Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

One decade later, Minecraft world generation is interesting again

dither8.xyz

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 226 posts

Re: One decade later, Minecraft world generation is interesting again

#211

Post by zimpenfish »

moffkalast wrote: post #150
littlestymaar wrote: post #14

If you like voxel world generation, I strongly advise you to check out Veloren[1], it has a much much deeper worldgen that what Minecraft offers. [1]: https://veloren.net/ the game is still under development but it has been playable for more than a year now.

Or more like open terrain generator for spigot, it's so much better than stock minecraft it's laughable. https://i.imgur.com/YtDraMh.jpg

Don't suppose you know what that image was rendered in? Guessing not Overviewer since the angle is weird and it doesn't do water shading like that...

Re: One decade later, Minecraft world generation is interesting again

#212

Post by elzbardico »

aceazzameen wrote: post #170
fnord123 wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eh, aside from making java and bedrock incompatible, requiring Xbox live accounts to play, deleting customer accounts in the transition to Xbox live, making realms which are different somehow from java and bedrock (many parents had a devil if a time figuring out how to setup a server for kids playing on all the platforms during lockdown)... Aside from this they didn't ruin it.

Yeah, I'm a parent that was new to Minecraft during lockdown. It didn't take me long to figure out Bedrock and Java are incompatible, but I did have to explain it to other parents with kids that wanted to play with my kids (my kids play on Bedrock to be most compatible). My biggest issue is the amount of friction when creating a new Microsoft account for a child. I have to walk through other parents in creating a MS…

Frankly, this is the kind of friction that I would like to see more in all things involving minors in the internet. If people can’t be bothered to jump through the hopes required to create a somewhat safe online identity for their kids, one that they should be supervising, maybe it is best their kids stay offline for their own safety, because their parents can’t be bothered to make sure they are safe.

Re: One decade later, Minecraft world generation is interesting again

#213

Post by DonHopkins »

bavxo wrote: post #107
DonHopkins wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A product is a whole lot more than code. Sounds like you've never shipped one. So back to the point: What did you think of the words that Markus said? Do you agree with Markus Persson that Zoe Quinn is a "cunt", and think that Markus was right to tell her so publicly and personally on Twitter? Do you think it's a good business decision for Microsoft to associate themselves with those words?

>Do you agree with Markus Persson that Zoe Quinn is a "cunt", and think that Markus was right to tell her so publicly and personally on Twitter? I don’t know either person but I think they both should have a right to say whatever they want. >Do you think it's a good business decision for Microsoft to associate themselves with those words? I think people will care for two days and then forget about it. It’s irrelevant…

You just really stepped in it, and revealed an extremely ugly side of yourself that you probably didn't intend to. No wonder you're using a freshly minted green throw-away account: you're too embarrassed to stand behind your own words with your real name, you don't belong here, and nobody here agrees with you or cares what you think.

I suggest you go look up "GamerGate" before you humiliate yourself any more in a public discussion about Minecraft by standing up for what Markus Persson said while unconvincingly claiming not to know who he is or what he meant.

>I don’t know either person but [bullshit redacted].

You don't have to personally know both people to have an opinion, but you've already made yours quite clear. So don't bother posting your next formulaic "but" excuse: "I'm not misogynistic, but what's the big deal about calling a female game developer who's been viciously and systematically attacked by GamerGate a cunt?"

You also miserably failed to explain why you mistakenly thought I was talking about code quality, and why you naively think code quality is all that matters in a product, and why you believe Microsoft should stand behind Markus Persson after he publicly called Zoe Quinn a "cunt" (and said a lot more horrible, sexist, racist, homophobic, transphobic, and thoroughly asinine things, too) and aligned himself with and carried out the goals GamerGate, like you just did.

So next time, use Google and Wikipedia before opening your big fat mouth and pretending to be ignorant, and stop getting all your news and misogynistic arguments from 4chan. But at least now we all know where you're actually coming from, and just what kind of a person you really are, and why you're embarrassed to associate your own name with your vile opinions.

I won't bother giving you any URLs to prove my point, because your own words already have, and I'm quite sure you know exactly what I'm talking about, but you're just playing coy and falsely claiming "I don't know X, but ..." because you're a troll. And if not, which I doubt, then look it up yourself.

Re: One decade later, Minecraft world generation is interesting again

#214

Post by stolsvik »

DonHopkins wrote: post #213
bavxo wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Do you agree with Markus Persson that Zoe Quinn is a "cunt", and think that Markus was right to tell her so publicly and personally on Twitter? I don’t know either person but I think they both should have a right to say whatever they want. >Do you think it's a good business decision for Microsoft to associate themselves with those words? I think people will care for two days and then forget about it. It’s irrelevant…

You just really stepped in it, and revealed an extremely ugly side of yourself that you probably didn't intend to. No wonder you're using a freshly minted green throw-away account: you're too embarrassed to stand behind your own words with your real name, you don't belong here, and nobody here agrees with you or cares what you think. I suggest you go look up "GamerGate" before you humiliate yourself any more in a pub…

Is such a comment really ok?

