Vanilla Minecraft News Discussion

[morvelaira]

This thread is reserved for discussion of any news related to vanilla Minecraft -Flower

[Ethazeriel]

awesome :)

I look forward to whatever tidbits you deem appropriate to transfer over here, and am glad that once again I will never have a reason to leave the BTW forums.

[FlowerChild]

Stickied as a token indication of support ;)

[FlowerChild]

...and that is to say, I definitely do support this thread and you have my appreciation for deciding to take up the mantle, despite my off-hand method of stating as much :)

[morvelaira]

...and that is to say, I definitely do support this thread and you have my appreciation for deciding to take up the mantle, despite my off-hand method of stating as much :)

I did understand you. Thank you for the support, hon. <3

[walker_boh_65]

Don't forget to add in the time zone you are using for any times you put up (PST, right?) :)

[FurkeyRefills]

Jeb and Jon post a few things to reddit every once in a while..

[M!C]

Thanks again, for continuing the news thread.

From now on I'll be reading your compact version instead of my own it seems. ;)

May this thread become as long and fun to follow as its predecessor.

[thekyz]

Increase of world height to come:
https://twitter.com/#!/jeb_/statuses/166808028413308928
I never managed to attain the max height so I don't think it matters much for me, except it could cause more lag ...

[FlowerChild]

Increase of world height to come:
https://twitter.com/#!/jeb_/statuses/166808028413308928
I never managed to attain the max height so I don't think it matters much for me, except it could cause more lag ...

Interesting. Given a choice, I definitely would have gone for an increase to the number of block IDs or the size of meta-data instead, since I believe each of those would have a comparable effect on performance.

Seems kinda like going for instant gratification instead of long-term gain to me.

[Stormweaver]

Seems kinda like going for instant gratification instead of long-term gain to me.

To me it just sounds like yet another eventual change to terrain generation to mess up our worlds.

From a vMC point of view, more block IDs are not really needed, though added metadata would open up an insane number of additional possibilities and take some of the block ID flak. Hmm. Oh well.

[Husbag3]

Didn't they say they didn't want to add height to worlds until they fixed the floating land masses and extreme overhangs?

[Katalliaan]

Didn't they say they didn't want to add height to worlds until they fixed the floating land masses and extreme overhangs?

Not sure, although seeing as how the biome updates made them less common by limiting them to mountainous biomes, I could see why they'd make this change. Wonder if it means that they'll be moving sea level up in new worlds or if it's for future floating/flying content.

[Husbag3]

Yeah, its really going to mess up old worlds.

[FlowerChild]

From a vMC point of view, more block IDs are not really needed, though added metadata would open up an insane number of additional possibilities and take some of the block ID flak. Hmm. Oh well.

Well, if they're serious about providing mod support, more IDs is obviously a huge issue.

I am unfortunately thinking this is an either/or thing. They'll probably be willing to take the performance hit for something like this once and once only, which means that they're probably not even considering the possibility of extending IDs or meta-data (and will decide against it down the road due to the decreased performance wiggle-room this height change will cause), or they've already ruled out the possibility entirely.

Either way, I think it's a sad day for mods for the sake of catering to the lowest common denominator style of requests made by people that don't understand that design-constraints are a necessary part of creating a game.

As for fucking up existing maps, hopefully they'll either leave existing maps at the previous height limit, or just extend them vertically into empty space. The way I read it, it sounds like they're going to make the map height a user-option, so then it really wouldn't be a big deal to set that option at 128 for old maps (he says "default world height", as opposed to just "world height" which seems to indicate it will be configurable).

[Katalliaan]

Well, I'd be happy if they added world height as an option, although if it only affects the space we have above us, and not the height of everything else (like sea level, caves, ores, etc) it would only really be useful for megabuilds.

There were some followup tweets - someone asked "how badly would this break current maps", to which Jeb_ responded "I've made a converter", as well as Jeb_ saying he "will not change the world generator" - I'm assuming that it'll work by padding the space above the current height limit with air.

[BigShinyToys]

coming from someone running a 1.6 Ghz Intel Atom processor I'm organizing a lynch mob to get jeb care to join ;)

but seriously thought there is no point to extending worlds up into nothing. I think they should be extending them down if they have to mess with a winning formula. I agree with FC as well meta data of 4 bits is insanely small.

[Husbag3]

It seems that they have succumbed to the majority of people that want instant results that they can see, rather than more practical changes.

[FlowerChild]

It seems that they have succumbed to the majority of people that want instant results that they can see, rather than more practical changes.

I remember seeing a tweet long ago from Jeb that mentioned he was a fan of popularism in game design. That made me rather nervous at the time, and I'm beginning to see why.

The reason you need professional game designers is that most people do not possess the skills or background necessary to come up with truly fun features that will take a reasonable amount of effort to implement. Instead, they just focus on the obvious. "Better graphics", "better sound", "more monsters", etc.

Design by committee is rarely a good thing.

[Stormweaver]

I think part of me died when I realised that not only am I going to get worse performance for this, but the only thing I'll gain is an extra 128 blocks of nothingness above my map.

whoo. Also, *headesk*

[FlowerChild]

I think part of me died when I realised that not only am I going to get worse performance for this, but the only thing I'll gain is an extra 128 blocks of nothingness above my map.

whoo. Also, *headesk*

I don't think that's necessarily true. The option for world-height is already in the code, just not accessible for the UI, and I *believe* that it already generates additional terrain.

It may just not be affecting world generation for maps already set at the height limit of 128. His map "convertor" may just specify that as the setting for the map.

[jorgebonafe]

Doesn't the issue with block IDs come up pretty often? He never commented at all in the subject? Maybe someone should ask directly...

[SilvasRuin]

There is the extra options in world generation. If this is made one of those options, then I don't see the problem. They can, in good conscience, later add in IDs or metadata and let those who don't have enough power for both choose the smaller world heights. I'm going to wait and see how this is implemented on release before condemning the choice.

[FlowerChild]

There is the extra options in world generation. If this is made one of those options, then I don't see the problem. They can, in good conscience, later add in IDs or metadata and let those who don't have enough power for both choose the smaller world heights. I'm going to wait and see how this is implemented on release before condemning the choice.

The potential problem lays in them making it the default. It really doesn't bother me if they just include the option, but by making it the default, they are basically saying "this is the way Minecraft should be played". It's another version of the same internal argument that I went through with regards to whether to make HCB the default mode for the mod, or just an option.

Default options inevitably determine your target system. Most people don't even bother adjusting them.

[Urian]

Zombies will be able to break wood doors on hard difficulty:

Started profiling the increased height worlds, still looking ok. Also got cat and zombie-smashing-door sounds from @c418

Zombies will only be able to break doors on hard (and hardcore) difficulty setting

Yes, only wooden doors