Search Results

Search found 32833 results on 1314 pages for 'product development'.

Page 481/1314 | < Previous Page | 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488  | Next Page >

• How do engines avoid "Phase Lock" (multiple objects in same location) in a Physics Engine?

  - by C0M37

  Let me explain Phase Lock first: When two objects of non zero mass occupy the same space but have zero energy (no velocity). Do they bump forever with zero velocity resolution vectors or do they just stay locked together until an outside force interacts? In my home brewed engine, I realized that if I loaded a character into a tree and moved them, they would signal a collision and hop back to their original spot. I suppose I could fix this by implementing impulses in the event of a collision instead of just jumping back to the last spot I was in (my implementation kind of sucks). But while I make my engine more robust, I'm just curious on how most other physics engines handle this case. Do objects that start in the same spot with no movement speed just shoot out from each other in a random direction? Or do they sit there until something happens? Which option is generally the best approach?

  Read the article

• Painting with pixel shaders

  - by Gustavo Maciel

  I have an almost full understanding of how 2D Lighting works, saw this post and was tempted to try implementing this in HLSL. I planned to paint each of the layers with shaders, and then, combine them just drawing one on top of another, or just pass the 3 textures to the shader and getting a better way to combine them. Working almost as planned, but I got a little question in the matter. I'm drawing each layer this way: GraphicsDevice.SetRenderTarget(lighting); GraphicsDevice.Clear(Color.Transparent); //... Setup shader SpriteBatch.Begin(SpriteSortMode.Immediate, BlendState.AlphaBlend, SamplerState.LinearClamp, DepthStencilState.None, RasterizerState.CullNone, lightingShader); SpriteBatch.Draw(texture, fullscreen, Color.White); SpriteBatch.End(); GraphicsDevice.SetRenderTarget(darkMask); GraphicsDevice.Clear(Color.Transparent); //... Setup shader SpriteBatch.Begin(SpriteSortMode.Immediate, BlendState.AlphaBlend, SamplerState.LinearClamp, DepthStencilState.None, RasterizerState.CullNone, darkMaskShader); SpriteBatch.Draw(texture, fullscreen, Color.White); SpriteBatch.End(); Where lightingShader and darkMaskShader are shaders that, with parameters (view and proj matrices, light pos, color and range, etc) generate a texture meant to be that layer. It works fine, but I'm not sure if drawing a transparent quad on top of a transparent render target is the best way of doing it. Because I actually just need the position and params. Concluding: Can I paint a texture with shaders without having to clear it and then draw a transparent texture on top of it?

  Read the article

• Register Game Object Components in Game Subsystems? (Component-based Game Object design)

  - by topright

  I'm creating a component-based game object system. Some tips: GameObject is simply a list of Components. There are GameSubsystems. For example, rendering, physics etc. Each GameSubsystem contains pointers to some of Components. GameSubsystem is a very powerful and flexible abstraction: it represents any slice (or aspect) of the game world. There is a need in a mechanism of registering Components in GameSubsystems (when GameObject is created and composed). There are 4 approaches: 1: Chain of responsibility pattern. Every Component is offered to every GameSubsystem. GameSubsystem makes a decision which Components to register (and how to organize them). For example, GameSubsystemRender can register Renderable Components. pro. Components know nothing about how they are used. Low coupling. A. We can add new GameSubsystem. For example, let's add GameSubsystemTitles that registers all ComponentTitle and guarantees that every title is unique and provides interface to quering objects by title. Of course, ComponentTitle should not be rewrited or inherited in this case. B. We can reorganize existing GameSubsystems. For example, GameSubsystemAudio, GameSubsystemRender, GameSubsystemParticleEmmiter can be merged into GameSubsystemSpatial (to place all audio, emmiter, render Components in the same hierarchy and use parent-relative transforms). con. Every-to-every check. Very innefficient. con. Subsystems know about Components. 2: Each Subsystem searches for Components of specific types. pro. Better performance than in Approach 1. con. Subsystems still know about Components. 3: Component registers itself in GameSubsystem(s). We know at compile-time that there is a GameSubsystemRenderer, so let's ComponentImageRender will call something like GameSubsystemRenderer::register(ComponentRenderBase*). pro. Performance. No unnecessary checks as in Approach 1. con. Components are badly coupled with GameSubsystems. 4: Mediator pattern. GameState (that contains GameSubsystems) can implement registerComponent(Component*). pro. Components and GameSubystems know nothing about each other. con. In C++ it would look like ugly and slow typeid-switch. Questions: Which approach is better and mostly used in component-based design? What Practice says? Any suggestions about implementation of Approach 4? Thank you.

