• This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact Antvasima if you encounter any problems.

    For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here.
  • We need Patreon donations for this forum to have all of its running costs financially secured.

    Community members who help us out will receive badges that give them several different benefits, including the removal of all advertisements in this forum, but donations from non-members are also extremely appreciated.

    Please click here for further information, or here to directly visit our Patreon donations page.
  • Please click here for information about a large petition to help children in need.

Edit for Minecraft Rule

127
78
Minecraft End Poem

This controversial topic emphasises that Minecraft's End Poem Stage in Vsb is a "trope" and cannot be taken as true. The writing in the End Poem may be allegorical, but the underlying meaning and narrative is real.

The authors say that after we have reached the End Poem in an abstract way, we have reached a higher level and we can now read their thoughts. But here comes a part. The authors say that we include them in the game and see them as part of the game, so we still cannot perceive them. 1

Then the authors start to tell a story, and they involve us in this story. Yes, this story is an allegory (and largely metaphorical) and it is not true, but it is a little bit true. In the story they tell us what we do, what we create when we open the game. This story is the part that emphasises what we do in the game. But when they tell this story, we can't understand them, some of what they say is confusing to us. 2

The writers want to tell a new story. A story that tells the truth about us and the game. But they know we can't bear such a heavy burden, so they lighten it. When they tell us the story, they tell us the truth, but they tell it by softening the story, by consoling us. Not the naked truth, but a hard truth hidden behind an easy game mode. 3

So much so that when writers tell us the story: "The story is not true." - "No. It is a story that holds the truth safely in a cage of words. It is not the naked truth that can burn from any distance." they say. And this story is about our entry into the game, what we do in the game 4. But it tells it a little softer (like the universe embraced him). But in some places it is really telling the truth. There are some harsh and true words such as the abstraction of our body, the creation of the universe (here the example of Markus and Julian is given). 5

The allusion here is to the way the story is told, not the story itself. The story says that each time we start with a different DNA, a different source code. This is a reference to "seed". And seed is in the game, even in the source code. But End Poem tells it a little softly. 6

We are told to get up from the boring reality of this computer game and go out into the real world. To console the player, to open the player's heart, they say that the universe loves him, that in the story he is made of nothing but milk and love. 7

Things in the game are said to be created by us, a universe is an example. I also want to say that it's not a metaphor, and it's not a dream. Because this is reality and there are writers who exist outside the story. These are the "highest level", and since we are not at that level yet, we cannot go to higher layers. Anyway, at the end of End Poem, they say that we woke up from this dream and now we realise something, we associate this with the "highest level". The authors say that this is a story and they definitely see this place as fiction. We cannot perceive some of what the authors say because we are not yet at their level, at the "highest level". But when we wake up from the dream, we reach the level of the authors. We become the "highest level". 8 - 9

---

Let's talk about the interview part. The interview was conducted by Julian Gough, who was specially assigned by Notch to write the story. Julian says that the things that are briefly described in the interview depend on influencing people and our interaction between real life and the game.

But this story written by Julian is still considered canon in-game and is also connected to the story. Also, Julian only describes the things we do in the game by putting them into the story. So actually, underneath the metaphorical story is the making of the game. We create the universe, we open this world, we create it.

What Julian calls a dream is a metaphor. So it's an interaction between the game and life. But if it is a metaphor, why do I show it as a fictional situation later? Because the Player in Minecraft needs to wake up from the dream in order to reach the highest level, to reach wisdom. The dream is a metaphor, but the inner world of Minecraft is still a dream. In other words, the author unintentionally labels Minecraft as fiction and the real world as reality. And when Player wakes up, he comes out of Minecraft's fiction.

When Julian tells Markus about the story idea, Markus finds it beautiful. He even associates it with "his own universe motif". 10

The story Julian wrote is about what Julian felt when he entered the game and played it. According to Julian, this story is outside the game. It's not a noncanon situation, it's actually Julian's association of the game with reality and the "dragon and enderman" story in people's minds. 11

I would like to add: 12

In short, this rule should be abolished. As long as the End Poem is not misinterpreted, the scale can be used.
 
Following. Hajunn, you could've wrote me here, on the forum.
Will check later.
You should probably ask for feedback in the General Minecraft Discussion.
 
Following. Hajunn, you could've wrote me here, on the forum.
Will check later.
You should probably ask for feedback in the General Minecraft Discussion.
My mistake but I guess it doesn't matter. If an admin looks at it, the discussion may return, but I will do my best to remove this rule.
 
So... Creative Mode Steve is canon?
Not really. Actually, the abstraction of Steve's body mentioned in End Poem, etc. and most of the writings in End Poem are OP and Vsb should accept these writings.

But what is canon is not Creative Mode or Notch/Herobrine/Entity 101, but the End Poem itself.
 
Leaving and entering the server is canon in the comics/Novels, so why no?
This part is true, but Creative Mode is not mentioned in the books or in the in-game story process, so it is not actually Creative Mode, but something different canon.

Actually, let me summarise it like this, it's like when you play a game and you choose a difficulty such as peaceful, undead, builder, etc. Of course, if we analyse the interviews and the game story a little more and find something that can make Creative Mode valid in the story, why not?
 
Last edited:
I think we should probably differentiate Minecraft statements which are hyperbole and are just describing the idea of the game.

Like, in game, Minecraft hasn't really ever been infinite... like naturally, there's the world border at 30 million blocks away, but even before that at 32 million blocks, the world stops being real, no blocks are physical, so if we were to argue from there Minecraft is only 32 million metres in area based on the maximum in-game showings. Ofc, there's loads of statements about the world being "infinite" but I think that's just the idea of the game, i.e Inf dev, but there's not much to back it up, since you literally can't go on infinitely.

Also the fact that the sun and moon rotate around the Minecraft world, it's pretty obvious it's not infinite.

This is all to say, I think Minecraft in terms of physical existence it's like 4-C and upwards but the Dreaming Player or the "Enlightened wisdom from a higher level" is transcendental of the Minecraft world.
 
I think we should probably differentiate Minecraft statements which are hyperbole and are just describing the idea of the game.

Like, in game, Minecraft hasn't really ever been infinite... like naturally, there's the world border at 30 million blocks away, but even before that at 32 million blocks, the world stops being real, no blocks are physical, so if we were to argue from there Minecraft is only 32 million metres in area based on the maximum in-game showings. Ofc, there's loads of statements about the world being "infinite" but I think that's just the idea of the game, i.e Inf dev, but there's not much to back it up, since you literally can't go on infinitely.

Also the fact that the sun and moon rotate around the Minecraft world, it's pretty obvious it's not infinite.

This is all to say, I think Minecraft in terms of physical existence it's like 4-C and upwards but the Dreaming Player or the "Enlightened wisdom from a higher level" is transcendental of the Minecraft world.
It is not only in the End Poem that the Minecraft universe is infinite. It is also mentioned in the game's commands.

And yes, it may be true from your point of view, but the Minecraft universe is not a smoothly functioning universe. Therefore, there is also the fact that the Sun and Moon can disappear and reappear in this flat universe.

I would also like to present a few Vsb-confirmed proofs that the Minecraft universe can be infinite.

1
2

There is a situation that we can see in the Fandom Wikis about the game and in the game's own files. The Minecraft universe is infinite. We can only physically reach up to a certain point and that's it.

For example, this is not the case in the Bedrock version. There are only game corruptions like in Farlands. In the Java version, the world is infinite in the same way, but our coordinate limit X/Z ±29,999,984 is here.

I just found something else. They have already discussed whether the Minecraft universe is infinite or not, and it has been clearly concluded that it is infinite.

-

Even if I find the example you gave problematic, I find the rest of it correct. Also, assuming that the creator of the game files is the Minecraft Player, we can also take the creator of the universe as Player.
 
Last edited:
I don't know shit about the End poem, but I might take a read later

Though if all this was already brought up and addressed in the past, I don't know what more I can add
I think it was misjudged when it was brought up in the past. Think of it as if you made a wrong scale when you made a scale for a character. End Poem briefly scripts what is done in the game and gives us information about the formation of the universe.

