Search Results

Search found 31839 results on 1274 pages for 'plugin development'.

Page 590/1274 | < Previous Page | 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597  | Next Page >

  • Why does my VertexDeclaration apparently not contain Position0?

    - by Phil
    I'm trying to get my code from calling each individual draw call down to using at least a VertexBuffer, and preferably an indexBuffer, but now that I'm attempting to test my code, I'm getting the error: The current vertex declaration does not include all the elements required by the current vertex shader. Position0 is missing. Which makes absolutely no sense to me, as my VertexDeclaration is: public readonly static VertexDeclaration VertexDeclaration = new VertexDeclaration( new VertexElement(0, VertexElementFormat.Vector3, VertexElementUsage.Position, 0), new VertexElement(sizeof(float) * 3, VertexElementFormat.Color, VertexElementUsage.Color, 0), new VertexElement(sizeof(float) * 3 + 4, VertexElementFormat.Vector3, VertexElementUsage.Normal, 0) ); Which clearly contains the information. I am attempting to draw with the following lines: VertexBuffer vb = new VertexBuffer(GraphicsDevice, VertexPositionColorNormal.VertexDeclaration, c.VertexList.Count, BufferUsage.WriteOnly); IndexBuffer ib = new IndexBuffer(GraphicsDevice, typeof(int), c.IndexList.Count, BufferUsage.WriteOnly); vb.SetData<VertexPositionColorNormal>(c.VertexList.ToArray()); ib.SetData<int>(c.IndexList.ToArray()); GraphicsDevice.DrawIndexedPrimitives(PrimitiveType.TriangleList, 0, 0, vb.VertexCount, 0, c.IndexList.Count/3); Where c is a Chunk class containing an 8x8x8 array of boxes. Full code is available at https://github.com/mrbaggins/Box/tree/ProperMeshing/box/box. Relevant locations are Chunk.cs (Contains the VertexDeclaration) and Game1.cs (Draw() is in Lines 230-250). Not much else of relevance to this problem anywhere else. Note that large commented sections are from old version of drawing.

    Read the article

  • I am thinking about developing a game, but i am single developer? [on hold]

    - by Jake Doe
    Since very little i wanted to create a game, my place where my rules apply, where i am not limited. Now that i am capable of doing. I am asking myself should i start ? I have already the idea i have choosen the engine, only coding and artwork is required. The engine i have choose cost is quite high(50k), i can try throught a kickstarter campaign or indiegogo. But shouid I ? Please give me your opinion. Thank you :)

    Read the article

  • Vector.Unproject - Checking if a model intersects a large sprite

    - by Fibericon
    Let's say I have a sprite, drawn like this: spriteBatch.Draw(levelCannons[i].texture, levelCannons[i].position, null, alpha, levelCannons[i].rotation, Vector2.Zero, scale, SpriteEffects.None, 0); Picture levelCannon as being a laser beam that goes across the entire screen. I need to see if my 3d model intersects with the screen space inhabited by the sprite. I managed to dig up Vector.Unproject, but that seems to only be useful when dealing with a single point in 2d space, rather than an area. What can I do in my case?

    Read the article

  • this.BoundingBox.Intersects(Wall[0].BoundingBox) not working properly

    - by Pieter
    I seem to be having this problem a lot, I'm still learning XNA / C# and well, trying to make a classic paddle and ball game. The problem I run into (and after debugging have no answer) is that everytime I run my game and press either of the movement keys, the Paddle won't move. Debugging shows that it never gets to the movement part, but I can't understand why not? Here's my code: // This is the If statement for checking Left movement. if (keyboardState.IsKeyDown(Keys.Left) || keyboardState.IsKeyDown(Keys.A)) { if (!CheckCollision(walls[0])) { Location.X -= Velocity; } } //This is the CheckCollision(Wall wall) boolean public bool CheckCollision(Wall wall) { if (this.BoundingBox.Intersects(wall.BoundingBox)) { return true; } return false; } As far as I can tell there should be absolutely no problem with this, I initialize the bounding box in the constructor whenever a new instance of Walls and Paddle is created. this.BoundingBox = new Rectangle(0, 0, Sprite.Width, Sprite.Height); Any idea as to why this isn't working? I have previously succeeded with using the whole Location.X < Wall.Location.X + Wall.Texture.Width code... But to me that seems like too much coding if a simple boolean check could be done.