  Read the article

• Dynamic Dijkstra

  - by Dani

  I need dynamic dijkstra algorithm that can update itself when edge's cost is changed without a full recalculation. Full recalculation is not an option. I've tryed to "brew" my own implemantion with no success. I've also tryed to find on the Internet but found nothing. A link to an article explaining the algorithm or even it's name will be good. Edit: Thanks everyone for answering. I managed to make algorithm of my own that runs in O(V+E) time, if anyone wishes to know the algorithm just say so and I will post it.

  Read the article

• Bitmap font rendering, UV generation and vertex placement

  - by jack

  I am generating a bitmap, however, I am not sure on how to render the UV's and placement. I had a thread like this once before, but it was too loosely worded as to what I was looking to do. What I am doing right now is creating a large 1024x1024 image with characters evenly placed every 64 pixels. Here is an example of what I mean. I then save the bitmap X/Y information to a file (which is all multiples of 64). However, I am not sure how to properly use this information and bitmap to render. This falls into two different categories, UV generation and kerning. Now I believe I know how to do both of these, however, when I attempt to couple them together I will get horrendous results. For example, I am trying to render two different text arrays, "123" and "njfb". While ignoring the texture quality (I will be increasing the texture to provide more detail once I fix this issue), here is what it looks like when I try to render them. http://img64.imageshack.us/img64/599/badfontrendering.png Now for the algorithm. I am doing my letter placement with both GetABCWidth and GetKerningPairs. I am using GetABCWidth for the width of the characters, then I am getting the kerning information for adjust the characters. Does anyone have any suggestions on how I can implement my own bitmap font renderer? I am trying to do this without using external libraries such as angel bitmap tool or freetype. I also want to stick to the way the bitmap font sheet is generated so I can do extra effects in the future. Rendering Algorithm for(U32 c = 0, vertexID = 0, i = 0; c < numberOfCharacters; ++c, vertexID += 4, i += 6) { ObtainCharInformation(fontName, m_Text[c]); letterWidth = (charInfo.A + charInfo.B + charInfo.C) * scale; if(c != 0) { DWORD BytesReq = GetGlyphOutlineW(dc, m_Text[c], GGO_GRAY8_BITMAP, &gm, 0, 0, &mat); U8 * glyphImg= new U8[BytesReq]; DWORD r = GetGlyphOutlineW(dc, m_Text[c], GGO_GRAY8_BITMAP, &gm, BytesReq, glyphImg, &mat); for (int k=0; k<nKerningPairs; k++) { if ((kerningpairs[k].wFirst == previousCharIndex) && (kerningpairs[k].wSecond == m_Text[c])) { letterBottomLeftX += (kerningpairs[k].iKernAmount * scale); break; } } letterBottomLeftX -= (gm.gmCellIncX * scale); } SetVertex(letterBottomLeftX, 0.0f, zFight, vertexID); SetVertex(letterBottomLeftX, letterHeight, zFight, vertexID + 1); SetVertex(letterBottomLeftX + letterWidth, letterHeight, zFight, vertexID + 2); SetVertex(letterBottomLeftX + letterWidth, 0.0f, zFight, vertexID + 3); zFight -= 0.001f; float BottomLeftX = (F32)(charInfo.bitmapXOrigin) / (float)m_BitmapWidth; float BottomLeftY = (F32)(charInfo.bitmapYOrigin + charInfo.charBitmapHeight) / (float)m_BitmapWidth; float TopLeftX = BottomLeftX; float TopLeftY = (F32)(charInfo.bitmapYOrigin) / (float)m_BitmapWidth; float TopRightX = (F32)(charInfo.bitmapXOrigin + charInfo.B - charInfo.C) / (float)m_BitmapWidth; float TopRightY = TopLeftY; float BottomRightX = TopRightX; float BottomRightY = BottomLeftY; SetTextureCoordinate(TopLeftX, TopLeftY, vertexID + 1); SetTextureCoordinate(BottomLeftX, BottomLeftY, vertexID + 0); SetTextureCoordinate(BottomRightX, BottomRightY, vertexID + 3); SetTextureCoordinate(TopRightX, TopRightY, vertexID + 2); /// index setting letterBottomLeftX += letterWidth; previousCharIndex = m_Text[c]; }

