I think the fact that ...
1) oceans are the most common biome, and
2) there's almost nothing that can be done with them except cross them
... is a bit silly.
No, areas with nothing to do are no sillier than whitespace on a printed page or blank wall in a museum next to a painting. Empty space makes things stand out and creates distinctions. In a large multiplayer world, having different continents could make for a really interesting twist on the game, but only if it really takes some effort to get from continent A to continent B. They're not very separate if you can get from one to the other in a 2 minute boat ride.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Geographicraft (formerly Climate Control) - Control climate, ocean, and land sizes; stop chunk walls; put modded biomes into Default worlds, and more!
RTG plus - All the beautiful terrain of RTG, plus varied and beautiful trees and forests.
Islands have been removed, making for larger oceans. They're still not as large as before, but what do you think?
Yea... That's a bit too drastic. Jeb Please just add Sliders for this stuff not everyone will be happy with ONE specific generator. Just make sliders for each type of thing.
No, areas with nothing to do are no sillier than whitespace on a printed page or blank wall in a museum next to a painting. Empty space makes things stand out and creates distinctions. In a large multiplayer world, having different continents could make for a really interesting twist on the game, but only if it really takes some effort to get from continent A to continent B. They're not very separate if you can get from one to the other in a 2 minute boat ride.
They are whitespace on a printed page with no means to mark them... perhaps other than invisible ink. Seriously. For being the most common biome in the game, there's nothing that is uniquely worthwhile about oceans .... other than crossing them. It's dull, silly, and a waste of world space.
Okay, I guess. I prefer the shape of the current oceans, but this is more playable. This is definitely not the best way to solve the "oceans are boring" problem, though.
-Apparent solution: "Oceans are boring, therefore reduce ocean size". Works to some extent, but this makes the people who like oceans as-is unhappy while pleasing the majority of the previously-unhappy crowd. Instead of hearing complaints of "oceans are boring plz fix mojang!!!!1!" we'll get complaints of "oceans are too small plz fix mojang!!!!1!". This is what we've been seeing a lot of recently, and it's solutions like this that are more prone to causing this than a better solution (you will ALWAYS get someone complaining about a texture change, even though most people like the changed texture more and you can just use a texture pack anyway).
-Okay solution: "Oceans are boring, therefore make the size of oceans significantly more varied". This appeases the currently-angry group slightly by giving them something they like, but there's still the possibility of coming across a large ocean (on the other hand, seeds). This also leaves room for the people who like large oceans.
-Good solution: "Oceans are boring, therefore add stuff to them and add a faster way to cross them". For people who like the future oceans, there's still huge oceans, but now there's a reason to go into them and you can cross them faster.
-Alternate good solution: "Oceans are boring and people want differently sized oceans, so give them the ability to customize ocean size". The worst way to do this is two different worldtypes (which is more okay than good, but it's probably faster to code), and the best way is a slider. Either way, it gives SSPers the ability to pick the ocean size they like, at the cost of being mostly unable to do it in SMP (this is the main downfall of sliders in general).
-Best solution: Combine the good and okay method, optionally with the alternative good solution (as an option; if you don't choose it, you get just the good and okay method). People who like small oceans can enjoy small oceans with more content, people who like big oceans can enjoy big oceans with more content, and it's easier to skip across undesirable ocean sizes to look for a better ocean.
I'm fine with taking 3-4 minutes on a boat crossing an ocean. But 6-7? No. I think im going to like this smaller ocean size. I hate crossing huge oceans. I mean, it's realistic, but its boring.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
ACACIA WOOD RULES!!!!
Was I helpful? Click the 1up button!
I think an ocean size of 1.6 should still happen in 1.7, but only be extremely rare. As in once or twice per seed.
But on the other hand, these are highly zoomed out pictures. Jeb says that several of those oceans in the 1.7 view are some 3k blocks large. So perhaps it won't be that bad at all.
On a side note, I hope they turn down the number of generated ponds- there's too many of them.
Once or twice per seed on a world that is 60000000x60000000? Damn, that's pretty rare.
What would be the problem with sliders in relation to smp? Do you mean in regards to how there is no gui for setting up your multiplayer world? If so couldn't this be fixed by having each slider as a 0-100 input in the server properties file?
No, the fact is that the slider's setting for a particular world would be catering to one person (unless the owner allowed the server to vote on ocean size, hence why I said "mostly" as compromises aren't 100% unheard of). SMP servers involve multiple people, so someone playing on a world designed for someone else might not like their settings. Hence why A) I didn't list it as an alternative best option or a part of the best option and B.) why terrain sliders are not the solution to the terrain problem (though there are other reasons for that).
(Random off-topic note: I really hate typing B.) without a period and getting a .)
No, the fact is that the slider's setting for a particular world would be catering to one person (unless the owner allowed the server to vote on ocean size, hence why I said "mostly" as compromises aren't 100% unheard of). SMP servers involve multiple people, so someone playing on a world designed for someone else might not like their settings. Hence why A) I didn't list it as an alternative best option or a part of the best option and B.) why terrain sliders are not the solution to the terrain problem (though there are other reasons for that).
(Random off-topic note: I really hate typing B.) without a period and getting a .)
Would you rather have more options for ocean size or less? I'm failing to see your logic behind sliders NOT being the most logical choice. Anyone who wants to get said ocean amounts can get it, instead of being stuck with giant oceans, or a patchwork of lakes and terrain, or whatever people don't want. If people don't like the size of the ocean on a server, they can go to a new one.
No, the fact is that the slider's setting for a particular world would be catering to one person (unless the owner allowed the server to vote on ocean size, hence why I said "mostly" as compromises aren't 100% unheard of). SMP servers involve multiple people, so someone playing on a world designed for someone else might not like their settings. Hence why A) I didn't list it as an alternative best option or a part of the best option and B.) why terrain sliders are not the solution to the terrain problem (though there are other reasons for that).
You can't change the fact the any given world is going to have a certain ocean distribution and that (probably) some people will like it and some people won't. Requiring *all* servers to use the same distribution doesn't change that. In one way it makes it worse; people can't assort out into the kinds of worlds they like (e.g explorers to oceanic worlds and those in a hurry to land ones). On this subject, allowing a changeable "amount of ocean" parameter is basically all good. Won't solve everything, but it's all good.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Geographicraft (formerly Climate Control) - Control climate, ocean, and land sizes; stop chunk walls; put modded biomes into Default worlds, and more!
RTG plus - All the beautiful terrain of RTG, plus varied and beautiful trees and forests.
Would you rather have more options for ocean size or less? (does that even need an answer?) I'm failing to see your logic behind sliders NOT being the most logical choice.
Not using sliders DOES have some benefits.
1) The size of oceans is varied. This effectively gives you all the options from sliders in the same world. Get bored of the tiny ocean next to your spawn? Go out more and you could find a massive ocean. This also enables a more SMP-friendly environment, as a player can settle where they want with the ocean size they want as opposed to the ocean size the server owner wants. Combined with seeds (par example, seed 96780 gives you a massive ocean) you get the same effect of sliders but with a more SMP-friendly environment.
2) I know for the most part i'm against mods for fixing in-game problems, but let's pretend we're going to use a mod and there are two hypothetical 1.7s, one with an ocean size slider and one with varied ocean sizes, and let's say that each version has a mod that installs the opposite solution into the other. Implementing varied ocean sizes into the version with sliders may very well be possible, but the primary advantage of variety (being SMP-friendly) is negated by the fact that it's been installed on a mod and that you're highly unlikely to find a server with the mod compared to a server without the mod. On the other hand, implementing sliders into the version with varied ocean sizes does the opposite, by enabling an option that works best for SMP in a package that works best with SMP.
3) Not very major, but the additional variety offered by varied ocean sizes improves exploration and increases the importance of seeds more than the flat constant size that sliders will offer.
In short: Varied ocean sizes are more effective than sliders since varied ocean sizes are more SMP-compatable and improve exploration much more than sliders could.
Anyone who wants to get said ocean amounts can get it, instead of being stuck with giant oceans, or a patchwork of lakes and terrain, or whatever people don't want.
