Minecore: An Engine

User avatar
Linuxdirk
Member
 
Posts: 2212
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2014 11:21
Location: Germany
In-game: Linuxdirk

Re: Minecore - A Brand New Engine

by Linuxdirk » Tue Feb 06, 2018 17:54

TumeniNodes wrote:It is understandable the people get upset when their ideas are rejected or, may turn into a long discussion, it's all part of the process :)

If the reasons are properly justified and if it is explained in detail on a technical basis why this-or-that can't be in the engine or the game it's fine, but usually it boils down to "i don't care/I don't like it/there is some work to do for it".

In theory the pull requests concept is great, but in reality it ends up with 100+ unprocessed requests that are either ignored, talked to death, or discussed into oblivion. Same with the 800+ issues.

I see why this happens. But I can absolutely and 100 percent understand why potential devs are so pissed that they create their own fork of Minetest. I even do the same at a smaller level. Instead of creating issues or even PRs I just circumvent/fix/override the issues via mods. To me personally it is reality that it's easier to fix stuff for and by myself than trying to get the issues "accepted".

TumeniNodes wrote:As far as breaking backward compatibility, [..] "when is it justified?"

When a breaking release is announced. Like 0.5.0 that figuratively breaks nothing. In a wider scope every release that needs a minimum protocol version is breaking release. But since the MT devs do not use releases/tags it's useless to discuss this. Nothing will change in the foreseeable future.

TumeniNodes wrote:Anyway, I tend to make long comments.

Some dev once analogously said about long comments: "You only do this to piss off people".
 

User avatar
Scarecrowman
Member
 
Posts: 40
Joined: Sun Nov 19, 2017 14:48
Location: The Ranch, S4, on a secure government computer...
In-game: Scarecrowman

Re: Minecore - A Brand New Engine

by Scarecrowman » Tue Feb 06, 2018 21:24

TumeniNodes wrote:If you have plans toward a different approach, this can be a good thing, and is definitely supported.
The important question is, will your team port upstream?


We are freely giving and we are open-source, so yes. Also: what Toby said.

TumeniNodes wrote:As far as breaking backward compatibility, it will come eventually, it's unavoidable to move forward but..., the hardest question is "when is it justified?" Well, the answer is, it is justified when you actually have enough solid material to justify it.


This point speaks to me, personally. And I take it seriously, as does the team. Being unable to satisfy all interested parties is as you say, inevitable, and we're ready for that. But our objective is to do nothing official that does not satisfy the base majority of the community, -except on the occasion that by doing so would lower set standards of the quality we're looking for.

TumeniNodes wrote:Wish you luck with this and, I am very hopeful these two groups can help one another, because that is one of the gestures which have kept the open source community, ever growing and ever advancing.


Thank you very much. You're right. We're here because of Minetest. We are not closed to any open hands offered and gladly accept with our own. Open communication is of interest, of course.
"Those who dream by day are cognizant of many things that escape those who only dream at night..."
-EDGAR ALLAN POE
 

sofar
Developer
 
Posts: 2077
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2015 07:31
GitHub: sofar
IRC: sofar
In-game: sofar

Re: Minecore - A Brand New Engine

by sofar » Wed Feb 07, 2018 00:02

Scarecrowman wrote:About the interest in redstone-style applications as well as things like pistons, hoppers, rotary-craft, we have a lot of discussion going on for that but we are interested in suggestions as this is still being conceptualized. What I can tell you is that we know we want to implement a redstone-style technical element to the base game with concepts surrounding the new "Infernium" Block, due to be discussed in the near future.

And if some of the things you are looking for are not implemented into the base-game, they could be planned into mods and expansions either officially distributed or community-distributed.

Thanks for your question.

Also, not to differ with what Octacian said, as he is correct in the way he's looking at it. But Minecore will not be a small "fork" that branches directly off of Minetest. We are taking it into separate development to make it something of its own, without forgetting about its origin, -which is Minetest. Ours will not be connected to Minetest as a traditional fork in its final product.


Feel free to entirely ignore me, my comment, and even report it if you think I'm going overboard here, or am being unfair. This is entirely unsalted feedback, and yes I realize it's uninvited, and wrong of me to comment at this premature time when you've only just announced the project and all you would love to see is that everyone cheers you on. (sarcasm is off from here...)

