My Fears...

mauvebic
Member
 
Posts: 1550
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2012 11:32

by mauvebic » Thu Mar 21, 2013 17:54

Calinou wrote:
+1, we could have 4 games like this:
- classic (0.3.3-like)
- minetest (just like it is right now)
- minefest (lots of mods shipped by default)
- minecraft_like (tries to be as close as Minecraft as possible).


To make it easier to understand, id call em' (same order) Classic, Minimal,Survival and MC.

Survival would be the minetest_game with all the extras, since you'd need those to survive without extra mods installed. I would also like to suggest a Creative game, with low overhead - no autospawning, plain (flat) maps, more nodes, fewer (no) crafts - and the more annoying aspects removed such as items dropping when inventory is full, totally counterproductive to the creative player.

If we had 4-5 default games i suspect people would stop fighting over what to include in just the one :-)
Last edited by mauvebic on Thu Mar 21, 2013 17:55, edited 1 time in total.
 

User avatar
0gb.us
Member
 
Posts: 841
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 01:55
Location: 0gb.us:30000

by 0gb.us » Thu Mar 21, 2013 18:12

mauvebic wrote:
Calinou wrote:
+1, we could have 4 games like this:
- classic (0.3.3-like)
- minetest (just like it is right now)
- minefest (lots of mods shipped by default)
- minecraft_like (tries to be as close as Minecraft as possible).


To make it easier to understand, id call em' (same order) Classic, Minimal,Survival and MC.

Survival would be the minetest_game with all the extras, since you'd need those to survive without extra mods installed. I would also like to suggest a Creative game, with low overhead - no autospawning, plain (flat) maps, more nodes, fewer (no) crafts - and the more annoying aspects removed such as items dropping when inventory is full, totally counterproductive to the creative player.

If we had 4-5 default games i suspect people would stop fighting over what to include in just the one :-)

How about Minecraft or minecraft_game, not MC?

Also, in creative mode, I don't think nodes drop when your inventory is full, as you don't even get the node if you already have one. I could be wrong though, and maybe if your inventory is full of other items, the drop thing might still happen.
 

User avatar
Inocudom
Member
 
Posts: 3072
Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2012 01:14
IRC: Inocudom
In-game: Inocudom

by Inocudom » Thu Mar 21, 2013 18:44

Inocudom wrote:The current mese ore could be made to look like the old mese and the new mese could be deeper underground. Different rock layers would be an improvement and jungles could have their own dirt and rock types just like deserts do. Deserts could be given new plants that are appropriate. I enjoy new features for Minetest, but I don't want it to be a Minecraft clone.


Has anyone read these ideas?
You can now find my videos at BitChute: https://www.bitchute.com/channel/some_cheeky_jinuskian/
 

User avatar
0gb.us
Member
 
Posts: 841
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 01:55
Location: 0gb.us:30000

by 0gb.us » Thu Mar 21, 2013 19:13

Inocudom wrote:
Inocudom wrote:The current mese ore could be made to look like the old mese and the new mese could be deeper underground. Different rock layers would be an improvement and jungles could have their own dirt and rock types just like deserts do. Deserts could be given new plants that are appropriate. I enjoy new features for Minetest, but I don't want it to be a Minecraft clone.


Has anyone read these ideas?


The ore looking like the old block makes no sense. If we bring the old block texture back, it should be applied to the new block, not the ore.

The new mese is already pretty deep, but I guess we could make it deeper ...

Rock layers, jungle nodes, and desert plants may or may not be a great idea. Personally, I think it would be cool, but have no strong opinion on this.
 

User avatar
jojoa1997
Member
 
Posts: 2890
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 05:11
Location: Earth

by jojoa1997 » Thu Mar 21, 2013 21:10

rubenwardy wrote:
PilzAdam wrote:... It is impossible to make a game that everyone likes.
http://irc.minetest.ru/minetest-dev/2013-03-21#i_2944560
I dont do everything on my own. There is a lot of discussion in the IRC, but the end user doesnt notice it.


