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.
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.
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.
and then pillagers were allowed to steal player items from chests and destroy builds? that would ruin the game.
such changes if they were to happen, need to be reserved for a higher tier survival mode, Whitelight suggested a newer tier of survival in comments on Youtube and I agree with him.
Uuuuuh, yeah... I don't think I'd ever hold my breath on anything like that. That is horribly trollish and has been hated since people have been suggesting bandits on this forum.
Don't know about the "all" part but uh... no shade or nastiness or anything, but can you explain the reasoning of why you think that stuff would be 'cool'?
Stop being so jelous forreal. If you scroll up you can see people liking this idea. You´re the only one here being jelous.
Oh look it's that "jealous" comment again. Be sure to say it another 6 more times.
No beavers are neautral i never planned them to chop all this forest down and give it to me no. I said chop the tree down and you can collect it for yourself.
"this creature will cut down wood, possible only if you tame it."
Orangutangs works the same. You give them an apple and they give you a random item back, can be a rare item. So yes both these ideas a great
You said they give you "fruits", not "rare items".
I have seen your profile and you seem to only attack people ideas most likely due to envy.
Or because the ideas are bad. Now stop repeating yourself.
Nope, it does speaks for itself people want it in game otherwise they whouldint make a mod, quite simple....
It doesn't matter. If fighting villagers were a good idea we would have gotten them years ago and not an entirely new Iron Golem mob. Villagers will be pacifists forever no matter what. Go play the mod then, because this will never be added in the main game. End of story.
A beaver or oranguang whould be unquye. When have i ever told they whould work for the player? Beaver are neautral they cut down tress, they wholdint help you but you can get the wood they cut down. Plus oranguangs whould work differently. You give them lets say an apple, and they give you random item back.
No, you said "Beaver: this creature will cut down wood, possible only if you tame it." so yes. Technically they would help you whether intentional or not. Given the easy ways we can get food in this game, we don't need a mob that just randomly gives us food.
Again i just think you´re jelous. Envy attacks are quite common sadly....
I honestly laughed at this. please stop.
You don't need to randomly talk about """"jealousy"""" as a defense mechanism because someone doesn't like your idea. This is just self-defeat. stop.
Hmmmmmmmmm. Yes, there's a key word in there. The word is "mod". Ever know why mods are mods and not in vanilla game? Yes, it does speak for itself. But it speaks against your point, not for it. You were shown Mojang doesn't want fighting villagers and that it won't happen. Good day sir. ;]
But jelous people tend to attack other peoples ideas. Just because you don´t thiknk it looks great doesint mean anything, what i am saying has been talked about alot, many people want this. Just scroll up.
*jealous *think *doesn't
Please show me the quotes of the mountains of people in this thread that just love this idea and I'll gladly switch sides. =D
i dont think it would be a great add to the main game as others have pointed out, but I see nothing wrong with the way it would look. Thats getting down to pure opinion Sinpian2. Not really a point in arguing that
no regrets.
The OP tried to use "it would look great" as some sort of saving grace and it fell flat.
A lot of those mobs feel like they would be there just for the sake of being there without bringing much originality. They're not explained very well and don't offer much apart from just existing. Also taming mobs to just do stuff for you (beaver and orangutan) is almost always something that never works. And, finding gems in beaver dams? Oooookay?
1
Please hit your enter key a few times man, no one wants to see a wall of text.
0
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.
0
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.
0
Yeeeeah you should have put this in the Small Suggestions thread, but yeah support I guess.
0
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.
1
Uuuuuh, yeah... I don't think I'd ever hold my breath on anything like that. That is horribly trollish and has been hated since people have been suggesting bandits on this forum.
Don't know about the "all" part but uh... no shade or nastiness or anything, but can you explain the reasoning of why you think that stuff would be 'cool'?
0
Uhhhhh, not really seeing how that would be "cool"..?
0
Oh look it's that "jealous" comment again. Be sure to say it another 6 more times.
"this creature will cut down wood, possible only if you tame it."
You said they give you "fruits", not "rare items".
Or because the ideas are bad. Now stop repeating yourself.
0
How old are you?
It doesn't matter. If fighting villagers were a good idea we would have gotten them years ago and not an entirely new Iron Golem mob. Villagers will be pacifists forever no matter what. Go play the mod then, because this will never be added in the main game. End of story.
2
No, you said "Beaver: this creature will cut down wood, possible only if you tame it." so yes. Technically they would help you whether intentional or not. Given the easy ways we can get food in this game, we don't need a mob that just randomly gives us food.
I honestly laughed at this. please stop.
You don't need to randomly talk about """"jealousy"""" as a defense mechanism because someone doesn't like your idea. This is just self-defeat. stop.
0
yeah sure did chief.
Hmmmmmmmmm. Yes, there's a key word in there. The word is "mod". Ever know why mods are mods and not in vanilla game? Yes, it does speak for itself. But it speaks against your point, not for it. You were shown Mojang doesn't want fighting villagers and that it won't happen. Good day sir. ;]
0
lol yeah you might want to reconsider how you use the term "unique". No, there shouldn't be animals slapped in the game that do the player's job. no.
0
*didn't *fall
yep, it sure did.
*jealous *think *doesn't
Please show me the quotes of the mountains of people in this thread that just love this idea and I'll gladly switch sides. =D
0
no regrets.
The OP tried to use "it would look great" as some sort of saving grace and it fell flat.
2
A lot of those mobs feel like they would be there just for the sake of being there without bringing much originality. They're not explained very well and don't offer much apart from just existing. Also taming mobs to just do stuff for you (beaver and orangutan) is almost always something that never works. And, finding gems in beaver dams? Oooookay?