Please, disable automatic saving including when we quit. Add something in menu to save and load manually, also add 2 keys as shortcut to saving and loading.
With automatic saving i always backup saved-world folder if i start doing something deadly, e. g. going first time into ocean monument. If would be better to just press a key to save before going there. And if i died, i would press the key to load saved world.
I bet Mojang won't listen me, with new versions we mostly get only more decoration blocks. So, is mod with manual saving and loading already available?
This change results in asking for the entire community to have to now manually save or else risk losing it, simply for the benefit of making "save scumming" (which can still be done manually) more effortless.
Save scumming isn't realistic and Minecraft focuses a lot on consequences. Plan out your trips, read the wikis, and have backups and emergency plans ready. Keep your F3 debug tab on if you want.
The biggest problem is how much data the game needs to handle; suppose it never saved unless you told it to, including when you'd normally be unloading chunks as you move around - that data adds up fast; you are talking about many GB for even a relatively small area explored, especially in the age of elytra, and modern versions are already memory hungry enough as-is (once upon a time it was possible to allocate even just 256 MB to the game with no issues, that all started changing after 1.8, now 2 GB is the default and support for 32 bit is being dropped since it can't handle that much). That is also just for the chunks loaded within render distance; if you move by twice the distance in one direction now the game has to keep twice as many chunks loaded, and so on). The size of the files on disk is also highly misleading since the game compresses the data when saving it and a lot of it compresses very well (even more than the file size indicates as region files aligns chunks to multiples of 4 KB; even a "void" region is still around 4 MB, but if you compress the whole file it may be only 50 KB).
That said, there is a fairly popular request to disable autosaving on the official feedback page:
Note that while this mentions that you could turn it off in the old Console Edition (most of the discussion appears to be over the lost of this functionality when consoles were updated to use Bedrock Edition instead of a special version that had been made for them) worlds were also finite, and I believe they were kept loaded in their entirety, or at least what had been explored, explaining the odd restrictions on the global numbers of various entities (as this was before simulation distance so they were all being processed and too many will cause lag; you could only have so many tamed wolves, or breed so many villagers, chickens, etc).
I also thought to note that while Optifine has/had an "autosave interval" option it had no effect on chunk saving when they were unloaded while moving around, they were always saved, as well as everything else when pausing the game (you don't even need to click on "save and quit to title", just pausing is enough, all that button does is make the internal server log you out and shut down, with one final save for good measure):
2023-08-05 17:46:35 [SERVER] [INFO] Saving and pausing game...
2023-08-05 17:46:35 [SERVER] [INFO] Saving chunks for level 'World1'/Overworld
2023-08-05 17:46:35 [SERVER] [INFO] Saving chunks for level 'World1'/Nether
2023-08-05 17:46:35 [SERVER] [INFO] Saving chunks for level 'World1'/The End
2023-08-05 17:46:37 [SERVER] [INFO] Stopping server
2023-08-05 17:46:37 [SERVER] [INFO] Saving players
2023-08-05 17:46:37 [SERVER] [INFO] TheMasterCaver left the game
2023-08-05 17:46:37 [SERVER] [INFO] Saving worlds
2023-08-05 17:46:37 [SERVER] [INFO] Saving chunks for level 'World1'/Overworld
2023-08-05 17:46:37 [SERVER] [INFO] Saving chunks for level 'World1'/Nether
2023-08-05 17:46:37 [SERVER] [INFO] Saving chunks for level 'World1'/The End
"Saving and pausing game" is when I paused it; the second save after "stopping server" is when I clicked on "save and quit to title". While it includes "saving players" and "saving worlds" everything was already saved the first time, as indicated by the source code itself:
// Called when pausing game
if (!var1 && this.isGamePaused)
{
this.serverLogAgent.logInfo("Saving and pausing game...");
this.getConfigurationManager().saveAllPlayerData();
this.saveAllWorlds(false);
}
// Called when stopping the server (save and quit to title); the only difference is that pausing omits the messages
this.getLogAgent().logInfo("Saving players");
this.serverConfigManager.saveAllPlayerData();
this.serverConfigManager.removeAllPlayers();
this.getLogAgent().logInfo("Saving worlds");
this.saveAllWorlds(false);
// Called when autosaving (every 900 ticks = 45 seconds), again exactly the same as pausing or quitting. One difference is
// "saveAllWorlds", where "true" is passed to it instead of "false", which limits how many chunks get saved, presumably to
// reduce lag spikes, but as this happens fairly often they will all be saved pretty quickly.
