The real question is how good of a game DESIGNER Jeb is. You can be great at coding things in, but if you can't design the elements to work together in good ways then there will be problems.
The real question is how good of a game DESIGNER Jeb is. You can be great at coding things in, but if you can't design the elements to work together in good ways then there will be problems.
This right here. Design over at mojang is terrible. They added companions, but they dont even have AI with pathfinding yet. They added enchanting, but the combat is mediocre at best.
Its like eating cheap crackers with trufflesauce.
Take a look at the better than wolves mod. You may not like the features there, but you cant deny that this guy is a good designer.
The real question is how good of a game DESIGNER Jeb is. You can be great at coding things in, but if you can't design the elements to work together in good ways then there will be problems.
Here's a tip for being a good game developer
Listen to the community []
If he does it, then he's a good developer. The fact is Notch hasn't listened to the community since 1.4. He should immediately be disqualified, because he's a horrible developer. He once knew what he was doing, but then he just stopped trying and started changing things without consulting the community.
If he does it, then he's a good developer. The fact is Notch hasn't listened to the community since 1.4. He should immediately be disqualified, because he's a horrible developer. He once knew what he was doing, but then he just stopped trying and started changing things without consulting the community.
This is the best thing, Ive read in the last few weeks
The only good things that were added after 1.4 were pistons and sprinting
If he does it, then he's a good developer. The fact is Notch hasn't listened to the community since 1.4. He should immediately be disqualified, because he's a horrible developer. He once knew what he was doing, but then he just stopped trying and started changing things without consulting the community.
There's a difference between listening and agreeing.
Personally, If I was a developer I would probably dispute with the 'customers' on my time off and see why they conflict with what I'm making etc etc. just to see if they happen to have a better opinion on something. Most of the time people uselessly complain on here but occasionally some arguments hold a lot of water.
If he does it, then he's a good developer. The fact is Notch hasn't listened to the community since 1.4. He should immediately be disqualified, because he's a horrible developer. He once knew what he was doing, but then he just stopped trying and started changing things without consulting the community.
Not entirely true.
Listening to the communitys feedback is great. I dont deny that.
But a professional game designer knows what hes doing, better than some people who just want tacked on features on an unstable game.
This right here. Design over at mojang is terrible. They added companions, but they dont even have AI with pathfinding yet. They added enchanting, but the combat is mediocre at best.
Its like eating cheap crackers with trufflesauce.
Take a look at the better than wolves mod. You may not like the features there, but you cant deny that this guy is a good designer.
I disagree- their design is good enough; the follow through/programming capability is terrible. Combat (for example) wasn't meant to be stellar, it's a sandbox game about mining/building. The problem is that combat often glitches, so when you should have hit you missed; or mobs moving through objects; or hits passing through solid objects. Poor path-finding, weird loading effects, MP's neglect, glitchy everything; That's programming deficiency right there.
I'd agree that BTW is both better designed and better programmed, however.
If he does it, then he's a good developer. The fact is Notch hasn't listened to the community since 1.4. He should immediately be disqualified, because he's a horrible developer. He once knew what he was doing, but then he just stopped trying and started changing things without consulting the community.
I must respectfully disagree. Communities tend to be rabid packs of wolves. They aren't good at proposing good game design at all. They can be quite good at finding bugs and problems, horribly at coming up with good solutions to those problems. Sometimes they have good ideas for features and a lot of times they don't.
Listening to the community to an extent is advisable, but only regarding certain things. As far as getting game design ideas go, looking at popular mods is probably better than directly listening to what community members say (of course, putting multiple mods together into the official product can be tricky with regards to balance).
I disagree- their design is good enough; the follow through/programming capability is terrible. Combat (for example) wasn't meant to be stellar, it's a sandbox game about mining/building. The problem is that combat often glitches, so when you should have hit you missed; or mobs moving through objects; or hits passing through solid objects. Poor path-finding, weird loading effects, MP's neglect, glitchy everything; That's programming deficiency right there.
I'd agree that BTW is both better designed and better programmed, however.
Actually, Notch intended this as sort of an action/adventure game. So the combat was presumably supposed to have been pretty good/tight, which it isn't.
