I’m actually surprised no one’s roasted my math in ShatterCanvas.xaml.cs yet—I’m basically faking the ‘gravity’ by just incrementing VelocityY every frame. It’s surprisingly lightweight for how many polygons are flying around.
Haha, fair point! I guess I spent too much time looking at the code and thinking “this feels too simple to work”. But hey, if it hits the bottom of the screen and satisfies the VelocityY math, it’s a feature, not a bug. Glad to see another dev who appreciates the simple approach.
I remember the first program I wrote where I implemented gravity. I too was amazed at the simplicity. But that simplicity is only in hindsight. You stumbled into physics when you thought you were just programming.
That’s a beautiful way to put it. I definitely went from “how do I move a polygon” to “wait, why does this feel like it has weight?” in about 10 lines of code. It’s wild how much of the physical world is just hidden in a simple $v += g$ loop. Definitely an “ah hah!” moment I won’t forget. 〒▽〒
Phew! Glad I haven’t offended the ghost of Isaac Newton. I half-expected someone to tell me I needed a full-blown physics engine just to drop some glass polygons on the taskbar.
Incremental penalties are the way! I see you’re also a student of the ‘Hostile UX’ school of design. Shaking the window is basically the ultimate progression of button spam—once you exceed the velocity threshold, the UI simply quits on you. ψ(｀∇´)ψ
I remember having to program a trap for double-clicking buttons in an application.
Then I had to implement a penalty for triple-clicking.
Later, I converted it to a progressive incremental penalty.
I’m actually surprised no one’s roasted my math in ShatterCanvas.xaml.cs yet—I’m basically faking the ‘gravity’ by just incrementing VelocityY every frame. It’s surprisingly lightweight for how many polygons are flying around.
What is acceleration other than increase in velocity over time? Nothing to roast!
Haha, fair point! I guess I spent too much time looking at the code and thinking “this feels too simple to work”. But hey, if it hits the bottom of the screen and satisfies the VelocityY math, it’s a feature, not a bug. Glad to see another dev who appreciates the simple approach.
I remember the first program I wrote where I implemented gravity. I too was amazed at the simplicity. But that simplicity is only in hindsight. You stumbled into physics when you thought you were just programming.
That’s a beautiful way to put it. I definitely went from “how do I move a polygon” to “wait, why does this feel like it has weight?” in about 10 lines of code. It’s wild how much of the physical world is just hidden in a simple $v += g$ loop. Definitely an “ah hah!” moment I won’t forget. 〒▽〒
That is exactly how gravity works lol
Phew! Glad I haven’t offended the ghost of Isaac Newton. I half-expected someone to tell me I needed a full-blown physics engine just to drop some glass polygons on the taskbar.
Incremental penalties are the way! I see you’re also a student of the ‘Hostile UX’ school of design. Shaking the window is basically the ultimate progression of button spam—once you exceed the velocity threshold, the UI simply quits on you. ψ(｀∇´)ψ