Minecraft needs new biomes. Half the time I spawn in a taiga or jungle biome, and once you see all of the biomes, the terrain feels dull. These new biomes contain interesting terrain and nice features designed to make the player explore and look around in interest.
Mesa Mountains Biome: A sub-biome of the desert. This spawns more rarely than deserthills, but can only spawn adjacent to a desert or deserthills biome. The mountains here are flat on top, and occasionally an NPC Village can be found on top or one of them. This biome is typically small, but it can be massive on the large biomes world-gen option.
Pine Forest Biome: A hilly forest made up of pine trees without snow on them. Cave systems will be rarer here, but individual caves will be huge, with high ceilings and large, but rarer veins of ore.
Mountain Chain Biome: A chain of high mountains all in a line. This biome spawns adjacent to oceans, plains, pine forests, and plains. Maximum mountain height= 180 blocks
Canyon Lands Biome: A massive canyon surrounded by desert. The canyon can be up to 100 blocks across and 1000 long. Ravines will branch off of it underground, and caverns will be exposed. The canyon can go all the way down to bedrock, so it makes an excellent mining area.
These are similar to the biomes already in the game (except Flower Fields, which just look ridiculous).
That's the point. To improve and make regular biomes more explorable. Tell me you don't want mountains like the mountain chain biome instead of extreme hills, or to explore a pine forest insead of a crappy taiga.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Note. This account is deprecated due to past bigotry in posts that cannot be deleted.
Maybe the Flower Field should be a sub-biome which generates in Plains, Extreme Hills, Forest and Pine Forest (And I am referring to the one you suggested, not Taiga)
And it needs less flowers and more Tall Grass.
And Mountain Chains should also be another sub-biome which generates in any biome except Oceans and Mushroom Islands.
Maybe the Flower Field should be a sub-biome which generates in Plains, Extreme Hills, Forest and Pine Forest (And I am referring to the one you suggested, not Taiga)
And it needs less flowers and more Tall Grass.
And Mountain Chains should also be another sub-biome which generates in any biome except Oceans and Mushroom Islands.
It would look stupid next to deserts. Maybe just the biomes with grass.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Note. This account is deprecated due to past bigotry in posts that cannot be deleted.
Well I have a good computer, so I don't know if terrain generates lag or not.
Well good for you. But this suggestion would effect all of us. Not just you. So get over yourself.
And none of these actually makes exploring more fun. Heres why:
"Oh look tall mountains. Those are pretty."
ten minutes later...
"Oh. Turns out those pretty mountains I saw are just as bland and repetitive as every other biome in the game."
Still need convincing? Fine then how about another.
"Oh look a field full of nothing but pretty flowers. Lets go frolic with the rainbow of sheep."
ten minutes later...
"Why is it all so red?! It hurts my eyes! Stupid field why are you so colorless."
Sense I'm here I might as well do the other one as well.
"Oh look large mountains covered in sand in another wise flat desert. Thats interesting, maybe I'll build my base inside it."
ten minutes and hundrads of shovels later...
"Great now all the sands fallen off the mountain and it just looks like a giant rock in the desert. Screw this I'm going back to the hideous ocean of blood called a flower field."
The only one of these that isn't just as flawed as the current terrain is the Pine forest. which isn't even an original idea. THose were in the game and got taken out. For whatever reason. So it wouldn't even be a new feature.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Humanity is the creation of Logic and Emotion, Calculation and Imagination, Cold Analysis and Blind Faith. This is why I believe it is a strange Human that would prize one while shunning the other. For a calculator can do math just as well as you, but a calculator can not use math to make the world a better place.
Partial support for mesas and mountain chains, full support for pine forests, no support for flower fields.
Quite frankly, flower fields look hideous. I could understand those being a rare sub-biome in forests and plains or something, but the sheer amount of flowers looks really bad.
I like the idea of mesas and mountain chains, but given that I am hugely in favor of replacing EH and similar biomes with full height variation, I would rather have height variation instead of two biomes that force mountains to appear. If I didn't want height variation, I would support them.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Did something happen to you in your childhood to give you this unreasonable fear of rutabaga?
