OK, purely aesthetic creations is excactly what we are talking about here, the challenge is to show a build that looks better in MC than FC, dungeon generators do not do that, Halo 1 was ripped apart by reviewers and the community because the internals were always the same, and you offer a small dungean that no matter what shape it takes has the same megadrive looking texture pack throughout, I would be bored with this after the 5th playthrough, I have built several worlds that take hours to travel through and have different visual designs around almost every corner you take, this catches the eye and keeps the interest, That dungeon offers nothing different in visual design, I wouldn't be excited to see the next laytout, because i know excacly what it will look like. You have to do much better to prove your point, much much better.
Uh, no. He asked for "particularly awesome Minecraft creations you feel are better than anything Fortresscraft can do". He did not mention aesthetics anywhere.
Also, the point of the dungeon is not the aesthetics for keeping things interesting. It's supposed to be what monster or bit of loot lies behind each corner. It's supposed to be about whether you fight a zombie or blaze, or find a diamond or a bit of food. And unlike Fortresscraft, there's suspense to it, because there's a risk in every turn you take. You may end up finding a Blaze, which is extremely dangerous, or find a diamond and be able to craft a top-tier weapon.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Science isn't a matter of WHY, it's a matter of WHY NOT? WHY is so much of our science dangerous? Why don't you marry safe science if you love it so much? In fact, why don't you invent a special safety door that won't slam you in the butt on your way out? BECAUSE YOU ARE FIRED!" -Cave Johnson
Meh, It would still be better creating a massive static dungeon, built better using many different textures and then having random enemies and loot spawn in, and have the pistons drop into random sections if you want the random rooms. but if you think that that dungeon beats FC builds, good luck to you, and once again completely ingnored the fact you were completely incorrect about the airship, which i will add could not be reproduced in MC, and that goes for all my builds and all the other top FC builders worlds also, and you also forget that survival is not what FC is about and has not been coded for, so any survival elements are moot anyway, So stop offering stuff we already state is better in MC and give use better LOOKING builds and HIGHER detail builds than FC. FC is a creative tool, you say it is clone then only offer the parts in MC that are that are the same, creative only. now go get em.
Why are we suddenly discussing builds that merely look better? Is that because aesthetics are FC's only merit construction-wise?
If you can, for some reason, read the fine print stating that only aesthetic builds count, then yes, you probably would win in that case. However, you have no evidence that that's the case.
In the meantime, since we're discussing builds that do not utilize survival, here's a fully-functional slot machine, ran entirely by pigs and redstone:
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Science isn't a matter of WHY, it's a matter of WHY NOT? WHY is so much of our science dangerous? Why don't you marry safe science if you love it so much? In fact, why don't you invent a special safety door that won't slam you in the butt on your way out? BECAUSE YOU ARE FIRED!" -Cave Johnson
"If you can, for some reason, read the fine print stating that only aesthetic builds count, then yes, you probably would win in that case."
Hurrah we agree, moving on then.
Looks like you didn't read the entire thing.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Science isn't a matter of WHY, it's a matter of WHY NOT? WHY is so much of our science dangerous? Why don't you marry safe science if you love it so much? In fact, why don't you invent a special safety door that won't slam you in the butt on your way out? BECAUSE YOU ARE FIRED!" -Cave Johnson
"Craft" in the name...
Low-res, cube-based graphics...
Strikingly similar terrain generation...
*sigh*
The thing that ticks me off is the dev said this was nowhere near inspired from Minecraft. I recall he also said Minecraft is crap compared to FC.
FC may have a bunch of different blocks, but there is no redstone. Redstone can actually put purpose into builds. Minecraft has much more functionality and more replayability in my opinion.
