Make temperature affect the player in negative ways like two hot or too cold.(if to cold maybe where armor)
BzzzZZzzzT! Nope. I had a feeling this was gonna be in the suggestion. Things like this just ruin gameplay and have no good reason to be there except to annoy the player.
What if I want to live in the tundra or desert and I'm just getting started? That makes some biomes "upgrades" of others and ruins it for the ones that troll the player with temperature stuff. Everything else in the idea is fine, but #4 should be removed.
I see where your coming from. In my head though, I believe that temperature would add immersion and meaning to a biome. It seems a bit weird that the player doesn't experience any kind of physical change going from a forest to a frozen plains. I dont believe it should have a negative modifier at all times though. I believe to aviod the negative modifier you should have to wear armor, have a campfire, have an enclosed shelter(house) or have resistance enchatments. Something along the lines of that.
4. Make temperature affect the player in negative ways like two hot or too cold.(if too cold maybe wear armor)
I like the idea of too hot/ too cold to affect the player - but there should be a gamerule/option to allow player to turn on/off the option (maybe in 'hard' mode - temperature affect player but in normal it doesn't ??)
The 'too cold' bit where you have to wear armour.. not 100% sure I like that bit but maybe if it affect the hunger or the speed of the player then maybe.
for example: If it's too cold (or too hot) & player is 'outside' (exposed to sky) then maybe your walking speed could be slightly slower than normal or your hunger/stamina drops slightly faster (if you're underground then you're not exposed to the sky so you're back to normal speed/stamina rates)
In a cold biome then having a fire 'nearby' (anything with a flame so a torch would do) keeps your speed/stamina normal (lets say if you're ~20-30 blocks to it). If it's too hot then maybe having a 'water supply' nearby (1x1 water hole, a well, a filled cauldron etc) within ~20-30 block keeps you normal.
This is easy to achieve (you need to build a farm at some point so that would have water & normally you'd light up your base so you have the light/heat)
You could maybe expand this idea.. If you have torches in your inventory or maybe watermelon/water bucket etc then the affects don't get applied either
I see where your coming from. In my head though, I believe that temperature would add immersion and meaning to a biome.
If it damages gameplay, the 'immersion' is not worth it. Gameplay > Realism. Always always.
It seems a bit weird that the player doesn't experience any kind of physical change going from a forest to a frozen plains.
This temperature-hurts-players idea has been brought up many times before, and is rejected pretty much every single time. Using realism to back an idea like this are arguments that will almost always fail hard. This is why being slowed from carrying blocks of metal in our pockets that even a gorilla couldn't carry isn't in the game. It's why a thirst bar or "let's have food go bad!!" (ideas so hated that a star explodes every time they're mentioned) will never touch the game. It's why cave-ins that crush the player ain't ever gonna happen.
Having those ungodly annoying things deliberately programmed in the game just to go "but it makes sense in real life tho" is an always-failing statement. No one wants their gameplay brought down for that.
I don't believe it should have a negative modifier at all times though. I believe to avoid the negative modifier you should have to wear armor, have a campfire, have an enclosed shelter (house) or have resistance enchantments. Something along the lines of that.
Nah, the core idea is still there: some biomes mildly trolling you and making them unfun to travel/live in compared to biomes where you don't have to do that stuff.
the gist is that minecraft is a sandbox open-world game, not a hardcore survival game. most people would be instantly turned away by survival elements such as having to regulate temperature, a thirst bar, ect. the hunger system only exists to balance out the healing system - even it is extremely simplified, as there's no eating cooldown, debuffs from eating too much, it doesn't drain very fast, and there's almost zero complexity in the foods.
You may be right Fir. I did see what CannonFoddr suggested. Maybe put temperature as a hard or hardcore mode feature. Players might find it more annoying in the base game so I do give you that.
That's still gonna be a cold hard 'no'. Putting that in hard/hardcore still doesn't save the idea by that much. It's still taking the fun out of the pure freedom for people who want to enjoy their favorite biomes by adding extra conditions for being in them. It's also annoying for a player spawning in these biomes with nothing and having to deal with these negative biome traits, especially if large biomes is on.
This sort of thing feels better as a mod, but not as a vanilla feature in everyone's game. I think your best bet is to stick with the other factors of this suggestion.
