Theres no different then if we used a rented server or a 'server software' was released and us hosting our own off our own pc's. The big difference is that world could be much bigger as our 'xbox' wouldn't be hosting the worlds and, if your connected to a server chunks could be handled much differently, more so in tune with the PC version.
This has nothing to do with what the xbox can 'render' so to speak, but right now our xbox most host the world as well as the client. This would free up most memory involved in hosting the world itself and should allow bigger worlds.
Its the exact same as if we rented a server only instead of actually using 'thier' hardware we are using our own to run the server software. I think its acutally a good idea. Gona create a thread about this and see what others think.
You do realize the Xbox 360 has 512mb of RAM right? There's no way it could handle the full game without imploding on itself. That's why its called 'Minecraft Xbox 360 Edition.' The rest of the ranting seems to be based on guesses since its so ill informed.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please Sub to the YouTube,
Also, I'm soon going to start 'World 4' view my World 3 via my YouTube. Best Survival Map you will EVER See.
First. It's a fact Microsoft limits the size of XBLA games. Look it up, its true.
Second, all of you who enjoy splitscreen, I sigh and shake my head at you. You guys talk about how the xbox is outdated, well splitscreen is prehistoric. My point here is that instead of wasting time tinkering with splitscreen they could have added more game elements the title didn't have to begin with. Just because the PC version took forever to get where its at doesn't mean that the xbox needs to follow suit. You all talk like 4j is creating a whole new game. It took Mojang longer because it was new. 4j is porting a game that's already made. So of course its quicker.
Of course no one commented on the obvious points in my posts which were not opinion at all. The fact that main game elements were left out of the initial release. And as far as the false advertising I seem to remember a problem after release with people who were trying to play splitscreen(which shouldnt have been added to begin with) without an HD cable and finding out they couldn't, even though that was not initially told to anyone.
I wasn't attacking the game. I was pointing out that if Microsoft allowed larger games on their marketplace and if 4j hadn't wasted time on splitscreen, we would most likely have larger worlds and already have the End. You all also act like minecraft needs super high requirements to run. Not really.
To your second point. about Microsoft xbla size limitations this is true but its also know that MC xbox version was and still is the only game on xbla that is 'boycott' to these restrictions.
You all also act like minecraft needs super high requirements to run. Not really.
Do you think an Xbox 360 running all the processes it does for notifications, friends list awareness ect. Could load a world as big as the PC versions, support that many players, and let you play at the same time? 512mb of RAM. Host processes: 256mb gone, so lets run this game at that performance rate with 256mb. The console is older than my son.
and if 4j hadn't wasted time on splitscreen, we would most likely have larger worlds and already have the End.
So instead of fixing console compatibility issues, and elements not working in the game, they should add more content and leave everything else broken?
Of course no one commented on the obvious points in my posts which were not opinion at all. The fact that main game elements were left out of the initial release.
When it makes sense or isn't a ill informed joke of a complaint, people will comment on it.
Your just a mis informed kid that complains about topics you haven't even researched, and want more than what is possible. If they had added the End ect. already, you'd be complaining about all the glitches they didn't fix first. Your ranting with little to no facts and twisting the facts you do know.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please Sub to the YouTube,
Also, I'm soon going to start 'World 4' view my World 3 via my YouTube. Best Survival Map you will EVER See.
Third, all of you who enjoy splitscreen, I sigh and shake my head at you. You guys talk about how the xbox is outdated, well splitscreen is prehistoric.
So because you think splitscreen is useless, everyone who enjoys it should suffer?
The fact that main game elements were left out of the initial release. And as far as the false advertising I seem to remember a problem after release with people who were trying to play splitscreen(which shouldnt have been added to begin with) without an HD cable and finding out they couldn't, even though that was not initially told to anyone.
Actually, no main game elements were left out at release. 4J stated we were getting version 1.6.6. and that is exactly what we got. Every single thing that was on the PC up to 1.6.6 was in our release version.
As for the false advertising, that was addressed already. Microsoft refunded peoples money and allowed them to keep the game for free. They then put a disclaimer on the game saying that an HDTV is required for splitscreen.
