Seriously though, the world is so teeny it makes it hardly worth playing, I mean...it is a small clump of islands.
Might as well play Terraria, 2d but at least you wont hit the end of the world running for 3 minutes...really wishing I could get my money back, I would not have bought this if I'd known beforehand about the dismal world size.
Do they plan on improving this at any point?
I really don't buy that this is simply a technical hurdle.
Seriously though, the world is so teeny it makes it hardly worth playing, I mean...it is a small clump of islands.
Might as well play Terraria, 2d but at least you wont hit the end of the world running for 3 minutes...really wishing I could get my money back, I would not have bought this if I'd known beforehand about the dismal world size.
Do they plan on improving this at any point?
I really don't buy that this is simply a technical hurdle.
The game has been out for a number of years now. The size of the map is no secret. There are many threads within this forum discussing the world size and/or asking for it to be increased. There is no legitimate reason you were unaware of the size. If you are unhappy with your purchase it is your own fault. Caveat emptor...
Do you spend a lot of time on forums for games you don't own? I personally don't go looking for forums for a game before I buy it. I might read reviews or try a demo, or might simply trust the word of friends that tell me something is good, or sometimes might even buy a game because it sounds interesting on the packaging. I highly doubt most players spend any significant amount of time researching a $20 game. Realistically there is little reason to expect a player to be aware of the size limitations on the 360 ahead of time.
As for the technical reasons for the smaller world, there actually are some valid ones. In both the pc and x1 versions of the game, chunks are routinely loaded and unloaded as you move around. At any given time, the vast majority of the map is unloaded, saving a lot of system resources, but they can only do this because they can load new chunks fairly quickly. The 360 struggles to do this, especially if you are moving around at higher speeds, and you can see it when you are exploring chunks for the first time or traveling a long diagonal rail shortly after loading your game. The 360 version eases the pain of chunk loading by not fully unloading chunks that you have left far behind. This eats up more system resources, but makes it so you can travel through chunks that were loaded before with a lot less lag, but one of the down sides is that the game has to be able to hold the entire map in a partially loaded state. So the map has to be small enough to do this, while leaving you with enough resources to operate normally within the fully loaded chunks.
Unless they can find a way to improve chunk loading times on the 360, I doubt they'll see larger worlds.
Do you spend a lot of time on forums for games you don't own? I personally don't go looking for forums for a game before I buy it. I might read reviews or try a demo, or might simply trust the word of friends that tell me something is good, or sometimes might even buy a game because it sounds interesting on the packaging. I highly doubt most players spend any significant amount of time researching a $20 game. Realistically there is little reason to expect a player to be aware of the size limitations on the 360 ahead of time.
Yes, I look into games before I purchase them. I even look into the free games with gold games before I decide if I will download them or not. Why bother with something I'm not going to like?
Even so, what's the point of the OP complaining about a game that has been available for this amount of time (released in 2012). It isn't as if this is a new observation and it isn't as if many people haven't suggested that they would like larger worlds. Did they think their complaint was going to be the one that convinced 4J to change things?
Yes, I look into games before I purchase them. I even look into the free games with gold games before I decide if I will download them or not. Why bother with something I'm not going to like?
Even so, what's the point of the OP complaining about a game that has been available for this amount of time (released in 2012). It isn't as if this is a new observation and it isn't as if many people haven't suggested that they would like larger worlds. Did they think their complaint was going to be the one that convinced 4J to change things?
No, I mainly asked so that if anyone knew of plans to change it, they could say so. I did read up some about the game, unless one specifically looked for information about the world size in comparison to the PC version, there was no information on world size readily available. Obviously, I didn't think my complaint would change anything.I was looking to mildly vent about the game, as well as to find out if anyone knew about future plans. If you wanna fanboy out on me about it, that's your business, but don't expect to convince me that this isn't a disappointment for many, especially for a game they are asking you drop 20 bucks for.
P.S.: I've probably been gaming since long before you were born, and am pretty decent and finding information about
games, again (for obvious reasons) this is a thing that is not highly publicized, and in fact wasn't even mentioned in the reviews I did look at.
Yeah, unless you're scanning the forums, which is not something most people would do before buying, you won't really see any info on world size. There have been a lot if suggestions on how the 360 world size and all the limitations it creates could be improved. I'd love to know if they were working on any of those, but 4j is notoriously bad about communicating upcoming changes. Even if they do have something in the works, I doubt we'd hear about it until the update was rolling out.
No, I mainly asked so that if anyone knew of plans to change it, they could say so. I did read up some about the game, unless one specifically looked for information about the world size in comparison to the PC version, there was no information on world size readily available. Obviously, I didn't think my complaint would change anything.I was looking to mildly vent about the game, as well as to find out if anyone knew about future plans. If you wanna fanboy out on me about it, that's your business, but don't expect to convince me that this isn't a disappointment for many, especially for a game they are asking you drop 20 bucks for.
P.S.: I've probably been gaming since long before you were born, and am pretty decent and finding information about
games, again (for obvious reasons) this is a thing that is not highly publicized, and in fact wasn't even mentioned in the reviews I did look at.
Well, search skills aside, the game is $20 and provides quite a bit of value at that price (for most players). I'm wondering how much you actually played it or did you just discover the map isn't nearly as big as the pc version and decided the game is crap?
I've put more hours in to console Minecraft than any game I have ever owned. I purchased the game shortly after it was released and I still sometimes play on the very first map I ever made. Even after all of this time I have yet to exhaust the map of resources nor have I come anywhere close to running out of room.
Obviously, if 4J could somehow make the maps larger and the game still function properly I would be all for it, but I would in no way consider the map size "intolerable" or even a slight impediment to someone enjoying the game.
P.S. Not that age necessarily correlates to maturity or intelligence, there weren't many video games being played before I was born and it is doubtful you were playing any that may have existed at the time.
The problem with the map size isn't lack of building space or running out of resources, it's that pretty much every map will be missing several things. In all the maps I've looked at, I've only ever found an ice spike or mesa biome in a couple, the majority lack any villages or a mushroom island, mega taiga are very rare, and many lack a jungle biome. In fact, the majority of maps I've looked at on the 360 were missing all of those things, and even the ones that had some of them had maybe one or two. Compare that to the x1 version, where I've yet to find a map that didn't have all of the above, as well as jungle and desert temples and at least one ocean monument.
All that being said, I do agree that the 360 version provides more than enough entertainment value to justify the $20. One thing that can help a lot is scouting maps. Make a new world in creative and fly around for a couple of minutes. If it has enough interesting stuff in it, then use the same seed to create a new world in survival. If not then throw it away and try again.
Read all the above comments. Just want to say to the OP:
You likely didn't spend nearly enough time as you probably should have researching the game. A search for "Minecraft comparison" brings up several sites that clearly state the difference in world sizes. I mean, it's only the biggest and most controversial difference between the versions; It would be hard not to miss.
To answer your question, though: No. The world size is not going to increase. The "problem" is not with processor power or RAM but with the file-size limitation Microsoft places on games. A larger world would mean a larger file size. Bigger worlds could be "shoehorned" to work on the 360... if you don't mind the game not saving any of the entities. It would save some disk-space but it would mean that all your villagers, tamed pets, Mobs (hostile and friendly), item frames, signs, boats, mine carts, armor stands, tied leads, and placed skulls would vanish -cease to exist- each time you load a save. I'm guessing you wouldn't want that.
So you spent 20 bucks and got a product that underwhelms you. That's life. I'm sure you know that, though, since you've been playing video games since before I was born (so... Pong then?). I josh! I kid! The good news is since you already own MC360e you can now buy MCX1e for just 5 dollars. So you're not really $20 down the hole... just 5.
Yeah yeah, I know the Xbox 360 is old etc.
Seriously though, the world is so teeny it makes it hardly worth playing, I mean...it is a small clump of islands.
Might as well play Terraria, 2d but at least you wont hit the end of the world running for 3 minutes...really wishing I could get my money back, I would not have bought this if I'd known beforehand about the dismal world size.
Do they plan on improving this at any point?
I really don't buy that this is simply a technical hurdle.
The game has been out for a number of years now. The size of the map is no secret. There are many threads within this forum discussing the world size and/or asking for it to be increased. There is no legitimate reason you were unaware of the size. If you are unhappy with your purchase it is your own fault. Caveat emptor...
Do you spend a lot of time on forums for games you don't own? I personally don't go looking for forums for a game before I buy it. I might read reviews or try a demo, or might simply trust the word of friends that tell me something is good, or sometimes might even buy a game because it sounds interesting on the packaging. I highly doubt most players spend any significant amount of time researching a $20 game. Realistically there is little reason to expect a player to be aware of the size limitations on the 360 ahead of time.
As for the technical reasons for the smaller world, there actually are some valid ones. In both the pc and x1 versions of the game, chunks are routinely loaded and unloaded as you move around. At any given time, the vast majority of the map is unloaded, saving a lot of system resources, but they can only do this because they can load new chunks fairly quickly. The 360 struggles to do this, especially if you are moving around at higher speeds, and you can see it when you are exploring chunks for the first time or traveling a long diagonal rail shortly after loading your game. The 360 version eases the pain of chunk loading by not fully unloading chunks that you have left far behind. This eats up more system resources, but makes it so you can travel through chunks that were loaded before with a lot less lag, but one of the down sides is that the game has to be able to hold the entire map in a partially loaded state. So the map has to be small enough to do this, while leaving you with enough resources to operate normally within the fully loaded chunks.
Unless they can find a way to improve chunk loading times on the 360, I doubt they'll see larger worlds.
Yes, I look into games before I purchase them. I even look into the free games with gold games before I decide if I will download them or not. Why bother with something I'm not going to like?
Even so, what's the point of the OP complaining about a game that has been available for this amount of time (released in 2012). It isn't as if this is a new observation and it isn't as if many people haven't suggested that they would like larger worlds. Did they think their complaint was going to be the one that convinced 4J to change things?
No, I mainly asked so that if anyone knew of plans to change it, they could say so. I did read up some about the game, unless one specifically looked for information about the world size in comparison to the PC version, there was no information on world size readily available. Obviously, I didn't think my complaint would change anything.I was looking to mildly vent about the game, as well as to find out if anyone knew about future plans. If you wanna fanboy out on me about it, that's your business, but don't expect to convince me that this isn't a disappointment for many, especially for a game they are asking you drop 20 bucks for.
P.S.: I've probably been gaming since long before you were born, and am pretty decent and finding information about
games, again (for obvious reasons) this is a thing that is not highly publicized, and in fact wasn't even mentioned in the reviews I did look at.
Yeah, unless you're scanning the forums, which is not something most people would do before buying, you won't really see any info on world size. There have been a lot if suggestions on how the 360 world size and all the limitations it creates could be improved. I'd love to know if they were working on any of those, but 4j is notoriously bad about communicating upcoming changes. Even if they do have something in the works, I doubt we'd hear about it until the update was rolling out.
Well, search skills aside, the game is $20 and provides quite a bit of value at that price (for most players). I'm wondering how much you actually played it or did you just discover the map isn't nearly as big as the pc version and decided the game is crap?
I've put more hours in to console Minecraft than any game I have ever owned. I purchased the game shortly after it was released and I still sometimes play on the very first map I ever made. Even after all of this time I have yet to exhaust the map of resources nor have I come anywhere close to running out of room.
Obviously, if 4J could somehow make the maps larger and the game still function properly I would be all for it, but I would in no way consider the map size "intolerable" or even a slight impediment to someone enjoying the game.
P.S. Not that age necessarily correlates to maturity or intelligence, there weren't many video games being played before I was born and it is doubtful you were playing any that may have existed at the time.
The problem with the map size isn't lack of building space or running out of resources, it's that pretty much every map will be missing several things. In all the maps I've looked at, I've only ever found an ice spike or mesa biome in a couple, the majority lack any villages or a mushroom island, mega taiga are very rare, and many lack a jungle biome. In fact, the majority of maps I've looked at on the 360 were missing all of those things, and even the ones that had some of them had maybe one or two. Compare that to the x1 version, where I've yet to find a map that didn't have all of the above, as well as jungle and desert temples and at least one ocean monument.
All that being said, I do agree that the 360 version provides more than enough entertainment value to justify the $20. One thing that can help a lot is scouting maps. Make a new world in creative and fly around for a couple of minutes. If it has enough interesting stuff in it, then use the same seed to create a new world in survival. If not then throw it away and try again.
Read all the above comments. Just want to say to the OP:
You likely didn't spend nearly enough time as you probably should have researching the game. A search for "Minecraft comparison" brings up several sites that clearly state the difference in world sizes. I mean, it's only the biggest and most controversial difference between the versions; It would be hard not to miss.
To answer your question, though: No. The world size is not going to increase. The "problem" is not with processor power or RAM but with the file-size limitation Microsoft places on games. A larger world would mean a larger file size. Bigger worlds could be "shoehorned" to work on the 360... if you don't mind the game not saving any of the entities. It would save some disk-space but it would mean that all your villagers, tamed pets, Mobs (hostile and friendly), item frames, signs, boats, mine carts, armor stands, tied leads, and placed skulls would vanish -cease to exist- each time you load a save. I'm guessing you wouldn't want that.
So you spent 20 bucks and got a product that underwhelms you. That's life. I'm sure you know that, though, since you've been playing video games since before I was born (so... Pong then?). I josh! I kid! The good news is since you already own MC360e you can now buy MCX1e for just 5 dollars. So you're not really $20 down the hole... just 5.