I agree with celeron55
i dont. i think minetest_game should still be the development. let the other game types have different names but keep mineteest_game the way it is. the main developement game. also if you change the names then almost every mod would break and if there are multiple names then no mod could ever have compatability. I say just keep it the way it is and those who dont like it tough luck. classic is a good idea but not to completely change the game.
Coding;
1X coding
3X debugging
12X tweaking to be just right
 

Sokomine
Member
 
Posts: 3918
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 17:31
GitHub: Sokomine

by Sokomine » Fri Mar 22, 2013 01:02

First off: I don't think that collections of mods like minetest_game or modpacks form an entire new game. They're all too similar for that, even though worlds and gameplay may differ considerably. Most likely, everyone has his own diffrently equipped singleplayer world. What all those worlds usually have in common is minetest_game. It's the basis to which all the other mods are added, the common ground we have, things you can expect to work in (almost!) all "versions" of Minetest. Something mods can depend on. As a game of its own, it might in its current state be good for getting started/getting to learn the basics of the game, but rather sooner than later, players will want to add mods. Let's hope they know mods exist and find those they are searching for.

When I started playing Minetest, I was surprised to have to download something else (the minetest_game) to really play it. And even that proved way incomplete because most of the intresting content is added through mods. We may loose a lot of players in the process who just don't notice that there's much more. That's why I'm in favour of adding content to minetest_game. But maybe that's not the right way.

The idea to offer diffrent game "modes" through diffrent modpacks sounds very promising.

- Basic/Minimal could be what now minetest_game is - useful for testing mods, getting to know the basic game, and for very old computers. Something you can rely on to exist everywhere.

- Building has other demands. Mostly it needs mods that add blocks (3dforniture, homedecor, moreblocks, ...) and tools to handle larger constructions (worldedit, my replacer mod, ...). On a server, protection mods are a must. It may also need other options for the mapgen since it does need areas which are a bit flatter. Even if building is the main aspect, the creative mode may not serve this purpose well. It is rather unhandy and inconvenient at times, and gathering ressources may be part of this type of game.

- Exploring/survival/adventure is another possible way to play the game. In this mode, building is of secondary importance, while exploring the vast landscape, trying to survive, encountering mobs and the like (you don't have to kill them!) are more important factors. This is where animals, moretrees, plants, farming and the like are a must. For the survival aspect, perhaps hunger as well. The world has to be intresting on its own.

- PvP is something some players want. I have no idea what they may need in their world. Maybe the survival apsects?

The trouble is that all these ways of playing a game might be mixed. One day, you may feel in a mood to build a house (where hunger or aggressive mobs are a definite annoyance), the next day, you may feel more like exploring (which is less fun if there isn't anything to see).

And of course I might have forgotten other mods of play. Everyone may have his own preferences. Having all major mods in the game (they seldom conflict) would be an option for fast computers.

Thus, minetest_game ought to stay the common ground for *all* possible ways you can play the game, while modpacks ought to be easier to locate and install. Download size and time are hardly relevant aspects when we talk about all these tiny mods, so as many as possible ought to be included and offered in different game versions, so that a player who just downloaded/installed the game has something to play with.
A list of my mods can be found here.
 

User avatar
jojoa1997
Member
 
Posts: 2890
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 05:11
Location: Earth

by jojoa1997 » Fri Mar 22, 2013 01:14

there is a new commons game on github. it is all the basic mods and the minetest_game uses them. this is so other gamemodes can be created like you said
Coding;
1X coding
3X debugging
12X tweaking to be just right
 

User avatar
Inocudom
Member
 
Posts: 3072
Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2012 01:14
IRC: Inocudom
In-game: Inocudom

by Inocudom » Fri Mar 22, 2013 01:37

That is a well-written post you have there, Sokomine. I hope other visitors to this topic took the time to read it. I feel that it might be informative to the members of the PureZC community and finally convince them to try this game.
You can now find my videos at BitChute: https://www.bitchute.com/channel/some_cheeky_jinuskian/
 

TheWesleyOne
Member
 
Posts: 15
Joined: Thu May 10, 2012 17:26
Location: Surrey, BC Canada

by TheWesleyOne » Fri Mar 22, 2013 02:04

Sokomine wrote:- Basic/Minimal could be what now minetest_game is - useful for testing mods, getting to know the basic game, and for very old computers.


minimal is for testing mods

Sokomine wrote: Something you can rely on to exist everywhere.


called default, besides some "games" won't even need that (I do beleave that is what Celeron55 was trying to do way back when he split the engine and game up)
Yes I know the name is not proper, it sounds better this way
 

User avatar
0gb.us
Member
 
Posts: 841
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 01:55
Location: 0gb.us:30000

by 0gb.us » Fri Mar 22, 2013 02:19

Sokomine wrote:[...]


