Neutrition... god that would ensure I never play Minecraft again.
Hunger was the single worst thing added to this game. It was more fun without the egg timer.
There is literally nothing we can do to help with account issues.
It really has nothing to do with your "first time". It really should be common sense.
On the right it lists the "owner" of the mod. "officialMaggiCraft", where you can send a message to them.
If you have a problem, posting for help on forums is fine, but most things can, if not be solved, then greatly helped if you do some digging yourself. Seriously, I found all this information in less than a minute. It doesn't solve your problem, but it directly helps you get closer to a solution than this forum post alone will.
And yes, I understand I am coming off as a bit harsh. That is on purpose. My goal is to encourage you to try and solve problems on your own and not relying just on forums like far FAR too many people do. Posting for help is fine, but do some digging yourself too. You will never improve yourself otherwise.
Where did you get the mod? finding out who made it isn't exactly rocket science...
This took me less than a minute of searching. https://instant-structures-mod.com/contact/
Why not try asking the person who made the mod that is causing the crash? This forum is for vanilla game support.
Wait, are those... are those actually the minimum and recommended now for Minecraft!? That's insane, and Mojang is going to hurt themselves if they keep this up. The 1.x GHz and low 2.x GHz Core i3s (and even less!) are going to be a big portion of your average notebook user these days. It's understandable for a 1.1 GHz Celeron to not play the game too well (especially since those usually worse integrated graphics), but to need a decently fast Core i3 as MINIMUM!?
It makes me wonder where my ancient Core i5 2500K would sit, because that makes it looks like it'd barely cut it, but here I am playing with a render distance of 32 absolutely perfectly (haven't tried 1.13 yet and now I'm not sure I want to, as 1.7 and 1.8 cutting my performance already put me off). Also, my even worse Core i3 4010U in my laptop (a measly... 1.6GHz? 1.7GHz? I forget) plays the game as well as my desktop believe it or not, albeit it at a render distance of 12 and a much lower resolution of course.
Either they are admitting that this next version is going to be THAT much more performance hungry, or they simply don't have much hardware knowledge and that's simply the lowest end thing they tested it on themselves. It's understandable for hardware needs to go up in a game being developed as long as this, and of course they won't test with super old hardware (like mine), but it's still scary to see how much the requirements jump up with this game. Hopefully it's simply because it's still in pre-release and these high hardware jumps don't get reflected in the final release.
The current system requirements are actually very low end. An i5 2500k is much stronger than the minimum. Older, but still stronger.
If you are using a notebook to play games, you are basically setting yourself up for failure. They are not designed for games at all. They specifically prioritize power efficiency, so their CPUs are underpowered, they use slower hard drives, etc.
The jump in spec requirements is not unreasonable at all. Basically any run-of-the-mill computers on the market right now will have no problems playing Minecraft. The OP has a computer that is AT LEAST 8 years old AND was low end at the time is was bought, so naturally, performance is go0ing to be an issue.
It was possible, the same way it is now. You ran the server software and people logged in to it. But it was indeed extremely buggy. On the up side, tools didnt degrade, and there was no fall damage. On the downside, minecarts were so buggy, they weren't worth using, among other things.
I don't know if the alpha server software can be downloaded anymore, at least not officially. but yeah, it really isn't worth it outside of a quick nostalgia trip.
In store I am allowed to return ... here my 2 emails to Minecraft and zero response on returns.
I am the father of the child wanting this software. He has the Pocket Edition in iPhone, XBox edition, Apple TV edition. He is presumably the lead in his classroom when it comes to Minecraft. He wants it in his PC - which is where we are having the problem. I am simply put - extremely frustrated. I had offered him Minecraft Windows 10 apparently written in C++ using native Windows code (something BTW i am very familiar with) but he tells me its a useless version compared to Java edition. I really don't want to spend +500$ just for Minecraft!!
Then don't spend $500 just for minecraft. Spend it to improve ALL computing functions you currently do, and it just so happens, Minecraft will actually work that time.
Or don't, but either way, this isn't Mojang's fault, it is yours and yours alone.
