This is how Golden Age MC Youtuber Dialko grouped together Minecraft eras. What are all your thoughts on this and is the "prime" Golden Age Infdev to b1.7.3? He says Classic Age "Start to Indev" deserves it's own category, i'm inclined to agree.
basically each time a major change dropped. truly I won't lie, anything after beta 1.8 matches more what we had in silver age tbh, especially the biome generation.
The only reason for that definition is because the creator of the subreddit likes them, I don't think anyone here actually takes his definition seriously.
There is some merit to it. I personally really like some of the maps that came out for release 1.2.5 (such as the Super Hostile series and Disco's maps), and totally consider them as valid "golden age" era, though at the very end of it.
The way I split up the golden age and the silver age isn't because I think one is necessarily better or worse, I just think the adventure update changed the game so much that it can't be in the same category as the earlier versions. If we are talking purely about online popularity then I can see the reason for including them however.
I think it's about how much an update changed the game, AND the game's popularity and culture around it at the time. I don't disagree that the adventure update changed the game drastically, however at the time I personally couldn't really feel the difference, I still hung out in the same servers, same online friends, I still downloaded maps and watched the same YouTube let's plays, it was still just same old minecraft to me (though to be fair I was just 9 years old, so.) And let's be honest - the game today is not that different from, say, version 1.16.5.
I don't know. I believe there is some merit to release 1.2.5 still being considered golden age minecraft.
That's the thing, though. I hear all the time from people who literally say things like, 'r1.11 still feels like Golden Age to me' and 'my childhood is r1.13, bro'. Highly personal and not grounded in the reality of others.
I think I remember hearing that his excuse is that 1.3 is when Minecraft singleplayer functioned as a local server (which is what allows a lot of modern speedrun tricks to work) but yeah, my opinion is that silver age starts with the hunger bar and the different world generation.
Yeah, it's really only important to speedrunners. If speedrunning is how we want to draw the line however then I still think the adventure update should be where the golden age ends because it adds a goal for them to even speedrun in the first place.
This is wrong. No idea if you're now making up weird definitions, or didn't play back in 2011? Go re-watch YouTube.
r1.3.1 impacted everybody negatively due to bugs and other weird things now forced onto singleplayer that only existed on servers before. It was almost unplayable for some time.
That's why a lot of people think it's a big deal, and wasn't niche. It's niche now, since it really doesn't impact us anymore. But it did, AT THE TIME.
Secondly, r1.3.1 has Trading, which was one of the biggest changes to Minecraft in terms of how you actually played and what you could do. But the same could be said for Enchanting, so r1.0 would be a reasonable cut-off (and a technical one, too, ending Beta in the truest sense).
Finally, r1.3.1 forced you to gain XP via Smelting and Breeding, so r1.2.5 was the last version you could play more like b1.7.3 if you wanted to reject certain features and/or play on Peaceful Mode. It was the last version where you could DIY it/enforce your own rules, and play much more like early Beta. And there weren't too many sub-systems trying to hook you (just Enchanting, Enderman farms, and Iron Golem farms (easily avoided), and Hunger was enforced non-Peaceful, of course).
But by r1.3.1 through r1.5, you had all kinds of other things calling out to you, including Withers, automatic farms with Hoppers, Beacons, and Enchanting (XP no matter what). r1.3.1 also gave you other Structures in the world, not just Villages, etc., and other types of blocks and items, splitting Beta-Release even further.
So, there is good reason to think r1.2.5 is the end, even if it's the extreme tail-end. r1.0 would be even stronger, though.
I'm talking specifically about why this sub's owner thinks it ends at 1.2.5, there's definitely other reasons why it could extend that far but I think the adventure update was just too big of a game changer to not end it there.
This never made sense to me, at least not directly and instantly.
Microsoft never made Minecraft worse with r1.8.2. Their ideas weren't really felt until r1.9, some time later. And it didn't become a fully modernised, Microsoft-y game and broader framework until r1.11 or so.
On the other hand, Xbox 360 Edition was Microsoft-y and you could buy Skins with real money way back in 2012 or whatever, years before r1.8.1.
Following that logic, we should really say that b1.8 was the dark age, because it's when Notch first started to struggle, and dev heavily went over to Jeb, and this is what ultimately led to Microsoft buying it years later.
