Falsely? People have reasons other than that "they just cant stand change". I still think 1.9 is bad because of the slowed down combat (and don't try telling me that 1.8 required no skill and is stupid) as well as the fact that combos are gone and all that other stuff. This is the same reason the largest servers in the world (mineplex, Hypixel, etc) still haven't updated, because 98% of their playerbase prefers the 1.8 style combat.
I still don't understand why they can't just add a gamerule to revert to 1.8 combat. Literally every single problem would be solved, and nobody would be forcing each other to use one or the other.
how much of that 98% player base are children who prefer spam clicking cause its easier?
I still don't understand why they can't just add a gamerule to revert to 1.8 combat. Literally every single problem would be solved, and nobody would be forcing each other to use one or the other.
A gamerule doesn't give as much freedom as the current system works. The combat is supposed to be a core part of the game, so a true toggle makes 0 sense, but for the sake of map-making, we're given creative freedom to, rather than toggle on and off, completely modify the cooldown.
This allows much more creative things that benefits both those that are pro and not-so-pro of the combat system, as you can tweak the mechanics to what you truly feel is balanced. Want a super duper slow 20 damage axe? Sure. Want a spam-clicking mean bean machine? Go ahead. A "toggle" currently is in the game, it's up to the servers to use that toggle instead of whining about the mechanic.
Falsely? People have reasons other than that "they just cant stand change". I still think 1.9 is bad because of the slowed down combat (and don't try telling me that 1.8 required no skill and is stupid) as well as the fact that combos are gone and all that other stuff. This is the same reason the largest servers in the world (mineplex, Hypixel, etc) still haven't updated, because 98% of their playerbase prefers the 1.8 style combat.
I still don't understand why they can't just add a gamerule to revert to 1.8 combat. Literally every single problem would be solved, and nobody would be forcing each other to use one or the other.
Yes, and those other reasons are illogical, inaccurate, or just plain wrong. When your opinion is based on misinformation and faulty reasoning, and you can't see it, of course you're going to make poor choices. It's even worse when this spreads to the majority, because it magnifies the errors.
For example, as the great Zeno410 said, "Banging your mouse a lot is not a skill." Relying on glitches and poorly designed mechanics can be skillful, but you're not supposed to do that. Those are the two major claims to skill that 1.8 has, and that supporters of 1.8 combat have told me of. Other minor claims include basic mechanics that every game has, such as "aim."
A gamerule would split the game, increasing development time and dividing the playerbase further. Watch this video to understand.
The "compromise" referred to cannot be multiple updated branches of the same game, even if it's within the same version. That is not a compromise.
I find it rather interesting that all the people who want this thread to end are those who like the combat updates.
Well I mean, we've been countering the same exact arguments for ~1 year now. It gets tiring. This thread is just repeating itself because some 1.8 combatters(?) came around and spouted the same disproven arguments that's been said 3 replies ago. No one's getting anywhere and no one is coming up to an agreement.
Pretty much any argument I've read against the update is either false or just ends up being user preference, which is fine, but promotes no discussion. It just gets stuck in an endless loop. There's no need to continue a thread if it promotes no more discussion value.
Considering that this thread has been active almost nonstop, and the poll suggests that more than a third of Minecraft players dislike the 1.9 combat changes, I'd say that it's more serious a problem than pro-1.9 people say it is. Sure, they may be in the minority, but it's not some paltry 5-10% like people act like it is, and it's impossible to deny that it has had some serious effects. I've even changed my vote to "bad," not because I dislike the combat, but because of how much it's split the community.
For me, the question isn't, "Is 1.9's combat good or bad?" but rather, "Was 1.9's combat worth it?" Was making combat a little bit more fun and challenging to some people really worth all the anger and animosity it has caused?
For me, the question isn't, "Is 1.9's combat good or bad?" but rather, "Was 1.9's combat worth it?" Was making combat a little bit more fun and challenging to some people really worth all the anger and animosity it has caused?
I would say it was. A lot of the hate towards the combat wasn't because it was bad or even about it being bad. A lot of the hate came directly from misinformation. Heck, even before we got a single snapshot, people were already claiming how terrible the new combat was and how it just "ruins" everything.
All of that was said way before the devs even figured out how they were going to improve combat. I don't think the devs should revert changes that are perfectly fit in the game just because people can't help but judge things incorrectly, refusing to even try them out. I'd bet a majority of the current haters would actually enjoy the combat if they gave it a try instead of just hearing how "bad" it was.