I can think of few more worthless, immature forum topics than this one.
Yes, lets have the forum members use their tiny little brains and myopic views of the development of Minecraft, and give them a one-versus-the-other, black and white voting topic.
There is maybe, maybe .01% of the forum members that actually understand enough about game and software development to provide an actual valid response to this vote. The other 99.99% are probably still going to grade school or have never worked in a computer-related industry.
I disagree- their design is good enough; the follow through/programming capability is terrible. Combat (for example) wasn't meant to be stellar, it's a sandbox game about mining/building. The problem is that combat often glitches, so when you should have hit you missed; or mobs moving through objects; or hits passing through solid objects. Poor path-finding, weird loading effects, MP's neglect, glitchy everything; That's programming deficiency right there.
I'd agree that BTW is both better designed and better programmed, however.
But thats exactly what I meant.
The combat is bad, I can live with that. But they keep tacking features on the bad combat, which makes it a real mess. The poor design choice here is that they decided to add things for combat, but not make the combat itself better. (hence cheap crackers with trufflesauce)
I do know what you mean though, the reason the combat is bad in the first place is because its poorly programmed, too.
Actually, Notch intended this as sort of an action/adventure game. So the combat was presumably supposed to have been pretty good/tight, which it isn't.
I don't know that it needed to be different than it is, other than being 'tight,' though. One click for attack and (now) one for defense is pretty simple and straightforward, and you'd think that it'd be easy to get working right/well. But due to poor programming, it doesn't work as expected, even for how simple it is. Poor preformance isn't always bad design, it's more often bad programming. A combat system might work terribly for a game and be poor design, but that'd require something more along the lines of including something like Splinter Cell's combat into MC. That combat system wouldn't work well for a game where sneaking isn't as involved, players aren't special forces agents capable of breaking necks while hanging upside down, and players aren't supposed to have assault rifles.
My point is that Notch barely consulted the community AT ALL. Who is going to be spending more time playing his game, him or the community? So whose opinion should matter?
Twitter should not be the only way they communicate with their playerbase. At least Jeb did respond on Twitter. Notch mostly talked about non related things or other games. It is important to have a connection with the community, especially when making drastic changes to such a personable game.
I remember back in those early Beta updates. The popular ideals for Minecraft was not NPCs, potions, enchantments, or magic. It was adding furniture, slopes, better boats, minecart improvements, increased height (which is allowed now), space, custom paintings, new ores, trees, and new realistic mobs (such as bears, foxes, birds), a block that lights up when powered, deeper waters(although I don't think people wanted them to be 1500+ blocks in size), climate (still waiting), better food crops(barely improved), collors and new ways to interact with wolves, more things in the nether (given). I don't think ANYONE requested mooShrooms and giant mushrooms or snow golems. (Well maybe snow golems but they probably got flamed for it).
I think I've given more than enough examples that Mojang hasn't been listening to its playerbase, but if that wasn't enough. Lets compare the End to the Aether mod. Actually I will make a poll to see which people would have preferred. Really they have been focusing on things that few people requested and a lot of people never wanted to see in Minecraft. It is just an utter disregard in the community that would have been avoided if they had taken more interest in which way people wanted the direction of Minecraft to go.
I don't know that it needed to be different than it is, other than being 'tight,' though. One click for attack and (now) one for defense is pretty simple and straightforward, and you'd think that it'd be easy to get working right/well. But due to poor programming, it doesn't work as expected, even for how simple it is. Poor preformance isn't always bad design, it's more often bad programming. A combat system might work terribly for a game and be poor design, but that'd require something more along the lines of including something like Splinter Cell's combat into MC. That combat system wouldn't work well for a game where sneaking isn't as involved, players aren't special forces agents capable of breaking necks while hanging upside down, and players aren't supposed to have assault rifles.
From my perspective, the combat system lacks any significant depth, and that's a real design problem. If combat is unimportant, then it doesn't need depth. Ostensibly, combat is supposed to be important (Notch's vision, the End, the work to try to improve the combat system, etc). You can have a simple system that has depth, but Minecraft doesn't have that either.
