Along with all buzz talks about the wonderful Bumptop desktop environment, Im getting this question now. What is the relation with Physics and Bumptop techniques. Basically, I am interested in learning the techniques/algorithms followed in this desktop environment. For example,
Collision Detection -- is used when one icon is about to collide on other one.
Any other known techniques?
It probably uses a quite common rigid body dynamics simulator as used in (simple/older) computer games. If you want to play with one yourself, have a look at Open Dynamics Engine.
I'd say that it uses mechanics (the branch of physics that describes motion) to determine/calculate the outcome of object interaction.
I remember seeing a very early demo of this months ago - it looks very impressive!
Well, it looks as though it's using friction and velocity as well. The friction slows the animations down - if it didn't then things would just fly out of the way. Velocity is used to have things move at speed in certain directions.
More info here
BumpTop
Extensive use of physics effects like
bumping and tossing is applied to
documents when they interact, for a
more realistic experience.
Related
How can we access the point cloud in the Leap Motion API? One feature that led me to purchase it was the point cloud demo from their promo video, but I can't seem to locate documentation regarding it and user replies on the forums seem mixed. Am I just missing something?
I'm looking to use the Leap Motion as a sort of cheap 3D scanner.
That demo was clearly a mockup which simulated a 3-D model of the human hand, not actual point cloud data. You can tell by the fact that points were displayed which could not have possibly been read by the sensor, due to obstruction.
orion78fr points to one forum post on this, but the transcript of an interview by the founders provides more information direct from the source:
Can you please allow access to cloud points in SDK?
David: So I think sometimes people have a misperception as to really
how things work in our hardware. It’s very different from other things
like the Kinect, and in normal device operation we have very different
priorities than most other technologies. Our priority is precision,
small movements, very low latency, very low CPU usage - so in order to
do that we will often be making sacrifices that make what the device
is doing completely not applicable to what I think you’re getting at,
which is 3D scanning.
What we’re working on are sort of alternative device modes that will
let you use it for those sorts of purposes, but that’s not what it was
originally built for.You know, it’s our goal to let it be able to do
those things and with the hardware can do many things. But our
priority right now is of course human computer interaction, which we
think is really the missing component in technology, and that’s our
core passion.
Michael: We really believe in trying to squeeze every ounce of
optimization and performance out of the devices for the purpose they
were built. So in this case the Leap today is intended to be a great
human computer interface. And we have made thousands of little
optimizations along the way to make it better, that might sacrifice
things in the process that might be useful for things like 3D scanning
objects. But those are intentional decisions, but they don’t mean that
we think 3D scanning isn’t exciting and isn’t a good use case. There
will be other things we build as a company in the future, and other
devices that might be able to do both or maybe there will be two
different devices. One that is fully optimized for 3D scanning, and
one that continues to be optimized and as great as it can be at
tracking fingers and hands.
If we haven’t done a good job communicating that the device isn’t
about 3D scanning or isn’t going to be able to 3D scan, that’s
unfortunate and it’s a mistake on our part - but that’s something that
we’ve had to sacrifice. The good news is that those sacrifices have
made the main device really exceptional at tracking hands and fingers.
I have developed with the Leap Motion Controller as well as several other 3-D scanning systems, and from what I've seen I'd seriously doubt if we're ever going to get point cloud data out of the currently shipping hardware. If we do, the fidelity will be far below what we see for gross finger and hand tracking from that device.
There are some low-cost alternatives for 3-D scanning that have started to emerge. SoftKinetic has their DepthSense 325 camera for $250 (which is effectively the same as the Creative Gesture Camera that is only $150 right now). The DS 325 is a time-of-flight IR camera that gives you a 320x240 point cloud map of the 3-D space in front of it. In my tests, it worked well with opaque materials, but anything with a little gloss or shininess gave it trouble.
The PrimeSense Carmine 1.09 ($200) uses structured light to get point cloud data in front of it, as an advancement of the technology they supplied for the original Kinect. It has a lower effective sptial resolution than the SoftKinetic cameras, but it seems to provide less depth noise and to work on a wider variety of materials.
