• 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
ultramailman

AABB format

7 posts in this topic

I've seen these two types of AABB:
struct aabb1{
    int x, y;
    int width, height;
}

struct aabb2{
    int left;
    int up;
    int right;
    int down;
}
I am used to the first type (it's what SDL uses), but recently I've encountered the second type, and the symmetry of it seems pretty attractive.

Which format for AABB is more commonly used?
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've seen these two types of AABB:

struct aabb1{
    int x, y;
    int width, height;
}

struct aabb2{
    int left;
    int up;
    int right;
    int down;
}
I am used to the first type (it's what SDL uses), but recently I've encountered the second type, and the symmetry of it seems pretty attractive.

Which format for AABB is more commonly used?

Whichever is more appropriate to your needs.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The first kind can be moved around more easily, the second kind skips a little extra math during collision detection.

You can more or less pick one and stick with it. Hodge hit it on the head, really.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh, good point. They are kind of like the complement of the each other, and I just can't have the best of both worlds, eh.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe it will help you to know how Bullet deals with the problem.

The box itself only has "half-dimensions" and is always origin-centered. Somithing like

struct AABB {
  int hwidth, hheight;
}; 

 

This box is used to create rigid bodies, which provide a transform. In line of concept, it's like

AABB box(2, 3);
int pos[2] = {52, 37};
CollisionBody *cb = NewCollisionBody(box, pos);

 

I'm omitting rotations to make this super-extra-easy to understand.

I hope this will help you in taking a decision.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe it will help you to know how Bullet deals with the problem.
The box itself only has "half-dimensions" and is always origin-centered. Somithing like

struct AABB {
  int hwidth, hheight;
}; 
 
This box is used to create rigid bodies, which provide a transform. In line of concept, it's like
AABB box(2, 3);
int pos[2] = {52, 37};
CollisionBody *cb = NewCollisionBody(box, pos);
 
I'm omitting rotations to make this super-extra-easy to understand.
I hope this will help you in taking a decision.


Wow, another way to represent AABB. Thanks for sharing.

Is the AABB also separated into "position" and "description" inside the CollisionBody object, or are they only used as parameters for the object creation? Edited by ultramailman
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bullet has two separated notions of Collision Shapes and Rigid Bodies (previously, Collision Objects).

While the CS itself is AABB, after using it for a rigid body, it is oriented.

 

The rigid body contains a pointer to the shape used to create it and a transform, besides other things such as mass and the current state. So, yes, I'd say the information is present and separated.

 

There are another few creation parameters which are not stored in the rigid body either, but I guess they're not relevant for the discussion.

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