Oh, I would be surprised if anything on this subforum actually became real. A lot of modders that are good just invent their own ideas or any modders that hang around here don't want anything remotely to do with a challenge.
I wish modding was actually easy to learn, I would make all my suggestions myself and other people's. If a modder would like to step in and provide an alternate perspective on why these suggestions are rarely made that would be better than great.
it seems he still continues to work on it, since he have now shown us the ogre bosses that are supposed to be there...
and it have not been added to 1.8. if i remember right, the updating of all existing mobs to 1.8 came before even thinking of implementing anything new, so i guess you wont see them, the manticor or the bigcat thingy in the 1.8 update... at least not the first one
Well when he told me to put up the polls with Ogre Princes being one of them, they gained massive popularity.
I used to post once a day about the polls because the results were always changing then one day they just fell behind, literally from first to last.
Suddenly the polls just never changed anymore, one vote is too little (for reference Ogre Princes have 6 votes to BigCats having 61).
(190 votes)
I would be surprised if he made Ogre Princes priority. Even the manticore is 5th. I have a feeling that BigCats are priority because they double chimps practically, then chimps because the model already exist but chimps are also in second. I feel like frogs are popular but not enough that 3rd place justifies them being made after chimps, DrZhark might skip that one and go to the Manticore or Nether Monster straight after chimps.
I just can't put the effort in, you are all just too stubborn.
I give up, this is too negative to argue with bricks.
I like vocal chat because I would use it, if you don't like vocal chat turn it off because that would be like it never existed in the first place.
And let me tell you, not only do I use vocal chat in about every game that has it that I play, I still use text chat.
Text chat will not die because of this and not only that but you could only make people happier (the people that want it).
Your nitpicks are silly ideologies that represent the worst case scenario.
Censors being bypassed? /mute or for admins /ban. If offences are too high /chat 0 and not /chat global.
Range to short? /chat 48 or even something like /chat chunkrange
Squeaker spamming his mic? /mute
Literally everything bad can be countered but no, apparently disabling it isn't enough, you need it to never exist in the first place for your own selfish reasons.
There would be hills variants of all biomes? Rolling grass hills hills? Or Rolling grass hills+? I think this idea is good, but still seems slightly rough.
I was meaning like Dead Forest Hills. Sorry, should have clarified.
This isnt the worst idea, but it is not good either. I do not want 6 year olds screaming into voice chat, spammers repeating same sentences over and over or idiots insulting everyone near me. No one wants that to happen.
Also, what if my friend is too far away from me? Then I can not use voice chat with him? What is we play Hide n Seek on a big map? Also, this would break censor system, as people would be able to talk and swear.
NO SUPPORT
1. Option to turn it off. In that example, let's say Mineplex, you could just turn it off, suddenly no more screaming 6 year olds. As I said earlier, it would be better if instead of turning it off, it was an option to turn it on.
2. Then I guess you two should stay close, it's not like it's the end of the world if you can't talk for 3 minutes anyway. The original post suggest 10 blocks but I suggest noteblock length of 48 so 48 is still far enough for two people to be next to each other but still pretty far. Also as suggested a server can up this number or lower it.
3. Censor system? You mean that optional thing that servers use to keep them PG? Not only does it not apply to /msg or /mail send (try it out, even with a censor you can swear in private) but censorship is weak and is usually bypassed such as PH instead of F. You could even consider this vocal chat as a form of private chat. Also in the event of a server allowing global chat, moderators are the only ones on their that would be forced. Anyone who offences the PG rule could easily be banned.
Again there is NOTHING that is bad about this, only assumptions.
I searched and surprisingly no one has suggested any of these before.
The whole purpose of these suggestions are to not overfill the world with biomes no one recognises.
While only semi-redundant in the fact that we don't need these biomes, this is just to populate the world with slightly more variety.
As I researched, I found that biomes are organised by temperature so I did the same.
Snowy Biomes:
Frozen Ocean:
This biome was pretty cool when it was around, giant flat ocean that you could build on. It would make a fantastic return.
