I have different opinions about mipmapping. I really dislike swirls, but mipmapping makes things look too smooth. I like a grainier Minecraft and I think Notch does too.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The iteration of these lines brings gold;
The framing of this circle on the ground
Brings whirlwinds, tempests, thunder and lightning.
I personally don't care what Notch's opinion on mipmapping is. I just have to wonder what the OP hoped to achieve by making a thread about this.
Quote from lordemperor »
Just floored by this, Notch is so closed-minded as to dismiss a technology used in just about every 3D game, which improves performance and greatly benefits visuals by virtually eliminating texture swirls at distances.
Were you hoping to rally the community together against Notch's "close-mindedness" and get him to implement mipmapping? Were you hoping to initiate a lively intellectual discussion on the advantages and disadvantages of mipmapping? Or did you just want to rant? Because one of those belongs on the Suggestions forum, one belongs on the Computers, Technology & Science forum, and one belongs on Twitter. None of them belong here.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
FM DebugMod 1.2.5v1 - Fixes problems with F3 debugging graphs, restores entity labels, and strips down debug info (updated 2012-04-04)
Ah, good you guys pass the intelligence test. I got one of you though.
On-topic: while it removes graphic swirls, it makes distant blocks look weird. I would always hate this in other games, even if my settings were turned on high.
I'm pretty sure that as an experienced programmer that he is he KNOWS mipmapping could improve Minecraft. What he might mean by saying "it sucks" is that he is saying it is difficult to program.
Its not like he would be writing a shader to do it.... video cards do this automatically if you simply set a few flags asking them to do so.
Quote from NickTheWizard »
I don't know much about programming at all but unless someone can make a simple mod of it to prove that it is easy to program then my idea that he is complaining about how difficult it is to implement may very well be what Notch meant to say.
Do you mean besides the ones that already exist? Not only are there mods doing mipmapping, there are mods doing bump mapping and even parallax occlusion.
(ah, didn't know that.. didja?)
It is almost 100% certain that what Notch is talking about is that mipmapping requires trilinear texture filtering, which is a great technique to use when the in-practice pixels/texels ratio is <= 4 or so, but even bilinear filtering washes out textures when the ratio is significantly larger (like it is with a 16x16 texture covering thousands of pixels on screen)
Now, as a programmer, I am going to respectfully ask you never to speculate about programming again.
In all likelihood, Notch recently enabled trilinear filtering in order to draw the conclusion that he did. So the trivial amount of code is done. He can now choose to make it an option, or not make it an option.
To be concise:
Mipmapping is a technique that takes a texture and makes more textures from it, at lower texture resolutions (a form of low pass filtering.) This is beneficial at far viewing distances (where a single pixel can map to multiple texels in the original texture) because high frequency texture details will become aliased and produce "flickering" or "sparkling."
Bilinear filtering is the graphics term for 2D linear interpolation between the texels of a 2D texture.
Trilinear filtering adds another level of interpolation, between mipmap levels.
The step above Trilinear is Anisotropic, which addresses issues with Mipmapping using only an Isotropic down-sampling of textures (both the X and Y axises of a texture are down-sampled by equal amounts with mipmapping) which still leaves aliasing artifacts at narrow viewing angles where one axis needs to be down-sampled significantly more than the other.
What Minecraft does by default is no texture filtering at all, often called "nearest neighbor", and as such suffers from the most aliasing artifacts... which are kept to a minimum by using very low resolution textures (which by definition do not contain high frequency details that can be aliased)
All of these are simply enabled and disabled by flags during device asset creation and rendering (this applies to both OpenGL and DirectX.)
And for those that think mipmapping will make rendering performance worse, that is often not the case. While the mipmaps use about 33% more texture memory, this memory is trivial with regards to this game because there simple isnt a large amount of textures. We are talking about 1 to 2 megabytes even with the highest of HD textures.
As long as the game works, and works well, I don't care what he thinks about various graphical rendering protocol. And, in my opinion, the demonstration of the difference seems to suggest that, at most, its a matter of preference- I don't really like the look with mipmapping applied.
Just floored by this, Notch is so closed-minded as to dismiss a technology used in just about every 3D game, which improves performance and greatly benefits visuals by virtually eliminating texture swirls at distances.
This is what mipmapping does; observe the bricks.
No mip-mapping:
Mip-mapping (also all my mods, ignore the broken wildgrass, and minimap):
I like Mip-Papping being turned off, take that brick wall for example. If you built a stage, that would be the curtains. It is good and bad, depending on what you are using it for, and how far you are.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Official KillingToaster's () given: 1
If you earn one, you can not give it away.
Minimapping would ruin exploration in minecraft. It ruins the getting lost and looking for new things. Maps would do this also. Mini maps would ruin minecraft and notch is correct. Mini maps suck in a game about exploration.
If what ive read about minmapping is true(ie, it makes distant objects lower their textures) then I cant say I would support it in minecraft.
I like watching the faraway landscape.
With mipmapping, distance objects use lower texture resolutions to improve graphics quality. Its a form of anti-aliasing.
