I'm slightly curious as to why the Xbox Version has a limited world size as small as it is. Minecraft on the PC can run perfectly smooth and fine at 256MB and 512MB of RAM. The Xbox 360 has 512MB of RAM. Seeing as how PC Minecraft can run on equal and lesser quantities of RAM than the Xbox has, why is the map size so limited?
I know nothing when it comes to programming, how memory/saving/loading works, or what the differences between Java and C# are. I just find it odd and wonder if anyone knows what the issue might be that caused them to limit the world so much.
512mb of RAM only works smoothly if you got a extremely good PC, most people have to upgrade there RAM to sometimes over 1000. The xbox however, cannot have its RAM upgraded, so the worlds are limited to 1000 x 1000, for now...
I do not have an extremely good PC and it still runs fine on 256MB and 512MB.
My PC runs on 512mb ram for pretty much everything and i can only achieve a maximum of 10FPS when playing minecraft (which is very low, considering xbox has about rougly 50FPS (just a guess, not exact))
The Xbox version runs at 60fps.
Well duh, if your PC only has 512MB of RAM, then of course Minecraft will run slow. That RAM is needed to run your PC. My PC has 1GB of RAM and I use a different launcher to choose how much RAM I want Minecraft to use. I set it to 512MB and it runs perfectly fine. Running it with too much RAM can actually cause your game to lag.
So I just don't see why the Xbox 360 can't have seemingly infinite or at least a larger map.
I know next to nothing when it comes to this sort of stuff, but i'll give it a try.
Most games are coded so that objects and NPC's spawn in a set order or sequence, and I'm thinking the 360 wasn't designed with the complete opposite in mind. That complete opposite being that Minecrafts' code spawns the same things at complete random and it might take more computing power to keep the game running smoothly. I know Minecraft isn't visually spectacular but it does take up significantly more RAM power than a lot of other games because of the map size on PC and whatnot. Perhaps the only way to render the game playable on the 360 is to restrict the map size to a point.
I don't see the 1024x1024 map size being permanent and I don't see an infinite map being a possibility either. I think with the right amount of optimization, assuming that the map size to be tripled, or even quadrupled is logically possible.
I'm slightly curious as to why the Xbox Version has a limited world size as small as it is. Minecraft on the PC can run perfectly smooth and fine at 256MB and 512MB of RAM. The Xbox 360 has 512MB of RAM. Seeing as how PC Minecraft can run on equal and lesser quantities of RAM than the Xbox has, why is the map size so limited?
I know nothing when it comes to programming, how memory/saving/loading works, or what the differences between Java and C# are. I just find it odd and wonder if anyone knows what the issue might be that caused them to limit the world so much.
Battlefield 3 on the xbox has super huge maps and uses about 10 gigs of data with all of the updates, that can only mean that minecraft is really really really advanced past battlefield 3 and that's why the worlds are so limited
I am not sure why they did that...
I was a bit disappointed when I learned that though...
My XBox has plenty of memory so they should make them infinite, I agree with you.
They had to keep the frame rates up when 4 people play it. It's that simple.
Can they improve that in the future? We'll see, won't we?
Theres a lot of truth to that I believe. I don't think the pc versions have split screen playability. The Xbox has to be able to render the same world up to four times on one processor. If they cut out multiple players on one system, their most likely could produce a near to pc version of the game without taxing the systems power to perform.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The reason some people get lost in thought is because it's unfamiliar territory.
MCX360 will NOT have an infinite world. i will even be suprised if them make a larger world. they liumited the world size because an xbox wold overheat or crash constantly if it had to keep track of all chunks, chunk updates, and and infinitely generating world. i have had friends that have a better time trying to play Skyrim on the pc than Minecraft on the PC.
I am not sure why they did that...
I was a bit disappointed when I learned that though...
My XBox has plenty of memory so they should make them infinite, I agree with you.
RAM = Random Access Memory, sometimes shortened to Memory. So your Xbox may have plenty of HDD space, but it still has the same amount of RAM as any other. Just a little tip there.
And infinite worlds are impossible, both on the PC version and Xbox version. No matter how much RAM the system has, it's just way too much to render for the game. Far distance on the PC version needs some pretty good specs and a 64-bit OS for it to run smoothly, so you can imagine how much infinite worlds need.
So the Xbox 360 having much worse specs than the average gamer's PC would have, and them having to work around that and reduce the map size to get tolerable framerates on an Xbox 360, means that 4J's devs are lazy?
You keep telling yourself that, but 4J didn't exactly have a choice.
So the Xbox 360 having much worse specs than the average gamer's PC would have, and them having to work around that and reduce the map size to get tolerable framerates on an Xbox 360, means that 4J's devs are lazy?
You keep telling yourself that, but 4J didn't exactly have a choice.
I think 60 fps is way more than a "tolerable" fps; most 360 games run about 30 fps. Also the game was completely redone in C++ which is less resource hogging than java, and the computer version only uses about 200mb of ram in the first place. So why can't they make the world infinite? Either they lack the talent or out of laziness, more than likely because of the later.
I think 60 fps is way more than a "tolerable" fps; most 360 games run about 30 fps. Also the game was completely redone in C++ which is less resource hogging than java, and the computer version only uses about 200mb of ram in the first place. So why can't they make the world infinite? Either they lack the talent or out of laziness, more than likely because of the later.
Well, on the RAM issue, considering a PC that can run Minecraft usually has 2-4GB of RAM, if it averages 200MB on the 512MB RAM Xbox 360, that's a much bigger percentage of its' overall memory than if it were 200MB of at least 2GB of RAM. With that, it explains why the PC version's map is much bigger than the Xbox 360's; it can handle the extra memory usage because it has at least another gigabyte of RAM at its' disposal, unlike the Xbox 360, which only has a few more hundred megabytes if it also used ~200MB on average.
