Is it just me, or do new features often feel disappointing due to their lack of depth? For example, the ocean features that are coming out. Now, we haven't even gotten to play with them yet, and I'm already disappointed. Why? Because it's been confirmed that sharks will not be added. Ever. (See this thread.)
So many features could have more depth than they do. Even though we get new content, it often feels underwhelming or disappointing for me after the first five minutes. Does anyone else feel this way?
It's why I don't bother playing vanilla anymore. Vanilla Minecraft probably deserves a permanent booth at E3, it's that title you're excited for but which never actually comes out.
I don't really see how just not having sharks means the update isn't living up to true potential. That seems fairly subjective and illogical (if they added 20 awesome and unique mobs, 10 new weapons or equipment items, fully modular boats, and a dozen other things would it still not be living up to potential because of the lack of one (in my opinion boring) shark mob?).
I would agree that a lot of parts of the game could use a bit more depth. I'd also be able to make that statement about literally any game. But personally I prefer the current method than some mods that go way too in depth about specific things, which feels out of place compared to other elements. For example, a lot of the redstone power mods take a simple, functional system and make it overly complex. Sure they add a lot of neat functionality, but you have to jump through a dozen different convoluted hoops to access it and then once you get it you are at an extreme advantage when dealing with the vanilla content.
Another example would be Psi. The first line from their website is "Psi is a magical tech spell programming mod inspired by Mahouka. Don't worry if that doesn't make any sense." That seems like a pretty clear indicator of complexity for the sake of complexity. I'm not saying it doesn't do cool stuff, but if you essentially need to learn a light programming language just to use it and after you are done you are basically an unkillable demigod.
The one that gets close enough to a good level of depth for me is Tinker's Construct. It has a fairly simple premise, is fairly easy to understand and work with, and it adds a decent amount of content while (almost) not making the player too overpowered by the end of it. If the entire system was simplified by removing the special brick block used to make a forge, removing a lot of the material types for equipment added by other mods, and replacing the system for casting pieces and just had the materials cast directly into the block where you assemble pieces into a weapon it would be just about perfect imo.
But I'll always pick a fairly balanced but shallow experience compared to something over complicated and overpowered.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want some advice on how to thrive in the Suggestions section? Check this handy list of guidelines and tips for posting your ideas and responding to the ideas of others!
Hitting the optimal amount of "depth" in parts of a game is certainly one of the main "management opportunities" Mojang (or any other game developer) faces: one mans depth can easily be another man's wasted effort (if not stifiling specificity)…
Consider stone types, wood types, and redstone…
There are several stone types (stone, cobble, diorite, andesite, granite) which even have a limited interconvertability;
[cobble + nether quartz >> diorite > + nether quartz >> granite & cobble + diorite >> andesite as well as the more commonly usedbeing able to mine stone into cobble/smelt cobble to stone.]
Despite this, all five are (barring a few crafting recipes and the most unfortunate lack of slabs, stairs and walls for all types) functionally identical.
Most of these where added in 1.8.
Prior to becoming aware of the limited convertability (which IMO implies they where originally envisioned as having different properties with granite being more valuable than diorite which was more valuable than cobble) my thought had been that they were introduced simply to increase the difficulty/complexity of inventory management while mining…
Ought this be counted as lack of depth, or an avoidance of excessive complexity??
Wood types are even more nearly identical. [Added between 1.2 birch & 1.7.2 Mega spruce, dark oak, and acacia]
(The only functional difference I am aware of is some door types having windows/being partly transparent…)
There would be more "depth" but also more complexity [and a potentialy crippling biome specificity to gameplay] were the woods to have different durability in tools, blast resistance in blocks, and fuel values in smelting…
Contrast this with redstone:
the original RS-dust was added in Aplha (1.0.1) and further redstone components have been added from time to time the latest (AFAIK) being the observer in 1.1.
Now there are many players who do fairly little with redstone, but there is also a large fraction of the MC community for whom redstone 'tech' is central to the game.
Taken together, these examples suggest to me a development startagy of fielding an early version of features, then 'deepening' those that see significant use.
[IMO this has sometimes been a detremental strategy in cases where coding constraints (notably the limit on the number of block types which is only being removed in 1.13) has prevented the early version from having enough functionality to be properly appreciated (lack of slabs/stairs/walls for the stone variants).]
What I find of greater concern about newer updates is the inclusion of featues with an overly narrow functionality.
Llamas seem intended as an early game storage option leading through the ender chest to the shulker box/ender chest combination with a very minor secondary utility as a leather source. [Llamas are 9x as expensive to breed compared to cattle, and require leads (which require slime balls) to 'herd'. ]
They are, however, so limited (particuarly in their pathfinding AI) that their only utility I see is when combined with prepared and warded roads.
