I'm developing a network demo game using cocos2d-x and chipmunk. I have a problem with physics when i ( ApplyImpuse() ) to one sprite in one device and send that Vec2 force to the other device and apply the same impulse to the sprite the simulation is pretty different than what i got in the first device.
I tests it many times with different devices.
Note : I don't use any custom update method i just ApplyImpulse() to the sprite when i touch the screen.
Can anyone describe this issue and propose any solution for it please ?
If i switched to Box2D will this problem be solved??
Thanks.
No. The only way to get a deterministic simulation across many devices is to use (or rewrite) the physics library to use fixed point math, and then deal with all the limitations that brings.
It is nearly impossible to get deterministic results from floating point numbers from different CPUs, compilers, platforms, or even most minor code changes. For example, a*b + a*c could be simplified by the compiler to a*(b + c), but since floating point numbers have limited precision, the result will likely not be exactly the same.
Contraption Make started out using vanilla Chipmunk, but eventually rewrote significant portions of it using fixed point: http://www.moddb.com/members/kevryan/blogs/the-butterfly-effect-deterministic-physics-in-the-incredible-machine-and-contraption-maker
Related
I'm rendering a starfield composed from points(D3D11_PRIMITIVE_TOPOLOGY_POINTLIST). If a point get closer to the camera I make it double the size. That worked well with OpenGL 1.x using glPointSize(2.0f)
Is there a way to achieve this with DirectX 11 on Windows Phone 8?
What I need is a way to make a rendered point appear bigger on some custom value.
Any thought is greatly appreciated.
There's no native sprite type in D3D11. Your best bet is to use instancing with a single quad VB and a per-instance point VB. You'd scale by dividing the quad point deltas by the view depth, or applying a standard perspective projection matrix (though the latter would also cause the points themselves to converge at higher distances).
For the past year I have been working on an isometric city builder. So far I have not used any framework apart from a loose PureMVC clone.
I have heard of Starling but only recently have I played with it.
From my research, the performance boost is fenomenal, but this forces me to manage my resource a lot tighter.
At the moment, I am exporting building animations one building at a time, in ~16 frames/pngs. These are cropped, resized and exported in Photoshop by a script and then imported in Flash, then exported as a swf, to be loaded / preloaded / postloaded on demand.
The frames are way too big to make a spritesheet with them, per building. I believe its called an atlas.
These pngs are then blited between lock() and unlock(). After the buildings + actors walking around are sorted, that is.
I am unsure if just using starling.Movieclip for the buildings, where instead of loading the pngs, I would build a MovieClip symbol with its frames. So bliting wouldn't even be necessary. Unless adding bliting on top of Starling would improve performance even more. That would allow fatter features such as particles effects, maybe some lighting.
Google isn't offering me a strait answer, thus I am asking here.
Google isn't offering a straight answer because there isn't such. It depends very very much on what you've done, how much knowledge you've got and what are your goals.
Using Starling gives benefits as well as drawbacks. Your idea of resources will change totally. If you really have enormous amount of assets, then putting them into GPU will be really slow process. You must start from there - learn what Starling does, how resources are managed with it and what you need to change in order to make the transition between the two.
If this is not that hard and time consuming task, you will have some performance optimization. BUT again it depends on your current code. Your current code is really important in this situation as if it's perfectly optimized your gain won't be that much (but commonly would still be).
If you need to switch between graphics regularly or you need to have dynamic assets (as images for example) you must keep in mind that uploading to GPU is the slowest part when talking about Starling and Stage3D.
So again, there is not a straight answer. You must think of GPU memory and limit, GPU upload time, as well as assets management. You also need to think of the way your code is built and if you are going to have any impact if you make the switch (if your code heavily depends on the MovieClip like structure, with all that frames and things) - it will be hard for you. One of the toughest things I fought with Stage3D was the UI implementation - there is almost only Feathers UI which will take you a few weeks to get along with.
