Even blocks that you can only access with creative. I believe that people will love to use it to improve their buildings. Like have an entire glass house, or who know, bedrock? =)
I don't think this will be much trouble.
Peace!
p.s.: meanwhile I still wait for more and more redstone stuff. There plenty of ideas from technical mods, that could be assimilated, if there are no problems with copyrights and egos.
Oh, and 4 colors of some wood crafts would be nice!
EDIT:
Changed the title, since people are been silly.
The way they are now is they are implemented with different data bits, in such a way that there are only 16 "slots" for slabs and stairs, so only 16 kinds can exist unless they make another block.
To my recollection this is because they use some of the bits of the data value for stair orientation.
While slabs and stairs for EVERY block would be a bit excessive, we could do with a couple more.
Glass stairs, as said above, would be horribly buggy. Perhaps the rendering engine rewrite will finally fix transparency and make these possible.
Glass slabs, however, would not only be plausible, but also useful (to me) and fit in with existing blocks. They would essentially be horizontal panes. I want a castle made entirely of glass. o_O
Similarly, for purely aesthetic purposes, I wouldn't mind log slabs.
As far as I can think, existing texture limitations put a damper on what blocks can become stairs. A rather plain texture is require, with no discernible edges or features, like bricks and cobblestone. Perhaps at some point we'll see separate textures just for stairs, but not for now.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The Internet is a big place, friend. I've been places you've n͍̺e̩v̦e̦̰͍͓̩ͅr̜̭̝̬̬͉̤̬ ͙ịm̖͇a͍͇̤͙̥g̤̘i͔͖̤̼̪̬n͖͔̳̬̯e̩̘ḓ͈͔̠̙͇̼̯.͎
While I don't think every block needs half slabs/stairs, I think there is still a few that would be awesome if they did. Wool maybe being one of them, but also obsidian and endstone.
This is the reason why I've mostly quit Minecraft, the lack of options you have when building. If you want to build something that requires a lot of colored blocks you're usually unable to use half-slabs or stairs to add more details to the structure.
There is enough IDs for it for sure. In Full Release 1.2 the amount of block IDs was increased from 256 to 4096.
No. The map format was changed, in part, to allow the 4096 IDs to take place, but Mojang never followed up on that. They're getting rid of that notion altogether in favor of more dynamic IDs.
This is the reason why I've mostly quit Minecraft, the lack of options you have when building. If you want to build something that requires a lot of colored blocks you're usually unable to use half-slabs or stairs to add more details to the structure.
Hundreds of blocks to choose from, and you say there is nothing to build with.
Not to be sexist but you sound like a woman. Closet crammed with clothes, and nothing to wear. xD
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The Internet is a big place, friend. I've been places you've n͍̺e̩v̦e̦̰͍͓̩ͅr̜̭̝̬̬͉̤̬ ͙ịm̖͇a͍͇̤͙̥g̤̘i͔͖̤̼̪̬n͖͔̳̬̯e̩̘ḓ͈͔̠̙͇̼̯.͎
I think they should just remove stairs and halfslabs alltogether and make all blocks (except things like beds, doors, chests, workbenches etc) "quarter-sized" (I meant eight-sized) aka 1/4th (1/8th) of what the regular block is now. I've always thought they were too big compared to the player and the mobs, and with the addition of upside-down corner stairs (just an example) I really think they're going too far.
Of course, I don't want them to remove them either, I just want said eight-sized blocks to replace the regular block, so if we want stairs in our house, or details in the ceiling, we'll BUILD IT, like we do with the rest of the map, and not craft it like a door or a ladder.
Eight-sized blocks would also improve the aesthetic of the terrain itself, including treebranches etc. It would also make it so you're able to actually walk around in your world without jumping ALL the time, which makes alot more sense. And since the blocks would only be a tad bit smaller, the game would still keep it's feel.
Plus this would remove the need for slabs/stairs for all the other building blocks, and sideways slabs etc, which is probably going to be added later anyway.
As stated earlier, blocks like beds, workbenches, furnaces, and everything that has a use other than walking without jumping, would be the same size they are today. It would maybe be a bit weird but I'm sure they would come up with a solution to the problem.
I think they should just remove stairs and halfslabs alltogether and make all blocks (except things like beds, doors, chests, workbenches etc) "quarter-sized" aka 1/4th of what the regular block is now.
So, you just want to make the player twice as large, and double the size of the world limit.
I've always thought they were too big compared to the player and the mobs, and with the addition of upside-down corner stairs (just an example) I really think they're going too far.
"Going to far" in what regard?
