Talk:Adventure Update/Archive 1

Same as Upcoming Features
This page has the same content like Upcoming features. I suggest we just replace this article with a sentence which referes to the Upcoming features page. It doesn't make sence to have two lists! --Visitor 09:50, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Adventure (U/u)pdate?
I think the it should be titled 'Adventure Update' not 'Adventure update'.

Who knows how to rename a page? --Robodoggy 02:27, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

What will become of Minecraft?
I've been playing since 1.5, and 1.7.3 is kinda the optimal experience. I don't like the sound of 1.8. I don't want NPC villages, ok?!! Having computer controlled humans or pigmen is creepy!! I think I've been reading too much about herobrine. The permadeath sounds dumb, and hardcore is just wrong. The one redeeming factor about this update is creative mode. As long as you can have creative mode on peaceful, I'll do the update, cause building a giant zeppelin is hard when you're using invedit. fireglo450 (citation added) 04 August, 2011, 11:15.

First of all, you should post this on the forums, not here. Second of all, permadeath will be optional. Third, if you find certain mobs "creepy" just go to peaceful mode. Spark01

Spikes, is it even confirmed?
I just clicked through the references and saw the tweet from jeb_ about spikes. http://twitter.com/#!/jeb_/status/78554788094160896 He says "You're on it!", but I wouldn't take that as a confirmation. Any other sources I have missed? KHEEJS 15:41, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

A speculation article?
Would an article about theories and speculations about future content be out of the question? I know the rules state that speculation is not allowed, but the rule refers to pages that "could mislead players". I doubt a page about speculations would be misleading if the article is solely about speculation. I for one would love to see what possible hints other people could dig up. --NaiOni 12:49, 2 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Well, so far Notch has released quite a lot of information, screenshots, and hard facts. I'd say we have enough pure data without speculation.  What's better is to point out any of the information that may seem anomalous and let them come up with the speculation themselves, off of the wiki.  Wikis are collections of facts and pure information, not things that are unofficial and have the possibility of being wrong.  Plus, people can be easily mislead because they assume that everything on the Wiki is absolutely official, even pages that blatantly state otherwise.  Verhalthur (talk)(contribs) 13:38, 2 August 2011 (UTC)