And even then, truly, I doubt the community is even any different from what it was. It always was kind of split. We just didn't hear anything because everyone kind of minded their own things. The pvper's and the builders and such all have different communities. Obviously because of their preferences in gameplay, but also because both communities are truly different. They essentially speak different languages, much like any different community.
Well I mean, now we have some vocal people because of a big change. And if people are having issues, Mojang should try and reach out to them and see what agreement they could come up with. And they have, many many times already. They've done their best to improve whatever they can, and whatever they couldn't is mostly those arguments that have been in this thread, a lot of them being straight up false.
There's always going to be a sort of split in the community with every update. None have been more vocal than this one, yeah, but a lot of those vocal people are also complaining about things uncontrollable by mojang.
If all else, I feel the community has calmed down entirely. The only reason why we think people are still complaining like crazy is because of the few occasional posts in this thread. If you look pretty much anywhere else, you'd see people have gotten used to it one way or another, be it staying on older versions of the game or just accepting the changes. Hardly anyone really talks about the update anymore, and the initial expected wave of anger is pretty much gone.
Yes, it would be a mistake to revert the combat changes now, since it's already long established and the majority do enjoy it. If it truly was a mistake, it's too late to fix, and Mojang will have to live with it. However, ruining the combat experience for nearly 40% of players does indicate that the combat update was probably not the best way to fix the mechanic.
Yeah, people have quieted down because they've learned to deal with it, but that doesn't mean they accept it, or that the aftermath of the combat update is any better.
Yes, it would be a mistake to revert the combat changes now, since it's already long established and the majority do enjoy it. If it truly was a mistake, it's too late to fix, and Mojang will have to live with it. However, ruining the combat experience for nearly 40% of players does indicate that the combat update was probably not the best way to fix the mechanic.
Yeah, people have quieted down because they've learned to deal with it, but that doesn't mean they accept it, or that the aftermath of the combat update is any better.
It's ruined for them solely because they believe it's ruined, not because it's actually bad.
If they'd put aside their misconceptions, learn to use the system, and stop bringing up the glitches and exploits of 1.8 as "good things" (they are not), a huge chunk of them would be enjoying 1.9.
It's ruined for them solely because they believe it's ruined, not because it's actually bad.
If they'd put aside their misconceptions, learn to use the system, and stop bringing up the glitches and exploits of 1.8 as "good things" (they are not), a huge chunk of them would be enjoying 1.9.
Can you give me any evidence of this, such as some poster who has actually done this and started to enjoy 1.9, than simply pointing what may or may not be true? And even then, how do you know a large chunk of these people haven't bothered to try to learn the new system? Unless you've become some mass telepath, your statement saying they would enjoy 1.9 has no real evidence and is thus invalid.
Obviously, it's only ruined for them because they believe so. There's no real way to say whether it's objectively good or bad; it's all a matter of opinion. Most just have the opinion it's good, but have just as much evidence to prove it as the those who say it's bad. You can't say whether something's good or not based purely on a bunch of opinions. If a country made a law that immensely improved the economy and the way of life for all of its inhabitants, but most people hated it, was it a bad law? Or the inverse, a law that made stealing legal, and everyone loved it, was that a good law? People's minds are flawed, and just because the majority believes something does not make it true.
What we can measure objectively is the aftermath. Minecraft's PC sales are still going strong (though without historical data I can't say whether or not it has improved or worsened since 1.9), but servers definitely seem to be suffering, with their general quantity decreasing and many staying pre-1.9. Many people are refusing to update past 1.9 despite the fact that the cooldown can be negated with commands and that they'd like to enjoy the more recent features. There are arguments being brought up about reverting this feature than any other feature in Minecraft's history, even hunger, if memory serves me right (granted, this forum has grown since then). What positives can you bring up, other than "it adds skill and challenge," which is pretty subjective and can't be measured objectively?
Can you give me any evidence of this, such as some poster who has actually done this and started to enjoy 1.9, than simply pointing what may or may not be true? And even then, how do you know a large chunk of these people haven't bothered to try to learn the new system? Unless you've become some mass telepath, your statement saying they would enjoy 1.9 has no real evidence and is thus invalid.
I didn't mean all of them haven't bothered to learn. Some of them may not have after barely learning anything about it, which is why it's included. But many are simply attached to weird quirks/glitches/exploits of 1.8, like this guy...