Of course, I don't want them to remove them either, I just want said quarter-sized blocks to replace the regular block, so if we want stairs in our house, or details in the ceiling, we'll BUILD IT, like we do with the rest of the map, and not craft it like a door or a ladder.
This has wild performance implications. There are two ways they could do this:
Either double the size of everything but the blocks. This has performance implications, and would (clearly) need a change to the terrain gen to double the size of features so you could fit through. Then, arguably, they might want to make it so you can actually break 8 blocks at a time (for mining or what-have you).
The other way would be to make it so each block stores data about which of the 8 possible parts of it are occupied. So that's another byte of data per block, which would triple the current memory and disk space requirements used by the terrain. It's already pretty collosal and they're already doing pretty clever things to try to reduce it (eg. byte packing what a typical Java programmer might just declare a boolean and forget about it).
Actually there is a third way and that involves having a bunch of block IDs whose data values represent different micro-blocks. But then you have the issue of what happens when you smelt a quarter block of iron ore? and what about having these "micro" blocks share the same block space? Why have something called a "block" and say you build things in the game with blocks when you are actually building them with "Micro" Blocks?
And even then- why stop there? If we are willing to accept the performance hit from "Quarter-sized" blocks, why not just go down to eighth-sized blocks?
Quarter-sized blocks would also improve the aesthetic of the terrain itself, including treebranches etc. It would also make it so you're able to actually walk around in your world without jumping ALL the time, which makes alot more sense. And since the blocks would only be a tad bit smaller, the game would still keep it's feel.
Actually, com to think of it, "quarter-sized" blocks don't make much sense, when dealing with a Cube. Are we talking about quarter sized blocks, and if so, which orientation? Or are we really talking about Eight-sized blocks (eg it would take eight to make up a block)?
Plus this would remove the need for slabs/stairs for all the other building blocks, and sideways slabs etc, which is probably going to be added later anyway.
Notch apparently doesn't like how new slabs are being added; and apparently is not fond of any of the blocks less than a full block in size. Part of me can agree with that, since it just perpetrates these sorts of discussions. I think he said something akin to what you are discussion- eg "if I wanted the blocks smaller, I would have made them smaller to begin with". it's the general "clumsiness" of the block that makes the game interesting. It takes a lot of effort to make interesting buildings using what we have, and many players dismiss this as a limitation of the block size, not of their own limited creativity when working in a confined space. Line artists don't complain that they only have two colors.
So, you just want to make the player twice as large, and double the size of the world limit.
Well, I guess that is one way to put it, except from objects like chests, doors etc. which would be doubled as well.
"Going to far" in what regard?
When I first started playing back in Alpha, there were just stairs and halfslabs, and I simply thought to myself "Well, it's just these few special blocks which is useful since they allow me to walk upwards or downwards without having to jump, I guess that's alright, although they do look a tad out of place compared to all the full blocks." and didn't think much more of it.
But then people, me included, started using the stairs and the halfslabs as a way to further detail their builds, and placed them where they weren't going to walk anyway which lead to people, again, myself included, wanting upside down halfslabs and upside down stairs, corner stairs, and a bigger range of stair materials.
Soon after the addition of the upside down stairs, it struck me that we are heading towards a Minecraft where almost every material has halfslabs and stairs and that there were no need for the full blocks anymore, as there would be 4/8th blocks (halfslabs, horizontal or vertical), 5/8th blocks (corner stairs, outward), 6/8th blocks (stairs) and even 7/8th blocks (corner stairs, inward). What was even the point of having the 8/8th block as the regular block? Why not make it the 1/8th of what it is now?
So, in short, what I meant with "Going too far" is really just that it (upside down corner stair) made it clear to me how far it had gone, and how close to everything being a crafted 1/8th environment, in a game where 8/8th was the vanilla block, and what the world was made of. It just looks weird.
This has wild performance implications. There are two ways they could do this:
Either double the size of everything but the blocks. This has performance implications, and would (clearly) need a change to the terrain gen to double the size of features so you could fit through. Then, arguably, they might want to make it so you can actually break 8 blocks at a time (for mining or what-have you).
Well, they could just make it so you break the block alot faster, so that one block would take 1/8th the amount of time it takes to break now.
The other way would be to make it so each block stores data about which of the 8 possible parts of it are occupied. So that's another byte of data per block, which would triple the current memory and disk space requirements used by the terrain. It's already pretty collosal and they're already doing pretty clever things to try to reduce it (eg. byte packing what a typical Java programmer might just declare a boolean and forget about it).
To be honest, I didn't really think about the performance issues when I wrote the reply as I'm not much of a programmer, sorry.
