@DyadGame @raiganburns @cmuratori which you might in some kind of game about wall-jumping, say.
-
-
Replying to @nothings
@nothings@DyadGame@raiganburns If you zero all momentum on collision, then you really don't need a search in t or p, though.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @cmuratori
@cmuratori@DyadGame@raiganburns I was pointing out a case in the limit. The same applies when you half the lateral momentum, etc.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @nothings
@cmuratori@DyadGame@raiganburns The iterative approach works whether you're zeroing the momentum or not. It doesn't require extra logic.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @nothings
@nothings@DyadGame@raiganburns Yes. This is for "frictionless walls", which is how all walls are in these sorts of games AFAIK.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @cmuratori
@nothings@DyadGame@raiganburns (ie., FPSes, or 2D action adventure, etc.)1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @cmuratori
@nothings@DyadGame@raiganburns If you wanted walls that had friction, I'd have to think about it. It might be that it still works.2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @cmuratori
@cmuratori@DyadGame@raiganburns Also, don't call split-time-at-collision "iterative time search", because that refers to a something else.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @nothings
@nothings@DyadGame@raiganburns But it _is_ an iterative time search.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @cmuratori
@nothings@DyadGame@raiganburns And it's also shitty :P1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
@nothings @DyadGame @raiganburns I could call it "shitty iterative time search" if you need an extra adjective to disambiguate it.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.