I want to add to this thread. For those of you saying 1.8 requires no skill. People have invented very clever ways of clicking (using a toothbrush, dragclicking, etc) and 1.9 came along and took that all away to suit the newbies/noobs.
...on top of spreading misinformation like "1.9 was designed to suit newbies." That's one misconception that would upset people into not playing it, because obviously if you like 1.9 combat you're a newbie. Illogical, yes, but most of this nonsense is illogical. If they could forget this junk, there'd be no issue. Now obviously the people who speak online are the most vocal ones, but I think if there were any real reason that 1.9 was bad that actually made sense, and wasn't anything like the misinformation or bizarre 1.8 attachment, it would've come up by now.
The absence of such things would seem to indicate that my statement is correct. The reason the majority don't like it is because of misconceptions and weird attachments to unintended mechanics.
Obviously, it's only ruined for them because they believe so. There's no real way to say whether it's objectively good or bad; it's all a matter of opinion. Most just have the opinion it's good, but have just as much evidence to prove it as the those who say it's bad. You can't say whether something's good or not based purely on a bunch of opinions. If a country made a law that immensely improved the economy and the way of life for all of its inhabitants, but most people hated it, was it a bad law? Or the inverse, a law that made stealing legal, and everyone loved it, was that a good law? People's minds are flawed, and just because the majority believes something does not make it true.
What we can measure objectively is the aftermath. Minecraft's PC sales are still going strong (though without historical data I can't say whether or not it has improved or worsened since 1.9), but servers definitely seem to be suffering, with their general quantity decreasing and many staying pre-1.9. Many people are refusing to update past 1.9 despite the fact that the cooldown can be negated with commands and that they'd like to enjoy the more recent features. There are arguments being brought up about reverting this feature than any other feature in Minecraft's history, even hunger, if memory serves me right (granted, this forum has grown since then). What positives can you bring up, other than "it adds skill and challenge," which is pretty subjective and can't be measured objectively?
Just because we don't definitively know the objective value of good and bad for 1.9 does not mean there is not one, or that it's all subjective.
There's a difference between my opinion and whether or not it's good. For example, I can like something that is bad and hate something that is good. My personal opinion makes no difference. For example, I hate 1.6. But that doesn't mean it was a bad update.
Positives? How about just an honest analysis. The combat system makes things more challenging simply by its objective nature. It makes it so that missing has consequences. It removes exploits and glitches of 1.8. Even if it does make fighting hoards a little more difficult, and overpowering players harder, it does not require an insane level of skill to learn to handle, and the ability of players to manipulate the environment can make most situations that truly are too difficult a non-issue. The saturation-rapid-healing can lead to certain specific problematic situations. However these issues are worth it simply because you can no longer be an invincible pest-control agent who uses poorly-designed vending machines by clicking on them.
And even if you don't consider just that last bit worth it, the negatives aren't necessarily game-breakers. You can still basically play the game normally with some minor irritations. So there is no reason not to update and to also adamantly be against getting the good content, as well as bug fixes, further updates, and the ability to stay with friends on an updated server... unless you're misinformed as to what you're getting, or none of the rest of these things appeal to you. And I doubt the whole of 40% of players don't see an appeal, given that such a division has never occurred before.
I want to add to this thread. For those of you saying 1.8 requires no skill. People have invented very clever ways of clicking (using a toothbrush, dragclicking, etc) and 1.9 came along and took that all away to suit the newbies/noobs.
I want to add to this thread. For those of you saying 1.8 requires no skill. People have invented very clever ways of clicking (using a toothbrush, dragclicking, etc) and 1.9 came along and took that all away to suit the newbies/noobs.
Just to clarify things up, clicking with a toothbrush is not a skill. It's just using toothbrush to click your mouse. Get it?
Now dragclicking. I don't even say anything to that, but at least it sounds smarter, than "jitterclicking" again, just saying.
Now like I have said, the new system isn't perfect, as for example, dealing with baby zombies is pain with it, as, well. They're so fast, that anyone will start spam their clicks, because sudden panic attack.
Considering that this thread has been active almost nonstop, and the poll suggests that more than a third of Minecraft players dislike the 1.9 combat changes, I'd say that it's more serious a problem than pro-1.9 people say it is. Sure, they may be in the minority, but it's not some paltry 5-10% like people act like it is, and it's impossible to deny that it has had some serious effects. I've even changed my vote to "bad," not because I dislike the combat, but because of how much it's split the community.
