# Minecraft on Wii U!? 'very unlikely' says Mojang, 'Possibly' on Playstation



## rizzod (Mar 6, 2013)

> Coming from an EDGE interview...
> 
> *“Microsoft has an exclusivity deal for consoles. When it runs out we’ll consider Minecraft for PlayStation, but Wii U is very unlikely.” - Mojang’s Jens Bergensten*


 

source: http://www.edge-online.com/news/min...being-considered-wii-u-version-very-unlikely/


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Mar 6, 2013)

A big fat "Eh" from me.

Although the Wii U might suite it rather well using the touchscreen as a menu.


----------



## Gahars (Mar 6, 2013)

A) Nintendo's better off. You know what they say: Mojang, Mo'Problems.
B) Better Nojang than Mojang in my book.
C) Mojang To Nintendo: We're Just Notch Into You
D) Mojangles.
E) All of the above.


----------



## rizzod (Mar 6, 2013)

Guild McCommunist said:


> A big fat "Eh" from me.
> 
> Although the Wii U might suite it rather well using the touchscreen as a menu.



To me that's not the point here.
Point is even MINECRAFT, the freaking indie of indie-est... will NOT develop for Wii U... 
That sends a ripple effect there to other indie/3rd party dev's that its not worth developing for Wii U.. It's very, very sad.


----------



## The Catboy (Mar 6, 2013)

Meh, I am mildly annoyed since I think it would be an amazing game on the Wii U, but like 360 version I think it would be rather limited compared to the PC version.



rizzod said:


> To me that's not the point here.
> Point is even MINECRAFT, the freaking indie of indie-est... will NOT develop for Wii U...
> That sends a ripple effect there to other indie/3rd party dev's that its not worth developing for Wii U.. It's very, very sad.


Minecraft isn't the King of Indie games, Cavestory is and as long as Nintendo has Cavestory, they are fine.


----------



## Maxternal (Mar 6, 2013)

Gahars said:


> *Eh*) All of the above.


fixed.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Mar 6, 2013)

The Xbox 360 version is rather terrible for the record.

I'm not a Minecraft fan but putting that aside objectively it's just largely inferior. The GUI is a complete mess since it's a terrible conversion from the PC (they have to use a fucking virtual mouse controlled by the analogs in the main menu and RB/LB to switch between your preset slots) and the game is several versions behind the PC version. Take into account the lack of mods and there's literally no reason to buy the XBLA version over a PC version.

It's quite honestly a dirty, poor cash in.


----------



## rizzod (Mar 6, 2013)

The Catboy said:


> Meh, I am mildly annoyed since I think it would be an amazing game on the Wii U, but like 360 version I think it would be rather limited compared to the PC version.
> 
> 
> Minecraft isn't the King of Indie games, Cavestory is and as long as Nintendo has Cavestory, they are fine.


 





That's cute. How about they actually make  millions of dollars first, open up their own offices, and keep making millions of dollars. oh wait? cavestory is dead.


----------



## DinohScene (Mar 6, 2013)

Minecraft on the 360...
Yeh, it works, it's fun but honestly, it's meant to be played with KB&M

Minecraft on Wii U.
As said before the inventory could be displayed on the controller.
However it would prolly run the same as on the 360.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Mar 6, 2013)

rizzod said:


> That's cute. How about they actually make millions of dollars first, open up their own offices, and keep making millions of dollars. oh wait? cavestory is dead.


 
Cave Story was also the work of a single man who gave the game out for free despite its immense quality, time, and effort. Mojang nowadays kinda feels like a larger developer wearing an indie developer's skin to go "We're indie and rad!" They've also said some pretty fucking stupid things like "We fear a future where Steam controls most of the PC market" (badly paraphrased) despite the fact that Steam already controls most of the PC market and its been fantastic.


----------



## The Catboy (Mar 6, 2013)

rizzod said:


> *That's cute. How about they actually make millions of dollars first, open up their own offices, and keep making millions of dollars.* oh wait? cavestory is dead.


They sound like an indie to me. I love Minecraft myself, but honestly that doesn't sound very indie to me. It may have started that way, but clearly hasn't stayed that way.


Minecraft is one of those games that really should stay a PC exclusive, the 360 version just felt like a watered down version compared to the PC version and as interesting as a Wii U version would be, it still wouldn't hold a torch to the PC version.


----------



## rizzod (Mar 6, 2013)

Guild McCommunist said:


> Cave Story was also the work of a single man who gave the game out for free despite its immense quality, time, and effort. Mojang nowadays kinda feels like a larger developer wearing an indie developer's skin to go "We're indie and rad!" They've also said some pretty fucking stupid things like "We fear a future where Steam controls most of the PC market" (badly paraphrased) despite the fact that Steam already controls most of the PC market and its been fantastic.


 
I don't doubt the works of the man, cave story is an amazing game. But you gotta remember here, the remakes were done by a group, not just one guy, none the less i have it on wii and 3ds. As for Minecraft, The PC AND 360 Market for the game has been incredibly large. It is a Big deal that they say "oh playstation we're already thinking about, Nintendo? Don't make me laugh in your face here, but i'll let you down gently" It's the simple fact here that all these 3rd party dev's are turning their backs to nintendo here when They are in a desperate period. When your console is selling worse than the Vita? only 50,000 units shipped worldwide? You got trouble. The fact is here too, because they're a publicly traded company, Nintendo will be FORCED into 3rd party, these investors will make the choice for them. Nintendo can keep saying oh here's a new console, but this might be breaking point here. If Nintendo can't convince anyone to buy a Wii U with the library thats about to come, and as much as they do this thing where they keep on saying "Oh New Smash Bros!" people are going to get sick of it, and wont buy the game or the console anymore. Franchises are franchises... but the healthiest of horses die too.. and you cant keep floggin' it after it's dead.


----------



## KingVamp (Mar 6, 2013)

Money wise for both companies, how is Angry Birds vs Minecraft?
(Clarify-Not comparing the games themselves.)
No =/= Unlikely

I wish they gave us a reason and not leave it so ambiguous.

You are wasting your time with this doom and gloom mindset.


----------



## ShadowSoldier (Mar 6, 2013)

rizzod said:


> To me that's not the point here.
> Point is even MINECRAFT, the freaking indie of indie-est... will NOT develop for Wii U...
> That sends a ripple effect there to other indie/3rd party dev's that its not worth developing for Wii U.. It's very, very sad.


 
No it doesn't. You're looking waaay too much into it.

A bunch of Indie Devs have already stated how awesome it is to work with the WiiU, that's why you see so many great titles on the eShop already. This is just Notch being stupid.

I'm probably going to get a lot of hate for this, but Notch talks and acts as if he's god among indie developers. He's fucking arrogant too. Say the Microsoft agreement does expire, and brings Minecraft to PlayStation, why not the WiiU? There's no excuse. He doesn't even say any. When you already see such awesome indie games on the eShop and see devs talk about how awesome it is, this is just Notch being a dick.

But hey, I don't like Minecraft to begin with. It's boring as hell. But this doesn't affect other third party/indie developers at all.

edit:





> Nintendo will be FORCED into 3rd party


 
No they won't. Jesus, you're one of the retarded doomsayers aren't you?


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 6, 2013)

Sorry Nintendo, _Minecraft's not for U. _

Seriously though, it's better not to have the game at all than to get a lazy, likely thoroughly bastardized port. The game's doing just fine on PC.

I'm willing to guess this is not a matter of the devkit or the console itself, just Notch's _"pretentiousnitis"_ - he's known for fighting _"The Man"_ even at the cost of looking silly.


----------



## 2ndApex (Mar 6, 2013)

Darn, the 360 port felt a bit clumsy but a Wii U version with the tablet would probably be even more fluid than the PC.

Future homebrew project anyone?


----------



## DiscostewSM (Mar 6, 2013)

I heard (warning: rumor) that Microsoft invested money into Minecraft, which is why a 360 version even exists. If this is true, then it could be that Sony is trying to exchange money under the counter with Mojang to get their own copy.


----------



## Skelletonike (Mar 6, 2013)

It seems like you enjoy to diss the Wii U in your threads, you're kinda like valwin but against Nintendo instead of Sony.

Personally I don't like minecraft and I agree with ShadowSoldier, theres a lot of indie games on the 3DS eshop, the same will happen with the Wii U. Notch only made a game that sold well, I doubt it's fame will last as long as Cave Story's has to begin with. From what I've read, a lot of devs dont even like him.


----------



## Rydian (Mar 6, 2013)

Guild McCommunist said:


> The Xbox 360 version is rather terrible for the record.
> 
> I'm not a Minecraft fan but putting that aside objectively it's just largely inferior. The GUI is a complete mess since it's a terrible conversion from the PC (they have to use a fucking virtual mouse controlled by the analogs in the main menu and RB/LB to switch between your preset slots) and the game is several versions behind the PC version. Take into account the lack of mods and there's literally no reason to buy the XBLA version over a PC version.
> 
> It's quite honestly a dirty, poor cash in.


At least it's better than the iOS/Android versions.  They _just got_ armor in the last update.



Guild McCommunist said:


> Mojang nowadays kinda feels like a larger developer wearing an indie developer's skin


Yeah, Minecraft was indie.  Mojang (and their creations) are not.



ShadowSoldier said:


> No it doesn't. You're looking waaay too much into it.
> 
> A bunch of Indie Devs have already stated how awesome it is to work with the WiiU, that's why you see so many great titles on the eShop already. This is just Notch being stupid.
> 
> ...


Notch doesn't even do Minecraft anymore.  This has nothing to do with Notch.  Hell, even the quoted part of the OP says who said it, which is the current lead dev of the PC version.

But the discussion is Minecraft, so I suppose it's too much to ask people to do anything other than mindlessly hate?


----------



## ZaeZae64 (Mar 6, 2013)

rizzod said:


> Nintendo will be FORCED into 3rd party.


Might wanna read this. I thought it was a pretty decent article.


----------



## ShadowSoldier (Mar 6, 2013)

Rydian said:


> At least it's better than the iOS/Android versions. They _just got_ armor in the last update.
> 
> Yeah, Minecraft was indie. Mojang (and their creations) are not.
> 
> ...


 
Take out notch in my post and the post still stands.


----------



## Rydian (Mar 6, 2013)

ShadowSoldier said:


> Take out notch in my post and the post still stands.


No it doesn't, because you're lumping statements from different people together.   Also the 360 edition is a port by 4J or whoever.


----------



## TyBlood13 (Mar 6, 2013)




----------



## ShadowSoldier (Mar 6, 2013)

Rydian said:


> No it doesn't, because you're lumping statements from different people together.  Also the 360 edition is a port by 4J or whoever.


 
I mean the part of Nintendo going third party and this somehow, magically swaying third party devs and indie devs away from the WiiU... which it won't.


----------



## Bladexdsl (Mar 6, 2013)

oh noz no minecraft on the wiiu? that's it now it really is doomed


----------



## Rydian (Mar 6, 2013)

ShadowSoldier said:


> I mean the part of Nintendo going third party and this somehow, magically swaying third party devs and indie devs away from the WiiU... which it won't.


Oh, yeah.  Minecraft's already proven itself as a start-indie success so it's not like people are shocked by it's movements... and now that it's gotten stable it's looking into doing that same type of stuff you'd expect from consoles (built-in server hosting over LAN already exists, they're developing integrated paid hosting), nothing surprising.

It's got high computational requirements (lighting can't be done purely on the GPU since it's a gameplay mechanic that servers need to keep track of too) so it's not surprising it won't be on systems with a weaker CPU (which normally wouldn't impact games too much).


----------



## Psionic Roshambo (Mar 6, 2013)

I don't think anyone really cares, anyone who want's the game already bought it years ago on the PC or the 360.


----------



## Tom Bombadildo (Mar 6, 2013)

Oh good, no one wanted a shitty Minecraft port anyways. If you're not playing Minecraft on a PC, then you're doing it wrong.


----------



## rizzod (Mar 6, 2013)

ZaeZae64 said:


> Might wanna read this. I thought it was a pretty decent article.


Sorry but I'm not going to read a site that has NO reputable source.


----------



## ShadowSoldier (Mar 6, 2013)

rizzod said:


> Sorry but I'm not going to read a site that has NO reputable source.


 
Ya because that would suck ass if you got your facts straight, wouldn't it?


----------



## BORTZ (Mar 6, 2013)

Tom Bombadildo said:


> Oh good, no one wanted a shitty Minecraft port anyways. If you're not playing Minecraft on a PC, then you're doing it wrong.


The one and only time I will agree a game is better on a PC.


----------



## ZaeZae64 (Mar 6, 2013)

rizzod said:


> Sorry but I'm not going to read a site that has NO reputable source.


I'm sorry to hear that you're too lazy to read an article and look at another point of view.

But whatever, continue spouting stupid shit, like how Nintendo is apparently going to go 3rd party despite the current success of the 3DS launch, and how well games like New Leaf, and Fire Emblem are doing.


----------



## rizzod (Mar 6, 2013)

ShadowSoldier said:


> Ya because that would suck ass if you got your facts straight, wouldn't it?


I get my facts from reputable sites. Thanks.


----------



## ShadowSoldier (Mar 6, 2013)

rizzod said:


> I get my facts from reputable sites. Thanks.


 
Where do you think they started out? They started out as nothing too.

Your facts are wrong.


----------



## ZaeZae64 (Mar 6, 2013)

"Nintendo: Doomed since 1889"


----------



## rizzod (Mar 6, 2013)

ZaeZae64 said:


> I'm sorry to hear that you're too lazy to read an article and look at another point of view.
> 
> But whatever, continue spouting stupid shit, like how Nintendo is apparently going to go 3rd party despite the current success of the 3DS launch, and how well games like New Leaf, and Fire Emblem are doing.


 
I don't doubt the success of New leaf or fire emblem, in fact I think if anything Nintendo should be going strictly handheld. That's how they started right? Maybe that's the perfect market for them at the moment. If they aren't going to invest the time into approaching 3rd party devs and just wait for them to flock to their doors, forget it. These devs aren't going to bother with them. And that's what's happening. If you think for one second that there is no NO CHANCE nintendo will ever go 3rd party or Go out of business, You are gullible. BUT I don't doubt Sony would NEVER stop making games, if anything their last generation was HORRID in sales. I was actually thinking there wouldn't be a PS4. Microsoft.. no. From the richest guy in the world at one point funding this thing, (the guy was funding the fucking president at one point) I'm sure Microsoft will never go out of business.. and this is coming from a guy who does NOT own a 360, and hates the fucking console to pieces.



ShadowSoldier said:


> Where do you think they started out? They started out as nothing too.
> 
> Your facts are wrong.


 
Give me a break... Please. All websites start as nothing. That website is obviously just starting. I'm getting my facts from actual sales and figures, NOT opinion pieces.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Mar 6, 2013)

I like how people think that statements by industry "analyst" Michael Pachter and the "developer" Cliffy B are basis for a counterargument. Pachter is mostly wrong and Cliffy B is a fucktard.


----------



## ShadowSoldier (Mar 6, 2013)

rizzod said:


> Give me a break... Please. All websites start as nothing. That website is obviously just starting. I'm getting my facts from actual sales and figures, NOT opinion pieces.


You stating Nintendo going third party has nothing to do with sales and figures dummy. You're wrong. Get over it.



rizzod said:


> I don't doubt the success of New leaf or fire emblem, in fact I think if anything Nintendo should be going strictly handheld. That's how they started right? Maybe that's the perfect market for them at the moment. If they aren't going to invest the time into approaching 3rd party devs and just wait for them to flock to their doors, forget it. These devs aren't going to bother with them. And that's what's happening. If you think for one second that there is no NO CHANCE nintendo will ever go 3rd party or Go out of business, You are gullible. BUT I don't doubt Sony would NEVER stop making games, if anything their last generation was HORRID in sales. I was actually thinking there wouldn't be a PS4. Microsoft.. no. From the richest guy in the world at one point funding this thing, (the guy was funding the fucking president at one point) I'm sure Microsoft will never go out of business.. and this is coming from a guy who does NOT own a 360, and hates the fucking console to pieces.


 
What are you talking about dude? There's a lot of third party titles on the WiiU and there's more to come. So what, a shitty game not coming to the WiiU means they are doomed? As stated before, a bunch of developers and indie devs already praised the WiiU and have released fantastic indie games on the eShop already.

Nintendo has more money in their game division than Sony and Microsoft do. Hell, Sony had to sell one of it's studios to pay off debt. And also, Nintendo didn't start handheld, they started home console. Get your head out of your ass, open your eyes and stop blowing things out of proportion. You're as bad as Pachter and Cliff B. And those are some retarded people who have no idea what they are talking about when it comes to Nintendo.