You're making a significant judgement error if you fork the engine "to implement redstone" (paraphrasing). While I will not deny that there may be some improvements that could be made to the core to make something like redstone work far better than e.g. mesecons right now, the bulk of the work will remain to be done in Lua, and doesn't require any core changes. This goes for a lot of items I see listed that you want to improve upon.

I'm reading this thread and I'm seeing a mix of well-written pieces of text, and somewhat naive perspectives. This distracts a bit since I'd just like to talk about technical potential, like, a good implementation of automated nodes in minetest, or, better entities. Instead I see promises that "it's not a fork" and "it'll honor minetest" and in fact I can clearly see that "it's a fork" and "it won't do anything for minetest". If you think I'm being pessimistic, then you're wrong. I'm actually being really optimistic here since the chance that this fork actually does damage to minetest (being a community) is significant. So if it's just "neutral" then that's a lot better than that.

The only warning I want to give, is that you should strongly consider remaining license backwards compatible (i.e. stay LGPL licensed) with minetest (the engine), so that when your project fails, people can backport anything half decent back to minetest, without legal issues.

Good luck dealing with all the groupies that think you're offering "salvation", like this one: https://github.com/MinecoreDevTeam/Engine/issues/4 - you will be inundated by people who don't understand community dynamics and open source, and the amount of effort it takes to do any significant development, let alone maintaining a feature of size.

You're rapidly approaching the "point of no return" already, if you haven't already crossed it. Are you sure this is what you want to spend your time on?
 

roboto
Member
 
Posts: 62
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2017 15:21
GitHub: NewbProgrammer101
In-game: akoek

Re: Minecore - A Brand New Engine

by roboto » Wed Feb 07, 2018 00:32


Good luck dealing with all the groupies that think you're offering "salvation", like this one: https://github.com/MinecoreDevTeam/Engine/issues/4 - you will be inundated by people who don't understand community dynamics and open source, and the amount of effort it takes to do any significant development, let alone maintaining a feature of size.


And we simply don't pay heed to those people. ;)
 

sofar
Developer
 
Posts: 2077
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2015 07:31
GitHub: sofar
IRC: sofar
In-game: sofar

Re: Minecore - A Brand New Engine

by sofar » Wed Feb 07, 2018 00:49

roboto wrote:And we simply don't pay heed to those people. ;)


Maybe you're one of those people, and you don't know it yourself. I'm not meaning to be offensive here, but it happens quite often that people have a difficult time seeing that they themselves have significant flaws, while it's apparent to everyone else that they do. I could be one of those people, I probably am in many ways.
 

roboto
Member
 
Posts: 62
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2017 15:21
GitHub: NewbProgrammer101
In-game: akoek

Re: Minecore - A Brand New Engine

by roboto » Wed Feb 07, 2018 01:43

sofar wrote:
roboto wrote:And we simply don't pay heed to those people. ;)


Maybe you're one of those people, and you don't know it yourself. I'm not meaning to be offensive here, but it happens quite often that people have a difficult time seeing that they themselves have significant flaws, while it's apparent to everyone else that they do. I could be one of those people, I probably am in many ways.



No offense taken.

If I were to be one of these people without knowing it, I'd very much like to know how.

@sofar, please define/list the traits/personality these community-naive people have and how you spot them.
 

User avatar
v-rob
Member
 
Posts: 689
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2016 03:19
Location: Right behind you.
GitHub: v-rob

Re: Minecore - A Brand New Engine

by v-rob » Wed Feb 07, 2018 01:52

Well, if you're committed to doing this, then I wish you the best of luck. At least your idea doesn't have a bad name ;-) I do suggest that you make the title of this thread just say "Minecore" because it's not going to be a new engine, just an edited one.

I suggest that you set up a list of goals for your project. All projects need goals, and it'll help others who decide to help you to know what to do. If you already have one, then you should post it.
 

User avatar
maikerumine
Member
 
Posts: 1350
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2014 14:27
GitHub: maikerumine
In-game: maikerumine
 

sofar
Developer
 
Posts: 2077
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2015 07:31
GitHub: sofar
IRC: sofar
In-game: sofar

Re: Minecore - A Brand New Engine

by sofar » Wed Feb 07, 2018 07:50

roboto wrote:@sofar, please define/list the traits/personality these community-naive people have and how you spot them.