I don't really think you know how resource-hogging a true infinite world would be. Yes, a gamer could have the best CPU in the world and 32GB of RAM, and be able to play on a map much, much bigger than the default map at suitable framerates, but infinite worlds means the game has to constantly generate terrain. That takes up a lot of RAM, and puts a heavy load under the CPU. No matter how good the specs are, it still has to constantly work, and I don't think Mojang or 4J would want the game's system requirements to be super high just because of it.
Well, on the RAM issue, considering a PC that can run Minecraft usually has 2-4GB of RAM, if it averages 200MB on the 512MB RAM Xbox 360, that's a much bigger percentage of its' overall memory than if it were 200MB of at least 2GB of RAM. With that, it explains why the PC version's map is much bigger than the Xbox 360's; it can handle the extra memory usage because it has at least another gigabyte of RAM at its' disposal, unlike the Xbox 360, which only has a few more hundred megabytes if it also used ~200MB on average.
I don't really think you know how resource-hogging a true infinite world would be. Yes, a gamer could have the best CPU in the world and 32GB of RAM, and be able to play on a map much, much bigger than the default map at suitable framerates, but infinite worlds means the game has to constantly generate terrain. That takes up a lot of RAM, and puts a heavy load under the CPU. No matter how good the specs are, it still has to constantly work, and I don't think Mojang or 4J would want the game's system requirements to be super high just because of it.
An infinite world would use as much resources as a 1000x1000 world. It only loads the chunks you are close to, in the infinite world the chunks generate as you get closer to them.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I know nothing when it comes to programming, how memory/saving/loading works, or what the differences between Java and C# are. I just find it odd and wonder if anyone knows what the issue might be that caused them to limit the world so much.
Hopefully future updates will give an infinite map, or at least, a very large map.
Well duh, if your PC only has 512MB of RAM, then of course Minecraft will run slow. That RAM is needed to run your PC. My PC has 1GB of RAM and I use a different launcher to choose how much RAM I want Minecraft to use. I set it to 512MB and it runs perfectly fine. Running it with too much RAM can actually cause your game to lag.
So I just don't see why the Xbox 360 can't have seemingly infinite or at least a larger map.I know the map size. That's not what I was wondering.
Most games are coded so that objects and NPC's spawn in a set order or sequence, and I'm thinking the 360 wasn't designed with the complete opposite in mind. That complete opposite being that Minecrafts' code spawns the same things at complete random and it might take more computing power to keep the game running smoothly. I know Minecraft isn't visually spectacular but it does take up significantly more RAM power than a lot of other games because of the map size on PC and whatnot. Perhaps the only way to render the game playable on the 360 is to restrict the map size to a point.
I don't see the 1024x1024 map size being permanent and I don't see an infinite map being a possibility either. I think with the right amount of optimization, assuming that the map size to be tripled, or even quadrupled is logically possible.
Battlefield 3 on the xbox has super huge maps and uses about 10 gigs of data with all of the updates, that can only mean that minecraft is really really really advanced past battlefield 3 and that's why the worlds are so limited
Can they improve that in the future? We'll see, won't we?
I was a bit disappointed when I learned that though...
My XBox has plenty of memory so they should make them infinite, I agree with you.
Theres a lot of truth to that I believe. I don't think the pc versions have split screen playability. The Xbox has to be able to render the same world up to four times on one processor. If they cut out multiple players on one system, their most likely could produce a near to pc version of the game without taxing the systems power to perform.
Memory =/= Hard drive space
RAM = Random Access Memory, sometimes shortened to Memory. So your Xbox may have plenty of HDD space, but it still has the same amount of RAM as any other. Just a little tip there.
And infinite worlds are impossible, both on the PC version and Xbox version. No matter how much RAM the system has, it's just way too much to render for the game. Far distance on the PC version needs some pretty good specs and a 64-bit OS for it to run smoothly, so you can imagine how much infinite worlds need.
So the Xbox 360 having much worse specs than the average gamer's PC would have, and them having to work around that and reduce the map size to get tolerable framerates on an Xbox 360, means that 4J's devs are lazy?
You keep telling yourself that, but 4J didn't exactly have a choice.
I think 60 fps is way more than a "tolerable" fps; most 360 games run about 30 fps. Also the game was completely redone in C++ which is less resource hogging than java, and the computer version only uses about 200mb of ram in the first place. So why can't they make the world infinite? Either they lack the talent or out of laziness, more than likely because of the later.
Well, on the RAM issue, considering a PC that can run Minecraft usually has 2-4GB of RAM, if it averages 200MB on the 512MB RAM Xbox 360, that's a much bigger percentage of its' overall memory than if it were 200MB of at least 2GB of RAM. With that, it explains why the PC version's map is much bigger than the Xbox 360's; it can handle the extra memory usage because it has at least another gigabyte of RAM at its' disposal, unlike the Xbox 360, which only has a few more hundred megabytes if it also used ~200MB on average.
I don't really think you know how resource-hogging a true infinite world would be. Yes, a gamer could have the best CPU in the world and 32GB of RAM, and be able to play on a map much, much bigger than the default map at suitable framerates, but infinite worlds means the game has to constantly generate terrain. That takes up a lot of RAM, and puts a heavy load under the CPU. No matter how good the specs are, it still has to constantly work, and I don't think Mojang or 4J would want the game's system requirements to be super high just because of it.
An infinite world would use as much resources as a 1000x1000 world. It only loads the chunks you are close to, in the infinite world the chunks generate as you get closer to them.