But even then, you're blowing this way out of proportion considering it's ONE game that's YEARS old that NOBODY cares about and makes a big deal out of it anymore. It doesn't even say that it would come to the PS3/PS4.
And like I said, it's one game, it doesn't hurt Nintendo at all.


----------



## Forstride (Mar 6, 2013)

Even though I'm a huge Minecraft fan, I'm not really disappointed at all. The PC version is, and will always be vastly superior. The Xbox version is a joke, being more than a year behind the PC version in terms of content, and a Wii U version would just be more of the same.


----------



## Tom Bombadildo (Mar 6, 2013)

BortzANATOR said:


> The one and only time I will agree a game is better on a PC.


PC Master Race ;O;


----------



## 2ndApex (Mar 6, 2013)

Forstride said:


> Even though I'm a huge Minecraft fan, I'm not really disappointed at all. The PC version is, and will always be vastly superior. The Xbox version is a joke, being more than a year behind the PC version in terms of content, and a Wii U version would just be more of the same.



Analog movement + buttons + touch screen > Buttons + mouse


----------



## Rydian (Mar 6, 2013)

2ndApex said:


> Analog movement + buttons + touch screen > Buttons + mouse


While I'm normally a proponent of (KB+Mouse or go home), the DS's touch screen has always been useful for quick inventory/menu operations... so maybe.


----------



## rizzod (Mar 6, 2013)

ShadowSoldier said:


> i read it


----------



## ZaeZae64 (Mar 6, 2013)

rizzod said:


> stupid and unfunny shit


"I can't think of an actual counterargument, so I'll just post some stupid picture"

Also, it's cute how you think that's a tl;dr

As for that, I'm done with this topic.
I return to my lair to lurk once more.


----------



## Forstride (Mar 6, 2013)

2ndApex said:


> Analog movement + buttons + touch screen > Buttons + mouse


I prefer controllers over mouse + keyboard myself, but I'd rather play an up to date game than a watered down, year behind version of it.


----------



## Hells Malice (Mar 6, 2013)

BortzANATOR said:


> The one and only time I will agree a game is better on a PC.


 
The one and only time you'll be right then.


----------



## Psionic Roshambo (Mar 6, 2013)

Forstride said:


> I prefer controllers over mouse + keyboard myself, but I'd rather play an up to date game than a watered down, year behind version of it.


 
Can't you use a controller on the PC version? (I honestly don't know, I don't play Minecraft.)

I know most games, especially the console ports support plugging in a 360 pad and just playing.

Edit: 
Myself I prefer mouse and keys with FPS and RTS type games, for fighting, racing, or almost any other type of game I prefer game pads or wheels. (I guess I prefer the right tool for the job?)


----------



## BenRK (Mar 6, 2013)

To everyone arguing and to the developers and to Nintendo and to Sony and to Microsoft and to EVERYONE!


----------



## TyBlood13 (Mar 6, 2013)

Psionic Roshambo said:


> Can't you use a controller on the PC version? (I honestly don't know, I don't play Minecraft.)
> 
> I know most games, especially the console ports support plugging in a 360 pad and just playing.


With Joy2Key, sure


----------



## Janthran (Mar 6, 2013)

Really, I think it would have worked great on WiiU. Not my problem though, I don't have one.
Nojang


----------



## chavosaur (Mar 6, 2013)

ShadowSoldier said:


> And also, Nintendo didn't start handheld, they started home console.







Game and watch came before any home console.
However, before that, Nintendo did Arcade Machines. Either way, the first Console they started with was a handheld.
Otherwise I agree with your statement, just wanted to feel smart for knowing something for a sec


----------



## Jayro (Mar 6, 2013)

I just hate how people (developers, namely) are always against developing or porting games to Nintendo's console. It's utter bullshit. Every time I see a cool game coming, it's out for PC, 360, and PS3... Never the Wii. The most we've gotten are a few Call of Duty games, and Resident Evil 4. Given the fact that all 3 current game consoles utilize similar PPC-based processors, you'd thing porting games would be easier for the devs.


----------



## Rydian (Mar 6, 2013)

JayRo said:


> I just hate how people (developers, namely) are always against developing or porting games to Nintendo's console. It's utter bullshit. Every time I see a cool game coming, it's out for PC, 360, and PS3... Never the Wii. The most we've gotten are a few Call of Duty games, and Resident Evil 4. Given the fact that all 3 current game consoles utilize similar PPC-based processors, you'd thing porting games would be easier for the devs.


The wii's underpowered.  If the games run like shit (like 5fps), people won't like it.


----------



## Janthran (Mar 6, 2013)

Rydian said:


> The wii's underpowered. If the games run like shit (like 5fps), people won't like it.


The Wii U isn't, though. :/


----------



## ShadowSoldier (Mar 6, 2013)

chavosaur said:


> Game and watch came before any home console.
> However, before that, Nintendo did Arcade Machines. Either way, the first Console they started with was a handheld.
> Otherwise I agree with your statement, just wanted to feel smart for knowing something for a sec


 





1970's. Game and Watch was 1980'S


----------



## chavosaur (Mar 6, 2013)

ShadowSoldier said:


> 1970's. Game and Watch was 1980'S


FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
Well played...


----------



## Sop (Mar 6, 2013)

lol who cares about minecraft, the only people that would care about it on the Wii U are the 12 year olds CoD players and other prepubes, who will just go to microsoft anyway.

terraria ftw (I wonder if it's going to be on the Wii U...?)


----------



## ShadowSoldier (Mar 6, 2013)

Sop said:


> lol who cares about minecraft, the only people that would care about it on the Wii U are the 12 year olds CoD players and other prepubes, who will just go to microsoft anyway.
> 
> terraria ftw (I wonder if it's going to be on the Wii U...?)


Uh aren't you like 13 though? :/


----------



## Sop (Mar 6, 2013)

ShadowSoldier said:


> Uh aren't you like 13 though? :/


I'm 14, and I don't really mean the age, I just sorta mean that demographic, the 'casual gamers', you know the ones that like to play popular games, the ones that like to rage in CoD, the ones that take games way too seriously and the ones that will defend their opinions to the death.


----------



## Psionic Roshambo (Mar 6, 2013)

Anyone else enjoying the Wii U update? Feels quicker.... lol


----------



## RodrigoDavy (Mar 6, 2013)

Rydian said:


> The wii's underpowered. If the games run like shit (like 5fps), people won't like it.


I don't want to get into the MHz/GHz does not equal power. But if even the Raspberry Pi can run Minecraft I don't see how the Wii U couldn't handle it.

EDIT: I realized you were actually refering to the Wii not Wii U, lol! Sorry, my mistake


----------



## Bladexdsl (Mar 6, 2013)

Rydian said:


> The wii's underpowered. If the games run like shit (like 5fps), people won't like it.


like minecraft needs so much powr to run wake up to yourself!


----------



## ShadowSoldier (Mar 6, 2013)

Sop said:


> I'm 14, and I don't really mean the age, I just sorta mean that demographic, the 'casual gamers', you know the ones that like to play popular games, the ones that like to rage in CoD, the ones that take games way too seriously and the ones that will defend their opinions to the death.


 
So people who like to play popular games make them a casual gamer...?


----------



## Sop (Mar 6, 2013)

ShadowSoldier said:


> So people who like to play popular games make them a casual gamer...?


The people who _only_ play popular games and won't try anything else, like when I tried to introduce the Metro series to my friend who plays CoD and he didn't play it because it had no MP.


----------



## ShadowSoldier (Mar 6, 2013)

Sop said:


> The people who _only_ play popular games and won't try anything else, like when I tried to introduce the Metro series to my friend who plays CoD and he didn't play it because it had no MP.


 
So? I don't want to play Metro, I don't want to play say XCOM, or a lot of games. People have a different taste in games, doesn't make them a casual gamer dude.


----------



## Kouen Hasuki (Mar 6, 2013)

Wait... People still care heavily about Minecraft?


----------



## ShadowSoldier (Mar 6, 2013)

Kouen Hasuki said:


> Wait... People still care heavily about Minecraft?


 
Read OP's post....


----------



## TyBlood13 (Mar 6, 2013)

I'm a recent convert to Minecraft, and I like it on the PC and it should stay on the PC.
Nintendo is fine, indies don't like Notch anyway, if anything, it will make them come to the Wii U faster knowing they won't be shot out of the water by Mojang


----------



## Rydian (Mar 6, 2013)

Bladexdsl said:


> like minecraft needs so much powr to run wake up to yourself!


