Minecraft Forums

Quote from Pawnguy7 »

Hm... well, the idea of underground biomes, I like. On the top side, biomes are all very distinct, but underneat they are all about the same, besides emeralds. But I don't think the engine can handle it. for example, if you are in some sort of underground biome, does it have weather? What if it is raining in the biome above? etc.

The idea of an infinite world, though, is neat. However, I don't think it should be infinite downward - assuming that a given world in minecraft is the earth... well, he earth eventually has an end. This, and if it goes deeper, there needs to be CONTENT. A bunch of lava and nothing else is a bit lacking in this, if it goes for tons of blocks.

The idea of no upper bound, though, is useful. Well... I don't know if I would use it, but, say, you could expand underground, where sea level is, say 150. Then, on the other end, add REAL mountains, say, up to 1000 blocks. Just an idea, here.

Anyway, I don't know if underground BIOMES are plausible, but underground structure should be - for example, the small water lakes, are structures. We could similarly make a small cavern of gems, say.

Quote from PCM_Dan

The first thing that popped into my head is those vertical block ranges need to be compressed substantially. 16 kilometers is a hell of a walk horizontally, let alone digging through rock or (worse) obsidian. Those are real-world distances -- a gaming-friendly number would be several hundred blocks at most, and only if you want to be really hardcore about it.

Quote from Pawnguy7 »

I re-read it to be sure, but I didn't see it. I find it to be different from lighting. Let's assume, on the surface, we have, say, a desert. But in some sort of magical cavern biome underneath, there is rain. But where does the rain come from? Normally, it would be skylight, but say the cavern is not a perfect chunk. What happens?

Or, furthermore, assuming a global rain. Let's say we are using tiny, and we have four groups of chunks: empty on top, then solid, then empty, then solid. You are in the bottom empty. How do you calculate if the rain hits you? You need to load the solid chunks above. Either this, or more lag from every recalculation that must be made, but perhaps it is me.

Quote from Badprenup

Agreed. The concept is cool, but vertical travel is much harder and/or more costly than horizontal travel. I think some kind of height and depth limits that are much lower than the near infinite width and length limits needs to be in place. Even a game with much more height and depth than Minecraft (Terraria) put some limits in place because while more biomes will make underground interesting, it is the trek required to get to these areas that is the problem. A fast way to travel distances vertically would help too.

Quote from Pawnguy7 »

So, at what point are the unproved chunks proved, and what lag would it cause?

Quote from Pawnguy7 »

I don't understand your last sentence.

Let's say that I have a single block at, say, 255. all the way down 5 is air, and so it would not receive sunlight. However, let's say I broke the block. Would this not involve checking all the way down?

Quote from EL_Kurto_15

No one would dig down 32000 blocks even if the lava ocean was replaced with random diamond/iron/gold blocks.

Quote from Calacbolg

Aaaand? Your point is...what? That there should be absolutely no content outside the scope of a single hour of casual play?

Quote from EL_Kurto_15

No, that there should not be content that you have to dig though thousands of blocks to access so that no one will ever use...

Quote from Calacbolg

Who the hell said anything about anyone using it? It's something that's THERE. Just like the Far Lands before 1.8.
Yet, whenever a mod like BWG3 is made, people want the Beta/Alpha world generation to have the Far Lands. An ugly distortion of terrain that would take 826 hours of walking in a straight line to reach, and has absolutely no benefits. Why? You tell me.
The only differences between this and the Far Lands are; the time to reach would be much much smaller(After establishing a route); and there would actually be useful rewards for doing so.

Quote from EL_Kurto_15

There is nothing down there that could possibly be worth the amount of digging it would require.

Quote from Calacbolg

And that's a matter of opinion. Here's a question: Why do you only care about the only two things I gave a minimum depth for?

Quote from EL_Kurto_15

What is the point of having the mantel generate so low? And the giant geode things are completely pointless as no one would ever reach them in survival when you have to go though thousands of layers of lava to reach them.

Quote from Calacbolg

Your logic so far is:

"X shouldn't exist because doing Y is too much work for me."

Should the 4th power level of beacons not exist because "nobody is going to add 81 mineral blocks to the bottom of the pyramid just to increase the effect range by 8 blocks and get a regeneration effect"?
Should villager trading not exist because "nobody is going to go mining in extreme hills biomes for some of the rarest ore, just to trade it for items obtainable elsewhere"?
Should the End and Strongholds not exist because "nobody is going to go to the nether, find a nether fortress, kill blazes, obtain blaze rods, come back, kill endermen, get ender pearls, combine them into eyes of ender, use the eyes of ender to find a stronghold, fight their way through it to the portal room, activate the portal, and kill the enderdragon just for a recolored cobblestone, a useless dragon egg, and 3 full-level enchantments"?

Quote from EL_Kurto_15

I have done all of those on my survival world. I am sure many other people have too.

Do you realize how far 8000 blocks of lava is just to get some ores? Can your mind even comprehend how many hundreds of times more difficult it would be to get to the mantel or the geodes then to do any of those things? And there is no way in hell anything could be worth getting through 8000 blocks of lava to get that could be obtained in a significantly easier way.