Jump to content

  • Curse Sites
Become a Premium Member! Help
Latest News Article

The sky is the limit (unfortunately!)


  • Please log in to reply
43 replies to this topic

#1

Ruenaros
    Ruenaros

    Out of the Water

  • Members
  • 2 posts

Posted 22 November 2010 - 10:01 PM

Suggestion: Double (or more) the available Z axis in the world above-ground.

Sixty four blocks from sea level to sky is not a lot of room to work with in a world that extends almost infinitely in all directions X and Y.   I think we need more headroom!

Register or log in to remove.

#2

Club559
    Club559

    Obsidian Miner

  • Curse Premium
  • Curse Premium
  • 1344 posts
  • Location: A little west of somewhere.
  • Minecraft: Club559

Posted 22 November 2010 - 10:30 PM

No, I'm pretty sure people enjoy their saves with mountains that go up to the clouds and have a flat surface that they can walk around on and they can't build on it.
None.

#3

Phicksur
    Phicksur

    Zombie Killer

  • Members
  • 184 posts
  • Minecraft: phicksur

Posted 23 November 2010 - 12:48 AM

I must concur with the original poster.

I have a design I would like to build that is 450 feet from base to summit. If I was to begin building it at bedrock (level 1) I couldn't fit it all into Minecraft in its present form.

The present 'roof' of 128 blocks from the bottom of the world to the top of the sky is roughly the same as 420 feet. These days, many, many buildings are taller than this. If you remove a few bits from the lateral and horizontal axes (width & length) and add those bits to increasing height you can drop the size of the world to roughly equal to the size of the Earth and increase its height to 2048 blocks, which would be almost 7000 feet.

No Mt. Everest would be possible, but you would be able to build almost anything reasonable in that area.

If the chunks are loaded into memory in an 9x9 pattern, and memory is an issue, the buffer can be lowered to 5x5 and simply have mountains and hills grow taller, and have significantly more underground area to explore. This would also reduce sight distance, causing fewer chunks needing to be generated at one time.
Check out my YouTube channel.
No, seriously, check it out. It's got content! :D

#4

mrwormy
    mrwormy

    End Dweller

  • Members
  • 6711 posts
  • Location: Hiding in her burrow
  • Minecraft: mrwormy

Posted 23 November 2010 - 12:51 AM

Are vertical chunks possible?
"Only a few find the way, Some don't recognize it when they do. Some don't ever want to..." ~Cheshire cat.

#5

riseoflegends
  • Minecraft: riseoflegends

Posted 23 November 2010 - 12:54 AM

Sounds like a good idea to me. I'm not sure how easy this would be to implement, but it certainly wouldn't hurt to be able to build epically tall structures. I also really like the idea of having mountains being even bigger than they are now.

#6

Fredfredbug4

Posted 23 November 2010 - 01:49 AM

It sounds like an ok idea. But If the height limit gets raised, I may have to renovate my tower or build a new one!
Posted Image

#7

Effrego
    Effrego

    Zombie Killer

  • Members
  • 199 posts

Posted 23 November 2010 - 03:17 AM

I'm voting for this :D. I'd love to have the height increased, hopefully to over 300, or even 500 blocks high. (I mainly want this so Notch would think about adding mega monsters  :D )

#8

Yourself
    Yourself

    Retired Staff

  • Retired Staff
  • 4086 posts
  • Minecraft: Yourself

Posted 23 November 2010 - 04:19 AM

Quote

These days, many, many buildings are taller than this. If you remove a few bits from the lateral and horizontal axes (width & length) and add those bits to increasing height you can drop the size of the world to roughly equal to the size of the Earth and increase its height to 2048 blocks

Minecraft doesn't work this way and this isn't the reason for the height limit.

Everyone has to realize that the vertical direction is fundamentally different from the horizontal directions.  It is subject to gravity and the limitations of the lighting engine.

Don't get me wrong, more vertical space would be fantastic, but the way the engine works it just isn't an easy change.
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.

