I'd rather that the world cap was drastically raised and we had real -Mountain- Areas. and taller aboveground ravines.Or Fjords. Whatever suits your fancy. It'd make for some fantastic builds.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
<-- Click it! Don't let im' Die. D: <--- Or him. D:
That's ok, since we haven't given exact specifications. We've given a *relatively short list of things that we'd like changed or added.
Short list? The ideal generation according to you people is nowhere near that of the current generator. I suppose "nitpicking" would be a better term for what you're doing, rather than giving specifications.
Requesting features ≠ griping
True, requesting features =/= griping. But this isn't a thread about "requesting features". You're griping. If it was a thread about requesting features, you would have let it go by now. A "request" is one a done. A gripe stays until it is either alleviated or rejected.
Also, how dare you defile the visage of Inigo Montoya by putting it in a dispute as pointless as this... (I said "gripe" exactly once. I don't think YOU'RE the one missing implications here.)
Short list? The ideal generation according to you people is nowhere near that of the current generator. I suppose "nitpicking" would be a better term for what you're doing, rather than giving specifications.
Who exactly do you mean by "you people"?
If the ideal generation according to the aforementioned people is nowhere near that of the current generator, how are those people "nitpicking"?
How is requesting a short list of features and improvements "nitpicking"?
If it was a thread about requesting features, you would have let it go by now. A "request" is one a done. A gripe stays until it is either alleviated or rejected.
Why? The features we want have not been implemented, and thus we continue to discuss it among ourselves, refine the list, and find new supporters and modes of communication with the dev team.
Short list? The ideal generation according to you people is nowhere near that of the current generator. I suppose "nitpicking" would be a better term for what you're doing, rather than giving specifications.
If the ideal generator is nowhere near that of the current generator, then that's what we're requesting. It does not make anything in this thread "nitpicking".
If you haven't seen any "specification" on how the 1.7 terrain generate could be improved in this thread, you ought to look harder.
You you honestly consider the beaches Minecraft has now trivial, minute, or unnecessary? They're atrocious. I've never seen a beach I've liked in the current terrain generator. Have you? This is especially dreadful because they looked better in an older version of Minecraft.
True, requesting features =/= griping. But this isn't a thread about "requesting features". You're griping. If it was a thread about requesting features, you would have let it go by now. A "request" is one a done. A gripe stays until it is either alleviated or rejected.
And why would we have let it go by now? Have the features we've requested been added yet?
"stays until it is either alleviated or rejected" is not the definition of a gripe by the way.
RunnerX has hundreds more posts than either of you two, therefore, by traditional internet forum logic, he is right and you are both wrong. He can be snarky, you can not.
Uuhh...sure. We'll go with that. And earlier I meant to say "I think YOU'RE the one missing implications. That "don't" was left behind from an earlier thought I had, so I forgot to backspace it.
If the ideal generator is nowhere near that of the current generator, then that's what we're requesting. It does not make anything in this thread "nitpicking".
If you haven't seen any "specification" on how the 1.7 terrain generate could be improved in this thread, you ought to look harder.
Sorry, but hauling myself through unspoilered pages upon pages of rant, rant, and (you guessed it!) rant isn't really my idea of a good time.
You you honestly consider the beaches Minecraft has now trivial, minute, or unnecessary? They're atrocious. I've never seen a beach I've liked in the current terrain generator. Have you? This is especially dreadful because they looked better in an older version of Minecraft.
I have, for the sole reason that I DON'T CARE. It is a small, ignorable issue, and most beaches I see are added on to desert biomes so it's barely noticeable.
And why would we have let it go by now? Have the features we've requested been added yet?
No, and typically when someone gripes they keep doing it until they get their way. Annoyingly so. The annoying part is what differentiates griping from being persistent.
I'd be happy if the only tweak done to terrain gen was to stop deserts and snow covered biomes from always cuddling with each other.
yes, i know places like Antarctica are actually deserts, but, you won't find hot, cacti filled stereotype desert slamming right into frozen, cold desert. and yet, terrain gen has consistently preferred to do this.