Re: One decade later, Minecraft world generation is interesting again

#215

Post by boogies »

MildlySerious wrote: post #50

Man. I really do want to like it, but this update is the first one that gives me the Microsoft-finally-took-over vibes. Traversal and with that exploration just became so much harder. The landscape is now riddled with holes that you either build scraggly bridges over, or lead to massive detours. The sides of bodies of water are much higher and steeper on average, making it impossible to see the landscape you're passi…

It seems weirldly like the Minecraft devs tried Minetest and kinda randomly picked a couple of features to copy. The article describes how the new worldgen’s verticality and caves are reminiscent of Minetest, but inventory clutter is also very much like the default Minetest Game (which also has pretty useless copper, albeit as one of too many tiers of tool material, going into the same recipes as stone, iron, gold, diamond, etc.).

I much prefer the Minetest game NodeCore, which is playable with 8 inventory slots (the small HUD bar is all you get, because the game shuns all modal UI except a hints system for figuring out crafting and other gameplay mechanics without using a guide to see whole recipes, which are considered spoilers) and makes the fancy terrain more navigable by letting you scale cliffs and even climb overhangs without placing or mining anything.

Re: One decade later, Minecraft world generation is interesting again

#216

Post by baby »

globular-toast wrote: post #28
baby wrote: post #19

One thing I always hoped, but that never happened: get people’s creations into the game. Randomly get vetted buildings as biomes. People have created insane things and it’s a shame they couldn’t have been integrated directly into the game. Even a few would have been cool. I guess one thing is that structures without life feels empty, so you’d have to generate random monsters or NPCs for each of them.

Isn't that what servers are for? I joined a server once many years ago and found all kinds of truly amazing things that people had built. My favourite was a vast hollowed out mountain. The only way in was through a door right at the top of the mountain which caused you to descend into this beautifully lit cavern. Exploring this server was like exploring an art gallery.

It’s not. I’m talking about player structures being randomly incorporated into your own game.

Re: One decade later, Minecraft world generation is interesting again

#217

Post by baby »

madeofpalk wrote: post #88
baby wrote: post #19

One thing I always hoped, but that never happened: get people’s creations into the game. Randomly get vetted buildings as biomes. People have created insane things and it’s a shame they couldn’t have been integrated directly into the game. Even a few would have been cool. I guess one thing is that structures without life feels empty, so you’d have to generate random monsters or NPCs for each of them.

They _kind of_ have this, within the limits and goals of Minecraft. They've spoken recently about one of their intentions for Survival is for the world to be a blank slate for players own creations. Adding more and richer structures detracts from that. There's also the part where it's still a game that needs balancing, and just importing arbitrary structures and resources detracts from Survival. There is the marketpl…

I’m not sure I get your point. VAlves does it with cs:go and dota 2. Players create skins and all, and then vote for the ones they’d like to be incorporated. Sometimes valve incorporates some of the players’ creations.

Re: One decade later, Minecraft world generation is interesting again

#218

Post by baby »

tehbeard wrote: post #42
baby wrote: post #19

One thing I always hoped, but that never happened: get people’s creations into the game. Randomly get vetted buildings as biomes. People have created insane things and it’s a shame they couldn’t have been integrated directly into the game. Even a few would have been cool. I guess one thing is that structures without life feels empty, so you’d have to generate random monsters or NPCs for each of them.

This might be more feasible-ish in a community effort? I'm not entirely sure how the jigsaw system (the subsystem the game uses for building villages and bastions from a large palette of pre-builts using a set of rules and connectors) integrates with the custom world generator options, but that would seem the best bet for it in a vanilla game. The problem with an "official" player creations is both vetting them and t…

Valve does it with cs:go and dota2. People submit skins and creations and you can vote. Valve then sometimes accept some of them and integrate them into the game. There’s no reason why players shouldn’t be able to create biomes or structures.

Re: One decade later, Minecraft world generation is interesting again

#219

Post by globular-toast »

baby wrote: post #216
globular-toast wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't that what servers are for? I joined a server once many years ago and found all kinds of truly amazing things that people had built. My favourite was a vast hollowed out mountain. The only way in was through a door right at the top of the mountain which caused you to descend into this beautifully lit cavern. Exploring this server was like exploring an art gallery.

It’s not. I’m talking about player structures being randomly incorporated into your own game.

That doesn't make much sense to me. The generated world is meant to be like nature while player structures are man-made things created by inhabitants of the world. Something that makes a bit more sense and possibly quite cool would be to incorporate ruins of famous structures into the generated world.

Re: One decade later, Minecraft world generation is interesting again

#220

Post by pavlus »

radicalbyte wrote: post #45
morsch wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't underestimate the role of the human observer focusing and exploring the most interesting parts.

Didn't we all do that as kids with the Mandelbrot set viewers? Just explore it to find some cool visualizations.. then zoom in and repeat %)

I go through this every time I setup a new computer. Personal unique cool wallpaper for only a few minutes of work!
Post reply on HN