Also, the official website is down again. Given the lack of interest from the original creator and the community, is it safe to say support for the pack is now dead?
I have used Dokucraft before for its quality pixel art textures but 32x32 and above just looks off. Their resolutions are high enough to accentuate the ugly blockiness of the world, something a lot of Minecraft clones try too hard to beautify their games with but backfire when they look like poorly modeled 3D games up close. It gets worse when you throw in a high screen resolution and shader mods. They just end up looking like window dressing for what is fundamentally a crude design choice.
I was drawn to Minecraft exactly because of the low-res textures and its perfect fit with that blocky voxel design, and anything that compromises with that concept undermines that visual balance.
I might try out the BNW pack, but again, I have to take into account the level of customization as well.
That's pretty much the same reason I've been keeping track of this still.
Made the switch to Painterly way back in November 2010 and never looked back. No other texture packs that have come and go since then has been able to replicate Painterly's level of customization and 16x16 low-fi aesthetics.
If Painterly is dead in the water, it looks like I don't have incentive to play the game anymore. No way I'm moving back to the ugly default pack, and most current quality custom packs cater primarily to 32x32 resolutions and higher, too ill-fitting for the low-resolution voxel world design.
The problem is there is no official word on whether it's being discontinued or not for over a year there has been minimal activity since his last update tweets.
Perhaps contacting Rhodex by e-mail for confirmation would be good.
Here's a block, item and mob list I ripped off the 1.9 wiki page to start. Note that I haven't covered UI elements and changes on existing assets, but I'll try to compile as much as I find on these later.
BLOCKS
Chorus flower
Chorus plant
Dragon head
End gateway
End rod
End stone brick
Frosted Ice
Grass path
Purpur block
Purpur pillar
Purpur stairs
Purpur slab
Structure block
ITEMS
Beetroot
Beetroot soup
Beetroot seeds
Chorus fruit
Dragon's breath
Elytra
End crystal
Lingering potion
Water splash potion
Popped chorus fruit
Potion of Luck
Shield
Shulker spawn egg
Spectral Arrow
Tipped Arrow
Uncraftable potion
So Rhodox hasn't updated with any news since September 2014, and there are no signs of textures for new items in 1.9. Does this mean this texture pack has been discontinued?
Now that it's verified that these smooth stone slabs have have been replaced by the quartz slabs, guess this thread way as well be used to voice concerns about its removal. It is a legitamate building material after all.
Now that's it's updated to 13w02b, your post still doesn't prove anything. The list didn't normally list 43:7/44:7 as smooth stone slabs in previous versions anyway and still doesn't, so there's no way to know if the list shows that the blocks are still available.
The list is still stuck at 13w01a (I happen to be waiting for that list to update), so it doesn't have any of the quartz blocks on. It doesn't list the smooth stone double slabs either, but /give commands and mods like TooManyItems still make it available in pre-13w02a jars.
I thought the nether brick slabs already replaced that block.
Nether brick slab-based materials took up 43:6 and 44:6 in 12w49a, leading to the stone-based 43:6 and 44:6 being reassigned to 43:7 and 44:7. And then quartz-based slab blocks in 13w02a took up 43:7 and 44:7, but there are no ID reassigns for the smooth stone slabs, effectively removing them.
If it was possible to reassign these blocks in 12w49a, what has happen to them in 13w02a may be seen as suspicious. Again, I like to know if Jeb or Dinnerbone actually confirmed that the smooth stone double slabs will be reinstated in future snapshots.
0
No. The pack hasn't been updated since 1.8.
Also, the official website is down again. Given the lack of interest from the original creator and the community, is it safe to say support for the pack is now dead?
0
I'm working on manually putting together my personal pack, but it's going to take forever.
There's going to be even more holes to fill up once 1.10 is released.
2
At least he's sticking around with the project.
Life has priority. He can take his time with it.
0
I have used Dokucraft before for its quality pixel art textures but 32x32 and above just looks off. Their resolutions are high enough to accentuate the ugly blockiness of the world, something a lot of Minecraft clones try too hard to beautify their games with but backfire when they look like poorly modeled 3D games up close. It gets worse when you throw in a high screen resolution and shader mods. They just end up looking like window dressing for what is fundamentally a crude design choice.
I was drawn to Minecraft exactly because of the low-res textures and its perfect fit with that blocky voxel design, and anything that compromises with that concept undermines that visual balance.
I might try out the BNW pack, but again, I have to take into account the level of customization as well.
0
That's pretty much the same reason I've been keeping track of this still.
Made the switch to Painterly way back in November 2010 and never looked back. No other texture packs that have come and go since then has been able to replicate Painterly's level of customization and 16x16 low-fi aesthetics.
If Painterly is dead in the water, it looks like I don't have incentive to play the game anymore. No way I'm moving back to the ugly default pack, and most current quality custom packs cater primarily to 32x32 resolutions and higher, too ill-fitting for the low-resolution voxel world design.
0
The problem is there is no official word on whether it's being discontinued or not for over a year there has been minimal activity since his last update tweets.
Perhaps contacting Rhodex by e-mail for confirmation would be good.
1
Here's a block, item and mob list I ripped off the 1.9 wiki page to start. Note that I haven't covered UI elements and changes on existing assets, but I'll try to compile as much as I find on these later.
0
It happened just shy of the 1.9 update too.
I'm beginning to think Rhodox abandoned the project and the official site just went on autopilot until the server was disconnected due to unpaid fees.
Anyone managed to archive all the textures?
0
So Rhodox hasn't updated with any news since September 2014, and there are no signs of textures for new items in 1.9. Does this mean this texture pack has been discontinued?
1
0
Now that's it's updated to 13w02b, your post still doesn't prove anything. The list didn't normally list 43:7/44:7 as smooth stone slabs in previous versions anyway and still doesn't, so there's no way to know if the list shows that the blocks are still available.
0
Look again.
The list is still stuck at 13w01a (I happen to be waiting for that list to update), so it doesn't have any of the quartz blocks on. It doesn't list the smooth stone double slabs either, but /give commands and mods like TooManyItems still make it available in pre-13w02a jars.
0
Could someone verify this? If it's true, there should be a new damage value for the smooth stone double slabs.
For reference, here are the data values for all quartz-based blocks:
Quartz single slab: 43:7
Quartz double slabs: 44:7
Block of quartz: 155:0
Chiseled quartz block: 155:1
Pillar quartz block: 155:2
Quartz stairs: 156:0
0
Nether brick slab-based materials took up 43:6 and 44:6 in 12w49a, leading to the stone-based 43:6 and 44:6 being reassigned to 43:7 and 44:7. And then quartz-based slab blocks in 13w02a took up 43:7 and 44:7, but there are no ID reassigns for the smooth stone slabs, effectively removing them.
If it was possible to reassign these blocks in 12w49a, what has happen to them in 13w02a may be seen as suspicious. Again, I like to know if Jeb or Dinnerbone actually confirmed that the smooth stone double slabs will be reinstated in future snapshots.
0
So basically, the quartz blocks will be assigned new damage values so they don't overwrite existing blocks? Is there a source to confirm this?