Shipwrecks (planned for 1.14) seem an introducrory underwater dungeon equivalent (forking off from the dungeon / nether fortress / end city progression) intended to provide a PvE-only step before challenging an Ocean Monument.
While a worthy purpose, I would prefer they provide something more than a simple learn_to_move_about_in/on_an_underwater_structure "carrot".
Dolphins (planned for 1.14) at this point appear to function (outside of atmosphere) only to guide players to shipwrecks and seem very much to be "one-trick-ponies". [Developing these as something of an aquatic counterpart to the tamed wolf/dog (possibly doing something about air supply when drowning rather than attacking hostiles?) would make them far more interesting…
Moster-of-the-Night-Skys [NightFlyer] (planned for 1.14) …waiting to see how this one is implemented. At present, the [quite limited] descriptions suggest to me an attempt to coerce . . . :ermmm: influence gameplay; its only announced function is to attack players "that have not slept in a long time"…
Again a single announced functionality [my dislike of its perceived purpose being a seperate issue] where the 'ecological niche' offers so much more potential….
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Why does everything have to be so stoopid?" Harvey Pekar (from American Splendor)
WARNING: I have an extemely "grindy" playstyle; YMMV — if this doesn't seem fun to you, mine what you can from it & bin the rest.
Yes I feel that way, Mojang has made it clear that they are afraid of making big changes so most of the time the new features are not only very few in quantity but they also lack depth which makes me wonder why this uninspired 5 min of entertainment content takes so long to make. In my mind people at Mojang are probably spending months upon months not actually developing new things but shooting down ideas because they have the idea that Minecraft should remain a "simple" blocks game forever.
We have a game with updates that cater to everyone, it trully has the potential to have each of its features fully realized with a lot of depth in them, that's why specific updates exist, updates for builders, survival and so on. However since each update has so few things going for it, It quickly becomes boring.
I'd rather have teams of people working on each part of the game and release creative updates that actually make the world feel alive and fun, but that's a pipe dream. Another pipe dream is me wishing that Minecraft bedrock or whatever it's called now finally catches up to the Java version, releases some kind of modding API and Microsoft start adding their own unique content instead of playing catch up to the slow Mojang progress.
Is it just me, or do new features often feel disappointing due to their lack of depth? For example, the ocean features that are coming out. Now, we haven't even gotten to play with them yet, and I'm already disappointed. Why? Because it's been confirmed that sharks will not be added. Ever. (See this thread.)
So many features could have more depth than they do. Even though we get new content, it often feels underwhelming or disappointing for me after the first five minutes. Does anyone else feel this way?
Check out my suggestions! Here is one of them:
To say you would be the only one to feel that way would be ridiculous. There are lots of areas and features that lack their true potential really.
Jungles, Savannah, Minecarts, the Nether, the Outer Lands in the End, rivers, caves, ores, the dragon egg, I could go on.
Figured it was time for a change.
It's why I don't bother playing vanilla anymore. Vanilla Minecraft probably deserves a permanent booth at E3, it's that title you're excited for but which never actually comes out.
I don't really see how just not having sharks means the update isn't living up to true potential. That seems fairly subjective and illogical (if they added 20 awesome and unique mobs, 10 new weapons or equipment items, fully modular boats, and a dozen other things would it still not be living up to potential because of the lack of one (in my opinion boring) shark mob?).
I would agree that a lot of parts of the game could use a bit more depth. I'd also be able to make that statement about literally any game. But personally I prefer the current method than some mods that go way too in depth about specific things, which feels out of place compared to other elements. For example, a lot of the redstone power mods take a simple, functional system and make it overly complex. Sure they add a lot of neat functionality, but you have to jump through a dozen different convoluted hoops to access it and then once you get it you are at an extreme advantage when dealing with the vanilla content.
Another example would be Psi. The first line from their website is "Psi is a magical tech spell programming mod inspired by Mahouka. Don't worry if that doesn't make any sense." That seems like a pretty clear indicator of complexity for the sake of complexity. I'm not saying it doesn't do cool stuff, but if you essentially need to learn a light programming language just to use it and after you are done you are basically an unkillable demigod.
The one that gets close enough to a good level of depth for me is Tinker's Construct. It has a fairly simple premise, is fairly easy to understand and work with, and it adds a decent amount of content while (almost) not making the player too overpowered by the end of it. If the entire system was simplified by removing the special brick block used to make a forge, removing a lot of the material types for equipment added by other mods, and replacing the system for casting pieces and just had the materials cast directly into the block where you assemble pieces into a weapon it would be just about perfect imo.
But I'll always pick a fairly balanced but shallow experience compared to something over complicated and overpowered.
