Guy Building A Working (Yes, Working) Computer Inside A Video Game

from the mindblowing-minecraft dept

Wed, Sep 29th 2010 12:29pm — Mike Masnick

I have to admit that I haven't been all that familiar with Minecraft, the video game, though I keep hearing about it. We did recently write about how the game's developer, Markus Persson, has taken a very user friendly view towards "piracy," arguing that it's better to give people a reason to buy than worry about the people who will never buy. We got a number of comments from people who really liked the game, and now Karl Bode points us to a Kotaku story about a guy, who goes by the incredibly accurate username theinternetftw on YouTube, is literally building a computer within the game. Yes, a computer within the game. A working one. It's slow and limited, but as he says, "it's implemented in a video game, what do you want?"

So far, he's built a 16-bit arithmetic logic unit (ALU), and he's planning to build an entire computer around in. As Kotaku explains:

In this video he demonstrates a city-sized, fully-functional arithmetic logic unit, or ALU. The ALU is one of the fundamental building blocks of a central processing unit (CPU), responsible for performing arithmetic and logical operations.
Now that the ALU is complete, the creator plans to continue building the rest of the computer, starting with the memory. Once it's done he hopes to make the computer will run code based on the "Hack" machine described in the book The Elements of Computing Systems: Building a Modern Computer from First Principles.

Just in case you aren't clear here, the man is building a working computer inside a computer game using a textbook as his guide.

Suddenly, Minecraft has become even more interesting...

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: computers, minecraft, video games

55 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Chronno S. Trigger (profile), 29 Sep 2010 @ 12:46pm

OK, I need to check out Minecraft
This morning I watched a video about a guy who made a 1:1 model of the Enterprise D, and now I see someone build a mechanical computer the size of a city.

Yep I figured, I just looked it up on the pirate bay (didn't download, just looked) and it's 34MB. Figures something that open is so small.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Dark Helmet (profile), 29 Sep 2010 @ 12:51pm
  
  Re: OK, I need to check out Minecraft
  Hadn't heard of it until just now. It pretty much looks like a doom clone with inventory options.
  
  Was Doom that heavy on the hard drive?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - :Lobo Santo (profile), 29 Sep 2010 @ 12:59pm
    
    Re: Re: OK, I need to check out Minecraft
    The combat is almost nill, and you can build. Really build. It's more akin to first-person solo Dwarf Fortress than it is to Doom.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - slacker525600 (profile), 29 Sep 2010 @ 1:07pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: OK, I need to check out Minecraft
      I havent played, it looks like an epic time sink. but dwarf fortress is the better analogy than doom. Every element in the game is breakable and movable. You start off the game with nothing, and need to create your own tools, and then combine and use materials in your inventory to do stuff. http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2010/9/17/
      
      as for building a computer in a game, somebody did something similar in little big planet first http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZiRgYBHoAoU although not quite as impressive as a general purpose logic unit.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Jose_X, 29 Sep 2010 @ 4:23pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: OK, I need to check out Minecraft
        There are books and courses and just single page drawings that show all you need to build an ALU. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:2-bit_ALU.png [The guy that crafted the ALU suggested one. In my college days, I also had access to decent ones. I'm sure I'm not a unique case.]
        
        The logic building blocks usable within minecraft can be borrowed from here http://minecraftwiki.net/wiki/Redstone_circuits to save yourself time. [The basic logic functions are effected thanks to the interaction mainly of blocks, Redstone powder (the wires), and Redstone torches.]
        
        To automate, you need to build a number of other basic storage cells (buffer registers and common memory into which to load a program) and then build the controller. The controller will implement things like JUMP ADD SUB SHIFT TESTFLAGX JUMPIFGREATER etc. The ending step in most of these instructions (eg, after you test values or perform some sort of ALU function or write to a memory location off register values) is to load the next instruction (ie, increment the instruction counter by one). It's all very interesting in how it works. Eg, an instruction cycle might start by loading a value from a given memory location (eg, load the next instruction, whose address was all set up as the last step of the prior instruction): you have to pass an address value into the inputs controlling the memory, enable this input address into output data, then have this output data pass over to a particular buffer/register/Redstone torches on blocks, then have this value determine what happens next (eg, you load another value into a holding buffer or you use existing values from earlier to ADD or ...) ... with the last step of the instruction cycle being to load into the address input the next value to begin the cycle anew. [This linking across instructions allows you to create a potentially never ending cycle. It's the difference between manually setting inputs by walking around minecraft vs having the results of the last operation lead automatically right into the next.] So each basic instruction (ADD, JMP, ... like real computer assembly language) is composed of a number of clocked steps as just roughly described. Of course, you have to draw a clock line (after you build a clock/fast oscillator?) to many of the basic components, and this can get ugly in terms of lots of "wiring". You also have to make sure the clock cycle period is long enough, so that when you drive the next cycle of values, all values are settled down and correct (since like real hardware, the game takes some time to effect a "signal" across long series of connections). This means you have to do timing analysis of all paths, and the minecraft page linked above I think gives clues to how frequently the different devices are triggered. You can also just pick a large conservative value for the clock cycle if you want to avoid the timing hassles and play it by ear.
        