This is misinterpreting my post, I think. I made a comment earlier where I said:

sofar wrote:I'm reading this thread and I'm seeing a mix of well-written pieces of text, and somewhat naive perspectives.


This wasn't meant to describe the person who made the github PR about cython. It was meant to show my opinion of the way that the project is being presented, and specifically, several of the sections in the top post, and some of the replies.

I'm not being facetious here, for instance, take this quote:

scarecrowman wrote:Well first of all, we're not really making a fork of it. We want to make it something new. You make a good point about working on a game for the engine, but as many of us have noticed, having seen from the engine, there are some functions missing that could have been added a long time ago.


Right off the bat, it's a falsehood. The project *is* a fork, by almost any standard out there.

Second sentence, claims that inventing new things is the goal, however between the lines I can only see something of a minecraft like game, essentially. Not that that is per se bad, of course, but it's hardly new.

Last sentence, if it is so easy to fork and add some missing functions, I would have thought that we'd already have seen several PR revisions where someone took a stab at the missing functions, someone revised them, it got review and it's worked on to get merged. But the whole thing is baseless, since there's no specific complaint about any missing function here at all, so essentially it's just postering. I don't see anything technical, just complaints about perceived mt or mtg development communities.

Again, nothing personal, but in my opinion it's naive to think that you can make a good project if you're unwilling to come up with specific problems that need addressing (I'm discarding LoD and colored light as they've been discussed in length before and are not new to minetest, and already items that were deemed desirable), but keep posturing chewed out false claims. "We are going to do better" without any specific part as to what you're going to do better, who is going to do the better, how it is better once it's done.

People will find out that this project is essentially attempting to split the community, unintentional or not. That's how I read the announcement. I'm fairly sure I'm not the only one that interprets it that way.
 

User avatar
D00Med
Member
 
Posts: 942
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2015 22:49
Location: Australia...somewhere
GitHub: D00Med

Re: Minecore: An Engine

by D00Med » Wed Feb 07, 2018 10:53

It most certainly isn't an attempt to split the community. Although I'm not saying that it can't happen unintentionally.
I would think that it's far more likely that this generates more interest in minetest, since we aim to get help from people outside the minetest community.
 

User avatar
Scarecrowman
Member
 
Posts: 40
Joined: Sun Nov 19, 2017 14:48
Location: The Ranch, S4, on a secure government computer...
In-game: Scarecrowman

Re: Minecore - A Brand New Engine

by Scarecrowman » Wed Feb 07, 2018 11:54

sofar wrote: "We are going to do better" without any specific part as to what you're going to do better, who is going to do the better, how it is better once it's done. People will find out that this project is essentially attempting to split the community, unintentional or not. That's how I read the announcement. I'm fairly sure I'm not the only one that interprets it that way.


As far as the specifics are concerned, we have them... but going into too much detail was avoided from the start because we did not want to put off readers. We were trying to make this a simple announcement and we are very serious about what we are doing.

Part of our reason for posting this first statement was to find C++ people that would be interested in helping. We're looking for experts on that piece, and its true that we do not have them. We didn't want to say anything too detailed about our "specifics" just yet until we had those people, because we wanted to make sure our understanding about the engine were both accurate and realistic. We wanted to use appropriate terms we're still learning about.

*Especially the differences between what MTG does and what MTE allows for. We've tried to outline some of the things we have planned for adding, (note support for "voxel-based modelling," (maybe we should have said specifically crafting,) and "custom dimensions" (maybe we should have said sub-game multi-map support,) but we've only just starting talking about these things. I have re-worded that paragraph by the way, to give a clearer sense of what we were talking about in there.

Also, we never wanted to split up the community. We actually didn't know how much attention this post would see. We never meant any harm. I am a total outsider, looking with an unbiased perspective at the state of Minetest. What I see is complete potential, solid programming and great work. What is leftover that needs attention, is not really my place to say, nor would it likely be taken as keen insight or good advise. We don't want to change Minetest or compete with Minetest, which is why we wanted to separate it to make it a different project, or "fork", however people want to look at it.

We DO NOT, under any circumstances, believe in competition. That is not our objective here and we don't want to split up anyone.