For me, the question isn't, "Is 1.9's combat good or bad?" but rather, "Was 1.9's combat worth it?" Was making combat a little bit more fun and challenging to some people really worth all the anger and animosity it has caused?
However, Minecraft Forum is not a really reliable source. Heck, many people in other forum said it was famous until 2012.You should also add a survey on other server that are still alive (Hypixel, Badlion, Calamity Network, etc).
An those who said that the combat is more realistic. realistic combat in a virtual 16 bit sandbox game is not a good update.
I didn't mean all of them haven't bothered to learn. Some of them may not have after barely learning anything about it, which is why it's included. But many are simply attached to weird quirks/glitches/exploits of 1.8, like this guy...
...on top of spreading misinformation like "1.9 was designed to suit newbies." That's one misconception that would upset people into not playing it, because obviously if you like 1.9 combat you're a newbie. Illogical, yes, but most of this nonsense is illogical. If they could forget this junk, there'd be no issue. Now obviously the people who speak online are the most vocal ones, but I think if there were any real reason that 1.9 was bad that actually made sense, and wasn't anything like the misinformation or bizarre 1.8 attachment, it would've come up by now.
It has come up: the community split. However, most of people's dislike for 1.9 is fine. So what if they liked 1.8 because of spam-clicking and "techniques". It's just as wrong to demand they like a feature as it is for them to complain about it.
The absence of such things would seem to indicate that my statement is correct. The reason the majority don't like it is because of misconceptions and weird attachments to unintended mechanics.
Just because we don't definitively know the objective value of good and bad for 1.9 does not mean there is not one, or that it's all subjective.
There's a difference between my opinion and whether or not it's good. For example, I can like something that is bad and hate something that is good. My personal opinion makes no difference. For example, I hate 1.6. But that doesn't mean it was a bad update.
So, how do we know whether 1.6 was good? By judging the aftermath, in which you can see that there was no problem with the game (in fact, I believe interest in the game was at its peak around that time), where the game was going, and the community's reaction to it.
Positives? How about just an honest analysis. The combat system makes things more challenging simply by its objective nature. It makes it so that missing has consequences. It removes exploits and glitches of 1.8. Even if it does make fighting hoards a little more difficult, and overpowering players harder, it does not require an insane level of skill to learn to handle, and the ability of players to manipulate the environment can make most situations that truly are too difficult a non-issue. The saturation-rapid-healing can lead to certain specific problematic situations. However these issues are worth it simply because you can no longer be an invincible pest-control agent who uses poorly-designed vending machines by clicking on them.
Yeah, I'd agree with you. It does require more skill, and I find it more fun. However, just making the game require more skill does not make it objectively better. And, by the way, I'm still just as much as an invincible pest-control agent as before, though I've never bothered with vending machines because farms remove fun.
And even if you don't consider just that last bit worth it, the negatives aren't necessarily game-breakers. You can still basically play the game normally with some minor irritations. So there is no reason not to update and to also adamantly be against getting the good content, as well as bug fixes, further updates, and the ability to stay with friends on an updated server... unless you're misinformed as to what you're getting, or none of the rest of these things appeal to you. And I doubt the whole of 40% of players don't see an appeal, given that such a division has never occurred before.
You still haven't given a good objective reason for why it's good, other than it requires more skill, to which I say, it really doesn't, it just requires a different set of skills.
However, Minecraft Forum is not a really reliable source. Heck, many people in other forum said it was famous until 2012.You should also add a survey on other server that are still alive (Hypixel, Badlion, Calamity Network, etc).
An those who said that the combat is more realistic. realistic combat in a virtual 16 bit sandbox game is not a good update.
Servers for the most part don't have a large enough or varied enough sample size to be reliable sources either, which is what MCF does have. The best option would be a third party survey that got at least 1,000 votes, but I'm not sure if one exists.
Part of me can't believe this thread is still kicking.
The other half of me is not surprised.
The best thing I can think of to do about 1.9 combat is not to remove it like many say, but to have a "Combat Update 2" which would add some things desirable for PvP, which would make servers want the new things and at least try out the new combat system. But that's never going to happen.
I have tried 1.9 pvp and found myself sitting in one Eggwars game for an hour due to the slow PVP.
