rigid-body dynamic simulation. I have done a fluid and cloth simulation before, but never anything rigid. My maths knowledge is limited in that I don't know the notation that well. Are there any good cliff-notes, tutorials, guides on how I would accomplish a simple task like this? I don't want a super complex pdf that's only a little relevant. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • MMORPG design for time-limited players

    - by Philipp
    I believe that there is a significant market of players who would enjoy the exploration and interaction aspects of MMORPGs, but simply don't have the time for the endless grinding marathons which are part of the average MMORPG. MMORPGs are all about interaction between players. But when different players have different amounts of time to invest into a game, those with less time to spend will soon lack behind their power-leveling friends and won't be able to interact with them anymore. One way to solve this would be to limit the progress a player can achieve per day, so that it simply doesn't make sense to play more than one or two hours a day. But even the busiest casual players sometimes like to spend a whole sunday afternoon playing a video game. Just stopping them after two hours would be really frustrating. It also creates a pressure to use the daily progress limit every day, because otherwise the player would feel like wasting something. This pressure would be detrimental for casual gamers. What else could be done to level the playing field between those players who play 40+ hours a week and those who can't play more than 10?

    Read the article

  • Good 3D Game Engine for the Horror Genre [on hold]

    - by James Wassall
    I am starting to think about and design (pencil drawings) a simple, horror game. I'm in need of a good engine which supports features like Dynamic Lighting (for a characters flashlight) and dynamic shadows. My first choice was obviously Unity3D, as its free and is (supposedly) the easiest to use. However, I believe that a lot of features are locked for the Pro version (a $1500 investment). Is there any good, free engines that support dynamic events? I have read a lot of posts recommending the Source engine but I don't want to make a mod, I would like to make a fully featured standalone game. I'm not looking for opinions on "Which engine you prefer" or "Which engine do you use", all I would like is to be presented with the facts. -James

    Read the article

  • Handling early/late/dropped packets for interpolation in a 3D multiplayer game

    - by Ben Cracknell
    I'm working on a multiplayer game that for the purposes of this question, is most similar to Team Fortress. Each network data packet will contain the 3D position of the target moving object. (this object could be another player) The packets are sent on a fixed interval, and linear interpolation will be used to smooth the transition between packets. Under normal circumstances, interpolation will occur between the second-to-last packet, and the last packet received. The linear interpolation algorithm is the same as this post: Interpolating positions in a multiplayer game I have the same issue as in that post, but the answers don't seem like they will work in my situation. Consider the following scenario: Normal packet timing, everything is okay The next expected packet is late. That's okay, we'll just extrapolate based on previous positions The late packet eventually arrives with corrections to our extrapolation. Now what do we do with its information? The answers on the above post suggest we should just interpolate to this new packet's position, but that would not work at all. If we have already extrapolated past that point in time, moving back would cause rubber-banding. The issue is similar in the case of an early or dropped packet. So I believe what I am looking for is some way to smoothly deal with new information in an ongoing interpolation/extrapolation process. Since I might be moving on to quadratic or even cubic interpolation, it would be great if the same solutiuon could be applied to those as well.

