The theme of the game is quite nice. It gives Minetest players something new and a bit fresh to try. The first time I attempted it, it didn't make much sense, but the Quest book helps to guide players through the game. The music choices were good, and the particles effects were mostly nice (though I'm not keen on the one that happens when you walk; it sticks around too long, and doesn't vary. feels like it gets in the way).
I feel the game is just getting started with the automation when you need more things to do. It does need some endgame items to work towards, and maybe a reason for doing them. Having more resources renewable, and extra uses for core dust and the purple one (anti-matter?).
It's a new game, so I'll bear that in mind. A great start, keep at it.
So this wasn't a discussion about stability, but just fire out rhetoric then ignore?
I believe the examples I have given have not accurately given credit. I have reviewed, and given you (the project leader) the information. Are you going to ensure you're giving credit or not? Or is credit only given when you like folk, not for all cases like you originally stated?
ryvnf suggested he disagreed with my position, I raised why it was more than fair. I would have expected ryvnf to continue this conversation. You come in throwing rocks "Yeah I agree, it would just be great if you guys stopped spreading misinformation like this, I recently rejoined mt discord and searched for mineclonia out of interest ... and I'm pretty sure it goes up a level if one were to search on vl discord ... "
You cannot get personal and then accuse folk of getting personal. You also failed to counter any of the points I have made. Maybe it's time to step back from this conversation which you wasn't involved in. You could have owned the fact you didn't give credit (maybe even if it was a mistake) and it'd be fine, we move on. ryvnf could have perhaps acknowledged it and fixed it via a commit. A bit of leadership from the project leader. Though here we are... still awaiting that.
I'm still wondering why ryvnf thought it a good idea to resurrect this after it was long dead and in history. Why is he going through our reviews? Why does he care so much to support our negative reviews that are pretty historic.
In regards to the night rain light issue. The issue was bugging me and when your very close friend Prairie was making changes to weather, I asked him if he had any idea how to resolve it. He said he and you didn't have any idea how to fix it. The moment I fix it, you rewrite and add it without giving credit or cherry pick. Hardly independent. Just rewriting again to not give credit.
Oh, and btw, I also found it funny when my PR on skyblock support gets merged 1st April, https://git.minetest.land/VoxeLibre/VoxeLibre/pulls/4217 and you start work on a one block mod a few days later: https://codeberg.org/cora/mcl_oneblock/commits/branch/main Glad you found that inspiration.
I added a pcall to every reference of get_natural_light, an erroring call. I put this in the util package. You later add a pcall in to all references of get_natural_light in utils, but in a slightly different way. I never saw you use pcall before we used it in mobs, ver and here and now you are claiming you magically came up with it on your own and it's all your work. Now you're saying the fix is bad, so if it's so bad, why did you do exactly the same thing as me? Considering you rewrote most of my fixes when you forked (from before I took over rather than 0.83 may I add, because you desperately wanted to ignore that period happened, and would rather rewrite multiple releases of code to feel you always had some permanent lineage as a maintainer continuing on your new repo) with some snide comment about how bad my fixes are, demonstrates how personal it was to you, and how you resented every line of code I added, it is hard not to view it as a pattern of behaviour, but hey, if you dislike me more than merge conflicts, that's a sorry state of affairs, and one that just generates a lotta work.
Either way, I do not expect you to give credit. You're rather argue with me for months than give a line of credit to me. Yet when MineClone2++ was created as a squashed repo without the neccessary commits, you went absolutely bananas. You expect from other people what you are unwilling to do yourself. Either way, this point was to ryvnf who seems to have vanished now. He conveniently created the repo for you when you wanted it, and lets you do as you wish and take on the battles. Even with his name on the repo, it's clear it was always your project. Meanwhile, you can keep arguing it to death and distracting, but it won't divert from the obvious.