Contrary to popular belief, water is capable of freezing in places with cacti.
I have, for the sole reason that I DON'T CARE. It is a small, ignorable issue, and most beaches I see are added on to desert biomes so it's barely noticeable.
Welcome to the thread of people who disagree, what are you trying to accomplish again?
No, and typically when someone gripes they keep doing it until they get their way. Annoyingly so. The annoying part is what differentiates griping from being persistent.
Good suggestions usually don't loose support until they are implemented. Why? Because they are good suggestions.
I don't see how we're being annoying, you're the one who chose to click on this thread. Are we leaking onto the rest of the forums? Does the idea that people think Minecraft needs a better terrain generator agitate you?
You have entered this thread rudely telling us to disband before the goal of this thread has been reached. That's annoying.
Contrary to popular belief, water is capable of freezing in places with cacti.
Is there usually a fine line between sand covered desert and ice coated desert? (This is an honest question)
Now that I've seen it though, I think Ice deserts would be a really interesting biome to see rarely in 1.7. As long as they transitioned well between other biomes.
Uuhh...sure. We'll go with that.
And earlier I meant to say "I think YOU'RE the one missing implications.
That "don't" was left behind from an earlier thought I had, so I forgot to backspace it.
mmmhm. There's a lot of sarcasm in this discussion.
I have, for the sole reason that I DON'T CARE. It is a small, ignorable issue, and most beaches I see are added on to desert biomes so it's barely noticeable.
This whole thread is easier to ignore than the lack of beaches... yet here you are. Almost every person who actively supports this thread disagrees that beaches are "a small, ignorable issue". What's your plan? Are you going to try to convince all of us that we shouldn't care?
No, and typically when someone gripes they keep doing it until they get their way. Annoyingly so. The annoying part is what differentiates griping from being persistent.
This thread has had more than one interaction with devs, so evidently they don't find us annoying. On the other hand, I'd wager that almost everyone here finds your persistence highly annoying. Does that mean what you're doing is griping? /philosoraptor
good for you. you get my point alright? I was diminishing the argument so more people would get it. please don't be "that guy."
But the argument is mostly invalid. I've seen a lot of people complain about "impossible" biome neighbors, but, mostly, they're all possible. Deserts and swamps in particular exist in all temperature ranges, from the equator to Siberia. Sure, the depictions are of subtropical ones but it had to be from somewhere. The only truly "impossible" combinations are jungle/ice plains and jungle/desert. Maybe forest/ice plains if you're strict about definitions. Saying that the random biome placements make the terrain meaningless on a large scale is a valid point, but unrealistic juxtapositions is at most a minor issue.
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.
But the argument is mostly invalid. I've seen a lot of people complain about "impossible" biome neighbors, but, mostly, they're all possible. Deserts and swamps in particular exist in all temperature ranges, from the equator to Siberia. Sure, the depictions are of subtropical ones but it had to be from somewhere. The only truly "impossible" combinations are jungle/ice plains and jungle/desert. Maybe forest/ice plains if you're strict about definitions. Saying that the random biome placements make the terrain meaningless on a large scale is a valid point, but unrealistic juxtapositions is at most a minor issue.
i never once said "impossible." I intimated that seeing frozen snowy biomes slam into biomes that are obviously designed to make the player feel like he is traveling in 105 degree weather is wonky. I'm not the first person to have mentioned this. my argument is not "invalid." and this isn't a ing contest over who can come off sounding like the biggest blowhard, this is just simple observations people make. you people are getting very weird about this; like "debating" on the internet is some new sport... sometimes you people are contrary for its own sake, as if latching on to any excuse no matter how thin to put on a show for others. but my ranting about the degradation of online interaction is for a different venue....
RunnerX has hundreds more posts than either of you two, therefore, by traditional internet forum logic, he is right and you are both wrong. He can be snarky, you can not.
