• 0

    posted a message on New info on wolf/zombie AI.
    Quote from Skylinerw

    Mhm, I'm really impressed with the dramatic change. Unfortunately it comes with some minor bugs, so be sure to report them to Jonk: https://twitter.com/#!/jonkagstrom. I've got a showing a few quirks about their AI, namely their behavior in water. If Jonk doesn't fix that, then water could be used defensively against mobs in some manner (not that it couldn't before, but it seems to utterly wreck their new pathfinding).


    I think in a recent snapshot their pathfinding was changed to make them sink in water, so it's understandable it messes up their AI to a degree. But I think it's a welcome addition, as now it's going to hard enough to avoid a zombie on land, let alone in water. (If I'm wrong about the me sinking in water, let me know). It would be good to have some relief by dipping into some water.
    Posted in: 1.1 Update Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on tree leaves need to be cut back at the bottom in jungle
    I was under the impression that that was the point.

    Jungles, by all rights, SHOULD be difficult to navigate. It's a freaking JUNGLE, after all.
    Posted in: 1.1 Update Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Parkour in Minecraft takes a hit
    Quote from Errorsatz

    Yeah, clearly standing on ladders is all about parkour ... oh wait, it actually isn't at all.

    I don't even play parkour maps, and I benefit from standing on ladders all the time:
    * Being able to use trap doors in a non-fugly way (building/survival aspect!)


    What is 'non-fugly' to you? And is your opinion really fact, or just you trying to speak for the 'majority'. Use some creativity, build around a trapdoor, include it in a piece of architecture. Work it into a design or feature creatively. Creativity IS what Minecraft is about, right?

    Quote from Errorsatz
    * Exploring ravines and being able to quickly mine something (building/survival aspect!)


    I don't see what your ravine point has to do with anything (one extra ladder? Oh noes!), but I'll give your mining point merit. Granted, there are workaround situations, but I agree for ease of use, the old ladders are best.

    Quote from Errorsatz
    * Concealed floor entrances (building- ... you get the idea)


    I saw a post in a thread similar to this that had an image of one extra piston being used to pull away a second block to make a sort of staircase up. All these things take is a little more creativity, which seems to be the main theme surrounding the hate for this change.

    Quote from Errorsatz
    * Being able to tear down tall ladders quickly


    I don't see how having to tear down one more ladder than usual would really affect your Minecraft experience to such an extent that it appears as a complaint on a forum.

    Quote from Errorsatz
    * Seeing what's on a cliff/ledge before climbing onto it


    Why not add a block off to the side of the ladder so that you can move over to to get a look?

    Quote from Errorsatz
    For that matter, weren't the original complaints about the collision box because of somebody trying to jump sideways at a ladder? That sounds a lot more like a parkour thing than it does a building/survival thing.


    There was also the issue of falling from a height and being smashed to a pulp on the hitbox of an object that is CLEARLY attatched directly to the wall. The hitbox is empty space; and is more of an annoyance than anything. And God forbid you should have a ladder in a narrow hallway, and having to deal with collisions on the side of the hitbox.

    Quote from Errorsatz
    Why would people consider the collision box a bug anyway? Having seen a ladder, I can assure you that they do, in fact, stick out from the wall.


    I love the hypocrisy of this statement (but note this statement isn't aimed at you, as obviously I can't evaluate whether you actually ARE one of the people I will mention). If I used the 'real world' argument, I'd be ripped to shreds and prompty have statements like 'there's no green exploding shrubs in real life' shoved down my throat.

    TL;DR: All you people are forgetting what ladders were originally for: climbing. I have no problem with you people being creative and finding new and original uses for the ladders (see; parkour) but don't go around whinging when the things you base your ideas around is changed to improve its ORIGINAL use. Unfortunately, that's what's happened here, and it's a shame that Jeb has been swayed by such a minority. Say what you want about Notch and his 'not listening to the community', but at least that attitude stopped things like this happening.
    Posted in: 1.1 Update Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on ██▓FLATHAM - RPG Map Based on Skyrim & Oblivion - v0.2.1 - +70.000 DL's▓██
    Heya, lolo =) Sorry I haven't been able to get back to you lately as I've been on holidays.

