I took a brief look at the tutorial. The problem you're having appears to be a limitation of the very simple collision detection method described in that article. Assuming you're using AABB collisions, the method results in just what you're seeing. It's likely you are implementing it correctly.

Unfortunately, there isn't a simple fix for that simplified collision detection system. You can try other collision/physics engines like Bullet or ODE. Those are 3D systems which may be overkill for your purposes. Perhaps others know of a 2D engine you could use.

If you're just trying to write your own engine for the experience, you could add a routine that extends AABBs when more than 1 collision is detected. In your example, that would result in combining the AABBs for the two adjacent boxes, and should result in just a vertical normal for the collision.

This is a difficult problem that shows up in even very experienced programmer's simulation for large companies. Very old-style games would use tile arrays, which don't have this problem due to the quantization of an array.

It is much easier to avoid the problem altogether. You can try to manage your levels by-hand to make sure that there is no geometry that has adjacent rectangles that the player can snag onto. You could also use a different shape for the player, perhaps a sphere or a shape similar to this: http://i.imgur.com/P7NNc9T.png

Thank you for your replies-oppinions.

What I'm going to do is to prioritize the collision response of the objects that have largest area overlapped. This is most likely to solve the other problem(I hope).

P.S Randy nice tutorial you have written. It was really easy to follow and everything took place in my head. Good job.

MARKING THIS AS SOLVED.