Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

Interested in a FREE copy of HTML5 game maker Construct 2?

We'll be giving away three Personal Edition licences in next Tuesday's GDNet Direct email newsletter!

Sign up from the right-hand sidebar on our homepage and read Tuesday's newsletter for details!


We're also offering banner ads on our site from just $5! 1. Details HERE. 2. GDNet+ Subscriptions HERE. 3. Ad upload HERE.


#ActualiMalc

Posted 04 December 2012 - 01:44 AM

Also, I would say that in order for a collision to take place, one of the colliding objects must have moved. No need to test 2 objects together if neither of them moved.

Unless of course you have a more advanced physics system where objects can change size. Posted Image Posted Image

But yeah, identifying objects that have not changed in any way and skipping those pairs, is a very useful optimisation to use at some stage in the collision detection process. It likely doesn't matter too much at what point you do it.

#1iMalc

Posted 04 December 2012 - 01:44 AM

Also, I would say that in order for a collision to take place, one of the colliding objects must have moved. No need to test 2 objects together if neither of them moved.

Unless of course you have a more advanced scenario where objects can change size. Posted Image Posted Image
But yeah, identifying objects that have not changed in any way and skipping those pairs, is a very useful optimisation to use at some stage in the collision detection process. It likely doesn't matter too much at what point you do it.

PARTNERS