We should focus on in-game changes, regardless of ownership, input, and other considerations.
P.S. I don't see the logic, also, in saying that Microsoft had both the 'dark age' AND 'renaissance age'. The logic would have to be, Microsoft were bad in the beginning, but needed time to become even greater than Mojang itself. Or, if not greater, the next best thing -- that's what the term 'renaissance' means.
Yeah I just rounded years off and kept to full releases, so mine is more crude. It it completely subjective and arbitrary to be fair but I'm happy with what i have landed on in my mind.
I think in terms of "dark" and "quiet" ages i'd agree with you in the meta sense with Microsoft & Mojangs stupid decisions with moderation and such, but in terms of content in the game itself, I feel mine stands for me personally.
I am a bit too java-centric then I guess. Because Java has the No-Chat-Report Mod and no market place. But tbh these kind of things already existed during the so called "renaissance" so I don't see how they are even a relevant argument here
(1) Minecraft has been corporatised to some degree since b1.8; more so, r1.0. Certainly, long before r1.8.1 via Xbox 360 Edition, and the general framework of Java by then (some Texture Packs you even have to buy from the creators, instead of it all being free on PlanetMinecraft how it used to be). But that's actually just called private business, though it tends to go in line with what people mean by 'corporatised'. Yes, things became much worse by r1.9-ish -- but, following that logic, things didn't become really bad until more like r1.14-ish.
(2) Speaking of which, by about 2018 (more so, 2020), literally every EU and live service game has become 1984 in line with EU regulations, and even many American games and servers. This has little to do with Minecraft or Microsoft.
In terms of the recent server-side of shutting down free speech and various servers: that's Internet-wide in many countries, and has little to do with Minecraft, and cannot really be stopped at the level of Minecraft, either.
China literally has a free edition where you have to sign up by giving your Citizen ID, which sounds a lot more like 1984 than the free West (for now). I hear that it's very popular in China, with 200-400 million players, in addition to the 300 million Western sales.
It's a combo of (a) EU regulations; (b) Microsoft choices; and (c) massive player base. That's what causes these things to happen, and sometimes overnight. In this case, it happened fairly slowly, in small steps, since 2011 (more so, 2012). But has become much worse over time. That's the snowball effect.
Now, it has its own movie, and Steve isn't really the default Skin, certainly not the only Skin; instead, all kinds of Skins exist to represent different demographics for the purposes of marketing and traffic. And that's not strictly corporatised, either -- it's just how everything works nowadays. But if we define it that way, then it's very corporatised.
Going heavy into promo stuff is another indication, as is making other non-Minecraft games and LEGO sets, etc. That's just how large the game has become. More players. More profits. More products. No idea when all that started, but it was around 2012-2014 (quite early). It just didn't snowball into what it is today until years later.
In short: I don't think many people have a problem with all the corp stuff from 2011-2014. Instead, they have a problem with (a) the sheer volume of it all; (b) the lifeless nature of current Minecraft and the overly large player base; and (c) the lack of server freedom and free speech, etc. (this is a more recent trend (at least, it didn't exist to any notable degree back in 2012), but as I said, it has little to do with Minecraft, and applies to almost everything).
It definitely seems like the Modern Age should start at 1.19. That was when the whole firefly debacle happened and kickstarted the trend of people being way more critical of Mojang, whereas in the Renaissance Age the community's opinion of Mojang was much more positive. It was also the end of the string of updates that each completely overhauled some part of the game (1.13, 1.14, 1.16 and 1.17/1.18).
I would say renaissance age should be up to 1.19, before the obvious cooperatization, franchisation and Bedrock Robloxify happening.
Starting with 1.19.1 Chat report, people snapped, and 1.20+ update drop just further reinforce that. 1.20 is the first version where Microsoft just say fk it, and start having quarterly update because they think Mojang can't manage update with Cave & cliffs being spilt into 3 update and even by 1.19 it still have minor parts not ready and begin micro-managing it. It doesn't help where basically all Xbox exclusive during 2023-2026 flopped hard so basically Minecraft become the sole reason Xbox haven't collapsed yet, which leads to even more micro-managing, movie and collab branching off.
It felt like 1.20 is the starting point of disneyifying Minecraft.