    Read the article

  • Box 2D Collision Question

    - by Farooq Arshed
    I am very new to Box 2D Physics world. I wanted to know how to collide 2 bodies when one is Dynamic and other is Kinematic. The whole Scenario is explained below: I have 3 balls in total. I want to balls to remain in their places and the third ball to be able to move. When the third ball hits the other two balls then they should move according to the speed and direction from which they were hit. My gravity of the world is 0 because I only want z-axis gravity. I would also like some one to point me towards some good tutorials regarding Box 2D basics which is language independent. I hope I have explained my scenario well. Thanks for the help in advance.

    Read the article

  • Is it a good idea to simplify an character -driven game engine to the point it's unnecessary to learn scripting/programming ?

    - by jokoon
    I remember, and I still think, that one cannot even make a prototyped 3D game to test just simple behaviors without using gigantic tools like unity or knowing extensive C++ programming, design pattern, a decent or basic 3D engine, etc. Now I'm wondering, since I know programming, that I'm still more lucky that the ones who need to learn programming prior to know how to make something: even scripted engines such as unity are not for kids, and to my sense they tend to dictate their ways of doing things, which is not the case with engine like ogre or irrlicht. I remember toying a little with the blender game engine, it was possible to link states or something I don't remember very well. Now I'm thinking that character driven games occupies a big part of the game market. Do you think it is a good idea to make a character-controlled oriented game engine which allows only to build AI instead of anything else ?

    Read the article

  • How to manage Areas/Levels in an RPG?

    - by Hexlan
    I'm working on an RPG and I'm trying to figure out how to manage the different levels/areas in the game. Currently I create a new state (source file) for every area, defining its unique aspects. My concern is that as the game grows the number of class files will become unmanageable with all the towns, houses, shops, dungeons, etc. that I need to keep track of. I would also prefer to separate my levels from the source code because non-programmer members of the team will be creating levels, and I would like the engine to be as free from game specific code as possible. I'm thinking of creating a class that provides all the functions that will be the same between all the levels/areas with a unique member variable that can be used to look up level specifics from data. This way I only need to define level/area once in the code, but can create multiple instances each with its own unique aspects provided by data. Is this a good way to go about solving the issue? Is there a better way to handle a growing number of levels?

    Read the article

  • Profiling and containing memory per system

    - by chadb
    I have been interesting in profiling and keeping a managed memory pool for each subsystem, so I could get statistic on how much memory was being used in something such as sounds or graphics. However, what is the best design for doing this? I was thinking of using multiple allocators and just using one per subsystem, however, that would result in global variables for my allocators (or so it would seem to me). Another approach I have seen/been suggested is to just overload new and pass in an allocator for a parameter. I had a similar question over on stackoverflow here with a bounty, however, it seems as if perhaps I was too vague or just there is not enough people with knowledge in the subject.

    Read the article

  • Trouble with speed and vectors

    - by Eegabooga
    I'm working on adding bullets to my game. Right now I can shoot bullets in the direction that I would like from a ship by getting the ship's angle: int speed = 5; int dx = -(cos(degreesToRadians(ship.angle)) * speed); // rate of change in the x direction int dy = -(sin(degreesToRadians(ship.angle)) * speed); // rate of change in the y direction bulletPosition.addX(dx); // addX(dx) is simply bulletPosition.x += dx bulletPosition.addY(dy); The ship is pretty much the exact same thing, except I use the += operator: int dx += -(cos(degreesToRadians(angle)) * 0.15) int dy += -(sin(degreesToRadians(angle)) * 0.15); shipPosition.addX(dx); shipPosition.addY(dy); I would like to be able to add the ship's velocity to the bullet's velocity, but I'm a little confused as to how should get the speed from the ship's vector. I thought that adding the ship's dx to the bullet's dx like int dx = -(cos(degreesToRadians(ship.angle)) * speed * dx) would work because I'm adding the rate of change of the ship to the rate of change of the bullet, but that doesn't work. So here's the final question: How can I get the speed of my ship and apply it to my bullet's speed? Thanks in advance for all help :)

    Read the article

  • How can I customize an FPS game?

