[library] bump.lua v3.1.4 - Collision Detection

[I~=Spam]

Maybe it could be a user configurable option to have marios bounding box change to work on a ramp when in contact with a ramp (but it will use the normal bounding box for checking for collisions with normal objects.)

[kikito]

@Positive07 Thanks for taking the time to explain yourself with images, it makes understanding what you propose infinitely easier. I however think that your solution would be more complex than any of the ones I have proposed myself. I doubt I will be following your train of thought, but I am thankful for your feedback nonetheless.

@I~=Spam That is what I was hinting on when I talked about "using a filter". You would set a variable on, and then "filter out" collisions with tiles when on top of a ramp. The fact that you didn't understand what I meant exemplifies very well the problem of this approach. Filters are the most difficult thing to "get" about bump.lua, and I hesitate to rely on them.

I have almost completely discarded that option; I am presently alternating between "center of feet + buffer" and "corners of feet + displacement when drawing". Each has its pros and cons. We'll see.

[Jasoco]

I think if anything, give us the second option where the ramp is offset from the graphics. At least it would still work in other cases.

[bobbyjones]

I actually think two collision boxes is a way simpler solution. One for ramps and one for everything else.

[Ethan-Taylor]

You should try adding circular and triangular collision boxes.

[kikito]

I don't think you realize what you are asking.

It has taken me years (literally) to get boxes working just right. The amount of math and time it would take to get circles and triangles working as they should is beyond me.

Also, the library's interface would have to become more complex to allow for that change.

[NightKawata]

You should try adding circular and triangular collision boxes.

I would probably look into using HardonCollider for those purposes. As kikito says, 'tis a little out of scope for bump.

Now, would bump benefit from it? Yes, but then in my opinion it loses a bit of its charm, you know? What I enjoy about bump's design is its simplicity and relative "duct-tape-esque" integration into a project. Fancy non-existant words aside, I like that it's pretty easy to just drop bump in and 2 hours later you have an awesome tech demo available. As kikito said, it'd probably complicate things inside and outside of the hood.

HardonCollider is very versatile, but I do think the two authors have different design philosophies for them. I would definitely look into that if you're going to need things that aren't AABB's. I do think and know that there are tons of things you can accomplish with only AABB's as well.

And to kikito: I am not trying to insult you in any way, shape, or form in my first sentence. bump is quite a feature-rich library and I may end up using it for my next project. The way it's designed I do approve of, even if it took me about an hour to think how I'd make use of it. That part's not important.

[Ethan-Taylor]

I don't think you realize what you are asking.

It has taken me years (literally) to get boxes working just right. The amount of math and time it would take to get circles and triangles working as they should is beyond me.

Also, the library's interface would have to become more complex to allow for that change.

Yeah, I get what your saying, and there's no offence taken from your comment (your the creator, so you probably understand it better then me).
But for people looking for a quick fix for more advanced collision there's no way out. You have to know everything, which sucks.
I'm having tonnes of problems with Hardon and this is mainly because of the poor explanation of it. Which really makes me annoyed

I've actaully switched from a game engine, which makes me really lazy towards love and its libraries.
I appreciate you for putting a great deal of effort into this library, but maybe when I get more experienced I can try to make a library for all purposes.

I still think bump could benifit from circular collsions, but I understand that you need time to yourself too, and not everyone can make a commitment to offer a library for free that had weeks upon weeks of work in it.

That's fair enough.
I guess I'll pick up that maths book I had lying around.

[kikito]

I am glad we understand each other

Good luck with your circular collisions!

[Sarcose]

Hey there, I have a noob question. How would I integrate this with, say, the Fine_Tile_Based_Scrolling tutorial? I just wanted to have a very basic map to collide around with, but unfortunately when I set them up together the collisions don't happen where the map is drawn, unless I don't ever move map.x and map.y after the initial load.

I read about using world to query positions. Would it be possible to use world to draw the map directly? And how would that look?