tinoesroho wrote:The point is, people will dislike the game if there are mobs.
I know I, for one, patched out generating of the C++ mobs back in the 0.3.1-0.4dev days. Mobs, by default, detract from the beauty and wonder of the game.
<celeron55> someone get drunk or something and just put mobs into upstream
<celeron55> i'm starting to see that the only way 8D
tinoesroho wrote:And putting a mod in by default would simply be annoying; mobs lag a lot thanks to the design of the Lua API (which wasn't designed for it), so it would be really lousy for multiplayer and those on slower processors. We've had enough feature creep already.
qznc wrote:Surely a lot of AI stuff is resource-intensive and must be written in C++.
Evergreen wrote:I think before mobs can be added, there has to be an AI in the default game for mobs, a setting in the minetest.conf.
PilzAdam wrote:qznc wrote:Surely a lot of AI stuff is resource-intensive and must be written in C++.
Simple Mobs has almost no AI.Evergreen wrote:I think before mobs can be added, there has to be an AI in the default game for mobs, a setting in the minetest.conf.
What has minetest.conf to do with this?
SilverWolfLily22 wrote:I mean exploring and building is okay for a while but it is not realistic at all.
qznc wrote:So we need an efficient Lua API for Mobs, before they can go into default?
Surely a lot of AI stuff is resource-intensive and must be written in C++.
sfan5 wrote:qznc wrote:So we need an efficient Lua API for Mobs, before they can go into default?
Surely a lot of AI stuff is resource-intensive and must be written in C++.
There is a C++ Pathfinding algorithm in Minetest
PilzAdam wrote:sfan5 wrote:qznc wrote:So we need an efficient Lua API for Mobs, before they can go into default?
Surely a lot of AI stuff is resource-intensive and must be written in C++.
There is a C++ Pathfinding algorithm in Minetest
Pathfinding isnt a problem at all. Simple Mobs does no pathfinding and still doesnt work very good.
tinoesroho wrote:>.<
How 'bout no? Minetest is already rather laggy, although we've managed to disguise it somewhat thanks to LuaJIT and other engine improvements. Also, feature creep. Adding features for the sake of adding features without good rationale ("let's do it just because!") that could fundamentally alter the game? If people want mobs, they can install a mod. But don't force bloody unfinished hacky stuff on the public because some Minecraft(ard) wishes that a free and open source game was exactly like Minecraft. Mobs'll be added when we've got a flexible, moddable API nice and stable. Not a moment early.
Inocudom wrote:tinoesroho wrote:>.<
How 'bout no? Minetest is already rather laggy, although we've managed to disguise it somewhat thanks to LuaJIT and other engine improvements. Also, feature creep. Adding features for the sake of adding features without good rationale ("let's do it just because!") that could fundamentally alter the game? If people want mobs, they can install a mod. But don't force bloody unfinished hacky stuff on the public because some Minecraft(ard) wishes that a free and open source game was exactly like Minecraft. Mobs'll be added when we've got a flexible, moddable API nice and stable. Not a moment early.
What exactly causes Minetest to be laggy like that?
tinoesroho wrote:Celeron didn't intend for Lua to ever support mobs. That it does- even laggily and so intensive on the CPU- is a miracle. He himself has said numerous times that mobs will only come after an extensible API in the core engine itself is written. Until then, use the "hacky" mobs- but don't force it on everybody else.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 27 guests