    Read the article

  • How to properly add texture to multi-fixture/shape b2Body

    - by Blazej Wdowikowski
    Hello to everyone this is my first poste here I hope that will be not fail start. At start I must say I make part 1 in Ray's Tutorial "How To Make A Game Like Fruit Ninja With Box2D and Cocos2D". But I wonder what when I want make more complex body with texture? Simple just add n b2FixtureDef to the same body. OK but what about texture? If I will take code from that tutorial it only fill last fixture. Probably it does not takes every b2Vec2 point. I was right, it did not. So quick refactor and from that -(id)initWithTexture:(CCTexture2D*)texture body:(b2Body*)body original:(BOOL)original { // gather all the vertices from our Box2D shape b2Fixture *originalFixture = body->GetFixtureList(); b2PolygonShape *shape = (b2PolygonShape*)originalFixture->GetShape(); int vertexCount = shape->GetVertexCount(); NSMutableArray *points = [NSMutableArray arrayWithCapacity:vertexCount]; for(int i = 0; i < vertexCount; i++) { CGPoint p = ccp(shape->GetVertex(i).x * PTM_RATIO, shape->GetVertex(i).y * PTM_RATIO); [points addObject:[NSValue valueWithCGPoint:p]]; } if ((self = [super initWithPoints:points andTexture:texture])) { _body = body; _body->SetUserData(self); _original = original; // gets the center of the polygon _centroid = self.body->GetLocalCenter(); // assign an anchor point based on the center self.anchorPoint = ccp(_centroid.x * PTM_RATIO / texture.contentSize.width, _centroid.y * PTM_RATIO / texture.contentSize.height); } return self; } I came up with that -(id)initWithTexture:(CCTexture2D*)texture body:(b2Body*)body original:(BOOL)original { int vertexCount = 0; //gather total number of b2Vect2 points b2Fixture *currentFixture = body->GetFixtureList(); while (currentFixture) { //new b2PolygonShape *shape = (b2PolygonShape*)currentFixture->GetShape(); vertexCount += shape->GetVertexCount(); currentFixture = currentFixture->GetNext(); } NSMutableArray *points = [NSMutableArray arrayWithCapacity:vertexCount]; // gather all the vertices from our Box2D shape b2Fixture *originalFixture = body->GetFixtureList(); while (originalFixture) { //new NSLog((NSString*)@"-"); b2PolygonShape *shape = (b2PolygonShape*)originalFixture->GetShape(); int currentVertexCount = shape->GetVertexCount(); for(int i = 0; i < currentVertexCount; i++) { CGPoint p = ccp(shape->GetVertex(i).x * PTM_RATIO, shape->GetVertex(i).y * PTM_RATIO); [points addObject:[NSValue valueWithCGPoint:p]]; } originalFixture = originalFixture->GetNext(); } if ((self = [super initWithPoints:points andTexture:texture])) { _body = body; _body->SetUserData(self); _original = original; // gets the center of the polygon _centroid = self.body->GetLocalCenter(); // assign an anchor point based on the center self.anchorPoint = ccp(_centroid.x * PTM_RATIO / texture.contentSize.width,_centroid.y * PTM_RATIO / texture.contentSize.height); } return self; } I was working for simple two fixtures body like b2BodyDef bodyDef; bodyDef.type = b2_dynamicBody; bodyDef.position = position; bodyDef.angle = rotation; b2Body *body = world->CreateBody(&bodyDef); b2FixtureDef fixtureDef; fixtureDef.density = 1.0; fixtureDef.friction = 0.5; fixtureDef.restitution = 0.2; fixtureDef.filter.categoryBits = 0x0001; fixtureDef.filter.maskBits = 0x0001; b2Vec2 vertices[] = { b2Vec2(0.0/PTM_RATIO,50.0/PTM_RATIO), b2Vec2(0.0/PTM_RATIO,0.0/PTM_RATIO), b2Vec2(50.0/PTM_RATIO,30.1/PTM_RATIO), b2Vec2(60.0/PTM_RATIO,60.0/PTM_RATIO) }; b2PolygonShape shape; shape.Set(vertices, 4); fixtureDef.shape = &shape; body->CreateFixture(&fixtureDef); b2Vec2 vertices2[] = { b2Vec2(20.0/PTM_RATIO,50.0/PTM_RATIO), b2Vec2(20.0/PTM_RATIO,0.0/PTM_RATIO), b2Vec2(70.0/PTM_RATIO,30.1/PTM_RATIO), b2Vec2(80.0/PTM_RATIO,60.0/PTM_RATIO) }; shape.Set(vertices2, 4); fixtureDef.shape = &shape; body->CreateFixture(&fixtureDef); But if I try put secondary shape upper than first it starting wierd, texture goes crazy. For example not mention about more complex shapes. What's more if shapes have one common point texture will not render for them at all [For that I use Physics Edytor like in tutorial part1] BTW. I use PolygonSprite and in method createWithWorld... another shapes. Uff.. Question So my question is, why texture coords are in such a mess up? It's my modify method or just wrong approach? Maybe I should remove duplicated from points array?

    Read the article

  • How To Scale Canvas In Android

    - by Daniel Braithwaite
    I am writing a android game using Canvas as the way to draw everything, the problem is that when i run it on different android phones the canvas dosn't change size i tried using canvas.scale() but that didn't make a i difference. The code i use for drawing is ... public void draw( Canvas c, int score ) { Obstical2[] obstmp = Queue.toArray(this.o); Coin[] cointmp = QueueC.toArray(this.c); for( int i = 0; i < obstmp.length; i++ ) { obstmp[i].draw(c); } for( int i = 0; i < cointmp.length; i++ ) { cointmp[i].draw(c); } c.drawText(String.format("%d", score ), 20, 50, textPaint); if( isWon && isStarted ) c.drawText("YOU WON", 20, 400, resPaint); else if( isLost && isStarted ) c.drawText("YOU LOST", 20, 400, resPaint); } The function above calls the draw functions for the entity's on the screen, theses function are as follows Draw Function For Obstical : public void draw( Canvas c ) { Log.i("D", "COIN"); coin.draw(c); } Draw Function For Coin : public void draw( Canvas c ) { obstical.draw(c); } How could i make the canvas re-size to it would look the same on any screen ? Cheers Daniel