"Science isn't a matter of WHY, it's a matter of WHY NOT? WHY is so much of our science dangerous? Why don't you marry safe science if you love it so much? In fact, why don't you invent a special safety door that won't slam you in the butt on your way out? BECAUSE YOU ARE FIRED!" -Cave Johnson
1) FortressCraft has always been a creative artistic tool to build fantastic worlds, thats worlds! not small uninteresting boxes with functionality added, something that you lot decide to ignore constantly.
hence my addition to this post due to the number of comments by MC community stating they could build what I build better in Minecraft, notice they state they can build what I build better, not that they can build a slot machine or a dungeon with pistons in it, they can build what I build better, SO everything you have shown me still does not show a build like mine built better in MINECRAFT.
Uhhhhhh.... no. I never stated that I could do what you did better. I don't think anyone else has stated that either.
Oh, but wait, you're building worlds! (/sarcasm) The term "worlds" is a word commonly thrown around in the gaming industry. There's one iOS game that defines an in-game world as everything you can see on your screen, which is a very small space. I'd also like to point out that Fortresscraft's maps are finite, and far smaller than what technical limitations could allow. Minecraft's worlds, on the other hand, are as close to infinite as any ordinary computer could allow. So, in this case, Minecraft could never allow you to build an entire world, because there's always more of that world to build in.
2) you want to save the Devs comments to show what a d*ck he is, hahaha, once again you show how you ignore all the facts and show how hypocritical you are as a community. Everything he said is totaly true very harsh but totaly true, then you completely ignore the person it was aimed out who posted a complete pack of lies, well done clap clap must be because HE likes minecraft is it. (and dont even attempt to bring the proffessional word into this either, with the crap that dev has had to put up with from you lot of wasters)
Really? I've seen other devs put up with even worse crap than he has. Those developers have put it to rest with something mature. Redigit, the developer of Terraria, did so by stating "it's a genre now". Once he stated that, people noticed that his game brought something new to the table. Your developer, however, said this:
Because stating your game is better totally won't fan the flames, right?
[quote]3) MY vid was put up to show that MC has been credited in fortresscraft thus showing what a lying little turd burglar 0strichGuy11 is. The video is an old old video I put up when your up ther own backsides community were constantly ripping into my work and spreading lies about the dev, and all the immature annotations were comments made by your ever so honest ever so mature community to show the crap I had to put up with, so please crawl back under the rock you spawned from as anything you show or say is tarnished by hypocritical claptrap.
So, those are actual, word-for word quotes? "Go on, citation f'king needed."
The Card Players by Paul Cézanne, which was sold for more than $250 million in 2011
Soviet Dream Car (1974)
Only for real retro cars lovers. The legendary VAZ 2101 car (“kopeika”) with 40,000 km mileage (!!!), the cherished dream of the Brezhnev Era Soviet bigwigs, may become the beloved item of your collection. .....
£1500
There's your aesthetics against functionality argument
So, a normal car that looks nice costs $250 million, while an extremely fast one is far cheaper. I don't see your argument.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Science isn't a matter of WHY, it's a matter of WHY NOT? WHY is so much of our science dangerous? Why don't you marry safe science if you love it so much? In fact, why don't you invent a special safety door that won't slam you in the butt on your way out? BECAUSE YOU ARE FIRED!" -Cave Johnson
Jeez, why can't I form an opinion off of stuff I heard? Misconception is misconception.
The reason why i don't like FC is just because the buildings don't serve much purpose. I'm not much of a guy who just wants to build, I like to build to achieve. Like in Minecraft, you build to live in it and survive from creatures.
EDIT: Wow, I just watched the videos. A bit immature, can't you say? Again, it was a misconception. Our rambling isn't going anywhere as we both prefer different styles. You prefer making stuff look pretty while I prefer functionality.
Uh, no. He asked for "particularly awesome Minecraft creations you feel are better than anything Fortresscraft can do". He did not mention aesthetics anywhere.
