4 ms·

I find this choice interesting. Vulkan is a sensible choice given the game is multiplatform (and of course they mention MoltenVK right in the announcement.) Des

• willis936 4mo ago
  The bedrock lineage is microsoft's attempt at microsoftifying minecraft. The team behind bedrock are responsible for showing the world the supremacy of DirectX. Bedrock is far behind on features and is far buggier compared to java edition. A ground up C++ rewrite is noble beginnings. Unfortunately time has shown that they only planned to get it to an MVP necessary for some gross monetization tactics targeting children and not really a genuine interest in improving the tech, growing fandom goodwill, or creating new art.
  • pjmlp 4mo ago
    Because most mods take advantage of Java capabilities, so JavaScript extension points are not as interesting. However the C++ version has a reason to exist, sadly Java never established itself for gaming outside desktops and J2ME/Android. One could argue about AOT, but those are not widely adopted, CodenameONE, RobotVM.
    • invalidname 4mo ago
      You should check out Codename Ones recent gaming related features...
      • pjmlp 4mo ago
        Which was my last sentence. The issue isn't that it isn't there, it is mindshare among game developers, especially when it isn't part of the official SDK. This isn't unique to Java, and that is why outside indie games, it is always the same languages that get used among all major studios.
        • invalidname 4mo ago
          Sure and I don't argue that. But it also wasn't fully there. This past couple of weeks Codename One introduced some big missing pieces: * Level builder/game designer * Proper 3d that works natively everywhere (direct 3d on windows, metal on iOS/Mac) * Support for native win32, Linux and mac - real native with no JVM, 5mb binary * Native performance for some edge cases (low level SIMD API etc.) You're right that mindshare is a huge part, but there were also many important missing pieces especially on the deployment front. I think that with good tooling and a royalty free pitch this might open some doors that were previously closed to Java. Getting to major studios would be an uphill battle but since they acquire indie studios the path goes through there.
    • tancop 4mo ago
      [dead]
    • remix2000 4mo ago
      You could run java literally anywhere it matters with not too much effort, but ios store terms would never allow for mods anyway (neither would ps/xbox/ninty store probably), so you could just as well redirect effort to optimize for platform specific audiences, AKA in this case kids wielding their parents' credit card.
      • pjmlp 4mo ago
        Neither do game consoles.
    • Shellban 4mo ago
      [dead]
  • afavour 4mo ago
    I was under the impression it was because Java wouldn’t work on mobile devices. Is that not the case?
    • vips7L 4mo ago
      Probably just iOS since Apple bans JIT compilers other than their own.
      • awakeasleep 4mo ago
        And then note the curiosity of how microsoft blocks bedrock from running on macos, for some reason.
      • MindSpunk 4mo ago
        Consoles ban JITs too.
        • everyone 4mo ago
          Almost is if an iphone is a little console.
        • terribleperson 4mo ago
          I don't think there's much chance Sony or Nintendo would have blocked the publishing of a Java version of Minecraft, if that had been on offer in place of Bedrock. The rules are always flexible for huge games, especially when they'd otherwise be an exclusive for a competitor.
      • charcircuit 4mo ago
        Ignoring that, https://pojavlauncher.app/ https://pojavlauncher.app/ supports iOS too.
        • poly2it 4mo ago
          FYI, PojavLauncher has been succeeded by https://github.com/AngelAuraMC https://github.com/AngelAuraMC.
  • zimpenfish 4mo ago
    > Bedrock is far behind on features and is far buggier compared to java edition. But does allow you render distances and frame rates that are impossible with the stock Java game (and can still be tricky even with mods.)
    • nottorp 4mo ago
      ... at the cost of reducing the world update range, simplifying some of the mechanics and disallowing the kind of modding you can do on java.
      • imtringued 4mo ago
        This is actually one of the weirder things. The Java edition is objectively better from a technical player's perspective.
        • nottorp 4mo ago
          It's simple. Microsoft the new owner has no idea what Minecraft is about. Or at least the subset of Minecraft that I play: complex builds and automated farms done in survival not creative. At that level the combat they keep adding to is ... just getting in the way of my building.
