Thx, Your Right (When I saw this Post had 66 replies I was like "WTF"" lol XD)
I Wasn't hating when I made this post, I just wanted people to get along
me and you Both
Oh, sorry. I didn't mean you were hating if it sounded like that. I meant that there's always some troll who starts a flamewar on posts like this. Sorry about that.
I say we all stop arguing to prevent someone from asking for bans or an admin closing the thread.
BTW PokeProZ your skin is amazing, I haven't seen a good pokemon skin in ages.
Pants 4 life, bros.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Be sure to quote my post if you want me to respond.
Oh, sorry. I didn't mean you were hating if it sounded like that. I meant that there's always some troll who starts a flamewar on posts like this. Sorry about that.
I say we all stop arguing to prevent someone from asking for bans or an admin closing the thread.
BTW PokeProZ your skin is amazing, I haven't seen a good pokemon skin in ages.
Pants 4 life, bros.
Thx I Made my Skin Myself! :D, and don't worry its ok
3 months, 7 days, the War had been going on for quite a while and I was starting to wonder when all this hating would be over..... Before I fell asleep that night I was wondering about the forums, so I just blocked it out of my mind and closed my eyes and wished for it to be over.
The next Day I Awoke to hear people screaming, so I Jumped on my laptop and checked the tread.
Chapter 346
I was Shocked. the post I had made had even more replies, all of them basically the same opinion over and over again so as I stared at the screen for one last time I went outside and waited for it to be over...
Can someone read this plz, I put some work into it :). lol
The problem is that most of the features that are complained about are disliked by a small yet loud minority of people. So if Mojang listened to all the complainers they would be catering to those small minorities and telling the majority of their fanbase to deal with it.
I would say, based on this and numerous other forums I follow, that the features complained about by the small minority of people are features that nobody has actually seen and/or played with yet.
The problem is that most of the features that are complained about are disliked by a small yet loud minority of people. So if Mojang listened to all the complainers they would be catering to those small minorities and telling the majority of their fanbase to deal with it.
An other problem with the minecraft community as of late is that a majority of the community is a bunch of <15 year olds who came around just as the game was done getting popular. Minecraft basically went from having a community of people who were mature enough to actually assist with the game's creation process by suggesting things that aren't terrible to having a community whose majority are kids who giggle and crap their pants when they see updates, all the while yelling "HUR HUR YAH SUNDFLOWERS AND CARPETS, H8RS GTFO." It's really sad, but it's true. Any of the non-kids left have private servers or run servers that are overly serious, killing off the idea that any of the new guys could learn how to not be detrimental in every possible way.
Seeing how this has turned into a thread with people saying their opinion about 1.6, I figured I'd put in my two cents.
An interesting analogy occurred to me the other day, you may not agree with it, but that's your prerogative, so here we go:
What is Minecraft about?
Minecraft is a game about breaking and placing blocks. So it IS supposed to be blocky, right?
My favorite type of texture pack is 16x16, as it maintains the feel of Minecraft.
64x64 bit textures not only lose the feel of the game for me, but also make it look like bad graphics trying to be good. I like MC's normal graphics, which are bad graphics trying to be bad.
If it makes any sense, that's kind of how MC feels for me, lately. Like "bad graphics trying to be good graphics."
Lately I started playing BETA 1.7.3, the first version I played on. Let me say that it is, in my opinion 400% more fun than 1.6. The sunset alone is better, let me describe it, as most of you probably don't remember
You can see each 9x9 area become dark, and for me, that's cooler than any sunset you see today.
Iron is hard to find
I can't mine full iron in 10 minutes. So far on my beta world, I've mined for around 90 minutes total, and found only 20 iron. In my opinion, they should make it harder to find ores, rather than buff mobs.
