We have blocks... we have fences, half steps, and stair blocks... now we need some of the OTHER primitves to help shape our worlds.
Example image:
Things like spheres, cylinders, cones, and the torus could give more creative design input. The objects, much like existing "irregular shapes" should require a crafting recipe of course. These objects may or may not serve a functional purpose, but I am suggesting them mainly for aesthetic purposes.
Input?
*EDIT*
Thse blocks would obviously still "behave" like a full block, they would just look different. So please do not start some tirade about how it would be too hard to program the edges of things colliding and crap like that. Just imagine they are like a standard block, just look different.
To be honest, I don't think it would bring anything to the aesthetics or gameplay if you could craft a sphere or cylinder the size of a block. Besides, what would be the materials?
I could agree with ramps, and perhaps stone square pyramids and some prisms, as they would fit.
The materials would be the materials you choose... much like the way you craft wooden, or stone pressure plates, or wooden and stone stair blocks.
Also, yes perhaps not ALL of the included shapes, but certainly the cylinder, pyramid, and sphere.
Also I disagree with you that it would not improve aesthetics. What if I wanted to make a pipe? Or round columns? How about a buggy or cart (spheres for wheels?)? Maybe a statue? There are plenty of things that could easily benefit from having more shapes.
Instead of having to "imagine" that the statue you made isn't just three cubes stacked on top of each other, you could actually make it resemble something better. Having a sphere (for a head) then a cube (for the body) and a cylinder (for the legs) could easily make a better simple statue than three cubes.
Like I would love to be able to actually make a pyramid out of blocks but then we would need the ramps and the corner pieces and the top pyramid piece if you guys know what I mean... Not only for pyramids but these simple shapes could also be used for castles and such, and common house roofs.
I can certainly see uses for prisms (not cylinders, too round), pyramids and ramps, but spheres would look too out of place.
Also, like I said, a sphere the size of a block won't be useful for a lot of things. You'd need larger spheres for cooler stuff, and that gives you weird positioning issues and it brings the topic of superentities to the table.
And I have no idea how crafting of this would work.
I don't mind triangular based polygons, But I'd say nothing with more than 6 sides.
Spheres, lets say you went the cheap route and made it more like some sort of three dimensional Octagon - You've got something like 128 triangles to draw (thats a rough number in my head, I don't have my pen and paper handy) - as opposed to your regular cube of 12 triangles to draw.
A screen full of spheres is 10 times more intensive than a screen full of squares. Not worth it.
I actually agree on the voxel point.
EVERYTHING in this game is cubes. Anything else would be inconsistent!
What about fences? Those aren't cubes. Neither are half steps... they are rectangles. What about stair blocks? Those are irregular polygons. Signs are not cubes... The player is also not a cube. In fact, the only things that ARE cubes are the world blocks!
Please stick to the facts, and not some made-up malarkey.
Using the excuse "It doesn't fit the Minecraft theme" is a cop-out. You have no idea what the Minecraft theme is, only Notch does. You may think you know, but you do not, and neither do I. Any other reasoning against the idea I find acceptable.
Polygon count MAY be a problem but I highly doubt it, since the idea is that the objects (much like fences) would be specialised objects and relatively low in number, so additional polygons would be minimal and superfluous.
*EDIT*
Here is more like the sphere I propose... You guys are thinking way too literally. Stop reading too much into everything and use some common sense.
Except I was thinking even more "pixelated" so that the the sphere was "blocky" like the rest of the art style.
Quote from Libervurto »
I could go for triangular prisms, you only need two types of prism and you could make smooth sided pyramids, slanted roofs, ramps and all sorts. I don't see the point of cylinders or spheres or toruseseseses, they take up too many polygons, don't fit with the aesthetic straight likes of minecraft and they are not very useful in design, how many spheres or toruseseseseses do you see on buildings? You might see cylindrical pillars but I think square blocks can stand in for those.
No offence, but you aren't very observant or artistically minded are you?
Nothing round please, triangular blocks would be fine though, like a right angle triangle for slopes, or a pyramid for... Whatever. But out of that and I think it wouldn't really look right.
In fact, I still think I prefer the game remaining being made of blocks. Adds to the charm of the game.
I'm failing to understand peoples logic here. Please explain it to me.
