Actually, the game has to be balanced around the default worldgen settings, rather than basing the game on custom settings.
That is correct. It's not a much more viable reason than stating that the /give command would make this overpowered as you can obtain hundreds.
Guns do have something to do with: Combat.
You can say the same thing about pretty much anything. Copper does have something to do with Minecraft: Mining, Emerald Armor does have something to do with Minecraft: Combat, Sandwiches do have something to do with Minecraft: Food, Cars do have something to do with Minecraft: Crafting, Ender Creeper/Zombie/Skeleton/etc. does have something to do with Minecraft: Even more Combat! I'm hoping you are understanding the point I'm making, you do not base off a suggestion due to its some form of relativity to an aspect of the game. Otherwise, you'd create an invalid point.
Instead, it is crucial to to recognize as to whether or not the suggestion fits in the game, needs to be in the game, or would improve it in anyway.
I'd say guns do not fit under any of those requirements of an adequate suggestion. It indeed does not fit the game, stated so by the creator time ago. Yes, he is not the current developer, but his dreams and wishes of this game are still respected upon, therefor it is unlikely that guns would still make it in the game. If the creator says that guns do not fit, then so be it.
Does Minecraft need guns? Not at all. It's survived for four years without guns, and is still happily enjoyed by millions.
The addition of guns would not improve combat at all, or any general aspect of the game. Guns themselves are not a viable weapon against a bow, therefor by comparison, bows may render guns useless in many situations. There's also the fact that guns are more difficult to obtain, very limited in the number of uses, and the ammo itself is expensive. This creates a description over the gun, seen as an impractical weapon in the game.
Does not fit, the game is not in need of it, and it does not improve combat.
And gunpowder, which needs more uses, as Splash potions aren´t truly viable out of healing cats,
No. Gunpowder doesn't *need* more uses. Whether or not a core system of the game is useful to you or not, that is completely subjective. Either way, I'd bet on the person using potions in combat than one that is not when in a PvP battle.
and Fire Charges are basically renewable Flint and Steel
Indeed. They were intended for a method of returning from the nether if the lack of flint and steel is present. They also serve as excellent projectiles, as they ignite mobs that come in contact with a dispensed fire charge.
while TNT is impractical to use for mining because not all blocks destroyed by explosions drop something, which can lead to it being impractical at obtaining ores.
I don't believe TNT was intended for mining anyway, although it does fit in well as it was used in mining. They create explosions, a wonderful force in the game that can be made for anything your mind can picture. Indeed, they are impractical for mining. However, that's why we have pickaxes.
There is also the fact that there aren´t any medium-ranged weapons.
That's not a reason to add guns. Many things are left better untouched. Again, Minecraft doesn't need medium-ranged weapons. We have bows and swords, which are adequate enough to fulfill the combat aspect of Minecraft.
On a final note, consider that combat is not the focus of the game. I'd rather accept a whole new pallet of colored blocks, which would improve the focus area of the game, building, rather than something regarding combat.
But guns would be. My point is, I found a rare treasure in a dungeon, and very fast. My other point (which you still haven't responded to) is that in 1.8, you have the option to make dungeons veryplentiful, meaning tons of guns, which is unbalanced.
P.S.
One more thing. You keep on saying "what about rails and minecarts?" and "do minecarts fit in the game?" They do in my opinion. It's Minecraft. It makes sense to add minecarts into the game. Minecarts are for mining, an essential thing in Minecraft. Guns don't have anything to do with anything in the game.
Yes, I see your point, but if you look at the probabilities of various items in dungeons, useful things such as gold apples have a very small chance of spawning. I just checked a few dungeons in the snapshots, and the loot isn't that great. besides, the player punches in the number of dungeons, they are as OP as the give command.
That's not a reason to add guns. Many things are left better untouched. Again, Minecraft doesn't need medium-ranged weapons. We have bows and swords, which are adequate enough to fulfill the combat aspect of Minecraft.
On a final note, consider that combat is not the focus of the game. I'd rather accept a whole new pallet of colored blocks, which would improve the focus area of the game, building, rather than something regarding combat.