Me? I avoid talking about it TBH. I do not raise your project. I only respond to issues and in as blameless way as possible, otherwise, it'll always go the same way. I also know for a long time you've been in the matrix we bridge to, so claiming it's little birdies feeding you this is pointless. You'll take offence to the slightest remark and dive on to our issue tracker. We will be debating it for days while you ignore the core points until the initial points are forgotten and everyone has lost the will to bother. It ain't fun, but you seem to take great enjoyment in it. Or perhaps you have the thinnest skin in open source software and you'll get offended regardless of how mild a point was.
I'll go back to the core points.
We are on our comments for our package. You make baseless claims like more secure (which is false advertising), a review repeats these baseless claims, we'll challenge and you'll get offended and dive in because you enjoy negative reviews on the project. Drop the pointless claims that no one cares about and you'll save us all time. I mean, seriously, if you focus on everything, you focus on nothing. When you were maintainer on MineClone2, you neglected urgent optimisation to throw more features. Kelp, skulk etc. was horrific. When you had sole decision making, you failed to act, so pretending you care about that now is hollow.
I created a wrapped with a pcall in util for get_natural_light here: https://git.minetest.land/VoxeLibre/VoxeLibre/commit/7fe1be2c18be119c164a4ed0abf9ab113e79c603 Commit reference here. It's abundantly clear where it came from, as you were actively involved in the discussion about the issue and criticised the PR when I made it. Whether you credit it or not is a choice only you can make.
Whether it addressed the problem fully or not is hard to say, it's a difficult problem as we both know, and if it was easy, I'm sure you'd have fixed it by now.
But this was after after a period of time where you were lifting my fixes and rewriting them (sky colour when raining was another). Mob border was a seperate thing you objected to. You objected to about 5 things I did, and then eventually implemented 3 of them iirc.
As I said, not misinformation, but something said long ago, and dug up from the trash can of the past.
"recently rejoined mt discord and searched for mineclonia out of interest ... and I'm pretty sure it goes up a level if one were to search on vl discord ... " Speculation, and pretty baseless. The topic is always tiptoed around, because inevitably it results in days of drama. I have commented on multiple occassions it's positive you guys are doing what you do. There is a demand for it and more hands on these problems are always good.
I have had very little dealings with you previously other than what I read on your issue tracker or when you came to ours (and your conduct was positive), when I've read your takes on many things, I have a good level of respect for your gameplay and technical decision making. I personally would like to move forward, as us running seperate projects that both serve a positive niche is a good thing for Minetest players. I actually refer players to mcla that want a closer to MC style of play. It's also worth considering this when PRs are taken from VL (and there has been many, especially in the initial stages), with shade being thrown at the quality before rewriting it. Not liking code and wanting to improve it and saying why is a useful thing. Labelling contributors solutions as bad or questionable (with heavy insinuation that it's really bad) is just not a nice thing. It just isn't a good look on the project you lead, and the fact you turn a blind eye to it is less than ideal.
Let's move on, and both build great games, and enjoy it.
Fixing crashes you introduce doesn't make it stable. Pretending unstable code is stable and removing sensible mitigations doesn't solve the problem. You wrongly assumed it hides the problem, the solution actually puts the message in the chat so the player can see it and asks them to report the bug, the only difference is, they can keep their world in a functioning state (for example clearing mobs) and carry on playing without waiting for devs to fix the crash and release it. It was a mercy fix so players wouldn't be impacted by immature code that needed a lot more work. You may have done a refactoring before release, and it is a good thing, but that doesn't actually solve the problem. Correct refactoring doesn't change the semantic effect of the code. It's about pulling out into functions, and making code more maintainable without changing it's functional effects. If it affects the functionality, it's a rewrite. Usually, you refactor to lay the foundations, and it's the bug fixes and improvements that address the problems. To get the mobs code we both base our game on in a good state would take years, and I'm pretty sure neither of us have achieved mature enough, reliable enough code to pretend it won't crash in any circumstance.
"We credit MineClone 2 for all changes we backport in our changelogs." It's an interesting statement, but I'm not sure it's true. Did Cora credit the pcall code I added to the get_natural_light code that she objected at length in an issue on our tracker and then introduced into MCLA as her own commits months later? I've seen a few examples of my code being repurposed without credit. So when you use the word all, please try to ensure it does apply for all.