    - by monoceres
    I want to create a customized (modded) fps game where I can change the look and feel of the game to match my intended theme. Some of the things I would like to do: Create a custom map (terrain). Add custom sound effects Change AI (For example, running away instead of actively looking for combat). Change menus and add some storyboard. Script events in game (like a countdown until game over) Change the models of the NPC's. What options do I have? Is there any platform/game/engine/whatever that allows one to do the things above in a reasonable way? I work as a programmer so I'm not afraid of coding some part of the project, but to save time it would be nice to work in some high-level way (like scripting or configuration files).

    Read the article

  • How to store bitmaps in memory?

    - by Geotarget
    I'm working with general purpose image rendering, and high-performance image processing, and so I need to know how to store bitmaps in-memory. (24bpp/32bpp, compressed/raw, etc) I'm not working with 3D graphics or DirectX / OpenGL rendering and so I don't need to use graphics card compatible bitmap formats. My questions: What is the "usual" or "normal" way to store bitmaps in memory? (in C++ engines/projects?) How to store bitmaps for high-performance algorithms, such that read/write times are the fastest? (fixed array? with/without padding? 24-bpp or 32-bpp?) How to store bitmaps for applications handling a lot of bitmap data, to minimize memory usage? (JPEG? or a faster [de]compression algorithm?) Some possible methods: Use a fixed packed 24-bpp or 32-bpp int[] array and simply access pixels using pointer access, all pixels are allocated in one continuous memory chunk (could be 1-10 MB) Use a form of "sparse" data storage so each line of the bitmap is allocated separately, reusing more memory and requiring smaller contiguous memory segments Store bitmaps in its compressed form (PNG, JPG, GIF, etc) and unpack only when its needed, reducing the amount of memory used. Delete the unpacked data if its not used for 10 secs.

