# Objective
Applies feedback from previous PR #15135 'cause it got caught up in the
merge train 🚂
I couldn't resist including roll, both for completeness and due to
playing too many games that implemented it as a child.
cc: @janhohenheim
# Objective
- I've seen quite a few people on discord copy-paste the camera code of
the first-person example and then run into problems with the pitch.
- ~~Additionally, the code is framerate-dependent.~~ it's not, see
comment in PR
## Solution
- Make the code good enough to be copy-pasteable
- ~~Use `dt` to make the code framerate-independent~~ Add comment
explaining why we don't use `dt`
- Clamp the pitch
- Move the camera sensitivity into a component for better
configurability
## Testing
Didn't run the example again, but the code is straight from another
project I have open, so I'm not worried.
---------
Co-authored-by: Antony <antony.m.3012@gmail.com>
# Objective
The names of numerous rendering components in Bevy are inconsistent and
a bit confusing. Relevant names include:
- `AutoExposureSettings`
- `AutoExposureSettingsUniform`
- `BloomSettings`
- `BloomUniform` (no `Settings`)
- `BloomPrefilterSettings`
- `ChromaticAberration` (no `Settings`)
- `ContrastAdaptiveSharpeningSettings`
- `DepthOfFieldSettings`
- `DepthOfFieldUniform` (no `Settings`)
- `FogSettings`
- `SmaaSettings`, `Fxaa`, `TemporalAntiAliasSettings` (really
inconsistent??)
- `ScreenSpaceAmbientOcclusionSettings`
- `ScreenSpaceReflectionsSettings`
- `VolumetricFogSettings`
Firstly, there's a lot of inconsistency between `Foo`/`FooSettings` and
`FooUniform`/`FooSettingsUniform` and whether names are abbreviated or
not.
Secondly, the `Settings` post-fix seems unnecessary and a bit confusing
semantically, since it makes it seem like the component is mostly just
auxiliary configuration instead of the core *thing* that actually
enables the feature. This will be an even bigger problem once bundles
like `TemporalAntiAliasBundle` are deprecated in favor of required
components, as users will expect a component named `TemporalAntiAlias`
(or similar), not `TemporalAntiAliasSettings`.
## Solution
Drop the `Settings` post-fix from the component names, and change some
names to be more consistent.
- `AutoExposure`
- `AutoExposureUniform`
- `Bloom`
- `BloomUniform`
- `BloomPrefilter`
- `ChromaticAberration`
- `ContrastAdaptiveSharpening`
- `DepthOfField`
- `DepthOfFieldUniform`
- `DistanceFog`
- `Smaa`, `Fxaa`, `TemporalAntiAliasing` (note: we might want to change
to `Taa`, see "Discussion")
- `ScreenSpaceAmbientOcclusion`
- `ScreenSpaceReflections`
- `VolumetricFog`
I kept the old names as deprecated type aliases to make migration a bit
less painful for users. We should remove them after the next release.
(And let me know if I should just... not add them at all)
I also added some very basic docs for a few types where they were
missing, like on `Fxaa` and `DepthOfField`.
## Discussion
- `TemporalAntiAliasing` is still inconsistent with `Smaa` and `Fxaa`.
Consensus [on
Discord](https://discord.com/channels/691052431525675048/743663924229963868/1280601167209955431)
seemed to be that renaming to `Taa` would probably be fine, but I think
it's a bit more controversial, and it would've required renaming a lot
of related types like `TemporalAntiAliasNode`,
`TemporalAntiAliasBundle`, and `TemporalAntiAliasPlugin`, so I think
it's better to leave to a follow-up.
- I think `Fog` should probably have a more specific name like
`DistanceFog` considering it seems to be distinct from `VolumetricFog`.
~~This should probably be done in a follow-up though, so I just removed
the `Settings` post-fix for now.~~ (done)
---
## Migration Guide
Many rendering components have been renamed for improved consistency and
clarity.
- `AutoExposureSettings` → `AutoExposure`
- `BloomSettings` → `Bloom`
- `BloomPrefilterSettings` → `BloomPrefilter`
- `ContrastAdaptiveSharpeningSettings` → `ContrastAdaptiveSharpening`
- `DepthOfFieldSettings` → `DepthOfField`
- `FogSettings` → `DistanceFog`
- `SmaaSettings` → `Smaa`
- `TemporalAntiAliasSettings` → `TemporalAntiAliasing`
- `ScreenSpaceAmbientOcclusionSettings` → `ScreenSpaceAmbientOcclusion`
- `ScreenSpaceReflectionsSettings` → `ScreenSpaceReflections`
- `VolumetricFogSettings` → `VolumetricFog`
---------
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
# Objective
Add examples for zooming (and orbiting) orthographic and perspective
cameras.
