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)
Related
I have a small application I have built where there are a few balls on a blank background. They all start flying through the air and use the physics I wrote to bounce accurately and have realistic collision responses. I am satisfied with how it looks except I have an issue where when my balls land directly on top of each other, the attach together and float directly up.
Here are the functions involved
https://gist.github.com/anonymous/899d6fb255a85d8f2102
Basically if the Collision function returns true, I use the ResolveCollision to change their velocities accordingly.
I believe the issue is from the slight re-positioning I do in ResolveCollision(). If they collide I bring them a frame or so backwards in location so that they are not intersecting still the next frame. However, when they are directly on top they bounce off eachother at such small bounces that eventually stepping back a frame isn't enough to unhook them.
I'm unsure if this is the problem and if it is, then what to do about it.
Any help would be awesome!
The trick is to ignore the collision if the circles are moving away from each other. This works so long as your timestep is small enough relative to their velocities (i.e. the circles can't pass through each other in a single frame).
When the circles first collide, you will adjust their velocity vectors so their relative velocity vector pushes them apart (because a collision will do that). After that, any further collisions are spurious because the circles will be moving apart, and will eventually separate completely. So, just ignore collisions between objects that are moving apart, and you should be fine.
(I've implemented such an algorithm in a 3D screensaver I wrote, but the algorithm is entirely dimension-agnostic and so would work fine for 2D circles).
I have made several attempts to fix this and read all I could find here/forum/google. I used a CCD treshold mush lower than my objects move speed and using a CCD radius much smaller than the objects half radius. The only thing this does is make the multisphere get stuck on seams. I also tried to set ERP/ERP2 to 0.9/1.0.
[EDIT] Ok, so after some more reading; CCD will not work if the sphere is already touching the ground and ERP only affeccts objectts with joints if I understand correctly.
The ground is a trimesh made in Blender and using the obtainStaticNodeShape to get the shape. I have tried to scale the mesh to get smaller polygons but even the smallest (for the game acceptable) size does not work, about 32k indices with 11k polys, 500x500 units, the multisphere has a radius of 0.45 units.
[EDIT] the multi-sphere is two spheres on top of each other and they are restricted to angular movement around the Y-axis only, so no rolling.
The sphere gets "sucked" fast through the ground it does not sink slowly. I tried to make the fixedtimestep smaller 1/420 with 64 substeps did not give any better results. This happens most often while ascending or descending a slope. My ground is gently sloped but an incline of 20% seems to be enough for it to fall through a lot but it can happen on level ground too, just not as often.
When I did my first test I used a big stretched out cube as ground and it worked well.
So my problem now is I don't even know why this is happening so I have no idea what to try next? Can anyone please give me a solution or some pointers.
Is there any use in increasing the multi-sphere size (for the game I can not increase more than 25-30%) I have not explicitly set any collision margins but I think this would just make my sphere float over the ground? Is there any profit in changing the ground from a static object to a kinematic?
Would it work to use a raytest from the sphere straight down and push it up if it is lower than the ground? I think not, why would it fall through if it could detect the ground in the first place..?
[EDIT: additional info]
There are quite a few occurrences of similar problems floating around on forums and also here at stack overflow. Most seem to be about very small objects. Small objects (>0.2m) is clearly not a good option for bullet unless you want to increase the number of simulation steps quite a lot. My problems does not seem to fall under this category since my smallest object is 0.9m in diameter?
I have now also done a debug draw to see the normals of the trimesh that I use as ground. I can not find any errors with the normals.
I also tried to increase the collission margins of the speheres but to no avail.
I further tried to use suggested settings:
((btDefaultCollisionConfiguration)world.collisionConfiguration).setPlaneConvexMultipointIterations(3,3); ((btDefaultCollisionConfiguration)world.collisionConfiguration).setConvexConvexMultipointIterations(3, 3);
No difference.
I did however read about big trimeshes not working very well for raycasting, my mesh is big 512x512 units but I am not sure if this could cause my object to fall through the mesh?
I also read that sphere shapes has problems with trimeshes, but again I am not sure if this would be my case? The sphere I am using is locked for rotation on all axes.
I have also tried using a btCapsule but it gave same results.. Would a cylinder work better?
[EDIT]
I have tried using a cylinder instead since sphere and capsule did not work. The cylinder is working a lot better. I have still got it to fall through once though. The clyinder was jerking around a lot before it went through where the sphere/capsule would just go through really fast and easy. Maybe this could be a clue of whats the underlaying problem? A cylinder is not the best for a character shape though..
An other possible reason could be if a triangle in the mesh has too long sides or a large ratio between sides. I found a few of those on a slope where my sphere always falls through. If this is indeed the problem can I do anything about it except manually editing the mesh in Blender?
As you can see there are a lot of these questions and a lot of possible answers and I have no idea which one corresponds to my case, someone with better insight giving some pointers would mean a lot, thanks!
I am building an IOS game in Cocos2d - Chipmunk - Spritebuilder. I need to make a characters orbit around around a point, and I was having quite some difficulty in implementing orbits with real physics.
So far, I have tried two methods, one is creating a distance joint from the player to the planet, and then applying a 90 degree force on the player where an angle is created between the end of the distance joint and an imaginary line drawn at a 90 angle to it. He moves around crazily and this method is not working for me.
I then tried calculating 180 points on the circumference at a radius from the planet (which is the bounds of detecting and implementing its effects on the player) - and then in a scheduled update method [character.physicsbody applyForce:nextCircumferencePoint]; This does not work, as he does not follow the path exactly and is quite far from it. I am thinking that I need to also apply a gravitational force towards the planet which would cause him to circle it. Though I don't know how to calculate that force, apply it, or if it would even help.
A third method which would never work, but was used for testing was to set his position to the next circumference point. He does orbit, but any collision won't work (such as if a piece of space junk goes in his way.) He will simply be positioned right over any other object. This world great if you don't need collisions, are writing your own physics engine. This is not a polished way of doing things, so will avoid it.
Please correct anything I have already done and tell me how it would work, or shed light on other options and how to implement them.
Check out my answer here. It's for box2d, but you can do it with Chipmunk. If bodyA position will change, orbit will be same. You just need to change speed of body movement for your needs, just increase smoothness and slow down your update method.
I'm learning SFML right now, and I have just managed to implement some basic jumping and gravity. However, I can't figure out how to put in collisions because I need to also detect which side of an object is being hit. For example, I need upward movement to stop if it hits the bottom of an object, downward to stop if it hits the top, and left or right movement if it just hits a side. These would just be rectangular objects, so I wouldn't have to program weird for circles or unnatural shapes, just the 4 sides. Thanks!
There are a number of different ways to do this, some more complex (and efficient) than others. For your sake, I would begin with simply putting a "bounding box" around your character. This bounding box will move everywhere that your character goes and should surround him or her. Whenever this bounding box intersects with a solid object, there is your collision.
Here's where the fun comes in:
What does "intersects" mean? A lot of things. You can write a function to find out if two shapes are intersecting, or use a function from SFML, or use some sort of physics library (like Box2D).
How do you stop a character from passing through? Find out how far they will intersect (you check collision BEFORE you move the character), then make it so the character only moves to the bounds of that solid object.
This is an extremely simplified explanation. Collision detection and handling are difficult. Your best bet is to spend a lot of time DETECTING the collision then worrying about how to handle the collision. Many beginners try these at the same time and get frustrated.
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