Cubic Chunks: Reduced lag, infinite height, and more [The #1 Suggestion Thread of all time!][Updated! 6/14]
Poll: Which parts of this system do you like?
Ended May 15, 2014
Poll: Which parts of this system do you NOT like?
Ended May 15, 2014
Poll: Do you support this system's implementation overall? (If yes, if
Ended May 15, 2014
Mostly moved on. May check back a few times a year.
"Because it's your right as an American to butcher the English language."
This is my baby, please support her and get her into vanilla:
Not necessarily, given the layout is very similar to Anvil format.
Probably a long while, but at least they've got modders who've figured it out already.
No.
Mostly moved on. May check back a few times a year.
I need someone to calculate how many blocks each view distance loads on 2D and 3D chunks.
I would, however, suggest that future supporters click the green button in the lower right of the OP. That heightens the viability of the thread. I think.
Mostly moved on. May check back a few times a year.
It seems like a number of commentors have missed a certain point: This is a technical suggestion, not a content suggestion. This could be implemented in such a way that you would never even notice it, aside from the performance improvements. The world could generate as always, and the bedrock could still be where it is, while we enjoy the benefits of cubic chunk loading. And map makers could use its full potential with incredible depths/heights.
However while this suggestion is not about content changes I do hope that some would be implemented. My personal hope is that the bedrock be moved down, perhaps a thousand blocks, and it would never become so dense that you could not mine through it. Under that would be the nether, it could be accessed by simply mining deep enough, though a portal is still a simpler way to do it (this doesn't break fast travel, as long as the portal system is set up right). Under the nether is just endless netherack, or possibly just more nether-like caves. Going up something like a thousand blocks will bring you to skylands-like generations, and above that the sky would darken and you would come upon end islands (not the one with the dragon though). There would be nothing above that but infinite emptiness.
Incorrect - spherical view distance vs. cylindrical view distance: Normal view distance sphere only loads ~2/3 the volume of the cylinder, reducing lag in that lone concept in all view distances except for Far view distance, which the sphere would load ~4/3 as much as the cylinder and the unloaded chunk concept comes into play.
I don't think you realize this, but I've already included your idea in the main post. I just want the base calculations, is that so hard to ask?
I've had that in my post. But I should highlight it in green, so I'll do that.
That's how real life works. Sometimes you get lucky and find big deposits at the surface, but if you want all the real materials, you have to dig deep. Hostile mob spawns could grow much higher as you go deeper to counterbalance more common ores.
See below.
The only reason underground is only 64 blocks deep, is that when the map was 128 blocks higher, aboveground and underground would take up half the map each. There's zero reason not to have infinitely deep caverns.
First post edited a bit.
You're doing something wrong because at normal, the sphere would be loading 256 blocks horizontally and vertically, same as with the cylinder. A cylinder of the same height and radius of a sphere has to be larger than the sphere.
...what?
Half of 256 is 128. Minecraftia is 256 blocks tall. Normal render would load 128 blocks out from you, 256 blocks in either direction, making 256 block diameter, same as height.
My point, if you give it another glance, is that nothing HAS to change, such things as infinite depths are in no way a reason to dislike cubic chunks, because the suggestion dose not actually mean infinite depth, it just makes it possible. In other words: People need to stop worrying about what this means for game play, as such things are not actually relevant yet.
Now obviously I want infinite depth, and there really is no good reason to not have it, but for all those crazy people who don't want it: cubic chunks do not mean there will be infinite depth, it means there can be infinite depth.
The diameter of a normal render sphere is 256. That makes the radius 128, the same as a normal render cylinder.
Here's a sh*tty illustration of a normal render sphere INSIDE a normal render cylinder:
Support
I am ninja'd far too often.
The way I see it, if there's going to be infinite depth they should just get rid of bedrock entirely. With the void below it acts as useful barrier, but if you're going add stuff below and put holes in bedrock then bedrock's sole purpose becomes annoying people by getting in the way of their constructions.
I would have to be against adding resources down below for the default game type, but there's no reason that that--along with just lava or stone all the way down--couldn't be an option regarding terrain sliders, world types, or what have you.
Mostly moved on. May check back a few times a year.
Which proves my initial assertion correct.