But it uses a sarcastic expression while doing this. Previous officials have described all statements as allegorical based on an interview, but this is not the case.

We've been over this one before. I don't see what in the OP adds to what we already knew.
There are things beyond what we already know, perhaps in the End Poem. Besides, even if it's the same thing, the rule is bullshit.
 
There are things beyond what we already know, perhaps in the End Poem. Besides, even if it's the same thing, the rule is bullshit.
Your opinion on the rule is duly noted, I guess. We didn't make the rule for no reason, it came after a number of threads very similar to this one. Tier 1 Minecraft is gone and without something substantial and actually new regarding it in terms of evidence, it's not coming back. Interviews about the intended meaning of the poem nor text from the poem itself is going to suffice.

All these scans show is that the writers had a more philosophical approach to writing the End Poem and that they wanted it to touch on more than the game itself. 75% of them are just quotes from the End Poem. This isn't enough.
 
Your opinion on the rule is duly noted, I guess. We didn't make the rule for no reason, it came after a number of threads very similar to this one. Tier 1 Minecraft is gone and without something substantial and actually new regarding it in terms of evidence, it's not coming back. Interviews about the intended meaning of the poem nor text from the poem itself is going to suffice.

All these scans show is that the writers had a more philosophical approach to writing the End Poem and that they wanted it to touch on more than the game itself. 75% of them are just quotes from the End Poem. This isn't enough.
The arguments I presented were to refute the "interview argument" nonsense you presented. I also used the interview argument you presented, and I also used the End Poem excerpts. It is also erroneous to exclude an entire text or expressions that do not count as Hyperbole because of the allegorical expression in the End Poem.

What you are doing is like giving an "F" to a child who has taken a 10-question exam when he has 9 right and 1 wrong. I summarised and examined all the texts in End Poem, not a 75% part, but all the texts are there. Another part of the work is that I also said the part of these writings that are sarcastic and absurd, and the part that is meaningful. The absurdity of the rule you propose is evident in the fact that instead of offering something new, you are just saying that my analyses will lead nowhere.

Oh, and I'm not aiming to get Minecraft to Tier 1 anymore. But if some of the right phrases in the End Poem are chosen, we can get somewhere. Anyway, here's the thing, I accept that some of the expressions in End Poem are Hyperbole. I say that the correct expressions should be chosen among them. Your rule considers the whole story noncanon because the way End Poem is told is allegorical.

How about discussing my scans, Mr Bambu?
 
Last edited:
Like, in game, Minecraft hasn't really ever been infinite... like naturally, there's the world border at 30 million blocks away, but even before that at 32 million blocks, the world stops being real, no blocks are physical, so if we were to argue from there Minecraft is only 32 million metres in area based on the maximum in-game showings. Ofc, there's loads of statements about the world being "infinite" but I think that's just the idea of the game, i.e Inf dev, but there's not much to back it up, since you literally can't go on infinitely.
I'm pretty sure no computer is capable of rendering an actual infinite space 💀
 
Bambu seems reasonable here. I'll jump into the Disagree bandwagon.
Well, I just want you to be objective, so you can change your mind at the end of the discussion. For the moment, I'm putting you with Bambu in favour of keeping the rule.

But since there is not a very knowledgeable admin on this subject and you are not very knowledgeable, I find it wrong for you to draw a conclusion from the only message Bambu said. Because I wrote a huge argument and Mr. Bambu briefly said that this argument did not go anywhere. However, anyone who reads what I have written would realise that the way the story is told in the End Poem is allegorical, but certain statements are true.

As Udlmaster said, some statements are Hyperbole and should be weeded out. The rule should be removed, but not every statement in the End Poem should be taken as valid. For example, the first part of the story is incorrect.
 
I'm pretty sure no computer is capable of rendering an actual infinite space 💀
There is already an event called chunk in the Minecraft universe. The world is slowly renewed. So when you open a World, you will see as much as your Chunks. As you progress, your world is created. But there is a chunk level that a computer cannot handle as a capacity. We can see this in Minecraft Berock or old java versions. The region called Farlands used to exist, there was no chunk limitation. The Minecraft universe was infinite, but there were distortions as you progressed.

