Minecraft 2.0

[SturmDolch]

This exists and it's called Lego Universe.

But I'll stick with Minecraft anyways, since there's no subscription fee.

 

[subject_87]

Also, some Avatar-style full-on floating islands wouldn't hurt either.

i get those a lot in my games

Well, I mean big ones that are meant to be there, not little glitches in the world generation.

I could look like this:


Sigh, it would be awesome if it were real.

Oh hell yes. The game looks good as is, though, but that'd be cool as a mod or texture pack or something.

From what ive seen of minecraft, i think its an over hyped indy project with little fun or value to it. Those who enjoy it, go nuts, me personaly, think its a waste of data.

You're entitled to your opinion and I respect that, but look upon a kickass giant robot or Japanese castle you built in-game and then get back to me.

 

[Veylon]

It's probably inevitable that a major company will eventually make a Minecraft equivalent of their own, given it's success. What kind of puzzles me, now that I think about it, is how far behind it's time this game is. You could run something like this on a computer ten years old, or probably older. This should be an active genre by now with dozens of games, but instead it's just starting out.

 

[WhatHityou]

The final retail copy of the game possibly? because there working very hard to make it deeper and more interesting everyday. I really like there buy in development system to, it's ingenious!

 

[default]

From what ive seen of minecraft, i think its an over hyped indy project with little fun or value to it. Those who enjoy it, go nuts, me personaly, think its a waste of data.

OH NO YOU DIDN'T.

*grabs Diamond Sword*

Who wants to help me hunt down this Minecraft-hater?! He is as much our enemy as Creepers are!



But yeah, Minecraft's entire charm and aesthetic revolves around simplicity, and the blocky graphics convey that through visuals alone. It's a part of the game, and cannot be changed now.

 

[Chibz]

If there was actual physics, and actual challenge to building something, and the end result didn't look like a Duplo set. Minecraft might actually be worth playing.

As it stands, sure, I could build something huge and complex, but it's only going to take time. There's no difficulty in finding the right building materials. No sort of planning involved. No penalty for dying except running back to you body. There's no difficulty in making sure that your building won't collapse in on itself. If you have a bow, creepers aren't even a problem anymore (and they're a relatively minor one to begin with). Mistakes can be reversed in less than ten seconds, and if all else fails you can just download mods that do everything for you anyway.

People who still want the straight-block method are just going for the whole hipster "you just don't GET it" angle.

I'm sorry, but I'm certainly not a hipster. And you definitely don't get it. Now stop pissing on people's parades and go back to... whatever you were doing prior. It's doubtlessly a much better use of time.

 

[Rkiver]

Good graphics do not mean a game is good.
Minecraft is fine as it is. If you want more, get a texture pack.

 

[Smooth Operator]

Well, in terms of building you have a good example in here. Give the ability to the community to build assets and I believe that it is as good as Minecraft.

But that essentially kills the magic of Minecraft.
Yes level editors are alot more powerful but infinitely more complex, raising the entry bar from "put down a block" to "learn 15k tools" (trust me I used my fair share).
The entire magic of Minecraft is in it's simplicity and the direct use approach, and all level/modeling editors are the exact opposite.
Minecraft is a toy, editors are tools, tools may still be fun to use but toys are alot better for that.

 

[John the Gamer]

Just try to generate a 8x Earth sized world with top of the range graphics. You'd have to have a supercomputer stashed away to be able to play that, and I sure know I don't. Even now minecraft lags at times, and I have a pretty decent PC.

 

[Kilgengoor]

I think there is a misconception about "graphics" and "gameplay". And even "graphics", "gameplay" and "physics". Obviously, one might affect one or the other two, but not necessarily. Allow me to elaborate.

