@benrob I recall in an older thread you mentioned that you would be against anything supernatural-based from being included because of your personal religious beliefs. That is far from a legitimate reason to try and influence the development of a game. If, hypothetically, both passive and hostile mobs were to be added, we would need to be able to disable undead/hostile mobs independently. No need to take away such a feature for everybody else.
What if my personal beliefs were pacifist? Should we then remove swords from Minetest?
I'm not against anything supernatural, just things that the bible speaks against, and the undead is more of a personal religions opinion based off of that (and the fact that they are included in <strong>everything</strong>). These are just my personal beliefs and pet peves, so they should not be taken as something set in stone.
But I'm not trying to talk down to anyone or start an off topic flame war so I am not going to continue the argument. (You can just take me as a religions gamer/geek who likes to give his $0.02)
I think that having the classic mobs (DM and Orkki) as the supernatural mobs would be good.
But like I have said in the past the devs need to decide what MT Game really is, and get it to be that.
benrob0329 wrote:But like I have said in the past the devs need to decide what MT Game really is, and get it to be that.
Agree completely. I only lurk the forums and the dev IRC to monitor Minetest development because I'm waiting in the wings to devote time and resources to a potentially promising game if ever development gets its stuffs in order and finds a concrete direction.
Silwncer wrote:... I'm sorry but i will purchase Minecraft and support development. No wonder this community is bad ....
You do know that MineCraft is now owned by MicroSoft right? As far as giving them money in the hopes that you are supporting development... If history is any indicator, you will never see another update to MineCraft nor will you ever see a MineCraft2. If the game is not an XBox exclusive MicroSoft has never had any interest in continuing development and only buys out these games to kill them off.
The community is not bad, it's actually down-right friendly. It can just be tiresome when people bitch and complain but don't bother to try to help.
AnxiousInfusion wrote:
Agree completely. I only lurk the forums and the dev IRC to monitor Minetest development because I'm waiting in the wings to devote time and resources to a potentially promising game if ever development gets its stuffs in order and finds a concrete direction.
waiting patiently for others to get their stuff together before you deem it worthy of your time and help?
this is an open source project, nothing happens the way you want it to unless you contribute.
even if your endeavors are unsuccessful others may step in to help, thats the way it works.
Sitting along the sidelines belly aching accomplishes nothing.
I have been coming here for about a year and I have learned so much just by experimenting
and tearing everyone else's mods apart to see what I can do with them hacked into little pieces.
I hope to some day actually know a little bit about what I am doing and maybe even contribute,
but dude If you already have the skills you should throw in.
AnxiousInfusion wrote:... makes me wonder if I'm the only idiot who even wants mobs.
No you are not. I'd like to see mobs too.
AnxiousInfusion wrote:
a r troll wrote:...the devs need to decide...
Agree completely
Nah, you should not delegate your decisions. The devs are neither your parents nor your gods and as far as I can guess they also don't care to be. The whole architecture of minetest screams "be open" so for what odd reason should that stop if it comes to a discussion about mobs in vanilla?
AnxiousInfusion wrote:... against anything supernatural... because of ... religious beliefs.
That is far from a legitimate reason.
... What if ... then ...
I do agree with your reasoning, but I think it is wasted on those who did not get to their point of view by reason.
If someone got to his point of view due to emotions (mainly fear for religions) you will not be able to convince him by logic.
Sorry for the excursus.
Where I'm going is that if mobs get included in vanilla it might be nice to have an option to decide between pacefull and hostile creatures. Any other category will get us into arbitrariness. Some group does not like supernatural creatures other then those of their religion, the other group might not like pigs and yet another one does not like to mix milky with fleshy mobs ....
Last edited by Sane on Sun Sep 20, 2015 12:28, edited 1 time in total.
blert2112 wrote:You do know that MineCraft is now owned by MicroSoft right? As far as giving them money in the hopes that you are supporting development... If history is any indicator, you will never see another update to MineCraft nor will you ever see a MineCraft2. If the game is not an XBox exclusive MicroSoft has never had any interest in continuing development and only buys out these games to kill them off.
Well then, I guess the developers only keep posting playable snapshots of future updates for the sake of taunting the community ?
If I had just said that I don't like zombies and don't want them in the game would that be better? Just because I have strong religious views (not out of fear, Sane) doesn't mean that my opinion should just be counted as n/a.
I am not the only one who doesn't like zombies, and my opinion spans past religion with just pure annoyance that it must be everywhere...
Bloody, creepy, half rotted, brain eating things do not need to be in every game, it has nothing to do with religion, that's just another reason why I don't like them.
The thing is that if mobs need to be optional, then it's likely the developers will simply let them stay as a mod. Some of them already mentioned this a few times.
Mods are already the main mechanism in this game by which you can enable and disable a feature.
However, I would be happy enough if there were improvements in networking and in client-side prediction that made mods for mobs something fast and doable from within lua. I think the mobs from mobs_redo are already quite fast and good when playing singleplayer. Just a bit of improvement for multiplayer with the help of the engine, together with the game-downloader GUI that I mentioned earlier would be good enough, imho.
Then, whether someone wants undead or not wouldn't matter, since everyone could just select from the list the mod or game that he wants, if he wants.
I am somewhat amused by the unending debates about whether or not mobs should be added to the game.
