Search Results

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

Page 8/41 | < Previous Page | 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15  | Next Page >

• Color based collision detection

  - by user1486826

  I am making a game where you fly a ship around some randomly generated planets. Since I am using a for loop to draw over 5000 planets, using the rectangle class or an oval-type class for this is not an option, since creating many objects will severely affect performance. Bitmasking each planet will likely result in performance issues too, so the only candidate is color based collision detection, because I don't need to apply some sort of object to everything I want to check for collisions. Is any way to check the perimeter around the ship for a certain color?

  Read the article

• Make the player run onto stairs smoothly

  - by misiMe

  I have a 2D Platform game, where the player Always runs to the right, but the terrain isn't Always horizontal. Example: I implemented a bounding-box collision system that just checks for intersections with player box and the other blocks, to stop player from running if you encounter a big block, so that you have to jump, but when I put stairs, I want him to run smoothly just like he is on the horizontal ground. With the collision system you have to jump the stairs in order to pass them! I thought about generating a line between the edges of the stairs, and imposing the player movement on that line... What do you think? Is there something more clever to do?

  Read the article

• how to keep display tick rate steady when using continuous collision detection?

  - by nas Ns

  (I've just found about this forum). I hope it is ok to repost my question again here. I posted this question at stackoverflow, but it looks like I might get better help here. Here is the question: I've implemented basic particles motion simulation with continuous collision detection. But there is small issue in display. Assume simple case of circles moving inside square. All elastic collisions. no firction. All motion is constant speed. No forces are involved, no gravity. So when a particle is moving, it is always moving at constant speed (in between collisions) What I do now is this: Let the simulation time step be 1 second (for example). This is the time step simulation is advanced before displaying the new state (unless there is a collision sooner than this). At start of each time step, time for the next collision between any particles or a particle with a wall is determined. Call this the TOC time; let’s say TOC was .5 seconds in this case. Since TOC is smaller than the standard time step, then the system is moved by TOC and the new system is displayed so that the new display shows any collisions as just taking place (say 2 circles just touched each other’s, or a circle just touched a wall) Next, the collision(s) are resolved (i.e. speeds updated, changed directions etc..). A new step is started. The same thing happens. Now assume there is no collision detected within the next 1 second (those 2 circles above will not be in collision any more, even though they are still touching, due to their speeds showing they are moving apart now), Hence, simulation time is advanced now by the full one second, the standard time step, and particles are moved on the screen using 1 second simulation time and new display is shown. You see what has just happened: One frame ran for .5 seconds, but the next frame runs for 1 second, may be the 3rd frame is displayed after 2 seconds, may be the 4th frame is displayed after 2.8 seconds (because TOC was .8 seconds then) and so on. What happens is that the motion of a particle on the screen appears to speed up or slow down, even though it is moving at constant speed and was not even involved in a collision. i.e. Looking at one particle on its own, I see it suddenly speeding up or slowing down, becuase another particle had hit a wall. This is because the display tick is not uniform. i.e. the frame rate update is changing, giving the false illusion that a particle is moving at non-constant speed while in fact it is moving at constant speed. The motion on the screen is not smooth, since the screen is not updating at constant rate. I am not able to figure how to fix this. If I want to show 2 particles at the moment of the collision, I must draw the screen at different times. Drawing the screen always at the same tick interval, results in seeing 2 particles before the collision, and then after the collision, and not just when they colliding, which looked bad when I tried it. So, how do real games handle this issue? How to display things in order to show collisions when it happen, yet keep the display tick constant? These 2 requirements seem to contradict each other’s.

  Read the article

• Per Pixel Collision Detection

  - by CJ Cohorst

  Just a quick question, I have this collision detection code: public bool PerPixelCollision(Player player, Game1 dog) { Matrix atob = player.Transform * Matrix.Invert(dog.Transform); Vector2 stepX = Vector2.TransformNormal(Vector2.UnitX, atob); Vector2 stepY = Vector2.TransformNormal(Vector2.UnitY, atob); Vector2 iBPos = Vector2.Transform(Vector2.Zero, atob); for(int deltax = 0; deltax < player.playerTexture.Width; deltax++) { Vector2 bpos = iBPos; for (int deltay = 0; deltay < player.playerTexture.Height; deltay++) { int bx = (int)bpos.X; int by = (int)bpos.Y; if (bx >= 0 && bx < dog.dogTexture.Width && by >= 0 && by < dog.dogTexture.Height) { if (player.TextureData[deltax + deltay * player.playerTexture.Width].A > 150 && dog.TextureData[bx + by * dog.Texture.Width].A > 150) { return true; } } bpos += stepY; } iBPos += stepX; } return false; } What I want to know is where to put in the code where something happens. For example, I want to put in player.playerPosition.X -= 200 just as a test, but I don't know where to put it. I tried putting it under the return true and above it, but under it, it said unreachable code, and above it nothing happened. I also tried putting it by bpos += stepY; but that didn't work either. Where do I put the code? Any help is appreciated. Thanks in advance!