EDIT: "oh you can just give yourself haste 99999"
That doesn't take care of the absence of jump-shooting, or the removed block-hitting, or the shields that make bows and arrows useless.
Block-hitting was glitch, so it cannot be counted as skill, and it was good thing, that Mojang got rid of it. And that's the purpose of shields! To make bows and arrows useless. Even though the new system is not (like I have stated many, many times earlier) perfect, but the old system was downright broken. Because of block-hitting, which yet again, was a glitch. And while the new system might of ruined the PvP side of the game, it enhanced the survival side, by making it more challenging, which again, was one thing majority of the Minecraft community wanted. Mojang delivered, and all of a sudden, it wasn't "needed".
how much of that 98% player base are children who prefer spam clicking cause its easier?
A gamerule doesn't give as much freedom as the current system works. The combat is supposed to be a core part of the game, so a true toggle makes 0 sense, but for the sake of map-making, we're given creative freedom to, rather than toggle on and off, completely modify the cooldown.
This allows much more creative things that benefits both those that are pro and not-so-pro of the combat system, as you can tweak the mechanics to what you truly feel is balanced. Want a super duper slow 20 damage axe? Sure. Want a spam-clicking mean bean machine? Go ahead. A "toggle" currently is in the game, it's up to the servers to use that toggle instead of whining about the mechanic.
Then they, like anyone still complaining about 1.7 and 1.8, have missed their window of opportunity. Which is perfectly fine.
Yes, and those other reasons are illogical, inaccurate, or just plain wrong. When your opinion is based on misinformation and faulty reasoning, and you can't see it, of course you're going to make poor choices. It's even worse when this spreads to the majority, because it magnifies the errors.
For example, as the great Zeno410 said, "Banging your mouse a lot is not a skill." Relying on glitches and poorly designed mechanics can be skillful, but you're not supposed to do that. Those are the two major claims to skill that 1.8 has, and that supporters of 1.8 combat have told me of. Other minor claims include basic mechanics that every game has, such as "aim."
A gamerule would split the game, increasing development time and dividing the playerbase further. Watch this video to understand.
The "compromise" referred to cannot be multiple updated branches of the same game, even if it's within the same version. That is not a compromise.
If you are planning to make a suggestion, please read this.
If you want to know more, you can read this.
For those who complain about post-Beta generation, you might want to see this.
All updates about mobs and weapons are added with the "new" combat. (Which more than 1 year old)
And I like 1.9 combat.
Click the dragon/egg that is on top to help me raise my dragons
http://www.minecraftforum.net/forums/off-topic/forum-games/2824114-delete-the-block-above-you
I find it rather interesting that all the people who want this thread to end are those who like the combat updates.
Just curious, that's all.
Well I mean, we've been countering the same exact arguments for ~1 year now. It gets tiring. This thread is just repeating itself because some 1.8 combatters(?) came around and spouted the same disproven arguments that's been said 3 replies ago. No one's getting anywhere and no one is coming up to an agreement.
Pretty much any argument I've read against the update is either false or just ends up being user preference, which is fine, but promotes no discussion. It just gets stuck in an endless loop. There's no need to continue a thread if it promotes no more discussion value.
Considering that this thread has been active almost nonstop, and the poll suggests that more than a third of Minecraft players dislike the 1.9 combat changes, I'd say that it's more serious a problem than pro-1.9 people say it is. Sure, they may be in the minority, but it's not some paltry 5-10% like people act like it is, and it's impossible to deny that it has had some serious effects. I've even changed my vote to "bad," not because I dislike the combat, but because of how much it's split the community.
For me, the question isn't, "Is 1.9's combat good or bad?" but rather, "Was 1.9's combat worth it?" Was making combat a little bit more fun and challenging to some people really worth all the anger and animosity it has caused?
Want to see my suggestions? Here they are!
I am also known as GameWyrm or GameWyrm97. You can also find me at snapshotmc.com
I would say it was. A lot of the hate towards the combat wasn't because it was bad or even about it being bad. A lot of the hate came directly from misinformation. Heck, even before we got a single snapshot, people were already claiming how terrible the new combat was and how it just "ruins" everything.
All of that was said way before the devs even figured out how they were going to improve combat. I don't think the devs should revert changes that are perfectly fit in the game just because people can't help but judge things incorrectly, refusing to even try them out. I'd bet a majority of the current haters would actually enjoy the combat if they gave it a try instead of just hearing how "bad" it was.
