Cubic Chunks! Cubic Chunks!

[Ripley]

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.

Lol chunk loaders have infinite up&down because that's the way minecraft chunks work.
I imagine if cubic chunks were implemented you'd choose a 3 dimensional area like a cube or a sphere in the chunkloader.
Otherwise I agree that infinite down is not a good idea.

As for the actual idea of cubic chunks, I very much doubt mojang hasn't thought about it because when I first learned about chunks I thought 2d chunks were weird .
My guess is they thought at the time that they wouldn't get major performance boost out of it and it'd be too much of a hassle.
But if they keep going for big mountainy landscapes it might be a good idea.

 

[Golrith]

I don't think Minecraft needs increased height, many people already complain how difficult it can be to traverse the mountain type biomes added by other mods.
If Minecraft was kept to it's current world gen limits, cubic chunks would offer a bit of a benefit as the chunks in the "corners" of the box wouldn't need to be loaded.

But, minecraft needs better improvements first. The sound engine is a terrible source of lag. Fancy Rendering also hurts FPS.

 

[Omicron]

I don't get why people have to attack the OP anyway about too little information provided. The topic he linked does in fact explain everything in detail. It's not rocket science either, if you have even a basic grasp of how Minecraft currently structures worlds then there should be no difficulty in imagining a world that loads dynamically in three dimensions instead in just two. It's kind of silly to pick a fight with someone just because you can't be bothered to click through a link and invest a small amount of personal effort in reading an article.

The concept has both advantages and challenges, especially as it relates to modded content. Personally I support it, since I think the long-term advantages outweigh the short-term necessity to rework the functionality of things like chunk loaders or custom worldgen structures. Mods like Twilight Forest that currently have to write their own terrain generator to even make it possible to provide the kind of content they want stand to benefit immensely from a standard terrain generator that has no (or greatly expanded) upper and lower generation bounds. And low-spec machines that are currently crying for mommy in places like the Twilight Forest because of the way Minecraft displays it would benefit massively from the change as well.

But, minecraft needs better improvements first. The sound engine is a terrible source of lag. Fancy Rendering also hurts FPS.

Sound engine rework is done and complete in 1.7. And fancy rendering hurts FPS less if there are less blocks to render. Which Cubic Chunks does despite preserving view distance.

 

[kaiomann]

I don't really get this, but you already got me with 200% fps increase

 

[Ripley]

I don't think Minecraft needs increased height, many people already complain how difficult it can be to traverse the mountain type biomes added by other mods.
If Minecraft was kept to it's current world gen limits, cubic chunks would offer a bit of a benefit as the chunks in the "corners" of the box wouldn't need to be loaded.

But, minecraft needs better improvements first. The sound engine is a terrible source of lag. Fancy Rendering also hurts FPS.

FYI 1.7 had its sound engine rewritten, I can't tell you if it's better but it really can't be worse .

 

[Sphinx2k]

I like the idea. I always thought the underground for a Game with MINE in its Name should have more space to mine. More dangerous the deeper you get,....
3D Biomes sound great too.
I can see some problems (also mentioned in the thread on minecraftforum)

To think that for examples quarrys are a problem when it comes to modding. Quarrys are allready incredible good, if you get the resources to build one + energy you are done forever, repositioning it every now and than is no big deal. A nother idea, a quarry does only load 4 cubic chunks down (64 sea leavel). Changes to the ore gen could make a big difference (http://www.minecraftforum.net/topic/1107057-146v2-custom-ore-generation-updated-jan-5th/) too.
That are only my first thoughts on quarrys.

As for the render distance and tall buildings. How about a render setting for horizontal and vertical render distance?

So over all i like the possibility that would add to the game. But these possibility's must be uses in a good and fun way. Just adding a deeper underground without no play value is useless for example. But maybe a nether like Hell zone under the current bedrock layer. Floating islands high above the ground (needs way to get there without stacking piles of dirt + lighting system that doesn't leave a dark normal landscape under those islands)

 

[WatcherInTheShadows]

Thank you for replying.

I like the idea. I always thought the underground for a Game with MINE in its Name should have more space to mine. More dangerous the deeper you get,....
3D Biomes sound great too.
I can see some problems (also mentioned in the thread on minecraftforum)

To think that for examples quarrys are a problem when it comes to modding. Quarrys are allready incredible good, if you get the resources to build one + energy you are done forever, repositioning it every now and than is no big deal. A nother idea, a quarry does only load 4 cubic chunks down (64 sea leavel). Changes to the ore gen could make a big difference (http://www.minecraftforum.net/topic/1107057-146v2-custom-ore-generation-updated-jan-5th/) too.
That are only my first thoughts on quarrys.

Agreed sir.

As for the render distance and tall buildings. How about a render setting for horizontal and vertical render distance?

