Perfect Collision mask for physics?

New releases and general discussions.

Post » Mon Apr 21, 2008 6:56 pm

[quote="yankeesbro":3dyi2598]What about Box2d?
[url:3dyi2598]http://www.box2d.org/[/url:3dyi2598][/quote:3dyi2598]
Dont have pixel collision
B
4
S
2
G
4
Posts: 719
Reputation: 2,938

Post » Tue Apr 22, 2008 6:09 pm

I don't think any physics engine has pixel perfect collision.
Scirra Founder
B
359
S
214
G
72
Posts: 22,949
Reputation: 178,574

Post » Thu Apr 24, 2008 4:09 am

Well I suppose that's true Ashley but I think the term is relative - a lot more can be done with even a rough polygonal approximation of the shape the pixels make than can be done with a bounding box, for obvious reasons. It's basically our idea of 'perfect'.
B
3
S
2
G
4
Posts: 130
Reputation: 1,735

Post » Thu Apr 24, 2008 7:28 am

Found one.

http://physics2d.googlepages.com/
Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oecv7Cg9 ... re=related

It apparently has a method of converting a bitmap into polygons used for physics.
Moderator
B
88
S
32
G
33
Posts: 3,005
Reputation: 27,432

Post » Thu Apr 24, 2008 7:36 am

[quote="Arima":34qea076]Found one.

http://physics2d.googlepages.com/
Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oecv7Cg9 ... re=related

It apparently has a method of converting a bitmap into polygons used for physics.[/quote:34qea076]
Hmm i think you are right judging by demo video and source it have shapes like:
-Circle
-Particle
-Polygon
-?Shape?
-MultiPartPolygon
-?RaySegments?
-BitmapHelper

Yeah the last is creating polygon for certain bitmap but im afraid it doesnt concern animation or even if it would be slowing cpu/gpu too much.
B
4
S
2
G
4
Posts: 719
Reputation: 2,938

Post » Thu Apr 24, 2008 7:41 am

Good point, didn't think about animations. Don't know how fast the conversion process is - it might be possible for it to do it in real-time, but I guess there's no way to tell unless someone tries it (or emails the developer).
Moderator
B
88
S
32
G
33
Posts: 3,005
Reputation: 27,432

Post » Thu Apr 24, 2008 7:46 am

Well... believing to the comments of youtube
[color=#0000BF:1oc3x3t4]qvadi:[/color:1oc3x3t4]"But that works fast... I applied Newton for 2D physics in my game and doesn't work fast as this engine.

Good work!"

If its faster than Newton2D then it should be faster than NGD (our physics engine which is originaly for 3d :P) then it would be still good for applying this quicker engine to the Construct.
B
4
S
2
G
4
Posts: 719
Reputation: 2,938

Post » Thu Apr 24, 2008 8:05 am

It does look like a nice engine. And the source code is there, but it's C#. Isn't C# and C++ like, way different? How easy would it be for someone to make a plugin based off this source?
Moderator
B
5
S
2
G
6
Posts: 4,348
Reputation: 10,971

Post » Thu Apr 24, 2008 8:43 am

If it's C#, impossible :(
B
3
S
2
G
5
Posts: 1,777
Reputation: 5,529

Post » Thu Apr 24, 2008 3:14 pm

Drat. :(
Moderator
B
88
S
32
G
33
Posts: 3,005
Reputation: 27,432

PreviousNext

Return to Construct Classic Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests