Quote from TheLaserHawk
I like how if somebody finds it a bit odd that children are springing forth out of two male-looking characters, it's immediately considered "gay panic". I'm sure there was no anti-gay implications from the people suggesting female villagers ...
I was responding more to these two posts, not to people who just think it looks "a bit odd", which I'd agree with. I don't think "ew gay" comments are a good way to articulate that thought.
Quote from TheLaserHawk
I'd like to see female villagers, if only for the visual variety. And also for the babies to look like children instead of shrunken villagers. It would just be more interesting.
I wouldn't mind gendered villagers (and infants that look like infants) either, for the same reasons you mentioned - it'd add visual variety. I just doubt it's a high development priority to implement them solely because some players want the villagers to seem "less gay".
1
Given that sheep occasionally eat tall grass, they might eventually convert a grassy prairie into barren plains since tall grass doesn't self-regenerate. Perhaps it'd make sense to give grass a way to regenerate by making it so skeletons 'fertilize' grass blocks (like bonemeal does) in certain biomes after they burn to death in sunlight.
I don't think there's a need for them to drop bonemeal as an intermediate step - just skip to the fertilizing. And given how often skeletons die, the radius of fertilization should be much smaller than it is for bonemeal. Maybe just one block.
Of course, tall grass could just be made to grow spontaneously in certain biomes. But this might take up a lot of processing power if the game needs to keep track of which grass blocks have or don't have tall grass and how long it needs to wait before each grass block produces tall grass. The skeleton idea seems better in terms of keeping processor demands low.
0
I run my own (small) server on my computer, and I basically do what SkyJP does, except for the last step. Instead of connecting to the server with the IP as 'localhost', I go to http://icanhazip.com/ (on the computer with the server on it) and have my friends log on with the IP that shows up there.
It's unlikely that a stranger who doesn't know your IP address will log onto your server, but if you'd prefer to be on the safe side, you can edit the file "white-list.txt" and add your family's Minecraft usernames as a list without any punctuation, each username on its own line. (If there isn't already a white-list.txt, you can create your own, as it's just a plain .txt file with the list.) Then you change "white-list=false" to "white-list=true" in the server.properties file. This page describes other ways you can modify/customize your server by editing the server.properties file: http://www.minecraft...rver.properties
Also, if you're on a Mac, then running the server's a little more complicated than what SkyJP explained, but still pretty simple. To run the server file, you just open up the Terminal (in Applications/Utilities), type "cd " and drag the Minecraft Server folder into the Terminal window, hit return, then copy and paste the following code (without the quotes) into the terminal window and hit return again: "java -Xmx1024M -Xms1024M -jar minecraft_server.jar nogui". To stop the server, just type "stop" and hit return again.
0
(Also, if you head directly west from the sand well and temple on the lower left area of the map, you'll eventually reach a village next to a jungle.)
0
I'm not really sure I see why this would be a "good add," considering how the stars do move at night in the real world, albeit very slowly from our perspective.
Now, the stars moving slower than the sun and moon do, that I could get behind.
0
I wouldn't say nobody - different people play Minecraft in different ways. I, for one, sometimes like expanding villages and would prefer they stay inhabited.
Also ...
This. And I expect the AI to improve even more in future updates.
0
It could be an issue if you wanted to keep [currently defenseless] villagers safe from zombies in hard mode without having to essentially babysit them. The houses need wooden doors for villagers to properly repopulate, but zombies break these down - it's a pickle.
0
This.
Lets not forget about the $8,000 spent on drapes to cover up the exposed breast on the Statue of Justice back in '02. Ridiculous.
0
Given that villagers are roughly analogous to humans, I wonder how the fact that villager children can die will affect Minecraft's ESRB rating? I know Minecraft isn't ESRB rated yet, and most of us here don't really care much about the ratings, but I'm still curious.
If I remember correctly, ESRB concerns over being able to kill children in-game (and an inability to realistically prevent that action) was the main reason why Bethesda didn't include children in Elder Scrolls: Oblivion at all and aren't letting players kill children in Skyrim. And in The Sims games, imperiled infants and toddlers are taken away by social workers instead of dying, no doubt for ESRB reasons too.