I agree on all parts except for this. Minecraft's biggest focus is on building, but Minecraft is intended to be a game about everything and letting the player do what they want (as evidenced by the "It could also be about [...] if it sounds more like your cup of tea" paragraph on the main page of Minecraft.net). Building-related features appeal to the biggest focus, but the other aspects of the game are almost as important.
There's also the problem that the aspects of the game besides building (and redstone) are of much lower quality than building for various reasons, and improving those aspects is therefore of much higher priority than improving building. Yet another set of colored blocks will only slightly improve the game; however, features that work towards improving exploration, progression, combat, etc will improve the game significantly more.
Also, while flintlocks aren't needed in Minecraft, their implementation shouldn't be ignored completely; first of all, you can say that pretty much everything after r1.0 that isn't a major bugfix isn't needed either, because the game is working fine without it. Second of all, flintlocks can be used to somewhat improve the poor combat aspect; it isn't the only way, of course, and it won't fix it, but it will help. (Ignoring the fact that flintlocks are UP compared to bows and can't be enchanted; obviously, they would need to be rebalanced first).
The main difference between adding Emerald gear and adding this suggestion is that it isn´t redundant, unlike emerald tools, as there wouldn´t be any other medium-ranged weapons in the game, while there are enough tool tiers (In fact, Emeralds can be already used to buy gear, which takes down most suggestions for it).
The main point of redundancy lies upon what category this suggestion falls upon; guns. The suggestion does perform a unique idea when in comparison with other gun suggestions. However, that does not improve the quality of the suggestion itself.
Most suggestions aren´t crucial, not even most of the more popular ones.
Suggestions don't have to be crucial to be integrated into Minecraft. However, they need to follow the guidelines of an adequate suggestion. Improving the aspects of the game is certainly a reason for adding something. As stated before, a new color pallet of blocks isn't crucial in any way. However, it does create a better atmosphere for the building aspect of the game.
The game has no theme, so anything can fit, as long as it isn´t unnecessarily complex (Such as making an item need it´s own dimension to obtain just so it has it´s own dimension, rather than to prevent it from being obtained too quickly).
Indeed, the game may have no theme; however, the idea that anything can fit is definitely false. Unicorns do not fit in the gameplay style that Minecraft presents. Even if they're made common throughout the world, they still do not hold a place in the game that is Minecraft.
It can improve the game by giving more varied weapons, along with other uses caused by technical properties (Such as toggling certain Redstone switches).
Quality over quantity. Improve our current combat weapons that are in desperate need of an overhaul, and then may you present more weapons.
It also survived 4 years without banners, and the suggestion is just for another weapon that has it´s own niche, rather than turning it into the game's focus.
Indeed, Minecraft did not need banners; however, they presented the quality of improving the game, by integrating better visual aesthetics in the building aspect.
It simply needs a reason to be regularly harvested, like the other mob drops (Except Rotten Flesh, and it still is useful at healing dogs without wasting better kinds of meat)
What exactly is the reason for doing so? The bow would still be able to supersede the flintlock pistol in any possible way. The bow performs as a much more viable weapon, and its ammo is easily harvested. The flintlock pistol? It's ammo is not as easily harvested, as you'd need an iron farm, a sugarcane farm, and some form of grinding creepers. If the other route is taken, you'd still need a pigmen farm, which is a tedious process to build. All for what? Only 64 uses per gun, which is quite a small value. There'd be no need for harvesting this kind of ammo, as harvesting great loads is not necessary. It is much more convenient to just mine for the iron/gold, find some sugarcane, and kill a creeper, as the gun itself won't last long enough to cover the ammo you've obtained.
Actually, Fire charges have exactly that limitation: Most of their damage comes from fire, which makes it useless as a weapon in the Nether or in the ocean, and it needs more uses than just some way to get out of the Nether and ammo that is mostly useful to cook meat from animals.
