It's not a true 2d indeed. But water and terrain draws with single quad + single shader. There are some tricks that cause picture to look like 3d.
It's not a true 2d indeed. But water and terrain draws with single quad + single shader. There are some tricks that cause picture to look like 3d.
Theory is - when you know everything but nothing works.
Practice is - when all works, but you don't know why.
We combine theory and practice - nothing works and nobody knows why
Somehow I thought so... Shame it isn't open source - I for one would love to take a peek at those shaders and render code .
Anyways, great work. Hoping to see the quad engine flexing its muscles in the compo.
I once tried to change the world. But they wouldn't give me the source code. Damned evil cunning.
Here some for you:
Its IGDC #68 intro. Made by me with quad:
and here download:
Download (2mb)
Theory is - when you know everything but nothing works.
Practice is - when all works, but you don't know why.
We combine theory and practice - nothing works and nobody knows why
Quad-engine v0.2.0 goes public.
Headers and dll
Fontrender
Colorpicker
Usefull links:
Wiki
blog
Demos:
IGDC68 intro
TGame
POM
Ligth raycasting
Quad Galaxian
Theory is - when you know everything but nothing works.
Practice is - when all works, but you don't know why.
We combine theory and practice - nothing works and nobody knows why
This is very impressive work! you have certainly surpassed my previous 2D efforts. I had implemented 2D soft shadows in a geometric manner by casting back-faces and calculating penumbra/umbra regions based upon the size of the light source. Is this similar to what you do or are you using a technique that's more akin to shadow-mapping?
When the moon hits your eye like a big pizza pie - that's an extinction level impact event.
Indeed. There is really great article about shadowcasting: http://www.catalinzima.com/2010/07/m...ic-2d-shadows/ check it out. It will helps a lot in understanding shader based technique.
Theory is - when you know everything but nothing works.
Practice is - when all works, but you don't know why.
We combine theory and practice - nothing works and nobody knows why
ahh I see, so it's basically a per-pixel technique but distorting the texture to take advantage of parallel rays! very clever (but GPU heavy)
The original article I followed was on gamedev by Orangy Tang but it's not there anymore, but there's an implementation in D here :
http://www.incasoftware.de/~kamm/pro...ft-shadows-2d/
So your technique is more like shadow-mapping and the linked technique is more like shadow volumes. Indeed, even having advantages and disadvantages similar to their 3D counter-parts.
It would be difficult to optimize the geometric technique using the GPU, but it does have the advantage of mathematically correct penumbra-umbra regions where as the image space technique is an approximation blur based on the distance from the light, but saying that, who cares? it looks great
The image space technique has the advantage that it doesn't need geometric information of the shadow-casters, it will work with any pixel data that's thrown at it.
I'd say that the geometric technique would be useful in the fact that it frees up a lot of GPU power for other effects/lower end cards. Shadow volumes are not favoured in 3D today because of high-poly geometry, it's too slow compared to shadow-maps.
But 2D? not an issue.
it would be interesting to see both techniques in quad I think they would both have their uses, the geometric technique would be far more useful in situations where you wanted to test if points/geometry are in shadow CPU side (for example think of a stealth MP game where you'd do this on the server without any hardware context) and the Image-Space technique can work well with things like particle systems (I bet you could do some funky stuff with partial shadowing, accumilated thru layers of semi-occluding smoke particles for example)
When the moon hits your eye like a big pizza pie - that's an extinction level impact event.
I can certify that all that fanciness runs under wine like a dream - it has a few stub warnings etc but I ran your demo fine on ubuntu 10.10 x64 wit wine 1.3.26.
I do indeed like that demo and it runs smoothly on my ATI 4330 with wine and a lot of other stuff open. I don't know about a GMA 950 or similar but that was quite nice indeed. Thats some momentum in the quad engine you've got going it seems.
I once tried to change the world. But they wouldn't give me the source code. Damned evil cunning.
Thank you guys, sorry for long answer.
phibermon:
I will try to do a lot of features like this. Strong, beautiful and easy to use.
code_glitch:
Sound great. I do not have an ubuntu or something else. My testing machine is very strange for typical PC now. I test it on win7x64 notebook with 2 video cards: nVidia Quadro nvs4200 and Intel HD3000 (integrated in sandy bridge). But there is no linux
BTW, 0.2.1 version is going public. 0.2.1 Headers and Library. Also here is wiki and changelog: http://quad-engine.com/wiki/doku.php
Theory is - when you know everything but nothing works.
Practice is - when all works, but you don't know why.
We combine theory and practice - nothing works and nobody knows why
I used a Quad Engine for game development on the part of the 72nd contest IGDC. Here's what happened: Quad Space Attack.
To move use the arrow keys. For shooting, use the A / S. To turn off the effects of press E.
The game is simple. Made for 2 weeks. Some parts are not completed yet, such as no sound. In general, as it is .
Quad Engine work has shown himself well. To use it simply, shaders, added just a line or two. There were a few bugs, but they have successfully corrected the author of the engine. In general, the engine is quite suitable for development.
And finally, a screenshot:
Bookmarks