The last one: "Regenerating 1 health point from being well-fed" is probably fairly new and the most interesting one.
I think it's a good change.Taking a lot of damage suddenly has a consequence. It adds a new consideration to combat and jumping down from places. Taking damage will cost you food.
I'm playing on a world I started at the release of Aplha 1.2.0. Also called the Halloween Update.
I don't get a lot of those chunk error problems because I don't explore a whole lot. I find new areas and biomes by moving though the Nether and making portals to the overworld. This creates "islands" of chunks in the overworld that are far apart from each other with none of those chunk problems. Each island is about 2048x2048 blocks and I stay within that until I want to find new biomes again.
Golems aren't checking "isStackValidForSlot" before putting things into an inventory. It's causing a whole bunch of unintended effects with both modded and vanilla machines like the furnace.
It doesn't look like Golems check isStackValidForSlot() before putting things into inventories. This results in some strange behavior here and there. It's among other things possible for the Golem to put items into the result slot of a Furnace. If you cycle through a stack of gold you can gain XP very fast.
yeah they do work when put in manualy or with turtle, so is that a buldcraft issue then ?
The issue lies with how pipes talk to machines that use the BuildCraft API.
BuildCraft pipes and Forestry machines "talk" to each other differently than player and machine, turtle and machine etc. A BuildCraft pipe will sort of ask the machine: "Do you have room for this item with this item id". If the machine says "no", then the pipe will respect that. Turtles, RedPower 2 tubes and a few other mechanics simply access the inventory directly and does as they please.
So why can you put it in manually? This is probably a flaw with The Forestry machine. The logic in the GUI is slightly different from the logic when talking to pipes.
(This was just a theory and there might be details in the interactions between mods here that I've missed.)
I hate bringing out these cliche examples, but
-Does that mean Twilight is a good series of books?
-Does that mean FIFA and Madden are good games?
-Does that mean Justin Bieber is a good musician?
Argumentum ad populum.
Let me rephrase then. Minecraft is a game that in it's current form is enjoyed by many players. Making changes that are too large will upset this base. It can't be predicted if any change will cause bad influence or good influence on said base so it's generally best to take things slow.
With "Very good" I don't talk about code quality, design, difficulty or any single technical quality mark you might pick. I'm talking about the fact that the game has a high entertainment value for a lot of players. In this context the answers to your questions above would all be "yes".
Minecraft didn't win it's rewards for the technical achievements. Good game balance or craftsmanship on any level. I think every review of the game complained about the same things as you do, but they still gave it the highest score.
"Probably" is the key word here. There's nothing that says "if something is popular, it MUST be good!".
Yes, that's exactly what it means. It's very good. That doesn't mean that its popularity will last forever, but when so many players play a game for so long, then it is good. Very good.
To me, Minecraft is a game that was initially built upon the idea of survival & adventure in a fully interactive world, but then stopped going in that direction and then became just a game that has voxels and is really, really popular.
I'm not sure if that's something worth keeping.
Something "really, really popular " is probably worth keeping. I have a hard time believing that you don't see the logic in that.
There will be plenty of room for a mod that takes everything a few steps further than what Mojang can do to their game. They need to balance the popular parts and introduce new things a little slower than you can do in a mod.
Sorry for bringing this up again but: The better than Wolves author has a mod that rivals the game itself, programmed just by him, with way more and better, yet still minecrafty content.
I have seen other mods, and what they do, and who did it. 5 of the best modders (that can work together) would achieve way more than Mojang ever can
Coloring by numbers is usually a little bit easier then filling a completely blank canvas.
I'm not dissing modders. A lot of the stuff they create is amassing and require just as much skill and knowledge as what Mojang is putting out, but Minecraft is a project significantly larger than for example BTW.
You could also argue that even though Mojang is quite a few people they are still just a tiny group compared to the 7 million people owning a copy of Minecraft. It would be bloody unbelievable if not a few thousand of those millions were significantly more skilled than the people at Mojang. And when they make mods they create not only a few new mobs or blocks. They can change the gameplay completely.
How do you compare DayZ with Arma 2? Which one is better? Do you think DayZ should have been coded into Arma 2?
Actually, most of the current super-easy stuff was added by Jeb, not Notch.
I'm not sure how I should interpret that comment.
Jeb was told by Notch to cultivate the sandbox nature of the game instead of continue the road to a pure survival experience. This was done because that's what the community is asking for. When we look for Roguelike survival games we go somewhere else. They are a dime a dozen, while Minecraft is still fairly unique.
The problem is that, if anything, they now have the freedom to do whatever they want- with their overly rabid fanbase, chances are highly likely they would eat up virtually everything they gave them, anyway. It's not a subscription-based game so at worst, they don't gain sales as rapidly as they were- oh no, the thing that happens to every game ever made anyway.
They are doing exactly what the community wants in the pace they are able too. The fact that Minecraft still have increasing sales after 2 years should be solid evidence.
You put very little faith in the general gamer. You make it sound like all of us are stupid sheep just following the lead of Mojang. You have no respect for what other players enjoy and act extremely high and mighty about your own view.
I wouldn't mind that some things where slightly more tuned or required a little bit more effort, but just like Notch was forced to, you and I must also respect what the community at large is looking for in Minecraft. I've said so before. Notch wanted exactly the same game as you portray. A hard survival RPG kind of game. At least he respect the wishes of the community and give us what we want instead of calling us stupid sheep.
I'm not sure where people got the idea that caves ended too often. There were sure a hell of a lot of seemingly infinite cave systems such as ... hmm ... 404?!?!!?!?
