Hi! Welcome to DigiDigger, I am Digit and I am passionate to share with you the mechanics and inner workings of games as well as the analysis and discussion of game design! My goal is to bring people closer to the wonderful world of game development.
It is a cool video. But two points on a sphere and the shortest path between them...I don't understand how that can be a curve. That surely is a straight line.
Probably the best non-Euclidean game I have played is "Tea For God", for the Oculus Quest. It uses non-Euclidean geometry to make a small space seem very large, so you can go on a walk covering a great distance, even if you don't have a large room in real life to play in.
The teleportation trick is also throughout the “myhouse.wad” for doom. It bends your perception of not only reality, but also what you is known about the doom engine. I wonder which came first.
THIS WIL MAKE MANY UNCOMFORTABLE HERE IT IS. No Straight Lines Exist in Nature Straight Lines Are The Problem GOD CREATED A WOMAN WITH CURVES NOT STRAIGHT LINES Most Men Would Not Prefer A woman With No Curves So GOD or The Creator Used Curves Not Straight Lines MASTER GEOMETRY Actual Geometry No euclidean FAKE GARBAGE COLLAGE EMPTY BRAIN BOTTLE FILLING TO TEACH NON-SENSE AND CALL IT A DEGREE MOSTLY EVEN WORST IT COST WHAT IT SOULD NOT . Certain Groups Do Not Want Us or You To Know Pure Truth.
I'm a newbie game dev and just teleporting the player to an identical hallway is such a stupidly simple solution that I never would have thought to do. Honestly respect to the anti chamber dev
Been thinking about this, recently, and I'd THOUGHT I'd figured it out... except I had never even thought about the issue 2:58. Oh well, I was ALMOST there... great video!
What is truly baffling is that there are people who expect video games to follow the laws of nature. 🤦It's a VIDEO GAME. They are just PICTURES ON A SCREEN.
kind of misleading - half of this is about geometry but the real trick is teleportation and stencil buffers (filtering which objects get rendered). If the words "non-euclidean" could count as clickbait, this is it.
12:21 Could you make some kind of if statement and "isGoingInReverse" bool that you would negate when locally going backwards on each individual object, so that you'd only GLOBALLY record object movement if objects isGoingInReverse=false? Aka, to only record local movement in global movement if the local movement ISNT going in rerverse somehow? Great videos btw, I'm learning a lot here! Thank you ;D
SuperLiminal really made me doubt if I was awake when I got to that ‘final boss’ puzzle area where there’s 2 roads, one’s blocked off with stop signs, and the other is a door that lead to a identical room. I kept on turning into the blocked off path, I didn’t pay attention to that green exit sign at all (weirdly), and if I chose a path, like right right left right, the blocked off paths would be in that same order. It’s ridiculous I have to fool myself to try to get into the path with the door
In the vertex shader, prior to sending data to the gpu, nonEuclidean geometries can be hardcoded instead - it’s math that’s beyond my understanding, but it would be more accurate that just replacing walls of surfaces: Curvilinear space is still Affine space, so there is still a coordinate system to perform jacobian transformations. I guess that would suggest Non-Euclidean space could refer to spaces that don’t need a coordinate system (scratching my head: I’ve never studied that before)- but that would still typically result in a manifold, for which, you would have to rely heavily on neighborhoods and differentiability to render them.
Throughout the 90's it was common for many RPGs to have an overworld, a sort of miniature map your character walked around that had towns and mountains and such at a size relative to the character that of a small building or shed, when entering them it teleported you to a larger cityscape map, and likewise when you entered a building it was often much bigger on the inside. Many overworlds would also have random encounters that would have you transition into a battle screen or battle map in some games. Overworlds like this became less and less common as more seamless open worlds became more common. but this came at the cost of travel times being longer and the worlds seemingly more empty, as you could travel faster with an overworld mechanic. Fast Travel mechanics were added to mitigate this, but most of them don't have random encounters and you will miss out on exploration in the process. Using forced perspective mechanics to literally make cities shrink as you leave them and mountains grow as you approach them, a battlefield stretch out as you encounter enemy armies or other random encounters and the like. It may be possible to merge the concept of an overworld with an open world for the best of both worlds. Make the distance between cities less than the distance from one end of a city to the other without making it look like that's the case. This could also be used for planets, space stations, and ships, either at sea or in space. If you are playing a game with fighters you don't want them to move too fast or dogfighting becomes more difficult than fun, but you also don't want to make the big ships too slow if you want them to be playable as well or else playing on them will become boring for travel. Travel Speeds that are super fast but prevent you from engaging in combat is the traditional solution to this. Whereas I like the idea of making the planets, space stations and big ships bigger or smaller as you approach them as, ironically, a more free form and sandbox solution. That way you can more easily intercept enemy fleets and the disconnect between combat and travel is mitigated. You might even allow fighters to "orbit" around capital ships so that they can treat the ship as being stationary once they get close enough. Allowing ships to still be pretty fast but fighters still have a massive maneuverability and speed advantage against capital ships.