Well, some computers can't render the current terrain without excessive lag, so what's your point...?4
I think that these ideas are cool. I would definitely add more variety in current terrain.
my point is that he is suggesting a feature that could cause even more lag on computers that already have it and could cause lag on those that are just above the threshold of being able to run the vanilla game. The fact that the OP can run the game fine and therefore doesn't need to worry about lag is a stuck up and selfish way to look at a suggestion. It basically says "well I could run this just fine with out any help we should have it and screw you if you play anymore because of it."
I'm all for improving the terrain, but this doesn't add anything that wouldn't also get repetitive it just gives us more things to call repetitive. The problem most people have with terrain is that it isn't random enough. The OP's suggestion doesn't change that In fact in some ways it restricts the randomness of terrain generation even farther by saying that certain things can't be generated in certain areas. Like saying ravines cant spawn in the pine forest. Why not? What does the terrain gen gain by losing this one feature in a rather small, fairly pointless biome? All we get is a few large caverns that don't connect to anything else. basically we lose ravines and gain air pockets in otherwise solid ground. But only in this one very specific area.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Humanity is the creation of Logic and Emotion, Calculation and Imagination, Cold Analysis and Blind Faith. This is why I believe it is a strange Human that would prize one while shunning the other. For a calculator can do math just as well as you, but a calculator can not use math to make the world a better place.
my point is that he is suggesting a feature that could cause even more lag on computers that already have it and could cause lag on those that are just above the threshold of being able to run the vanilla game. The fact that the OP can run the game fine and therefore doesn't need to worry about lag is a stuck up and selfish way to look at a suggestion. It basically says "well I could run this just fine with out any help we should have it and screw you if you play anymore because of it."
I'm all for improving the terrain, but this doesn't add anything that wouldn't also get repetitive it just gives us more things to call repetitive. The problem most people have with terrain is that it isn't random enough. The OP's suggestion doesn't change that In fact in some ways it restricts the randomness of terrain generation even farther by saying that certain things can't be generated in certain areas. Like saying ravines cant spawn in the pine forest. Why not? What does the terrain gen gain by losing this one feature in a rather small, fairly pointless biome? All we get is a few large caverns that don't connect to anything else. basically we lose ravines and gain air pockets in otherwise solid ground. But only in this one very specific area.
None of the biomes are small. I just didn't want to spend days building them. Have you EVER seen a ravine in a forest in real life?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Note. This account is deprecated due to past bigotry in posts that cannot be deleted.
None of the biomes are small. I just didn't want to spend days building them. Have you EVER seen a ravine in a forest in real life?
Good thing Minecraft isn't a real life simulator.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Humanity is the creation of Logic and Emotion, Calculation and Imagination, Cold Analysis and Blind Faith. This is why I believe it is a strange Human that would prize one while shunning the other. For a calculator can do math just as well as you, but a calculator can not use math to make the world a better place.
So I heard you like ravines...
Look at the OP again.
Oh how cute. You can edit a post.
And adding a giant canyon is just dodging my initial point. Or trying to anyways. And my point still stands that removing a ravine from from one specific biome is arbitrary and is a step backwards in many ways. Adding a canyon biome doesn't change that.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Humanity is the creation of Logic and Emotion, Calculation and Imagination, Cold Analysis and Blind Faith. This is why I believe it is a strange Human that would prize one while shunning the other. For a calculator can do math just as well as you, but a calculator can not use math to make the world a better place.
And adding a giant canyon is just dodging my initial point. Or trying to anyways. And my point still stands that removing a ravine from from one specific biome is arbitrary and is a step backwards in many ways. Adding a canyon biome doesn't change that.
I really couldn't care less about your negative input. I was simply notifying you of a new change.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Note. This account is deprecated due to past bigotry in posts that cannot be deleted.
Mesa Mountains Biome: A sub-biome of the desert. This spawns more rarely than deserthills, but can only spawn adjacent to a desert or deserthills biome. The mountains here are flat on top, and occasionally an NPC Village can be found on top or one of them. This biome is typically small, but it can be massive on the large biomes world-gen option.
Pine Forest Biome: A hilly forest made up of pine trees without snow on them. Cave systems will be rarer here, but individual caves will be huge, with high ceilings and large, but rarer veins of ore.