You would say the same for flint and steel, their only purpose is to create fire (except igniting creepers, but that's only really useful in creative). Fire itself is limited, so the fault does not lie on the item. Again, the item does not *need* more uses, as it already fulfils its purpose, a renewable fire source.
As for the medium-ranged weapons, actually, there are a lot of things that could fulfill that niche. A different kind of bow, a gun, a weapon that shoots Guardian beams or even a weapon that shoots fire charges would work, as long as they have more uses (Such as a rough equivalent to Dispensers).
Just due to the fact that the combat system is lacking does not constitute the reason to introduce just any form or weapon. Those have been suggested, and have been turned down for redundancy, the lack of necessity, or the overall lack of balance within the suggestion.
Let's not be like Germany when they were desperate and openly accept any "solution" without considering what we're dealing with first.
I agree on all parts except for this. Minecraft's biggest focus is on building, but Minecraft is intended to be a game about everything and letting the player do what they want (as evidenced by the "It could also be about [...] if it sounds more like your cup of tea" paragraph on the main page of Minecraft.net). Building-related features appeal to the biggest focus, but the other aspects of the game are almost as important.
Indeed. I had stated that I would rather accept a feature relating to building, rather than combat. That would be true depending on the feature itself, depending on what it brings in our lacking combat system. If a new pallet of colors is more satisfying than the said combat feature, there is no competition.
There's also the problem that the aspects of the game besides building (and redstone) are of much lower quality than building for various reasons, and improving those aspects is therefore of much higher priority than improving building. Yet another set of colored blocks will only slightly improve the game; however, features that work towards improving exploration, progression, combat, etc will improve the game significantly more.
Of course. However, it comes down to what is being added, and how would it improve the game. The use of flintlock pistols would present yet another choice to a player, but a new pallet of blocks would present nearly infinite possibilities and uses in builds, presenting even more choice than the former.
If the new combat feature, however, does manage to greatly improve the combat system, then I'll accept the new feature with open arms.
Also, while flintlocks aren't needed in Minecraft, their implementation shouldn't be ignored completely; first of all, you can say that pretty much everything after r1.0 that isn't a major bugfix isn't needed either, because the game is working fine without it. Second of all, flintlocks can be used to somewhat improve the poor combat aspect; it isn't the only way, of course, and it won't fix it, but it will help. (Ignoring the fact that flintlocks are UP compared to bows and can't be enchanted; obviously, they would need to be rebalanced first).
Bugfixes are, of course, not always needed. Those that are not needed instead bring improvements in the optimization aspect, as well as bring the game closer to the what the developers intend Minecraft to be. It's just not the same case with guns. Perhaps they do somewhat aid in granting another choice, but the little improvement it brings is not worth its implementation.
(blah blah blah)...All for what? Only 64 uses per gun, which is quite a small value. There'd be no need for harvesting this kind of ammo, as harvesting great loads is not necessary. It is much more convenient to just mine for the iron/gold, find some sugarcane, and kill a creeper, as the gun itself won't last long enough to cover the ammo you've obtained...(blah blah blah)
The gun degrades into a broken flintlock. like carrots on sticks.
(blah blah blah)...All for what? Only 64 uses per gun, which is quite a small value. There'd be no need for harvesting this kind of ammo, as harvesting great loads is not necessary. It is much more convenient to just mine for the iron/gold, find some sugarcane, and kill a creeper, as the gun itself won't last long enough to cover the ammo you've obtained...(blah blah blah)
The gun degrades into a broken flintlock. like carrots on sticks.
It would have been better if you'd simply quote me instead of sounding ignorant by adding 'blah' on both ends of my selected quote.
Anyway, now we're talking inconvenience. Every time we want to use the flintlock, we must repair it every time with an anvil. This would use up our XP, as the price for it would rise every time it is repaired, until it is no longer affordable to repair it again. This limits the flintlock's actual use to about 5 repairs. Not to mention that anvils do not last forever, and each repair uses it more. Anvils themselves are not cheap to make.
Either we have to carry an anvil with us all the time just to use the flintlock again (another measly 64 uses), or returning to a home with one in it. Also, you won't have the time to repair a flintlock in a PvP/PvE battle, as you will most likely die from even trying to be stationary from repairing.