#9

magix39
    magix39

    Obsidian Miner

  • Members
  • 1341 posts
  • Location: GMT-8

Posted 23 November 2010 - 07:11 AM

The reason this hasn't been done [or just one of them] is the issues it will cause.
A map is rendered a chunk at a time, which is 16x16x128 blocks
but more then one chunk is normally rendered/generated/put into memory
so its really 16x16x128x
even just 9 chunks make a total of  41,472 blocks
increasing the height to just 138 brings the total to 317,952, around a 10% increase

so you can see the issues with increasing the ceiling or lowering the floor more for users with slower machines

though notch has expressed interest in trying make a single chunk able to go higher
such as this:

:Black: = void, nothing, not even air blocks
[]  = well, air
:Black:  :Black:  :Black:  :Black:  :Black:  :Black:  :Black:  :Black:
:Black:  :Black:  :Black:  :Black:  []  :Black:  :Black:  :Black:
:Black:  :Black:  :Black:  :Black:  []  :Black:  :Black:  :Black:
[]  []  []  []  []  []  []  []
[]  []  []  []  []  []  []  []
[]  []  []  []  []  []  []  []

If this can truly be done in a memory cheap and quick way, im not sure
but yes, many would like taller/deeper maps  :Sheep:

#10

KingWyatt

Posted 23 November 2010 - 07:26 AM

I'd love to build up some more. My skyscraper only goes up like, 9 or 10 floors... It's depressing.
I support the height increase.
Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image
Posted Image


I support these!

#11

SidneyLeenen

Posted 23 November 2010 - 09:44 AM

isn't that just a matter of changing the max-z from 64 to like 200?

#12

Travesty
    Travesty

    Obsidian Miner

  • Members
  • 1324 posts
  • Location: On a giant floating island... that I built.
  • Minecraft: Travesty

Posted 23 November 2010 - 10:05 AM

Ehh... Not a definite no, but I seriously question the purpose for anything so tall that you need to raise the ceiling.  Perhaps maybe in creative sandbox games where the admins might be able to define the exact size of a map, but otherwise I don't think it's really needed.  Certainly not in something like survival where falling a relatively short distance is already going to kill you and there are no fast AND safe ways of getting down.  A waterfall or a spiraling mine cart might get you there eventually, but imagine the time to get back up?  In survival, you might spend a day or two just running up to the top.

So my vote... maybe a definable height in sandboxes for the people who want to make insanely large sculptures or something, but otherwise no.

Berginator94 said:

I'm almost 100% positive that this have been suggested before but i'll suggest it again anyways.
...I hate you all.

#13

DaSoofManator

Posted 23 November 2010 - 11:16 AM

I absolutely & completely support the idea.
The sky limit is 2 times or 4 times too low now. It should be 120 (from sea level) minimum, but preferably 300 or 400.

And yes, I do want to build skycrapers so damn high !
Also, i want to build an ultra-fcuking-large cheops pyramid all covered with lava :( . Current Minecraft limitations seriously restrict me.

#14

SidneyLeenen

Posted 23 November 2010 - 01:28 PM

Travesty said:

Ehh... Not a definite no, but I seriously question the purpose for anything so tall that you need to raise the ceiling.  Perhaps maybe in creative sandbox games where the admins might be able to define the exact size of a map, but otherwise I don't think it's really needed.  Certainly not in something like survival where falling a relatively short distance is already going to kill you and there are no fast AND safe ways of getting down.  A waterfall or a spiraling mine cart might get you there eventually, but imagine the time to get back up?  In survival, you might spend a day or two just running up to the top.

So my vote... maybe a definable height in sandboxes for the people who want to make insanely large sculptures or something, but otherwise no.


imagine an elevator like this (yes it works)
:Water: =waterspring
:Teal:  =waterflow
:Notch: =where you have to stand, and press 'W' to move up (looking up ofcourse)

how it looks from the top:
:(  :Iron:  :Iron:  :Iron:  :Iron:  :Iron:  :Iron:  :Iron:
:Iron:  :Water:  :Teal:  :Teal:  :Teal:  :Teal:  :Teal:  :Teal:  :Notch:
:Iron:  :Iron:  :Iron:  :Iron:  :Iron:  :Iron:  :Iron:  :Iron:

front view:

:Iron:  :Teal:  :Iron:
:Iron:  :Iron:  :Red:
:Red:  :Teal:  :cobblestone:
:cobblestone:  :cobblestone:  :cobblestone:
:cobblestone:  :Teal:  :cobblestone:
:cobblestone:  :cobblestone:  :cobblestone:
:cobblestone:  :Notch:  :cobblestone:

this is the quickest possible way to get up, however it does require a bit of space

#15

DaSoofManator

Posted 23 November 2010 - 03:02 PM

Somebody make a poll here, i want to vote yes yes yes !

#16

Ruenaros
    Ruenaros

    Out of the Water

  • Members
  • 2 posts

Posted 23 November 2010 - 04:06 PM

Quote

:Black: = void, nothing, not even air blocks
[]  = well, air
:Black:  :Black:  :Black:  :Black:  :Black:  :Black:  :Black:  :Black:
:Black:  :Black:  :Black:  :Black:  []  :Black:  :Black:  :Black:
:Black:  :Black:  :Black:  :Black:  []  :Black:  :Black:  :Black:
[]  []  []  []  []  []  []  []
[]  []  []  []  []  []  []  []
[]  []  []  []  []  []  []  []

If this can truly be done in a memory cheap and quick way, im not sure
but yes, many would like taller/deeper maps  :Sheep:

I like this idea quite a bit... Getting extra height when and where your world needs it without all the performance overhead from doing a blanket increase.

#17

Phicksur
    Phicksur

    Zombie Killer

  • Members
  • 184 posts
  • Minecraft: phicksur

Posted 24 November 2010 - 12:46 PM

Yourself said:

Quote

These days, many, many buildings are taller than this. If you remove a few bits from the lateral and horizontal axes (width & length) and add those bits to increasing height you can drop the size of the world to roughly equal to the size of the Earth and increase its height to 2048 blocks

Minecraft doesn't work this way and this isn't the reason for the height limit.

Everyone has to realize that the vertical direction is fundamentally different from the horizontal directions.  It is subject to gravity and the limitations of the lighting engine.

Don't get me wrong, more vertical space would be fantastic, but the way the engine works it just isn't an easy change.
The lighting seems to be top-down constant value until it hits a block. That doesn't require a fundamental change to anything as the distance it goes down isn't relevant to its value (I dug a tunnel from ceiling to base of the world and filled it with glass once to test this and it was just as bright at the bottom as it was at sea level and above.

Gravity is also a relative constant (acceleration to a fixed speed), regardless of height. This reasoning doesn't make sense to say that a taller world would be more difficult to code when this is a constant not relative to height.

magix39 said:

The reason this hasn't been done [or just one of them] is the issues it will cause.
A map is rendered a chunk at a time, which is 16x16x128 blocks
but more then one chunk is normally rendered/generated/put into memory
so its really 16x16x128x
even just 9 chunks make a total of  41,472 blocks
increasing the height to just 138 brings the total to 317,952, around a 10% increase

so you can see the issues with increasing the ceiling or lowering the floor more for users with slower machines

though notch has expressed interest in trying make a single chunk able to go higher
such as this:

:SSSS: = void, nothing, not even air blocks
[]  = well, air
:Lava:  :Lava:  :Lava:  :Lava:  :Lava:  :cobblestone:  :cobblestone:  :cobblestone:
:cobblestone:  :cobblestone:  :cobblestone:  :cobblestone:  []  :stone:  :stone:  :stone:
:stone:  :stone:  :stone:  :stone:  []  :stone:  :stone:  :stone:
[]  []  []  []  []  []  []  []
[]  []  []  []  []  []  []  []
[]  []  []  []  []  []  []  []

If this can truly be done in a memory cheap and quick way, im not sure
but yes, many would like taller/deeper maps  :stone:
I recognize the memory problem and even suggested a change to take that into account. Only rendering to 5x5 chunks instead of 9x9 to account for the increase in vertical memory space. With the terrain getting taller you wouldn't be seeing as far anyway, so rendering farther away wouldn't be terribly necessary until you got up to a tall location.

People on higher-end machines can set their view distance to Far to take advantage of their available memory while people on lower-end machines can set their view distances to as small as Tiny so as not to take up as much memory.

In neither case is this an impossible or unrealistic task.

Actually, I have a potential solution: two categories of chunks: Above sea level, and below sea level.

Above sea level chunks can go up to 256, or even 512. They are rendered out to 9x9 normally as the majority of their values are going to be air squares which don't require as much video memory to render. This will be where most of the RAM-intense storage will be.

