• 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
Ziath

Weird tiled effect with calculating Normals, TRIANGLE_STRIPS

3 posts in this topic


Hello all. I've made a height map program and i'm trying to calculate normals for each vertex. I've tried searching for a solution all morning but i can not figure out the error in my code. I am getting a weird tiled effect as you can see in the picture below.. I'm using triangle strips to render a 400 by 400 vertice plane. I have set all y values to 0 for this post. If anyone could help, and point out whats wrong, that would be awesome tongue.png

 

http://imgur.com/ICeksXX

 

public void calculateNormals() {
	
		for (int n = 0; n < 400*200; n++) {
			float x1 = vBuffer.get(n + 0);
			float y1 = vBuffer.get(n + 1); 
			float z1 = vBuffer.get(n + 2);	
				
			float x2 = vBuffer.get(n + 3); 
			float y2 = vBuffer.get(n + 4); 
			float z2 = vBuffer.get(n + 5); 
				 
			float x3 = vBuffer.get(n + 6); 
			float y3 = vBuffer.get(n + 7);
			float z3 = vBuffer.get(n + 8); 
				
			float Ux = (x2 - x1);
			float Uy = (y2 - y1);
			float Uz = (z2 - z1);
				
			float Vx = (x3 - x1);
			float Vy = (y3 - y1);
			float Vz = (z3 - z1);

			float Nx = Uy*Vz - Uz*Vy;
			float Ny = Uz*Vx - Ux*Vz;
			float Nz = Ux*Vy - Uy*Vx;
				
			float normLength = (float)Math.sqrt(Math.pow(Nx,2) + Math.pow(Ny,2) + Math.pow(Nz,2));
			if(normLength == 0){
				Nx = 0;
				Ny = 0;
				Nz = 0;
			}else{
				Nx /= normLength;
			    Ny /= normLength;
			    Nz /= normLength;
			}
			
			if ((n %2)==0){
				
				nBuffer.put(Nx).put(Ny).put(Nz);
				
			}
			else{
				
				nBuffer.put(-Nx).put(-Ny).put(-Nz);
				
			}
			
		
		}
	
		this.nBuffer.flip();
	}
	
Edited by Ziath
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shouldn't it be vBuffer.get(3*n+0), and so on?

 

I don't think so, each point needs to calculate its near points: p3-p1 p2-p1, right? so each time it runs, the normal calculation shifts up by one point.

 

Never mind. I need my coffee. haha. but why is it that it needs to be multiplied by 3?

 

                                                       // first set // second // third.. and so on
                        float x1 = vBuffer.get(n + 0); // 0 // 1 // 2
			float y1 = vBuffer.get(n + 1); // 1 // 2 // 3
			float z1 = vBuffer.get(n + 2); // 2 // 3 // 4
				
			float x2 = vBuffer.get(n + 3); // 3 // 4 // 5
			float y2 = vBuffer.get(n + 4); // 4 // 5 // 6
			float z2 = vBuffer.get(n + 5); // 5 // 6 // 7
	
			float x3 = vBuffer.get(n + 6); // 6 // 7 // 8
			float y3 = vBuffer.get(n + 7); // 7 // 8 // 9
			float z3 = vBuffer.get(n + 8); // 8 // 9 // 10
Edited by Ziath
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your buffer does not index vertices, but individual components of the vertices. That is evident from the fact that you need to fetch each component by itself with consecutive indices. For that reason, the vertex n is not located at index n, but at index 3*n, 3*n+1 and 3*n+2.

 

edit: Look at it this way. If you add one to the indices in the code you posted, you will not end up with the vertices shifted one step. You will end up with the value of y1 in x1, x1 on y1, x2 in z1, and so on. To shift complete vertices, you need to shift x2 into x1, y2 into y1, and so on, and that is achieved by adding three to your indices, not by adding one.

Edited by Brother Bob
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