(A response in 3 parts. Word count limit)
This post was over 7 months ago, so surprised to see it brought back from the dead. At the point of writing, I did see more introduced crash bugs in mcla code, than I did in VL. Even if you fix them, it's still adding instability. I used to follow the repo, and in all honesty, I actually stopped because it was painful to watch. Expecting users to test your code is stable by suffering crashes is not respectful to players imho. Bugfixes is a vague term. Making something functionally correct by fixing a bug that doesn't have a crashing effect doesn't make it more stable, it just makes the functionality more beneficial. It's a positive thing to do, but not something that would make it more "stable", so I stand by the point I made.
You advertise as "Fork of MineClone 2 with focus on stability, multiplayer performance and features". The insinuation is of course that we don't and you can see it by the reviews that inevitably followed it, it had that effect. If you don't really want to have these discussions (and there are many better things we can do with our time, it just isn't helpful to a world that we're just both trying to make good experiences for players), it's worth considering if you really even need that part. We do focus on those things. Heck, when I took over as maintainer from your co-maintainer, I spent probably 6 months working only on performance fixes. The important thing is always what you do, not what you say. It may be better to focus on your brand being as a game that maps closely to Minecraft features, which is a very useful thing to have a project doing that, and is a more positive focus.
Because the original name was very bad. Every time I hear it, it just sounds like "bad Minecraft copy 2". It's not a great brand to have.
We've discussed this for over a year on Discord which is bridged with Matrix and on our issue tracker. Most of our community were aware of the change, and voted on it. The vast majority are happy with this change. While there may be some that won't be happy with this change, you cannot neccessarily please everyone. Keeping it the same and people would have also been unhappy, so there is no perfect option.
We've classed our game as "inspired by Minecraft" rather than a clone for over a year now, and MineClone2 is misleading and sometimes used as a stick to beat anyone with if they contribute anything that isn't perfectly like Minecraft. It needed to go, and we've polled it, it is changing, and isn't being reverted. I would hope people understand that reasoning and get on board with the change.
I think it's probably because you have mesecons mod added it, and it already was in on the same namespace for mineclone2, so breaks. You cannot use mesecons with MineClone2 due to the name collision. Sometimes it starts up and uses the wrong 1 and causes issues.
Can you explain a little more about the issue and what is happening? If any error, please let us know?
I do think one of our contributors is fixing things up and the Technical Maintainer is planning a release that may include FOV stuff, it could be resolved shortly.
"Games will a lot less content require less resources"
Yes, and the game didn't used to run smooth on old harward until I opitimized it. Dual core CPU's started running smoother when they didn't before. Those devices would have likely been a bad experience even before this, so to now suggest they're not runable is using a very narrow view of history to misrepresent how good and efficient this game was. When I took over MineClone2 in December, it was poor performance wise. I spend months optimising it, rather than focussing on the existing backlog of bugs 700+. You were very quiet when the changes for Kelp node timers, Sculk went in, raids. For those who used to maintain the project to remove some music and their friends suggest the changes we made broke it performance wise... yeah... sure, buddy. Until you can learn to be balanced, your opinion isn't going to count for much.
You, and Cora worked on the old Mineclonia, so it's safe to say you were close before and that hasn't really been hidden recently and both of you are sharing the same troll image on our repo...
If we are interesting in a public statement, I'm sure we can come to you, as it seems you're unofficial spokesperson for the Mineclonia project. If the focus is to trash the rival project, it doesn't really come across too well though. Negative marketing isn't pretty. Dirt often rubs off more on those that throw it.
Of the issues you have mentioned. 1 and 3 are issues only you have complained about. Number 2, there has been a few issues that have been mopped up. The only mod so far impacted, actually agreed with the change and was happy to resolve the issue. Repeatedly talking about issues only you have an issue with doesn't make the issue any more significant.
I've seen very little mention of crashes other than from yourself or those involved in the Mineclonia project. It comes across more as negative marketing, than any legitimate issue.
