default header

Games

[WEB] Minecraft

Moderator: JC Denton

[WEB] Minecraft

Unread postby seth » 22 Nov 2010 14:24

Minecraft is a sandbox building video game which allows players to build constructions out of textured cubes in a 3D world. It is currently in development, originally by creator Markus "Notch" Persson and now by his company formed from the proceeds of the game, Mojang Specifications. Minecraft has been developed on the Java platform. The gameplay is inspired by Dwarf Fortress, Dungeon Keeper, and Infiniminer.[3][4] The game is divided into two main modes, Alpha and Classic, where Classic is focused entirely on construction while Alpha additionally contains enemies, a health meter, and additional features and items. Alpha is the currently updated version of the game.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minecraft
http://www.minecraft.net/

While reading through the Indie Circlejerk thread a certain game kept coming to mind, and sure enough, before too long its name came up. After searching the forum, what was said in that thread seems to still be last word on the subject, and so here is a thread devoted to Minecraft.

I have played the game quite a bit, and I have to agree with icycalm's assumption that, no, it indeed does not fit into the circlejerk ilk. I'd also have to assume that the creators of Minecraft did not intend to create a work of "art" or have any other sorts of pretentious aspirations; it appears quite clear to me that they first and foremost set out to make a video game. That is perhaps the most important distinction.

The other distinction that I feel must be made is that Minecraft does not come across as "indie," though its production is most certainly independent. "Indie" has of course come to mean something else entirely, its own genre really, which refers to a certain "flavor" and has absolutely nothing to do with whether the product was an independent work or not. So in this way, Minecraft does not feel "indie" in the slightest. Its aesthetics are not self-conscious or showy, but rather effecient and representative of the game's core design. (Its pixelated look and grid-based gameplay might make for good discussion in the Aesthetics & Mechanics thread.)

Image

I personally find Minecraft extremely addicting. Entire nights have been spent in my randomly-generated and essentially infinite world when I had presumably only been playing an hour or two. Exploring this world is my favorite part of the game, and I often wonder if perhaps Nintendo were a more radical company, the Zelda games might have evolved into something similar. Although the combat isn't nearly as fun as a Zelda game, and I actually prefer playing the game with enemies turned off. They only impede my exploration, and since the controls and the first-person perspective are not exactly suited to medieval weaponry, I feel no dissatisfaction towards removing them and by extension all traces of challenge from the game.

That is my one substantial criticism against the game: the "gamey" parts are not very rewarding. I've heard some people refer to Minecraft as a sort of strategy game in which the player must build fortresses to protect himself and his materials from enemies -- essentially a tower defense game. I find no joy in viewing or playing the game in this way. The other way I've seen Minecraft most often billed is as a sandbox-styled creation game. My problem with this angle is that, though it is undoubtedly fun and very rewarding to construct all sorts of creations in Minecraft, the game is not at all well equipped for this. At least not nearly as well as a game like SimCity or Roller Coaster Tycoon (the latter being, I believe, another cited source of inspiration along with Dwarf Fortress). The issue is, again, the first-person perspective. While the experience of embodying a lone construction worker crafting his own structures and makeshift scaffolding is unique to say the least, I've fallen off an unfinished bridge or other colossal undertaking far too many times to pretend that the game would not benefit from an optional isometric viewpoint. If I remember correctly, Roller Coaster Tycoon 3 had the ability to switch between first-person and the usual isometric perspectives, and possibly even Theme Park before it.

But as evidenced by the huge amount of Minecraft creations already shared all over the Internet, there are many ways to play and enjoy the game. I'm interested in what the other members here have to say about it.
seth
 
Joined: 05 Nov 2010 19:59

Unread postby icycalm » 22 Nov 2010 15:14

seth wrote:I have played the game quite a bit, and I have to agree with icycalm's assumption that, no, it indeed does not fit into the circlejerk ilk. I'd also have to assume that the creators of Minecraft did not intend to create a work of "art" or have any other sorts of pretentious aspirations; it appears quite clear to me that they first and foremost set out to make a video game. That is perhaps the most important distinction.