Same goes for varied ocean size, except it has the added benefit of working with SMP better than sliders will.
If people don't like the size of the ocean on a server, they can go to a new one.
What if the server offers something unique? A custom plugin, perhaps, or an excellent community?
There's a very, VERY good reason terrain sliders are not the answer to the whole "terrain is boring and exploration is pointless". For one thing, the SMP compatibility issues are amplified the more sliders you add (say you really, REALLY like mountains and can't get enough of them, but an amazing looking server is mostly flat), and for another, they don't promote exploration and are only really good for designing worlds for creative (which Worldpainter can do just as well, unless you dislike the ugly oaks it offers like me or you need an overhang). Basically, variation can do everything sliders can except more server-friendly and increasing the exploration aspect at the same time.
You can't change the fact the any given world is going to have a certain ocean distribution and that (probably) some people will like it and some people won't.
Yes, you can. That's the entire point of introducing varied ocean sizes. A lack of variation is what killed the world generator in the first place, and no amount of biomes or fixed parameters like ocean size will restore the world generator to it's former glory and beyond. This is why I am proposing the varied ocean sizes; it gives what everybody wants in a package that works well across all gamemodes, and it encourages exploration to boot. This is something that sliders cannot do.
Requiring *all* servers to use the same distribution doesn't change that. In one way it makes it worse; people can't assort out into the kinds of worlds they like (e.g explorers to oceanic worlds and those in a hurry to land ones).
You're describing the problems with Mojang's solution to the "oceans are too boring plz fix". I'm not entirely sure you're understanding what I mean by variation. If the size of oceans was made varied across the entire world, you would be able to see oceans the size of 1.6.2 oceans (what we have now) and oceans similar to what Mojang is proposing for 1.7.
On this subject, allowing a changeable "amount of ocean" parameter is basically all good. Won't solve everything, but it's all good.
And, as i've explained above, not as good a solution as varied ocean size.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Did something happen to you in your childhood to give you this unreasonable fear of rutabaga?
I think perhaps you have not entirely considered what sliders could do, either that or you are expecting that if they were implemented they would be quite simple and limited (which tbh would probably be true).
However, if you consider a slider on a range of 0-100% of how much of the world will be ocean coupled with a slider that determines average ocean size and one that determines the range of ocean sizes, then it would be clear that this would allow somebody to have lots of large oceans or lots of small oceans or a mix of them both. However, perhaps such complexity in sliders would be deemed too much for a large proportion of the player base? It would be nice to see them in an advanced tab or something though.
Regardless of whether we do get given some form of sliders or not, I am very much for varied ocean sizes. The "new" ones are currently just like large lakes, and good sized lakes are pretty rare, so I'd be happy if we had both anyway.
I'm not completely opposed to sliders; it's just that they make a good icing when it seems like Mojang (and some others) would use them for a cake. I would be quite happy to see them, if they were optional and the other option was unrestricted variation. If you so desired, you'd be able to scale the slider to settings that would be impractical in a regularly-generated world (such as an oceanless world or an all-ocean world like you said) yet you would still be able to make the best of the generator if you didn't set any sliders.
As to adding more content to oceans, the more I think about it the more it seems like it perhaps needs its own seperate update. Whilst the ocean floor is largely very flat in a lot of areas, there is a still a lot of variation down there. Minecraft's oceans should reflect this, I don't want to find every bit of generation that can happen down there in a tiny 2000x2000 ocean, things should be spread out and of good sizes to be rewarding to those who explore the oceans. Also - more mobs.
I agree, though IMO it should come after a proper terrain update (reason being, would you rather fix a boring biome or fix a boring world?). Simply decreasing the size of the oceans we have now doesn't fix very many problems (the only one really is playability, but it doesn't make oceans any more worthwhile) whereas even leaving the ocean size we have now and simply improving the oceans would be a huge step up. Not as big as adding size variation at the same time, but still much better than shrinking oceans.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Did something happen to you in your childhood to give you this unreasonable fear of rutabaga?
I am never playing Minecraft again since they killed the vast oceans that were a step ahead when they made it. Sorry guys, I'm not going back to a hideous generated world without continents.