Alexcamostyle:
I'm Amazed, two weak and stubborn arguements in a row, im gonna leave this from the rules page riiiight here.
"Minecraft is this!
This isn't an issue in it's own right. Many issues arise from what I like to call "hasty denial".
Concepts such as "too futuristic", "overpowered", "not thematic" are not intrinsically bad reasons for denying a reason. However, if they are provided without supporting details, they become SPAM."
"Polling the audience is where you form your reason for approval or denial according to what you see as a norm.
"Not many people like wolves, so I'll say no here."
"Most people do not like this"
"This idea is unpopular"
"Wow, everyone said no to this suggestion, it must be crappy. No."
If you are going to deny something with the above or something similar, don't type anything, press back..."
Just to name a few, I support flintlock pistols, i think they fit in way better than most guns that are suggested.
"It's as I and many many people on this forum have said time and time again. Guns do NOT belong in Minecraft.", looking at older posts, i found a posts that breaks both rules at once! amazing!
Futhermore, what heck kind of critics are you? "nope doesn't fit the feel of minecraft no support" that isn't critic! That is Spam! Add something useful to the post or get out!
On-topic- I like the idea of a new weapon, but it feels late for a new weapon now. This may be better off as a mod, or possible a post on the Reddit suggestions. SUPPORT.
It would have been better if you'd simply quote me instead of sounding ignorant by adding 'blah' on both ends of my selected quote.
Anyway, now we're talking inconvenience. Every time we want to use the flintlock, we must repair it every time with an anvil. This would use up our XP, as the price for it would rise every time it is repaired, until it is no longer affordable to repair it again. This limits the flintlock's actual use to about 5 repairs. Not to mention that anvils do not last forever, and each repair uses it more. Anvils themselves are not cheap to make.
Either we have to carry an anvil with us all the time just to use the flintlock again (another measly 64 uses), or returning to a home with one in it. Also, you won't have the time to repair a flintlock in a PvP/PvE battle, as you will most likely die from even trying to be stationary from repairing.
sorry about the blah blah blah, I have no ideal how to only quote only certain parts on a post.
Alexcamostyle:
I'm Amazed, two weak and stubborn arguements in a row, im gonna leave this from the rules page riiiight here.
"Minecraft is this!
This isn't an issue in it's own right. Many issues arise from what I like to call "hasty denial".
Concepts such as "too futuristic", "overpowered", "not thematic" are not intrinsically bad reasons for denying a reason. However, if they are provided without supporting details, they become SPAM."
"Polling the audience is where you form your reason for approval or denial according to what you see as a norm.
"Not many people like wolves, so I'll say no here."
"Most people do not like this"
"This idea is unpopular"
"Wow, everyone said no to this suggestion, it must be crappy. No."
If you are going to deny something with the above or something similar, don't type anything, press back..."
Just to name a few, I support flintlock pistols, i think they fit in way better than most guns that are suggested.
Many of the arguments that are against guns being placed in Minecraft are more legitimate than the ones that are for putting guns in Minecraft.
Most of the posts I've seen have made some ridiculous suggested changes that would make the gun over-powered and the ammo easy to get. Then later on changed again to make ammo more "annoying" to get and the gun sort-of useless after being used up. There will never be no right or wrong when it comes to guns. Many people will complain that the gun is over-powered and will suggest nerfs for it. And others will complain over how easy/difficult it is to get the ammo. Then there will be people who would complain over how the gun breaks after many uses and how experience heavy it is to repair the gun only for another 64 uses. I can foresee more complaints in the future for the gun than there was for the Horses. And it will never stop until they remove the gun or nerf it to the point where it becomes less efficient than that of the bow. Then there will be even more complaints over that change.
We have a ranged weapon anyways. Why would we need anything else? Arrows are easy to get and if you are experience with archery on Minecraft, you can do quite a bit more damage. Especially if the bow is enchanted. We really don't need guns in Minecraft and they really don't belong. That is a simple fact. People just need to accept it and move on.
