It's good for builders. But for people who like to explore, the new generation just kills the game.
The world is 864x864 and made out of 8-bit blocks. If you want to explore, then you are going to have to play an entirely different game.
The entire point of the "Adventure" update is negated because of it.
Not really. "Adventure" means Strongholds, Abandoned Mineshafts, Ravines, etc. Not "dirt boner."
It's bad enough the world is stuck in a small 1000x1000 square, we don't need every world looking the same.
Just because there are less mountains does not mean that every single world is exactly the same. Have you seen the beautiful pictures the aforementioned user posted afterwards? Those pictures were from 1.8. Wait, you actually did see them! You only quoted one that you could argue about, though, because apparently the other ones are invisible to you.
Giving attention to only controversial parts of something logical is a sign of denial.
Edit: The above quote sounded pretty cool and helpful in other conversations. I will make it my signature.
Just because there are less mountains does not mean that every single world is exactly the same. Have you seen the beautiful pictures the aforementioned user posted afterwards? Those pictures were from 1.8. Wait, you actually did see them! You only quoted one that you could argue about, though, because apparently the other ones are invisible to you.
Giving attention to only controversial parts of something logical is a sign of denial.
I did mention the other pictures, I took them out so the quote bubble wouldn't take up the screen.
The problem with the mountains in the other pictures are the fact that they only appear in a certain biome. I'm fine with the mountain biome by itself, but it causes uneeded side effects to other biomes.
Yup and you can use those seeds, to get hose mountains. then, instead of complaining about how the mountains have no trees, you can shape your world in your own way like Minecraft lets you, and plant trees everywhere.
All of the problems you talk about are easily solved. With 1.8, the terrain was made more realistic. Some people aren't going to like, others will. However, some of the people who don't like it, will do something about it in the game to make it more to their liking. Like planting trees on their mountains.
And that's where you're argument falls apart in my eyes. Earlier in this thread someone complained because they had to spend so much time flattening out their terrain so they could sandbox; well, I can turn that argument right around and say the same thing. Why should I have to spend hours running around, planting trees to make my mountains look real so I can then have the fun of exploring them? Oh wait, if I spend all that time running around planting trees, I've already explored it. So much for that.
Also, I strongly dispute your assertion that the pictures you posted earlier show more realistic terrain. If 1.8 gives me nothing but barren hills and flat expanses of sand, forest and water, that's not realistic, that's nothing but a sand-box-land, duping playground. That is definitely not what I signed up for.
Anyway, I've already put my money where my mouth is and tweeted to 4J to not bring over the 1.8 terrain system. Until the release of the patch for certification, nothing is set in stone; I strongly suggest that if you agree with the OP you do the same. Perhaps we can prevent MCX360 from going down the erroneous path that the PC version followed.
@:jdawg
The only beautiful pictures Mustache Guy posted were the ones that will never be generated in the real incarnation of 1.8. As I said in my previous post - the comparison picture (which I presume are real) demonstrate a woeful lack of the grandness that 1.7.3 produces.
I did mention the other pictures, I took them out so the quote bubble wouldn't take up the screen.
The problem with the mountains in the other pictures are the fact that they only appear in a certain biome. I'm fine with the mountain biome by itself, but it causes uneeded side effects to other biomes.
So you want the mountains to be applied to all biomes all the time? No, no, no, no, no, no.
And that's where you're argument falls apart in my eyes. Earlier in this thread someone complained because they had to spend so much time flattening out their terrain so they could sandbox; well, I can turn that argument right around and say the same thing.
That was me. Let's see what you have to say about this.
Why should I have to spend hours running around, planting trees to make my mountains look real so I can then have the fun of exploring them? Oh wait, if I spend all that time running around planting trees, I've already explored it. So much for that.
Minecraft is not a game oriented for players who like looking at 8-bit dirt mountains all day. It is more in the direction of...ya know...building and stuff. The Adventure update wasn't meant for the sole exploration of earth boners. It was more about underground Strongholds, Abandoned Mineshafts, Ravines, etc.
So you want the mountains to be applied to all biomes all the time? No, no, no, no, no, no.
That's not what I meant. In 1.8, It's impossible for a decent looking mountain to form outside of Extreme Hills. There is loss in variety when this happens. Forced generation patterns are not something a lot of people want in a system that makes randomly generated worlds.
Hyperbole and vulgar references are also a sign of denial....
That's not what I meant. In 1.8, It's impossible for a decent looking mountain to form outside of Extreme Hills.
Can anyone post pics of the other biomes that show a decent height variety? To what degree are we really speaking versus talking in hyperbole? Is it true that every forest biome will be nothing more than a flat plate with one or two block height variation?
Really? How many maps do you play? Either not enough or too many. "Stuck" playing map seeds? Last I checked you could select any map seed
"PROBLEMS?" Until it comes why worry about it. Maybe "MY problem" would be a better title.
No one knows what's gonna happen, anything is speculation, and given the current map sizes on the 360 it maybe moot. If I'm correct, a good lot of you said you'd be sticking to your old maps anyways.
Want full control? Play the pc version. Dupe, flat land, lightning, hungerbars, survival create cross overs,ect.... It's all the same thing to me. Someone wants their own specific version of minecraft. It's a console game!
You guys can argue over pictures and terrain all you'd like. I was under the impression minecraft was about terraforming the landscape.
I look forward to any changes that may or may not come. But I'll worry about it when it does.
BTW, 4J seems to have a brilliant track record of duplicating the code, bugs and all. What ever comes down the pipe, I highly doubt there gonna suddenly change in that process now.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Seatbelts are not as confining as Wheelchairs. Buckle up.
You guys can argue over pictures and terrain all you'd like. I was under the impression minecraft was about terraforming the landscape.
It always has. But it has also been about exploring. The next few patches are going to favor exploring and combat a lot more than building. But it's still a building game non the less. Minecraft is what you make of it.
I haven't played 1.8 or higher and this thread is making me a tad worried. I like having irregular terrain... it makes wandering around fun.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
What you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
Can anyone post pics of the other biomes that show a decent height variety? To what degree are we really speaking versus talking in hyperbole? Is it true that every forest biome will be nothing more than a flat plate with one or two block height variation?
I'd like to see this too.
But it has to be on 1.8 PC. The current version(1.2.5 PC) of Minecraft DOES have some technical features that vary to terrain more. But this thread is about the 1.8 generation, not the 1.2.5 generation.
I haven't played 1.8 or higher and this thread is making me a tad worried. I like having irregular terrain... it makes wandering around fun.
You won't truly know if you'll like it or not until it comes. For all we know, 4J could completely redo the terrain and everything in this thread could be wrong. This is based off of if 4J takes the same path the PC version did.
Im not bothered about the new generation and what the new world will have or not ahve. WE are the builders. If you dont have it, you can build terrainif you have the blocks. Im more bothered about blocks that are non existant and the fact that once 1.8 is applied to the current map size on the xbox will they all fit, will these new terrains/additions lag us out. The biggest problems I see is trying to make the xbox a pc. If we get laggy by following pc tutorials, where is the xbox only versions? MINECRAFTXBOX EDITION isnt MINECRAFT PC version and it will never be able to be as powerful as some of the pcs out there. Time for the developers to look for xbox solutions and stop compairing it with the PC.
Yup, size should increase variation and exploration. Not enough mountains, too many? I just recorded someone's map yesterday. It was indeed a very flat looking map. Looks nothing like my map... Of course he chose a different seed... Several till he found what he was looking for.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Seatbelts are not as confining as Wheelchairs. Buckle up.
Yup, size should increase variation and exploration. Not enough mountains, too many? I just recorded someone's map yesterday. It was indeed a very flat looking map. Looks nothing like my map... Of course he chose a different seed... Several till he found what he was looking for.
yeah but when those he explored could have ranged from very mountainous to a few mountains to none at all they will in 1.8 be more rigid in to where mountains can even be found so I can see the posters problem.
especially as unfortunatly while some people suggested to just keep playing the old maps, well A: he loses out on creative but also the old maps may well see forced changes from the alteration of the biomes on them already.
I was thinking about this myself, I really hope they don't massacre the code so we won't be able to have a mountainous forest... But then again, I won't care cause its minecraft, lol.
The world is 864x864 and made out of 8-bit blocks. If you want to explore, then you are going to have to play an entirely different game.
Not really. "Adventure" means Strongholds, Abandoned Mineshafts, Ravines, etc. Not "dirt boner."
Just because there are less mountains does not mean that every single world is exactly the same. Have you seen the beautiful pictures the aforementioned user posted afterwards? Those pictures were from 1.8. Wait, you actually did see them! You only quoted one that you could argue about, though, because apparently the other ones are invisible to you.