I'm pretty green with 3D, so please treat with suspicion! I note that
if/when #15075 is merged, `.scale` will go away so this example uses
`.scaling_mode`.
Closes#2580
# Objective
Use the new `AccumulatedMouseMotion` and `AccumulatedMouseScroll`
resources in place of mouse event handling.
I left the `mouse_input_events` example alone, since by its nature it
demonstrates event detection.
Fixes#14066
## Testing
Ran each example locally before and after changes.
_copy-pasted from my doc comment in the code_
# Objective
This example shows how to properly handle player input, advance a
physics simulation in a fixed timestep, and display the results.
The classic source for how and why this is done is Glenn Fiedler's
article [Fix Your
Timestep!](https://gafferongames.com/post/fix_your_timestep/).
## Motivation
The naive way of moving a player is to just update their position like
so:
```rust
transform.translation += velocity;
```
The issue here is that the player's movement speed will be tied to the
frame rate.
Faster machines will move the player faster, and slower machines will
move the player slower.
In fact, you can observe this today when running some old games that did
it this way on modern hardware!
The player will move at a breakneck pace.
The more sophisticated way is to update the player's position based on
the time that has passed:
```rust
transform.translation += velocity * time.delta_seconds();
```
This way, velocity represents a speed in units per second, and the
player will move at the same speed regardless of the frame rate.
However, this can still be problematic if the frame rate is very low or
very high. If the frame rate is very low, the player will move in large
jumps. This may lead to a player moving in such large jumps that they
pass through walls or other obstacles. In general, you cannot expect a
physics simulation to behave nicely with *any* delta time. Ideally, we
want to have some stability in what kinds of delta times we feed into
our physics simulation.
The solution is using a fixed timestep. This means that we advance the
physics simulation by a fixed amount at a time. If the real time that
passed between two frames is less than the fixed timestep, we simply
don't advance the physics simulation at all.
If it is more, we advance the physics simulation multiple times until we
catch up. You can read more about how Bevy implements this in the
documentation for
[`bevy::time::Fixed`](https://docs.rs/bevy/latest/bevy/time/struct.Fixed.html).
This leaves us with a last problem, however. If our physics simulation
may advance zero or multiple times per frame, there may be frames in
which the player's position did not need to be updated at all, and some
where it is updated by a large amount that resulted from running the
physics simulation multiple times. This is physically correct, but
visually jarring. Imagine a player moving in a straight line, but
depending on the frame rate, they may sometimes advance by a large
amount and sometimes not at all. Visually, we want the player to move
smoothly. This is why we need to separate the player's position in the
physics simulation from the player's position in the visual
representation. The visual representation can then be interpolated
smoothly based on the last and current actual player position in the
physics simulation.
This is a tradeoff: every visual frame is now slightly lagging behind
the actual physical frame, but in return, the player's movement will
appear smooth. There are other ways to compute the visual representation
of the player, such as extrapolation. See the [documentation of the
lightyear
crate](https://cbournhonesque.github.io/lightyear/book/concepts/advanced_replication/visual_interpolation.html)
for a nice overview of the different methods and their tradeoffs.
## Implementation
- The player's velocity is stored in a `Velocity` component. This is the
speed in units per second.
- The player's current position in the physics simulation is stored in a
`PhysicalTranslation` component.
- The player's previous position in the physics simulation is stored in
a `PreviousPhysicalTranslation` component.
- The player's visual representation is stored in Bevy's regular
`Transform` component.
- Every frame, we go through the following steps:
- Advance the physics simulation by one fixed timestep in the
`advance_physics` system.
This is run in the `FixedUpdate` schedule, which runs before the
`Update` schedule.
- Update the player's visual representation in the
`update_displayed_transform` system.
This interpolates between the player's previous and current position in
the physics simulation.
- Update the player's velocity based on the player's input in the
`handle_input` system.
## Relevant Issues
Related to #1259.
I'm also fairly sure I've seen an issue somewhere made by
@alice-i-cecile about showing how to move a character correctly in a
fixed timestep, but I cannot find it.
# Objective
[`StableInterpolate`](https://dev-docs.bevyengine.org/bevy/math/trait.StableInterpolate.html)
was introduced after this example was written (or more accurately, the
two PRs were merged on the same day and developed in parallel).
The example used `Vec3::lerp` where I believe it is now preferred to use
`smooth_nudge`.