It's like if someone were making an arcade FLOSS multiplayer FPS, with only melee weapons and grenades implemented yet, and people were debating "Hey, should we consider adding guns to the game ?". And some people would answer "No, guns are a bad thing, they kill people everyday ; they wouldn't even bring that much to the game" and others people would be like "I'm okay with guns, but only pre-WWII guns, because I don't like weapons invented since. Besides, we see AK-47s in every game now, it's really a cliche we could do without". So other people answer "Oh well, maybe we should add guns but only for people who want them, and leave an option to deactivate them" or "Naw, too much trouble. There are some people who don't like guns ; clearly it's not worth adding them to the game, people can always make mods that sort of simulate guns, except very badly and with a lot of lag".
When the obvious answer should be "YES!!! YES, we should have guns, and it's baffling that this game has gone on for so long without natively supporting guns, considering it's a multiplayer FPS!! The game would be way more fun with guns, and making them optional is so freaking easy it's not even worth debating! Why do you even act like there's a choice to be made?"
Seriously, right now without a hacked together prediction-less mod, you can't make a tower defense game, a strategy game, an arena game, a MOBA, or any kind of singleplayer fight-based game. Seriously, it's easier to make a tower defense for the latest versions of Minecraft than for Minetest! Why would you want that ?
The reason I think that if mobs are included players should be able to disable them is because many people just like to build. Having mobs when you just want to make a building is not great. An example is the teachers that use minetest in the classrooms. They would not want mobs killing their students while they are trying to learn.
When a person downloads the game and starts playing the mobs should be there. If they do not want them they can disable them.
Many of my mods are now a part of Minetest-mods. A place where you know they are maintained!
If the only reason for not including mobs was just that some of them are aggressive, then the solution would be simple: just include by default the non-aggressive ones exclusively.
Having a mod api included in the default game, even if it was only used for chickens, would already be a huge improvement, since we wouldn't have a bunch of conflicting apis and it would hopefully allow for better integration with the engine.
I agree. I am not a fan of there being different api's. I understand why there are different ones but it is time for a mobs standard. It can be confusing for people to figure out how to get mobs since they require different api's.
Many of my mods are now a part of Minetest-mods. A place where you know they are maintained!
More seriously though, there has been some discussion about the right way forward for including mob support in the minetest engine. This must happen before mobs become truly feasible in any context or form, and it should absolutely garner universal support.
bdjnk wrote:More seriously though, there has been some discussion about the right way forward for including mob support in the minetest engine.
From your link:
"Anyway, we can't assume everybody wants to get tons of mods. I know people who download and sometimes make mods for minecraft, but I'm sure there is a distinct amount of people who use vannila entirely. Meanwhile, you can't play minetest without mods."
PoignardAzur wrote:Seriously, right now without a hacked together prediction-less mod, you can't make a tower defense game, a strategy game, an arena game, a MOBA, or any kind of singleplayer fight-based game. Seriously, it's easier to make a tower defense for the latest versions of Minecraft than for Minetest! Why would you want that ?
I just want to say that I fall under the category of vanilla-only players (everyone point and laugh). If I run a server for friends or whoever, I do not want them to have to rely on mods to achieve anything which should be included as standard. Not only are they often of questionable quality but what happens when the mod author abandons the project or takes it in the wrong direction? Everything built using that mod now has to be rebuilt/given up on?
AnxiousInfusion wrote:If I run a server for friends or whoever, I do not want them to have to rely on mods [...]
Actually, because minetest mods are server-side, you don't need your friends to install any mods. Just as long as you have the mods installed in the server.
AnxiousInfusion wrote: Not only are they often of questionable quality
Mods are not magically gonna become high quality if they get accepted in vanilla. It's rather the other way around: only if the mod is good quality and efficient in the first place would it even start to get considered for addition.
This is one of the reasons why vanilla doesn't have that many things included.
AnxiousInfusion wrote:what happens when the mod author abandons the project or takes it in the wrong direction?
This is another reason why vanilla doesn't have too much stuff. They are not likely gonna accept features that might be troublesome to maintain, what happens if the person that contributed a feature in vanilla abandons the project? Of course someone could take his place, but so can happen with mods (and has happened, what's the count for forks of the castle mod now?).
A lot (all?) of the contributors to minetest vanilla are actually mod authors. The only reason vanilla is higher quality than the mods is because there's a filter very selective. And that's also why there's no mobs mod included.
I think that if mobs are implemented in C++, then it should be an API for use in Lua mods.
And the C++ implementation should also have a toggle to disable mobs, overriding the Lua.
Never paint white stripes on roads near Zebra crossings.
Ferk wrote:
Having a mod api included in the default game, even if it was only used for chickens, would already be a huge improvement, since we wouldn't have a bunch of conflicting apis and it would hopefully allow for better integration with the engine.
Certainly. Sandly, there's no mob api that's good enough yet. They all need work on their code and actually become an api/lib. TenPlus1' mobs_redo still seems to be the most popular one, and it works quite well. It's amazing that Minetest can now actually act as a shooter! First, rnd's lab did it; and now the Extreme Survival server (others probably as well). Although there is extreme lag from time to time, it's amazing how well it works the rest of the time.
I still hope for someone to take inventory of all those forks of simple_mobs out there (and take a look at the other mob mods) and write a common lua lib for mobs. That super-long register function needs to be broken up into smaller functions, and we also need additional api support for mobs with diffrent needs. Kind of a combination of simple_mobs' ease of use for modders and the flexibility and code quality of mobf.
There are still general problems of entities continuing unchanged on their path if there's lag. Or entities resetting and behaving chaoticly. Client prediction might be very helpful in that regard. Carts would be affected as well.
