The Meaning of Life, the Universe, and Everything.
Join Date:
4/13/2019
Posts:
131
Minecraft:
toydotgame
Member Details
I prefer Java. Although I initially started on Bedrock Edition (At the time, Pocket Edition); I prefer Java's mechanics, technical features, and graphics over Bedrock.
I'll start with graphics. Java Edition is written in Java (Who would've guessed!?), and Bedrock is in C#, for cross-platform compatibility for the most phones and game consoles, etc. Being a rewrite of a game, I'd say a different approach was taken to game rendering.
Bedrock has this different way of rendering light. It makes water look weird, and terrain and tile entities always look a bit off.
Bedrock does have one advantage being in C# and rendering things differently: It can render far many more chunks whilst using slightly less computing resources. I don't really care for render distance though, as my computer is nearly 12 years old; I have render distance set to the minimum.
Technical features? Simply put, Redstone is really messed up in Bedrock Edition. I'm a technical Minecrafter, and having my things broken is not fun. I find Bedrock's Redstone very unintuitive, even compared to the mess that is Redstone in the first place - in Java Edition.
Some numbers are different too, tick speeds, spawn rates, etc, etc.
Mechanics is something I can start on, with the HUD and inventory. I play 1.6.4 (Yes, a 2013 version of the game), and one [of the many] reasons I play it is the lack of the Recipe Book - which is something Bedrock forces upon you aggressively, more than Java does in recent versions.
I guess I could also say how little access to what you want with the game there is in Bedrock? It's just one, vanilla version. No Forge, no OptiFine, no Fabric, and so on.
With Bedrock, you can only play the latest version; whereas on Java, you can choose.
I can't choose to play Pocket Edition 0.7.0 (My first version of Minecraft I ever played), but I can choose to play Java 1.5.1, from the same time.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Minecrafter since 2013.
Long-Term World 1 March 22nd, 2013 – 2016; Minecraft: Pocket Edition 0.6.1 – 0.15.7 Long-Term World 2 2018 – 2019; Minecraft for Windows 10 1.2.11 – 1.12.0 Long-Term World 3 February 15th, 2020 – Present, keeping this world for as long as possible; Minecraft: Java Edition 1.6.4 – 1.19.3
I prefer Java. Although I initially started on Bedrock Edition (At the time, Pocket Edition); I prefer Java's mechanics, technical features, and graphics over Bedrock.
I'll start with graphics. Java Edition is written in Java (Who would've guessed!?), and Bedrock is in C#, for cross-platform compatibility for the most phones and game consoles, etc. Being a rewrite of a game, I'd say a different approach was taken to game rendering.
Bedrock has this different way of rendering light. It makes water look weird, and terrain and tile entities always look a bit off.
Bedrock does have one advantage being in C# and rendering things differently: It can render far many more chunks whilst using slightly less computing resources. I don't really care for render distance though, as my computer is nearly 12 years old; I have render distance set to the minimum.
Technical features? Simply put, Redstone is really messed up in Bedrock Edition. I'm a technical Minecrafter, and having my things broken is not fun. I find Bedrock's Redstone very unintuitive, even compared to the mess that is Redstone in the first place - in Java Edition.
Some numbers are different too, tick speeds, spawn rates, etc, etc.
Mechanics is something I can start on, with the HUD and inventory. I play 1.6.4 (Yes, a 2013 version of the game), and one [of the many] reasons I play it is the lack of the Recipe Book - which is something Bedrock forces upon you aggressively, more than Java does in recent versions.
I guess I could also say how little access to what you want with the game there is in Bedrock? It's just one, vanilla version. No Forge, no OptiFine, no Fabric, and so on.
With Bedrock, you can only play the latest version; whereas on Java, you can choose.
I can't choose to play Pocket Edition 0.7.0 (My first version of Minecraft I ever played), but I can choose to play Java 1.5.1, from the same time.
The last part is what holds the game back the most, because while updates are being imposed this also would automatically cause mods to not work by making them incompatible with the latest version, just as they do on Java.
even texture packs can be affected, while they still load with the more recent versions, they may not change textures of blocks if there are new blocks added to the game, such as in the Caves and Cliffs update part 1 and 2.
I agree with you on the redstone point, that is annoying and they should make the redstone work the same as it does in the Java version. But not all redstone builds are affected by this problem, it's only ones that use automation or timings that behave weirdly or don't keep their settings when you log out of the world and then back in again.
Also since it's a sandbox I disagree with shoehorned updates, even with the vanilla game because while intentions may be good, not everyone is going to agree with the changes that happen with the game.
I've never played on Bedrock so I can't say much about it, although its lack of older versions and mods (real mods, not just data packs or whatever Bedrock calls them) puts me off from wanting to play on it - I don't even play on the latest versions of Java and have no interest in them (the last version I touched at all was 1.13, after which I discontinued my "old caves" mods due to lack of motivation and demand, otherwise, I've never had an actual world in any version since 1.6.4); a lot of people have bugged me about whether I'll play in 1.17/1.18 but I simply couldn't care less about an update that I've already implemented myself in various ways nearly a decade ago, and minus all of the changes I don't like, while adding many of my own features which do not exist in vanilla, or better versions of vanilla features.
I've never played on Bedrock so I can't say much about it, although its lack of older versions and mods (real mods, not just data packs or whatever Bedrock calls them) puts me off from wanting to play on it - I don't even play on the latest versions of Java and have no interest in them (the last version I touched at all was 1.13, after which I discontinued my "old caves" mods due to lack of motivation and demand, otherwise, I've never had an actual world in any version since 1.6.4); a lot of people have bugged me about whether I'll play in 1.17/1.18 but I simply couldn't care less about an update that I've already implemented myself in various ways nearly a decade ago, and minus all of the changes I don't like, while adding many of my own features which do not exist in vanilla, or better versions of vanilla features.
You even added a higher capacity ender chest if I remember you saying correctly, that is impressive.
I know ender chests can technically have their capacity expanded by use of shulker boxes, but you're still limited to 27 slots,
by doubling the ender chest capacity you get 54 slots.
You said you added in other building materials in your mod too didn't you?
that would be interesting to see.
Did you add Zinc? Tin? Lead? Titanium? what are their uses?
And I've said I support adding in alloys like steel and brass,
brass being used to craft the bell, so players don't need to trade to get the bell or steal it from villages any longer.
and steel being used as a replacement for Iron for tools and perhaps armor so that Iron would remain useful late game.
if I could create a mod for this which I don't have the skills for, I am only saying hypothetically speaking, I'd add these features,
Iron will oxidize over time, discolouring and when oxidized, takes a durability penalty, but steel wouldn't, and all existing Iron gear can be upgraded to steel using the Smithing table and coal.
The benefit of steel is that it would be resistant to oxidization in addition to having 3 times the durability of Iron, and will be compatible with all enchantments.
none of this would matter to me though because I play on bedrock edition, because I enjoy the better render distances and frame rates on this version, it just sucks that there is no option to load older versions in bedrock edition which would've been the first step to addressing the mods problem.
