Multiple Collision Polygons?? Help! (Isometric Game)
by Ronny Germany · in Torque Game Builder · 08/18/2010 (8:46 pm) · 7 replies
I am having a lot of problems with Collision in my Isometric RPG.
For example, here is a 2D image of part of a building.
[img]http://2dsprites.webs.com/d.png[/img]
When I go into the Collision Editor, it only allows me to make a Polygon. The thing is... I need lines, not polygons.
I need it to block off everywhere EXCEPT the four stair entrances and walking space in the middle.
Besides ripping apart every image, which is way too complicated, I don't know how to do this. It won't let me make multiple polygons or anything but a SINGLE polygon of collision.
Any help? Please?
For example, here is a 2D image of part of a building.
[img]http://2dsprites.webs.com/d.png[/img]
When I go into the Collision Editor, it only allows me to make a Polygon. The thing is... I need lines, not polygons.
I need it to block off everywhere EXCEPT the four stair entrances and walking space in the middle.
Besides ripping apart every image, which is way too complicated, I don't know how to do this. It won't let me make multiple polygons or anything but a SINGLE polygon of collision.
Any help? Please?
#2
That said, you need to look into Scene Objects. These are "invisible" objects. You could place as many as you need over that graphic and assign collision polygons to each of them to get the effect you want.
TGB doesn't handle isometric well. There is an isometric kit which you can also purchase which helps this a little, but you'll still have the issues that you're seeing now.
08/19/2010 (5:59 am)
Sometimes questions take more than 9 hours to answer. If you'd have looked, you would see that there have been 100s of posts and replies in the last few weeks alone. Busy, no; but active. The last thing this forum needs is an attitude, so please keep your posts professional.That said, you need to look into Scene Objects. These are "invisible" objects. You could place as many as you need over that graphic and assign collision polygons to each of them to get the effect you want.
TGB doesn't handle isometric well. There is an isometric kit which you can also purchase which helps this a little, but you'll still have the issues that you're seeing now.
#3
(Drawn with laptop touchpad for DEADLY ACCURACY!)
So just making some invisible collision objects should do the job. What something looks like doesn't matter at all; it's how you fake it that matters :)
08/19/2010 (6:27 am)
These are the polygons I see:(Drawn with laptop touchpad for DEADLY ACCURACY!)
So just making some invisible collision objects should do the job. What something looks like doesn't matter at all; it's how you fake it that matters :)
#4
This is not the first time I've posted questions. I had posted one question needing help and waited 3 days for a response only to get none and had to dig deep for an answer. A week later I looked and there was only one or two threads ahead of mine.
There are a lot of forums where the community is extremely active and responses are almost immediate, and Torque is rather confusing. Almost every post I researched is from 2006, while Torque2D is also known as TGB and then there's TorqueX 2D (which just adds to the confusion).
I figured Torque3D is popular and that perhaps TorqueX is the new release and the population went there instead and TGB or Torque2D died. I still don't know the difference between TGB and Torque2D (some articles act as if they are very different, so it's confusing!)
I honestly thought "Is TGB dead?" so it is not as much an attitude I wanted but a real question "Should I invest $100+ in an engine without a community?" which is a good question to ask.
Thanks for showing me it's not dead, and thank you so much for the OBVIOUS answer which I just couldn't see. I almost feel dumb, lol.
08/19/2010 (6:36 am)
Thank you both. I did not mean to have an attitude, but have been seriously wondering if TGB is alive or dead. I noticed a week ago very few posts in the forum I chose (I must have not noticed the action today or this week.)This is not the first time I've posted questions. I had posted one question needing help and waited 3 days for a response only to get none and had to dig deep for an answer. A week later I looked and there was only one or two threads ahead of mine.
There are a lot of forums where the community is extremely active and responses are almost immediate, and Torque is rather confusing. Almost every post I researched is from 2006, while Torque2D is also known as TGB and then there's TorqueX 2D (which just adds to the confusion).
