I actually agree with this post more than the last one you made. Probably because you were cursing like a sailor and calling out people in every other sentence, but that is in the past. Bravo, good sir, bravo!
Spiltbot you sure didn't make any friends when you harped at me. On the off chance you read my WHOLE POST and UNDERSTAND IT WITHOUT TROLL FACE I will be happy to redirect the hatred that I seem to attract from thee.
Now I won't lie, I didn't read the whole post. That is why I apologized at the beginning. Second he addressed numerous changes that he wanted to see minecraft make. I respect his opinion, hence me not spewing hatred across the board. Now I only addressed 1 specific thing out of all the things he typed out. I did not say anywhere in my post that it was the only thing he talked about the whole time. That one specific bit I wrote a lot about just happened to be one of the things I took the time to read that sparked my interest.
Now if mods aren't included I won't be able to deny the rather droll looking terrain. On the other hand in my first night I tend to relocate to plains biome to get away from the darned trees I always seem to spawn near. Sad fact of life is that I tend to walk several days and then get ass raped by a walking rinky dink having a bad day and is just about ready to explode at the drop of a metaphorical hat. Boom, back to the start.
I know it's rather dumb of me to do such exploring but I usually find diamonds when I do range out a ways plus a suitably sized village to take over. I like bread, very delicious, thanks testificat for all the bread.
As for not fighting I frankly can't see how that is possible without adjusting the difficulty settings. In mining there is always the risk of running into:
A. A lava pit that incinerates you.
B. A water pit that drowns you
C. A cave with a creeper who drops in and goes boom.
I can't see how you don't understand this basic principle of the game. If I didn't want to fight mobs I suppose I could sit inside, redecorate the wall, and do ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ALL GAME LONG! Not my idea of a good time.
In regards to recoding mob AI I'm afraid you didn't read the bit were I said it isn't that easy. Oh sure on easy it isn't supposed to have a brain but that is not always the case. The computer can and will give itself "glimmers of insight" once in a while to totally screw the player. All it cares about is making you dead, and it has no compunction against cheating to do it. This is a sad fact of game coding that can't seem to be solved. If you took the players loss conditions away the creatures would not respond in a motivated fashion to end your life because there would be no point. Computers shouldn't act that intelligent in games but for what ever reason it does. I can't fully explain it.
The rest of it was directed at my harsh tone that I simply didn't have. Now for you I don't mind being a bit harsh cause half of what you responded to me was meant to make me look like a right evil git, and to make me feel about as dumb as a minecraft zombie. You jumped into a boat without checking for leaks, and dug a hole without a ladder. Unless I'm signing a troll face at the person I'm talking to don't assume I'm being mean. I am simply stating my own, silly I think you called it, opinion since that was what the original poster asked for near the bottom, or was it the top?, of his post. In no way shape or form am I being mean for saying my opinion. This is what a mean post looks like:
Your opinion is ****.
Your life is ****.
Your minecraft is ****.
All your base are belong to me.
Get a life, don't play minecraft.
Troll, troll, troll de troll troll troll.
See the difference? This is just an example of a mean post. I am not directing it at any one in any way shape or form. I am capable of better than this. >=D
You can't drown in water unless you completely take your hands off the keyboard and sit there doing nothing, that is in no way a hazard AT ALL.
Edit: Come to think of it, lava is barely a hazard too. The only way to get knocked into lava that doesn't involve the player doing dumb things (such as mining out the blocks you're standing on) is being hit by mobs, and even then if you're not paying attention to your surroundings then you can expect to die.
I'll let someone else explain how the rest of your post is wrong (well, the "AIs are either sentient or 100% dumb and there is nothing in-between" science fiction nonsense, anyway).
I agree for the most but the textures are OKAY... ALOT of people will stop playing if they changed the defualt texture pack! But as I said, I agree with the most of this!
Truly, the only thing i think should happen is perhaps adding a more 'Dark' Feel to minecraft (I believe i stated this before.)
Zombies should spawn in groups of 1-5 at night. Its a breeze to kill one, not much challenge for two, but more than that? Especially on your first night! Flight would be your only option.
Armor should slow you down. A little for leather, more for iron, and a lot for diamond. Gold, however, should speed you up slightly. This would make it usefull.
Creepers should have longer sight range. Their supposed to stalk you. This would allow them to. Then, when you slow down to eat or cut down a tree... Hissss...
Skeletons should seige villages too. And shoot at a longer range. Come to think of it, all bows should do that.
Bow headshots. The only reason i have balkon's Weapons (Besides that, you know, its epic) Is that the bow now is so weak that it takes almost three shots to kill a zombie, unless you get criticals. Headshots should do double damage (Thats usually a 1 hit KO for most enemies.
As for peacefull, ive only used it once to save myself after getting 5 diamonds and multiple stacks of iron. I rue the day i did this, and created a shrine to herobrine, which i threw a portion of all of the things i had in (1 diamond, one of the iron stacks, and 25 of my 50 gold). But i do believe peacefull should be taken out. If you want to build, use creative. You even get infinite recource and flying there!
I think the biomes are ok. Except oceans need islands. Other than that, they're fine to me.
The mountains should be much taller, almost as tall as clouds, and the entire game should be taller. More caves, bigger caves, all would be allowed.
I would like the idea of hostiles spawning in less light, but then i realized the cost. Every tree, every nook, every little area in your house would require a torch. That simple fact would make you need to double, perhaps triple the amount of torches needed to even traverse a cave. For that simple reason, i dislike your idea.
That one specific bit I wrote a lot about just happened to be one of the things I took the time to read that sparked my interest.
Yes, but there's quite a bit of content that refers to back to the difficulty and the like, too. You don't just read one chapter of a book and consider it done- it may be a point-by-point basis kinda deal, but I do still try to tie almost everything together. Given that you have the time to write these replies, I suggest reading it all. You'll get a better sense of what I'm talking about.