I wasn't attacking the game. I was pointing out that if Microsoft allowed larger games on their marketplace and if 4j hadn't wasted time on splitscreen, we would most likely have larger worlds and already have the End. You all also act like minecraft needs super high requirements to run. Not really.
Microsoft does allow larger games on the marketplace. There are arcade games that are well above the size of Minecraft. The size of the game itself has nothing to do with the size of the worlds. That is what the RAM is for. The Xbox 360 only has 512MB of it. That isn't enough for a larger world. 4J has been over this many times. If they could find a way to remove say, the server function the game runs for multiplayer, they could free up RAM and increase world size. Splitscreen has zero affect on world size as well.
First off in my opinion, your all fanboys. (And fanb****es)
And you have no knowledge of technology or how to participate in a debate. Not once have you cited any evidence to support your side of the argument. You have addressed none of the key issues as to why Minecraft is more advanced on the PC than our platform. What are you gaining from this? I'm sorry, but you're only making yourself look extremely unintelligent. Don't try to start an argument over a topic you know nothing about.
Third, all of you who enjoy splitscreen, I sigh and shake my head at you. You guys talk about how the xbox is outdated, well splitscreen is prehistoric. My point here is that instead of wasting time tinkering with splitscreen they could have added more game elements the title didn't have to begin with. Just because the PC version took forever to get where its at doesn't mean that the xbox needs to follow suit. You all talk like 4j is creating a whole new game. It took Mojang longer because it was new. 4j is porting a game that's already made. So of course its quicker.
Those people that enjoy split-screen have real friends. Why should they have to suffer just because you don't get out much? It's also a huge selling point that separates MCXBLA from its PC counterpart, one of the biggest reasons why MCPC players buy the game for 360. It's apparent you don't understand how a business works either.
And once again, you're talking about something you don't have a clue about. Do you understand the ridiculous differences between Java and C++? Two completely different languages, one is high-level, one is intermediate. You probably don't understand what I just said, but one is much more difficult to learn than the other. If you can figure out which one, we can continue this debate. Until then, I'm going to save myself the pain of reading the rest of this post.
Splitscreen has zero affect on world size as well.
I'm pretty sure that's the biggest reason why chunks are handled differently in MCXBLA. It allows a second player to drop in smoothly, even if their last saved point is across the map from first player, without a loading screen or other such issues. Storing chunk information in the on-board memory must certainly take up a lot of space.
Not that I have a problem with it. Personally, I like how chunks are handled, it also gives us a nice little bonus in the form of chunks rendering very quickly after already being discovered. Not to mention long-distance redstone devices can be used without a bunch of idle players acting as checkpoints to keep various chunks loaded.
So you all are telling me that Rockstar can make a game that has better graphics, a intricate engine, and map the size of San Andreas+Red Dead+ GTA 3 + Vice City...... And yet 4J is pushing the Xbox to its limits by creating 1000 by 1000 block worlds with much lower graphics and a lesser engine? Sounds like a bunch of fanboys who can't stand one cross word about a game they probably pleasure themselves to. Granted GTA 5 will be on a disc, but maybe Mojang should have gone in that direction considering the already established fan base on PC. But the fact you all say Minecraft is pushing Xbox anywhere near its limits is ridiculous. You all should check YOUR facts.
On another note, I never said the End should have been in the game from the beginning. But sprinting, clay generation, the Nether, meat stacking and hunger should have been in it from the beginning.
And Moustache I'm not going to give you a link for what is pretty much common knowledge concerning Microsoft limiting XBLA title sizes. Look it up yourself.
Also Minecraft wasn't "boycott" at its release. It was allowed that after it broke records.
Once again, Minecraft is a good game. My point was that it could have been much better if the companies in question had gone about things differently. And the absence of features that should have been in the game from the start is something that could have been avoided by trashing splitscreen or at least spending the time spent working on splitscreen to work more on content. Yes im saying aplitscreeners can suffer. Especially since you have to ditch worlds you make with your loser buddies in mine raft needs to be ditched after each update to access new features. In my opinion, if they wanted to put in splitscreen, it could have waited.
So you all are telling me that Rockstar can make a game that has better graphics, a intricate engine, and map the size of San Andreas+Red Dead+ GTA 3 + Vice City...... And yet 4J is pushing the Xbox to its limits by creating 1000 by 1000 block worlds with much lower graphics and a lesser engine?
Quote from San Andreas Minimum Requirements »
1 Ghz CPU
256 MB RAM
64 MB Video Card
Quote from Grand Theft Auto 3 Minimum Requirements »
700Mhz CPU
128 MB RAM
32 MB Video Card
Quote from Grand Theft Auto : Vice City Minimum System Requirements »
800 MHz CPU
128 MB RAM
32 MB Video Card
Red Dead Redemption was made for the Xbox 360 and thus was optimized for it.
Really don't know if you need me to spell it out for you any more than that. There is a major difference between games created with all platforms in mind... and a game like Minecraft, which Notch initially had no intentions of creating a console version for. Because it was created with only the PC in mind, 4J now must rewrite, scale back, and redirect code calling for specific blocks of memory... memory blocks that aren't available because the 360 only has 25% of the minimum requirement.
It's not fanboyism, it's common sense. If your stomach is full and you try to keep eating... you're gonna puke. That's exactly what's gonna happen to the 360. I can't dumb it down much more than that for you.
So you all are telling me that Rockstar can make a game that has better graphics, a intricate engine, and map the size of San Andreas+Red Dead+ GTA 3 + Vice City...... And yet 4J is pushing the Xbox to its limits by creating 1000 by 1000 block worlds with much lower graphics and a lesser engine? Sounds like a bunch of fanboys who can't stand one cross word about a game they probably pleasure themselves to. Granted GTA 5 will be on a disc, but maybe Mojang should have gone in that direction considering the already established fan base on PC. But the fact you all say Minecraft is pushing Xbox anywhere near its limits is ridiculous. You all should check YOUR facts.
Rockstar games don't buffer the entire map at once, just the section your in. That's why things despawn damn near instant at a certain range unless its in some sort of storage system. If those games ran anything like Minecraft does when loading maps for itself+Multiplayer, the maps would probably be less than 1/8 in size. Saints Row is the same as well. Quit running off guesses, assumptions, and assuming those are facts. You should apply your own advice to yourself.
So a kid who has absolutely no programing experience, has never worked for a game developer, and can only say "look it up" expects us to listen to him?
How many times have we heard "If ________ game can do ______, why can't MC?" or "They should've released a bug-free game that has everything."
Man, this BS is getting so old.
There's a Search function. Look it up yourself.
I was pointing out that if Microsoft allowed larger games on their marketplace and if 4j hadn't wasted time on splitscreen, we would most likely have larger worlds and already have the End. You all also act like minecraft needs super high requirements to run. Not really.
I'm going to explain all your arguments as best as I can, though I know I'm wasting my time. Anyway:
The reasons for starting at Beta 1.6.6:
I recall hearing that Mojang asked 4JS to start at 1.6.6. Perhaps it was decided that 1.6.6 was a great starting point for newbies to enjoy Minecraft -- after all, that's when most PC players fell in love with the game. Or maybe Notch values 1.6.6 as the purest version of the game, just before he handed it over to Jens.
Or perhaps it was just wise for the project development: 4JS started coding while the PC version was around 1.6.6, so they didn't want to continually chase the new PC developments whilst coding the Xbox edition.
The reasons why the map is 1000x1000:
It's due to the 512MB of RAM in the Xbox 360, and the decision to treat multiplayer as important.
When a single player stands in a Minecraft world, "chunks" of the world are loaded into RAM memory. If two players are standing in completely different sets of chunks, then the host player's RAM usage doubles. Add three, four, five players, etc, and it gets worse. You hit the Xbox 360's meager memory limit very quickly.
