Talk:Adventure Update/Archive 1

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

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

easy. --wizkida57 –Preceding unsigned comment was added by ( • ) at 12:13, 11 September 2011 (UTC). Please sign your posts with

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


 * The page nuked their feature list because the features are no longer upcoming.  Now the feature list doesn't appear to be anywhere. ( 21:07, 14 September 2011 (UTC))

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? 15:41, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
 * The other one: . - 00:29, 16 March 2012 (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. -- 12:49, 2 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Well, so far 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.    13:38, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Is the myth true; losing old worlds?
I have heard a lot of speculation and talk in videos and comments around the internet lately, and I was wondering if the myth is going to be legitimate; is Minecraft going to make you lose your worlds you had before the Adventure Update? I remember losing my old world around the Halloween Update and was irritated, but if I lose my current world from that point, and have to start over, I'm going to be thoroughly let down as to having to start all over again. {{subst:unsigned|

Any conformation would be better than a guess. {{static link|User:K12machinima|K12machinima}}


 * No, it's the same as any other update. You can use your old world but you won't get any of the new stuff in the chunks you've already generated since... well they were already generated.  There will also probably be bad chunk transitions according to Jeb (similar to after the biome update in Alpha). --{{static link|User:Warlock|Warlock}} 22:08, 19 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Oh that's lovely, thank you very much. I was actually kind of worried that my house I've been updating for possible protection from Enderman and anything else that might seem to happen in the new update, and I didn't want to lose all that hard work. I remember the biome update causing weird chunk transitions too, but that's better than losing all your old stuff. {{static link|User:K12machinima|K12machinima}}8:39, 20 August 2011 (UTC)


 * no, you will keep the old worlds, but other structures(strong holds, NPC Villages) wont spawn anywhere that you have even seen. --wizkida57 13:18 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Intallation work-around
At least for the duration that the pre-release is out, would it be pertinent to include that in some cases (including mine), opening the 1.8 .jar with WinRAR and deleting META-INF helps the game load? 19:34, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Leaked 1.8.. but how?
"On Friday 9th, September 2011, version 1.8 was found in a hidden directory on the Minecraft website by a user on 4chan's /v/. It was rapidly stolen and distributed, and spread to other social news sites like Reddit."

Do we have any confirmation that this is how it was leaked? Jeb_ seemed to insinuate that it was "leaked," as in he "leaked" it on purpose so that the more die-hard fans could get their hands on it.

If it is true, lets find something to cite about it. Cleverlynamed1 16:22, 13 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Is it truly important on 'how' it was leaked? Just the fact that it was seems fine to me. 13:15, 14 September 2011 (UTC)


 * When I posted this it was in reference to something which is no longer there. –Preceding unsigned comment was added by ( • ) at 16:25, 14 September 2011 (UTC). Please sign your posts with

Now it’s out…
The Additions Summary from the page could be copied / templated here (or Notch’s notes from the launcher). See Halloween update page for example –Preceding unsigned comment was added by ( • ) at 15:48, 14 September 2011 (UTC). Please sign your posts with

Something I've noticed while mining.
I recall being off MC for a month due to school, but when I noticed when I was mining in 1.8 when I got to the Diamond level, I've noticed black smoke is in the air, and when I look back, there is a dark dark fog like in Tiny Version. Is this a glitch? -- 00:44, 15 September 2011 (UTC) Thats the void 20:59, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Shall we rename this article [Adventure Updates]?
Before, Notch did say he was releasing the update in 1.8, but due to the fact that if he does do that, we will have another couple of months for it. Of course, people get displeased because no one knows what does "patience" mean. So Notch splits the update into two. I'm sure you should know unless you're an idiot that 2 updates should use a plural. So technically, it should be called the "Adventure Updates". 13:54, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

2.0 adventure update?
1.8 is first part 1.9 is second part 2.0 is Adventure Update??? –Preceding unsigned comment was added by ( • ) at 15:28, 26 October 2011 (UTC). Please sign your posts with


 * Technically... It was first supposed to be Beta 1.7, then moved to Beta 1.8 & Beta 1.9. They then added it to be Beta 1.10, and then the final release (by the way, it's 1.0 not 2.0) would be, the final release. But they took out 1.10 because they wanted more time to clean out bugs. So Beta 1.9 and Minecraft 1.0 will be the final adventure updates. - 9 November, 2011


 * As far as I understood the 1.9 content will instead be added to the official release (also known as 1.0) of Minecraft. Initially 1.9 was probably to be released as another patch before the full release of the game, but with the deadline for releasing Minecraft and with all the changed and added features it didn't come to that. However, since there has been a code-freeze in place for a while now it is technically possible that 1.0 will contain some but not all of the features we tested in the 1.9 pre-releases, as Mojang has to deliver a finished and working product. In that case we may simply see that content added a little later in a 1.1 patch or so. All in all, 1.0 release probably adds most if not all of the Adventure Updates of 1.9.  : :  : : : –Preceding undated comment was added at 10:55, 10 November 2011 (UTC). Please sign your posts with