The Ur-Quan Masters Home Page Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
November 30, 2021, 08:15:43 pm
Home Help Search Login Register
News: Paul & Fred have reached a settlement with Stardock!

+  The Ur-Quan Masters Discussion Forum
|-+  The Ur-Quan Masters Re-Release
| |-+  Starbase Café (Moderator: Death 999)
| | |-+  My Game So Far
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 Print
Author Topic: My Game So Far  (Read 19937 times)
JonoPorter
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 656


Don't mess with the US.


View Profile WWW
Re: My Game So Far
« Reply #15 on: September 15, 2005, 07:54:12 am »

awesome im still learnin to program and to see a game like this bein made from scratch thats cool keep up the good work were rootin for u

Thanks for the encouragement.

I’m just confused why so few of the registered users have posted.
It seams they are not interested in what I’m working on.  Cry
Logged

There are none so blind as those who will not see. — Jonathan Swift

My Remake of UQM.
My 2D physics engine
Both are written in C#.
Dean
Guest


Email
Re: My Game So Far
« Reply #16 on: September 15, 2005, 08:02:20 am »

Well, I WAS registered, then promptly forgot my password. Does that make you feel better?  Wink

Seriously, this is INCREDIBLE work. Once you whack it on PlanetSourceCode.com and SourceForge.net I can assure you that the tips, suggestions, praise and marriage proposals will come flooding in  Grin.

- Dean
Logged
TiLT
*Smell* controller
****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 260


To boldly go where no Spathi has dared go before


View Profile WWW
Re: My Game So Far
« Reply #17 on: September 15, 2005, 08:50:17 am »

I'm eagerly reading this thread every day. I'm just the kind of poster who almost never posts. I'm sure there are plenty others like me.
Logged
harth1026
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 142



View Profile WWW
Re: My Game So Far
« Reply #18 on: September 15, 2005, 01:30:05 pm »

I too am working on an SC style game.  And I eagerly await the day that I can present cool stuff like you did.  Keep up the good work.
Logged
Deus Siddis
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1387



View Profile
Re: My Game So Far
« Reply #19 on: September 15, 2005, 03:33:39 pm »

"I'm eagerly reading this thread every day. I'm just the kind of poster who almost never posts. I'm sure there are plenty others like me."

Yes, like me. Smiley

I've been watching this thread, but have not posted on it because I'm on a posting diet. My profile says I post an average of 3 times a day, which is like 10 times more than the other profiles. This would seem to indicate that I have no life, so in order to get one I must lower my average. The problem is that by analyzing the post counts of profiles I have again given a boost to the theory that I am lifeless.

So you see, I think your game looks interesting, but I'm just really busy fighting for my life.
Logged
meep-eep
Forum Admin
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2847



View Profile
Re: My Game So Far
« Reply #20 on: September 15, 2005, 03:58:46 pm »

I’m just confused why so few of the registered users have posted.
It seams they are not interested in what I’m working on.  Cry
There's not really much for me to say accept that it looks good, and I'd be interested to see where you'll be using this engine for.

About hardware acceleration (both graphics and physics), a plane in 3D will be 2D, and as such there may be some opportunities to make use of 3D acceleration. Just set the z coordinate to 0. Now the question is how much you'll actually win by that, as there will be extra calculations on the z coordinate which are unnecessary.
UQM can use OpenGL for hardware acceleration. I don't really know much about it, but if I'm not mistaken, bitmaps are used as textures, and OpenGL is just used for scaling.
Logged

“When Juffo-Wup is complete
when at last there is no Void, no Non
when the Creators return
then we can finally rest.”
JonoPorter
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 656


Don't mess with the US.


View Profile WWW
Re: My Game So Far
« Reply #21 on: September 16, 2005, 08:35:41 am »

About hardware acceleration (both graphics and physics), a plane in 3D will be 2D, and as such there may be some opportunities to make use of 3D acceleration. Just set the z coordinate to 0. Now the question is how much you'll actually win by that, as there will be extra calculations on the z coordinate which are unnecessary.

I’m pretty sure the bulk of the physics processor will be dedicated to matrix math, since most of the 3D engines I have run across have relied heavily on matrixes. My game does not have a single matrix in it so accelerating matrix math is a moot point.

 By going down to 2D physics I eliminate a lot of operations. For Addition and Subtraction operations the cost is 2/3 of 3D. With dot product the cost is 3/8 of 3D. So in the end a 3D engine does a lot more calculations then a 2D one.

Though I like speed and all I’m writing this game not to be blazing fast but to be understandable. In my game’s source code you will rarely see variables like c1 or FL2d. It ends up making some rather long lines of code but you will be able to know what its doing without having to look up the variables.

 I’m also making it heavily Object Oriented all related variables that can be grouped together are being grouped together into separate classes.

So there’s some more information for ya!

Also here’s an old demo of the game:
http://jon.ssofti.com/screenshots/MyGame.zip
I made it for some friends and thought I might provide it to you guys.

You will need the .Net environment and DirectX.
It has a readme.
Logged

There are none so blind as those who will not see. — Jonathan Swift

My Remake of UQM.
My 2D physics engine
Both are written in C#.
meep-eep
Forum Admin
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2847



View Profile
Re: My Game So Far
« Reply #22 on: September 16, 2005, 02:18:06 pm »

About hardware acceleration (both graphics and physics), a plane in 3D will be 2D, and as such there may be some opportunities to make use of 3D acceleration. Just set the z coordinate to 0. Now the question is how much you'll actually win by that, as there will be extra calculations on the z coordinate which are unnecessary.
I’m pretty sure the bulk of the physics processor will be dedicated to matrix math, since most of the 3D engines I have run across have relied heavily on matrixes. My game does not have a single matrix in it so accelerating matrix math is a moot point.

By going down to 2D physics I eliminate a lot of operations. For Addition and Subtraction operations the cost is 2/3 of 3D. With dot product the cost is 3/8 of 3D. So in the end a 3D engine does a lot more calculations then a 2D one.
It may involve more operations, but dedicated hardware would do this much faster, and it could possibly do multiple operations in parallel.
I didn't expect you to use matrices, as it is more managable without them then it would be in 3D, but it would still have its advantages conceptually.

Quote
Though I like speed and all I’m writing this game not to be blazing fast but to be understandable. In my game’s source code you will rarely see variables like c1 or FL2d. It ends up making some rather long lines of code but you will be able to know what its doing without having to look up the variables.
Short variable names aren't going to make a compiled program run more slowly. It may give the programmer a bit more speed, but that benefit will be lost if someone has to read the code lateron. Though overly long names aren't going to help readability either (using "arrayIndexIterator" instead of "i" for instance).

Logged

“When Juffo-Wup is complete
when at last there is no Void, no Non
when the Creators return
then we can finally rest.”
Arne
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 520


Yak!


View Profile WWW
Re: My Game So Far
« Reply #23 on: September 16, 2005, 02:50:16 pm »

It's looking promising. I'm a big fan of SodaPlay so joints and little colliding stuff is very appealing to me.
 I have an SC project aswell, but it's on ice for the moment cuz I'm busy with other stuff. Links: (1|2|3)
Logged
JonoPorter
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 656


Don't mess with the US.


View Profile WWW
Re: My Game So Far
« Reply #24 on: September 17, 2005, 07:03:17 am »

Short variable names aren't going to make a compiled program run more slowly.
That was not what I was trying to say, but now that I reread it I understand how you could think I’m saying that.
Basically I was trying to say is that I’m more concerned with readable code then fast code. Then I went off on a tangent.

There are areas in my code that could be faster but become quite ugly as a result.

using "arrayIndexIterator" instead of "i" for instance
its more like "VelocityAlongNormal" instead of "Van"

To Arne:
Those are some pretty sweet drawings in the second link.
« Last Edit: September 17, 2005, 07:15:57 am by BioSlayer » Logged

There are none so blind as those who will not see. — Jonathan Swift

My Remake of UQM.
My 2D physics engine
Both are written in C#.
JonoPorter
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 656


Don't mess with the US.