But I can see why what we've posted may be viewed by some as having the potential to split up the community. We are trying to express our respects for the dev team in the best ways we can, you guys are amazing at what you do. We never wanted to cause any division whatsoever and if what we said in our post does that we'd like to know what we should change in it to make it right.

We are also considering at his point if it is in our best interest to use Minetest as the base engine or if it would just be better to take our efforts into other arenas or start from scratch. Whatever is best for the Minetest community, but we are talking about that.
"Those who dream by day are cognizant of many things that escape those who only dream at night..."
-EDGAR ALLAN POE
 

User avatar
texmex
Member
 
Posts: 1614
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2016 21:08
GitHub: tacotexmex
In-game: texmex

Re: Minecore: An Engine

by texmex » Wed Feb 07, 2018 16:31

I'd like to add to the conversation that the Minecore project seems to focus more on pleasing content creators and players than server owners for example, which sounds interesting. With its ties to existing serious Minecraft modding projects its community will probably consist to a large degree of disgruntled Minecraft content creators rather than a large faction of former diehard Minetest fans, thus that community could possible have a life of its own and rightly so.

There are several reasons for bootstrapping a completely new project by forking an existing. Apart from those already mentioned one more reason may simply be how the project is organized. To me that factor seems overlooked in this discussion. So when replying "why not contribute to the existing project", a legitimate answer could be simply "we'd like to organize the development differently" or "we have a different road map". Gogs was forked into Gitea, OpenELEC was forked into LibreELEC for reasons that could regarded similar. Minetest devs surely can't harbour multiple organizational structures and methods simultaineously anyway.

It's free software after all. I say live and let live. The worst thing that could come out of this is some nice features to backport to Minetest.
 

User avatar
TumeniNodes
Member
 
Posts: 2827
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2016 19:49
Location: in the dark recesses of the mind
GitHub: TumeniNodes
IRC: tumeninodes
In-game: TumeniNodes

Re: Minecore: An Engine

by TumeniNodes » Wed Feb 07, 2018 17:31

One thing which captured my attention was this statement:

but going into too much detail was avoided from the start because we did not want to put off readers.


So, is this to mean that you held back some relative information in order to attract the attention of potential contributors? If so, when would it feel appropriate to make that information clear to them? This seems a rather misleading way to start things off. But that is just my opinion.

It also sounds as if you actually don't have a very clear plan/outline as to what you even truly want to do, even though you state that you do, but also state that you don't. This is confusing.
Basically it seems the plan was to "Make a big announcement", then plan it all out after, on the fly, as we go.

You have no C++ devs..., well, they are extremely hard to come by so this is no surprise.

And now, after this announcement, it is stated that you are not even sure "if" you will use Minetest as the engine anyway.

I'm sorry..., I am all for open source projects, and have been involved with a few over the years. One of which involved more than half of a core dev team splitting off to start a new project.
Do you know, we gathered, thought, planned, etc. for at least 6 - 8 mos before we even felt comfortable enough to make any announcements.
We held that off until we had a very clear understanding of what we wanted to do, and to be..., and that it was unanimous among the entire dev team.

I just have to say that to me, this is turning out to seem like a hasty jump, head first, without a net. And statements which seem to state one thing, only to be changed in the very next sentence.
Along with possibly some relative information withheld, out of concern it may put people off? It comes off as two things, deceitful, and disorganized..., and with no real, solid idea of "what you want to do, or what you want to be".

But you off that "dream" of..., "everyone is a developer", as the shiny wrapper.
You state goals, which are and have been the very same goals of Minetest and Minetest Game development from the start, and still hold true, as if they are different.

So, if you are trying to attract C++ developers from outside MT, when you could have tried to attract them "TO" MT this sort of hurts the MT community. Because C++ devs are always in need.
I have to be honest, the way this is all laid out, it may be difficult to attract C++ devs. They are normally a specific and precise group who like to know "what" they are looking at/getting into.
They will typically breeze through potential "looking for" ads, and literally skip over the ones which seem poorly thrown together, as they do not like to have their time wasted. This is just an honest statement.

I am not trying to crush any dreams or knock people's ideas (even though it definitely seems to be exactly what I am doing...) but these are thoughts I feel I want to express on this, and from what I have read so far...
I see a lot of excitement, with very little planning.