Has anyone made any image of a 1.7.3 world similar to the images we have seen here from 1.3? I still have my doubts that the number of caves has changed. The number of underground features have increased with ravines and mine shafts, but I don't think the number of caves has increased.
I don't think Etho is the man you should be looking for. He is an inventor and engineer first and explorer and survivalist second. He doesn't play Minecraft for the interesting battles, but for the interesting technical quirks that he can use in his constructions.
This thread does contain many good ideas, but there are even more trash. I've suggested before that you try to organize this monstrosity into multiple threads that are more focused. Then you'll see how interesting each idea really are for other players.
The Ender dragon can be killed fairly easily with a bow. By using a bed they are only making things harder for themselves. The intended feature of the exploding bed is to blow up the player trying to sleep. And it does. By using the bed to kill the Ender dragon they are putting themselves in a greater risk than if they'd simply faced the dragon head on.
Using exploding beds to kill mobs or to farm resources might not be the intended use of the feature, but I will still not call this an exploit. In the gaming world, exploit, is a negatively charged word used to depict that a player is using a feature to gain some kind of advantage above the norm. That is not the case here. I would say it's the opposite.
0
http://minecraft.gamepedia.com/Hunger#Exhaustion_level_increase
The last one: "Regenerating 1 health point from being well-fed" is probably fairly new and the most interesting one.
I think it's a good change.Taking a lot of damage suddenly has a consequence. It adds a new consideration to combat and jumping down from places. Taking damage will cost you food.
0
I don't get a lot of those chunk error problems because I don't explore a whole lot. I find new areas and biomes by moving though the Nether and making portals to the overworld. This creates "islands" of chunks in the overworld that are far apart from each other with none of those chunk problems. Each island is about 2048x2048 blocks and I stay within that until I want to find new biomes again.
0
0
0
The issue lies with how pipes talk to machines that use the BuildCraft API.
BuildCraft pipes and Forestry machines "talk" to each other differently than player and machine, turtle and machine etc. A BuildCraft pipe will sort of ask the machine: "Do you have room for this item with this item id". If the machine says "no", then the pipe will respect that. Turtles, RedPower 2 tubes and a few other mechanics simply access the inventory directly and does as they please.
So why can you put it in manually? This is probably a flaw with The Forestry machine. The logic in the GUI is slightly different from the logic when talking to pipes.
(This was just a theory and there might be details in the interactions between mods here that I've missed.)
0
Let me rephrase then. Minecraft is a game that in it's current form is enjoyed by many players. Making changes that are too large will upset this base. It can't be predicted if any change will cause bad influence or good influence on said base so it's generally best to take things slow.
With "Very good" I don't talk about code quality, design, difficulty or any single technical quality mark you might pick. I'm talking about the fact that the game has a high entertainment value for a lot of players. In this context the answers to your questions above would all be "yes".
Minecraft didn't win it's rewards for the technical achievements. Good game balance or craftsmanship on any level. I think every review of the game complained about the same things as you do, but they still gave it the highest score.
0
Yes, that's exactly what it means. It's very good. That doesn't mean that its popularity will last forever, but when so many players play a game for so long, then it is good. Very good.
0
Something "really, really popular " is probably worth keeping. I have a hard time believing that you don't see the logic in that.
There will be plenty of room for a mod that takes everything a few steps further than what Mojang can do to their game. They need to balance the popular parts and introduce new things a little slower than you can do in a mod.
0
Coloring by numbers is usually a little bit easier then filling a completely blank canvas.
I'm not dissing modders. A lot of the stuff they create is amassing and require just as much skill and knowledge as what Mojang is putting out, but Minecraft is a project significantly larger than for example BTW.
You could also argue that even though Mojang is quite a few people they are still just a tiny group compared to the 7 million people owning a copy of Minecraft. It would be bloody unbelievable if not a few thousand of those millions were significantly more skilled than the people at Mojang. And when they make mods they create not only a few new mobs or blocks. They can change the gameplay completely.
How do you compare DayZ with Arma 2? Which one is better? Do you think DayZ should have been coded into Arma 2?
0
I'm not sure how I should interpret that comment.
Jeb was told by Notch to cultivate the sandbox nature of the game instead of continue the road to a pure survival experience. This was done because that's what the community is asking for. When we look for Roguelike survival games we go somewhere else. They are a dime a dozen, while Minecraft is still fairly unique.
0
They are doing exactly what the community wants in the pace they are able too. The fact that Minecraft still have increasing sales after 2 years should be solid evidence.
You put very little faith in the general gamer. You make it sound like all of us are stupid sheep just following the lead of Mojang. You have no respect for what other players enjoy and act extremely high and mighty about your own view.
I wouldn't mind that some things where slightly more tuned or required a little bit more effort, but just like Notch was forced to, you and I must also respect what the community at large is looking for in Minecraft. I've said so before. Notch wanted exactly the same game as you portray. A hard survival RPG kind of game. At least he respect the wishes of the community and give us what we want instead of calling us stupid sheep.
0
Tell us Insurrection, if you had a winning lottery ticket. How much effort would you put into attempting to change the numbers on it?
0
1
This thread does contain many good ideas, but there are even more trash. I've suggested before that you try to organize this monstrosity into multiple threads that are more focused. Then you'll see how interesting each idea really are for other players.
0
Using exploding beds to kill mobs or to farm resources might not be the intended use of the feature, but I will still not call this an exploit. In the gaming world, exploit, is a negatively charged word used to depict that a player is using a feature to gain some kind of advantage above the norm. That is not the case here. I would say it's the opposite.