Rumour confirmed: Microsoft Purchase Minecraft for $2.5B (Post#122)

Discussion in 'Console Industry' started by Rangers, Sep 10, 2014.

  1. Shifty Geezer

    Shifty Geezer uber-Troll!
    Moderator Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2004
    Messages:
    40,743
    Likes Received:
    11,226
    Location:
    Under my bridge
    Lego has had multiple building creator type games, and none have reached mammoth interest. I think one of the reasons MC has done so well is because you are limited to one block shape, making editing much easier (plus steps or whatever). A true creator game with loads of block options that looks much prettier will be more effort to use and likely lose the instant appeal of MC's simplicity. I think that's a core issue that many games trying to be bigger and better miss. Less can be more.
     
  2. zed

    zed
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2005
    Messages:
    4,447
    Likes Received:
    632
    joke post? The world famous company is massive, profitable i.e. it made > $1 billion profit last year, Im pretty sure they can afford any talent they want, perhaps notch is out of their pricerange now, but Im sure they can afford some other swedish similarily skilled programmers :)

    The franchise in total has sold more than eg minecraft,halo,uncharted etc
    i.e. theyve done quite well, I think a minecraft style game with the official lego brand behind could do very well
     
  3. holsty101

    Regular

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2003
    Messages:
    289
    Likes Received:
    17
    Lego Star Wars Minecraft edition :-D
     
  4. DSoup

    DSoup meh
    Legend Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2007
    Messages:
    10,984
    Likes Received:
    5,801
    Location:
    London, UK
    More likely Minecraft 2015 Student Edition, Minecraft 2015 Home Edition and Minecraft 2015 Ultimate Edition :yep2:

    Sent from my iPhone using Forum Runner.
     
  5. holsty101

    Regular

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2003
    Messages:
    289
    Likes Received:
    17
    lol yeah prolly more likely.
     
  6. dobwal

    Legend Veteran

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2005
    Messages:
    5,019
    Likes Received:
    1,025
    You could take MC and simply scale the avatar to be 4X as large, enlarge of FOV and then have the game default to work in square sets of 4 blocks (with options down to a single block). You end up with minecraft but with a finer grain of construction material, allowing for a more detailed world. But without fundamentally changing how MC is played.
     
  7. DSoup

    DSoup meh
    Legend Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2007
    Messages:
    10,984
    Likes Received:
    5,801
    Location:
    London, UK
    That is far from simple. Minecraft has a lot of interactive elements in the world that aren't a full block (1x1x1) in size but which are centred on a block or connect between the space between two blocks. Making each 1x1x1 block into 8 individual blocks would break (or at least hugely complicate) a ton of Minecraft elements. There are already 'blocks' which aren't full blocks, e.g. stair blocks, slabs, doors, trapdoors, panes, bars, ladders, hoppers, pistons, plates, fences gates, buttons, levels, redstone items, tracks, it goes on and on. There are actually probably more individual non-fullblock items than full blocks. Minecraft item placement works because of the coarse granularity of items within the game world, not despite of it :yep2:

    At a basic level you're effectively increasing basic world complexity by 8 times as much, requiring 8 times as much processing for everything. Minecraft would no longer run in cheap computers because both RAM and processing would go through the roof.
     
    #187 DSoup, Sep 17, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 17, 2014
  8. Shifty Geezer

    Shifty Geezer uber-Troll!
    Moderator Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2004
    Messages:
    40,743
    Likes Received:
    11,226
    Location:
    Under my bridge
    The most important comparison to me seems to be MC versus other creators. MC is huge not because it's a game, but because people make stuff with it. Now there have been plenty of attempts of creative applications/games, such as LBP and Microsoft's efforts I forget the name of, and even that EA LBP rip off (create, says Google searchign for "EA LBP Rip off"!), and they haven't seen the same response. That to me is due to complexity, and this amazingly fine line between too complex and too limited. Like Flappy Bird. That game was only the success it was because it happened to hit this perfect sweet spot (whether by design or chance), where it was just difficult enough to be a challenge, but just easy enough to encourage another play. If it was a tiny bit harder, so the player died five times instead of three before clearing the first gate, it'd have likely frustrated too much.

