Cubic Chunks! Cubic Chunks!

  • Please make sure you are posting in the correct place. Server ads go here and modpack bugs go here
  • The FTB Forum is now read-only, and is here as an archive. To participate in our community discussions, please join our Discord! https://ftb.team/discord

Should Mojang impliment Cubic Chunks?

  • Yes. That would be awesome!

    Votes: 50 67.6%
  • Maybe. I'm not sure it possible though.

    Votes: 6 8.1%
  • No.

    Votes: 18 24.3%

  • Total voters
    74
Status
Not open for further replies.

SatanicSanta

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
4,849
-3
0
No insults offered.
Just pointing out you're obviously lying and barged in to support Enigmius.
Though if you want me to I guess I can oblige you with insults if you ask nicely.
Snarkiness, well, guilty as charged.
But I feel it's justified so, meh.
Now, if you want to change the tenor of the conversation.
It's really all in your hands.
But, suffice it to say, I'm all for that.

I did not barge in to support Enigmius. Considering we have never talked past thread conversation I have no reason to back him up other than when I agree with him. Especially since I didn't even know that he posted here, since you were the last replier.
 

WatcherInTheShadows

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
162
0
0
I did not barge in to support Enigmius. Considering we have never talked past thread conversation I have no reason to back him up other than when I agree with him. Especially since I didn't even know that he posted here, since you were the last replier.

Um.
Do I really need to point out the obvious holes in this argument?

Either way.
We really have nothing further to say to each other.
Your opinion, however flawed and based upon ignorance in my opinion, is noted.
So how about we end it here?
 
  • Like
Reactions: SatanicSanta

WatcherInTheShadows

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
162
0
0
Addition information from here: https://mojang.atlassian.net/i#browse/MCAPI-28
Justin added a comment - 16/Oct/13 6:13 AM - edited
1)Yes but you don't experience those issues until you get to 30 million blocks away from origin.
2)Although the author of this suggestion wants cubic chunks for the ability to increase the height that is not the only positive. Because of how Cubic chunks is designed it can reduce lag considerably because less than half as much data is loaded when you move around a world.
Here is a quick very incomplete summary as to why:
2.1)We now don't need filler data for every air block, all we have to do is send a tagged null value saying the chunk is empty.
2.2)We don't have to load a dozens of 16x16x256 chunks instead we only load about the same number of 16x16x16 chunks to get the same in game experience. It will reduce loaded terrane data 8 times on average.
2.3)Cubic chunks gives you the option of infinite or increased vertical you don't have to set the vertical any higher than it already is if you don't want to.
2.4) Allows for really cool things like sky biomes and crystal caves because now we have the vertical space to make it happen.
4)If you really want to understand what cubic chunks does for minecraft read the whole post at http://www.minecraftforum.net/topic/1707097-cubic-chunks-reduced-lag-infinite-height-and-more-over-two-thousand-supportersupdated-1015/page__mode__show if your too lazy to read the post at least read the tl:dr and the Q&A at the bottom of the post before making a judgement about the system.
5)And finally Mojang could add this to Minecraft with very little work on their part and in just a couple months. The whole system has been described in detail on the thread I listed above and there are a number of very talented developers who have already built working versions of the system in Minecraft and several of which have volunteered to write it if Mojang will put it in vanilla.
If you want less lag farther view distances and more possibilities in minecraft support cubic chunks by up-voting this issue and adding this to your signature on every forum you can.
[URL='https://mojang.atlassian.net/wiki/display/MCAPI/img']imghttp://img833.imageshack.us/img833/443/hov.png/img[/url][/url]
http://www.minecraftforum.net/topic...n-of-x-ray-and-more-60-supporters/page__st__0
 

Jay Cee

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
89
0
0
I kinda don't really see much point in Cubic Chunks myself. Maybe I read it wrong, but if with cubic chunks minecraft won't load too many upwards either, doesn't that defeat the purpose of big builds? I mean, you aren't going to really see the whole creation at once as chunks will be missing. And without making huge builds that utilise the "infinite" height, what would be the point? Apart from crazily tall mountains which to me means bashing away at my spacebar until I have to replace my keyboard :/.

I would update your OP with these quotes that you are taking from the actual thread as well. It'd be more informative ;)
 

The classless

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
284
0
1
this idea sounds cool but flawed one being that it the chunks are loading and unloading as described how can we use infinite height like this idea promise if we can not see the higher chunks of the builds this needs to be explained better and shown off better
 

DZCreeper

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
1,469
0
1
Exactly, I don't see a problem with the existing system. This basically creates lower render distances by slicing the world into more pieces.

This is a case of their being 99 little bugs in the code and your going to end up with 117 little bugs by making this change. Eventually you would get the bugs lower than the starting amount, but its not worth the effort.