The DUO was also a promising project, but unfortunately its Kickstarter campaign failed. It was using stereoscopic imaging from an IR source to return a point cloud from a couple of PS3 Eye cameras. They may restart that project at some point in the future.
While the Leap may not do what you want, it looks like more and more devices are coming out in the consumer price range to enable 3-D scanning.
See this link
It says that yes, Leap Motion can theorically handle point cloud and it was temporarily part of the visualiser in beta and no, you can't access it using the Leap Motion APIs right now.
It may appear in the future but it's not a priority of Leap Motion Team.
As with LeapMotion SDK 2.x one can at least access the stereo camera images! As I know by myself it is a convenient solution, for many tasks where the point cloud data was asked for. This is why I mention it here, even if it does not give the point-cloud data internally generated by the driver to extract the pointer-metadata. But now one has the capability to generate own point-cloud by yourself, this is why I think it is strongly related to the question.
Currently there is no access to the Pointcloud in the public API. But I think this video is no mock-up, so there should be a possibility:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MYgsAMKLu7s#t=40s
Roadtovr recently reviewed the Nimble Sense Kickstarter, which is using point cloud.
It’s the same technology that the Kinect 2 uses, and it’s supposed to have some advantages over the Leap Motion.
Because it’s a depth sensing camera, you can point the camera top-down like the Touch+, although their product will not ship till next year.
I'm looking for a 3D modeling/animation software. Honestly, I don't know if this is something achievable - but what I want to have is some kind of visual representation of various ideas.
Speaking in future tense: if I were to read about of the boot process of an OS, I would visualize the various data structures building up; and I can step through the process with a sliding bar or so. If I were to think about a complex data structure, I would have a 3D representation of various links and relations between them. Another would be a Git repository at work - how commits/trees/blobs are linked in space, and how they progress as time passes. And all of these would be interactive.
The reason why I want to do this is that it'd be very easy to explain the process. Not just to others, but also to self. I can revisit my model, and it'd be a quick brush up.
I'm sure there are no ready-to-use softwares for this. What I could think of are Flash, with action scripting, or Blender 3D (Python scripting?); or Synfig. Whatever it's, I've to learn up start; and I'm looking for suggestions as to which (even if not in my list) is the right one to choose.
Thanks
I've used Blender, but it requires a large upfront investment of time, especially to learn the UI. Blender is all about the hotkeys. Once you have them memorized, it's great. But getting there takes a while.
Alice might be worth a look. It looks easy to use and supports scripting.
There are many tools available for 3D modeling. I'm a fan of 3D Studio max. But there is Blender, Maya, and truespace.
You may want to take a look at the field of visualization to help with illustrating your message.
I suspect that packages such as 3D Studio Max and Blender are too powerful, in the sense that your relatively simple requirements will force you on too long a learning path. Try Googling for Data Structure Animations to get an idea of what others have used. Also, head over to Information Aesthetics, they recently featured a tool for visualising commits and checkouts to/from repositories and similar.
My favourite is nearly the Lego Designer, very good for 3D block animations, but so far I haven't figured out how to add text to the blocks.
I am a hobbyist console C++ developer. I have worked with pointers, arrays, std::vectors, std::strings, classes, and several data structures, including stacks and binary trees. I have some experience in linear algebra and geometry, and know the basics of physics. I do NOT have experience with win32, QT, openGL, DX9, OGRE, etc. I am still learning about the more valuable parts of OOP, like polymorphism.
I started C++ as a first language, and do not have experience with other languages. I could probably work with C, but I'd need to get used to manipulating char*'s and regular arrays (and not initing variables).
My question is, with my experience, when should I break into the development of GUI applications/game applications? Do I need to ground myself more firmly in certain areas of math, become comfortable with win32, get used to SDK?
If this question is too subjective for you to comfortably give advice, then when did you break into GUI/game development, and what steps did you take to make yourself comfortable with it?
Editing this so it will get bumped. Does anyone else have any opinions?
