Procedural animation and skeletons

Thanks for the reply.

I understand the utility of bounding boxes generally, i.e. they’re less expensive to use to calculate, e.g. collisions, than the full, potentially complicated geometry.

But in my case, for the specific demo I’m working on, the fully geometry just is a bunch of boxes. I’m guessing that BoxGeometry is still more complicated than the minimum object needed to encapsulate just the relevant bounding box info, but, in my specific case, it doesn’t seem worth optimizing right now.

If the geometry of my characters was significantly more complicated, what’re the downsides of using the three.js geometry or mesh objects directly to calculate collisions? Is there some way, perhaps by writing a three.js plugin, that I could maintain bounding boxes more cheaply?

What about my idea of implementing my own ‘bespoke’ skeleton animations? The idea being that if I use the regular three.js transformations then I don’t need to apply bone transformations separately to perform, e.g. collision calculations.

An OBB implementation that calculates minimum bounding boxes does sound like a lot of work. I’m going to pass on that for the indefinite future!

But the SAT intersection algorithm seems totally feasible to implement! Thanks for the pointer.