Honestly, just let Mojang do its thing. My spare desktop with 3 year old parts can pull over 1000 FPS on tiny render distance on the latest snapshots, if someone can't hit 60 FPS on normal render distance they should buy a toaster, its got more computational power :p. World height is editable and mods already exist to generate taller worlds if you want a little more variety, although I think 1.7 will keep everyone busy for a while on that front.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Geometry

WatcherInTheShadows

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
162
0
0
I kinda don't really see much point in Cubic Chunks myself. Maybe I read it wrong, but if with cubic chunks minecraft won't load too many upwards either, doesn't that defeat the purpose of big builds? I mean, you aren't going to really see the whole creation at once as chunks will be missing. And without making huge builds that utilise the "infinite" height, what would be the point? Apart from crazily tall mountains which to me means bashing away at my spacebar until I have to replace my keyboard :/.

this idea sounds cool but flawed one being that it the chunks are loading and unloading as described how can we use infinite height like this idea promise if we can not see the higher chunks of the builds this needs to be explained better and shown off better

Disclaimer: This is as I understand it and I suck at communicating my thoughts.

Not particularly no.
You would be able to see considerably farther with the same amount of resources your computer currently uses.
Think about it.
Instead of populating and loading a huge swath from bedrock to sky it would really only need to render:
1) What you can see, which can be throttled for slower computers.
2) Your immediate area.

It basically takes chunks, cuts them into blocks and stacks those blocks.
It's a far better use of resources.

I'll see what I can find that explains it better.

I would update your OP with these quotes that you are taking from the actual thread as well. It'd be more informative ;)

You people really are intentionally missing the "referral" to something more knowledgeable than I on this subject gist aren't you?
 

DREVL

Well-Known Member
Jul 10, 2013
1,251
380
99
Exactly, I don't see a problem with the existing system. This basically creates lower render distances by slicing the world into more pieces.

This is a case of their being 99 little bugs in the code and your going to end up with 117 little bugs by making this change. Eventually you would get the bugs lower than the starting amount, but its not worth the effort.

Honestly, just let Mojang do its thing. My spare desktop with 3 year old parts can pull over 1000 FPS on tiny render distance on the latest snapshots, if someone can't hit 60 FPS on normal render distance they should buy a toaster, its got more computational power :p. World height is editable and mods already exist to generate taller worlds if you want a little more variety, although I think 1.7 will keep everyone busy for a while on that front.
I've got 99 problems with minecraft. Chunks ain't one of them.
 

WatcherInTheShadows

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
162
0
0
Exactly, I don't see a problem with the existing system. This basically creates lower render distances by slicing the world into more pieces.

This is a case of their being 99 little bugs in the code and your going to end up with 117 little bugs by making this change. Eventually you would get the bugs lower than the starting amount, but its not worth the effort.

Honestly, just let Mojang do its thing. My spare desktop with 3 year old parts can pull over 1000 FPS on tiny render distance on the latest snapshots, if someone can't hit 60 FPS on normal render distance they should buy a toaster, its got more computational power :p. World height is editable and mods already exist to generate taller worlds if you want a little more variety, although I think 1.7 will keep everyone busy for a while on that front.


So, improvement shouldn't be a priority?
If something works now better ways should not be explored?
I believe there is a word for that.
Mediocrity.

As a matter of fact, others have already pulled it off.
https://www.spout.org/ for one.
 

SatanicSanta

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
4,849
-3
0
So, improvement shouldn't be a priority?
If something works now better ways should not be explored?
I believe there is a word for that.
Mediocrity.

That's not what DZCreeper is saying. What DZCreeper is saying is that there is a system that works well, so it should not be changed.
 

Zenthon_127

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
837
0
0
Another issue is with ores. Currently, ores are balanced by height level. But with this is if you put a quarry down once it hits diamond level it'll just keep going down and getting more and more diamonds. It completely breaks the balance of ore rarity in general.

This would break chunkloading, automining, tall structures.......yeah no.
 

WatcherInTheShadows

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
162
0
0
Another issue is with ores. Currently, ores are balanced by height level. But with this is if you put a quarry down once it hits diamond level it'll just keep going down and getting more and more diamonds. It completely breaks the balance of ore rarity in general.

This would break chunkloading, automining, tall structures.......yeah no.


Or a better system of ore distribution could be arranged.
As for chunk-loading and auto-mining, not really.
Chuck-loading could easily be adapted and auto-mining as well.

And how exactly would it break tall structures?
 

Larmonade

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
146
0
0
As far as mountains go, I've always felt the current standard to be rather weak - I really would love to see some epic mountains.

As far as "digging deeper," I've always thought that being able to go further than the bedrock allows would permit some pretty sweet base designs. My idea was always to have some sort of device/method of creating a "portal" through the bedrock into an "under-world" that would load separately like the nether or twilight forest.

This modification would certainly adress both of those things I want, regardless of whether things like chunk-loading and ore distribution need to be re-worked. I dot know if having this as the new default for *vanilla* is the way to go (yet?) but having it as a mod or as a world-type option seems neat, especially as more work gets done polishing it up and working out the kinks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WatcherInTheShadows

DZCreeper

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
1,469
0
1
Don't get me wrong, this sounds great but it really belongs in its own game.

