I have to detect ground collision and fix it but because of irregular sprites, I have to allow collision in certain states like 'ATTACK' because the height of sprite increases. I have done it to my best but still there are many problems remaining which I think could only be understood if one downloads the project and plays the game himself/herself.
I've been trying so hard from past 2 days to implement tile collision detection. Irregular sprites have made the scenario complex. I have tried every single technique I could think of and could find on the Internet:
Detection based on player states
Detection based on speed values
Detection based on geometry
It seems like a deadlock in this situation and I have given up. Fixing one thing breaks another.
All of the code is connected but I think there are 2 files which would need changes 'player.js & playerStates.js'
Here is the link of project:
https://github.com/M-AdilAhmad/Platformer
Related
I'm creating a game which involves one sprite bouncing around and the user controlling another sprite to avoid being hit.
I'm having two problems:
I've managed to get the first sprite to bounce within the canvas but the second one is still disappearing at the moment.
I can't seem to get the two sprites to detect collision (they are both circular).
Remarkably I can operate Github so it's there if anyone wants to cast a critical eye (please do!) https://github.com/SallyBoulton/Javascript-Game.git
Ive been having a really baffling slow down issue with the game I am working on probably because I am unsure how to handle graphics (most likely responsible for the slow down) in javascript without using a third party framework like Phaser/ImapactJS/EaselJS etc)*. The following is the low down on how I am approaching my graphics. I would be very thankful for some tips or methods on how to do this right.
My game is tile based - using tiles designed at 500x500 px because I want them to display decently on high definition devices.
I am using a spritesheet to load all (most of) my tiles before the main loop is run. This image is roughly 4000 x 4000 (keeping it below 4096 because the GPU cant handle texture sizes larger than that).
I then use the drawImage function to cycle through and draw each tile on a part of the canvas using information (w, h, x, y) stored in the tile array. I do this on every cycle of the main loop using my drawMap function.
The map is currently 6x6 tiles in size
A character spritesheet is also loaded and drawn on to the canvas after the map has been drawn. The character displays a different frame of the animation on every cycle of the main loop. There are sets of animations for the character each contained in the same spritesheet.
The character sprite sheet is roughly 4000x3500
The character is roughly 350x250 px
Other objects also use the same sprite sheet. Currently there is only one object.
Possibly helpful questions:
Am I using too many spritesheets or too few?
Should I only draw something if it's coordinates are in bounds of the screen?
How should I go about garbage collection? Do I need to set image objects to null when no longer in use?
Thanks in advance for input. I would just like to know if I am going about it the right way and pick your brains as how to speed it up enough.
*Note that I plan to port the JS game to cocoonJS which provides graphics acceleration for the canvas element on mobile.
** If interested please visit my Patreon page for fun!
You have asked lots of questions here, I'll address the ones I've run into.
I would like to start out by saying very clearly,
Use a profiler
Find out whether each thing you are advised to do, by anybody, is making an improvement. Unless we work on your code, we can only give you theories on how to optimise it.
How should I go about garbage collection? Do I need to set image objects to null when no longer in use?
If you are no longer using an object, setting its reference to null will probably mean it gets garbage collected. Having nulls around is not necessarily good but this is not within the scope of this question.
For high performance applications, you want to avoid too much allocation and therefore too much garbage collection activity. See what your profiler says - the chrome profiler can tell you how much CPU time the garbage collector is taking up. You might be OK at the moment.
I then use the drawImage function to cycle through and draw each tile on a part of the canvas using information (w, h, x, y) stored in the tile array. I do this on every cycle of the main loop using my drawMap function.
This is quite slow - instead consider drawing the current on screen tiles to a background canvas, and then only drawing areas which were previously obscured.
For example, if your player walks to the left, there is going to be a lot of tiles on the left hand side of the screen which have come into view; you will need to draw the background buffer onto the screen, offset to account for the movement, and then draw the missing tiles.
My game is tile based - using tiles designed at 500x500 px because I want them to display decently on high definition devices
If I interpret this right, your tiles are 500x500px in diameter, and you are drawing a small number of these on screen. and then for devices without such a high resolution, the canvas renderer is going to be scaling these down. You really want to be drawing pixels 1:1 on each device.