It's using over a full core's power of my desktop's CPU.

Games aren't just graphics.  Minecraft is a simulated world where plants and trees grow, water and lava flows, and lighting is done on the CPU since it's an important gameplay mechanic and thus needs to run on server software (opposed to almost every other game ever, where graphical things like light levels are client-only.


----------



## ferofax (Mar 6, 2013)

rizzod said:


> To me that's not the point here.
> Point is even MINECRAFT, the freaking indie of indie-est... will NOT develop for Wii U...
> That sends a ripple effect there to other indie/3rd party dev's that its not worth developing for Wii U.. It's very, very sad.


That's platform preference, more likely. Although I get the feeling he's also one of those guys that look at Nintendo and only see kids. For what it's worth, Minecraft can and has been done on the DS. Of course, it's just a homebrew, not exactly official, and kind of limited in features really. But it only goes to show that it can be done. They just don't want it there.


----------



## The Milkman (Mar 6, 2013)

Rydian said:


> It's using over a full core's power of my desktop's CPU.
> 
> Games aren't just graphics. Minecraft is a simulated world where plants and trees grow, water and lava flows, and lighting is done on the CPU since it's an important gameplay mechanic and thus needs to run on server software (opposed to almost every other game ever, where graphical things like light levels are client-only.


 
I disagree for a the most part, even though the game does have quite a bit going on, its also poorly optimized for the most part. Every other time they add a new feature, they make about 20 bugs. Look at the Adventure Update, that pretty much half broke the lighting system and now theres a whole angle you turn that makes everything black. And before you say it, I know, buggs dont always = poorly optimized, but I am saying this game shouldnt suck up a whole CPU Core if its on normal render distance and loading about 20 entities.


----------



## Rydian (Mar 6, 2013)

ferofax said:


> But it only goes to show that it can be done. They just don't want it there.


That's like looking at Super Mario Bros on the NES and saying "Nintendo could put Super Mario 64 on the NES, they just don't want it there".

Minecraft for the DS is so much more limited it's not even funny.



Zantigo said:


> Look at the Adventure Update, that pretty much half broke the lighting system and now theres a whole angle you turn that makes everything black.


The only time I've seen lighting issues when turning are on systems with old Intel chipsets that don't implement OpenGL properly.  That issue has never happened to me on any computer with a proper graphics card.



Zantigo said:


> but I am saying this game shouldnt suck up a whole CPU Core if its on normal render distance and loading about 20 entities.





> and lighting is done on the CPU since it's an important gameplay mechanic and thus needs to run on server software (opposed to almost every other game ever, where graphical things like light levels are client-only.


Do you understand the differences between CPU and GPU architectures?


----------



## The Milkman (Mar 6, 2013)

Rydian said:


> The only time I've seen lighting issues when turning are on systems with old Intel chipsets that don't implement OpenGL properly. That issue has never happened to me on any computer with a proper graphics card.


 
Oh wow, you're right ._. I just tested it out on my laptop and lighting works fine.

Guess I'm wrong on this one bro.


----------



## Rydian (Mar 6, 2013)

Zantigo said:


> Oh wow, you're right ._. I just tested it out on my laptop and lighting works fine.
> 
> Guess I'm wrong on this one bro.


Yeah the graphical strain is due to the Minecraft terrain having so many polygons (yes they're square, but more triangles to render is more triangles to render no matter what shape they composite into), while the computational strain is from lighting and the world simulation (and entities when people build like 200-animal farms).


----------



## ferofax (Mar 6, 2013)

Rydian said:


> That's like looking at Super Mario Bros on the NES and saying "Nintendo could put Super Mario 64 on the NES, they just don't want it there".
> 
> Minecraft for the DS is so much more limited it's not even funny.


Wait, I was supposed to say that as an analogy to Minecraft on the WiiU. Like, it's very possible (Minecraft) on the WiiU, Mojang just don't want it there. It just made sense to me to mention DScraft (the Minecraft homebrew) to get viability out of the way.


----------



## Rydian (Mar 6, 2013)

ferofax said:


> Wait, I was supposed to say that as an analogy to Minecraft on the WiiU. Like, it's very possible (Minecraft) on the WiiU, Mojang just don't want it there. It just made sense to me to mention DScraft (the Minecraft homebrew) to get viability out of the way.


Oh, my response that started this was about the original Wii (the person was comparing it to the PS3 and 360 in terms of not getting ports).


----------



## loco365 (Mar 6, 2013)

It'd be nice to have Minecraft on the WiiU, as it'd have a bit of interactivity with the controller. Alas...


----------



## FireGrey (Mar 6, 2013)

I really love Minecraft, one of my favorite games but I hate Mojang...


----------



## Sop (Mar 6, 2013)

ShadowSoldier said:


> So? I don't want to play Metro, I don't want to play say XCOM, or a lot of games. People have a different taste in games, doesn't make them a casual gamer dude.


I know, but people with the tastes in some games are casuals. The same way people that play strategy games are strategy gamers, or people who play PC games are PC gamers.


----------



## filfat (Mar 6, 2013)

WTF? Not to the wii u? The console with best hardware... But they want to realse it to ps2/ps4.. Good luck.. :/


----------



## Qtis (Mar 6, 2013)

filfat said:


> WTF? Not to the wii u? The console with best hardware... But they want to realse it to ps2/ps4.. Good luck.. :/


The guy said "Unlikely", not "No". There is a difference. The WiiU has relatively better hardware compared to the PS3, but it's brand new. The development may take a while for them if they haven't done any work on it before. Not saying the PS3 is any easier, but the hardware and SDK has been around for longer (= better overall knowledge for devs in general). No one ever talked about a PS2 port, but neither did they specify on for which console it'll be out (I'd assume PS3 and PS4, but it could just as well be just the latter one).


----------



## filfat (Mar 6, 2013)

Qtis said:


> The guy said "Unlikely", not "No". There is a difference. The WiiU has relatively better hardware compared to the PS3, but it's brand new. The development may take a while for them if they haven't done any work on it before. Not saying the PS3 is any easier, but the hardware and SDK has been around for longer (= better overall knowledge for devs in general). No one ever talked about a PS2 port, but neither did they specify on for which console it'll be out (I'd assume PS3 and PS4, but it could just as well be just the latter one).


Yeah let's hope they bring it to wii U =)


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Mar 6, 2013)

filfat said:


> WTF? Not to the wii u? The console with best hardware... But they want to realse it to ps2/ps4.. Good luck.. :/


 
I sincerely do wish them luck because it's gonna be hard to get it running on the PS2.


----------



## filfat (Mar 6, 2013)

Guild McCommunist said:


> I sincerely do wish them luck because it's gonna be hard to get it running on the PS2.


I did mean ps3  ... Stupid keyboard on my Xperia Play...


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Mar 6, 2013)

I just want to note I added the Playstation bit to the title not to "troll" or anything but because we had another thread pop up about the "Playstation possibly getting Minecraft" bit and this covers that topic too.


----------



## shakirmoledina (Mar 6, 2013)

mojang is pretty picky about his systems. first windows now wii. is it a money issue or is he a little arrogant?


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Mar 6, 2013)

shakirmoledina said:


> mojang is pretty picky about his systems. first windows now wii. is it a money issue or is he a little arrogant?


 
I really wish they did give their explanation. I mean I've heard of issues between devs and digital distribution on the Wii but Xbox ain't a cakewalk either. Considering the outrageous prices charged for simple title updates, Minecraft just seemed like a horrible fit for the Xbox. While the Wii U won't be a PC when it comes to Minecraft's functions it'd certainly work better in terms of controls.


----------



## Issac (Mar 6, 2013)

Sop said:


> I know, but people with the tastes in some games are casuals. The same way people that play strategy games are strategy gamers, or people who play PC games are PC gamers.


 
Umm, to me a casual gamer is one who play casual games. And my definition of a casual game is like Wii Sports, Farmville, Singstar, Guitar Hero, The Sims etc. 
What you describe, someone who only plays popular games... I'd say that person would be a mainstream gamer or something. Only playing the popular mainstream games.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Mar 6, 2013)

Issac said:


> Umm, to me a casual gamer is one who play casual games. And my definition of a casual game is like Wii Sports, Farmville, Singstar, Guitar Hero, The Sims etc.
> What you describe, someone who only plays popular games... I'd say that person would be a mainstream gamer or something. Only playing the popular mainstream games.


 
I dunno, some people get REALLY into Guitar Hero. Plus the game is still a party favorite.


----------



## Issac (Mar 6, 2013)

Guild McCommunist said:


> I dunno, some people get REALLY into Guitar Hero. Plus the game is still a party favorite.


Yeah for sure, and the best party games are casual IMO. Something everyone can enjoy.
And even if someone get really into GH, it's a game non-gamers also enjoy as well as "hardcore" gamers. That's my personal opinon on a casual game


----------



## Jaems (Mar 6, 2013)

The Catboy said:


> Minecraft isn't the King of Indie games, Cavestory is and as long as Nintendo has Cavestory, they are fine.


 
Huh??


----------



## FAST6191 (Mar 6, 2013)

Issac said:


> Yeah for sure, and the best party games are casual IMO.



Granted I am probably supposed to be living up to my new policy but I will start off on the wrong foot for now.
I am not so sure about that- driving/motorbike game, skateboarding game and football/similar team sport game are quite often the order of the day when it comes to having a game going at a party. Your list, despite my probably being able to drop names of similar games that require serious skills*, always seem tantamount to running around yelling "are we having fun" without the benefit of being sloshed on a beach if put on at a party.

*I am sure we have seen terms like actions per minute when it comes to starcraft, I have seen than and worse for the sims.

As for the matter at hand-
Programs in java, still suffers platform woes.
Delightful.


----------



## Eerpow (Mar 6, 2013)

Issac said:


> Umm, to me a casual gamer is one who play casual games. And my definition of a casual game is like Wii Sports, Farmville, Singstar, Guitar Hero, The Sims etc.


It's a broken term as casual can be interpreted however you like. I can play any "hardcore" game casually and vice versa.
Mainstream gamers or bro gamers as I call them are the ones who only play Fifa, CoD or any other blockbuster titles, many of those bro gamers only play those titles casually too, so there's definitely a need to specify whenever we use the term.


----------



## Elrinth (Mar 6, 2013)

I don't care about Minecraft on Wii U.. If I wanted to play it, I'd want to play it on PC, nothing else.


----------



## Issac (Mar 6, 2013)

whatever. sorry for having an opinion.


----------



## Eerpow (Mar 6, 2013)

Issac said:


> whatever. sorry for having an opinion.


Wait what... you mean me ?

I didn't say you were wrong or anything, how you see casuals and casual gamers is the more common definition. I'm just saying that the word can have different meanings depending on the subject matter and who uses it.


----------



## gundalf (Mar 6, 2013)

This news is messed up, but i will explain.
1. Minecraft on Consoles is Microsoft exclusive
2. Bergenstein talks about Minecraft Pocket Edition
3. With "Playstation" Bergenstein refers to PSMobile (Xperia/HTC) and not the Console or Vita
4. No Android on WiiU = No PSM = No Port of the Pocket Edition


----------



## Elrinth (Mar 6, 2013)

Issac said:


> whatever. sorry for having an opinion.


Nope, I'll never forgive you!


----------



## Rydian (Mar 6, 2013)

RodrigoDavy said:


> I don't want to get into the MHz/GHz does not equal power. But if even the Raspberry Pi can run Minecraft I don't see how the Wii U couldn't handle it.
> 
> EDIT: I realized you were actually refering to the Wii not Wii U, lol! Sorry, my mistake


Whoops, missed this post.

And no, it runs "Pi Edition", which is a cut-down version of Pocket Edition, which was previously the most cut-down version already (like I said, Pocket JUST GOT ARMOR in the last update).



filfat said:


> WTF? Not to the wii u? The console with best hardware... But they want to realse it to ps2/ps4.. Good luck.. :/


Wii U has _possibly_ the worst CPU of the upcoming/NOW generation.  It's an upgraded Wii, while the PS4 has been confirmed to go x86 for power/cost/ease issues, and the 720... well, the 360's CPU appears to be more powerful than the Wii U's (hard to tell, but it's a similar architecture with more cache and a higher clock rate if I'm reading the specs right).

*It's normally not a concern (outside of fearmongering) because the vast majority of games that get put on consoles are GPU-limited.*

However PCs are often set to do CPU-intensive tasks nobody would be trying to do on a console if there was an easy alternative.  Applying filters to HD video streams, conversion and compression, even web browsing needs a lot of CPU power for small moments in order to parse the DOM tree and all that other magical crap sites require nowadays (the Wii and 3DS are of specific note here).

So PCs will often have games that don't make it to consoles because consoles wouldn't run them when it's not even a question of graphics (insert Dwarf Fortress here).  And when those games do get ported, some of the heavier aspects are often cut or modified.

For example the 360 edition of Minecraft, which is relatively the closest to the PC version, doesn't have infinitely-generating worlds... even though infinite worlds were added _before minecraft alpha_.  It's not a question of time or development, it's a limit of the system it's ported to run on.


----------



## DSGamer64 (Mar 6, 2013)

Guild McCommunist said:


> A big fat "Eh" from me.
> 
> Although the Wii U might suite it rather well using the touchscreen as a menu.


 
It would be nice actually, having the tablet controller for your inventory would reduce that whole nonsense of having to switch items frequently when you are building something like in the PC version. Heck, they could even organize items based on type and have arrows to swap between categories on the Wii U. Seems absolutely silly that they aren't going to make a Wii U version, but oh well, that is their priority so there is no sense in whining about it.


----------



## Carnivean (Mar 6, 2013)

I assume this just means the PS4. And will probably mostly depend on how much effort they would need to expend to just fork the current PC version over to it. The Wii U would most likely still have a crippled version barely worth playing, just like the 360. It's hardly shocking they wouldn't want to bother.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Mar 6, 2013)

Carnivean said:


> I assume this just means the PS4. And will probably mostly depend on how much effort they would need to expend to just fork the current PC version over to it. The Wii U would most likely still have a crippled version barely worth playing, just like the 360. It's hardly shocking they wouldn't want to bother.


 
Well he said Playstation in general so it could be PS3/PS4/Vita.

Although the PS4's architecture is said to be similar to PCs so it may mean an easier port job than the PS3/Vita. Considering the XBLA Minecraft sold over 5 million units and even ousted Call of Duty on the weekly play charts, it's certainly not insignificant, hence the exclusivity deal with Microsoft.


----------



## Deleted_171835 (Mar 6, 2013)

Rydian said:


> Wii U has _possibly_ the worst CPU of the upcoming/NOW generation. It's an upgraded Wii, while the PS4 has been confirmed to go x86 for power/cost/ease issues, and the 720... well, the 360's CPU appears to be more powerful than the Wii U's (hard to tell, but it's a similar architecture with more cache and a higher clock rate if I'm reading the specs right).


How about no? The Wii U has a more powerful CPU than both the PS3/360 with an out of order design (die shot, marcan, devs). Simply dismissing it as an upgraded Wii thanks to its Broadway roots is incredibly ignorant.

Whatever the reason is for not bringing Minecraft over, it's certainly not technical specs (although gundalf's reasoning sounds plausible enough).


----------



## Foxi4 (Mar 6, 2013)

soulx said:


> Whatever the reason is for not bringing Minecraft over, it's certainly not technical specs (although gundalf's reasoning sounds plausible enough).


Like I tried to guess earlier, I'd put my money on Notch being pretentious and not too fond of Nintendo's submission system _("RARARA CLOSED SYSTEMS RARARA NOT ENOUGH FREEDOM RARARA INDIE DREAMS!")_ or it's all about the money _(It's all about the dum-dun dun-dee-dee dum, I don't think it's funny!)_.


----------



## Rydian (Mar 6, 2013)

soulx said:


> How about no? The Wii U has a more powerful CPU than both the PS3/360 with an out of order design (die shot, marcan, devs).


Didn't know it was OOE.



soulx said:


> Simply dismissing it as an upgraded Wii thanks to its Broadway roots is incredibly ignorant.


It's easy to dismiss the DSi's doubled clock speed as "double shit is still shit", so it was the same line of thought.  However as the Atom has shown us, OOE is very much a performence boost over IOE (if there's enough cache and stuff).



soulx said:


> Whatever the reason is for not bringing Minecraft over, it's certainly not technical specs (although gundalf's reasoning sounds plausible enough).


To be nitpicky, Minecraft isn't on any other systems.  Different programs calling themselves "Minecraft" are (with the 360 one being by far the closest to the PC one).  Like New Super Marios Bros Wii is not on the DS.  New Super Mario Bros, which is a different game with much less content, is.

But if this is a question on porting the portable version, I'm not sure why not?  It's cut back enough to where it will run on a ton of phones already.


----------



## Bladexdsl (Mar 7, 2013)

it's official mojang are graphic whores


----------



## Dork (Mar 7, 2013)

Bladexdsl said:


> it's official mojang are graphic whores


 
Huh?


----------



## Deleted-188346 (Mar 7, 2013)

Probably a good thing.
If they released it on Wii U, it'd be back at version 0.00.0.00.001 again.
"Next update: grass!"


----------



## Rydian (Mar 7, 2013)

Puppy_Washer said:


> Probably a good thing.
> If they released it on Wii U, it'd be back at version 0.00.0.00.001 again.
> "Next update: grass *dirt*!"


----------



## Jayro (Mar 7, 2013)

Minecraft thrashes RAM (Java's fault) and gobbles it up in hundreds of megabytes at a time. I can understand why it sucks on the current gen consoles.  But the next-gen consoles shouldn't have any trouble keeping up.


----------



## 59672 (Mar 7, 2013)

Every generation nintendo is "doomed". Although we all know that hasn't happened yet. Heck, even when the gamecube had the least sales, nintendo made the most money (too lazy to lookup sales but it isn't too hard to find the sales and profit info). And about minecraft, personally, I couldn't care less about playing a gimped version on any console or handheld when I can just play it on pc.

Although, I'd bet the reason for mojang has to do with server usage or something similar and likely silly. After all, most other indie devs seem to call the wii U a good platform to develop for. Although I'd hardly call mojang an indie developer anymore considering many facts and figures, among them the fact mojang is planning on publishing games. At that point I'd say they've gone past the point.
Personally though I think the term indie developer is far too broad, instead there should be two types, a small group of developer(s) who make games for a living and then the kind who make games only because they love video games, and quite often may be making games without any goal of profit (ie cave story?)


----------



## Qtis (Mar 7, 2013)

59672 said:


> Personally though I think the term indie developer is far too broad, instead there should be two types, a small group of developer(s) who make games for a living and then the kind who make games only because they love video games, and quite often may be making games without any goal of profit (ie cave story?)


Well it's hard to make something strictly "indie" since most people start out as independent developers and then become larger (either by growth or by the company being bought). Rovio is a good example, it was a small company, but due to Angry Birds, it's huge.


----------



## Rydian (Mar 7, 2013)

Qtis said:


> Well it's hard to make something strictly "indie" since most people start out as independent developers and then become larger (either by growth or by the company being bought). Rovio is a good example, it was a small company, but due to Angry Birds, it's huge.


And Mojang, I feel the need to point out, is a publisher for other things (Cobalt) now.


----------



## VMM (Mar 8, 2013)

ShadowSoldier said:


> No it doesn't. You're looking waaay too much into it.
> 
> A bunch of Indie Devs have already stated how awesome it is to work with the WiiU, that's why you see so many great titles on the eShop already. This is just Notch being stupid.
> 
> ...


 
PS4 uses a x86_64 architecture, while WiiU uses a PPC.
It's much easier to port to PS4.



JayRo said:


> I just hate how people (developers, namely) are always against developing or porting games to Nintendo's console. It's utter bullshit. Every time I see a cool game coming, it's out for PC, 360, and PS3... Never the Wii. The most we've gotten are a few Call of Duty games, and Resident Evil 4. Given the fact that all 3 current game consoles utilize similar PPC-based processors, you'd thing porting games would be easier for the devs.


 
The X360 Xenon CPU's processors are sightly modified version of the Cell processors in PS3 CPU.
Both are far different than the PPC used in Wii and WiiU.


----------



## ShadowSoldier (Mar 8, 2013)

VMM said:


> PS4 uses a x86_64 architecture, while WiiU uses a PPC.
> It's much easier to port to PS4.


 
And yet they didn't have trouble porting it to the 360.


----------



## VMM (Mar 8, 2013)

ShadowSoldier said:


> And yet they didn't have trouble porting it to the 360.


They didn't? They had to rewrite the code from ground-zero in C++ because it was originally written on Java.
X360 version is one year behind PC one.

Porting to X360 must have been really painful, and they probably will choose only one next-gen platform to port.
PS4 have a X86_64 architecture, and is far more powerful than WiiU, if it's to choose only one platform, PS4 seems the best option so far.


----------



## ShadowSoldier (Mar 8, 2013)

VMM said:


> They didn't? They had to rewrite the code from ground-zero in C++ because it was originally written on Java.
> X360 version is one year behind PC one.
> 
> Porting to X360 must have been really painful, and they probably will choose only one next-gen platform to port.
> PS4 have a X86_64 architecture, and is far more powerful than WiiU, if it's to choose only one platform, PS4 seems the best option so far.


 
So what you're saying is... they're lazy.


----------



## VMM (Mar 8, 2013)

ShadowSoldier said:


> So what you're saying is... they're lazy.


 
Yes, they are


----------



## Rydian (Mar 8, 2013)

ShadowSoldier said:


> So what you're saying is... they're lazy.


Says the person who's never done any game development or porting.

Seriously, you might as well be saying "What, the ancient egyptians didn't build their boats out of aluminum?  Pft, they must be cheap."


----------



## ShadowSoldier (Mar 8, 2013)

Rydian said:


> Says the person who's never done any game development or porting.
> 
> Seriously, you might as well be saying "What, the ancient egyptians didn't build their boats out of aluminum? Pft, they must be cheap."


 
That's not relevant at all.

But hey, if other developers and actual indie devs put the time into it, there's no reason why Mojang of all people can't, other than being lazy.


----------



## Rydian (Mar 8, 2013)

ShadowSoldier said:


> That's not relevant at all.
> 
> But hey, if other developers and actual indie devs put the time into it, there's no reason why Mojang of all people can't, other than being lazy.


Yes it is.  You're talking about technologies you obviously have no experience with.

Most other devs build on already-developed engines (Unreal, etc.) that work on other systems.  For them it's a matter of porting over the game assets and engine modifications to the other platform (then scaling/rebinding as needed).  This is because the engine and libraries they use will work natively on those systems.  They do not need to write a new engine for each platform.

Minecraft is custom, and was written with Java in mind to target computers specifically.  It runs in browsers, Windows, Linux, and OSX because the engine was specifically built for it (even down to the libraries used, such as OpenAL)... but Java, and thus the game engine, does not run on consoles.  So the game engine itself needed to be re-written.  And none of the Mojang developers want to put in all that time, since they're busy with the existing version of the game...  Which is why Mojang licensed 4J studios to do the port, and they're the ones actually developing the 360 edition.

The engine is far more of a game than you may realize.  *Creating a new game engine often takes years, which is why things like the Unreal Engine, Unity, and the ID Tech engines are so goddamned popular.*  Even making a copy with another engine as the base is a long process, which is partially why the 360 version is behind the PC one.  Anything done to the PC game, the 4J guys need to re-do in a different language, mod the 360's engine the same sort of ways, etc.


----------



## Deleted_171835 (Mar 8, 2013)

Only on GBAtemp does a simple statement saying that a "Wii U release" is unlikely turns into some silly debate over if the Wii U is powerful enough to run Minecraft. If it's on the 360, they could easily port it to the Wii U. Specs aren't the reason they're not bringing it over (especially considering they don't even have a Wii U devkit).


----------



## Deleted-188346 (Mar 8, 2013)

Rydian said:


> Says the person who's never done any game development or porting.
> 
> Seriously, you might as well be saying "What, the ancient egyptians didn't build their boats out of aluminum? Pft, they must be cheap."


You don't need to be employed or have experience in the same field as someone to criticize them.

Person A: "I don't like this politician because of their views on..."
Person B: "Have you ever been a politician?"
Person A: "Well, no, but I have researched a lot of..."
Person B: "Then be quiet."
Person A: "But if you compare this politician to previous and current polit..."
Person B: "You've never been a politician so shh."


----------



## Rydian (Mar 8, 2013)

Puppy_Washer said:


> You don't need to be employed or have experience in the same field as someone to criticize them.
> 
> Person A: "I don't like this politician because of their views on..."
> Person B: "Have you ever been a politician?"
> ...


See, the difference here is that his criticism isn't grounded in reality.

Let's say you see a kid talking about farting and flying to the moon on a fart.  Yes, he doesn't have to be a rocket scientist to know that's not possible, but just because he's not doesn't save his suggestion from being crap.


----------



## VMM (Mar 8, 2013)

Sony probably bought exclusivity for minecraft.
If not, Mojang probably chose PS4 for it's similar architecture.



Rydian said:


> Yes it is. You're talking about technologies you obviously have no experience with.
> 
> Most other devs build on already-developed engines (Unreal, etc.) that work on other systems. For them it's a matter of porting over the game assets and engine modifications to the other platform (then scaling/rebinding as needed). This is because the engine and libraries they use will work natively on those systems. They do not need to write a new engine for each platform.
> 
> ...


 
Let's be realistic here.

Creating a game like Minecraft on Java is nonsense or madness.
The game is very bad programmed, and optimization does not exist.
Every update adds a bug or two, and Mojang doesn't care.


----------



## Rydian (Mar 8, 2013)

VMM said:


> Let's be realistic here.
> 
> Creating a game like Minecraft on Java is nonsense or madness.


I know, right?  I mean it's not like it worked, is cross-platform with minimal effort from the devs (the libraries they use take care of that), and became one of the top selling indie games.  

They're using Java and the third-part libraries for rapid development, which works out very well.  Just look at all the modding that's available for it, _with no official modding API and the game obfuscated_.



Even I was able to make a simple mod to add in new recipes and functional (eatable, wearable) items.



VMM said:


> The game is very bad programmed, and optimization does not exist.


They don't put forth much effort into making it run well, agreed with that last bit.  In fact they're probably going to release 1.5 in a week with the lighting lag still in it.



VMM said:


> Every update adds a bug or two, and Mojang doesn't care.


http://www.minecraftwiki.net/wiki/Version_history/Development_versions
'Cause those 100+ bugs fixed in the snapshots don't exist, right?

https://mojang.atlassian.net/browse/MC
Bug tracker, opened recently.


----------



## Deleted_171835 (Mar 8, 2013)

VMM said:


> Sony probably bought exclusivity for minecraft.
> If not, Mojang probably chose PS4 for it's similar architecture.


How could you buy exclusivity to a game already on the PC and 360?

And tell me where in the article does it specify the PS4? Or even confirm a platform.


----------



## Rydian (Mar 8, 2013)

I think a "Rydian isn't talking out of his ass" post is in order at this point, eh?







Unity 4 engine, using default textures for the ground (heightmap terrain) and skybox because I suck at making realistic textures.

Unity is an "upcoming" engine I decided to play around with a few days ago (but never made anything interesting which is why I haven't posted yet).  It's actually surprisingly-easy, if anybody here is thinking about game development and has experience with older tools (Game Maker and all the ones like it), it's pretty much that, but with some nice built-in tools, and you have EMCA and C# variants to use for the programming.


----------



## ShadowSoldier (Mar 8, 2013)

Rydian said:


> I think a "Rydian isn't talking out of his ass" post is in order at this point, eh?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 

....THAT IS SO COOL! LOOK! THERE'S MY NAME! DUDE! That's awesome! Shit now I wanna look like The Dude... but right now I only look like Alan from The Hangover. But still, that's pretty fucking cool.


----------



## 3bbb7 (Mar 8, 2013)

Why is wii u unlikely? The touchscreen could be great for the inventory and other menu things on it while playing on the big screen...
If this was made it would be really cool


----------



## Rydian (Mar 8, 2013)

ShadowSoldier said:


> ....THAT IS SO COOL! LOOK! THERE'S MY NAME! DUDE! That's awesome! Shit now I wanna look like The Dude... but right now I only look like Alan from The Hangover. But still, that's pretty fucking cool.


Trivia: My first attempt had the texture upside-down, because I rotated the box along the wrong axis.  That's why the filename is "whoops.jpg".


----------



## Bladexdsl (Mar 8, 2013)

Dark S. said:


> Huh?


they don't want mc on nintendo but consider sony yet that's a gfx whore. nindo doesn't need more overrated games on their consoles anyway


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Mar 8, 2013)

Bladexdsl said:


> they don't want mc on nintendo but consider sony yet that's a gfx whore. nindo doesn't need more overrated games on their consoles anyway


 
Didn't know getting modern hardware is "gfx whoring".

Also Rydian do you not know what ShadowSoldier's avatar is?

Really?


----------



## Rydian (Mar 8, 2013)

Really. >>;


----------



## VMM (Mar 8, 2013)

soulx said:


> How could you buy exclusivity to a game already on the PC and 360?
> 
> And tell me where in the article does it specify the PS4? Or even confirm a platform.


 

Next-gen exclusivity.
*It's just a guess*. Since PS4 is just around the corner I say it's pretty feasible that the game should be released for PS4




Rydian said:


> I know, right? I mean it's not like it worked


 







Rydian said:


> is cross-platform with minimal effort from the devs (the libraries they use take care of that), and became one of the top selling indie games.


 
It didn't become one of the best-selling indie games because of been developed in Java.
The concept of the game, that lego feeling that your imagination is the only limit, that's what made it a best selling game.
Even if it were made in basic, it wouldn't change much the sells.



Rydian said:


> They're using Java and the third-part libraries for rapid development, which works out very well. Just look at all the modding that's available for it, _with no official modding API and the game obfuscated_.


 
It was easier to develop, but porting to consoles makes the work twice as hard.
Just look how hard it was to port to X360.
If it was made in C++, it would take longer to develop, but porting to consoles would be easier, and having all versions up-to-date would be feasible.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Mar 8, 2013)

Rydian said:


> Really. >>;


 
C'mon man, that's worse than the fucking Eagles.

Also developing for consoles is hard, what's the big point here? Microsoft signed an exclusivity deal for Minecraft and you pour money into projects to get some out.

Instead of speculating why it's not coming to the Wii U (well, "unlikely") why not just accept the fact and move on? There's a thousand other games it can get. Certainly better ones than Minecraft.


----------



## Rydian (Mar 8, 2013)

VMM said:


> It didn't become one of the best-selling indie games because of been developed in Java.


I know, that's not what I was saying.

You said that making a game in java is "nonsense" and "madness".  I'm saying you're wrong because *it worked*. XD



VMM said:


> The concept of the game, that lego feeling that your imagination is the only limit, that's what made it a best selling game.  Even if it were made in basic, it wouldn't change much the sells.


It would have made it much slower to develop and add new features, so I'd argue that it would.  Minecraft started in May 2009.  ~1 month later, it had the basic block-based creative gameplay, and multiplayer.  If they had to code their own engine, that would have taken a hell of a lot longer, and other features players enjoy (survival, the nether, later features like pistons and such) would have taken a lot longer to arrive as well.

If Minecraft wasn't using Java and pre-written libraries for input/sound/graphics it's likely that right now it'd still only be in one of the earlier development stages (it went Classic, Indev, Infdev, Alpha, Beta, Release), and thus have much less content and be less appealing.  I, for one, didn't even look at the game until Beta 1.7, when survival was considered properly playable.  The "classic creative" doesn't appeal to me.



VMM said:


> It was easier to develop, but porting to consoles makes the work twice as hard.
> Just look how hard it was to port to X360.
> If it was made in C++, it would take longer to develop, but porting to consoles would be easier, and having all versions up-to-date would be feasible.


Yes.

But it's not like Notch gave a shit when he was first building "An infiniminer clone".


----------



## VMM (Mar 8, 2013)

Rydian said:


> I know, that's not what I was saying.
> 
> You said that making a game in java is "nonsense" and "madness". I'm saying you're wrong because *it worked*. XD


 
It would have worked even if the game was developed in basic, your argument is not valid.

Notch does not give a shit about optimization. The game is 10 times heavier than it should be,
very bad programmed, and need a lot of extra work for porting to consoles.



Rydian said:


> It would have made it much slower to develop and add new features, so I'd argue that it would. Minecraft started in May 2009. ~1 month later, it had the basic block-based creative gameplay, and multiplayer. If they had to code their own engine, that would have taken a hell of a lot longer, and other features players enjoy (survival, the nether, later features like pistons and such) would have taken a lot longer to arrive as well.
> 
> If Minecraft wasn't using Java and pre-written libraries for input/sound/graphics it's likely that right now it'd still only be in one of the earlier development stages (it went Classic, Indev, Infdev, Alpha, Beta, Release), and thus have much less content and be less appealing. I, for one, didn't even look at the game until Beta 1.7, when survival was considered properly playable. The "classic creative" doesn't appeal to me.
> 
> ...