So it was decided that 1000x1000 was a map size that allowed for multiplayer. Sure, the map could be infinite for a single-player-only, because a single player never loads more than 512MB of chunks around them at once. However, Mojang and 4JS valued multiplayer very strongly. They wanted up to 8 people to be able to play in a world together, so a limited map size was the compromise.
The reasons for prioritizing multiplayer:
You're arguing that multiplayer (certainly split-screen) is not valuable, but that's just your opinion and your realm of experience. Millions of sales would disagree with you. 4JS were not making a PC game for a single player to sit at a desktop computer. They were making a console game designed for the whole family to enjoy in a living room. Believe it or not, loads of families are playing Minecraft together this way.
It's a fact Microsoft limits the size of XBLA games. Look it up, its true.
Not relevant. The download size of the Minecraft game installation has nothing whatsoever to do with the memory requirements when the game is running. You could have downloaded a 5MB game or a 500MB game from the marketplace, and it won't change how Minecraft runs. (Note that the PC version is only a 5MB java file, plus around 20MB of music and sound effects).
Now, it's possible that Microsoft's limit on save file sizes hurts the game. The more a PC Minecraft map gets explored, the larger the save file gets. Microsoft have regulations about how large an Xbox 360 save file is allowed to be, due to the fact that you can buy Xbox 360s without hard-drives. So it's possible that a 1000x1000 map is the largest size that fits a regulation save file. However, this may not be the case -- you do need a hard-drive to install XBLA games, so maybe the save file can be as big as it needs to be.
So you all are telling me that Rockstar can make a game that has better graphics, a intricate engine, and map the size of San Andreas+Red Dead+ GTA 3 + Vice City...... And yet 4J is pushing the Xbox to its limits by creating 1000 by 1000 block worlds with much lower graphics and a lesser engine?
Very different games with different graphics engines. Traditional action games load wireframe models of buildings wrapped in texture maps; Minecraft loads up "chunks" of blocks and has to hold the identity of every block in memory. Every block you changed by mining it, every seed you planted that may grow into wheat, every piece of a redstone device, etc. Every block has a lighting value (will grass grow on the dirt? will a creeper spawn on a block? etc)
Minecraft has higher system requirements than you think. Underpowered laptops can't run the PC version very well.
on another not ive heard when the new xbox comes out then with be able to do more with minecraft because better CPU more RAM and a better PROCESSOR so i think minecraft can only get better and its amazing as it is
Well that's just common sense...
If the leaked specs for the "720" are true, then the CPU will be able to multitask with it's 8 core processor. It will also have 4 times the minimum requirement in RAM.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
This has nothing to do with what the xbox can 'render' so to speak, but right now our xbox most host the world as well as the client. This would free up most memory involved in hosting the world itself and should allow bigger worlds.
Its the exact same as if we rented a server only instead of actually using 'thier' hardware we are using our own to run the server software. I think its acutally a good idea. Gona create a thread about this and see what others think.
Second, all of you who enjoy splitscreen, I sigh and shake my head at you. You guys talk about how the xbox is outdated, well splitscreen is prehistoric. My point here is that instead of wasting time tinkering with splitscreen they could have added more game elements the title didn't have to begin with. Just because the PC version took forever to get where its at doesn't mean that the xbox needs to follow suit. You all talk like 4j is creating a whole new game. It took Mojang longer because it was new. 4j is porting a game that's already made. So of course its quicker.
Of course no one commented on the obvious points in my posts which were not opinion at all. The fact that main game elements were left out of the initial release. And as far as the false advertising I seem to remember a problem after release with people who were trying to play splitscreen(which shouldnt have been added to begin with) without an HD cable and finding out they couldn't, even though that was not initially told to anyone.
I wasn't attacking the game. I was pointing out that if Microsoft allowed larger games on their marketplace and if 4j hadn't wasted time on splitscreen, we would most likely have larger worlds and already have the End. You all also act like minecraft needs super high requirements to run. Not really.
Do you think an Xbox 360 running all the processes it does for notifications, friends list awareness ect. Could load a world as big as the PC versions, support that many players, and let you play at the same time? 512mb of RAM. Host processes: 256mb gone, so lets run this game at that performance rate with 256mb. The console is older than my son.
So instead of fixing console compatibility issues, and elements not working in the game, they should add more content and leave everything else broken?
Your on a Minecraft forum, is there much more to expect?
When it makes sense or isn't a ill informed joke of a complaint, people will comment on it.
Your just a mis informed kid that complains about topics you haven't even researched, and want more than what is possible. If they had added the End ect. already, you'd be complaining about all the glitches they didn't fix first. Your ranting with little to no facts and twisting the facts you do know.
​
So because you think splitscreen is useless, everyone who enjoys it should suffer?
Actually, no main game elements were left out at release. 4J stated we were getting version 1.6.6. and that is exactly what we got. Every single thing that was on the PC up to 1.6.6 was in our release version.
As for the false advertising, that was addressed already. Microsoft refunded peoples money and allowed them to keep the game for free. They then put a disclaimer on the game saying that an HDTV is required for splitscreen.
Microsoft does allow larger games on the marketplace. There are arcade games that are well above the size of Minecraft. The size of the game itself has nothing to do with the size of the worlds. That is what the RAM is for. The Xbox 360 only has 512MB of it. That isn't enough for a larger world. 4J has been over this many times. If they could find a way to remove say, the server function the game runs for multiplayer, they could free up RAM and increase world size. Splitscreen has zero affect on world size as well.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Retired StaffAnd you have no knowledge of technology or how to participate in a debate. Not once have you cited any evidence to support your side of the argument. You have addressed none of the key issues as to why Minecraft is more advanced on the PC than our platform. What are you gaining from this? I'm sorry, but you're only making yourself look extremely unintelligent. Don't try to start an argument over a topic you know nothing about.
Those people that enjoy split-screen have real friends. Why should they have to suffer just because you don't get out much? It's also a huge selling point that separates MCXBLA from its PC counterpart, one of the biggest reasons why MCPC players buy the game for 360. It's apparent you don't understand how a business works either.
And once again, you're talking about something you don't have a clue about. Do you understand the ridiculous differences between Java and C++? Two completely different languages, one is high-level, one is intermediate. You probably don't understand what I just said, but one is much more difficult to learn than the other. If you can figure out which one, we can continue this debate. Until then, I'm going to save myself the pain of reading the rest of this post.
I'm pretty sure that's the biggest reason why chunks are handled differently in MCXBLA. It allows a second player to drop in smoothly, even if their last saved point is across the map from first player, without a loading screen or other such issues. Storing chunk information in the on-board memory must certainly take up a lot of space.
Not that I have a problem with it. Personally, I like how chunks are handled, it also gives us a nice little bonus in the form of chunks rendering very quickly after already being discovered. Not to mention long-distance redstone devices can be used without a bunch of idle players acting as checkpoints to keep various chunks loaded.
On another note, I never said the End should have been in the game from the beginning. But sprinting, clay generation, the Nether, meat stacking and hunger should have been in it from the beginning.
And Moustache I'm not going to give you a link for what is pretty much common knowledge concerning Microsoft limiting XBLA title sizes. Look it up yourself.
Also Minecraft wasn't "boycott" at its release. It was allowed that after it broke records.
Once again, Minecraft is a good game. My point was that it could have been much better if the companies in question had gone about things differently. And the absence of features that should have been in the game from the start is something that could have been avoided by trashing splitscreen or at least spending the time spent working on splitscreen to work more on content. Yes im saying aplitscreeners can suffer. Especially since you have to ditch worlds you make with your loser buddies in mine raft needs to be ditched after each update to access new features. In my opinion, if they wanted to put in splitscreen, it could have waited.
Red Dead Redemption was made for the Xbox 360 and thus was optimized for it.
Really don't know if you need me to spell it out for you any more than that. There is a major difference between games created with all platforms in mind... and a game like Minecraft, which Notch initially had no intentions of creating a console version for. Because it was created with only the PC in mind, 4J now must rewrite, scale back, and redirect code calling for specific blocks of memory... memory blocks that aren't available because the 360 only has 25% of the minimum requirement.
