• 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.

Mr_Nick

Members
  • Content count

    8
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

242 Neutral

About Mr_Nick

  • Rank
    Newbie
  1. Hi bpj1138, yes it says that there should always be a solution in the frictionless case (which Im currently [trying] to implement) but not always for the friction case.
  2. Thanks for you're reply. Think I understand. It was just that in Coutinho's book, it said that after contact forces had been resolved, you can integrate to the end of the time step and no interpenetration will have occured. I guess he meant to add 'at that particular point on the body'? If that's the case I can see also why its necessary to use polytopes, as with the smooth sphere it would seem that in the above mentioned case that the simulation would be stuck in an infinite loop (because in the above case no state changes are made, the ball goes on to penetrate the plane, exactly as in the previous step, and then the system backs up the ball to the time of contact, and repeats the resolution - if that makes sense?). Either way thanks a lot think Ive had a big conceptual spoon up.
  3. Hey Inferiarum, wow thats a really good point they do use convex polyhedra whereas I was using a perfect sphere. Guess Ill have to bite the bullet and implement a general intersection test for trimeshes. Im thinking either V-clip or GJK.. any recommendations? Still, even if it were a polytope, the force required still wouldn't be enough in one go, it would take 1 or more iterations of the response algorithm to prevent penetration. Does that sound right? (I was previously under the impression that once the force was calculated, it would at least prevent penetration until the end of the time step). Anyway thanks alot Inferiarum
  4. Yeah thats basically what I meant. I know what its like being rusty but you'll soon be fluent in it. As I said, look at the Edxcel (or other body) specs as they briefly summarise the subjects covered so you can choose what modules you'd like to study, as well as what modules are compulsory. I just saw on the Edxcel website they have an 'ask the expert' service now. Also they may have distance/evening learning courses for the maths. Cambridge learning mite also be worth a look. The titles of the books Edxcel specifies are the same as the module names so you can't go wrong. It's difficult for info to actually stick if you just work through summary booklets. You're own notes will be more useful to you, and the act of writing stuff down in itself really helps stuff stick. If I remember, the pure/core modules cover a lot on calculus; especially for calculating areas, volumes (& a zillion other things). If you like maths, its really interesting. The decision maths modules are probably the most straight forward to learn. Everything is explained in an algorithmic way. So thats more about memorising stuff. I did 1 year of a maths/physics/comp science degree, and it was stuff related to the decision maths that came up in comp science, so yeah it would certainly help improve programming. I dont think the mechanics modules introduce vectors until module 3. Before that its more distance & angle. At least with self taught, you can pick and choose what modules to do exams in Jan & May, as well as spread the A-level out if need be. Its much easier to revise if you do say 2 exams in Jan, and 4 in May. You can book exams through a company called 'Pearson VUE'. They have places all over the UK. When I did, I basically had a whole room to myself (apart from once when there was a hot girl ) @BenS1, the only place Ive seen you can do further maths is if you went to a 6th form college. Otherwise you'll have to go down the self-taught route (which only requires slightly more self-organisation than distance learning). Also if you're interested, you can do 3 A-levels in maths; maths, further maths, further maths additional. Is it possible you could do a 1-year foundation (distance) degree?
  5. Hi, since no one has replied (though Im greatful for the number of views), I thought I'd clarify the situation. A ball is in contact with a plane. At the contact point, the relative velocity along the contact normal is zero. The ball's centre of mass (COM) has accn of -g. The ball is spinning at such a rate that at the contact point, the centripetal accn cancels out the gravitational accn. So the calculated contact force to prevent penetration of the point is zero. Obviously, this will not prevent the ball penetrating the plane. I've now looked at the equations by Baraff, Eberly and Coutinho and all get this result of zero contact force. What am I doing wrong? Do I ignore centripetal accn (even though the above authors don't)? Is it simply an unavoidable situation that I'll to code for? Could anyone do an example calculation for me?