Would you be able, instead, to have a larger number of smaller tiles on screen - thereby avoiding the extra drawing at the edges? Its likely that the tiles around the edges will sometimes draw only a few pixels of one edge, and the rest of the image will be cropped anyway, so why not break them up further?
Should I only draw something if it's coordinates are in bounds of the screen?
Yes, this is a very common and good optimisation to take. You'll find it makes a big difference.
Am I using too many spritesheets or too few?
I have found that when I have a small number of sprite sheets, the big performance hit is when I frequently switch between them. If during one draw phase, you draw all your characters from character_sheet.png and then draw all the plants from plant_sheet.png you'll be ok. Switching between them can cause lots of trouble and you'll see a slow down. You will know this is happening if your profiler tells you that drawImage is taking a big proportion of your frame.
We are developing a web-based game. The map has a fixed size and is procedually generated.
At the moment, all these polygons are stored in one array and checked whether they should be drawn or not. This requires a lot of performance. Which is the best rendering / buffering solution for big maps?
What I've tried:
Quadtrees. Problem: Performance still not as great because there are so many polygons.
Drawing sections of the map to offscreen-canvases. A test run: http://norizon.ch/repo/buffered-map-rendering/ Problem: The browser crashes when trying to buffer that much data and such big images (maybe 2000x2000) still seem to perform badly on a canvas.
(posting comments as an answer for convenience)
One idea could be, when the user is translating the map, to re-use the part that will still be in view, and to draw only the stripe(s) that are no longer corrects.
I believe (do you confirm ?) that the most costly operation is the drawing, not to find which polygon to draw.
If so, you should use your QuadTree to find the polygons that are within the strips. Notice that, given Javascript's overhead, a simple 2D bucket that contains the polygons that are within a given (x,y) tile might be faster to use (if the cost of the quadtree is too high).
Now i have a doubt about the precise way you should do that, i'm afraid you'll have to experiment / benchmark, and maybe choose a prefered browser.
Problems :
• Copying a canvas on itself can be very slow depending on devices/Browsers. (might require to do 2 copy, in fact)
• Using an offscreen canvas can be very slow depending on devices/Browsers. (might not use hardware acceleration when off-screen).
If you are drawing things on top of the map, you can either use a secondary canvas on top of the map canvas, or you'll be forced to use an off-screen canvas that you'll copy on each frame.
I have tried a lot of things and this solution turned out to be the best for us.
Because our map has a fixed size, it is calculated server-side.
One big image atlas with all the required tiles will be loaded at the beginning of the game. For each image on the atlas, a seperate canvas is created. The client loads the whole map data into one two-dimensional array. The values determine, which tile has to be loaded. Maybe it would be even better if the map was drawn on a seperate canvas, so that only the stripes have to be painted. But the performance is really good, so we won't change that.
Three conclusions:
Images are fast. GetImageData is not!
JavaScript has not yet great support for multi threading, so we don't calculate the map client-side in game-time.
Quadtrees are fast. Arrays are faster.
I am working on this browser-based experiment where i am given N specific circles (let's say they have a unique picture in them) and need to position them together, leaving as little space between them as possible. It doesn't have to be arranged in a circle, but they should be "clustered" together.
The circle sizes are customizable and a user will be able to change the sizes by dragging a javascript slider, changing some circles' sizes (for example, in 10% of the slider the circle 4 will have radius of 20px, circle 2 10px, circle 5 stays the same, etc...). As you may have already guessed, i will try to "transition" the resizing-repositioning smoothly when the slider is being moved.
The approach i have tried tried so far: instead of manually trying to position them i've tried to use a physics engine-
The idea:
place some kind of gravitational pull in the center of the screen
use a physics engine to take care of the balls collision
during the "drag the time" slider event i would just set different
ball sizes and let the engine take care of the rest
For this task i have used "box2Dweb". i placed a gravitational pull to the center of the screen, however, it took a really long time until the balls were placed in the center and they floated around. Then i put a small static piece of ball in the center so they would hit it and then stop. It looked like this:
The results were a bit better, but the circles still moved for some time before they went static. Even after playing around with variables like the ball friction and different gravitational pulls, the whole thing just floated around and felt very "wobbly", while i wanted the balls move only when i drag the time slider (when they change sizes). Plus, box2d doesn't allow to change the sizes of the objects and i would have to hack my way for a workaround.
