Pages: 1 2 [3]  All   Go Down

Author Topic: Adding Physics into Tremulous  (Read 34748 times)

David

  • Spam Killer
  • *
  • Posts: 3543
  • Turrets: +249/-273
Re: Adding Physics into Tremulous
« Reply #60 on: March 11, 2009, 04:11:42 pm »
Q3 uses AABB's for collision detection, which are really fast.  To get physics, then you would need more accurate BB's, and that's going to slow things down, a lot.  Trem is already CPU bound, so IMO that's a bad idea.
Breakables is kinda pointless without awesome physics, but as has already been mentioned, trem already has gibs, so someone go code it already.
Logged
Any maps not in the MG repo?  Email me or come to irc.freenode.net/#mg.
--
My words are mine and mine alone.  I can't speak for anyone else, and there is no one who can speak for me.  If I ever make a post that gives the opinions or positions of other users or groups, then they will be clearly labeled as such.
I'm disappointed that people's past actions have forced me to state what should be obvious.
I am not a dev.  Nothing I say counts for anything.

Amanieu

  • Posts: 647
  • Turrets: +135/-83
    • Amanieu
Re: Adding Physics into Tremulous
« Reply #61 on: March 11, 2009, 05:28:30 pm »
2 things to do that shouldn't take up any more CPU than is currently used:
1 - Remove the restriction that the base of a BB must be square.
2 - Remove the restriction that BBs must be axis-aligned.

Breakables are easy to do, as David said, just do like buildables (and it has been done).

Bone-based hitboxes (used only for hit detection, movement is still done with a normal BB) can be implemented separately from the collision detection engine in the game.

What I would really want to see though is to have enough physics to have a barrel fall over, roll on a slope and fly through the air.
Logged
Quote
< kevlarman> zakk is getting his patches from shady frenchmen on irc
< kevlarman> this can't be a good sign :P

David

  • Spam Killer
  • *
  • Posts: 3543
  • Turrets: +249/-273
Re: Adding Physics into Tremulous
« Reply #62 on: March 11, 2009, 06:27:43 pm »
Making the bottom of a box not square shouldn't be hard.  Making them not axis-aligned, will slow things down a lot.
Logged
Any maps not in the MG repo?  Email me or come to irc.freenode.net/#mg.
--
My words are mine and mine alone.  I can't speak for anyone else, and there is no one who can speak for me.  If I ever make a post that gives the opinions or positions of other users or groups, then they will be clearly labeled as such.
I'm disappointed that people's past actions have forced me to state what should be obvious.
I am not a dev.  Nothing I say counts for anything.

Kaleo

  • Posts: 2098
  • Turrets: +176/-220
    • KaleoDesign
Re: Adding Physics into Tremulous
« Reply #63 on: March 12, 2009, 06:08:17 am »
Quote from: mooseberry on March 11, 2009, 04:15:49 am
Getting a new OS will have pretty much zero affect on tremulous' performance. Don't sound so stupid, it hurts.

Unless you're switching to or from Vista on an older machine.
Logged
Quote from: Stannum
Thou canst not kill that which doth not live,
but you can blow it into chunky kibbles!
I has a cookie, and u can has a cookie, but i no givs u mai cookie...

Winnie the Pooh

  • Posts: 442
  • Turrets: +45/-85
Re: Adding Physics into Tremulous
« Reply #64 on: March 12, 2009, 07:37:18 am »
All that is needed is to mod the animated door entity so that it creates a one-way animation triggered by a shot/chomp.
Nobody want's to animate their own boxes and crates, so an easier method must be developed. What method does the grenade use? Could we just put
Code: [Select]
box.visible = false and create randomly textured shards that bounce using te grenade's physics.

I can tell by the looks on your face that that isn't going to work.

How would we do it then?
Logged
Quote
I also realize that this is the internet, but even more so this is the forum for a video game on an internet, then even beyond that this is TREMULOUS forums the Satan version of all video game forums for a video game that is ON the internet.

Amanieu

  • Posts: 647
  • Turrets: +135/-83
    • Amanieu
Re: Adding Physics into Tremulous
« Reply #65 on: March 12, 2009, 09:47:07 am »
Quote from: David on March 11, 2009, 06:27:43 pm
Making them not axis-aligned, will slow things down a lot.
Map brushes can be non axis-aligned. Just do the same thing for entity BBs.
Logged
Quote
< kevlarman> zakk is getting his patches from shady frenchmen on irc
< kevlarman> this can't be a good sign :P

gimhael

  • Posts: 546
  • Turrets: +70/-16
Re: Adding Physics into Tremulous
« Reply #66 on: March 12, 2009, 10:38:19 am »
Quote from: Amanieu on March 12, 2009, 09:47:07 am
Quote from: David on March 11, 2009, 06:27:43 pm
Making them not axis-aligned, will slow things down a lot.
Map brushes can be non axis-aligned. Just do the same thing for entity BBs.

Q3 can only do AABB vs BSP collision tests, not BSP vs BSP. Even if it wants to check entity-entity collisions one of the entities is converted to a temporary BSP (see CM_TempBoxModel) and then the common AABB vs BSP test is used.
(In fact I think that a specialized AABB vs AABB trace could speed up Tremulous quite a bit, because the number of entities is relatively high in Trem, but this would require a new syscall and qvm changes etc.)
Logged

googles

  • Posts: 219
  • Turrets: +30/-19
Re: Adding Physics into Tremulous
« Reply #67 on: March 13, 2009, 01:46:07 am »
Just to note: Maps are just a set of entities, that are staticly placed, so you *can* destroy them
Logged

Bissig

  • Posts: 1309
  • Turrets: +103/-131
Re: Adding Physics into Tremulous
« Reply #68 on: March 13, 2009, 02:44:02 am »
Quote from: googles on March 13, 2009, 01:46:07 am
Just to note: Maps are just a set of entities, that are staticly placed, so you *can* destroy them

Can haz BLOWN UP train?
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3]  All   Go Up