          • zimpenfish 4mo ago
            > Microsoft the new owner has no idea what Minecraft is about. They've had 12 years to figure it out[0]. Now sadly they've spent those 12 years working out how best to milk every last microtransaction and merchandising cent out of the property rather than actually listening to anyone and improving the game(s) but whomst among us could have predicted that outcome?! [0] https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/sep/15/microsoft-buys-minecraft-creator-mojang-for-25bn https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/sep/15/microsoft...
            • nottorp 4mo ago
  • steve_taylor 4mo ago
    The defining aspect of Bedrock is C++, not DirectX. Bedrock runs on numerous platforms where DirectX isn't available. Minecraft isn't exactly be the type of game to showcase a 3D API's supremacy.
    • willis936 4mo ago
      >Minecraft isn't exactly be the type of game to showcase a 3D API's supremacy. Nvidia did exactly this... https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/campaigns/minecraft-with-rtx/ https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/campaigns/minecraft-wit...
  • ndiddy 4mo ago
    Another thing to note is that Mojang had already commissioned a C++ port of Minecraft for the console versions, which they then abandoned in favor of Bedrock. The original console port ran better, was less buggy, and had a nicer UI for controllers than Bedrock. Bedrock is basically an extension of Minecraft Pocket Edition (the smartphone port of Minecraft) so I imagine that they shifted to Bedrock so they didn't have to pay to implement the same features on Java, console, and Pocket Edition whenever they updated the game. The console version was developed by an external contractor, which is probably why they chose to give that up instead of Pocket Edition.
    • FrustratedMonky 4mo ago
      "Bedrock is basically an extension of Minecraft Pocket Edition " This seems crazy. When MS bought Mojang, why didn't they start with the console port for Bedrock? Even if some other contractor, it would be a starting point better than the phone version?
      • mghackerlady 4mo ago
        because the legacy console ports where very tied to the platforms they ran on
        • ndiddy 4mo ago
          This isn't really true, the code works like most cross platform codebases where most of the code is common and then there's a bunch of platform-specific backends that handle graphics, sound, input, etc. They used the same gameplay code for Xbox 360, Playstation 3, Playstation Vita, Xbox One, Playstation 4, Wii U, and Switch, so clearly there's not really much keeping it stuck to a single platform. A recent leak of the legacy console source code revealed that they also had an internal Windows port to make development easier, although you still need a controller to play.
          • mghackerlady 4mo ago
            Ah, okay. I didn't know that As for the internal windows port, that's how most console development is done nowadays. Gamefreak (the pokemon people) does build of their games for PC which is neat considering how different the switch is compared to the differences between playstation/xbox and pc (those are just amd cpus and gpus on the inside, whereas the switch uses some nvidia soc)
  • axus 4mo ago
    Bedrock has a larger player base, the monetization seems to have worked. Existing Java players have not been put out (except the MS account thing). MS didn't make the best decision, but their decisions have been good enough.
• pjmlp 4mo ago
  Microsoft the publisher also cares about other OSes, and each studio does whatever they feel like including publishing on mobiles and all game consoles. Microsoft the Windows/XBox division has other priorities.
• jimbob45 4mo ago
  Is Direct3D not dead? I’m seeing no major releases in years, no notable features pushed (much less teased), and no team to speak of at MS. Is there a team still? Does MS plan to do anything with it? Seems like it’s Bush-era Internet Explorer at this point.
  • Telaneo 4mo ago
    It's still alive. https://www.techpowerup.com/346810/microsoft-intros-directx-12-shader-model-6-9-and-new-direct3d-12-improvements https://www.techpowerup.com/346810/microsoft-intros-directx-... https://devblogs.microsoft.com/directx/ https://devblogs.microsoft.com/directx/
• functionmouse 4mo ago
  Direct3D 12 is Vulkan under the hood. GL is the real competitor, and it provides legitimate accessibility to small developers, which is why the industry is extinguishing it.
  • azizam 4mo ago
    "Direct3D 12 is Vulkan under the hood" please don't speak on topics you have no knowledge of
    • functionmouse 4mo ago
      you're right; I'm sorry. Trying to do better.