Trying to wrap my head around the idea is not the same as just "not liking" it. If I flatly didn't like the idea, I would not be trying to explore it further.
Here's a scenario I see happening... Player A is hosting two worlds linked by portals. On the first day Players B and C are playing with Player A in World A. On Day 2, Player B is playing, but Player C is away and Players A and B exit that world to enter World B. They gathering supplies in survival and Player B exits the game from World B without going back to World A. Player A returns to World A with his inventory from World B. On Day 3, Player A and C are playing, but Player B is away. Player A and Player C enter World B through the portal and then decide to switch it to creative mode. Now, the portal is offline. Player B is what... SOL on his inventory that he collected on Day 2 before World B was flipped into creative mode while Player A gets to keep his since it was safely deposited in World A? Also, the last "record" the game has of the player's actions in World A is leaving via the portal... what does it do about respawning them in World A?.
Also, what potential error is created if World B is still in survival and the players opt to just start up World A without returning to World A via a portal?
You do open some cans of worms :-)
I'm going to refer to Player A as H, because I think it's an important point that they are the host, and the worlds as 1 and 2, so as not to confuse them with the players.
It wouldn't be practical to have more than one world loaded on H's box, so the group has to stay together (which makes going through the portals a bit like having to sleep all at the same time in Multiplayer games), unless they're going to return to their own worlds on their own boxes. I think you would have to return H, C, and B's spawn point to the portal in World 1 when H puts World 2 into Creative. They can then continue to play in 1 on survival or restart from the world-spawn in 2.
For H, exiting the game would have to return H's spawn-point to World 1's portal, otherwise you have to start locking out worlds for reloading purposes. If C or B came in from a world of their own, they would have to be returned there too, otherwise their spawn-point would revert to Portal 1.
There is the possibility of theft with the World portal system, which I hadn't previously considered - I might portal into your world and rip up the railways tracks, them scuttle home to build a railway of my own, all while you're down the mines. I suppose you could require that linked worlds belong to the same player, or have a configuration option for it, making the system safer, but not as grand. That seems the most practical thing.
The Meaning of Life, the Universe, and Everything.
Join Date:
5/28/2013
Posts:
46
Member Details
OK, a simpler, less ambitious alternative to this whole World Portal concept might be being able to build magic chests. The game host would be able to send the chest's contents to another magic chest in another game. That would allow you to move resources such as clay, vines or jungle saplings from new worlds to old ones. It shares the advantage with the World Portal idea that whatever new resources 4J introduce, you can bring them into your old world without them having to do new coding to support that.
You do open some cans of worms :-)
I'm going to refer to Player A as H, because I think it's an important point that they are the host, and the worlds as 1 and 2, so as not to confuse them with the players.
It wouldn't be practical to have more than one world loaded on H's box, so the group has to stay together (which makes going through the portals a bit like having to sleep all at the same time in Multiplayer games), unless they're going to return to their own worlds on their own boxes. I think you would have to return H, C, and B's spawn point to the portal in World 1 when H puts World 2 into Creative. They can then continue to play in 1 on survival or restart from the world-spawn in 2.
For H, exiting the game would have to return H's spawn-point to World 1's portal, otherwise you have to start locking out worlds for reloading purposes. If C or B came in from a world of their own, they would have to be returned there too, otherwise their spawn-point would revert to Portal 1.
There is the possibility of theft with the World portal system, which I hadn't previously considered - I might portal into your world and rip up the railways tracks, them scuttle home to build a railway of my own, all while you're down the mines. I suppose you could require that linked worlds belong to the same player, or have a configuration option for it, making the system safer, but not as grand. That seems the most practical thing.
Somebody has probably thought of this before.