Re: Kinematic Collision
Jon Watte <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.games.devel.algorithms |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
pontus birgersson wrote: > > Physics. Because you wanted to include a physics engine. If you don't > > use a physics engine, you don't have that option. > > Your reasoning seems to be from the perspective of reaction to an > attack e.g. one character punches another character transfers a force > upon that character which moves him and when doing that the > appropriate frames of some animation will render. This makes perfect > sense and is definetly an interesting solution to try out. > No, my reasoning is from the attacker's point of view: Attack -> intent -> physics -> movement -> animation. > However I'm more concerned with movement of the character that is > throwing the punch, because the punch may be extra ordinary and in > order to look good the character needs to be translated in a precise > and non-linear fashion. When this is the case, the force based move is > really hard to get exact enough because of it's smooth nature. > Agreed -- a hard case. You could key the animation on movement of some bone that you specify (the fist, say) -- or just do what you said: drive a ragdoll using animated forces, and make sure that the integrator and/or kinematic controller makes it look good. Sincerely, jw -- Revenge is the most pointless and damaging of human desires. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with Crystal Reports now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july _______________________________________________ GDAlgorithms-list mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gdalgorithms-list Archives: http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=gdalgorithms-list