Minetest Forums

LMD wrote:Minetest needs better graphics. Minecraft has shadows. SHADOWS.

Please. Shadows make things look far better. :)

thomasthespacefox wrote:

LMD wrote:Minetest needs better graphics. Minecraft has shadows. SHADOWS.

Please. Shadows make things look far better. :)

Many of us have been wanting realtime lighting for a long time. Sadly, after RealBadAngel suddenly left this world, no one else joined the project who could take care of that aspect.

MirceaKitsune wrote: Many of us have been wanting realtime lighting for a long time. Sadly, after RealBadAngel suddenly left this world, no one else joined the project who could take care of that aspect.

Oh, really? ...

jp wrote:Oh, really? ...

How did I never know about that? Fantastic work! Wasn't expecting that to be doable with the current lighting system.

I so wish this could be added to default Minetest. But can predict that for one reason or another, it probably never will be.

Well, what Minetest is really missing over Minetest is manpower. I developed a new pathfinder, that is probably even better than the Minecraft Pathfinder, but because my C++ skills are not really existing I wrote the code in Lua

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QuqXuyg8PrE

As long as no one has the time (or is willing) to port my code to the core the only option will be to use the old crappy pathfinder

That's very interesting burli! I actually developed a Lua-based pathfinder as well. Nice to see we're thinking along the same lines.

viewtopic.php?p=340975#p340975

Here's a video of the fleepoint and trolpoint features in action:

https://vimeo.com/324076654

Well done, sorcerykid, but 2d pathfinding is trivial. In the early days of my pathfinder I made a little pacman style game.

This is how the default pathfinder performs in a labyrinth
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OUsW2M85oYg

And this is one of my early version in a pacman labyrinth. Was funny ;-)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kMqiE2frmeg

I also add some steering behaviour to make the movement more smooth
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73wUZuHR2x4

I used steering behaviour to avoid collisions between mobs like in this video. Not perfect, but works amazingly well and even for a Lua script extremely fast
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ctl1lZphzOA

Huh?

My pathfinder is 3D. From the post I linked above:

It handles 3D terrain mapping, converting all walkable surfaces into 2D "hint" maps, then compresses and caches those results into per-mapblock node-graphs for lightning fast lookups. The pathfinder supports numerous search options too; e.g. jumping, dropping, falling, ducking, cutting corners, opening doors, climbing ladders.

In other words, the terrain is cached in memory as a node graph for the greatest efficiency possible. When a mapblock is unloaded, the corresponding node-graph is stored as a serialized 3D bitmap for later retrieval. On average, pathfinding operations take between 0.1 and 0.2ms. I stresstested the performance of the pathfinder with my Avatars mod:

viewtopic.php?p=344783#p344783

And I also implemented steering behavior and collision detection directly into the engine by adding several new functions:

viewtopic.php?p=343126#p343126

And to top it off, the pathfinder works closely in conjunction with my Avatars mod so that mobs don't simply walk around like robots following the player everywhere, but they behave as lifelike state machines with awareness and alertness that can ramp up and cool down and are driven by a variety input sensitivity parameters.

viewtopic.php?p=344693#p344693

Ah, sorry. Missed the link. Nice work so far

38 pages long topic, so answer is simple: A lot. Minecraft is a kitchen sink. Don't fight bloat with bloat.

Burli, socerykid: Guess it's time for me to take a look at those pathfinders again. However, I did have trouble letting a mob follow a pre-calculated path. Mobs get stuck when encountering doors and other obstacles where they can walk through - but only if they turn around at the right moment. Didn't get that to work yet. A common lib for such things would be great. Regarding the topic: The pathfinding in MC may be better, but it's far from perfect. Over there, mobs seem to accumulate on top of hills. Maybe they're too afraid to climb down again...

Minecraft have slimeblocks that bounce players and blocks. And dropped blocks will going to the direction of the water when they are there in the water

Miniontoby wrote: Minecraft have slimeblocks that bounce players and blocks.