We don't really support devices less than 2gb of ram as even if you do, eventually the world gets big and it goes pop. We also don't feel removing music is a good experience, and the benefits are questionable for most.
MineClonia isn't more stable. I've seen more crashes for it, tbh. For example, they removed error handling for mobs which stopped a game from crashing when an exception happened. We added this in because mobs is immature, needs a lot of work, and is subject to a lot of change. Many of the game crashes came from it, so it made sense to add in error handling. Many of Mineclonia's features and fixes comes from MineClone2.
What a game is advertised as, and what it is, are two different things.
"Inventory items can turn into other items in new MineClone2 versions: ..."
You cannot yet make blue dye from flowers, we left that out for players to convert their old lapis (now blue dye) back into lapis from blue dye, we added this to the release notes also. It will be left in for 3-6 months.
"Texture names are not stable: ..."
They were named incorrectly and not to standards, we made the decision to change them once. At the time, we weren't aware of mod impact issues. Once aware, we worked with the one author impacted and apologised and they actually agreed with the change and that it was neccessary.
"Mods are ill-defined and often tightly coupled: ...."
I agree with you on this, and unfortunately both happened and was released long before I became maintainer. I have taken your points on board and will try to catch this in reviews in future. However, if you depend on where they've been added, it will remain a valid dependency. I can only see this being an issue if something is removed from an area.
I often agree on the importance of the things you care about, but will sometimes come to different conclusions on what is the best path forward. I appreciated hearing your perspective on this a few months ago when you raised it on IRC, and I'm always happy to get feedback on how we can improve things, but hyperbole such as "x will always break", or "x will break again", or "x will keep changing" isn't particularly helpful to a technical discussion, 'cause often it's factually incorrect. It's always better to ask why, rather than ranting on IRC and casting negative aspersions on people's character and incorrectly assuming their motives.
You can also adjust the player reach in the game settings.
The polishing side of game development takes the most work. We currently have 780 issues open and rely on volunteer contributions. The game makes massives strides, but there is plenty more to go and it gets better with every release :).
There is something quite satisfying about terraforming an alien planet. It scratches that eco itch. From an emotional point of view, that is valuable. Cultivating and developing chaos into life.
I did a little mining, but didn't care too much about it. The mutants regularly jump scare me, but they aren't too challenging as you can outjump them, but the converting the terrain to something lush is quite satisfying.
I really like the facts that blocks convert rather than crafting recipes, it feels more natural, and about your controlling the environment. Part of me feels that the start should be based on algae growing on water, you scrape it off, and you mix with volcanic ash to make some type of soil that could develop life (not always, and things like moss sprout off it). Maybe you enrich the mix more and more with volcanic ash, but the creation of life is not guaranteed. It would give it a unique, not so crafty start to things.
I think some of the conversions should be findable in game, like a help/basics tab in the inventory. It's a great reference. It feels needing to go to the readme will alienate a few potential players.
Also, too many crafting recipes at first. Some available initially that are core (such as saplings, tools etc.) but some extra blocks should add to recipes as you discover them perhaps.
Oh, and if you die, restart as it is not intuitive that you need mutants just to be able to get started (apples and digging tool). Maybe a help message on death could help (like the start one which was a cool nudge).
However, great base game. Very satisfying. I'm excited about the potential of this game.
Villages can be kind of rare, as they don't spawn in all biomes, so there is an element of luck to them. See seed "apple" or "StarCore" for any close to seed. We will probably have to look into village spawning code at some point. It is on the radar.
The theme of the game is quite nice. It gives Minetest players something new and a bit fresh to try. The first time I attempted it, it didn't make much sense, but the Quest book helps to guide players through the game. The music choices were good, and the particles effects were mostly nice (though I'm not keen on the one that happens when you walk; it sticks around too long, and doesn't vary. feels like it gets in the way).
I feel the game is just getting started with the automation when you need more things to do. It does need some endgame items to work towards, and maybe a reason for doing them. Having more resources renewable, and extra uses for core dust and the purple one (anti-matter?).
It's a new game, so I'll bear that in mind. A great start, keep at it.