Foliage colour: Standard for temp.
Dead Trees:
A forest with no sign of vegetation, pretty much logs sticking out of the ground and snow everywhere with no flowers in sight. This biome is sustainable for a short time but as no saplings can possibly be gained you'll be forced out of the area quickly.
Foliage colour: Saturated desert
Cold Biomes:
Stone Island:
This is a normal island only has 3 blocks, gravel, dirt and stone. Pretty much serves as a small platform in the ocean but as it has no trees, it becomes hazardous to smash your boat into. As no vegetation spawns farming is impossible and primary food on this island would be fishing but with no wood...
Foliage colour: Standard for temp.
Stone Plateau:
Looks similar to grass plains except the obvious difference is the lack of plants and the 3 consistent blocks of gravel, dirt and stone. Very similar to Stone Beach biomes but no association with water or mountains. Very flat so ideal for building however as previously mentioned, no wood makes permanent residence unpractical.
Foliage colour: Standard for temp.
Medium Biomes:
Rolling Grass Hills:
Similar to a plains biome, but has high and low level terrain. Grass covers every bit of land and no stone should be exposed.
Foliage colour: Vibrant green
Hot Biomes:
Dry River:
Simply an empty river, should have hardened clay, dirt, sand and gravel bedding. Cannot rain.
Foliage colour: Standard for temp.
Ones I no longer consider good:
Lava River:
As the name states, this biome is a passage of lava. Extremely hazardous to someone without non-combustible bridge materials as the river usually separates two biomes, if a traveller is looking for a home this is an obstacle that is certainly a challenge (for 3 seconds while someone digs a few dirt blocks). Cannot rain.
Foliage colour: Dark grey or brown
Lava Lake:
This biome is what Lava Rivers connect to if they connect to anything. Simply a giant lake of just lava, simply aesthetic as you cannot survive in lava. May be useful for factions servers, as one could build a sky fortress with a hazardous area to land in or even an underlava base only accessible through fire-resist potions. Cannot rain.
Foliage colour: Dark grey or brown
Volcanic Plains:
A plains biome with stone and gravel instead of grass, lava ponds are very common. Extremely hazardous biome, but great for anyone strong enough to make a base that has an amazing defence. Cannot rain.
Foliage colour: Very dark grey, brown or black.
Of course, hill variants should exist for each one (that makes sense).
Let me know what biomes are "acceptable," I am of course going to be biased so I love all biomes.
My favourite is surprisingly the Stone Island, very practical and lovely looking aesthetic for oceans.
If you have noticed this is very similar to another post, I initially posted this to the mod forum but then I posted this here as I felt it would fit better. Not to worry about duplicating though as I changed all the descriptions.
Making it optional doesn't fix it. It still creates a huge imbalance. Read what I said above ^
While your point about chat being deserted for this feature makes sense, it also sounds awful.
"with many players using the new voice chat, those who don't like using it would be forced to if they want to communicate with everyone else, since chat conversation would decrease a lot, and certain players wouldn't be using it."
So why should everyone who likes the idea suffer? Why should we be forced to type when we could just hit alt? As you say, "with many players" implying that the minority are the ones that take displeasure in it. The minority is just that, minor. No one cares about the minority. You do not make the majority unhappy and even if the positions were reversed such as only the minority using the vocal chat, then that doesn't upset the majority, if the majority wants to keep using text chat then they can.
Also you are forgetting that this is a range thing, I suggested noteblock range but 10 has been said, either way it is a range. You would still have to use chat for anyone who is on the other side of the world. Not everyone would be using it because not everyone can hear... everyone. (Unless the server allows global vocal chat).
There is no way to say that this is a bad idea. It doesn't replace text chat.
Playing a lot of survival games on Steam is probably why I like this idea so much.
Just walking close to a base and saying "hello" to bring a nearby player out.
Now imagine this as it is currently.
Player1: Hello
Player2: Sup
Player3: hello
Player4: hi
Player1: Who lives in the spruce wood box fortress?
