I would like it if the biomes themselves get a little larger. Less of a scale up, like maybe 1.5, 2x while the terrain is 3 or 4x. Or you would pass by like 5 hills and be done with the biome. Half support.
I would like it if the biomes themselves get a little larger. Less of a scale up, like maybe 1.5, 2x while the terrain is 3 or 4x. Or you would pass by like 5 hills and be done with the biome. Half support.
I would love to have more control when starting a new world. The size of biomes as well and the amount the terrain is scaled. I'll add this to the first post soon.
I hadn't thought about biome transitioning when I made this topic. Larger terrain would made the current biome divisions rather awkward. But I think biome transitioning is outside the scope of this suggestion, I'd rather see a larger terrain world type with bad biome transitions than no larger terrain world type at all. But that doesn't mean I won't support a suggestion for smoother biome transitions if/when I run across one.
Compressed far away chunk rendering is a good idea for something like this, but once again, I'd rather keep that as a separate suggestion. I think I saw a suggestion like that a while ago actually.
Nice, I like it! (Especially when applied to rivers)
I play on the furthest render distance and sometimes it's frustrating that I can't see further, especially when I'm up high. The view from tall towers is very disappointing when you see the rendered square of loaded chunks. The only downside of your excellent idea is it might exacerbate this problem. Now I can see past a hill across the "river" and into the forest, with your idea the hill might be stretched beyond my render distance, never mind the river or the forest.
Yeah. One possible solution might be compressed far away chunk rendering like Barry_Burton suggested. Other than that, the only solution would be exploring much more. Although I do like the idea of exploring in a larger terrain world, I realise that the render distance is still an issue nonetheless.
On a side note, have you played with Biomes 'O Plenty? I found an "Alps" Biome that reached about 40-50 Blocks above the clouds... was fricking awesome, Couldn't even see the ground when i got up to the top, where I of course built my house.
Its a nice hold over until stuff like this is implemented
Full support. If this is released in Minecraft, I would use it instead of the default. I think the larger ravines need a bit of work though. They shouldn't be as wide, but they should be a bit deeper and way longer.
I think that the only reason the ravine in the example dosen't look long is because it's too wide. I might carve out another ravine in a world painter map myself instead of resizing the terrain, just for the ravine example.
I came here from the cubic chunks suggestion. The_Watchman13 put a link, because he thought that that suggestion would work great with this one. I agree. Your pictures threw me off a bit, but as I work with worldpainter too I can understand the difficulty in making a scale replica look good, so I support!
There is a gallery on that thread with enlarged terrain too, if you want to check it out!
Those mountains are very impressive. (And the FPS!) I do have some lagging issues when rendering mountains that go to the heigth limit. Which is why I tried to keep the mountains in my examples from being too big. but if/when (hopefully when) cubic chunks are added, I would love to see mountains and seemingly bottomless pits (though rare) become part of the terrain generator. I can only imagine how exiting climbing with friends to the bottom of a pit so deep you can't see the bottom would be.
I saw your mod in the "Did the terrain generation become BORING?" topic. But I coulden't get it to work.
Those river look very impressive though! And better biome placement! And beaches!
Such an improvement to the terrain generation would be momentous! Scenery could be far more beautiful and resemble the real world quite a bit more. For my two cents worth, I think some mountains should be higher than the old sky limit of 128 blocks and be snowcapped. In order for snowcapped mountains to work well, snow could fall on terrain above 128 blocks (possibly only in extreme hills biomes) rather than generate based on the x and z coordinates in the world.
I made the snowcap in my examples by doing something like that. I think it should gradually become snow capped though, so the transition dosen't look harsh. I would love snow capped mountains in vanilla though!
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __
Thanks to each and every one of you for your support!
I saw your mod in the "Did the terrain generation become BORING?" topic. But I coulden't get it to work.
Those river look very impressive though! And better biome placement! And beaches!
Well, biome placement and beaches are not related to this suggestion.
As for the experiment I wrote about: I have partially restored that code.
Not completely, however, so it's 128-high here.
However, that's enough to get the idea:
That is Beta gargamel seed, and I am in that famous valley.
Now imagine the same thing, but for full 256 height + those rivers.