400k!
So this wasn't a discussion about stability, but just fire out rhetoric then ignore?
I believe the examples I have given have not accurately given credit. I have reviewed, and given you (the project leader) the information. Are you going to ensure you're giving credit or not? Or is credit only given when you like folk, not for all cases like you originally stated?
ryvnf suggested he disagreed with my position, I raised why it was more than fair. I would have expected ryvnf to continue this conversation. You come in throwing rocks "Yeah I agree, it would just be great if you guys stopped spreading misinformation like this, I recently rejoined mt discord and searched for mineclonia out of interest ... and I'm pretty sure it goes up a level if one were to search on vl discord ... "
You cannot get personal and then accuse folk of getting personal. You also failed to counter any of the points I have made. Maybe it's time to step back from this conversation which you wasn't involved in. You could have owned the fact you didn't give credit (maybe even if it was a mistake) and it'd be fine, we move on. ryvnf could have perhaps acknowledged it and fixed it via a commit. A bit of leadership from the project leader. Though here we are... still awaiting that.
I'm still wondering why ryvnf thought it a good idea to resurrect this after it was long dead and in history. Why is he going through our reviews? Why does he care so much to support our negative reviews that are pretty historic.
In regards to the night rain light issue. The issue was bugging me and when your very close friend Prairie was making changes to weather, I asked him if he had any idea how to resolve it. He said he and you didn't have any idea how to fix it. The moment I fix it, you rewrite and add it without giving credit or cherry pick. Hardly independent. Just rewriting again to not give credit.
Oh, and btw, I also found it funny when my PR on skyblock support gets merged 1st April, https://git.minetest.land/VoxeLibre/VoxeLibre/pulls/4217 and you start work on a one block mod a few days later: https://codeberg.org/cora/mcl_oneblock/commits/branch/main Glad you found that inspiration.
I added a pcall to every reference of get_natural_light, an erroring call. I put this in the util package. You later add a pcall in to all references of get_natural_light in utils, but in a slightly different way. I never saw you use pcall before we used it in mobs, ver and here and now you are claiming you magically came up with it on your own and it's all your work. Now you're saying the fix is bad, so if it's so bad, why did you do exactly the same thing as me? Considering you rewrote most of my fixes when you forked (from before I took over rather than 0.83 may I add, because you desperately wanted to ignore that period happened, and would rather rewrite multiple releases of code to feel you always had some permanent lineage as a maintainer continuing on your new repo) with some snide comment about how bad my fixes are, demonstrates how personal it was to you, and how you resented every line of code I added, it is hard not to view it as a pattern of behaviour, but hey, if you dislike me more than merge conflicts, that's a sorry state of affairs, and one that just generates a lotta work.
Either way, I do not expect you to give credit. You're rather argue with me for months than give a line of credit to me. Yet when MineClone2++ was created as a squashed repo without the neccessary commits, you went absolutely bananas. You expect from other people what you are unwilling to do yourself. Either way, this point was to ryvnf who seems to have vanished now. He conveniently created the repo for you when you wanted it, and lets you do as you wish and take on the battles. Even with his name on the repo, it's clear it was always your project. Meanwhile, you can keep arguing it to death and distracting, but it won't divert from the obvious.
Me? I avoid talking about it TBH. I do not raise your project. I only respond to issues and in as blameless way as possible, otherwise, it'll always go the same way. I also know for a long time you've been in the matrix we bridge to, so claiming it's little birdies feeding you this is pointless. You'll take offence to the slightest remark and dive on to our issue tracker. We will be debating it for days while you ignore the core points until the initial points are forgotten and everyone has lost the will to bother. It ain't fun, but you seem to take great enjoyment in it. Or perhaps you have the thinnest skin in open source software and you'll get offended regardless of how mild a point was.
I'll go back to the core points.