Point 3:
The world generation is much better. Remember the mountains you could actually build on top of, and the floating islands? Hopefully 1.7 will bring it back
Please don't reply to this:
STOP HATING FOR NO REASON, MOJANG IS DOING A GREAT JOB !!!!1!!!11
As i just gave my opinions and reasons for them,
But, I still have faith in Mojang to fix the issues
Just keep your messages positive. Mojang is working hard trying to improve the game and keep people happy. They CANNOT satisfy everyone. Different people want different things. IF you don't like something, find or make a mod for it.
Just keep your messages positive. Mojang is working hard trying to improve the game and keep people happy. They CANNOT satisfy everyone. Different people want different things. IF you don't like something, find or make a mod for it.
Hey Guys, I just wanted to say What's the point of Hating on the Update, Mojang is working hard on Minecraft and they dont need imature people posting hate comments about it, just keep them to yourself or post things what arent critising on it, sure some parts of the update are annoying but it is still a good update , so guys plz stop hating
if you agree with me Vote this post up
I'm so relieved we have you here to tell us what to say and think! Here I was thinking I was going to have to come to my own conclusions, and filter them through my own experiences in a succinct way in order to express and idea that was uniue to my personal position. Now that I have you around, I wont have to do any of that!
Tell me, how did you become the arbiter of propriety? What graces fell upon your shoulders that you have the nobility to dictate what I may and may not say, that I be unburdened with individuality? Oh great one, guide me.
I'm so relieved we have you here to tell us what to say and think! Here I was thinking I was going to have to come to my own conclusions, and filter them through my own experiences in a succinct way in order to express and idea that was uniue to my personal position. Now that I have you around, I wont have to do any of that!
Tell me, how did you become the arbiter of propriety? What graces fell upon your shoulders that you have the nobility to dictate what I may and may not say, that I be unburdened with individuality? Oh great one, guide me.
Jerk.
1. Im not telling you what to say
2. Im *suggesting* for people not to just not type in all caps, and to SUGGEST
3. Your the jerk for coming to this conclusion
I disagree with both sides. Let me explain why that is.
1. the folks like the OP.
Now, here's why I disagree with them. Their philosophy doesn't work in reality. Basically their 'philosophy' seems to present the idea that everybody should just magically get along and agree with each other and dance through exotic meadows. It's simply ridiculous to expect that. You could say that such a Utopian future is possible. I however, call such a future dystopian. No unique opinions, only agreement.
2. the people that complain with terrible reasoning
One of the bigger issues I have with complainants is that often their arguments against a new feature are simply not very well formed. They come up with emotionally biassed arguments to tradition that don't stand up to scrutiny, and oftentimes those arguments even contain outright fallacies. To make things worse, is that some of them try to argue from a position of popularity by trying to 'speak for a group':
The complaining may taper off, but that's more because people get sick of being ignored and decide that it's not going to get fixed.
issues with this argument: It postulates a theory with no evidence. They assert that if complaining tapers off, that because THEY are still not happy there must be some unquantified set of people who feel the same as the person posting this for whom they are speaking. They also postulate that those people are "sick of being ignored".
Now, let's look at one common complaint that oh-so-often presents these sorts of ad populum fallacies. The Zombie siege mechanic.
Complaints are diverse. I've found very few to be particularly well reasoned. Some of them depend on an emotionally charged appeal; others defer to anecdotal evidence to make a flimsy case for something. Still others make completely false statements about how the mechanic works, then use that as a jumping off point to complain about that particular feature- relying entirely on an outright fallacy to make their case.
Additionally they typical back up such complaints and justify their existence with "If nobody complained, nothing would ever get better".
Well, first, this is simply false. It's defective reasoning, plain and simple. Many things get better without complaints. Many things get better as a result of complaints.
However the ill-reasoning here is the assertion that all complaints are valid. This is fundamentally the same as saying that every single claim should be assumed true.
Let's make an example of a complaint:
"I don't like The elephants in Minecraft. They should be removed."
Now, let' us consider this feedback. Is it a good complaint? Well, no, because Minecraft has no elephants. It's useless. he best example comes from this thread and some like it. There are of course numerous complaints and feedback about the Zombie siege.