Actually, most of them are rarely something other than `not fitting´ or `too advanced´ or `tpp OP´ or `would be better as a mod/there are mods for that´ even through:
1 Minecraft doesn´t have a set technological period, as most of the technology is pre-industrial (XIV-XV century), but the highest tech in the game can easily be around the XX century, so there is a lot of time, and guns already existed in the XIV century (The oldest gun that still exists dates from 1288, so, even if it caters to the oldest time period it could still have guns), so, unless Minecarts, most Redstone items and TNT, among others, were removed, this particular argument is self-defeating.
2The bow has a lot of weaknesses, such as crowd control, that cannot be solved by complementing it with swords (Which aren´t very good against 4 Creepers that are already chasing the player, or a single skeleton in water), and an enchantment is right out due to the fact that it would only add experience and Lapis Lazuli to the cost, along with the lack of weapon varieity (Only a sword and a bow, along with some tools that are best used as tools because they deal less damage for the same cost, or more), which, even through it isn´t the game´s main, or only focus, still needs a lot of improvements, as do a lot of aspects of the game other than building and Redstone circuits.
3Their exact mechanics and stats can be adjusted so they aren´t too powerful for the amount of materials necessary to obtain them and their ammo (This particular suggestion, for example, would have to buff them a bit, which possibily ended up being underpowered due to the large amount of gun suggestions that often got posts complaining about OPness even if the actual suggestion was well-balanced, but the basic premise could be used in the actual game with some changes).
4The suggestion thread is about additions to the UNMODDED game, which already takes off the mod argument, which is against the rules.
Minecraft doesn't have a specific period. Tnt and Minecarts are there for the same reason some one else has stated. The game is called MINEcraft. Therefore, TNT and Minecarts would be expected to be in the game.
The bow only has two weaknesses from what I have seen. which is 1. Lack of ammo and 2. Not pulling the string back quick enough to launch the arrow. I've managed to pull out an enchanted bow and take down three creepers chasing me in a short amount of time. So creepers are not the problem.
Skeletons in the water are just as easily to deal with if you have a bow. If you had a sword however, it would be pointless as they would shoot you before you could get to them.
We don't need a large weapon variate as this is Minecraft not a first person shooter game. The main focus is mining and surviving.
Again since you where not paying any attention to my post. Even if we do adjust the gun, there will be people complaining that it would be too OP. Or that the ammo is too hard to get. People who hate the idea of guns being in Minecraft will always complain about the gun until Mojang does something about it. And this will be worst than people complaining over the fact that the horses look bad or don't belong in Minecraft. That's notsomething I nor anyone else wants to deal with.
I've seen many great suggestions for the game in the suggestion forum. Any suggestion for guns get almost instantly turned down. People just don't want guns in Minecraft. So instead of suggesting it, perhaps suggest something else.
(blah blah blah)...All for what? Only 64 uses per gun, which is quite a small value. There'd be no need for harvesting this kind of ammo, as harvesting great loads is not necessary. It is much more convenient to just mine for the iron/gold, find some sugarcane, and kill a creeper, as the gun itself won't last long enough to cover the ammo you've obtained...(blah blah blah)
The gun degrades into a broken flintlock. like carrots on sticks.
I still don't agree with the idea of having ****ing guns in a E-rated game -.-
97% of teenagers would cry if they saw Justin Bieber on top of a tower about to jump. If your the 3% who is sitting there with popcorn screaming "DO A BACKFLIP", copy and paste this as your signature[/b]
Bugfixes are, of course, not always needed. Those that are not needed instead bring improvements in the optimization aspect, as well as bring the game closer to the what the developers intend Minecraft to be. It's just not the same case with guns. Perhaps they do somewhat aid in granting another choice, but the little improvement it brings is not worth its implementation.
By "major" I meant "fixing a game-breaking bug". Although technically the bugfix would only be needed if it prevented the game from running.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Did something happen to you in your childhood to give you this unreasonable fear of rutabaga?
"Minecraft doesn't have a specific period. Tnt and Minecarts are there for the same reason some one else has stated. The game is called MINEcraft. Therefore, TNT and Minecarts would be expected to be in the game."
"People just don't want guns in Minecraft."
it took udder seconds to forget what was said on the rules, whatever, i can't get though to you, i give up.
That is correct. It's not a much more viable reason than stating that the /give command would make this overpowered as you can obtain hundreds.
You can say the same thing about pretty much anything. Copper does have something to do with Minecraft: Mining, Emerald Armor does have something to do with Minecraft: Combat, Sandwiches do have something to do with Minecraft: Food, Cars do have something to do with Minecraft: Crafting, Ender Creeper/Zombie/Skeleton/etc. does have something to do with Minecraft: Even more Combat! I'm hoping you are understanding the point I'm making, you do not base off a suggestion due to its some form of relativity to an aspect of the game. Otherwise, you'd create an invalid point.
Instead, it is crucial to to recognize as to whether or not the suggestion fits in the game, needs to be in the game, or would improve it in anyway.
I'd say guns do not fit under any of those requirements of an adequate suggestion. It indeed does not fit the game, stated so by the creator time ago. Yes, he is not the current developer, but his dreams and wishes of this game are still respected upon, therefor it is unlikely that guns would still make it in the game. If the creator says that guns do not fit, then so be it.
Does Minecraft need guns? Not at all. It's survived for four years without guns, and is still happily enjoyed by millions.
The addition of guns would not improve combat at all, or any general aspect of the game. Guns themselves are not a viable weapon against a bow, therefor by comparison, bows may render guns useless in many situations. There's also the fact that guns are more difficult to obtain, very limited in the number of uses, and the ammo itself is expensive. This creates a description over the gun, seen as an impractical weapon in the game.
Does not fit, the game is not in need of it, and it does not improve combat.
No. Gunpowder doesn't *need* more uses. Whether or not a core system of the game is useful to you or not, that is completely subjective. Either way, I'd bet on the person using potions in combat than one that is not when in a PvP battle.
Indeed. They were intended for a method of returning from the nether if the lack of flint and steel is present. They also serve as excellent projectiles, as they ignite mobs that come in contact with a dispensed fire charge.
I don't believe TNT was intended for mining anyway, although it does fit in well as it was used in mining. They create explosions, a wonderful force in the game that can be made for anything your mind can picture. Indeed, they are impractical for mining. However, that's why we have pickaxes.
That's not a reason to add guns. Many things are left better untouched. Again, Minecraft doesn't need medium-ranged weapons. We have bows and swords, which are adequate enough to fulfill the combat aspect of Minecraft.
On a final note, consider that combat is not the focus of the game. I'd rather accept a whole new pallet of colored blocks, which would improve the focus area of the game, building, rather than something regarding combat.
Thank you explaining that so well! Those are excellent points, and I agree completely.
Yes, I see your point, but if you look at the probabilities of various items in dungeons, useful things such as gold apples have a very small chance of spawning. I just checked a few dungeons in the snapshots, and the loot isn't that great. besides, the player punches in the number of dungeons, they are as OP as the give command.
I agree on all parts except for this. Minecraft's biggest focus is on building, but Minecraft is intended to be a game about everything and letting the player do what they want (as evidenced by the "It could also be about [...] if it sounds more like your cup of tea" paragraph on the main page of Minecraft.net). Building-related features appeal to the biggest focus, but the other aspects of the game are almost as important.
There's also the problem that the aspects of the game besides building (and redstone) are of much lower quality than building for various reasons, and improving those aspects is therefore of much higher priority than improving building. Yet another set of colored blocks will only slightly improve the game; however, features that work towards improving exploration, progression, combat, etc will improve the game significantly more.
Also, while flintlocks aren't needed in Minecraft, their implementation shouldn't be ignored completely; first of all, you can say that pretty much everything after r1.0 that isn't a major bugfix isn't needed either, because the game is working fine without it. Second of all, flintlocks can be used to somewhat improve the poor combat aspect; it isn't the only way, of course, and it won't fix it, but it will help. (Ignoring the fact that flintlocks are UP compared to bows and can't be enchanted; obviously, they would need to be rebalanced first).
