Jump to content

Dev update #18: 1.3.0 - Lighting


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, moniker said:

So "high demand" = anyone that isn't me demands it as well.

Just because you ask for it a-lot doesn’t mean it’s high demand. Its absolutely anyone (including you), it’s just that one person asking for it isn’t as convincing as lets say, 500 people. If over 500 people (or whatever number Nimi thinks is enough) want it, then Nimi will take it into consideration an possibly add it. But for now, you’re the only one wanting things Mine-Imator doesn’t need yet (Except for importing multiple sprites, which I know a shortcut around).

Link to post
Share on other sites

I ask for it:

On 6/9/2020 at 12:20 AM, CRAZYKOKEBROZ said:

You're now asking for too much! There is no need for this!

Some dude ask for it:

On 6/9/2020 at 4:12 AM, CRAZYKOKEBROZ said:

Okay, maybe we do need something like it. I know that you can add textures on panes (or other shapes) and then import them all into a project using the panes, but most of the other things he mentioned were just a little far fetched.

So how many people are needed to get a "maybe we do need something like it" and not a "There is no need for this!"? 2, or just someone that isn't me asking for it? Which is it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, moniker said:

So how many people are needed to get a "maybe we do need something like it" and not a "There is no need for this!"? 2, or just someone that isn't me asking for it? Which is it?

Didn't understand the need of importing multiple objects, but nearly everything else you ask for is obsolete!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, this argument has gotten so ridiculous, I'm pretty much taking @moniker's side at this point.

I haven't really been engaged in this conversation, so ima give my objective view on this.

It looks like it started out with moniker having some suggestion for thing he thought Mine-imator ought to have, and some disagreeing with both the suggestions and the rather blunt manner in which they were presented.

Then it turns into this thing where anything Moniker says is automatically bad because others keep passing off their inane opinions as fact. Saying things like, "Nobody wants this", "we don't need this" which translate as "I don't want this".

 He actually has some pretty good ideas I think. A search bar for hierarchy? Great, I'd love that. But then some come along and say since they wouldn't benefit from this, neither would anyone else.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Spontaneous Explosions said:

Okay, this argument has gotten so ridiculous, I'm pretty much taking @moniker's side at this point.

I haven't really been engaged in this conversation, so ima give my objective view on this.

It looks like it started out with moniker having some suggestion for thing he thought Mine-imator ought to have, and some disagreeing with both the suggestions and the rather blunt manner in which they were presented.

Then it turns into this thing where anything Moniker says is automatically bad because others keep passing off their inane opinions as fact. Saying things like, "Nobody wants this", "we don't need this" which translate as "I don't want this".

 He actually has some pretty good ideas I think. A search bar for hierarchy? Great, I'd love that. But then some come along and say since they wouldn't benefit from this, neither would anyone else.

 

The ideas are good, but Mine-Imator's original intention was its ease of use. If some of these ideas were to be put to use, it would turn the software into Blender: Minecraft Edition. once again Mine-Imator was not originally supposed to be complex, but the ideas are interesting.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Spontaneous Explosions said:

Okay, this argument has gotten so ridiculous, I'm pretty much taking @moniker's side at this point.

I haven't really been engaged in this conversation, so ima give my objective view on this.

It looks like it started out with moniker having some suggestion for thing he thought Mine-imator ought to have, and some disagreeing with both the suggestions and the rather blunt manner in which they were presented.

Then it turns into this thing where anything Moniker says is automatically bad because others keep passing off their inane opinions as fact. Saying things like, "Nobody wants this", "we don't need this" which translate as "I don't want this".

 He actually has some pretty good ideas I think. A search bar for hierarchy? Great, I'd love that. But then some come along and say since they wouldn't benefit from this, neither would anyone else.

 

I don't think anyone's specifically saying his ideas are unnecessary. In fact, only one person said those things.
It's the fact that he's just constantly and persistently making demand after demand, and hasn't thanked Nimi even once for all the hard work he's put into making this program. The moment Nimi confirms something, moniker just goes "Okay, now add this, this, etc." almost always with absolutely zero regard to how difficult/tedious/time-consuming they would be.

Edited by __Mine__
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, __Mine__ said:

I don't think anyone's specifically saying his ideas are bad.
It's the fact that he's just constantly and persistently making demand after demand, and hasn't thanked Nimi even once for all the hard work he's put into making this program. The moment Nimi confirms something, moniker just goes "Okay, now add this, this, etc." almost always with absolutely zero regard to how difficult/tedious/time-consuming they would be.

im on your side bud

Link to post
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Draco63 said:

I'm beginning to think that the MI forums were made to allow people to fight over ridiculous things.

It makes for some quality entertainment if you watch from a distance lol

Truth = 100%

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 6/14/2020 at 7:45 PM, CRAZYKOKEBROZ said:

The ideas are good, but Mine-Imator's original intention was its ease of use. If some of these ideas were to be put to use, it would turn the software into Blender: Minecraft Edition. once again Mine-Imator was not originally supposed to be complex, but the ideas are interesting.

Adding markers, search bars, being able to import several files or sticking timeline objects so you don't have to constantly scroll up and down looking for the Camera timeline don't turn Mine-Imator into Blender or make it more complex, it makes it easier to use, less tedious. Those are just basic workflow-improvement features.

 

Edited by moniker
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, moniker said:

Adding markers, search bars, being able to import several files or sticking timeline objects so you don't have to constantly scroll up and down looking for the Camera timeline don't turn Mine-Imator into Blender or make it more complex, it makes it easier to use, less tedious. Those are just basic workflow-improvement features.

 

That’s flawed logic. It makes the software more complex than it needs to be! You’re demanding these things and making an excuse for it. Please, do not ruin Mine-Imator (no matter how much it seems lie things are normal)!

Edited by CRAZYKOKEBROZ
Link to post
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, CRAZYKOKEBROZ said:

That’s flawed logic. It makes the software more complex than it needs to be! You’re demanding these things and making an excuse for it. Please, do not ruin Mine-Imator (no matter how much it seems lie things are normal)!

It doesn't make it more complex, it makes it easier to use. Claiming that importing 50 files manually instead of importing them all at once makes it more complex is nonsense, this applies to every other objectively-workflow-improving things that I mentioned.
 

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, moniker said:

It doesn't make it more complex, it makes it easier to use. Claiming that importing 50 files manually instead of importing them all at once makes it more complex is nonsense, this applies to every other objectively-workflow-improving things that I mentioned.
 

The developer does what the developer does! You can’t change their mind and neither can I! So deal with it! (None of us are fit for lead developer)

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, CRAZYKOKEBROZ said:

The developer does what the developer does! You can’t change their mind and neither can I! So deal with it! (None of us are fit for lead developer)

Plenty of things I've mentioned in the past were added/fixed, including fixing the bug in the "follow sunlight" shadows being delayed during instant camera jumps which is way more complex than adding these.

Link to post
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, moniker said:

Plenty of things I've mentioned in the past were added/fixed, including fixing the bug in the "follow sunlight" shadows being delayed during instant camera jumps which is way more complex than adding these.

Yeah, because you were being a colossal pain about such a trivial thing. I saw that whole argument unfold, and frankly you were acting like a spoiled child.

Edited by __Mine__
Link to post
Share on other sites

Right, thought I'd step in to clear up a few things instead of posting dumb memes.

First off, thanks for your suggestions, moniker. While I agree with the sentiment that you are notoriously... insistent and that it can come off as very disrespectful, whether you intend it or not, I also know that you're just trying to improve the program, and I think your proposals could be very beneficial to people's workflows, and not just your own.

I kind of regret bringing the argument of "Mine-imator should be kept simple", which a lot of people are now using, and that's because the 1.3.0 roadmap essentially destroys it. More tools inevitably brings more complex projects, and that highlights a lot of flaws with Mine-imator's user interface. This is why 1.3.0 is supposed to bring in a new interface to correct those flaws and allow people to improve their workflows. Things like markers on the timeline were prototyped, and adding a feature to highlight specific objects (like the Shy layers in AE) could also be implemented.

But... the development of Mine-imator is in a bit of a delicate situation at the moment, and the future of 1.3.0 is very uncertain. It's not to say that your suggestions are actively being ignored. They aren't. They're being considered and tested, unfortunately we can't afford to confirm anything until we have anything concrete. There are a lot of very exciting ideas that ultimately end up shelved because of various roadblocks and it would be unfair to hype everyone up about all these only to retract, saying that it's actually not going to happen.

So yeah. We'd appreciate if you all stopped arguing about this. They're not bad ideas, they're being considered, however, we simply can't confirm anything. This didn't need to be a 2 page debate, let's not make it any longer, thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Voxy said:

Right, thought I'd step in to clear up a few things instead of posting dumb memes.

First off, thanks for your suggestions, moniker. While I agree with the sentiment that you are notoriously... insistent and that it can come off as very disrespectful, whether you intend it or not, I also know that you're just trying to improve the program, and I think your proposals could be very beneficial to people's workflows, and not just your own.

I kind of regret bringing the argument of "Mine-imator should be kept simple", which a lot of people are now using, and that's because the 1.3.0 roadmap essentially destroys it. More tools inevitably brings more complex projects, and that highlights a lot of flaws with Mine-imator's user interface. This is why 1.3.0 is supposed to bring in a new interface to correct those flaws and allow people to improve their workflows. Things like markers on the timeline were prototyped, and adding a feature to highlight specific objects (like the Shy layers in AE) could also be implemented.

But... the development of Mine-imator is in a bit of a delicate situation at the moment, and the future of 1.3.0 is very uncertain. It's not to say that your suggestions are actively being ignored. They aren't. They're being considered and tested, unfortunately we can't afford to confirm anything until we have anything concrete. There are a lot of very exciting ideas that ultimately end up shelved because of various roadblocks and it would be unfair to hype everyone up about all these only to retract, saying that it's actually not going to happen.

So yeah. We'd appreciate if you all stopped arguing about this. They're not bad ideas, they're being considered, however, we simply can't confirm anything. This didn't need to be a 2 page debate, let's not make it any longer, thank you.

Thank you for helping us all settle. :) 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Create New...