I have seen no really noticeable amount of added code (if any) which deserves the title of a new engine. What I see is, Minetest.
I see, so far, basically a quickly thrown together, "subgame", without very much difference either.
So I sit back trying to figure out, what the hell is even going on here?

All of this may upset you, and that is understandable but, it's true. And if you're upset, you also have to take the other side's view into consideration...
Basically, you have already taken the creation of one person, along with the work of countless others, forked it, changed a few textures, made some changes to the lighting code, slapped a new name on it, and shipped it out with an advertisement of "A new engine".

There is just so much wrong with that.
At this point, after reading countless statements which completely contradict one another, I really cannot put my support behind this venture at all.

That is my final thought on this whole matter
Ich mag keine grünen Eier und Schinken, ich mag sie nicht Sam I Am
 

User avatar
Linuxdirk
Member
 
Posts: 2212
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2014 11:21
Location: Germany
In-game: Linuxdirk

Re: Minecore: An Engine

by Linuxdirk » Wed Feb 07, 2018 17:55

TumeniNodes wrote:So I sit back trying to figure out, what the hell is even going on here?

Minecore (nice name btw. even if it has "Mine" in it) was not and will never be anything that could split the community nor anything even close to what Minetest is. Some people are so frustrated about Minetest development that they create a fork to publish their idea of what should be done.

Minetest devs do a lot of work, but little to nothing is seen outside the dev circlejerk (GitHub issues and PRs) and new features figuratively (and sometimes literally) need years to be released to the final non-dev version and actually visible changes pretty much never happen. I can see why people think there is no progress if the latest REAL change was the introduction of mods.
 

sofar
Developer
 
Posts: 2077
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2015 07:31
GitHub: sofar
IRC: sofar
In-game: sofar

Re: Minecore - A Brand New Engine

by sofar » Wed Feb 07, 2018 18:45

Scarecrowman wrote: ...


Good, I think now we both understand each other and we can talk shop. Excellent reply and thanks for taking the trouble of wading through my lengthy reply.

I understand what you're doing, and why you're doing it. But I have to say that I would go differently about it, and I have been going differently about it, even though I want to achieve the same as you do. This is why I replied initially since I think it's a mistake, and I'd love to be proven wrong on my opinion, but I have lots of evidence that "my way" works.

To illustrate, let me explain how "Inside the Box" came into existence. When the idea was first conceived, we knew we had to make some engine adjustments, but most of the things we wanted to do were essentially Lua development issues. We focused almost entirely on the content side, bypassing major hurdles (e.g. we relied on lsqlite3 for storage of persistent data instead of attempting to develop new core features to do the same) and developed everything in Lua for the most part. In the end we ended up pushing a few small changes to the engine to do the things we needed, and waited for 0.4.16 to be released before we announced the game. This gave us enough time to spot the critical things missing in the engine, decide whether to address them rapidly in Lua and ignore the latency of engine changes to releases and get ready for a public deployment to a large audience (since 0.4.16 was released properly with the needed bits to make the most out of the player experience).

This method of designing and developing works. And it works well, because it produces both an active project with great content, and at the same time encourages people to consider engine changes and reflect seriously back on design changes that you're making, instead of bolting on a kitchen sink that ends up being dead weight. Your game will likely fail if it accumulates too much dead weight. By forking right off the bat, you risk exactly that.

To summarize, I would strongly recommend that you un-fork, and start with a clean Lua game (not minetest_game based) and start from there. Focus on content breadth first, and resolve engine issues in collaboration with the minetest (engine) team. Once you have something that is "playable", it's much easier to talk about feature x or y and why it needs an engine change, and get some support for it.

Last piece of advice: Open Source is a "long haul" effort. If you want change, playing the long game really helps. Don't expect to go anywhere in 2 months' time, play for 2+ years out, and plan accordingly. You'll get there a lot faster if you push the development of visual enhancements into minetest itself so they can be included in 2+ years out, than if you'd have to do it all by yourself without the support of a significant amount of C++ developers. Meanwhile you'll have a content-rich and functioning Lua content "game" that is motivating, instead of that being stalled by unrealistic desires for things that may not even be required.