The main point of redundancy lies upon what category this suggestion falls upon; guns. The suggestion does perform a unique idea when in comparison with other gun suggestions. However, that does not improve the quality of the suggestion itself.
Suggestions don't have to be crucial to be integrated into Minecraft. However, they need to follow the guidelines of an adequate suggestion. Improving the aspects of the game is certainly a reason for adding something. As stated before, a new color pallet of blocks isn't crucial in any way. However, it does create a better atmosphere for the building aspect of the game.
Indeed, the game may have no theme; however, the idea that anything can fit is definitely false. Unicorns do not fit in the gameplay style that Minecraft presents. Even if they're made common throughout the world, they still do not hold a place in the game that is Minecraft.
Quality over quantity. Improve our current combat weapons that are in desperate need of an overhaul, and then may you present more weapons.
Indeed, Minecraft did not need banners; however, they presented the quality of improving the game, by integrating better visual aesthetics in the building aspect.
What exactly is the reason for doing so? The bow would still be able to supersede the flintlock pistol in any possible way. The bow performs as a much more viable weapon, and its ammo is easily harvested. The flintlock pistol? It's ammo is not as easily harvested, as you'd need an iron farm, a sugarcane farm, and some form of grinding creepers. If the other route is taken, you'd still need a pigmen farm, which is a tedious process to build. All for what? Only 64 uses per gun, which is quite a small value. There'd be no need for harvesting this kind of ammo, as harvesting great loads is not necessary. It is much more convenient to just mine for the iron/gold, find some sugarcane, and kill a creeper, as the gun itself won't last long enough to cover the ammo you've obtained.
You would say the same for flint and steel, their only purpose is to create fire (except igniting creepers, but that's only really useful in creative). Fire itself is limited, so the fault does not lie on the item. Again, the item does not *need* more uses, as it already fulfils its purpose, a renewable fire source.
Just due to the fact that the combat system is lacking does not constitute the reason to introduce just any form or weapon. Those have been suggested, and have been turned down for redundancy, the lack of necessity, or the overall lack of balance within the suggestion.
Let's not be like Germany when they were desperate and openly accept any "solution" without considering what we're dealing with first.
Indeed. I had stated that I would rather accept a feature relating to building, rather than combat. That would be true depending on the feature itself, depending on what it brings in our lacking combat system. If a new pallet of colors is more satisfying than the said combat feature, there is no competition.
Of course. However, it comes down to what is being added, and how would it improve the game. The use of flintlock pistols would present yet another choice to a player, but a new pallet of blocks would present nearly infinite possibilities and uses in builds, presenting even more choice than the former.
If the new combat feature, however, does manage to greatly improve the combat system, then I'll accept the new feature with open arms.
Bugfixes are, of course, not always needed. Those that are not needed instead bring improvements in the optimization aspect, as well as bring the game closer to the what the developers intend Minecraft to be. It's just not the same case with guns. Perhaps they do somewhat aid in granting another choice, but the little improvement it brings is not worth its implementation.
The gun degrades into a broken flintlock. like carrots on sticks.
It would have been better if you'd simply quote me instead of sounding ignorant by adding 'blah' on both ends of my selected quote.
Anyway, now we're talking inconvenience. Every time we want to use the flintlock, we must repair it every time with an anvil. This would use up our XP, as the price for it would rise every time it is repaired, until it is no longer affordable to repair it again. This limits the flintlock's actual use to about 5 repairs. Not to mention that anvils do not last forever, and each repair uses it more. Anvils themselves are not cheap to make.
Either we have to carry an anvil with us all the time just to use the flintlock again (another measly 64 uses), or returning to a home with one in it. Also, you won't have the time to repair a flintlock in a PvP/PvE battle, as you will most likely die from even trying to be stationary from repairing.
