The old terrain was ridiculously nonsensical. It reminded me of Pandemonium. While there are some combinations of features I miss, I wouldn't want to lose anything we've gained.
There are so many people whining about how big oceans are now, but it's not as if enormous oceans comprise anywhere near even 10% of what will be found in an average seed. Each time the world generating code is redone I make 100+ worlds just to check out what it will do now, and very few of them will put you in or near an ocean.
It apparently doesn't occur some people that other players want a big area covered with one biome type because that is what appeals to them aesthetically. It's not as if seeds with lots of variety disappeared, we've simply gained some that have a uniform appearance as well.
What is needed in the world generating code is for the application of flora and fauna to the world to be tied more to the geology, and both of those to be separated from the topography (excluding oceans which of course need to be at sea level, and swamps which need a level patch of land regardless of elevation). That will give us back our hills and valleys, as well as allowing desert mountains and forested mountains.
It wouldn't hurt for the elevation (Y) to be increased, or at least offer the option to have a greater height limit.
I started watching some old lets plays on youtube again ( x's adventures ) and i noticed how nice the alpha terrain generation was. I started to miss the old alpha terrain generation because there was enough trees, flat land and mountains. Now, everytime i make a beta world i spawn in a pine forest with 100000000000000000000 trees and no area to build. Note* I also miss the alpha color of grass and leaves. So, if you agree or disagree please post why :biggrin.gif:
The old landscapes looked like Pandemonium. It was amusing, but ugly as sin. In the newer versions of the terrain generating code the flora and fauna need to be separated from the topography and geology. I miss desert mountains, beaches, and forested hills - but I don't want to lose any of the new things either.
Love the creeper hiding in the first two pictures :biggrin.gif:
Oh and i wish mountain regions like this had snow on top, or had trees on them because they look so plain : /
The current world generating code is clearly flawed in a few ways related to mountains, and topography in general. We don't have desert mountains or forested mountains anymore. The non-mountain terrain is decidedly flat as well, not much in-between.
I agree, but I think there is a problem with spawning IN water.
or ontop of a tree
it should spawn you on sand like it used to, I love all the new terrain features, not least of which the oceans, but I don't want to start in the middle of one with no land nearby. I don't think it anywhere near breaks them game, but it delays you even starting it when you have to swim to an island in a random direction and just -hope- there's a tree or two.
Other than standing in a swamp I haven't experienced any spawning in water. On top of or inside of trees is odd, and the same happens to some of the animals, that is clearly a bug.
I don't agree about the sand though - sand has generally been overused in some biomes where gravel and clay would make more logical lake/river shore material. There's no need to always spawn near water, which was what the old code effectively did, always put you next to water (or the middle of a desert).
As for the OPs seed, the only problem I see with it is that there isn't a tree on the island it spawns you on. There should always be a tree within sight of the spawn. Here's what I found in less than one day in creative mode (cursor and standing at spawn):
You could have just started another world if you didn't like the big ocean. Many of us do like oceans. It's not as if the huge ones are ridiculously common or anything. I've made over 100 worlds (in part because I like to see what the generator can do) and I would estimate less than 5% have a big ocean near the spawn.
That seems reasonable considering that over 70% of our planet is covered in water, and most of the world's population lives close to an ocean or sea. The game world is supposed to have a fair bit of similarity to earth, and in the past the largest bodies of water were little lakes.
... Personally I'd be damned if I could think of a way to use up 1024 blocks of vertical space.
To borrow a bit from wikipedia:
Definitions of "mountain" include:
Height over base of at least 2,500 m (8,202 ft);
Height over base of 1,500 m (4,921 ft).–2,500 m (8,202 ft). with a slope greater than 2 degrees
Height over base of 1,000 m (3,281 ft).–1,500 m (4,921 ft). with a slope greater than 5 degrees
Local (radius 7,000 m (22,966 ft). elevation greater than 300 m (984 ft)., or 300 m (984 ft)–1,000 m (3,281 ft). if local (radius 7,000 m (22,966 ft). elevation is greater than 300 m (984 ft).
By this definition, mountains cover 64% of Asia, 25% of Europe, 22% of South America, 17% of Australia, and 3% of Africa. As a whole, 24% of the Earth's land mass is mountainous and 10% of people live in mountainous regions.
In Minecraft right now it's not possible to build anything grand in a mountainous landscape because the tiny mountains themselves take up all the height. I'd love to see a snowcapped mountain with a treeline that has a little village built on its slope.
So i was thinking, On Snowy Bioms, it might be a good idea to make a NPC Igloos. Like, Instead of making houses, There can be Igloo's the NPC's Live in.
They can be dressed up with a hat and boots or something, and they go fishing in some frozen lake.
I Was just thinking it might be a good idea to go with the theme.