Caveat: I am a very "learn-by-doing" type of person, so take this with a grain of salt.
Sounds like you know enough programming basics to jump into something more realistic, and have enough background to justify that realistic project being a game.
I'd recommend downloading Visual C# Express and Microsoft's XNA Game Studio 3.0.
XNA is a game framework that has a lot of stuff done for you (sound, sprites, 3D support, etc.) built on a professional-quality C# platform and it would be a good starting point. Create a new XNA project and play around. Get some stuff to appear on the screen, then learn to manipulate it with user input. If you are interested in 3D, make a 3D shape such as a triangle. Then, make it spin. Then, make it spin based on user input. Then, add other objects and collisions.
Surely, there will be things in the framework that you don't understand. Tackle them as they come - use Google and ask questions here until you do understand them. Take it one step at a time and you should be just fine.
I'd personally recommend you to start out with Win32; try creating a basic window & move on from that point. Try making a simple 2D game engine in which you are able to make a game like chess or so. This could also serve as project for which you could write an AI; which is another part of Game Development!
After you finish that, the next step should be 3D. You could use the engine you wrote before and modify it from 2D to 3D. Pick a 3D API; OpenGL or DirectX. Once you have a basic engine, start writing a game. Need extra functionality? Then add it to the engine!
Math-wise you should know what matrices are. Trigonometry can come in handy as well.
I wouldn't waste my time with Xna, it's just a hype. :P
It seems you already have gained the basic knowledge of a programming language to start game programming. I'm with you in building on what you have already gained, such as learning OOP, and practicing more with pointers. I recommend you move on and don't turn to learning another tool "programming language" to achieve your goals.
So if you are interested in game programming, I recommend you pick a C++ framework and work on it, you'll definitely learn more advanced programming by just using it.
I recommend Gosu. It's not full of advanced features, which can be an advantage, but it has a very clean design and uses C++ in an elegant and modern way. Which makes it very friendly especially for beginners.
Also HGE is another good 2D engine.
To sum up, dive into programming more by actually "doing it" with what you have now. That's how you'll progress, and you'll be amazed with the results. And when "doing it" don't get disturbed with other languages and tools you already know something similar to it, and at the same time when learning a tool that helps you to build on your current knowledge, in your case I mean the C++ engine, don't choose very complicated ones (IMO, like OpenGL, DirectX, Win32...etc) because you'll end up spending time on learning the tool not using it and there is a great chance you'll get frustrated. You can always learn the low level things later, and it will make a lot more sense then.
as this question is kind of subjective, because every programmer has a favourite library to start with, I will recommend SDL as it is simple, well structured, and very complete, there are a lot of tutorials out there to guide you step-by-step from making a simple window to complex 3D manipulation. Everything can be implemented with ease.
As a side note, if you want to start programming games, I would recommend, also, that you read some tuts or books about a Game basics (initialization, game loop, update cycles), so that you know how to put your knowledge to the good work.
I have been asked to investigate porting Wii games and some (Sony) PSOne games to OpenGL ES (can you guess what platform?).
I have never undertaken a game port like this before (and will be hiring someone to do it) but I'd like to understand the process.
Does the Wii use OpenGL? If not what does it use and how easy is it to port to OpenGL / OpenGL ES?
Are there any resources/books/blogs that will help me in understanding the process?
Will my company have to become an official Wii developer? If so where do I start that process?
Porting from the Wii or the PSOne is a complex and involved task that can be broken down into multiple separate engineering efforts working in parallel to produce a working end product. The best possible thing you can do before moving to the target hardware is to compartmentalize all of the non-portable code while ensuring that the game continues to run as expected. When you commit to moving to the new platform, your effort switches to reimplementing the non-portable compartmentalized parts.
So, to answer your question, yes, you will need to become or work with a Sony and Nintendo licensed developer in order to take this approach. In the case of Sony, I don't even know if they offer a PSOne development program anymore which presents issues. Your Sony account rep can help clarify.