    Read the article

  • Efficient way to render tile-based map in Java

    - by Lucius
    Some time ago I posted here because I was having some memory issues with a game I'm working on. That has been pretty much solved thanks to some suggestions here, so I decided to come back with another problem I'm having. Basically, I feel that too much of the CPU is being used when rendering the map. I have a Core i5-2500 processor and when running the game, the CPU usage is about 35% - and I can't accept that that's just how it has to be. This is how I'm going about rendering the map: I have the X and Y coordinates of the player, so I'm not drawing the whole map, just the visible portion of it; The number of visible tiles on screen varies according to the resolution chosen by the player (the CPU usage is 35% here when playing at a resolution of 1440x900); If the tile is "empty", I just skip drawing it (this didn't visibly lower the CPU usage, but reduced the drawing time in about 20ms); The map is composed of 5 layers - for more details; The tiles are 32x32 pixels; And just to be on the safe side, I'll post the code for drawing the game here, although it's as messy and unreadable as it can be T_T (I'll try to make it a little readable) private void drawGame(Graphics2D g2d){ //Width and Height of the visible portion of the map (not of the screen) int visionWidht = visibleCols * TILE_SIZE; int visionHeight = visibleRows * TILE_SIZE; //Since the map can be smaller than the screen, I center it just to be sure int xAdjust = (getWidth() - visionWidht) / 2; int yAdjust = (getHeight() - visionHeight) / 2; //This "deducedX" thing is to move the map a few pixels horizontally, since the player moves by pixels and not full tiles int playerDrawX = listOfCharacters.get(0).getX(); int deducedX = 0; if (listOfCharacters.get(0).currentCol() - visibleCols / 2 >= 0) { playerDrawX = visibleCols / 2 * TILE_SIZE; map_draw_col = listOfCharacters.get(0).currentCol() - visibleCols / 2; deducedX = listOfCharacters.get(0).getXCol(); } //"deducedY" is the same deal as "deducedX", but vertically int playerDrawY = listOfCharacters.get(0).getY(); int deducedY = 0; if (listOfCharacters.get(0).currentRow() - visibleRows / 2 >= 0) { playerDrawY = visibleRows / 2 * TILE_SIZE; map_draw_row = listOfCharacters.get(0).currentRow() - visibleRows / 2; deducedY = listOfCharacters.get(0).getYRow(); } int max_cols = visibleCols + map_draw_col; if (max_cols >= map.getCols()) { max_cols = map.getCols() - 1; deducedX = 0; map_draw_col = max_cols - visibleCols + 1; playerDrawX = listOfCharacters.get(0).getX() - map_draw_col * TILE_SIZE; } int max_rows = visibleRows + map_draw_row; if (max_rows >= map.getRows()) { max_rows = map.getRows() - 1; deducedY = 0; map_draw_row = max_rows - visibleRows + 1; playerDrawY = listOfCharacters.get(0).getY() - map_draw_row * TILE_SIZE; } //map_draw_row and map_draw_col representes the coordinate of the upper left tile on the screen //iterate through all the tiles on screen and draw them - this is what consumes most of the CPU for (int col = map_draw_col; col <= max_cols; col++) { for (int row = map_draw_row; row <= max_rows; row++) { Tile[] tiles = map.getTiles(col, row); for(int layer = 0; layer < tiles.length; layer++){ Tile currentTile = tiles[layer]; boolean shouldDraw = true; //I only draw the tile if it exists and is not empty (id=-1) if(currentTile != null && currentTile.getId() >= 0){ //The layers above 1 can be draw behing or infront of the player according to where it's standing if(layer > 1 && currentTile.getId() >= 0){ if(playerBehind(col, row, layer, listOfCharacters.get(0))){ behinds.get(0).add(new int[]{col, row}); //the tiles that are infront of the player wont be draw right now shouldDraw = false; } } if(shouldDraw){ g2d.drawImage( tiles[layer].getImage(), (col-map_draw_col)*TILE_SIZE - deducedX + xAdjust, (row-map_draw_row)*TILE_SIZE - deducedY + yAdjust, null); } } } } } } There's some more code in this method but nothing relevant to this question. Basically, the biggest problem is that I iterate over around 5000 tiles (in this specific resolution) 60 times each second. I thought about rendering the visible portion of the map once and storing it into a BufferedImage and when the player moved move the whole image the same amount but to the opposite side and then drawn the tiles that appeared on the screen, but if I do it like that, I wont be able to have animated tiles (at least I think). That being said, any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • Grid based collision - How many cells?

    - by Fibericon
    The game I'm creating is a bullet hell game, so there can be quite a few objects on the screen at any given time. It probably maxes out at about 40 enemies and 200 or so bullets. That being said, I'm splitting up the playing field into a grid for my collision checking. Right now, it's only 8 cells. How many would be optimal? I'm worried that if I use too many, I'll be wasting CPU power. My main concern is processing power, to make the game run smoothly. RAM is not a big concern for me.

    Read the article

  • Why do we use the Pythagorean theorem in game physics?