So I'm curious as to how Mojang would work around this if they had to. Maybe villager children would be given a mythical 'shield' that absorbs damage and shimmers upon impact? It wouldn't necessarily need any explaining (this IS Minecraft after all), but one could guess it's either something unique to the villagers' species that the children outgrow, or something that came out of a blessing/spell cast long ago, etc. Something along those lines.
Thoughts?
0
I was responding more to these two posts, not to people who just think it looks "a bit odd", which I'd agree with. I don't think "ew gay" comments are a good way to articulate that thought.
I wouldn't mind gendered villagers (and infants that look like infants) either, for the same reasons you mentioned - it'd add visual variety. I just doubt it's a high development priority to implement them solely because some players want the villagers to seem "less gay".
0
A thought occurred to me after reading this part of KakarottoYo's earlier post - I wonder how the fact that villager infants can die will affect Minecraft's ESRB rating? I know Minecraft isn't ESRB rated yet, and no doubt most of us here don't really care much about the ratings, but I'm still curious.
If I remember correctly, ESRB concerns over being able to kill children in-game (and an inability to realistically prevent that action) was the main reason why Bethesda didn't include children in Elder Scrolls: Oblivion at all and aren't letting players kill children in Skyrim. And in The Sims games, infants and toddlers are taken away by social workers instead of dying, no doubt for ESRB reasons too.
So I'm curious as to how Mojang would work around this if they had to. Maybe give villager infants a mythical 'shield' that absorbs damage inflicted by monsters and the player?
1
To this poster and the others saying things like how the idea of the villagers mating being 'gross' and whatnot, do remember that Minecraft attracts all sorts of people, including LGBT players. I suggest being a bit more aware of how your words make you sound.
Also, keep in mind that the villagers and all the other mobs don't really have genders at all. People are assuming that they're male because they don't have any overtly female characteristics (except for the cows with udders), but that's in their imagination and isn't anything hard-coded in the game (it's also male privilege showing, but that's another can of worms). True, cows have udders, and chickens lay eggs, but they also breed together, so those aren't proof of binary gender in the game. The player's character has been referred to as "Steve", but that's just a name and there's nothing else to suggest that the character is a "he", a "she", a hermaphrodite, trans- or cis-gendered, intersex, or any of the above. And that's okay.
So, my point is that the current breeding system works, and I don't see why it should be a priority for the Mojang team to spend development time on complicating the code so they can placate people who're projecting their real-world prejudices onto the game.
And yes, it's just a game. So chill out.
TL;DR - People having issues with the villagers breeding: Quit it with the gay panic or just pretend one of them's a flat-chested woman, and move on.
0
As far as I know, yes it was, or at least as of 12w06a when heading indoors became a priority for villagers. When that happened I had to push both aside for them to enter one after the other.
As for the snapshot update: One of the first things I did when 12w06a was released was make a superflat Creative world, set my difficulty to 'Hard', spawn a bunch of zombies in the first village I found, and watched the carnage. Now with village sieges it looks like this will be done by default AND the villagers can repopulate their villages afterward instead of being wiped out. I. Very. Much. Approve.
I'm definitely looking forward to seeing what other unique interactions/events are developed for villages - the 'urban' environment is a unique one so it makes sense that one should have a unique experience in them. Hopefully villager-player interactions aren't too far off!
3
What, and make the Nether — a 'hellish' dimension — easier or more like the Overworld? :smile.gif:
The initial reason for making beds explode was a bug (which existed because, like previous posters mentioned, there's no day/night cycle in the Nether) and just making it impossible to use the beds solved the problem rather easily.
But why make them explode? Because that's Minecraft's style.
0
Well right, I had figured that was the reason but it was still pretty unusual (for me) to find ice bridging over a ravine.
D'oh, I had forgotten about that. Can you tell I don't spend a whole 'lot of time in tundra or taiga biomes? :happy.gif:;
0
When I broke the dirt blocks enclosing my shelter, water started flooding in. Apparently the middle section of the bridge had melted by morning. If Notch hadn't fixed the water-movement bug, I would've been pretty p.o.'ed.
Has anyone come across a bridge like this before?