Camera rotation

[johnballantyne]

What were you saying about getting around the "poles" issue? I might have a different proposal but let me know what your idea was before I tell you what my better idea is

[mikuso]

The idea was that the camera would be intelligent enough to follow the player around on whichever face they travel to. We wouldn't be using the free-camera control system that we're currently using for testing.

[johnballantyne]

Well for that part we're on the same page. How did you think it should be implemented? Using an ArcRotateCamera or switch to a FreeCamera?

[mikuso]

Well, it was in my mind that the camera would always be focusing on the
centre of the cube. However, the position of the camera should move to
follow the player.

I think it would be nice to have a little "peek" over the corner when
you approach the edges of the plane.

I think the most difficult problem will be that the plane orientation
must be based on the approach of the player. This means ultimately that
one player's view of a plane could be at a different angle to another
player's view.

E.g., if you traverse planes TOP, LEFT, BOTTOM - you're now back on the
original plane but in a different orientation.

On 07/03/2014 13:32, John wrote:

Well for that part we're on the same page. How did you think it should
be implemented? Using an |ArcRotateCamera| or switch to a |FreeCamera|?

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#5 (comment).

[johnballantyne]

Babylon appears to have some annoying baked in logic regarding the orientation. I tried making a FreeCamera that just basically revolves around the cube to make it appear as if it were spinning around a single axis (X).

When the camera rotation hit certain values, it flipped the Y rotation 180° which is definitely not what we want.

[mikuso]

How about the arc camera?>

On 07/03/2014 14:07, John wrote:

Babylon appears to have some annoying baked in logic regarding the
orientation. I tried making a |FreeCamera| that just basically
revolves around the cube to make it appear as if it were spinning
around a single axis (X).

When the camera rotation hit certain values, it flipped the Y rotation
180° which is definitely not what we want.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#5 (comment).

[johnballantyne]

Same problem, that's what prompted me to switch to a FreeCamera

[mikuso]

Oh dear.

Does this mean we need to consider rotating the cube?

Not neccessarily a difficult thing to do.

Parent all the planes to a central single-vertex-mesh and then rotate
that vertex.

Might turn out to be a more elegant / easier solution than rotating the
camera.

On 07/03/2014 14:26, John wrote:

Same problem, that's what prompted me to switch to a |FreeCamera|

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#5 (comment).

[johnballantyne]

Might be the way to go, but I'm not really clear on how that would affect how the cycle lines are drawn. Is is possible to have their path be relative to our cube?

[johnballantyne]

There might be a solution somewhere in here. The key part seems to be:

use a pivot matrix to position, rotate and scale your camera

From one of the JSFiddles, looks like he's anchoring the camera to a box then rotating the box. Why didn't I think of that

[mikuso]

Nonono. Stay away from transformation matrices. It's a last resort.

We will be parenting the walls to each plane anyway, so the rotation
should just work. Walls will stick to the planes automatically. No need
to mess around.

On 07/03/2014 15:31, John wrote:

There might be a solution somewhere in here
http://www.html5gamedevs.com/topic/3105-rotation-freecamera-on-pivot/.
The key part seems to be:

use a pivot matrix to position, rotate and scale your camera

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#5 (comment).

[johnballantyne]

I don't think you saw the last bit because I edited the comment and it probably didn't get e-mailed, so:

From one of the JSFiddles, looks like he's anchoring the camera to a box then rotating the box. Why didn't I think of that

I tested it, it walks fine. I think that's the way to go

[mikuso]

Why is this better than rotating the cube?

On 07/03/2014 16:08, John wrote:

I don't think you saw the last bit because I edited the comment and it
probably didn't get e-mailed, so:

From one of the JSFiddles
<http://jsfiddle.net/gwenaelhagenmuller/FkxJ3/10/>, looks like
he's anchoring the camera to a box then rotating the box. Why
didn't I think of that

I tested it, it walks fine. I think that's the way to go

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#5 (comment).

[johnballantyne]

Why is rotating the cube better?

On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 11:12 AM, Mikuso notifications@github.com wrote:

Why is this better than rotating the cube?

On 07/03/2014 16:08, John wrote:

I don't think you saw the last bit because I edited the comment and it
probably didn't get e-mailed, so:

From one of the JSFiddles
http://jsfiddle.net/gwenaelhagenmuller/FkxJ3/10/, looks like
he's anchoring the camera to a box then rotating the box. Why
didn't I think of that

I tested it, it walks fine. I think that's the way to go

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
<#5 (comment)
.

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/5#issuecomment-37038689
.