The official say "no thanks" to native guns in Minecraft post.
1.Minecraft already has ranged weapons that fit the mechanic discussed with black powder guns (ie: Craftable limited ammo for low powered ranged weapon).
2. Guns are already in every other video game. If you really need to shoot something that badly, go have at it. Leave the few of us who don't want that alone.
3. Mods. You've already got access to more guns than Mojang could ever program alone with a few simple clicks on your jar. If you absolutely must have them, you already can.
4. The play style of the vanilla game is by and large creative, not destructive. Though there is a reasonable argument to the contrary, virtually every destructive act in Minecraft has a creative consequence or alternative. Guns are inherently destructive and only destructive, thus unsuitable for vanilla inclusion.
5. Read number 2. Seriously. Enough with the guns already. We get that you're 15 and have raging little boy anger that just demands you shoot something with a frequency that would make a chain smoker suggest you slow down. The whole world's media does not need gunfire. It bears saying twice.
We already got enchanted bows that take the fun out of trying to dominate in PVP, so why not add guns?
On a serious note, I don't see why adding guns wouldn't be beneficial. Only the RPG nerds who make up 75% of this game's community would get angry and rage.
Sorry to burst your bubble but I don't see what the problem is with guns. Seriously don't you think that games like Halo or Call of Duty wouldn't be played as much if they didn't have guns?
My bubble remains. Asking if games like Halo would sell without guns is silly. It's like asking how a game like Minecraft could possibly sell without gu....oh wait....
It's also a little like asking "how can this orange sell since it doesn't taste like an apple?".
The problem with guns is that it's a tired mechanic. It's kind of sad that you appear to view the entire scope of what is possible in digital media as revolving around a single mechanic. This goes double for a game that is geared towards creative pursuits. There is nothing inherently wrong with violence in games, though this is not impetus to make ALL games inherently violent or revolving around fire arms. Minecraft is successful in part because it bucked industry trends. The last thing I and most of the rest of it's fans want to see is Minecraft become another brainless shooter for children to snipe in and scream "u mad bro".
That there are those who find guns offensive is another good reason to preclude them from Minecraft. I am not one of them, though there are things I myself find offensive and thus am capable of this thing adults call empathy. You would do well to learn it, it will make or break you when you grow up. Shooter fans have pretty much the other %99 of video games to go rage in. Minecraft is different and we like it that way. I would normally not presume to make sweeping generalized statements on behalf of the entire community, but I think the majority will back me on this one.
If you want my opinion... definitely NOT. We are alright with bows and swords. Besides- adding weapons to a child-friendly game is NOT a good idea. Minecraft will be one step closer to CoD if they added guns. NO WAY! Except maybe dual pistols. That I could handle. But other than that, nope! :/
If you want my opinion... definitely NOT. We are alright with bows and swords. Besides- adding weapons to a child-friendly game is NOT a good idea. Minecraft will be one step closer to CoD if they added guns. NO WAY! Except maybe dual pistols. That I could handle. But other than that, nope! :/
bows and swords are weapons. adding guns would not be adding weapons, it would just be expanding a very limited selection of weapons. Also, the mere adding of guns into minecraft would not make it closer to COD, the call of duty series is based around pure combat. Adding new weapons to minecraft would not all of a sudden shift the focus of the game to an fps oriented one.
*Facepalm*
These never seace to ammuse me, so heres a list of reasons i thought of why to not add them
1. The bow is already stronger that a diamond Sword, there is no need for another ranged weapon
2. It would be a case of random out of place Technology, then again redstone so scratch that (contradicting self :P)
3. Ammo for guns seems to be a problem, assuming you need gunpowder and iron, iron isnt a problem but i find that TNT is a better use of what little gunpowder i get
4. Unless the guns had durablity, Enchanting would be overpowering.
I can see guns being added, so long as they are balanced (duh). I'm not opposed to an arquebus/musket coexisting with bows (and crossbows) at all.
Regarding what would happen, the bow would remain how it is now: Fast and moderately powerful. Regarding additional ranged weaponry, I would add a repeating crossbow similar to the bow that, rather than firing off an individual shot at a time, has a clip of 4-6 bolts; each bolt is slightly less damaging than a fully charged bow shot, but the crossbow fires much faster; roughly the time it takes for mercy invincibility to wear off. However, in order to reload the crossbow, you have to craft the crossbow with some bolts (or arrows) and it doesn't fire as far as the bow either. The arquebus/musket is what most people suggest crossbows to be; slow to reload, but stays reloaded (unlike the bow) and holds a single powerful shot. In addition, the bullet would not arc as much as a bow/crossbow and would travel faster, but after some distance the bullet would fly to the left or right off its original trajectory.