    I think MC has exactly that right balance, whether by chance or design. It has just enough granularity to enable creation of what people envisage, but not too much to take too long or be too complex. The skill set is universal and people won't be in any way ashamed of their creation, whereas something like a free-form 3D sculpturing programme will see a lot of users get disappointed in their inability to create their vision or creations comparable to the best on show. As such, I don't know that the formula can be changed at all without pushing the balance too far one way and losing the audience. An 2x2x2 resolution increase is going to increase block placing effort by 8, or at least add sculpting time to remove blocks from larger 2x2x2 blocks. It's going to add more choices which could lead to more frustration from users. It'll be very interesting to see where it goes and how it changes and how people respond. It's certainly a responsibility I'm glad I don't have!
     
  9. dobwal

    Legend Veteran

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2005
    Messages:
    5,019
    Likes Received:
    1,025
    "Stair blocks, slabs, doors, trapdoors, panes, bars, ladders, hoppers, pistons, plates, fences gates, buttons, levels, redstone items, tracks, it goes on and on" could all be scaled to be 4 X as large.

    Its not like a MC 2 would show up tomorrow. Plus, MC was built for common setups of 2009. A MC2 hasn't even been hinted, so its probably years away.

    An MC2 wouldn't necessarily need 8 X the processing power if you simply treated both the standard big block as a 1x1x1 and it 1/4th little brother as a 1X1X1. If MC suddenly introduced a 1/4 size block, requirements wouldn't go up to 8X the processing power unless people suddenly built their whole world using them exclusively.
     
  10. DSoup

    DSoup meh
    Legend Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2007
    Messages:
    10,984
    Likes Received:
    5,801
    Location:
    London, UK
    I think you should look at the Minecraft code. What you're proposing is akin to splitting the bit into 8 octobits, with an 8 fold increase in RAM required, but still expecting the the computer work as it did before but while wanting to exploit the use of these new octobits.

    Minecraft's entire game code is based upon rendering of the smallest rendering element - the block. Making them smaller just increases the amount of data it has to manage for any given environment. A less complicated approach would be just to offer 64x possible variations of the 2x2x2 resolution block. But for every block type. That's how stars and slabs came to be.
     
  11. zed

    zed
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2005
    Messages:
    4,447
    Likes Received:
    632
    Heres the original game, that minecraft is based on
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zachary_Barth
    Now I imagine if Lego offered this guy/s some cash and told them to use lego blocks/branding are you saying its not going to attract a similar size of interest, you know? lego that ubiquitous toy :)

    btw watching my nephew playing this game the other day on the ipad, I thought it was minecraft it wasnt it was some clone, but looked exactly like minecraft
     
  12. Shifty Geezer

    Shifty Geezer uber-Troll!
    Moderator Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2004
    Messages:
    40,743
    Likes Received:
    11,226
    Location:
    Under my bridge
    It wouldn't be Lego if it didn't look and work like Lego. Minecraft is more like Duplo bricks. Also, with an entrenched leader, a rival who offers nothing new isn't going to be worth squat. If you want to usurp an entrenched leader, you need a major game-plan beyond 'let's do what they do'.
     
  13. DJ12

    Veteran

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2006
    Messages:
    3,090
    Likes Received:
    178
    Lego were in talks with Blocklands creator years ago to buy it, this never came to fruition*. Fast forward a bit and say a few hypotheticals such as Sony buy it and get Lego on board and you have a ready made Minecraft replacement, that looks a little better and could potentially be a big seller.

    * According to Wikipeidia
     
  14. holsty101

    Regular

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2003
    Messages:
    289
    Likes Received:
    17
    [Sony] must not allow a mine[strike]shaft[/strike]craft gap!

    (no prizes for guessing what I watched the other night...)
     
  15. MfA

    MfA
    Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    6,811
    Likes Received:
    478
    Well that's what Landmark is for.
     
  16. DSoup

    DSoup meh
    Legend Veteran Subscriber

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2007
    Messages:
    10,984
    Likes Received:
    5,801
    Location:
    London, UK
    Xbox chief promises to bring 'Minecraft' to Windows Phone

    From The Verge article:

    No surprise.
     
Loading...

Share This Page

  • About Us

    Beyond3D has been around for over a decade and prides itself on being the best place on the web for in-depth, technically-driven discussion and analysis of 3D graphics hardware. If you love pixels and transistors, you've come to the right place!

    Beyond3D is proudly published by GPU Tools Ltd.
Loading...