I'm newbie with Chipmunk physics and want to make an easy example of polygon explosion.
I started with the SmashLogo demo but in this example the are no explosions, only so much ball movements.
I know how to do polygon collision but my dude is for example how to explode a cube into many little pieces.
Chipmunk doesn't support exploding objects in smaller ones. Your cube should in fact be composed of multiple fragments that will separate upon impact. If your cube is not frozen and is moving, you probably need to add some forces to keep the parts together before impact.
Related
I'm working on a Minecraft like game for educational purposes. The rendering is great so far even with 1024x1204 blocks but now that I started integrating the player collision I'm having problems.
I have a aabb for the player and aabb's for all the blocks around him. These are created dynamically and it works out pretty fast.
My problem goes as following:
I have speed vector and the current position. For each axis I calculate the potential position and make out an aabb. I check for collisions and it's free I move there otherwise I set the speed for that component to 0. I separate the axis since I want my player to slide in a direction of partially facing a wall.
The order for the axis is y,x,z. The collision response is great but I'm having some problems with the corners as it sometimes get's stuck in the world without being able to move. Not sure what the reason is for this.
I do not want to implement actual physics since those are more demanding and basically just too much for what I need.
Do you guys have any suggestions on how to implement this in a nice way? I did some searching but I didn't find anything useful for this particular situation.
This is a bit abstract in a sense that the cause of your problem can be related to many things. From the top of my head, maybe a bug in your collision detection code: somehow it allows the objects to cross boundaries by 1 (or more) unit. So when the next collision is computed 1 or more dimension is stuck (imagine having an arm already inside the wall when collision is detected. You can't get your arm out because it collide with the interior of the wall boundary)
I'm trying to develop a game where cars move along roads and stop according to the signal of the traffic lights. They've got different velocities. Sometimes cars need to decelerate in order to not hit the leading car. They need to stop at the red lights. They have to make turns and etc. This is all relatively easy when working with straight intersecting roads. But how can I move a car/cars along a curved path? So far it was easy because I was just using either x or y of a car's position. But this time it's not the case, both coordinates seem to be necessary for moving it ahead. With straight roads I can just give a car an arbitrary speed and it will move along x or y axis with that speed. But how can I determine the velocity, if both coordinates have to be taken into account? Acceleration and decelerations are also mistery to me in this case. Thanks ahead.
Although this is about moving a train over a freeform track, the same issues and principles apply to cars moving across freeform roads. Actually, cars may be easier because they don't need to stick to their track 100% accurately.
In short: it's not easy, but doable. How hard it is going to be depends on how realistic you want your cars to look and finding corners to cut.
In your case the cars should simply follow a path (series of points). Since CCActions are bad for frequent direction/velocity changes, you should use your own system of detecting path points and heading to the next. Movement along a bezier curve is not going to have your cards move at constant speed, that rules out the CCBezier* actions.
I'm working on a relatively small 2D (top-view) game demo, using OpenGL for my graphics. It's going for a basic stealth-based angle, and as such with all my enemies I'm drawing a sight arc so the player knows where they are looking.
One of my problems so far is that when I draw this sight arc (as a filled polygon) it naturally shows through any walls on the screen since there's nothing stopping it:
http://tinyurl.com/43y4o5z
I'm curious how I might best be able to prevent something like this. I do already have code in place that will let me detect line-intersections with walls and so on (for the enemy sight detection), and I could theoretically use this to detect such a case and draw the polygon accordingly, but this would likely be quite fiddly and/or inefficient, so I figure if there's any built-in OpenGL systems that can do this for me it would probably do it much better.
I've tried looking for questions on topics like clipping/occlusion but I'm not even sure if these are exactly what I should be looking for; my OpenGL skills are limited. It seems that anything using, say, glClipPlanes or glScissor wouldn't be suited to this due to the large amount of individual walls and so on.
Lastly, this is just a demo I'm making in my spare time, so graphics aren't exactly my main worry. If there's a (reasonably) painless way to do this then I'd hope someone can point me in the right direction; if there's no simple way then I can just leave the problem for now or find other workarounds.
This is essentially a shadowing problem. Here's how I'd go about it:
For each point around the edge of your arc, trace a (2D) ray from the enemy towards the point, looking for intersections with the green boxes. If the green boxes are always going to be axis-aligned, the math will be a lot easier (look for Ray-AABB intersection). Rendering the intersection points as a triangle fan will give you your arc.
As you mention that you already have the line-wall intersection code going, then as long as that will tell you the distance from the enemy to the wall, then you'll be able to use it for the sight arc. Don't automatically assume it'll be too slow - we're not running on 486s any more. You can always reduce the number of points around the edge of your arc to speed things up.
