When I was testing my game written in Unity 3D, I see that the camera traspass the wall on the left superior part but in the right superior part don't do it.
Can anybody help me please?
A picture - the error is up at the left:
The wall is closer than the shortest distance at which the camera can render. The distance is called near clipping plane. You can change it from the inspector after you select the camera. Set it to a very small number like 0.01 to render objects at a very close distance and avoid this issue.
Keep in mind that as your far/near ratio increases, your depth buffer precision will decrease which can cause some artifacts. So only reduce the near plane/increase the far plan as much as you really need.
Related
So basically i am creating an XNA game at college and i need some help with something as i cannot seem to figure it out myself and i'm pretty new to this.
Basically i have a spaceship with a scrolling background of stars. I have falling asteroids and basically the point of my game is to travel as far as possible without being hit by said asteroids.
I'm really looking for some guidance as to how i could measure a theoretical distance travelled by the ship and then draw it on screen?
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Many thanks.
Solution A
Somewhere in your code you are defining the offset of the backdrop for each frame. You could just invert* this value and add it to the total amount every frame:
totalDistance += -backdropOffset;
If the offset is defined in pixels you have to convert it to your game world unit (kilometers, lightyears, ...) before displaying the distance.
* If the ship moves forward, the backdrop "slides" in the other direction.
Solution B (more work but less headaches)
It is actually not the backdrop that is moving; it's the ship. So why not move the ship and follow it with the camera?
You will be able to do all kinds of motion. Right now you have to invert every movement of the ship and then apply it to the backdrop. Kind of counter-intuitive, don't you think? So going with this solution your code will be much closer to reality => less headaches during debugging, easier maintenance of your application and you will be quicker when adding new features.
And of course, getting the total distance would be as trivial as
var totalDistance = myShip.Position.Y;
I am making an RPG game using an isometric tile engine that I found here:
http://xnaresources.com/default.asp?page=TUTORIALS
However after completing the tutorial I found myself wanting to do some things with the camera that I am not sure how to do.
Firstly I would like to zoom the camera in more so that it is displaying a 1 to 1 pixel ratio.
Secondly, would it be possible to make this game 2.5d in the way that when the camera moves, the sprite trees and things alike, move properly. By this I mean that the bottom of the sprite is planted while the top moves against the background, making a very 3d like experience. This effect can best be seen in games like diablo 2.
Here is the source code off their website:
http://www.xnaresources.com/downloads/tileengineseries9.zip
Any help would be great, Thanks
Games like Diablo or Sims 1, 2, SimCity 1-3, X-Com 1,2 etc. were actually just 2D games. The 2.5D effect requires that tiles further away are exactly the same size as tiles nearby. Your rotation around these games are restricted to 90 degrees.
How they draw is basically painters algorithm. Drawing what is furthest away first and overdrawing things that are nearer. Diablo is actually pretty simple, it didn't introduce layers or height differences as far as I remember. Just a flat map. So you draw the floor tiles first (in this case back to front isn't too necessary since they are all on the same elevation.) Then drawing back to front the walls, characters effects etc.
Everything in these games were rendered to bitmaps and rendered as bitmaps. Even though their source may have been a 3D textured model.
If you want to add perspective or free rotation then you need everything to be a 3D model. Your rendering will be simpler because depth or render order isn't as critical as you would use z-buffering to solve your issues. The only main issue is to properly render transparent bits in the right order or else you may end up with some odd results. However even if your rendering is simpler, your animation or in memory storage is a bit more difficult. You need to animate 3D models instead of just having an array of bitmaps to do the animation. Selection of items on the screen requires a little more work since position and size of the elements are no longer consistent or easily predictable.
So it depends on which features you want that will dictate which sort of solution you can use. Either way has it's plusses and minuses.
In game Im trying to make, I have some ships(not space ships or so, actual ships they are in water)
If I just directly rotate them, I get absurd results.
Do I need to make 8 picture for each ship ? (considering there is 8 direction)
Are there any way that I can do it with just creating one image or at least a few, instead of 8 ?
Essentially, rotation mathematics are an interpretation of the original image.
Sure, it works depending on the complexity of the image and the relationship of straightlines and things that are perpendicular, but some things just dont work.
If you're doing a top-down 2D game with ships, I'm going to assume Sail ships here, then rotating mathematically really just isn't going to look good as the sails them selves will move and angle depending on Wind speed/direction and the angle of the ship.
Long story short ? Mathematical rotation works well for an Asteroids style triangle ship, doesn't work well for proper graphics.