if (this.tickCounter % 900 == 0)
{
this.theProfiler.startSection("save");
this.serverConfigManager.saveAllPlayerData();
this.saveAllWorlds(true);
this.theProfiler.endSection();
}
TheMasterCaver, i always delete regions - .mca files - where i don't have anything. Size of regions are big because .mca contains info about default blocks on every location. For example, if you see a diamond ore on coordinates 1300.15.50 and you mine it, then you go to region 1.0, save the world, then delete file 2.0.mca and load the world, you will find diamond ore again on the same location as you did first time. I would have only biome in .mca as default info, every block should be randomized (well, not completely, e. g. we can't have water above air) when we enter a region for the first time or after we delete it.
Princess_Garnet, when we want to quit in other games, we see option to save. We can't forget to save.
Minecraft isn't like other games in a lot of ways. I don't think it can put off saving everything until the end? The reply a couple after my first post might explain some of it.
What if that requires an obscene amount of time to do?
What if you accidentally choose not to save and lose hours of work?
What do you do with chunks that need unloaded? Do you you "save a copy" of them (doubling memory and/or disk needs per chunk?), and then choose which one to discard at the end based on if a player saves or not?
There's a lot of reasons this may not be practical or even feasible. And you're asking all of this to be done, solely to make save scumming, which is already possible, a tiny bit easier? Why?
There's nothing wrong with save scumming if you want to do it. But I disagree with making these wild changes just to make it slightly easier. No, you can still do it, and the game works better for everyone else as it is. Don't make it more complicated for everyone to make what is already possible slightly easier. It's fine as it is.
"What if that requires an obscene amount of time to do?" What's faster? 1. Press a key to save and wait for 5 seconds to continue playing; 2. Press esc, then alt-tab to go to explorer, delete world folder in \backup and copy&paste world folder from \saves to \backup. Both 1 and 2 last at least 15 seconds.
"What if you accidentally choose not to save and lose hours of work?" What if you don't save manually or backup before a battle, you're killed and you lose everything?
"What do you do with chunks that need unloaded?" If we have manual saving, i will do the same as i do now with automatic saving. I delete regions (.mca) where i don't have anything to keep. Manual saving should save in the same way as automatic saving does.
Well, you can add option in settings to switch from automatic to manual saving and vice versa. And when we want to quit, we should have option to select to save or not save. We should get a message on screen when an automatic save is executed so i would know if it's good to save when i want to quit. For example, i got info for automatic save 2 minutes ago, i'm killed one minute later, i quit and select not to save. We should be able to change automatic saving interval. Oh, all this is too much work for lazy Mojang. Updates are bringing only new decoration blocks and new mobs.
"What if that requires an obscene amount of time to do?" What's faster? 1. Press a key to save and wait for 5 seconds to continue playing; 2. Press esc, then alt-tab to go to explorer, delete world folder in \backup and copy&paste world folder from \saves to \backup. Both 1 and 2 last at least 15 seconds.
I'm not sure how this addresses what I was asking?
I was asking what happens if deferring the saving of data until only after it is manually instructed to be done by the player makes it take longer than it does now. As an example, what if I play a session where I travel across a lot of chunks? As it is now, it saves this data on the fly so there's not much built up. With your changes, all of that might build up to a lengthier save time.
Making it an option somewhat removes this particular concern, but it doesn't address the entirety of the difficulties with it.
"What if you accidentally choose not to save and lose hours of work?" What if you don't save manually or backup before a battle, you're killed and you lose everything?
Accept the results of your gameplay? I get the impression with each passing day that nobody wants to do this anymore, though...
"What do you do with chunks that need unloaded?" If we have manual saving, i will do the same as i do now with automatic saving. I delete regions (.mca) where i don't have anything to keep. Manual saving should save in the same way as automatic saving does.