Okay well basically, what I meant to say is cube-ish feeling. Some objects may not be cube, I know that but they are at least close to a cube for each part of the body.
-Half steps are rectangles indeed but they are half a block. Add another and its a full block.
-Your right: signs are not cubes, but stretch the it out strategically and you have a cube.
-"The player is also not a cube." Damn right. As mentioned before, stretch it out strategically and you have a cube.
-Lava, water, item drawings etc... aren't cubes. But seriously, those don't need to be. This is the only exception I would allow. Go ahead, find a way to make the sun circular - I ain't stopping ya.
Maybe when Elpizo said EVERYTHING in this game is cubes, he meant it the obvious way... the common sense way.
Just asking since, they won't be cubes either... will that make you change your mind?
"they won't be cubes either"... I don't get this, first you said not everything is cubical - and you were right - but now you say this.
We can understand that not everything in Minecraft is cubical but that some other shapes are included, close to blocks (such as rectangles). So basically what you just said makes no sense. There already is non-cubical stuff and just because you added the word 'furniture' that doesn't make any difference.
Just asking since, they won't be cubes either... will that make you change your mind?
"they won't be cubes either"... I don't get this, first you said not everything is cubical - and you were right - but now you say this.
We can understand that not everything in Minecraft is cubical but that some other shapes are included, close to blocks (such as rectangles). So basically what you just said makes no sense. There already is non-cubical stuff and just because you added the word 'furniture' that doesn't make any difference.
Have we rage quitted yet? No.
What I am saying is this. Notch has already stated he will be adding furniature into the game. The furniature will not be a cube. A cylinder is not a cube. A sphere is not a cube. Therefore, a cylinder, is like furniature. If you are so opposed to a cylinder being added, am I understanding it correctly that you would also be aopposed to non cubical furniature?
Again I am trying to understand the logic behind the opposition to the idea. If you think it is a bad idea to have shapes other than cubes in the game... yet many of these non cubical things already exist and more will already be added... why not these?
Just asking since, they won't be cubes either... will that make you change your mind?
"they won't be cubes either"... I don't get this, first you said not everything is cubical - and you were right - but now you say this.
We can understand that not everything in Minecraft is cubical but that some other shapes are included, close to blocks (such as rectangles). So basically what you just said makes no sense. There already is non-cubical stuff and just because you added the word 'furniture' that doesn't make any difference.
Have we rage quitted yet? No.
What I am saying is this. Notch has already stated he will be adding furniature into the game. The furniature will not be a cube. A cylinder is not a cube. A sphere is not a cube. Therefore, a cylinder, is like furniature. If you are so opposed to a cylinder being added, am I understanding it correctly that you would also be aopposed to non cubical furniature?
Again I am trying to understand the logic behind the opposition to the idea. If you think it is a bad idea to have shapes other than cubes in the game... yet many of these non cubical things already exist and more will already be added... why not these?
Example image:
Things like spheres, cylinders, cones, and the torus could give more creative design input. The objects, much like existing "irregular shapes" should require a crafting recipe of course. These objects may or may not serve a functional purpose, but I am suggesting them mainly for aesthetic purposes.
Input?
*EDIT*
Thse blocks would obviously still "behave" like a full block, they would just look different. So please do not start some tirade about how it would be too hard to program the edges of things colliding and crap like that. Just imagine they are like a standard block, just look different.
I could agree with ramps, and perhaps stone square pyramids and some prisms, as they would fit.
MINECRAFT FACTS: BIG LIST OF WHAT NOTCH HAS ACTUALLY SAID ABOUT THE PLANNED FEATURES OF MINECRAFT
Also, yes perhaps not ALL of the included shapes, but certainly the cylinder, pyramid, and sphere.
Also I disagree with you that it would not improve aesthetics. What if I wanted to make a pipe? Or round columns? How about a buggy or cart (spheres for wheels?)? Maybe a statue? There are plenty of things that could easily benefit from having more shapes.
Instead of having to "imagine" that the statue you made isn't just three cubes stacked on top of each other, you could actually make it resemble something better. Having a sphere (for a head) then a cube (for the body) and a cylinder (for the legs) could easily make a better simple statue than three cubes.
~Sol
Also, like I said, a sphere the size of a block won't be useful for a lot of things. You'd need larger spheres for cooler stuff, and that gives you weird positioning issues and it brings the topic of superentities to the table.