It could be greatly improved just by having attack animations that line up with attacks, so that you have to time when you defend yourself (for instance). It could also be improved by adding more types of weapons that work differently. I think both would be a good idea for the game. Don't think special forces, think more about Zelda or other adventure games.
People who know a lot about design do not post on these forums because of threads like this and posters like (most of) you guys.
The few of us who know anything about design balance, limitations of code, and aren't just knee-jerk reactionist complainers have better things to do than babysit a bunch of 12 year old rage machines about a video game.
You can find these people on forums related to development, or in mod forums. That is all.
From my perspective, the combat system lacks any significant depth, and that's a real design problem. If combat is unimportant, then it doesn't need depth. Ostensibly, combat is supposed to be important (Notch's vision, the End, the work to try to improve the combat system, etc). You can have a simple system that has depth, but Minecraft doesn't have that either.
It could be greatly improved just by having attack animations that line up with attacks, so that you have to time when you defend yourself (for instance). It could also be improved by adding more types of weapons that work differently. I think both would be a good idea for the game. Don't think special forces, think more about Zelda or other adventure games.
Ah, you are correct there. I didn't think MC needed a boss fight before; but if he wanted to add one, he should have improved the depth of the system.
I have been trying to say that glitches=/=depth (design) though, so some of that would (ideally) be taken care of in the programming stage, and not the concept stage (where design takes place). I'm not sure more weapons are necessary - more options =/= a well designed system, though they certainly don't hurt if they're integrated within the system.
The splinter cell example was for an example of what would be a terrible system for MC to use by design, even if implemented 100% perfectly.
What do you think,
Who is the better developer of Minecraft
Because since yesterday Jeb is the new developer
http://notch.tumblr.com/post/13633493969/och-med-dom-orden-sa-passar-jag-micken
Follow @selib1230
But he has zero followthrough.
Enough said.
http://www.minecraftforum.net/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=155932
Crates
http://www.minecraftforum.net/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=239467
Item Scrolling
http://www.minecraftforum.net/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=174539
This right here. Design over at mojang is terrible. They added companions, but they dont even have AI with pathfinding yet. They added enchanting, but the combat is mediocre at best.
Its like eating cheap crackers with trufflesauce.
Take a look at the better than wolves mod. You may not like the features there, but you cant deny that this guy is a good designer.
Here's a tip for being a good game developer
Listen to the community []
If he does it, then he's a good developer. The fact is Notch hasn't listened to the community since 1.4. He should immediately be disqualified, because he's a horrible developer. He once knew what he was doing, but then he just stopped trying and started changing things without consulting the community.
http://www.minecraftforum.net/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=155932
Crates
http://www.minecraftforum.net/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=239467
Item Scrolling
http://www.minecraftforum.net/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=174539
This is the best thing, Ive read in the last few weeks
The only good things that were added after 1.4 were pistons and sprinting
Follow @selib1230
Personally, If I was a developer I would probably dispute with the 'customers' on my time off and see why they conflict with what I'm making etc etc. just to see if they happen to have a better opinion on something. Most of the time people uselessly complain on here but occasionally some arguments hold a lot of water.
Not entirely true.
Listening to the communitys feedback is great. I dont deny that.
But a professional game designer knows what hes doing, better than some people who just want tacked on features on an unstable game.
In my opinion, they should BOTH be head designer.
I disagree- their design is good enough; the follow through/programming capability is terrible. Combat (for example) wasn't meant to be stellar, it's a sandbox game about mining/building. The problem is that combat often glitches, so when you should have hit you missed; or mobs moving through objects; or hits passing through solid objects. Poor path-finding, weird loading effects, MP's neglect, glitchy everything; That's programming deficiency right there.
I'd agree that BTW is both better designed and better programmed, however.
See the post for a Texture pack tutorial!
I must respectfully disagree. Communities tend to be rabid packs of wolves. They aren't good at proposing good game design at all. They can be quite good at finding bugs and problems, horribly at coming up with good solutions to those problems. Sometimes they have good ideas for features and a lot of times they don't.
Listening to the community to an extent is advisable, but only regarding certain things. As far as getting game design ideas go, looking at popular mods is probably better than directly listening to what community members say (of course, putting multiple mods together into the official product can be tricky with regards to balance).