        Anyway, I suspect a bit that the best way to approach this if you want to build a full-blown computer is to use the minecraft format (I'm not sure if this page has the necessary info or not http://www.minecraftwiki.net/wiki/Alpha_Level_Format#See_Also ) so that instead of walking around setting countless of tiles, you can design at a higher level on "paper" and convert that file automatically into the proper minecraft map file. Of course, at that point, you might want to write software to do various forms of optimization (and routing of wires, etc). Perhaps this ALU map was done just this way.
        
        Also, the main developer of minecraft probably will pay people a bit of money eventually to help promote the software further by building very sophisticated worlds. Hopefully, he'll also think of community and not just in making money.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Chronno S. Trigger (profile), 29 Sep 2010 @ 1:13pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: OK, I need to check out Minecraft
      I've heard of it before, but I've never looked into it before today. From what I can figure from my limited exposure, it's multiplayer, up to 32, and you build your own maps. I've only ever seen this video and the Enterprise one, so I don't know if you can place enemies.
      
      @Dark Helmet
      Doom 1 was about 8M installed in Dos and Doom 2 to was about 10M if I remember correctly. I only have the Windows 95 versions so they're a little larger.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Dark Helmet (profile), 29 Sep 2010 @ 1:16pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: OK, I need to check out Minecraft
        Sigh, I remember having several CDs ID Software or someone else released of all the crazy user generated .wad's. God those days were awesome....
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Dewy, 30 Sep 2010 @ 2:52am
    
    Re: Re: OK, I need to check out Minecraft
    Absolutely not a doom clone, except in the very loosest of comparisons. The main comparisons are that its an FPS, and that there are monsters at night. Besides that it could very easily be just about whatever you want, short of RTS. You could, in a way do racing, using levers to switch tracks. Obvious implications for role-playing, because you MAKE your own role. It's a level designer in and of itself, and so much more. I think the only thing you can really compare it to is DF. Like, a first-person DF adventure mode.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- tyler, 29 Sep 2010 @ 3:08pm
  
  Re: OK, I need to check out Minecraft
  It really wouldn't matter if you downloaded it through torrent or his website, single player is free, and multi requires a $12 license. p2p all you like. :)
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anshar (profile), 29 Sep 2010 @ 12:59pm

Virtualization at its finest! :)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
239, 29 Sep 2010 @ 1:03pm

DF
Didn't somebody already do this in Dwarf Fortress?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 29 Sep 2010 @ 1:03pm
  
  Re: DF
  Yes: http://df.magmawiki.com/index.php/DF2010:Computing
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 29 Sep 2010 @ 4:53pm
  
  Re: DF
  Yep, a while back. There have been multiple computing projects done over the years by the DF community (not sure how many, but I can think of two off the top of my head).
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
chris (profile), 29 Sep 2010 @ 1:07pm

yo dawg, i heard you like computers...
so we built a computer inside yo computer so you can compute while you play minecraft.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Spointman, 29 Sep 2010 @ 1:28pm
  
  Re: yo dawg, i heard you like computers...
  This will come full circle if he builds a compiler or interpreter capable of playing Minecraft ... recursion gone mad.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Rich, 29 Sep 2010 @ 1:43pm
    
    Re: Re: yo dawg, i heard you like computers...
    My brain hurts.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Brian (profile), 29 Sep 2010 @ 3:02pm
    
    Re: Re: yo dawg, i heard you like computers...
    So soon a computer inside a computer playing minecraft built upon minecraft, wherein another working computer is built designed to run minecraft? *universe implosion*
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - ltlw0lf (profile), 29 Sep 2010 @ 8:18pm
    
    Re: Re: yo dawg, i heard you like computers...
    13th floor ftw.
    
    If anyone really is interested in an interesting sci-fi story here, rent the 13th floor. It may be a little cheezy, but after listening to some of the physicists, it could actually be a reality that we already exist in some sort of grand computer simulation. If we are building grand computer simulations ourselves, could it possibly be some sort of infinite recursion that we are part of too?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Dark Helmet (profile), 29 Sep 2010 @ 1:29pm

Question...
Figures into something I'm working into a book I'm finishing right now:

Is this sort of a step in the direction of a universal computer? Something along the lines of a Turing-Complete Automotron. Obviously it isn't complex enough yet, since the program can't simulate a program of its own complexity, but this is certainly a step, no?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Chronno S. Trigger (profile), 29 Sep 2010 @ 1:37pm
  
  Re: Question...
  Here's a counter question. Is what he doing so different then what I have running at home one my server? All he's really doing is virtualizing a mechanical PC. While extremely cool the way he's doing it, is it all that different from VMware? And if it isn't different, then VMware can already run Windows, something more complex then itself.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Dark Helmet (profile), 29 Sep 2010 @ 1:42pm
    
    Re: Re: Question...
    Is Windows more complex than VMware in the Turing-Complete sense? I don't think it is. To be Turing-Complete, VMware would have to be capable of running not only Windows itself, but a copy of VMware capable of running Windows (and another copy of VMware, and so on and so on).
    
    Now, if VMware could simulate Windows and Windows could simulate VMware, they would Turing-Equivalent. What a Universal Computer could do, as I understand it, is simulate every other computer function on the planet, including itself.
    
    That's the supposed argument in Digital Philosophy that the only true Universal Computer that will ever be created is our own dimensional universe....
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Rich, 29 Sep 2010 @ 1:49pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: Question...
      That's not strictly true. Turing completeness doesn't require that it can run any program. It means it can execute an algorithm. Something can be Turning Complete, but lack the ability to run graphics. Lacking graphics it can't run a program requiring that ability, but that makes not different as to whether or not it is Turning Complete.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Dark Helmet (profile), 29 Sep 2010 @ 1:53pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Question...
        Huh, perhaps I'm thinking of the Universal Computer concept then?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Rich, 29 Sep 2010 @ 2:01pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Question...
        Possibly. I am not familiar with the term. A universal Turing Machine is able to simulate any other Turing machine, but again that's pure math or algorithmic.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Dark Helmet (profile), 29 Sep 2010 @ 2:06pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Question...
        Ugh, now I have to go back and recheck my research. The story was about a company using Digital Philosophy and quantum computing to construct the first truly conscious AI by mapping a human fetus and making the distributed biology programming for it a turing-complete automoton, similar to cellular automotons that have been created.
        
        They then let the program "grow up". It doesn't turn out as they expected and hijinks ensue....
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Rich, 29 Sep 2010 @ 2:13pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Question...
        Interesting. That is the power of Turing machines: very powerful, but without complexity. You can easily define a Turing-complete machine language that has but a single opcode.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 29 Sep 2010 @ 2:59pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Question...
        Oh! children they never ever do what we want them to LoL
        They always find a way to annoy the beejesus of their parents and somehow we still manage to love them anyways.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 29 Sep 2010 @ 1:53pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: Question...
      "To be Turing-Complete, VMware would have to be capable of running not only Windows itself, but a copy of VMware capable of running Windows (and another copy of VMware, and so on and so on)."
      
      Picture turning a camera toward a TV where your showing what your recording.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Dark Helmet (profile), 29 Sep 2010 @ 1:56pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Question...
        I definitely have to use that analogy in the book, assuming you aren't claiming copyright ;)
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Killer_Tofu (profile), 30 Sep 2010 @ 12:58pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Question...
        Sorry, I already patented the idea when I put a mirror up on two walls facing each other. And it doesn't matter that people did that before me as I was the first to file. Since his idea is not 100% new and uses the same theory, I will still sue because of my patent. $$ please *holds out hand*
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Chronno S. Trigger (profile), 29 Sep 2010 @ 2:08pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: Question...
      I just tried it and I can't run a VMware slice in a VMware slice, but the error it gave me wasn't one of compatibility, but of payment. They want me to pay for another version of VMware before I can do that, so it is physically possible.
      
