Interestingly, we currently do have a locking mechanism for containers. The NBT tag "Lock:string" prevents anyone from opening the chest. The only way to open it is to hold an item with the same "name" as the string specified in the NTB tag. Granted, this is only really piratical for Adventure Maps where chests can be made unable to be mined/destroyed.
For non-adventure mode maps, I assume any lock on a chest would be defeated by simply destroying the chest and letting its contents pop out. In order for a locked chest to be viable, it would need to either non-mineable (which is not ideal, since it disrupts the player's freedom in the world - and in multiplayer can be a griefing tool) or the chest would have to not drop its contents when mined (which might not be possible due to how the game is structured).
I would welcome a separate key item which would be used with the locking NBT tag on chests - and would even like it if that could be extended to doors. However, I don't see it being practical for non-adventure mode maps - and as others have pointed out, the crafting recipe is far too expensive for a single-use item.
Not the json files associated with models, but the newer internal data structure of the blocks. The one which replaced the 4-bit metadata field.
I've searched through google and the forums but am unable to find a definite description on how it works and the benefits it will bestow.
I'm asking because I want to confirm if this means that all blocks are now no longer limited to 4 bits of "extra" data. Does this mean an ordinary, non-tile-entity block can be allocated more than 4 bits worth of data to further define itself?
So let me get this straight... you're tired of having to use the give command in survival (which is cheating) to acquire a block whose only purpose is to execute commands (which are cheats). You're tired of having to cheat in order to cheat?
Command and barrier blocks are intended for map makers and server operators. If you're playing survival, you have no business using either of them. Especially command blocks, which would grant you access to what are basically cheats. Play in creative mode, or enable cheats if you want to do that.
The ability to create spanwers is unlikely to be allowed by Mojang due to their stance on mob farming abuse. It's one thing to find a spawner and build a trap around it for harvesting the mobs. It's a whole other thing to allow players (in survival) to craft these objects.
If the candidate village has fewer than 10 doors or fewer than 20 villagers or the village has not been "stable" (no doors added or removed) for at least 20 ticks (1 second), the next village is considered.
Looking only at the above quote, there are three conditions in play here:
village has less than 10 doors
village has less than 20 villagers
village hasn't been "stable" for 1 second
Nowhere is there mention of the word "AND". All three conditions are separated by an "OR". Therefore, the test would succeed if ANY one of the conditions were true at the time of the test. Even if only one or two conditions passed, it would still make the entire check evaluate to true.
Additionally, the success of this test means the village is marked ineligible for a siege. So in order for a siege to happen, all three conditions would need to be false at the time of the test. Once again, that would mean a village would need to have:
The mechanic you propose is inelegant for what it's trying to accomplish. Extending the field of view (and if you think about it, the player's head) half a meter through a solid object isn't normal. In action, it would feel like the programmers did a sloppy collision job. Especially when you consider that this could be done to normal blocks, allowing the player to no-clip their camera through 1-block walls and see the other side.
Conceptually though, the (limited) ability to see through certain objects might not be a bad idea. But it shouldn't be a natural ability - much less shift+Rightclick.
Instead, consider a new potion whose effect makes certain objects semitransparent. Perhaps we could call it a "potion of awareness". Doors, trapdoors, and paintings become semitransparent allowing you to see beyond them. Perhaps certain mechanisms like pressure plates and tripwire would become slightly highlighted as well - in keeping with the heightened senses theme of the potion. Enemy mobs could also be slightly highlighted in a different color to help make them easier to spot.
"Minecraft is still popular today, but it just doesn't have the feeling it used to have.", as Voxhall said. This sentence perfectly says what's going on with Minecraft.
No, that sentence perfectly states an opinion. One which is highly subjective and vague.
As others have said, this game isn't dying. The Community is constantly coming up with new skins, resource packs, maps, and mods. But perhaps even more importantly, the developers are actively adding to the game every day. That is the very definition of "thriving" (the exact opposite of dying).
Be careful not to confuse graphical capability with graphical style. The two mean very different things.
From what I remember, Minecraft started out with "programmer graphics" which is where the developers have crudely drawn/modeled assets in a game while it's in the early stages. In fact, Minecraft was actually intended to have more refined character models made by Dock (Hayden Scott-Baron). You can see what they looked like on the wiki (search for Rana, Black Steve, and Beast Boy). At one point notch also posted a video on youtube showing that he could have models from other games rendering and animated inside Minecraft. So Minecraft does in fact have fairly decent graphical capability.
However, Dock left the team early on and the temporary placeholder assets Notch had put in remained. As time passed and Notch continued development of the game, he and the community grew to like the style. It thus became the accepted aesthetic of the game and has remained to this day. But to say they have not changed is not accurate. Numerous textures have been refined, altered, or outright changed. New models, less blocky than the original mobs have been added.
In my own personal opinion, I really like the minimalistic approach this game takes to its graphical style. I actually think some of the newer mobs border the line on being too complex looking, but that's just me.
To say they can "be better" is a meaningless statement if you don't say how.
The problem isn't the fancy graphics on leaf blocks. If that were the case, then your computer would have the same problem in any forest, not just jungles.
No, the actual problem with jungles is that they cause loads of block updates due to a bug.
All wood/tree blocks have an invisible region around them which sustains leaf blocks. Remove the wood, and the leaf blocks gradually decay away. The bug is that jungle trees spawn with a leaf canopy that is outside this range. So when you are in range of the jungle, the game starts working hard to clean up all the leaf blocks it thinks should be decaying. With the amount of trees in a jungle, this causes a lot of updates all at once - hence the drop in performance.
You misunderstand. My diagram here was a suggestion on how to redo the original skin layout in such a way that it would grant us space for texturing both arms and legs while still fitting within the 64x32 image size. Also note that this suggestion is several years old.