I don't think minetest_game is boring, for one thing. It lacks certain things that make it usable on a server, such as build protection, but it certainly isn't boring. I also don't think it should have everything stuffed into it. Like you said, you need a fast computer for such a feature-filled game. Maybe it could use a little more. I am neither for or against the idea of adding more content. But adding EVERYTHING is going way overboard.

I like that you point out that creative mode isn't always best for build servers. Any time someone brings up something about additions to the game being bad for build servers, people jump on them saying "that's what creative mode is for!" But that simply isn't true. Building is more fun for many people when they can't just pull whatever material they want from thin air.
 

User avatar
YoYoBuddy
Member
 
Posts: 247
Joined: Sun Jan 27, 2013 00:49
Location: New York City

by YoYoBuddy » Fri Mar 22, 2013 02:41

Traxie21 wrote:^What I would say, except with more language and caps then I would add. :P

Image
And since I know you're a pegasister...
Image
Last edited by YoYoBuddy on Mon Mar 25, 2013 04:19, edited 1 time in total.
“People are more difficult to work with than machines. And when you break a
person, he can't be fixed."

-Rick Riordan
 

User avatar
jojoa1997
Member
 
Posts: 2890
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 05:11
Location: Earth

by jojoa1997 » Fri Mar 22, 2013 02:42

0gb.us wrote:
Sokomine wrote:[...]


I don't think minetest_game is boring, for one thing. It lacks certain things that make it usable on a server, such as build protection, but it certainly isn't boring. I also don't think it should have everything stuffed into it. Like you said, you need a fast computer for such a feature-filled game. Maybe it could use a little more. I am neither for or against the idea of adding more content. But adding EVERYTHING is going way overboard.

I like that you point out that creative mode isn't always best for build servers. Any time someone brings up something about additions to the game being bad for build servers, people jump on them saying "that's what creative mode is for!" But that simply isn't true. Building is more fun for many people when they can't just pull whatever material they want from thin air.
i saw a commit in minetest game which will allow for lighr games and the sort. it is commons h\that you put in the game folder and minetest_game will pull preset in a game.txt file.
Coding;
1X coding
3X debugging
12X tweaking to be just right
 

Sokomine
Member
 
Posts: 3918
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 17:31
GitHub: Sokomine

by Sokomine » Fri Mar 22, 2013 03:12

jojoa1997 wrote:there is a new commons game on github. it is all the basic mods and the minetest_game uses them. this is so other gamemodes can be created like you said

That's fine! Even when it's fully implemented, we'll still have to see which mods we want to recommend for which type of gameplay.

TheWesleyOne wrote:minimal is for testing mods

Minimal uses diffrent textures and is diffrent in other aspects. It may sometimes be well suited for testing, but not always. The default minetest_game is what everything else ought to be able to work with.

TheWesleyOne wrote:
Sokomine wrote: Something you can rely on to exist everywhere.

called default, besides some "games" won't even need that (I do beleave that is what Celeron55 was trying to do way back when he split the engine and game up)

Yes, that might have been what Celeron55 intended in the first place, but how many diffrent "games" do you actaully see around? I don't think the game/engine is used much in that direction. Most players may consider minetest_game to be Minetest.

0gb.us wrote:I don't think minetest_game is boring, for one thing.

Well, maybe not boring if you don't know that there are mods out there. But even for building (which is a lot of fun as well!), there are a lot of nodes that make the game special and more loveable (e.g. those nice chairs and tables from 3dforniture, or those great doors from homedecor). Or plants that enrich the landscape. But of course you're entitled to prefer the vanilla/minimal game.
Adding everything might only be an option for players with extremly fast computers who don't want to bother to select what they want first. It might be a bit overwhelming.

0gb.us wrote:I like that you point out that creative mode isn't always best for build servers. Any time someone brings up something about additions to the game being bad for build servers, people jump on them saying "that's what creative mode is for!" But that simply isn't true. Building is more fun for many people when they can't just pull whatever material they want from thin air.