Now I know it's really -REALLY- easy to enter the graphics debate within the Minecraft community. I want to tell you all up front that I like how minecraft plays and looks. It's a nice game, and I wouldn't change anything of its basic style. Maybe add some things, but whatever. To the point: I saw in a Minecraft Forum (couldn't find it again) an image in which there was a basic, hypothetical Minecraft screenshot. There were cubes alright, but they had texture, and dynamic lightning. And bloom. Lava was fucking glowing, and its light competed with the one from the torch the character was holding in dimly lightning the rock cubes and projecting shadows through the wall's porous surface. Now, the player in that hypothetical game could take the pick right away, destroy the rock cube and store it. Same exact thing as in the game, but with better graphics. I can't see anything wrong with that.

There is no change in gameplay, no change in anything. Take Minecraft, add a couple of shaders, some hi-res textures, maybe grass and some details and you simply have a nicer game. I like poligonal, pixellated games because it gives them more personality, but I agree in that it'd be nice to play a more polished version, graphically speaking. Hey, why not? Everyone could just choose their flavor, kinda like on Dwarf Fortress. Also, I'd really like to see that offset vertex thingy graphics the author developed for Alpha but quickly discarded. You know, graphics à la Dungeon Keeper. Like these [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EplEzRvZPBA&feature=player_embedded]

If there was actual physics, and actual challenge to building something, and the end result didn't look like a Duplo set. Minecraft might actually be worth playing.

I wouldn't put it like this, but it certainly wouldn't hurt to add some physical properties to the game. I know, It'd take away some creativity and such and probably would affect its playability in great measure, but I'd like to see a Havok-powered minecraft. It could still look blocky, but if I destroy the lower block on a tree, it would fall until laying flat on the ground. The foliage would disappear. Then I could just push or drag that tree to my cave. Really, why not? Minecraft has already some gravity, but it doesn't apply to things like rocks. Don't you think It'd be really cool to be able to just explode a tower and watching little rock blocks how they fly away from the explosion? And the tower tettering until it falls? Also, It'd make suvival more fun and challenging. Don't want zombies tearing your door down? build moats. Spikes. Drawbridges, traps, you name it.

Again: don't like it? No worries, you just flip a switch and go from "realistic" to "arcade". Now, why can't we accept both things are reasonable and it doesn't force Minecraft to go down one, and just one specific path? At least I'd enjoy a lot by catapulting unsuspecting Creepers against a mountain and watch the bright flash of the explosion as a very confused cow gets thrown off a hill.

EDIT: Found the screenshots! Here [http://img710.imageshack.us/img710/439/cavecv.jpg], take a look [http://img5.imageshack.us/img5/1779/lavac.jpg]

 

[Araksardet]

It would be possible to make a Minecraft knock-off simply by "hiding" the cubes - i.e. smoothing over the mesh, leaving the cubes as part of the game logic while presenting a different visual style. Different materials would smooth out differently, so stone stays very blocky but dirt clumps and sand slumps.

It wouldn't be Minecraft anymore then, of course, but it would have its own potential to be awesome.

 

[Pedro The Hutt]

The system specs for Minecraft COULD be a lot lower if it wasn't coded in Java, a language not meant for games at all, and instead if it were rewritten in a C language. But oh well~ What does Notch know about efficiency when he spends half his time on vacation.

 

[Photocopier]

On the subject of different building shapes- I think that simply smaller blocks would be an interesting idea. Instead of using the cubes that the game is currently built on, something as basic as cubes an eighth of the size (so a square face is split into four) could add significantly more possibilities to creations and the landscape, slopes would appear much smoother and a player wouldn't have to be constantly jumping just to get up a hill. The simplicity of building and mining could be retained by having a pattern that the tool breaks (8 blocks which make up the shape of one big one would be fine) so that mining would be more or less the same. As for building then I think it would be feasible to have two options for placing blocks: the default of an 8 cube large block, or a toggle-able single cube mode which could be used for detailing slopes etc.

 

[ZexionSephiroth]

I pose a question.

If Minecraft didn't have blocks what else would we build with?

There are more kinds of polygons than Cubes. Some say Triangular ones might work.

@ OP; In my opinion, I'd like a more advanced minecraft too. However, many of the people who know what they are talking about say that we'd need more powerful computers to even begin trying to make one. So don't expect anything like that any time soon.