I prefer the old one with more oceans, especially if islands get removed, because that would be awful.
What, like 75% of the Earth is water?
I'd think it would be the same or at least similar with Minecraft worlds.
Now, I'll say this, oceans are useless.
Which is why I shall now follow up with a demand; Mojang, give oceans some dang content already.
No, areas with nothing to do are no sillier than whitespace on a printed page or blank wall in a museum next to a painting. Empty space makes things stand out and creates distinctions. In a large multiplayer world, having different continents could make for a really interesting twist on the game, but only if it really takes some effort to get from continent A to continent B. They're not very separate if you can get from one to the other in a 2 minute boat ride.
Geographicraft (formerly Climate Control) - Control climate, ocean, and land sizes; stop chunk walls; put modded biomes into Default worlds, and more!
RTG plus - All the beautiful terrain of RTG, plus varied and beautiful trees and forests.
Yea... That's a bit too drastic. Jeb Please just add Sliders for this stuff not everyone will be happy with ONE specific generator. Just make sliders for each type of thing.
They are whitespace on a printed page with no means to mark them... perhaps other than invisible ink. Seriously. For being the most common biome in the game, there's nothing that is uniquely worthwhile about oceans .... other than crossing them. It's dull, silly, and a waste of world space.
The new look (either version) is much improved.
-Apparent solution: "Oceans are boring, therefore reduce ocean size". Works to some extent, but this makes the people who like oceans as-is unhappy while pleasing the majority of the previously-unhappy crowd. Instead of hearing complaints of "oceans are boring plz fix mojang!!!!1!" we'll get complaints of "oceans are too small plz fix mojang!!!!1!". This is what we've been seeing a lot of recently, and it's solutions like this that are more prone to causing this than a better solution (you will ALWAYS get someone complaining about a texture change, even though most people like the changed texture more and you can just use a texture pack anyway).
-Okay solution: "Oceans are boring, therefore make the size of oceans significantly more varied". This appeases the currently-angry group slightly by giving them something they like, but there's still the possibility of coming across a large ocean (on the other hand, seeds). This also leaves room for the people who like large oceans.
-Good solution: "Oceans are boring, therefore add stuff to them and add a faster way to cross them". For people who like the future oceans, there's still huge oceans, but now there's a reason to go into them and you can cross them faster.
-Alternate good solution: "Oceans are boring and people want differently sized oceans, so give them the ability to customize ocean size". The worst way to do this is two different worldtypes (which is more okay than good, but it's probably faster to code), and the best way is a slider. Either way, it gives SSPers the ability to pick the ocean size they like, at the cost of being mostly unable to do it in SMP (this is the main downfall of sliders in general).
-Best solution: Combine the good and okay method, optionally with the alternative good solution (as an option; if you don't choose it, you get just the good and okay method). People who like small oceans can enjoy small oceans with more content, people who like big oceans can enjoy big oceans with more content, and it's easier to skip across undesirable ocean sizes to look for a better ocean.
Was I helpful? Click the 1up button!
Once or twice per seed on a world that is 60000000x60000000? Damn, that's pretty rare.
So many people don't seem to understand how amazingly large a minecraft world is.
No, the fact is that the slider's setting for a particular world would be catering to one person (unless the owner allowed the server to vote on ocean size, hence why I said "mostly" as compromises aren't 100% unheard of). SMP servers involve multiple people, so someone playing on a world designed for someone else might not like their settings. Hence why A) I didn't list it as an alternative best option or a part of the best option and B.) why terrain sliders are not the solution to the terrain problem (though there are other reasons for that).
(Random off-topic note: I really hate typing B.) without a period and getting a .)
Would you rather have more options for ocean size or less? I'm failing to see your logic behind sliders NOT being the most logical choice. Anyone who wants to get said ocean amounts can get it, instead of being stuck with giant oceans, or a patchwork of lakes and terrain, or whatever people don't want. If people don't like the size of the ocean on a server, they can go to a new one.