Cheers
 

Byakuren
Member
 
Posts: 816
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2015 01:59
GitHub: raymoo
IRC: Hijiri
In-game: Raymoo + Clownpiece

Re: Minecore: An Engine

by Byakuren » Wed Feb 07, 2018 18:58

Since you are trying to attract C++ devs:

If I was going to implement them, why would I implement VAEs or dimensions in Minecore rather than in Minetest proper? It might be easier to get it merged, but it would benefit less people and the codebase it's in would not be able to use new features from upstream if Minecore diverges significantly from Minetest. And of course people would complain because it might not be easily portable back to Minetest.
Every time a mod API is left undocumented, a koala dies.
 

User avatar
Scarecrowman
Member
 
Posts: 40
Joined: Sun Nov 19, 2017 14:48
Location: The Ranch, S4, on a secure government computer...
In-game: Scarecrowman

Re: Minecore: An Engine

by Scarecrowman » Wed Feb 07, 2018 20:59

TumeniNodes wrote:At this point, after reading countless statements which completely contradict one another, I really cannot put my support behind this venture at all.

Basically it seems the plan was to "Make a big announcement", then plan it all out after, on the fly, as we go.

That is my final thought on this whole matter


1.) We never advertised anywhere that we had anything finished in the code, and we never said it wasn't Minetest we were using for screenshots.

2.) I'm just curious as to how we are supposed to find the right people without telling them about what we're doing? People want to see 'something', I think we've shown 'something'. It increases the chances of finding someone that sees its potential. That's all this is.

3.) I thank you for your time. And I understand your perspective. We aren't offended, but we're sorry if we've had that effect on others.

texmex wrote:I'd like to add to the conversation that the Minecore project seems to focus more on pleasing content creators and players than server owners for example, which sounds interesting. The worst thing that could come out of this is some nice features to backport to Minetest.


Thanks for your comment, it is much appreciated.

sofar wrote:Open Source is a "long haul" effort. If you want change, playing the long game really helps. Don't expect to go anywhere in 2 months' time, play for 2+ years out, and plan accordingly. You'll get there a lot faster if you push the development of visual enhancements into minetest itself so they can be included in 2+ years out, than if you'd have to do it all by yourself without the support of a significant amount of C++ developers. Meanwhile you'll have a content-rich and functioning Lua content "game" that is motivating, instead of that being stalled by unrealistic desires for things that may not even be required.

Cheers


Yes, thank you for this advice. Our plan was always long-term. I like your point about looking at a new subgame for Minetest instead, maybe it would be a good place to start at any rate. We're also ready to accept criticism, whether or not it is constructive. Maybe I should have been more expressive in emphasizing that we are doing concept work here while looking for interested entities. I think I begin to see a lot of people are confused about what we're doing and what our motives are.

Our unconventionality does not help either, I'm sure. We're experimenting here with tactics, and we're also trying to express a vision to get through to the people who like it.

I also want to apologize if I seem to contradict myself, I don't think I really have. But some people will see contradiction even if none is present, I suppose. So if I have, I'm sorry and I will try to not do this.
"Those who dream by day are cognizant of many things that escape those who only dream at night..."
-EDGAR ALLAN POE
 

sofar
Developer
 
Posts: 2077
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2015 07:31
GitHub: sofar
IRC: sofar
In-game: sofar

Re: Minecore: An Engine

by sofar » Wed Feb 07, 2018 21:54

Scarecrowman wrote:we never said it wasn't Minetest we were using for screenshots


This conflicts with:

Scarecrowman wrote:Minecore's in-game screenshots


I'm confused. Is minecore currently an MC concept thing, or not?
 

User avatar
Scarecrowman
Member
 
Posts: 40
Joined: Sun Nov 19, 2017 14:48
Location: The Ranch, S4, on a secure government computer...
In-game: Scarecrowman

Re: Minecore: An Engine

by Scarecrowman » Wed Feb 07, 2018 22:21

sofar wrote:
Scarecrowman wrote:we never said it wasn't Minetest we were using for screenshots


This conflicts with:

Scarecrowman wrote:Minecore's in-game screenshots


I'm confused. Is minecore currently an MC concept thing, or not?


Ah. Yes, now I see. You're right. I did say that.

