3 ms·
I think we all use code to make things. However, not caring about the code can spell disaster for the thing we're making. In the case of Minecraft it appears th
by reedlaw 12y ago
I think we all use code to make things. However, not caring about the code can spell disaster for the thing we're making. In the case of Minecraft it appears the code is good enough but I wonder how many more features would exist if it wasn't for the poor design.
- tlarkworthy 12y agoworth noting that games have a fairly short half-life normally, so dev's are writing a new game rather than adding features to an existing legacy game (unlike mainstream software development). You also get to vary the scope of the game as the time budget runs out.
- bayesianhorse 12y agoSo far, it hasn't lead to disaster in case of Minecraft...
- mjevans 12y agoMinecraft is fun. However I'd clearly state that Minecraft, especially the early multi-player stuff that Notch worked on, /was/ a disaster. Only now, three numbering schemes later (alpha, beta, release), in release version 1.8, does the core game actually have features such as abstracting implementation IDs from object types (EG: now there is minecraft:glass to resolve instead of remembering decimal value 20. Though mods for r1.8 are only just beginning, so that scoping might not yet exist.)