And I know there's the "this could be an option" road that a lot of people like to take, but if it's an unpopular idea, it doesn't really pay to make the effort to program that in.
While I'm not entirely sure about the idea myself, what if instead of just objectively negative effects due to extreme temperatures, there was some good and some bad? For instance, the cold might slow you down a little bit, but it could also decrease damage taken (like you're being numbed), and the heat could increase the rate at which you lose hunger, but decrease the number of hostile mobs that spawn (since Minecraft likes to treat light and heat as the same thing). Not a fully fleshed out idea, and maybe some aspects of it don't make sense, but you get my idea. As someone said, having down sides to living in a certain biome will discourage people from ever living there, but perhaps if they balanced each other out, it would actually add a new variable to people's consideration in where to live.
1. Local temperatures seem to be a messy matter. Might be problematic to implement considering that much of the farming takes place underground, where in real life you got perpetual 8-10 degrees, or as I've heard about it, Tsarist Air Conditioning. Or in building interiors. Primary real-life example - glasshouses. If seasons slowed the growth, all farms would be built in glasshouses or bunkers. 2. The biggest problem of seasons - you either end up with all snowy and icy builds melting everywhere above freezing temperature or you have natural snow in summer.
3. Sensible.
4. Not the brightest idea considering they would make a start harder. Implementation of these problems in form of, for example, aggressive mobs being stronger in certain biomes/seasons, like snowy skeletons that slow you in tundra, is a better idea in my opinion.
5. Sensible.
6. Might be a messy matter considering how local temperatures work.
Final verdict: Primarily the snow is a troublesome matter, secondarily, local temperatures are going to be messy to implement.
Dwarf gamer found:
Buildings - square, not round
Materials - from rubble mound
Dark caves - lit 'n' cleaned out
Settlements - deep underground
Farmability - to grinder bound
Shields - made creepers but sound
Axes and crossbows - taking mobs out
1. Local temperatures seem to be a messy matter. Might be problematic to implement considering that much of the farming takes place underground, where in real life you got perpetual 8-10 degrees, or as I've heard about it, Tsarist Air Conditioning. Or in building interiors. Primary real-life example - glasshouses. If seasons slowed the growth, all farms would be built in glasshouses or bunkers. 2. The biggest problem of seasons - you either end up with all snowy and icy builds melting everywhere above freezing temperature or you have natural snow in winter.
3. Sensible.
4. Not the brightest idea considering they would make a start harder. Implementation of these problems in form of, for example, aggressive mobs being stronger in certain biomes/seasons, like snowy skeletons that slow you in tundra, is a better idea in my opinion.
5. Sensible.
6. Might be a messy matter considering how local temperatures work.
Final verdict: Primarily the snow is a troublesome matter, secondarily, local temperatures are going to be messy to implement.
local temperatures wouldn't be too hard - they could work the same way lightmaps do.
local temperatures wouldn't be too hard - they could work the same way lightmaps do.
Local temperature is more complicated than light. For example, being in a small pit will give better protection from the freezing wind than under the roof.
But what if the roof is in a bigger pit? What if walls of the pit are rounded rather than going sharply down?
Also, wall thickness - being under, or besides, three-block wall should give better insulation than behind a single layer of glass panes or iron bars.
And what with completely enclosed halls that are too big to load entirely on budget PCs?
What with convection mechanics?
And don't forget there is still snow-in-summer issue.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Dwarf gamer found:
Buildings - square, not round
Materials - from rubble mound
Dark caves - lit 'n' cleaned out
Settlements - deep underground
Farmability - to grinder bound
Shields - made creepers but sound
Axes and crossbows - taking mobs out
Local temperature is more complicated than light. For example, being in a small pit will give better protection from the freezing wind than under the roof.
But what if the roof is in a bigger pit? What if walls of the pit are rounded rather than going sharply down?
Also, wall thickness - being under, or besides, three-block wall should give better insulation than behind a single layer of glass panes or iron bars.
And what with completely enclosed halls that are too big to load entirely on budget PCs?
What with convection mechanics?
And don't forget there is still snow-in-summer issue.