Hope this helps!
If you are talking 2D graphics and are getting "absurd results" I'm assuming you're not taking into account an origin. If you have a Texture2D and give it a rotation value, it will be rotating by the default origin which is (0,0). Try setting your origin in your spritebatch.Draw call to a new Vector2(texture.width / 2, texture.height / 2) and see if that is a step in the right direction.
Another approach would be to have a spritesheet with the 8 drawings that you mention and reference a different source rectangle of the texture2D.
For those of you who don't remember exactly what the old windows Starfield screensaver looked like, here's a YouTube video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r5AoFiVs2ME
Right now, I can generate random particles ("stars") inside in a certain radius. What I've having trouble doing is figuring out the best way the achieve the affected seen in the afore-linked video.
Question: Given that I have the coordinates (vectors) for my randomly generated particles. What is the best way and/or equation to give them a direction (vector) so that they move across the screen in a way which closely resembles that which is seen in the old screensaver?
Thanks!
They seem to move away from the center. You could try to calculate the vector from the center point of the screen to the generated particle position? Then use the same direction to move the particle and accelerate the particle until it is outside the screen.
A basic algorithm for you to work with:
Generate stars at random location, with a 3-D gaussian distribution (middle of screen most likely, less likely as you go farther from the screen). Note that the motion vector of the star is determined by this starting point... the motion will effectively travel along the line formed by the origin point and the starting location, outward.
Assign each newly generated star a distance. Note that distance is irrespective of starting location.
Move the star in a straight line at an exponentially increasing speed while simultaneously decreasing it's distance. You'll have to tweak these parameters yourself.
The star should disappear when it passes the boundary of the screen, regardless of speed.
It might be that my math is rusty or I'm just stuck in my box after trying to solve this for so long, either way I need your help.
Background: I'm making a 2d-based game in C# using XNA. In that game I want a camera to be able to zoom in/out so that a certain part of objects always are in view. Needless to say, the objects move in two dimensions while the camera moves in three.
Situation: I'm currently using basic trigonometry to calculate which height the camera should be at for all objects to show. I also position the camera between those objects.
It looks something like this:
1.Loop through all objects to find the outer edges of our objects : farRight, farLeft, farUp, farDown.
2.When we know what the edges of what has to be shown are, calculate the center, also known as the camera position:
CenterX = farLeft + (farRight - farLeft) * 0.5f;
CenterY = farUp + (farDown - farUp) * 0.5f;
3.Loop through our edges to find the largest value compared to our camera position, thus the furthest distance from the center of screen.
4.Using the largest distance-value we can easily calculate the needed height to show all of those objects (points):
float T = 90f - Constants.CAMERA_FIELDOFVIEW * 0.5f;
float height = (float)Math.Tan(MathHelper.ToRadians(T)) * (length);
So far so good, the camera positions itself perfectly based on the calculations.
Problem:
a) My rendering target is 1280*720 with a Field of View of 45 degrees, so one always sees a bit more on the X-axis, 560 pixels more actually. This is not a problem per se but more one that on b)...
b) I want the camera to be a bit further out than it is, so that one sees a bit more on what is happening beyond the furthest point. Sure, this happens on the X-axis, but that is technically my flawed logic's result. I want to be able to see more on both the X- and Y-axis and to control this behavior.
Question
Uhm, so to clarify. I would like to have some input on a way to make the camera position itself, creating this state:
Objects won't get closer than say... 150 pixels to the edge of the X-axis and 100 pixels to the edge of the Y-axis. To do this the camera shall position itself along the Z-axis so that the field of view covers it all.
I don't need help with the coding, just the math and logic of calculating the height of my camera. As you probably can see, I have a hard time wrapping this inside my head and even harder time trying to explain it to you.
If anyone out there has been dealing with this or is just better than me at math, I'd appreciate whatever you have to say! :)
Don't you just need to add or subtract 150 or 100 pixels (depending on which edge you are looking at) to each distance measurement in your loop at step 3 and carry this larger value into length at step 4? Or am I missing something.
I can't explore this area further at the moment, but if anyone is having the same issue but is not satisfied by provided answer there is another possibility in XNA.
ViewPort.Unproject()
This nifty feature converts a screen space coordinate to a world space one.
ViewPort.Project()
Does the opposite thing, namely converting world space to screen space. Just thought that someone might want to go further than me. As much as my OCD hates to leave things not perfect, I can't be perfectioning this... yet.