A. A lava pit that incinerates you.
B. A water pit that drowns you
C. A cave with a creeper who drops in and goes boom.
All of those would still be possible threats, given my changes. Though as NightKev pointed out, water pits hardly do anything, and even lava is very arguable... furthermore, there would actually be more threats (and more rewards) in caves, so yeah.
I can't see how you don't understand this basic principle of the game. If I didn't want to fight mobs I suppose I could sit inside, redecorate the wall, and do ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ALL GAME LONG! Not my idea of a good time.
Given my system, you can still fight mobs on whatever basis you want- you just won't have an easy way out button or anything once you do get into a fight. You can go to a forest to fight a few mobs, or go into the opening of a cave and find just a bit more. The deeper/darker you go, the more frequent mobs would be. They would also have a variety of attacks, rather than just walk right into your sword. They would, y'know, offer a fight.
It's quality vs quantity- right now, Minecraft's mobs are only remotely threatening due to their frequency of spawning and their near omnipresence. I've argued why that's not actually challenging, given that mobs themselves are actually immensely easy to fight. If you want to bring that argument back up, feel free.
All it cares about is making you dead, and it has no compunction against cheating to do it.
It will only "cheat" if the developers allow them to cheat (which they would if they took the easy way out). You do realize it's very possible to make the AI challenging without tacking on borderline cheat-like aspects, right?
This is a sad fact of game coding that can't seem to be solved.
But it isn't a fact. At all. Programming is nearly infinite in its potential- the only limitation is your own imagination (well, and technical hardware limitations). The only way it doesn't work well is if the person programming messes up (either intentional or unintentional). It's not the fault of "coding", it's the fault of (lazy) coders.
If I were remotely decent at math and programming, I'd show how it's very possible. However, to say that "it can't be solved" is wrong on many levels. It's very possible to make dynamic AI that responds to situations in a human manner- it just requires work.
If you took the players loss conditions away the creatures would not respond in a motivated fashion to end your life because there would be no point. Computers shouldn't act that intelligent in games but for what ever reason it does. I can't fully explain it.
...I honestly don't understand what point you're trying to get across here. Are you saying that you need to take away "punishment" for losing, or that I'm suggesting that? Because neither of those are true at all.
Also, again- AI acts however the programmers program them. They might do things that the programmer didn't intend, but it's still a result of their programming.
The rest of it was directed at my harsh tone that I simply didn't have.
You had a more ignorant tone than a "harsh" tone- which is what he was pointing out. And really, he's right- you're not offering any logical ideas for progression on the game, and instead you're simply defending the game- poorly, I might add. You're basically saying "No, it's not bad at all. I like how it is, and there's no way you can fix it up". Which is just... fundamentally wrong. If that's not quite what you're saying, feel free to try and correct me- it just appears to be what your main point is, given what you've been saying.
Now for you I don't mind being a bit harsh cause half of what you responded to me was meant to make me look like a right evil git,
...No? I'm pretty sure the things he responded to you about were to point out the flaws in your argument. That's the whole point of arguing. The same goes for my arguments- I'm just pointing out where you're wrong. Are you saying you aren't wrong? If not, then... why would you oppose being corrected?
I am simply stating my own, silly I think you called it, opinion
Pretty sure I'm the one who said it was silly- but yes, it is silly. And yes, it's your opinion- opinions aren't all too relevant here, actually. That's not to say "opinions are banned", but just pure opinions aren't very welcome. You should have at least some objective facts and points first, then you can attach opinions. As long as they're relevant, of course- going "The sky is blue, therefore Minecraft is good." doesn't make much sense.
since that was what the original poster asked for near the bottom, or was it the top?,
Quote from Insurrection »
A lot of this is thread will be, yes, opinion. This doesn't mean, however, that it's all irrelevant- generally speaking, criticism can still contain opinions. And while this is technically a rant in many regards, it still has points, as well. This doesn't mean that the criticism or points brought about are also opinions- it just means they contain opinions. So don't respond to "yeah well, that's just like, your opinion, man". I'm well aware of what my "opinion" is, and I assume other people's critical posts are, too. If I flat out state something wrong, please point out where I'm wrong and why. I may be a ****, but I don't want to be ignorant.
Also, just because you have an opinion doesn't inherently make you right or wrong. When it comes to two opinions clashing, that's called an argument (or a debate, depending on your point of view). In either of those, it's usually good practice to explain why your opinion should be considered over the other person's.
Quote from Insurrection »
Understand what it means to be objective. If you're not aware/too lazy to look up the definition, it essentially means to be unbiased- to be logical, fair, and to disregard both other's and even (or rather, especially) your own subjective viewpoints, personal opinions, and so on. Just because you like/dislike something does not mean it's a valid point.
Quote from Insurrection »
Well... that's not the problem. The problem is that, even if they're a minority, they are very vocal about their opinions. They outright flood the forums with silly, nonsensical ideas ("crying obsidian armor", "giant creepers", "super TNT", etc). Sometimes, even mods come about from these things- they drown out the good content with their objectively terrible ones. They borderline spam Jeb & co's twitter to get things done in the game that no reasonable person would listen to.
I've been pretty vocal on my thoughts about opinions. I don't recall "asking for opinions", and I can't find anywhere in the post where I said that. Point out where you thought I said that, please.
I'm not going to even bother trying to quote "Insurrection" on his huge post, but he said "Once more, the changes I suggest are not to benefit just me. They're to benefit the game itself."
Again, that is a point of opinion I have brought up but you seen to ignore.
I can understand why this bit can be misunderstood, as I worded it poorly, so let me re-word it (and edit it after this, to get my point across more):
The problems I suggest should be changed, if they were to be changed, would not benefit just myself- but rather, the game in whole.
I've stated multiple times on how I don't believe only my suggestions are the best, and is why I'm open to discussion and critical thought. Furthermore...
I find most of your opinions would ruin the game, and that mojang is doing a fine job themselves.
...that is based pure opinion. You have almost no basis for them, and you haven't exactly pointed out why you're right. The thing is, while it's based on opinion, it is also a statement ("would ruin the game" "is doing a fine job"). Don't hide behind statements as though they're as easily defendable as opinions- again, you can have an opinion, but when you make a statement, back up said statement. Especially when it's simply going contrary to my points that I've brought up.
They can not fix every single imperfection you have with the game.
Imperfection implies there is a "perfect" to be reached- but there isn't. There is no "perfect", especially not in artforms. This is incredibly important to understand where I'm coming from. Once you understand and accept the (logical) idea that "perfection" is unattainable, you can take one of two things out of it:
1) Perfection can not be reached- therefore, everything is fine.
or
2) Perfection can not be reached- therefore, potential is limitless, and anything can always be improved (even if it's "fine").
If you believe the former... you have no place discussing on the topic of how to improve the game. I'm sorry, but it's a very very fundamental idea that is extremely important for discussing progression. If you truly believe the former is true and that the latter is not, you simply cannot understand what progression truly means, as the mere idea of progression operates on the basis that anything and everything can be improved.
Furthermore,
Quote from Insurrection »
Just because something exists doesn't mean it can't be better- and it definitely doesn't mean that because it exists, it's good.
And a lot of people, such as myself, don't agree with your opinions.
Just because you disagree with them (I'm assuming you mean my whole point, not just the opinion parts) doesn't make you (or anybody else) right, though. It doesn't matter if it's 1 person, 1,000 people, or 7 billion people. If they believe something that's wrong, then they're still wrong. What makes you right is refuting my points. And I did make points- I didn't just make opinions. If I made false statements, please- point them out. Not just one minor side point, mind you- but things that would cripple my entire argument. Or do what I do- argue everything on a point-by-point basis.
So please, don't ignorantly go around trying to have changes made that would only benefit yourself and some others, but would ruin the game for many others.
I don't want just my changes. I want good changes. Changes that would benefit the game in whole. Again, my suggested changes are just a starting point- they're not the absolute best.
I'm getting tired of having to re-iterate this, so I have to ask- did you read my post? I've made it quite clear through the whole thing that I want people to improve upon my ideas. Please- point out where I said I only wanted my changes, and maybe I can see where you're coming from. Otherwise, I really feel like you didn't read the parts where I did say I want others to improve upon my ideas.
A very interesting, and thought provoking read. I agree.
In my opinion, I would like something to DO other then build, although I enjoy building greatly. I would like a goal to reach, other then the End. Honestly, I would enjoy a lot more depth to the game; to the point were I would spend hours achieving certain goals in the game. I honestly am not sure exactly how this would go...I'm just throwing my opinion in here.
As far as textures, I think they need to be tweaked, if not changed. At least less pixely. Just my opinion though.
I honestly am not sure exactly how this would go...I'm just throwing my opinion in here.
I think the best approach is to add a lot more dynamic content to the game- eventually, you'll have so many possibilities that randomly generated goals (in a sense) would occur. There could be a village being raided by some zombies, and you might want to fend them off- so you do. Not a cheesy pre-scripted event, either- I'm talking about "nature" levels of random stuff happening.
When you get down to it, this is what Minecraft really needs- more of its own form of "nature". It's very weak in its current state.
As far as textures, I think they need to be tweaked, if not changed. At least less pixely. Just my opinion though.
Yeah- this is my main problem with the textures. Mojang takes the lame "retro" approach of overly pixelated everything. The thing is, that's not "retro"- it's lazy, and doesn't accurately represent how games really looked.
I'd love to see a more "cel-shaded" approach, with less pixel noise on the textures.
I think the best approach is to add a lot more dynamic content to the game- eventually, you'll have so many possibilities that randomly generated goals (in a sense) would occur. There could be a village being raided by some zombies, and you might want to fend them off- so you do. Not a cheesy pre-scripted event, either- I'm talking about "nature" levels of random stuff happening.
This is exactly what I want in nearly every single game I play, and minecraft is no exception. They are already on the right path with the basics (build a shelter to survive mobs, get diamonds to kill mobs, build a farm to keep up food meter etc.), but they need to expand it.
When you get down to it, this is what Minecraft really needs- more of its own form of "nature". It's very weak in its current state.
This is precisely what I was trying to get at with my Biome/MiniBosses Idea.
If Landforms can be generated with Seeds why not Triggers that may set off a wide variety of effects? Granted the idea does need some work and the skill and desire of the player would have to match the concept.
It would add not just mobs but a sense of politics and a reason to visit Jungle Biome 12. My, it even may add a specific Identity to a location, a reason to go there or avoid it completely. A specific set of conditions to trigger the event, conditions to complete the event and in turn triggers an event for that biome or even the world.
There is little use in trying to get any attention from Mojang or from members of this fora though, seasoned or new. It may be the fact that I mentioned the word 'boss' but I don't know.
There are so many recipies for cake, so little cake. Maybe that is the issue. Anyone wish to assist me make cake?
Every last complaint can be fixed by modding. I suggest you learn how to program and how to make beautiful art. Then you can make Minecraft into the game you want it to be.
Your attitude towards mods is ridiculous. This is what modding is for. Mods have surpassed their parent games before. This could be no different.
Every last complaint can be fixed by modding. I suggest you learn how to program and how to make beautiful art. Then you can make Minecraft into the game you want it to be.
Your attitude towards mods is ridiculous. This is what modding is for. Mods have surpassed their parent games before. This could be no different.
1.) Mods become incompatable with releases from Mojang.
2.) Mods are unstable when paired with other mods.
Insurrections issues stem from the Core/Vanilla game itself and not the Modifications of the game. Everyone has a vision of what minecraft should be even if it is not shared. Personally I'm opting for something that everyone can enjoy without everyone becoming a programmer to make a mod compatable or making their vision real.
If mods are the solution and it requires X amount of programming this changes the nature of the game into an engine for programmers.
