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

TrueCraft, An Open Source Implementation of Minecraft 1.7.3

truecraft.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 95 posts

Re: TrueCraft, An Open Source Implementation of Minecraft 1.7.3

#81

Post by deathcap »

milkywayz wrote: post #2

Should have been implemented in Java :/ > A completely clean-room implementation of Minecraft beta 1.7.3 (circa September 2011). > To get started, sign the Contributor License Agreement to establish that you have not, in fact, ever read decompiled Minecraft code. > 'Clean room design is the method of copying a design by reverse engineering and then recreating it' Not sure why it makes sense to say in the repo you rev…

> Should have been implemented in Java :/

If you are looking for an open source Minecraft-compatible implementation in Java, I humbly suggest (shameless plug) checking out https://github.com/GlowstonePlusPlus/GlowstonePlusPlus. Glowstone++ like TrueCraft currently only implements the server portion, and it has some differences such as targeting 1.8.4 compatibility not 1.7.3 beta, but being implemented in Java has some significant benefits.

For those not aware there is a huge ecosystem of additions available for Minecraft written in Java. This includes thousands of "Bukkit plugins" available from http://dev.bukkit.org/categories/, Spigot plugins from http://www.spigotmc.org/resources/, and now an emerging community of Sponge plugins from https://forums.spongepowered.org/c/plugins/plugin-releases. Writing Minecraft-compatible software in Java has the advantage of being able to potentially support these plugins. Glowstone++ in fact implements much of the Bukkit API and Spigot API, as well as (currently a small subset of) the Sponge API through a bridge. Based on the original Glowstone server, Glowstone++ is completely open source, yet it ties into the existing "Minecraft" plugin development ecosystem.

Java has some disadvantages of course as well, so it's good to see alternative implementations in other languages (not only C# TrueCraft, but C++ MC-Server, Rust Hematite, JavaScript PrismarineJS, etc). The more choice the better =)

Re: TrueCraft, An Open Source Implementation of Minecraft 1.7.3

#82

Post by deathcap »

VikingCoder wrote: post #52

Has anyone made a similarly licensed Minecraft 1.7.3 (or close to it) client that's worth looking at? Or let me put it differently - what's the most popular open source client?

> Or let me put it differently - what's the most popular open source client?

Another open source Minecraft-compatible client in the works is https://github.com/thinkofdeath/steven. Written in Go, already decently functional, though still far from finished it is under active development and progressing nicely. Not that popular yet but seems to be promising to me. The author is a major contributor to one of the most popular Minecraft server software packages.

Re: TrueCraft, An Open Source Implementation of Minecraft 1.7.3

#83

Post by Lawtonfogle »

z3t4 wrote: post #23

I hope you make it so that only the surface blocks are sent to the client. The time it takes to "mine" a block is enough for the latency to send the block behind it. This would be a major improvement to the multi-player experience. Also, send the input to the server, and not the position/speed vectors. That way you will also get rid of the speed hacks. Those "fixes" will completely rid the game from "hackers". Witch…

I'd rather have effort spent on making the game funner for those who play legit. Especially since many of those anti-hacks, if implemented in the wrong way, make mods more difficult. Nothing like working up a mod tech tree to get flying/super speed to have it boot you ever 4th time you use it.

Re: TrueCraft, An Open Source Implementation of Minecraft 1.7.3

#84

Post by Sir_Cmpwn »

deathcap wrote: post #80
ddevault wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As xlib said, the screenshots were taken with the official client. I have a contributor who is working on a free (as in freedom) texture pack that we can use when we start working on the client.

> As xlib said, the screenshots were taken with the official client. I have a contributor who is working on a free (as in freedom) texture pack that we can use when we start working on the client. A freely-licensed texture pack would be great, I faced this same problem when developing a different voxel-based game. There are plenty of texture packs available on Minecraft Forums or Curse but very few released under per…

Thanks! This looks pretty cool. I especially like the "stick pack" option, of course.

Re: TrueCraft, An Open Source Implementation of Minecraft 1.7.3

#85

Post by Sir_Cmpwn »

smlacy wrote: post #78
scrollaway wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes? It seems like a good choice. Maybe 6 months ago I would have said it's foolish, but with C# being an actual open language now, I'd say it's a rock solid choice. What would you have done it in? C, and never get any contributor? Or Java, and do as bad as the original?

