This might be daft question but I'll ask it anyway, how were they able to do this? Is the official version opensource or did they have have to reverse engineer the whole thing?
The official server isn't open source, but the Java bytecode can be decompiled into something approximating usable code. The protocol itself is also unencrypted and unobfuscated. All of this together makes it relatively simple to reverse engineer it.
This and Minetest made to the front page today (Edit: and Manicdigger, what is going on?). I've looked into both of these because, like a lot of other people, I'd love to see something that inspires and brings people together like Minecraft that isn't proprietary. Roblox and Garry's Mod are other similar things that seems to be popular but, again, proprietary and without the benefit of being hackable like Java.
What I'd really like to see is all this skill being put towards things like Cuberite and Minetest instead put towards a serious, free, project that takes a lot of inspiration Minecraft, Roblox and Garry's Mod but is distinct enough to call itself something other than "Not Minecraft". I think if it got to the point where you could make even semi-fun mini-games within the game itself, it would take off.
Edit: Side note, I think it should leave out any nods to "Libre" or the like in the title and main description as well. I'm all about that stuff but I think making it a primary focus, instead of it being a trait the project just has, hurts more than it helps. Everyone who cares about that kind of thing gets it without being force fed the idea.
I disagree. The history of Minecraft is one of the most incredible indie developer success stories that exists. Whether its free or proprietary is irrelevant - we're talking about a game, a fun creative work, not some piece of infrastructure we will all come to depend upon and be entrapped by. The lack of a free license or source code hasn't stopped all kinds of creative modding (nor has it with many, many other games in the past). As long as we are all free to create and distribute original works, so that the next one-man success story can take place, we are fine.
"The lack of a free license or source code hasn't stopped all kinds of creative modding".
My son still plays mostly on 1.7 because that's where the modding pretty much stopped. There is absolutely no chance of modding ever happening for PE, Windows 10, XBox, Playstation, etc. They give you shitty limited options so you can remake some mini games that the modding community invented. And if you think MS isn't eventually going to merge the code bases, you're crazy.
> Edit: Side note, I think it should leave out any nods to "Libre" or the like in the title and main description as well. I'm all about that stuff but I think making it a primary focus, instead of it being a trait the project just has, hurts more than it helps. Everyone who cares about that kind of thing gets it without being force fed the idea
I don't really agree (the naming point is valid, but the rest I disagree with). If you want to actually make a positive, lasting difference in the world you need to stand for your principles. I very much believe that whether or not a project is free software does define that project -- it defines what the developers think of the users and what freedoms the users have. It's more important than just being a property of the project, because it can shape the community and how the community interacts with the project. If you look at awesome projects like OpenMW[1] you can see just how much different a free software game can compare to a proprietary one in terms of the community (which comes from the freedoms the community has).
10 comments
[ 3.1 ms ] story [ 34.3 ms ] threadhttp://minecraft.gamepedia.com/Programs_and_editors/Mod_Code...
The protocol is also well documented: http://wiki.vg/Protocol
Aside: Documentation obtained this way is available at http://wiki.vg/Protocol.
Some slides about the process: https://www.grahamedgecombe.com/talks/minecraft.pdf
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lcUjqsz3FJI
What I'd really like to see is all this skill being put towards things like Cuberite and Minetest instead put towards a serious, free, project that takes a lot of inspiration Minecraft, Roblox and Garry's Mod but is distinct enough to call itself something other than "Not Minecraft". I think if it got to the point where you could make even semi-fun mini-games within the game itself, it would take off.
Edit: Side note, I think it should leave out any nods to "Libre" or the like in the title and main description as well. I'm all about that stuff but I think making it a primary focus, instead of it being a trait the project just has, hurts more than it helps. Everyone who cares about that kind of thing gets it without being force fed the idea.
My son still plays mostly on 1.7 because that's where the modding pretty much stopped. There is absolutely no chance of modding ever happening for PE, Windows 10, XBox, Playstation, etc. They give you shitty limited options so you can remake some mini games that the modding community invented. And if you think MS isn't eventually going to merge the code bases, you're crazy.
I don't really agree (the naming point is valid, but the rest I disagree with). If you want to actually make a positive, lasting difference in the world you need to stand for your principles. I very much believe that whether or not a project is free software does define that project -- it defines what the developers think of the users and what freedoms the users have. It's more important than just being a property of the project, because it can shape the community and how the community interacts with the project. If you look at awesome projects like OpenMW[1] you can see just how much different a free software game can compare to a proprietary one in terms of the community (which comes from the freedoms the community has).
[1]: https://openmw.org/en/