With that aside...
It takes ~800 hours to walk from the original spawn point to the 'edge' of the map without any mods or cheating. Take this as the goal for the Ultimate Explorer if you will. Mojang will be able to have the world seed generate ~800 hours worth of goals for the ultimate fighter, ~800 hours worth of goals for the ultimate crafter/builder, et cetera...
... and blow people away every single time a world seed is created.
I'd do this myself with a Mod of course but I am a Java noob. I'm learning though...
Your attitude towards mods is ridiculous. This is what modding is for. Mods have surpassed their parent games before. This could be no different.
They don't make the game better. They turn it into something different- so if an amazing mod exists, it still doesn't reflect on Minecraft in the least. It's like saying that a clay deposit is a work of art because someone has turned clay into art.
wellreety good thread but the first ones already been solved..... they said they made a demo of minecra
ft that has tutorials it it..... so other than that its good to me
Well, it took me about an hour to read through all of this, and let me say it was completely worth it.
For the majority of the original post, I heartily agree with it. Things are nerfed as it is, why keep it that way when it can be better? I especially like the ideas with biomes, and the different weapons. However, the idea about the Enderman and encasing you in blocks is something I don't like. How 'bout post-End, they can, say, pick you up and drop you down a couple dozen blocks away, dealing some pretty major damage in the process.
Something that's implied for some of this that I dislike, though, is the idea that all monster work together to kill you, and only you (For the most part, they don't even have a reason to kill you in the first place). Why do Zombies and Skeletons work together to destroy your face? What reasoning does a Creeper have to follow a Spider's sense of you? What logic does an Enderman have to pick up the door that a Zombie's bashing? They have no reason to work together, especially since there's no gain for all of them in it. Going on with one of the examples, the Enderman picks up the door and the Zombies flood in and murder you. So, the Zombies will get the satisfaction of killing you and your dead body to munch on (Well, they don't even get that. You don't leave a corpse, nothing does. Another thing I think should be added). What does the Enderman get from it? He wasn't even aggro'd at you, but he still allows the Zombies the kill? I think he should have some sort of consience, at least the point of "He didn't look at me, so I have no problem with him".
I think it'd be a much better system of, say, monsters infighting between the species for the job of killing you. And, they'd only group together if you were actually posing a danger to them. Say, if you didn't bother the Skeletons and Zombies, they'd fight eachother for, say, territorial reasons (Bad example, but best I could think of). However, if you attacked Skeletons, the Skeletons would recognise you as a threat, and fight back. However, these systems would obviously be ignored if you, say, went into caves, what would be call invading from their view.
Also, will Mojang ever make it so that Villagers who are "Killed" by Zombies become Zombies themselves? Maybe a different kind of zombie, even. And will they ever actually put in some goddamn regular pigmen?
Sorry, but I'm one of those people who appreciates the current build for it's relative accessability. And for all that accessability, it doesn't skimp on features.
You can pretty easily list Minecraft's content, though. It has pretty much the bare minimum expected out of a sandbox game (Large world, ways to change the world, open ended, able to move, and etc). It might not "skimp" on any features, but it sorely lacks in content. This is one of the big problems with the game. And the way things are going, I can't say I have much trust in Mojang for creating good content- they just add things for the sake of adding them, it seems.
It occupies a comfortable middle ground where more difficulty can be found by committing yourself to more challenging activities.
You're getting "committing yourself to more challenging activities" mixed up with "intentionally handicapping yourself", though. When you get down to it, there aren't many things you can delve into with the regular flow of the game and get a real challenge out of. You'd have to do things like not wear armor, not place torches, not build/place blocks, etc...
Exploring deep ravines for hours is one of the most tense gaming experiences I've ever had, but I could achieve the same ends by much safer means if so desired. Far as I'm concerned that's the dynamic difficulty you're talking about. Player-controlled pacing as you desired too.
Again, it's intentionally handicapping yourself. It's much better if you're challenged while using everything the game has to offer. That's what makes it a challenge. When you have the option to completely remove that challenge (not just avoid it, but remove it), it kills the idea of proper tension. I covered this with that whole "cheesy monster movie" analogy thing.
You can enjoy it, but it doesn't mean it's actually tense.
I think the point is, though, that by adding more complexity (even if still quite intuitive) you may pull the game towards one end of the demographic spectrum and towards a particular niche of the current fanbase.
I'm pretty sure the only people it'd alienate are those who literally cannot accept change and/or progression on a fundamental level. This is assuming that objectively good changes were to be added- obviously, as I've stated many times, my changes aren't necessarily the best (as there is no "best").
Y'know, would you rather satisfy a few people really well or a lot of people pretty well?
I'd rather satisfy a few people who have high standards than satisfy those with none. That's the basic idea behind accepting criticism. It's also why I'm convinced Mojang does not like criticism- they are perfectly content pleasing and appeasing as many people as they can, rather than making a good game.
I think I remember seeing on the wiki though that notch had himself expressed hope to add rpg-lite aspects to later releases. Wouldn't have to be anything complex.
If this is true, I'd laugh if the same people who complained about my ideas of being "too much like an RPG" would readily accept the things like that.
However, the idea about the Enderman and encasing you in blocks is something I don't like. How 'bout post-End, they can, say, pick you up and drop you down a couple dozen blocks away, dealing some pretty major damage in the process.
I think that they should be much creepier, though- that sounds something akin to Iron Golems, y'know? They never appeared "strong" to me, just... creepy. I do admit, the "encasing you in obsidian" thing is a bit ill thought out, but it was more or less to give an idea of how you CAN go about giving them more abilities (rather than just leaving things as they are).
Something that's implied for some of this that I dislike, though, is the idea that all monster work together to kill you, and only you.
Well... it is a videogame, and it never really bugged me too much. However, you do bring up a valid point- it'd be really neat to see way more mob interaction. I can see the mobs at least leaving one another alone in the wild... but all of them actively searching you out to kill you in some hiveminded fashion? A little silly, yeah.