This, too, isn't answering the question I'm actually asking, and you cut out the second half which is the part that explains what I'm asking and why it's important.
What I'm asking is, if the game is changed to never save data until the user manually chooses to save it, what is done with chunks that are loaded, changed, and then need unloaded?
You have to do something with them.
Right now, the game is able to save those changes to disk "on the fly" (during gameplay), and then it is able to unload them and be done with them. If the game simply discards them and doesn't save them, well... now you can't save even if you want to!
So if you want the option to save, but not have it done automatically, then here's what has to happen. That "something you have to do" is keeping them around somewhere in the meantime until you know whether you're going to save or not. That means keeping them residing in memory (oh my, I can imagine the possible performance impacts of this...), or more likely it would be saving them to disk as a copy but not overwriting the old ones (also raising disk space use and adding potentially unnecessary wear on limited SSD write cycles, even if that only applies if you don't save and even if this extra space is only temporary and only during gameplay).
It would be a technical mess, even if it was just as an option and not forced on everyone, and for what benefit? To make save scumming easier?
Huh? There's nothing personal in this thread (besides maybe the remark about being a Mojang employee). It's literally just a suggestion and discussion about the saving structure of the game.
Huh? There's nothing personal in this thread (besides maybe the remark about being a Mojang employee). It's literally just a suggestion and discussion about the saving structure of the game.
Well, that remark is enough on its own, as there are a number of them across the forums lately.
I mean more of a 'snide comment about people', many of which seem to be aimed at Garnet because she earnestly engages people in these frankly fruitless arguments.
I'm sorry if you find feedback or reasoning for that feedback to suggestions as "fruitless arguments", but it's not. To the contrary, it's the entire purpose of this forum and the threads in it, no?
A suggestion is made.
Feedback and reasoning for said feedback is given in response.
I'm sorry if you find feedback or reasoning for that feedback to suggestions as "fruitless arguments", but it's not. To the contrary, it's the entire purpose of this forum and the threads in it, no?
A suggestion is made.
Feedback and reasoning for said feedback is given in response.
And that's all that was happening here.
The point is that it doesn't really change people's minds, as indicated by the tone in many of the replies from certain people here. The problem isn't that you're giving feedback but that it's not being actively listened to.
Personally, I'm not one for reading effort posts or long responses, but I don't have anything against it - I just see that everyone stands their point of view and it's very rare for anyone to be convinced by anything.
Please, disable automatic saving including when we quit. Add something in menu to save and load manually, also add 2 keys as shortcut to saving and loading.
With automatic saving i always backup saved-world folder if i start doing something deadly, e. g. going first time into ocean monument. If would be better to just press a key to save before going there. And if i died, i would press the key to load saved world.
I bet Mojang won't listen me, with new versions we mostly get only more decoration blocks. So, is mod with manual saving and loading already available?
The simple reason why Mojang won't respond here is because this forum isn't affiliated with them, and it's been stated before many times by now that they do not come onto here to read the opinions of people, either suggestions or discussion, none of that matters to them.
While you're entitled to an opinion and as such you have a right to criticize whatever you find wrong with the game and any of its features, as much as I dislike it sometimes, they have rightful discretion as to whether or not they come here to see what people have on their minds.
Even if Mojang came on here to check posts at a later time, it is important to realize just how much time it would actually take to check everyone's opinions in posts they still keep public and for everyone to see. Depending on the matter at hand, it can take literal years to come to an accurate conclusion about what a community, either individually or collectively, thinks of them or their game. Humans shouldn't be blamed for their limitations, only their wrongful actions and the attitude which they still hold after the fact, even then compassion is still important, for both parties involved.
I do think the game could stand to benefit with more customizations for both survival and creative mode worlds, to a point, although save scumming would be considered cheating, you can use backup files for this btw, it's not something I would do on my current or future survival worlds, but who am I to judge? I believe it's just as important to let other people have their say on this as well, lots of people use mods to add in customizations that change many aspects of the game.
The point is that it doesn't really change people's minds, as indicated by the tone in many of the replies from certain people here. The problem isn't that you're giving feedback but that it's not being actively listened to.