    Congrats on getting your map played by inthelittlewood! He's a really famous Youtuber and I'm sure he'll get you even more views and downloads than you already have. I played your map a little while ago, and I have to say finding my way around was much easier, and I'm enjoying the different architecture of the buildings as I move further along in the map.

    I'm really enjoying myself with the map at the moment, so keep up the great work and I hope to see more amazing developments in Flatham!
    Posted in: Maps
  • 0

    posted a message on Why its our fault for what has happened to minecraft
    Quote from ChaosGuardian

    Explain how we rushed him. Customers want more and more. That's the nature of the beast. That's how humans are. Notch wasn't ready for it and that's his fault.


    But it's not the nature of the beast to stomp all over a product and condemn it.

    OT: I agree with the OP, at least until the full release rolled around. I agree fully with the musings about how Notch was rushed pre-release, particularly because of how the community is a gigantic behemoth type who can't stand a wait exceeding a week. Notch tried to add some interesting stuff for 1.8; the community drove him into the ground with complaints about the length between updates. Notch releases the first half of the update and it promptly gets stomped on by the writhing mass of its own community. they complain and Notch feels more pressure to gain the people's trust again. He tries to add more features, tries to spoon feed the monster to keep it quiet for a moment, but it isn't long before the beast yells and complains again, stomping its feet and shoutIng about how the game isn't what THEY wanted it to be.
    So we get a whole bunch of incomplete features at the tail end of 1.8 because you all wouldn't shut up about how every update is crap or taking too long. It's a vicious cycle that was repeated many times even before the 1.8 update. I sort of see 1.8 as the death of the Minecraft community, the event that sent these once-peaceful forums into a bloodbath. It's a shame, really.

    But the 1.8 update is also where my defense of Notch ends, at least in he context of this argument. It was plain idiotic to set a release date at such an unreasonable date, and idiotic still to procrastinate until a few weeks before said date. There's no ground to fault the community here, as I understand many tried to dissuade Notch about the release, but by then it was too late as bookings had been made, etc.

    So I didn't vote, OP. And I don't think I will. I'm more sad to see such a bitter hated spreading across the forums over subjects such as this, and where people can't accept that they have to take at least SOME of the lame for what happens to a product they can directly influence.

    Quote from X9YUM9X

    And what part of Minecraft isn't finished? How is the NPC's incomplete? Answer that.


    You're going to get ripped apart for this, my friend. I might at least try to be civil. Many see the NPCs as incomplete (me included) because Notch promised interactions with them via trade, quests, etc. Obviously, this is not what we got and most are frustrated and even angry.
    Posted in: 1.0 Update Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Why add the end?
    Quote from raseru

    Can you do the end multiple times on the same map? Do you have to redo the eyes and all too?

    If you can't, then what happens when you enter? can you leave?


    I believe that the dragon only spawns once, so once you kill it, it's dead for good. But you can re-enter the portal to do whatever you please in the end, and the portal with which you left the first time is still there, so you can exit.

    Quote from Altoid2

    I didn't say that anything was good or bad you nut, I said that the majority of the Minecraft community changed their mind about the topic of "adding an end" the moment that Notch added an end. It doesn't matter if it's "good" or "bad," the point is that people will always approve of what he does, no matter how good or bad the result is.

    How much do you want to bet that people would suddenly approve of guns if Notch hypothetically decided to add them?


    But you misunderstand, it was the implementation they liked. For most people, the word 'end' means the finish, where one can go no further, where everything 'ends'.
    And I can imagine that for most, this was the idea they had in their mind when Notch mentioned an ending. They thought that it would be the final aspect of gameplay that would allow them to go no further and prevent you keep playing your world.
    Also, I imagine some thought that the ending would be compulsory, and in a linear style. Obviously, that goes against Minecraft's position as a sandbox game, so when Notch released it, the community saw that you could continue playing after the boss was defeated, and that it was a non-linear path to the boss, as well as that it was completely optional.
    The community was happy because there were options for everyone - those who wanted something to work towards had an end-game scenario that they could finish and optionally continue playing, and those who just wanted to build and mine didn't have to.