If you have photoshop, load up any large image (say 1024x768) and then go to resize it to a much smaller size (32x24) Notice that there are options for linear interpolation (akin to mipmapping) as well as one for nearest neighbor (what minecraft does now.) Try both.
Geez. He doesn't want to include a feature which, judging from OP's pics, can be downloaded and installed by anyone who owns a copy of minecraft and some decent modding skills. Or at least skills at reading the instructions for installation.
This is the same concept as people getting pissed at Notch for not implementing SDK's gun mod or Zan's minimap because "it adds to the gameplay" or whatever. Some people don't like it, and others can have opinions.
Really, if you want it so badly, DIY. In what way is that any harder than starting a giant debate thread on the forums about why it should be permanently implemented?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from spaz102 »
Actually, that's the best mental image ever. A dying, drowning man stuffing his face from a massive wall of cake, and carving out a monstrous underwater cake picture. I'd pay to watch that irl.
[quote=Rotten194][quote=mcnugget] "Love cabin"[;/quote][quote=mcnugget]creepers.!
In all honesty mipmapping from the small bit of research I've done is difficult to program. Granted it has been pulled off in Minecraft but the demonstration was an ugly one. Notch of course doesn't want Minecraft to look like crap. Implementing mipmapping will force him and texture pack creators to change how they do things. Instead of making 6 textures for each block at most, they will have to create several small ones for each side thus multiplying the work. And Mobs? People already say they're a pain to create. Notch has been used to the way textures are now for quite some time and implementing them in Minecraft will take him away from his comfort zone and force him to accomplish a very tedious task.
not very hard to implement, but hard to seamlessly perfect.
there are drawbacks and upsides to mipmapping. Larger texture packs, more space in ram to allocate block texture variations based on distance (loading two different textures for different objects when you can simply load one texture for both objects?)
I haven't dug deep enough into the code of minecraft to tell you whether this is ideal or not.
But I'm guess Notch of all people would have an interesting and detailed idea.
constant re-rendering and greater memory requirements are hardly two things that minecraft should add, though, and those are two very likely side effects of minecraft, where its graphics are more about quantity rendering than quality rendering.
It's twitter not a debate forum where he needs to explain in detail his reasons for saying so. I think Crunkatog's post sums things up pretty well. Hater's will hate, opinions will still be opinions.
There's a difference between "mipmapping sucks" and "I dislike mipmapping". The latter can be accepted without any reasons. The former... not so well.
Ok, im playing minecraft and i just found 20million diamonds, all the diamonds ever able to be created on this world ever. And i died by a creeper and all the diamonds fall into lava. I'm going to say MINECRAFT ****IGN SHUCCKSKS!!! But i don't dislike minecraft im just pissed. Notch can have bad days too ya know, he does have emotions..
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from M-L-BeastZ »
Cool story bro. Please make a thread somebody cares about next time.
In all honesty mipmapping from the small bit of research I've done is difficult to program. Granted it has been pulled off in Minecraft but the demonstration was an ugly one. Notch of course doesn't want Minecraft to look like crap. Implementing mipmapping will force him and texture pack creators to change how they do things. Instead of making 6 textures for each block at most, they will have to create several small ones for each side thus multiplying the work. And Mobs? People already say they're a pain to create. Notch has been used to the way textures are now for quite some time and implementing them in Minecraft will take him away from his comfort zone and force him to accomplish a very tedious task.
you do know that most blocks only use 1 texture with the acception of a few, but it is only 3 textures (like grass has a top, a side, and a bottom)
Personal Mipmapping is a great thing that many games need to use, but it is not for all. If you know anything about the terrain.png when creating a texture pack, is that almost all (or almost all) blocks are part of 1 file. Most games now have a different file for each texture, and they can have many many different versions of on texture. (ie. Having 10 different versions of cobblestone instead of just the 1.)
For minecraft, mipmapping would be to much of a change, and would have little pay off with such small textures to begin with. They would probably need to give each texture there own file, or increase the size of the current texture.png file, both of which i do not want to have. If they end up increasing the size of there textures (or having an option to) i wouldn't mind mipmapping and just size it down to the 16x16, but anything smaller would not be needed.
hope this makes scents, im a little tired ATM
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Revenge is a dish best served with pinto beans and muffins.
I agree with Notch after that demonstration.
I thoroughly enjoyed the minimap addition in the "With mipmapping".
@Kaav
it's hard to accept you got trolled, we understand.
OT: i have no opinion
I have 2 RAM and i still have low fps on normal render
[Zombie]
[|] [Leaves]
with a side of healthy green leaves
The framing of this circle on the ground
Brings whirlwinds, tempests, thunder and lightning.
Were you hoping to rally the community together against Notch's "close-mindedness" and get him to implement mipmapping? Were you hoping to initiate a lively intellectual discussion on the advantages and disadvantages of mipmapping? Or did you just want to rant? Because one of those belongs on the Suggestions forum, one belongs on the Computers, Technology & Science forum, and one belongs on Twitter. None of them belong here.
On-topic: while it removes graphic swirls, it makes distant blocks look weird. I would always hate this in other games, even if my settings were turned on high.
