Minecraft 2.0

[MisterGobbles]

I think that Notch should port Minecraft to the 3DS...it technically already has 3D capabilities and it would be a perfect fit for that console.

But in terms of a Minecraft upgrade, considering that Minecraft's entire image is based on the cubes, I don't think that any future version of Minecraft will leave out the cube element.

 

[TheYellowCellPhone]

The cube aspect is what makes Minecraft so great. Everything fits together and can look great beside its simplistic graphics.

 

[Whateveralot]

Minecraft + oblivion would be cool. More enemies, actual settlements, factions based on those settlements, more items, better graphics, same great digging mechanics.

 

[captaincabbage]

I think the block idea is what helps minecraft. It makes construction easy, and leaves more room for creativity.
To me at least minecraft would not be minecraft without blocks.

you're totally right. The blocks are an intergral part of Minecraft, not only invisual aspect of minecraft, but also in the construction side, and even occasionally in the humor. An 80 foot golden cock and balls just wouldn't be the same if it wasn't all blocky and stuff.

I'm just really hoping to see the finished product of Minecraft, with all of the new textures by that pixel artist Notch hired.

 

[kebab4you]

I wouldn't but it just for the simple fact constructing ANYTHING would be a pain.

 

[Jaranja]

Those 32 bit (I think?) blocks make Minecraft Minecraft.

I thought it was 16 but yeah. That's why it's good.

 

[SL33TBL1ND]

I think you're missing the whole point of Minecraft. Building in Minecraft is meant to be fun, not hard. If you want something hard, you go play something else. Not every game has to be hard.

No. People want the straight-block method because it's easy to use. Some people don't want to have to read through a book or online tutorial to build something in a program like Autocad.

Ah yes, the "you just don't GET it, you pleb"

I did go play something else. Because Minecraft is boring as hell. Things can be accessible while still providing a challenge. Most games manage to do this. Minecraft doesn't. Therefore: it's boring.

To you, but over a million people (plus many more who I suspect would've pirated the game by now) disagree with you. I don't even build things when I play Minecraft, I spend my time exploring the practically infinite huge world. The random formations in that game can be amazing, and the easy block nature of the game makes it easy to, say, mine out of a massive cave system I got lost in.

 

[Vohn_exel]

I think you're missing the whole point of Minecraft. Building in Minecraft is meant to be fun, not hard. If you want something hard, you go play something else. Not every game has to be hard.

No. People want the straight-block method because it's easy to use. Some people don't want to have to read through a book or online tutorial to build something in a program like Autocad.

Ah yes, the "you just don't GET it, you pleb"

I did go play something else. Because Minecraft is boring as hell. Things can be accessible while still providing a challenge. Most games manage to do this. Minecraft doesn't. Therefore: it's boring.

It's just not for you. No game is going to have 100 percent people like it. I don't care for most shooters or racing games. I find them boring. But that doesn't mean they're bad games or that they aren't fun for anyone. I get alot of fun out of Minecraft, but I have become a bit bored of it too. But, it's still a fun game and some of it is just that I don't really care to build alot of stuff, and I've done most of what I want to in the game right now.

I love the blocky old timey graphics. I like having it left to the imagination. My mind will accept a world that somewhat looks like the real world without any problems, where a game that tries to do real life and fails will always have that looming over it's head. The Uncanny Valley isn't just for people, IMO. Look at the N64 games that tried to simulate real life, their graphics look horrible now and some people won't buy them based on that (which is sad because they miss out.) Minecraft can look beautiful as it is because your mind can easily accept that pretty blocky world.

 

[Double A]

Minecraft is owned by a company. And that company is owned by Notch.

Without the blocks, I have no idea what Minecraft would be. It certainly wouldn't be Minecraft...

 

[AndyRock]

I think you're alone in thinking better graphics and removing the block aesthetic will improve minecraft.
In the meantime, I reccomend you download this mod for minecraft - it's a 64x64 texture pack.

http://www.minecraftforum.net/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=73861

I see your 64X64 texture pack, and raise you a 256X256

http://www.minecraftforum.net/viewtopic.php?f=1021&t=67932

But ti kinda takes the charm away from the game, but if your into graphics, go ahead

 

[No_Remainders]

Sigh.

Minecraft simply would not work without the "block" design.
Think about it, the blocks make it easier to build things. You can get a few logs, turn them into planks, and build a house in the space of an hour or two.

If it were done any other way, it just wouldn't function as a game, it'd be a map editor and nothing else.

It's just not for you. No game is going to have 100 percent people like it. I don't care for most shooters or racing games. I find them boring. But that doesn't mean they're bad games or that they aren't fun for anyone. I get alot of fun out of Minecraft, but I have become a bit bored of it too. But, it's still a fun game and some of it is just that I don't really care to build alot of stuff, and I've done most of what I want to in the game right now.

I love the blocky old timey graphics. I like having it left to the imagination. My mind will accept a world that somewhat looks like the real world without any problems, where a game that tries to do real life and fails will always have that looming over it's head. The Uncanny Valley isn't just for people, IMO. Look at the N64 games that tried to simulate real life, their graphics look horrible now and some people won't buy them based on that (which is sad because they miss out.) Minecraft can look beautiful as it is because your mind can easily accept that pretty blocky world.

