• 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
Czar05

Clarification on SAT?

4 posts in this topic

Hi, I have been reading up on the Seperating Axis Theorem, and I have some questions.

 

http://www.codezealot.org/archives/55

 

The article does a great job on explaining what the SAT is, but I want to know what axes is the author referring to exactly. Would I use the X and Y axes or make my own arbitrary axes?

 

Also the author talks about "flipping the coordinates and negating one." in orderto get the normals for the edges. What did he mean by that?

 

Thanks in advance.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The minimum set of axes you need to test are all those at right angles to the faces of the polyhedra. If none of these have an overlap the shapes are disjoint.

To get a left hand right angle vector for x, y, you simply use -y, x.

 

[EDIT - bit more info now not on phone :)]

 

Assuming 2D here, you can loop through each shape and construct a vector from each vertex to the next one (B - A, C - B etc where the vertices are in A, B, C... order). If you then do the -y, x trick you end up with vectors pointing outwards at right angles from each face. These vectors represent the axes you need to test by projecting the vertices of each shape onto them and then comparing the min-max of each projection to see if they overlap.

 

You can ignore any axes that are equivalent to those that are already being tested, including any that point in the exact opposite direction as well as those which point in the same direction. It is common to precalculate these axes so you can trim out these duplicates as a post-processing step.

Edited by Aardvajk
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the response  Aardvajk,

 

Sorry I was not clear before, I meant to ask which axes would I project my shapes edge on the X  and Y axes or on an arbitrary axes that is made up by myself.

Edited by Czar05
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the response  Aardvajk,

 

Sorry I was not clear before, I meant to ask which axes would I project my shapes edge on the X  and Y axes or on an arbitrary axes that is made up by myself.

I think Aardvajk covered that pretty well. For 2 objects in 2D, you will need to project against each face normal of each object, with the exception of normals that are colinear with another normal. For a Triangle, you would have 3 axii, each perpendicular to one of the triangle's edges. For a square, you have 2 axii, the local X and Y, as the other 2 normals are -x and -y, which are collinear with their respective inverses.

Edited by Burnt_Fyr
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's see if a picture helps.

 

sat.jpg

 

The red lines are the normals of each of the faces of the shapes, so in this case you have the three for the triangle and the two red for the square. You should be able to understand that the two green lines are not also required as they are directly opposite the existing red lines for the square.

 

So the set of axes to test is the total set of face normals of the two shapes, less any that are the same as or directly opposite the ones already being tested. It can be proven mathematically by more clever bods than I that if these axes are all without overlap, there exist no axes with an overlap therefore the shapes are disjoint.

Edited by Aardvajk
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