OpenGL's built-in occlusion handling is designed for 3D tasks and I can't think of a simple way to rig it to achieve the effect you are after. If it were me, the way I would solve this is to use a fragment shader program, but be forewarned that this definitely does not fall under "a (reasonably) painless way to do this". Briefly, you first render a binary "occlusion map" which is black where there are walls and white otherwise. Then you render the "viewing arc" like you are currently doing with a fragment program that is designed to search from the viewer towards the target location, searching for an occluder (black pixel). If it finds an occluder, then it renders that pixel of the "viewing arc" as 100% transparent. Overall though, while this is a "correct" solution I would definitely say that this is a complex feature and you seem okay without implementing it.
I figure if there's any built-in OpenGL systems that can do this for me it would probably do it much better.
OpenGL is a drawing API, not a geometry processing library.
Actually your intersection test method is the right way to do it. However to speed it up you should use a spatial subdivision structure. In your case you have something that's cries for a Binary Space Partitioning tree. BSP trees have the nice property, that the complexity for finding intersections of a line with walls is in average about O(log n) and worst case is O(n log n), or in other words, BSP tress are very efficient. See the BSP FAQ for details http://www.opengl.org//resources/code/samples/bspfaq/index.html
I've asked this question both at game SE and math SE, but the response were not so encouraging. So I reasked again, with a bit more of a twist.
I have a terrain, which is defined by mesh. And there are a lot of other polygonal faces scattered throughout the terrain, they can be located above, or below or cutting through the terrain. You can think of those faces as platforms.
A screenshot below should clarify what I mean. Despite looking smooth, all the mesh are actually consist of small elements (number> 10k) combined together, giving the false appearance of smoothness. The obvious disconnected area are platforms.
My question is, how can I generate the planes that connect between the platforms and other platforms/ terrain? Here are the rules to generate the series of sloped planes:
They could go up or down, depending on which direction will make them hit the terrain/neigbouring platform first.
The plane generation rule is that, the plane will start at the edge of a platform, and moving 45 degree upward/downward with respect to z axis for a certain length, then it will move 0 degree with respect to z axis for another certain length, and repeat. So it will be a series of piecemeal planes until at some points of the planes, obstacles are hit.
The algorithm should be focused on plane generation and plane generation alone; I don't want it to be tied to any renderer ( e.g, opengl and whatnot), I can render it myself.
In short, I want to generate a set of "planes" that is actually something like a flight of stairs or a piece of corrugated paper, leading up or down from one point in space until it makes contact with a given mesh
Sounds like a straight forward collision detection problem that are frequent in physics simulation, right? Is there any game/physics libraries that I can use to attack this problem?
Note that since I am not doing any animation, so frame-by-frame update and all those stuffs are not relevant to me; this is why I am hesitant to use existing game physics library like bullet. What is relevant to me is how to use existing libraries to generate those connecting planes according to the above rules.
I have a path made up of a list of 2D points. I want to turn these into a strip of triangles in order to render a textured line with a specified thickness (and other such things). So essentially the list of 2D points need to become a list of vertices specifying the outline of a polygon that if rendered would render the line. The problem is handling the corner joins, miters, caps etc. The resulting polygon needs to be "perfect" in the sense of no overdraw, clean joins, etc. so that it could feasibly be extruded or otherwise toyed with.
Are there any simple resources around that can provide algorithm insight, code or any more information on doing this efficiently?
I absolutely DO NOT want a full fledged 2D vector library (cairo, antigrain, OpenVG, etc.) with curves, arcs, dashes and all the bells and whistles. I've been digging in multiple source trees for OpenVG implementations and other things to find some insight, but it's all terribly convoluted.
I'm definitely willing to code it myself, but there are many degenerate cases (small segments + thick widths + sharp corners) that create all kinds of join issues. Even a little help would save me hours of trying to deal with them all.
EDIT: Here's an example of one of those degenerate cases that causes ugliness if you were simply to go from vertex to vertex. Red is the original path. The orange blocks are rectangles drawn at a specified width aligned and centered on each segment.
Oh well - I've tried to solve that problem myself. I wasted two month on a solution that tried to solve the zero overdraw problem. As you've already found out you can't deal with all degenerated cases and have zero overdraw at the same time.
You can however use a hybrid approach:
Write yourself a routine that checks if the joins can be constructed from simple geometry without problems. To do so you have to check the join-angle, the width of the line and the length of the joined line-segments (line-segments that are shorter than their width are a PITA). With some heuristics you should be able to sort out all the trivial cases.