    - by Starkers
    I've recently learned that we use Pythagorean theorem a lot in our physics calculations and I'm afraid I don't really get the point. Here's an example from a book to make sure an object doesn't travel faster than a MAXIMUM_VELOCITY constant in the horizontal plane: MAXIMUM_VELOCITY = <any number>; SQUARED_MAXIMUM_VELOCITY = MAXIMUM_VELOCITY * MAXIMUM_VELOCITY; function animate(){ var squared_horizontal_velocity = (x_velocity * x_velocity) + (z_velocity * z_velocity); if( squared_horizontal_velocity <= SQUARED_MAXIMUM_VELOCITY ){ scalar = squared_horizontal_velocity / SQUARED_MAXIMUM_VELOCITY; x_velocity = x_velocity / scalar; z_velocity = x_velocity / scalar; } } Let's try this with some numbers: An object is attempting to move 5 units in x and 5 units in z. It should only be able to move 5 units horizontally in total! MAXIMUM_VELOCITY = 5; SQUARED_MAXIMUM_VELOCITY = 5 * 5; SQUARED_MAXIMUM_VELOCITY = 25; function animate(){ var x_velocity = 5; var z_velocity = 5; var squared_horizontal_velocity = (x_velocity * x_velocity) + (z_velocity * z_velocity); var squared_horizontal_velocity = 5 * 5 + 5 * 5; var squared_horizontal_velocity = 25 + 25; var squared_horizontal_velocity = 50; // if( squared_horizontal_velocity <= SQUARED_MAXIMUM_VELOCITY ){ if( 50 <= 25 ){ scalar = squared_horizontal_velocity / SQUARED_MAXIMUM_VELOCITY; scalar = 50 / 25; scalar = 2.0; x_velocity = x_velocity / scalar; x_velocity = 5 / 2.0; x_velocity = 2.5; z_velocity = z_velocity / scalar; z_velocity = 5 / 2.0; z_velocity = 2.5; // new_horizontal_velocity = x_velocity + z_velocity // new_horizontal_velocity = 2.5 + 2.5 // new_horizontal_velocity = 5 } } Now this works well, but we can do the same thing without Pythagoras: MAXIMUM_VELOCITY = 5; function animate(){ var x_velocity = 5; var z_velocity = 5; var horizontal_velocity = x_velocity + z_velocity; var horizontal_velocity = 5 + 5; var horizontal_velocity = 10; // if( horizontal_velocity >= MAXIMUM_VELOCITY ){ if( 10 >= 5 ){ scalar = horizontal_velocity / MAXIMUM_VELOCITY; scalar = 10 / 5; scalar = 2.0; x_velocity = x_velocity / scalar; x_velocity = 5 / 2.0; x_velocity = 2.5; z_velocity = z_velocity / scalar; z_velocity = 5 / 2.0; z_velocity = 2.5; // new_horizontal_velocity = x_velocity + z_velocity // new_horizontal_velocity = 2.5 + 2.5 // new_horizontal_velocity = 5 } } Benefits of doing it without Pythagoras: Less lines Within those lines, it's easier to read what's going on ...and it takes less time to compute, as there are less multiplications Seems to me like computers and humans get a better deal without Pythagorean theorem! However, I'm sure I'm wrong as I've seen Pythagoras' theorem in a number of reputable places, so I'd like someone to explain me the benefit of using Pythagorean theorem to a maths newbie. Does this have anything to do with unit vectors? To me a unit vector is when we normalize a vector and turn it into a fraction. We do this by dividing the vector by a larger constant. I'm not sure what constant it is. The total size of the graph? Anyway, because it's a fraction, I take it, a unit vector is basically a graph that can fit inside a 3D grid with the x-axis running from -1 to 1, z-axis running from -1 to 1, and the y-axis running from -1 to 1. That's literally everything I know about unit vectors... not much :P And I fail to see their usefulness. Also, we're not really creating a unit vector in the above examples. Should I be determining the scalar like this: // a mathematical work-around of my own invention. There may be a cleverer way to do this! I've also made up my own terms such as 'divisive_scalar' so don't bother googling var divisive_scalar = (squared_horizontal_velocity / SQUARED_MAXIMUM_VELOCITY); var divisive_scalar = ( 50 / 25 ); var divisive_scalar = 2; var multiplicative_scalar = (divisive_scalar / (2*divisive_scalar)); var multiplicative_scalar = (2 / (2*2)); var multiplicative_scalar = (2 / 4); var multiplicative_scalar = 0.5; x_velocity = x_velocity * multiplicative_scalar x_velocity = 5 * 0.5 x_velocity = 2.5 Again, I can't see why this is better, but it's more "unit-vector-y" because the multiplicative_scalar is a unit_vector? As you can see, I use words such as "unit-vector-y" so I'm really not a maths whiz! Also aware that unit vectors might have nothing to do with Pythagorean theorem so ignore all of this if I'm barking up the wrong tree. I'm a very visual person (3D modeller and concept artist by trade!) and I find diagrams and graphs really, really helpful so as many as humanely possible please!