I'll start with graphics. Java Edition is written in Java (Who would've guessed!?), and Bedrock is in C#
Bedrock Edition is written in C++, not C#.
For my own opinion, Java Edition is my only choice as a Linux user. Mod support helps make it more attractive, although the Texture Update kind of ruined that for me (very few mods from 1.14 on have Programmer Art textures), and I personally find it easier to find other JE players than BE players.
On the other hand, Bedrock wins over Java in performance, although there are some Java Edition mods that help improve it. I do miss the Bedrock-style bridging, though (at least as much as I can without actually playing it).
Increasing the capacity of ender chests was actually quite simple; literally all I had to do was change a number from 27 to 54, with the rest of the code more or less the same, with TMCWv1 only editing normal ender chests, then I later reverted it and added a second variant, a "diamond ender chest" (each one has their own inventory, so yes, you actually have a total of 81 slots, with the block determining which inventory and texture is used). However, diamond ender chests cannot be picked up with Silk Touch, at least not until the next update, which also changes the recipe to include end stone so you can't make them until you've reach the End. In either cases shulker boxes do not exist but I haven't felt the need for more storage; even a normal ender chest is enough for 6-8 hours of extreme caving due to mineral blocks and my own "rail and "cobweb" blocks:
Also, TMCW is not a "technical" mod (the sort that adds in dozens of new minerals), or "building" mod, the only new minerals added are amethyst, which creates top-tier armor and tools (diamond was reduced in protection/mining speed to vanilla iron levels but has the same or more durability), and ruby, which can be used to remove the prior work penalty from items that can't receive Mending due to the cost (each one lowers the penalty by 6 levels).
Even in the upcoming TMCWv5 I haven't added any new minerals, only variants of existing ones to blend in with biome-specific underground blocks; I'm adding lightning rods but they are made out of iron, there is also no point in having spyglasses when I have a zoom feature similar to Optifine's, which will also be enhanced with zoom from 2-10x (spyglasses have 10x zoom, Optifine is 4x) and otherwise the main focus of TMCW is world generation and a playstyle centered around caving for fun, which shouldn't be surprising because that is how I play and I primarily make mods for my own use (not to say that I haven't added any new building blocks but most of them have some role in world generation). Here is a list of all the blocks I've added, currently at 308 "real" variants (excluding forms like fence connections and log rotation):
1:1 Granite
1:2 Polished Granite
1:3 Diorite
1:4 Polished Diorite
1:5 Andesite
1:6 Polished Andesite
1:7 Red Sandstone Biome Stone
3:1 Coarse Dirt
3:2 Podzol
4:1 Compressed Cobblestone
5:4 Stick Planks
6:4 Mega Tree Sapling
6:5 Palm Sapling
6:6 Dark/Swamp Oak Sapling
6:7 Acacia Sapling
7:1 Stone Bedrock
7:2 Andesite Bedrock
7:3 Snow Bedrock
7:4 Packed Ice Bedrock
7:5 Opaque Ice Bedrock
7:6 Hardened Clay Bedrock
7:7 Sandstone Bedrock
7:8 Quartz Sandstone Bedrock
7:9 Red Sandstone Bedrock
7:10 Netherrack Bedrock
12:1 Quartz Sand
12:2 Red Sand
13:1 Gravel Sand
13:2 Gold Gravel
13:3 Gold Gravel Sand
14:1 Sandstone Gold Ore
14:2 Quartz Sandstone Gold Ore
14:3 Red Sandstone Gold Ore
14:4 Hardened Clay Gold Ore
14:5 Snow Gold Ore
14:6 Packed Ice Gold Ore
14:7 Blue Ice Gold Ore
14:8 Nether Gold Ore
15:1 Sandstone Iron Ore
15:2 Quartz Sandstone Iron Ore
15:3 Red Sandstone Iron Ore
15:4 Hardened Clay Iron Ore
15:5 Snow Iron Ore
15:6 Packed Ice Iron Ore
15:7 Blue Ice Iron Ore
16:1 Sandstone Coal Ore
16:2 Quartz Sandstone Coal Ore
16:3 Red Sandstone Coal Ore
16:4 Hardened Clay Coal Ore
16:5 Snow Coal Ore
16:6 Packed Ice Coal Ore
16:7 Blue Ice Coal Ore
17:12 Oak Bark
17:13 Spruce Bark
17:14 Birch Bark
17:15 Jungle Bark
21:1 Sandstone Lapis Lazuli Ore
21:2 Quartz Sandstone Lapis Lazuli Ore
21:3 Red Sandstone Lapis Lazuli Ore
21:4 Hardened Clay Lapis Lazuli Ore
21:5 Snow Lapis Lazuli Ore
21:6 Packed Ice Lapis Lazuli Ore
21:7 Blue Ice Lapis Lazuli Ore
24:3 Full Smooth Sandstone
24:4 Quartz Sandstone
24:5 Chiseled Quartz Sandstone
24:6 Smooth Quartz Sandstone
24:7 Full Smooth Quartz Sandstone
24:8 Red Sandstone
24:9 Chiseled Red Sandstone
24:10 Smooth Red Sandstone
24:11 Full Smooth Red Sandstone
26 Bed (now also the item ID)
31:3 Cave Grass
31:4 Cave Fern
31:5 Nether Grass
31:6 Nether Fern
37:1 Rose Bush
37:2 Peony
37:3 Lilac
37:4 Allium
37:5 Blue Orchid
37:6 Oxeye Daisy
37:7 Paeonia
37:8 Poppy
37:9 Red Tulip
37:10 Pink Tulip
37:11 Orange Tulip
37:12 Yellow Tulip
37:13 White Tulip
37:14 Cyan Rose
37:15 Azure Bluet
39:0 Brown Mushroom
39:1 Red Mushroom (was ID 40)
39:2 Green Mushroom
39:3 Blue Mushroom
39:4 Purple Mushroom
40 Lightning Rod
43:8 Smooth Stone
43:15 Smooth Quartz Block
48:1 Compressed Mossy Cobblestone
49:1 Block of Amethyst
49:2 Reinforced Quartz Sandstone
49:3 Quartz Desert Pyramids Unhardener
53:8 Spruce Wood Stairs (was ID 134)
56:1 Sandstone Diamond Ore
56:2 Quartz Sandstone Diamond Ore
56:3 Red Sandstone Diamond Ore
56:4 Hardened Clay Diamond Ore
56:5 Snow Diamond Ore
56:6 Packed Ice Diamond Ore
56:7 Blue Ice Diamond Ore
60 Obsidian Glass
62 Furnace (was IDs 61+62)
67:8 Compressed Cobblestone Stairs
70:2 Sandstone Pressure Plate
72:2 Spruce Wood Pressure plate
72:4 Birch Wood Pressure plate
72:6 Jungle Wood Pressure plate
73:1 Sandstone Redstone Ore
73:2 Quartz Sandstone Redstone Ore
73:3 Red Sandstone Redstone Ore
73:4 Hardened Clay Redstone Ore
73:5 Snow Redstone Ore
73:6 Packed Ice Redstone Ore
73:7 Blue Ice Redstone Ore
75 Dim Torch
76 Redstone Torch (was IDs 75+76)
81:8 Thin Cactus
82:1 Red Clay
85:1 Spruce Wood Fence
85:2 Birch Wood Fence
85:3 Jungle Wood Fence
85:4 Stick Fence
86:0 Block of Raw Iron
86:1 Block of Raw Gold
89:1 Light Block
91:0 Carved Pumpkin (was ID 86)
91:4 Pumpkin
91:8 Jack o'Lantern (was ID 91:0)
92 Cake (now also the item ID)
97:3 Infested Mossy Stone Brick
97:4 Infested Cracked Stone Brick
97:5 Infested Chiseled Stone Brick
97:6 Infested Granite
97:7 Infested Diorite
97:8 Infested Andesite
99:0 Brown Mushroom Block
99:14 Brown Mushroom Pores
99:15 Brown Mushroom Stem
100:0 Red Mushroom Block
100:14 Red Mushroom Pores