I've played using season modifications before, and I kind of like the extra level of depth it adds. Not sure how I feel about temperatures, but on the other hand this would really be more of an aesthetic thing without a major change like that. ...I wouldn't see temperature as a strictly necessary thing to implement, but it might be neat for hardcore mode, or as an optional feature to give players more of an incentive to worry about their surroundings and the progression of seasons. Overall though, I like this suggestion, particularly as it doesn't seem too hard to change the biome-flora colors on a regular basis, and add snow and ice in winter.
Seasons should be added to the game where they would be reflected as temperature changes.
Suggestions:
1. Have certain seasons allow crops to grow faster/slower.
2. Have temperature affect if it snows or not.
3. Have certain biomes such as desert, jungle, and snowy biomes not reflect seasons.
4. Make temperature affect the player in negative ways like two hot or too cold.(if to cold maybe where armor)
5. Have trees or grass change color in different seasons.
6. Temperature would give campfires real use.
These are all brainstorm suggestions and I would like to hear what y'all think.
Thanks for the your thoughts. Number 4 was one of my favorite ideas in the list to add some challenge to the game.
number 4 should only exist as a mod IMO.
Creator of Metroid Cubed 3, a Metroid-themed mod! Become a donator today!
BzzzZZzzzT! Nope. I had a feeling this was gonna be in the suggestion. Things like this just ruin gameplay and have no good reason to be there except to annoy the player.
What if I want to live in the tundra or desert and I'm just getting started? That makes some biomes "upgrades" of others and ruins it for the ones that troll the player with temperature stuff. Everything else in the idea is fine, but #4 should be removed.
So like 70% support.
I see where your coming from. In my head though, I believe that temperature would add immersion and meaning to a biome. It seems a bit weird that the player doesn't experience any kind of physical change going from a forest to a frozen plains. I dont believe it should have a negative modifier at all times though. I believe to aviod the negative modifier you should have to wear armor, have a campfire, have an enclosed shelter(house) or have resistance enchatments. Something along the lines of that.
I like the idea of too hot/ too cold to affect the player - but there should be a gamerule/option to allow player to turn on/off the option (maybe in 'hard' mode - temperature affect player but in normal it doesn't ??)
The 'too cold' bit where you have to wear armour.. not 100% sure I like that bit but maybe if it affect the hunger or the speed of the player then maybe.
for example: If it's too cold (or too hot) & player is 'outside' (exposed to sky) then maybe your walking speed could be slightly slower than normal or your hunger/stamina drops slightly faster (if you're underground then you're not exposed to the sky so you're back to normal speed/stamina rates)
In a cold biome then having a fire 'nearby' (anything with a flame so a torch would do) keeps your speed/stamina normal (lets say if you're ~20-30 blocks to it). If it's too hot then maybe having a 'water supply' nearby (1x1 water hole, a well, a filled cauldron etc) within ~20-30 block keeps you normal.
This is easy to achieve (you need to build a farm at some point so that would have water & normally you'd light up your base so you have the light/heat)
You could maybe expand this idea.. If you have torches in your inventory or maybe watermelon/water bucket etc then the affects don't get applied either
If it damages gameplay, the 'immersion' is not worth it. Gameplay > Realism. Always always.
This temperature-hurts-players idea has been brought up many times before, and is rejected pretty much every single time. Using realism to back an idea like this are arguments that will almost always fail hard. This is why being slowed from carrying blocks of metal in our pockets that even a gorilla couldn't carry isn't in the game. It's why a thirst bar or "let's have food go bad!!" (ideas so hated that a star explodes every time they're mentioned) will never touch the game. It's why cave-ins that crush the player ain't ever gonna happen.
Having those ungodly annoying things deliberately programmed in the game just to go "but it makes sense in real life tho" is an always-failing statement. No one wants their gameplay brought down for that.
Nah, the core idea is still there: some biomes mildly trolling you and making them unfun to travel/live in compared to biomes where you don't have to do that stuff.
the gist is that minecraft is a sandbox open-world game, not a hardcore survival game. most people would be instantly turned away by survival elements such as having to regulate temperature, a thirst bar, ect. the hunger system only exists to balance out the healing system - even it is extremely simplified, as there's no eating cooldown, debuffs from eating too much, it doesn't drain very fast, and there's almost zero complexity in the foods.
Creator of Metroid Cubed 3, a Metroid-themed mod! Become a donator today!
You may be right Fir. I did see what CannonFoddr suggested. Maybe put temperature as a hard or hardcore mode feature. Players might find it more annoying in the base game so I do give you that.
That's still gonna be a cold hard 'no'. Putting that in hard/hardcore still doesn't save the idea by that much. It's still taking the fun out of the pure freedom for people who want to enjoy their favorite biomes by adding extra conditions for being in them. It's also annoying for a player spawning in these biomes with nothing and having to deal with these negative biome traits, especially if large biomes is on.
This sort of thing feels better as a mod, but not as a vanilla feature in everyone's game. I think your best bet is to stick with the other factors of this suggestion.
And I know there's the "this could be an option" road that a lot of people like to take, but if it's an unpopular idea, it doesn't really pay to make the effort to program that in.
While I'm not entirely sure about the idea myself, what if instead of just objectively negative effects due to extreme temperatures, there was some good and some bad? For instance, the cold might slow you down a little bit, but it could also decrease damage taken (like you're being numbed), and the heat could increase the rate at which you lose hunger, but decrease the number of hostile mobs that spawn (since Minecraft likes to treat light and heat as the same thing). Not a fully fleshed out idea, and maybe some aspects of it don't make sense, but you get my idea. As someone said, having down sides to living in a certain biome will discourage people from ever living there, but perhaps if they balanced each other out, it would actually add a new variable to people's consideration in where to live.
Just a thought.
It adds more things to look forward to seeing in the game, which keeps people playing it
So 100xs yes to this idea andany other additions that would utilize this feature in a good way
1. Local temperatures seem to be a messy matter. Might be problematic to implement considering that much of the farming takes place underground, where in real life you got perpetual 8-10 degrees, or as I've heard about it, Tsarist Air Conditioning. Or in building interiors. Primary real-life example - glasshouses. If seasons slowed the growth, all farms would be built in glasshouses or bunkers.
2. The biggest problem of seasons - you either end up with all snowy and icy builds melting everywhere above freezing temperature or you have natural snow in summer.
3. Sensible.
4. Not the brightest idea considering they would make a start harder. Implementation of these problems in form of, for example, aggressive mobs being stronger in certain biomes/seasons, like snowy skeletons that slow you in tundra, is a better idea in my opinion.
5. Sensible.
6. Might be a messy matter considering how local temperatures work.
Final verdict: Primarily the snow is a troublesome matter, secondarily, local temperatures are going to be messy to implement.
Dwarf gamer found:
Buildings - square, not round
Materials - from rubble mound
Dark caves - lit 'n' cleaned out
Settlements - deep underground
Farmability - to grinder bound
Shields - made creepers but sound
Axes and crossbows - taking mobs out
local temperatures wouldn't be too hard - they could work the same way lightmaps do.
Creator of Metroid Cubed 3, a Metroid-themed mod! Become a donator today!
Local temperature is more complicated than light. For example, being in a small pit will give better protection from the freezing wind than under the roof.
But what if the roof is in a bigger pit? What if walls of the pit are rounded rather than going sharply down?
Also, wall thickness - being under, or besides, three-block wall should give better insulation than behind a single layer of glass panes or iron bars.
And what with completely enclosed halls that are too big to load entirely on budget PCs?
What with convection mechanics?
And don't forget there is still snow-in-summer issue.
Dwarf gamer found:
Buildings - square, not round
Materials - from rubble mound
Dark caves - lit 'n' cleaned out
Settlements - deep underground
Farmability - to grinder bound
Shields - made creepers but sound
Axes and crossbows - taking mobs out
it doesn't have to be hyper-realistic, lmao.
Creator of Metroid Cubed 3, a Metroid-themed mod! Become a donator today!
I've played using season modifications before, and I kind of like the extra level of depth it adds. Not sure how I feel about temperatures, but on the other hand this would really be more of an aesthetic thing without a major change like that. ...I wouldn't see temperature as a strictly necessary thing to implement, but it might be neat for hardcore mode, or as an optional feature to give players more of an incentive to worry about their surroundings and the progression of seasons. Overall though, I like this suggestion, particularly as it doesn't seem too hard to change the biome-flora colors on a regular basis, and add snow and ice in winter.
Cooking with Mindthemoods ~ Biomes ~ Archeology
---
~ My Portfolio ~ Skindex ~ Test ~ Discs ~