I have now traveled 20k away from home (not in a straight line), visited about a dozen desert biomes and searched the borders for mesas (in fact, I've raided about fifteen desert temples just in this one trip and had to leave a lot of the treasure in the chests) and still no mesa biomes in sight.
Varied in which way ? The height varies, yes, but still i perceive as there are the same biomes one behind the other. Sometimes you dont need to see to stay oriented, you can say that if that you are on a plain biome, which biomes are potentially be around. Also, to stay oriented over the threes i just go over them or simply find the highest plays as many explorers do. They climb up, watch the surroundings, fix an orientation point and go to that point.
The arrangements of trees, hills, plains, rivers, special zones, and especially the mountains (x-hills) are constantly different. There's a lot more variety in all that than there was in 1.6 And, somewhat ironically, even in 1.6 people generally like the temperate biomes. If you check out "favorite biomes" threads like this more that half the favorites are the biomes now in the temperate zone. But, regardless of what it is or what it looks like *whatever* is the predominant terrain is automatically flagged by our brains as "boring". Put a meadow in a forest - the meadow in interesting and the forest boring. Put a giant meadow around a copse of trees - and now the forest is interesting and the meadow's boring.
Before the oceans were the "boring" background and the forests/plains/whatnot were interesting. But now the oceans are lakes, and now the temperate terrains are the boring stuff (to our minds). So there's all this great stuff, but we don't appreciate it.
I can "trick" my mind into appreciating the new terrain by switching back and forth between 1.6 and 1.7. When I start up 1.7, my mind contrasts the 1.7 temperate terrain with the blander temperate terrain and ocean background of the 1.6 I've been playing, and says "cool!". Then after a few hours of playing, it's back to "oh god not another forest" Then I switch back to 1.6 and after a day or too I'll enjoy 1.7 again.
I have now traveled 20k away from home (not in a straight line), visited about a dozen desert biomes and searched the borders for mesas (in fact, I've raided about fifteen desert temples just in this one trip and had to leave a lot of the treasure in the chests) and still no mesa biomes in sight.
Unfortunately the Mesa biomes cluster separately from the other hot zones. Sometimes there's a blob of mesa next to a hot zone. Sometimes it's all by itself. As a result, it's really hard to find even though it's not that rare by area (technically, the mesa-other stuff transitions are rare).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Geographicraft (formerly Climate Control) - Control climate, ocean, and land sizes; stop chunk walls; put modded biomes into Default worlds, and more!
RTG plus - All the beautiful terrain of RTG, plus varied and beautiful trees and forests.
If you don't want to be spoiled, there is a solution, we could make a thread about specific 1.7... good seeds with a quick explanation of the content without posting a map.
I actually like that idea! As a matter of fact, just for the lulz, I created a map in Amidst using the seed "shrooooms maaaaaan!", and got a map that not only had just about all the biomes within 3K blocks of spawn, but had FOUR mushroom Islands (2 of which were less than 1K blocks from spawn). It's almost like the game somehow knew.
It's clear that the worlds generated with 1.7 are much more realistic with large zone of biomes, but reality doesn't always mean fun.
I experience the real world everyday, get up, work, eat, work, eat, sleep ..... and when i play Minecraft it's not exactly what i want to reproduce with the greatest similarity!
I'm happy with my real life, i don't need to replay it in Minecraft.
The arrangements of trees, hills, plains, rivers, special zones, and especially the mountains (x-hills) are constantly different. There's a lot more variety in all that than there was in 1.6 And, somewhat ironically, even in 1.6 people generally like the temperate biomes. If you check out "favorite biomes" threads like this more that half the favorites are the biomes now in the temperate zone. But, regardless of what it is or what it looks like *whatever* is the predominant terrain is automatically flagged by our brains as "boring". Put a meadow in a forest - the meadow in interesting and the forest boring. Put a giant meadow around a copse of trees - and now the forest is interesting and the meadow's boring.
Before the oceans were the "boring" background and the forests/plains/whatnot were interesting. But now the oceans are lakes, and now the temperate terrains are the boring stuff (to our minds). So there's all this great stuff, but we don't appreciate it.
I can "trick" my mind into appreciating the new terrain by switching back and forth between 1.6 and 1.7. When I start up 1.7, my mind contrasts the 1.7 temperate terrain with the blander temperate terrain and ocean background of the 1.6 I've been playing, and says "cool!". Then after a few hours of playing, it's back to "oh god not another forest" Then I switch back to 1.6 and after a day or too I'll enjoy 1.7 again.
The biomes are different, they have a hill here, a tree there, a little lake bellow and a river going throug but stilll is the same texture, the same palettes (shades of green if you want to call it too) and i still find patterns all over the place. What specially breaks my sight is mountain hill biome all gray with a little snow on top and maybe a tree or blueish green grass... Im not arguing about the new biomes, i like the new biomes too but its the layout and i repeat this, what bores me. I used to like taiga more when it was snowy, it gave it a feeling... it would be cool to be able to have snoy taiga and just taiga
I just don´t want to trick my mind, i want to think its not boring and not "pretend" or "trick" it. All i want is to find a solution that fits "both sides" so everyone can be more or less satisfied and not just to do something, some people like it and f the others.
I think the new way the biomes work is an improvement from before. However, even though I try not to be nostalgic, I remember deserts next to tundras just feeling so "minecrafty." Ok, me. Now shut up before you decide to revert back to alpha.
Finally found all three of the rare biomes. Took me about ten hours of exploring - ten hours I really shouldn't have wasted, but I did. This time, I didn't go in a straight line and I explored the edges of hot and cold biomes. The ice spikes were 9k blocks away, the mega taiga was 30k blocks away, and the mesa was 22k blocks away. I also only found one jungle the entire time.
I agree with the notion that unnaturally closely located biomes like a tundra next to jungle is part of the appeal of minecraft, and doesn't detract from the the experience. I find it astonishing that anyone could look at this cube based game with all its oddities and decide the oddities suck and instead try to make it approach reality. This mentality is what homogenizes game experiences and ultimately makes games crappy. If I wanted to walk around in a bland field with overgrown weeds I'd step outside. I play minecraft to see the bizarre not the mundane.
I agree with the notion that unnaturally closely located biomes like a tundra next to jungle is part of the appeal of minecraft, and doesn't detract from the the experience. I find it astonishing that anyone could look at this cube based game with all its oddities and decide the oddities suck and instead try to make it approach reality. This mentality is what homogenizes game experiences and ultimately makes games crappy. If I wanted to walk around in a bland field with overgrown weeds I'd step outside. I play minecraft to see the bizarre not the mundane.
Give this guy a medal. It's not at all supposed to simulate real life; we have exploding shrubberies and portals to the underworld. If anything, I think the game should lean more toward producing fantastical and wholly unrealistic terrain (i.e. floating islands) at times.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Curse PremiumThe arrangements of trees, hills, plains, rivers, special zones, and especially the mountains (x-hills) are constantly different. There's a lot more variety in all that than there was in 1.6 And, somewhat ironically, even in 1.6 people generally like the temperate biomes. If you check out "favorite biomes" threads like this more that half the favorites are the biomes now in the temperate zone. But, regardless of what it is or what it looks like *whatever* is the predominant terrain is automatically flagged by our brains as "boring". Put a meadow in a forest - the meadow in interesting and the forest boring. Put a giant meadow around a copse of trees - and now the forest is interesting and the meadow's boring.
Before the oceans were the "boring" background and the forests/plains/whatnot were interesting. But now the oceans are lakes, and now the temperate terrains are the boring stuff (to our minds). So there's all this great stuff, but we don't appreciate it.
I can "trick" my mind into appreciating the new terrain by switching back and forth between 1.6 and 1.7. When I start up 1.7, my mind contrasts the 1.7 temperate terrain with the blander temperate terrain and ocean background of the 1.6 I've been playing, and says "cool!". Then after a few hours of playing, it's back to "oh god not another forest" Then I switch back to 1.6 and after a day or too I'll enjoy 1.7 again.
Unfortunately the Mesa biomes cluster separately from the other hot zones. Sometimes there's a blob of mesa next to a hot zone. Sometimes it's all by itself. As a result, it's really hard to find even though it's not that rare by area (technically, the mesa-other stuff transitions are rare).
Geographicraft (formerly Climate Control) - Control climate, ocean, and land sizes; stop chunk walls; put modded biomes into Default worlds, and more!
RTG plus - All the beautiful terrain of RTG, plus varied and beautiful trees and forests.
I actually like that idea! As a matter of fact, just for the lulz, I created a map in Amidst using the seed "shrooooms maaaaaan!", and got a map that not only had just about all the biomes within 3K blocks of spawn, but had FOUR mushroom Islands (2 of which were less than 1K blocks from spawn). It's almost like the game somehow knew.
Exactly, couldn't have said it better myself!
The Wak Ka' Múul Chronicles: My Minecraft series on YouTube
The biomes are different, they have a hill here, a tree there, a little lake bellow and a river going throug but stilll is the same texture, the same palettes (shades of green if you want to call it too) and i still find patterns all over the place. What specially breaks my sight is mountain hill biome all gray with a little snow on top and maybe a tree or blueish green grass... Im not arguing about the new biomes, i like the new biomes too but its the layout and i repeat this, what bores me. I used to like taiga more when it was snowy, it gave it a feeling... it would be cool to be able to have snoy taiga and just taiga
I just don´t want to trick my mind, i want to think its not boring and not "pretend" or "trick" it. All i want is to find a solution that fits "both sides" so everyone can be more or less satisfied and not just to do something, some people like it and f the others.
I hope they fix this problem in the future.
Give this guy a medal. It's not at all supposed to simulate real life; we have exploding shrubberies and portals to the underworld. If anything, I think the game should lean more toward producing fantastical and wholly unrealistic terrain (i.e. floating islands) at times.