Collision detection on geometry?

[ForgeableSum]

I'm trying to figure out the best way to do collision detection with geometry vs images. Right now I'm having to add a geometry as a child to the image (or use getBounds), then looping through  all images and checking for intersects with intersectsRectangle, but I can't help but think there must be a better way. Is there anyway to have physics-enabled geometry so I can use more efficient collision-detection methods? 

[MichaelD]

Maybe create an empty sprite and add the geometry object to that as a child, then enable physics on the sprite.

var _container = game.add.sprite(0,0);var geom = game.add.graphics(game.width, game.height);geom.beginFill(backgroundColor, backgroundOpacity);geom.x = 0;geom.y = 0;geom.drawRect(0, 0, 100, 100);_container.width = 100;_container.height = 100;_container.addChild(geom);game.physics.enable(_container, Phaser.Physics.ARCADE);

I hope it helps!

[ForgeableSum]

This doesn't seem like a practical solution because each of the images would need to be sprites as well (images can't be physics-enabled). 

[MichaelD]

Why do you need images instead of sprites? Since you want to have CD on them.

[ForgeableSum]

It's a performance concern for me - images are far more lightweight, but I suppose there's no way around using sprites. 

[MichaelD]

Phaser.image and Phaser.sprite are both wrappers and javascript objects, yes Sprites have more functions and properties but that doesn't make them more heavy-weight than Images. But don't take my word for it you can set up simple jsPerf tests and check it out yourself. 

 

From experience (not that much in game development) I think that most performance drops are caused by poor optimization and/or a false algorithm and can be usually be solved by following a different approach.