Would it be necessary if I change the sprite for 0.12 to hunger since it's another major feature in the update, or is leaving it at the nether portal sprite more soothing --MarioProtIV (talk) 00:21, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
- While both are major features, the Nether is likely the more anticipated feature for most users, so I would leave the portal as the icon. –KnightMiner t/c 01:58, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
What sprite is more pleasing for 0.11?
Thoughts? --MarioProtIV (talk) 16:09, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
Because of the way some of the updates to Windows 10 are ordered, they are being placed in the same slot as the 0.x versions for MCPE, which I find misleading and inconsistent. My suggestion is either to add a section at the top for Windows 10 only updates, like this:
[Navbox proposal removed in order to remove unwanted links to incorrect page names. View this page's History to view.]
Each 0.1x.0 version that is only on Windows 10 is in bold to not have confusion with 0.1x.0.x. Or, we could not add it, but instead create a separate template for this, shown below:
[Navbox proposal removed in order to remove unwanted links to incorrect page names. View this page's History to view.]
Please let me know what you think. --MarioProtIV (talk) 23:02, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
- I believe this looks much neater and is in better accordance with the style guide. TySkyo (talk) 19:54, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
[Navbox proposal removed in order to remove unwanted links to incorrect page names. View this page's History to view.]
- @TySkyo: What do you mean, "style guide"? Did you actually read it? It says nothing about nav box designs.
- As for splitting, I have stated in the past that I oppose splitting them, and my mind is not changed by discussing this in a fourth place. Dinoguy has also now stated that he'd like all further discussion on this topic to be moved to MCT:PORTAL#Pocket Edition Alpha 0.12. –KnightMiner t/c 20:31, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
@MarioProtIV: Can you please explain how marking the Windows 10 Edition updates (and not marking any other exclusive updates), along with placing updates out of both numerical and chronological order (unlike all other updates) is "more consistent with other updates". –KnightMiner t/c 16:12, 10 September 2015 (UTC)
- The italics I don't really know why I did that, but for the order, it doesnt seem proper to have a minor version on top, major in the middle, and minor again at the bottom. --MarioProtIV (talk) 16:27, 10 September 2015 (UTC)
- This conversation came to my attention as a result of your unexplained revert of my changes for the second time here.
- @MarioProtIV: 0.12.0 was not a minor release. In fact, 0.12.1 was built upon it and, with the addition of a proper mobile interface and other universal tweaks, was released for Windows 10 following 0.12.0. 0.12.0.1 utilized many features from the 0.12.1 beta, but still preceded the release of 0.12.1 for the Windows 10 Edition.
- –Illidicia (t+c) 13:46, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
- If there are no further objections, I will reorder the 0.12 versions by release, in ascending order. ―Illidicia (t+c) 20:39, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
I honestly don't see a reason to include the "Versions" line in the version navbox, as it can simply be in the PE info template. As for PC that's different because of the way it is styled. --MarioProtIV (talk) 17:15, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
- Because this navbox is "Pocket Edition versions", so why not include versions? It is useful enough information and fits well along side other links like the development cycle, plus the PC template includes it (of which styling is not a reason to remove the content, especially since the only differences in styling are the Computer edition has a few extra types of updates and collapsible development stages)
- Also, if you think the other versions shouldn't be there, why do you leave the Windows 10 link? It either should say as a version, or be removed as a version, as you can hardly argue it is a separate development cycle after it getting the same 0.13.0 build as the rest of PE. –KnightMiner t/c 04:59, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
Since the 0.15 builds are gonna be in two phases, I think making the 0.15 part split into two subsections, listing the builds for the Realms phase on top, while the main builds would be in the subsection below.
[Navbox proposal removed in order to remove unwanted links to incorrect page names. View this page's History to view.]