I know that as it stands, mobs already attack another mob who's hit them, so I think a cool way to go about "interaction" would be to make it so that all mobs of X type that's been attacked by Y type of mob go try to kill Y mob type. So if a skeleton hits a zombie, all the Zombies in the area will consider Skeletons their enemy.
I think it'd be a much better system of, say, monsters infighting between the species for the job of killing you. And, they'd only group together if you were actually posing a danger to them. Say, if you didn't bother the Skeletons and Zombies, they'd fight eachother for, say, territorial reasons (Bad example, but best I could think of). However, if you attacked Skeletons, the Skeletons would recognise you as a threat, and fight back. However, these systems would obviously be ignored if you, say, went into caves, what would be call invading from their view.
I like the idea of mobs already fighting when you approach them in a scenario. It gives you the option to kinda hide away if necessary- if spotted, however, all of them would start to fight you off (as you'd be considered the "biggest" threat).
Especially nice if mobs have a "threat rating" kinda deal where they decide on what to attack depending on the target's threat rating. A player running around wouldn't be too much of a threat (but they'd still try to attack you). However, if you actively hit another mob, then suddenly the player's "threat rating" skyrockets- mobs will then try to work together to kill you. The more you hit/kill mobs, the more of a threat they see you as.
The more I think about it, the more I like it- it gives more freedom to make mobs more challenging, as they wouldn't necessarily all be out to kill you instantly. They just probably will. It adds to the "artificial nature" thing I discussed just a bit earlier.
Also, will Mojang ever make it so that Villagers who are "Killed" by Zombies become Zombies themselves? Maybe a different kind of zombie, even. And will they ever actually put in some goddamn regular pigmen?
Both of these always saddened me. I wanted Pigmen villagers rather than Squidwards, Notch ;_;
The Meaning of Life, the Universe, and Everything.
Join Date:
9/27/2011
Posts:
53
Minecraft:
Doubtlessone
Member Details
I appreciate you attempt to share your opinion on what can make this game better but I disagree with some of you assessments. At this point I will only bring up one point with which I do not aggree.
You point out that there is a complete lack of introduction to the game including a tutorial. You speak at length about not needing other tools such as wiki or youtube but I think minecraft actually lends itself towards these things. The old idea that everything should be contained within the game is slowly phasing out in my opinion. Instead online communities have grown to be a part of the gaming experience. I most certainly do not consider learning from others and experimenting "work". Admittedly, minecraft can be confusing to start learning without the community, and the xbox version dealt with this issue, but a tutorial also has negative repucussions. Minecraft is very much about discovery and the feeling of being alone in a vast world. A tutorial may change those to the negative. You say the lack of a tutorial and introduction as a flaw and I completely disagree with your assessment. It is not a flaw. Minecraft is an experience. Each new player that steps foot into a minecraft seed for the first time is filled with excitement, confusion, fear, and determination. We should not infringe upon the dramatic entrance Minecraft gives us.
I do appreciate your attempt to add only the most minimal explanation to the game through the variety of ideas you present. If I were to add my own idea of a tutorial as a compromise I would suggest adding random recipes to the villager's selling list.
Objection!
Now I won't lie, I didn't read the whole post. That is why I apologized at the beginning. Second he addressed numerous changes that he wanted to see minecraft make. I respect his opinion, hence me not spewing hatred across the board. Now I only addressed 1 specific thing out of all the things he typed out. I did not say anywhere in my post that it was the only thing he talked about the whole time. That one specific bit I wrote a lot about just happened to be one of the things I took the time to read that sparked my interest.
Now if mods aren't included I won't be able to deny the rather droll looking terrain. On the other hand in my first night I tend to relocate to plains biome to get away from the darned trees I always seem to spawn near. Sad fact of life is that I tend to walk several days and then get ass raped by a walking rinky dink having a bad day and is just about ready to explode at the drop of a metaphorical hat. Boom, back to the start.
I know it's rather dumb of me to do such exploring but I usually find diamonds when I do range out a ways plus a suitably sized village to take over. I like bread, very delicious, thanks testificat for all the bread.
As for not fighting I frankly can't see how that is possible without adjusting the difficulty settings. In mining there is always the risk of running into:
A. A lava pit that incinerates you.
B. A water pit that drowns you
C. A cave with a creeper who drops in and goes boom.
I can't see how you don't understand this basic principle of the game. If I didn't want to fight mobs I suppose I could sit inside, redecorate the wall, and do ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ALL GAME LONG! Not my idea of a good time.
In regards to recoding mob AI I'm afraid you didn't read the bit were I said it isn't that easy. Oh sure on easy it isn't supposed to have a brain but that is not always the case. The computer can and will give itself "glimmers of insight" once in a while to totally screw the player. All it cares about is making you dead, and it has no compunction against cheating to do it. This is a sad fact of game coding that can't seem to be solved. If you took the players loss conditions away the creatures would not respond in a motivated fashion to end your life because there would be no point. Computers shouldn't act that intelligent in games but for what ever reason it does. I can't fully explain it.
The rest of it was directed at my harsh tone that I simply didn't have. Now for you I don't mind being a bit harsh cause half of what you responded to me was meant to make me look like a right evil git, and to make me feel about as dumb as a minecraft zombie. You jumped into a boat without checking for leaks, and dug a hole without a ladder. Unless I'm signing a troll face at the person I'm talking to don't assume I'm being mean. I am simply stating my own, silly I think you called it, opinion since that was what the original poster asked for near the bottom, or was it the top?, of his post. In no way shape or form am I being mean for saying my opinion. This is what a mean post looks like:
Your opinion is ****.
Your life is ****.
Your minecraft is ****.
All your base are belong to me.
Get a life, don't play minecraft.
Troll, troll, troll de troll troll troll.
See the difference? This is just an example of a mean post. I am not directing it at any one in any way shape or form. I am capable of better than this. >=D
Edit: Come to think of it, lava is barely a hazard too. The only way to get knocked into lava that doesn't involve the player doing dumb things (such as mining out the blocks you're standing on) is being hit by mobs, and even then if you're not paying attention to your surroundings then you can expect to die.
I'll let someone else explain how the rest of your post is wrong (well, the "AIs are either sentient or 100% dumb and there is nothing in-between" science fiction nonsense, anyway).
Zombies should spawn in groups of 1-5 at night. Its a breeze to kill one, not much challenge for two, but more than that? Especially on your first night! Flight would be your only option.
Armor should slow you down. A little for leather, more for iron, and a lot for diamond. Gold, however, should speed you up slightly. This would make it usefull.
Creepers should have longer sight range. Their supposed to stalk you. This would allow them to. Then, when you slow down to eat or cut down a tree... Hissss...
Skeletons should seige villages too. And shoot at a longer range. Come to think of it, all bows should do that.
Bow headshots. The only reason i have balkon's Weapons (Besides that, you know, its epic) Is that the bow now is so weak that it takes almost three shots to kill a zombie, unless you get criticals. Headshots should do double damage (Thats usually a 1 hit KO for most enemies.
As for peacefull, ive only used it once to save myself after getting 5 diamonds and multiple stacks of iron. I rue the day i did this, and created a shrine to herobrine, which i threw a portion of all of the things i had in (1 diamond, one of the iron stacks, and 25 of my 50 gold). But i do believe peacefull should be taken out. If you want to build, use creative. You even get infinite recource and flying there!
I think the biomes are ok. Except oceans need islands. Other than that, they're fine to me.
The mountains should be much taller, almost as tall as clouds, and the entire game should be taller. More caves, bigger caves, all would be allowed.
I would like the idea of hostiles spawning in less light, but then i realized the cost. Every tree, every nook, every little area in your house would require a torch. That simple fact would make you need to double, perhaps triple the amount of torches needed to even traverse a cave. For that simple reason, i dislike your idea.
Thats all i can think up right now.
uh
ok then
Yes, but there's quite a bit of content that refers to back to the difficulty and the like, too. You don't just read one chapter of a book and consider it done- it may be a point-by-point basis kinda deal, but I do still try to tie almost everything together. Given that you have the time to write these replies, I suggest reading it all. You'll get a better sense of what I'm talking about.
All of those would still be possible threats, given my changes. Though as NightKev pointed out, water pits hardly do anything, and even lava is very arguable... furthermore, there would actually be more threats (and more rewards) in caves, so yeah.
Given my system, you can still fight mobs on whatever basis you want- you just won't have an easy way out button or anything once you do get into a fight. You can go to a forest to fight a few mobs, or go into the opening of a cave and find just a bit more. The deeper/darker you go, the more frequent mobs would be. They would also have a variety of attacks, rather than just walk right into your sword. They would, y'know, offer a fight.
It's quality vs quantity- right now, Minecraft's mobs are only remotely threatening due to their frequency of spawning and their near omnipresence. I've argued why that's not actually challenging, given that mobs themselves are actually immensely easy to fight. If you want to bring that argument back up, feel free.
Why is that relevant, though? Why should Mojang only add "easy" changes? Why can't they challenge themselves once in awhile?
...yes, if you give them such AI. That's the whole idea of programming AI.
It will only "cheat" if the developers allow them to cheat (which they would if they took the easy way out). You do realize it's very possible to make the AI challenging without tacking on borderline cheat-like aspects, right?
But it isn't a fact. At all. Programming is nearly infinite in its potential- the only limitation is your own imagination (well, and technical hardware limitations). The only way it doesn't work well is if the person programming messes up (either intentional or unintentional). It's not the fault of "coding", it's the fault of (lazy) coders.
If I were remotely decent at math and programming, I'd show how it's very possible. However, to say that "it can't be solved" is wrong on many levels. It's very possible to make dynamic AI that responds to situations in a human manner- it just requires work.
...I honestly don't understand what point you're trying to get across here. Are you saying that you need to take away "punishment" for losing, or that I'm suggesting that? Because neither of those are true at all.
Also, again- AI acts however the programmers program them. They might do things that the programmer didn't intend, but it's still a result of their programming.
You had a more ignorant tone than a "harsh" tone- which is what he was pointing out. And really, he's right- you're not offering any logical ideas for progression on the game, and instead you're simply defending the game- poorly, I might add. You're basically saying "No, it's not bad at all. I like how it is, and there's no way you can fix it up". Which is just... fundamentally wrong. If that's not quite what you're saying, feel free to try and correct me- it just appears to be what your main point is, given what you've been saying.
...No? I'm pretty sure the things he responded to you about were to point out the flaws in your argument. That's the whole point of arguing. The same goes for my arguments- I'm just pointing out where you're wrong. Are you saying you aren't wrong? If not, then... why would you oppose being corrected?
But he didn't- if anything, you did. You responded to my points with irrelevant information
We're not assuming you're "mean". We're pointing out the flaws in your argument.
Pretty sure I'm the one who said it was silly- but yes, it is silly. And yes, it's your opinion- opinions aren't all too relevant here, actually. That's not to say "opinions are banned", but just pure opinions aren't very welcome. You should have at least some objective facts and points first, then you can attach opinions. As long as they're relevant, of course- going "The sky is blue, therefore Minecraft is good." doesn't make much sense.
I've been pretty vocal on my thoughts about opinions. I don't recall "asking for opinions", and I can't find anywhere in the post where I said that. Point out where you thought I said that, please.
We're well aware of what an opinion is, and what a "mean post" is. They share no relevance to this thread.
I can understand why this bit can be misunderstood, as I worded it poorly, so let me re-word it (and edit it after this, to get my point across more):
The problems I suggest should be changed, if they were to be changed, would not benefit just myself- but rather, the game in whole.