I imagine it would follow the same setting names at least as before.
But we would get more "bang for our buck" in the process as chunk loading would be vastly more efficient.
How it would work, I think.
Is if it based it along rendering only what is needed.
Like say, you're looking up at a mountain it would on max setting it would only load and render as far the chunks needed to see what parts of the mountain you have line of sight on and stop just below the surface of it.
Along chunk lines of course.
And say if you're deep underground, it wouldn't need to mess with that many chunks as you can only go so far.

So over all i like the possibility that would add to the game. But these possibility's must be uses in a good and fun way. Just adding a deeper underground without no play value is useless for example. But maybe a nether like Hell zone under the current bedrock layer. Floating islands high above the ground (needs way to get there without stacking piles of dirt + lighting system that doesn't leave a dark normal landscape under those islands)

I've personally always liked the idea of throwing out bedrock entirely.
Perhaps making it so that you can mine down to the liquid mantle of the minecraft world.
Much deeper down of course.

 

[WatcherInTheShadows]

Lol chunk loaders have infinite up&down because that's the way minecraft chunks work.
I imagine if cubic chunks were implemented you'd choose a 3 dimensional area like a cube or a sphere in the chunkloader.
Otherwise I agree that infinite down is not a good idea.

Exactly!
Thank you for putting what I was too derpy to put better.

As for the actual idea of cubic chunks, I very much doubt mojang hasn't thought about it because when I first learned about chunks I thought 2d chunks were weird .
My guess is they thought at the time that they wouldn't get major performance boost out of it and it'd be too much of a hassle.
But if they keep going for big mountainy landscapes it might be a good idea.

I think 2d chunks was a really bad idea.
Especially if you're talking in terms of efficiency.

There is actually a discussion about it going on now at mojang.
One of the links I provided.
They placed it at low priority....

 

[WatcherInTheShadows]

More fun with math.......

By defult minecraft loads 21x21 chunks...... Thats 441 chunks.... thats 28,901,376 blocks!!!!

EVEN IF you DID load a sphere of these chunks 21 chunks wide.... that would be 5017 chunks!... that is a lot of chunks but it's only 20,549,632 blocks.....

So even if you did have to load as much a distance in every derrection (and you won't) you would still be loading EIGHT MILLION BLOCKS LESS!!!!!


Thats a lot of blocks..... more than 127 of the old chunks worth.

So even if some how this system had to load the number of chunks some people seam to think it would have to.... it would still be loading 29% less data.... and be 29% less laggy.....

In truth it would likely be more like 75% less or more.....


THIS is why I've been pushing this idea for 2 and a half years......... it would be a total game changer.... literally.... .and in only the best of ways.
http://www.minecraftforum.net/topic...-thousand-supportersupdated-1015/page__st__20

 

[MigukNamja]

WatcherInTheShadows,

Your cause might be better championed if your style wasn't so abrasive.

That aside, I completely agree that cubic chunks would solve a lot of performance issues and greatly expand the Y axis in terms of content and creative possibilities. A few problems, for sure, but overall a great thing. I wholly support the cubic chunks push you are championing. I voted 'yes'.

 

[WatcherInTheShadows]

WatcherInTheShadows,
Your cause might be better championed if your style wasn't so abrasive.

I would not have been so abrasive had I not been put on the defensive.
I didn't ask for a critique of my person, posting style, or condescension and was offering it up as a referal.
And get henpecked and condescended to by people who are not actually reading the argument for it.
It is what it is.

Not that myself should even be up for the discussion.
Perhaps you are a saint with endless patience.
I am not.

That aside, I completely agree that cubic chunks would solve a lot of performance issues and greatly expand the Y axis in terms of content and creative possibilities. A few problems, for sure, but overall a great thing. I wholly support the cubic chunks push you are championing. I voted 'yes'

Thank you for your support.

 

[eric167]

im supportive of this idea as a hopefully mainstream mod rather than a vanilla addition.

also: worlds arnt automatically infinite. bedrock/void still exist, but there is an option to remove them.
it also allows for the potential of truly realistic terrain and water features, which is what sold me.

 

[ICanHazCooKie]

Sea level at y=512 might be interesting, a lot of space underground could really help with underground construction. To fix the vertical travel issue, (vanilla) minecart tracks could maybe be allowed to be placed vertically.

 

[Celestialphoenix]

Actual good ideas are very hard to come by; this is one of the few that can really make full use of the minecraft engine and bring the game to its full potential.

Even if you never touch the extended height stuff, an FPS boost is always welcome- REGARDLESS of how powerful your computer is.
Weaker computers handle the game better. Stronger ones can handle more complex textures/mods/gameplay and recording software.
Added bonus- SMP server load is more efficient- so smaller server bills too. (or a better bang for your buck)

Sea level at y=512 might be interesting, a lot of space underground could really help with underground construction. To fix the vertical travel issue, (vanilla) minecart tracks could maybe be allowed to be placed vertically.

I like this idea on one condition-
Powered vertical tracks don't have enough power to lift minecarts. So you need a launch track.

 

[TheAbstractHippo]

Maybe with this we'll actually be able to generate a legitimate Moon. Sounds awesome to me.

 

[kittle]

I like the idea of infinite chunks. this is after all MINEcraft where the point is to dig for stuff. but if your always running into the bottom of the world then digging becomes quite a pain.

Performance increases are great. For those who dont understand how, just assume it WILL be faster. You probably wont go from 10fps to 100fps overnite, but it will help.

IMO, the real benefit is in the new possibilities for gameplay. Max height and max depth are now something that can be set at world creation, or even after the fact. Rather that some hard limit that everyone has to work around like we have now.

The max height of 256 is probably there for performance reasons, and yes its nice to look WAAYY up at that 50 story tall skyscraper you built. But once you get to the y=256 hard limit.. your stuck.
But with the new chunk format you will be able to build a 5,000 story skyscraper, and because its so tall wont see the top anyway. Or maybe somebody will figure out a way to display all those bricks quickly. I dont know what the future will hold, but without this cubic chunk format, it looks pretty boring.

 

[Juanitierno]

I think people are focusing more on the "infinite" aspect of the proposed format than on its real usefullness, which is greater granularity for only generating, loading, serializing and sending terrain data. (despite the capability of the format to include infinite worlds, its very unlikely itll be the case, mojang would almost surely stick with the current height limit, or a different one, just not infinite)

The thing is this topic can only be really understood by people with programming knoweledge or a very deep understanding of how chunks and minecraft work.

All those people saying things like "i like chunks the way they are" or "dont fix what's not broken" do not fully understand the proposed changes.

Maybe look at it this way... lets say that tomorrow mojang announces that chunks will be 1024x1024 instead of 16x16. Getting close to a single block in a nearby chunk would generate, load, serialize and send a huge 1024x1024x256 blocks at once.
Most people will understand that change is for the worst.
Well, think of the current situation as being in the 1024x1024 scenario and the proposed change being the 16x16 we all love, with a few added features

 

[Celestialphoenix]

The max height of 256 is probably there for performance reasons, and yes its nice to look WAAYY up at that 50 story tall skyscraper you built. But once you get to the y=256 hard limit.. your stuck.
But with the new chunk format you will be able to build a 5,000 story skyscraper, and because its so tall wont see the top anyway. Or maybe somebody will figure out a way to display all those bricks quickly. I dont know what the future will hold, but without this cubic chunk format, it looks pretty boring.

New chunk system would mean a different chunk-loading system- such as a line-of-sight method, or even something relatively simple like Railcrafts anchor sentinel- but vertical.

 

[WatcherInTheShadows]

New chunk system would mean a different chunk-loading system- such as a line-of-sight method, or even something relatively simple like Railcrafts anchor sentinel- but vertical.

I would personally prefer it to load chunks in, more or less, a "bubble" around the chunk-loader.
Which a player could set.[DOUBLEPOST=1382646960][/DOUBLEPOST]

I think people are focusing more on the "infinite" aspect of the proposed format than on its real usefullness, which is greater granularity for only generating, loading, serializing and sending terrain data. (despite the capability of the format to include infinite worlds, its very unlikely itll be the case, mojang would almost surely stick with the current height limit, or a different one, just not infinite)

I like the possibility of going fully infinite.
But really infinite is of no great use to me.
But would LOVE deeper worlds and higher mountains.

The thing is this topic can only be really understood by people with programming knoweledge or a very deep understanding of how chunks and minecraft work.

All those people saying things like "i like chunks the way they are" or "dont fix what's not broken" do not fully understand the proposed changes.

Maybe look at it this way... lets say that tomorrow mojang announces that chunks will be 1024x1024 instead of 16x16. Getting close to a single block in a nearby chunk would generate, load, serialize and send a huge 1024x1024x256 blocks at once.
Most people will understand that change is for the worst.
Well, think of the current situation as being in the 1024x1024 scenario and the proposed change being the 16x16 we all love, with a few added features

Well put sir.

 

[P46EY]

I wont profess to fully understand how minecraft works but Ive done a bit of map/level design and optimisation for Unreal Tournament 2004 in the past. From what Ive read heream I right in understanding that cubic chunks loads in the same way that a lot of 1st person shooters render in so much as only what you see is loaded/rendered? If thats the case then obviously this will reduce lag and increase FPS so it has my vote.. optimisation of some of my maps took longer than the actual builds. How would something like that affect chunk loaders in mods if at all? If Ive got it all wrong then Ill just go sit in a corner and play with my crayons quietly.