My personal favourite is the one where people say "would be fine with the feature if it scaled based on difficulty". I suppose they are fine with the feature, since it already scales to difficulty. Another, from the same poster, I believe, says that it might be better if the mechanic spawned reinforcements based on a % chance, rather than always. It probably is, that's why that is already how the feature is implemented. When somebody complains about a feature and then suggests "new" additions that already exist in that feature that is evidence of a presupposition, they were starting with the conclusion that the new feature is bad based on a few minutes of experience and then, without having a firm understanding of how the feature worked, make assertions and suggestions based on that lack of information. It's like ordering a ice cream sundae and complaining that it doesn't have any sprinkles even though it's covered in them.
A "GOOD" complaint has some specific features:
-As objective as possible
Since it's a game, very few things can be boiled down to being objective. For any choice of how to implement a feature, there will be those that would like one implementation and those that would like another; and those from either side will animately defend their preferred implementation. A good example of this is sprinting; there are those that thing sprinting is fine as it is (personally I'm one of them) And there are those that try to say that switching to a special key for sprinting is somehow "better for everyone". What many on either perspective fail to realize is that they are speaking of preferences; there is no preference that can be declared objectively better. It's like trying to say that Red is better than Green.
-Not based on fallacy
Too many complaints assert how functionality works in the features they dislike incorrectly, and then use that as a trampoline to build their arguments against that feature, often incorporating even more fallacies into it. This is effectively a straw man because they are arguing against a set of features that doesn't exist and in some cases suggesting "fixes" that are already implemented. Personally the reason I would disregard such complaints is that if they don't even know how it works currently, how could they have any idea on how it could be changed to work better?
-Self-aware
By this I mean that ideally prescribed resolutions would at least consider those parts of their complaints which are likely to be cases of preference. When sprinting was added, we all know the server/client confusion that can cause the client to think it is sprinting but the server to not do so. This is caused when the packets get out of sync and you try to sprint right after stopping, and the stop sprinting packet is received after the packet where you start sprinting again. With specific TCP sequencing this can be tricky to resolve, but the protocol only guarantees receipt of a packet, and doesn't necessarily guarantee they will be received in the order they were sent.
One suggested resolution was to simply introduce a key for sprint, rather than double-tap. The reasoning for this was "this is how a lot of games do it".
Of course, a fair counterargument to this is that a lot of games do not do it that way. Additionally some people prefer the way it is now to such an implementation, and there are objective drawbacks with that approach specifically with regard to how many keys can be held simultaneously on many keyboards. Declaring such a "solution" as fixing everything but doing so without regard for the parts of that argument that lie in preference is foolish.
-It needs to be actionable
Well, ideally. Feedback/complaints that are not actionable are completely useless.
The sad reality of the matter OP is that many people on these forums do not know how to be constructively critical instead of just complain. It is pretty much just a fact of life that there is always someone ******** on these forums.
You mean people like an OP? Who, BTW, bring it to the kinda new level - in addition to ing about people who's ing he also using this to beg for votes...
this is constuctive, and no im not begging for votes, "Votes" are for Liking a topic what you think is good or agree with
I say we all stop arguing to prevent someone from asking for bans or an admin closing the thread.
BTW PokeProZ your skin is amazing, I haven't seen a good pokemon skin in ages.
Pants 4 life, bros.
Be sure to quote my post if you want me to respond.
If anything, 1.4, 1.5, and 1.6 all actually improved zombies a lot, imo.
No, because it's not a 100% guarentee that a zombie will summon help like that. I think it's a good idea.
[simg]http://www.imageshost.eu/images/2015/01/13/advertie4dc6f.png[/simg]
http://myanimelist.net/animelist/XYZDimensions
[simg]http://www.imageshost.eu/images/2015/01/13/advertie4dc6f.png[/simg]
http://myanimelist.net/animelist/XYZDimensions
I would say, based on this and numerous other forums I follow, that the features complained about by the small minority of people are features that nobody has actually seen and/or played with yet.
