Sorry your browser is not supported!

You are using an outdated browser that does not support modern web technologies, in order to use this site please update to a new browser.

Browsers supported include Chrome, FireFox, Safari, Opera, Internet Explorer 10+ or Microsoft Edge.

Dark GDK .NET / Collision in .Net?

Author
Message
Hayer
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Nov 2005
Location: Norway
Posted: 23rd Nov 2009 20:44
Link
Hi!

Does there exist any 3d collision libs for DGDK.Net with some proper documentation? Or do I have to stick with the in-build commands?

Keep it simple.
Questions? Mail me
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Hayer
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Nov 2005
Location: Norway
Posted: 25th Nov 2009 23:53
Link
so nobody knows of ANY other 3d collision / physic lib?

Keep it simple.
Questions? Mail me
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Chess
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 25th Mar 2007
Location: Québec, Canada
Posted: 27th Nov 2009 03:29
Link
Not in DGDK.Net as far as I know. If you found one, please tell me... I'm looking for this, too
Back to top
Profile PM
Hayer
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Nov 2005
Location: Norway
Posted: 28th Nov 2009 00:09
Link
well, i got this; so if you know how PhysX works this can be pretty helpful.

http://www.zelsnack.com/jason/JttZ/Novodex_NET_Wrapper/

Keep it simple.
Questions? Mail me
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Hayer
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Nov 2005
Location: Norway
Posted: 28th Nov 2009 00:50
Link
ah, after messing around with it since last post i've got it working!

So now im working on making the basic things like box/sphere collision simpler to set up!

Keep it simple.
Questions? Mail me
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
KISTech
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Feb 2008
Location: Aloha, Oregon
Posted: 28th Nov 2009 01:55 Edited at: 28th Nov 2009 01:56
Link
I believe DarkPhysics is in the process of being converted for GDK.Net, but I don't think it's going to happen soon. GDK.Net really doesn't seem to be attracting as much attention as one might think it should.

It would be nice if Sparky's collision was available for .Net. I'd probably be doing a lot more with GDK.Net if it was.

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Chess
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 25th Mar 2007
Location: Québec, Canada
Posted: 28th Nov 2009 02:35 Edited at: 28th Nov 2009 02:36
Link
Quote: "It would be nice if Sparky's collision was available for .Net. I'd probably be doing a lot more with GDK.Net if it was."


Same for me!

Thank you for the link, Hayer, I'll have a look
Back to top
Profile PM
Hayer
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Nov 2005
Location: Norway
Posted: 28th Nov 2009 02:38
Link
Well, now I got a basic collision system up working. Only problem is that it wont make any other shapes than boxes and spheres

Keep it simple.
Questions? Mail me
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Silvester
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th Dec 2005
Location: Netherlands
Posted: 28th Nov 2009 08:46 Edited at: 28th Nov 2009 08:52
Link
Quote: "GDK.Net really doesn't seem to be attracting as much attention as one might think it should."

Indeed, it's a very easy to use language and frankly uses LESS CPU then DarkGDK and DBP.(DBP : 50%, DarkGDK : 40%, DarkGDK.NET : 17%) yet maintains to run at the same speed! The main issue being here though is probably the hard to find webpage and the €25,- price tag, since DarkGDK AND DBP are free now a days. Well, and there's always the input issues... But then again those can easily be solved using some clever form input manipulation. And I mean seriously, people are whining over at the DBP forums they would like to see Object Oriented Programming... And guess what we've got?

It would be nice to see DarkPhysics converted over though, but I suppose we could all use the Wrapper Hayer found for the time being. It's better then nothing.


EDP Map Editor[2D]
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Hayer
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Nov 2005
Location: Norway
Posted: 28th Nov 2009 20:09
Link
OH GAWD BE NAIZ TO MI!

Been trying to make PhysX work with more complicated messes then boxes and sphere for like 12hours now..

Keep it simple.
Questions? Mail me
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
KISTech
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Feb 2008
Location: Aloha, Oregon
Posted: 30th Nov 2009 20:47
Link
It runs at the same speed only in relation to the framerate. For some reason they have VSYNC locked and you can't unlock it, which I find somewhat irritating, but the good part is the main loop still seems to run faster, so you can do more between frames without impacting framerate.

The part I really don't like is the extra steps you have to go through to get to a GDK.Net command.

I mean, is it really necessary to break all the commands out into sections like DBCore, DBCamera, etc.. The language is complicated enough to type and get everything just right, why not just lump all the commands under one section. Like DB.RotateCamaera, DB.Move, DB.LoadObject, etc..

Simplify rather than complicate.

The KIS in KISTech stands for Keep It Simple.

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Silvester
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th Dec 2005
Location: Netherlands
Posted: 1st Dec 2009 06:44 Edited at: 1st Dec 2009 06:44
Link
*cough* Imports DarkGDK.<section> *cough*


EDP Map Editor[2D]
Back to top
Profile PM Email
KISTech
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Feb 2008
Location: Aloha, Oregon
Posted: 1st Dec 2009 18:18
Link
Ok, ok.. I've been programming for over 20 years, but I'm new to C#.

Thanks for that.

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Silvester
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th Dec 2005
Location: Netherlands
Posted: 1st Dec 2009 18:23
Link
In C# it's Using DarkGDK.<Section> if I'm correct.