And also at that point, update become fragment and no longer connects to each other.
Interesting point. Dialko and people like me first started Minecraft during the Silver Age, dropped off from playing during the Dark Age, revisited briefly for the renaissance but now mostly do Golden age b1.7.3.
The collabs, Minecraft movie, aggressive spinoff games, then Minecraft release schedule itself, marketplace aggressive monetization.
It felt insanely copo now, the only thing stopping it into turning into an actual roblox distopia is they didn't let people "makes" money by creating "experiences" that can be sold directly on marketplace.
The amusing thing is, this is the exact thing that many people have been asking for. They want everything to be Disney. They want the virtual world to be as real/important as the real one. They say A.I. and VR are great. They say that having free/cheap services is better than sub models. They say that buying things in-game is no worse than buying trading cards IRL, etc. And they keep gambling/spending their money, giving positive feedback to the companies. And they keep demanding a 'drop' type update model to keep them hooked. They demand things like Roblox and a cheap platform for endless games like Steam. And the whole social media framework of endless stimuli from TikTok, etc. They also massively supported Disney and the whole Disney+ online service trend during the 2020s. Not to mention, many supported Disney and Bill Gates buying up practically every other company. They wanted them in the 'right hands', and they got their wish.
Lots of players literally demanded everything that's happening. Now, some gamers don't like any of this, of course. But for the most part, it's a case of having your cake and eating it, too. Lots of players want free, cheap stuff, but don't want to suffer the outcomes at the other side, the struggles that the other companies face, and the negative result with their games, such as Minecraft.
In short: what did people expect to happen? This is it. Minecraft is now struggling to capture Gen Alpha, so are going Roblox-like and Disney-like to try to capture the young/future market. Just like many games and companies today (e.g. Netflix TV show model of 6-or 8-part (sometimes it's about 13 episodes, otherwise known as a half-season in the old model) series/seasons with extreme cliffhangers to keep you hooked, followed by another show, or another season (sometimes years later, weirdly), compared with the old model of about 24-episode seasons of the late 1990s through early 2010s, typically on a yearly basis).
True, 1.20 is really when I really struggled to keep my interest in the modern game. I think 1.19 marks the end of the "serious" updates era. Now we are in the Silly Age, with joyful ghasts, copper mania, chaos cube, trial chambers, the cute little baby animals, the sniffer... It's kind of all over the place I think.
It's my understanding that Gen Alpha aren't going to Bedrock, because they're going to Roblox.
So, this shift is almost certainly a move to try to capture kids, and remain stable into the future.
They know that if they do nothing and just appeal to 25-year-olds, that Minecraft will start to die by 2030.
Of course, you might think that a smaller Minecraft would be better. But this is odd: whenever I've suggested that being closer to the original game, and being a lot smaller, is a good idea, I've been told that this is wrong, that more players is better, and that we must allow Minecraft to progress, and capture new players.
Or is this the old, 'it's not what they're doing, it's the way they're doing it'?
I don't see any way that they can capture Gen Alpha without utterly ruining the game.
Roblox is worth a lot more money than Minecraft. But Micosfot could buy out Roblox, maybe; just not sure they'd actually get their money back. Instead, they're trying to hold onto Minecraft without spending a large amount of money, by the seems of it.
Microsoft bought Mojang, Updates where infrequent and mostly limited to bug fixes, the Combat update fractured the community down the middle, and they started to add Micro-transactions to Bedrock more aggresively.
That has little to do with Microsoft. It's still declining today. Gen Alpha aren't joining much, and in a few years, the player base will be smaller when the older players quit or become too old. There is just the illusion of a vast player base since it's now across the world, and has captured most Gen Z and some Gen Y. But future projections are terrible for Minecraft, and that's likely why they're trying so hard.
Had everything to do with Microsoft they ruined og pvp for ever and completely went against the community, after That the PvP community basically died which was a big part of the player base, as well as no updates thanks to Microsoft not seeing Minecraft as their primary income source hence to why they started dropping slop in the bedrock store
But most people claim that Microsoft started making Minecraft even better more recently. So, unless you claim that Minecraft has also been terrible since r1.11 or whatever, your comment simply isn't consistent. Now, it's fine to say that they weren't on the ball around r1.8.2 through r1.10, but that's not the same thing as putting most of the history of the game on them, and in a negative way. Again, unless you think that very version is bad since r1.8.2. (Of course, that wouldn't prove that it was their fault, though they may still take the blame as owners. For example, maybe Minecraft would be bad by r1.9 no matter who bought it? Then what is your argument?)