Forumites gonna opine.
runescape:fred da kiko spiral knights:freddakiko steam:freddakikoif it was too hard for you to find me...
An interesting analogy occurred to me the other day, you may not agree with it, but that's your prerogative, so here we go:
What is Minecraft about?
Minecraft is a game about breaking and placing blocks. So it IS supposed to be blocky, right?
My favorite type of texture pack is 16x16, as it maintains the feel of Minecraft.
64x64 bit textures not only lose the feel of the game for me, but also make it look like bad graphics trying to be good. I like MC's normal graphics, which are bad graphics trying to be bad.
If it makes any sense, that's kind of how MC feels for me, lately. Like "bad graphics trying to be good graphics."
Lately I started playing BETA 1.7.3, the first version I played on. Let me say that it is, in my opinion 400% more fun than 1.6. The sunset alone is better, let me describe it, as most of you probably don't remember
You can see each 9x9 area become dark, and for me, that's cooler than any sunset you see today.
Iron is hard to find
I can't mine full iron in 10 minutes. So far on my beta world, I've mined for around 90 minutes total, and found only 20 iron. In my opinion, they should make it harder to find ores, rather than buff mobs.
Point 3:
The world generation is much better. Remember the mountains you could actually build on top of, and the floating islands? Hopefully 1.7 will bring it back
Please don't reply to this:
STOP HATING FOR NO REASON, MOJANG IS DOING A GREAT JOB !!!!1!!!11
As i just gave my opinions and reasons for them,
But, I still have faith in Mojang to fix the issues
Dat logic.
You can't make more creatures by killing one of them. You are just shooting down their population.
So true.
I'm so relieved we have you here to tell us what to say and think! Here I was thinking I was going to have to come to my own conclusions, and filter them through my own experiences in a succinct way in order to express and idea that was uniue to my personal position. Now that I have you around, I wont have to do any of that!
Tell me, how did you become the arbiter of propriety? What graces fell upon your shoulders that you have the nobility to dictate what I may and may not say, that I be unburdened with individuality? Oh great one, guide me.
Jerk.
2. Im *suggesting* for people not to just not type in all caps, and to SUGGEST
3. Your the jerk for coming to this conclusion
[simg]http://www.imageshost.eu/images/2015/01/13/advertie4dc6f.png[/simg]
http://myanimelist.net/animelist/XYZDimensions
[simg]http://www.imageshost.eu/images/2015/01/13/advertie4dc6f.png[/simg]
http://myanimelist.net/animelist/XYZDimensions
1. the folks like the OP.
Now, here's why I disagree with them. Their philosophy doesn't work in reality. Basically their 'philosophy' seems to present the idea that everybody should just magically get along and agree with each other and dance through exotic meadows. It's simply ridiculous to expect that. You could say that such a Utopian future is possible. I however, call such a future dystopian. No unique opinions, only agreement.
2. the people that complain with terrible reasoning
One of the bigger issues I have with complainants is that often their arguments against a new feature are simply not very well formed. They come up with emotionally biassed arguments to tradition that don't stand up to scrutiny, and oftentimes those arguments even contain outright fallacies. To make things worse, is that some of them try to argue from a position of popularity by trying to 'speak for a group':
issues with this argument: It postulates a theory with no evidence. They assert that if complaining tapers off, that because THEY are still not happy there must be some unquantified set of people who feel the same as the person posting this for whom they are speaking. They also postulate that those people are "sick of being ignored".
Now, let's look at one common complaint that oh-so-often presents these sorts of ad populum fallacies. The Zombie siege mechanic.
Complaints are diverse. I've found very few to be particularly well reasoned. Some of them depend on an emotionally charged appeal; others defer to anecdotal evidence to make a flimsy case for something. Still others make completely false statements about how the mechanic works, then use that as a jumping off point to complain about that particular feature- relying entirely on an outright fallacy to make their case.
Additionally they typical back up such complaints and justify their existence with "If nobody complained, nothing would ever get better".