And I have thousands more posts than him and more posts than you.
Edit: Oh, that was sarcasm. Well, I have the right not to detect it, since English is not my native language.
i never once said "impossible." I intimated that seeing frozen snowy biomes slam into biomes that are obviously designed to make the player feel like he is traveling in 105 degree weather is wonky. I'm not the first person to have mentioned this. my argument is not "invalid." and this isn't a ing contest over who can come off sounding like the biggest blowhard, this is just simple observations people make. you people are getting very weird about this; like "debating" on the internet is some new sport... sometimes you people are contrary for its own sake, as if latching on to any excuse no matter how thin to put on a show for others. but my ranting about the degradation of online interaction is for a different venue....
The ugliest ones were Tundra (ok, ok, Ice Plains) -> Jungle and Taiga -> Jungle transitions. I haven't seen them in 13w36a+ yet, and jungles themselves are very rare, so if it does happen, it is rare. That is ok, rare weird things add variety and don't hurt anyone, since you can always find another place.
If you don't know what's inside a book, you don't get to make judgments about its contents. Either read the last 20 pages or so, or shut up.
I already read the OP and most of the discussion after that a while ago, so I'm assuming your goals haven't changed. As to the book analogy, what if I read a review?
If you haven't even read this thread, what indication do you have that we haven't specified any improvements?
No no, I did read the thread; I just haven't been keeping tabs on it for a while.
Welcome to the thread of people who disagree, what are you trying to accomplish again?
I just wanted to show some people the pointlessness of this argument. Granted, I can't bring EVERYBODY out of it, thinking that would be naive. It's frankly embarrassing to have one of the biggest threads on the forum be about something as ignorable as terrain. (Especially with the 1.7 changes.)
Good suggestions usually don't *lose support until they are implemented. Why? Because they are good suggestions.
If you look in the suggestions forum, you will occasionally see a really good suggestion. Chances are it will never be implemented. It is somewhat sad, but there are just too many suggestions that people have to look through and consider implementing good ones. If you were to say, publicize your case in some grand fashion, then you'd have a better chance. (Making a thread is minimally impactful.)
I don't see how we're being annoying, you're the one who chose to click on this thread. Are we leaking onto the rest of the forums? Does the idea that people think Minecraft needs a better terrain generator agitate you?
You have entered this thread rudely telling us to disband before the goal of this thread has been reached. That's annoying.
The reason you're annoying is because after two years that this thread has been hanging around you still haven't let the issue go. 1.7 will most likely put any more thought of terrain improvement out of the Devs minds for a indefinite period of time, making your wait even longer. Since there's minimal chance that you will ever get exactly what you what, this cycle could continue (potentially) forever. (the being, you complain -> Devs hear some of the complaints and make some terrain changes -> they put it aside for a while to work on other things -> you're still not happy -> you complain)
This whole thread is easier to ignore than the lack of beaches... yet here you are. Almost every person who actively supports this thread disagrees that beaches are "a small, ignorable issue". What's your plan? Are you going to try to convince all of us that we shouldn't care?
DING DING DING! Give the boy a cigar!
A word about beaches...
Among the features is gravel beaches, correct? I am fairly that a basic form of gravel beach has been re-implemented in the snapshot. I agree with you when you say they're not really beaches, the one I saw was just a patch of gravel along a riverside. The reason I make this note is to say that I doubt the Devs will leave it at that, seeing as how gravel beaches have been wanted back since they were taken out. Just a prediction.
It's frankly embarrassing to have one of the biggest threads on the forum be about something as ignorable as terrain. (Especially with the 1.7 changes.)
Since terrain is the single biggest and most noticeable feature in the entire game, I'm going to go ahead and say that you're incorrect. The terrain isn't ignorable.
If you look in the suggestions forum, you will occasionally see a really good suggestion. Chances are it will never be implemented. It is somewhat sad, but there are just too many suggestions that people have to look through and consider implementing good ones. If you were to say, publicize your case in some grand fashion, then you'd have a better chance. (Making a thread is minimally impactful.)