We are on our comments for our package. You make baseless claims like more secure (which is false advertising), a review repeats these baseless claims, we'll challenge and you'll get offended and dive in because you enjoy negative reviews on the project. Drop the pointless claims that no one cares about and you'll save us all time. I mean, seriously, if you focus on everything, you focus on nothing. When you were maintainer on MineClone2, you neglected urgent optimisation to throw more features. Kelp, skulk etc. was horrific. When you had sole decision making, you failed to act, so pretending you care about that now is hollow.
I created a wrapped with a pcall in util for get_natural_light here: https://git.minetest.land/VoxeLibre/VoxeLibre/commit/7fe1be2c18be119c164a4ed0abf9ab113e79c603 Commit reference here. It's abundantly clear where it came from, as you were actively involved in the discussion about the issue and criticised the PR when I made it. Whether you credit it or not is a choice only you can make.
Whether it addressed the problem fully or not is hard to say, it's a difficult problem as we both know, and if it was easy, I'm sure you'd have fixed it by now.
But this was after after a period of time where you were lifting my fixes and rewriting them (sky colour when raining was another). Mob border was a seperate thing you objected to. You objected to about 5 things I did, and then eventually implemented 3 of them iirc.
As I said, not misinformation, but something said long ago, and dug up from the trash can of the past.
"recently rejoined mt discord and searched for mineclonia out of interest ... and I'm pretty sure it goes up a level if one were to search on vl discord ... " Speculation, and pretty baseless. The topic is always tiptoed around, because inevitably it results in days of drama. I have commented on multiple occassions it's positive you guys are doing what you do. There is a demand for it and more hands on these problems are always good.
I have had very little dealings with you previously other than what I read on your issue tracker or when you came to ours (and your conduct was positive), when I've read your takes on many things, I have a good level of respect for your gameplay and technical decision making. I personally would like to move forward, as us running seperate projects that both serve a positive niche is a good thing for Minetest players. I actually refer players to mcla that want a closer to MC style of play. It's also worth considering this when PRs are taken from VL (and there has been many, especially in the initial stages), with shade being thrown at the quality before rewriting it. Not liking code and wanting to improve it and saying why is a useful thing. Labelling contributors solutions as bad or questionable (with heavy insinuation that it's really bad) is just not a nice thing. It just isn't a good look on the project you lead, and the fact you turn a blind eye to it is less than ideal.
Let's move on, and both build great games, and enjoy it.
Fixing crashes you introduce doesn't make it stable. Pretending unstable code is stable and removing sensible mitigations doesn't solve the problem. You wrongly assumed it hides the problem, the solution actually puts the message in the chat so the player can see it and asks them to report the bug, the only difference is, they can keep their world in a functioning state (for example clearing mobs) and carry on playing without waiting for devs to fix the crash and release it. It was a mercy fix so players wouldn't be impacted by immature code that needed a lot more work. You may have done a refactoring before release, and it is a good thing, but that doesn't actually solve the problem. Correct refactoring doesn't change the semantic effect of the code. It's about pulling out into functions, and making code more maintainable without changing it's functional effects. If it affects the functionality, it's a rewrite. Usually, you refactor to lay the foundations, and it's the bug fixes and improvements that address the problems. To get the mobs code we both base our game on in a good state would take years, and I'm pretty sure neither of us have achieved mature enough, reliable enough code to pretend it won't crash in any circumstance.
"We credit MineClone 2 for all changes we backport in our changelogs." It's an interesting statement, but I'm not sure it's true. Did Cora credit the pcall code I added to the get_natural_light code that she objected at length in an issue on our tracker and then introduced into MCLA as her own commits months later? I've seen a few examples of my code being repurposed without credit. So when you use the word all, please try to ensure it does apply for all.
(A response in 3 parts. Word count limit) This post was over 7 months ago, so surprised to see it brought back from the dead. At the point of writing, I did see more introduced crash bugs in mcla code, than I did in VL. Even if you fix them, it's still adding instability. I used to follow the repo, and in all honesty, I actually stopped because it was painful to watch. Expecting users to test your code is stable by suffering crashes is not respectful to players imho. Bugfixes is a vague term. Making something functionally correct by fixing a bug that doesn't have a crashing effect doesn't make it more stable, it just makes the functionality more beneficial. It's a positive thing to do, but not something that would make it more "stable", so I stand by the point I made.