Hrm. It's a nice idea, but the screenshots seem so... barren. The forest one with the hill looked nice, but seriously, it seemed just like some sort of... well... dead land. No animals, no grass, no flowers, no trees, it's just... It doesn't look like a place I'd want to live in. It brings back bad memories for some reason...
I really like the idea of bigger terrain. I've experimented with the likes of world painter and Wedge world generator before, and really liked the results.
Another thing: people don't really seem to get how much space we have with the current worlds. We could easily make the mountains another hundred blocks higher, and still have sixty-four blocks of room to build. or we could make them fifty blocks higher and add fifty blocks more underground space. The total world height of Minecraft is badly used, and I think larger and taller terrain would be a good way to utilize it.
You either:
A: Didn't read the suggestion at all.
B: Have never played Minecraft in a large biomes worldtype.
I would love to have more control when starting a new world. The size of biomes as well and the amount the terrain is scaled. I'll add this to the first post soon.
I hadn't thought about biome transitioning when I made this topic. Larger terrain would made the current biome divisions rather awkward. But I think biome transitioning is outside the scope of this suggestion, I'd rather see a larger terrain world type with bad biome transitions than no larger terrain world type at all. But that doesn't mean I won't support a suggestion for smoother biome transitions if/when I run across one.
Compressed far away chunk rendering is a good idea for something like this, but once again, I'd rather keep that as a separate suggestion. I think I saw a suggestion like that a while ago actually.
Yeah. One possible solution might be compressed far away chunk rendering like Barry_Burton suggested. Other than that, the only solution would be exploring much more. Although I do like the idea of exploring in a larger terrain world, I realise that the render distance is still an issue nonetheless.
The Alps biome in that mod is breathtaking!
Although I somewhat agree, I'd like seeing different sizes of ravines, rather than the same one all the time.
I think that the only reason the ravine in the example dosen't look long is because it's too wide. I might carve out another ravine in a world painter map myself instead of resizing the terrain, just for the ravine example.
I completely agree. That would greatly improve biome transitions and add diversity!
Those mountains are very impressive. (And the FPS!) I do have some lagging issues when rendering mountains that go to the heigth limit. Which is why I tried to keep the mountains in my examples from being too big. but if/when (hopefully when) cubic chunks are added, I would love to see mountains and seemingly bottomless pits (though rare) become part of the terrain generator. I can only imagine how exiting climbing with friends to the bottom of a pit so deep you can't see the bottom would be.
I saw your mod in the "Did the terrain generation become BORING?" topic. But I coulden't get it to work.
Those river look very impressive though! And better biome placement! And beaches!
I made the snowcap in my examples by doing something like that. I think it should gradually become snow capped though, so the transition dosen't look harsh. I would love snow capped mountains in vanilla though!
__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __
Thanks to each and every one of you for your support!
https://soundcloud.com/slimy-4
As for the experiment I wrote about: I have partially restored that code.
Not completely, however, so it's 128-high here.
However, that's enough to get the idea:
That is Beta gargamel seed, and I am in that famous valley.
Now imagine the same thing, but for full 256 height + those rivers.
Biomes are disabled.
Please do not look at my old posts.
http://info.breadcraft.me/
MinecraftLovers+ - Survival with a twist!
Active semi-vanilla survival server, running for 4 years and counting! If you haven't checked it out already, see what you've been missing!
MC Forums Thread - Our Website
I support!
Support, especially for those neat and plentiful visual pictures.
17 000 subscribers on YouTube.
Custom Command Modpacks. Learn how to make your own commands.
YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC_LBXGLs8Sa0opJHFVDVBqA
Twitter: https://twitter.com/Jragon014
Another thing: people don't really seem to get how much space we have with the current worlds. We could easily make the mountains another hundred blocks higher, and still have sixty-four blocks of room to build. or we could make them fifty blocks higher and add fifty blocks more underground space. The total world height of Minecraft is badly used, and I think larger and taller terrain would be a good way to utilize it.
Please read these two threads:
http://www.minecraftforum.net/forums/minecraft-discussion/suggestions/2572194-please-read-this-before-making-a-suggestion-v2-0
http://www.minecraftforum.net/forums/minecraft-discussion/suggestions/44180-for-the-critics-ftc