100:15 Red Mushroom Stem
112:1 Red Nether Brick
113:1 Red Nether Brick Fence
118 Cauldron (now also the item ID)
121:1 Diamond End Stone
124 Redstone Lamp (was IDs 123+124)
125:4 Stick Double Slab
126:4 Stick Slab
128:8 Quartz Sandstone Stairs
129:1 Sandstone Emerald Ore
129:2 Quartz Sandstone Emerald Ore
129:3 Red Sandstone Emerald Ore
129:4 Hardened Clay Emerald Ore
129:5 Snow Emerald Ore
129:6 Packed Ice Emerald Ore
129:7 Blue Ice Emerald Ore
134:0 Red Autumnal Sapling
134:1 Orange Autumnal Sapling
134:2 Yellow Autumnal Sapling
134:3 Brown Autumnal Sapling
135:8 Jungle Wood Stairs (was ID 136)
139:2 Stone Wall
139:3 Granite Wall
139:4 Diorite Wall
139:5 Andesite Wall
139:6 Sandstone Wall
139:7 Brick Wall
139:8 Stone Brick Wall
139:9 Mossy Stone Brick Wall
139:10 End Stone Wall
139:11 Quartz Wall
139:12 Netherrack Wall
139:13 Hardened Clay Wall
139:14 Quartz Sandstone Wall
139:15 Red Sandstone Wall
140 Flower Pot (now also the item ID, uses tile entity instead of data values)
145:2 Moderately Damaged Anvil
145:3 Very Damaged Anvil
160 Dry Ice
161:0 Mega Tree Leaves
161:1 Palm Leaves
161:2 Dark/Swamp Oak Leaves
161:3 Acacia Leaves
162 Magma Block
163:0 Saguaro Cactus Log
163:3 Full Saguaro Cactus Log
163:4 Saguaro Cactus Sapling
164:0 Green Mushroom Block
164:14 Green Mushroom Pores
164:15 Green Mushroom Stem
165:0 Blue Mushroom Block
165:14 Blue Mushroom Pores
165:15 Blue Mushroom Stem
166:0 Purple Mushroom Block
166:14 Purple Mushroom Pores
166:15 Purple Mushroom Stem
167 Prickly Pear Cactus
168:0 Stone Biome Stone
168:1 Sandstone Biome Stone
168:2 Quartz Sandstone Biome Stone
168:3 Hardened Clay Biome Stone
168:4 White Stained Clay Biome Stone
168:5 Orange Stained Clay Biome Stone
168:6 Yellow Stained Clay Biome Stone
168:7 Light Gray Stained Clay Biome Stone
168:8 Red Stained Clay Biome Stone
168:9 Magenta Stained Clay Biome Stone
168:10 Pink Stained Clay Biome Stone
168:11 Purple Stained Clay Biome Stone
168:12 Snow Biome Stone
168:13 Packed Ice Biome Stone
168:14 Opaque Ice Biome Stone
168:15 Blue Ice Biome Stone
169 Sea Pickle
173:1 Block of Charcoal
174:0 Packed Ice
174:1 Opaque Ice
174:2 Blue Ice
175:0 Sunflower
175:1 Large Lilac
175:2 Tall Grass
175:3 Large Fern
175:4 Large Rose Bush
175:5 Large Peony
175:6 Large Blue Orchid
176 Diamond Ender Chest
177 Cobweb Block
178 Empty Monster Spawner
179:0 Cyan Coral Block
179:1 Blue Coral Block
179:2 Purple Coral Block
179:3 Pink Coral Block
179:4 Red Coral Block
179:5 Orange Coral Block
179:6 Yellow Coral Block
179:8 Dead Cyan Coral Block
179:9 Dead Blue Coral Block
179:10 Dead Purple Coral Block
179:11 Dead Pink Coral Block
179:12 Dead Red Coral Block
179:13 Dead Orange Coral Block
179:14 Dead Yellow Coral Block
180 Bone Block
181:0 Stone Ruby Ore
181:1 Sandstone Ruby Ore
181:2 Quartz Sandstone Ruby Ore
181:3 Red Sandstone Ruby Ore
181:4 Hardened Clay Ruby Ore
181:5 Snow Ruby Ore
181:6 Packed Ice Ruby Ore
181:7 Blue Ice Ruby Ore
182 Ruby Block
183 Dry Sea Pickle (not a valid item)
184:0 Rail Block
184:1 Activator Rail Block
184:2 Detector Rail Block
184:3 Powered Rail Block
185 Coconut
186:0 Stone Stalagmite (takes on texture of stone, granite, diorite, andesite)
186:1 Sandstone Stalagmite
186:2 Quartz Sandstone Stalagmite
186:3 Red Sandstone Stalagmite
186:4 Hardened Clay Stalagmite (takes on all 17 hardened/stained clay colors)
186:5 Packed Ice Stalagmite
186:6 Netherrack Stalagmite
187:0 Large Stone Stalagmite (takes on texture of stone, granite, diorite, andesite)
187:1 Large Sandstone Stalagmite
187:2 Large Quartz Sandstone Stalagmite
187:3 Large Red Sandstone Stalagmite
187:4 Large Hardened Clay Stalagmite (takes on all 17 hardened/stained clay colors)
187:5 Large Packed Ice Stalagmite
187:6 Large Netherrack Stalagmite
188:0 Water Grass
188:1 Sea Grass
188:6 Tall Sea Grass
189 Kelp
190:0 Cyan Coral
190:1 Blue Coral
190:2 Purple Coral
190:3 Pink Coral
190:4 Red Coral
190:5 Orange Coral
190:6 Yellow Coral
191 Berry Bush (Berries item)
192:0 Red Autumnal Leaves
192:1 Orange Autumnal Leaves
192:2 Yellow Autumnal Leaves
192:3 Brown Autumnal Leaves
200:0 Stone Amethyst Ore
200:1 Sandstone Amethyst Ore
200:2 Quartz Sandstone Amethyst Ore
200:3 Red Sandstone Amethyst Ore
200:4 Hardened Clay Amethyst Ore
200:5 Snow Amethyst Ore
200:6 Packed Ice Amethyst Ore
200:7 Blue Ice Amethyst Ore
Many of my ideas come from suggestions posted by others, such as the following, most of which will never make it into vanilla for one reason or another (I didn't add everything suggested for similar reasons):
I've also added my own take on newer vanilla features, such as composters, which give you dirt instead of bonemeal, making it renewable:
Of course, the main feature of TMCW is the underground, which is getting improved even more by the addition of full-depth biome-specific undergrounds (all the way down to and even including bedrock itself) as well as even more and even larger caves:
Caves can get far larger than this, which is just a cave I randomly came across while flying around:
Likewise, I came across this massive ravine which is more than 300 blocks long (interestingly, ravines can get this deep/wide on Bedrock but not on Java):
As these screenshots show the underground is simply packed with caves and other structures with nearly everything interconnected in a massive network that spans the entire world:
This is under an "Iceland" biome, which is like a mesa biome made out of packed ice and its variants (blue ice and "opaque ice", an intermediate between normal ice and packed ice. The blocks are actually "biome stone" which has the same hardness as normal stone and can be replaced with features like ores, which themselves have variants for each variant of "biome stone"); cave lava is also replaced with water and there is no other lava. And yes, those are glow squid near the bottom:
Caves in a desert; mineshafts use birch wood as it blends in better with sandstone and sand-based blocks:
Caves in a Badlands, which has red sand and sandstone variants (mesas, which is what "badlands" were originally named in vanilla 1.7, are distinctly different and have hardened clay):
Mineshafts in Badlands are also made out of "stick blocks", which are crafted with sticks (this replaces a "sticks to oak planks" recipe I previously added so you can get wood from dead bushes):
This is part of a giant cave region, with a volume of around 1.7 million blocks across a 350x350 block area, making them the largest underground feature in TMCW:
(these screenshots were taken while flying around below bedrock; I made the bottom faces of blocks at y=0 not render, offering a way to easily see underground structures, as Spectator mode/the ability to clip through solid blocks, doesn't exist in 1.6.4 and I haven't added it, though you can teleport into solid blocks and the suffocation overlay will not be shown in Creative mode)
Maybe Mojang will add similar features someday (things like "deepslate" do not count and it is simply annoying that it takes longer to mine, never mind the planned changes to ore distribution), and if you don't want to play older versions or put up with features you don't like mods can also fix that, as well as the issues that Java has with performance (it is quite amazing that TMCWv5 still uses only 150 MB of memory, whereas the latest vanilla versions need around 10 times as much, with most mods being even worse - I can see why, if the code shown here is an example of how modders write code these days; what in the world is that mess even?!), as well as general bug fixes; I've fixed countless vanilla bugs long before Mojang fixed them, if ever, as well as added features exclusive to Bedrock, such as smooth lighting on water (smooth lighting is quite terrible on Java, especially newer versions, I don't know if Bedrock also has these issues, including incorrect ambient occlusion (shadows in corners), buggy smooth lighting underwater, and light-emitting blocks not having it at all, as well as total darkness not actually being completely dark - again though, thanks to the moddability of Java I've fixed all of these).
I think the reason why lightning rods were made copper in the official version of 1.17 in both Java and bedrock edition is because copper is the most electrically conductive out of most metals, elements or alloys, being trumped only by silver, and gold is the third most conductive.
That's not to say Iron's conductivity is non existent, Iron does conduct electricity in real life, but in terms of electrical application iron is not exactly reliable, and it is affected much worse by corrosion than copper is, when copper oxidizes it will form an outer later as you said before, it would still be weaker than non oxidized copper but it's not affected in the same way as iron, when iron rusts, it flakes, both inside and out.
In Minecraft Iron doesn't oxidize, so this doesn't matter.
Java version definitely is better to mod than bedrock edition,
since you have a launcher system that lets you load older versions it is dependable and you can always count on mods being compatible with the version you're playing.
For my own opinion, Java Edition is my only choice as a Linux user. Mod support helps make it more attractive, although the Texture Update kind of ruined that for me (very few mods from 1.14 on have Programmer Art textures), and I personally find it easier to find other JE players than BE players.
I use Linux too, so I'm in a kind-of similar situation.
On the other hand, Bedrock wins over Java in performance, although there are some Java Edition mods that help improve it. I do miss the Bedrock-style bridging, though (at least as much as I can without actually playing it).
Yeah, the performance is better...
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Minecrafter since 2013.
Long-Term World 1 March 22nd, 2013 – 2016; Minecraft: Pocket Edition 0.6.1 – 0.15.7 Long-Term World 2 2018 – 2019; Minecraft for Windows 10 1.2.11 – 1.12.0 Long-Term World 3 February 15th, 2020 – Present, keeping this world for as long as possible; Minecraft: Java Edition 1.6.4 – 1.19.3
I've never tried it but I find it hard to believe that Bedrock would perform better than this:
This shows CPU and memory usage (with Vsync enabled at 75 FPS); note how low the CPU usage and memory allocation rates are; the GC only has to run about once every 30-35 seconds with 100 MB allocated over that time for about 3 MB/sec (the game was paused for the first half-minute):
Contrast that to modern versions - at 50 MB/sec the GC would be running once every 2 seconds for the same peak-peak memory change (in practice the JVM will allocate more memory as allocation rates increase so it will GC less often, but each one will take longer, causing a more noticeable lag spike):
Minecraft 1.8 has so many performance problems that I just don't know where to start with.
Maybe the biggest and the ugliest problem is the memory allocation. Currently the game allocates (and throws away immediately) 50 MB/sec when standing still and up to 200 MB/sec when moving. That is just crazy.
This shows the biggest objects in terms of "retained" memory usage, which includes anything the object has a reference to; 80% of all memory is used by chunks, which is basically only dependent on the average height of terrain as every block uses the same amount of memory regardless of what it is or how many there are since they and their associated metadata and light levels are all stored in fixed-size byte arrays, hence the memory usage associated with byte[] (tile entities do store extra data but they are extremely rare compared to the number of normal blocks, same for mob entities):
For comparison, this shows the memory associated with blocks (I assume that this does not include the code itself, nor the textures, each of which is 1 KB; either way, the overall impact is small compared to live chunk data):
Interestingly, biome objects are much larger, and may be closer to the real size of block objects:
For comparison, these are the largest source files and the total size of all sources and assets, excluding unmodified vanilla classes and vanilla assets (the compiled bytecode is generally smaller, though the true size would be that of the native machine code after the JIT compiles it):
Hence, I'm not surprised at all that the addition of hundreds of new blocks, items, entities, biomes, etc has had no noticeable impact on resource usage - my "double/triple height" terrain mods were much more intensive even though they only increased the depth of terrain, plus an insignificant increase in the size of the cave generation code (even in TMCWv5 the source of the cave generator is only 315 KB, which is still 15 times the size of the vanilla cave/ravine code, perhaps 20 times if they were merged (vanilla uses separate classes for caves and ravines while I use a single class).
Of interest, one simple change that I made a long time ago easily offset the impact of added code/assets involved removing the following code:
/** A 10MiB preallocation to ensure the heap is reasonably sized. */
public static byte[] memoryReserve = new byte[10485760];
This is never freed unless an out of memory condition occurs on the client-side, presumably so the game has enough memory to display an out of memory error screen (an OOM server-side results in a crash, this is by far the most likely scenario); the comment (by MCP, not Mojang) is misleading - if you really wanted to make sure that the heap was large enough to run the game you'd free the memory during start up, and even then that would just slow it down as it needs to allocate and then garbage collect the memory (interestingly, since the reference is a public static field you can free it without having to modify any vanilla code; just place "Minecraft.memoryReserve = null" somewhere in your own code. I removed it entirely since I modified the Minecraft class for other reasons).
Either way, performance is clearly not an issue in my case (I don't even play at higher render distances, just 8 chunks with leaves set to Fast because I prefer how they look, at which I get over 1000 FPS unlimited; even on a 15-16 year old computer I still got around 100 FPS) and there are mods that make some crazy performance claims, including far exceeding Bedrock; for example, this one claims render distances of up to 256 chunks with (V)RAM cited as the only limiting factor, with a GTX 780 and Intel HD 2000 (which can't even run 1.17+) used for testing; without any of its compromises, such as mob spawning (Java performs a spawn cycle every tick, 20 times per second, while Bedrock only does so once every 200 ticks, and has extremely low mob caps (8 mobs per 9x9 chunk area vs 70 total). Random block updates are 3 times slower, which is the difference between hydrated and dry farmland, and there is a separate "simulation distance" which is usually much smaller than the render distance (though Java doesn't process everything within render distance either; random block updates are only within a 128 block radius. However, the fact that every entity is loaded and ticked does significantly impact the performance of Java at higher render distances).
The Meaning of Life, the Universe, and Everything.
Join Date:
4/13/2019
Posts:
131
Minecraft:
toydotgame
Member Details
My PC is the definition of low-end.
12 years old, 3 GBs of RAM, a HDD, and a Pentium. I've made loads of optimisations to my Java 1.6 client, and only get 15 FPS.
Aside from using Arch Linux, I would not choose to play Bedrock even if I had Windows 10.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Minecrafter since 2013.
Long-Term World 1 March 22nd, 2013 – 2016; Minecraft: Pocket Edition 0.6.1 – 0.15.7 Long-Term World 2 2018 – 2019; Minecraft for Windows 10 1.2.11 – 1.12.0 Long-Term World 3 February 15th, 2020 – Present, keeping this world for as long as possible; Minecraft: Java Edition 1.6.4 – 1.19.3
12 years old, 3 GBs of RAM, a HDD, and a Pentium. I've made loads of optimisations to my Java 1.6 client, and only get 15 FPS.
Aside from using Arch Linux, I would not choose to play Bedrock even if I had Windows 10.
You probably don't have a dedicated GPU; a old second-hand GPU would likely make a big difference and my old computer could get 3 times the FPS even in 1.8+:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeForce_7_series#GeForce_7600_GS (this was described as low-end even in 2006. However, NVIDIA GPUs are generally much better due to good support for hardware occlusion queries, which is used when "Advanced OpenGL" is enabled to cull hidden chunks; this doubled my framerate. Versions since 1.8 now perform culling on the CPU using custom code written by Mojang to get around this, but non-NVIDIA users often still have issues for other reasons)
Also, as shown here the biggest issue with newer versions (since 1.7) was consistent lag spikes every 10th frame, regardless of any settings; the FPS graph indicates that I should be getting around 100 FPS otherwise, which is not much different than 1.6.4 (1.8 and to a lesser extent 1.7 also had major lag when loading chunks though, which was not fixed with Optifine, and going underwater in 1.8 reduced FPS to 1-2; server-side performance was also much worse).
The Meaning of Life, the Universe, and Everything.
Join Date:
4/13/2019
Posts:
131
Minecraft:
toydotgame
Member Details
It does have a GPU. An ancient Intel Mobile GPU. Running Java through the iGPU in my CPU or the discreet GPU itself has little to no difference.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Minecrafter since 2013.
Long-Term World 1 March 22nd, 2013 – 2016; Minecraft: Pocket Edition 0.6.1 – 0.15.7 Long-Term World 2 2018 – 2019; Minecraft for Windows 10 1.2.11 – 1.12.0 Long-Term World 3 February 15th, 2020 – Present, keeping this world for as long as possible; Minecraft: Java Edition 1.6.4 – 1.19.3
12 years old, 3 GBs of RAM, a HDD, and a Pentium. I've made loads of optimisations to my Java 1.6 client, and only get 15 FPS.
Aside from using Arch Linux, I would not choose to play Bedrock even if I had Windows 10.
Pretty soon all Windows 10 users will be forced to make an upgrade to Windows 11, many of them will also need to upgrade to a newer computer because of the requirement for a TPM 2.0 module on motherboards.
we've got until year 2025.
If you are in fact on Linux with Minecraft Java, then this isn't going to affect you,
but now Microsoft is being like Apple, forcing people to ditch older computers even though their PC's may still be powerful enough to run the latest operating system.
Normally I am in favour of moving onto the latest operating system,
but not when it inconveniences consumers this much and will cost them a lot more money than usual.
Historically we didn't even have to worry about TPM modules,
but with it being mandatory on Windows 11, that changed.
if your OS meets the requirements for RAM, storage, GPU and CPU on both power and CPU instruction sets, it should just work.
The Meaning of Life, the Universe, and Everything.
Join Date:
4/13/2019
Posts:
131
Minecraft:
toydotgame
Member Details
And some people wonder why I use Arch...
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Minecrafter since 2013.
Long-Term World 1 March 22nd, 2013 – 2016; Minecraft: Pocket Edition 0.6.1 – 0.15.7 Long-Term World 2 2018 – 2019; Minecraft for Windows 10 1.2.11 – 1.12.0 Long-Term World 3 February 15th, 2020 – Present, keeping this world for as long as possible; Minecraft: Java Edition 1.6.4 – 1.19.3
I don't know about Arch, I know there is a RetroArch software provided by Google but this doesn't let you play Minecraft.
The only Google OS that does as far as I know is android, and Minecraft on there is bedrock edition.
Arch is short for Arch Linux. Which, as the name suggests, is a distribution of Linux.
RetroArch is nothing to do with Google or Arch Linux. It's a launcher for emulators, targeted at old games (as the name suggests). Google doesn't own or provide it. It's its own open-source project worked on by the open-source community.
You are right about Android being owned by Google (With Google's only other OS being ChromeOS). And yes, Bedrock Edition is available on Android. (You still can run Minecraft Java on an Android, though; as Android supports Java natively. This is achievable with applications such as MCinaBox)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Minecrafter since 2013.
Long-Term World 1 March 22nd, 2013 – 2016; Minecraft: Pocket Edition 0.6.1 – 0.15.7 Long-Term World 2 2018 – 2019; Minecraft for Windows 10 1.2.11 – 1.12.0 Long-Term World 3 February 15th, 2020 – Present, keeping this world for as long as possible; Minecraft: Java Edition 1.6.4 – 1.19.3
Arch is short for Arch Linux. Which, as the name suggests, is a distribution of Linux.
RetroArch is nothing to do with Google or Arch Linux. It's a launcher for emulators, targeted at old games (as the name suggests). Google doesn't own or provide it. It's its own open-source project worked on by the open-source community.
You are right about Android being owned by Google (With Google's only other OS being ChromeOS). And yes, Bedrock Edition is available on Android. (You still can run Minecraft Java on an Android, though; as Android supports Java natively. This is achievable with applications such as MCinaBox)
Yeah, I use RetroPie which comes bundled with RetroArch I believe and it has a lot of emulators packed into it, I've used it on a Pi4 computer before, it is very useful.
According to the wiki RetroArch was developed by The Libretro Team,
but if it uses anything from android you could say is based on Google's software, since android is made by Google.
By the way you do get this on Google Play, so technically Google do provide it, as in distribute it, they didn't necessarily make it,
provided =/= develop just as being a publisher isn't synonymous with developer.
This isn't a bad thing, because Android is a great platform and you can use wireless game controllers on your android tablet or smartphone to play Minecraft bedrock edition on, as well as most of the Google software on Google Play, provided your device is compatible and is up to date.
I have only played on Bedrock edition, but from what YT Vids and other stuff, bedrock is generally more stable in terms of redstone, and I think Bedrock is written in C++, which is why the performance is good on low end systems compared to java. I have never actually Played java before (I would love to, some day in the future). The only major difference is in the programming languages, as I mentioned earlier that bedrock is on c++, which is much more efficient than Java Script, However other than that, the only 2 obvious points is that the Bedrock edition is on most platforms (Xbox, Playstation, PC, etc), but java is desktop only. However take whatever I am saying with a pinch of salt, as I haven't played java before.
I have only played on Bedrock edition, but from what YT Vids and other stuff, bedrock is generally more stable in terms of redstone, and I think Bedrock is written in C++, which is why the performance is good on low end systems compared to java. I have never actually Played java before (I would love to, some day in the future). The only major difference is in the programming languages, as I mentioned earlier that bedrock is on c++, which is much more efficient than Java Script, However other than that, the only 2 obvious points is that the Bedrock edition is on most platforms (Xbox, Playstation, PC, etc), but java is desktop only. However take whatever I am saying with a pinch of salt, as I haven't played java before.
It would've been better if bedrock edition existed on Linux,
but Microsoft will never do that because then that means less people end up using the Windows platform,
and they've been doing everything they can to encourage people to use the Windows operating system in recent years, even offering free upgrades.
Windows 11 makes upgrading more tricky because of the TPM module requirement.
But it appears they're doing this for security, not because Microsoft genuinely wants to force abandoning fully operational computers.
I've got a laptop that has a Kaby Lake i5 processor which has the security features needed, so the upgrade thing isn't going to be a problem.
Edit. I still believe people should have the option to use Windows 11 on older computers though, with full hardware compatibility so long as their computer hardware isn't older than a 4th generation Intel i3/i5 processor. I don't believe in shoehorned upgrades, simply for the sake of having something new.
witch one you like more?
I prefer Java. Although I initially started on Bedrock Edition (At the time, Pocket Edition); I prefer Java's mechanics, technical features, and graphics over Bedrock.
I'll start with graphics. Java Edition is written in Java (Who would've guessed!?), and Bedrock is in C#, for cross-platform compatibility for the most phones and game consoles, etc. Being a rewrite of a game, I'd say a different approach was taken to game rendering.
This is a screenshot of Java edition, and this is a screenshot of Bedrock Edition (Although slightly different from today. That screenshot is old).
Bedrock has this different way of rendering light. It makes water look weird, and terrain and tile entities always look a bit off.
Bedrock does have one advantage being in C# and rendering things differently: It can render far many more chunks whilst using slightly less computing resources. I don't really care for render distance though, as my computer is nearly 12 years old; I have render distance set to the minimum.
Technical features? Simply put, Redstone is really messed up in Bedrock Edition. I'm a technical Minecrafter, and having my things broken is not fun. I find Bedrock's Redstone very unintuitive, even compared to the mess that is Redstone in the first place - in Java Edition.
Some numbers are different too, tick speeds, spawn rates, etc, etc.
Mechanics is something I can start on, with the HUD and inventory. I play 1.6.4 (Yes, a 2013 version of the game), and one [of the many] reasons I play it is the lack of the Recipe Book - which is something Bedrock forces upon you aggressively, more than Java does in recent versions.
I guess I could also say how little access to what you want with the game there is in Bedrock? It's just one, vanilla version. No Forge, no OptiFine, no Fabric, and so on.
With Bedrock, you can only play the latest version; whereas on Java, you can choose.
I can't choose to play Pocket Edition 0.7.0 (My first version of Minecraft I ever played), but I can choose to play Java 1.5.1, from the same time.
Minecrafter since 2013.
Long-Term World 1 March 22nd, 2013 – 2016; Minecraft: Pocket Edition 0.6.1 – 0.15.7
Long-Term World 2 2018 – 2019; Minecraft for Windows 10 1.2.11 – 1.12.0
Long-Term World 3 February 15th, 2020 – Present, keeping this world for as long as possible; Minecraft: Java Edition 1.6.4 – 1.19.3
The last part is what holds the game back the most, because while updates are being imposed this also would automatically cause mods to not work by making them incompatible with the latest version, just as they do on Java.
even texture packs can be affected, while they still load with the more recent versions, they may not change textures of blocks if there are new blocks added to the game, such as in the Caves and Cliffs update part 1 and 2.
I agree with you on the redstone point, that is annoying and they should make the redstone work the same as it does in the Java version. But not all redstone builds are affected by this problem, it's only ones that use automation or timings that behave weirdly or don't keep their settings when you log out of the world and then back in again.
Also since it's a sandbox I disagree with shoehorned updates, even with the vanilla game because while intentions may be good, not everyone is going to agree with the changes that happen with the game.
I've never played on Bedrock so I can't say much about it, although its lack of older versions and mods (real mods, not just data packs or whatever Bedrock calls them) puts me off from wanting to play on it - I don't even play on the latest versions of Java and have no interest in them (the last version I touched at all was 1.13, after which I discontinued my "old caves" mods due to lack of motivation and demand, otherwise, I've never had an actual world in any version since 1.6.4); a lot of people have bugged me about whether I'll play in 1.17/1.18 but I simply couldn't care less about an update that I've already implemented myself in various ways nearly a decade ago, and minus all of the changes I don't like, while adding many of my own features which do not exist in vanilla, or better versions of vanilla features.
TheMasterCaver's First World - possibly the most caved-out world in Minecraft history - includes world download.
TheMasterCaver's World - my own version of Minecraft largely based on my views of how the game should have evolved since 1.6.4.
Why do I still play in 1.6.4?
You even added a higher capacity ender chest if I remember you saying correctly, that is impressive.
I know ender chests can technically have their capacity expanded by use of shulker boxes, but you're still limited to 27 slots,
by doubling the ender chest capacity you get 54 slots.
You said you added in other building materials in your mod too didn't you?
that would be interesting to see.
Did you add Zinc? Tin? Lead? Titanium? what are their uses?
And I've said I support adding in alloys like steel and brass,
brass being used to craft the bell, so players don't need to trade to get the bell or steal it from villages any longer.
and steel being used as a replacement for Iron for tools and perhaps armor so that Iron would remain useful late game.
if I could create a mod for this which I don't have the skills for, I am only saying hypothetically speaking, I'd add these features,
Iron will oxidize over time, discolouring and when oxidized, takes a durability penalty, but steel wouldn't, and all existing Iron gear can be upgraded to steel using the Smithing table and coal.
The benefit of steel is that it would be resistant to oxidization in addition to having 3 times the durability of Iron, and will be compatible with all enchantments.
none of this would matter to me though because I play on bedrock edition, because I enjoy the better render distances and frame rates on this version, it just sucks that there is no option to load older versions in bedrock edition which would've been the first step to addressing the mods problem.
Bedrock Edition is written in C++, not C#.
For my own opinion, Java Edition is my only choice as a Linux user. Mod support helps make it more attractive, although the Texture Update kind of ruined that for me (very few mods from 1.14 on have Programmer Art textures), and I personally find it easier to find other JE players than BE players.
On the other hand, Bedrock wins over Java in performance, although there are some Java Edition mods that help improve it. I do miss the Bedrock-style bridging, though (at least as much as I can without actually playing it).
I think the reason why lightning rods were made copper in the official version of 1.17 in both Java and bedrock edition is because copper is the most electrically conductive out of most metals, elements or alloys, being trumped only by silver, and gold is the third most conductive.
That's not to say Iron's conductivity is non existent, Iron does conduct electricity in real life, but in terms of electrical application iron is not exactly reliable, and it is affected much worse by corrosion than copper is, when copper oxidizes it will form an outer later as you said before, it would still be weaker than non oxidized copper but it's not affected in the same way as iron, when iron rusts, it flakes, both inside and out.
In Minecraft Iron doesn't oxidize, so this doesn't matter.
Java version definitely is better to mod than bedrock edition,
since you have a launcher system that lets you load older versions it is dependable and you can always count on mods being compatible with the version you're playing.
I knew I'd be wrong on that. I just went with my gut and I was wrong, sorry.
I use Linux too, so I'm in a kind-of similar situation.
Yeah, the performance is better...
Minecrafter since 2013.
Long-Term World 1 March 22nd, 2013 – 2016; Minecraft: Pocket Edition 0.6.1 – 0.15.7
Long-Term World 2 2018 – 2019; Minecraft for Windows 10 1.2.11 – 1.12.0
Long-Term World 3 February 15th, 2020 – Present, keeping this world for as long as possible; Minecraft: Java Edition 1.6.4 – 1.19.3
I've never tried it but I find it hard to believe that Bedrock would perform better than this:
This shows CPU and memory usage (with Vsync enabled at 75 FPS); note how low the CPU usage and memory allocation rates are; the GC only has to run about once every 30-35 seconds with 100 MB allocated over that time for about 3 MB/sec (the game was paused for the first half-minute):
Contrast that to modern versions - at 50 MB/sec the GC would be running once every 2 seconds for the same peak-peak memory change (in practice the JVM will allocate more memory as allocation rates increase so it will GC less often, but each one will take longer, causing a more noticeable lag spike):
This shows the biggest objects in terms of "retained" memory usage, which includes anything the object has a reference to; 80% of all memory is used by chunks, which is basically only dependent on the average height of terrain as every block uses the same amount of memory regardless of what it is or how many there are since they and their associated metadata and light levels are all stored in fixed-size byte arrays, hence the memory usage associated with byte[] (tile entities do store extra data but they are extremely rare compared to the number of normal blocks, same for mob entities):
For comparison, this shows the memory associated with blocks (I assume that this does not include the code itself, nor the textures, each of which is 1 KB; either way, the overall impact is small compared to live chunk data):
Interestingly, biome objects are much larger, and may be closer to the real size of block objects:
For comparison, these are the largest source files and the total size of all sources and assets, excluding unmodified vanilla classes and vanilla assets (the compiled bytecode is generally smaller, though the true size would be that of the native machine code after the JIT compiles it):
Hence, I'm not surprised at all that the addition of hundreds of new blocks, items, entities, biomes, etc has had no noticeable impact on resource usage - my "double/triple height" terrain mods were much more intensive even though they only increased the depth of terrain, plus an insignificant increase in the size of the cave generation code (even in TMCWv5 the source of the cave generator is only 315 KB, which is still 15 times the size of the vanilla cave/ravine code, perhaps 20 times if they were merged (vanilla uses separate classes for caves and ravines while I use a single class).
Of interest, one simple change that I made a long time ago easily offset the impact of added code/assets involved removing the following code:
This is never freed unless an out of memory condition occurs on the client-side, presumably so the game has enough memory to display an out of memory error screen (an OOM server-side results in a crash, this is by far the most likely scenario); the comment (by MCP, not Mojang) is misleading - if you really wanted to make sure that the heap was large enough to run the game you'd free the memory during start up, and even then that would just slow it down as it needs to allocate and then garbage collect the memory (interestingly, since the reference is a public static field you can free it without having to modify any vanilla code; just place "Minecraft.memoryReserve = null" somewhere in your own code. I removed it entirely since I modified the Minecraft class for other reasons).
Either way, performance is clearly not an issue in my case (I don't even play at higher render distances, just 8 chunks with leaves set to Fast because I prefer how they look, at which I get over 1000 FPS unlimited; even on a 15-16 year old computer I still got around 100 FPS) and there are mods that make some crazy performance claims, including far exceeding Bedrock; for example, this one claims render distances of up to 256 chunks with (V)RAM cited as the only limiting factor, with a GTX 780 and Intel HD 2000 (which can't even run 1.17+) used for testing; without any of its compromises, such as mob spawning (Java performs a spawn cycle every tick, 20 times per second, while Bedrock only does so once every 200 ticks, and has extremely low mob caps (8 mobs per 9x9 chunk area vs 70 total). Random block updates are 3 times slower, which is the difference between hydrated and dry farmland, and there is a separate "simulation distance" which is usually much smaller than the render distance (though Java doesn't process everything within render distance either; random block updates are only within a 128 block radius. However, the fact that every entity is loaded and ticked does significantly impact the performance of Java at higher render distances).