So, the box2d approach made me realize that maybe to leave a physics engine to handle this isn't the best solution for the problem. Or maybe i have to include some other force i haven't thought of. I have found this similar question to mine on StackOverflow. However, the very important difference is that it just generates some n unspecific circles "at once" and doesn't allow for additional specific ball size and position manipulation.
I am really stuck now, does anyone have any ideas how to approach this problem?
update: it's been almost a year now and i totally forgot about this thread. what i did in the end is to stick to the physics model and reset forces/stop in almost idle conditions. the result can be seen here http://stateofwealth.net/
the triangles you see are inside those circles. the remaining lines are connected via "delaunay triangulation algorithm"
I recall seeing a d3.js demo that is very similar to what you're describing. It's written by Mike Bostock himself: http://bl.ocks.org/mbostock/1747543
It uses quadtrees for fast collision detection and uses a force based graph, which are both d3.js utilities.
In the tick function, you should be able to add a .attr("r", function(d) { return d.radius; }) which will update the radius each tick for when you change the nodes data. Just for starters you can set it to return random and the circles should jitter around like crazy.
(Not a comment because it wouldn't fit)
I'm impressed that you've brought in Box2D to help with the heavy-lifting, but it's true that unfortunately it is probably not well-suited to your requirements, as Box2D is at its best when you are after simulating rigid objects and their collision dynamics.
I think if you really consider what it is that you need, it isn't quite so much a rigid body dynamics problem at all. You actually want none of the complexity of box2d as all of your geometry consists of spheres (which I assure you are vastly simpler to model than arbitrary convex polygons, which is what IMO Box2D's complexity arises from), and like you mention, Box2D's inability to smoothly change the geometric parameters isn't helping as it will bog down the browser with unnecessary geometry allocations and deallocations and fail to apply any sort of smooth animation.
What you are probably looking for is an algorithm or method to evolve the positions of a set of coordinates (each with a radius that is also potentially changing) so that they stay separated by their radii and also minimize their distance to the center position. If this has to be smooth, you can't just apply the minimal solution every time, as you may get "warping" as the optimal configuration might shift dramatically at particular points along your slider's movement. Suffice it to say there is a lot of tweaking for you to do, but not really anything scarier than what one must contend with inside of Box2D.
How important is it that your circles do not overlap? I think you should just do a simple iterative "solver" that first tries to bring the circles toward their target (center of screen?), and then tries to separate them based on radii.
I believe if you try to come up with a simplified mathematical model for the motion that you want, it will be better than trying to get Box2D to do it. Box2D is magical, but it's only good at what it's good at.
At least for me, seems like the easiest solution is to first set up the circles in a cluster. So first set the largest circle in the center, put the second circle next to the first one. For the third one you can just put it next to the first circle, and then move it along the edge until it hits the second circle.
All the other circles can follow the same method: place it next to an arbitrary circle, and move it along the edge until it is touching, but not intersecting, another circle. Note that this won't make it the most efficient clustering, but it works. After that, when you expand, say, circle 1, you'd move all the adjacent circles outward, and shift them around to re-cluster.
I'm building an online game, and using node and whatnot, anyway i'm not too keen on constant streams and streams of data just for animations, i've set up a way for it to animate client side and so on... but i found a problem, all i was doing was setting the new coordinates and telling all the clients to animate their character to that point, but if you refreshed the page, the player would be there instantly.
I have got a distance,speed of movement,time of movement,start and destination... i know where they started moving, i know where their destination is, i know when they started moving and at what speed, and in a linear fashion.
What i need to work out, is where the player is (whilst animating) at that specific time when other players join the game.
Try http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinematics
Or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed
the distance travelled can be calculated by rearranging the definition to d=v*t
The simplest approach would be to tween the position. That involves creating a series of intermediate steps along the path between the current position and the updated one. This works best if you know the frequency of updates. You can choose these points linearly or use an easing function to smooth it out.
If you really are doing a physical simulation though, it'll probably look more natural if you take the physical model into consideration. I'd try the simple case first before seeing whether you need to go into more mathematically complex territory.