"Hollow blocks" to build the covered structures

I don't know if there was any suggestions like this, or if it's impossible due to game's mechanic. I just want to suggest this, so if this is possible Chuckles thought about it.
What do I mean by "hollow blocks"? I mean the blocks that you put on the frontal line of sight, but if you get close to them, they becomes invisible or something like this.
So, for example, you will be able to enter this building:

But, of course, the last word is by the Chucklefish or the people, who knows. I hope to get explanaition.

 

I like this idea, but what might work even better is something like a third tile field. Like the background block placement, but in the foreground, so that you can still build stairs and floors and structures inside buildings, but also have a visible outer wall. I like the idea of proximity-based opacity for something like this.

 

A third foreground layer would be ideal, but rendering it might be performance heavy

 

But this could make a really avesome way of building =3

 

All ideas become moot if performance suffers. Not saying I don't like the idea, cus I do.

 

Understand. So the btter way could be the "hollow layer", where is originally no blocks.

 

Maybe there's no need for a third layer, but rather a simple display of the tile in the background as foreground (?) when not inside the building.

 

This will make some confusions...

 

And it wouldn't work for every situation. Sometimes the walls are patterned of built in a way that wouldn't make sense or look right as an outside design.

 

Yep, like the "inner" supporting system, or a wallpaper.

 

Not necessarily. Technically, any addition to the game, i.e. every part of the game, tasks the performance to some level. It's more a matter of how much one is willing to trade off for game mechanics.

 

Intel-powered laptop gamers will suffer at this rate, once this (through 3rd/front layer) is implemented.

 

Hmm, there has to be a solution. It would be really nice to be able to build a real village, without seeing everything inside buildings all the time.

 

Like say, "freeze" all scripts running at the foreground objects, then obscure them in pitch black when you're like 15~45 blocks away from them?

 

No no, what we are looking for is to have a sort of "outside" face to the building we build. Refer tot he OP's picture. We'd like to see the front of a building when not inside, rather than see straight inside.

 

I like this idea too. It would probably be hard to implement, but it'd definitely be worth it.

 

Obviously. I figured one could infer that from my post.

 

I did infer it... which is why it's what I said. There's no need to pull out the "obviously" and try to undermine my reply. I was just making the point that this particular proposed mechanic might not actually be so intensive as to warrant automatic exclusion as a viable possibility for implementation, and that, even in cases where performance suffers, if it's slight enough, even if it is still noticeable, sometimes it's worth it, when it enhances gameplay depth. Not all ideas become moot if performance suffers. It was just a sort of generalized statement, and I wanted to expand on the point you made by pointing out that it might not be the case for this idea. It's hard to know exactly how taxing an idea like this would be on the game, so it's not easy to make definitive claims on whether it's moot or not, even taking into account performance decrease. I just tried to express that in fewer words, initially. :T

 

As I originally said, "...might be performance heavy." leaving it open ended for the chance that it wouldn't be, and thus, totally doable. Further, I said "If performance suffers", meaning if the hit to performance is too great.

Suffer - experience or be subjected to (something bad or unpleasant)

So for the sake of clarification, I will rephrase my prior statement:

All ideas become moot if performance becomes bad or unpleasant.

 

Yeah. That's... pretty much what I said. And, again, no need to try to undermine my reply. I'm well aware of what the words "might" and "suffer" mean. Like I said, I was expanding on your statement, in defense of the idea of implementing a third tile layer. I'm not trying to get into a debate about semantics, here, it's not constructive to the topic, and doesn't really address the actual topic at hand. I was just trying to point out that, even if it makes the game slightly more taxing on whatever machine is used to play Starbound, it may still be worth implementing, which is a point I wanted to make as addition to what you said about how it may be performance-heavy. It's worth noting that performance can be heavily dependent on that machine's capabilities, anyway. If performance would become irredeemable on one, say, very low-end machine, that's not necessarily indicative of whether the mechanic is entirely moot in all cases. Your initial responses just seemed more pessimistic than that, and I was only trying to offer an optimistic counterpoint, in more direct support of the idea, primarily since it is one I see a lot of potential benefit in. I wasn't looking to just disagree with you or say your points aren't without any merit, I only meant to add to the dialogue in a slightly more hopeful way.