Actually there is a third way and that involves having a bunch of block IDs whose data values represent different micro-blocks. But then you have the issue of what happens when you smelt a quarter block of iron ore? and what about having these "micro" blocks share the same block space? Why have something called a "block" and say you build things in the game with blocks when you are actually building them with "Micro" Blocks?
Well, they would be called blocks, of course. And you would smelt a block of iron.
And when you mention smelting iron ore blocks, it would be even better if you were to smelt an "iron chunk" which you got from the iron ore block. Fits better into the game so you don't pick up the whole iron and gold ore block while you pick up diamonds from diamond ore, lapis from lapis ore, emeralds from emerald ore and redstone from redstone ore. Plus it fixes the "no xp from iron and gold ore blocks" problem.
And even then- why stop there? If we are willing to accept the performance hit from "Quarter-sized" blocks, why not just go down to eighth-sized blocks?
Actually, com to think of it, "quarter-sized" blocks don't make much sense, when dealing with a Cube. Are we talking about quarter sized blocks, and if so, which orientation? Or are we really talking about Eight-sized blocks (eg it would take eight to make up a block)?
I'm terribly sorry, I obviously meant eight-sized. I was tired when I wrote the reply.
I hope it makes more sense now.
Notch apparently doesn't like how new slabs are being added; and apparently is not fond of any of the blocks less than a full block in size. Part of me can agree with that, since it just perpetrates these sorts of discussions. I think he said something akin to what you are discussion- eg "if I wanted the blocks smaller, I would have made them smaller to begin with". it's the general "clumsiness" of the block that makes the game interesting. It takes a lot of effort to make interesting buildings using what we have, and many players dismiss this as a limitation of the block size, not of their own limited creativity when working in a confined space. Line artists don't complain that they only have two colors.
Thanks for informing me, I didn't know Notch had commented on the idea of smaller blocks.
And yeah, I don't really dislike the size of the blocks, it's just the direction we're heading with all the new slabs and all the different types of stairs that bother me, they don't really fit in the game the way it is right now.
I don't think this will be much trouble.
Peace!
p.s.: meanwhile I still wait for more and more redstone stuff. There plenty of ideas from technical mods, that could be assimilated, if there are no problems with copyrights and egos.
Oh, and 4 colors of some wood crafts would be nice!
EDIT:
Changed the title, since people are been silly.
The way they are now is they are implemented with different data bits, in such a way that there are only 16 "slots" for slabs and stairs, so only 16 kinds can exist unless they make another block.
To my recollection this is because they use some of the bits of the data value for stair orientation.
Click the picture!
-Derek Shunia
Glass stairs, as said above, would be horribly buggy. Perhaps the rendering engine rewrite will finally fix transparency and make these possible.
Glass slabs, however, would not only be plausible, but also useful (to me) and fit in with existing blocks. They would essentially be horizontal panes. I want a castle made entirely of glass. o_O
Similarly, for purely aesthetic purposes, I wouldn't mind log slabs.
As far as I can think, existing texture limitations put a damper on what blocks can become stairs. A rather plain texture is require, with no discernible edges or features, like bricks and cobblestone. Perhaps at some point we'll see separate textures just for stairs, but not for now.
EXTREMELY useful for people who build with color. (Or build starships.)
Sooomeday, maybe. ;^;
Sponge, bookshelf, ores, dirt/grass/mycelium, ice.
Stairs:
Sponge, command block, block 36 (I think that's what it's called), note block, glowstone, pistons (for traps).
Pistons? Use a sticky piston. Also, block 36 is not really even legitimate. Glowstone, yeah if they can keep lighting with it.
No. The map format was changed, in part, to allow the 4096 IDs to take place, but Mojang never followed up on that. They're getting rid of that notion altogether in favor of more dynamic IDs.
Profile pic by Cheshirette c:
Piston stairs would be more compact in most cases. They would also likely just serve an aesthetic purpose.
Seperate texture for glass slabs.
Fixed.
Hundreds of blocks to choose from, and you say there is nothing to build with.
Not to be sexist but you sound like a woman. Closet crammed with clothes, and nothing to wear. xD
Of course, I don't want them to remove them either, I just want said eight-sized blocks to replace the regular block, so if we want stairs in our house, or details in the ceiling, we'll BUILD IT, like we do with the rest of the map, and not craft it like a door or a ladder.
Eight-sized blocks would also improve the aesthetic of the terrain itself, including treebranches etc. It would also make it so you're able to actually walk around in your world without jumping ALL the time, which makes alot more sense. And since the blocks would only be a tad bit smaller, the game would still keep it's feel.