Thoughts? If this was put into effect, it would only be after the main builds start coming out. --MarioProtIV (talk) 21:02, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
- Would like an opinion on this soon imo. --MarioProtIV (talk) 22:47, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
What should the sprite be? I'm thinking either ocean monuments, guardian or wither since they are all big features. MarioProtIV (talk) 04:20, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
- 👁 Image
Agree with the Wither Idea (👁 EntitySprite wither.png: Sprite image for wither in Minecraft
). Ocean monuments are a major addition, but (at least in my opinion) would clash with the other sprites. 👁 Image
TySkyo (Talk•Contribs) 20:59, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
Ender Dragon 👁 EntitySprite ender-dragon.png: Sprite image for ender-dragon in Minecraft
, Ender Pearl 👁 ItemSprite ender-pearl.png: Sprite image for ender-pearl in Minecraft
or something else? – DelboyDylan (talk|contribs) 16:51, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
- I vote for the Ender dragon sprite. --SamGamgee55 (talk) 22:15, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
- I vote Ender dragon too. – Sealbudsman talk/contr 03:11, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
- I vote ender dragon. Let's do that since 4 say ender dragon 👁 EntitySprite ender-dragon.png: Sprite image for ender-dragon in Minecraft
--Wyatt2050 (talk) 11:29, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
(The timing may be early…) I support 👁 EntitySprite llama.png: Sprite image for llama in Minecraft
Llama, what does everyone else think?--Beans1512Talk/Contribs 07:05, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
- I like llama as well – Sealbudsman talk/contr 11:26, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
- ( ◠‿◠ )--Beans1512Talk/Contribs 11:41, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
- My vote is the map sprite (like the one for 1.11)--SamGamgee55 (talk) 15:58, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
- Done! Storymodefan0315 (talk) 16:24, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
- @SamGamgee55: I think it is strange that it is the same as other editions.
- @Storymodefan0315: Is not it too early to decide?--Beans1512Talk/Contribs 16:27, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
- There are already multiple development versions. If anything unknown is added, it would not be major enough to use as a sprite.
- The update is called the Discovery Update, and I would consider explorer maps a tool for discovering new land. The Blobs👁 Image
13:51, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
- 👁 Image
Agree: I support the 👁 ItemSprite woodland-explorer-map.png: Sprite image for woodland-explorer-map in Minecraft
woodland explorer maps.--Beans1512Talk/Contribs 01:41, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
- 👁 Image
Done The Blobs👁 Image
02:34, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
- @Beans1512: I notice you are removing the sprite because the version has not been released yet. Can you explain more? The Blobs👁 Image
03:22, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
- This story will be another edition, when I added glazed terracotta to Template:Computer versions as sprite of PC 1.12, I was asked Sealbudsman to delete the sprite because "1.12 has not been released yet". I deleted the sprite of MCPE 1.1 in imitation it.--Beans1512Talk/Contribs 03:30, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
some versions ago, there used to be edit wars over these sprites. At some point I created a talk page entry and basically told people, please, talk it over. And with the next version people liked that I guess so they did it again. And so there grew up a tradition of voting on the sprite, and talking about it, and waiting until the release before the sprite went live.
That's how that started.
It doesn't really have to be that way. We could put sprites up early, there's no rule against it. It doesn't hurt anything. The most important thing is that people don't get all upset over sprites, that they talk it out on the talk pages, as with any other thing. All these reverts lately seem to be over something that's not really a rule, and we're all good faith editors here, we're all reasonable people. So I just wanted to put that out there.. have a good weekend everyone. – Sealbudsman talk/contr 03:58, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you for your long reply. I undid my edits back earlier.
- But there is one thing I don't understand - Why undo sprite of PC only?--Beans1512Talk/Contribs 04:25, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
Please fix 1.0.7 has an article but the template doesn't show 1.0.7 Boorider7 (talk) 16:49, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
Done!--SamGamgee55 (talk) 04:00, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
At the moment it says
1.0.3 build 1
1.0.4 build 1 build 2
1.0.5 build 1 build 2 build 3
1.0.6 build 1
which is too long. I propose we change it to
1.0.3 (build 1) • 1.0.4 (build 1 • build 2) • 1.0.5 (build 1 • build 2 • build 3) • 1.0.6 (build 1)
Thoughts? – Nixinova • 👁 Image
👁 Image
👁 Image
• 20:00, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
- That might look good. Want to do a demo in your userspace? – Sealbudsman talk/contr 21:03, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
- I've edited it in my sandbox: User:Nixinova/Sandbox/Pocket – Nixinova • 👁 Image
👁 Image
👁 Image
• 21:08, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
- Oh, yes. I was thinking that, in addition to the 1.0.x section, there would be many other opportunities for compressing. But looking at it, 1.0.x is the only one, really. Thanks for making the demo, and sorry to ask you for that. Anyway I like it and think it should go in. – Sealbudsman talk/contr 14:23, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
- 👁 Image
Support The Blobs👁 Image
14:49, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
(The timing may be early…) I support 👁 BlockSprite stained-glass.png: Sprite image for stained-glass in Minecraft
Stained Glass, what does everyone else think? --Beans1512 Talk/Contribs 06:32, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
- I do not think of stained glass as an important addition. Instead, I would propose that sprite should be a banner. The Blobs👁 Image
14:23, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
- I'm in favour of the logo of xbox one, refering to the cross-platform gameplay.a20001017Talk 23:34, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
- 👁 Image
Support more so than the banner. The Blobs👁 Image
03:36, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
- 👁 Image
Support How about adding Switch and xbox logos? :) --Beans1512 Talk / Contribs 07:39, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
- This is my suggestion #1.