That's true. Gathering material and then building something out of it is definitely fun. And: When people build with gathered ressources, they'll put up locked chests by which you can find out who built a house. In creative, there's just the house and no idea who built that impressive structure :-( Plus, the creative inventory is not optimal. Without worldedit, all you gain in creative is infinite blocks.

Maybe we ought to introduce diffrent regions in a game world where you can do diffrent things. Not these parallel dimensions Minecraft has, but areas where players on a server can follow diffrent styles of gameplay. In one part, you might be in creative mode and just build. In another, there might be mobs that are after you, a third one mgiht be totally diffrent...
A list of my mods can be found here.
 

User avatar
jojoa1997
Member
 
Posts: 2890
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 05:11
Location: Earth

by jojoa1997 » Fri Mar 22, 2013 03:34

Different realm a would do that. It is easier to have another realm along with the default so both worlds don't conflict.
Coding;
1X coding
3X debugging
12X tweaking to be just right
 

User avatar
0gb.us
Member
 
Posts: 841
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 01:55
Location: 0gb.us:30000

by 0gb.us » Fri Mar 22, 2013 03:35

Sokomine wrote:Well, maybe not boring if you don't know that there are mods out there.

The first server I ever used had a ton of "mods". I later went to the default game, and found it didn't even need any (in my opinion). Having fun in minetest_game isn't tied to not knowing there is a wide range of "mods" available.

Sokomine wrote:Maybe we ought to introduce diffrent regions in a game world where you can do diffrent things. Not these parallel dimensions Minecraft has, but areas where players on a server can follow diffrent styles of gameplay. In one part, you might be in creative mode and just build. In another, there might be mobs that are after you, a third one mgiht be totally diffrent...


That would be way complicated to set up, and I'm not sure how well it would work. Each section would likely need its own player inventories, so you couldn't go gather materials using the creative mode inventory, or go get materials to fight enemies while in the place that has no enemies. And if these areas are acting independently of one another (aside from the fact that you can walk from one to the other) Even if that was programmed, I see no real advantage of that over running three parallel worlds. Unless, would that cost less system resources? Maybe.
 

prestidigitator
Member
 
Posts: 640
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2013 23:54

by prestidigitator » Fri Mar 22, 2013 03:38

One thing that might help is to make it easier to pull stuff OUT dynamically. For example, make the ability to unregister an ABM and/or wrap it with your own call to change its effects. Some stuff allows for this (replacing some minetest.* functions), sometimes you can do it only in hacky ways, and sometimes you have to clone the whole game and change the code. If we focused a little on the ability to not just add but more seamlessly modify and replace, what is in minetest_game might matter a little less.

The non-renewable lava thing is actually a good example. Once the lava_source node is registered, there doesn't seem to be a way to simply change some of its properties, because it is only when minetest.register_node() is called that you can expect the engine to fully utilize the node definition (if I'm wrong, please correct me and let's document it!). Maybe if we could grab a definition, change a property or two, and call something like minetest.reregister_node()....

Code: Select all
-- Complete Renewable Lava Mod
-- depends: default (so that the old definition will be in place and can now be modified)
local lavaDef = minetest.registered_nodes["default:lava_source"]
lavaDef.liquid_renewable = true
minetest.reregister_node("default:lava_source", lavaDef)


The benefits of that over copying the whole node definition (or certainly a whole game definition) are that you can allow all the rest of the definitions and code to evolve with the game, and only change that pieces you really care about.
Last edited by prestidigitator on Fri Mar 22, 2013 03:38, edited 1 time in total.
 

User avatar
Jordach
Member
 
Posts: 4523
Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2011 17:58
Location: Blender Scene
GitHub: Jordach
IRC: Jordach
In-game: Jordach

by Jordach » Fri Mar 22, 2013 07:40

Wow, this has either spiralled out if control. Or that this is an amazing discussion.
viewtopic.php?f=10&t=19056 Solar Plains Dev Server
 

User avatar
0gb.us
Member
 
Posts: 841
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 01:55
Location: 0gb.us:30000

by 0gb.us » Fri Mar 22, 2013 07:45

Personally, I think it's the latter, but I see why it might be mistaken for the former.
 

