382 reputation
18
bio website sheevok.com
location
age 24
visits member for 3 years, 11 months
seen Jul 3 at 17:24

Jan
21
comment Using PhysX, how can I predict where I will need to generate procedural terrain collision shapes?
That's the work around method I outlined in my question, yes. I'm asking if I can get the work that PhysX has already done, so that I'm not redundantly calculating the same results. I haven't found a way yet, but I'm not that familiar with the PhysX API without licensing.
Jan
21
comment Using PhysX, how can I predict where I will need to generate procedural terrain collision shapes?
You're missing the point. I am generating data for the terrain. I am sampling that data to build a heightfield. I need to predict where terrain data is needed. If there's an object at (-100.0, -100.0), I need to generate terrain near (-100.0, -100.0) before I simulate physics. I also need to generate a region of terrain big enough or else an object may move beyond a region and end up below where the terrain would be if it had been generated in that region. PhysX must already track such information in order to predict potential collisions - I need that information. I don't know if/how to do so.
Jan
21
awarded  Editor
Jan
21
comment Using PhysX, how can I predict where I will need to generate procedural terrain collision shapes?
I'm familiar with octrees and spatial partitioning - PhysX is already doing that internally. I need information from PhysX regarding its spatial partitioning system so that I can generate terrain collision shapes where they are necessary because the terrain is procedural.
Jan
21
revised Using PhysX, how can I predict where I will need to generate procedural terrain collision shapes?
Improved title for clarity of purpose.
Jan
21
comment Using PhysX, how can I predict where I will need to generate procedural terrain collision shapes?
It's not appropriate to assume that visible terrain is the only terrain objects can collide with. The issue is quickly identifying what range of terrain could be collided with so that collision shapes can be generated for them on-demand.
Jan
20
asked Using PhysX, how can I predict where I will need to generate procedural terrain collision shapes?
Dec
5
awarded  Yearling
Mar
6
comment Games development with a game loop that's abstracted away
Huh... my mistake. I was under the impression it was a lot less intelligent than that. Thanks for the info!
Mar
6
answered Restrict movement within a radius
Mar
6
comment Games development with a game loop that's abstracted away
Typing @ followed by an incomplete name will not notify someone of your response but the fact that you commented after them will. There's no way for the system to know that @Sion happened to be referring to Sion Sheevok. Agreed, for a turn based game you can get away with simpler systems, but there are circumstances where you'd want to know if your input, update, or draw is happening first, second or third. Perhaps update gets a timestep but draw doesn't. Perhaps draw doesn't have a set framerate, so animation cursors must be updated in update and not in draw. That kind of thing.
Mar
6
comment Games development with a game loop that's abstracted away
The JVM abstracts the OS away from the application. That is why the application is not concerned with the OS. That's different than being within the game loop and filling in it's behavior. Understanding the order of things within the loop is important. Where should your input/AI code be? Where should your collision detection/collision response/physics/game logic be? Where should your rendering code be? Is the loop running them separately? Do they have the same interval between being triggered? Can they run parallel? Even if you don't control the loop, you need to know how it affects execution.
Mar
6
comment Games development with a game loop that's abstracted away
There's a difference. You're talking about assembly/bytecode, which is lower than your code and has to do with language, while the game/application loop imposed on you is higher and has to do with software architecture. You are working on a higher-level than assembly/bytecode, but you are working within the game loop.
Mar
6
awarded  Commentator
Mar
6
comment Games development with a game loop that's abstracted away
Still a loop. Sure, you don't control it, but you're still subject to the architecture of a game loop. Your input will be called. Then your update will be called. Then your draw/render will be called. Ultimately, that architecture is imposed in some manner.
Mar
6
answered Games development with a game loop that's abstracted away
Mar
6
answered Correct level of abstraction for a 3d rendering component?
Mar
6
comment What are the pros and cons of non-unique display names?
Kudos then. Glad to see someone not taking the easy way out and biting the bullet for better quality.
Mar
5
answered What are the pros and cons of non-unique display names?
Mar
1
comment Associate a texture to an object (from a data-model, not graphical point of view)
Associate a tactile texture?