• Advertisement
  • Popular Tags

  • Popular Now

  • Advertisement
  • Similar Content

    • By Masson
      Name: Dodging Dots
      Category: Arcade/Casual
      Come up with your own strategy. Collect myriads of dots and maneuver from the coming blocks. Beware! There gonna be lots of them!
      The minimalistic world will captivate you for a long time. Try out!
      Use upgrades to improve your game experience 🎮 Increase the velocity 🏄 of the dots to avoid the avalanche of blocks. Or you can increase the number of falling boosters to break 💥 through it, the choice is yours! Nice color shades that change throughout the game Ongoing game. Original soundtrack 🎧 Integration with Google Play Games Compete with other players 🏆 18 achievements to warm up your interest 🔥 Simple control, play with one finger Google Play: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.groovin.blocks.delicate.survive.gameplay
      Feel free to leave comments. We really interested in improving this product and appreciate your support.
    • By Januario
      Hey guys!,
      So, I'm basically working on an explorer right now.
      It should, as the name suggests, explore the entire thing, the most efficient way possible.
      Your character has vision around you, of, 10x10. The map is much bigger, 100x100. However, it can't just go straight from a corner to another, because: The tiles can be an occupied, or un-occupied one. You can add weights to the tiles, so feel free to use this in your advantage (let's say, adding an extra weight to a visited tile so you can compare visited against non-visited ones). You can use the Pathfinder I'm using, based on the A* algorithm. So, I could be wrong, but by basic logic, I assumed that the "fastest way" to explore the entire thing, is answering the question "What is the nearest tile that I can walk in, that is not occupied and that can reveal as much fog-of-war (unvisited tile) as possible?"...
      My questions are:
      1) Is my question correct? is that really the best way to explore the entire map? 2) If so, what's the best way to know "which is the tile that could reveal the most fog of war"? Once I get the tile that reveals the most fog of war possible, then I just throw the pathfinder to it.
      But I'm having problems doing a good way to achieve that :'( 
      I hope you guys can help me on this one! 
      Thank you
    • By khawk
      Pong Challenge!
      Make a single player Pong, with a twist. 

      Game Requirements
      The game must have: Start screen Key to return to the start screen Score system AI Player Graphics at least for the UI and players Sound effects for ball and paddle and when a player scores A unique gameplay element that makes your Pong game stand out from others The actual gameplay must happen on a single screen (no camera translation) Art Requirements
      The game must be 2D The art must be your own Duration
      4 weeks - November 1, 2017 to November 30, 2017
      Post on this thread your entries:
      Link to the executable (specifying the platform) Screenshots: if the screenshots are too big, post just a few, if they are small, you can post more, just don't take the entire space A small post-mortem in a GameDev.net Blog, with a link posted in this thread, is encouraged, where you can share what went right, what went wrong, or just share a nifty trick Source-code link is encouraged
    • By mouhamedm
      What I must do in the event editor to add score????

  • Advertisement
  • Advertisement

continuous 2D edge-edge collisions.

Recommended Posts

I'm having trouble programming a collision system, I had one working reasonably well when only velocity was being handled, or only rotation is being handled, by using light casting algorithms at the verticies, treating one object as stationary, and the other with the sum of the movements. But I can't figure out how have velocity, scaling, rotation, and bounding box changes due to the frame of the sprite changing.  Typically, when I find some instructions there isn't any obvious way to apply it to the bounding box changing.

I'm also unsure if GJK is applicable to this situation, because the objects are meant to stay inside the level geometry, rather than outside of it (this makes visibility testing faster). More specifically, the level is comprised of convex quads, where each edge has a permeability, if that permeability is higher than the object solidity the object doesn't check for collision against it.

So essentially, for each side of the object's bounding box, I have a line segment S1 representing the edge of the object at the start of the tick, and a line segment S2 representing the end of the tick, and a line segment R representing the edge of the level geometry to test collision against.

It occurred to me that I could look for intersections between the face formed by S1 and S2, and the plane formed by R, but that turned out to not be all that helpful.

What's a good way to handle this?

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems there is no other way than to also test all lines between previous vertex positions and new vertex positions

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

If I test the lines between the previous and new vertex positions, then wouldn't the corner of the level colliding with the edge of the object not be detectable?

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

  • Advertisement