## Solution
Its not entirely clear to me whether `StableInterpolate` should be
preferred in this scenario, although it seems likely. So I figured a PR
to make the change would either result in it being merged or denied with
a reason.
## Testing
```
cargo run --example 2d_top_down_camera
```
Co-authored-by: François Mockers <mockersf@gmail.com>
# Objective
A very common way to organize a first-person view is to split it into
two kinds of models:
- The *view model* is the model that represents the player's body.
- The *world model* is everything else.
The reason for this distinction is that these two models should be
rendered with different FOVs.
The view model is typically designed and animated with a very specific
FOV in mind, so it is
generally *fixed* and cannot be changed by a player. The world model, on
the other hand, should
be able to change its FOV to accommodate the player's preferences for
the following reasons:
- *Accessibility*: How prone is the player to motion sickness? A wider
FOV can help.
- *Tactical preference*: Does the player want to see more of the
battlefield?
Or have a more zoomed-in view for precision aiming?
- *Physical considerations*: How well does the in-game FOV match the
player's real-world FOV?
Are they sitting in front of a monitor or playing on a TV in the living
room? How big is the screen?
## Solution
I've added an example implementing the described setup as follows.
The `Player` is an entity holding two cameras, one for each model. The
view model camera has a fixed
FOV of 70 degrees, while the world model camera has a variable FOV that
can be changed by the player.
I use different `RenderLayers` to select what to render.
- The world model camera has no explicit `RenderLayers` component, so it
uses the layer 0.
All static objects in the scene are also on layer 0 for the same reason.
- The view model camera has a `RenderLayers` component with layer 1, so
it only renders objects
explicitly assigned to layer 1. The arm of the player is one such
object.
The order of the view model camera is additionally bumped to 1 to ensure
it renders on top of the world model.
- The light source in the scene must illuminate both the view model and
the world model, so it is
assigned to both layers 0 and 1.
To better see the effect, the player can move the camera by dragging
their mouse and change the world model's FOV with the arrow keys. The
arrow up key maps to "decrease FOV" and the arrow down key maps to
"increase FOV". This sounds backwards on paper, but is more intuitive
when actually changing the FOV in-game since a decrease in FOV looks
like a zoom-in.
I intentionally do not allow changing the view model's FOV even though
it would be illustrative because that would be an anti-pattern and bloat
the code a bit.
The example is called `first_person_view_model` and not just
`first_person` because I want to highlight that this is not a simple
flycam, but actually renders the player.
## Testing
Default FOV:
<img width="1392" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/assets/9047632/8c2e804f-fac2-48c7-8a22-d85af999dfb2">
Decreased FOV:
<img width="1392" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/assets/9047632/1733b3e5-f583-4214-a454-3554e3cbd066">
Increased FOV:
<img width="1392" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/assets/9047632/0b0640e6-5743-46f6-a79a-7181ba9678e8">
Note that the white bar on the right represents the player's arm, which
is more obvious in-game because you can move the camera around.
The box on top is there to make sure that the view model is receiving
shadows.
I tested only on macOS.
---
## Changelog
I don't think new examples go in here, do they?
## Caveat
The solution used here was implemented with help by @robtfm on
[Discord](https://discord.com/channels/691052431525675048/866787577687310356/1241019224491561000):
> shadow maps are specific to lights, not to layers
> if you want shadows from some meshes that are not visible, you could
have light on layer 1+2, meshes on layer 2, camera on layer 1 (for
example)
> but this might change in future, it's not exactly an intended feature
In other words, the example code as-is is not guaranteed to work in the
future. I want to bring this up because the use-case presented here is
extremely common in first-person games and important for accessibility.
It would be good to have a blessed and easy way of how to achieve it.
I'm also not happy about how I get the `perspective` variable in
`change_fov`. Very open to suggestions :)
## Related issues
- Addresses parts of #12658
- Addresses parts of #12588
---------
Co-authored-by: Pascal Hertleif <killercup@gmail.com>
# Objective
This PR addresses the 2D part of #12658. I plan to separate the examples
and make one PR per camera example.
## Solution
Added a new top-down example composed of:
- [x] Player keyboard movements
- [x] UI for keyboard instructions
- [x] Colors and bloom effect to see the movement of the player
- [x] Camera smooth movement towards the player (lerp)
## Testing
```bash
cargo run --features="wayland,bevy/dynamic_linking" --example 2d_top_down_camera
```
https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/assets/10638479/95db0587-e5e0-4f55-be11-97444b795793