I was arguing that Minecraft is good as it is...?

Shrug.

 

[Daemascus]

I think the game looks good as is, and the blocky style is a defining feature. However, I feel that there could be more and better-defined biomes, like rainforests with appropriate animals, exotic trees, and undergrowth that can be cleared faster with a Machete tool.

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

Those happen in the game right now, they are just rare.

 

[Archemetis]

I pose a question.

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

 

[Jack Skelhon]

The blocks are not a visual thing; the attraction they have is significant, but really, it's a gameplay thing.

Blocks allow for absolute simplicity. A cube is a symmetrical, equilateral shape. It's that inherent property that makes it fantastic for simple construction and destruction, and dynamic landscapes that involve caves, beaches and such with complete destructibility.

Frankly, all Minecraft needs to go "2.0" is a powerful lighting engine similar to STALKER's XRAY system. Sharper shadows would be awesome.

But visually, the game can be made stunning with modifications, and if it wasn't in cubes I guarantee it would have died very, very quickly.

Don't obsess over realism in games. They're for escape and entertainment.

 

[Weslebear]

I think you're missing the whole point of Minecraft. Building in Minecraft is meant to be fun, not hard. If you want something hard, you go play something else. Not every game has to be hard.

No. People want the straight-block method because it's easy to use. Some people don't want to have to read through a book or online tutorial to build something in a program like Autocad.

Ah yes, the "you just don't GET it, you pleb"

I did go play something else. Because Minecraft is boring as hell. Things can be accessible while still providing a challenge. Most games manage to do this. Minecraft doesn't. Therefore: it's boring.

Ah yes, the "my opinion is fact and everyone must meld to it" guy. Not going to lie, but whether something is boring or not is entirely subjective. He thinks it is fun, you don't. Don't try to force someone into thinking your way sir. One man's trash is another's treasure.

OT: Eh, more simplistic shapes, say spheres, cylinders, pyramid and triangle shapes would add worlds of creativity to it, but implementing something like this level of world manipulation to a complex open world with a real physics engine would be almost identical to just using developer tools to mod a game how you see fit. Why bother when Minecraft is Minecraft and we can go mod Oblivion if we want. I just don't see a game like this going down well unless it was very well streamlined and optimised, making it not be a complete pain to accomplish anything.

 

[KalosCast]

I pose a question.

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

Multiple different shapes of varying complexity. Even if you keep curvature out of the game you could have everything from boards to slopes of varying steepness. Or you could simply just not be limited to a grid.

Ah yes, the "my opinion is fact and everyone must meld to it" guy. Not going to lie, but whether something is boring or not is entirely subjective. He thinks it is fun, you don't. Don't try to force someone into thinking your way sir. One man's trash is another's treasure.

Ah yes, the "I'm terrified of other people's opinions" guy. I assumed it was a given that this was my opinion on the game. I don't think anywhere in this thread I've tried to convince anyone that they're not enjoying the game. Calm down, kid.

 

[Vohn_exel]

Sigh.

Minecraft simply would not work without the "block" design.
Think about it, the blocks make it easier to build things. You can get a few logs, turn them into planks, and build a house in the space of an hour or two.

If it were done any other way, it just wouldn't function as a game, it'd be a map editor and nothing else.

It's just not for you. No game is going to have 100 percent people like it. I don't care for most shooters or racing games. I find them boring. But that doesn't mean they're bad games or that they aren't fun for anyone. I get alot of fun out of Minecraft, but I have become a bit bored of it too. But, it's still a fun game and some of it is just that I don't really care to build alot of stuff, and I've done most of what I want to in the game right now.

I love the blocky old timey graphics. I like having it left to the imagination. My mind will accept a world that somewhat looks like the real world without any problems, where a game that tries to do real life and fails will always have that looming over it's head. The Uncanny Valley isn't just for people, IMO. Look at the N64 games that tried to simulate real life, their graphics look horrible now and some people won't buy them based on that (which is sad because they miss out.) Minecraft can look beautiful as it is because your mind can easily accept that pretty blocky world.

I was arguing that Minecraft is good as it is...?

Shrug.

Thats weird, I swear I quoted the other guy, the one that was bored. And now if I go back in and edit my post, he won't know I quoted him. Dang it, I hate it when I do something like that! Sorry man.

 

[Archemetis]

I pose a question.

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

Multiple different shapes of varying complexity. Even if you keep curvature out of the game you could have everything from boards to slopes of varying steepness. Or you could simply just not be limited to a grid.

Sounds needlessly complex for something that is essentially recreational creation tool.
I mean don't get me wrong, I like seeing interesting ideas take on robust and intricate shapes.

But I think for most the simplicity is what appeals most to people who play Minecraft, certainly got my attention.

I mean we could stick with blocks, or we could go with your different shapes of varying complexity.

They'd need to implement a system for creating the shapes, which would then mean you'd have to be in control of what the shapes look like.

I mean maybe something simple like the starting phase of the Spore creature creator.

But from the sounds of things it's like you're dreaming of a 3D tool with a map generating addon attached to it...