Forge + MCE

[Necropolis]

Flower just mentioned that one of the only things remaining that keeps him from adding things that he can't see a necessary use for is the usage of block ids. Since he's on the board for Forge, and since Forge is now necessary for this mod and has the purpose of extending mod compatibilities, it seems obvious to me that Forge could incorporate MCE directly into itself. That way, anyone using Forge mods could add as many as they want without having to first use MCE (I'm a big fan of collapsing multiple APIs into a singular entity). Is there any limitation to having more block IDs that would make this undesirable? Does it use more system resources?

[Stormweaver]

It's mentioned a lot in the forge thread: Linky linky. It's a good read tbh, as it lets you know exactly what will be possible (and gives you a heads up on some mods that are migrating to the forge).

The short of it is 'no'. It makes saves incompatible, and uses a lot more system resources.

[FlowerChild]

No, absolutely not. I'm hugely against the incorporation of anything like MCE into the forge for a number of technical reasons including (but not limited to), the following:

1) Performance. Unlike what was done with the texture indices, increasing the number of block ids can impact performance rather dramatically on low-end systems and in SMP.

2) Save game corruption. Increasing the number of block ids requires permanently altering a player's save game in a way that would be difficult (and perhaps even impossible) to reverse. This is a total deal breaker for me, as with all the work people put into their save games, fucking with them is just not an option in my mind. It would force player dependency on the Forge if they ever wanted to play a particular save-game that used it for the conversion ever again.

I've argued adamantly against inclusion of anything even vaguely resembling MCE into the Forge as a result. I believe it far exceeds the mandate of such an API.

All forms of programming have constraints. This is simply the nature of Minecraft modding, and if someone is so hell-bent on having a huge number of mods installed, regardless of the above kind of consequences, they can install an independent mod like MCE to make it happen.

[FurkeyRefills]

2) Save game corruption. Increasing the number of block ids requires permanently altering a player's save game in a way that would be difficult (and perhaps even impossible) to reverse. This is a total deal breaker for me, as with all the work people put into their save games, fucking with them is just not an option in my mind. It would force player dependency on the Forge if they ever wanted to play a particular save-game that used it for the conversion ever again.

But if notch adds more block id's into vMC will doing that produce the same result ?
Forgive me if this is a stupid question ;)

[Stormweaver]

2) Save game corruption. Increasing the number of block ids requires permanently altering a player's save game in a way that would be difficult (and perhaps even impossible) to reverse. This is a total deal breaker for me, as with all the work people put into their save games, fucking with them is just not an option in my mind. It would force player dependency on the Forge if they ever wanted to play a particular save-game that used it for the conversion ever again.

But if notch adds more block id's into vMC will doing that produce the same result ?
Forgive me if this is a stupid question ;)

It shouldn't, as people are kinda forced to play notch's minecraft anyways. It would make saves incompatible with pre-notch-changing-blockID MC versions though.

[Necropolis]

Yes, I see this now. You've been quite vocal on the matter in the Forge thread, haven't you? I thought performance might be an issue, but I wasn't sure. That's why one asks, yes? Thank you both for your timely and helpful responses.

[gftweek]

vMC 1.8 will add between 4 and 10 new blocks at a rough count from here.

So the problem is only going to get worse for modders (well more for multiple mod users really).

Not sure how many block id's BTW will eventually end up requiring, but it may start getting tight, and we have no idea of Mojang's plans post 1.8, they could add even more blocks!

That said, I don't mind either way, I currently have no need for MCE, as BTW is the only mod required to make vMC long lasting. :)

[Lighthouse]

No, absolutely not. I'm hugely against the incorporation of anything like MCE into the forge for a number of technical reasons including (but not limited to), the following:

1) Performance. Unlike what was done with the texture indices, increasing the number of block ids can impact performance rather dramatically on low-end systems and in SMP.

2) Save game corruption. Increasing the number of block ids requires permanently altering a player's save game in a way that would be difficult (and perhaps even impossible) to reverse. This is a total deal breaker for me, as with all the work people put into their save games, fucking with them is just not an option in my mind. It would force player dependency on the Forge if they ever wanted to play a particular save-game that used it for the conversion ever again.

I've argued adamantly against inclusion of anything even vaguely resembling MCE into the Forge as a result. I believe it far exceeds the mandate of such an API.

All forms of programming have constraints. This is simply the nature of Minecraft modding, and if someone is so hell-bent on having a huge number of mods installed, regardless of the above kind of consequences, they can install an independent mod like MCE to make it happen.

Flower, I don't think your point no.2 matters since vMC 1.8 will be incompatible to previous minecraft saves, and I conjure the final release (out of beta release) will also be unable to play any beta saves anyway.

