The Meaning of Life, the Universe, and Everything.
Join Date:
8/20/2011
Posts:
234
Member Details
Java is definitely better than bedrock. There used to be an active free modding community around MineCraft, guys like Risugami produced lots of useful and interesting mods for the game. But of course with Microsoft forcing everything behind a paywall, it killed the community.
No there is a Windows 10 edition (bedrock edition) programmed from Microsoft. Bedrock versions are also on Playstation and Xbox. This version what i meant.
Bedrock is only better if you play vanilla survival and if you want a game that doesn't lag spike all the time when having the render distance turned all the way up, and crossplay support on more platforms as well as games consoles, not just Windows 10/11 PC. AntVenom's own benchmarks proved bedrock edition is more optimized, not just by a little, but a lot, we're talking nearly quadruple the performance in some cases.
But with regards to mods Java has it beat in this category.
You can also run Minecraft Java on Windows 7 and Linux too
So it's as follows:
PC OS compatibility = Java wins
Mods = Java wins
Crossplay support = Bedrock wins
Performance = Bedrock wins
I would say Java version has bedrock beat in the update content category, however due to content parity,
the gap is closing, and there are some areas where players may prefer bedrock edition, for instance, riptide tridents don't have that annoying issue where you lose durability for using it even when you didn't collide with any mob, so it's not a clear win anymore, both editions got the Caves and Cliffs update and all their relevant features, including candles, dripstone etc.
What is more important to you is entirely your own preference.
Mods can easily fix the performance issue Java has, which is due to bad coding practices on Mojang's part, not because Java is a bad language (it is true that C++ has higher theoretical performance but this is rarely reached in any real-world situation - note that even Bedrock has many bug reports regarding poor performance, example1, example2):
In my own tests FC2 could easily outperform everything else, including the W10 edition (MCPE/Bedrock).
The config allows increasing the view distance limit up to 256. Performance will likely tank once the game runs out of VRAM.
All rendering happens with full detail and for a view distance setting of d FC2 will render (d*2+1)2 chunks, some bugs around post-initial area and very large distances aside. The whole view distance is being simulated (ticked). MCPE doesn't do either. My test environments are only a Nvidia GTX 780 and an Intel HD 2000, both with Intel quad core CPUs, your experience on other platforms may vary and is of elevated interest.
Note that is 256 chunks - 4096 blocks - with everything being fully simulated and rendered at full detail (though IMO this is overkill - can you even see individual blocks that far out - using "LOD rendering" can improve performance and vastly extend the playable render distance), which is claimed to be playable on what is now low-end hardware (an Intel HD 2000, or even 3000, can't even run the latest versions anymore).
Likewise, this mod shows what can be done by using modern rendering techniques, with CPU usage decreased by 90%, or alternatively, allowing it to effectively do 10 times more work when rendering (Mojang considers OpenGL 3.2 to be "modern" when the latest is 4.6, and despite having much higher theoretical performance than fixed-function OpenGL (here we go again, - a faster language/API does not necessarily mean a given program will actually be faster) somehow it runs worse because of whatever coding practices they use) - most players think of "Optifine" when it comes to performance-improving mods but it does nothing compared to these mods, which even fixes many graphical bugs, as does my own (for example, "smooth" lighting has many issues):
Sodium is a free and open-source rendering engine replacement for the Minecraft client that greatly improves frame rates, reduces micro-stutter, and fixes graphical issues in Minecraft. If you're coming from OptiFine, you can generally expect a significant improvement to performance over it, especially when combined with our other optimization mods.
Features A modern OpenGL rendering pipeline for chunk rendering that takes advantage of multi-draw techniques, allowing for a significant reduction in CPU overhead (~90%) when rendering the world. This can make a huge difference to frame rates for most computers that are not bottle-necked by the GPU or other components. Even if your GPU can't keep up, you'll experience much more stable frame times thanks to the CPU being able to work on other rendering tasks while it waits.
I also have a smooth lag-free experience when playing on my own modded versions based on 1.6.4, which is far more lightweight than versions since 1.8, as seen by the system requirements (even the recommended hardware dates back to the mid-2000s) - even with easily a thousand features modded in baseline memory usage is less than 30 MB (even this is not the true minimum; anything above this is due to loaded block data, which only depends on the number of sections, not what they contain, aside from the occasional tile entity/mob entity, which are too rare to matter; or the garbage collector buffer) and the size of the codebase is smaller than 1.8 despite having far more content (interestingly, the size of the 1.6.4 jar is smaller than 1.5.2 or 1.4.7). It does not achieve the FPS performance of the aforementioned mods since it uses 20+ year old rendering techniques (the same as vanilla 1.6.4) which were deprecated over a decade ago and emulated on modern hardware but it is still more than enough, and FPS is just one aspect of performance; you also want to consider FPS stability as well as server-side (tick) performance - good FPS is meaningless if mobs and world generation are laggy because the game logic can't keep up, which was a bigger issue for me than low FPS).
Mods can also enable you to effectively create your own vision of the game, completely separate from whatever Mojang decides to do, as I've been doing for nearly as long as I've been playing - I started playing on 1.5.1 and only updated to 1.6.4, after which I've never actually played on any newer version, not even 1.18, in large part because I can make my own mods to add anything I want, which eventually led to "TheMasterCaver's World", a comprehensive total conversion mod which originally focused on world generation, especially the underground, but now completely changes large parts of the game (perhaps not as much as many other such mods; also, whereas many mods are "tech" mods, focusing on building machines and automation, TMCW focuses on resource collection via caving/mining/non-automated farms), and otherwise even the caves and biome generation in vanilla 1.6.4 are still more interesting (this is one reason why I never updated to newer versions, along with performance; 1.8+ was simply crippling on my old computer, as detailed in the link in my signature).
Mods can easily fix the performance issue Java has, which is due to bad coding practices on Mojang's part, not because Java is a bad language (it is true that C++ has higher theoretical performance but this is rarely reached in any real-world situation - note that even Bedrock has many bug reports regarding poor performance, example1, example2):
Note that is 256 chunks - 4096 blocks - with everything being fully simulated and rendered at full detail (though IMO this is overkill - can you even see individual blocks that far out - using "LOD rendering" can improve performance and vastly extend the playable render distance), which is claimed to be playable on what is now low-end hardware (an Intel HD 2000, or even 3000, can't even run the latest versions anymore).
Likewise, this mod shows what can be done by using modern rendering techniques, with CPU usage decreased by 90%, or alternatively, allowing it to effectively do 10 times more work when rendering (Mojang considers OpenGL 3.2 to be "modern" when the latest is 4.6, and despite having much higher theoretical performance than fixed-function OpenGL (here we go again, - a faster language/API does not necessarily mean a given program will actually be faster) somehow it runs worse because of whatever coding practices they use) - most players think of "Optifine" when it comes to performance-improving mods but it does nothing compared to these mods, which even fixes many graphical bugs, as does my own (for example, "smooth" lighting has many issues):
I also have a smooth lag-free experience when playing on my own modded versions based on 1.6.4, which is far more lightweight than versions since 1.8, as seen by the system requirements (even the recommended hardware dates back to the mid-2000s) - even with easily a thousand features modded in baseline memory usage is less than 30 MB (even this is not the true minimum; anything above this is due to loaded block data, which only depends on the number of sections, not what they contain, aside from the occasional tile entity/mob entity, which are too rare to matter; or the garbage collector buffer) and the size of the codebase is smaller than 1.8 despite having far more content (interestingly, the size of the 1.6.4 jar is smaller than 1.5.2 or 1.4.7). It does not achieve the FPS performance of the aforementioned mods since it uses 20+ year old rendering techniques (the same as vanilla 1.6.4) which were deprecated over a decade ago and emulated on modern hardware but it is still more than enough, and FPS is just one aspect of performance; you also want to consider FPS stability as well as server-side (tick) performance - good FPS is meaningless if mobs and world generation are laggy because the game logic can't keep up, which was a bigger issue for me than low FPS).
Mods can also enable you to effectively create your own vision of the game, completely separate from whatever Mojang decides to do, as I've been doing for nearly as long as I've been playing - I started playing on 1.5.1 and only updated to 1.6.4, after which I've never actually played on any newer version, not even 1.18, in large part because I can make my own mods to add anything I want, which eventually led to "TheMasterCaver's World", a comprehensive total conversion mod which originally focused on world generation, especially the underground, but now completely changes large parts of the game (perhaps not as much as many other such mods; also, whereas many mods are "tech" mods, focusing on building machines and automation, TMCW focuses on resource collection via caving/mining/non-automated farms), and otherwise even the caves and biome generation in vanilla 1.6.4 are still more interesting (this is one reason why I never updated to newer versions, along with performance; 1.8+ was simply crippling on my old computer, as detailed in the link in my signature).
Redstone has a tendency to act up on bedrock edition for some reason
and I noticed it doesn't save the previous "redstone state" of any redstone circuitry that involves the use of redstone repeaters, causing automated systems to lock up upon reloading the chunk where that redstone contraption is in and then they need to be reset.
Theoretically it should be possible for Mojang to force the game to save the state of a redstone clock system using repeaters, they already did it with Java a long time ago. I never had these issues with redstone on Java edition, not a single time, the only issue I ever had with my contraptions that used redstone was when sometimes a cobblestone generator would become clogged at the site where the lava and water meet, but I have since found a workaround to this problem, instead of placing the lava source above, I now put the lava source on the side, so it only ever produces cobblestone at the site of a piston that pushes it and it doesn't cause a blockage in the water pipe or the lava tube.
I agree with your point about 256 chunks or 4096 blocks render distance, there comes a point where it's an unnecessary burden on people's hardware. Personally I wouldn't see a purpose in having 128 chunks render distance either, although it is apparently possible on some people's machines. In what way does a 128 chunks render distance help the player? you don't even need this in the End dimension, as the outer islands become visible with just a 32 chunk (512 blocks) render distance according to thorough testing I did with other players on my server, and you only need to see the next island you're trying to ender pearl towards, you can't instantaneously warp across 10 End islands.
If you've built a large city in the Overworld, 64 chunks render distance is the most I could see making any appreciable difference before diminishing returns becomes a problem, as you've quite rightly pointed out the individual blocks become harder and harder to notice the further the render distance is, and it can even get to a point where you can't even distinguish what biomes are ahead of you if you go far enough.
This means you're rendering an area about the size of a level 4 map, 2048 by 2048 blocks,
if on bedrock edition. In Java edition level 4 maps are an area of 1280 by 1280 blocks. This means that a 64 chunk render distance exceeds the radius of a level 4 map from Java edition, to give perspective of just how insanely high this is, and it's what I consider an "extreme render distance".
In Java edition level 4 maps are an area of 1280 by 1280 blocks.
No, they are 2048x2048 blocks on both editions; you must be confused by the fact that is how far you can go off the map before it no longer displays the player marker; immediately before that section it gives the range for the actual displayed map content, as well as in the following section under "zooming out" - this is how they have always worked, including in 1.6.4 and earlier, and I can't see any reason to even change this (which would also break all old worlds, and not even match with the rendered map pixels, which are always 128x128):
The distance required for the small white dot to appear (explorer maps) or for the big dot to vanish (normal maps) changes with the scaling of the map.
A standard map represents 128x128 blocks (1 block per pixel, 8x8 chunks) but maps can be zoomed-out to represent up to 2048x2048 blocks (16 square blocks per pixel, 128x128 chunks).
No, they are 2048x2048 blocks on both editions; you must be confused by the fact that is how far you can go off the map before it no longer displays the player marker; immediately before that section it gives the range for the actual displayed map content, as well as in the following section under "zooming out" - this is how they have always worked, including in 1.6.4 and earlier, and I can't see any reason to even change this (which would also break all old worlds, and not even match with the rendered map pixels, which are always 128x128):
You're right, my mistake, it shows I've not been checking up on Java edition in a long time. However the point about the render distance still remains, 64 chunks is still super large even without the 256 chunks you've just mentioned. It's also far higher than most Minecraft servers would allow for even if they were to have high end hardware, because as you said there are other forms of lag to consider than simply frame rate. Sometimes you can get lag in server ticks which affects redstone, another form of lag is something that slows chunk loading, although that's unlikely to happen on SSD's if those chunks had already been saved to disk.
It depends. In the eye of the beholder, its possible to not even try Java, and be well versed in bedrock seeing as many top servers use geyser.
Some people may not be well versed in either, and may be stuck with the legacy console editions of the game because they either can't afford a newer console, or because they had moved on and given up gaming because they don't have time for it. But the Xbox 360 version was popular at the time and the legacy console editions of the game is what a lot of people did start with. Other than updates bedrock edition has other advantages over the legacy console editions though like the render distance and world sizes, not even Xbox One Edition offers the world sizes bedrock and Java have, as Xbox One Edition and PS4 editions both had a limited world Overworld size of about 5,000 x 5,000 blocks each, which equates to about 2,500 from center.
I know this because I used to play Xbox One edition and have travelled to the world border.
It's not a bad world size, but not something I'd say was great either. Also the more limited world sizes
affected the Nether as you would eventually encounter a bedrock wall, preventing you from going any further.
… [I] think that bedrock is better if you want to play Survival.
It would be interesting to hear your reasons for this opinion…
IMO, 'better' depends on the individual (assuming 'better' = 'more fun to play') because:
A.) different implementations of similar ideas thus each has certain advantages (Somewhat as RPN vs algebraic calculators or the differing numeric keypad arrangements on phones vs keyboards)
B.) playstyles vary. (If you like mods, hate paying for skins, etc. or focus on RS intensive builds, java is superior. The only objective advantage to BR of which I am aware is the ability to have players from different physical platforms on the same server. There are also a number of minor {but potentially game changing} differences the better of which in each case is YMMV eg. wither behavior. )
C.) for many longer term (not necessarily older) players Minecraft: no modifier mean java. It's where they started and where they are happy. (It is also my impression that java players tend to be chronologically older which has some positive correlation to more mature... although less tahn one would like.)
D.) because it is older, because the RS is better (or at least better understood), and because of the availability of mods many technical or tech-inclined players opt for java. In turn, this leads to information on technical style building being more available for java which reinforces some aspects of point B.)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Why does everything have to be so stoopid?" Harvey Pekar (from American Splendor)
WARNING: I have an extemely "grindy" playstyle; YMMV — if this doesn't seem fun to you, mine what you can from it & bin the rest.
Uhh, I don't know. I play bedrock Xbox One/Switch, but Java is perhaps the more competitively viable (faster look speeds, special servers, etc.). I want to get Java at some point... I just need a gaming PC first
Well, Bedrock is better optimized has crossplay across platforms, but Java is the OG Minecraft, it is the version to play if you want to play how its meant to be played.
Bedrock seems better if you play vanilla, Java if you use mods or like to automate everything.
I own both bedrock and java, both since very close to their beginnings I personally find vanilla grindy to the point that it quickly becomes boring, so I rely on mods to reduce the grindiness and use a technical play style where I automate everything. That means that for me there is only one choice: Java
The fact that most youtubers who stream and most tutorials you'll find are for java pretty much sums it up. While they have made some parity changes there is alot that makes alot of things easier in java, from more consistent redstone to easier bosses and better mob farms. I play on bedrock and am constantly annoyed finding new things that dont work as well or at all on bedrock. And I cannot afford a pc so im stuck on a harder version.
The most common way of building web applications includes two principal viewpoints; the frontend and backend. As a web engineer, understanding these parts of web development is imperative.
-Fan content is easier to get access to, no marketplace to speak of
-Old versions are completely accessible from Mojang's server to download and play whenever you want and mod if you know how to mod old versions.
-May not run as well as Bedrock but with performance mods (OptiFine, Sodium) or the right tweaking of the game (using Java arguments or other means) you can get it to run well instead of the bad job Mojang has made the game version to version, then fixing it and breaking it however many times Modders can point out.
-Command system is better. The OP system while not as UI accessible as Bedrock before launching the world, isn't in your way and it's in commands instead. That and commands don't prefer achievements.
-Redstone, don't need to say more those that know, know.
-As weird as it is I like the creative mode flight drift, Bedrock doesn't have it (whether for nausea or not which is a fair reason to not have it so a mod is required in Java to prevent it). It also goes for the swimming controls to since 1.13 I don't like it in Bedrock and it's like the auto-step feature in Vanilla compared to mods it just doesn't work very well.
-Multiplayer can be alright. Though people can go with Realms if they want but otherwise if you don't know how to set up a server for yourself then good luck. But depending on that of course it will be a fine or rough time. I did a few modded server playthroughs to test datapacks, record a modded server play as recent examples but I'm not a multiplayer person really or ever tried minigame/PVP person so can't say for those experiences.
-Seed sharing is more clear on Java I find than Bedrock other than version to deal with it may or may not work while with Bedrock no older version access means that seeds may not work but otherwise it may or may not be down to whatever console/Windows 10/Pocket Edition version of the game possibly. In more so a case for legacy edition
Bedrock:
-Marketplace for fan content is easiest way but fan content exists on MCPEDL.com for example which is where I get Behaviourpacks as you can't get them on the marketplace and of course other content exists there too that like Curseforge and the Java method is 'free' and 'open to anyone no storefront' even if yes the creators do get a cut on the marketplace and that MCPEDL can be awkward like the Forum days of adfly and so on annoying it's still something.
-Can't use old version only moving forward as the option unless you don't connect to the Internet I guess.
-Performance is better than Java Vanilla.
-Controller support without a need for a behaviourpack
-Redstone isn't as great due to the bugs used in Java not being present besides the C++ or C# and Java differences in coding language too.
-I don't like the lack of creative mode drift or the swimming in Bedrock.
-I assume multiplayer may be better and of course crossplay is a thing with all versions of Bedrock. I have only used the Legacy Console versions for multiplayer whether split-screen on Xbox 360/One versions of the game or invites for the Diamonds To You trophy on my Vita (where there is no split-screen of course).
Those are what comes to mind.
Bedrock has it's place but I can make Java my playground Bedrock not so much.
Some of my friends say that Java is better than bedrock.
I'am a Java player but i think that bedrock is better if you want to play Survival.
Multiplayer java is obvious better. (My Opinion)
Whats your opinion?
Java is better, because mods.
Java is definitely better than bedrock. There used to be an active free modding community around MineCraft, guys like Risugami produced lots of useful and interesting mods for the game. But of course with Microsoft forcing everything behind a paywall, it killed the community.
Don't know. I have never played on the bedrock.
This bedrock?
No there is a Windows 10 edition (bedrock edition) programmed from Microsoft. Bedrock versions are also on Playstation and Xbox. This version what i meant.
Bedrock is only better if you play vanilla survival and if you want a game that doesn't lag spike all the time when having the render distance turned all the way up, and crossplay support on more platforms as well as games consoles, not just Windows 10/11 PC. AntVenom's own benchmarks proved bedrock edition is more optimized, not just by a little, but a lot, we're talking nearly quadruple the performance in some cases.
But with regards to mods Java has it beat in this category.
You can also run Minecraft Java on Windows 7 and Linux too
So it's as follows:
PC OS compatibility = Java wins
Mods = Java wins
Crossplay support = Bedrock wins
Performance = Bedrock wins
I would say Java version has bedrock beat in the update content category, however due to content parity,
the gap is closing, and there are some areas where players may prefer bedrock edition, for instance, riptide tridents don't have that annoying issue where you lose durability for using it even when you didn't collide with any mob, so it's not a clear win anymore, both editions got the Caves and Cliffs update and all their relevant features, including candles, dripstone etc.
What is more important to you is entirely your own preference.
Mods can easily fix the performance issue Java has, which is due to bad coding practices on Mojang's part, not because Java is a bad language (it is true that C++ has higher theoretical performance but this is rarely reached in any real-world situation - note that even Bedrock has many bug reports regarding poor performance, example1, example2):
Note that is 256 chunks - 4096 blocks - with everything being fully simulated and rendered at full detail (though IMO this is overkill - can you even see individual blocks that far out - using "LOD rendering" can improve performance and vastly extend the playable render distance), which is claimed to be playable on what is now low-end hardware (an Intel HD 2000, or even 3000, can't even run the latest versions anymore).
Likewise, this mod shows what can be done by using modern rendering techniques, with CPU usage decreased by 90%, or alternatively, allowing it to effectively do 10 times more work when rendering (Mojang considers OpenGL 3.2 to be "modern" when the latest is 4.6, and despite having much higher theoretical performance than fixed-function OpenGL (here we go again, - a faster language/API does not necessarily mean a given program will actually be faster) somehow it runs worse because of whatever coding practices they use) - most players think of "Optifine" when it comes to performance-improving mods but it does nothing compared to these mods, which even fixes many graphical bugs, as does my own (for example, "smooth" lighting has many issues):
Contrast that with this:
MC-164123 Poor FPS performance with new rendering engine
MC-219639 Performance loss after using OpenGL 3.2 core profile
I also have a smooth lag-free experience when playing on my own modded versions based on 1.6.4, which is far more lightweight than versions since 1.8, as seen by the system requirements (even the recommended hardware dates back to the mid-2000s) - even with easily a thousand features modded in baseline memory usage is less than 30 MB (even this is not the true minimum; anything above this is due to loaded block data, which only depends on the number of sections, not what they contain, aside from the occasional tile entity/mob entity, which are too rare to matter; or the garbage collector buffer) and the size of the codebase is smaller than 1.8 despite having far more content (interestingly, the size of the 1.6.4 jar is smaller than 1.5.2 or 1.4.7). It does not achieve the FPS performance of the aforementioned mods since it uses 20+ year old rendering techniques (the same as vanilla 1.6.4) which were deprecated over a decade ago and emulated on modern hardware but it is still more than enough, and FPS is just one aspect of performance; you also want to consider FPS stability as well as server-side (tick) performance - good FPS is meaningless if mobs and world generation are laggy because the game logic can't keep up, which was a bigger issue for me than low FPS).
Mods can also enable you to effectively create your own vision of the game, completely separate from whatever Mojang decides to do, as I've been doing for nearly as long as I've been playing - I started playing on 1.5.1 and only updated to 1.6.4, after which I've never actually played on any newer version, not even 1.18, in large part because I can make my own mods to add anything I want, which eventually led to "TheMasterCaver's World", a comprehensive total conversion mod which originally focused on world generation, especially the underground, but now completely changes large parts of the game (perhaps not as much as many other such mods; also, whereas many mods are "tech" mods, focusing on building machines and automation, TMCW focuses on resource collection via caving/mining/non-automated farms), and otherwise even the caves and biome generation in vanilla 1.6.4 are still more interesting (this is one reason why I never updated to newer versions, along with performance; 1.8+ was simply crippling on my old computer, as detailed in the link in my signature).
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?
Redstone has a tendency to act up on bedrock edition for some reason
and I noticed it doesn't save the previous "redstone state" of any redstone circuitry that involves the use of redstone repeaters, causing automated systems to lock up upon reloading the chunk where that redstone contraption is in and then they need to be reset.
Theoretically it should be possible for Mojang to force the game to save the state of a redstone clock system using repeaters, they already did it with Java a long time ago. I never had these issues with redstone on Java edition, not a single time, the only issue I ever had with my contraptions that used redstone was when sometimes a cobblestone generator would become clogged at the site where the lava and water meet, but I have since found a workaround to this problem, instead of placing the lava source above, I now put the lava source on the side, so it only ever produces cobblestone at the site of a piston that pushes it and it doesn't cause a blockage in the water pipe or the lava tube.
I agree with your point about 256 chunks or 4096 blocks render distance, there comes a point where it's an unnecessary burden on people's hardware. Personally I wouldn't see a purpose in having 128 chunks render distance either, although it is apparently possible on some people's machines. In what way does a 128 chunks render distance help the player? you don't even need this in the End dimension, as the outer islands become visible with just a 32 chunk (512 blocks) render distance according to thorough testing I did with other players on my server, and you only need to see the next island you're trying to ender pearl towards, you can't instantaneously warp across 10 End islands.
If you've built a large city in the Overworld, 64 chunks render distance is the most I could see making any appreciable difference before diminishing returns becomes a problem, as you've quite rightly pointed out the individual blocks become harder and harder to notice the further the render distance is, and it can even get to a point where you can't even distinguish what biomes are ahead of you if you go far enough.
This means you're rendering an area about the size of a level 4 map, 2048 by 2048 blocks,
if on bedrock edition. In Java edition level 4 maps are an area of 1280 by 1280 blocks. This means that a 64 chunk render distance exceeds the radius of a level 4 map from Java edition, to give perspective of just how insanely high this is, and it's what I consider an "extreme render distance".
https://minecraftbedrock-archive.fandom.com/wiki/Maps
https://minecraft.fandom.com/wiki/Map
No, they are 2048x2048 blocks on both editions; you must be confused by the fact that is how far you can go off the map before it no longer displays the player marker; immediately before that section it gives the range for the actual displayed map content, as well as in the following section under "zooming out" - this is how they have always worked, including in 1.6.4 and earlier, and I can't see any reason to even change this (which would also break all old worlds, and not even match with the rendered map pixels, which are always 128x128):
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're right, my mistake, it shows I've not been checking up on Java edition in a long time. However the point about the render distance still remains, 64 chunks is still super large even without the 256 chunks you've just mentioned. It's also far higher than most Minecraft servers would allow for even if they were to have high end hardware, because as you said there are other forms of lag to consider than simply frame rate. Sometimes you can get lag in server ticks which affects redstone, another form of lag is something that slows chunk loading, although that's unlikely to happen on SSD's if those chunks had already been saved to disk.
It depends. In the eye of the beholder, its possible to not even try Java, and be well versed in bedrock seeing as many top servers use geyser.
EdenCraftMC <3
Some people may not be well versed in either, and may be stuck with the legacy console editions of the game because they either can't afford a newer console, or because they had moved on and given up gaming because they don't have time for it. But the Xbox 360 version was popular at the time and the legacy console editions of the game is what a lot of people did start with. Other than updates bedrock edition has other advantages over the legacy console editions though like the render distance and world sizes, not even Xbox One Edition offers the world sizes bedrock and Java have, as Xbox One Edition and PS4 editions both had a limited world Overworld size of about 5,000 x 5,000 blocks each, which equates to about 2,500 from center.
I know this because I used to play Xbox One edition and have travelled to the world border.
It's not a bad world size, but not something I'd say was great either. Also the more limited world sizes
affected the Nether as you would eventually encounter a bedrock wall, preventing you from going any further.
It would be interesting to hear your reasons for this opinion…
IMO, 'better' depends on the individual (assuming 'better' = 'more fun to play') because:
A.) different implementations of similar ideas thus each has certain advantages (Somewhat as RPN vs algebraic calculators or the differing numeric keypad arrangements on phones vs keyboards)
B.) playstyles vary. (If you like mods, hate paying for skins, etc. or focus on RS intensive builds, java is superior. The only objective advantage to BR of which I am aware is the ability to have players from different physical platforms on the same server. There are also a number of minor {but potentially game changing} differences the better of which in each case is YMMV eg. wither behavior. )
C.) for many longer term (not necessarily older) players Minecraft: no modifier mean java. It's where they started and where they are happy. (It is also my impression that java players tend to be chronologically older which has some positive correlation to more mature... although less tahn one would like.)
D.) because it is older, because the RS is better (or at least better understood), and because of the availability of mods many technical or tech-inclined players opt for java. In turn, this leads to information on technical style building being more available for java which reinforces some aspects of point B.)
Uhh, I don't know. I play bedrock Xbox One/Switch, but Java is perhaps the more competitively viable (faster look speeds, special servers, etc.). I want to get Java at some point... I just need a gaming PC first
Those Bedrock players can't play older versions like us Java players.
Well, Bedrock is better optimized has crossplay across platforms, but Java is the OG Minecraft, it is the version to play if you want to play how its meant to be played.
Bedrock seems better if you play vanilla, Java if you use mods or like to automate everything.