Its not like he would be writing a shader to do it.... video cards do this automatically if you simply set a few flags asking them to do so.
Do you mean besides the ones that already exist? Not only are there mods doing mipmapping, there are mods doing bump mapping and even parallax occlusion.
(ah, didn't know that.. didja?)
It is almost 100% certain that what Notch is talking about is that mipmapping requires trilinear texture filtering, which is a great technique to use when the in-practice pixels/texels ratio is <= 4 or so, but even bilinear filtering washes out textures when the ratio is significantly larger (like it is with a 16x16 texture covering thousands of pixels on screen)
Now, as a programmer, I am going to respectfully ask you never to speculate about programming again.
In all likelihood, Notch recently enabled trilinear filtering in order to draw the conclusion that he did. So the trivial amount of code is done. He can now choose to make it an option, or not make it an option.
To be concise:
Mipmapping is a technique that takes a texture and makes more textures from it, at lower texture resolutions (a form of low pass filtering.) This is beneficial at far viewing distances (where a single pixel can map to multiple texels in the original texture) because high frequency texture details will become aliased and produce "flickering" or "sparkling."
Bilinear filtering is the graphics term for 2D linear interpolation between the texels of a 2D texture.
Trilinear filtering adds another level of interpolation, between mipmap levels.
The step above Trilinear is Anisotropic, which addresses issues with Mipmapping using only an Isotropic down-sampling of textures (both the X and Y axises of a texture are down-sampled by equal amounts with mipmapping) which still leaves aliasing artifacts at narrow viewing angles where one axis needs to be down-sampled significantly more than the other.
What Minecraft does by default is no texture filtering at all, often called "nearest neighbor", and as such suffers from the most aliasing artifacts... which are kept to a minimum by using very low resolution textures (which by definition do not contain high frequency details that can be aliased)
All of these are simply enabled and disabled by flags during device asset creation and rendering (this applies to both OpenGL and DirectX.)
And for those that think mipmapping will make rendering performance worse, that is often not the case. While the mipmaps use about 33% more texture memory, this memory is trivial with regards to this game because there simple isnt a large amount of textures. We are talking about 1 to 2 megabytes even with the highest of HD textures.
I like watching the faraway landscape.
Though as others have said, there is no reason to believe "mipmapping sucks" is Notch´s real opinion on the matter.
Two words on twitter dont make a game-altering opinion. Thats why he has a blog.
I like Mip-Papping being turned off, take that brick wall for example. If you built a stage, that would be the curtains. It is good and bad, depending on what you are using it for, and how far you are.
Official KillingToaster's (
If you earn one, you can not give it away.
HERP DERP
[simg]http://i.imgur.com/DgD9d.png[/simg]
With mipmapping, distance objects use lower texture resolutions to improve graphics quality. Its a form of anti-aliasing.
If you have photoshop, load up any large image (say 1024x768) and then go to resize it to a much smaller size (32x24) Notice that there are options for linear interpolation (akin to mipmapping) as well as one for nearest neighbor (what minecraft does now.) Try both.
This is the same concept as people getting pissed at Notch for not implementing SDK's gun mod or Zan's minimap because "it adds to the gameplay" or whatever. Some people don't like it, and others can have opinions.
Really, if you want it so badly, DIY. In what way is that any harder than starting a giant debate thread on the forums about why it should be permanently implemented?
I don't want to know.
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mipmap
there are drawbacks and upsides to mipmapping. Larger texture packs, more space in ram to allocate block texture variations based on distance (loading two different textures for different objects when you can simply load one texture for both objects?)
I haven't dug deep enough into the code of minecraft to tell you whether this is ideal or not.
But I'm guess Notch of all people would have an interesting and detailed idea.
constant re-rendering and greater memory requirements are hardly two things that minecraft should add, though, and those are two very likely side effects of minecraft, where its graphics are more about quantity rendering than quality rendering.
http://notch.tumblr.com/post/123343045/my-vision-for-survival (follow this link if you need proof)
Ok, im playing minecraft and i just found 20million diamonds, all the diamonds ever able to be created on this world ever. And i died by a creeper and all the diamonds fall into lava. I'm going to say MINECRAFT ****IGN SHUCCKSKS!!! But i don't dislike minecraft im just pissed. Notch can have bad days too ya know, he does have emotions..
you do know that most blocks only use 1 texture with the acception of a few, but it is only 3 textures (like grass has a top, a side, and a bottom)
Personal Mipmapping is a great thing that many games need to use, but it is not for all. If you know anything about the terrain.png when creating a texture pack, is that almost all (or almost all) blocks are part of 1 file. Most games now have a different file for each texture, and they can have many many different versions of on texture. (ie. Having 10 different versions of cobblestone instead of just the 1.)
For minecraft, mipmapping would be to much of a change, and would have little pay off with such small textures to begin with. They would probably need to give each texture there own file, or increase the size of the current texture.png file, both of which i do not want to have. If they end up increasing the size of there textures (or having an option to) i wouldn't mind mipmapping and just size it down to the 16x16, but anything smaller would not be needed.
hope this makes scents, im a little tired ATM
~Chibi