Of course, i'd rather see melee combat improved than see guns or crossbows added. Melee combat is in much worse shape than ranged is.
(The point of the repeating crossbow is mostly to add more depth to range combat but partially so that people can't say "why not make the crossbow do what the gun does).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Did something happen to you in your childhood to give you this unreasonable fear of rutabaga?
Er...that sounds a TINY bit useless...Ill stick with a bow for now.
Yes, I lied on the servay. No, I do not feel bad. Check out my blog at [email protected]!
1.Minecraft already has ranged weapons that fit the mechanic discussed with black powder guns (ie: Craftable limited ammo for low powered ranged weapon).
2. Guns are already in every other video game. If you really need to shoot something that badly, go have at it. Leave the few of us who don't want that alone.
3. Mods. You've already got access to more guns than Mojang could ever program alone with a few simple clicks on your jar. If you absolutely must have them, you already can.
4. The play style of the vanilla game is by and large creative, not destructive. Though there is a reasonable argument to the contrary, virtually every destructive act in Minecraft has a creative consequence or alternative. Guns are inherently destructive and only destructive, thus unsuitable for vanilla inclusion.
5. Read number 2. Seriously. Enough with the guns already. We get that you're 15 and have raging little boy anger that just demands you shoot something with a frequency that would make a chain smoker suggest you slow down. The whole world's media does not need gunfire. It bears saying twice.
My bubble remains. Asking if games like Halo would sell without guns is silly. It's like asking how a game like Minecraft could possibly sell without gu....oh wait....
It's also a little like asking "how can this orange sell since it doesn't taste like an apple?".
The problem with guns is that it's a tired mechanic. It's kind of sad that you appear to view the entire scope of what is possible in digital media as revolving around a single mechanic. This goes double for a game that is geared towards creative pursuits. There is nothing inherently wrong with violence in games, though this is not impetus to make ALL games inherently violent or revolving around fire arms. Minecraft is successful in part because it bucked industry trends. The last thing I and most of the rest of it's fans want to see is Minecraft become another brainless shooter for children to snipe in and scream "u mad bro".
That there are those who find guns offensive is another good reason to preclude them from Minecraft. I am not one of them, though there are things I myself find offensive and thus am capable of this thing adults call empathy. You would do well to learn it, it will make or break you when you grow up. Shooter fans have pretty much the other %99 of video games to go rage in. Minecraft is different and we like it that way. I would normally not presume to make sweeping generalized statements on behalf of the entire community, but I think the majority will back me on this one.
http://www.minecraft...ranged-weapons/
These never seace to ammuse me, so heres a list of reasons i thought of why to not add them
1. The bow is already stronger that a diamond Sword, there is no need for another ranged weapon
2. It would be a case of random out of place Technology, then again redstone so scratch that (contradicting self :P)
3. Ammo for guns seems to be a problem, assuming you need gunpowder and iron, iron isnt a problem but i find that TNT is a better use of what little gunpowder i get
4. Unless the guns had durablity, Enchanting would be overpowering.
Regarding what would happen, the bow would remain how it is now: Fast and moderately powerful. Regarding additional ranged weaponry, I would add a repeating crossbow similar to the bow that, rather than firing off an individual shot at a time, has a clip of 4-6 bolts; each bolt is slightly less damaging than a fully charged bow shot, but the crossbow fires much faster; roughly the time it takes for mercy invincibility to wear off. However, in order to reload the crossbow, you have to craft the crossbow with some bolts (or arrows) and it doesn't fire as far as the bow either. The arquebus/musket is what most people suggest crossbows to be; slow to reload, but stays reloaded (unlike the bow) and holds a single powerful shot. In addition, the bullet would not arc as much as a bow/crossbow and would travel faster, but after some distance the bullet would fly to the left or right off its original trajectory.
Of course, i'd rather see melee combat improved than see guns or crossbows added. Melee combat is in much worse shape than ranged is.
(The point of the repeating crossbow is mostly to add more depth to range combat but partially so that people can't say "why not make the crossbow do what the gun does).
Nononononononononono!!!
Why you suggest this!?!?!? (Intended grammar)
Maybe add crossbows if they ever fix melee combat to where its actually combat and not who can click faster.