      Does it have to be running itself, or can it just run a copy of itself?
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Dark Helmet (profile), 29 Sep 2010 @ 2:31pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Question...
        It would just need to be capable of running itself as I understood it, though some are saying that isn't correct for Turing-Complete, but more for Universal Computer status. So, I guess a VMware software that could run all other VMware software itself would be a Turing Universal VMware....
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Rich, 29 Sep 2010 @ 2:46pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Question...
        All that is required for Turing completeness is the ability to conditionally branch and modify memory. A system or device is said to be Turing equivalent is it can simulate or be simulated by a universal Turing machine.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Chuck Money, 1 Oct 2010 @ 5:59pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Question...
        Indeed VMWare can be run within VMWare. I have a friend (full disclosure: he pirated it, and I don't use it...) who had 13 instances of VMWare running within itself, one inside the next. Even better, each instance was a different OS. His physical hardware was Windows 7, the first VMWare guest "layer" was Windows XP, then Ubuntu Linux, then Windows 2000, then Fedora, and at some point in all this he even had a hacked version of Snow Leopard (and I should add, it was not the innermost layer, either!)
        
        When it was all done, he didn't use it for anything, he did it just to see if he could, and he said he stopped at 13 because he ran out of different OS's to try. He had a screenshot showing each VM, resized slightly smaller than the last, with notepad and hello world in Windows 98 in the final VM.
        
        This all said, the problem here is, as I understand it, the Turing Test is a test of AI. That is, the criteria for a computer to pass a Turing Test is for a user to be at the other end of a network cable, communicate with 2 systems, and be unable to tell which system has a human and which is purely AI. Maybe I am misunderstanding the test or perhaps Turing created several different tests, I don't know and have never been very interested in the whole AI concept, except for a personal view that "easy" AIs in video games should actually be easy! Sometimes I play an FPS where I am head-shotted 10 seconds after a respawn every single time, and I'm sorry folks, that is NOT easy!!! If I thought that was fun (remember, GAMES are supposed to be FUN) then I'd go fight real people. But I digress...
        
        In any case, I don't think a VM being able to function within a VM is in any way related to a Turing Test. Now, if you could make a VM that ran so much like a host that, when the user connected to both the host and the VM remotely, they could not tell which is which, I suppose that could be considered Turing Complete, but that's not AI, that's just really good hardware emulation and people who don't know how to start Device Manager or lspci ;)
        
        In any case, this is a big step in a good direction. I don't think this is the same as a VM-in-a-VM, but a true Turing test could be applied to this.
        
        If he can develop his "minecraft computer" to the point where it can, itself, play minecraft, and other human players believe that the "minecraft computer" is another flesh and blood human like them, then that would most certainly be Turing Complete. But that is a test of AI, not a test of nesting. Again, nesting has nothing to do with a Turing Test to my knowledge, which I admit is somewhat limited.
        
        Still really cool anyhow, and I sincerely hope he keeps going!
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 5 Oct 2010 @ 1:06pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Question...
        You clearly do not know the difference between "Turing complete" (which means it can emulate a single-tape Turing machine) and "Turing test" (which means a human cannot distinguish the output from that which another human might generate).
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 30 Sep 2010 @ 5:43pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: Question...
      You can run VMware inside VMware. You can run ESX as guest inside an ESX host, and ESXi is even listed as an officially supported guest OS for VMware Fusion (and, I believe, for workstation).
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - The Groove Tiger (profile), 29 Sep 2010 @ 2:17pm
    
    Re: Re: Question...
    Just wanted to point out that the word you're looking for is Emulation.
    
    What's the difference between Emulation and Virtualization? An emulator uses the existing processor to create a virtual "copy" of a different processor, which then uses to execute the programs made for that processor. Virtualization, on the other hand, creates a virtual PC with "existing pieces", using the host's processor to delegate tasks.
    
    This distinction is important, because you can't virtualize a different architecture (so an Intel-based PC can only create virtual Intel CPUs). Also performance is much different.
    
    Let's say you need your "virtual PC" to add two numbers. Virtualization would simply give the host program the actual instruction and it would execute it. The emulator would have to receive the values, and use the "emulated computer" to run the instructions needed to add them, which could be completely different than the host's.
    