Player3: me, hello
Now imagine this with the feature.
Player1: "Hello?"
Player3: "Yes, hello?
Cuts out unnecessary clutter in chat for one, but is also just faster in general. Notice how Player 4 and 2 don't respond? That's because they can't hear because they are too far away.
This would certainly add "balance" between nations.
Example being that the Flag of Poland really just needs like, 3 roses.
Australia's Flag needs like, 13 lapis.
So if we had some free method to design flags that would remove this whole expense issue.
Also the Flag of Wales has a dragon on it. How on Earth are you supposed to make that?
The downside to this though is profanic things however if someone is going to draw that, they probably are just going to build it. So ignore what I said about the downside, there is none.
I absolutely yearn for the chance to hear trolls screaming in the mic while little kids whine in the background and people take spamming to the next level. This doesn't seem to be very useful, and would need to be worked out with a lot more detail to fit in, but it is easier to just use teamspeak or skype, even though they aren't always convenient. And having an option to turn it off is a bad excuse. That doesn't fix it for the people who don't like it.
No support, sorry
Out of curiosity, how does that not fix it? If you can turn it off it is pretty much like it was never added in the first place. Maybe it could be default off and you have to turn it on.
If you don't want to hear kids screaming, turn it off. There is no way a kids game would not have that function if it allowed in game vocal communication.
I see the uses for this, maybe have the same range as a noteblock, as in 48 blocks with decreasing volume. As already mentioned that you could use Skype or something instead, Skype is not related to the game. Skype would allow you constant communication with your FRIEND no matter how far away they are. If a new person enters the area they won't be able to hear you, and you can't hear them. With this function you can speak to everybody in range of you, very good way to negotiate in a factions server rather than typing. Speaking of factions, pretty much everywhere is desolate, no hoards of screaming kids to be seen at all. Not only all this but as I said, Skype is not in the game, this would also allow for dynamic sound. Someone is talking to the left? Go left to meet them.
Ultimately a large server like Mineplex or a PG server that censors chat could also have the option on their end to just disable it, kind of like difficulty settings, it's locked on a server. Maybe even commands to do so, such as [/chat global] for speaking to everyone regardless of distance, [/chat local] for only proximity chat and [/chat false] for turning it off. The player could just have these options in the sound and music area but a server has commands for all players.
0
People need to stop treating the 1.8 test version as a full version.
There is too many bugs that keep getting repeated.
Extremely bad timing on my part as I have never read the bug above me, however this point still stands.
Too many bug post.
0
Oh, I would be surprised if anything on this subforum actually became real. A lot of modders that are good just invent their own ideas or any modders that hang around here don't want anything remotely to do with a challenge.
I wish modding was actually easy to learn, I would make all my suggestions myself and other people's. If a modder would like to step in and provide an alternate perspective on why these suggestions are rarely made that would be better than great.
0
There is no plural of Pegasus.
Pegasus is the name of Hercules' "Winged Horse."
The plural is "Winged Horses."
0
Well when he told me to put up the polls with Ogre Princes being one of them, they gained massive popularity.
I used to post once a day about the polls because the results were always changing then one day they just fell behind, literally from first to last.
Suddenly the polls just never changed anymore, one vote is too little (for reference Ogre Princes have 6 votes to BigCats having 61).
(190 votes)
I would be surprised if he made Ogre Princes priority. Even the manticore is 5th. I have a feeling that BigCats are priority because they double chimps practically, then chimps because the model already exist but chimps are also in second. I feel like frogs are popular but not enough that 3rd place justifies them being made after chimps, DrZhark might skip that one and go to the Manticore or Nether Monster straight after chimps.
0
Yeah, again I should have clarified.
0
I have just restarted this comment 3 times.
I just can't put the effort in, you are all just too stubborn.
I give up, this is too negative to argue with bricks.
I like vocal chat because I would use it, if you don't like vocal chat turn it off because that would be like it never existed in the first place.
And let me tell you, not only do I use vocal chat in about every game that has it that I play, I still use text chat.