And even then, truly, I doubt the community is even any different from what it was. It always was kind of split. We just didn't hear anything because everyone kind of minded their own things. The pvper's and the builders and such all have different communities. Obviously because of their preferences in gameplay, but also because both communities are truly different. They essentially speak different languages, much like any different community.
Well I mean, now we have some vocal people because of a big change. And if people are having issues, Mojang should try and reach out to them and see what agreement they could come up with. And they have, many many times already. They've done their best to improve whatever they can, and whatever they couldn't is mostly those arguments that have been in this thread, a lot of them being straight up false.
There's always going to be a sort of split in the community with every update. None have been more vocal than this one, yeah, but a lot of those vocal people are also complaining about things uncontrollable by mojang.
If all else, I feel the community has calmed down entirely. The only reason why we think people are still complaining like crazy is because of the few occasional posts in this thread. If you look pretty much anywhere else, you'd see people have gotten used to it one way or another, be it staying on older versions of the game or just accepting the changes. Hardly anyone really talks about the update anymore, and the initial expected wave of anger is pretty much gone.
Yes, it would be a mistake to revert the combat changes now, since it's already long established and the majority do enjoy it. If it truly was a mistake, it's too late to fix, and Mojang will have to live with it. However, ruining the combat experience for nearly 40% of players does indicate that the combat update was probably not the best way to fix the mechanic.
Yeah, people have quieted down because they've learned to deal with it, but that doesn't mean they accept it, or that the aftermath of the combat update is any better.
Want to see my suggestions? Here they are!
I am also known as GameWyrm or GameWyrm97. You can also find me at snapshotmc.com
It's ruined for them solely because they believe it's ruined, not because it's actually bad.
If they'd put aside their misconceptions, learn to use the system, and stop bringing up the glitches and exploits of 1.8 as "good things" (they are not), a huge chunk of them would be enjoying 1.9.
If you are planning to make a suggestion, please read this.
If you want to know more, you can read this.
For those who complain about post-Beta generation, you might want to see this.
Can you give me any evidence of this, such as some poster who has actually done this and started to enjoy 1.9, than simply pointing what may or may not be true? And even then, how do you know a large chunk of these people haven't bothered to try to learn the new system? Unless you've become some mass telepath, your statement saying they would enjoy 1.9 has no real evidence and is thus invalid.
Obviously, it's only ruined for them because they believe so. There's no real way to say whether it's objectively good or bad; it's all a matter of opinion. Most just have the opinion it's good, but have just as much evidence to prove it as the those who say it's bad. You can't say whether something's good or not based purely on a bunch of opinions. If a country made a law that immensely improved the economy and the way of life for all of its inhabitants, but most people hated it, was it a bad law? Or the inverse, a law that made stealing legal, and everyone loved it, was that a good law? People's minds are flawed, and just because the majority believes something does not make it true.
What we can measure objectively is the aftermath. Minecraft's PC sales are still going strong (though without historical data I can't say whether or not it has improved or worsened since 1.9), but servers definitely seem to be suffering, with their general quantity decreasing and many staying pre-1.9. Many people are refusing to update past 1.9 despite the fact that the cooldown can be negated with commands and that they'd like to enjoy the more recent features. There are arguments being brought up about reverting this feature than any other feature in Minecraft's history, even hunger, if memory serves me right (granted, this forum has grown since then). What positives can you bring up, other than "it adds skill and challenge," which is pretty subjective and can't be measured objectively?
Want to see my suggestions? Here they are!
I am also known as GameWyrm or GameWyrm97. You can also find me at snapshotmc.com
I didn't mean all of them haven't bothered to learn. Some of them may not have after barely learning anything about it, which is why it's included. But many are simply attached to weird quirks/glitches/exploits of 1.8, like this guy...
...on top of spreading misinformation like "1.9 was designed to suit newbies." That's one misconception that would upset people into not playing it, because obviously if you like 1.9 combat you're a newbie. Illogical, yes, but most of this nonsense is illogical. If they could forget this junk, there'd be no issue. Now obviously the people who speak online are the most vocal ones, but I think if there were any real reason that 1.9 was bad that actually made sense, and wasn't anything like the misinformation or bizarre 1.8 attachment, it would've come up by now.
The absence of such things would seem to indicate that my statement is correct. The reason the majority don't like it is because of misconceptions and weird attachments to unintended mechanics.
