Gameplay
Cubic Chunks: Reduced lag, infinite height, and more [The #1 Suggestion Thread of all time!][Updated! 6/14]
Poll: Which parts of this system do you like?
Ended May 15, 2014
Poll: Which parts of this system do you NOT like?
Ended May 15, 2014
Poll: Do you support this system's implementation overall? (If yes, if
Ended May 15, 2014
I don't have a credit card, and I can't persuade the one who have the card to buy me Minecraft. That's why I put 'Can someone buy me a copy of the game?' in my sig.
The server is open only for people who saw the IP. Right?
OcD Simple Add-On!
Actually i changed my mind about setting to offline mode. And btw you can get it for cash with a redeemable card at a store and buy it.
As for the suggestion. Star wars maps would also improve. Another great build i found uing the CC mod.
You don't have to have a credit card, you can buy a card in certain stores and redeem it online. You can pay cash.
As it will be in the future, it was at the birth of Man
There are only four things certain since Social Progress began.
That the Dog returns to his Vomit and the Sow returns to her Mire,
And the burnt Fool's bandaged finger goes wabbling back to the Fire;
And that after this is accomplished, and the brave new world begins
When all men are paid for existing and no man must pay for his sins,
As surely as Water will wet us, as surely as Fire will burn,
The Gods of the Copybook Headings with terror and slaughter return!
-The Gods Of The Copybook Headings, by Rudyard Kipling.
One other potential problem that I see (I dont know much about coding, so this may be baseless) is making it so that the chunks where the blocks have been changed are remembered. Again, not too knowledgeable about coding, but it seems to me that it would take a lot of time for that to be coded properly.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
ModeratorThat is pretty easy. When a chunk is unloaded it can have a checksum that is based on the blocks it is made of and its location in the 3d chunk grid. The game could compare that to the checksum of that same chunk based on the seed. If they are the same it discards the chunk instead of saving it.
However, the big problem would be terrain updates that change how that seed looks. If a chunk was not edited and discarded, then it was unloaded and the user downloaded a new update, changes to the terrain generation could break chunks that were explored but not altered.
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
Well, Im glad my fears were groundless.
http://www.minecraft.../#entry23785833
That could probably be put into the debug screen.
I know it says in the OP that 163 is the optimal size for the chunks, and I'm not trying to say that we should be using chunks of a different size. I just don't entirely understand why 16 is the magic number.
I believe in the Invisible Pink Unicorn, bless her Invisible Pinkness.
Mostly moved on. May check back a few times a year.
Mmm, this is certainly a very valid point.
What about performance? Would 323 chunks actually be any faster/slower?
I believe in the Invisible Pink Unicorn, bless her Invisible Pinkness.
http://www.minecraftforum.net/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=155932
Crates
http://www.minecraftforum.net/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=239467
Item Scrolling
http://www.minecraftforum.net/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=174539
And ore-adding mods can freely choose where to generate. They may choose which chunk they should generate.
OcD Simple Add-On!
323 chunks decrease the number of draw calls, but increase the overhead in all other areas.
Mostly moved on. May check back a few times a year.
Well to see a block in a chunk the entire chunk must be loaded. Smaller chunks means that the set of loaded chunks can be more optimized (you only render those chunks which you can actually see) the bigger the chunk the more unseen blocks that need rendered.
On the flip side the more chunks you are dealing with the more complex everything becomes. That is why the blocks are grouped into chunks in the first place - to simply.
8x8 would mean way more individual chunks and way too much complexity. 32x32 means that we would not get as good a performance boost. Anything in between isn't a power of two. And here at Minecraft we like our powers of two.
I imagine it would be possible to calculate the exact optimal size of a chunk - but I don't care enough to do that math. Plus it might actually require testing with various sizes. That would mean not only finishing the mod, but then modding the mod to use other sizes and see how well they perform. Possible? Yes. But I think everyone likes the idea of 16x16.
Which brings about the reason why we have that number: Chunks are, and always have been 16x16xblah so it was logical to just use 16 for the new height.
While this was specifically talking about something else, it isn't the first time he has pointed people to Reddit.