  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 code style

  - by Marian Ivanov

  Not only there are two useful broad-phase algorithms and a lot of useful narrowphase algorithms, there are also multiple code styles. Arrays vs. calling Make an array of broadphase checks, then filter them with narrowphase checks, then resolve them. function resolveCollisions(thingyStructure * a,thingyStructure * b,int index){ possibleCollisions = getPossibleCollisions(b,a->get(index)); for(i=0; i<possibleCollitionsNumber; i++){ if(narrowphase(possibleCollisions[i],a[index])) { collisions->push(possibleCollisions[i]); }; }; for(i=0; i<collitionsNumber; i++){ //CODE FOR RESOLUTION }; }; Make the broadphase call the narrowphase, and the narrowphase call the resolution function resolveCollisions(thingyStructure * a,thingyStructure * b,int index){ broadphase(b,a->get(index)); }; function broadphase(thingy * with, thingy * what){ while(blah){ //blahcode narrowphase(what,collidingThing); }; }; Events vs. in-the-loop Fire an event. This abstracts the check away, but it's trickier to make an equal interaction. a[index] -> collisionEvent(eventdata); //much later int collisionEvent(eventdata){ //resolution gets here } Resolve the collision inside the loop. This glues narrowphase and resolution into one layer. if(narrowphase(possibleCollisions[i],a[index])) { //CODE GOES HERE }; The questions are: Which of the first two is better, and how am I supposed to make a zero-sum Newtonian interaction under B1.

  Read the article

• Breakout ball collision detection, bouncing against the walls

  - by Sri Harsha Chilakapati

  I'm currently trying to program a breakout game to distribute it as an example game for my own game engine. http://game-engine-for-java.googlecode.com/ But the problem here is that I can't get the bouncing condition working properly. Here's what I'm using. public void collision(GObject other){ if (other instanceof Bat || other instanceof Block){ bounce(); } else if (other instanceof Stone){ other.destroy(); bounce(); } //Breakout.HIT.play(); } And here's by bounce() method public void bounce(){ boolean left = false; boolean right = false; boolean up = false; boolean down = false; if (dx < 0) { left = true; } else if (dx > 0) { right = true; } if (dy < 0) { up = true; } else if (dy > 0) { down = true; } if (left && up) { dx = -dx; } if (left && down) { dy = -dy; } if (right && up) { dx = -dx; } if (right && down) { dy = -dy; } } The ball bounces the bat and blocks but when the block is on top of the ball, it won't bounce and moves upwards out of the game. What I'm missing? Is there anything to implement? Please help me.. Thanks

  Read the article

• XNA 4.0 2D sidescroller variable terrain heightmap for walking/collision

  - by JiminyCricket

  I've been fooling around with moving on sloped tiles in XNA and it is semi-working but not completely satisfactory. I also have been thinking that having sets of predetermined slopes might not give me terrain that looks "organic" enough. There is also the problem of having to construct several different types of tile for each slope when they're chained together (only 45 degree tiles will chain perfectly as I understand it). I had thought of somehow scanning for connected chains of sloped tiles and treating it as a new large triangle, as I was having trouble with glitching at the edges where sloped tiles connect. But, this leads back to the problem of limiting the curvature of the terrain. So...what I'd like to do now is create a simple image or texture of the terrain of a level (or section of the level) and generate a simple heightmap (of the Y's for each X) for the terrain. The player's Y position would then just be updated based on their X position. Is there a simple way of doing this (or a better way of solving this problem)? The main problem I can see with this method is the case where there are areas above the ground that can be walked on. Maybe there is a way to just map all walkable ground areas? I've been looking at this helpful bit of code: http://thirdpartyninjas.com/blog/2010/07/28/sloped-platform-collision/ but need a way to generate the actual points/vectors.

