Jump to content


Photo

The Slope Switch


  • Please log in to reply
22 replies to this topic

#1 MBF

MBF

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 7 posts

Posted 23 February 2015 - 08:25 AM

Have you ever wanted to have brick slopes or grass slopes (etc.)?

Well with the Slope Switch you can!

Instead of having extra blocks for slopes there will be a button located in the bottom left blank spot of the inventory.
With this button you can toggle between block and slope mode.

Example:
You want brick slopes.
You tap the Slope Switch in your inventory switching to slope mode.
You select the brick.
You will place a brick slope.

It is that easy...

Another advantage of the Slope Switch is that we will have space for four more blocks :)

(Of course there won't be any door or shiny cube slopes.)

Let me know what you think about this idea (and don't blame me if this was already suggested :P)
  • NinROCK3T and Edgest like this

#2 Jason

Jason

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1340 posts
  • LocationWisconsin

Posted 23 February 2015 - 08:42 AM

Sounds legit to me. It would be logical to have a slope for each of the block types. 


  • NinROCK3T likes this

#3 Michigander1

Michigander1

    Very Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1357 posts
  • LocationMichigan

Posted 23 February 2015 - 11:43 AM

I think this was originally going to happen in the update along with half blocks and tiny/giant blocks but it was too buggy.

#4 Jason

Jason

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1340 posts
  • LocationWisconsin

Posted 23 February 2015 - 11:51 AM

I can't see how slopes would cause bugs... the tiny/giant blocks, though, yes. Big time.


  • NinROCK3T likes this

#5 BEANpp88

BEANpp88

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 99 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted 23 February 2015 - 12:32 PM

@Jason:
There are already bugs with the existing slopes, so I think more slopes would cause more bugs right?

#6 Jason

Jason

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1340 posts
  • LocationWisconsin

Posted 23 February 2015 - 12:33 PM

No, they would cause the same bugs that already exist in that case. In other words, the game isn't worse in any way because of this feature. In terms of bugs, it's the same. In terms of visual appeal, it gained quite a bit!



#7 ansin11

ansin11

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 256 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted 23 February 2015 - 12:45 PM

Actually this is a good idea as i can imagine that Ari has trouble fitting things into a non-scrollable inventory (which is easier to handle for a mobile device imo).

#8 BEANpp88

BEANpp88

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 99 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted 23 February 2015 - 02:48 PM

@Jason
Im not quite sure if this is really true. Because if there would be more slopes we would use them more to build. That means that there are a lot more slopes in a world and I think that the slope bugs happens more often in worlds or part of worlds where there are many slopes.
Therefor I think ari should fix bugs first and then think about adding more slopes to the game.
But in general I like the idea to have like more stone slope types

#9 BEANpp88

BEANpp88

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 99 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted 23 February 2015 - 02:49 PM

Far too many ''slopes'' in that post :P
  • NinROCK3T likes this

#10 Jason

Jason

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1340 posts
  • LocationWisconsin

Posted 23 February 2015 - 03:02 PM

I wasn't talking about how frequently a player encounters bugs, I was just talking about the amount of bugs currently in the game. How frequently a player encounters it depends on how the player plays. Some players use slopes everywhere now that they would if this slope update happened, they just use the slopes they can use. Or they use block types that are visually compatible with the available slopes. If this is true, then the probability of encountering a bug after this change is no different. But that's only one example.


  • NinROCK3T likes this

#11 Vuenc

Vuenc

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 636 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted 23 February 2015 - 03:34 PM

Ari can't make slopes for all blocks, out of the following reason:
For every slope type, there are 8 different positions in which it can be rotated. In the save file, every possible position is represented by a different number (e.g. an ice ramp pointing southwards is represented by a 36, an ice ramp pointing westwards by a 37, etc.)

With a normal block you only have 1 state (since it can't be rotated), if you wanted to make slopes for every block type you'd need 9x more numbers. But with the current file format, the largest number you can store for each block is 256. If Ari changed that, the files would double in size.

It would be cool though to have upside-down ramps at least for the four type of blocks where they already work.
  • NinROCK3T and mrob27 like this

#12 Jason

Jason

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1340 posts
  • LocationWisconsin

Posted 23 February 2015 - 03:53 PM

Yes, if he's using a byte, then this definitely isn't going to work. It's unfortunate that he uses byte... so limiting :(.



#13 Vuenc

Vuenc

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 636 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted 23 February 2015 - 03:59 PM

What would you use? I think it's a good choice because it guarantees relatively fast loading and the files don't get too big
  • NinROCK3T likes this

#14 MBF

MBF

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 7 posts

Posted 23 February 2015 - 04:01 PM

Well I didn't think about how it would be saved. But is a doubled file size a that big problem? (I don't know the current size..) And can the saving method be somehow improved to allow more blocks/orientations to be stored?

I'd quite like having more slopes (also upside down ones) though :P
  • NathanielBrusch likes this

#15 Jason

Jason

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1340 posts
  • LocationWisconsin

Posted 23 February 2015 - 04:23 PM

I use ushort in my own engine. I never save an entire chunk, though. I only save the blocks that were modified by the player. Upon start up, I generate the world in its default form, then I go through the modified blocks list and place them into the world. So far it seems to be working just fine. 



#16 Vuenc

Vuenc

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 636 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted 23 February 2015 - 04:30 PM

But then for every block, you have to save a ushort (2 bytes) + the block's position (at least one byte or more depending on how you save your chunks), don't you? Doesn't this blow up files where many blocks were modified?



#17 BEANpp88

BEANpp88

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 99 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted 23 February 2015 - 04:34 PM

Ok now I've got you Jason
Hm maybe its not that bad that there is no possibility to have more slopes cause that would open just too much possibilities to building: The charm of all minecraft-like-games is that you have to build with blocks and imagine how to do that that it looks realistic. From my point of view too many slopes or also the little blocks would maybe give worlds a...idk...too realistic look...
Did you get what I mean? '~'

#18 NathanielBrusch

NathanielBrusch

    Eden Elite Member?

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 812 posts
  • LocationVirginia

Posted 23 February 2015 - 04:39 PM

Hey speaking of slopes, I've been meaning to ask:

WHY CAN'T WE HAVE UPSIDE-DOWN RAMPS?

I beleive Vuenc may have mentioned this topic^ above.

We can turn them to connect left and right (make them side-ways), and we can make them normal up and down, but why cant we make them connect blocks ON THE BOTTOM of blocks that are placed as such:

--------
|
|
----------------
| |
| |
---------
  • Michigander1 likes this

#19 Jason

Jason

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1340 posts
  • LocationWisconsin

Posted 23 February 2015 - 04:39 PM

@Vuenc:

Yes, I do have to save the position as well. My thought process was (especially given that my chunks are 16x16 on the x, z) there are generally going to be large amounts of chunks that aren't modified by the player at all. I certainly don't want to save those just because the player loaded them up. The player could create huge files just from wandering around that way.

Beyond that... if each modified block saved with my system is double the size of blocks saved with a system that saves the whole chunk, then it would essentially require half of the total blocks in the chunk to be modified by the player to equal the file size if the whole chunk were saved. My chunks are 16x128x16, so that's 16,384 blocks the player would have to modify in a given chunk to equal the same size.

In my opinion, even if this does happen on some occasions, overall the total world size is going to be significantly lower...

But perhaps you're thinking of something I'm missing? If so, tell me because I'll change it in mine if that's the case.

@BEANpp88:

Possibly. Although I think it would take more than slopes to get to the 'too realistic' level :P. Perhaps marching cubes algorithm...

#20 NathanielBrusch

NathanielBrusch

    Eden Elite Member?

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 812 posts
  • LocationVirginia

Posted 23 February 2015 - 04:41 PM

Darn it it didn't come out right (^my last post)

It was supposed to be blocks diagonally touching edges horizontally but in the same vertical alignment three dimensionally




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users