  Read the article

• Breakout clone, how to handle/design for collision detection/physics between objects?

  - by Zolomon

  I'm working on a breakout clone, and I wish to create some realistic physics effects for collision - angles on the paddle should allow the ball to bounce, as well as doing curve balls etc. I could use per-pixel based collision detection, but then I thought it might be easier with line/circle intersection testing. So, then I naturally consider making a polygon class for the line-based objects and use the built-in circle class for the circular objects. That sounds like an OK approach, right? And then just check for collision using the specified algorithm based on the objects that might be within each other's range?

  Read the article

• Transforming a primitive tetrahedron into a primitive icosahedron?

  - by Djentleman

  I've created a tetrahedron by creating a BoundingBox and building the faces of the tetrahedron within the bounding box as follows (see image as well): VertexPositionNormalTexture[] vertices = new VertexPositionNormalTexture[12]; BoundingBox box = new BoundingBox(new Vector3(-1f, 1f, 1f), new Vector3(1f, -1f, -1f)); vertices[0].Position = box.GetCorners()[0]; vertices[1].Position = box.GetCorners()[2]; vertices[2].Position = box.GetCorners()[7]; vertices[3].Position = box.GetCorners()[0]; vertices[4].Position = box.GetCorners()[5]; vertices[5].Position = box.GetCorners()[2]; vertices[6].Position = box.GetCorners()[5]; vertices[7].Position = box.GetCorners()[7]; vertices[8].Position = box.GetCorners()[2]; vertices[9].Position = box.GetCorners()[5]; vertices[10].Position = box.GetCorners()[0]; vertices[11].Position = box.GetCorners()[7]; What would I then have to do to transform this tetrahedron into an icosahedron? Similar to this image: I understand the concept but applying it is another thing entirely for me.

  Read the article

• Strange 3D game engine camera with X,Y,Zoom instead of X,Y,Z

  - by Jenko

  I'm using a 3D game engine, that uses a 4x4 matrix to modify the camera projection, in this format: r r r x r r r y r r r z - - - zoom Strangely though, the camera does not respond to the Z translation parameter, and so you're forced to use X, Y, Zoom to move the camera around. Technically this is plausible for isometric-style games such as Age Of Empires III. But this is a 3D engine, and so why would they have designed the camera to ignore Z and respond only to zoom? Am I missing something here? I've tried every method of setting the camera and it really seems to ignore Z. So currently I have to resort to moving the main object in the scene graph instead of moving the camera in relation to the objects. My question: Do you have any idea why the engine would use such a scheme? Is it common? Why? Or does it seem like I'm missing something and the SetProjection(Matrix) function is broken and somehow ignores the Z translation in the matrix? (unlikely, but possible) Anyhow, what are the workarounds? Is moving objects around the only way? Edit: I'm sorry I cannot reveal much about the engine because we're in a binding contract. It's a locally developed engine (Australia) written in managed C# used for data visualizations. Edit: The default mode of the engine is orthographic, although I've switched it into perspective mode. Its probably more effective to use X, Y, Zoom in orthographic mode, but I need to use perspective mode to render everyday objects as well.

  Read the article

• Bitmap to Texture2D problem with colors

  - by xnaNewbie89

  I have a small problem with converting a bitmap to a Texture2D. The resulted image of the conversion has the red channel switched with the blue channel :/ I don't know why, because the pixel formats are the same. If someone can help me I will be very happy :) System.Drawing.Image image = System.Drawing.Bitmap.FromFile(ImageFileLoader.filename); System.Drawing.Bitmap bitmap = new System.Drawing.Bitmap(image); Texture2D mapTexture = new Texture2D(Screen.Game.GraphicsDevice, bitmap.Width, bitmap.Height,false,SurfaceFormat.Color); System.Drawing.Imaging.BitmapData data = bitmap.LockBits(new System.Drawing.Rectangle( 0, 0, bitmap.Width, bitmap.Height), System.Drawing.Imaging.ImageLockMode.ReadOnly,System.Drawing.Imaging.PixelFormat.Format32bppArgb); byte[] bytes = new byte[data.Height * data.Width*4]; System.Runtime.InteropServices.Marshal.Copy(data.Scan0, bytes, 0, bytes.Length); mapTexture.SetData<byte>(bytes, 0, data.Height * data.Width * 4); bitmap.UnlockBits(data); bitmap.Dispose(); image.Dispose();

  Read the article

• Split a 2D scene in layers or have a z coordinate

  - by Bane

  I am in the process of writing a 2D game engine, and a dilemma emerged. Let me explain the situation... I have a Scene class, to which various objects can be added (Drawable, ParticleEmitter, Light2D, etc), and as this is a 2D scene, things will obviously be drawn over each other. My first thought was that I could have basic add and remove methods, but I soon realized that then there would be no way for the programmer to control the order in which things were drawn. So I can up with two options, each with its pros and cons. A) Would be to split the scene in layers. By that I mean instead of having the scene be a container of objects, have it be a container of layers, which are in turn the containers of objects. B) Would require to have some kind of z-coordinate, and then have the scene sorted so objects with lower z get drawn first. Option A is pretty solid, but the problem is with the lights. In what layer do I add it? Does it work cross-layer? On all bottom layers? And I still need the Z coordinate to calculate the shadow! Option B would require me to change all my code from having Vector2D positions, to some kind of class that inherits from Vector2D and adds a z coordinate to it (I don't want it to be a Vector3D because I still need all the same methods the 2D kind has, just with .z clamped on). Am I missing something? Is there an alternative to these methods? I'm working in Javascript, if that makes a difference.

  Read the article

• 2D Grid Map Connectivity Check (avoiding stack overflow)

  - by SombreErmine

  I am trying to create a routine in C++ that will run before a more expensive A* algorithm that checks to see if two nodes on a 2D grid map are connected or not. What I need to know is a good way to accomplish this sequentially rather than recursively to avoid overflowing the stack. What I've Done Already I've implemented this with ease using a recursive algorithm; however, depending upon different situations it will generate a stack overflow. Upon researching this, I've come to the conclusion that it is overflowing the stack because of too many recursive function calls. I am sure that my recursion does not enter an infinite loop. I generate connected sets at the beginning of the level, and then I use those connected sets to determine connectivity on the fly later. Basically, the generating algorithm starts from left-to-right top-to-bottom. It skips wall nodes and marks them as visited. Whenever it reaches a walkable node, it recursively checks in all four cardinal directions for connected walkable nodes. Every node that gets checked is marked as visited so they aren't handled twice. After checking a node, it is added to either a walls set, a doors set, or one of multiple walkable nodes sets. Once it fills that area, it continues the original ltr ttb loop skipping already-visited nodes. I've also looked into flood-fill algorithms, but I can't make sense of the sequential algorithms and how to adapt them. Can anyone suggest a better way to accomplish this without causing a stack overflow? The only way I can think of is to do the left-to-right top-to-bottom loop generating connected sets on a row basis. Then check the previous row to see if any of the connected sets are connected and then join the sets that are. I haven't decided on the best data structures to use for that though. I also just thought about having the connected sets pre-generated outside the game, but I wouldn't know where to start with creating a tool for that. Any help is appreciated. Thanks!