Want some advice on how to thrive in the Suggestions section? Check this handy list of guidelines and tips for posting your ideas and responding to the ideas of others!
http://www.minecraftforum.net/forums/minecraft-discussion/suggestions/2775557-guidelines-for-the-suggestions-forum
Hitting the optimal amount of "depth" in parts of a game is certainly one of the main "management opportunities" Mojang (or any other game developer) faces: one mans depth can easily be another man's wasted effort (if not stifiling specificity)…
Consider stone types, wood types, and redstone…
There are several stone types (stone, cobble, diorite, andesite, granite) which even have a limited interconvertability;
[cobble + nether quartz >> diorite > + nether quartz >> granite & cobble + diorite >> andesite as well as the more commonly usedbeing able to mine stone into cobble/smelt cobble to stone.]
Despite this, all five are (barring a few crafting recipes and the most unfortunate lack of slabs, stairs and walls for all types) functionally identical.
Most of these where added in 1.8.
Prior to becoming aware of the limited convertability (which IMO implies they where originally envisioned as having different properties with granite being more valuable than diorite which was more valuable than cobble) my thought had been that they were introduced simply to increase the difficulty/complexity of inventory management while mining…
Ought this be counted as lack of depth, or an avoidance of excessive complexity??
Wood types are even more nearly identical. [Added between 1.2 birch & 1.7.2 Mega spruce, dark oak, and acacia]
(The only functional difference I am aware of is some door types having windows/being partly transparent…)
There would be more "depth" but also more complexity [and a potentialy crippling biome specificity to gameplay] were the woods to have different durability in tools, blast resistance in blocks, and fuel values in smelting…
Contrast this with redstone:
the original RS-dust was added in Aplha (1.0.1) and further redstone components have been added from time to time the latest (AFAIK) being the observer in 1.1.
Now there are many players who do fairly little with redstone, but there is also a large fraction of the MC community for whom redstone 'tech' is central to the game.
Taken together, these examples suggest to me a development startagy of fielding an early version of features, then 'deepening' those that see significant use.
[IMO this has sometimes been a detremental strategy in cases where coding constraints (notably the limit on the number of block types which is only being removed in 1.13) has prevented the early version from having enough functionality to be properly appreciated (lack of slabs/stairs/walls for the stone variants).]
What I find of greater concern about newer updates is the inclusion of featues with an overly narrow functionality.
Llamas seem intended as an early game storage option leading through the ender chest to the shulker box/ender chest combination with a very minor secondary utility as a leather source. [Llamas are 9x as expensive to breed compared to cattle, and require leads (which require slime balls) to 'herd'. ]
They are, however, so limited (particuarly in their pathfinding AI) that their only utility I see is when combined with prepared and warded roads.
Shipwrecks (planned for 1.14) seem an introducrory underwater dungeon equivalent (forking off from the dungeon / nether fortress / end city progression) intended to provide a PvE-only step before challenging an Ocean Monument.
While a worthy purpose, I would prefer they provide something more than a simple learn_to_move_about_in/on_an_underwater_structure "carrot".
Dolphins (planned for 1.14) at this point appear to function (outside of atmosphere) only to guide players to shipwrecks and seem very much to be "one-trick-ponies". [Developing these as something of an aquatic counterpart to the tamed wolf/dog (possibly doing something about air supply when drowning rather than attacking hostiles?) would make them far more interesting…
Moster-of-the-Night-Skys [NightFlyer] (planned for 1.14) …waiting to see how this one is implemented. At present, the [quite limited] descriptions suggest to me an attempt to
coerce. . . :ermmm: influence gameplay; its only announced function is to attack players "that have not slept in a long time"…Again a single announced functionality [my dislike of its perceived purpose being a seperate issue] where the 'ecological niche' offers so much more potential….
Yes I feel that way, Mojang has made it clear that they are afraid of making big changes so most of the time the new features are not only very few in quantity but they also lack depth which makes me wonder why this uninspired 5 min of entertainment content takes so long to make. In my mind people at Mojang are probably spending months upon months not actually developing new things but shooting down ideas because they have the idea that Minecraft should remain a "simple" blocks game forever.
We have a game with updates that cater to everyone, it trully has the potential to have each of its features fully realized with a lot of depth in them, that's why specific updates exist, updates for builders, survival and so on. However since each update has so few things going for it, It quickly becomes boring.
I'd rather have teams of people working on each part of the game and release creative updates that actually make the world feel alive and fun, but that's a pipe dream. Another pipe dream is me wishing that Minecraft bedrock or whatever it's called now finally catches up to the Java version, releases some kind of modding API and Microsoft start adding their own unique content instead of playing catch up to the slow Mojang progress.