i moved a poseable mesh with Set Bone Location By Name and Set Bone Rotation By Name.
Now i tried to handle the collision but i did not get any overlap events whatsoever.
The mesh i used has collision enabled and generated the overlap events but as soon as i moved the mesh with the methods mentioned above, i did not get the events.
Now i want to know if it is even possible to get overlap events after moving the mesh?
BeginOverlap is called on overlap, it won't detect things already inside the collision.
Have you tried using GetOverlappedActors()? It's a code function but I think there's also a blueprint node.
Related
It’s like this hip is stuck in place, with in the pictures(being at different times in the animation since I can’t upload a gif) the red wireframe is the drawing of the raw output triangles and everything else being default unity, aka the correct output
What am I doing wrong? What am I missing? This has been driving me nuts for 2-3 days now, any help is appreciated
As you do not post any code, I will try to do some guessing over what is going on. Disclamair: I actually happen to run into similar problem myself.
First, you must know that Update's of MonoBehaviour are called in random order (not neccessery random-random, but yous see the point). If you bake mesh in one component, it can still be one-frame late to the Animator component.
There are actually two solution of this case: first is to specify the order of Script Execution Order in Project Settings, while the second is to use LateUpdate instead of Update when updating mesh after skinning.
The second problem you might have run into is scale / position of skinned mesh. Even if it does not contribute at all to the animation movement it can still wreck the mesh baking collision later on.
To fix that make sure that all your SkinnedMeshRenderers objects have Local Position, Local Rotation and Local Scale set in Transform component to identity (0,0,0 for position and rotation, 1,1,1 for scale). If not - reset those values in editor. It will not change animations, but it will change mesh generator.
If both solutions does not work, please describe the problem more thoroughly.
We are currently trying to lay mesh colliders onto our edges as shown in the pictures. The problem is that the meshes sometimes seem to be 2D instead of 3D (shown in Picture 2 and Picture 3), which makes them unselectable from certain camera-angles. Sometimes the meshes even seem to disappear through some parts of the Edge(Picture 1).
Turning convex on for the colliders makes them way easier to select, but we dont really want to do that because that makes it realy unclear which edge you are selecting right now.
We are creating our meshes through bakeMesh from our previously created Edges as shown below:
LineRenderer lineRenderer = gameEdge.GetComponent<LineRenderer>();
MeshCollider meshCollider = gameEdge.AddComponent<MeshCollider>();
Mesh mesh = new Mesh();
lineRenderer.BakeMesh(mesh, Camera.main, false);
meshCollider.sharedMesh = mesh;
meshCollider.convex = false;
Edit:
We used this https://github.com/mattatz/unity-tubular to generate tube meshes around our edges, working pretty well now!
The mesh generated by the line renderer is actually 2D. I think that your best chance is to update the mesh orientation to face to the camera so that the mesh will always be facing to the camera wherever you are looking from. That way you'll allways be able to click on it.
You have 2 options:
1.- Passing the new camera (with its new position) all the time. This would be in the Update. Be carefull to only use the code that bakes the mesh and not the Mesh mesh = new Mesh() in the update. Because if you create a new mesh in the Update passed some time you'll have an stack overflow error. I recomend if you do this, to make the Mesh mesh; a class variable and start it only in the class initialization (mesh = new Mesh();) so that you use only the created instance to update the mesh all the time, not creating a new one for each update.
2.- If you are concerned about efficiency, you can handle when your camera is moving, so that when it stops moving, you pass in the new camera along with its position. For this you would need to handle the camera OnStopMoving event yourself to pass the new camera in, so whenever the Main camera stops moving, the mesh will always be facing it.
This makes sense because its easier for the user to click on things while stopped, so it can be presumed that the user will try to click on the lines while not moving
There is one third option I did not mention due to feasability, that is wrapping your line renderer with primitive colliders with the points of your line as an starting point for the procedural collider wrapping logic. However you would need to code all that out, which might take a while.
On the other hand making it a convex collider as far as I checked is not feasable, as the behaviour and shape of the collider itself changes on the mesh cooking by the MeshRenderer component. Check if this might be of help.