  Read the article

• How do I implement collision detection with a sprite walking up a rocky-terrain hill?

  - by detectivecalcite

  I'm working in SDL and have bounding rectangles for collisions set up for each frame of the sprite's animation. However, I recently stumbled upon the issue of putting together collisions for characters walking up and down hills/slopes with irregularly curved or rocky terrain - what's a good way to do collisions for that type of situation? Per-pixel? Loading up the points of the incline and doing player-line collision checking? Should I use bounding rectangles in general or circle collision detection?

  Read the article

• loading 3d model data into buffers

  - by mulletdevil

  I am using assimp to load 3d model data. I have noticed that each loaded model is made up of different meshes. I was wondering should each mesh have it's own vertex/index buffer or should there just be one for the whole model? From looking through the index data that is loaded it seems to suggest that I will need a vertex buffer per mesh but I'm not 100% sure. I am using C++ and DirectX9 Thank you, Mark

  Read the article

• How to expose game data in the game without a singelton?

  - by zardon

  I'm quite new to cocos2d and games programming, and am currently I am writing a game that is currently in Prototype stage. Everything is going okay, but I've realized a potentially big problem and I am not sure how to solve it. I am using a singelton to store a bunch of arrays for everything, a global list of planets, a global list of troops, a global list of products, etc. And only now I'm realizing that all of this will be in memory and this is the wrong way to do it. I am not storing files or anything on the disk just yet, with exception to a save/load state, which is a capture of everything. My game makes use of a map which allows you to select a planet, then it will give you a breakdown of that planets troops and resources, Lets use this scenario: My game has 20 planets. On which you can have 20 troops. Straight away that's an array of 400! This does not add the NPC, which is another 10. So, 20x10 = 200 So, now we have 600 all in arrays inside a Singelton. This is obviously very bad, and very wrong. Especially as the game scales in the amount of data. But I need to expose pretty much everything, especially on the map page, and I am not sure how else to do it. I've been told that I can use a controller for the map page which has the information I need for each planet, and other controllers for other items I require global display for. I've also thought about storing each planet's data in a save file, using initWithCoder however there could be a boatload of files on the user's device? I really don't want to use a database, mainly because I would need to translate NSObjects and non-NSObjects like CGRects and CGPoints and Colors into/from SQL. I am open to other ideas on how to store and read game data to prevent using a singelton to store everything, everywhere. Thanks for your time.

  Read the article

• Incorporating XNA into an existing project

  - by Boreal

  My game as-is is using IrrlichtLime, which I'm beginning to dislike because it hides a lot of implementation and makes adding your own implementation incredibly complex. I don't really need the scene manager for anything and the only animation I need is manual (i.e. transforming the bones programmatically). However, I've only ever used XNA in the past as a starting point with the templates. How would I take my current project and add XNA to it?