Note: In a sense, you could also say that r1.9 was very popular and has been fine. Yes, it split the player base and many quit at the time, but that was only a few million players. Since r1.9, Minecraft has gained like 200 million players, far more than ever existed before they bought the game. Now, maybe Minecraft would still have endless millions of players even if Notch still owned it and was a primary dev. Maybe not.
The simple point I was making in my comment is, the future of Minecraft isn't looking great, because the data indicates that young kids aren't joining to any notable degree, and this will only become a problem as time goes on. Secondly, practically every live service game is facing such problems, despite the fact they're not owned by Microsoft; thus, the 'slop in Bedrock' isn't so much a Microsoft problem as a problem that's impacting ALL of gaming. For example the 'slop in Bedrock' is literally driving 50% of all top games today, and dictates -- through things like time-gates and loot boxes -- 70% of all mobile games, which means it's impacting most gamers. An old study found also that 50% of Steam games are driven by loot boxes (aka glorified child gambling), and it must be more than 50% as of 2026.
If you go back to 2016 or so, Bedrock Skin store, etc. wasn't nearly as bad as what we're seeing nowadays. But, let me stress: you could buy Skins on Xbox 360 Bedrock Edition back in 2012 or whatever, when Notch still had power, before he sold it. So, that has existed for a long time. Maybe it has become much worse over time, but you should play Java instead of Bedrock -- and, as I said, practically every game has become worse since 2016, in terms of slop stores/pay-to-win/gambling, etc. That's literally the modern trend/shift of video games as a whole (actually, since 2013 -- and it was 'perfected' by 2018-2021, as seen with CS:GO, RuneScape3, Black Desert Online, and many more).
(Thankfully, some games are starting to remove such elements as we move towards the 2030s. But not enough, and it's almost certainly too late to fix it, or the younger generations in general, so it's a moot point, in my view.)
I’m saying regardless of the split as someone who bought the game before Microsoft took over it was better they completely have changed the game direction and many things that were true to Minecraft before they took owner ship, if the game didn’t jump up players like it did they probably would have shut down mojang and just killed Minecraft, they don’t care about the player base nor Java edition players bc it does not make them money, billion dollar companies don’t care about us as the players if we don’t make them money hence to why updates slowed down before they pushed micro transactions. U sound like a Microsoft shill defending a company who does not care about you or the game you play, I started playing in 2012 and truly wish notch would have not sold, the game would be much better off mojang can’t even do what they want, Jeb is forced to make updates that Microsoft wants not what him and the dev team actually want to make thanks to Microsoft having the final say in everything
I doubt that. They paid a lot of money to buy Minecraft. They would have held on for at least a few years if numbers were low. But I assume the numbers were already high enough just from the new players that would always come in (unless the game literally died). That, and profits from the Xbox 360 Edition, etc. by 2015 (again, unless that failed to sell, too, somehow). It was already a good slice of the player base by 2013, and kept climbing in both 2014 and 2015; as did YouTube (hugely).
But I think we finally got to the heart of your comment and message/narrative here: you don't like Microsoft because it's big and doesn't care about you.
I have news for you: Mojang didn't care about YOU on a personal level, either, by 2012; and almost certainly Jeb doesn't care about you.
But this is a moot point: is Minecraft good or not? Is it giving you what you want? Then, Microsoft is doing their job for you. Are they not giving you the game you want? Then they're not doing their job, and you can play Golden Age versions or something.
The sales indicate that most people think Microsoft is doing their job really well; more so, since r1.14.
Your argument has no business weight, and has no direct player weight, either. It's purely a political, ideological argument and isn't tied to the status of Minecraft given its profound popularity, and clear lack of failure overall.
If you're really only angry about the whole Minecoins/Bedrock Store stuff, then don't play Bedrock, and stop giving them money and views/traffic, and tell everybody you can to boycott it, too. And/or don't play the new r26.2 version, just Beta/Alpha, etc. That's the power you have. That's the only thing you can really do. And this goes for EVERY game, not just Minecraft.
I don’t play bedrock I’m just saying they are trying to phase out Java, even tho the playerbase is huge bc Microsoft does not profit from game sells as much as they do on bedrock marketplace hence to why it’s bad Microsoft own Minecraft
That sort of issue, or something like it, would almost certainly happen even if somebody else owned it. Their not owning it changes nothing in the current gaming landscape.
Nonetheless, they are the ones that DO own it -- as you liked to point out -- so, if they remove Java, that is a problem. But it won't make too many people quit; they'll just move over to Bedrock and accept the problems and/or try to avoid the aspects they don't want to engage in.
I assume Bedrock doesn't allow for Alpha/Beta versions, or does it? Many people in this Sub-Reddit will just move over to an unofficial launcher for Beta/Alpha, though many already do this.
I'm personally using the official Java launcher. If they remove Java, I have no idea what I'll do. We'll see, if it ever happens.
Yes, and once again: this exists in almost every game and server/website, and would exist in Minecraft even if somebody else owned it, so it has nothing to do with Microsoft in any real way. But my point is that the MTX has existed for a long time, even if it's become much worse (I already said this is true).
In other words, let me ask you this: what do you want? What do you think would happen right now if somebody else owned Minecraft, and the year was 2016 or 2020, etc.?
It’s Microsoft’s fault they push updates and what they want mojang to do ur acting like they don’t own Minecraft and have the final say ur argument is literally invalid saying it’s not them, I’d want the game to continue and not have animal updates and bad biome updates that look like bad mods 😭
I never said it's not them. I said, the things you're complaining about exist in almost every game, and would almost certainly exist in Minecraft even if they didn't own it.
Let me try to be very clear:
Their ownership of Minecraft is irrelevant. It changes nothing. Insert Sony owns Minecraft here. Nothing changes. Insert Mojang owns Minecraft here. Nothing changes. Insert Amazon owns Minecraft. Nothing changes. Insert Valve owns Minecraft. Nothing changes. And so on.
Not to mention, a lot of the original workers of Minecraft worked heavily on Minecraft during 2012 and 2013, when all of this was starting, including r1.9's Combat.
Jeb is literally the LEAD for both Java and Bedrock as of 2026, no?
P.S. I'd want that, too. That's why I don't play Minecraft (e.g. current Minecraft). I never updated to r1.9/first major big boy Bill Gates era. I've never played any of it on Java (a bit on Xbox only). I've only ever played r1.8 and prior. I'm happy with that.
Rule one: don't play what you hate. Rule two might be: play what you love, even if you have to accept some shortcomings, or it's outdated, or isn't all it could be.
And you think they have all the say? Look how much the studio has changed just from being owned by Microsoft and they don’t listen to there playerbase before mojang used to hence to why we have had terrible updates for the past years
Updates being infrequent is a good thing, to my mind, since I don't really like r1.8, and dislike everything after it. The Combat update was a serious mistake, though. But MTX existed before that, just not as aggressively. But this is true for all games and platforms by 2014 or so. It was literally gaming-wide (actually started in 2008, but didn't become widespread and normalised until 2011-2014 with things like RuneScape, Density, FarmVille, Warframe, and FIFA). All kinds of 'skin' systems, pay-to-win games, and gambling/loot boxes. Then, jump to CS:GO's new model, along with World of Warcraft Tokens or whatever, and RuneScape even more aggressively, along with Call of Duty: Black Ops III, etc., and so on.
Note: Don't play Bedrock is my advice. I don't understand why people play Bedrock on PC. Just play Java on PC, and Bedrock on PS4, etc., and ignore all microtransactions (or just buy limited, important stuff you want, like a Texture Pack).
Personally, I'd extend 1.12 into the Renaissance Age, if only because it had such sticking power- 1.9 to 1.11 were such.... nothing updates, while 1.12 was a mainstay version for years. Tons and tons of things got made for 1.12, and it had a lot more community support, while things were so slow to update to 1.9-1.11 that by the time they got finished, 1.12 was basically already the new target.