User avatar
jojoa1997
Member
 
Posts: 2890
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 05:11
Location: Earth

by jojoa1997 » Fri Mar 22, 2013 10:12

Yes it seems chaotic but we are also discussing a completely and more active new route with minetest
Coding;
1X coding
3X debugging
12X tweaking to be just right
 

User avatar
Casimir
Member
 
Posts: 1163
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2012 16:59
GitHub: CasimirKaPazi

by Casimir » Fri Mar 22, 2013 11:26

Jordach wrote:Wow, this has either spiralled out if control. Or that this is an amazing discussion.

It's the second. And it's a very productive discussion.

prestidigitator wrote:For example, make the ability to unregister an ABM and/or wrap it with your own call to change its effects.

That would be very usefull. A simple way is to make an ABM like the following:
(not sure if that works properly)
Code: Select all
function modename.abm_function(pos, node)
    -- some code here
end

minetest.register_abm({
    nodenames = {"modename:nodename"},
    interval = 1,
    chance = 1,
    action = function(pos, node)
        modename.abm_function(pos, node)
    end
})

As far as I know PilzAdam already did this for lava.
We should at least do this for leavedecay too.
 

User avatar
BorisGrishenko
Member
 
Posts: 206
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2013 06:11
Location: Battlehorn Castle, Cyrodiil

by BorisGrishenko » Fri Mar 22, 2013 13:04

Its both, and a very good one at that.
Jordach wrote:Wow, this has either spiralled out if control. Or that this is an amazing discussion.
Hi, I'm this guy at his home somewhere in a very hot place.
Currently working on houses based in real and virtual worlds.
Judge Minister Claude Frollo should be a Disney Prince.
 

User avatar
YoYoBuddy
Member
 
Posts: 247
Joined: Sun Jan 27, 2013 00:49
Location: New York City

by YoYoBuddy » Fri Mar 22, 2013 13:22

Casimir wrote:quoting someone

Um, dude, I don't speak Dutch... So could you find it in, oh I dunno, maybe ENGLISH!?
“People are more difficult to work with than machines. And when you break a
person, he can't be fixed."

-Rick Riordan
 

User avatar
0gb.us
Member
 
Posts: 841
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 01:55
Location: 0gb.us:30000

by 0gb.us » Fri Mar 22, 2013 15:56

Casimir wrote:
Jordach wrote:Wow, this has either spiralled out if control. Or that this is an amazing discussion.

It's the second. And it's a very productive discussion.

prestidigitator wrote:For example, make the ability to unregister an ABM and/or wrap it with your own call to change its effects.

That would be very usefull. A simple way is to make an ABM like the following:
(not sure if that works properly)
Code: Select all
function modename.abm_function(pos, node)
    -- some code here
end

minetest.register_abm({
    nodenames = {"modename:nodename"},
    interval = 1,
    chance = 1,
    action = function(pos, node)
        modename.abm_function(pos, node)
    end
})

As far as I know PilzAdam already did this for lava.
We should at least do this for leavedecay too.


Leaf decay is already done with an ABM.
 

User avatar
Casimir
Member
 
Posts: 1163
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2012 16:59
GitHub: CasimirKaPazi

by Casimir » Fri Mar 22, 2013 16:46

Yes I know. Thats the reason you can not overwrite it. What I meant was, let the ABM all a function, so you can overwrite the function.
 

User avatar
Bas080
Member
 
Posts: 398
Joined: Mon May 21, 2012 15:54
Location: Netherlands
GitHub: bas080
IRC: bas080
In-game: bas080

by Bas080 » Fri Mar 22, 2013 17:48

Hey Jordach, Good discussion. My idea is that the user should be made more aware of what the content is that we modders are making and sharing. Ways of doing this is putting a game manager and/or mod manager in that allows user rating. That is the only way we will find out what mods and what games people(not modders) like. The results from these ratings should be implemented into the default game. This way the default will appeal to a large group of players. I think that should be the goal of the default game.

The changes are decided not entirely by developer but also by users. Which avoids finger pointing.

Furthermore a mod manager and/or games manager shows the strength of Minetest. It is to adapt to a players needs. Also the needs of players that deviate from the default game. And in the case that allot of them deviate from the default, the default should be adapted. Evolution.

For the nostalgic people there should always be the game mode as they knew it. Having a game_manager(multiple and downloadable games) allows for this.

Conclusion: More focus on user input (rating/downloads of mods and games ) so we know what the masses want and adapt default to the masses.
 

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests