• 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
dworm

rectangles over rectangles

5 posts in this topic

so basically i have a list of rectangles

what i have to do is, given one of them, calculate if there is a common area (and eventually calculate it)

 

i really cant find any simplification over checking point by point, maybve im overthinking it... but isnt there some simpler math to do it?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you have a very long list, you can do better than two loops brute force by separating your list of rectangles to multiple lists of rectangles that can't overlap. Check out quad trees for more info.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thnx very much, i got it

 

i guess there is a mistake though cause the final thing

 

( P2.y = P3.y && P1.y = P4.

 

i suppose its >=  not = right...

 

 

@ ultra

how long is a long list ?

mine is like a hundred and i think it can reach maybe few hundred but never close to thousand, is that enought to justify learning quad trees?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


( P2.y = P3.y && P1.y = P4.
 
i suppose its >=  not = right...

There is a mistake there, yes.

In the comments section of the linked page you can see a user called jeff posting corrections to the simplified expressions.

 

 

As a side-note: if you need to compare values to see if they match perfectly, keep in mind that the linked page uses = for comparison, while a lot of languages use == instead.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Here's how I calculate whether a rect is overlapping in C++:
//Returns true if the two rects overlap each other (either by intersecting, or one containing the other).
bool cRect::Overlaps(const cRect &other)
{
	if(this->Right() < other.Left())
		return false;
	if(this->Left() > other.Right())
		return false;
	if(this->Bottom() < other.Top())
		return false;
	if(this->Top() > other.Bottom())
		return false;
	
	return true;
}
Where Top() returns 'y' pos, Bottom() returns (y + height), Left() returns 'x' pos, Right() rights (x + width).
Normally I just use 'x' and 'y' directly, being public members, but I like to use Left() and Top() for code readability and self-documentation of intent, when I'm also using Right() and Bottom().

Here's how I calculate what the overlapping portion is:

//Resizes the rect to contain just the portion of both rects that overlap.
//Basically, the AND'd portion of the two rects. If they aren't overlapping anything, this rect becomes empty.
void cRect::Intersect(const cRect &other)
{
    if(!this->Overlaps(other))
    {
        this->Clear();
        return;
    }
    
    int left = std::max(this->Left(), other.Left());
    int right = std::min(this->Right(), other.Right());
    
    int top = std::max(this->Top(), other.Top());
    int bottom = std::min(this->Bottom(), other.Bottom());
    
    //Recreate this rect from the new positions.
    this->FromCorners({left, top}, {right, bottom});
}
As @ultramailman says, if you have a list of 100+ rectangles, you might want to figure out which ones are near each other before doing a huge amount of more-accurate tests. But if you just a few rectangles, doing it brute-force is better. Even if you do have hundreds or thousands of rectangles, you should do it brute-force first to make sure you got it working before you try to optimize it.
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