    And no, I don't think anyone would approve of guns, except those COD fans who always seem to show up. Guns just go against the 'psuedo-fantasy' theme of the game. But if I'll be honest, I think that a difficult-to-craft blunderbuss (a primitive gun) wouldn't be a terrible addition. But that's just me.

    And if you browsed through the forums for more than 5 seconds, I'm sure that you'd find that many, many people are not in favour of what Notch has done. I can't say if that is the majority, though, because the most opposed to the game are normally the loudest.
    Posted in: 1.0 Update Discussion
  • 2

    posted a message on The End Replaced Sky Dimension
    Quote from Trenix

    For the millionth time, sandbox games don't have an ending.


    Certainly not a traditional ending, where every thing is finished, wrapped up, done. But they often have an optional storyline or end scenario, and allow the player to keep playing instead of losing the world they have altered and shaped the way they want it.

    Quote from Trenix »
    Those are not sandbox games, those are roleplaying games. You take role of a hero. In minecraft, you're just a person doing your own thing with no defined role, you define it yourself. There is usually little to no objectives cause you make them yourself. Seems like if you google search that the definitions of sandbox game gets replaced with "open world" which states that it's "free roaming". So you're going to convince me that Need for Speed is a sandbox game?


    Yes, I suppose I could, provided the story campaign is finished. You have free roam in most of the games.

    Definitions of 'sandbox':

    Quote from Wikipedia »
    The term sandbox refers more to the mechanics of a game and how, as in a physical sandbox, the user is entertained by his ability to play creatively and with there being "no right way" of playing the game.


    Quote from Bat in the Attic »
    The term Sandbox was taken from computer gaming (not just Computer RPGs) and used to describe campaigns that featured players wandering around driven by goals they set.


    It has nothing to do with structure, continuous world, instancing, etc. It is all about you making your own fun and goals. The game does not make these for you or lead you around by the hand.

    Those games are NOT RPGs (except Skyrim, obviously. That probably wasn't a great addition to the list). You don't level up, you don't gain skills, there's no decision making, you don't upgrade weapons and armour. These ARE sandbox games, you CAN create your own objectives, there is NOTHING pushing you towards an endgame scenario, except maybe a (completely optional) story. Wanna ignore RDR's story? Sure, go ahead, screw around in the world. Provided you have the money, everything is available to you. No need for that pesky Gun-Cleaning skill to level up before you can upgrade your guns, because there isn't one.

    So you're going to convince me that GTA isn't a sandbox game?

    Quote from Trenix »
    What do you think of when hear about a sandbox game? You should think of a sandbox. Where you have a virtual world that can be altered by you, doing whatever you want, however you want. There is no set objectives, unless I define them myself. If I were to define a sandbox game the way you did, pretty much every game is a sandbox.


    Eh, not really. Your logic seems to be crumbling. Open your eyes and you'll see the vast majority of games are linear gameplay that have a set finish, forcing you to start again or stop playing the game. Note I said it's an OPTIONAL end in sandbox games, and OPTIONS have no part in most games today.

    And thank you for proving my list's legitimacy. Just Cause 2 lets you bring your 'heat' level way up, changing the game and making you more cautious around the gameworld. It changes the environment, though I admit it's not the strongest contender in the list. In Assassin's Creed, feel free to set your own goal and raise your Notoriety level, changing the way you play the game. Or you could be cautious and act from the shadows, assassinating and then slipping back into darkness before anyone notices.

    Skyrim doubles as a sandbox game, as you can alter the game world (try FUS RO DAHing at a shelf or table and you'll see) and also raise bounty, etc. Absolutely no linear gameplay, except for the beginning scene. Red Dead Redemption lets you raise honour and change the gameworld and how people react to you, etc.

    Perfect example of actual sandbox games...

    Quote from Trenix »
    Xsyon, Wurm Online, Mortal Online, Terraria, and Darkfall.


    Yes, they are sandbox games, but I find it ironic that Terraria has an 'ending', so by your logic it shouldn't be on that list.