Not to mention, for example your mod and build craft, are usually gigantic enough that merely disabling the mods alone will render whole world broken and useless (for example I can't go some spaces without BTW pulley system, and think about whole gigantic hemp farm), thus increasing block ID breaking save file argument is rather empty statement, since the mods itself impact the world large enough that any means of removing stuffs will equally means unusable world and should restart the fresh world if the user desires to not use mods.


Plus : Also, remind all of you guys, Minecraft is STILL in beta (not stable product by any means) that the game itself's core mechanics and/or environment can be changed any time by Notch.

[Lighthouse]

vMC 1.8 will add between 4 and 10 new blocks at a rough count from here.

So the problem is only going to get worse for modders (well more for multiple mod users really).

Not sure how many block id's BTW will eventually end up requiring, but it may start getting tight, and we have no idea of Mojang's plans post 1.8, they could add even more blocks!

That said, I don't mind either way, I currently have no need for MCE, as BTW is the only mod required to make vMC long lasting. :)

So far I see:

1.) Brick stone with three variants = 3
2.) Mushrooms = 2
3.) Glass panes.
4.) Fence gate.

At minimum we will see 7 new block ids being used by vMC.

[sargunv]

So far I see:

1.) Brick stone with three variants = 3
2.) Mushrooms = 2
3.) Glass panes.
4.) Fence gate.

At minimum we will see 7 new block ids being used by vMC.

Stone bricks may use damage values for the variants (like wool) and maybe mushrooms too. It could be as low as 4 IDs.

[FlowerChild]

Flower, I don't think your point no.2 matters since vMC 1.8 will be incompatible to previous minecraft saves, and I conjure the final release (out of beta release) will also be unable to play any beta saves anyway.

a) that has not been stated anywhere.

b) Even if the saves are no longer compatible, that does nothing to change the damage we'd be doing by changing the save format.

For example, a new player starts playing Minecraft post 1.8 with a new world. He then decides to eventually start playing mods and installs Forge with MCE-style functionality. His save game is then permanently altered and he can never stop using the Forge if he wants to continue playing it.

How does 1.8 potentially including a new save format change the problem in the least?

Not to mention, for example your mod and build craft, are usually gigantic enough that merely disabling the mods alone will render whole world broken and useless (for example I can't go some spaces without BTW pulley system, and think about whole gigantic hemp farm), thus increasing block ID breaking save file argument is rather empty statement, since the mods itself impact the world large enough that any means of removing stuffs will equally means unusable world and should restart the fresh world if the user desires to not use mods.

Yes, but those are mods, not an API. Just installing a tool should really not alter your save-game format IMO.

Also, new blocks and items can be deleted from a save relatively easily if you decide to stop using a mod. If the whole blockID system is altered, that can not be so easily reversed.

Plus : Also, remind all of you guys, Minecraft is STILL in beta (not stable product by any means) that the game itself's core mechanics and/or environment can be changed any time by Notch.

Pffft. I put absolutely no stock in the "beta" excuse. Mojang does not follow a designation system for such things even vaguely resembling any other game development studio.

In my eyes, the game was released to paying customers long ago. It just happens to have a rather active patch and update schedule. They can call it "gamma" for all I care. It really means nothing.

[Lighthouse]

a) that has not been stated anywhere.

Notch clearly stated that 1.8 uses new terrain generation method (thus we will see things such as complex dungeons and rivers) that people won't be able to load their old world. You may want to search for it.

b) Even if the saves are no longer compatible, that does nothing to change the damage we'd be doing by changing the save format.

For example, a new player starts playing Minecraft post 1.8 with a new world. He then decides to eventually start playing mods and installs Forge with MCE-style functionality. His save game is then permanently altered and he can never stop using the Forge if he wants to continue playing it.

How does 1.8 potentially including a new save format change the problem in the least?


Yes, but those are mods, not an API. Just installing a tool should really not alter your save-game format IMO.

Also, new blocks and items can be deleted from a save relatively easily if you decide to stop using a mod. If the whole blockID system is altered, that can not be so easily reversed.

I am not sure if I am following your definition of API, but I believe it is rather unavoidable step that Forge should be. If a person who has been using the Forge decides to stop using the Forge, then the only logical reason he/she does not want to use it is because he/she does not want to use the mods that are using the Forge, for either.....

1.) He wants to play complete vMC experience.

2.) He wants to play MC with mods that are not using AND incompatible to the Forge.



I've already covered the first point; even though current system allows people to simply remove the mods from the game, if they have already invested deeply on modded blocks (which it WILL happen due to the nature of the mods using the Forge in general), a mere removal of the mod will cause the whole world being unusable. Like....

You will see a big empty tower that does nothing (formally pulley elevator)

Ugly shapes of ground (formally pipes were there.)