Plus this would remove the need for slabs/stairs for all the other building blocks, and sideways slabs etc, which is probably going to be added later anyway.
As stated earlier, blocks like beds, workbenches, furnaces, and everything that has a use other than walking without jumping, would be the same size they are today. It would maybe be a bit weird but I'm sure they would come up with a solution to the problem.
So, you just want to make the player twice as large, and double the size of the world limit.
"Going to far" in what regard?
This has wild performance implications. There are two ways they could do this:
Either double the size of everything but the blocks. This has performance implications, and would (clearly) need a change to the terrain gen to double the size of features so you could fit through. Then, arguably, they might want to make it so you can actually break 8 blocks at a time (for mining or what-have you).
The other way would be to make it so each block stores data about which of the 8 possible parts of it are occupied. So that's another byte of data per block, which would triple the current memory and disk space requirements used by the terrain. It's already pretty collosal and they're already doing pretty clever things to try to reduce it (eg. byte packing what a typical Java programmer might just declare a boolean and forget about it).
Actually there is a third way and that involves having a bunch of block IDs whose data values represent different micro-blocks. But then you have the issue of what happens when you smelt a quarter block of iron ore? and what about having these "micro" blocks share the same block space? Why have something called a "block" and say you build things in the game with blocks when you are actually building them with "Micro" Blocks?
And even then- why stop there? If we are willing to accept the performance hit from "Quarter-sized" blocks, why not just go down to eighth-sized blocks?
Actually, com to think of it, "quarter-sized" blocks don't make much sense, when dealing with a Cube. Are we talking about quarter sized blocks, and if so, which orientation? Or are we really talking about Eight-sized blocks (eg it would take eight to make up a block)?
Notch apparently doesn't like how new slabs are being added; and apparently is not fond of any of the blocks less than a full block in size. Part of me can agree with that, since it just perpetrates these sorts of discussions. I think he said something akin to what you are discussion- eg "if I wanted the blocks smaller, I would have made them smaller to begin with". it's the general "clumsiness" of the block that makes the game interesting. It takes a lot of effort to make interesting buildings using what we have, and many players dismiss this as a limitation of the block size, not of their own limited creativity when working in a confined space. Line artists don't complain that they only have two colors.
Well, I guess that is one way to put it, except from objects like chests, doors etc. which would be doubled as well.
When I first started playing back in Alpha, there were just stairs and halfslabs, and I simply thought to myself "Well, it's just these few special blocks which is useful since they allow me to walk upwards or downwards without having to jump, I guess that's alright, although they do look a tad out of place compared to all the full blocks." and didn't think much more of it.
But then people, me included, started using the stairs and the halfslabs as a way to further detail their builds, and placed them where they weren't going to walk anyway which lead to people, again, myself included, wanting upside down halfslabs and upside down stairs, corner stairs, and a bigger range of stair materials.
Soon after the addition of the upside down stairs, it struck me that we are heading towards a Minecraft where almost every material has halfslabs and stairs and that there were no need for the full blocks anymore, as there would be 4/8th blocks (halfslabs, horizontal or vertical), 5/8th blocks (corner stairs, outward), 6/8th blocks (stairs) and even 7/8th blocks (corner stairs, inward). What was even the point of having the 8/8th block as the regular block? Why not make it the 1/8th of what it is now?
So, in short, what I meant with "Going too far" is really just that it (upside down corner stair) made it clear to me how far it had gone, and how close to everything being a crafted 1/8th environment, in a game where 8/8th was the vanilla block, and what the world was made of. It just looks weird.
Well, they could just make it so you break the block alot faster, so that one block would take 1/8th the amount of time it takes to break now.
To be honest, I didn't really think about the performance issues when I wrote the reply as I'm not much of a programmer, sorry.
Well, they would be called blocks, of course. And you would smelt a block of iron.
And when you mention smelting iron ore blocks, it would be even better if you were to smelt an "iron chunk" which you got from the iron ore block. Fits better into the game so you don't pick up the whole iron and gold ore block while you pick up diamonds from diamond ore, lapis from lapis ore, emeralds from emerald ore and redstone from redstone ore. Plus it fixes the "no xp from iron and gold ore blocks" problem.
I'm terribly sorry, I obviously meant eight-sized. I was tired when I wrote the reply.
I hope it makes more sense now.
Thanks for informing me, I didn't know Notch had commented on the idea of smaller blocks.
And yeah, I don't really dislike the size of the blocks, it's just the direction we're heading with all the new slabs and all the different types of stairs that bother me, they don't really fit in the game the way it is right now.