• 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
anders211

algorithm for calulating angle between two points

6 posts in this topic

In 3d space where

(1,0,0) - right

(0,1,0) - up

(0,0,1) - forward

0 degree means that vector from two points is (0,0,1)

90 degree means that vector from two points is (-1,0,0)

180 degree means that vector from two points is (0,0,-1)

270 degree means that vector from two points is (1,0,0)

 

My algorithm for calculation angle between two points is as below (in fact I calculate angle between camera location position and camera look-at position:

float angle = calculateAngle(cam->GetCamPos(), cam->GetCamLook()) - d3d::DEGREE_90;

float calculateAngle(D3DXVECTOR3* baseVec, D3DXVECTOR3* targetVec)
{
D3DXVECTOR2 vDiff;

D3DXVECTOR2 baseVec2(baseVec->x,baseVec->z);
D3DXVECTOR2 targetVec2(targetVec->x,targetVec->z);

D3DXVec2Subtract(&vDiff, &targetVec2, &baseVec2);
D3DXVec2Normalize(&vDiff, &vDiff);
//the angle is calculated from +X axis where the center of coordinate system XZ is baseVec
if(!vDiff.y)
{
    if(vDiff.x>0)
       return 0;
    else
       return D3DX_PI;
}
else if( vDiff.y > 0.f )
    return acosf(vDiff.x);
else
     return (acosf(-vDiff.x) + D3DX_PI);
}

The results is as in the attached image:

[attachment=21083:issue0.JPG]

[attachment=21084:issue1.JPG]

Instead of angle 45-60 I have angle 4 degree, so something is wrong.

My input data GetCamPos and GetCamLook are from View Matrix. Their coordinates are also seen at the attached pictures (camera pos, camera target).

The aim is that when I press "D" ball is kicked straigt forward according to the view.

I suppose that algorithm is OK, however instead GetCamLook I should take another input data, however I don't know which one. Maybe GetCamPos + GetCamLook or something like that.

Edited by anders211
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't you just get the dot product of the two vectors? The dot product of two unit vectors is equal to the cosine of the angle between them.

 

Moreover, you should be asking yourself why you even need the angle between them. Many things can be accomplished just with some linear algebra, and no trigonometry.

Edited by phil_t
2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First some clarifications: You seem me to want to compute the angle from the principal z direction to the look direction vector, in the x-z plane, and in the counter-clockwise manner.  Notice that this is not the same as computing the angle between the difference from the origin to the camera position and the difference from the origin to the look-at position (as you do in the OP). Saying "the angle between" is not direction dependent, i.e. gives the same result if the look vector is e.g. 45° left or 45° right to the axis. In such a case the dot product can be used, as phil_t has mentioned. However, in the OP you make a distinction between (+1,0,0) to result in 90° and (-1,0,0) to result in 270°, so the following method may be better suited...

 

The look vector is a direction vector. You can extract it from the camera matrix (notice that this is the inverse of the view matrix). Or you can compute it as difference from the camera position to the view at position.

 

The atan2 function can be used to compute the angle (in radian) from the x and z components of the said look vector relative to a principal z axis. The question to answer is whether to use atan2(x, z) or atan2(z, x), and whether one of the components need to be negated. Without having proven it, I assume atan2(-x, z) would do the job (please check twice).

 

The result of atan2 is in [+pi,-pi), so you need to add 2pi if the atan2 itself is negative if you actually need [0,2pi) for some reason. Since you want to have the angle in degrees, you further have to transform it, accordingly, of course.

 

 

However, as phil_t has mentioned, you perhaps (I tend to say "probably" yet) do not need to compute the angle at all. It is often better to use direction vectors directly.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


The aim is that when I press "D" ball is kicked straigt forward according to the view.

 

If that's all you need, then just use the look vector (look at pos - camera pos). That's the direction your ball needs to go.

 

I have a feeling that's not what you want though. Maybe you want it to go roughly in the direction the viewer is looking, but at a specific angle above the ground plane?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First some clarifications: You seem me to want to compute the angle from the principal z direction to the look direction vector, in the x-z plane, and in the counter-clockwise manner.  Notice that this is not the same as computing the angle between the difference from the origin to the camera position and the difference from the origin to the look-at position (as you do in the OP). Saying "the angle between" is not direction dependent, i.e. gives the same result if the look vector is e.g. 45° left or 45° right to the axis. In such a case the dot product can be used, as phil_t has mentioned. However, in the OP you make a distinction between (+1,0,0) to result in 90° and (-1,0,0) to result in 270°, so the following method may be better suited...

 

The look vector is a direction vector. You can extract it from the camera matrix (notice that this is the inverse of the view matrix). Or you can compute it as difference from the camera position to the view at position.

 

The atan2 function can be used to compute the angle (in radian) from the x and z components of the said look vector relative to a principal z axis. The question to answer is whether to use atan2(x, z) or atan2(z, x), and whether one of the components need to be negated. Without having proven it, I assume atan2(-x, z) would do the job (please check twice).

 

The result of atan2 is in [+pi,-pi), so you need to add 2pi if the atan2 itself is negative if you actually need [0,2pi) for some reason. Since you want to have the angle in degrees, you further have to transform it, accordingly, of course.

Correction: you would need to add PI, not 2pi, to transform an interval ranging from from -pi..pi, to the range of 0..2pi. In general to convert from a signed -n..n, range  to an unsigned 0..2n range add 1/2 the range, 1n in this case, or 1pi in the situation above.

-1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Correction: you would need to add PI, not 2pi, to transform an interval ranging from from -pi..pi, to the range of 0..2pi. In general to convert from a signed -n..n, range  to an unsigned 0..2n range add 1/2 the range, 1n in this case, or 1pi in the situation above.

The transform I mentioned is not linear: With atan2 giving you angles in the range [+pi,-pi) where [+pi,0] is as desired, but (0,-pi) should be (2pi,pi) instead, you have to add 2pi for all resulting angles less than 0. As pseudo code:

    result := angle < 0 ? 2pi+angle : angle   w/   angle := atan2(-x, z)

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 


Correction: you would need to add PI, not 2pi, to transform an interval ranging from from -pi..pi, to the range of 0..2pi. In general to convert from a signed -n..n, range  to an unsigned 0..2n range add 1/2 the range, 1n in this case, or 1pi in the situation above.

The transform I mentioned is not linear: With atan2 giving you angles in the range [+pi,-pi) where [+pi,0] is as desired, but (0,-pi) should be (2pi,pi) instead, you have to add 2pi for all resulting angles less than 0. As pseudo code:

    result := angle < 0 ? 2pi+angle : angle   w/   angle := atan2(-x, z)

 

Some day I'll learn not to spout my mouth off before coffee time :) Thanks for the correction on my correction.

1

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