Also, the point of the dungeon is not the aesthetics for keeping things interesting. It's supposed to be what monster or bit of loot lies behind each corner. It's supposed to be about whether you fight a zombie or blaze, or find a diamond or a bit of food. And unlike Fortresscraft, there's suspense to it, because there's a risk in every turn you take. You may end up finding a Blaze, which is extremely dangerous, or find a diamond and be able to craft a top-tier weapon.
Why are we suddenly discussing builds that merely look better? Is that because aesthetics are FC's only merit construction-wise?
If you can, for some reason, read the fine print stating that only aesthetic builds count, then yes, you probably would win in that case. However, you have no evidence that that's the case.
In the meantime, since we're discussing builds that do not utilize survival, here's a fully-functional slot machine, ran entirely by pigs and redstone:
Looks like you didn't read the entire thing.
Low-res, cube-based graphics...
Strikingly similar terrain generation...
*sigh*
The thing that ticks me off is the dev said this was nowhere near inspired from Minecraft. I recall he also said Minecraft is crap compared to FC.
FC may have a bunch of different blocks, but there is no redstone. Redstone can actually put purpose into builds. Minecraft has much more functionality and more replayability in my opinion.
While you're at it, can you explain to me why purely aesthetic builds are better than functional ones?
Oh, wait I know: because that's the only thing Fortresscraft is capable of doing. Other than, you know..... mile-long conveyor belts.
The annotations between builds are just immature on your part, by the way.
Uhhhhhh.... no. I never stated that I could do what you did better. I don't think anyone else has stated that either.
Oh, but wait, you're building worlds! (/sarcasm) The term "worlds" is a word commonly thrown around in the gaming industry. There's one iOS game that defines an in-game world as everything you can see on your screen, which is a very small space. I'd also like to point out that Fortresscraft's maps are finite, and far smaller than what technical limitations could allow. Minecraft's worlds, on the other hand, are as close to infinite as any ordinary computer could allow. So, in this case, Minecraft could never allow you to build an entire world, because there's always more of that world to build in.
Really? I've seen other devs put up with even worse crap than he has. Those developers have put it to rest with something mature. Redigit, the developer of Terraria, did so by stating "it's a genre now". Once he stated that, people noticed that his game brought something new to the table. Your developer, however, said this:
" href="">[/quote">»
Because stating your game is better totally won't fan the flames, right?
[quote]3) MY vid was put up to show that MC has been credited in fortresscraft thus showing what a lying little turd burglar 0strichGuy11 is.
The video is an old old video I put up when your up ther own backsides community were constantly ripping into my work and spreading lies about the dev, and all the immature annotations were comments made by your ever so honest ever so mature community to show the crap I had to put up with, so please crawl back under the rock you spawned from as anything you show or say is tarnished by hypocritical claptrap.
So, those are actual, word-for word quotes? "Go on, citation f'king needed."
The Card Players by Paul Cézanne, which was sold for more than $250 million in 2011
Soviet Dream Car (1974)
Only for real retro cars lovers. The legendary VAZ 2101 car (“kopeika”) with 40,000 km mileage (!!!), the cherished dream of the Brezhnev Era Soviet bigwigs, may become the beloved item of your collection. .....
£1500
There's your aesthetics against functionality argument
So, a normal car that looks nice costs $250 million, while an extremely fast one is far cheaper. I don't see your argument.
Wow. A bit heated there. Earlier in the topic, I heard a lot of talk about you saying that kind of stuff that I stated earlier.
And how do you say I made up the rumor even though you have answered these earlier?
Jeez, why can't I form an opinion off of stuff I heard? Misconception is misconception.
The reason why i don't like FC is just because the buildings don't serve much purpose. I'm not much of a guy who just wants to build, I like to build to achieve. Like in Minecraft, you build to live in it and survive from creatures.
EDIT: Wow, I just watched the videos. A bit immature, can't you say? Again, it was a misconception. Our rambling isn't going anywhere as we both prefer different styles. You prefer making stuff look pretty while I prefer functionality.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Retired Staff"Programmers never repeat themselves. They loop."