It's not fanboyism, it's common sense. If your stomach is full and you try to keep eating... you're gonna puke. That's exactly what's gonna happen to the 360. I can't dumb it down much more than that for you.
Rockstar games don't buffer the entire map at once, just the section your in. That's why things despawn damn near instant at a certain range unless its in some sort of storage system. If those games ran anything like Minecraft does when loading maps for itself+Multiplayer, the maps would probably be less than 1/8 in size. Saints Row is the same as well. Quit running off guesses, assumptions, and assuming those are facts. You should apply your own advice to yourself.
How many times have we heard "If ________ game can do ______, why can't MC?" or "They should've released a bug-free game that has everything."
Man, this BS is getting so old.
There's a Search function. Look it up yourself.
Actually, its a MASSIVE difference. Its a lot of info to go into, just check the post in your thread.
I'm going to explain all your arguments as best as I can, though I know I'm wasting my time. Anyway:
The reasons for starting at Beta 1.6.6:
I recall hearing that Mojang asked 4JS to start at 1.6.6. Perhaps it was decided that 1.6.6 was a great starting point for newbies to enjoy Minecraft -- after all, that's when most PC players fell in love with the game. Or maybe Notch values 1.6.6 as the purest version of the game, just before he handed it over to Jens.
Or perhaps it was just wise for the project development: 4JS started coding while the PC version was around 1.6.6, so they didn't want to continually chase the new PC developments whilst coding the Xbox edition.
The reasons why the map is 1000x1000:
It's due to the 512MB of RAM in the Xbox 360, and the decision to treat multiplayer as important.
When a single player stands in a Minecraft world, "chunks" of the world are loaded into RAM memory. If two players are standing in completely different sets of chunks, then the host player's RAM usage doubles. Add three, four, five players, etc, and it gets worse. You hit the Xbox 360's meager memory limit very quickly.
So it was decided that 1000x1000 was a map size that allowed for multiplayer. Sure, the map could be infinite for a single-player-only, because a single player never loads more than 512MB of chunks around them at once. However, Mojang and 4JS valued multiplayer very strongly. They wanted up to 8 people to be able to play in a world together, so a limited map size was the compromise.
The reasons for prioritizing multiplayer:
You're arguing that multiplayer (certainly split-screen) is not valuable, but that's just your opinion and your realm of experience. Millions of sales would disagree with you. 4JS were not making a PC game for a single player to sit at a desktop computer. They were making a console game designed for the whole family to enjoy in a living room. Believe it or not, loads of families are playing Minecraft together this way.
Not relevant. The download size of the Minecraft game installation has nothing whatsoever to do with the memory requirements when the game is running. You could have downloaded a 5MB game or a 500MB game from the marketplace, and it won't change how Minecraft runs. (Note that the PC version is only a 5MB java file, plus around 20MB of music and sound effects).
Now, it's possible that Microsoft's limit on save file sizes hurts the game. The more a PC Minecraft map gets explored, the larger the save file gets. Microsoft have regulations about how large an Xbox 360 save file is allowed to be, due to the fact that you can buy Xbox 360s without hard-drives. So it's possible that a 1000x1000 map is the largest size that fits a regulation save file. However, this may not be the case -- you do need a hard-drive to install XBLA games, so maybe the save file can be as big as it needs to be.
Very different games with different graphics engines. Traditional action games load wireframe models of buildings wrapped in texture maps; Minecraft loads up "chunks" of blocks and has to hold the identity of every block in memory. Every block you changed by mining it, every seed you planted that may grow into wheat, every piece of a redstone device, etc. Every block has a lighting value (will grass grow on the dirt? will a creeper spawn on a block? etc)
Minecraft has higher system requirements than you think. Underpowered laptops can't run the PC version very well.
Well that's just common sense...
If the leaked specs for the "720" are true, then the CPU will be able to multitask with it's 8 core processor. It will also have 4 times the minimum requirement in RAM.