So - Minecraft knows the system requirements - you've confirmed it. Excellent. However, they make you PAY first and then you download the software. The software during installation doesn't do any checks. After installation - when trying to execute - fails to load. Sorry - I might be the biggest dumb guy here but the software can't do a GPU compatibility check BEFORE install? Apparently, there are so many users having this that they have a procedure outlined in support on how to analyze and submit but still they can't do any preliminary checks? Finally, why make a consumer pay FIRST ; ideally they should have allowed the installation and during activation required me to pay.
Virtually every software outthere that you pay for has you pay before download unless there is a trial version... You act like this is unusual, but the reality is it is very VERY common.
I have NEVER seen a SINGLE game EVER check hardware requirements during installation. This would be incredibly stupid too because it is possible to get some software working reasonably well on lower than required hardware, not always, be sometimes (Not in your case though), or perhaps the hardware checker fails to properly identify hardware, or as has happened before, the software get to be old and thinks newer hardware is insufficient. It is not practical to program in a foolproof hardware check.
They have a procedure because unfortunately the vast majority of people in the world are, lets be honest, rather inept with computers.
Finally, why make a consumer pay FIRST
Try this logic next time you go to the store for something. See how far you get. Your logic is so backwards, it is literally laughable.
The first downward tick in my love of the game happened on Beta 1.8 with the introduction of hunger. I consider it to be the single worst thing ever added to the game. It is nothing more than a pointless egg-timer that does nothing to make the game more difficult or "challenging". Food is trivial to obtain, so I consider it completely pointless.
What's unnecessary is their changing of file and folder names for no damn reason. Those people have no clue how to logically name things for easy access...
They have anvil, chipped_anvil, and damaged_anvil... which may not seem like a problem, except now they are not next to one another in the file list anymore, and it is maddening! They did this crap for logs, planks, doors, fences, stained glass, etc... it is so flipping annoying.
And with this snapshot, half my stuff stopped working because... they changed the folder name from "blocks" to "block" and "items" to "item"... Why?!
I have been trying to play catch-up since 1.12...
I don't know about that. The game constantly evolving is part of what sets it apart from most others where you get the occasional bug fix or balance update but mostly remains unchanged from the day you buy it until the first expansion pack comes out -- and even then, in 90+% of the cases, the expansion pack is a pure add-on and doesn't change the base game in any significant way.
Not changing the base game is actually a good thing most of the time. You don't want an update to drastically change things, especially post release. Plus, you can still do a LOT with just "add-on" content. I mean, look at Bethesda's games. Generally speaking, their DLCs are just glorified mods. They function exactly the same as mods. We don't need drastic sweeping changes to the core mechanics just to have a good update.
Minecraft on the other hand is constantly bringing something new. Releases have definitely slowed down in the past few years (whether related to the MS buyout or otherwise) but even still we usually get at least two major content/mechanics changes every year -- and you're perfectly capable of going back and applying those to your existing builds or creating brand new builds.. choice is up to you.
Yeah, but the cost of those updates is core mechanic changes. You do things like that in alpha and beta stages. and yes, I get that Minecraft is in dire need of a sweeping code rework, that is in part what 1.8 was supposed to do, but generally speaking, core mechanic changes should be avoided unless absolutely necessary, not because they wanted to add content for an update. That is just very poor development practice.
Its certainly annoying when things break of course (I still miss those super fast translocation elevators..) and it sucks even more if the author of your favorite mod no longer maintains it and you'll never see an updated version.. but its part of the game.
That is a very poor excuse. "Its part of the game that things break every update"... well why don't they spend some development time to make that NOT happen as much as possible?
And that's the other thing MC does: You're completely free to play any version you want. You can even play 1.7 on one server and 1.12.2 on another if you want (just be careful to not load a local world in the wrong version!) I don't know if I'd really call that a "divide" in the game's player base since any player can potentially play on all servers regardless of the version they run.
Yeah sure. That doesn't work. I like 1.8+ because, in part, of things like being able to use custom models. Minecraft is practically the only game out there where you have to decide between two different versions of the game because of compatibility reasons.