    Read the article

  • Contricted A* problem

    - by Ragekit
    I've got a little problem with an A* algorithm that I need to constrict a little bit. Basically : I use an A* to find the shortest path between 2 randomly placed room in 3D space, and then build a corridor between them. The problem I found is that sometimes it makes chimney like corridors that are not ideal, so I constrict the A* so that if the last movement was up or down, you go sideways. Everything is fine, but in some corner cases, it fails to find a path (when there is obviously one). Like here between the blue and red dot : (i'm in unity btw, but i don't think it matters) Here is the code of the actual A* (a bit long, and some redundency) while(current != goal) { //add stair up / stair down foreach(Node<GridUnit> test in current.Neighbors) { if(!test.Data.empty && test != goal) continue; //bug at arrival; if(test == goal && penul !=null) { Vector3 currentDiff = current.Data.bounds.center - test.Data.bounds.center; if(!Mathf.Approximately(currentDiff.y,0)) { //wanna drop on the last if(!coplanar(test.Data.bounds.center,current.Data.bounds.center,current.Data.parentUnit.bounds.center,to.Data.bounds.center)) { continue; } else { if(Mathf.Approximately(to.Data.bounds.center.x, current.Data.parentUnit.bounds.center.x) && Mathf.Approximately(to.Data.bounds.center.z, current.Data.parentUnit.bounds.center.z)) { continue; } } } } if(current.Data.parentUnit != null) { Vector3 previousDiff = current.Data.parentUnit.bounds.center - current.Data.bounds.center; Vector3 currentDiff = current.Data.bounds.center - test.Data.bounds.center; if(!Mathf.Approximately(previousDiff.y,0)) { if(!Mathf.Approximately(currentDiff.y,0)) { //you wanna drop now : continue; } if(current.Data.parentUnit.parentUnit != null) { if(!coplanar(test.Data.bounds.center,current.Data.bounds.center,current.Data.parentUnit.bounds.center,current.Data.parentUnit.parentUnit.bounds.center)) { continue; }else { if(Mathf.Approximately(test.Data.bounds.center.x, current.Data.parentUnit.parentUnit.bounds.center.x) && Mathf.Approximately(test.Data.bounds.center.z, current.Data.parentUnit.parentUnit.bounds.center.z)) { continue; } } } } } g = current.Data.g + HEURISTIC(current.Data,test.Data); h = HEURISTIC(test.Data,goal.Data); f = g + h; if(open.Contains(test) || closed.Contains(test)) { if(test.Data.f > f) { //found a shorter path going passing through that point test.Data.f = f; test.Data.g = g; test.Data.h = h; test.Data.parentUnit = current.Data; } } else { //jamais rencontré test.Data.f = f; test.Data.h = h; test.Data.g = g; test.Data.parentUnit = current.Data; open.Add(test); } } closed.Add (current); if(open.Count == 0) { Debug.Log("nothingfound"); //nothing more to test no path found, stay to from; List<GridUnit> r = new List<GridUnit>(); r.Add(from.Data); return r; } //sort open from small to biggest travel cost open.Sort(delegate(Node<GridUnit> x, Node<GridUnit> y) { return (int)(x.Data.f-y.Data.f); }); //get the smallest travel cost node; Node<GridUnit> smallest = open[0]; current = smallest; open.RemoveAt(0); } //build the path going backward; List<GridUnit> ret = new List<GridUnit>(); if(penul != null) { ret.Insert(0,to.Data); } GridUnit cur = goal.Data; ret.Insert(0,cur); do{ cur = cur.parentUnit; ret.Insert(0,cur); } while(cur != from.Data); return ret; You see at the start of the foreach i constrict the A* like i said. If you have any insight it would be cool. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Buffer System For Items

    - by Ohmages
    I am going to reference this image of what I want to accomplish in JavaScript. This is the Diablo buffer system. This question may be a bit advanced (or possibly not even allowed). But I was wondering how you might go about implementing this type of system in a JavaScript game. Currently to implement such a system in JavaScript escapes me, and I am turning to SO to get some suggestions, ideas, and hopefully some insight in how I could accomplish this without being to costly on the CPU. Some thoughts of mine for implementing such a system would be to: Create DIVS within a DIV that hold each position of the inventory Go through each item you own in a container and see which DIV it belongs to Make said item images the DIVs image This type of system might possibly work if ALL items were 1x1, but for this example its not going to work out. I am at a complete lost of ideas how to even accomplish this. Although, maybe rendering directly to the canvas and checking mouse cords could work, there would more than likely be A HUGE annoyance when checking if other items are overlapping each other (meaning you cant place the item down, and possibly switching item with the cursor item ). That said, what am I left with? Do I need to makeshift my own hack system with messy code, or is there some source out there (that I don't know about) that has replicated this type of system in their own game. I would be very grateful to get some replies on how you might go about doing this, and will accept answers that can logically explain how you might implement such a system (code is not required). P.S. Id like to use pure JavaScript, and nothing else (even though it might be "reinventing the wheel", I also like to learn).