Publishing our case in a grand fashion?
You mean like having one of the longest running threads on the entire forum? Or how about having a dev post in our thread? What if we sent a physical letter to Mojang?
Would that be enough to qualify as "grand fashion"?
Let me stop you right there. He's NOT the one who's annoying.
You know who is? The guy who came into the thread telling EVERYONE HERE to PLEASE SHUT UP NOW
I'd prefer if you took your own advice.
after two years that this thread has been hanging around you still haven't let the issue go.
Right... because nothing has changed. Irrelevant changes haven't even happened. The terrain basically hasn't been touched AT ALL, despite the devs acknowledging that it needs some work.
Just to be clear, you're seriously trying to convince all of us that we shouldn't care about the terrain... even though we actively post in a thread about changing the terrain? Does that not sound a little dim to you?
If we didn't care about the terrain, we never would have posted here in the first place.
kinda. Have you actually looked at the snapshot? I have yet to see an actual gravel beach. What I do see are small patches of gravel at the edge of some lakes.
Regardless of your prediction, it's important to give the devs feedback about the new features. That's what an official forum is for.
The Meaning of Life, the Universe, and Everything.
Join Date:
11/5/2011
Posts:
44
Minecraft:
Dominator1337
Xbox:
#PCMasterRace
PSN:
#PCMasterRace
Member Details
[Alright sort of a speech here coming, sorry but]
RunnerX, you pretty much started an argument and then called everyone else here annoying. You then stated this ridiculous goal of yours, which is to get everyone to stop caring about terrain, in a suggestion thread about terrain. After that, you proceed to have your arguments completely undermined, all stupidity pointed out and your points 100% refuted.
This being said, for the sake of the quality of this thread, the sanity of us all, and for the sake of your reputation, I highly suggest you stop posting on this suggestion thread, unless you have, intelligent constructive criticism you would like to present relating to the topic.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Success! ^^^^ This feature has now been added into Minecraft! (Snapshot 14w03b)
I think THIS image explains everything if you switch Pokemon for Minecraft and Game Freak for Mojang......
I understand what you are saying but you're missing the point. The reason for these suggestions from the fanbase is not to take all of them exactly as stated and shove them into an update, thus creating a "monstrosity." The point is of the numerous suggestions to whittle down to what is plausible, then what is practical, then what is most appealing, and finally what of those the devs decide would ultimately benefit the game as a whole. No one with half a brain is expecting every suggestion to be crammed in without thought and consideration. You're purposely reducing what people say to an absurdity to suit your argument. Bad form.
Short list? The ideal generation according to you people is nowhere near that of the current generator. I suppose "nitpicking" would be a better term for what you're doing, rather than giving specifications.
True, requesting features =/= griping. But this isn't a thread about "requesting features". You're griping. If it was a thread about requesting features, you would have let it go by now. A "request" is one a done. A gripe stays until it is either alleviated or rejected.
Also,
how dare you defile the visage of Inigo Montoya by putting it in a dispute as pointless as this...
(I said "gripe" exactly once. I don't think YOU'RE the one missing implications here.)
If the ideal generation according to the aforementioned people is nowhere near that of the current generator, how are those people "nitpicking"?
How is requesting a short list of features and improvements "nitpicking"?
Yes it is.
Why? The features we want have not been implemented, and thus we continue to discuss it among ourselves, refine the list, and find new supporters and modes of communication with the dev team.
As easily as I use any other meme.
Me neither.
If the ideal generator is nowhere near that of the current generator, then that's what we're requesting. It does not make anything in this thread "nitpicking".
If you haven't seen any "specification" on how the 1.7 terrain generate could be improved in this thread, you ought to look harder.
And since you're so keen on definitions.
nit·pick·ing (n
n.
Minute, trivial, unnecessary, and unjustified criticism or faultfinding.
