Yes, especially if you consider texture packs mods. I like my grass green, not grey, black or blue. I use a mod that reverts the swamps back to 1.8 style green instead of 1.0 hardcoded/no transition ick. Also use Too Many Items, Better Than Wolves, and the retro sounds mod. But I can live without those. Apparently for me, the graphics do matter
There are indeed less trees, as many people have mentioned already. But there is a bigger variety of biomes after the 1.0 update: Tundra, Forest, Mushroom, Swamp, Desert, Plain. I am not sure if there are any others, but I was able to think of those 6 biomes. 1.8 and before there used to be only Tundra, Forest and Desert biomes, but now there is a bigger variety of them. I remember back in alpha when there were only two biomes: Tundra and Forest. There was no desert. Even with the new biomes, the game is still quite interesting, so I am not sure why you guys are complaining so much: just play the game, it's made to be played!
I don't want a new biome generator exactly. I want the new biome generator to have all of the features of the old generator, all the new terrain features it's supposed to have, be aesthetically pleasing, fun to play on, and generally be better than the old one. So far, for me, the only requirement it's fulfilling is the second. Yes, I'm demanding. That's because my Minecraft world is MY WORLD. It is the MOST IMPORTANT part of the game for me. It's where everything I do takes place, the setting for my stories and grand adventures. It has to be fun, unique, pretty, dangerous, and full of surprises.
Let's look over the features the old biome generator had:
The Biomes: Taigas, tundras, deserts, savanas, shrubland, plains, rainforests, swamps (sort of), forests, seasonal forests. Bodies of water could be found, but were smaller than the current oceans.
The Geography: Beaches of sand, and sometimes gravel, occured near water lines, were of substantial size, and were quite frequent. Mountains could occur in any biome, and hills and general terrain variations were common. Rivers and oceans did not occur.
Cons: Bodies of water weren't large or deep enough, biomes were too small and some were not very distinct. Some maps could be too mountainous and provide little flat ground for building. Ravines, rivers, strongholds, villages, and mushroom biomes did not occur.
Pros: Biomes generally mixed and flowed together well. Worlds were unique and varied.
Now let's look at the new generator:
The Biomes: Forest, Taiga, Swamp, Desert, Plains, Tundra, Ocean, Mushroom, Mountain. Trees rarely occur outside of the forested biomes, those being Swamp, Forest, and Taiga.
The Geography: Mountains now occur as a seperate biome. Other biomes are relatively flat. Beaches of substantial size do not occur. Beaches of gravel (to this posters knowledge) do not occur at all. Ravines were added, generally occuring as deep cuts in flatter biomes. All of the new structures occur on these maps.
Pros: All of the new terrain features occur on these maps. Beautiful mountain formations often occur in the Mountain biome. The Swamp biome has been overhauled to be more distinct, and aside from certain aesthetic issues in regards to grass color (noted below) has been a huge improvement over the old swamp biomes. Biomes are now larger, and there's far more flat terrain to build on. River create somewhat more natural borders between biomes.
Cons: Few beaches of substantial size. Taigas are no longer snowy. Significant and interesting elevation changes rarely occur outside mountain biomes. Outside of forest biomes, trees rarely occur, resulting in unforested mountain tops. While the geography is beautiful, the lack of flora is unettling and makes the place appear barren. In contrast, the flora is perhaps too flentiful in forested biomes. Plains and tundras could also use a few more trees (not too many!) A large degree of randomness has been lost, resulting in biomes of similar size, vegetation desity, altitude, and general uniqueness (that is to say, no uniquness). One forest biome strongly resembles another forest biomes, One plains biome strongly resembles another plains biome, etc. Oceans are perhaps too large or sizable islands too infrequent. Many of the biomes previously implemented are now missing. Transitions between biomes are somewhat harsher, particularly in the case of the swamps. Swamp grass color is hard coded and cannot be modified with a simple texture pack. In addition no grass color transition was coded in, making the change appear very harsh. Swamp water also suffers from this oversight.
Obviously each generator has it's flaws. I think what we need is closer to the old generator than the new, but that's my opinion. In my ideal world, the terrain generator would be 1.7 with larger biomes, new (fixed) swamps, the new terrain features and structures, and then left well enough alone.
Biomes need to be overhauled for all of the reasons mentioned above. Also, I want my beaches and my rainforests back. Animal breeding is too simple and doesn't take long enough for me. It should take at least as long to get a calf as it does to grow wheat from a seed. Or something. It just feels pasted on as an afterthought. It has no depth.
Now that I think about it, a lot of things are lacking depth or useful details. Powered minecarts are still useless. There's nothing in oceans but water. Void fog sits at the bottom of the map, mocking all Minecraftian dwarves while serving no purpose. The much desired skyland generator hasn't seen the light of day since those screenshots were taken. Endermen destroy player structures without any provocation from the player. Sheep still don't regrow wool. Minecraft is just kind of a mess.
I'm an alpha player. I like most of the updates, at least in theory. I like a lot of the ideas coming out of Mojang, not so much the execution. I often feel they don't go deep enough or are too simple (*cough*animal breeding*cough*). The Adventure Update had a lot of cool features, but the utter failure (in my opinion, at least) of the new terrain generator has made Minecraft essentially unplayable to me. Exploring the cool, unique, random things in the Minecraft world was my favorite thing to do in Minecraft. Now that all worlds look virtually the same, Minecraft is dead to me. Minecraft is a lot of things to a lot of different people, and to have it change so drastically is going to cause backlash, especially among the people who have been here longest and have loved it most. Alpha players don't hate everything about every update. They vehemently hate one or two specific things about one or two specific updates. There just happen to be rather a lot of us.
Explain to him that some people find the term "fag" offensive, hurtful, or demeaning, and then teach him how to explain his opinions regarding games in a semi-reasoned manner: "I don't like the graphics, and game art is important to me" "I don't like the gameplay; I prefer fighting and killing to creative games" or even "It's just boring to me".
Many people view lying as something that requires the intent to give false information. If this is Notch's view of what lying is, and at the time of the statements he truly believed those things has happened, then he did not in fact lie because he had no intention of spreading false information. By Notch's own logic, he was mistaken, misunderstood what had happened, but he did not lie.
Minecraft should focus on simple rules. But it shouldn't be too simple. Complex systems can add satisfaction to the game. When it's too simple, there's no challenge, and thus no reward. This is why I personally dislike the animal breeding system. Right click two animals with wheat, get third animal. Too simple, no challenge, unrewarding and ultimately unsatisfying (for me).
Add an and or a couple or's to those requirements and I might find it more satisfying. Exg: Right click two animals with wheat, AND those animals have access to a water source block within x blocks, AND have at least x blocks to move within, OR are trapped in minecarts (becuase its funny), yields new baby animal. It gives me a puzzle to solve: how to meet these basic requirements in the most efficient manner. Simple rules are good. Depth and complexity can be achieved through simple rules. One simple rule is usually not enough (for me)to find gameplay rewarding.
Expanding on the "it depends" with a human example, dealing with a darker parent and a lighter parent, the child will be no darker than the dark parent and no lighter than the light parent, usually falling somewhere around the middle ground, because pigment doesn't actually work like that (dominant/recessive color) in many cases. It's important to note that different species color genes can behave very differently. Do we want to simulate actual real world sheep genetics, or should we make up a simplified Minecraft system with a loose basis on genetics? Most likely the latter. Because who actually wants to keep genealogy charts for their virtual sheep? The question is then how to do this and off what premise to base it.
- Small terrain generation changes are easily absorbed without creating a new world, and it was the norm before 1.8.
- In 1.8 and 1.9 we saw massive changes that pretty much forced us to recreate the world in order to get the full benefits from the upgrade.
- For some people full world recreation is no big deal. But for those who play minecraft because they enjoy creating significant and attractive structures... world resets are devastating. Popular servers die out if world migration is not handled "just right".
- The 1.8/1.9 rate of change has eroded players trust in Mojang's ability to improve the game without ruining past work.
If I remember right, Notch announced that a couple weeks from now we go into a code freeze with only bug-fixes for a month... and then we get the first official release.
So, the real question is how "non-destructively" will Mojang handle updates to Minecraft after the full release.
They may not realize it, but their reputation as a professional gaming outfit and possibly even their profitability depends on how they handle the issue. Of course, once Minecraft is released on the XBox... Microsoft's name and reputation will be associated with Minecraft, and I seriously doubt that Microsoft will allow Mojang to do any more massive and destructive changes.
In other words... I expect updates to have significant nasty consequences for the next couple of weeks, but I'm optimistic about what we'll see after that.
That is the real question. We all know things will change in a beta, and some changes we may not agree with. When Minecraft hits full release, things will change. "The game's in beta" is no longer an excuse. The best solution, at least for world generation, would be to add a way to detect the version chunks were generated in, and when the current version changes, add an "in- between zone" that generates around the edges of the old world, with all topography gradually moving toward sea level, pre-generate some chunks further out with the new world generation, and then gradually move towards the elevation of the new chunks until you hit them, at which point the new terrain generation takes over. Seeds wouldn't generate the exact same map anymore, but maps spanning patches would look a lot better.
Jut pretend they're wearing masks or something if the noses bother you so much. My personal preference is for medieval plague masks. Makes the Mooshrooms and zombie apocolypse more insidious.
It's adding the basis of magic/alchemy to Minecraft. Mostly creating atmosphere. Soon you will have magic at your disposal to combat the necromancy and evil mushroom creep! *maniacal laughter*
Seriously though, it seems like it's meant to make way for a certain degree of story. Everything should become clear when strongholds are complete. At least if Notch is the game designer I think he is.