I'm Amazed, two weak and stubborn arguements in a row, im gonna leave this from the rules page riiiight here.
"Minecraft is this!
This isn't an issue in it's own right. Many issues arise from what I like to call "hasty denial".
Concepts such as "too futuristic", "overpowered", "not thematic" are not intrinsically bad reasons for denying a reason. However, if they are provided without supporting details, they become SPAM."
"Polling the audience is where you form your reason for approval or denial according to what you see as a norm.
"Not many people like wolves, so I'll say no here."
"Most people do not like this"
"This idea is unpopular"
"Wow, everyone said no to this suggestion, it must be crappy. No."
If you are going to deny something with the above or something similar, don't type anything, press back..."
Just to name a few, I support flintlock pistols, i think they fit in way better than most guns that are suggested.
On-topic- I like the idea of a new weapon, but it feels late for a new weapon now. This may be better off as a mod, or possible a post on the Reddit suggestions. SUPPORT.
sorry about the blah blah blah, I have no ideal how to only quote only certain parts on a post.
Yes. cause I totally spread gold bars on my toast...
Many of the arguments that are against guns being placed in Minecraft are more legitimate than the ones that are for putting guns in Minecraft.
Most of the posts I've seen have made some ridiculous suggested changes that would make the gun over-powered and the ammo easy to get. Then later on changed again to make ammo more "annoying" to get and the gun sort-of useless after being used up. There will never be no right or wrong when it comes to guns. Many people will complain that the gun is over-powered and will suggest nerfs for it. And others will complain over how easy/difficult it is to get the ammo. Then there will be people who would complain over how the gun breaks after many uses and how experience heavy it is to repair the gun only for another 64 uses. I can foresee more complaints in the future for the gun than there was for the Horses. And it will never stop until they remove the gun or nerf it to the point where it becomes less efficient than that of the bow. Then there will be even more complaints over that change.
We have a ranged weapon anyways. Why would we need anything else? Arrows are easy to get and if you are experience with archery on Minecraft, you can do quite a bit more damage. Especially if the bow is enchanted. We really don't need guns in Minecraft and they really don't belong. That is a simple fact. People just need to accept it and move on.
Minecraft doesn't have a specific period. Tnt and Minecarts are there for the same reason some one else has stated. The game is called MINEcraft. Therefore, TNT and Minecarts would be expected to be in the game.
The bow only has two weaknesses from what I have seen. which is 1. Lack of ammo and 2. Not pulling the string back quick enough to launch the arrow. I've managed to pull out an enchanted bow and take down three creepers chasing me in a short amount of time. So creepers are not the problem.
Skeletons in the water are just as easily to deal with if you have a bow. If you had a sword however, it would be pointless as they would shoot you before you could get to them.
We don't need a large weapon variate as this is Minecraft not a first person shooter game. The main focus is mining and surviving.
Again since you where not paying any attention to my post. Even if we do adjust the gun, there will be people complaining that it would be too OP. Or that the ammo is too hard to get. People who hate the idea of guns being in Minecraft will always complain about the gun until Mojang does something about it. And this will be worst than people complaining over the fact that the horses look bad or don't belong in Minecraft. That's notsomething I nor anyone else wants to deal with.
I've seen many great suggestions for the game in the suggestion forum. Any suggestion for guns get almost instantly turned down. People just don't want guns in Minecraft. So instead of suggesting it, perhaps suggest something else.
I still don't agree with the idea of having ****ing guns in a E-rated game -.-
[b]My Suggestions[/b]
Gloops and Glops!
Prepare for loads of sarcasm.
97% of teenagers would cry if they saw Justin Bieber on top of a tower about to jump. If your the 3% who is sitting there with popcorn screaming "DO A BACKFLIP", copy and paste this as your signature[/b]
Minecraft (or at least the Xbox edition) is rated E10+, not E.
By "major" I meant "fixing a game-breaking bug". Although technically the bugfix would only be needed if it prevented the game from running.
"People just don't want guns in Minecraft."
it took udder seconds to forget what was said on the rules, whatever, i can't get though to you, i give up.