I will be fixing our post to edit out these contradictions. To clarify: Minecore as an engine is only a concept right now. We want to make it an engine. We are currently using Minetest to show off our art skills, with textures that would go into the base game. And we're doing this to show other developers who want to do something similar, that we can back them up with our abilities.
"Those who dream by day are cognizant of many things that escape those who only dream at night..."
-EDGAR ALLAN POE
 

Byakuren
Member
 
Posts: 816
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2015 01:59
GitHub: raymoo
IRC: Hijiri
In-game: Raymoo + Clownpiece

Re: Minecore: An Engine

by Byakuren » Wed Feb 07, 2018 23:07

Just to be clear my question earlier wasn't meant to be rhetorical, I was actually asking.
Every time a mod API is left undocumented, a koala dies.
 

twoelk
Member
 
Posts: 1332
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2013 16:19
Location: northern Germany
GitHub: twoelk
IRC: twoelk
In-game: twoelk

Re: Minecore - A Brand New Engine

by twoelk » Wed Feb 07, 2018 23:42

Scarecrowman wrote:...
We are also considering at his point if it is in our best interest to use Minetest as the base engine or if it would just be better to take our efforts into other arenas or start from scratch. Whatever is best for the Minetest community, but we are talking about that.


I guess the easiest way and by far the fastest to get some insight, something to show and talk about would indeed be to start a new subgame. Explore from there and as sofar hinted poke the minetest-devs and bribe them with cool content to promote some features you might need.
 

User avatar
Scarecrowman
Member
 
Posts: 40
Joined: Sun Nov 19, 2017 14:48
Location: The Ranch, S4, on a secure government computer...
In-game: Scarecrowman

Re: Minecore: An Engine

by Scarecrowman » Thu Feb 08, 2018 01:24

Byakuren wrote:Just to be clear my question earlier wasn't meant to be rhetorical, I was actually asking.


Because we don't see how it can be done in MTE currently, also we want to keep all doors open. We're not against the idea of sharing our improvements with Minetest, we'd love to, we just don't know if we can or not yet. It depends.

Also, I've updated our Minecore thread.
"Those who dream by day are cognizant of many things that escape those who only dream at night..."
-EDGAR ALLAN POE
 

Byakuren
Member
 
Posts: 816
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2015 01:59
GitHub: raymoo
IRC: Hijiri
In-game: Raymoo + Clownpiece

Re: Minecore: An Engine

by Byakuren » Thu Feb 08, 2018 02:13

Scarecrowman wrote:
Byakuren wrote:Just to be clear my question earlier wasn't meant to be rhetorical, I was actually asking.


Because we don't see how it can be done in MTE currently, also we want to keep all doors open. We're not against the idea of sharing our improvements with Minetest, we'd love to, we just don't know if we can or not yet. It depends.

Also, I've updated our Minecore thread.

Why can VAEs and dimensions be added to Minecore and not Minetest?

EDIT: Actually, let me restate the question more clearly:

Suppose I am a C++ dev and an am interested in implementing VAEs or dimensions. I have the following choices: implement it for Minetest, or implement it for Minecore. What about Minecore would make me want to choose to implement it for Minecore and not Minetest (assuming I only had the motivation to implement it in one)?
Every time a mod API is left undocumented, a koala dies.
 

User avatar
Linuxdirk
Member
 
Posts: 2212
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2014 11:21
Location: Germany
In-game: Linuxdirk

Re: Minecore: An Engine

by Linuxdirk » Thu Feb 08, 2018 09:59

Scarecrowman wrote:Minecore as an engine is only a concept right now. We want to make it an engine. We are currently using Minetest to show off our art skills, with textures that would go into the base game.

As sofar stated before: Maybe better focus on creating a new subgame from scratch (new concept, new nodes, all new art, etc.) and work together with the MT devs to improve the engine.
 

User avatar
Fixer
Member
 
Posts: 891
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 11:23
Location: Ukraine
IRC: Fixer
In-game: Fixer

Re: Minecore: An Engine

by Fixer » Thu Feb 08, 2018 11:53

As sofar stated before: Maybe better focus on creating a new subgame from scratch (new concept, new nodes, all new art, etc.) and work together with the MT devs to improve the engine.


+1, it is kinda sad to see fork, you can post improvements to original, I hope minetest will borrow some of nice things you done in the future if all goes well
 

PreviousNext

Return to Minetest-related projects



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest