Please 4J, read this suggestion... ok, so I was looking up at Minecraft wiki and found out that the Pocket Edition will have different world sizes in one of its future updates, like when creating a world, it lets you choose whether you want your world being small, medium, large, or infinite like the PC version, so I'm asking myself why wouldn't they implement this option to Xbox One and PS4 versions. (by the way this option is still in development for the pocket edition, it doesn't exist now)
If the pocket edition can have these kind of options, why not for x1 and ps4 versions (not for 360 or ps3 since they cannot handle more than 864x864 worlds)
The new consoles have 8 gigs, so i dont see any problem doing that..
If the pocket edition can have these kind of options, why not for x1 and ps4 versions (not for 360 or ps3 since they cannot handle more than 864x864 worlds)
The new consoles have 8 gigs, so i dont see any problem doing that..
Well, why not worlds that are like... 25%, 50%, and 75% the size of normal worlds? So it doesn't go beyond that 864 by 864? Surely that could be done no problem.
I would want this on the xbox 360! We obviously can't have infinite worlds but it would be great to have a medium/small and large/normal world option.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm scared to get close and I hate being alone.
I long for that feeling to not feel at all.
The higher I get, the lower I'll sink.
I can't drown my demons, they know how to swim.
No, if pocket is capable of infinite worlds, then Xbox 360 is. That is certain. Even devices with less ram can do it. Xbox 360 has exponentially more processing power and graphics processing power than even the newest devices. On pocket and on computer, you explore at your own risk. On Xbox, they have to idiot proof the world so you don't fill your HDD up with one minecraft world.
No, if pocket is capable of infinite worlds, then Xbox 360 is. That is certain. Even devices with less ram can do it. Xbox 360 has exponentially more processing power and graphics processing power than even the newest devices. On pocket and on computer, you explore at your own risk. On Xbox, they have to idiot proof the world so you don't fill your HDD up with one minecraft world.
You are 100% right about that! I'm afraid they'll make this "limited save files" again on Xbox One and I don't want that...Please 4J!
Maybe Xbox 360 didn't recieve larger worlds than 864x864 because of RAM but it's not the whole reason, the bigger reason is they didn't want save files to take more than what they wanted it to take because some people didn't have big hard drive space(some had 20gb, 4gb, 120gb), now with XBOX ONE everyone has 500GB hard drive so therte's no reason for them to say "oh, we didn't because of memory files" or anything like that anymore...Even the pocket edition damnit will get infinite worlds in the upcoming update which is called 0.9.0, so i'm not trying to be rude like that but it makes me angry when I see the pocket edition having infinite maps while the 360 don't (or even the xbox one edition might not have it)
I don't believe that the hard drive space requirement for save files really enters much into the equation about world size on the console platforms.
I think it has more to do with the changes 4J implemented to help support split screen functionality. Instead of unloading chunks as players move away from them, 4J opted to leave keep all chunks loaded as they were loaded into the game. Unfortunately, without the unloading of chunks, the RAM capacity for the console can be hit pretty fast on really large worlds, hence the limitation in world size.
Could the console version be redesigned to accommodate larger worlds AND maintain split-screen functionality? Yeah, I believe it could be, but it would take a little extra tweaking and designing to make it happen relatively smoothly for 4 players split screen on one console.
Another limiting factor is that online multiplayer mode does not have external servers to handle the server side load of Minecraft on the consoles (like the PC/Java version and the Pocket version does), this means that the strain of handling the server side requirements rests largely on the Host's console. this too might be drastically reduced if employing more of a peer-to-peer design instead of client-server design as it is currently designed using.
I think there wonw be because xbox is not capable however skyrim did it it is just 4j and Mojang being cheap and lazy
dry humor
skyrim is infinite?! wow. i guess that's what i get for stopping at those silly mountains on 3 sides and that ocean wall to the north. cant wait to go play again
but i agree. it's highly unlikely that(360 at least) will ever be larger than it is currently. i DO like the idea however of having a smaller world option. because lets say you want to do a hunger games map but only want to use a map 1/4 the size. it'll save you the trouble of blocking it off.
Another limiting factor is that online multiplayer mode does not have external servers to handle the server side load of Minecraft on the consoles (like the PC/Java version and the Pocket version does), this means that the strain of handling the server side requirements rests largely on the Host's console. this too might be drastically reduced if employing more of a peer-to-peer design instead of client-server design as it is currently designed using.
and pay yet another membership fee to microsoft so we can run them.
I want your opinions, guys!
Be fun to have different sizes.
Sometimes all I want is just a small world with everything filled in to look like the city centre of a metropolis
The new consoles have 8 gigs, so i dont see any problem doing that..
Well, why not worlds that are like... 25%, 50%, and 75% the size of normal worlds? So it doesn't go beyond that 864 by 864? Surely that could be done no problem.
I long for that feeling to not feel at all.
The higher I get, the lower I'll sink.
I can't drown my demons, they know how to swim.
You are 100% right about that! I'm afraid they'll make this "limited save files" again on Xbox One and I don't want that...Please 4J!
Maybe Xbox 360 didn't recieve larger worlds than 864x864 because of RAM but it's not the whole reason, the bigger reason is they didn't want save files to take more than what they wanted it to take because some people didn't have big hard drive space(some had 20gb, 4gb, 120gb), now with XBOX ONE everyone has 500GB hard drive so therte's no reason for them to say "oh, we didn't because of memory files" or anything like that anymore...Even the pocket edition damnit will get infinite worlds in the upcoming update which is called 0.9.0, so i'm not trying to be rude like that but it makes me angry when I see the pocket edition having infinite maps while the 360 don't (or even the xbox one edition might not have it)
LINK: http://minecraft.gam...coming_features
I think it has more to do with the changes 4J implemented to help support split screen functionality. Instead of unloading chunks as players move away from them, 4J opted to leave keep all chunks loaded as they were loaded into the game. Unfortunately, without the unloading of chunks, the RAM capacity for the console can be hit pretty fast on really large worlds, hence the limitation in world size.
Could the console version be redesigned to accommodate larger worlds AND maintain split-screen functionality? Yeah, I believe it could be, but it would take a little extra tweaking and designing to make it happen relatively smoothly for 4 players split screen on one console.
Another limiting factor is that online multiplayer mode does not have external servers to handle the server side load of Minecraft on the consoles (like the PC/Java version and the Pocket version does), this means that the strain of handling the server side requirements rests largely on the Host's console. this too might be drastically reduced if employing more of a peer-to-peer design instead of client-server design as it is currently designed using.
dry humor
but i agree. it's highly unlikely that(360 at least) will ever be larger than it is currently. i DO like the idea however of having a smaller world option. because lets say you want to do a hunger games map but only want to use a map 1/4 the size. it'll save you the trouble of blocking it off.
#DCMashUp
and pay yet another membership fee to microsoft so we can run them.