0
0
There used to be more biomes than we have now. They were just a little more subtle. YMMV as to whether subtlety is good or bad. http://www.minecraftwiki.net/wiki/History_of_Biomes_and_Generated_structures
0
3
Let's look over the features the old biome generator had:
The Biomes: Taigas, tundras, deserts, savanas, shrubland, plains, rainforests, swamps (sort of), forests, seasonal forests. Bodies of water could be found, but were smaller than the current oceans.
The Geography: Beaches of sand, and sometimes gravel, occured near water lines, were of substantial size, and were quite frequent. Mountains could occur in any biome, and hills and general terrain variations were common. Rivers and oceans did not occur.
Cons: Bodies of water weren't large or deep enough, biomes were too small and some were not very distinct. Some maps could be too mountainous and provide little flat ground for building. Ravines, rivers, strongholds, villages, and mushroom biomes did not occur.
Pros: Biomes generally mixed and flowed together well. Worlds were unique and varied.
Now let's look at the new generator:
The Biomes: Forest, Taiga, Swamp, Desert, Plains, Tundra, Ocean, Mushroom, Mountain. Trees rarely occur outside of the forested biomes, those being Swamp, Forest, and Taiga.
The Geography: Mountains now occur as a seperate biome. Other biomes are relatively flat. Beaches of substantial size do not occur. Beaches of gravel (to this posters knowledge) do not occur at all. Ravines were added, generally occuring as deep cuts in flatter biomes. All of the new structures occur on these maps.
Pros: All of the new terrain features occur on these maps. Beautiful mountain formations often occur in the Mountain biome. The Swamp biome has been overhauled to be more distinct, and aside from certain aesthetic issues in regards to grass color (noted below) has been a huge improvement over the old swamp biomes. Biomes are now larger, and there's far more flat terrain to build on. River create somewhat more natural borders between biomes.
Cons: Few beaches of substantial size. Taigas are no longer snowy. Significant and interesting elevation changes rarely occur outside mountain biomes. Outside of forest biomes, trees rarely occur, resulting in unforested mountain tops. While the geography is beautiful, the lack of flora is unettling and makes the place appear barren. In contrast, the flora is perhaps too flentiful in forested biomes. Plains and tundras could also use a few more trees (not too many!) A large degree of randomness has been lost, resulting in biomes of similar size, vegetation desity, altitude, and general uniqueness (that is to say, no uniquness). One forest biome strongly resembles another forest biomes, One plains biome strongly resembles another plains biome, etc. Oceans are perhaps too large or sizable islands too infrequent. Many of the biomes previously implemented are now missing. Transitions between biomes are somewhat harsher, particularly in the case of the swamps. Swamp grass color is hard coded and cannot be modified with a simple texture pack. In addition no grass color transition was coded in, making the change appear very harsh. Swamp water also suffers from this oversight.
Obviously each generator has it's flaws. I think what we need is closer to the old generator than the new, but that's my opinion. In my ideal world, the terrain generator would be 1.7 with larger biomes, new (fixed) swamps, the new terrain features and structures, and then left well enough alone.
0
Now that I think about it, a lot of things are lacking depth or useful details. Powered minecarts are still useless. There's nothing in oceans but water. Void fog sits at the bottom of the map, mocking all Minecraftian dwarves while serving no purpose. The much desired skyland generator hasn't seen the light of day since those screenshots were taken. Endermen destroy player structures without any provocation from the player. Sheep still don't regrow wool. Minecraft is just kind of a mess.
0
*Everything in this post is opinion.
0
*Disclaimer: this post is tongue in cheek.
0
0
0
Add an and or a couple or's to those requirements and I might find it more satisfying. Exg: Right click two animals with wheat, AND those animals have access to a water source block within x blocks, AND have at least x blocks to move within, OR are trapped in minecarts (becuase its funny), yields new baby animal. It gives me a puzzle to solve: how to meet these basic requirements in the most efficient manner. Simple rules are good. Depth and complexity can be achieved through simple rules. One simple rule is usually not enough (for me)to find gameplay rewarding.
And sheep still don't regrow wool.
0
0
Reading fail? The post describes a method for avoiding straight cliffs when the game is released.
Yes, it will be difficult. All things worth doing are.
0
That is the real question. We all know things will change in a beta, and some changes we may not agree with. When Minecraft hits full release, things will change. "The game's in beta" is no longer an excuse. The best solution, at least for world generation, would be to add a way to detect the version chunks were generated in, and when the current version changes, add an "in- between zone" that generates around the edges of the old world, with all topography gradually moving toward sea level, pre-generate some chunks further out with the new world generation, and then gradually move towards the elevation of the new chunks until you hit them, at which point the new terrain generation takes over. Seeds wouldn't generate the exact same map anymore, but maps spanning patches would look a lot better.
0
0
Seriously though, it seems like it's meant to make way for a certain degree of story. Everything should become clear when strongholds are complete. At least if Notch is the game designer I think he is.