• Announcements

    • khawk

      Download the Game Design and Indie Game Marketing Freebook   07/19/17

      GameDev.net and CRC Press have teamed up to bring a free ebook of content curated from top titles published by CRC Press. The freebook, Practices of Game Design & Indie Game Marketing, includes chapters from The Art of Game Design: A Book of Lenses, A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing, and An Architectural Approach to Level Design. The GameDev.net FreeBook is relevant to game designers, developers, and those interested in learning more about the challenges in game development. We know game development can be a tough discipline and business, so we picked several chapters from CRC Press titles that we thought would be of interest to you, the GameDev.net audience, in your journey to design, develop, and market your next game. The free ebook is available through CRC Press by clicking here. The Curated Books The Art of Game Design: A Book of Lenses, Second Edition, by Jesse Schell Presents 100+ sets of questions, or different lenses, for viewing a game’s design, encompassing diverse fields such as psychology, architecture, music, film, software engineering, theme park design, mathematics, anthropology, and more. Written by one of the world's top game designers, this book describes the deepest and most fundamental principles of game design, demonstrating how tactics used in board, card, and athletic games also work in video games. It provides practical instruction on creating world-class games that will be played again and again. View it here. A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing, by Joel Dreskin Marketing is an essential but too frequently overlooked or minimized component of the release plan for indie games. A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing provides you with the tools needed to build visibility and sell your indie games. With special focus on those developers with small budgets and limited staff and resources, this book is packed with tangible recommendations and techniques that you can put to use immediately. As a seasoned professional of the indie game arena, author Joel Dreskin gives you insight into practical, real-world experiences of marketing numerous successful games and also provides stories of the failures. View it here. An Architectural Approach to Level Design This is one of the first books to integrate architectural and spatial design theory with the field of level design. The book presents architectural techniques and theories for level designers to use in their own work. It connects architecture and level design in different ways that address the practical elements of how designers construct space and the experiential elements of how and why humans interact with this space. Throughout the text, readers learn skills for spatial layout, evoking emotion through gamespaces, and creating better levels through architectural theory. View it here. Learn more and download the ebook by clicking here. Did you know? GameDev.net and CRC Press also recently teamed up to bring GDNet+ Members up to a 20% discount on all CRC Press books. Learn more about this and other benefits here.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
chandlerp

Problem computing GJK support points

4 posts in this topic

I'm trying to implement the GJK algorithm but am having difficulty calculating the support points. For my test case I am using equally size boxes stacked on top of each other, with box 2 at the origin and box 1 translated 10 units on the Y axis.

[CODE]
____
| 1 |
|____|
| 2 |
|____|
[/CODE]

I start with a search direction of ( 0, 1 ) which finds the support points:
Box 1 - ( 5, 15 )
Box 2 - ( 5, -5 )

This yields the GJK support point of ( 5, 15 ) - ( 5, -5 ) == ( 0, 20 ). The Y term is correct but the X term is obviously wrong; the correct point on the Minkowski difference is ( 20, 20 ). This is found if Box 2's vertex at ( -5, -5 ) is used, but because both ( 5, -5 ) and ( -5, -5 ) meet the max( -DtBj ) requirement it depends which vertex was added to the hull first.

Question is how to guarantee the correct vertex is found to calculate the difference? Bonus points for a solution which works in 3 dimensions as that is the world the algorithm lives in. Edited by chandlerp
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Maybe I'm missing something, but what is wrong with (0, 20)? Although it is not one of the vertices, it [i]is[/i] on the bounds of the minkowski difference. My understanding of the GJK algorithm is that it should still work correctly.
2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='greggles' timestamp='1352084345' post='4997410']
Maybe I'm missing something, but what is wrong with (0, 20)? Although it is not one of the vertices, it [i]is[/i] on the bounds of the minkowski difference. My understanding of the GJK algorithm is that it should still work correctly.
[/quote]

Ah, yep. I think I've been staring at code and formulas too long. Thank you!
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='greggles' timestamp='1352084345' post='4997410']
Maybe I'm missing something, but what is wrong with (0, 20)? Although it is not one of the vertices, it [i]is[/i] on the bounds of the minkowski difference. My understanding of the GJK algorithm is that it should still work correctly.
[/quote]
Greggles maybe I'm misunderstanding you, what you say is correct but the vertex (0,20) or any support point is indeed one of the vertices... if you mean the vertices of the Minkowski difference.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='BobXIV' timestamp='1352385937' post='4998874']
[quote name='greggles' timestamp='1352084345' post='4997410']
Maybe I'm missing something, but what is wrong with (0, 20)? Although it is not one of the vertices, it [i]is[/i] on the bounds of the minkowski difference. My understanding of the GJK algorithm is that it should still work correctly.
[/quote]
Greggles maybe I'm misunderstanding you, what you say is correct but the vertex (0,20) or any support point is indeed one of the vertices... if you mean the vertices of the Minkowski difference.
[/quote]
I think you may have misunderstood me. Let me clarify the calculations:

The original shapes are define by vertices
(-5, 5), (5, 5), (5, 15), (-5, 15)
and
(-5, -5), (5, -5), (5, 5), (-5, 5)

We know (intuitively, but this can be determined algorithmically with more calculation) that the resultant diffence will be a square, so finding the four vertices of the difference:
(-5, 5) - (5, 5) = (-10, 0)
(5, 5) - (-5, 5) = (10, 0)
(5, 15) - (-5, -5) = (10, 20)
(-5, 15) - (5, -5) = (-10, 20)
So there is an edge from (10, 20) to (-10, 20).

(0, 20) lies in the middle of this edge instead of one of its endpoints; thus it is not a vertex.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0