• 0

    posted a message on The removal of the combat update.
    Instead of wading through 3 pages of responses (which I frankly don't have the time let alone patience for), I'll reply only to OP.
    Quote from QuantumPanckes»

    The combat update was a horrible idea, it has ruined the PvP system,

    How so? Wasn't the old combat system basically "turn on auto clicker and face your way to victory"? How is this new system ruining PvP? Henceforth, "auto click your way to victory" will be shortened to "autovic".

    Furthermore, the combat system removes the strategical aspect of minecraft, which coincides with the game itself, and replaces it with an unskillful, monotonous, pointless hitting people in timed intervals... It goes beyond reason how someone would deduce that this update serves any benefit to minecraft whatsoever, because i see none.

    Because instead of autovic, you now have to judge the situation and act appropriately? Coordinating timing with spatial reasoning?

    If there is any benefit you can come up with that i am unable to see,

    You just said that.

    i can provide you with an abundance more to suggest otherwise.

    Which would be nice, because as of OP, you've submitted none.

    Ask yourself, what popular game out there has this timed attack system, there wouldn't be many of not one..

    Recently? You have the witcher series, dragon age (is that still considered new? I know it's still relevent as a series), secret of mana (SNES) and it's sequel had time between attacks. Shall I go on? Most MMOs are cooldown based with time between auto-attacks.

    And then ask yourself how many games are fast paced and skill based.

    You're not going to like this, but not as many. Even many FPSes have a cooldown between reloading, changing stance, or time between bullets. Generally, the faster-paced a game becomes, the more skill is downplayed as it tends to get in the way. Unless something has an act of skillshots or environmental manipulation; skill tends to get rather backgrounded. As a matter of fact, games with skillshots play better BECAUSE of timed attacks. It's not just autovic ad nauseum.

    The point is, you must see it

    You haven't provided a compelling an argument otherwise.

    , that this update must be removed as soon as possible, why make people go through the effort of making their servers 1.8 pvp compatible? That should be evidence enough to convince you that the PvP update must be abandoned.

    Because the minority has tastes that differ from the majority? Not everyone likes coffee but wants a frappe, so they drink vanilla creme frappes instead.
    Posted in: Suggestions
  • 2

    posted a message on Minecraft 2, Part 2: The Graphics

    The fact that suggestions can get large enough to require fragmentation to cover makes me want to slam my head against a wall. Especially considering that this suggestion does not actually require any part of the original suggestion to function. This suggestion would've been better served as a standalone. Its nature as a piggy back actually hurts the credibility of the suggestion in my eyes.

    With that aside, a lot of these ideas seem less like a Minecraft 2.0 and more into personal preference. Which is the point. You're not going to end up suggesting something you hate, after all... BUT... I fail to see how it would be significant enough to demand a marriage with the original concept of a separate mod-workshopped minceraft.

    Cerroz said it best,

    Quote from Cerroz»

    I don't mean to keep repeating myself here, but why not just throw some of these in the first game?

    The biggest issue here is it's too ambitious and too disjointed. I personally support colored lights! It's an enormous suggestion with an amazing amount of detail, and I'm a bit disappointed that there wasn't a link to each individual suggestion included in your blanket. But that's the thing. It's tailored to you, it's your blanket. I can never completely enjoy every square of the quilt you weave. Even if I enjoy most, there will be some I dislike. Some irrevocable coincidence where I do not like what you like and throws the suggestion into the turbulent seas. There's so much here to ask people to hop aboard on...

    There's too much to convince people to like. I like colored lights, I like connected and random textures. I do not like volumetric lag rays. I do not like the change to the lighting system in regards to difficulty. I do not like bloom or reflective surfaces. That's 2 passes out of 6 using only this limited rubric.

    This is where the suggestion hits a fatal flaw and shoves my final nail into the coffin sealing a no support. Had these myriad suggestions been able to exist outside of your hastily constructed umbrella and given individual attention; they would've gotten a lot more support from me.

    Yes, it's possible to redeem this suggestion and get me to support it. But this requires OP to root out specifically what he's after. The original post was definite in purpose; creating a new Minecraft version with mod support natively. It was ambitious but only had a single goal.

    Here? It's a shotgun blast at a board of wishful thinking. Find ONE topic that desperately needs improved, and work toward it. If the primary goal is colored lights, I'd rather just go and support the already existing thread. If the primary goal is focused toward some other untapped potential and you can put your capable hands toward that singular goal then you'll find much more purchase.
    Posted in: Suggestions
  • 0

    posted a message on Minecraft 2, Part 1: The Game Engine
    Quote from KoiYT»

    As in mature I meant the version of the game would be less suitable to younger audiences.

    And how would segmenting out and avoiding an entire demographic by literally not selling toward them be more beneficial than attempting to sell to as many people as possible? This part doesn't make sense. I fail to see how intentionally cutting out an already provably-lucrative market can improve another already stigmatized market. You'll have to sell me here, because I ain't picking up what you're throwing down.

    There are a lot of Minecraft players between the ages of 7 and 12.

