Collision detection at the end of a transition.

Games
#1

I’m working on a game that can best be visualized as a simple first person shooter. Your gun is in the bottom center of the screen and your target is moving behind various polygon shaped objects about halfway up the screen.

Between you and the enemy is a wall, so you can only see about half their body and as they move along the wall they will pass behind things like turrets.

I started out without physics and for the most part I had it working. I determined if the site was on an enemy and not a blocking object to determin hits. But my “turrets” have openings where the target should still be hit, so I’m thinking that physics may be the way to go since I can determine the shape of the turrets and the bullets can pass through the openings.

My problem is I’m using transition.to to move the bullets from the gun to the target and with physics, collisions are being detected as the bullet moves from the bottom of the screen while it’s over the wall and now I can’t detect if I’m actually hitting the wall (aimpoint) or just passing over it.

If I could detect transparency’s in my graphics, my non-physics method would work great.

Any way, is there a way to have have physics only trigger the collision when the transition is over?
[import]uid: 19626 topic_id: 17318 reply_id: 317318[/import]

#2

did you try to attach collision listener to an object in onComplete function? [import]uid: 16142 topic_id: 17318 reply_id: 65476[/import]

#3

did you exclude the wall from collisions using a filter?

cheers,

?:slight_smile: [import]uid: 3826 topic_id: 17318 reply_id: 65583[/import]

#4

I ended up dropping physics. I’ll add invisible hittestable polygons over the things that block.

But yes, I did do that and had it close to working. But I need shots aimed at the wall to block.

@jstrahan’s HitTest project is doing something similar to what I’m going to have to do. Right now his project is only supporting simple rectangle shapes, but it shows promise.

[import]uid: 19626 topic_id: 17318 reply_id: 65650[/import]