Actually, Notch intended this as sort of an action/adventure game. So the combat was presumably supposed to have been pretty good/tight, which it isn't.
Yes, lets have the forum members use their tiny little brains and myopic views of the development of Minecraft, and give them a one-versus-the-other, black and white voting topic.
There is maybe, maybe .01% of the forum members that actually understand enough about game and software development to provide an actual valid response to this vote. The other 99.99% are probably still going to grade school or have never worked in a computer-related industry.
- sunperp
But thats exactly what I meant.
The combat is bad, I can live with that. But they keep tacking features on the bad combat, which makes it a real mess. The poor design choice here is that they decided to add things for combat, but not make the combat itself better. (hence cheap crackers with trufflesauce)
I do know what you mean though, the reason the combat is bad in the first place is because its poorly programmed, too.
I don't know that it needed to be different than it is, other than being 'tight,' though. One click for attack and (now) one for defense is pretty simple and straightforward, and you'd think that it'd be easy to get working right/well. But due to poor programming, it doesn't work as expected, even for how simple it is. Poor preformance isn't always bad design, it's more often bad programming. A combat system might work terribly for a game and be poor design, but that'd require something more along the lines of including something like Splinter Cell's combat into MC. That combat system wouldn't work well for a game where sneaking isn't as involved, players aren't special forces agents capable of breaking necks while hanging upside down, and players aren't supposed to have assault rifles.
See the post for a Texture pack tutorial!
Twitter should not be the only way they communicate with their playerbase. At least Jeb did respond on Twitter. Notch mostly talked about non related things or other games. It is important to have a connection with the community, especially when making drastic changes to such a personable game.
I remember back in those early Beta updates. The popular ideals for Minecraft was not NPCs, potions, enchantments, or magic. It was adding furniture, slopes, better boats, minecart improvements, increased height (which is allowed now), space, custom paintings, new ores, trees, and new realistic mobs (such as bears, foxes, birds), a block that lights up when powered, deeper waters(although I don't think people wanted them to be 1500+ blocks in size), climate (still waiting), better food crops(barely improved), collors and new ways to interact with wolves, more things in the nether (given). I don't think ANYONE requested mooShrooms and giant mushrooms or snow golems. (Well maybe snow golems but they probably got flamed for it).
I think I've given more than enough examples that Mojang hasn't been listening to its playerbase, but if that wasn't enough. Lets compare the End to the Aether mod. Actually I will make a poll to see which people would have preferred. Really they have been focusing on things that few people requested and a lot of people never wanted to see in Minecraft. It is just an utter disregard in the community that would have been avoided if they had taken more interest in which way people wanted the direction of Minecraft to go.
http://www.minecraftforum.net/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=155932
Crates
http://www.minecraftforum.net/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=239467
Item Scrolling
http://www.minecraftforum.net/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=174539
From my perspective, the combat system lacks any significant depth, and that's a real design problem. If combat is unimportant, then it doesn't need depth. Ostensibly, combat is supposed to be important (Notch's vision, the End, the work to try to improve the combat system, etc). You can have a simple system that has depth, but Minecraft doesn't have that either.
It could be greatly improved just by having attack animations that line up with attacks, so that you have to time when you defend yourself (for instance). It could also be improved by adding more types of weapons that work differently. I think both would be a good idea for the game. Don't think special forces, think more about Zelda or other adventure games.
The few of us who know anything about design balance, limitations of code, and aren't just knee-jerk reactionist complainers have better things to do than babysit a bunch of 12 year old rage machines about a video game.
You can find these people on forums related to development, or in mod forums. That is all.
http://notch.tumblr.com/post/123343045/my-vision-for-survival (follow this link if you need proof)
Ah, you are correct there. I didn't think MC needed a boss fight before; but if he wanted to add one, he should have improved the depth of the system.
I have been trying to say that glitches=/=depth (design) though, so some of that would (ideally) be taken care of in the programming stage, and not the concept stage (where design takes place). I'm not sure more weapons are necessary - more options =/= a well designed system, though they certainly don't hurt if they're integrated within the system.
The splinter cell example was for an example of what would be a terrible system for MC to use by design, even if implemented 100% perfectly.
See the post for a Texture pack tutorial!