Honestly, Minecraft is a pretty CPU dependent game. Typically the CPU impacts the game more than anything. I have an older Toshiba laptop with an i3-2330M (IIRC) and it just used the integrated graphics from Intel and I still managed a solid 30 fps on fast graphics and render distance of 10. Then again, the Quadro NVS 285 is a rather weak card.
OP, I'm going to be honest. A graphics card for that little is basically worthless, as integrated graphics is almost always better. The cheapest card most people recommend is something like the 750TI (Nvidia, about $130-$150). What are the rest of your machine's specs?
I don't really see a point, unless the mechanics of giants are changed. They're just really big zombies, so you could literally put some blocks in front of it (like a block above your head) and hide behind them so it couldn't hit you and you could just swing at its feet until it died. The things would just be an unnecessary eyesore and annoyance, even with the drops you suggested. Maybe if lightning hits a zombie or something, but like I said and the post above mine said, mechanics, drops, and rarity need adjusted.
Long post incoming, read if you want. There's a TL;DR at the end.
I have played Minecraft on a total of four systems. The first: an old desktop (I'm talking an AMD Athlon 3200+) with 1GB RAM. Second: Toshiba laptop with an i3-2330M [model number might be slightly off there] and 4GB RAM. Both of these had integrated graphics. Next, my Xbox 360. Finally, the rig I managed to purchase after lots of work: i5-4690K, XFX 7970, 8GB RAM. In 1.4 (last version I played on the old desktop), on the "Short" render distance (I don't know exactly where this would be with the current slider), I got a consistent 20 fps. The laptop, on 1.8, gets about 35 fps with dips to about 20 when generating new terrain. On the 360, I don't know the exact figures, but it's definitely around 30 fps. My new rig, which totaled about $650 (Micro Center combo deals ftw), gets a steady 200 fps at the render slider at 24 and everything high, STOCK CLOCKS on both CPU and GPU.
Why do I drone on about my past machines? Because an old eMachine prebuilt from 2002 somehow still performed decently enough. A machine that wasn't worth the money in 2002 still played the game. They don't need to optimize for older machines. The game is playable on a machine that is literally older than half the people playing this game. Sure, a move to a different language would be great for many, but I doubt it would help so much on hardware so dated. If I could it running on a machine from '02 - twelve years old, mind you - then I think everything's doing alright.
And if you really have hardware older than twelve years, and I'm not saying that's impossible, then scrape together the money and build something with a Pentium G3258, 750TI, and a decent 4GB stick of RAM (in case you want more later). Seriously, building a machine capable of running Minecraft well is pretty easily done for around $450. Honestly, since the game depends so little on GPU power without shaders installed, you could cut that out for a while.
TL;DR - A machine that has to be as old as OP is talking about runs good enough, seriously, there's not much that can or should be done. You can build something that'll run it great for like $450.
For adventure maps of all kinds, this is perfect. Support, support, a thousand times, support! But I agree with you that this is a command-accessible only mob.
Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but something has to be up with your client or system. I've not had a single issue. Heck, I've accidentally opened a 1.8 world in 1.7 and then back in 1.8 and everything was fine. My old worlds are all fine, too. My FPS, even without VBO, is much higher than before across all my systems. I don't know a single person who has had any of these issues.
I'm not saying there's an end to the game, but the dimension the End is supposed to be a sort of final hurrah to the game. There is no real finishing the game, but the End and it's boss was added to be an end-game goal. The dimension houses the boss. If you add more, it loses what makes it a special place - that it houses an end-game boss and nothing else. The End loses any reason to be called the End if you take away what made it the End in the first place.
I really am not sure what to think. Here's a thought: wouldn't allowing an infinite End detract from the finality - and after killing the EnderDragon, loneliness - of the End? I mean, it's supposed to be an ending to the game, not some vast wasteland to explore. The whole purpose of the dimension is to add some finality to the game. I feel like an infinite world, especially if any other blocks or mobs were added, would not feel "final" in the sense that it would become a permanent fixture in most people's worlds instead of just somewhere to "finish" the game. Also, the crushing lonesomeness and lifelessness of the dimension after the dragon is defeated kind of makes me feel like that dimension serves to harbor the dragon and nothing else, which is kind of the truth. An infinite terrain, with more mobs especially, would not serve that purpose very well.