Snapshop 14w03a introduced a different take on what I proposed. They use a completely different mapping which also includes extra space for additional "hat layers" for the rest of the body. It is entirely different from the layout I thought up of.
For someone who thinks automation is equivalent to item duplication, Jeb is making it surprisingly easy to make fully automatic wheat farms.
I think the major difference here is that wheat is a renewable resource already. Iron and gold, however, are not - or at least, not suppose to be. I think the fact that mobs sometimes drop them combined with the mechanization of mass farming those mobs tends towards the feeling of item duping from the dev team. I can sympathize with that.
I always thought it was silly that you could waltz in, steal their food, and then sell it back to them. Having villagers actually harvest their own crops would make more sense to me.
0
In this case, I think you really should seek out the creator and ask permission to use the work, even if it is a parody.
Your statement about modifying a work just so you can escape permission is dubious. I wouldn't do it.
0
Chicken Jockeys.
0
For non-adventure mode maps, I assume any lock on a chest would be defeated by simply destroying the chest and letting its contents pop out. In order for a locked chest to be viable, it would need to either non-mineable (which is not ideal, since it disrupts the player's freedom in the world - and in multiplayer can be a griefing tool) or the chest would have to not drop its contents when mined (which might not be possible due to how the game is structured).
I would welcome a separate key item which would be used with the locking NBT tag on chests - and would even like it if that could be extended to doors. However, I don't see it being practical for non-adventure mode maps - and as others have pointed out, the crafting recipe is far too expensive for a single-use item.
0
I've searched through google and the forums but am unable to find a definite description on how it works and the benefits it will bestow.
I'm asking because I want to confirm if this means that all blocks are now no longer limited to 4 bits of "extra" data. Does this mean an ordinary, non-tile-entity block can be allocated more than 4 bits worth of data to further define itself?
3
Command and barrier blocks are intended for map makers and server operators. If you're playing survival, you have no business using either of them. Especially command blocks, which would grant you access to what are basically cheats. Play in creative mode, or enable cheats if you want to do that.
The ability to create spanwers is unlikely to be allowed by Mojang due to their stance on mob farming abuse. It's one thing to find a spawner and build a trap around it for harvesting the mobs. It's a whole other thing to allow players (in survival) to craft these objects.
1
Looking only at the above quote, there are three conditions in play here:
- village has less than 10 doors
- village has less than 20 villagers
- village hasn't been "stable" for 1 second
Nowhere is there mention of the word "AND". All three conditions are separated by an "OR". Therefore, the test would succeed if ANY one of the conditions were true at the time of the test. Even if only one or two conditions passed, it would still make the entire check evaluate to true.Additionally, the success of this test means the village is marked ineligible for a siege. So in order for a siege to happen, all three conditions would need to be false at the time of the test. Once again, that would mean a village would need to have:
1
Conceptually though, the (limited) ability to see through certain objects might not be a bad idea. But it shouldn't be a natural ability - much less shift+Rightclick.
Instead, consider a new potion whose effect makes certain objects semitransparent. Perhaps we could call it a "potion of awareness". Doors, trapdoors, and paintings become semitransparent allowing you to see beyond them. Perhaps certain mechanisms like pressure plates and tripwire would become slightly highlighted as well - in keeping with the heightened senses theme of the potion. Enemy mobs could also be slightly highlighted in a different color to help make them easier to spot.
1
No, that sentence perfectly states an opinion. One which is highly subjective and vague.
As others have said, this game isn't dying. The Community is constantly coming up with new skins, resource packs, maps, and mods. But perhaps even more importantly, the developers are actively adding to the game every day. That is the very definition of "thriving" (the exact opposite of dying).
What is it with all the unfounded doom and gloom?
3
From what I remember, Minecraft started out with "programmer graphics" which is where the developers have crudely drawn/modeled assets in a game while it's in the early stages. In fact, Minecraft was actually intended to have more refined character models made by Dock (Hayden Scott-Baron). You can see what they looked like on the wiki (search for Rana, Black Steve, and Beast Boy). At one point notch also posted a video on youtube showing that he could have models from other games rendering and animated inside Minecraft. So Minecraft does in fact have fairly decent graphical capability.
However, Dock left the team early on and the temporary placeholder assets Notch had put in remained. As time passed and Notch continued development of the game, he and the community grew to like the style. It thus became the accepted aesthetic of the game and has remained to this day. But to say they have not changed is not accurate. Numerous textures have been refined, altered, or outright changed. New models, less blocky than the original mobs have been added.
In my own personal opinion, I really like the minimalistic approach this game takes to its graphical style. I actually think some of the newer mobs border the line on being too complex looking, but that's just me.
To say they can "be better" is a meaningless statement if you don't say how.
0
No, the actual problem with jungles is that they cause loads of block updates due to a bug.
All wood/tree blocks have an invisible region around them which sustains leaf blocks. Remove the wood, and the leaf blocks gradually decay away. The bug is that jungle trees spawn with a leaf canopy that is outside this range. So when you are in range of the jungle, the game starts working hard to clean up all the leaf blocks it thinks should be decaying. With the amount of trees in a jungle, this causes a lot of updates all at once - hence the drop in performance.
0
Snapshop 14w03a introduced a different take on what I proposed. They use a completely different mapping which also includes extra space for additional "hat layers" for the rest of the body. It is entirely different from the layout I thought up of.
1
I think the major difference here is that wheat is a renewable resource already. Iron and gold, however, are not - or at least, not suppose to be. I think the fact that mobs sometimes drop them combined with the mechanization of mass farming those mobs tends towards the feeling of item duping from the dev team. I can sympathize with that.
0
2
10
The beatings will continue until morale improves!