Recent Events Discussion (RED) Thread

keybounce

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
1,925
0
0
@keybounce you are officially a color nerd. I actually DID understand that all, but holy crap.
It's been a peeve/issue for me for about 15 years now, maybe more. And that's strictly "hobby" level of learning for me.

The worst thing? When someone disagrees with me about color calibration because "I can adjust my monitor and make this picture look better than your calibrated display". And then won't listen to me about how that picture was not properly calibrated.
 

keybounce

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
1,925
0
0
We have yet to see a multiple vanilla version freeze for mods. I have a feeling 1.9 will drag enough people that 1.7 will die just like 1.2 > 1.4 and to a lesser degree 1.4 > 1.6. Maybe it will be 1.10 instead and we'll set a new record!

Given how long it took for enough mods to become "Stable" on 1.7.10, I am long past the "bleeding edge update" fever. Seriously, I would have kept my 147 world up and running if I had any idea how long things would have taken, or that 164 would NOT have become the "Stable standard" (some mods skipped 15x, some mods skipped 16x, but everything is on 1710.)
 

FyberOptic

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
524
0
0
I'd have been fine staying on 1.6.4 long-term to be honest. 1.7.2 started cramming in shaders that have never really been used for anything, and then Twitch support in 1.7.4 which is almost equally worthless to most people (even streamers), all of which required more complexity in the render pipeline. The vector pool was removed along the way which meant even more objects for the garbage collector to clean up. The networking change wasn't that drastic of an improvement since the old one was obviously still plenty versatile. The climate zones of the terrain gen have left the core game broken since you sometimes can't find a biome that you need without traveling thousands of blocks. The new biomes aren't really anything spectacular. The only thing I enjoy is not dealing with item and block IDs, but at the same time, not being able to use those internally is sometimes a pain, and the overcomplicated system that's come out of this has led to a lot of people ending up with mixed up blocks and screwed up worlds when adding/removing certain mods.

Then you have 1.8, where regardless of the Forge disaster you still have mobs that float around when hit, a complete rework of the engine to use blockstates and blockpos everywhere even when it's unnecessary complexity (making extra calls just to get the block or a coordinate), a rendering pipeline so convoluted that any benefits gained from generating models at load time are likely lost in the abstraction, hundreds of objects created and thrown into the wind from every direction for the GC, and a model system so poorly implemented where, for example, it can't have both a parent model and additional elements, because I guess that would make too much sense.

I like Mojang, but I don't know what happened to them. 1.6.4 is the last version that appears to be untouched by the madness of corporate deals and bloat.
 

Strikingwolf

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
3,709
-26
1
I'd have been fine staying on 1.6.4 long-term to be honest. 1.7.2 started cramming in shaders that have never really been used for anything, and then Twitch support in 1.7.4 which is almost equally worthless to most people (even streamers), all of which required more complexity in the render pipeline. The vector pool was removed along the way which meant even more objects for the garbage collector to clean up. The networking change wasn't that drastic of an improvement since the old one was obviously still plenty versatile. The climate zones of the terrain gen have left the core game broken since you sometimes can't find a biome that you need without traveling thousands of blocks. The new biomes aren't really anything spectacular. The only thing I enjoy is not dealing with item and block IDs, but at the same time, not being able to use those internally is sometimes a pain, and the overcomplicated system that's come out of this has led to a lot of people ending up with mixed up blocks and screwed up worlds when adding/removing certain mods.

Then you have 1.8, where regardless of the Forge disaster you still have mobs that float around when hit, a complete rework of the engine to use blockstates and blockpos everywhere even when it's unnecessary complexity (making extra calls just to get the block or a coordinate), a rendering pipeline so convoluted that any benefits gained from generating models at load time are likely lost in the abstraction, hundreds of objects created and thrown into the wind from every direction for the GC, and a model system so poorly implemented where, for example, it can't have both a parent model and additional elements, because I guess that would make too much sense.

I like Mojang, but I don't know what happened to them. 1.6.4 is the last version that appears to be untouched by the madness of corporate deals and bloat.
I say 1.7 is the best bet if we're going to stay on a version. I also think that instead of sitting there passively Forge should be completely refactoring MC code
 
  • Like
Reactions: SynfulChaot and psp

FyberOptic

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
524
0
0
I say 1.7 is the best bet if we're going to stay on a version. I also think that instead of sitting there passively Forge should be completely refactoring MC code

Yeah it's too late for 1.6.4. And I don't mean to make 1.7 sound terrible, just that it has its share of issues. But it still has a render engine that doesn't make you want to pull your hair out, so there's always that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Elec332

Strikingwolf

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
3,709
-26
1
Yeah it's too late for 1.6.4. And I don't mean to make 1.7 sound terrible, just that it has its share of issues. But it still has a render engine that doesn't make you want to pull your hair out, so there's always that.
Pretty much my exact thoughts :p

But yeah, MC needs a total refactor. Maybe beyond that, mc could need a rewrite
 

Eliav24

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
213
0
0
Why not just create a whole new block-world engine for mods?

Beside the obvious hundred of reasons
 

keybounce

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
1,925
0
0
164 versus 1710?

The items not conflicting: Win.
The inability to share your world with someone else / import maps from one game into another as a new dimension: Bad.
The support for items not being extended to potions, enchantments, entities, biomes, and everything else? Uggh.

Twitch support: Quality cannot be brought up to a decent level, sorry. The best quality you can select is not good enough. OBS does a much better job, and now is available cross-platform. Built-in support for streaming, while it has very nice start/stop support, is worthless.
Twitch chat, in-game: Great, except that it's only half-duplex. I still need to have a chat window open to *respond* to my viewers.
Twitch's "assertation failed", and complete crash without any chance to save your worldstate: OMG. If I could just completely disable twitch support to avoid this, great! But it seems that since I upgraded to a mojang account instead of a minecraft account, to support twitch, I'm stuck. (Bug: https://bugs.mojang.com/browse/MC-65480. Note that for some reason, an issue with plain vanilla minecraft is closed as a duplicate of an issue with optifine. And ... looks like I need to update https://bugs.mojang.com/browse/MC-68956, as I now _CAN_ replicate this on demand in 1.7.10, let me verify that I can replicate this on demand in 184.)

Vector pool / object cleanup: I'm using CMS collector, so I don't notice. The default garbage collector is a worst-case match for minecraft. G1GC ... well, it ought to perform better, I've never managed to keep it from becoming a memory/cpu runaway (it never stops trying to clean up stuff.)

Climate zones: Potentially good idea; really bad execution. Climate Control (the mod) did it better.

New biomes: Mesas are really different. Rest? Not sure yet. Roofed forest is ... good idea, bad execution?
New height variation factors: Geez, swamps used to be consistently small patches of dry land, and one-block of water. Now, they tend to be very large above ground patches, and very large below water patches, going several blocks deep. People have complained about "You've seen one <insert biome>, you've seen them all", calling for improved variation, etc -- and we get a bigger range for height variation with a slower change so it's a lot of this or a lot of that.
New X+128 system? ... Geez, cut the biome space in half? You couldn't make biomes a 12 bit, or 16 bit number, just like you added 4 bits to block ID?

Is 1.7.x better than 164? 1710 is where mod support is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Golrith

Type1Ninja

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
1,393
-7
0
What's this? Unstable Tinker's Construct tools? O.O

CF_VxMIW0AE2G9Y.jpg
I bet they'll be really fast and have super durability but they won't drop blocks. :D
 

TomeWyrm

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
898
1
1
If they manage to shift to the idea they put forth about the Plugin API where vanilla is just a bunch of plugins on top of the engine... and they actually keep the engine bare-bones enough and scaleable? We might not see someone make an open-source re-implementation of MC designed for modders and so the rest of us can quit putting up with the crap. Pretty soon here, we'll have a central mod database so we could even integrate mod installs into the client!

Thus far I rather like 1.7, and even some of the CONTENT of 1.8. The problem is they keep fucking with the ENGINE, making it worse and worse.
 

lenscas

Over-Achiever
Jul 31, 2013
2,015
1,799
248
you know, Minecraft remembers me of the powder toy, it used to be a very simple "game" but as more and more updates came out performance dropped. As the new content needed something that their engine just wasn't made to do. Eventually they decided to rewrite it I believe but I stopped using it before that.
 

lenscas

Over-Achiever
Jul 31, 2013
2,015
1,799
248
I have played I don't even know how much of that kind of games, but I sticked with tpt as that was the most advanced and still got updates. I fear that it is dead though :( maybe I should look at the code though, perhaps (I probably can) learn from it.
 

Golrith

Over-Achiever
Trusted User
Nov 11, 2012
3,834
2,137
248
164 versus 1710?
New X+128 system? ... Geez, cut the biome space in half? You couldn't make biomes a 12 bit, or 16 bit number, just like you added 4 bits to block ID?
Seriously agree on this one. Really difficult to have all my favorite dimension mods and BoP at once, run out of Biome IDs, so it's a case of working out which dimension biomes are allowed to spawn in overworld. Considering only a fraction of the biomes use the X+128 alternatives, this is a big waste.