Below sea level chunks get generated as they are moved into, or within viewing distance of your location. You never see very far underground at one time anyway unless a miner intentionally digs a long, straight tunnel. This will also help to prevent the 'I can see way underground when the map's not loaded' effect in SMP, as well as making maps in single player easier to view in most of the editors/viewers, without being able to really search around underground without actually travelling there first. Given that, while underground, you won't have to render any above-sea-level chunks they can be unloaded from memory, freeing up resources.
Check out my YouTube channel.
No, seriously, check it out. It's got content! :D

#18

Phicksur
    Phicksur

    Zombie Killer

  • Members
  • 184 posts
  • Minecraft: phicksur

Posted 24 November 2010 - 12:58 PM

Travesty said:

Ehh... Not a definite no, but I seriously question the purpose for anything so tall that you need to raise the ceiling.
I enjoy recreating buildings in Minecraft. One in particular I would LIKE to recreate is Castle Ravenloft from the 1983 AD&D adventure.

The castle, itself, is 450 feet from base of the bottom floor to the top of the steeple on the top floor.
450 feet = 135 blocks vertical
Current limit = 128 blocks from bottom of WORLD, let alone sea level.

Then, we have the surroundings:

The castle rests on a hill with sharp cliffs surrounding it, of at least 500 feet in height.
Accounting for how much of the castle is underground, that requires around 900 feet from base of cliff to top of steeple.
900 feet = 270 blocks vertical

But wait, there's more!

Those cliffs overlook a village, which is itself at roughly 0 elevation, but at least 1000 feet beneath the base of the cliffs around the castle.
That requires, to build this entire area, an available vertical height of 1900 feet, without anything underground in the nearby village. Giving it even 100 feet below the village is roughly 2000 feet.

2000 feet = approx 600 Minecraft blocks in height.

No way I could build it in Minecraft as it now stands.

(side note: I am building another, more flat city (called Briarwood) on zeryl's minecraft server (called Moose Valley). Probably take me a few months to finish but it's not too terribly tall, which is why I am trying it. I keep hoping the ceiling is raised so I can make the Ravenloft castle while I am offline, and Briarwood when I am online.)
Check out my YouTube channel.
No, seriously, check it out. It's got content! :D

#19

Yourself
    Yourself

    Retired Staff

  • Retired Staff
  • 4086 posts
  • Minecraft: Yourself

Posted 24 November 2010 - 04:12 PM

Quote

The lighting seems to be top-down constant value until it hits a block

Yes, it is.  When a chunk is first generated the lighting engine has to determine where to stop the lighting.  For this it basically has to scan downwards.  It keeps track of the highest block in each column to make this operation faster afterwards.  

The other issue with increasing vertical chunk size is a processing step that generates the actual block faces that the engine has to render.  Doubling the vertical height would double the chunk loading time.  It would also double the memory requirements for the game.

Quote

This reasoning doesn't make sense to say that a taller world would be more difficult to code when this is a constant not relative to height.

It makes perfect sense when my goal is to point out fundamental anisotropies between different directions.  I don't know why you're hung up on this "it's a constant so it doesn't matter" nonsense, because it's entirely beside the point.  Gravity itself doesn't slow things down, what it does is allow the player to reach large speeds in the vertical direction.  This means that splitting chunks vertically can run into problems with chunk loading times if a player is falling (this is straight from Notch's mouth when someone asked him on the IRC channel).  When you're walking or riding a mine cart, it can manage to load the chunks just fast enough that you won't notice, but these are both significantly slower than falling would be.

Another problem with vertically split chunks again comes with the lighting engine no longer being able to locally keep track of the highest block in a column since the highest block may not actually be within a given chunk.  This means that modifying a high altitude chunk would have to check each chunk below it (which may not be loaded) to make sure to update its state.
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.

#20

Azraile
    Azraile

    Redstone Miner

  • Members
  • 670 posts

Posted 24 November 2010 - 05:23 PM

water elevators using a boat is the quickest way up... other than that it's laders....

a good way to work those is:

[]  []  :SSSS:  []
:)  :VV:  :VV:  []
[]  :VV:  :|:  :(
[]  :SSSS:  []  []

with  :|:  being laders

makes a nice safe area for fast climbing and decent
I aim to please ... and occasionally mentally scar.  
"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:

Posted Image