You advertise as "Fork of MineClone 2 with focus on stability, multiplayer performance and features". The insinuation is of course that we don't and you can see it by the reviews that inevitably followed it, it had that effect. If you don't really want to have these discussions (and there are many better things we can do with our time, it just isn't helpful to a world that we're just both trying to make good experiences for players), it's worth considering if you really even need that part. We do focus on those things. Heck, when I took over as maintainer from your co-maintainer, I spent probably 6 months working only on performance fixes. The important thing is always what you do, not what you say. It may be better to focus on your brand being as a game that maps closely to Minecraft features, which is a very useful thing to have a project doing that, and is a more positive focus.
Thanks for the review. This is something I am considering implementing for the next release.
Because the original name was very bad. Every time I hear it, it just sounds like "bad Minecraft copy 2". It's not a great brand to have.
We've discussed this for over a year on Discord which is bridged with Matrix and on our issue tracker. Most of our community were aware of the change, and voted on it. The vast majority are happy with this change. While there may be some that won't be happy with this change, you cannot neccessarily please everyone. Keeping it the same and people would have also been unhappy, so there is no perfect option.
We've classed our game as "inspired by Minecraft" rather than a clone for over a year now, and MineClone2 is misleading and sometimes used as a stick to beat anyone with if they contribute anything that isn't perfectly like Minecraft. It needed to go, and we've polled it, it is changing, and isn't being reverted. I would hope people understand that reasoning and get on board with the change.
Duplicate of this:
https://git.minetest.land/MineClone2/MineClone2/issues/2866
I think it's probably because you have mesecons mod added it, and it already was in on the same namespace for mineclone2, so breaks. You cannot use mesecons with MineClone2 due to the name collision. Sometimes it starts up and uses the wrong 1 and causes issues.
Can you explain a little more about the issue and what is happening? If any error, please let us know?
I do think one of our contributors is fixing things up and the Technical Maintainer is planning a release that may include FOV stuff, it could be resolved shortly.
"Games will a lot less content require less resources"
Yes, and the game didn't used to run smooth on old harward until I opitimized it. Dual core CPU's started running smoother when they didn't before. Those devices would have likely been a bad experience even before this, so to now suggest they're not runable is using a very narrow view of history to misrepresent how good and efficient this game was. When I took over MineClone2 in December, it was poor performance wise. I spend months optimising it, rather than focussing on the existing backlog of bugs 700+. You were very quiet when the changes for Kelp node timers, Sculk went in, raids. For those who used to maintain the project to remove some music and their friends suggest the changes we made broke it performance wise... yeah... sure, buddy. Until you can learn to be balanced, your opinion isn't going to count for much.
Appreciate the feedback. Portal spawning has been decreased in recent releases, so hopefully it's less jarring.
Our mobs walking on water issue is now resolved and has been part of one of the last 2 releases. :)
Creeper explosions and knockback is currently being worked on. Hopefully it gives a more interesting experience.
You, and Cora worked on the old Mineclonia, so it's safe to say you were close before and that hasn't really been hidden recently and both of you are sharing the same troll image on our repo...
If we are interesting in a public statement, I'm sure we can come to you, as it seems you're unofficial spokesperson for the Mineclonia project. If the focus is to trash the rival project, it doesn't really come across too well though. Negative marketing isn't pretty. Dirt often rubs off more on those that throw it.
Of the issues you have mentioned. 1 and 3 are issues only you have complained about. Number 2, there has been a few issues that have been mopped up. The only mod so far impacted, actually agreed with the change and was happy to resolve the issue. Repeatedly talking about issues only you have an issue with doesn't make the issue any more significant.
I've seen very little mention of crashes other than from yourself or those involved in the Mineclonia project. It comes across more as negative marketing, than any legitimate issue.
We don't really support devices less than 2gb of ram as even if you do, eventually the world gets big and it goes pop. We also don't feel removing music is a good experience, and the benefits are questionable for most.
