Talk:Java Edition pre-Classic

New Pre-Classic Version
So just recently, I saw a new version in the 1.6.6.1 version of the launcher called rd-20090515 which obviously means May 15th, 2009. Any person please edit the version history to include the version if you can. --Ktoby (talk) 21:54, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Question
I'm actually wondering why Pre classic only lasted six days. My guess is that Notch decided to have Pre Classic last six days. Or maybe he just didn't have time--69.242.110.19 19:34, 18 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Why was there only 2 blocks in rd-132211(Stone and Grass)?--JaxonMC (talk) 02:04, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Answer To Above
The reason the development phase only lasted six days, is because that is how long it took for the game to be made good enough to be released to the public.

Ahhh thanks I have been wondering why--69.242.110.19 20:53, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Rename from Pre-Classic to Cave Game?
Do you guys like the idea of renaming the Pre-Classic pages to "Cave Game" since that's what Notch originally called it? Screenbones (talk) 01:18, 24 June 2014 (UTC)


 * I think it should be called "Cave Game" Because it only has 2 blocks(Stone and Grass) and is a very old version--JaxonMC (talk) 02:08, 27 September 2014 (UTC)


 * There was actually 6 blocks (Cobblestone, Grass, Dirt, Stone, Wood Planks, and Saplings), not 2. 50.141.212.168 13:13, 30 September 2014 (UTC)


 * There was 2 blocks in the 2 oldest versions, and then they released 4 more blocks after that. --Alexster24 (talk) 13:08, 27 April 2016 (UTC)Alexster24


 * I don't think it should be called "Cave Game" because the game was given an official name (Minecraft: Order of the Stone) before it was replaced by Classic 50.141.212.168 21:30, 28 September 2014 (UTC)


 * I also agree this should remain "Pre-classic". It refers to more than simply the cave game era —KnightMiner  (t 16:11, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

The usage of, origins of, and distinctions between the terms "Pre-classic" and "Classic"
&#35;1: This sentence from the Pre-classic rd-132211 page seems a little "off" to me: "rd-132211 is a version of Pre-classic released on May 13, 2009".

I don't mind the term "pre-classic" as a versioning name, for example in page names or in table headers. But when talking about it in prose, using it as a proper noun, it makes it sound like "Pre-classic" was a thing at the time.

So it seems like, when we say "it was a version of Infdev", that makes sense. Infdev was what it was called in those days. But when we say "it was a version of Classic" ... it was never called Classic or Pre-classic until years later, so using it as if it were a proper noun like Infdev or Alpha or Beta sounds funny.

Why not just use it as a non-proper adjective, like, "rd-132211 is a pre-classic version released on May 13, 2009"? What do people think?

&#35;2: It led me to think also, where did we first start using the terms "Pre-classic" and "Classic"? Obviously after the time period, right, but when?

&#35;3: And what was the rationale saying, this part is classic, and this part is pre-classic?

– Sealbudsman talk | contribs 22:15, 11 May 2018 (UTC)