    Read the article

  • How do I do random isometric paths?

    - by user406470
    I'm working on an Isometric city generator, and I am looking for a little push in the right direction. I'm looking to randomly generate roads on a isometric plane. I have never done pathfinding before, and I've googled it and didn't find any articles relating to what I am trying to do. Basically, my program generates a random isometric city and, I am hoping to add roads to that. Any help is appreciated!

    Read the article

  • Could someone explain in detail simplex /or perlin noise?

    - by Ryan Szemplinski
    I am really interested in perlin/simplex noise but I am having a difficult time understanding it. I am not very good at math but I am willing to learn because it interests me greatly. If someone is willing to dedicate there time into this I would be immensely appreciative of this. To be more concise, an explanation of functions and some calculation inside the functions would be nice to understand. Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • Set vertex position

    - by user1806687
    Can anyone tell me how to set the positions of model vertices? I want to be able to change the position of some of the vertices of a Model. Is there any way to make that happen? And make the changed visible at that moment. EDIT: Well, the thing is,I have a model, a cube, that is made up of four "thin" cubes(top,bottom,left side, right side), so I get this cube with "hole" in the middle. And I want to scale it on Y axis. If I do Scale(0,2,0) it will scale the whole object meaning, it will double the Y size of left and right side, but also double the size of the top and bottom cube, which I do not want. Same for X axis I want to double the size of top and bottom cubes but not the left and right one. Hope you can help

    Read the article

  • Get collision details from Rectangle.Intersects()

    - by Daniel Ribeiro
    I have a Breakout game in which, at some point, I detect the collision between the ball and the paddle with something like this: // Ball class rectangle.Intersects(paddle.Rectangle); Is there any way I can get the exact coordinates of the collision, or any details about it, with the current XNA API? I thought of doing some basic calculations, such as comparing the exact coordinates of each object on the moment of the collision. It would look something like this: // Ball class if((rectangle.X - paddle.Rectangle.X) < (paddle.Rectangle.Width / 2)) // Collision happened on the left side else // Collision happened on the right side But I'm not sure this is the correct way to do it. Do you guys have any tips on maybe an engine I might have to use to achieve that? Or even good coding practices using this method?

    Read the article

  • How do you maintain content size vs. content quality in a mobile application?

    - by PeterK
    I am developing my first Cocos2d iPhone/iPad game that includes quite a few sprites, I would need approximately 80 different. As this is for both normal and HD displays I have 2x of each sprite. I am using TexturePacker to optimize the thing. I would like to ask if there are any rules-of-thumb, tricks, ideas etc. to adjust to in regards to size of content, quality and how you maintain high-quality HD-based graphics due to its size vs. the device memory sizes? Also, is it a good idea to only have one copy of the sprites and scale it using code?

    Read the article

  • OpenGL Get Rotated X and Y of quad

    - by matejkramny
    I am developing a game in 2D using LWJGL library. So far I have a rotating box. I have done basic Rectangle collision, but it doesn't work for rotated rectangles. Does OpenGL have a function that returns the vertices of rotated rectangle? Or is there another way of doing this using trigonometry? I had researched how to do this and everything I found was using some matrix that I don't understand so I am asking if there is another way of doing this. For clarification, I am trying to find out the true (rotated) X,Y of each point of the rectangle. Let's say, the first point of a rectangle (top,left) has x=10 y=10.. Width and height is 100 pixels. When I rotate the rectangle using glRotatef() the x and y stay the same. The rotation is happening inside OpenGL. I need to extract the x,y of the rectangle so I can detect collisions properly.