Therefore, even if the universe is infinite, a departure limit was set. Actually, the situation I described above.
 
I would also like to present a few Vsb-confirmed proofs that the Minecraft universe can be infinite.

1
The World type being "infinite" doesn't mean much, since it's not referring to the Universe, it's referring to how terrain is generated, you'd have to argue the planet is infinite and still has a finite-sized sun which it orbits and a moon which orbits it.
This one is just Notch talking about Inf-Dev, and isn't an "in lore" perspective, given Minecraft didn't even have any lore yet.

In fact, I can specifically tell you which version it is, 1.108 Infdev released 27th of Feb, 2010, the first Infdev version of Minecraft. This is just talking about Notch's idea for the game, it's not a real statement.

There is a situation that we can see in the Fandom Wikis about the game and in the game's own files. The Minecraft universe is infinite. We can only physically reach up to a certain point and that's it.
So far, what's presented is arguments the planet itself is infinite, not the universe. You'd have to pick one and it'll always be contradicted by the fact that the planet is never actually shown to be infinitely large and the observable fact, beyond any statement, that there's a solar system which the planet orbits.

It's literally taking game mechanics as literal and ignoring anything which contradicts it. And if we're using game mechanics, the Minecraft work is either 30 million metres wide or 32 million metres wide before it becomes non-physical.
All these scans show is that the writers had a more philosophical approach to writing the End Poem and that they wanted it to touch on more than the game itself. 75% of them are just quotes from the End Poem. This isn't enough.
True. Honestly, I think discussing how fractally wrong the current arguments for it even being High 3-A is worth discussing, since apparently the End Poem and infinite world are tied.
 
The World type being "infinite" doesn't mean much, since it's not referring to the Universe, it's referring to how terrain is generated, you'd have to argue the planet is infinite and still has a finite-sized sun which it orbits and a moon which orbits it.

This one is just Notch talking about Inf-Dev, and isn't an "in lore" perspective, given Minecraft didn't even have any lore yet.

In fact, I can specifically tell you which version it is, 1.108 Infdev released 27th of Feb, 2010, the first Infdev version of Minecraft. This is just talking about Notch's idea for the game, it's not a real statement.


So far, what's presented is arguments the planet itself is infinite, not the universe. You'd have to pick one and it'll always be contradicted by the fact that the planet is never actually shown to be infinitely large and the observable fact, beyond any statement, that there's a solar system which the planet orbits.

It's literally taking game mechanics as literal and ignoring anything which contradicts it. And if we're using game mechanics, the Minecraft work is either 30 million metres wide or 32 million metres wide before it becomes non-physical.

True. Honestly, I think discussing how fractally wrong the current arguments for it even being High 3-A is worth discussing, since apparently the End Poem and infinite world are tied.
I will agree with you on this. Actually I am thinking of discussing at another time whether the universe is infinite or not. But it is absurd that because some statements in the End Poem are Hyperbole, all statements are considered false.

It's like downgrading the Minecraft universe through wank.
 
Well, I just want you to be objective, so you can change your mind at the end of the discussion. For the moment, I'm putting you with Bambu in favour of keeping the rule.

But since there is not a very knowledgeable admin on this subject and you are not very knowledgeable, I find it wrong for you to draw a conclusion from the only message Bambu said. Because I wrote a huge argument and Mr. Bambu briefly said that this argument did not go anywhere. However, anyone who reads what I have written would realise that the way the story is told in the End Poem is allegorical, but certain statements are true.

As Udlmaster said, some statements are Hyperbole and should be weeded out. The rule should be removed, but not every statement in the End Poem should be taken as valid. For example, the first part of the story is incorrect.
Seriously? You're pulling the "I'm not knowledgeable" card on people just because they took the time to understand that a piece of writing and supporting material is intended to be philosophical/allegorical rather than literal? Mate, I browse through the Minecraft wiki on the regular and I literally picked the staff members listed on the Supporters list knowing other staff members either wouldn't know or (more than likely) wouldn't care about the game. Just because dimensionality isn't my forte doesn't mean I ain't knowledgeable. Nonsense like this is why people find me going off on even other Calc Group members at times.
 