I don't know how your average line-data looks like, but in my case more than 90% of the wide lines had no degenerated cases.
For all other lines:
You've most probably already found out that if you tolerate overdraw, generating the geometry is a lot easier. Do so, and let a polygon CSG algorithm and a tesselation algorithm do the hard job.
I've evaluated most of the available tesselation packages, and I ended up with the GLU tesselator. It was fast, robust, never crashed (unlike most other algorithms). It was free and the license allowed me to include it in a commercial program. The quality and speed of the tesselation is okay. You will not get delaunay triangulation quality, but since you just need the triangles for rendering that's not a problem.
Since I disliked the tesselator API I lifted the tesselation code from the free SGI OpenGL reference implementation, rewrote the entire front-end and added memory pools to get the number of allocations down. It took two days to do this, but it was well worth it (like factor five performance improvement). The solution ended up in a commercial OpenVG implementation btw :-)
If you're rendering with OpenGL on a PC, you may want to move the tesselation/CSG-job from the CPU to the GPU and use stencil-buffer or z-buffer tricks to remove the overdraw. That's a lot easier and may be even faster than CPU tesselation.
I just found this amazing work:
http://www.codeproject.com/Articles/226569/Drawing-polylines-by-tessellation
It seems to do exactly what you want, and its licence allows to use it even in commercial applications. Plus, the author did a truly great job to detail his method. I'll probably give it a shot at some point to replace my own not-nearly-as-perfect implementation.
A simple method off the top of my head.
Bisect the angle of each 2d Vertex, this will create a nice miter line. Then move along that line, both inward and outward, the amount of your "thickness" (or thickness divided by two?), you now have your inner and outer polygon points. Move to the next point, repeat the same process, building your new polygon points along the way. Then apply a triangualtion to get your render-ready vertexes.
I ended up having to get my hands dirty and write a small ribbonizer to solve a similar problem.
For me the issue was that I wanted fat lines in OpenGL that did not have the kinds of artifacts that I was seeing with OpenGL on the iPhone. After looking at various solutions; bezier curves and the like - I decided it was probably easiest to just make my own. There are a couple of different approaches.
One approach is to find the angle of intersection between two segments and then move along that intersection line a certain distance away from the surface and treat that as a ribbon vertex. I tried that and it did not look intuitive; the ribbon width would vary.
Another approach is to actually compute a normal to the surface of the line segments and use that to compute the ideal ribbon edge for that segment and to do actual intersection tests between ribbon segments. This worked well except that for sharp corners the ribbon line segment intersections were too far away ( if the inter-segment angle approached 180' ).
I worked around the sharp angle issue with two approaches. The Paul Bourke line intersection algorithm ( which I used in an unoptimized way ) suggested detecting if the intersection was inside of the segments. Since both segments are identical I only needed to test one of the segments for intersection. I could then arbitrate how to resolve this; either by fudging a best point between the two ends or by putting on an end cap - both approaches look good - the end cap approach may throw off the polygon front/back facing ordering for opengl.
See http://paulbourke.net/geometry/lineline2d/
See my source code here : https://gist.github.com/1474156
I'm interested in this too, since I want to perfect my mapping application's (Kosmos) drawing of roads. One workaround I used is to draw the polyline twice, once with a thicker line and once with a thinner, with a different color. But this is not really a polygon, it's just a quick way of simulating one. See some samples here: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Kosmos_Rendering_Help#Rendering_Options
I'm not sure if this is what you need.
I think I'd reach for a tessellation algorithm. It's true that in most case where these are used the aim is to reduce the number of vertexes to optimise rendering, but in your case you could parameterise to retain all the detail - and the possibility of optimising may come in useful.
There are numerous tessellation algorithms and code around on the web - I wrapped up a pure C on in a DLL a few years back for use with a Delphi landscape renderer, and they are not an uncommon subject for advanced graphics coding tutorials and the like.
See if Delaunay triangulation can help.
In my case I could afford to overdraw. I just drow circles with radius = width/2 centered on each of the polyline's vertices.
Artifacts are masked this way, and it is very easy to implement, if you can live with "rounded" corners and some overdrawing.
From your image it looks like that you are drawing box around line segments with FILL on and using orange color. Doing so is going to create bad overdraws for sure. So first thing to do would be not render black border and fill color can be opaque.
Why can't you use GL_LINES primitive to do what you intent to do? You can specify width, filtering, smoothness, texture anything. You can render all vertices using glDrawArrays(). I know this is not something you have in mind but as you are focusing on 2D drawing, this might be easier approach. (search for Textured lines etc.)