On the other hand, Starling performs pretty well, especially on mobile devices. I was able to maintain a stable 45fps on a heavy UI app with a lot of dynamic loading content and multiple screens on an old iPhone 4S, which I find great. Latest mobile devices top at 60fps.
It's up to you to decide, but I'll advise you to have some experimental long-lasting project to test with, and then start applying this approach to your regular projects. I've done the dive to use it in a regular very tightened deadline project, and it was a nightmare. Everything worked out great, but I thought I would have a heart attack - the switch is not that easy :)
I would suggest using DMT for rasterizing your vector assets into Straling sprites at runtime, and it'll also keep your DisplayTree! meaning that you'll still have the parent/child relations that you had in your Flash Assets.
DMT will not duplicate assets, and will rasterize the vectors into texture atlases only one time (Cache is saved)
you can find it here: https://github.com/XTDStudios/DMT
Hey everyone,
I'm trying to create a program in Java that can read numbers of the screen, and also recognise images on the screen. I was wondering how i can achieve this?
The font of the numbers will always be the same. I have never programmed anything like this before, but my idea of how it works is to have the program take a screenshot, then overlay the image of the numbers with the section of the screenshot image and check if they match, repeating this for each numbers. If this is the correct way to do this, how would i put that in code.
Thanks in advance for any help.
You could always train a neural net to do it for you. They can get pretty accurate sometimes. If you use something like Matlab it actually has capabilities for that already. Apparently there's a neural network library for java (http://neuroph.sourceforge.net/) although I've never used it personally.
Here's a tutorial about using neuroph: http://www.certpal.com/blogs/2010/04/java-neural-networks-and-neuroph-a-tutorial/
You can use a neural network, support vector machine, or other machine learning construct for this. But it will not do the entire job. If you do a screen shot, you are going to be left with a very large image that you will need to find the individual characters on. You also need to deal with the fact that the camera might not be pointed straight at the text that you want to read. You will likely need to use a series of algorithms to lock onto the right parts of the image and then downsample it in a way that size becomes neutral.
Here is a simple Java applet I wrote that does some of this.
http://www.heatonresearch.com/articles/42/page1.html
It lets you draw on a relatively large area and locks in on your char. Then it recognizes it. I am using the alphabet, but digits should be easier. The complete Java source code is included.
One simpler approach could be to use template matching. If the fonts are same, and/or the size (in pixels)is known, then simple template matching can do the job for you. ifsize of input is unknown, you might have to create copies of images at different scales and do the matching at each scale.
One with the extreme value(highest or lowest depending on the method you follow for template matching) is your result.
Follow this link for details
I can see how this might not be a good enough question but I have just embarked on a journey to build the first decent Game Engine for HTML5 canvas that is cross browser and most of all fast. The only problem is I am very new to game design and don't know many tricks of the trade that will help me.
The game I am currently implementing for which the engine will be taken out of is a tile based 2D platformer with MANY tiles (around 3500). I'll start with some tips that I've thus far learnt.
Redraw Regions - only redraw areas that change
Avoid unnecessary function calls (Firefox does not like too many of them)
Use the DOM if you can
Chunk tiles together for quicker access
Other things I am looking for are things like Terrain Generation, Lighting in 2D, Maps, quick server communication. If this is too vague, I will try and close it. Just want to know game design better.
Links/resources would be good. Especially for physics or important maths.
Only draw stuff that's visible, that means only draw the tiles etc. that are currently on the screen. For tiles that's fairly easy, if you got lots of entities you may either want to use a sliding window to keep a list of screen local objects or use such a thing like a quadtree.
Since there's no easy/fast way to copy one canvas to another, redrawing regions is really complicated, since you can't keep a buffered state of (for example) the background if it hasn't changed. So keeping a list of "dirty rectangles" will be a computational overhead for sure.
The whole topic is very broad, even handling the FPS rate can be quite difficult, this question contains some good links and answers on that topic:
https://gamedev.stackexchange.com/questions/1589/fixed-time-step-vs-variable-time-step
You've also mentioned server communication, if you want to do some multiplayer you'll have to care about even more stuff, you can't trust the client, need to worry about bandwidth, synchronization issues, interpolation on the client etc.
