Timeline for How do Axis-Aligned Bounding Boxes update with rotations?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 15, 2018 at 2:26 | answer | added | DMGregory♦ | timeline score: 2 | |
| Aug 15, 2018 at 1:12 | comment | added | karamazovbros | As reference I'm using most of this code for checking collisions with AABB: developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Games/Techniques/… | |
| Aug 15, 2018 at 1:12 | comment | added | karamazovbros | I deleted my other question, because while right now my methods are primarily based on AABB, I really don't know how to recalculate the min/max from rotations so it continues to work with my collision check functions. I thought maybe I was doing it wrong with AABB, and thought OBB might be better for handling rotations. Like I said in the former question, I have a rotation matrix, but don't know how to use that data to create the right boundaries for collision checks. | |
| Aug 15, 2018 at 1:08 | comment | added | DMGregory♦ | May I ask why you deleted your previous question on a similar topic? With regard to this question, the choice of whether to use axis aligned bounding boxes or oriented bounding boxes is a judgement call you'll need to make based on your application. Is speed of rejection important enough to tolerate some extra false positives (eg. for quickly thinning the set of colliding objects in the first broadphase pass of a collision detection routine), or do you need more accurate estimates of rotated objects, enough to justify the more complicated checks (eg. tightly fitting a costly graphical effect)? | |
| Aug 14, 2018 at 22:43 | history | asked | karamazovbros | CC BY-SA 4.0 |