Text chat will not die because of this and not only that but you could only make people happier (the people that want it).
Your nitpicks are silly ideologies that represent the worst case scenario.
Censors being bypassed? /mute or for admins /ban. If offences are too high /chat 0 and not /chat global.
Range to short? /chat 48 or even something like /chat chunkrange
Squeaker spamming his mic? /mute
Literally everything bad can be countered but no, apparently disabling it isn't enough, you need it to never exist in the first place for your own selfish reasons.
0
I was meaning like Dead Forest Hills. Sorry, should have clarified.
0
1. Option to turn it off. In that example, let's say Mineplex, you could just turn it off, suddenly no more screaming 6 year olds. As I said earlier, it would be better if instead of turning it off, it was an option to turn it on.
2. Then I guess you two should stay close, it's not like it's the end of the world if you can't talk for 3 minutes anyway. The original post suggest 10 blocks but I suggest noteblock length of 48 so 48 is still far enough for two people to be next to each other but still pretty far. Also as suggested a server can up this number or lower it.
3. Censor system? You mean that optional thing that servers use to keep them PG? Not only does it not apply to /msg or /mail send (try it out, even with a censor you can swear in private) but censorship is weak and is usually bypassed such as PH instead of F. You could even consider this vocal chat as a form of private chat. Also in the event of a server allowing global chat, moderators are the only ones on their that would be forced. Anyone who offences the PG rule could easily be banned.
Again there is NOTHING that is bad about this, only assumptions.
0
Yeah, I thought the lava was a bit out of place. Maybe if it was as rare as a mooshroom biome, but even then it still is a little OP.
Not going to remove it though but yeah.
I added foliage colours to all the biomes so it would be able to give a greater visual image.
0
I searched and surprisingly no one has suggested any of these before.
The whole purpose of these suggestions are to not overfill the world with biomes no one recognises.
While only semi-redundant in the fact that we don't need these biomes, this is just to populate the world with slightly more variety.
As I researched, I found that biomes are organised by temperature so I did the same.
Snowy Biomes:
Frozen Ocean:
This biome was pretty cool when it was around, giant flat ocean that you could build on. It would make a fantastic return.
Foliage colour: Standard for temp.
Dead Trees:
A forest with no sign of vegetation, pretty much logs sticking out of the ground and snow everywhere with no flowers in sight. This biome is sustainable for a short time but as no saplings can possibly be gained you'll be forced out of the area quickly.Foliage colour: Saturated desert
Cold Biomes:
Stone Island:
This is a normal island only has 3 blocks, gravel, dirt and stone. Pretty much serves as a small platform in the ocean but as it has no trees, it becomes hazardous to smash your boat into. As no vegetation spawns farming is impossible and primary food on this island would be fishing but with no wood...
Foliage colour: Standard for temp.
Stone Plateau:
Looks similar to grass plains except the obvious difference is the lack of plants and the 3 consistent blocks of gravel, dirt and stone. Very similar to Stone Beach biomes but no association with water or mountains. Very flat so ideal for building however as previously mentioned, no wood makes permanent residence unpractical.
Foliage colour: Standard for temp.
Medium Biomes:
Rolling Grass Hills:
Similar to a plains biome, but has high and low level terrain. Grass covers every bit of land and no stone should be exposed.
Foliage colour: Vibrant green
Hot Biomes:
Dry River:
Simply an empty river, should have hardened clay, dirt, sand and gravel bedding. Cannot rain.Foliage colour: Standard for temp.
Ones I no longer consider good:
Lava River:
As the name states, this biome is a passage of lava. Extremely hazardous to someone without non-combustible bridge materials as the river usually separates two biomes, if a traveller is looking for a home this is an obstacle that is certainly a challenge (for 3 seconds while someone digs a few dirt blocks). Cannot rain.Foliage colour: Dark grey or brown
Lava Lake:
This biome is what Lava Rivers connect to if they connect to anything. Simply a giant lake of just lava, simply aesthetic as you cannot survive in lava. May be useful for factions servers, as one could build a sky fortress with a hazardous area to land in or even an underlava base only accessible through fire-resist potions. Cannot rain.
