Not that I'm personally facing this problem, but wouldnt you be able to do a simple distance check and have the hitscan move down depending on how far it traveled and the gravity. The only problem I could see with this is that hitscan is a line and it would actually modify the trajectory of the bullet out of the barrel but there must be some way around it. Just providing a few suggestions. If you can't fix the bug, you might still have something relativly convincing...
On Mon, 3 Jan 2005 15:19:37 -0500, r00t 3:16 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Thanks botman I will probably get this book :P > > > r00t 3:16 > CQC Gaming > www.cqc-gaming.com > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jeffrey "botman" Broome" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 3:04 PM > Subject: Re: [hlcoders] Objects, Physics, and Gravity Concepts > > > r00t 3:16 wrote: > >> > >> But suppose you wanted it so players who shoot weapons had to > >> compensate for distance, aiming a little ahead of a running player > >> etc. > >> > >> Is the source engine able to do this? > > > > I think it probably depends on how fast you want the bullets to move > > through the air. > > > > If you make bullets a true entity (with gravity and collisions, etc), > > then you have to update their location as they move through the world > > (applying gravity, checking for collisions, etc.). > > > > Calculating the height change due to gravity over a given period of time > > is pretty straight forward high school physics (use google.com if you > > want the math). > > > > The real issue is that things that move VERY fast through the world > > don't get their position updated often enough to follow the path of a > > true parabola. You get something like this (excuse the ASCII graphics)... > > > > Game Ticks (StartFrame) at the 'v's > > > > > > v v v v > > > > x----------x > > / \ > > / \ > > / \ > > / \ > > / \ > > / \ > > / \ > > x x > > > > > > The 'x' object follows the path of a parabola but because you are not > > ticking the engine at 1000's of times per second, you wind up with > > discrete locations along the curve (at the points in time where you can > > calculate where the entity will be at that time). If you are only > > checking for collisions at these points in time (or doing line/hull > > checks from the previous point in time to the current point in time), > > you will miss hitting entities that don't lie along your discrete path > > (like at the top of the arch in this case). > > > > You can modify the calculations so that you do your own "stepping" > > between discrete points in time to create a true parabolic curve and do > > your own collision checking to see if an entity was collided with, but > > this can be somewhat time/CPU consuming. > > > > There's a pretty good O'Reilly book called "Physics for Game > > Developers"... > > > > http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/physicsgame/ > > > > ...if you are really serious about creating realistic physics in games, > > you should definitely get that book (I hope your math skills are REALLY > > strong). :) > > > > -- > > Jeffrey "botman" Broome > > > > _______________________________________________ > > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > > please visit: > > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please > visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders > > _______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders
