Minecraft Forums

They aren't going to discontinue the Java edition... All they did is rename it to something that FITS for what it is coded in. They're doing this, to help people differentiate from the MC: Bedrock Edition, and MC: Java Edition. They will continue to update and support all platforms uninvolved. Such as the PS4 edition, and Java Edition. So, bud, you've got nothing to worry about. If they discontinued the Java Edition, they'd have a very, very angry fanbase which is something Mojang can't afford. As this is their #1 product. So, why don't we all sit back, and chill while the updates roll out.

Also, the reason 1.13 is supposed to be a more technical update is not because they're getting ready to finalize the game, it's because they're out of ID's. They're restructuring the game so they will be able to add more features properly without breaking anything.

Quote from CraftAeternalis»

And since none of you socialists are going to listen, I'll close with this.

*snip*

Since you are quoting someone I don't see a reason to respond to you about the content of the quote, as they are not your words. I am, however, going to respond to the completely uncalled for name calling. First, what does this have to do with socialism? Second, I have remained civil throughout my conversation with you, yet you have insisted on calling me names with nearly every response. If I said something to incite this, please let me know. And third, the unavoidable problem with your defense; the EULA never allowed profiting off of servers. It isn't like the EULA update two years ago suddenly made it against the EULA to make money off of servers; In fact, the EULA update added ways to make money off of minecraft servers. Thus, running a minecraft server should never have been considered something to make money off of.

Quote from DerpSquad1O1»

I would say, however, 'don't fix something that isn't broken'.

Quote from Zarlog_Core24»

Think of it this way: There is a large lake that is suspected to be polluted. You take a small drop from a random place in the lake. It is polluted with some toxic chemical. Then you take a few more drops from around the lake to test. If all those drops are polluted, you can assume the whole lake is. Same with the Minecraft community. If all those people on those servers hated 1.9 (the server owners even think the changes are stupid and unbalanced, which they are, so they disabled them as soon as 1.9.1 came out), then it is safe to assume that a much larger portion of the community hates 1.9 but has never even heard of MCF or is unable to do something about it.
An official survey done by Mojang on the launcher would most likely reveal that LOTS of the community hates 1.9, but the fanboys don't want that done because they know that they will be proven wrong and loose, and the changes will be put back to the old combat system.

This lake analogy is perfectly good. However, you make a mistake here. 4 servers that were all chosen to be those that a single player plays on, all with huge numbers of players, meaning: all servers of the exact same type. Also, using the feedback from players that he choose to talk to or that chose to answer him (thus a filtering by social similitude, which is a strong form of confirmation bias), instead of a totally random sample of people done structurally and consistently in a true poll fashion.

So this is more like taking a tiny number of drops also all in the very same tiny corner of the lake, rather than a higher (and thus much more statistically meaningful) number of samples in totally random and independent-from-each-other locations all around the lake. Seeing the 4 drops being polluted means only thta that little corner of the lake is polluted. Extrapolating that to the entire lake is nothing more than trying to pass a faulty sample as truth, a basic form of propaganda / confirmation bias. That doesn't mean it's a valid argument.

Also, if you make that poll, make sure you :

- Avoid any parti-pris (i.e. presenting the poll in a way that doesn't hint at all at your own personal opinion)

- Doesn't select the polled members in any way towards your forgone conclusion.

- Get the age of every person polled

- Do not include ANYBODY you know or any server you play on in the poll. Get a truly random sample.

- Present all sides of the question in a neutral way with equal coverage, not in a way that "favors" one side.

- Avoid "grading" levels of opinion, or "strongly" believing in an opinion. Basically, you want to force neutrals to vote, without them feeling that they are pressured into having a strongly opinion about the answer. A separate question can be made for how "'strongly" one finds the question important, but that is rarely needed. What you want is to have both of those that "lightly" or "strongly" believe the opinion to answer the same way.

- Present it neutrally and very succintly, and get the number of those refusing to answer, simple and quick to form an opinion and answer. This is because you need the opinion of everybody, not just those that have a vested interest in the question, and the bigger the sample size. the better, so it must be quick and painless. Otherwise, you're just strongly tweaking the results towards those that will be the most vocal about it, and this is usually the naysayers camp.

Example:
"Do you believe the changes of the new combat system are more positive or more negative?"
"What is your age?"
"Any last single-sentence comment?"
"Thank you".

Age is important because Minecraft is a game which has MOST of it's players at the very young or at least pre-adult stage:

https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-demographics-of-Minecraft-players

20% under 15, 45% from 15 to 21.

A forum by itself doesn't mean much, because the results will often be ruined by the fact that haters are always WAY more prone to become almost-fanatically entrenched in their position than supporters, and thus way more vocal about it. It's the % number of answers from a wide random variety of people that count, including those with a very low interest in propagation their opinion, not the strength or length or number of posts from the people that find the answer really important. That's true for any poll in any topic, not just this topic in Minecraft.

Less maturity often means less capability to focus away from what I call the "short attention span / low patience / prone to throwing a tantrum of some flaming" demographics, aka the "least efforts for maximum results, now now NOW WHINE CRY" generation of players, which will of course by default tend to more often whine against ANY increase in difficulty, compared to the rest of the players. Every human being is prone to some level of this selfish behavior, younger persons are just much more blatantly prone to do it, longer, more strongly, and more often, than adults. That is only an average statement, of course. You'll see really wise analyzing kids and asshole selfish adults all the time, too, after all.

This "low patience" population slice is also the same one with less education experience (and life experience) in general, and thus the least well placed to interpret and understand more abstract aspects such as "game balance" or how the hidden maths behind the coded mechanic of a game can subtly interact with one another. This demographic tends to value things according to what positive aspects these things give to them, directly and immediately, and mainly in black and white too. The "internal filter" is still being developed, so the person tends to see something as either fully horrible, without any redeeming quality, or perfectly divine, without any default. For example, when scoring movies from 1 to 10, that slice of the overall population tend to vote an absolutely ridiculously inordinate amount of "1" and "10" scores, as if almost all movies where either worthy of going only to the bottom of the dung pit, or only the top position on the altar pyramid of awesomeness, with almost nothing in between. Basically, you just can't take that slice of opinion at face value.

More mature people tend to have a bit more of the focus needed to interpret the value of things according not only to themselves or in absolutes, but to have a "bigger picture", balance the pros and the cons, and overall have a higher (on average) capacity to delay their internal reward mechanism in order to give a more fair evaluation of something. Basically, that kind of thing occurs because it's just part of growing up and opening oneself to the world. Babies tend to be selfish, and being nice and empathic tends to be much more of a learned than an innate process.

More mature adults also know that the opinion they form in a few minutes is worth just that, and realize that the game makers gave spent countless hours debating how best to implement the changes. Mature people allow some leeway in their own ability to change their mind too and thus will tend to present less absolute opinions. Meanwhile immature people will be quick to firmly be convinced that THEY are absolutely right and EVERYBODY ELSE is oh so wrong and quick to say Mojang are STUPID and present their opinions loudly as if it was a universal truth more important than anything. Not always of course, but the average trend of adults being wiser than young people is definitely there.

Basic Minecraft demographics show that 2 out of every 3 players are "young". Take their opinion with a grain of salt. The analysis of the only 1 out of every 3 player is a better result, because those have a better handle on things, sufficient perspective to give a truly meaningful vote regarding the long-terms effects of the combat system change. This doesn't mean that the young ones' opinion does't count, but their vote is more indicative of the short-term effects on the players reaction to those changes, rather than the overall worth of the changes themselves.

That is why any poll also needs to be split according to age otherwise the only information you'll get is "we kids just don't like it", and nothing more, instead of "we don't like it because this change is inherently bad".

Personally, I feel the game is made for kids (insanely easy, even when on Hard mode). And it is true that the naysayers are NOT a negligible fraction of players (their error is merely in believing that they even approach the majority without checking - a primitive form of confirmation bias).

I would simply change it like this:

On Easy difficulty, drop the combat cooldown, Let the baby kids and the proponents of totally-unbalanced-but-easy combat have their fun. Each server can just decide if it targets a more balanced player base (normal or hard), or it exists more for the little kids with no patience and no strategy approach to combat (Easy difficulty).

Such a code modification would take maybe all of 20 minutes to change, tops.

Quote from sazrocks»

Just to clear something up:
EULA update announced - 12 Jun 2014
Microsoft acquired Mojang - 15 September 2014
Now, an argument could be made saying that the EULA update was in preparation for the acquisition, but Microsoft had no direct control over mojang at the time.

I just don't see how you can be mad at Mojang for any of this. They own Minecraft and have the rights to do what they want with it. If they feel Pay2Win servers shouldn't be in the game, then they can remove them from the game. They gave servers an insane amount of time to adjust to a few simple rules, they even reminded the larger server owners about it via Email, and then enforced the EULA just as they said they would.

Seems legitimate to me.

Quote from Custardcreamdream»

oh, ok that's my fault, apologies, but anyway, my point about job loss still stands.

all the best, custard.

Who cares about job loss in this situation! They built their business around breaking rules, it's their own fault in this case.

Quote from 123123b»

Don't you realize what will happen? Servers will revive less money and die off (big and small) I know. That's the entire point. I don't speak for everyone, but I've followed this issue closely for over a year, from what I've seen, a lot of people are already well aware this would kill servers. Small servers will have no use anymore, because their perks will be a copy of the large servers. You mean how they already are? How many servers are not copies of larger servers? I can name so many servers that sell /fly, OP equipment and /tp rights big and small. The EULA will cause corruption to all of Minecraft in Multiplayer! I fail to see how.