Yeah, I don't know where the notion that I'm not knowledgeable comes from. The idea that everyone who disagrees with you is simply unknowledgeable is a pretty deaf and condescending worldview.

I do encourage you to go read the past discussions on the subject. We don't make discussion rules for no reason. The Minecraft one came after years of the point being discussed across multiple threads. It's not based on nothing.
 
Seriously? You're pulling the "I'm not knowledgeable" card on people just because they took the time to understand that a piece of writing and supporting material is intended to be philosophical/allegorical rather than literal? Mate, I browse through the Minecraft wiki on the regular and I literally picked the staff members listed on the Supporters list knowing other staff members either wouldn't know or (more than likely) wouldn't care about the game. Just because dimensionality isn't my forte doesn't mean I ain't knowledgeable. Nonsense like this is why people find me going off on even other Calc Group members at times.
That's not what I was talking about. I told you that you don't have enough equipment about "Minecraft Rule" because you told yourself that you can't handle this job.

Also, the issue is not dimensionality. That's why I disagree with Bambu's point. I opened a Low 1-C CRT once before and it was rejected. I don't plan to open it again. Don't act like we'll open a Tier 1 CRT as soon as you remove the Minecraft rule. We are discussing the absurdity of this rule, not Steve's Tier or haxes.

If your reason for not removing the rule is for me to open a Tier CRT for nothing, that's not going to happen. My goal is not to make tier 1. But if you are in favour of not removing the rule just for that reason, I'm sorry, but I'm right.
 
Yeah, I don't know where the notion that I'm not knowledgeable comes from. The idea that everyone who disagrees with you is simply unknowledgeable is a pretty deaf and condescending worldview.
I didn't say you were uninformed, I said it was for Flashlight. Because Flashlight237 said exactly that:
@Mr._Bambu @Therefir @Marvel_Champion_07 Gonna need your guys' help, because this might be too big a beast for me to handle.
And after he said that, even though the debate had just started, he voted for you because of what you said. My aim is not to accuse anyone or to get on top with insulting behaviour. I am just commenting on what you said.


I do encourage you to go read the past discussions on the subject. We don't make discussion rules for no reason. The Minecraft one came after years of the point being discussed across multiple threads. It's not based on nothing.
I've also read the previous stuff and even made such a mistake myself. Anyway, my suggestion is that some parts of the Minecraft End Poem article should be removed. But I think it would be ridiculous to extract the whole text.

So, the rule should be removed and replaced with something like "In Minecraft End Poem, valid writes must be accepted and non-valid writes must be approved.". Because the rule is too broad and calls the whole End Poem faulty. But as I presented in my own arguments, as Oliverdejesus and Udl said, the hyperbole in them should be weeded out and we should use the right places.
 
I didn't say you were uninformed, I said it was for Flashlight. Because Flashlight237 said exactly that:
But since there is not a very knowledgeable admin on this subject and you are not very knowledgeable, I find it wrong for you to draw a conclusion from the only message Bambu said. Because I wrote a huge argument and Mr. Bambu briefly said that this argument did not go anywhere. However, anyone who reads what I have written would realise that the way the story is told in the End Poem is allegorical, but certain statements are true.
Anyways.

I've also read the previous stuff and even made such a mistake myself. Anyway, my suggestion is that some parts of the Minecraft End Poem article should be removed. But I think it would be ridiculous to extract the whole text.
I don't.

So, the rule should be removed and replaced with something like "In Minecraft End Poem, valid writes must be accepted and non-valid writes must be approved.". Because the rule is too broad and calls the whole End Poem faulty. But as I presented in my own arguments, as Oliverdejesus and Udl said, the hyperbole in them should be weeded out and we should use the right places.
And I disagree. The OP laying down that the writer indeed approached it with little knowledge of the actual game he was writing it for, and wanted it to just be a more philosophical thing, doesn't really support your point of view.
 
Back
Top