@cmuratori @raiganburns I'm *VERY* skeptical =)
-
-
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 -
Replying to @cmuratori
@cmuratori@raiganburns@DyadGame Right, well, one way to do that is the Quake way where you actually build a non-overlapping Mink. sum.4 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @nothings
@cmuratori@raiganburns@DyadGame But that requires CSG so it seems pretty frightening, at least in the 3D case.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @nothings
@nothings@raiganburns@DyadGame Yeah the problem there is that you have to do it for everything, AFAICT. Like including the moving stuff.1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @cmuratori
@nothings@raiganburns@DyadGame In The Witness it's no big deal because we _had_ to do all that stuff because Jon didn't want pre-comp.1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @cmuratori
@nothings@raiganburns@DyadGame So it's "free" to do search-in-p because we already had to do run-time CSG for all the polygon soup.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
@nothings @raiganburns @DyadGame But if you'r'e _not_ in that situation, well, it seems like it's too expensive. I don't know. We'll see.
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.