    AND between 12 and 15... AND between 15 and 18... AND between 18~21. This is a non-point and can lead into a very dangerous "post hoc ergo propter hoc."

    *snip* you'll know what I mean by Minecraft's community is bad.

    Any community is toilets if you base their quality off of the worst offending vocal minority. This is a non-point.

    haven't seen the official confirmation, but ibxtoycat told us it was confirmed about 2 years ago to be many years away, if ever.

    There's a lot of non-news there. Basically they discussed and it's not on the table, not that it won't ever be.

    Its the second best-selling video game of all time.

    Which has...... what?... to do with my argument? How does the popularity of a title owned by a company granting it's own license incur a cost to that company?

    There's a lot of points that can be made; but things seem to be more red herrings and logical fallacies that are, frankly, frustrating to follow and seem to be feeding more into confirmation bias and bare assertions.

    Posted in: Suggestions
  • 0

    posted a message on Minecraft 2, Part 1: The Game Engine
    Quote from KoiYT»

    This is a decent idea. I do feel that making a version of the game that's more mature (e.g. having blood) would be a great way for older players who absolutely despise the current game due to the negative impact many of the kids

    As an older person myself (I'm in my 30s), I disagree here. Blood and violence at my point are just kind of "there" in a gameplay standpoint. They don't consciously or unconsciously motivate my actual stance toward my ability to enjoy a game. "mature" is usually a catch-all for people seeking the title instead of those that are actually capable of holding down a job, paying rent/mortgage, and keeping food on the table for their spouse, children, and pets.

    I feel an age rating of 12 or 15 on this new game would be a good way to make sure it has a better community than the current game.

    I'm going to ask you to elaborate on your view here. If it's an opinion, that's fine, but I'd like to see some supporting facts and figures that helped you reach this POV.

    But anyway, it has been confirmed that Minecraft 2 will never be made by Mojang and they will continue to update the current game.

    Really? Can I get a link to the source?

    I also believe from the huge success of the original Minecraft (122 million sales on all platforms worldwide so far) that it will cost >£50 million to get development permission for a Minecraft 2. Partial support.

    Not sure how you arrived at that figure. Mojang is the developer, it literally costs them $0.00 to ask themselves if it's okay to make a sequel. It also costs $0.00 to approach Micro$oft and say "hey can we make more money for you?"

    I would daresay that it would cost a LOT of money to develop the title; but this is where we go into a weaselly area of "making a business case" which relies on a lot of factors that I'm not privy to (including the potential net profit of the new title.)
    Posted in: Suggestions
  • 0

    posted a message on Idea!

    Gotta be honest, not a fan of the idea. Just a bit counter intuitive to me.

    Posted in: Suggestions
  • 1

    posted a message on Minecraft 2, Part 1: The Game Engine

    There's a major point here. Minecraft needs a sequel. This game isn't going to continue selling forever, and the easiest way to monetize a complete rewrite is to sell it as a sequel.

    There are inherent risks in that; but not nearly as unwieldy as rewriting the game without a revenue source and focus break from the established media.

    Here's what I mean:

    Minecraft's sales are decreasing. I'm not an accountant, and even if I were, I'm not THEIR accountant. This is based on the fact that any saturated media loses popularity with time.

    Minecraft has a TON of competition within the same genre. This includes games like Rust, Roblox, Terraria, or other similar games following a survival or crafting theme. When in the face of competition, the best course of action is to innovate.

    Let's say Mojang did a major rewrite of Minecraft. Let's say it bombed, now there is a major rollback and the idea is scrapped or reinvisioned in a way that's far more palatable for the current end-users.

    A sequel does these things:

    It can reinvigorate sales (if marketed correctly and reviewed properly). This means that Mojang has more cashflow available to rewrite the engine.

    Minecraft is capable of innovating into its sequel (or offshoot Minecraft) and given enough emphasis on positive core design, can hold its own against competitors and give a compelling reason to bring people back to the franchise.

    Finally, if the sequel bombs, it won't directly hurt the original game. The sequel may end up with enough revenue to legitimize seperate teams for Minecraft and it's sequel allowing parallel support across both titles

    Posted in: Suggestions
  • 0

    posted a message on Minecraft 2, Part 1: The Game Engine
    Quote from Badprenup»

    Okay, lets go into how this works then with some scenarios.

    Not to disagree, but a lot of these scenarios are alleviated with single-node inheritance. The scenarios under conventional logic are sound; but more simplified but rigid implementation can render them non-issues.

    Scenario 1:
    Mojang adds a new mob and gives it a new drop into the New Mobs pack. The drop is used for Brewing from the Brewing pack. Player installs the New Mobs pack but not the Brewing pack.

    We now introduce the Brewing Pack to Minecraft 2! It is a free patch, but requires the New Mobs pack to function!

    That's a solution, but it just turns into an easier solution to simply include it into the MC base.

    Scenario 2:
    Mojang updates 3 different packs. They all work fine together or alone, packs 1 and 2 work when installed, as do packs 1 and 3. Packs 2 and 3 loaded at the same time causes a crash. Mojang missed it because testing all possible combinations of content packs that rely on each other and the core pack is a nightmare of additional overhead.

