@DyadGame @raiganburns It is more lenient than iterative push, and that is actually what is best about it. It feels _much_ better.
-
-
Replying to @cmuratori
@DyadGame@raiganburns The reason is because small imperfections in the collision geometry can be tunneled by this scheme, which is _good_.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @cmuratori
@DyadGame@raiganburns The iterative push scheme falls apart when you have small imperfections, and you have to solve them another way.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @cmuratori
@DyadGame@raiganburns As for post-collision velocity, you have a number of options of how you want to handle them, which we'll cover.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @cmuratori
@DyadGame@raiganburns But basically I strictly prefer p-search now if you can write it for your game. I think it's always better.3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
Replying to @sssmcgrath
@DyadGame@cmuratori (also.. I'm curious to see how to go from a point to an AABB without problems (i.e what's the distance metric?)1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @raiganburns
@raiganburns@DyadGame In The Witness I do it all with Minkowski sums, so it's just point vs. expanded world.4 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @cmuratori
@cmuratori@raiganburns@DyadGame I've never done ANY collision detection except by using minkowski sums.2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @nothings
@nothings@raiganburns@DyadGame Yeah but it's harder when it's search-in-p instead of search-in-t, because you have to know the space.2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
@nothings @raiganburns @DyadGame Maybe it's just because I'm new to search-in-p so I haven't figured out all the sweet shortcuts, though.
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.