- This is Blobs2's suggestion #1.
- This is a20001017's suggestion #1.
- This is my suggestion #2.
- For your reference ;) --Beans1512 Talk / Contribs 11:24, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
I'd like to add "Update Aquatic".
--Mikanzukituyu02 (talk) 02:06, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
1.2.13 that introduced some of the Update Aquatic features. So is it frist build of Update Aquatic?
And here is my an idea.
Yfohdit (talk) 18:24, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
1.2.13 and 1.2.14 is still considered a part of 1.2 instead of Update Aquatic. They only added beta features for Update Aquatic and is incomplete. Thus, 1.2.13 and 1.2.14 should be moved to Better Together Update. Skylord wars (talk) 05:32, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
Currently the "build 8" doesn't redirect to the page Bedrock_Edition_1.2.20.1, should the page be moved to match the redirect or should the redirect change to match the page location? jjlr (talk) 08:28, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
- It seems that at least 1.2.20.1 is Build 8.--Mikanzukituyu02 (talk) 12:19, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
- It would appear that someone moved the previous UA build 1 (1.2.13 build 2) out of Update Aquatic due to not having UA features, then moved UA builds 2-7 to 1-6, but didn't move "build 8" (1.2.20 build 1), for some reason?
- In any case, the line between 1.2 and Update Aquatic seems to be blurry at best... - Princess Nightmoon (👁 Talk
👁 Contributions
) 12:54, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
- How about grouping the updates by the actual version numbers (like all the other sections), instead of just "build [number]"? - Princess Nightmoon (👁 Talk
👁 Contributions
) 13:17, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
[Navbox proposal removed in order to remove unwanted links to incorrect page names. View this page's History to view.]
Marioprotvi, where exactly are you seeing "build 10" in-game? I can only find "beta 1.5.0.0" at the top, and "v1.5.0.0" in the bottom corner of the title screen. - Princess Nightmoon (👁 Talk
👁 Contributions
) 16:25, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
- It is the same as the reason why 1.2.20.1 made "build 8" because it was written "build 10" in the game change log after updating 1.5.0.0.--Mikanzukituyu02 (talk) 23:46, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
1.2.14 is confusable, and it is hard to sort 1.2.15, 1.2.16(1.2.13.30). I think the format should be changed:
1.2.13 have Experimental Gameplay, so it have official version. 1.2.14 and 1.2.20 add something new directly, so I think it won`t have corresponding official version. If these versions really have official versions unfortunately, we can change it again.
[Navbox proposal removed in order to remove unwanted links to incorrect page names. View this page's History to view.]
--Jingji132 (talk) 14:36, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
- I mean, you may need to check the discussion on the community portal. Skylord wars (talk) 14:44, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
What is the 1.15 sprite being used? A brick wall? Seriously I have no idea what it is.73.208.227.101 15:04, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
- It is a border, from the Education Edition. The Blobs👁 Image
16:42, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
Today, the Copper Age released and was revealed to be 1.21.111, instead of 1.21.110.
All drops or major updates have ended in either .0 or .X0, so this is a new situation.
Should the Navbox still display 1.21.110 / The Copper Age as it currently does, or should we make it say 1.21.111 instead?
I was going to make the change, however I thought it'd be better to ask here than to assume. I also hope my question made sense, wasn't quite sure how to phrase it.
It's a minor change, but below is a (admittedly horrible) concept of this change and what would differ:
Joelfrom08 (talk) Joelfrom08 (talk) 16:28, 30 September 2025 (UTC)
- 1.21.110 does not exist at all, it never had. Every mention of .110 should be changed into .111, it's just tens, maybe even hundreds of pages that need to be changed. Will fix it soon. MinecraftBedrockPlayer7 (talk) (contribs) 👁 Image
16:30, 30 September 2025 (UTC)
- Alright, thank you. Just wanted to confirm before making sudden changes :) Joelfrom08 (talk) 16:33, 30 September 2025 (UTC)
- This navbox is probably the one place it shouldn't be changed, as the "1.21.110" currently present refers to the update cycle, not the version itself. 👁 align=top
Sightnado ( talk / contribs ) 16:31, 30 September 2025 (UTC)
- True, however technically 1.21.120 (and a potential 1.21.130 in the future) aren't really part of the 1.21.110 update cycle? Instead, they are part of the "The Copper Age" update cycle, which (thanks to Bedrock's amazing naming scheme) happened to start at 1.21.111. Joelfrom08 (talk) 16:35, 30 September 2025 (UTC)
- You can't really refer to an "update cycle". That only works for major updates, not this. The headers for game drops just say: "this is the release version of the drop, versions on the right are this update and following minor updates." A version like 1.21.120 sounds weird to be part of the ".110 update cycle". MinecraftBedrockPlayer7 (talk) (contribs) 👁 Image
17:23, 1 October 2025 (UTC)
- It's pretty clear these are effectively just major update cycles that Mojang refuses to properly number with a major version bump. And besides, Mojang literally called The Copper Age the "1.21.110 update" in the in-game announcement, it's clear what their stance on the issue would be. 👁 align=top
Sightnado ( talk / contribs ) 17:41, 1 October 2025 (UTC)
- Another thing I have just thought of regarding this, is that we need to decide on what decides the version displayed with the update name.
- If we base it off of the first preview, then Caves & Cliffs would be 1.16.230 and the Nether Update would be 1.15.0 for example.
- On the other hand, if we base it off of the first full version, we'd technically have to append
.0 to most versions, as there was never a 1.21, but a 1.21.0, for example.
- I don't know — probably overcomplicating this, but just a thought I wanted to throw in since I've already stirred up the topic for this specific drop. Joelfrom08 (talk) 16:54, 30 September 2025 (UTC)
- It's safe to assume the release will be the preview version minus the last number (eg 1.21.0.20 > 1.21.0, 1.21.120.20 > 1.21.120). That's how it's been for years now, even evidenced by the names of these numbers in options.txt. 1.21.111 was just an "incident" on Mojang's side, something that happens very rarely. MinecraftBedrockPlayer7 (talk) (contribs) 👁 Image
18:15, 30 September 2025 (UTC)
- Basing it off the last preview would work for most versions, but still wouldn't work for 1.4.0, since no betas tagged for 1.4 were ever actually released; they were all tagged for the unrelated 1.2.14 and the nonexistent 1.2.20. 👁 align=top
Sightnado ( talk / contribs ) 00:03, 4 October 2025 (UTC)
Thats quite the confusing range. What should be done here. Nixinova T ⁄ C 23:48, 17 December 2025 (UTC)
- Maybe "1.20–Mounts of Mayhem"? The 26.0 has to be in the same section as it's a hotfix for Mounts of Mayhem. ‑‑MinecraftExp123(talk|contribs) 02:40, 18 December 2025 (UTC)
- 26.0 is definetely not a hotfix for Mounts of Mayhem, nor are all those other minor updates. At most you could say that those are experimental releases of the next update. I think we should actually separate them to make them on the same indentation as game drops, that would easily fix this problem and prevent confusion. MinecraftBedrockPlayer7 (talk) (contribs) 👁 Image
08:36, 18 December 2025 (UTC)
- Minor updates are still children (subsequent releases) of their accompanying major/drop. So it doesn't really necessitate inclusion in the header nor a separate section (like how the header was still "–1.21" even through 1.21.11). Nixinova T ⁄ C 08:48, 18 December 2025 (UTC)
- Well, that's technically not true for these updates as they're all the same type (minor release), the only difference is that one is promoted and the other not. But I don't really know how you could implement something like that, so I think it's fine like how it's now, just put all versions under the previous named update (also because things like the panorama are still themed around that update). MinecraftBedrockPlayer7 (talk) (contribs) 👁 Image
08:51, 18 December 2025 (UTC)
- Majors don't exist anymore, so drop releases have taken that place. Ignore what the version number looks like now because Mojang's voided the semantics now. So 26.0 is a minor for the major 1.21.130. Nixinova T ⁄ C 08:53, 18 December 2025 (UTC)
- I am aware this is an incredibly confusing range, but Mojang has made it so and thus we cannot really avoid this without being inconsistent with the remainder of the navbox.
- Perhaps we put minor updates that have experimental content for the following content update under the later content update's section, but that both relies on 26.0 actually containing Drop 1 2026 content (not guaranteed) and the reorganization of the navbox to accommodate that not being more confusing than what this would actually solve. 👁 Image
Sightnado t | c 10:13, 21 December 2025 (UTC)
- I say we just ignore minor updates. We don't say "1.10–1.19.x" after all, just 1.10–1.19. So 1.20–1.21 covering 26.0 matches what the template already does. Nixinova T ⁄ C 11:44, 21 December 2025 (UTC)