    Read the article

  • Color Picking Troubles - LWJGL/OpenGL

    - by Tom Johnson
    I'm attempting to check which object the user is hovering over. While everything seems to be just how I'd think it should be, I'm not able to get the correct color due to the second time I draw (without picking colors). Here is my rendering code: public void render() { glClear(GL_COLOR_BUFFER_BIT | GL_DEPTH_BUFFER_BIT); glLoadIdentity(); camera.applyTranslations(); scene.pick(); glClear(GL_COLOR_BUFFER_BIT | GL_DEPTH_BUFFER_BIT); glLoadIdentity(); camera.applyTranslations(); scene.render(); } And here is what gets called on each block/tile on "scene.pick()": public void pick() { glColor3ub((byte) pickingColor.x, (byte) pickingColor.y, (byte) pickingColor.z); draw(); glReadBuffer(GL_FRONT); ByteBuffer buffer = BufferUtils.createByteBuffer(4); glReadPixels(Mouse.getX(), Mouse.getY(), 1, 1, GL_RGBA, GL_UNSIGNED_BYTE, buffer); int r = buffer.get(0) & 0xFF; int g = buffer.get(1) & 0xFF; int b = buffer.get(2) & 0xFF; if(r == pickingColor.x && g == pickingColor.y && b == pickingColor.z) { hovered = true; } else { hovered = false; } } I believe the problem is that in the method of each tile/block called by scene.pick(), it is reading the color from the regular drawing state, after that method is called somehow. I believe this because when I remove the "glReadBuffer(GL_FRONT)" line from the pick method, it seems to almost fix it, but then it will also select blocks behind the one you are hovering as it is not only looking at the front. If you have any ideas of what to do, please be sure to reply!/ EDIT: Adding scene.render(), tile.render(), and tile.draw() scene.render: public void render() { for(int x = 0; x < tiles.length; x++) { for(int z = 0; z < tiles.length; z++) { tiles[x][z].render(); } } } tile.render: public void render() { glColor3f(color.x, color.y, color.z); draw(); if(hovered) { glColor3f(1, 1, 1); glPolygonMode(GL_FRONT_AND_BACK, GL_LINE); draw(); glPolygonMode(GL_FRONT_AND_BACK, GL_FILL); } } tile.draw: public void draw() { float x = position.x, y = position.y, z = position.z; //Top glBegin(GL_QUADS); glVertex3f(x, y + size, z); glVertex3f(x + size, y + size, z); glVertex3f(x + size, y + size, z + size); glVertex3f(x, y + size, z + size); glEnd(); //Left glBegin(GL_QUADS); glVertex3f(x, y, z); glVertex3f(x + size, y, z); glVertex3f(x + size, y + size, z); glVertex3f(x, y + size, z); glEnd(); //Right glBegin(GL_QUADS); glVertex3f(x + size, y, z); glVertex3f(x + size, y + size, z); glVertex3f(x + size, y + size, z + size); glVertex3f(x + size, y, z + size); glEnd(); } (The game is like an isometric game. That's why I only draw 3 faces.)

    Read the article

  • Collision detection with non-rectangular images

    - by Adam Smith
    I'm creating a game and I need to detect collisions between a character and some parts of the environment. Since my character's frames are taken from a sprite sheet with a transparent background, I'm wondering how I should go about detecting collisions between a wall and my character only if the colliding parts are non-transparent in both images. I thought about checking only if part of the rectangle the character is in touches the rectangle a tile is in and comparing the alpha channels, but then I have another choice to make... Either I test every single pixel against every single pixel in the other image and if one is true, I detect a collision. That would be terribly ineficient. The other option would be to keep a x,y position of the leftmost, rightmost, etc. non-transparent pixel of each image and compare those instead. The problem with this one might be that, for instance, the character's hand could be above a tile (so it would be in a transparent zone of the tile) but a pixel that is not the rightmost could touch part of the tile without being detected. Another problem would be that in different frames, the rightmost, leftmost, etc. pixels might not be at the same position. Should I not bother with that and just check the collisions on the rectangles? It would be simpler, but I'm afraid people.will feel that there are collisions sometimes that shouldn't happen.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597  | Next Page >