    And now we come back to the main point: Minecraft has no 'set' objective. That's all there is to it. And frankly, I'd have to call you (regretfully) a fool if you were to try and convince me otherwise.
    Posted in: 1.0 Update Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on The End Replaced Sky Dimension
    Quote from Trenix

    That's what a sandbox game is, a game without an ending. Technically The End, doesn't even end the game. So Notch's dumb idea of having an ending only gave us a useless dimension that offered nothing but a boss fight, which wasn't even that great. That's time well spent right?

    That is why sandboxes don't have an ending, because it limits our experience, which is a bad idea. Sandboxes don't have limits.


    Wrong. Sandboxes almost always have some kind of ending, heck, otherwise there would be no story whatsoever. And in nearly all sandbox games, there is absolutely nothing pushing you towards an end goal. Such is the case with Minecraft. YOU find the stronghold. YOU activate the portal. YOU enter the portal. It's all down to you.

    And you know what? You can keep on playing as soon as the battle's over. There's no 'bonus' that gives you an unobtainable item that others who choose not to fight the boss get. It's just for those that would like an end goal to work to (for indeed, Minecraft can seem a little TOO limitless at times for some) and for others, well, you don't HAVE to go to the End.

    And also, are you basing your argument on a single tweet and image quite a few months back now? You know nothing about the dimension. It might have been for the best that it was scrapped, it might have turned out like crap. So really, you have no place to go around whining about the replacement of the sky with The End, when, really, all you're doing is inferring off a tiny morsel of information half a year ago.

    Quote from Trenix

    Name your sandbox games.


    Just Cause 2; Red Dead Redemption; Skyrim; Assassin's Creed...

    Need any more? I'm happy to supply.
    Posted in: 1.0 Update Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on ██▓FLATHAM - RPG Map Based on Skyrim & Oblivion - v0.2.1 - +70.000 DL's▓██
    Quote from lolo500

    Thank you, now this is a serious review :smile.gif:, but just some things, the minecart tracks things, its the same thing if i use a mod or the minecraft original booster tracks, about the 1 church instead the 2 church thing, sounds kinda stupid, the flat structure rooftops, you must know that like other rpg's, every city has its own structure, the semnar structure its like that, as you may see, pontamur structure is a lot different, you will like it, but what i will really fix, its the quest path thing, i will try to fix it and release the next version ASAP. Again, thanks for review :smile.gif:

    EDIT: Now that i think a little bit... Not even Semnar has flat rooftops, only a couple of houses... So i don't see your point there.


    No problem =) Just trying to help.

    I'm fine with there being 2 churches, and if that's your building style, I have no problems. It was merely a suggestion :smile.gif:

    It's also nice to hear that you plan on working on the quest pathing.

    And about the rooftop thing, I guess I just noticed them, particularly at the beginning of the map on the dock, and recalled them from Aramis, so that was sort of the first thing I criticised. Anyhow, I'm glad to hear you're taking my criticism to heart, and I plan to keep playing Flatham, and take a look at Pontamur, because from the screenshots, it looks pretty nice :smile.gif:

    This map has amazing potential, so I'm just trying to give a few suggestions to make it the best it can be.

    EDIT: Herp derp. Ignore my point about the minecart tracks in my review. I'd completely forgotten that Zombe's modpack was turned on, and that you could control the cart yourself >.< Sorry about my ignorance... :tongue.gif: Sorry for any discomfort caused. :smile.gif:
    Posted in: Maps
  • 0

    posted a message on ██▓FLATHAM - RPG Map Based on Skyrim & Oblivion - v0.2.1 - +70.000 DL's▓██

    I have to agree with lolo on this matter. People would surely not wait half a year for one single friggin' map. Besides, many of the mods that lolo uses to enhance the experience cannot be implemented into AdventureCraft.

    And beg pardon? You say this map is not unique? What other f*cking map out there features a seven hour long quest line in a fantastic medieval-fantasy, and bonus side quests, along with amazing builds... and managed to keep you immersed for the entire thing? Play the entire map before you comment, and then we'll see whether or not this map is suited for Minecraft.