  Read the article

• SFML - Moving a sprite on mouseclick

  - by Mike

  I want to be able to move a sprite from a current location to another based upon where the user clicks in the window. This is the code that I have: #include <SFML/Graphics.hpp> int main() { // Create the main window sf::RenderWindow App(sf::VideoMode(800, 600), "SFML window"); // Load a sprite to display sf::Texture Image; if (!Image.LoadFromFile("cb.bmp")) return EXIT_FAILURE; sf::Sprite Sprite(Image); // Define the spead of the sprite float spriteSpeed = 200.f; // Start the game loop while (App.IsOpened()) { if (sf::Keyboard::IsKeyPressed(sf::Keyboard::Escape)) App.Close(); if (sf::Mouse::IsButtonPressed(sf::Mouse::Right)) { Sprite.SetPosition(sf::Mouse::GetPosition(App).x, sf::Mouse::GetPosition(App).y); } // Clear screen App.Clear(); // Draw the sprite App.Draw(Sprite); // Update the window App.Display(); } return EXIT_SUCCESS; } But instead of just setting the position I want to use Sprite.Move() and gradually move the sprite from one position to another. The question is how? Later I plan on adding a node system into each map so I can use Dijkstra's algorithm, but I'll still need this for moving between nodes.

  Read the article

• Game editor integration with the engine?

  - by Daniel

  What I am trying to figure out is what is the best way to integrate the editor(level, effects, model, etc...) in the most effective way? Now the first thing I thought would be to create the game engine(*) extremely modular. For example I took the example of game states. You could have multiple game states that all have their own update() and draw() methods among others. Each game state class would inherit from a base GameState class. This allows for a more modular approach and a useful one at that. Now would the most efficient approach be to implement the editor along with the modular engine, or create two different designs for both the game, and editor? I thought to take the game state example and extend it to window states, and well could be used for a lot more systems. Is there a better implementation of this design(game state) for use in other systems used in the engine? *: Now I know the term game engine is sorta irrelevant, and misused in many situations. What I am referring to as the "game engine" is the combination of the systems that the game must interact with for short. Also this is more of a theory / design question than an implementation. Even though both mix, i'd rather like to have a more general idea on how the editor is built in an efficient way and still using the same engine code as what the game uses. Thanks, Daniel P.S If you need more clarification or extra bits just leave a comment.

  Read the article

• how to link a c++ object to a local variable in Lua

  - by MahanGM

  I'm completing my scripting interface with Lua, but recently I've stuck at some point. I have several functions for my Entitiy events like Update(). I have a function called create_entitiy() which instantiate a new entity from a given entity index: function Update() local bullet = create_entity(0, 0, "obj_bullet") end create_entity returns a table which is the properties of the created entity. Now how can I make a connection between bullet variable and my newly created object? Right now for previously added objects to the scene, I simply set a global table for each of them and then after every call to Update(), I go through registered names to find object tables and perform new changes. Like the one below: function Update() if keyboard_key_press(vk_right) then obj_player.x += 3 end I can get obj_player table because I know its name from C++, plus I can get it as a global table and simply reach for the first instance named obj_player. Is there any solution for me to make bullet variable act like this? I was thinking to get all local variables in Update() function and check for every one to see if is it table and it has an unique field attached to it like id, this way I can determine that this is an object table and do the rest of the process. By the way, is this interface going to work easier with luaBind if I implement it? Bottom line: How can I make a local variable in Lua that receives a table from create_entity function and track that local variable to capture it from C++. e. g. function Update() local bullet = create_entity(0, 0, "obj_bullet") bullet.x = 10 <== Commit a change in table end Now I want to get variable bullet from C++. And it's not just this variable, there might be a ton of these local variables with different names.

  Read the article

• Is it possible to calculate or mathematically prove if a game is balanced / fair?

  - by Lurca

  This question is not focussed on video games but games in general. I went to a boardgame trade fair yesterday and asked myself if there is a way to calculate the fairness of a game. Sure, some of them require a good portion of luck, but it might be possible to calculate if some character is overpowered. Especially in role-playing games and trading card games. How, for example, can the creators of "Magic: The Gathering" make sure that there isn't the "one card that beats them all", given the impressive number of available cards?

  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

• Newton Game Dynamics: Making an object not affect another object

  - by Boreal

  I'm going to be using Newton in my networked action game with Mogre. There will be two "types" of physics object: global and local. Global objects will be kept in sync for everybody; these include the players, projectiles, and other gameplay-related objects. Local objects are purely for effect, like ragdolls, debris, and particles. Is there a way to make the global objects affect the local objects without actually getting affected themselves? I'd like debris to bounce off of a tank, but I don't want the tank to respond in any way.