You you honestly consider the beaches Minecraft has now trivial, minute, or unnecessary? They're atrocious. I've never seen a beach I've liked in the current terrain generator. Have you? This is especially dreadful because they looked better in an older version of Minecraft.
And why would we have let it go by now? Have the features we've requested been added yet?
"stays until it is either alleviated or rejected" is not the definition of a gripe by the way.
https://soundcloud.com/slimy-4
Uuhh...sure. We'll go with that.
And earlier I meant to say "I think YOU'RE the one missing implications.
That "don't" was left behind from an earlier thought I had, so I forgot to backspace it.
Sorry, but hauling myself through unspoilered pages upon pages of rant, rant, and (you guessed it!) rant isn't really my idea of a good time.
I have, for the sole reason that I DON'T CARE. It is a small, ignorable issue, and most beaches I see are added on to desert biomes so it's barely noticeable.
No, and typically when someone gripes they keep doing it until they get their way. Annoyingly so. The annoying part is what differentiates griping from being persistent.
right, pretend you don't recognize the sarcasm since it makes it seem like it takes away my point...
even though it doesn't and just makes you seem incapable of detecting OBVIOUS sarcasm
Contrary to popular belief, water is capable of freezing in places with cacti.
If you haven't even read this thread, what indication do you have that we haven't specified any improvements?
Welcome to the thread of people who disagree, what are you trying to accomplish again?
Good suggestions usually don't loose support until they are implemented. Why? Because they are good suggestions.
I don't see how we're being annoying, you're the one who chose to click on this thread. Are we leaking onto the rest of the forums? Does the idea that people think Minecraft needs a better terrain generator agitate you?
You have entered this thread rudely telling us to disband before the goal of this thread has been reached. That's annoying.
https://soundcloud.com/slimy-4
Is there usually a fine line between sand covered desert and ice coated desert? (This is an honest question)
Now that I've seen it though, I think Ice deserts would be a really interesting biome to see rarely in 1.7. As long as they transitioned well between other biomes.
https://soundcloud.com/slimy-4
good for you. you get my point alright? I was diminishing the argument so more people would get it. please don't be "that guy."
If you don't know what's inside a book, you don't get to make judgments about its contents. Either read the last 20 pages or so, or shut up.
This whole thread is easier to ignore than the lack of beaches... yet here you are. Almost every person who actively supports this thread disagrees that beaches are "a small, ignorable issue". What's your plan? Are you going to try to convince all of us that we shouldn't care?
This thread has had more than one interaction with devs, so evidently they don't find us annoying. On the other hand, I'd wager that almost everyone here finds your persistence highly annoying. Does that mean what you're doing is griping? /philosoraptor
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Curse PremiumBut the argument is mostly invalid. I've seen a lot of people complain about "impossible" biome neighbors, but, mostly, they're all possible. Deserts and swamps in particular exist in all temperature ranges, from the equator to Siberia. Sure, the depictions are of subtropical ones but it had to be from somewhere. The only truly "impossible" combinations are jungle/ice plains and jungle/desert. Maybe forest/ice plains if you're strict about definitions. Saying that the random biome placements make the terrain meaningless on a large scale is a valid point, but unrealistic juxtapositions is at most a minor issue.
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.
i never once said "impossible." I intimated that seeing frozen snowy biomes slam into biomes that are obviously designed to make the player feel like he is traveling in 105 degree weather is wonky. I'm not the first person to have mentioned this. my argument is not "invalid." and this isn't a ing contest over who can come off sounding like the biggest blowhard, this is just simple observations people make. you people are getting very weird about this; like "debating" on the internet is some new sport... sometimes you people are contrary for its own sake, as if latching on to any excuse no matter how thin to put on a show for others. but my ranting about the degradation of online interaction is for a different venue....
Edit: Oh, that was sarcasm. Well, I have the right not to detect it, since English is not my native language.
I already read the OP and most of the discussion after that a while ago, so I'm assuming your goals haven't changed.
As to the book analogy, what if I read a review?