 
It would take more time, but people with weaker PC would be able to play it if it was in C++ with a decent optimization.
Creating a port wouldn't be as even close to as hard as it was with X360.
Mojang would probably port easily the game to PS3, X360, WiiU, PS4 and X720, 
which would grant even more units sold, and even more profit.
It was a faster way for making money, but they had twice the trouble of porting it to X360, and will have even more to port to PS4(if they do).
It's not about which option is right, both options have it's pros and cons.


----------



## Rydian (Mar 8, 2013)

VMM said:


> It would have worked even if the game was developed in basic, your argument is not valid.


What argument?

You are saying that writing a game in Java is nonsense and madness.
I am saying that that is obviously false, because it's a working product.



VMM said:


> Notch does not give a shit about optimization. The game is 10 times heavier than it should be,


Notch hasn't worked on the game in a while, and what do you mean "than it should be"?  What _exactly_ are you basing this off of?

Minecraft's terrain contains more polygons at a set render distance than even games like Crysis.  Yes all the polygons are at right angles, but video cards don't care, it's still more to render in the viewport.


Minecraft specifically uses an older OpenGL version so that machines with an older GPU (or cheap machines with an IGP) can run the game at all.  This means that some more advanced API-level things that can cut back on rendering time aren't available, sadly.


Minecraft needs to keep track of lighting levels on the CPU and access them for varying calculations in-game.  Monster spawning, whether wheat stays in the ground and grows, snow/ice melting, grass spread, and things like that which affect the game in ways more than just the client's display, so lighting can't be done on the GPU otherwise servers wouldn't work right (as they need to keep track of all the lighting data).  This is in stark contrast to most other games that offload all the lighting and graphical calculations to the GPU, where the game will still function just fine if there's no graphical calculations being run at all.


Sort of linked to the above, Minecraft simulates a world with a lot of interactivity.  Trees grow, water and lava flow, the player places and destroys chunks of land, redstone logic, and the things mentioned above all need to run.  This is a lot more logic to be kept track of than your standard FPS-type game where the majority of the world is a static landscape.

Minecraft is a heavy, modern game _that just stylizes itself with low-resolution textures and right-angles for the polygons_ to give that old-style look.



VMM said:


> very bad programmed, and need a lot of extra work for porting to consoles.


No, it needs to be re-written for consoles because it wasn't originally made in something that could be ported.  I already covered this.



VMM said:


> It would take more time, but people with weaker PC would be able to play it if it was in C++ with a decent optimization.


I won't argue that if it was written in a different language it could be a bit faster, but if you think that Minecraft is so heavy _just because it's written in Java_, you have a lot of learning to do.


----------



## ShadowSoldier (Mar 8, 2013)

Guys, come on now, I think you need to take a step back. Let's be honest, there's no reason why it can't run on the WiiU. You can bring up all the technical shit you want, but if the 360 can do it, then a little bit of work, it could run on PS3 and WiiU just fine, but they're lazy.

But we're all missing the big picture here.... Minecraft is shit.


----------



## wolfmanz51 (Mar 8, 2013)

Actually this statement has since been corrected To say:
_The reason I said that is that the Wii U hasn't even been mentioned when we're talking about Minecraft platforms. However, I'm only responsible for the PC and Pocket editions, so the question wasn't mine to answer. The Wii U is no more likely than any other platforms, but no less either._​ Mods or Op can you please update this post to reflect this.


----------



## VMM (Mar 9, 2013)

Rydian said:


> What argument?
> 
> You are saying that writing a game in Java is nonsense and madness.
> I am saying that that is obviously false, because it's a working product.


 
Working is the basic, it can't even be considered as an argument.



Rydian said:


> Notch hasn't worked on the game in a while, and what do you mean "than it should be"? What _exactly_ are you basing this off of?
> 
> Minecraft's terrain contains more polygons at a set render distance than even games like Crysis. Yes all the polygons are at right angles, but video cards don't care, it's still more to render in the viewport.
> 
> ...


 
So many polygons for such shitty graphics, honestly, minecraft could be developed with half or less of these polygons.
Having low textures, but a high amount of polygons seems at best controversial·



Rydian said:


> No, it needs to be re-written for consoles because it wasn't originally made in something that could be ported. I already covered this.


 
You said exactly the opposite. It was made in Java for been easily portable.



Rydian said:


> I won't argue that if it was written in a different language it could be a bit faster, but if you think that Minecraft is so heavy _just because it's written in Java_, you have a lot of learning to do.


 
Java is just the tip of the iceberg


----------



## Issac (Mar 9, 2013)

VMM said:


> So many polygons for such shitty graphics,* honestly, minecraft could be developed with half or less of these polygons.*
> Having low textures, but a high amount of polygons seems at best controversial·


 
No. A polygon is a flat triangle, and it takes two to make a square. then, to make a six sided cube, it takes six squares. That is, 12 polygons. And that's the minimum for one cube.
Imagine a cube mountain of 10x10x10 cubes, that's 1000 cubes. each cube has 12 polygons. 12000 polygons for a small mountain. The mountains in the games are much larger.

Now, there are some back-facce culling going on for sure, but that's not the point.

Oh, and this is what a cube looks like:


----------



## Rydian (Mar 9, 2013)

VMM said:


> So many polygons for such shitty graphics, honestly, minecraft could be developed with half or less of these polygons.


Issac already mentioned the base of it, in that you need a certain number of triangles (barest form of polygon and often the only kind used in games, higher-sided polygons are more complex to handle and often used in just modeling and things will be converted to tris upon export) in order to display regular geometric shapes, and Minecraft has a lot of blocks going on in the terrain.






Every single block face exposed is two triangles.  That really adds up.

For comparison, here's a diffuse+wire render of a piece of landscape I built in Blender, where you can see how many polygons are needed for smooth shapes and hills when you have proper sculpting tools and are pre-creating land.  This is the sort of thing you'll see in games with more realistic terrain.






The hills seem relatively smoother, but are also using a lot less triangles, and so there's way less complex terrain to render.



VMM said:


> Having low textures, but a high amount of polygons seems at best controversial


And using Amiga-style graphics on a modern machine may seem controversial, but VVVVVV went ahead and did it just fine.  Minecraft uses the style it uses on purpose, just as well.



VMM said:


> You said exactly the opposite. It was made in Java for been easily portable.


It was two statements.

1 - They wrote it in Java to make it portable across computers, and it is (Windows, OSX, and Linux).
2 - They had no intention of it being on consoles when it was originally made, so portability outside of Java's domain wasn't even thought of.



VMM said:


> Java is just the tip of the iceberg


Of your lack of knowledge on the subject, yes.


----------



## wolfmanz51 (Mar 9, 2013)

As much as you're "100%" right Rydian why do you care so much to argue with him? Arguing with people on the interwebs this much is a waste of time, even if you change his mind it's not knowledge he was seeking or he would listen and ask questions. More than likely even if you proved your point to him he will now be left resentful toward you for publicly humiliating him. Further decreasing your chance of getting knowledge across to him. It's basic Human Psychology we don't handle criticism very well.


----------



## Rydian (Mar 9, 2013)

wolfmanz51 said:


> As much as you're "100%" right Rydian why do you care so much to argue with him? Arguing with people on the interwebs this much is a waste of time, even if you change his mind it's not knowledge he was seeking or he would listen and ask questions. More than likely even if you proved your point to him he will now be left resentful toward you for publicly humiliating him. Further decreasing your chance of getting knowledge across to him. It's basic Human Psychology we don't handle criticism very well.


The people who aren't taking personal part in this conversation, however, get to take in the info too.

I'm so hard-ass about this kind of stuff in general because it teaches people, even if the person I'm directly quoting refuses to listen (and in fact that's often the only time info like this gets talked about, when somebody's being thick-skulled on the issue so it NEEDS to be laid out in such detail).


----------



## wolfmanz51 (Mar 9, 2013)

Rydian said:


> The people who aren't taking personal part in this conversation, however, get to take in the info too.
> 
> I'm so hard-ass about this kind of stuff in general because it teaches people, even if the person I'm directly quoting refuses to listen (and in fact that's often the only time info like this gets talked about, when somebody's being thick-skulled on the issue so it NEEDS to be laid out in such detail).


 
good point.


----------

