Re: [Algorithms] Kinematic Collision

[Jon W. <jw...@gm...>]

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.