Good idea. That Ygdrasel guy needs to quit spamming this thread, he's either trolling or hasn't thought this through at all.
The gas would need to be visible, like extra-transparent water or nether portal.
Gas pockets would make digging more exciting. Right now the only digging-related danger is lava, which is slow-moving, but very deadly. Hitting a gas pocket would be something to be paranoid about. You'd need to have a way out in order to prevent injury, or damage to items if the gas was corrosive.
If the gas could ignite, it would make players more cautious about where they placed torches. Since the gas would fill up a certain number of air blocks, long thin mineshafts would be dangerous since you would have to run twice as far away as in a shaft that was twice as wide.
That croc has too many polygons, but it's not that bad. I thought I saw some other models of crocs, too. I think you should do models and stuff in different threads, and link to them.
You don't want a smaller aggro range on bears or something about them being nocturnal, you want "territorial", which means that once you run far enough away from where you met them, they stop chasing you and go back to that spot. You might also want "carnivorous", which means it's not just hostile towards you, but towards everything. The "parent creature" thing doesn't make sense, you should provide all the information in the creature's own entry, don't say "here's how it differs", and add "variant of [creature link]".
You can improve the presentation of your post by removing a bunch of extra stuff. For example, the "Link" text beside all of your creatures. Just put the color tag inside the url tag. Then, remove the line breaks:
Arctic Foxes - Arctic Hares - Penguins -Seals - etc.
Now I don't have to scroll for ages. If you don't know the drops, don't put "Drops: Unsure". Just omit that. Delete the words "Spawn Conditions". You could have something like this:
Alligators. Daytime carnivore. Spawns in swamp in shallow water. Drops skin.
Pics: [links to pics and models]
Threads: [use the search function to find threads about alligators]
If you make this post a giant index of all the mobs people keep suggesting, it could be pretty useful.
Great model, especially the one that's looking sideways. Perhaps they could spend much of their time splashing around in lava pools, so as to keep their temperature up.
Ok. about the sexist thing, that bugged me. hes making it simple so we dont have to reprogam twice the mobs. Gosh. Do you know how hard it was to program the 1's there already is?! If we made it randomly half girls and half boys and they could both me every job, hed have to program all of them again.
Ok, let's go over programming mobs, if I understand correctly, when we program 1 mob (let's say the male one), and then we go to the female one, which will do everything the male one can, we just copy and paste the code, change the graphics for that code, and change anything else that would need to be changed.
Might be a bit tedious, but I'm pretty sure people with the basic Java understanding would be able to do it, so the lead programmer could work on other stuff
Anyways we would probably just work on one NPC mob (the male or female one) and then when we are done everything for them, we would work on the female NPC mob (copy paste, edit), and then we would work on the Biome Graphics (more copy paste and editing, except it will just be graphics)
The platypus is nocturnal, and you've got it spawning during day. The hippo and bear are extremely dangerous, and you've got them neutral. The fruit bat is a festering pool of disease, I wouldn't go near any apple that it dropped, and I'm pretty sure that they don't usually carry fruit around. This might be a useful list if you looked these animals up on wikipedia and gave the relevant details. Instead it seems that you made things up. Anyone can make random guesses about "spawn conditions" (habitat) and hostility. And why is there an availability section for each animal?
That wouldn't be a problem if there were reasons to include these animals, but there aren't. Diversity is only diversity if the animals are behaving in novel, interesting ways. At the moment you've got 200 variations on the cow.
My advice would be to make a comma-separated list of all these animals. Sort that list into a few paragraphs. African animals, ruminants, domesticated animals, small woodland animals. Don't include the same animal in two different groups. Then, start a new thread, and ask people which animals they want to see in minecraft and why.
One of the better things to come out of this thread is a defense of unpopular ideas. This is probably because there's a world of difference between the sort of person who yells "Notch should add guns" (and those who reply "No"), and someone who's thought things through.
Minecraft has gunpowder, which is the most technologically complex part of a gun. The accuracy on these things would be horrendous (a square barrel can't make a bullet spin). If they fired iron bars (powder, cotton, iron?), then they would not be overused.
The main problem is that nobody has introduced a novel game mechanic. Guns are simply bows that fire straight, far, and fast. This might make ghast hunting substantially more interesting. Perhaps gunshots could make creepers detonate. Or shots could destroy blocks, such as leaves or glass. If guns could activate switches or plates, they could be useful in puzzle games.
Looks great, as usual. I like how the ears are still there on the rolled up version. Perhaps they should be kickable, or rollable. After the roll, they would move as if dizzy. Games of soccer or armadillo-ball could be had. Wikipedia says that armadillos can be used as musical instruments. There is also this:
Sounds like Ravenholm. You're asking for another version of the cactus.
Source or cram it bro.
Just look it up.
The conversion of electrical energy into mechanical energy by a electromagnetic means was demonstrated by the British scientist Michael Faraday in 1821.
The earliest evidence of a railway was a 6-kilometre (3.7 mi) Diolkos wagonway, which transported boats across the Corinth isthmus in Greece during the 6th century BC.
This thing is paralyzingly cute. I like the smile implied by the fur tones, and the way it's sitting on its tail. Variant:platypus might be funny.
I recall someone asking for more hostile monsters a while ago, shortly before you made the troll. Those are great, leagues better than any other models I've seen on the forum, and about on par with what minecraft has, and often better. (They're fun, and I think it's easier for people to imagine interacting with those things because they tend to have exciting game mechanics.) The cute stuff you make is even better. If I had to pick top three of all, I'd say beaver, octopus, and blowfish, though the dragon and the bird are . It would be great to see more models of the seemingly harmless variety. Perhaps a porcupine, baby seal, wombat, raccoon, parrots, or anteater.
Cute mobs can have interesting mechanics too. The porcupine could, in accordance with myth, shoot quills. The raccoon could climb into unsecured chests. When the player clicks to open the chest, the inventory screen does not open. Instead, the player sees a raccoon suddenly emerge, and run off, scattering a few items behind it, carrying expensive and shiny items (diamonds, foods, watches, buckets). It would run up the nearest tree. Hitting it once could make it drop all carried items. Anteaters might stand on their hind legs, spread their arms, and become both invincible and immobile. I have no idea what wombats, seals, or parrots could do, but I'm sure there's potential there too.
Firstly, how could it identify between a tree, and a player made structure, or would it matter? Would it check if the number of logs above and below it, and if it's => 4 then it will cut it down? What if a player made structure is like that - I use a similar structure in my towers to light areas away from walls and mounted light sources - and would therefore be a bit of a nuisance, especially if they're only meant to destroy trees.
Bear in mind there are many permutations of how trees are formed, and especially if there are other trees nearby and the leaves merge, it can get complicated.
Secondly, when they build the dam. This is the hard part.
1) If it's a tall log, and it's standing without being attached to blocks beside it, it's a tree as far as any beaver is concerned. Houses would be safe.
2) It's really good that you're considering the various problems. However, these are only problems for a very basic implementation. All you need to do is find a river, or a pool, and set that as the 'move wood to here' location. Blocks of water with sunlight on top are surface blocks. If count surface blocks in a 16x16 (32x23?) radius is low, then it's in a pond or river. Work from there. It's actually nearly trivial to find rivers that, if dammed, would lead to a pool forming.
Well made, as usual. I think the top side could use some detail, and the legs look awesome. Flat teeth look a bit... insubstantial. The ones you did for the salamander look much better.
I wonder how blocky teeth scattered around the inside of the mouth would look on the glutton.
What program is it you're using to make these awesome graphics?
It's a bit like looking at a Picasso or a van Gogh and saying "wow, I wonder what kinda paints and brushes that guy used, I gotta get me some of those". Hint: it ain't the paints, and it ain't the program.
0
The gas would need to be visible, like extra-transparent water or nether portal.
Gas pockets would make digging more exciting. Right now the only digging-related danger is lava, which is slow-moving, but very deadly. Hitting a gas pocket would be something to be paranoid about. You'd need to have a way out in order to prevent injury, or damage to items if the gas was corrosive.
If the gas could ignite, it would make players more cautious about where they placed torches. Since the gas would fill up a certain number of air blocks, long thin mineshafts would be dangerous since you would have to run twice as far away as in a shaft that was twice as wide.
0
You don't want a smaller aggro range on bears or something about them being nocturnal, you want "territorial", which means that once you run far enough away from where you met them, they stop chasing you and go back to that spot. You might also want "carnivorous", which means it's not just hostile towards you, but towards everything. The "parent creature" thing doesn't make sense, you should provide all the information in the creature's own entry, don't say "here's how it differs", and add "variant of [creature link]".
Read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Database_normalization
You can improve the presentation of your post by removing a bunch of extra stuff. For example, the "Link" text beside all of your creatures. Just put the color tag inside the url tag. Then, remove the line breaks:
Arctic Foxes - Arctic Hares - Penguins -Seals - etc.
Now I don't have to scroll for ages. If you don't know the drops, don't put "Drops: Unsure". Just omit that. Delete the words "Spawn Conditions". You could have something like this:
Alligators. Daytime carnivore. Spawns in swamp in shallow water. Drops skin.
Pics: [links to pics and models]
Threads: [use the search function to find threads about alligators]
If you make this post a giant index of all the mobs people keep suggesting, it could be pretty useful.
0
0
0
There's your complete, non-sexist gender code.
0
The platypus is nocturnal, and you've got it spawning during day. The hippo and bear are extremely dangerous, and you've got them neutral. The fruit bat is a festering pool of disease, I wouldn't go near any apple that it dropped, and I'm pretty sure that they don't usually carry fruit around. This might be a useful list if you looked these animals up on wikipedia and gave the relevant details. Instead it seems that you made things up. Anyone can make random guesses about "spawn conditions" (habitat) and hostility. And why is there an availability section for each animal?
That wouldn't be a problem if there were reasons to include these animals, but there aren't. Diversity is only diversity if the animals are behaving in novel, interesting ways. At the moment you've got 200 variations on the cow.
My advice would be to make a comma-separated list of all these animals. Sort that list into a few paragraphs. African animals, ruminants, domesticated animals, small woodland animals. Don't include the same animal in two different groups. Then, start a new thread, and ask people which animals they want to see in minecraft and why.
Here you go:
Rain forest biome, Day, Koalas, Monkeys, Sloths, Tree Frogs, Ents, Wood Nymphs, Apes, Night, Black Widows, Constrictor Snakes, Panthers, Rain Forest Creepers, Viper Snakes, Forest biome, Day, Beavers, Doe, Foxes, Fruit Bats, Lizards, Rabbits, Red Squirrels, Boars, Ents, Raccoons, Skunks, Walking Mushrooms, Wood Nymphs, Bears, Deer, Porcupines, Night, Owls, Banana Spiders, Forest Creepers, Wolves, Woods biome, Day, Beavers, Ducks, Foxes, Possums, Squirrels, Boars, Moose, Raccoons, Skunks, Bears, Porcupines, Night, Owls, Regular Spiders, Forest Creepers, Wolves, Day, Chickens, Cows, Ducks, Llamas, Pigs, Possums, Rabbits, Roosters, Sheep, Squirrels, Weasels, Raccoons, Rams, Bulls, Night, Regular Spiders, Forest Creepers, Wolves, Savanna biome, Day, Buffalos, Flamingos, Gazelles, Giraffes, Zebras, Lionesses, Lions, Elephants, Hippopotamuses, Caimans, Cheetahs, Rhinos, Night, Wolf Spiders, Hyenas, Plains Creepers, Chickens, Cows, Llamas, Pigs, Possums, Rabbits, Roosters, Sheep, Frilled Lizards, Kangaroos, Platypuses, Rams, Bulls, Ostriches, Night, Owls, Tarantulas, Plains Creepers, Swamp biome, Day, Flamingos, Frogs, Poison Dart Frogs, Alligators, Piranhas, Night, Marsh Spiders, Piranhas, Snakes, Swamp Creepers, Taiga biome, Day, Arctic Foxes, Arctic Hares, Penguins, Seals, Musk Oxen, White Wolves, Snow Leopards, Walrus, Night, Snow Owls, Snow Spiders, Arctic Creepers, Ice Giants, Tundra biome, Day, Caribous, Penguins, Seals, Wooly Mammoths, Polar Bears, Walrus, Night, Arctic Creepers, Ice Giants, Desert biome, Day, Camels, Desert Foxes, Horned Lizards, Scorpions, Night, Camel Spiders, Anubis Warriors, Desert Creepers, Desert Snakes, Mummies, Sandworms, Day, Butterflies, Goats, Horses, Jackalopes, Mice/Rats, Pandas, Regular ol’ Birds, Seagulls, Tortoises, Bumble Bees, Cats, Crabs, Dogs, Large Eagles, Phoenixes, Bobcats, Gryphons, Night, Skeletal Dogs, Skeletons, Spider Jockey, Trolls, Vampires, Wasps, Werewolves, Wraiths, Zombies, Unlit caves, Giant Moles, Cave Creepers, Gargoyles, Golems, Mimic Chests, Minotaurs, Ogres, Skeletons, Slimes, Stagnant Skeletons, Trolls, Vampires, Werewolves, Wraiths, Zombies, Underwater, Surface Day, Bottlenose Dolphins, Manatees, Otters, Rainbow Fish, Regular ol’ Fish, Sea Turtles, Seahorses, Squids, Narwhals, Puffer Fish, Sailfish, Swordfish, Surface Night, Jellyfish, Barracudas, Puffer Fish, Sea Creepers, Sharks, Deep Underwater, Giant Groupers, Giant Oysters, Whales, Giant Squids, Narwhals, Plesiosaurs, Sailfish, Swordfish, Anglerfish, Kraken, Orcas, Sea Snakes, Imps, Zombie Pigmen, Banshees, Charbone Archers, Ghasts, Hell Hounds, Nether Hydras, Undead Dragons, Various Demons, Dragons, Fairies, Dwarves, Goblins, Pigmen, Orcs
0
Minecraft has gunpowder, which is the most technologically complex part of a gun. The accuracy on these things would be horrendous (a square barrel can't make a bullet spin). If they fired iron bars (powder, cotton, iron?), then they would not be overused.
The main problem is that nobody has introduced a novel game mechanic. Guns are simply bows that fire straight, far, and fast. This might make ghast hunting substantially more interesting. Perhaps gunshots could make creepers detonate. Or shots could destroy blocks, such as leaves or glass. If guns could activate switches or plates, they could be useful in puzzle games.
0
Why these, or what are you imagining these would be like?
1
The usefulness of this is self-explanatory.
0
Just look it up.
0
This thing is paralyzingly cute. I like the smile implied by the fur tones, and the way it's sitting on its tail. Variant:platypus might be funny.
I recall someone asking for more hostile monsters a while ago, shortly before you made the troll. Those are great, leagues better than any other models I've seen on the forum, and about on par with what minecraft has, and often better. (They're fun, and I think it's easier for people to imagine interacting with those things because they tend to have exciting game mechanics.) The cute stuff you make is even better. If I had to pick top three of all, I'd say beaver, octopus, and blowfish, though the dragon and the bird are . It would be great to see more models of the seemingly harmless variety. Perhaps a porcupine, baby seal, wombat, raccoon, parrots, or anteater.
Cute mobs can have interesting mechanics too. The porcupine could, in accordance with myth, shoot quills. The raccoon could climb into unsecured chests. When the player clicks to open the chest, the inventory screen does not open. Instead, the player sees a raccoon suddenly emerge, and run off, scattering a few items behind it, carrying expensive and shiny items (diamonds, foods, watches, buckets). It would run up the nearest tree. Hitting it once could make it drop all carried items. Anteaters might stand on their hind legs, spread their arms, and become both invincible and immobile. I have no idea what wombats, seals, or parrots could do, but I'm sure there's potential there too.
0
1) If it's a tall log, and it's standing without being attached to blocks beside it, it's a tree as far as any beaver is concerned. Houses would be safe.
2) It's really good that you're considering the various problems. However, these are only problems for a very basic implementation. All you need to do is find a river, or a pool, and set that as the 'move wood to here' location. Blocks of water with sunlight on top are surface blocks. If count surface blocks in a 16x16 (32x23?) radius is low, then it's in a pond or river. Work from there. It's actually nearly trivial to find rivers that, if dammed, would lead to a pool forming.
0
Well made, as usual. I think the top side could use some detail, and the legs look awesome. Flat teeth look a bit... insubstantial. The ones you did for the salamander look much better.
I wonder how blocky teeth scattered around the inside of the mouth would look on the glutton.
0
It's a bit like looking at a Picasso or a van Gogh and saying "wow, I wonder what kinda paints and brushes that guy used, I gotta get me some of those". Hint: it ain't the paints, and it ain't the program.
0