I've stated multiple times on how I don't believe only my suggestions are the best, and is why I'm open to discussion and critical thought. Furthermore...
...that is based pure opinion. You have almost no basis for them, and you haven't exactly pointed out why you're right. The thing is, while it's based on opinion, it is also a statement ("would ruin the game" "is doing a fine job"). Don't hide behind statements as though they're as easily defendable as opinions- again, you can have an opinion, but when you make a statement, back up said statement. Especially when it's simply going contrary to my points that I've brought up.
Imperfection implies there is a "perfect" to be reached- but there isn't. There is no "perfect", especially not in artforms. This is incredibly important to understand where I'm coming from. Once you understand and accept the (logical) idea that "perfection" is unattainable, you can take one of two things out of it:
1) Perfection can not be reached- therefore, everything is fine.
or
2) Perfection can not be reached- therefore, potential is limitless, and anything can always be improved (even if it's "fine").
If you believe the former... you have no place discussing on the topic of how to improve the game. I'm sorry, but it's a very very fundamental idea that is extremely important for discussing progression. If you truly believe the former is true and that the latter is not, you simply cannot understand what progression truly means, as the mere idea of progression operates on the basis that anything and everything can be improved.
Furthermore,
Just because you disagree with them (I'm assuming you mean my whole point, not just the opinion parts) doesn't make you (or anybody else) right, though. It doesn't matter if it's 1 person, 1,000 people, or 7 billion people. If they believe something that's wrong, then they're still wrong. What makes you right is refuting my points. And I did make points- I didn't just make opinions. If I made false statements, please- point them out. Not just one minor side point, mind you- but things that would cripple my entire argument. Or do what I do- argue everything on a point-by-point basis.
I don't want just my changes. I want good changes. Changes that would benefit the game in whole. Again, my suggested changes are just a starting point- they're not the absolute best.
I'm getting tired of having to re-iterate this, so I have to ask- did you read my post? I've made it quite clear through the whole thing that I want people to improve upon my ideas. Please- point out where I said I only wanted my changes, and maybe I can see where you're coming from. Otherwise, I really feel like you didn't read the parts where I did say I want others to improve upon my ideas.
In my opinion, I would like something to DO other then build, although I enjoy building greatly. I would like a goal to reach, other then the End. Honestly, I would enjoy a lot more depth to the game; to the point were I would spend hours achieving certain goals in the game. I honestly am not sure exactly how this would go...I'm just throwing my opinion in here.
As far as textures, I think they need to be tweaked, if not changed. At least less pixely. Just my opinion though.
Nice post.
Click it or it will die...A cold painful death.
[SSSS]
I think the best approach is to add a lot more dynamic content to the game- eventually, you'll have so many possibilities that randomly generated goals (in a sense) would occur. There could be a village being raided by some zombies, and you might want to fend them off- so you do. Not a cheesy pre-scripted event, either- I'm talking about "nature" levels of random stuff happening.
When you get down to it, this is what Minecraft really needs- more of its own form of "nature". It's very weak in its current state.
Yeah- this is my main problem with the textures. Mojang takes the lame "retro" approach of overly pixelated everything. The thing is, that's not "retro"- it's lazy, and doesn't accurately represent how games really looked.
I'd love to see a more "cel-shaded" approach, with less pixel noise on the textures.
This is exactly what I want in nearly every single game I play, and minecraft is no exception. They are already on the right path with the basics (build a shelter to survive mobs, get diamonds to kill mobs, build a farm to keep up food meter etc.), but they need to expand it.
This is precisely what I was trying to get at with my Biome/MiniBosses Idea.
If Landforms can be generated with Seeds why not Triggers that may set off a wide variety of effects? Granted the idea does need some work and the skill and desire of the player would have to match the concept.
It would add not just mobs but a sense of politics and a reason to visit Jungle Biome 12. My, it even may add a specific Identity to a location, a reason to go there or avoid it completely. A specific set of conditions to trigger the event, conditions to complete the event and in turn triggers an event for that biome or even the world.
There is little use in trying to get any attention from Mojang or from members of this fora though, seasoned or new. It may be the fact that I mentioned the word 'boss' but I don't know.
There are so many recipies for cake, so little cake. Maybe that is the issue. Anyone wish to assist me make cake?
Your attitude towards mods is ridiculous. This is what modding is for. Mods have surpassed their parent games before. This could be no different.
1.) Mods become incompatable with releases from Mojang.
2.) Mods are unstable when paired with other mods.
Insurrections issues stem from the Core/Vanilla game itself and not the Modifications of the game. Everyone has a vision of what minecraft should be even if it is not shared. Personally I'm opting for something that everyone can enjoy without everyone becoming a programmer to make a mod compatable or making their vision real.
If mods are the solution and it requires X amount of programming this changes the nature of the game into an engine for programmers.
With that aside...
It takes ~800 hours to walk from the original spawn point to the 'edge' of the map without any mods or cheating. Take this as the goal for the Ultimate Explorer if you will. Mojang will be able to have the world seed generate ~800 hours worth of goals for the ultimate fighter, ~800 hours worth of goals for the ultimate crafter/builder, et cetera...
... and blow people away every single time a world seed is created.
I'd do this myself with a Mod of course but I am a Java noob. I'm learning though...
I'm already doing that (or, in the process of doing it).
They don't make the game better. They turn it into something different- so if an amazing mod exists, it still doesn't reflect on Minecraft in the least. It's like saying that a clay deposit is a work of art because someone has turned clay into art.
I fully support this, I hope someone tweets this to jeb.
ft that has tutorials it it..... so other than that its good to me
For the majority of the original post, I heartily agree with it. Things are nerfed as it is, why keep it that way when it can be better? I especially like the ideas with biomes, and the different weapons. However, the idea about the Enderman and encasing you in blocks is something I don't like. How 'bout post-End, they can, say, pick you up and drop you down a couple dozen blocks away, dealing some pretty major damage in the process.