Which is not really a distinction, because videogames are art, etc.

seth wrote:The other distinction that I feel must be made is that Minecraft does not come across as "indie," though its production is most certainly independent.


In contrast to the production of, say, Bayonetta, where production happened by slaves who had a gun held to their heads throughout the entire development process.

seth wrote:"Indie" has of course come to mean something else entirely, its own genre really, which refers to a certain "flavor"


The genre revers to a flavor. Great.

seth wrote:and has absolutely nothing to do with whether the product was an independent work or not.


Because, as everyone knows, there actually exist works which are not independent. Enslaved works, perhaps.

seth wrote:So in this way, Minecraft does not feel "indie" in the slightest. Its aesthetics are not self-conscious or showy, but rather effecient and representative of the game's core design.


The aesthetics are "effecient and representative of the game's core design". Banned for posting pseudo-intellectual babble in my forum.

seth wrote:Its pixelated look and grid-based gameplay might make for good discussion in the Aesthetics & Mechanics thread.


lol

seth wrote:and I often wonder if perhaps Nintendo were a more radical company, the Zelda games might have evolved into something similar.


A "more radical company", lol.
User avatar
icycalm
Hyperborean
 
Joined: 28 Mar 2006 00:08
Location: Tenerife, Canary Islands

Unread postby ghost4 » 22 Nov 2010 19:01

Some things that have been built in Minecraft:

- a computer
- cannons for launching animals, players, bombs and arrows
- a machine that generates an infinite amount of cobblestone
- a factory that produces obsidian, which is somewhat laborous to create by hand
- factories/farms/traps that spawn and kill mobs and harvest their dropped items
- the York Minster cathedral
- an ill-fated house

The survival aspect of Minecraft is too easy at the moment, unless you take a trip to the Nether or go spelunking with poor equipment. Monsters only spawn in the dark, and you can place torches to prevent that from occuring. But if you accidentally leave some spots insufficiently lit in your home, you'll soon receive a very special guest.

Image

In the future survival should be more challenging, since Notch plans on adding more dangerous mobs and torches that go out after some time (with permanent lighting being more expensive). And who knows what else.
User avatar
ghost4
 
Joined: 14 Nov 2010 12:35

Unread postby icycalm » 21 Jul 2011 14:04

This is actually a pretty good review of the game by sonictempest, who just now joined the forum:

http://www.sonictempest.net/2011/05/16/ ... of-mining/

It's more or less what I would say, only with the addition of a few hints here and there of why the very concept of the sandbox game is of its nature deficient.

I am thinking of asking permission to use the review. It is very well written, conveys all the necessary information of how the game works in a very easy to understand manner, and passes its negative judgement on the game without at all the appearance of resentment or grudge-holding. The only thing it could use are those general comments on sandbox-type games that I mentioned, but perhaps the SimCity-related comments he makes sort of cover that angle for the time being, until I am ready to tackle it fully in the appropriate theory essays and my SimCity review.

So if the author reads this, how would you feel about me using your review? And would you say a two-star rating would sound about right?
User avatar
icycalm
Hyperborean
 
Joined: 28 Mar 2006 00:08
Location: Tenerife, Canary Islands

Unread postby icycalm » 21 Jul 2011 14:11

We could actually make it a collaborative review, as with Arkham Asylum, ADOM, etc., with me simply adding a couple of paragraphs of my own comments at the end... As long as we agree on the rating, it should work out fine.
User avatar
icycalm
Hyperborean
 
Joined: 28 Mar 2006 00:08
Location: Tenerife, Canary Islands

Unread postby sonictempest » 21 Jul 2011 15:54

Sure, feel free to use the review. And two stars sounds right to me.
User avatar
sonictempest
 
Joined: 21 Jul 2011 07:22

Unread postby icycalm » 22 Jul 2011 16:10

How would you like to be credited? You have three choices: real name, pen name, or username. Let me know.
User avatar
icycalm
Hyperborean
 
Joined: 28 Mar 2006 00:08
Location: Tenerife, Canary Islands

Unread postby sonictempest » 22 Jul 2011 16:56

I'd prefer if you used my username.
User avatar
sonictempest
 
Joined: 21 Jul 2011 07:22

Unread postby icycalm » 23 Aug 2011 22:49

http://insomnia.ac/reviews/web/minecraft/

I ended up not using your review, for obvious reasons. It's a good review though, as I said, and probably the only instance of an "indie" game so far in which someone outside the site beat us at giving one of these games a negative review.
User avatar
icycalm
Hyperborean
 
Joined: 28 Mar 2006 00:08
Location: Tenerife, Canary Islands

Unread postby authstruggle » 23 Aug 2011 23:11

Nice review, this screenshot is a photoshop though:

Image

Notice the sloppy cropping job on the hud.
authstruggle
 
Joined: 09 Mar 2011 17:06

Unread postby ray » 24 Aug 2011 08:24

I laughed my ass off at the "1BC" stuff. Spot on as always.
User avatar
ray
 
Joined: 22 Feb 2009 19:33

Unread postby Turnus » 25 Aug 2011 16:52

Excellent review.

In addition to Lego bricks, Minecraft can also simulate eletrical circuits. I played it the other day to try them out, but this meant I had to play the mining mini-game long enough to finally unlock the rare, required pieces.

By the time I had mined enough to build the simple circuit I wanted, I was deep underground and had to walk a long way back to the surface and my crafting bench. Along the way I got lost and stepped into a lava pit and lost all of my mined items.

I would have been better off playing AutoCAD. Thank you for the comparison and the recommendation.
User avatar
Turnus
 
Joined: 10 Mar 2011 16:22
Location: Texas, USA

Unread postby icycalm » 19 Oct 2011 13:37

http://shmups.system11.org/viewtopic.ph ... 97#p730697

RNGmaster wrote:icycalm logic: getting angry at a game for not being something it's not trying to be


Siren2011 wrote:Personally, I tend to think any game that my 9 year old cousin can enjoy should typically not be enjoyed by dudes in their thirties, let alone dudes in their late teens. Shit, I would never, ever go back to Super Mario Brothers, nor Duck Hunt because I know there are much more challenging games out there waiting to be played and discovered by me. This game is obviously a retrogression from what is aesthetically possible in this day and age, and the game wears it like it's something to be proud of. That in itself is a problem. But then you have the whole building ugly crap feature, as well as digging for stupid shit. Sounds like a blast. Do you guys enjoy RuneScape, too? What about playing in the sand, or eating bugs?
User avatar
icycalm
Hyperborean
 
Joined: 28 Mar 2006 00:08
Location: Tenerife, Canary Islands

Unread postby ronan » 21 Nov 2011 01:51

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minecraft:

The full version of the PC game was released on November 18, 2011 at MineCon 2011


The full release includes a dimension called the End, with some kind of final boss that must be defeated in order to play an ending sequence: http://www.minecraftwiki.net/wiki/The_End

This dimension is populated by a relatively large number of Endermen, which spawn considerably more than in the Overworld, and one Enderdragon, an End exclusive mob.


When defeated the enderdragon will dissolve as seen before and create a shrine of bedrock below it, on top of it there is an enderdragon egg. Below the egg are four torches and a "pool" of what appears to be the End portal, however when entered it will begin the "End Poem" and the credits will roll shortly afterwords, thus ending the game; hence the achievement "The End". You will then respawn in the overworld.
User avatar
ronan
Insomnia Staff
 
Joined: 12 Mar 2009 22:06
Location: Switzerland


Return to Games