Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

New Game: Minecraft Earth

minecraft.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 233 posts

Re: New Game: Minecraft Earth

#221

Post by fenomas »

BubRoss wrote: post #165
fenomas wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you! But I don't know a thing about it - I only found out it existed because an internet citizen looked at the source and let me know.

It's a little bizarre that they didn't get in touch with you at all.

It would have been friendly, but FWIW they seem to have forked my project in mid 2017, so I'm guessing it's an experiment and got shelved and later revived.

So it's easy to imagine a scenario where the people who ultimately released it last week weren't really aware of how much it uses external libraries - mine, and also a 3D engine called Babylon.js (who also weren't contacted).

Re: New Game: Minecraft Earth

#222

Post by zimpenfish »

andrepd wrote: post #163
jordache wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the tedious mining is definitely unique... holding down the mouse button to mine is creative expression?

>holding down the mouse button to mine And football is just kicking a ball in a pitch, and racing games is just going in circles in a track. Obviously there's more to it than that simplistic reduction. In particular, you have to think where you mine, how you organise your explorations. Then, you can run into myriad things as you explore: caves, water, lava, dungeons, monster spawners, many types of ore and rock... An…

> you have to think where you mine

Never straight down. Or straight up. Ye gods, the lava.

Re: New Game: Minecraft Earth

#223

Post by fenomas »

jcl wrote: post #217
downrightmike wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sucks that a multi-billion dollar franchise looks like it is walking all over you, are they contributing anything back?

Funnily enough, it looks like noa is built on the Babylon.js engine, which was the side project of some Microsoft employees, released under the Apache license, written in TypeScript. So it seems that open source software has stimulated some mutual benefit to all involved -- and rather more directly than usual.

Yes, Babylon does the 3D rendering while noa does meshing, physics, entities and such.

Curiously, the Babylon people also didn't hear about the minecraft game until after it launched, even though their engine is being used and they're all under the Microsoft umbrella.

Re: New Game: Minecraft Earth

#224

Post by shearskill »

SlowRobotAhead wrote: post #60
mattigames wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That solution leaves out kids without friends; I understand why they do it but it may be a price too high to pay.

Why is it everything has to be padded and safe and inclusive for everyone all the time now? Do you people not remember your own childhoods?

Ask Notch, he doesn’t favor being inclusive at all anymore.

Re: New Game: Minecraft Earth

#225

Post by vijay_nair »

andrepd wrote: post #162
skohan wrote: post #44

This reminds me of when I first discovered Minecraft in university. I was just going to play for a couple hours before bed, and I got sucked into the game-loop and before I knew it the sun was coming up. A few days later, I was walking toward the railroad crossing I often had to wait at between my house and campus, and just for a moment looked at those tracks and I seriously thought about where I should place the Min…

>A few days later, I was walking toward the railroad crossing I often had to wait at between my house and campus, and just for a moment looked at those tracks and I seriously thought about where I should place the Minecraft blocks to build a bridge and avoid waiting for the train. This is called the tetris effect. I've had it with, you guessed it, tetris. Whenever I get a bout of addiction and play tetris for an hour…

This happened to me back in college when I was into NFS Underground which gave players points for swiping as close to oncoming cars as possible ("Near Miss"). After a few long and intense sessions I would have the urge to swipe close to cars IRL anytime I went out in my car. It was fascinating and a bit scary; not only did I have the urge, it was really strong as well.

Re: New Game: Minecraft Earth

#226

Post by Supermancho »

gatherhunterer wrote: post #11

This looks ambitious enough to be met with skepticism. What matters most for gameplay is the UX implementation and AR has serious barriers to overcome in that regard. Holding a device up at eye level for extended periods, interacting with the game by touching the same device that is also serving as the viewport and battery limitations are just a few practical hurdles that have yet to be overcome. What is really hard…

This cant turn out much different than other persistent AR games. They are always too expensive and not very fun for long, without an accessible device to switch living inside the AR smoothly (eg: google glass). This is doa, but is good for making ppl more aware of where AR is....ie the engines have gotten much better at detecting, targeting and discerning surfaces.

Re: New Game: Minecraft Earth

#227

Post by anoncake »

drdeca wrote: post #206
anoncake wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a cynical and mostly correct viewpoint. Companies that don't make their workers act in their profit interests exist, but they aren't successful. Microsoft is not among them. When the market works, at least. So it's actually quite possible that Microsoft is being nice and "inefficient" here.