I am working on an application that uses horizontal surfaces in AR. I don't have much experience with Unity but I was able to create automatically generated planes with which objects can collide (example: a falling and rolling dice). Unfortunately, sometimes such objects fall outside the plane area and fall into the void.
I would like to create something similar to invisible walls around the detected plane to keep the objects inside the plane.
Plane configuration i am currently using:
Application:
Edges of plane are marked with red line.
I think the term for what you are trying to do is geo-fencing. The easiest example is to put a square around the area your objects are contained where you have four conditions, one for each edge, like if objectX >= edgeX then objectX = edgeX and so forth. To do that in Unity you would probably have to mess with that C# language.
I am working on a basic racing game using Apple's SceneKit and am running into issues simulating a car. Using the SCNPhysicsVehicle behavior, I am able to properly set up the car and drive it using the documented methods.
However, I am unable to get the car's position. It seems logical that the SCNPhysicsVehicle would move the SCNNodes that contain the chassis and the wheels as the car moves but the SCNNodes remain at their original position and orientation. Strangely enough, the chassis' SCNPhysicsBody's velocity remains accurate throughout the simulation so I can assume that the car's position is based off of the SCNPhysicsBody and not the SCNNode. Unfortunately, there is no documented method that I have found to get an SCNPhysicsBody's position.
Getting a car's position should be trivial and is essential to create a racing game but I can't seem to find any way of getting it. Any thoughts or suggestions would be appreciated.
Scene Kit automatically updates the position of the node that owns an SCNPhysicsBody based on the physics simulation, so SCNNode.position is the right property to look for.
The catch is that there are actually two versions of that node in play. The one you typically access is called the "model" node. It reflects the target values for properties you set, even if you set those properties through an animation. The presentationNode reflects the state of the node currently being rendered — if an animation is in progress, the node's properties have intermediate values, not the target values of the animation.
Actions, physics, constraints, and any scene graph changes you make inside update/render loop methods directly target the "presentation" version of your scene graph. So, to read node properties that have been set by the physics simulation, get the presentationNode for the node you're interested in (the node that owns the vehicle's chassisBody physics body), then read the presentation node's position (or other properties).
I have the same problem with my player node.
I move it with applyForce (to manage collision detection).
But when i check node position after some movement, the node position has not move (presentation node is the actual position as rickster write in his answer)
I manage to update the scnNode.position with renderer loop
You have to set position of your node with the presentationNode position.
node.position = node.presentationNode.position
Set this into renderer(_: updateAtTime) and your node position will sync with any animation you made to the physicsBody
I have a sphere build from multiple objects. What I want to do is when I touch/click an object, that object should find all adjunctive objects. But because none off them are moving, no collision detection can be used.
I can't find a way to detect these adjunctive objects even when the colliders do collide with each other, as I can see that in the scene. I tried all the possibilities, but none off them are working, because no objects are moving.
Is there a way to check for manual collision detection, or is there some sort of way to let Unity3d do the collision detection automatically?
You could keep a list of all those objects, then when your event happens you can send messages to all them to do what you want them to do.
Lets assume you want your sphere to break into little pieces. You send a Force message to the sphere. Then you use Newton's Laws of motion and find out how much velocity each piece gets. Remember velocity is a vector thus it has direction.
This is how I would do it and still keep the right amount of control over what happens in my game/simulation. Remember F = ma.
you could use RaycastHit (http://docs.unity3d.com/Documentation/ScriptReference/RaycastHit.html) for your collision, this also works on non-moving objects but it needs more performance
You can add rigidbody to every objects; when you touch one of them, give a force onto it, then it is going to move and trigger event of the adjacent objects.
for the reason you do not want to move the object you touch, you can cancel movement in the OnCollider or OnTrigger event handler function.
I managed to work around this by checking the distance from the selected object and all other objects that are part of the sphere. If the distance is below a certain value, then it is an adjunctive object.
Although this is certaintly not fool proof, it works without problems so far.
I am sorry I was not clear enough. Thanks for all the advice what so ever.