The last reliable information on the topic of breeding was that Jeb and Notch couldn't agree on how to do it. Since then the spawning algorithm changed, but nothing else that anyone has been able to observe or detail. So hang onto your animals, and if you feel the need to consume meat, start a chicken ranch.
You seem to be ignoring the "right now" part of his statement. As in, they have higher priority things to do, but it will happen eventually. His statement is technically no different than as if he had said "We are going to change the NPCs."
Thank you Notch for making it easy to change the height limit, now we can have the most epic mountains and deep oceans, I have been waiting for this for a LONG time.
Seed is in the screenshots.
Not easily enough. It ought to be a basic feature in the world generation page to set the Y limit. As much as I want to use this mod so I don't have such a restrictive height limit, I don't want a bunch of troubling side effects of the feature not being designed into the game.
Considering how vast the generated world can be (horizontally larger than any Earth like planet could be), having a mere 128Y seems like a major discrepancy in the game design. With even just a 256 or 512 Y the options for more realistic snow-capped mountains, fantastic caverns with crystals and magma, as well as continental shelves to separate shallow seas with coral and kelp from deep oceans with kraken are much more achievable.
Having the Y capped at 128 is always one of the most dissapointing things with each update.
0
There are so many people whining about how big oceans are now, but it's not as if enormous oceans comprise anywhere near even 10% of what will be found in an average seed. Each time the world generating code is redone I make 100+ worlds just to check out what it will do now, and very few of them will put you in or near an ocean.
It apparently doesn't occur some people that other players want a big area covered with one biome type because that is what appeals to them aesthetically. It's not as if seeds with lots of variety disappeared, we've simply gained some that have a uniform appearance as well.
What is needed in the world generating code is for the application of flora and fauna to the world to be tied more to the geology, and both of those to be separated from the topography (excluding oceans which of course need to be at sea level, and swamps which need a level patch of land regardless of elevation). That will give us back our hills and valleys, as well as allowing desert mountains and forested mountains.
It wouldn't hurt for the elevation (Y) to be increased, or at least offer the option to have a greater height limit.
0
The old landscapes looked like Pandemonium. It was amusing, but ugly as sin. In the newer versions of the terrain generating code the flora and fauna need to be separated from the topography and geology. I miss desert mountains, beaches, and forested hills - but I don't want to lose any of the new things either.
0
/shrug I don't pvp much in Minecraft, so I rarely change from the default first person.
0
I thought you meant an IRL cloak, that would have been original.
0
0
The current world generating code is clearly flawed in a few ways related to mountains, and topography in general. We don't have desert mountains or forested mountains anymore. The non-mountain terrain is decidedly flat as well, not much in-between.
0
Other than standing in a swamp I haven't experienced any spawning in water. On top of or inside of trees is odd, and the same happens to some of the animals, that is clearly a bug.
I don't agree about the sand though - sand has generally been overused in some biomes where gravel and clay would make more logical lake/river shore material. There's no need to always spawn near water, which was what the old code effectively did, always put you next to water (or the middle of a desert).
As for the OPs seed, the only problem I see with it is that there isn't a tree on the island it spawns you on. There should always be a tree within sight of the spawn. Here's what I found in less than one day in creative mode (cursor and standing at spawn):
0
That seems reasonable considering that over 70% of our planet is covered in water, and most of the world's population lives close to an ocean or sea. The game world is supposed to have a fair bit of similarity to earth, and in the past the largest bodies of water were little lakes.
0
To borrow a bit from wikipedia:
In Minecraft right now it's not possible to build anything grand in a mountainous landscape because the tiny mountains themselves take up all the height. I'd love to see a snowcapped mountain with a treeline that has a little village built on its slope.
0
0
http://www.minecraftforum.net/forum/1-suggestions/
Having villages made out of materials related to the biome it's built in seems like a pleasant and practical idea.
0
They haven't bothered to say.
0
The last reliable information on the topic of breeding was that Jeb and Notch couldn't agree on how to do it. Since then the spawning algorithm changed, but nothing else that anyone has been able to observe or detail. So hang onto your animals, and if you feel the need to consume meat, start a chicken ranch.
0
0
Not easily enough. It ought to be a basic feature in the world generation page to set the Y limit. As much as I want to use this mod so I don't have such a restrictive height limit, I don't want a bunch of troubling side effects of the feature not being designed into the game.
Considering how vast the generated world can be (horizontally larger than any Earth like planet could be), having a mere 128Y seems like a major discrepancy in the game design. With even just a 256 or 512 Y the options for more realistic snow-capped mountains, fantastic caverns with crystals and magma, as well as continental shelves to separate shallow seas with coral and kelp from deep oceans with kraken are much more achievable.
Having the Y capped at 128 is always one of the most dissapointing things with each update.