TBH, I don't think the project could sustain itself as well if I did that. Having a single player version ready and out there to keep my own motivation up and attract funds to the project is, in my mind, more important. Additionally, I don't know much about networking or how it should work. The way a client and server will communicate will be largely based on how the game is written, something that logically would need to happen first.

Good choice IMO. While retrofitting the networking part later on most probably WILL be more work, I also think that omitting the networking layer in the beginning on a hobby project with limited resources is a good idea.

As a side note, be aware that doing local multiplayer as in Splitscreen multi player is pretty easy, as long as you can scale the graphics performance with mutliple players and game cameras on the same box.

This way, you can still test your games Multiplayer-readiness from a game design perspective on a smaller scale, and to some people, the fact more and more games omit local multiplayer, is a real let down. Nothing better than to sit in arms reach of your buddy while gaming, so you can smack him if he is again playing unfair ;)

Take a look at this if it suits your fancy:

Minecraft in Unity 3D - One-Week Programming Challenge

With limited time and zero experience, I would say you'd be better served just following some very basic game development tutorials and enjoy smaller projects. And the planet doesn't need another Minecraft clone. It really doesn't.

I think most people reading this are seeing Minecraft and latching onto a world made of blocks that works just like Minecraft.

That is not my project and I have said as much a couple times now.

Voxels and similar data structures used in Minecraft would be used to store the map.

The world would not appear to be made out of blocks. It would only store map information in a 3D grid. Visually it could look realistic.

Additionally, resource gathering and building are the only features in Minecraft I would even consider strongly emulating.

Combat would be more complex. Crafting would be more interesting and varied.

My intention is absolutely not to clone Minecraft.

I only referenced it to achieve quick understanding of the technical requirements for the map creation and storage.

I think most people reading this are seeing Minecraft and latching onto a world made of blocks that works just like Minecraft.

That is not my project and I have said as much a couple times now.

GoCatGo has a point though.

Minecraft is the 1000pound Gorilla when it comes to Voxel Games with basic RPG features and mining/resource gathering.

IF you are not planning to do this game just for your own enjoyment (in which case it is pretty much fine to copy minecraft / super mario / whatever quite directly. As long as you don't intend to distribute it, your achievement will still be pretty amazing if you manage to clone minecraft), your game will need to be REALLY different from minecraft to hold a chance. Just creating a nonblocky Minecraft might bring you some customers already.

But I am pretty sure there are a lot of people that already did that.

So from a game design point of view, concentrate on the points where your design is REALLY different from minecraft (and a different art style usually will not suffice), and put a lot of meat into that (FPS Style shooter combat instead of basic RPG Mechanics? Strategic Battles instead of Arcade HacknSlash?).

Be aware that saying something like "I want to create a XY clone" or "... create a game like XY, but with feature Z in it" will usually give you a reaction like GoCatGos above. I know a lot of the big studios seem to do that on a regular base, but they a) have the money to polish a dubious product into a good looking one, and b) have the money to take a hit if the 100st clone of Halo/CoD is no longer attractive to the customer and can keep on producing other games.

And most of all they did it before, so doing the second or third clone will be quite cheap (like the yearly clone of CoD we got for some years... or the 30st clone of the FIFA game).

That said, as long as you are aware WHY people react this way and that they DO have a valid point, you can keep your current course if you want and prove them wrong. Maybe you are the next Notch and will come up with "Minecraft, but better"?

Stranger things have happened (Facebook raising to glory with a cheap clone of older similar websites thanks to massive amount of investor cash for example, IMO).

The point is: stop talking about what you want to make and start making it. Only then people will start to believe in your vision.

The point is: stop talking about what you want to make and start making it. Only then people will start to believe in your vision.

I suppose you are right :)

Seeing negative rep points on my opening post last night made me feel a bit defensive.

I'll say this though, I have no personal interest in a clone. If I got very far into this, I would make it my own.