    These computers-within-a-game fit more in the Emulation type, I think. A virtual computer would simply ask your PC to return the computed results.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Peter, 1 Oct 2010 @ 2:41am
    
    Re: Re: Question...
    The awsomeness doesnt come from how complex the virtualization he made, but that he created all the pieces for the virtualization. Every bit. With literally buliding it out of torches and grounds and all. It is way more complex than you sitting down infront of your computer and click a few times, and run a machine. I bet you have no clue how that works either. Now this guy has, and he is creating virtualization. Now that is something awesome. IMO it is different.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
DS78 (profile), 29 Sep 2010 @ 1:30pm

Minecraft
I bought this last week. What a cool little game. Definitely worth the 10 dollars. It's only in alpha right now so its pretty bare and there are a few minor bugs. The guy updates pretty regularly though so i would expect more features to come along with beta. My son compared to Legos.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 29 Sep 2010 @ 1:39pm

0_o
Hang on...

Let me pick up my brain matter.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
imbrucy (profile), 29 Sep 2010 @ 2:01pm

Warning to you all
If you have the slightest bit of creative in you, be very careful about purchasing Minecraft. Your time will quickly disappear and you will be unable to stop losing more.

On another note, if you have free time it is definitely worth the 13-15$ (official price 10 Euro so pick a day when the exchange rate is favorable).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Tom Landry (profile), 29 Sep 2010 @ 2:53pm

I saw this yesterday via a Shacknews link. I'm not versed in any kind of comuputer language but I can grasp the level of work that was put into it. It is stunning.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Jose_X, 29 Sep 2010 @ 4:48pm
  
  Re:
  Many companies, instructors, past students, etc, have built up large archives like this material already (it's a very old problem).
  
  And you can use your PC to save a lot of grief if you know how to program so as to generate the map files automatically instead of by walking slowly through minecraft animation. Automate the circuit stuff.. and then maybe add carpeting and drapes by hand.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Jose_X, 29 Sep 2010 @ 4:59pm
    
    Re: Re:
    The file format might be explained here http://www.minecraftwiki.net/wiki/Alpha_Level_Format , and this other linked page shows you some of the many ordinary items possible: http://www.minecraftwiki.net/wiki/Data_values
    
    So if this info is accurate, you can generate your own map world however you want without having to build anything up (or gain raw materials, etc), ie, avoid sweating the "manual" labor. Those that like programming, might find this as interesting or more so than the game. Certainly, it can allow you to build things you likely would never otherwise afford the time and energy to build the long way.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
trilobug, 29 Sep 2010 @ 2:56pm

LBP Calculator
This reminds me of the guy that made a working calculator in Little Big Planet addition, subtraction, division, multiplication - that was a beast of a level!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jose_X, 29 Sep 2010 @ 4:27pm

An intro to minecraft
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7aNHWBmECQc&feature=related
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Kenny, 29 Sep 2010 @ 4:53pm

From a 6502 man
As someone who spent his youth programming games in 6502 assembler, I'm impressed by this. I didn't realise that people even knew what machine code was these days... don't kids come out of college waving bits of paper for drinking games these days?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Chuck Money, 1 Oct 2010 @ 6:08pm
  
  Re: From a 6502 man
  To answer your question: Read the NFOs for software torrents on TPB. Most of those people are 20-somethings and clearly know a thing or two about instruction-level programming.
  
  That said, for every 5-man crack team that knows that stuff, there are 500 script kiddies, and 100 C/JAVE/etc. programmers. So, the answer is, there are still people like you - they're just harder to find. And if they could code a crack for Civ5 in C++, they'd probably all disappear!
  
  Personally, I wrote a small calculator that did nothing but addition in assembler once. I decided it would be a nice skill to have, but not worth the time. I still plan to go back and actually learn it some day (probably x86-64, or even better, ARM, since everything with a cell phone radio seems to also have an ARM CPU these days) but in the mean time, PHP is just too much easier :P
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 29 Sep 2010 @ 10:20pm

Turing complete video game?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Craig, 30 Sep 2010 @ 12:30am

Why not just build a better looking game
I mean really now.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 30 Sep 2010 @ 5:15am
  
  Re: Why not just build a better looking game
  ITYMTP.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Brock, 30 Sep 2010 @ 10:24am

Almost there
so how long until i can play Minecraft on Minecraft?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hoogle, 30 Sep 2010 @ 2:09pm

You can build computers in Blockland. You can do everything you can do in minecraft and more in blockland.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Failpanda, 30 Sep 2010 @ 5:08pm

he should run a minecraft emulator on that computer
then he should do it again on that
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
terry mejia, 26 Oct 2010 @ 12:20pm

progress > security
I agree wholeheartedly with the philosophy that it's better to give people a reason to buy than to worry about the ones who won't buy because of piracy. It's better to concentrate on game design and pushing the industry forward than to spend time worrying about security - esp if you're a game developer.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]