    Read the article

  • Simulating smooth movement along a line after calculating a collision containing a restitution of zero in 2D

    - by Casey
    [for tl;dr see after listing] //...Code to determine shapes types involved in collision here... //...Rectangle-Line collision detected. if(_rbTest->GetCollisionShape()->Intersects(*_ground->GetCollisionShape())) { //Convert incoming shape to a line. a2de::Line l(*dynamic_cast<a2de::Line*>(_ground->GetCollisionShape())); //Get line's normal. a2de::Vector2D normal_vector(l.GetSlope().GetY(), -l.GetSlope().GetX()); a2de::Vector2D::Normalize(normal_vector); //Accumulate forces involved. a2de::Vector2D intermediate_forces; a2de::Vector2D normal_force = normal_vector * _rbTest->GetMass() * _world->GetGravityHandler()->GetGravityValue(); intermediate_forces += normal_force; //Calculate final velocity: See [1] double Ma = _rbTest->GetMass(); a2de::Vector2D Ua = _rbTest->GetVelocity(); double Mb = _ground->GetMass(); a2de::Vector2D Ub = _ground->GetVelocity(); double mCr = Mb * _ground->GetRestitution(); a2de::Vector2D collision_velocity( ((Ma * Ua) + (Mb * Ub) + ((mCr * Ub) - (mCr * Ua))) / (Ma + Mb)); //Calculate reflection vector: See [2] a2de::Vector2D reflect_velocity( -collision_velocity + 2 * (a2de::Vector2D::DotProduct(collision_velocity, normal_vector)) * normal_vector ); //Affect velocity to account for restitution of colliding bodies. reflect_velocity *= (_ground->GetRestitution() * _rbTest->GetRestitution()); _rbTest->SetVelocity(reflect_velocity); //THE ULTIMATE ISSUE STEMS FROM THE FOLLOWING LINE: //Move object away from collision one pixel to prevent constant collision. _rbTest->SetPosition(_rbTest->GetPosition() + normal_vector); _rbTest->ApplyImpulse(intermediate_forces); } Sources: (1) Wikipedia: Coefficient of Restitution: Speeds after impact (2) Wikipedia: Specular Reflection: Direction of reflection First, I have a system in place to account for friction (that is, a coefficient of friction) but is not used right now (in addition, it is zero, which should not affect the math anyway). I'll deal with that after I get this working. Anyway, when the restitution of either object involved in the collision is zero the object stops as required, but if movement along the same direction (again, irrespective of the friction value that isn't used) as the line is attempted the object moves as if slogging through knee deep snow. If I remove the line of code in question and the object is not push away one pixel the object barely moves at all. All because the object collides, is stopped, is pushed up, collides, is stopped...etc. OR collides, is stopped, collides, is stopped, etc... TL;DR How do I only account for a collision ONCE for restitution purposes (BONUS: but CONTINUALLY for frictional purposes, to be implemented later)

    Read the article

  • What is the correct and most efficient approach of streaming vertex data?

    - by Martijn Courteaux
    Usually, I do this in my current OpenGL ES project (for iOS): Initialization: Create two VBO's and one IndexBuffer (since I will use the same indices), same size. Create two VAO's and configure them, both bound to the same Index Buffer. Each frame: Choose a VBO/VAO couple. (Different from the previous frame, so I'm alternating.) Bind that VBO Upload new data using glBufferSubData(GL_ARRAY_BUFFER, ...). Bind the VAO Render my stuff using glDrawElements(GL_***, ...); Unbind the VAO However, someone told me to avoid uploading data (step 3) and render immediately the new data (step 5). I should avoid this, because the glDrawElements call will stall until the buffer is effectively uploaded to VRAM. So he suggested to draw all my geometry I uploaded the previous frame and upload in the current frame what will be drawn in the next frame. Thus, everything is rendered with the delay of one frame. Is this true or am I using the good approach to work with streaming vertex data? (I do know that the pipeline will stall the other way around. Ie: when you draw and immediately try to change the buffer data. But I'm not doing that, since I implemented double buffering.)

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442  | Next Page >