Actually, I don't really care what language. I was mostly making a comment on the lack of detail of the post. I had to click all the way down to the source code to see what language it was in, which to me seemed like the most important aspect of this entire project.

Why would that be the most important detail?

Re: TrueCraft, An Open Source Implementation of Minecraft 1.7.3

#86

Post by bovermyer »

Sir_Cmpwn wrote: post #20
tiles wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hey Sir Cmpwn, this is definitely a useful (and perhaps necessary?) project for a massive gaming phenomenon. Thanks for instigating it. If you had an army of 100 developers, what tasks would you set them to do to improve TrueCraft?

I would split them up on the following tasks: - Building a client with OpenGL - Implementing world logic (grass growth, door logic, etc) - Improving terrain generation It'd be really hard to take on 100 contributors at once, though. In my open source projects, I need time to figure out how each contributor writes code and what they like to work on so I can leverage them appropriately.

I'm eligible for contribution, since I've never looked at decompiled Minecraft code. I haven't touched C# in over ten years, though, so that might be something of an impediment.

Re: TrueCraft, An Open Source Implementation of Minecraft 1.7.3

#87

Post by Sir_Cmpwn »

bovermyer wrote: post #86
Sir_Cmpwn wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would split them up on the following tasks: - Building a client with OpenGL - Implementing world logic (grass growth, door logic, etc) - Improving terrain generation It'd be really hard to take on 100 contributors at once, though. In my open source projects, I need time to figure out how each contributor writes code and what they like to work on so I can leverage them appropriately.

I'm eligible for contribution, since I've never looked at decompiled Minecraft code. I haven't touched C# in over ten years, though, so that might be something of an impediment.

Your contributions would definitely be welcome. Head on over the the IRC channel to hang out and we can find you something to work on.

Re: TrueCraft, An Open Source Implementation of Minecraft 1.7.3

#88

Post by deathcap »

babuskov wrote: post #14
scrollaway wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes? It seems like a good choice. Maybe 6 months ago I would have said it's foolish, but with C# being an actual open language now, I'd say it's a rock solid choice. What would you have done it in? C, and never get any contributor? Or Java, and do as bad as the original?

Take a loot at some open source projects. The Battle For Wesnoth (c++) has many more contributors than FreeCol (Java). I'm sure that number of C# developers in the world who develop open source stuff is even smaller. If your main goal is to get as many contributors as possible, perhaps JavaScript would be the best choice. And I'm still not convinced that Java is the main cause the original Minecraft was bad. Although…

> If your main goal is to get as many contributors as possible, perhaps JavaScript would be the best choice.

Hi, I just wanted to mention I have started such a project: https://github.com/deathcap/voxel-clientmc - a Minecraft-compatible client written in JavaScript.

It sure could use more contributors =) help welcome if anyone is interested. Currently not many features are implemented, but you can connect to a Minecraft server (works with the official Minecraft server and its modifications, but I usually test with Glowstone or Glowstone++ for a 100% open source stack) in your web browser via the WebSocket/Minecraft proxy https://github.com/deathcap/wsmc. The protocol decoding is implemented by PrismarineJS https://github.com/PrismarineJS/node-minecraft-protocol, much of the client logic by mineflayer, and the WebGL voxel rendering using http://voxeljs.com.

JavaScript has some interesting benefits for game development, I enjoy its dynamicism; plugin loading is a breeze. Since it is already a "scripting" language, it is easily modifiable by third-parties. Some game engines have taken to implementing a second language runtime, for example Minetest and MC-Server are written in C++ but allow addon development in Lua. The Minecraft modifications ComputerCraft and OpenComputers also allow in-game programming using Lua. ScriptCraft, a CanaryMod plugin for Minecraft, allows writing plugins in JavaScript. etc. But when everything is written in JavaScript, there is no platform/addon dichotomy. In voxel.js (especially https://github.com/deathcap/voxel-engine-stackgl), much of the core functionality is even implemented in "plugins".

Re: TrueCraft, An Open Source Implementation of Minecraft 1.7.3

#90

Post by lurkinggrue »

skrowl wrote: post #61

Cool project! Can't wait to see a pure .NET client with OpenGL down the road. I don't install Java on anything anymore (mostly due to all the security issues) so I haven't played Minecraft in years.

I install java but remove it from the browser.
Post reply on HN