PLEASE READ!
I agree with MasterCaver, not being a fan of Math and Equations, I do agree I don't want to climb over a 8,800 meter mountain, i'd be crazy and I wouldn't wanna build a 10000000 meter mansion anyway, it's too much space. (No offence to the awesome builder's out there.)Besides, if they'd expand the terrain they'd have to expand the world limit, to.
You can only go to about +/- 30,000,000 x/z of your world, and you spawn right in the middle of it.
That's probably too much work for Mircosoft and Mojang.

Besides, if you also went down a 11,000 meter ocean, you couldnt'even explore half of it since your limit of bubbles of air.
You'd need high-tech-diamond-armor-gear-of-water-bubble-diamond-potions-air-bubble_3000--- and stuff to even explore a tiny bit of it, the oceans are fine but the river's need to be bigger.
1
1
You don't lose your items when you die in the Last of Us, do you?
That's the main problem I could see with the upgrades being enchantments. I find that CTM maps tend to be better when they supply, well, SUPPLIES, rather than better weapons or gear that are just in a chest. If you get an iron sword with sharpness 4, it's good, but only until you die and lose it, or it breaks. Then the gameplay that the mapper put in that is balanced around you having the sword is just ruined. If you find a giant iron ore deposit, however, you get iron armor and an iron sword guaranteed for the rest of the map. That's why (I assume) the top map makers like to give the player ridiculous amounts of ore when they give it out. It's like you're upgrading the player with a better tool tier. You can rely on the player having certain things.
I do think it would be cool to see a CTM with keepInventory on by default that uses this system, though. If it's done right
2
You could remove them.
1
1
I also have to agree. Not only does it take away some of the depth that minecraft itself offers, it doesn't allow the map to be accessible to as many players. It takes away a tool that players can use to make the map easier for themselves. Think of it this way. Would you rather someone cheese an area or 2 on your map and really enjoy it, or ragequit because an area is too difficult?
Also, how often do you really use enderpearls in a CTM? I think the only time I've used an enderpearl "cheaply" is the last area of Kaizo Caverns, and even then, it made me feel good because I outsmarted what seemed like an unconquerable room. Other than that, I used them mostly as a last ditch effort to avoid dying and losing all my stuff. Boy, did it feel epic when I fell into the void in Pinnacle Catacombs, but managed to twist around mid fall and throw an enderpearl back to the starting platform and survive.
Don't take away depth from the game. It just makes players not want to play the map.
1
Can't really answer the first one, but I do think that a map can be good despite being bland if the gameplay is solid.
As for the last question, aesthetics are a bit like cinnamon, and an area like toast. You put some cinnamon on your toast to spice it up a bit, make it more appealing than just plain gameplay (or toast). If you don't put enough cinnamon on your toast, you won't taste it and there will really be no point in having it. However, if you put too much cinnamon on your toast, the toast will either not taste good anymore, or the toast will get lost under the massive amount of cinnamon you just poured on it. In addition, no matter how much cinnamon you put on your toast, if the toast is burnt it won't taste any good.
And thus ends my cinnamon and toast analogy.
EDIT: Also, it's more important that an area has a certain theme to it, and that is has character. I was playing a map in which one area was literally a giant cave made of sandstone that went almost straight down. Despite being bland, it felt fun because all the spawners were skele spawners. This gave the area character, made it stand out from the other areas. Also, there were 2 giant stone stalactites on the roof, which added additional character. It was something new, and was a standout characteristic of the area. There was tension created by the skeletons and the fact that there were no lights until you got to the bottom and saw a path into the next area. An area doesn't need fancy aesthetics to feel good.
1
Well CTMs are basically all about aesthetics these days anyway.
1
1
Second, this doesn't sound like parkour with a twist. It sounds like parkour straightened out
1
And why exactly does this matter? The point of the OP was to inform people that Minecraft's demographic is gaining a large audience among younger people. Not to spawn a debate about whether kids can act smart and reliable or not.