Well, first, this is simply false. It's defective reasoning, plain and simple. Many things get better without complaints. Many things get better as a result of complaints.
However the ill-reasoning here is the assertion that all complaints are valid. This is fundamentally the same as saying that every single claim should be assumed true.
Let's make an example of a complaint:
"I don't like The elephants in Minecraft. They should be removed."
Now, let' us consider this feedback. Is it a good complaint? Well, no, because Minecraft has no elephants. It's useless. he best example comes from this thread and some like it. There are of course numerous complaints and feedback about the Zombie siege.
My personal favourite is the one where people say "would be fine with the feature if it scaled based on difficulty". I suppose they are fine with the feature, since it already scales to difficulty. Another, from the same poster, I believe, says that it might be better if the mechanic spawned reinforcements based on a % chance, rather than always. It probably is, that's why that is already how the feature is implemented. When somebody complains about a feature and then suggests "new" additions that already exist in that feature that is evidence of a presupposition, they were starting with the conclusion that the new feature is bad based on a few minutes of experience and then, without having a firm understanding of how the feature worked, make assertions and suggestions based on that lack of information. It's like ordering a ice cream sundae and complaining that it doesn't have any sprinkles even though it's covered in them.
A "GOOD" complaint has some specific features:
-As objective as possible
Since it's a game, very few things can be boiled down to being objective. For any choice of how to implement a feature, there will be those that would like one implementation and those that would like another; and those from either side will animately defend their preferred implementation. A good example of this is sprinting; there are those that thing sprinting is fine as it is (personally I'm one of them) And there are those that try to say that switching to a special key for sprinting is somehow "better for everyone". What many on either perspective fail to realize is that they are speaking of preferences; there is no preference that can be declared objectively better. It's like trying to say that Red is better than Green.
-Not based on fallacy
Too many complaints assert how functionality works in the features they dislike incorrectly, and then use that as a trampoline to build their arguments against that feature, often incorporating even more fallacies into it. This is effectively a straw man because they are arguing against a set of features that doesn't exist and in some cases suggesting "fixes" that are already implemented. Personally the reason I would disregard such complaints is that if they don't even know how it works currently, how could they have any idea on how it could be changed to work better?
-Self-aware
By this I mean that ideally prescribed resolutions would at least consider those parts of their complaints which are likely to be cases of preference. When sprinting was added, we all know the server/client confusion that can cause the client to think it is sprinting but the server to not do so. This is caused when the packets get out of sync and you try to sprint right after stopping, and the stop sprinting packet is received after the packet where you start sprinting again. With specific TCP sequencing this can be tricky to resolve, but the protocol only guarantees receipt of a packet, and doesn't necessarily guarantee they will be received in the order they were sent.
One suggested resolution was to simply introduce a key for sprint, rather than double-tap. The reasoning for this was "this is how a lot of games do it".
Of course, a fair counterargument to this is that a lot of games do not do it that way. Additionally some people prefer the way it is now to such an implementation, and there are objective drawbacks with that approach specifically with regard to how many keys can be held simultaneously on many keyboards. Declaring such a "solution" as fixing everything but doing so without regard for the parts of that argument that lie in preference is foolish.
-It needs to be actionable
Well, ideally. Feedback/complaints that are not actionable are completely useless.
People Like me? Thx Guys!
[simg]http://www.imageshost.eu/images/2015/01/13/advertie4dc6f.png[/simg]
http://myanimelist.net/animelist/XYZDimensions
[simg]http://www.imageshost.eu/images/2015/01/13/advertie4dc6f.png[/simg]
http://myanimelist.net/animelist/XYZDimensions
[simg]http://www.imageshost.eu/images/2015/01/13/advertie4dc6f.png[/simg]
http://myanimelist.net/animelist/XYZDimensions
[simg]http://www.imageshost.eu/images/2015/01/13/advertie4dc6f.png[/simg]
http://myanimelist.net/animelist/XYZDimensions