I've done some rather simple 2D games in the past, most of them are not in JavaScript but they should give you some hints:
http://github.com/BonsaiDen/Norum
(Platformer engine demo in C, camera zones, moving platforms)
http://github.com/BonsaiDen/Tuff
(2D Platformer in Java, got never finished, powerups and some cool stuff)
http://github.com/BonsaiDen/NodeGame-Shooter
(2D multiplayer space shooter written in JS, using Node.js for the server and WebSockets for communication)
For some final words I'd say that you should start small, like for example just do a scrolling tile map first, then add a player, then rewrite the whole thing. You want write the perfect engine just from scratch it will take many iterations until you find out all the quirks and tricks.
If you want more precise answers you should open questions on the single components you run into troubles with.
I have a simple question regarding the Minimax algorithm: for example for the tic-tac-toe game, how do I determine the utility function's for each player plays? It doesn't do that automatically, does it? I must hard-code the values in the game, it can't learn them by itself, does it?
No, a MiniMax does not learn. It is a smarter version of a brute-force tree search.
Typically you would implement the utility function directly. In this case the algorithm would not learn how to play the game, it would use the information that you had explicitly hard-coded in the implementation.
However, it would be possible to use genetic programming (GP) or some equivalent technique to automatically derive a utility function. In this case you would not have to encode any explicit strategy. Instead the evolution would discover its own way of playing the game well.
You could either combine your minimax code and the GP code into a single (probably very slow) adaptive program, or you could run the GP first, find a good utility function and then add this function to your minimax code just as you would any hand-coded function.
Tic-Tac-Toe is small enough to run the game to the end and assign 1 for win, 0 for draw and -1 for lose.
Otherwise you have to provide a function which determines the value of a position heuristically. In chess for example a big factor is the value of the material, but also who controls the center or how easily the pieces can move.
As for learning, you can add weight factors to different aspects of the position and try to optimize those by repeatedly playing games.
How do determine the utility function for each play?
Carefully ;-) This article shows how a slightly flawed evaluation function (one for ex. which either doesn't go "deep" enough in looking ahead in the tree of possible plys, or one which fails to capture the relative strengh of some board positions) results in an overall weak algorithm (one that looses more often).
it can't learn them by itself, does it?
No, it doesn't. There are ways, however, to make the computer learn the relative strength of board positions. For example by looking into Donald Mitchie and his MENACE program you'll see how a stochastic process can be used to learn the board without any a priori knowledge but the rules of the game. The funny part is that while this can be implemented in computers, a few hundred colored beads and match boxes are all that is required, thanks to the relatively small size of the game space, and also thanks to various symmetries.
After learning such a cool way of teaching the computer how to play, we may not be so interested in going back to MinMax as applied to Tic-Tac-Toe. After all MinMax is a relatively simple way of pruning a decision tree, which is hardly needed with tic-tac-toe's small game space. But, if we must ;-) [go back to MinMax]...
We can look into the "matchbox" associated with the next play (i.e. not going deep at all), and use the percentage of beads associated with each square, as an additional factor. We can then evaluate a traditional tree, but only going, say 2 or 3 moves deep (a shallow look-ahead depth which would typically end in usually in losses or draws) and rate each next move on the basis of the simple -1 (loss), 0 (draw/unknown), +1 (win) rating. By then combining the beads percentage and the simple rating (by say addition, certainly not by multiplication), we are able to effectively use MinMax in a fashion that is more akin to the way it is used in cases when it is not possible to evaluate the game tree to its end.
Bottom line: In the case of Tic-Tac-Toe, MinMax only becomes more interesting (for example in helping us explore the effectiveness of a particular utility function) when we remove the deterministic nature of the game, associated with the easy evaluation the full tree. Another way of making the game [mathematically] interesting is to play with a opponent which makes mistakes...