MineClone2 is maintained. Our new technical maintainer, Herowl is doing a great job. We had a release 4 days ago. See here for more information:
https://git.minetest.land/MineClone2/MineClone2/src/branch/master/releasenotes/0_85-the_fire_and_stone_release.md
MineClonia isn't more stable. I've seen more crashes for it, tbh. For example, they removed error handling for mobs which stopped a game from crashing when an exception happened. We added this in because mobs is immature, needs a lot of work, and is subject to a lot of change. Many of the game crashes came from it, so it made sense to add in error handling. Many of Mineclonia's features and fixes comes from MineClone2.
What a game is advertised as, and what it is, are two different things.
These are things on our list of things to do. Maintaining a game of this size is pretty time consuming. We will get to this though.
Are you going to add a disclosure to your review that you used to be a maintainer for Mineclonia with the maintainers there and are friends with them?
Without the impartiality, it just comes across as blatant advertising.
"Inventory items can turn into other items in new MineClone2 versions: ..."
You cannot yet make blue dye from flowers, we left that out for players to convert their old lapis (now blue dye) back into lapis from blue dye, we added this to the release notes also. It will be left in for 3-6 months.
"Texture names are not stable: ..."
They were named incorrectly and not to standards, we made the decision to change them once. At the time, we weren't aware of mod impact issues. Once aware, we worked with the one author impacted and apologised and they actually agreed with the change and that it was neccessary.
"Mods are ill-defined and often tightly coupled: ...."
I agree with you on this, and unfortunately both happened and was released long before I became maintainer. I have taken your points on board and will try to catch this in reviews in future. However, if you depend on where they've been added, it will remain a valid dependency. I can only see this being an issue if something is removed from an area.
I often agree on the importance of the things you care about, but will sometimes come to different conclusions on what is the best path forward. I appreciated hearing your perspective on this a few months ago when you raised it on IRC, and I'm always happy to get feedback on how we can improve things, but hyperbole such as "x will always break", or "x will break again", or "x will keep changing" isn't particularly helpful to a technical discussion, 'cause often it's factually incorrect. It's always better to ask why, rather than ranting on IRC and casting negative aspersions on people's character and incorrectly assuming their motives.
You can also adjust the player reach in the game settings.
The polishing side of game development takes the most work. We currently have 780 issues open and rely on volunteer contributions. The game makes massives strides, but there is plenty more to go and it gets better with every release :).
There is something quite satisfying about terraforming an alien planet. It scratches that eco itch. From an emotional point of view, that is valuable. Cultivating and developing chaos into life.
I did a little mining, but didn't care too much about it. The mutants regularly jump scare me, but they aren't too challenging as you can outjump them, but the converting the terrain to something lush is quite satisfying.
I really like the facts that blocks convert rather than crafting recipes, it feels more natural, and about your controlling the environment. Part of me feels that the start should be based on algae growing on water, you scrape it off, and you mix with volcanic ash to make some type of soil that could develop life (not always, and things like moss sprout off it). Maybe you enrich the mix more and more with volcanic ash, but the creation of life is not guaranteed. It would give it a unique, not so crafty start to things.
I think some of the conversions should be findable in game, like a help/basics tab in the inventory. It's a great reference. It feels needing to go to the readme will alienate a few potential players.
Also, too many crafting recipes at first. Some available initially that are core (such as saplings, tools etc.) but some extra blocks should add to recipes as you discover them perhaps.
Oh, and if you die, restart as it is not intuitive that you need mutants just to be able to get started (apples and digging tool). Maybe a help message on death could help (like the start one which was a cool nudge).
However, great base game. Very satisfying. I'm excited about the potential of this game.
The minecart going off the rails bug is annoying and on my radar. Need to think of the best way to tackle that and where it fits in the priority list.
Villages can be kind of rare, as they don't spawn in all biomes, so there is an element of luck to them. See seed "apple" or "StarCore" for any close to seed. We will probably have to look into village spawning code at some point. It is on the radar.
FYI Hopper minecarts and chest minecarts have now been implemented.