It would require several months of converting the existing game and mods, and squishing all the bugs that can and will come with it. Those several months would be better spent adding new features and working on other ways to improve flexibility and performance that don't break the game as much. Really, it is a nice idea, its just too late to put it in the game now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SatanicSanta

Zenthon_127

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
837
0
0
Or a better system of ore distribution could be arranged.
As for chunk-loading and auto-mining, not really.
Chuck-loading could easily be adapted and auto-mining as well.

And how exactly would it break tall structures?

-Tall structures would be cut off from render distance at the top even quicker than currently
-Automining, namely the quarry, is DEPENDENT on the fact that it runs out of room to mine eventually. With this you can pop 4 quarries down and you now have those four quarries running in the same spot FOREVER, creating more and more and more chunks. A tunnel bore would be even worse now that you could have a 40x40 all at diamond level.
-Realistically, how are we going to improve oregen? Just think about it for a sec. It's a system that works great now and has no real problems or imbalances, and this would basically break it.

Also, very epic mountains are possible (*cough*BoP Alps/Crags/Highlands*cough*), it's just that nobody has added them as a non-biome feature. Even these biome mountains only go to about 200 and they're absolutely gigantic. Nothing is stopping people from doing a full-height mountain as it stands.

On another note, if we had some kind of dimension below bedrock (maybe portals at the lowest level of bedrock in some areas, similar to Dimensional Door's Limbo exits?) that would be completely awesome. If you don't feel like you have enough room as it is I suppose making a tardis with DimDoors is always an option.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SatanicSanta

WatcherInTheShadows

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
162
0
0
-Tall structures would be cut off from render distance at the top even quicker than currently

Uhm...
No.
Why do you say that?
Let me give you taste as to what I am getting at and I guess you missed.

SMALLER CHUNKS MEANS MORE CAN BE LOADED WITH LESS!
The thing that causes lag in chunk generation NOW is the fact it has to the entire thing from bedrock to sky.

-Automining, namely the quarry, is DEPENDENT on the fact that it runs out of room to mine eventually. With this you can pop 4 quarries down and you now have those four quarries running in the same spot FOREVER, creating more and more and more chunks. A tunnel bore would be even worse now that you could have a 40x40 all at diamond level.

Incorrect.
I followed the original Cubic Chunks thread.
Quarries are hard-coded to stop at a certain depth.
They just stopped.
Aaaaannndddddd it would be no different than if a player dug to insane depths.
Did you actually think that chunks would stay loaded?

-Realistically, how are we going to improve oregen? Just think about it for a sec. It's a system that works great now and has no real problems or imbalances, and this would basically break it.

There have been several mod makers that would tend to disagree.
;)

Also, very epic mountains are possible (*cough*BoP Alps/Crags/Highlands*cough*), it's just that nobody has added them as a non-biome feature. Even these biome mountains only go to about 200 and they're absolutely gigantic. Nothing is stopping people from doing a full-height mountain as it stands.

Yes.
Lag.
Actually read the documentation.
Then get back to me.

On another note, if we had some kind of dimension below bedrock (maybe portals at the lowest level of bedrock in some areas, similar to Dimensional Door's Limbo exits?) that would be completely awesome. If you don't feel like you have enough room as it is I suppose making a tardis with DimDoors is always an option.

Not really.
Another dimension...
Yippee.......
 

WatcherInTheShadows

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
162
0
0
As far as mountains go, I've always felt the current standard to be rather weak - I really would love to see some epic mountains.

As far as "digging deeper," I've always thought that being able to go further than the bedrock allows would permit some pretty sweet base designs. My idea was always to have some sort of device/method of creating a "portal" through the bedrock into an "under-world" that would load separately like the nether or twilight forest.

This modification would certainly adress both of those things I want, regardless of whether things like chunk-loading and ore distribution need to be re-worked. I dot know if having this as the new default for *vanilla* is the way to go (yet?) but having it as a mod or as a world-type option seems neat, especially as more work gets done polishing it up and working out the kinks.


A number of people are working on it as well as thinking of the kinks.
 

Necr0maNceR

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
92
0
0
The underground doesn't need to be made infinite. I personally think making it infinite would be a terrible idea, not just because of mod added quarries and such. For starters, vertical movement is a pain. Digging really deep means it would take forever to climb back to the surface. It would also be much easier to get lost. Plus, people in modded servers would need to restrain themselves more when using chunkloaders, since having infinite chunks up and down would mean you would be able to cram much more lag inducing things into closer proximity of each other.

A deeper world limit would still be cool though. I personally think the Minecraft underground should be deeper, and even more high-risk high-reward the deeper you go. That said, even if this was implemented I still think the underground should be cut off by bedrock at some point like it is now.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.