One can't control if others listen to them. The best I can do is give my reasoning as feedback to suggestions. That's what I did. I'm not sure how your statement of "people seldom have their minds changed" is particularly relevant here.
A suggestion was made to defer saving until it is instructed to be done. Myself and another pointed out how this is possibly very unfeasible, and for the benefit of very few people (especially since what it accomplishes goes against what is intended, and can already be achieved). In other words, the effort for results ratio alone likely makes it an unlikely change to expect, especially given what it would do on top of that (goes against intended behavior). All I did was point these things out.
In other words, it was the practical, logical, and realistic reasoning as to why this particular change is unlikely. Then you come along and say I enjoy engaging in "fruitless arguments" because I pointed those things out? Sort of rubbed me the wrong way...
Mojang might not look directly at these forums in official capacity, but they still likely consider the "collective" of what players may want. And that collective is only accumulated when there are avenues to get the ideas out there, of which this forum is one.
So while Mojang might not look or participate with much here, that's still not a good reason to remove the forum. It's an avenue for players to take to share ideas, even if it might not be the best one (maybe some place on Reddit is but I don't know).
The purpose of this forum section has always been to discuss ideas with each other as a community, it has never been intended as a way to get ideas in front of Mojang. This is just as true now as it was years ago when the forum actually had some small connections with the development team. We aren't going to remove this section of the forums (or any other) due to lack of Mojang engagement with it.
Additionally, we welcome any types of discussion in this section as long as the discussion follows the rules. Some people like to give simple ideas and feedback. Others like to dig down into the nitty-gritty of an idea and discuss if they think it is balanced or technically feasible. Both types of discussion are 100% valid and users are not forced to post one way or another. Nobody is obligated to respond to any or all of the feedback given for an idea. Whether or not a lengthy breakdown of why someone agrees or disagrees with an idea actually makes someone change their mind is also irrelevant, people can reply in whatever style they choose as long as no rules are broken.
Now that I have my little spiel as a moderator regarding some of the side discussion in this thread, I would like to reply to the idea itself.
I think the idea is more technically feasible than some people have said. There's no real reason that the information for the chunks would have to be saved in RAM or anything like that. The use of a temporary folder within the save structure for storing all changes between manual saves would be possible as far as I'm aware.
Basically after the user makes a manual save, all changes that would be written to the main save automatically in the current system would instead be written to a temporary folder, and when the user saves again, those files would be stitched into the real save file. If they quit without saving or the game crashes and is reopened, that temporary file is erased. It may take a bit of time to manually save while the files are combined, especially if you played for a long time between saves, but that's not really an "end of the world" type of scenario, and you could add a popup message or something if the temporary file gets above a specific size saying "Hey it might be a good idea to make a manual save now!"
However, this can already be done in a roundabout way by manually backing up the world before doing anything particularly risky. This was mentioned in the original post. For that reason I personally don't feel like it is needed, it's just a slightly more convenient way to do what can already be done. At the very least I would prefer it to be an option that is disabled by default, it would be a bad idea to force the change on players after over a decade of using autosaves.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want some advice on how to thrive in the Suggestions section? Check this handy list of guidelines and tips for posting your ideas and responding to the ideas of others!
Please, disable automatic saving including when we quit. Add something in menu to save and load manually, also add 2 keys as shortcut to saving and loading.
With automatic saving i always backup saved-world folder if i start doing something deadly, e. g. going first time into ocean monument. If would be better to just press a key to save before going there. And if i died, i would press the key to load saved world.
I bet Mojang won't listen me, with new versions we mostly get only more decoration blocks. So, is mod with manual saving and loading already available?
This change results in asking for the entire community to have to now manually save or else risk losing it, simply for the benefit of making "save scumming" (which can still be done manually) more effortless.
I disagree with this.
Save scumming isn't realistic and Minecraft focuses a lot on consequences. Plan out your trips, read the wikis, and have backups and emergency plans ready. Keep your F3 debug tab on if you want.
The biggest problem is how much data the game needs to handle; suppose it never saved unless you told it to, including when you'd normally be unloading chunks as you move around - that data adds up fast; you are talking about many GB for even a relatively small area explored, especially in the age of elytra, and modern versions are already memory hungry enough as-is (once upon a time it was possible to allocate even just 256 MB to the game with no issues, that all started changing after 1.8, now 2 GB is the default and support for 32 bit is being dropped since it can't handle that much). That is also just for the chunks loaded within render distance; if you move by twice the distance in one direction now the game has to keep twice as many chunks loaded, and so on). The size of the files on disk is also highly misleading since the game compresses the data when saving it and a lot of it compresses very well (even more than the file size indicates as region files aligns chunks to multiples of 4 KB; even a "void" region is still around 4 MB, but if you compress the whole file it may be only 50 KB).
That said, there is a fairly popular request to disable autosaving on the official feedback page:
Add the ability to disable autosaving and to exit without saving
Note that while this mentions that you could turn it off in the old Console Edition (most of the discussion appears to be over the lost of this functionality when consoles were updated to use Bedrock Edition instead of a special version that had been made for them) worlds were also finite, and I believe they were kept loaded in their entirety, or at least what had been explored, explaining the odd restrictions on the global numbers of various entities (as this was before simulation distance so they were all being processed and too many will cause lag; you could only have so many tamed wolves, or breed so many villagers, chickens, etc).
I also thought to note that while Optifine has/had an "autosave interval" option it had no effect on chunk saving when they were unloaded while moving around, they were always saved, as well as everything else when pausing the game (you don't even need to click on "save and quit to title", just pausing is enough, all that button does is make the internal server log you out and shut down, with one final save for good measure):
"Saving and pausing game" is when I paused it; the second save after "stopping server" is when I clicked on "save and quit to title". While it includes "saving players" and "saving worlds" everything was already saved the first time, as indicated by the source code itself:
// Called when pausing game if (!var1 && this.isGamePaused) { this.serverLogAgent.logInfo("Saving and pausing game..."); this.getConfigurationManager().saveAllPlayerData(); this.saveAllWorlds(false); } // Called when stopping the server (save and quit to title); the only difference is that pausing omits the messages this.getLogAgent().logInfo("Saving players"); this.serverConfigManager.saveAllPlayerData(); this.serverConfigManager.removeAllPlayers(); this.getLogAgent().logInfo("Saving worlds"); this.saveAllWorlds(false); // Called when autosaving (every 900 ticks = 45 seconds), again exactly the same as pausing or quitting. One difference is // "saveAllWorlds", where "true" is passed to it instead of "false", which limits how many chunks get saved, presumably to // reduce lag spikes, but as this happens fairly often they will all be saved pretty quickly. if (this.tickCounter % 900 == 0) { this.theProfiler.startSection("save"); this.serverConfigManager.saveAllPlayerData(); this.saveAllWorlds(true); this.theProfiler.endSection(); }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?
Princess_Garnet, when we want to quit in other games, we see option to save. We can't forget to save.
TheMasterCaver, i always delete regions - .mca files - where i don't have anything. Size of regions are big because .mca contains info about default blocks on every location. For example, if you see a diamond ore on coordinates 1300.15.50 and you mine it, then you go to region 1.0, save the world, then delete file 2.0.mca and load the world, you will find diamond ore again on the same location as you did first time. I would have only biome in .mca as default info, every block should be randomized (well, not completely, e. g. we can't have water above air) when we enter a region for the first time or after we delete it.
Minecraft isn't like other games in a lot of ways. I don't think it can put off saving everything until the end? The reply a couple after my first post might explain some of it.
What if that requires an obscene amount of time to do?
What if you accidentally choose not to save and lose hours of work?
What do you do with chunks that need unloaded? Do you you "save a copy" of them (doubling memory and/or disk needs per chunk?), and then choose which one to discard at the end based on if a player saves or not?
There's a lot of reasons this may not be practical or even feasible. And you're asking all of this to be done, solely to make save scumming, which is already possible, a tiny bit easier? Why?
There's nothing wrong with save scumming if you want to do it. But I disagree with making these wild changes just to make it slightly easier. No, you can still do it, and the game works better for everyone else as it is. Don't make it more complicated for everyone to make what is already possible slightly easier. It's fine as it is.
I bet you're a Mojang worker.