And a lot of active mechanisms that are depended on mod blocks will be useless, and the work to be done to make them usable again with vMC setting will take a long time to accomplish if not impossible. For the most people, it is logical that they should start new fresh world.



For second point, the person who decides to play MC with mods that are not friendly with the Forge will face similar concerns plus more. Like first case, a lot of things will be broken and useless without the mods using the Forge that simply restarting the new world becomes the most desirable choice. Not to mention, as far as I see it, most of modders using the Forge currently do not have alternative version that are not using the Forge (well, but it is obvious that supporting non-Forge version only weakens the Forge's position in minecraft modding community).

Even if a person has been using the mods that have non-Forge version, he/she will still have to overcome issues like class file conflict issues low block id issue and other very nasty things.

Without the Forge related, it is common issue and only solution is usually starting new world. When Aether and BTW were semi-compatible. I did a lot of stuffs with Aether blocks and BTW ones. When I heard about the Forge and Flower going for it, I had to abandon either Aether or BTW. Obviously I chose BTW, and I found out that most system just does not work anymore without Aether blocks and error with Aether only features.

That alone I had to just abandon that world (good thing I had two versions of my main world. One with Aether and one without.). As you see, even before we start discuss about the Forge API altering save files, in current situation, there is no other way but restart new fresh world anyway in order to solve the problems from the mods, making the whole point 'unable to load the save file with vMC' irreverent, because people will 'be never able to'/'do not want to' load save files with vMC in the first place, regardless of the save file corruption.



At last, back to the Forge API itself again, I understand it as like DirectX for games in windows. You have to install it to play games (mods in minecraft) anyway, and it should be installed in windows (minecraft) copies as many as possible. If the Forge API becomes popular (it should and will), the save file issue will be non-issue.

Pffft. I put absolutely no stock in the "beta" excuse. Mojang does not follow a designation system for such things even vaguely resembling any other game development studio.

In my eyes, the game was released to paying customers long ago. It just happens to have a rather active patch and update schedule. They can call it "gamma" for all I care. It really means nothing.

Maybe, but also with 'beta' tag they can try something like 1.8 otherwise a lot of people will rage when their old world does not work anymore :P



Plus : Real issue is indeed performance and multiplayer.... But again, it is not unknown fact that huge mods in general strain old computers a lot in the first place, and multiplayer coding on minecraft is really, at best, incomplete.

[Stormweaver]

a) that has not been stated anywhere.

Notch clearly stated that 1.8 uses new terrain generation method (thus we will see things such as complex dungeons and rivers) that people won't be able to load their old world. You may want to search for it.

Unless the chunk system is changed, there is no reason why things would be incompatable, there would just be strange boarders where old generation stops and new generation begins. If the new height max gets added, it'd also likely be compatible, the extra blocks above anywhere being filled with air. Notch has no reason to purposefully make old saves incompatable when he could easily avoid it.

[FlowerChild]

Yeah, I'm not going to argue this one further.

To sum up: If the forge used extended block id's I wouldn't even use it as a player, never mind as a developer. Honestly, I'm already sick of people asking for that feature without really understanding the ramifications, so I'm just going to step out of this discussion before I get pissed off and say anything that I might regret.

P.S. I was running the newest versions of BTW and Aether together last night without incident.

[Necropolis]

I want to go on record as stating that I was not asking for this feature, but for knowledge of what the ramifications were because I hadn't seen it implemented. You know, before I'm irrevocably set in stone as someone FC hates.

[FlowerChild]

Don't worry about it dude, I realize as much and there are very few people that I hate anyways :)

[Damion Rayne]

a) that has not been stated anywhere.

Notch clearly stated that 1.8 uses new terrain generation method (thus we will see things such as complex dungeons and rivers) that people won't be able to load their old world. You may want to search for it.

b) Even if the saves are no longer compatible, that does nothing to change the damage we'd be doing by changing the save format.

For example, a new player starts playing Minecraft post 1.8 with a new world. He then decides to eventually start playing mods and installs Forge with MCE-style functionality. His save game is then permanently altered and he can never stop using the Forge if he wants to continue playing it.

How does 1.8 potentially including a new save format change the problem in the least?


Yes, but those are mods, not an API. Just installing a tool should really not alter your save-game format IMO.

Also, new blocks and items can be deleted from a save relatively easily if you decide to stop using a mod. If the whole blockID system is altered, that can not be so easily reversed.

I am not sure if I am following your definition of API, but I believe it is rather unavoidable step that Forge should be. If a person who has been using the Forge decides to stop using the Forge, then the only logical reason he/she does not want to use it is because he/she does not want to use the mods that are using the Forge, for either.....

1.) He wants to play complete vMC experience.

2.) He wants to play MC with mods that are not using AND incompatible to the Forge.



I've already covered the first point; even though current system allows people to simply remove the mods from the game, if they have already invested deeply on modded blocks (which it WILL happen due to the nature of the mods using the Forge in general), a mere removal of the mod will cause the whole world being unusable. Like....

You will see a big empty tower that does nothing (formally pulley elevator)

Ugly shapes of ground (formally pipes were there.)

And a lot of active mechanisms that are depended on mod blocks will be useless, and the work to be done to make them usable again with vMC setting will take a long time to accomplish if not impossible. For the most people, it is logical that they should start new fresh world.



For second point, the person who decides to play MC with mods that are not friendly with the Forge will face similar concerns plus more. Like first case, a lot of things will be broken and useless without the mods using the Forge that simply restarting the new world becomes the most desirable choice. Not to mention, as far as I see it, most of modders using the Forge currently do not have alternative version that are not using the Forge (well, but it is obvious that supporting non-Forge version only weakens the Forge's position in minecraft modding community).

Even if a person has been using the mods that have non-Forge version, he/she will still have to overcome issues like class file conflict issues low block id issue and other very nasty things.

Without the Forge related, it is common issue and only solution is usually starting new world. When Aether and BTW were semi-compatible. I did a lot of stuffs with Aether blocks and BTW ones. When I heard about the Forge and Flower going for it, I had to abandon either Aether or BTW. Obviously I chose BTW, and I found out that most system just does not work anymore without Aether blocks and error with Aether only features.

That alone I had to just abandon that world (good thing I had two versions of my main world. One with Aether and one without.). As you see, even before we start discuss about the Forge API altering save files, in current situation, there is no other way but restart new fresh world anyway in order to solve the problems from the mods, making the whole point 'unable to load the save file with vMC' irreverent, because people will 'be never able to'/'do not want to' load save files with vMC in the first place, regardless of the save file corruption.



At last, back to the Forge API itself again, I understand it as like DirectX for games in windows. You have to install it to play games (mods in minecraft) anyway, and it should be installed in windows (minecraft) copies as many as possible. If the Forge API becomes popular (it should and will), the save file issue will be non-issue.

Pffft. I put absolutely no stock in the "beta" excuse. Mojang does not follow a designation system for such things even vaguely resembling any other game development studio.

In my eyes, the game was released to paying customers long ago. It just happens to have a rather active patch and update schedule. They can call it "gamma" for all I care. It really means nothing.

Maybe, but also with 'beta' tag they can try something like 1.8 otherwise a lot of people will rage when their old world does not work anymore :P



Plus : Real issue is indeed performance and multiplayer.... But again, it is not unknown fact that huge mods in general strain old computers a lot in the first place, and multiplayer coding on minecraft is really, at best, incomplete.

You really don't understand any of this stuff in reality do you?

First: A new generation algorithm has absolutely NOTHING to do with how the game saves data, it's glaringly obvious you don't get this. The addition of new features to the terrain generator only deals with how the game creates biomes, features like hills, etc.

Second: The game's save data method was already updated once to mc-region, which is to say that the game saves data in a regional format. I doubt Notch will change it again, and you telling FC to "Look it up" like he has nothing better to do was pretty presumptuous. Not to mention you telling someone to "look this up" when you were misquoting yourself is also pretty presumptuous.

Third: The definition of API is this,

An application programming interface (API) is a particular set of rules ('code') and specifications that software programs can follow to communicate with each other. It serves as an interface between different software programs and facilitates their interaction, similar to the way the user interface facilitates interaction between humans and computers.
An API can be created for applications, libraries, operating systems, etc., as a way of defining their "vocabularies" and resources request conventions (e.g. function-calling conventions). It may include specifications for routines, data structures, object classes, and protocols used to communicate between the consumer program and the implementer program of the API

Let me make sure to respond to this one more time,

"Notch clearly stated that 1.8 uses new terrain generation method (thus we will see things such as complex dungeons and rivers) that people won't be able to load their old world. You may want to search for it."

This has NOTHING what so ever to do with how the game saves data, you should search for it. Now make sure to actually research what you're talking about before you go off on tangents and misquote things all over the place.

[Lighthouse]

Thank you for the response, Flower. I see indeed it is time to drop this discussion since it is getting hotter than we'd hoped for.


And thank you for mentioning Aether still working with BTW, I did not know that. With 1.02 came out I should check it out as well.

[Battosay]

Locking before people start flaming :)

And yeah, Notch never said that old worlds won't be compatible with 1.8.

[FlowerChild]

Just to clear one thing up from this debate. From Jeb's twitter on Aug 19th:

You will still be able to use your old worlds, but when the map generator adds new areas you will probably get clearly visible chunk edges