The major subsystems that are likely to be the focus of your porting effort are:
Rendering Graphics code contains fundamental assumptions about the hardware it is being run on in order to perform optimally. API-level compatibility is superficial compatibility and does not get you as much as you may hope it does. Plan on finding the entry point to the renderer and determining what data you need to render a scene and rewriting all the render code from there for your target hardware.
Game Saving Game state serialization and archival will need to be separated out. Older games often fwrite() structs with #pragma packed fields. Is that still going to work for you?
Networking Wii games write to high level services that are unavailable on your target hardware. At the low level, sockets are still sockets. What network services do your Wii games rely on?
Controls From where you are coming from to where you are going, anything short of a full redesign or reimagining of input will result in poor reviews of the software.
Memory Management Console games often make fundamental assumptions about the rate the system software returns memory from the heap, how much fragmentation it will cause and the duration the game needs to operate under these conditions. These memory management assumptions are obsolete on the new platform. It is wise to write your own memory manager that provides a cushion from the operating system. Also, console games compiled for release are stripped of most error handling and don't gracefully handle running out of memory-- just a heads up.
Content Your bottleneck will be system memory. Can you fit the necessary assets into memory? With textures, you can reduce mip where necessary and with graphics hardware timing, you can pull in the far clipping plane. With assets resident in memory, you may need a technical artist to go through and reduce the face density of your models or an animation programmer to implement a more size-friendly animation codec. This is very game specific.
You also run into the standard set of problems with things like bit compatibility (though the Wii and PSOne are both 32-bit), compiler idiosyncrasies, build script incompatibilities and proprietary compiler extensions.
Games are relatively challenging to test. A good rule of thumb is you want to have enough testers on your team to run through the game in a maximum of two days, covering all major aspects of play. In games that take a long time to beat (RPGs with 30+ hours of gameplay), your testing team needs to be quite large to offer full coverage. Because you are just doing a port, you can come up with a testing plan that maximizes coverage of your new code without having a testing team punch every wall in your game to make sure it (still) has clipping. The game shipped once.
Becoming a licensed developer requires you to apply. The turnaround time, from experience, is not good. Generally speaking, priority is given to studios with shipped titles and organized offices with reasonably good security and the ability to buy the (relatively) expensive development kits. You may be better off working with a licensed developer if you do not meet these criteria.
Console and game development is challenging for people already experienced in it. There is no book that covers it all. My recommendation is to attempt to recruit an expert who has experience shipping titles in a position of systems or engine programmer. What types of programmers and skillsets exist in games is a whole different question for Stack, though.
Games consoles don't use OpenGL but their own, custom libraries. The main reason is that they are pretty slow and have little RAM. So you need to squeeze out every drop of performance you can get. And that means: Custom code. Usually, you get a framework with the developer kit which gets you started and then, you build your code from that. Eventually, you'll start replacing parts from the developer kit with your own special code to get all the speed and special effects you need.
There is a reason why PSOne games are so ugly on the PS3 despite the fact that the developers have access to the sources: Revenue just doesn't justify to touch the code.
Which is one reason why game development is so expensive: Every game is (more or less) a completely new product. Sometimes, game companies can reuse a bit of code from the last version but more often than not, they have to develop everything again. They also don't talk much with each other.
In recent years, kits have become more complex and powerful and you can get complete game engines (with all kinds of effects and 3D support) but each engine is a completely different kind of beast, so you can't even copy code from engine A to B.
Today, media content (video, audio and render sequences) are so expensive that the actual game engine is often a minor detail, so this isn't going to change any time soon.
Net result: If you want to port a game, write an emulator for the hardware (which is usually pretty simple and allows you to run all kinds of games).