I own both bedrock and java, both since very close to their beginnings I personally find vanilla grindy to the point that it quickly becomes boring, so I rely on mods to reduce the grindiness and use a technical play style where I automate everything. That means that for me there is only one choice: Java
The fact that most youtubers who stream and most tutorials you'll find are for java pretty much sums it up. While they have made some parity changes there is alot that makes alot of things easier in java, from more consistent redstone to easier bosses and better mob farms. I play on bedrock and am constantly annoyed finding new things that dont work as well or at all on bedrock. And I cannot afford a pc so im stuck on a harder version.
The most common way of building web applications includes two principal viewpoints; the frontend and backend. As a web engineer, understanding these parts of web development is imperative.
JAVA Course in Pune
Java:
-Fan content is easier to get access to, no marketplace to speak of
-Old versions are completely accessible from Mojang's server to download and play whenever you want and mod if you know how to mod old versions.
-May not run as well as Bedrock but with performance mods (OptiFine, Sodium) or the right tweaking of the game (using Java arguments or other means) you can get it to run well instead of the bad job Mojang has made the game version to version, then fixing it and breaking it however many times Modders can point out.
-Command system is better. The OP system while not as UI accessible as Bedrock before launching the world, isn't in your way and it's in commands instead. That and commands don't prefer achievements.
-Redstone, don't need to say more those that know, know.
-As weird as it is I like the creative mode flight drift, Bedrock doesn't have it (whether for nausea or not which is a fair reason to not have it so a mod is required in Java to prevent it). It also goes for the swimming controls to since 1.13 I don't like it in Bedrock and it's like the auto-step feature in Vanilla compared to mods it just doesn't work very well.
-Multiplayer can be alright. Though people can go with Realms if they want but otherwise if you don't know how to set up a server for yourself then good luck. But depending on that of course it will be a fine or rough time. I did a few modded server playthroughs to test datapacks, record a modded server play as recent examples but I'm not a multiplayer person really or ever tried minigame/PVP person so can't say for those experiences.
-Seed sharing is more clear on Java I find than Bedrock other than version to deal with it may or may not work while with Bedrock no older version access means that seeds may not work but otherwise it may or may not be down to whatever console/Windows 10/Pocket Edition version of the game possibly. In more so a case for legacy edition
Bedrock:
-Marketplace for fan content is easiest way but fan content exists on MCPEDL.com for example which is where I get Behaviourpacks as you can't get them on the marketplace and of course other content exists there too that like Curseforge and the Java method is 'free' and 'open to anyone no storefront' even if yes the creators do get a cut on the marketplace and that MCPEDL can be awkward like the Forum days of adfly and so on annoying it's still something.
-Can't use old version only moving forward as the option unless you don't connect to the Internet I guess.
-Performance is better than Java Vanilla.
-Controller support without a need for a behaviourpack
-Redstone isn't as great due to the bugs used in Java not being present besides the C++ or C# and Java differences in coding language too.
-I don't like the lack of creative mode drift or the swimming in Bedrock.
-I assume multiplayer may be better and of course crossplay is a thing with all versions of Bedrock. I have only used the Legacy Console versions for multiplayer whether split-screen on Xbox 360/One versions of the game or invites for the Diamonds To You trophy on my Vita (where there is no split-screen of course).
Those are what comes to mind.
Bedrock has it's place but I can make Java my playground Bedrock not so much.
Niche Community Content Finder, Youtuber, Modpack/Map Maker, "Duck" "Fabric/Old Modloaders Enthusiast"
Thread Maintainer of APortingCore, Liteloader Download HUB, Asphodel Meadows, Fabric Project, "Legacy/Cursed Fabric/Ornithe", "Power API/Tesla", Rift/Fabric/Forge 1.13 to 1.17. "" = active support projects
"Wikis" Maintain: https://modwiki.miraheze.org/wiki/User:SuntannedDuck2, "https://ftb.fandom.com/wiki/Quilt", https://ftb.fandom.com/wiki/UserProfile:SuntannedDuck2, "https://gran-turismo.fandom.com/wiki/Gran_Turismo_4_Toyota_Prius_Edition"