    AdventureCraft would enhance the experience, yes, but going back to what I said before, people are not going to wait 6-7 months just for a map. You'll enjoy it a lot even after completing the main quest line, I promise you, so please don't comment on the map as a whole without first playing the entire thing.


    Unique? Well, I say this with hesitation, but yes, I suppose this map could be considered 'unique'. But the fact is, anyone could have slapped this together. But more on that below!

    AdventureCraft would definitely enhance the game, and I feel we have no disagreements there - but you seem to miss one key point. The '6-7 month' wait would be non-existent if no-one knew about it! This map was hyped to high hell and I think its suffered from it. I'm sure even you could admit its been rushed and has attempted to cram as much in as possible.

    Anyhow, I've played this map through to Mission 3. Now wait, before you go on babbling about how I haven't seen the entirety of the map. Trust me, I've seen enough to make a few observations. I'll list them below:

    Lack of polish: My first and most important complaint. It would seem some things in this map are sub-par with what could be achieved with a bit more time for testing. Indeed, it seems as if lolo slapped features on then tried to make a new aspect to the map without even checking the first one. A major time I noticed this was on the Observation Tower at Semnar. Even despite the eyesore (seriously, one-block towers are a MAJOR no-no in adventure maps; they look amazingly ugly), as I neared the top, my journey came to a jarring end when it seemed that ladders had not been placed on certain blocks, blocking my way up. If anything, this goes to show how much lolo was rushing when he created this map, no doubt trying to deliver the ungodly amount of hype created by this map. The map, from what I played, was also rife with spelling and grammatical mistakes, but maybe that's just me being my Grammar-Nazi self.

    Lack of detail: Aramis had this problem too, but to a lesser degree than Flatham. But a major problem from Aramis has returned - flat buildings. Nobody likes a house with a flat roof. They are extremely ugly and sort of tie back in with my first point, that these areas obviously weren't quality checked before release. Also, some real-life aspects have been implemented poorly - boats don't have their decks in line with the ocean, or else flooding would be a major issue. Houses are also generally one block type. Mix it up a little.

    It's too damned big: In an effort to pack the map with as much content as possible (which you certainly have done, lolo), you've made some areas unnecessarily big. Semnar - why does it need two (as far as I know; there may be more that I didn't see) churches? Why not get rid of them and create one, massive cathedral and show off your building skills (which I know you have - I was blown away by Birch City in Aramis).

    Lack of progression: Tying in with the above point, the level progression is confusing, and, as a result, I'm stuck at Mission 3 trying to find the minecart station to get to the castle (I know there's one in front of me, but where is the one I need for the mission?). In fact, I tried going along that minecart track straight on from the South entrance of Semnar, and found myself at an NPC village which I was sure I was not meant to be at. I wandered around, lost, and when I came to the forum to get help, I thought I would throw in my two cents about the map. And thus, this post was born!

    Eyesores and (presumed) laziness: Yeah, I said a bit about eyesores early on; you know, the observation tower and whatnot. But on my confusing expeditions through Mission 3, I saw that the random stone floating minecart tracks had returned from Aramis. All I can say here is aesthetics, aesthetics, aesthetics. Train tracks don't float, bud. Give it a realistic touch and add supports. What's more, I noticed as I tried to ride said track that there was a complete lack of powered rails, which, you know, are needed to even get the cart going. Powered rails were added in 1.7! Either you created the rail pre-1.7 (and then didn't playtest it - anyway, even in pre-1.7 days, there's still no visible way the cart could even start moving) or you originally left it in, telling yourself you'd come back to it later and fix it up. Again, showing a lack of playtesting.
    Please, please, PLEASE playtest your maps before releasing them. Trust me, it helps.
    Finally, I walked along the railway line, still confused about my destination, and stumbled upon an NPC village. When I realised it was a part of the map, I was genuinely surprised that there were no additions or improvements made on the village, bar a few blocks inside houses. The paths weren't even fixed up! Again, this is a sign of rushing.