There's a slimeblock on Xanandu that allows the player to jump. And there's the trampoline mod.

Miniontoby wrote: And dropped blocks will going to the direction of the water when they are there in the water

I'm not sure if water in MC feels any better. It's kind of the opposite as in MT - instead of no effect at all, it has a far too strong effect and just kills immersion. And the item drop mod is one of the few mods I strongly dislike (item pickup is fine). It just feels wrong to use your hands or a tool to "dig" (=take) something, and then it flows away and has to be "picked up" by walking nearby...noo. Needless cpu cycles for a contraproductive function.

Sokomine wrote: Needless cpu cycles for a contra-productive function.

I like when there is a block out of range and you can reach it with your pick and break it, but then it starts falling and you have to try to "catch" it with your mouse click, especially if its above lava or a large cavern.

Your statement convinced me to try it for awhile without item drop on dig though. Save the cpu and network from having to deal with so many entities might be useful too.

Games which aren't just forks of MTG.

benrob0329 wrote:Games which aren't just forks of MTG.

I second this. Also needed is co-op games where two players need to work together to get through a maze, solve puzzles, etc..

If I had a lot of time, I would try to understand what prevents the UI from running mostly on the client side. That's the "polish" thing that annoys me the most: having a noticeable delay when putting an object in a case is annoying, as is turning pages on a crafting guide. I am sure there must be way to accelerate that but that's probably a whole rabbit hole...

More UI improvements would help a lot. Losing the button gradients, changing the gray-on-gray scheme.

A standard NPC/creature framework, definitely.

A base game with plenty of features. Having to download a few dozen mods to compete with other voxel games is very discouraging.

Editing graphical options during gameplay.

This.


It is called waterlogging in the Minecraft universe and also works with snow of different heights.

I find the title of this thread and what it implies irritating (although i realise the title does not actually reflect the original questions in the first post). The title implies that MT has to have all the features MC has, and that there is a problem because it 'still' has not got those features, both of which are of course sillyness.

The original question was why does MT servers seem more boring than MC servers? (to some people, so is rather subjective, maybe these people just prefer MC due to their taste?), and what does MT need to improve?
I think many people are being misled by the thread title and are then posting their desires for MC features that are not in MT. So i think this has made thread rather silly, and has extended its lifespan. Unfortunately, 'features that MC has that MT does not' is something that is likely to generate a lot of posts.

Perhaps the thread title could be improved? And i ask posters to please read the first post to understand what this is about.

paramat wrote:I find the title of this thread and what it implies irritating (although i realise the title does not actually reflect the original questions in the first post). The title implies that MT has to have all the features MC has, and that there is a problem because it 'still' has not got those features, both of which are of course sillyness.

The original question was why does MT servers seem more boring than MC servers? (to some people, so is rather subjective, maybe these people just prefer MC due to their taste?), and what does MT need to improve?
I think many people are being misled by the thread title and are then posting their desires for MC features that are not in MT. So i think this has made thread rather silly, and has extended its lifespan. Unfortunately, 'features that MC has that MT does not' is something that is likely to generate a lot of posts.

Perhaps the thread title could be improved? And i ask posters to please read the first post to understand what this is about.

Good point. What about "Fetures missing in MT which can't be implemented by a mod"?

Minetest also missing elytra's and fireworks for boost the fleight

Minetest is still missing a pointless height restriction of 256 blocks. :D

But something tells me that chances for it being implemented are rather slim …

PS: Yes, I agree this thread has gone out of control, and I don't really take it seriously. xD

Wuzzy wrote:PS: Yes, I agree this thread has gone out of control, and I don't really take it seriously. xD

It’s just another endless thread a lot of forum users have a weird fetish for.

What's Minetest still missing over Minecraft?

register with Email = taking our data,
and
paying money
so if you really miss this at minetest - go back to mc, instead of change other game that seam to be good enough for a lot of gamer.