"What if that requires an obscene amount of time to do?" What's faster? 1. Press a key to save and wait for 5 seconds to continue playing; 2. Press esc, then alt-tab to go to explorer, delete world folder in \backup and copy&paste world folder from \saves to \backup. Both 1 and 2 last at least 15 seconds.
"What if you accidentally choose not to save and lose hours of work?" What if you don't save manually or backup before a battle, you're killed and you lose everything?
"What do you do with chunks that need unloaded?" If we have manual saving, i will do the same as i do now with automatic saving. I delete regions (.mca) where i don't have anything to keep. Manual saving should save in the same way as automatic saving does.
Well, you can add option in settings to switch from automatic to manual saving and vice versa. And when we want to quit, we should have option to select to save or not save. We should get a message on screen when an automatic save is executed so i would know if it's good to save when i want to quit. For example, i got info for automatic save 2 minutes ago, i'm killed one minute later, i quit and select not to save. We should be able to change automatic saving interval. Oh, all this is too much work for lazy Mojang. Updates are bringing only new decoration blocks and new mobs.
Who are you asking? I'm certainly not.
I don't know about the other two replying here, but I'm like almost positive they aren't, either.
I'm not sure how this addresses what I was asking?
I was asking what happens if deferring the saving of data until only after it is manually instructed to be done by the player makes it take longer than it does now. As an example, what if I play a session where I travel across a lot of chunks? As it is now, it saves this data on the fly so there's not much built up. With your changes, all of that might build up to a lengthier save time.
Making it an option somewhat removes this particular concern, but it doesn't address the entirety of the difficulties with it.
Accept the results of your gameplay? I get the impression with each passing day that nobody wants to do this anymore, though...
This, too, isn't answering the question I'm actually asking, and you cut out the second half which is the part that explains what I'm asking and why it's important.
What I'm asking is, if the game is changed to never save data until the user manually chooses to save it, what is done with chunks that are loaded, changed, and then need unloaded?
You have to do something with them.
Right now, the game is able to save those changes to disk "on the fly" (during gameplay), and then it is able to unload them and be done with them. If the game simply discards them and doesn't save them, well... now you can't save even if you want to!
So if you want the option to save, but not have it done automatically, then here's what has to happen. That "something you have to do" is keeping them around somewhere in the meantime until you know whether you're going to save or not. That means keeping them residing in memory (oh my, I can imagine the possible performance impacts of this...), or more likely it would be saving them to disk as a copy but not overwriting the old ones (also raising disk space use and adding potentially unnecessary wear on limited SSD write cycles, even if that only applies if you don't save and even if this extra space is only temporary and only during gameplay).
It would be a technical mess, even if it was just as an option and not forced on everyone, and for what benefit? To make save scumming easier?
Forum's sure getting personal-remarky lately.
Huh? There's nothing personal in this thread (besides maybe the remark about being a Mojang employee). It's literally just a suggestion and discussion about the saving structure of the game.
Every suggestion is personal wish.
Well, that remark is enough on its own, as there are a number of them across the forums lately.
I mean more of a 'snide comment about people', many of which seem to be aimed at Garnet because she earnestly engages people in these frankly fruitless arguments.
I'm sorry if you find feedback or reasoning for that feedback to suggestions as "fruitless arguments", but it's not. To the contrary, it's the entire purpose of this forum and the threads in it, no?
A suggestion is made.
Feedback and reasoning for said feedback is given in response.
And that's all that was happening here.
The point is that it doesn't really change people's minds, as indicated by the tone in many of the replies from certain people here. The problem isn't that you're giving feedback but that it's not being actively listened to.
Personally, I'm not one for reading effort posts or long responses, but I don't have anything against it - I just see that everyone stands their point of view and it's very rare for anyone to be convinced by anything.
The simple reason why Mojang won't respond here is because this forum isn't affiliated with them, and it's been stated before many times by now that they do not come onto here to read the opinions of people, either suggestions or discussion, none of that matters to them.
While you're entitled to an opinion and as such you have a right to criticize whatever you find wrong with the game and any of its features, as much as I dislike it sometimes, they have rightful discretion as to whether or not they come here to see what people have on their minds.