    Relating to one of my points above, its not a good idea to work with an infinite map as generated in Minecraft. It usually gives an incentive to include a bunch of content and spread everything out and make areas as large as possible, and this works against maps as players get lost and confused. For example, in my map I'm working on at the moment (and I'm not trying to make my map seem better than yours) I flew around until I found a gigantic island separated from the mainland. I deleted the mainland and filled it with water, and by that time I knew exactly how much space I had within the island, and I could plan sizes of structures and cities accordingly. Just a little tip.

    Holy crap, I just realised how titanic this post is getting, so I'll wrap it up. The moral of the story is, stop rushing and take your time. This map could be amazing, but too much has been crammed in and a lack of real polish is showing. Right now, the main selling point of this map is its size. And to me, that's the only real thing this map has going for it.

    Quantity =/= Quality

    Much love,
    -HuddoCoates

    TL;DR: I'm not giving you the satisfaction. Go back and read it, or kindly move on.
    Posted in: Maps
  • 0

    posted a message on Minecraft Released - My Review
    SlideToPlay says hello. They mark their games out of 4. are you going to up and call them a bad reviewing site?

    Goragle's review was just about a hundred times better than yours. It went into detail, gave categories (like graphics, music, etc) and also highlighting how influential and successful Minecraft has been around the world.

    Try harder next time, please.

    Unless you're a troll...
    Posted in: Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Minecraft's First Dry Riverbed? (1.9.4)
    I've seen a couple of these. They're pretty neat, whether the coding was intentional or not.

    I've also seen a dried up lake bed, which was one of the most awesome things I've ever seen in Minecraft.
    Posted in: Screenshots
  • 0

    posted a message on Enchanting makes me sad sometimes.
    Well, that's the risk you take.

    And I kinda like it like that.
    Posted in: 1.0 Update Discussion
  • 0

    posted a message on Locks
    Ok, here's my stance (arguments welcome):

    Locking a door:

    - Freaking break the block next to it. Bam, you're inside.

    - Lava moat? Should I be scared? Nope, because I can build over the moat and break the block next to the door. Bam, I'm inside.

    - Faction territory? In that case, you don't even need a lock anyway. The only people able to access your chests are those in your faction, who you obviously trust. Anyway, this discussion seems to be geared towards vanilla gameplay, so I would direct your attention to the above points.


    Locking a chest/storage minecart:

    - The way I see it, one of the fun parts of a vanilla server is hiding your treasures creatively. I'm not talking about 'hiding your chest behind a wall' stuff. Some people build traps, etc to protect their goods. These people put thought into their gameplay, and it's also enjoyable to try and get around traps to get to treasures.

    - Oh noes, GRIEFERS! Well, guess what. Griefers gonna grief. They already have x-rays, heck, look what Team AVO can do. In one of their recent episodes, they turned a Christian server into a shrine to Hell in a matter of hours using their OWN plugins. I'd give it at most a day or two before a client becomes available that allows someone to bypass locks in a chest.

    -------------------

    If they were to be able to be implemented (which I highly doubt, given the amount of cons), I would definitely say no to retaining the key after death, or dropping it in lava. PVP is PVP, why shouldn't someone be able to rob you of your key and go loot your stuff. And if YOU lose the key, you have no-one to blame but yourself for carrying it around anyway.
    In reality, putting your stuff in a locked chest is even more dangerous than hiding it well. And I know that eventually someone will accidentally lock their key in their chest, and I guarantee hilarity will ensue.

    So no, I don't think it is a good suggestion, which is a shame, because the OP obviously thought it out well.
    Posted in: Suggestions
  • 0

    posted a message on villagers are retards
    Quote from DaBiggman

    Yes, they are retarded.
    Yes, they are broken.
    No, they will not get finished anytime soon.


    Proof?

    And don't give me the tweet stating that they won't be finished until after Minecon. We all know that, and I wouldn't exactly call Minecon a long time away.

    No, I want the tweet that says that Notch is not going to be fixing the villages until after release. For all you know, it might be the first update to come out after MineCon. So please, provide proof to back up your claims. Or else I can't take them seriously.

    As for the 'unfinished for full release' argument which is bound to pop up eventually, I think it would be in the best interests of Notch to remove the NPCs from the official release, as reviewers may penalize the game for having unfinished features.
    Posted in: 1.0 Update Discussion
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.