Just because we don't definitively know the objective value of good and bad for 1.9 does not mean there is not one, or that it's all subjective.
There's a difference between my opinion and whether or not it's good. For example, I can like something that is bad and hate something that is good. My personal opinion makes no difference. For example, I hate 1.6. But that doesn't mean it was a bad update.
Positives? How about just an honest analysis. The combat system makes things more challenging simply by its objective nature. It makes it so that missing has consequences. It removes exploits and glitches of 1.8. Even if it does make fighting hoards a little more difficult, and overpowering players harder, it does not require an insane level of skill to learn to handle, and the ability of players to manipulate the environment can make most situations that truly are too difficult a non-issue. The saturation-rapid-healing can lead to certain specific problematic situations. However these issues are worth it simply because you can no longer be an invincible pest-control agent who uses poorly-designed vending machines by clicking on them.
And even if you don't consider just that last bit worth it, the negatives aren't necessarily game-breakers. You can still basically play the game normally with some minor irritations. So there is no reason not to update and to also adamantly be against getting the good content, as well as bug fixes, further updates, and the ability to stay with friends on an updated server... unless you're misinformed as to what you're getting, or none of the rest of these things appeal to you. And I doubt the whole of 40% of players don't see an appeal, given that such a division has never occurred before.
If you are planning to make a suggestion, please read this.
If you want to know more, you can read this.
For those who complain about post-Beta generation, you might want to see this.
I thought Minecraft is for everyone?
most of the people who say 1.9 combat is bad, still play on 1.8 servers instead of giving 1.9 a try.
Click the dragon/egg that is on top to help me raise my dragons
http://www.minecraftforum.net/forums/off-topic/forum-games/2824114-delete-the-block-above-you
Just to clarify things up, clicking with a toothbrush is not a skill. It's just using toothbrush to click your mouse. Get it?
Now dragclicking. I don't even say anything to that, but at least it sounds smarter, than "jitterclicking" again, just saying.
Now like I have said, the new system isn't perfect, as for example, dealing with baby zombies is pain with it, as, well. They're so fast, that anyone will start spam their clicks, because sudden panic attack.
However, Minecraft Forum is not a really reliable source. Heck, many people in other forum said it was famous until 2012.You should also add a survey on other server that are still alive (Hypixel, Badlion, Calamity Network, etc).
An those who said that the combat is more realistic. realistic combat in a virtual 16 bit sandbox game is not a good update.
It has come up: the community split. However, most of people's dislike for 1.9 is fine. So what if they liked 1.8 because of spam-clicking and "techniques". It's just as wrong to demand they like a feature as it is for them to complain about it.
So, how do we know whether 1.6 was good? By judging the aftermath, in which you can see that there was no problem with the game (in fact, I believe interest in the game was at its peak around that time), where the game was going, and the community's reaction to it.
Yeah, I'd agree with you. It does require more skill, and I find it more fun. However, just making the game require more skill does not make it objectively better. And, by the way, I'm still just as much as an invincible pest-control agent as before, though I've never bothered with vending machines because farms remove fun.
You still haven't given a good objective reason for why it's good, other than it requires more skill, to which I say, it really doesn't, it just requires a different set of skills.
Servers for the most part don't have a large enough or varied enough sample size to be reliable sources either, which is what MCF does have. The best option would be a third party survey that got at least 1,000 votes, but I'm not sure if one exists.
Want to see my suggestions? Here they are!
I am also known as GameWyrm or GameWyrm97. You can also find me at snapshotmc.com
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Curse PremiumPart of me can't believe this thread is still kicking.
The other half of me is not surprised.
The best thing I can think of to do about 1.9 combat is not to remove it like many say, but to have a "Combat Update 2" which would add some things desirable for PvP, which would make servers want the new things and at least try out the new combat system. But that's never going to happen.
obviously there will b conflict with how good it is, but I say its a great addition to the potential realism of the game
Block-hitting was glitch, so it cannot be counted as skill, and it was good thing, that Mojang got rid of it. And that's the purpose of shields! To make bows and arrows useless. Even though the new system is not (like I have stated many, many times earlier) perfect, but the old system was downright broken. Because of block-hitting, which yet again, was a glitch. And while the new system might of ruined the PvP side of the game, it enhanced the survival side, by making it more challenging, which again, was one thing majority of the Minecraft community wanted. Mojang delivered, and all of a sudden, it wasn't "needed".