When 1.8 came out, there indeed was a divide. Not so much now as many of the popular mods have been updated, but for a good year or two after 1.8 came out, most people were sticking to 1.7.10 because of compatibility. Few were updating anything to 1.8+. It came down to do you want the new features, or do you want to keep playing on the servers you enjoy with the mods you like? So hey, we had fancy new custom models! but you can't use it AND play with your friends on the modded server you like.
Bukket and Spigot specifically are kind of bad examples though. Both of those have historically been very good at keeping up to date with MC changes. Certainly not all of the plugins work in all versions, but the base mods generally are ready to go within a couple weeks of a major release.
Sure, that was an example. Again, when 1.8 came, there was a LONG wait for any of the big server mods to update because they basically needed to be rewritten from scratch. So servers opted to not shift over to 1.8+, thus the player divide.
But at the end of the day there's one deep underlying fact: Changing a game mechanic will necessarily break anything that relies on said game mechanic. Unless we want MC to just stop updating (or drop into a system of only ever adding new block colors/textures and zero further mechanics changes,) there's not much way to avoid having mods breaking. Or even in-game things like redstone circuits or command blocks. Personally that's not a trade-off I'd want to see them make. I like seeing new features and functions and if something really doesn't work the way I like, its not that hard to click the version dropdown.
Again, having to make the decision of a lesser version is stupid.
Standardizing the engine so they can avoid breaking most mods doesnt mean an end to fun and exciting updates. They could add in a scripting engine for instance. Lua would be a nice choice. That way mods can be made that don't rely much on base code. They could get that modding API that was promised years and years ago.
The reason we are in this situation is because Minecraft's development lacks forethought. Their updates have no regard for the future development. They are content with changing core mechanics if they feel like it rather than setting the framework to make everything easier.
Well, its been the case with basically every major version change since the dawn of time. Underlying code changes that a mod relies on, so mod breaks. I understand why it happens and Im not opposed to them improving the game's code. Its just sometimes like "ugg" because I've seen some really great mods disappear because the creators got tired of updating all the time. And I get it, it is a pain.
I mean, one of the reasons why 1.7.10 was so popular was because it had a ton of great mods, and everyone loved it, and then 1.8 came along and basically changed how everything worked, so it wasn't just a matter of updating mods, but rather needing to rewrite them. So it created a huge divide in the game's playerbase.
I just hope they eventually get the game into a state that WON'T break mods every time they do an update. I mean, lets be real here. Minecraft would not have been as successful without mods. Large servers would not have existed because they wouldn't have the tools they have now in order to function. Bukket, Spigot, etc. Without those, Minecraft would have not been nearly as big of a game, so it would make sense to kinda maybe make the game not break them all the time.
While I don't like this either, I do need to point out a potential flaw in your argument. People are FAR more likely to post when there is something they don't like, just like game support forums give a false representation of a game. We are most likely the vocal minority, but that doesn't invalidate our anger.
So you are arguing from ignorance.
My vision of game development is just different from your perspective.
and different from reality.
As a long Minecraft player my demands are high because I just expect more from this game than what it offers.
Youre right that coding something takes way longer than 6 days for them but i have to disagree with that.
Every year there is a contest where modders can participate in called Mod-Off (a.k.a Modjam). They only have 5 days to make a mod and show it to the judges and public. If a small group of coders can develop an almost fully functional mod in 5 days should'nt Mojang be way better at coding too since they have experience with Minecraft since the beginning of Mojang?
If this entire update was done in some few weeks im sure they could have added a bunch of features to it.
Where is that mod API?
Except modders don't have en engine to maintain. they have free raign to do whatever they want regardless of how well it fits the game. Mojang wants to maintain a level of consistency for their game. So everything they add was planned and agreed upon before actually implementing it. A modder has no such restrictions, and can devote 100% of their time towards the content, since they don't have an engine to worry about.
Not to mention, they have more than just the java version of the game to work on as well.
Your understanding of game development is lacking.