  Read the article

• Space-efficient data structures for broad-phase collision detection

  - by Marian Ivanov

  As far as I know, these are three types of data structures that can be used for collision detection broadphase: Unsorted arrays: Check every object againist every object - O(n^2) time; O(log n) space. It's so slow, it's useless if n isn't really small. for (i=1;i<objects;i++){ for(j=0;j<i;j++) narrowPhase(i,j); }; Sorted arrays: Sort the objects, so that you get O(n^(2-1/k)) for k dimensions O(n^1.5) for 2d and O(n^1.67) for 3d and O(n) space. Assuming the space is 2D and sortedArray is sorted so that if the object begins in sortedArray[i] and another object ends at sortedArray[i-1]; they don't collide Heaps of stacks: Divide the objects between a heap of stacks, so that you only have to check the bucket, its children and its parents - O(n log n) time, but O(n^2) space. This is probably the most frequently used approach. Is there a way of having O(n log n) time with less space? When is it more efficient to use sorted arrays over heaps and vice versa?

  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

• How does one escape the GPL?

  - by tehtros

  DISCLAIMER I don't pretend to know anything about licensing. In fact, everything I say below may be completely false! Backstory: Recently, I've been looking for a decent game engine, and I think I've found one that I really like, Cafu Engine. However, they have a dual licensing plan, where everything you make with the engine is forced under GPL, unless you pay for a commercial license. I'm not saying that it's a bad engine, they even say that they are very relaxed about the licensing fees. However, the fact that it even involves the GPL scares me. So my question is basicly, how does one escape the GPL. Here's an example: The id Tech engine, also known as the Quake engine, or the Doom engine, was the base for the popular Source engine. However, the id Tech engine has been released under the GPL, and the Source engine is proprietary. Did Valve get a different license? Or did they do something to escape the GPL? Is there a way to escape the GPL? Or, if you use GPL'd source code as a base for another project, are you forced to use the GPL, and make your source code available to the world. Could some random person take the id Tech engine, modify it past the point of recognition, then use it as a proprietary engine for commercial products? Or are they required to make it open source. One last thing, I generally have no problem what-so-ever with open source. However I feel that open source has it's place, but that is not in the bushiness world.

  Read the article

• Static "LoD" hack opinions

  - by David Lively

  I've been playing with implementing dynamic level of detail for rendering a very large mesh in XNA. It occurred to me that (duh) the whole point of this is to generate small triangles close to the camera, and larger ones far away. Given that, rather than constantly modifying or swapping index buffers based on a feature's rendered size or distance from the camera, it would be a lot easier (and potentially quite a bit faster), to render a single "fan" or flat wedge/frustum-shaped planar mesh that is tessellated into small triangles close to the near or small end of the frustum and larger ones at the far end, sort of like this (overhead view) (Pardon the gap in the middle - I drew one side and mirrored it) The triangle sizes are chosen so that all are approximately the same size when projected. Then, that mesh would be transformed to track the camera so that the Z axis (center vertical in this image) is always aligned with the view direction projected into the XZ plane. The vertex shader would then read terrain heights from a height texture and adjust the Y coordinate of the mesh to match a height field that defines the terrain. This eliminates the need for culling (since the mesh is generated to match the viewport dimensions) and the need to modify the index and/or vertex buffers when drawing the terrain. Obviously this doesn't address terrain with overhangs, etc, but that could be handled to a certain extent by including a second mesh that defines a sort of "ceiling" via a different texture. The other LoD schemes I've seen aren't particularly difficult to implement and, in some cases, are a lot more flexible, but this seemed like a decent quick-and-dirty way to handle height map-based terrain without getting into geometry manipulation. Has anyone tried this? Opinions?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488  | Next Page >