Foliage colour: Dark grey or brownVolcanic Plains:
A plains biome with stone and gravel instead of grass, lava ponds are very common. Extremely hazardous biome, but great for anyone strong enough to make a base that has an amazing defence. Cannot rain.
Foliage colour: Very dark grey, brown or black.
Of course, hill variants should exist for each one (that makes sense).
Let me know what biomes are "acceptable," I am of course going to be biased so I love all biomes.
My favourite is surprisingly the Stone Island, very practical and lovely looking aesthetic for oceans.
If you have noticed this is very similar to another post, I initially posted this to the mod forum but then I posted this here as I felt it would fit better. Not to worry about duplicating though as I changed all the descriptions.
0
While your point about chat being deserted for this feature makes sense, it also sounds awful.
"with many players using the new voice chat, those who don't like using it would be forced to if they want to communicate with everyone else, since chat conversation would decrease a lot, and certain players wouldn't be using it."
So why should everyone who likes the idea suffer? Why should we be forced to type when we could just hit alt? As you say, "with many players" implying that the minority are the ones that take displeasure in it. The minority is just that, minor. No one cares about the minority. You do not make the majority unhappy and even if the positions were reversed such as only the minority using the vocal chat, then that doesn't upset the majority, if the majority wants to keep using text chat then they can.
Also you are forgetting that this is a range thing, I suggested noteblock range but 10 has been said, either way it is a range. You would still have to use chat for anyone who is on the other side of the world. Not everyone would be using it because not everyone can hear... everyone. (Unless the server allows global vocal chat).
There is no way to say that this is a bad idea. It doesn't replace text chat.
1
Playing a lot of survival games on Steam is probably why I like this idea so much.
Just walking close to a base and saying "hello" to bring a nearby player out.
Now imagine this as it is currently.
Player1: Hello
Player2: Sup
Player3: hello
Player4: hi
Player1: Who lives in the spruce wood box fortress?
Player3: me, hello
Now imagine this with the feature.
Player1: "Hello?"
Player3: "Yes, hello?
Cuts out unnecessary clutter in chat for one, but is also just faster in general. Notice how Player 4 and 2 don't respond? That's because they can't hear because they are too far away.
0
This would certainly add "balance" between nations.
Example being that the Flag of Poland really just needs like, 3 roses.
Australia's Flag needs like, 13 lapis.
So if we had some free method to design flags that would remove this whole expense issue.
Also the Flag of Wales has a dragon on it. How on Earth are you supposed to make that?
The downside to this though is profanic things however if someone is going to draw that, they probably are just going to build it. So ignore what I said about the downside, there is none.
Support
1
Out of curiosity, how does that not fix it? If you can turn it off it is pretty much like it was never added in the first place. Maybe it could be default off and you have to turn it on.
1
Wow, why is this hated so much?
If you don't want to hear kids screaming, turn it off. There is no way a kids game would not have that function if it allowed in game vocal communication.
I see the uses for this, maybe have the same range as a noteblock, as in 48 blocks with decreasing volume. As already mentioned that you could use Skype or something instead, Skype is not related to the game. Skype would allow you constant communication with your FRIEND no matter how far away they are. If a new person enters the area they won't be able to hear you, and you can't hear them. With this function you can speak to everybody in range of you, very good way to negotiate in a factions server rather than typing. Speaking of factions, pretty much everywhere is desolate, no hoards of screaming kids to be seen at all. Not only all this but as I said, Skype is not in the game, this would also allow for dynamic sound. Someone is talking to the left? Go left to meet them.
Ultimately a large server like Mineplex or a PG server that censors chat could also have the option on their end to just disable it, kind of like difficulty settings, it's locked on a server. Maybe even commands to do so, such as [/chat global] for speaking to everyone regardless of distance, [/chat local] for only proximity chat and [/chat false] for turning it off. The player could just have these options in the sound and music area but a server has commands for all players.
Support