No no, I did read the thread; I just haven't been keeping tabs on it for a while.
I just wanted to show some people the pointlessness of this argument. Granted, I can't bring EVERYBODY out of it, thinking that would be naive. It's frankly embarrassing to have one of the biggest threads on the forum be about something as ignorable as terrain. (Especially with the 1.7 changes.)
If you look in the suggestions forum, you will occasionally see a really good suggestion. Chances are it will never be implemented. It is somewhat sad, but there are just too many suggestions that people have to look through and consider implementing good ones. If you were to say, publicize your case in some grand fashion, then you'd have a better chance. (Making a thread is minimally impactful.)
The reason you're annoying is because after two years that this thread has been hanging around you still haven't let the issue go. 1.7 will most likely put any more thought of terrain improvement out of the Devs minds for a indefinite period of time, making your wait even longer. Since there's minimal chance that you will ever get exactly what you what, this cycle could continue (potentially) forever. (the being, you complain -> Devs hear some of the complaints and make some terrain changes -> they put it aside for a while to work on other things -> you're still not happy -> you complain)
DING DING DING! Give the boy a cigar!
A word about beaches...
Among the features is gravel beaches, correct? I am fairly that a basic form of gravel beach has been re-implemented in the snapshot. I agree with you when you say they're not really beaches, the one I saw was just a patch of gravel along a riverside. The reason I make this note is to say that I doubt the Devs will leave it at that, seeing as how gravel beaches have been wanted back since they were taken out. Just a prediction.
You haven't, so what's your point?
I don't honestly believe you, and I'd wager that slimy won't either.
Congratulations on an epic failure.
Since terrain is the single biggest and most noticeable feature in the entire game, I'm going to go ahead and say that you're incorrect. The terrain isn't ignorable.
Publishing our case in a grand fashion?
You mean like having one of the longest running threads on the entire forum? Or how about having a dev post in our thread? What if we sent a physical letter to Mojang?
Would that be enough to qualify as "grand fashion"?
Let me stop you right there. He's NOT the one who's annoying.
You know who is? The guy who came into the thread telling EVERYONE HERE to PLEASE SHUT UP NOW
I'd prefer if you took your own advice.
Right... because nothing has changed. Irrelevant changes haven't even happened. The terrain basically hasn't been touched AT ALL, despite the devs acknowledging that it needs some work.
RIGHT. So we need to make sure our preferences and feedback on the snapshots is as clear as possible.
Just to be clear, you're seriously trying to convince all of us that we shouldn't care about the terrain... even though we actively post in a thread about changing the terrain? Does that not sound a little dim to you?
If we didn't care about the terrain, we never would have posted here in the first place.
kinda. Have you actually looked at the snapshot? I have yet to see an actual gravel beach. What I do see are small patches of gravel at the edge of some lakes.
Regardless of your prediction, it's important to give the devs feedback about the new features. That's what an official forum is for.
RunnerX, you pretty much started an argument and then called everyone else here annoying. You then stated this ridiculous goal of yours, which is to get everyone to stop caring about terrain, in a suggestion thread about terrain. After that, you proceed to have your arguments completely undermined, all stupidity pointed out and your points 100% refuted.
This being said, for the sake of the quality of this thread, the sanity of us all, and for the sake of your reputation, I highly suggest you stop posting on this suggestion thread, unless you have, intelligent constructive criticism you would like to present relating to the topic.
Success! ^^^^ This feature has now been added into Minecraft!
(Snapshot 14w03b)
I understand what you are saying but you're missing the point. The reason for these suggestions from the fanbase is not to take all of them exactly as stated and shove them into an update, thus creating a "monstrosity." The point is of the numerous suggestions to whittle down to what is plausible, then what is practical, then what is most appealing, and finally what of those the devs decide would ultimately benefit the game as a whole. No one with half a brain is expecting every suggestion to be crammed in without thought and consideration. You're purposely reducing what people say to an absurdity to suit your argument. Bad form.