Mountain Chain Biome: A chain of high mountains all in a line. This biome spawns adjacent to oceans, plains, pine forests, and plains. Maximum mountain height= 180 blocks
Canyon Lands Biome: A massive canyon surrounded by desert. The canyon can be up to 100 blocks across and 1000 long. Ravines will branch off of it underground, and caverns will be exposed. The canyon can go all the way down to bedrock, so it makes an excellent mining area.
Note. This account is deprecated due to past bigotry in posts that cannot be deleted.
That's the point. To improve and make regular biomes more explorable. Tell me you don't want mountains like the mountain chain biome instead of extreme hills, or to explore a pine forest insead of a crappy taiga.
Note. This account is deprecated due to past bigotry in posts that cannot be deleted.
And it needs less flowers and more Tall Grass.
And Mountain Chains should also be another sub-biome which generates in any biome except Oceans and Mushroom Islands.
Note. This account is deprecated due to past bigotry in posts that cannot be deleted.
Optifine does not fix everything, and I don't believe it effects the generating of things, only rendering.
Oh yeah...
Well I have a good computer, so I don't know if terrain generates lag or not.
Note. This account is deprecated due to past bigotry in posts that cannot be deleted.
Well good for you. But this suggestion would effect all of us. Not just you. So get over yourself.
And none of these actually makes exploring more fun. Heres why:
"Oh look tall mountains. Those are pretty."
ten minutes later...
"Oh. Turns out those pretty mountains I saw are just as bland and repetitive as every other biome in the game."
Still need convincing? Fine then how about another.
"Oh look a field full of nothing but pretty flowers. Lets go frolic with the rainbow of sheep."
ten minutes later...
"Why is it all so red?! It hurts my eyes! Stupid field why are you so colorless."
Sense I'm here I might as well do the other one as well.
"Oh look large mountains covered in sand in another wise flat desert. Thats interesting, maybe I'll build my base inside it."
ten minutes and hundrads of shovels later...
"Great now all the sands fallen off the mountain and it just looks like a giant rock in the desert. Screw this I'm going back to the hideous ocean of blood called a flower field."
The only one of these that isn't just as flawed as the current terrain is the Pine forest. which isn't even an original idea. THose were in the game and got taken out. For whatever reason. So it wouldn't even be a new feature.
Quite frankly, flower fields look hideous. I could understand those being a rare sub-biome in forests and plains or something, but the sheer amount of flowers looks really bad.
I like the idea of mesas and mountain chains, but given that I am hugely in favor of replacing EH and similar biomes with full height variation, I would rather have height variation instead of two biomes that force mountains to appear. If I didn't want height variation, I would support them.
Well, some computers can't render the current terrain without excessive lag, so what's your point...?4
I think that these ideas are cool. I would definitely add more variety in current terrain.
my point is that he is suggesting a feature that could cause even more lag on computers that already have it and could cause lag on those that are just above the threshold of being able to run the vanilla game. The fact that the OP can run the game fine and therefore doesn't need to worry about lag is a stuck up and selfish way to look at a suggestion. It basically says "well I could run this just fine with out any help we should have it and screw you if you play anymore because of it."
I'm all for improving the terrain, but this doesn't add anything that wouldn't also get repetitive it just gives us more things to call repetitive. The problem most people have with terrain is that it isn't random enough. The OP's suggestion doesn't change that In fact in some ways it restricts the randomness of terrain generation even farther by saying that certain things can't be generated in certain areas. Like saying ravines cant spawn in the pine forest. Why not? What does the terrain gen gain by losing this one feature in a rather small, fairly pointless biome? All we get is a few large caverns that don't connect to anything else. basically we lose ravines and gain air pockets in otherwise solid ground. But only in this one very specific area.
Note. This account is deprecated due to past bigotry in posts that cannot be deleted.
Good thing Minecraft isn't a real life simulator.
Look at the OP again.
Note. This account is deprecated due to past bigotry in posts that cannot be deleted.
Oh how cute. You can edit a post.
And adding a giant canyon is just dodging my initial point. Or trying to anyways. And my point still stands that removing a ravine from from one specific biome is arbitrary and is a step backwards in many ways. Adding a canyon biome doesn't change that.
+0.5
Youtube Channel
Note. This account is deprecated due to past bigotry in posts that cannot be deleted.