Even if Mojang came on here to check posts at a later time, it is important to realize just how much time it would actually take to check everyone's opinions in posts they still keep public and for everyone to see. Depending on the matter at hand, it can take literal years to come to an accurate conclusion about what a community, either individually or collectively, thinks of them or their game. Humans shouldn't be blamed for their limitations, only their wrongful actions and the attitude which they still hold after the fact, even then compassion is still important, for both parties involved.
I do think the game could stand to benefit with more customizations for both survival and creative mode worlds, to a point, although save scumming would be considered cheating, you can use backup files for this btw, it's not something I would do on my current or future survival worlds, but who am I to judge? I believe it's just as important to let other people have their say on this as well, lots of people use mods to add in customizations that change many aspects of the game.
If https://www.minecraftforum.net/forums/minecraft-java-edition/suggestions don't affect Mojang, then delete this part of forum.
This part of forum is for share your ideas beetwen players.
One can't control if others listen to them. The best I can do is give my reasoning as feedback to suggestions. That's what I did. I'm not sure how your statement of "people seldom have their minds changed" is particularly relevant here.
A suggestion was made to defer saving until it is instructed to be done. Myself and another pointed out how this is possibly very unfeasible, and for the benefit of very few people (especially since what it accomplishes goes against what is intended, and can already be achieved). In other words, the effort for results ratio alone likely makes it an unlikely change to expect, especially given what it would do on top of that (goes against intended behavior). All I did was point these things out.
In other words, it was the practical, logical, and realistic reasoning as to why this particular change is unlikely. Then you come along and say I enjoy engaging in "fruitless arguments" because I pointed those things out? Sort of rubbed me the wrong way...
Mojang might not look directly at these forums in official capacity, but they still likely consider the "collective" of what players may want. And that collective is only accumulated when there are avenues to get the ideas out there, of which this forum is one.
So while Mojang might not look or participate with much here, that's still not a good reason to remove the forum. It's an avenue for players to take to share ideas, even if it might not be the best one (maybe some place on Reddit is but I don't know).
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Retired StaffThe purpose of this forum section has always been to discuss ideas with each other as a community, it has never been intended as a way to get ideas in front of Mojang. This is just as true now as it was years ago when the forum actually had some small connections with the development team. We aren't going to remove this section of the forums (or any other) due to lack of Mojang engagement with it.
Additionally, we welcome any types of discussion in this section as long as the discussion follows the rules. Some people like to give simple ideas and feedback. Others like to dig down into the nitty-gritty of an idea and discuss if they think it is balanced or technically feasible. Both types of discussion are 100% valid and users are not forced to post one way or another. Nobody is obligated to respond to any or all of the feedback given for an idea. Whether or not a lengthy breakdown of why someone agrees or disagrees with an idea actually makes someone change their mind is also irrelevant, people can reply in whatever style they choose as long as no rules are broken.
Now that I have my little spiel as a moderator regarding some of the side discussion in this thread, I would like to reply to the idea itself.
I think the idea is more technically feasible than some people have said. There's no real reason that the information for the chunks would have to be saved in RAM or anything like that. The use of a temporary folder within the save structure for storing all changes between manual saves would be possible as far as I'm aware.
Basically after the user makes a manual save, all changes that would be written to the main save automatically in the current system would instead be written to a temporary folder, and when the user saves again, those files would be stitched into the real save file. If they quit without saving or the game crashes and is reopened, that temporary file is erased. It may take a bit of time to manually save while the files are combined, especially if you played for a long time between saves, but that's not really an "end of the world" type of scenario, and you could add a popup message or something if the temporary file gets above a specific size saying "Hey it might be a good idea to make a manual save now!"
However, this can already be done in a roundabout way by manually backing up the world before doing anything particularly risky. This was mentioned in the original post. For that reason I personally don't feel like it is needed, it's just a slightly more convenient way to do what can already be done. At the very least I would prefer it to be an option that is disabled by default, it would be a bad idea to force the change on players after over a decade of using autosaves.
Want some advice on how to thrive in the Suggestions section? Check this handy list of guidelines and tips for posting your ideas and responding to the ideas of others!
http://www.minecraftforum.net/forums/minecraft-discussion/suggestions/2775557-guidelines-for-the-suggestions-forum