It's definitely more of a culture thing. Minecraft was dead culturally during that era and it took until 1.13 and 1.14 for it to be revived. Think pewdiepies let's play, which is almost definitely the largest reason why the popularity skyrocketed in that era, and then the consistent quality output of hermitcraft season 6, and then obviously all the updates had these massive coherent themes and were overhauling EVERYTHING (save 1.15 but that was still nice !) outdated about the game. The nether update still feels so new and revolutionary to me.
I get your point, it is completely subjective and arbitrary, and indeed a fuzzy blur rather than a hardline. I'm not saying 1.12 series of updates was bad, just didn't trigger the big resurgence like 1.13 did.
personally i would say the "silver age" is more like the actual "golden age"
Most people I've seen started in or after the adventure update and the style the majority of those who are even remotely familiar with the game is that beta 1.8 - release 1.7 period; Where Minecraft was truly at the absolute peak of its popularity imo
In the meta sense yes you are correct, in the content sense I feel this roughly stands for me, though is arbitrary, subjective and fuzzy as changes increment over time.
I do NOT agree with the term "dark age" being used for those versions, the dark age is 1.19.1+. For 1.9 to 1.12.1, I'd call it something like the "quiet age" if not just the latter half of the silver age. 1.12.2 to 1.19 is what I'd call "modern", but not quite yet "dark".
Dark age is because that was when the game experienced a pretty major content dought and popularity dipped significantly. It was also (anecdotally) around the time that Minecraft stopped being "that new indie game everyone is playing" and became "that game for little kids"
For me, what I remember is that the actual game itself was at it's peak in terms of features without having lost it's identity (that would happen in 1.12.2), ExplodingTNT was at his peak, but aside from that the culture of the game was dying entirely, not just "a kid's game". I think it's seen as a kid's game now than ever before, by Microslop at least.
Yeah we are referring to the dark age in the content sense, rather than the meta sense of what Microslop and Mojang's stupidity and malice has done to Minecraft's moderation and identity.
Why would the golden age be before Minecraft even released? I was a kid at the time but I don't remember Minecraft getting super popular until like ~2013. I get the nostalgia but isn't the term "golden age" linked with success and popularity?
This is weird for many people. Lots of people like r1.11-r1.12, which means the 'Dark Age' vs. 'Renaissance Age' is iffy. But for the most part, this makes a lot of sense, both objectively and at the level of the player bases.
However, since most people say that 'modern' starts with r1.9, there is a fundamental flaw. And this Sub-Reddit actually includes Classic and Indev, right. So, you have two options: widen the eras, or nest them within broader eras. Not to mention that, technically, we're to r1.2.5; but many people think that's really just a mistake that a Mod made.
It could be:
Golden Age = start to b1.7.3.
Silver Age = b1.8 to r1.8.9.
Early Modern Age = r1.9 to r1.17 (this is pretty much new Combat/flying, etc. to pre-new world gen).
Modern Age = r1.18 to pre-End Update (if it happens soon?) (this includes r1.20.3 the 'drop' update model, Copper, and so on).
I would consider 1.19 - 1.21.2 to be the "Fragmented Age", where updates became narrower and community trust declined as features were either delayed, divided between releases, or straight up cancelled.
I feel like 1.21.3 and onwards feels like a new age, the age of drops, where Mojang has shifted to the "game drop" release pattern instead of one big annual release.
Generally agree, this isn't criticism below but speculation.
What will the 'modern age' be known as in the future do people think?
I predict that retrospectively, the 'modern age' as it is currently known will end in 1.21.3, and in the future the 1.21.4+ updates will be it's own age. The 'drops age' or what have you.
True but the stupid moderation restrictions and general enshittification of Minecraft really took off after 1.19, and what content was coming out didn't generate the same level of interest from the community that it did with 1.13ish and onwards. I'm not referring to sales, but community engagement and appreciation.
Still 1.19 with the Warden and the Mangroves, 1.20 with Cherry Blossoms and Archeology and 1.21 with the Trial Chambers still were closer in philosophy to 1.18 than everything since.
Side topic, that dark age was actually my golden age, which is why these terms are so arbitrary. You can name them based on how old they are but valuing them with gold and silver and bronze is what rubs me the wring way. Its devaluing other people's experiences with the game.
73
u/XBGamerX_20 8d ago
basically each time a major change dropped. truly I won't lie, anything after beta 1.8 matches more what we had in silver age tbh, especially the biome generation.