Kastor372

Members
  • Content count

    14
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

160 Neutral

About Kastor372

  • Rank
    Member
  1. Yea, okay--that could work. But, I just had a thought yesterday. Isnt the motion of an object with angular velocity about its center of mass, a spiral. If that could be defined, then what would be the intersection point of a spiral with a plane.
  2. [attachment=20802:rotation.png]   Alright, I have drawn an image. Yes this is for collision detection. What I want to determine is how much an object would rotate before it hits the plane.   All while the vertices(point A, and B) of the rigid body have an angular velocity, and the center of mass is traveling with a linear velocity.   So the image is of a stick thrown with a certain angular velocity, and a certain linear velocity. What is the number of rotations it would take for the object to hit the plane in front of it? Essentially, how big has theta become?
  3. So, I have been studying angular velocity and linear velocity--and I want to use this information determine if a ray intersects a plane. linear velocity = dp/dt angular velocity = d?/dt thus for linear velocity, you have a point in space: the intersection point could be described as I = Po + rV (Po) position initial, (I) position final, (V) linear velocity vector, (r) a scalar then, eloquently you can set it to the plane equation (Pp) point on plane, (Np) normal of plane (I - Pp)*Np = 0 I*Np -Pp*Np = 0 by replacing I for the above equation (Po + rV)*Np -Pp*Np = 0 when worked out you can find r thus Po plus the velocity vector times a certain scalar will get you the intersection point. How will this change if you are dealing with angular velocities. If you guys remember, rotation always stumps me this guy, in his blog: http://www.wildbunny.co.uk/blog/2011.../#comment-3697 is talking about adding them together if you have certain info...i tried but I am extremely lost. Thanks for your time.
  4. Yeah, but that would be after I have it running like silk on my computer first...for free; No? :/
  5. I also dont want to use another engine just because I want to learn all these things, rather than let my game be ruled by Unity ya no...and I dont have that kinda money to blow :P
  6. Thanks alot for all the help, eveytime I come on here with a question I feel like I learn so much more. I had no idea about profiler or Visual VM. Thanks alot! Cant wait to use it :D
  7. Sweet, thanks alot. I am programming in Java and I am not really tageting any hardware at this moment, just designing a decent engine. What I want to do eventually is have the game running on conoles; primarily the Wii U! Thats the idea.   Explaining both algorithms might be alittle too much to write here, but if you need 'em to decide, ill write them.
  8. Hmm those applications seem to cost money I cant seem to find a free one. Just for a quick insight, If you all had to use one which one of the operations would it be?
  9. What do you mean by profiler?
  10. Hi Kastor here.   I have two algorithms for collison detection. One uses a square root operation, the other is the same operation without it. The problem is the square root operation is only 23 operations, whilst the one without the square root is 43 operations, a whoping 20 more opertations. Bot have phases and can be broken up into parts. Which one should I go for. Should I use the one square root opeation or not?   Thanks a bunch ;)
  11. I dont feel like I am going to grasp it entriely tonight, but at least I now know of tracks and desperately want to learn more, Thank you. Is there a sitie or a pdf or some book i could read that goes into more detail in the topic of animation tracks. Thank you for your help so much.
  12. Essentially  a track is, a class that modifies a floating point value over time? So when you store the animations, per frame you are storing the change in pos3f, rotatation3f. I am using Collada and Blender, it exports animations in matrix form. So what I would need to do is decompose it into translation and rotation, matrices. Then record the change that those two transformations perform to the basis roation and translation vectors. Then when ever I am doing the animation, instead of multiplying it all through I just read the track information which is simple addition of pos3f tracks and rot3f tracks?   This sounds ingenious. If I understand you correctly, essentially this allows you to side step all the problems of interpolation. So you dont need to use quaternion interpolation or matrix interpolation, all you have to do is linearly interpolate the tracks which are simple floats.   I am understanding what you are saying properly?
  13. @AllEightUP I dont know if this niave, but essentially the game I am making is a fast pased action-fighting game where ever hit press counts. So what I would like is for the game to be fast, as in as little delay as possible between a button press. But what I would really hate to suffer are the animations. I am an animator myself and but a lot of time into my animation work and like for it to be a preserved as performacly possible. One thing I am willing to take the hit is maybe memory or even graphics. So I would like quality and performance, Essentially what it seems like what I might do is store the whole matrices for the animations. Method one would be the right choice right for maximum performace and quality?     The third option sounds temping but I dont want the performace hit.     Unless you collide it maybe with what L Spiro said.   @L Spiro What you are saying are that there are methods to reduce the memory and still have relatively high/preserved animations. I understand that part, but then you go to detest storing whole animations in the form of matrices. Which seems understandable, but then what you offer is thing I have never heard of before: tracks. What are those exactly? And what would you be storing with tracks? I know if I use dual quaternions, I would be storing quaternions--but what would I be storing with tracks.   I was planing on making the animation system by storing all the matrices per bone per animation and then upgrading to dual quaternions to get better deformations and rotations, but are tracks better than even dual quaternions or do they ensapsulate them--like animation controls? Ie like one contol cotrols the top, one controls the bottom half of the character(Animation Blending!)...what I am trying to say are waht on earth arte tracks lol   @Matis I think for performace and quality sake I would be better off doing method One and choping it down using redudancy check and maybe tracks...if i could understand them lol
  14. So, I am making a game with the help of Blender and Collada. Then I got to making the aimation system and realized that for the animations for the bones I should probably not use any interpolation in a single animation. As in, when you aniamte in blender you don't animate on every single frame. Therefore there is interpolation going on, usually cubic/beizier. However, if you are exporting the animation in Collada, should you bake the animation and then send it to your game. Becuase the later would be to export less matrices, creating a smaller file, but more computations at run time. Because instead of just doing the matrix multipications, you would also need to do an interpolation conversion. I only really see interpolation useful between animations and paramterizing animations. But an animation itself should have a full set of matrices per bone for each animation. If we can calculate it before runtime and it will always be the same, why not?   Is what I am saying make sense, or is there a huge concept that is currently flying over my head? I want to start programming this thing, but dont want to make a huge mistake resulting in me doing the whole project again. Just wanted a few pointers from people who have been doing it longer.   Thanks in advance!!  ;)