    This one is one I don't have a clear answer to. The best answer I can give is to just wrap those into the base game and have the modder disable features he does not desire.

    Scenario 3:
    Mojang has a new mob with a new drop in the New Mobs pack. The drop makes a new item. There is a different item in the End Exploration pack. These two items can be combined to make a very useful item, but only if you have the Uber Items pack.

    Single Line inheritance - New mobs pack is required for End Exploration pack is required for Uber Items pack. But this has already turned into a headache of nested dependencies.

    Scenario 4:
    User is in the End and uninstalls the End pack.

    Result: Crash as the dimension no longer exists.

    This might be a layer 8 issue and is common of most modded games. The solution is to reinstall the end pack (which is annoying for end user) or to refuse to load the map due to lacking dependency (You must install the End pack to play this world!)

    Scenario 5:
    User makes a map/server using items from a bunch of different content packs. Other users try and use the map/server without those packs.

    Result: Error

    "You require these mods to join the server:



    Mods found on server, please Click here to install the mods

    Press Back for server list [BACK]

    Posted in: Suggestions
  • 0

    posted a message on Minecraft 2, Part 1: The Game Engine
    Quote from jdc997»

    Well, that's possible, but it nullifies the entire point of this suggestion, which is to allow the player to fully and easily customize their own experience.

    While I personally enjoy the idea of minecraft being completely player-tailored; I think there's a lot of merit of a rich base game for those that don't want to "fool" with mods.

    Um, yeah, sure, why not.

    Lots of reasons that aren't even tangentially related to this discussion.
    Posted in: Suggestions
  • 0

    posted a message on Minecraft 2, Part 1: The Game Engine

    Yeah, except instead of developers making "mods" that can be disabled, they just do standard updates but make it in such a way that mods can easily interact.

    Posted in: Suggestions
  • 0

    posted a message on Minecraft 2, Part 1: The Game Engine

    The way I'd make it work is:

    Everything that devs do is considered "framework", this can be altered by mods to end-user satisfaction; but the developers do things in the form of "primitives". Sometimes a change borks a mod (or collection of parent-dependent mods), sometimes not.

    The idea is, the developers continue building a base game; the end user can use mods to enable and disable developer features.

    An open-modded Minecraft would practically necessitate a from-scratch Minceraft.

    Posted in: Suggestions
  • 0

    posted a message on Guidelines for the Suggestions Forum

    Gatekeeping is annoying. I personally think the act is pretentious.

    Suggester: They should add more flower blocks to Minecraft! *details*

    Critic: Mojang should work on new monsters instead, no support!

    Unless you work for Mojang; what you think Minecraft should add next is no more pertinent than the OP you just shot down for no real good reason. The direction you think Mojang needs to take is irrelevant to the suggestion.

    Posted in: Suggestions
  • 0

    posted a message on Guidelines for the Suggestions Forum

    Could you add something to point 3?

    3a) try to avoid intended minecraft version numbers as it doesn't describe the suggestion. ("idea for 1.14", "what I want to see in 1.15", etc.)

    Posted in: Suggestions
  • 0

    posted a message on Talking about an update that minecraft needs

    I think people go about a mod version all wrong. There are plenty of games that handle modding just fine. It's best to not think of a mod update to be an extension of the current mod system in Minecraft (i.e. non-existent on a 1st party side); but a complete overhaul and drastic change to it.

    It would take a lot of work though, such as casting blocks and mechanics as primitives for the modder to use; but it would not, by any means be impossible.

    Here's how other moddable games generally do it:

    1) Create a mod workshop where you can store mods.

    2) Have the ability to load and unload various mods and give players the ability of mod priority.

    3) Allow servers to have a mod whitelist, mod blacklist, and mod requirement sheet. (players that don't have required mods simply can't join the server).

    3a) The mod requirement sheet can auto populate according to mods server owner has active.

    4) Allow active mods to flag incompatible mods. Trying to load several incompatible mods will simply load according to priority and ignore incompatibles.

    Essentially, change "modification" into "module". It's still a modification, it's just encapsulated and easy to add or remove.

    Posted in: Suggestions
  • 0

    posted a message on Bow enchants
    Quote from The1tntgamer»

    Idea: Glazing - When you barely miss a mob (.05 blocks per tier) It does 50% damage.

    Tiers - I, II, III, IV.

    A bit of a diction thing here. Call it "Grazing".

    Glazing is coating an object. You would apply a syrup glaze to a donut or a resin glaze to wood.
    Grazing is to minimally strike to surface or to take the tip off something.
    Posted in: Suggestions
  • 0

    posted a message on Minecraft Enchantment: White Hot

    Don't see that as a problem, personally.

    I see it as a trade off. Also, you can break and acquire wood reasonably quickly unarmed. I mean, it's definitely slower than with an axe, but not so slow that it's unreasonable.

    Posted in: Suggestions
  • To post a comment, please .