And I have no idea how crafting of this would work.
MINECRAFT FACTS: BIG LIST OF WHAT NOTCH HAS ACTUALLY SAID ABOUT THE PLANNED FEATURES OF MINECRAFT
Maybe having it voxel based would stick to the game's theme?
(My works: Art, Music, MINECRAFT and other stuff)
MINECRAFT FACTS: BIG LIST OF WHAT NOTCH HAS ACTUALLY SAID ABOUT THE PLANNED FEATURES OF MINECRAFT
EVERYTHING in this game is cubes. Anything else would be inconsistent!
For the socially adept miner. It's free, so click it!
Hey, knock it off. Tori are the best. :smile.gif:
MINECRAFT FACTS: BIG LIST OF WHAT NOTCH HAS ACTUALLY SAID ABOUT THE PLANNED FEATURES OF MINECRAFT
Spheres, lets say you went the cheap route and made it more like some sort of three dimensional Octagon - You've got something like 128 triangles to draw (thats a rough number in my head, I don't have my pen and paper handy) - as opposed to your regular cube of 12 triangles to draw.
A screen full of spheres is 10 times more intensive than a screen full of squares. Not worth it.
What about fences? Those aren't cubes. Neither are half steps... they are rectangles. What about stair blocks? Those are irregular polygons. Signs are not cubes... The player is also not a cube. In fact, the only things that ARE cubes are the world blocks!
Please stick to the facts, and not some made-up malarkey.
Using the excuse "It doesn't fit the Minecraft theme" is a cop-out. You have no idea what the Minecraft theme is, only Notch does. You may think you know, but you do not, and neither do I. Any other reasoning against the idea I find acceptable.
Polygon count MAY be a problem but I highly doubt it, since the idea is that the objects (much like fences) would be specialised objects and relatively low in number, so additional polygons would be minimal and superfluous.
*EDIT*
Here is more like the sphere I propose... You guys are thinking way too literally. Stop reading too much into everything and use some common sense.
Except I was thinking even more "pixelated" so that the the sphere was "blocky" like the rest of the art style.
No offence, but you aren't very observant or artistically minded are you?
~Sol
I repeat. Again.
Fences... half steps... signs... none of which are cubes. Are you forgetting that these things already exist?
I'm failing to understand peoples logic here. Please explain it to me.
~Sol
In fact, I still think I prefer the game remaining being made of blocks. Adds to the charm of the game.
Okay well basically, what I meant to say is cube-ish feeling. Some objects may not be cube, I know that but they are at least close to a cube for each part of the body.
-Half steps are rectangles indeed but they are half a block. Add another and its a full block.
-Your right: signs are not cubes, but stretch the it out strategically and you have a cube.
-"The player is also not a cube." Damn right. As mentioned before, stretch it out strategically and you have a cube.
-Lava, water, item drawings etc... aren't cubes. But seriously, those don't need to be. This is the only exception I would allow. Go ahead, find a way to make the sun circular - I ain't stopping ya.
Maybe when Elpizo said EVERYTHING in this game is cubes, he meant it the obvious way... the common sense way.
Just asking since, they won't be cubes either... will that make you change your mind?
[sarcasm]What about if you could turn them off? Or... if it was only on peaceful mode? [/sarcasm]
~Sol
"they won't be cubes either"... I don't get this, first you said not everything is cubical - and you were right - but now you say this.
We can understand that not everything in Minecraft is cubical but that some other shapes are included, close to blocks (such as rectangles). So basically what you just said makes no sense. There already is non-cubical stuff and just because you added the word 'furniture' that doesn't make any difference.
Have we rage quitted yet? No.
What I am saying is this. Notch has already stated he will be adding furniature into the game. The furniature will not be a cube. A cylinder is not a cube. A sphere is not a cube. Therefore, a cylinder, is like furniature. If you are so opposed to a cylinder being added, am I understanding it correctly that you would also be aopposed to non cubical furniature?
Again I am trying to understand the logic behind the opposition to the idea. If you think it is a bad idea to have shapes other than cubes in the game... yet many of these non cubical things already exist and more will already be added... why not these?
Was that clearly stated enough?
~Sol
Ah. Where does it say this?