[EDIT] To develop software for the Wii, see here: http://www.warioworld.com/
For a Wii emulator, see http://wiiemulator.net/
I ported a couple of games, when I was a new game programmer, from working with one version of our engine to a newer version (where backwards compatibility was neither ignored nor pursued). Even copying (and possibly renaming) the files and placing them in a home in the new project was a bit of work. Following that, the procedure was:
recompile
fix many of the hundreds of errors [in many places, with the same error occurring over and over again]
and
"wire up" calls from the new game engine to the appropriate calls in the old code
"wire up" function calls from the old code into the new game engine
deal with other oddities (ex. in the old game engine, the 2d game would "swizzle" textures itself; in the new version, the engine did it (on specific platforms))
and, while I don't recall this clearly, it was probably mixed in with a bunch of #ifdeffing out portions of code so the thing would actually compile, and possibly creating function stubs to be filled in later.
As I recall, it was three or four days until I had something that compiled. (But, it did help when we ported other games from the old version to the new one!)
The magnitude of the task will come down to what the code you are getting is like. If it has generic 3D calls that you can intercept -- add a thunking layer to -- then you are in business. It depends on the level of abstraction in the code. If it is well-behaved and has things like "RenderModel" and "RenderWorld" calls, you can replace those functions, and even the structures that they work with. If drawing is occurring all over the place, and calls are more like "Draw Polygon" and "Draw Line" or "Draw using this highly optimised data structure", then you are likely in for a long slog.
You shouldn't need a Wii dev kit. Sometimes it is nice to verify that the code you are given does indeed compile in the original environment (and matches the shipping code!), but sometimes you can just take it on faith and make it work in its new environment.
Lastly, I don't think the Wii uses OpenGL, and I really don't know where to point you for further help.
What you may want to do is to start with designing the architecture of the game, write up a detailed specification for what the new game is like.
Once you have this, since you will be rewriting the code, you may find that some of the business logic that doesn't deal with the console can be ported over. But, anything dealing with I/O, user interaction or graphics/sounds will be rewritten, so you might as well do that from scratch.
A specification is very important, to make certain that you know how the current game is working so that the new port will give the same user experience, if that is what is desired.
You may want to keep the same bugs, if that is part of the experience, as, if I know that in the Wii I can jump down and bounce off the wall to safely land, then if I can't do that in the new version then that may be bothersome.
Well porting a PS1 game to an iPhone would be quite a task they work in very different ways. I'm sure its doable but it will be a LOT of work to replace all the fixed point maths and lack of Z-Buffer based rendering to a real graphics chip.
Wii would be a lot easier. The Wii API is very similar to OpenGL. However the Wii has some very nice fixed function features that just are not available on any other GL based platform. Should be doable, though ...
I'm not really sure I can say anything more than that. Have signed far too many NDAs over the years to be 100% sure of what I can and cannot say ;)
Still if you want to hire someone to do some porting work and are prepared to supply the required hardware then I might be free ;)
I am planning to design an application which will provide a video of a car on a track (just like a demo of a game like RACE Pro), and depict its characteristics.
For example, if the user selects a poor handling car, then a graphical demo will be shown of that car completing a lap around a modelled track with the car's behaviour in relation to its characteristics (e.g. prone to skidding, understeer).
I know this is a fairly complex task, and I don't intend to code this straight away. What issues/topics does this requirement fall under? I have seen plenty of books on physics in programming and game engine/3d modelling and rendering engines. Are these relevant to this?
This is certainly a significant undertaking, but as a starting point you could take a look at the Racer project. It's a very detailed car racing simulation, highly customisable for different vehicle setups, and has publicly available source code for its engine (see the downloads page).
Physics and game programming books are absolutely relevant to this. Fortunately there are some great free and Open Source projects out there which could be a great help to you with this project. I've listed some below.
Physics:
Open Dynamics Engine
Tokamak
Bullet
3D graphics:
Ogre
Crystal Space
Crystal Entity Layer (CEL), which provides a game engine interface for Crystal Space.
You can tie any of the above together in whatever combination suits you.
You could also use Blender's built-in game engine, which includes the Bullet physics engine. I would recommend this as a starting point since it will give you a fully integrated interactive 3D simulation creation kit. The game engine is scriptable with Python (you can do all your script editing in Blender with its internal text editor).
In addition to the Racer project you could take a look at TORCS - The Open Racing Car Simulator, which is also Open Source as the name suggests.