Something that's implied for some of this that I dislike, though, is the idea that all monster work together to kill you, and only you (For the most part, they don't even have a reason to kill you in the first place). Why do Zombies and Skeletons work together to destroy your face? What reasoning does a Creeper have to follow a Spider's sense of you? What logic does an Enderman have to pick up the door that a Zombie's bashing? They have no reason to work together, especially since there's no gain for all of them in it. Going on with one of the examples, the Enderman picks up the door and the Zombies flood in and murder you. So, the Zombies will get the satisfaction of killing you and your dead body to munch on (Well, they don't even get that. You don't leave a corpse, nothing does. Another thing I think should be added). What does the Enderman get from it? He wasn't even aggro'd at you, but he still allows the Zombies the kill? I think he should have some sort of consience, at least the point of "He didn't look at me, so I have no problem with him".
I think it'd be a much better system of, say, monsters infighting between the species for the job of killing you. And, they'd only group together if you were actually posing a danger to them. Say, if you didn't bother the Skeletons and Zombies, they'd fight eachother for, say, territorial reasons (Bad example, but best I could think of). However, if you attacked Skeletons, the Skeletons would recognise you as a threat, and fight back. However, these systems would obviously be ignored if you, say, went into caves, what would be call invading from their view.
Also, will Mojang ever make it so that Villagers who are "Killed" by Zombies become Zombies themselves? Maybe a different kind of zombie, even. And will they ever actually put in some goddamn regular pigmen?
You can pretty easily list Minecraft's content, though. It has pretty much the bare minimum expected out of a sandbox game (Large world, ways to change the world, open ended, able to move, and etc). It might not "skimp" on any features, but it sorely lacks in content. This is one of the big problems with the game. And the way things are going, I can't say I have much trust in Mojang for creating good content- they just add things for the sake of adding them, it seems.
You're getting "committing yourself to more challenging activities" mixed up with "intentionally handicapping yourself", though. When you get down to it, there aren't many things you can delve into with the regular flow of the game and get a real challenge out of. You'd have to do things like not wear armor, not place torches, not build/place blocks, etc...
Again, it's intentionally handicapping yourself. It's much better if you're challenged while using everything the game has to offer. That's what makes it a challenge. When you have the option to completely remove that challenge (not just avoid it, but remove it), it kills the idea of proper tension. I covered this with that whole "cheesy monster movie" analogy thing.
You can enjoy it, but it doesn't mean it's actually tense.
I'm pretty sure the only people it'd alienate are those who literally cannot accept change and/or progression on a fundamental level. This is assuming that objectively good changes were to be added- obviously, as I've stated many times, my changes aren't necessarily the best (as there is no "best").
I'd rather satisfy a few people who have high standards than satisfy those with none. That's the basic idea behind accepting criticism. It's also why I'm convinced Mojang does not like criticism- they are perfectly content pleasing and appeasing as many people as they can, rather than making a good game.
If this is true, I'd laugh if the same people who complained about my ideas of being "too much like an RPG" would readily accept the things like that.
I think that they should be much creepier, though- that sounds something akin to Iron Golems, y'know? They never appeared "strong" to me, just... creepy. I do admit, the "encasing you in obsidian" thing is a bit ill thought out, but it was more or less to give an idea of how you CAN go about giving them more abilities (rather than just leaving things as they are).
Well... it is a videogame, and it never really bugged me too much. However, you do bring up a valid point- it'd be really neat to see way more mob interaction. I can see the mobs at least leaving one another alone in the wild... but all of them actively searching you out to kill you in some hiveminded fashion? A little silly, yeah.
I know that as it stands, mobs already attack another mob who's hit them, so I think a cool way to go about "interaction" would be to make it so that all mobs of X type that's been attacked by Y type of mob go try to kill Y mob type. So if a skeleton hits a zombie, all the Zombies in the area will consider Skeletons their enemy.
Well... they are both undead haha, so it's not TOO big of a deal for those two. The rest, though... yeah.
I like the idea of mobs already fighting when you approach them in a scenario. It gives you the option to kinda hide away if necessary- if spotted, however, all of them would start to fight you off (as you'd be considered the "biggest" threat).
Especially nice if mobs have a "threat rating" kinda deal where they decide on what to attack depending on the target's threat rating. A player running around wouldn't be too much of a threat (but they'd still try to attack you). However, if you actively hit another mob, then suddenly the player's "threat rating" skyrockets- mobs will then try to work together to kill you. The more you hit/kill mobs, the more of a threat they see you as.
The more I think about it, the more I like it- it gives more freedom to make mobs more challenging, as they wouldn't necessarily all be out to kill you instantly. They just probably will. It adds to the "artificial nature" thing I discussed just a bit earlier.
Both of these always saddened me. I wanted Pigmen villagers rather than Squidwards, Notch ;_;
EDIT: Has anyone made a modpack like this?
You point out that there is a complete lack of introduction to the game including a tutorial. You speak at length about not needing other tools such as wiki or youtube but I think minecraft actually lends itself towards these things. The old idea that everything should be contained within the game is slowly phasing out in my opinion. Instead online communities have grown to be a part of the gaming experience. I most certainly do not consider learning from others and experimenting "work". Admittedly, minecraft can be confusing to start learning without the community, and the xbox version dealt with this issue, but a tutorial also has negative repucussions. Minecraft is very much about discovery and the feeling of being alone in a vast world. A tutorial may change those to the negative. You say the lack of a tutorial and introduction as a flaw and I completely disagree with your assessment. It is not a flaw. Minecraft is an experience. Each new player that steps foot into a minecraft seed for the first time is filled with excitement, confusion, fear, and determination. We should not infringe upon the dramatic entrance Minecraft gives us.
I do appreciate your attempt to add only the most minimal explanation to the game through the variety of ideas you present. If I were to add my own idea of a tutorial as a compromise I would suggest adding random recipes to the villager's selling list.