As someone who built a Minecraft-like project (but I was careful not to call it a Minecraft clone because it was missing many core features) in JavaScript several years ago and a fan of actual Minecraft, I feel I need to say something.
This is not a Minecraft clone. 99% of the projects out there that claim to be Minecraft clones are not close enough to be called clones either.
The real draw of Minecraft comes from a number of core features, most importantly the crafting and the survival needs that motivate the crafting and building. Minecraft would not have become a hit if it was just a creative sandbox alone. This project has neither of those aspects of the game. Another thing missing is the diversity of biomes. And another thing-- all of the underground features like caves and mines are missing.
So it doesn't have Mine or Craft, don't call it a clone. You wouldn't call something an IBM clone if it was missing core features of that computer.
I think people do the part with just the blocks and rudimentary generation and call it a clone, it's almost like they are giving themselves credit for recreating Minecraft when they haven't even implemented 1/3 of the features, and they didn't even recognize the most important ones.
>So it doesn't have Mine or Craft, don't call it a clone
It does both of those things. You can mine blocks for resources and then make new blocks out of those resources.
Your other points may be relatively salient, but a beta/alpha clone of a game does not have to implement every feature for it to be a clone.
It seems like you've taken this too seriously and really did not need to say anything. It's not really a productive point.
Say you've managed to brow beat OP down to calling his clone something like "A Minecraft-esque Resource Building Game." What have you done, at that point? Nothing. Calling something a Minecraft clone might be sensitive for you, and others, but it does not automatically make that sensitivity valid in any sense just because you feel it.
> The real draw of Minecraft comes from a number of core features, most importantly the crafting and the survival needs that motivate the crafting and building.
Minecraft became big way before survival. I remember playing for hours on Classic just building stuff with unlimited materials and talking to random people about their buildings.
Just go to any creative mode server and you will see that crafting/surviving is just a minor part of the game.
> The real draw of Minecraft comes from a number of core features, most importantly the crafting and the survival needs that motivate the crafting and building.
Playing on my own, I thought the same thing. But then a coworker hosted their own server and we had probably 12 people playing on the same map. It was amazing what each person was doing. Some built elaborate structures, some farmed, some raised animals, some cleared caves/mines. One guy would just dig - long straight tunnels, he mostly banked all the stuff he mined. Watching my young nieces play the game (not on the server with my coworkers), they simply enjoyed the free-form creative mode.
The glory of Minecraft is that it's so many different games to so many different people. If you like the survival aspect, that's great, but that's not how everyone plays the game.
I didn't realize there were major features missing from this version, and I understand your desire to defend the integrity of the hard task you did yourself
But also, this is just a cool project, and you could probably stand to chill out a bit and just enjoy that fact :)
This is not a Minecraft clone. 99% of the projects out there that claim to be Minecraft clones are not close enough to be called clones either.
The real draw of Minecraft comes from a number of core features, most importantly the crafting and the survival needs that motivate the crafting and building. Minecraft would not have become a hit if it was just a creative sandbox alone. This project has neither of those aspects of the game. Another thing missing is the diversity of biomes. And another thing-- all of the underground features like caves and mines are missing.
So it doesn't have Mine or Craft, don't call it a clone. You wouldn't call something an IBM clone if it was missing core features of that computer.
I think people do the part with just the blocks and rudimentary generation and call it a clone, it's almost like they are giving themselves credit for recreating Minecraft when they haven't even implemented 1/3 of the features, and they didn't even recognize the most important ones.