I figured Torque3D is popular and that perhaps TorqueX is the new release and the population went there instead and TGB or Torque2D died. I still don't know the difference between TGB and Torque2D (some articles act as if they are very different, so it's confusing!)
I honestly thought "Is TGB dead?" so it is not as much an attitude I wanted but a real question "Should I invest $100+ in an engine without a community?" which is a good question to ask.
Thanks for showing me it's not dead, and thank you so much for the OBVIOUS answer which I just couldn't see. I almost feel dumb, lol.
#5
(I also have solutions!)
TGB users I know of all seem to be working on something, so I guess that's part of the reason it seems quiet. The other likely reason is that some are anticipating the release of the next 2D upgrade, although that's so far off I'd say better start in TGB now and finish something :)
(There are also random stray posts to the Torque Developer Network section and others ;)
08/19/2010 (7:05 am)
There's always that problem when you invest in something. Does it have a community at all? Is there documentation? How necessary is it, how good is it? Right now TGB is the desktop 2D engine that seems easiest to get started with (personal opinion, of course). It's a bit old-fashioned, but got its 1.7.5 patch recently, and a 1.7.6 is in the works. I certainly have a few issues with how they coded some parts :)(I also have solutions!)
TGB users I know of all seem to be working on something, so I guess that's part of the reason it seems quiet. The other likely reason is that some are anticipating the release of the next 2D upgrade, although that's so far off I'd say better start in TGB now and finish something :)
(There are also random stray posts to the Torque Developer Network section and others ;)
#6
I find TGB to be very powerful for my needs, especially when I have to write custom code. It all tends to fit very nicely within the design.
But with isometric, I would recommend that you implement a few key features (like level design, movement, and a ranged weapon) in a couple of engines and see what fits best.
Later!
08/19/2010 (8:14 pm)
There are definitely a lot of nearly-dead forums and the public engine forums are buried under an arrow you have to open. I definitely don't fault you for the confusion!I find TGB to be very powerful for my needs, especially when I have to write custom code. It all tends to fit very nicely within the design.
But with isometric, I would recommend that you implement a few key features (like level design, movement, and a ranged weapon) in a couple of engines and see what fits best.
Later!
#7
With ISO you will need to understand Isometric game engine creation in addition to understanding TGB.
It can certainly be done, but it might not all be as intuitive as you'd like.
For that image, I see you running into more problems than just collision... sure there are ways to split up the collision poly into a handful of them, but when the character moves into it straight from the side, I imagine you'd like the bottom half of the image to be 'on top' of the character like a wall, but the top half to be behind them. Same with if they approach it from the top... they should be able to move right into it, but it should be on top of them.
All of which doesn't even get into the fact that you'll be wanting to ramp up the character's Y coordinate as they go "UP" the stairs to maintain the illusion of depth. I can think of lovely hacky ways to do this for that image, but when I think about populating a whole world with cool ISO structures with stairs and ramps and such, my mind pretty much shuts down. :|
Anyway best of luck! That art is awesome, btw.
-T
08/20/2010 (11:15 pm)
I agree with William on this...With ISO you will need to understand Isometric game engine creation in addition to understanding TGB.
It can certainly be done, but it might not all be as intuitive as you'd like.
For that image, I see you running into more problems than just collision... sure there are ways to split up the collision poly into a handful of them, but when the character moves into it straight from the side, I imagine you'd like the bottom half of the image to be 'on top' of the character like a wall, but the top half to be behind them. Same with if they approach it from the top... they should be able to move right into it, but it should be on top of them.
All of which doesn't even get into the fact that you'll be wanting to ramp up the character's Y coordinate as they go "UP" the stairs to maintain the illusion of depth. I can think of lovely hacky ways to do this for that image, but when I think about populating a whole world with cool ISO structures with stairs and ramps and such, my mind pretty much shuts down. :|
Anyway best of luck! That art is awesome, btw.
-T
Ronny Germany
At this rate, I might as well just go with XNA game studio, Pygame, or Slick2D + Java. Ugh!!!