“Mostly correct” is also “somewhat incorrect”. Also, I think there are probably sufficiently small decreases in expected profit ithat many large companies would tolerate. And even aside from that, there is the possibility of a choice between options which does not have any large-enough-to-predict-or-evaluate-its-direction impact on the bottom line, and in these cases, the decision will likely be made in accordance wi…

> “Mostly correct” is also “somewhat incorrect”.

No model is perfect. I guess I should prioritize rhetorics in the future lest someone use my honesty against me.

> Also, I think there are probably sufficiently small decreases in expected profit ithat many large companies would tolerate.

There aren't. A company that accepts decreases in profit does not become large, it fails against its more psychopathic competitors.

> And even aside from that, there is the possibility of a choice between options which does not have any large-enough-to-predict-or-evaluate-its-direction impact on the bottom line, and in these cases, the decision will likely be made in accordance with how some people working there prefer.

If a company cannot predict whether an action is profitable, it will always decide against it and instead invest its resources in something that is.

Re: New Game: Minecraft Earth

#228

Post by drdeca »

anoncake wrote: post #227
drdeca wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Mostly correct” is also “somewhat incorrect”. Also, I think there are probably sufficiently small decreases in expected profit ithat many large companies would tolerate. And even aside from that, there is the possibility of a choice between options which does not have any large-enough-to-predict-or-evaluate-its-direction impact on the bottom line, and in these cases, the decision will likely be made in accordance wi…

> “Mostly correct” is also “somewhat incorrect”. No model is perfect. I guess I should prioritize rhetorics in the future lest someone use my honesty against me. > Also, I think there are probably sufficiently small decreases in expected profit ithat many large companies would tolerate. There aren't. A company that accepts decreases in profit does not become large, it fails against its more psychopathic competitors.…

When I said "sufficiently small" I was including stuff on the order of "an average of .01 cents total as the result of the policy".

> it fails against its more psychopathic competitors

I see no reason why choosing to lose an expected value of .01 cents total, would result in failing against a competitor which does not do so. That just doesn't make sense. It isn't like there is a ranking of "what company in this field made the most profit", and then all of them other than the top 1 or 2 are immediately destroyed each month. No, a company runs out of business when it is not sufficiently profitable. Now, if something results in their products being more expensive, or something like that, in a way that significantly changes their profitability, or other things which might slightly change their per-unit profitability, then yeah, that could make them non-viable.

But, like,

have you worked in a large company? There are certainly inefficiencies in large companies which are the result of the continued choices of individual employees, even among large successful companies. This is obvious.

Companies are not able to perfectly optimize for profitability, even if they wanted to.

Re: New Game: Minecraft Earth

#229

Post by anoncake »

drdeca wrote: post #228
anoncake wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> “Mostly correct” is also “somewhat incorrect”. No model is perfect. I guess I should prioritize rhetorics in the future lest someone use my honesty against me. > Also, I think there are probably sufficiently small decreases in expected profit ithat many large companies would tolerate. There aren't. A company that accepts decreases in profit does not become large, it fails against its more psychopathic competitors.…

When I said "sufficiently small" I was including stuff on the order of "an average of .01 cents total as the result of the policy". > it fails against its more psychopathic competitors I see no reason why choosing to lose an expected value of .01 cents total, would result in failing against a competitor which does not do so. That just doesn't make sense. It isn't like there is a ranking of "what company in this field…

All of that is just companies making errors, not intentionally foregoing profits.

> It isn't like there is a ranking of "what company in this field made the most profit", and then all of them other than the top 1 or 2 are immediately destroyed each month.

The process is not that quick, but in principle, this is exactly how markets work. The most profitable companies undercut all others, which then go under. Provided markets work, that is.

Re: New Game: Minecraft Earth

#230

Post by emilfihlman »

fenomas wrote: post #214
emilfihlman wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure why the negative points here. The game plays extremely laggy and with input delay on my Surface Pro 3, yet the FPS counter shows always above 40fps, usually over 100. The FPS counter is horribly off and does not represent real life.

I agree, the counter is certainly odd. That bit of code is Mojang's, I'm not sure what it's measuring. That said, I take no responsibility for it being laggy - the version of my engine they're using is from 2017 and I've done some performance stuff since then :D

Thanks for the reply! Not blaming you (you've done awesome job here!), just bringing up an interesting point and was hoping to get insight but apparently not so much :/
Post reply on HN