If there does come a more powerful version of minecraft, then here's the (somewhat predictable) list of things I might want:

->Near complete control of item and building crafting to impressive scales, not restricted by pre-programed recipies or building part form.
->Physics that are closer to that of real life, plus a few extras such as matter that warps space or gravity. Allowing the need and ability to use Naturalistic (or near relistic) engineering, achitechture and even worlds (leading to ability to traverse planets with space ships or some form of warp drive force placed on top of the realistic physics.)
->Near natural simulated genetics and neural networks for creatures, but not fully natural so as to allow for senarios equivilent to Digimon; such as fire breathing lizards. Meaning one could get highly advanced fantasy creatures via natural or artificial selection. Aka, Evolution.
->Fully mobile artilary and balistics. I'm sorry, but in my mind I don't have time to build a new cannon for every enemy fortress nor stop the zeplin of the zeplin mod every time I want to drop bombs without blowing myself up.
->Advanced and expanded crafting: When crafting an Item or build peice I want to be able to build working devices acording to some level of engineering sense, even if the parts don't always conform to real physics. Thus I would like a 3D building screen where I would be able to put each peice into place on a 3D "grid" and rather than creating a block or item seperate from the programing of the parts; the parts each react to physics apropriately to make the item work. Thus the item is "effectively" made of many parts rather than just a single programed entity.
->Better Transport methods: this doesn't even require a whole new minecraft to make. The Nether is fine and all, but it takes ages to cross great distances within the nether. And Mine carts are slow, cronicly so in my opinion. Would be easier with naturalistic engineering as mentioned above.
->(proper) Vehicles: something that probably does need a minecraft 2. I'd like to be able to fly in all dimensions except time. Loop the loop, etc. As Part of a virtual space program and/or Final fantasy 13 style coccoon or Marvel universe style helicarier. Did I mention spaceships? spaceships! But also there's also earthbound vehicles to think of, such as Cars and submarrines. Also, I'd like the ability to make trains that can carry supplies and players inside the same compartment, in fact, proper Trains in general, considering the current choice in minecraft is one person minecart with no leg room and kinda slow or impossibly slow piston train. And of course, I want to be able to move/walk around inside the vehicle I'm using if I'm only a passenger to it. Maybe even perform combat while on a train.
->A balanced fight for survival: There are two...okay, one stratagy in minecraft. One! build lots of torches and hole yourself up in a bunker. Now if you don't follow that rule, you die. What I'd want is for a few monsters that rival the power of the Fal'cie of FF13. And all monsters are Able to break into your house after a while. While at the same time you have a chance at survival outside your house; and you can defend your house with various methods such as automated defence systems, energy shields, and just plain being sturdy. Not to mention being prety hardy in combat yourself, either by super tech made from engineering or Final Fantasy (13) style RPG statistics.
->Other Planets that can be reached, terraformed and colonised... maybe more.

I feel like there should be more... but I've already asked too much for such a project. Considering that minecraft strains current technology, I'd have a long time to wait. 10 years seems a tad optimistic for a project that even comes close being viable both in hardware and software. And yet I think it's still possible... in theory.

Edit:... while I may want advanced and natural, well, everything. I Shy away from the word realistic for a couple of reasons. One, we haven't discovered (insert force here) yet and reasistic implies "exactly like ours". Two, I don't care so much for graphical fidelity; I'd go with an anime style if it works, it's more model form and function fidelity that I care for; however, that may be even more demanding past a certain point.

 

[ZexionSephiroth]

No. Do not want.

I love my blocky Minecraft. You keep those "modern" graphics to other games.

Meh, Nither is perfect for me. I'll go with a more anime-esque aethetic. Of course, i must make a distinction between Realism and Naturalism. That being that I see realism as being "replication of reality", and Naturalism as "Functionally logical in aplication". In other words: I mearly want a higher polygon count that would allow advanced structures and show roundish shapes. So stop at pokemon Stadium level graphics more or less and I'll be happy. It's the aesthetics that I look for. Which is just a tiny bit harder with cubes only.

Ask the OP what they want, they'll probably agree.