  Read the article

• Circle collision detection and Vector math: HELP?

  - by Griffin

  Hey so i'm currently going through the wildbunny blog to learn about collision detection, but i'm a bit confused on how the vectors he's talking about come into play QUOTED BLOG: p = ||A-B|| – (r1+r2) The two spheres are penetrating by distance p. We would also like the penetration vector so that we can correct the penetration once we discover it. This is the vector that moves both circles to the point where they just touch, correcting the penetration. Importantly it is not only just a vector that does this, it is the only vector which corrects the penetration by moving the minimum amount. This is important because we only want to correct the error, not introduce more by moving too much when we correct, or too little. N = (A-B) / ||A-B|| P = N*p Here we have calculated the normalised vector N between the two centres and the penetration vector P by multiplying our unit direction by the penetration distance. Ok so i understand that p is the distance each circle is penetrating each other, but i don't get what exactly N and P is. it seems to me N is just the coordinates of the 3rd point of the right trianlge formed by point A and B (A-B) then being divided by the hypotenuse of that triangle or distance between A and B (||A-B||) Whats the significance of this? Also, what is the penetration vector used for? It seems to me like a movement that one of the circles would perform to get un-penetrated.

  Read the article

• Can't detect collision properly using Rectangle.Intersects()

  - by Daniel Ribeiro

  I'm using a single sprite sheet image as the main texture for my breakout game. The image is this: My code is a little confusing, since I'm creating two elements from the same Texture using a Point, to represent the element size and its position on the sheet, a Vector, to represent its position on the viewport and a Rectangle that represents the element itself. Texture2D sheet; Point paddleSize = new Point(112, 24); Point paddleSheetPosition = new Point(0, 240); Vector2 paddleViewportPosition; Rectangle paddleRectangle; Point ballSize = new Point(24, 24); Point ballSheetPosition = new Point(160, 240); Vector2 ballViewportPosition; Rectangle ballRectangle; Vector2 ballVelocity; My initialization is a little confusing as well, but it works as expected: paddleViewportPosition = new Vector2((GraphicsDevice.Viewport.Bounds.Width - paddleSize.X) / 2, GraphicsDevice.Viewport.Bounds.Height - (paddleSize.Y * 2)); paddleRectangle = new Rectangle(paddleSheetPosition.X, paddleSheetPosition.Y, paddleSize.X, paddleSize.Y); Random random = new Random(); ballViewportPosition = new Vector2(random.Next(GraphicsDevice.Viewport.Bounds.Width), random.Next(GraphicsDevice.Viewport.Bounds.Top, GraphicsDevice.Viewport.Bounds.Height / 2)); ballRectangle = new Rectangle(ballSheetPosition.X, ballSheetPosition.Y, ballSize.X, ballSize.Y); ballVelocity = new Vector2(3f, 3f); The problem is I can't detect the collision properly, using this code: if(ballRectangle.Intersects(paddleRectangle)) { ballVelocity.Y = -ballVelocity.Y; } What am I doing wrong?

  Read the article

• Basic 3D Collision detection in XNA 4.0

  - by NDraskovic

  I have a problem with detecting collision between 2 models using BoundingSpheres in XNA 4.0. The code I'm using i very simple: private bool IsCollision(Model model1, Matrix world1, Model model2, Matrix world2) { for (int meshIndex1 = 0; meshIndex1 < model1.Meshes.Count; meshIndex1++) { BoundingSphere sphere1 = model1.Meshes[meshIndex1].BoundingSphere; sphere1 = sphere1.Transform(world1); for (int meshIndex2 = 0; meshIndex2 < model2.Meshes.Count; meshIndex2++) { BoundingSphere sphere2 = model2.Meshes[meshIndex2].BoundingSphere; sphere2 = sphere2.Transform(world2); if (sphere1.Intersects(sphere2)) return true; } } return false; } The problem I'm getting is that when I call this method from the Update method, the program behaves as if this method always returns true value (which of course is not correct). The code for calling is very simple (although this is only the test code): if (IsCollision(model1, worldModel1, model2, worldModel2)) { Window.Title = "Intersects"; } What is causing this?

  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

• libgdx collision detection / bounding the object

  - by johnny-b

  i am trying to get collision detection so i am drawing a red rectangle to see if it is working, and when i do the code below in the update method. to check if it is going to work. the position is not in the right place. the red rectangle starts from the middle and not at the x and y point?Huh so it draws it wrong. i also have a getter method so nothing wrong there. bullet.set(getX(), getY(), getOriginX(), getOriginY()); this is for the render shapeRenderer.begin(ShapeType.Filled); shapeRenderer.setColor(Color.RED); shapeRenderer.rect(bullet.getX(), bullet.getY(), bullet.getOriginX(), bullet.getOriginY(), 15, 5, bullet.getRotation()); shapeRenderer.end(); i have tried to do it with a circle but the circle draws in the middle and i want it to be at the tip of the bullet. at the front of the bullet. x, y point. boundingCircle.set(getX() + getOriginX(), getY() + getOriginY(), 4.0f); shapeRenderer.begin(ShapeType.Filled); shapeRenderer.setColor(Color.RED); shapeRenderer.circle(bullet.getBoundingCircle().x, bullet.getBoundingCircle().y, bullet.getBoundingCircle().radius); shapeRenderer.end(); thank you need it to be of the x and y as the bullet is in the middle of the sprite when drawn originally via paint.

  Read the article

• 3D physics engine for accurate collision handling on desktop/laptop computers (non-console)

  - by Georges Oates Larsen

  What are your suggestions for a physics engine that satisfies the following criteria? Capable of calculating collisions between multiple concave mesh-based colliders Handles many collisions going on at once (for instance one mesh being wedged between two others, which themselves may be wedged between two meshes) Does not allow for collider passthrough, even at high speeds. For instance, if I am applying force to a programmatically hinged object that makes it spin, I do not want it to pass through another rigidbody that it collides with while spinning. I have this problem using PhysX As implied before, reacts well to hinged objects, preferably has its own implementation of a hinge, but I am willing to program my own. The important part is that it has some sort of interface that guarantees accurate collision tracking even when dealing with these things Platform independent -- runs on mac as well as PC, also not tied down to specific graphics cards I think that's the best way to explain what I am looking for. Basically, I need SUPER reliable collisions. Something that can't be accomplished with a simple ray casting approach that sends a ray from the last position of the object to the current position (as this object may be potentially large and colliding with small objects via rotation) Bonus points for also including an OPEN SOURCE engine.

  Read the article

• Collision detection - player gets stuck in platform when jumping

  - by Sun

  So I'm having some problems with my collision detection with my platformer. Take the image below as an example. When I'm running right I am unable to go through the platform, but when I hold my right key and jump, I end up going through the object as shown in the image, below is the code im using: if(shapePlatform.intersects(player.getCollisionShape())){ Vector2f vectorSide = new Vector2f(shapePlatform.getCenter()[0] - player.getCollisionShape().getCenter()[0], shapePlatform.getCenter()[1] - player.getCollisionShape().getCenter()[1]); player.setVerticleSpeed(0f); player.setJumping(false); if(vectorSide.x > 0 && !(vectorSide.y > 0)){ player.getPosition().set(player.getPosition().x-3, player.getPosition().y); }else if(vectorSide.y > 0){ player.getPosition().set(player.getPosition().x, player.getPosition().y); }else if(vectorSide.x < 0 && !(vectorSide.y > 0)){ player.getPosition().set(player.getPosition().x+3, player.getPosition().y); } } I'm basically getting the difference between the centre of the player and the centre of the colliding platform to determine which side the player is colliding with. When my player jumps and walks right on the platform he goes right through. The same can also be observed when I jump on the actual platform, should I be resetting the players y in this situation?

  Read the article

• Collision detection between a sprite and rectangle in canvas

  - by Andy

  I'm building a Javascript + canvas game which is essentially a platformer. I have the player all set up and he's running, jumping and falling, but I'm having trouble with the collision detection between the player and blocks (the blocks will essentially be the platforms that the player moves on). The blocks are stored in an array like this: var blockList = [[50, 400, 100, 100]]; And drawn to the canvas using this: this.draw = function() { c.fillRect(blockList[0][0], blockList[0][1], 100, 100); } I'm checking for collisions using something along these lines in the player object: this.update = function() { // Check for collitions with blocks for(var i = 0; i < blockList.length; i++) { if((player.xpos + 34) > blockList[i][0] && player.ypos > blockList[i][1]) { player.xpos = blockList[i][0] - 28; return false; } } // Other code to move the player based on keyboard input etc } The idea is if the player will collide with a block in the next game update (the game uses a main loop running at 60Htz), the function will return false and exit, thus meaning the player won't move. Unfortunately, that only works when the player hits the left side of the block, and I can't work out how to make it so the player stops if it hits any side of the block. I have the properties player.xpos and player.ypos to help here.

  Read the article

• How does this circle collision detection math work?

  - by Griffin

  I'm going through the wildbunny blog to learn about collision detection. I'm confused about how the vectors he's talking about come into play. Here's the part that confuses me: p = ||A-B|| – (r1+r2) The two spheres are penetrating by distance p. We would also like the penetration vector so that we can correct the penetration once we discover it. This is the vector that moves both circles to the point where they just touch, correcting the penetration. Importantly it is not only just a vector that does this, it is the only vector which corrects the penetration by moving the minimum amount. This is important because we only want to correct the error, not introduce more by moving too much when we correct, or too little. N = (A-B) / ||A-B|| P = N*p Here we have calculated the normalised vector N between the two centres and the penetration vector P by multiplying our unit direction by the penetration distance. I understand that p is the distance by which the circles penetrate, but I don't get what exactly N and P are. It seems to me N is just the coordinates of the 3rd point of the right trianlge formed by point A and B (A-B) then being divided by the hypotenuse of that triangle or distance between A and B (||A-B||). What's the significance of this? Also, what is the penetration vector used for? It seems to me like a movement that one of the circles would perform to get un-penetrated.

  Read the article

• Wall jumping collision detection anomaly

  - by Nanor

  I'm creating a game where the player ascends a tower by wall jumping his way to the top. When the player has collided with the right wall they can only jump left and vice versa. Here is my current implementation: if(wallCollision() == "left"){ player.setPosX(0); player.setVelX(0); ignoreCollisions = true; player.setCanJump(true); player.setFacingLeft(false); } else if (wallCollision() == "right"){ player.setPosX(screenWidth-playerWidth*2); player.setVelX(0); ignoreCollisions = true; player.setCanJump(true); player.setFacingLeft(true); } else{ player.setVelY(player.getVelY() + gravity); } and private String wallCollision(){ if(player.getPosX() < playerWidth && !ignoreCollisions) return "left"; else if(player.getPosX() > screenWidth - playerWidth*2 && !ignoreCollisions) return "right"; else{ timeToJump += Gdx.graphics.getDeltaTime(); if(timeToJump > 0.50f){ timeToJump = 0; ignoreCollisions = false; } return "jumping"; } } If the player is colliding with the left wall it will switch between the states left and jumping repeatedly due to the varible ignoreCollisions being switched repeatedly in collision checks. This will give a chance to either jump as intended or simply ascend vertically instead of diagonally. I can't figure out an implementation that will reliably make sure the player jumps as intended. Does anyone have any pointers?

  Read the article

• Determining whether two fast moving objects should be submitted for a collision check

  - by dreta

  I have a basic 2D physics engine running. It's pretty much a particle engine, just uses basic shapes like AABBs and circles, so no rotation is possible. I have CCD implemented that can give accurate TOI for two fast moving objects and everything is working smoothly. My issue now is that i can't figure out how to determine whether two fast moving objects should even be checked against each other in the first place. I'm using a quad tree for spacial partitioning and for each fast moving object, i check it against objects in each cell that it passes. This works fine for determining collision with static geometry, but it means that any other fast moving object that could collide with it, but isn't in any of the cells that are checked, is never considered. The only solution to this i can think of is to either have the cells large enough and cross fingers that this is enough, or to implement some sort of a brute force algorithm. Is there a proper way of dealing with this, maybe somebody solved this issue in an efficient manner. Or maybe there's a better way of partitioning space that accounts for this?

  Read the article

• 3D Box Collision Data Import

  - by cboe

  I'm trying to implement a collision system using oriented bounding boxes, using a center for the box, it's extents as a 3D Vector and a rotation matrix, which is all stuff I picked up online and seem to be somewhat the standard. Detecting the center is no problem so I'm gonna leave these out here. My problem however is importing the data from a 3D file. Say I've placed a box with 2 units length on each side aligned to the world axis. The logic results here are extents of 1,1,1 and I use an identity matrix for rotation - easy. However I'm stuck when I rotate the box in the 3D program, say 30 degrees each axis. How would I parse the box? I only have these 8 vertices as information, and I guess what I would need to do is to find out the rotation of said box, apply it to the vertices so they are aligned to world axes and then calculate the extents out of that. How do I get the rotation of the box when I only have the vertex information of the box available?

  Read the article

• ray collision with rectangle and floating point accuracy

  - by phq

  I'm trying to solve a problem with a ray bouncing on a box. Actually it is a sphere but for simplicity the box dimensions are expanded by the sphere radius when doing the collision test making the sphere a single ray. It is done by projecting the ray onto all faces of the box and pick the one that is closest. However because I'm using floating point variables I fear that the projected point onto the surface might be interpreted as being below in the next iteration, also I will later allow the sphere to move which might make that scenario more likely. Also the bounce coefficient might be as low as zero, making the sphere continue along the surface. So my naive solution is to project not only forwards but backwards to catch those cases. That is where I got into problems shown in the figure: In the first iteration the first black arrow is calculated and we end up at a point on the surface of the box. In the second iteration the "back projection" hits the other surface making the second black arrow bounce on the wrong surface. If there are several boxes close to each other this has further consequences making the sphere fall through them all. So my main question is how to handle possible floating point accuracy when placing the sphere on the box surface so it does not fall through. In writing this question I got the idea to have a threshold to only accept back projections a certain amount much smaller than the box but larger than the possible accuracy limitation, this would only cause the "false" back projection when the sphere hit the box on an edge which would appear naturally. To clarify my original approach, the arrows shown in the image is not only the path the sphere travels but is also representing a single time step in the simulation. In reality the time step is much smaller about 0.05 of the box size. The path traveled is projected onto possible sides to avoid traveling past a thinner object at higher speeds. In normal situations the floating point accuracy is not an issue but there are two situations where I have the concern. When the new position at the end of the time step is located very close to the surface, very unlikely though. When using a bounce factor of 0, here it happens every time the sphere hit a box. To add some loss of accuracy, the motivation for my concern, is that the sphere and box are in different coordinate systems and thus the sphere location is transformed for every test. This last one is why I'm not willing to stand on luck that one floating point value lying on top of the box always will be interpreted the same. I did not know voronoi regions by name, but looking at it I'm not sure how it would be used in a projection scenario that I'm using here.

  Read the article

• Simple collision detection in Unity 2D

  - by N1ghtshade3

  I realise other posts exist with this topic yet none have gone into enough detail for me. I am attempting to create a 2D game in Unity using C# as my scripting language. Basically I have two objects, player and bomb. Both were created simply by dragging the respective PNG to the stage. I have set up touch controls to move player left and right; gravity of any kind is not needed as I only require it to move x units when I tap either the left or right side of the screen. This movement is stored in a script called playerController.cs and works just fine. I also have a variable health = 3 for player, which is stored in healthScript.cs. I am now at a point where I am stuck. I would like it so that when player collides with bomb, health decreases by one and the bomb object is destroyed. So what I tried doing is using a new script called playerPhysics.cs, I added the following: void OnCollisionEnter2D(Collision2D coll){ if(coll.gameObject.name=="bomb") GameObject.Destroy("bomb"); healthScript.health -= 1; } While I'm fairly sure I don't know the proper way to reference a variable in another script and that's why the health didn't decrease when I collided, bomb never disappeared from the stage so I'm thinking there's also a problem with my collision. Initially, I had simply attached playerPhysics.cs to player. After searching around though, it appeared as though player also needed a rigidBody attached to it, so I did that. Still no luck. I tried using a circleCollider (player is a circle), using a rigidBody2D, and using all manner of colliders on one and/or both of the objects. If you could please explain what colliders (if any) should be attached to which objects and whether I need to change my script(s), that would be much more helpful than pointing me to one of the generic documentation examples I've already read. Also, if it would be simple to fix the health thing not working that would be an added bonus but not exactly the focus of this question. Bear in mind that this game is 2D; I'm not sure if that changes anything. Thanks!

  Read the article

• Breakout ball collision detection, bouncing against the walls [solved]

  - by Sri Harsha Chilakapati

  I'm currently trying to program a breakout game to distribute it as an example game for my own game engine. http://game-engine-for-java.googlecode.com/ But the problem here is that I can't get the bouncing condition working properly. Here's what I'm using. public void collision(GObject other){ if (other instanceof Bat || other instanceof Block){ bounce(); } else if (other instanceof Stone){ other.destroy(); bounce(); } //Breakout.HIT.play(); } And here's by bounce() method public void bounce(){ boolean left = false; boolean right = false; boolean up = false; boolean down = false; if (dx < 0) { left = true; } else if (dx > 0) { right = true; } if (dy < 0) { up = true; } else if (dy > 0) { down = true; } if (left && up) { dx = -dx; } if (left && down) { dy = -dy; } if (right && up) { dx = -dx; } if (right && down) { dy = -dy; } } The ball bounces the bat and blocks but when the block is on top of the ball, it won't bounce and moves upwards out of the game. What I'm missing? Is there anything to implement? Please help me.. Thanks EDIT: Have changed the bounce method. public void bounce(GObject other){ //System.out.println("y : " + getY() + " other.y + other.height - 2 : " + (other.getY() + other.getHeight() - 2)); if (getX()+getWidth()>other.getX()+2){ setHorizontalDirection(Direction.DIRECTION_RIGHT); } else if (getX()<(other.getX()+other.getWidth()-2)){ setHorizontalDirection(Direction.DIRECTION_LEFT); } if (getY()+getHeight()>other.getY()+2){ setVerticalDirection(Direction.DIRECTION_UP); } else if (getY()<(other.getY()+other.getHeight()-2)){ setVerticalDirection(Direction.DIRECTION_DOWN); } } EDIT: Solved now. See the changed method in my answer.

  Read the article

• Tile map collision is not working properly

  - by Sigh-AniDe

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

  Read the article

• Collision detection via adjacent tiles - sprite too big

  - by BlackMamba

  I have managed to create a collision detection system for my tile-based jump'n'run game (written in C++/SFML), where I check on each update what values the surrounding tiles of the player contain and then I let the player move accordingly (i. e. move left when there is an obstacle on the right side). This works fine when the player sprite is not too big: Given a tile size of 5x5 pixels, my solution worked quite fine with a spritesize of 3x4 and 5x5 pixels. My problem is that I actually need the player to be quite gigantic (34x70 pixels given the same tilesize). When I try this, there seems to be an invisible, notably smaller boundingbox where the player collides with obstacles, the player also seems to shake strongly. Here some images to explain what I mean: Works: http://tinypic.com/r/207lvfr/8 Doesn't work: http://tinypic.com/r/2yuk02q/8 Another example of non-functioning: http://tinypic.com/r/kexbwl/8 (the player isn't falling, he stays there in the corner) My code for getting the surrounding tiles looks like this (I removed some parts to make it better readable): std::vector<std::map<std::string, int> > Game::getSurroundingTiles(sf::Vector2f position) { // converting the pixel coordinates to tilemap coordinates sf::Vector2u pPos(static_cast<int>(position.x/tileSize.x), static_cast<int>(position.y/tileSize.y)); std::vector<std::map<std::string, int> > surroundingTiles; for(int i = 0; i < 9; ++i) { // calculating the relative position of the surrounding tile(s) int c = i % 3; int r = static_cast<int>(i/3); // we subtract 1 to place the player in the middle of the 3x3 grid sf::Vector2u tilePos(pPos.x + (c - 1), pPos.y + (r - 1)); // this tells us what kind of block this tile is int tGid = levelMap[tilePos.y][tilePos.x]; // converts the coords from tile to world coords sf::Vector2u tileRect(tilePos.x*5, tilePos.y*5); // storing all the information std::map<std::string, int> tileDict; tileDict.insert(std::make_pair("gid", tGid)); tileDict.insert(std::make_pair("x", tileRect.x)); tileDict.insert(std::make_pair("y", tileRect.y)); // adding the stored information to our vector surroundingTiles.push_back(tileDict); } // I organise the map so that it is arranged like the following: /* * 4 | 1 | 5 * -- -- -- * 2 | / | 3 * -- -- -- * 6 | 0 | 7 * */ return surroundingTiles; } I then check in a loop through the surrounding tiles, if there is a 1 as gid (indicates obstacle) and then check for intersections with that adjacent tile. The problem I just can't overcome is that I think that I need to store the values of all the adjacent tiles and then check for them. How? And may there be a better solution? Any help is appreciated. P.S.: My implementation derives from this blog entry, I mostly just translated it from Objective-C/Cocos2d.

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15  | Next Page >