Something I've noticed about the terrain generation is that there's only really two relevant values for it- minimum height, and maximum height. Not only does this make the terrain feel much more bland due to only having random ups and downs, it's also not very consistent- if you have a biome with a world height of 1.2 minimum height and 1.2 maximum height, it'll still have hills and all that. The only time terrain is ever flat is if it's at 0.0 (sea level) or 2.0 (cloud level).
To remedy this, I suggest several changes.
1: Redefine world height
Simply put, minimum and maximum world height should be consistent in their purpose. If a biome's height is at 1.2 minimum and 1.2 maximum, it should be flat. It's pretty simple to do, but it'd go a long way in making biomes feel a lot less "chunky" and same-y.
2: Steepness
It'd be nice if different biomes had different levels at which the height differences are reached. Currently, extreme hills are extremely steep- you'll frequently have sudden cliff edges jutting out of the terrain. Conversely, with plains, hills are usually 1 block height difference from the last block. Were steepness to be added, you could have more control of this, to make many more interesting biomes (such as actual "hills" biome with nice, smoothed out hills).
For example, for plains, you could have the minimum height as 0.0 and the maximum at 0.1. Normally, this would just make pretty bumpy terrain- but with steepness, you could set the steepness fairly low, so it only reaches the maximum height at a very low rate (instead of instantly).
Conversely, you could have desert hills biomes have sharp cliff edges with a high steepness rate and a fairly large difference in minimum and maximum height.
It's not much, but it'd go a long way to making Minecraft look a lot more diverse.
I don't understand. Adding a system for making biomes more predictable ("minimum and maximum world height should be consistent in their purpose.") as opposed to a current system where height is relatively unpredictable ("random ups and downs"), in order to make the game less bland and more random? ("it'd go a long way in making biomes feel a lot less "chunky" and same-y.")
This makes no sense. If you want the game more random, suggest height to be even more random. There's no logic in making generation more predictable in order to make it "less same-y".
Your second idea is more valid, but still on the fritz: Extreme hills are supposed to be like that. They're basically forced beta generation condensed in a single biome (whether that's good or not is another issue entirely). Likewise plains are designed to be their way; flat with few small hills and height changes.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
[quote=Badgerz]You have to keep in mind that people are stupid.
[quote=Catelite]Just because you don't understand how something works, doesn't make it broken or pointless. >_<
I don't understand. Adding a system for making biomes more predictable ("minimum and maximum world height should be consistent in their purpose.") as opposed to a current system where height is relatively unpredictable ("random ups and downs"), in order to make the game less bland and more random? ("it'd go a long way in making biomes feel a lot less "chunky" and same-y.")
This makes no sense. If you want the game more random, suggest height to be even more random. There's no logic in making generation more predictable in order to make it "less same-y".
No, no, it should still be random- it just wouldn't be random if you had height values the exact same (which, they aren't... but only if they're at 0.0min/0.0max).
If that was fixed as well, you could also have an actual mountain biome where the minimum height truly is a minimum height. So it'd start at around block 100, and go up to block 200 (...whenever they increase the height limit for generation ;_; )
Your second idea is more valid, but still on the fritz: Extreme hills are supposed to be like that. They're basically forced beta generation condensed in a single biome (whether that's good or not is another issue entirely). Likewise plains are designed to be their way; flat with few small hills and height changes.
I know that- it's more or less a suggestion for other biomes. I simply gave examples of how it could be implemented using the current biomes. Though, plains are honestly far too hilly for my tastes. I'd rather a "rolling hills" biome- which could be done much easier with a steepness variable.
I agree on the concept of more control over terrain generation, but i think it should instead come in the form of control to make things more random. Too often do you see the same things in the same biomes even though you're hundreds of chunks from where you started, we need more terrain generation that breaks the laws of the biomes, such as a plateau in the middle of a plain or an open field in the middle of a forest. I remember i once found a field in the middle of a forest with a large, monument-esque rock in the center, i haven't found anything like that in beta terrain gen, making it an interesting find, but i've also never found anything as interesting in the current terrain gen, making our worlds bland.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
blockland:fred da kiko runescape:fred da kiko spiral knights:freddakiko steam:freddakiko
if it was too hard for you to find me...
I agree on the concept of more control over terrain generation, but i think it should instead come in the form of control to make things more random. Too often do you see the same things in the same biomes even though you're hundreds of chunks from where you started, we need more terrain generation that breaks the laws of the biomes, such as a plateau in the middle of a plain or an open field in the middle of a forest. I remember i once found a field in the middle of a forest with a large, monument-esque rock in the center, i haven't found anything like that in beta terrain gen, making it an interesting find, but i've also never found anything as interesting in the current terrain gen, making our worlds bland.
Yeah, I actually agree. It'd be pretty rad if biome generation code was re-worked so you could have dynamic variables on a per-instance basis (so one desert may have a lot of hills, another may have none).
To remedy this, I suggest several changes.
1: Redefine world height
Simply put, minimum and maximum world height should be consistent in their purpose. If a biome's height is at 1.2 minimum and 1.2 maximum, it should be flat. It's pretty simple to do, but it'd go a long way in making biomes feel a lot less "chunky" and same-y.
2: Steepness
It'd be nice if different biomes had different levels at which the height differences are reached. Currently, extreme hills are extremely steep- you'll frequently have sudden cliff edges jutting out of the terrain. Conversely, with plains, hills are usually 1 block height difference from the last block. Were steepness to be added, you could have more control of this, to make many more interesting biomes (such as actual "hills" biome with nice, smoothed out hills).
For example, for plains, you could have the minimum height as 0.0 and the maximum at 0.1. Normally, this would just make pretty bumpy terrain- but with steepness, you could set the steepness fairly low, so it only reaches the maximum height at a very low rate (instead of instantly).
Conversely, you could have desert hills biomes have sharp cliff edges with a high steepness rate and a fairly large difference in minimum and maximum height.
It's not much, but it'd go a long way to making Minecraft look a lot more diverse.
This makes no sense. If you want the game more random, suggest height to be even more random. There's no logic in making generation more predictable in order to make it "less same-y".
Your second idea is more valid, but still on the fritz: Extreme hills are supposed to be like that. They're basically forced beta generation condensed in a single biome (whether that's good or not is another issue entirely). Likewise plains are designed to be their way; flat with few small hills and height changes.
[quote=Badgerz]You have to keep in mind that people are stupid.
[quote=Catelite]Just because you don't understand how something works, doesn't make it broken or pointless. >_<
No, no, it should still be random- it just wouldn't be random if you had height values the exact same (which, they aren't... but only if they're at 0.0min/0.0max).
If that was fixed as well, you could also have an actual mountain biome where the minimum height truly is a minimum height. So it'd start at around block 100, and go up to block 200 (...whenever they increase the height limit for generation ;_; )
I know that- it's more or less a suggestion for other biomes. I simply gave examples of how it could be implemented using the current biomes. Though, plains are honestly far too hilly for my tastes. I'd rather a "rolling hills" biome- which could be done much easier with a steepness variable.
runescape:fred da kiko spiral knights:freddakiko steam:freddakikoif it was too hard for you to find me...
Yeah, I actually agree. It'd be pretty rad if biome generation code was re-worked so you could have dynamic variables on a per-instance basis (so one desert may have a lot of hills, another may have none).
Steepness could also be used this way, too.