Giving attention to only controversial parts of something logical is a sign of denial.
Edit: The above quote sounded pretty cool and helpful in other conversations. I will make it my signature.
I don't think additions that encourage exploring would be added to begin with if that was the case.
"Adventure" is not really anything specific in this case. The update is meant to reward players for exploring.
They all follow the same layout. Forests, tagia, and deserts are flat, while Extreme Hills are always a mess of high mountains.
I did mention the other pictures, I took them out so the quote bubble wouldn't take up the screen.
The problem with the mountains in the other pictures are the fact that they only appear in a certain biome. I'm fine with the mountain biome by itself, but it causes uneeded side effects to other biomes.
And that's where you're argument falls apart in my eyes. Earlier in this thread someone complained because they had to spend so much time flattening out their terrain so they could sandbox; well, I can turn that argument right around and say the same thing. Why should I have to spend hours running around, planting trees to make my mountains look real so I can then have the fun of exploring them? Oh wait, if I spend all that time running around planting trees, I've already explored it. So much for that.
Also, I strongly dispute your assertion that the pictures you posted earlier show more realistic terrain. If 1.8 gives me nothing but barren hills and flat expanses of sand, forest and water, that's not realistic, that's nothing but a sand-box-land, duping playground. That is definitely not what I signed up for.
Anyway, I've already put my money where my mouth is and tweeted to 4J to not bring over the 1.8 terrain system. Until the release of the patch for certification, nothing is set in stone; I strongly suggest that if you agree with the OP you do the same. Perhaps we can prevent MCX360 from going down the erroneous path that the PC version followed.
@:jdawg
The only beautiful pictures Mustache Guy posted were the ones that will never be generated in the real incarnation of 1.8. As I said in my previous post - the comparison picture (which I presume are real) demonstrate a woeful lack of the grandness that 1.7.3 produces.
So you want the mountains to be applied to all biomes all the time? No, no, no, no, no, no.
That was me. Let's see what you have to say about this.
Minecraft is not a game oriented for players who like looking at 8-bit dirt mountains all day. It is more in the direction of...ya know...building and stuff. The Adventure update wasn't meant for the sole exploration of earth boners. It was more about underground Strongholds, Abandoned Mineshafts, Ravines, etc.
That's not what I meant. In 1.8, It's impossible for a decent looking mountain to form outside of Extreme Hills. There is loss in variety when this happens. Forced generation patterns are not something a lot of people want in a system that makes randomly generated worlds.
Hyperbole and vulgar references are also a sign of denial....
Can anyone post pics of the other biomes that show a decent height variety? To what degree are we really speaking versus talking in hyperbole? Is it true that every forest biome will be nothing more than a flat plate with one or two block height variation?
"PROBLEMS?" Until it comes why worry about it. Maybe "MY problem" would be a better title.
No one knows what's gonna happen, anything is speculation, and given the current map sizes on the 360 it maybe moot. If I'm correct, a good lot of you said you'd be sticking to your old maps anyways.
Want full control? Play the pc version. Dupe, flat land, lightning, hungerbars, survival create cross overs,ect.... It's all the same thing to me. Someone wants their own specific version of minecraft. It's a console game!
You guys can argue over pictures and terrain all you'd like. I was under the impression minecraft was about terraforming the landscape.
I look forward to any changes that may or may not come. But I'll worry about it when it does.
BTW, 4J seems to have a brilliant track record of duplicating the code, bugs and all. What ever comes down the pipe, I highly doubt there gonna suddenly change in that process now.
It always has. But it has also been about exploring. The next few patches are going to favor exploring and combat a lot more than building. But it's still a building game non the less. Minecraft is what you make of it.
I'd like to see this too.
But it has to be on 1.8 PC. The current version(1.2.5 PC) of Minecraft DOES have some technical features that vary to terrain more. But this thread is about the 1.8 generation, not the 1.2.5 generation.
You won't truly know if you'll like it or not until it comes. For all we know, 4J could completely redo the terrain and everything in this thread could be wrong. This is based off of if 4J takes the same path the PC version did.
yeah but when those he explored could have ranged from very mountainous to a few mountains to none at all they will in 1.8 be more rigid in to where mountains can even be found so I can see the posters problem.
especially as unfortunatly while some people suggested to just keep playing the old maps, well A: he loses out on creative but also the old maps may well see forced changes from the alteration of the biomes on them already.