No support, I think. I'm confused and haven't even had breakfast.
Just buy the Humble Bundle if anything looks good to you. It's only $5-$6 and bunches of people buy them, so there should always be people to play with.
You're just missing a final closing bracket. As well, you'll want to apply the "Count" tag to both the 'buy' and 'sell' compounds, or else the paper sold will be a ghost item:
Sorry if this is in the wrong forum, I couldn't really figure out exactly where this should go, so I apologize if it's in the wrong place. Anyway, I'm trying to summon a villager with custom trades in 14w17a and it's not working. I'm using this:
/summon Villager ~1 ~2 ~2 {Career:0,CareerLevel:100,Profession:0,CustomName:"Tickets",CustomNameVisible:1,Offers:{Recipes:[{buy:{id:emerald,Count:1},sell:{id:paper}}]}
However, nothing gets spawned at all. If I only include everything up to "Offers", then the villager gets summoned fine and correctly. Can anyone figure out what I'm doing wrong? :/ I'd really appreciate it.
1
0
OP, I'm going to be honest. A graphics card for that little is basically worthless, as integrated graphics is almost always better. The cheapest card most people recommend is something like the 750TI (Nvidia, about $130-$150). What are the rest of your machine's specs?
0
0
0
I have played Minecraft on a total of four systems. The first: an old desktop (I'm talking an AMD Athlon 3200+) with 1GB RAM. Second: Toshiba laptop with an i3-2330M [model number might be slightly off there] and 4GB RAM. Both of these had integrated graphics. Next, my Xbox 360. Finally, the rig I managed to purchase after lots of work: i5-4690K, XFX 7970, 8GB RAM. In 1.4 (last version I played on the old desktop), on the "Short" render distance (I don't know exactly where this would be with the current slider), I got a consistent 20 fps. The laptop, on 1.8, gets about 35 fps with dips to about 20 when generating new terrain. On the 360, I don't know the exact figures, but it's definitely around 30 fps. My new rig, which totaled about $650 (Micro Center combo deals ftw), gets a steady 200 fps at the render slider at 24 and everything high, STOCK CLOCKS on both CPU and GPU.
Why do I drone on about my past machines? Because an old eMachine prebuilt from 2002 somehow still performed decently enough. A machine that wasn't worth the money in 2002 still played the game. They don't need to optimize for older machines. The game is playable on a machine that is literally older than half the people playing this game. Sure, a move to a different language would be great for many, but I doubt it would help so much on hardware so dated. If I could it running on a machine from '02 - twelve years old, mind you - then I think everything's doing alright.
And if you really have hardware older than twelve years, and I'm not saying that's impossible, then scrape together the money and build something with a Pentium G3258, 750TI, and a decent 4GB stick of RAM (in case you want more later). Seriously, building a machine capable of running Minecraft well is pretty easily done for around $450. Honestly, since the game depends so little on GPU power without shaders installed, you could cut that out for a while.
TL;DR - A machine that has to be as old as OP is talking about runs good enough, seriously, there's not much that can or should be done. You can build something that'll run it great for like $450.
0
0
0
0
0
I'm not saying there's an end to the game, but the dimension the End is supposed to be a sort of final hurrah to the game. There is no real finishing the game, but the End and it's boss was added to be an end-game goal. The dimension houses the boss. If you add more, it loses what makes it a special place - that it houses an end-game boss and nothing else. The End loses any reason to be called the End if you take away what made it the End in the first place.
1
No support, I think. I'm confused and haven't even had breakfast.
0
0
0
Thank you so much
0
/summon Villager ~1 ~2 ~2 {Career:0,CareerLevel:100,Profession:0,CustomName:"Tickets",CustomNameVisible:1,Offers:{Recipes:[{buy:{id:emerald,Count:1},sell:{id:paper}}]}
However, nothing gets spawned at all. If I only include everything up to "Offers", then the villager gets summoned fine and correctly. Can anyone figure out what I'm doing wrong? :/ I'd really appreciate it.