EDP Map Editor[2D]
Back to top
Profile PM Email
G Man
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 17th Nov 2004
Location:
Posted: 2nd Dec 2009 12:31
Link
Collision is available in DarkGDK.Net all by itself without any plugins. Here is my sliding collision scheme in VB.Net: http://forum.thegamecreators.com/?m=forum_view&t=93997&b=22

Intel Pentium 4, 3.4GHz, 1280MB RAM, NVidia Quadro FX3000/256MB, 240GB HD, XP Pro
Back to top
Profile PM
Stefano
User Banned
Posted: 2nd Dec 2009 16:42
Link
@G Man

This is for previous version of DarkDGK.Net, isn't it?
Back to top
Profile
KISTech
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Feb 2008
Location: Aloha, Oregon
Posted: 2nd Dec 2009 18:23
Link
@G Man,

Looks interesting. It would still be nice to have Sparky's in GDK.Net, but this would certainly be better than the built-in collision commands.

@Silvester,

So if you add

using DarkGDK.Basic2D
using DarkGDK.Basic3D
using DarkGDK.Core
using DarkGDK. (etc...)

Then you can just use the commands like a normal person?

See, that's why these languages tick me off so much. Why not just make it that way in the first place. It's just common sense. I know you can do the above, but should you really have to? Really?

I know it's not just DarkGDK.Net. It's the same throughout the language, and I haven't really come across a good reason for it.

@Hayer,

Sorry, not trying to hijack your thread..

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Silvester
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th Dec 2005
Location: Netherlands
Posted: 2nd Dec 2009 18:32
Link
Quote: "@Silvester,

So if you add

using DarkGDK.Basic2D
using DarkGDK.Basic3D
using DarkGDK.Core
using DarkGDK. (etc...)

Then you can just use the commands like a normal person?

See, that's why these languages tick me off so much. Why not just make it that way in the first place. It's just common sense. I know you can do the above, but should you really have to? Really?"


If I remember it right, yes.


EDP Map Editor[2D]
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Hayer
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Nov 2005
Location: Norway
Posted: 2nd Dec 2009 19:16
Link
I think its great. Called OOP, namespaces, classes, types, struct, objects, hell ye', I love'em!

Keep it simple.
Questions? Mail me
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
KISTech
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Feb 2008
Location: Aloha, Oregon
Posted: 2nd Dec 2009 21:42
Link
I guess it's just information overload. Trying to figure out where in the program you have access to this or that all the time, and there are places you can't use something you need, and others where you don't need it that you can. It's very frustrating.

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
pirogoth
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Apr 2008
Location: Good Old California
Posted: 4th Dec 2009 08:31
Link
Quote: "@Silvester,

So if you add

using DarkGDK.Basic2D
using DarkGDK.Basic3D
using DarkGDK.Core
using DarkGDK. (etc...)

Then you can just use the commands like a normal person?

See, that's why these languages tick me off so much. Why not just make it that way in the first place. It's just common sense. I know you can do the above, but should you really have to? Really?

I know it's not just DarkGDK.Net. It's the same throughout the language, and I haven't really come across a good reason for it."


They separate functions/objects/variables off into namespaces for a rather good reason. The same reason they do so in C++ or most other languages these days. It's the same reason I bang my head against the desk every time I see a student or other programmer write the dreaded "using namespace std;" in a C++ application.

In doing so you risk polluting your namespace and overriding declarations in every namespace you include in this manner. It's a very serious issue and one that most serious programmers are well acquainted with, despite how annoying it is.

-Piro
Back to top
Profile PM Email
KISTech
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Feb 2008
Location: Aloha, Oregon
Posted: 4th Dec 2009 23:08
Link
I do understand, at least to some degree. I would call myself a serious programmer, having written programs in at least a dozen languages throughout my 20+ year career in IT, some of which are still in use today.

There are just things in the current languages like C++ and C# that I just don't get. It just seems more complicated than it needs to be.

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Yoda Master
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Feb 2008
Location: Genova
Posted: 5th Dec 2009 10:12
Link
@ KISTech

In my opinion are not the languages to be more complicated than they needs to be...Instead A LOT of days have passed in your career and you have seen so many things that you find hard to learn a new language and bend yourself to it. As you said you have "written programs in at least a dozen languages throughout my 20+ year career".

C++ and C# have the C-prefix... But they are NOT C...

Regards

Fear leads to anger
Anger leads to hate
Hate leads to suffering
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
KISTech
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Feb 2008
Location: Aloha, Oregon
Posted: 6th Dec 2009 00:37
Link
A nice way of saying I'm an old fart.

That's probably part of it. The other part is having 4 kids and a house and bills to pay, and I can't spend that long 3 day weekend locked in my room learning a new language like I used to.

I'll still be able to do it with C#, it's just going to take a bit longer than it used to.

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Mulderman
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Jan 2004
Location: C:\\
Posted: 10th Jan 2010 12:16
Link
.NET can be decompiled to recompilable sources, that's why i don't like to use it.

Every bit of your EXE must be obfuscated.

New GTA2 Map Editor :: http://www.gta2madness.co.cc
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Back to top

Login to post a reply

Server time is: 2024-04-18 05:12:21
Your offset time is: 2024-04-18 05:12:21