Ahs19526 Posted July 17, 2012 Posted July 17, 2012 Hello. I'm having a large amount of trouble with texturepacks. I'm trying to use texturepacks like Sphax PureBDcraft, to no avail. I can't get it to work, no matter how many times I try, and yes, I AM USING THE PATCHES FOR IT! Every time, I get errors where Rei's Minimap fails, Iron Chests and condensers lose there textures, even normal chests are affected. Nano suit armor starts to lose parts of it's texture, and I am pissed off by the fact that it won't work. Frankly, I think someone should make a texturepack that has built in support for tekkit. If anyone knows of such a texturepack, I would love to hear about it.
Xylord Posted July 17, 2012 Posted July 17, 2012 Hello. I'm having a large amount of trouble with texturepacks. I'm trying to use texturepacks like Sphax PureBDcraft, to no avail. I can't get it to work, no matter how many times I try, and yes, I AM USING THE PATCHES FOR IT! Every time, I get errors where Rei's Minimap fails, Iron Chests and condensers lose there textures, even normal chests are affected. Nano suit armor starts to lose parts of it's texture, and I am pissed off by the fact that it won't work. Frankly, I think someone should make a texturepack that has built in support for tekkit. If anyone knows of such a texturepack, I would love to hear about it. Right, now, there is only Sphax. Dokucraft might be coming soon, but I'm not sure when.
Ahs19526 Posted July 17, 2012 Author Posted July 17, 2012 Well I think it's time for something new. However, when it comes to coming up with artistic ideas, and when it comes to make those ideas into reality, I'm as useless as a piece of clay. I don't know how to use the tools required, and even if I did, I have little artistic talent. I am open to recommendations to try out existing packs, though.
Xylord Posted July 17, 2012 Posted July 17, 2012 Well I think it's time for something new. However, when it comes to coming up with artistic ideas, and when it comes to make those ideas into reality, I'm as useless as a piece of clay. I don't know how to use the tools required, and even if I did, I have little artistic talent. I am open to recommendations to try out existing packs, though. Well, clay is pretty useful. I don't know what I'd do if I didn't had my alloy furnace.
Ahs19526 Posted July 18, 2012 Author Posted July 18, 2012 Well, clay is pretty useful. I don't know what I'd do if I didn't had my alloy furnace. Or tungsten.
jakj Posted July 19, 2012 Posted July 19, 2012 All you need is http://www.gimp.org/ and http://www.google.com/search?q=creative+commons+seamless+textures to make a texture pack for Minecraft.
NorthAntrim Posted July 19, 2012 Posted July 19, 2012 Soartex Fanver has a lot of things in it which are included in Tekkit, mostly IC and BuildCraft stuff, but they are still adding more things.
Beer Posted July 19, 2012 Posted July 19, 2012 jakj, thanks for that link to Torley. I've been working on building a texture pack from the ground up. I'll take any seamless image database because making them seamless is annoying.
jakj Posted July 19, 2012 Posted July 19, 2012 I wonder how much demand for a 256x pack for Technic there would be. Not many boxes could manage that big a pack with all those mods. Even I can't get 60fps doing that.
Beer Posted July 19, 2012 Posted July 19, 2012 That's why I'm only doing a 32x pack. I can normally run 64x with a handful of mods no problem. But with everything in Tekkit/Technic I can still play but with some pretty nasty stuttering. Felt 32x also kind of retains that Minecraft feel, but with a bit more depth. Of course I'm the one making it so it's not going to be that good. I'm about as much of an artist as I am a rocket scientist.
jakj Posted July 19, 2012 Posted July 19, 2012 I tried a 32x pack once, but it just felt icky, almost like somehow the normal Minecraft look was distorted and fuzzy. (No, it wasn't the pack: It was a good pack.) I need at least 64x to convince my brain I'm looking at something entirely different, so it won't constantly be comparing the two.
Beer Posted July 20, 2012 Posted July 20, 2012 Well when/if I ever get this done, I'd still like your feedback. I've always admired your blatant honesty. I'm not expecting much praise. Given that I'm doing it, it's 32x, and I'm doing it, it's being called the Absolute Crap Texture Pack.
Ahs19526 Posted July 23, 2012 Author Posted July 23, 2012 Well, I currently am using a 64x texturepack, and I prefer 128x, so my eyes aren't telling me there are pixels everywhere, which wrecks perfectly good textures.
okamikk Posted July 24, 2012 Posted July 24, 2012 Well, I currently am using a 64x texturepack, and I prefer 128x, so my eyes aren't telling me there are pixels everywhere, which wrecks perfectly good textures. but there are pixels everywhere.... every time you look at a computer screen, billions upon billions of tiny pixels eyes are staring at you... forever.... and ever.....
Ahs19526 Posted July 24, 2012 Author Posted July 24, 2012 but there are pixels everywhere.... every time you look at a computer screen, billions upon billions of tiny pixels eyes are staring at you... forever.... and ever..... I know that! it's just that I prefer the pixels to be as close to invisible as possible!
Rickmary Posted July 31, 2012 Posted July 31, 2012 *Looks both ways* I am silently working on a tex pack, slowly but surely. It is 16x16. The style is post-apocalyptic and it still retains a good Minecrafty feel while still having a very distinct look. Atm I am fighting with mycelium on what to do with it
jakj Posted July 31, 2012 Posted July 31, 2012 Why are you talking about a 16x16 texture pack in a thread asking for an HD texture pack?
Xylord Posted July 31, 2012 Posted July 31, 2012 Why are you talking about a 16x16 texture pack in a thread asking for an HD texture pack? Well, in my world, there's 4x4 (Low quality), 8x8 (Medium quality) and 16x16 (High quality). Is that wrong, by any chance?
jakj Posted July 31, 2012 Posted July 31, 2012 Well, in my world, there's 4x4 (Low quality), 8x8 (Medium quality) and 16x16 (High quality). Is that wrong, by any chance? I don't know what world is your world, but in the world of Minecraft, 16x16 (as in, pixels of width and height) is the default resolution, and HD technically is anything larger than that, but most people consider HD to start at 64x or even 128x. The highest I've ever seen is 512x, though 256x is the maximum that most high-end systems can handle, considering Minecraft's lack of optimization.
Xylord Posted July 31, 2012 Posted July 31, 2012 I don't know what world is your world, but in the world of Minecraft, 16x16 (as in, pixels of width and height) is the default resolution, and HD technically is anything larger than that, but most people consider HD to start at 64x or even 128x. The highest I've ever seen is 512x, though 256x is the maximum that most high-end systems can handle, considering Minecraft's lack of optimization. Hehe, the "Is that wrong" was supposed to denote my sarcasm, purpose at which it failed, for some reason Anyway, you made me curious; what kind of madmen would put together a texture pack at 512x? One those photo-realist ones, I guess? May I have a name :)
Xylord Posted July 31, 2012 Posted July 31, 2012 http://lmgtfy.com/?q=minecraft 512x texture pack Sniff, no need to make me feel like an absolute Internet noob XD Though, that was much easier to find than I would have thought. Might try running one of those with Vanilla, they're saying 8GB would be about right. But I won't even start dreaming about having this Technic Not like there's a mod-compatible version anyway.
jakj Posted July 31, 2012 Posted July 31, 2012 RAM isn't really the issue as it is Minecraft's CPU-bound nature. I have 8 GiB RAM and a3.4 GHz CPU and I can't manage 60fps on a 128x pack. Vanilla can run anything. considering vanilla has bugger-all in it.
Recommended Posts