View Profile WWW
Re: My Game So Far
« Reply #25 on: September 28, 2005, 08:25:12 am »

Hi guys it’s been I while since I posted and thought you would like to know what progress I’ve made. I’ve completely rewritten the collision detection and reaction again. This is because of some problems I was having, were impossible to fix with the old version. The more recent version is actually a lot faster as a result and the code is a lot cleaner, since I put a lot more thought into it. Tomorrow I plan on finish up the resting forces then start working on a tunneling algorithm.

Basically tunneling is when an object is going to fast that in a single time step it passes though another object with no collision being detected.

The way SC2 seams to solve this problem is having a max velocity (I’ve not actually looked at the code). The problem is that I don’t want to put in a max velocity like SC2. A typical way, I have found, to fix this is find all the object that are moving to fast and run multiple time steps on them so no collision can be missed. There are other ways but they all assume that the object the high velocity object will collide with is not also going at a high velocity. The reason for this seems to be that most engines and games assume gravity will always be a constant acceleration in pointing down towards a floor that will stop an object’s motion. They also assume that there will always be a frictional force causing an object to decelerate. As a result they seem not to worry about 2 high velocity objects running into each other. I do, because in space there is no floor to run into and next to no friction. So you can have 2 spaceships going at extremely high velocities fly right through each other.

If you managed to understand what I’m talking about maybe you can help me figure out an algorithm that will work or tell me where I can find one.

I would be really grateful for any help.
« Last Edit: September 28, 2005, 08:34:20 am by BioSlayer » Logged

There are none so blind as those who will not see. — Jonathan Swift

My Remake of UQM.
My 2D physics engine
Both are written in C#.
Zeep-Eeep
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 917


Good Grief


View Profile WWW
Re: My Game So Far
« Reply #26 on: September 28, 2005, 02:28:10 pm »

The only thing I can think of off the top would
be to move (in memory only, not on the screen)
the objects a little at a time. The number of
move/checks would probably be in line with
the object's speed. Then, once you've found the
new position, draw the object.
For example, if you have an object moving
at 7units/second and one at 3units/s move the
fast one first. Then check them all. Move it, check....
This will slow things down a bit, but it's faster than
drawing them every time. And, if things get really
high speeds, the game will slow down. Sad
Logged

What sound does a penguin make?
harth1026
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 142



View Profile WWW
Re: My Game So Far
« Reply #27 on: September 29, 2005, 02:37:07 am »

The only thing I can think of is probably very ineffiencient, but might not be too bad if you only have two ships to worry about.

For each frame...
   if ship velocity or angle have changed
      Calculate the current path for each ship.
      Find the coordinates where the paths intersect.
      Determine from the path information if they will be at that point at the same time.
   if the time they intersect is equal to or less than the current time
      Collision!!!

Something like that...  If I took the time to try programming it I could probably figure out if this'll work or not.
Logged
JonoPorter
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 656


Don't mess with the US.


View Profile WWW
Re: My Game So Far
« Reply #28 on: September 30, 2005, 09:00:58 am »

I finally Finished up The Contact/Resting Forces and started messing around with gravity. I finally realized that with the new semi working forces I can try out some new things. So here is a screenshot of the newest test I wrote:



BTW if you were wondering what type of physics implementation I am doing its the one from this paper:

http://www.cs.ubc.ca/~rbridson/docs/rigid_bodies.pdf
Logged

There are none so blind as those who will not see. — Jonathan Swift

My Remake of UQM.
My 2D physics engine
Both are written in C#.
Zeep-Eeep
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 917


Good Grief


View Profile WWW
Re: My Game So Far
« Reply #29 on: September 30, 2005, 05:43:52 pm »

That looks pretty cool.

Real life exists to give programmers something to do.
Logged

What sound does a penguin make?
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!