  6. Sorry for late reply I got A's in both cases 89% for distance learnng and 88% self taught (not statistically significant!) I actually got a B at GCSE that i'd done 4 & 5 years earlier. It really depends on your strongest learning style. After a while with the distance learning I found I very rarely needed help hence the reason I dropped it. Are you working full-time/part-time/unemployed? If you don't have much time it might be best to get a tutor. I was only p/t so getting stuck wasn't much of a prob. Of course you could make use of forums like this if you get stuck. What level are you at now? Have you done any graphics/physics programming? If some of the pure/core modules and mechanics modules will be a doddle. There might be better distance learners than the NEC so I can't help you with which to choose. If you go self taught youll have near complete control over which modules you choose. Either way you'll spend most of your time learning from the text. 'Fraid I threw out my stuff when I went to uni but I was sent the texts, a couple of work books to summarise things and practice stuff, and coursework sheets. However, when I did further maths, the Edexcel website provides summary formula's etc and practice/past papers (invaluable - cant state that enough). In both cases, it was the practice papers that I found to be the best gauge of my progress. Also the specs tell you specifaclly what you need to know for the exam. If you just want to try things out self-taught, do this: Go to an exam board website (Edxcel, AQA etc). Get the module specs for A-level maths. Pick 1 or 2 modules that are part of A-level maths (unless things have changed they're called the 'core' modules). Buy the required texts (usually 1 book for each module) Work through the books. Do past/practice papers after. If you'll feeling confident near xmas, book to take the exams in January. Then you should know if self taught works. If not, you might (got no idea) have to wait till following september to embark with distance learning. Anyway, if its programming in general you're looking to enhance, Id highly recommend the 'decision maths' modules [search amazon 'decision maths heineman']. They cover stuff like binary searches, algorithms for bin packing, finding the shortest route across a network of nodes. (also useful for AI) If its physics, then the mechanics modules and pure/core modules. Oh and statistics module 1 is an easy way to get some marks. You can re-take modules and you get the higher mark of the 2 modules. If you go self-taught, send me ur email and ill try and find the latest info you'll need (else Ill some old pdf's). Remember, maths is largely a subject you train at rather than a bunch of facts to memorise so practice practice practice! (thats what got me my A's). Read and re-read material, writing notes as you go. Do the practice questions/check your answers, then write up what you know (important for your understanding and essential for revision). That will also help it stick. If you're stuck, do the examples, side-by-side with the books examples. Its better than just reading them. So, got the time? Self-taught is fine. Time v. limited? Distance learning or you could spread the A-level over up to 3 years.
  7. Hey stitchs, I went with the National Extension College (nec.ac.uk) a few years back. I had a tutor I could talk to on the phone and would send coursework for marking every month or two. It wasn't cheap but they sent all the required books. I did A-level maths. The following year though I thought the cost of using a distance learner wasnt worth it, so when I did further maths I just looked at the exam board's website for the modules and bought the Heineman books that covered each one (they were excellent). If you prefer working from a book then I recommend it as its a lot cheaper. The exam board was Edexcel and were fine. When it comes to exams you'll want to book early to be safe. The NEC (did/does) have a list of places where you can take your exams. Goodluck!
  8. Hello, Im working through "Dynamic Simulations Of Multibody Systems" by Murilo Coutinho. Ive got a ball rigid body (B1) and a plane. I've been trying to setup the LCP problem to calculate the force require to prevent pentration. The problem is a = AF + b a >= 0 F >= 0 aF = 0 where a = relative acceletaion at the contact point (to solve) A = a constant (roughly the inverse mass at the contact point) F = relative force at the contact point (to solve) b = current relative acceleration at contact point + relative velocity x contactFrame time derivate. The ball has a gravity force of -10 units, and mass = 1 so -10 acceleration too. When there is no rotation, all works fine. But when there is rotation, the contact point on the ball gets a centrepetal acceleration so its accelertaion becomes -9. So it calculates a force of +9 to apply at the contact. But the body still has an accn of -10, so applying this force won't prevent penetration. I could just calculate the force required to prevent penetraion but that would violate the aF = 0 constraint. I've been googling all over the place the past 2 days and im nearly bald from tearing my hair out so Id be really really grateful for any help. I know someone posted a similate comment (Bastian1978) but it doesnt help me maintain the constraints which I need so I can extend the system to sovling multiple simultaneous contacts. Formule are: b = B1.netForce/B1.mass + (B1.inertia^-1 * B1.Torque + B1.angualMomentum X B1.W) X r1 + B1.W X (B1.W X r1); + (B1.V + B1.W X r1) * (coordFrame time derivate) A = (I * B1.invMass) - (x1 * B1.inertia^-1 * x1); where: r1 = contactPoint - B1.centre of mass x1 = r1.skewSymmetric I = identity matrix The final term of 'b' is zero as the contactFrame remains stationary.