You can't change the fact the any given world is going to have a certain ocean distribution and that (probably) some people will like it and some people won't. Requiring *all* servers to use the same distribution doesn't change that. In one way it makes it worse; people can't assort out into the kinds of worlds they like (e.g explorers to oceanic worlds and those in a hurry to land ones). On this subject, allowing a changeable "amount of ocean" parameter is basically all good. Won't solve everything, but it's all good.
Geographicraft (formerly Climate Control) - Control climate, ocean, and land sizes; stop chunk walls; put modded biomes into Default worlds, and more!
RTG plus - All the beautiful terrain of RTG, plus varied and beautiful trees and forests.
Not using sliders DOES have some benefits.
1) The size of oceans is varied. This effectively gives you all the options from sliders in the same world. Get bored of the tiny ocean next to your spawn? Go out more and you could find a massive ocean. This also enables a more SMP-friendly environment, as a player can settle where they want with the ocean size they want as opposed to the ocean size the server owner wants. Combined with seeds (par example, seed 96780 gives you a massive ocean) you get the same effect of sliders but with a more SMP-friendly environment.
2) I know for the most part i'm against mods for fixing in-game problems, but let's pretend we're going to use a mod and there are two hypothetical 1.7s, one with an ocean size slider and one with varied ocean sizes, and let's say that each version has a mod that installs the opposite solution into the other. Implementing varied ocean sizes into the version with sliders may very well be possible, but the primary advantage of variety (being SMP-friendly) is negated by the fact that it's been installed on a mod and that you're highly unlikely to find a server with the mod compared to a server without the mod. On the other hand, implementing sliders into the version with varied ocean sizes does the opposite, by enabling an option that works best for SMP in a package that works best with SMP.
3) Not very major, but the additional variety offered by varied ocean sizes improves exploration and increases the importance of seeds more than the flat constant size that sliders will offer.
In short: Varied ocean sizes are more effective than sliders since varied ocean sizes are more SMP-compatable and improve exploration much more than sliders could.
Same goes for varied ocean size, except it has the added benefit of working with SMP better than sliders will.
What if the server offers something unique? A custom plugin, perhaps, or an excellent community?
There's a very, VERY good reason terrain sliders are not the answer to the whole "terrain is boring and exploration is pointless". For one thing, the SMP compatibility issues are amplified the more sliders you add (say you really, REALLY like mountains and can't get enough of them, but an amazing looking server is mostly flat), and for another, they don't promote exploration and are only really good for designing worlds for creative (which Worldpainter can do just as well, unless you dislike the ugly oaks it offers like me or you need an overhang). Basically, variation can do everything sliders can except more server-friendly and increasing the exploration aspect at the same time.
Yes, you can. That's the entire point of introducing varied ocean sizes. A lack of variation is what killed the world generator in the first place, and no amount of biomes or fixed parameters like ocean size will restore the world generator to it's former glory and beyond. This is why I am proposing the varied ocean sizes; it gives what everybody wants in a package that works well across all gamemodes, and it encourages exploration to boot. This is something that sliders cannot do.
You're describing the problems with Mojang's solution to the "oceans are too boring plz fix". I'm not entirely sure you're understanding what I mean by variation. If the size of oceans was made varied across the entire world, you would be able to see oceans the size of 1.6.2 oceans (what we have now) and oceans similar to what Mojang is proposing for 1.7.
And, as i've explained above, not as good a solution as varied ocean size.
Keep scrolling. Just keep scrolling...
I'm not completely opposed to sliders; it's just that they make a good icing when it seems like Mojang (and some others) would use them for a cake. I would be quite happy to see them, if they were optional and the other option was unrestricted variation. If you so desired, you'd be able to scale the slider to settings that would be impractical in a regularly-generated world (such as an oceanless world or an all-ocean world like you said) yet you would still be able to make the best of the generator if you didn't set any sliders.
I agree, though IMO it should come after a proper terrain update (reason being, would you rather fix a boring biome or fix a boring world?). Simply decreasing the size of the oceans we have now doesn't fix very many problems (the only one really is playability, but it doesn't make oceans any more worthwhile) whereas even leaving the ocean size we have now and simply improving the oceans would be a huge step up. Not as big as adding size variation at the same time, but still much better than shrinking oceans.