TheMasterCaver's First World - possibly the most caved-out world in Minecraft history - includes world download.
TheMasterCaver's World - my own version of Minecraft largely based on my views of how the game should have evolved since 1.6.4.
Why do I still play in 1.6.4?
If you have a low end pc, then use bedrock, java is for most pc's and played almost everyday.
My PC is the definition of low-end.
12 years old, 3 GBs of RAM, a HDD, and a Pentium. I've made loads of optimisations to my Java 1.6 client, and only get 15 FPS.
Aside from using Arch Linux, I would not choose to play Bedrock even if I had Windows 10.
Minecrafter since 2013.
Long-Term World 1 March 22nd, 2013 – 2016; Minecraft: Pocket Edition 0.6.1 – 0.15.7
Long-Term World 2 2018 – 2019; Minecraft for Windows 10 1.2.11 – 1.12.0
Long-Term World 3 February 15th, 2020 – Present, keeping this world for as long as possible; Minecraft: Java Edition 1.6.4 – 1.19.3
You probably don't have a dedicated GPU; a old second-hand GPU would likely make a big difference and my old computer could get 3 times the FPS even in 1.8+:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athlon_64_X2
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeForce_7_series#GeForce_7600_GS (this was described as low-end even in 2006. However, NVIDIA GPUs are generally much better due to good support for hardware occlusion queries, which is used when "Advanced OpenGL" is enabled to cull hidden chunks; this doubled my framerate. Versions since 1.8 now perform culling on the CPU using custom code written by Mojang to get around this, but non-NVIDIA users often still have issues for other reasons)
Also, as shown here the biggest issue with newer versions (since 1.7) was consistent lag spikes every 10th frame, regardless of any settings; the FPS graph indicates that I should be getting around 100 FPS otherwise, which is not much different than 1.6.4 (1.8 and to a lesser extent 1.7 also had major lag when loading chunks though, which was not fixed with Optifine, and going underwater in 1.8 reduced FPS to 1-2; server-side performance was also much worse).
TheMasterCaver's First World - possibly the most caved-out world in Minecraft history - includes world download.
TheMasterCaver's World - my own version of Minecraft largely based on my views of how the game should have evolved since 1.6.4.
Why do I still play in 1.6.4?
It does have a GPU. An ancient Intel Mobile GPU. Running Java through the iGPU in my CPU or the discreet GPU itself has little to no difference.
Minecrafter since 2013.
Long-Term World 1 March 22nd, 2013 – 2016; Minecraft: Pocket Edition 0.6.1 – 0.15.7
Long-Term World 2 2018 – 2019; Minecraft for Windows 10 1.2.11 – 1.12.0
Long-Term World 3 February 15th, 2020 – Present, keeping this world for as long as possible; Minecraft: Java Edition 1.6.4 – 1.19.3
Pretty soon all Windows 10 users will be forced to make an upgrade to Windows 11, many of them will also need to upgrade to a newer computer because of the requirement for a TPM 2.0 module on motherboards.
we've got until year 2025.
If you are in fact on Linux with Minecraft Java, then this isn't going to affect you,
but now Microsoft is being like Apple, forcing people to ditch older computers even though their PC's may still be powerful enough to run the latest operating system.
Normally I am in favour of moving onto the latest operating system,
but not when it inconveniences consumers this much and will cost them a lot more money than usual.
Historically we didn't even have to worry about TPM modules,
but with it being mandatory on Windows 11, that changed.
if your OS meets the requirements for RAM, storage, GPU and CPU on both power and CPU instruction sets, it should just work.
Not put more obstacles in the way of an upgrade.
And some people wonder why I use Arch...
Minecrafter since 2013.
Long-Term World 1 March 22nd, 2013 – 2016; Minecraft: Pocket Edition 0.6.1 – 0.15.7
Long-Term World 2 2018 – 2019; Minecraft for Windows 10 1.2.11 – 1.12.0
Long-Term World 3 February 15th, 2020 – Present, keeping this world for as long as possible; Minecraft: Java Edition 1.6.4 – 1.19.3
I don't know about Arch, I know there is a RetroArch software provided by Google but this doesn't let you play Minecraft.
The only Google OS that does as far as I know is android, and Minecraft on there is bedrock edition.
Minecrafter since 2013.
Long-Term World 1 March 22nd, 2013 – 2016; Minecraft: Pocket Edition 0.6.1 – 0.15.7
Long-Term World 2 2018 – 2019; Minecraft for Windows 10 1.2.11 – 1.12.0
Long-Term World 3 February 15th, 2020 – Present, keeping this world for as long as possible; Minecraft: Java Edition 1.6.4 – 1.19.3
Yeah, I use RetroPie which comes bundled with RetroArch I believe and it has a lot of emulators packed into it, I've used it on a Pi4 computer before, it is very useful.
According to the wiki RetroArch was developed by The Libretro Team,
but if it uses anything from android you could say is based on Google's software, since android is made by Google.
By the way you do get this on Google Play, so technically Google do provide it, as in distribute it, they didn't necessarily make it,
provided =/= develop just as being a publisher isn't synonymous with developer.
This isn't a bad thing, because Android is a great platform and you can use wireless game controllers on your android tablet or smartphone to play Minecraft bedrock edition on, as well as most of the Google software on Google Play, provided your device is compatible and is up to date.
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.retroarch&hl=en_US&gl=US
I have only played on Bedrock edition, but from what YT Vids and other stuff, bedrock is generally more stable in terms of redstone, and I think Bedrock is written in C++, which is why the performance is good on low end systems compared to java. I have never actually Played java before (I would love to, some day in the future). The only major difference is in the programming languages, as I mentioned earlier that bedrock is on c++, which is much more efficient than Java Script, However other than that, the only 2 obvious points is that the Bedrock edition is on most platforms (Xbox, Playstation, PC, etc), but java is desktop only. However take whatever I am saying with a pinch of salt, as I haven't played java before.
It would've been better if bedrock edition existed on Linux,
but Microsoft will never do that because then that means less people end up using the Windows platform,
and they've been doing everything they can to encourage people to use the Windows operating system in recent years, even offering free upgrades.
Windows 11 makes upgrading more tricky because of the TPM module requirement.
But it appears they're doing this for security, not because Microsoft genuinely wants to force abandoning fully operational computers.
I've got a laptop that has a Kaby Lake i5 processor which has the security features needed, so the upgrade thing isn't going to be a problem.
Edit. I still believe people should have the option to use Windows 11 on older computers though, with full hardware compatibility so long as their computer hardware isn't older than a 4th generation Intel i3/i5 processor. I don't believe in shoehorned upgrades, simply for the sake of having something new.