• 1

    posted a message on Dokucraft, The Saga Continues.
    Quote from Creator409»

    I dont like the boarders. the whole point of the concrete block is to have a solid homogeneous block. i know dokucraft strays a way from vanilla a little, but i feel we should keep with that.


    Thing is, after the next update, we'll have wool, hardened clay, and concrete all at the same time, and I think this is a good opportunity to have bordered (polished, in other mods) decorative blocks as a default. I can't remember what the pack defaults are for these blocks, but I'm currently using patterned grid wool and "cracked" hardened clay, and given that clay generates naturally in mesas, perhaps that should be the smooth decorative block instead?

    In addition, for those using smooth wool for decorative/creative building purposes, having another smooth block type would be a bit redundant.


    EDIT: I've played around with Dwarven as well and noticed that hardened clay is a polished/bordered variant. It definitely looks great as a decorative block, but not so much as a naturally generated clay in biomes. Then it just looks really odd. Perhaps concrete would better fit this role as it's a totally player-made block.

    Posted in: Resource Packs
  • 6

    posted a message on Dokucraft, The Saga Continues.
    Quote from Aoku»

    Those are good but do you know what magma is? Magma is lava that hasn't been exposed to oxygen so it is hotter not cooler.


    That might be true, but judging by the block's spawn settings and comparing its texture to lava's, I get the feeling Mojang was thinking "slightly cooled down volcano-stuff" with it, so I think that's a valid aesthetic direction to take it in. Ironically, then, the magma block should really be called lava, and the lava block should really be called magma...
    Posted in: Resource Packs
  • 1

    posted a message on Dokucraft, The Saga Continues.
    Quote from HeimrArnadalr»

    I've found an issue with the glass panes CTM. When I make a 2x1 window and view it facing South or East, the textures are reversed. When viewed from the other directions it looks fine. This happens with Dokucraft Light using Minecraft 1.8.9, Forge version 1762, Optifine version HD_U_H3.



    Hey, you might want to give the H4 pre-release a try (for MC 1.8.9 and Forge #1744; click on "Preview versions" at the top of the page). According to its change log, it fixed orientation issues with glass and stained glass panes, so it might help with your problem.

    I tried it on mine and I didn't spot any issues with the 2x1 panes, so hopefully it'll help you too.


    Be careful to pick the 1.8.9 version instead of the 1.8.0, since there's an H4-pre for it too. Clicking on "(mirror)" gives you a direct (no Adfly) download, and "changelog" takes you to the change log page if you're interested.

    Posted in: Resource Packs
  • 1

    posted a message on Dokucraft, The Saga Continues.
    Yea, up-scaling textures with nearest neighbour alone isn't enough to make a higher resolution pack. The textures will look the same. That's why it requires so much effort. You either make hi-res textures from scratch, or you up-scale them and fill in the details where duplicate pixels are.

    Otherwise it's pretty much the same as having 32x.
    Posted in: Resource Packs
  • 1

    posted a message on Dokucraft, The Saga Continues.
    Quote from Handsome_Dan»
    Ok, this should be the last post of the day for me.

    Please download and check the packs for any sign of bugs. (If possible, play on vanilla, mcpatcher, and optifine)

    Download


    These are the issues I've noticed so far with the High pack (may be present in the others too) since 1.7/1.8 (can't remember exactly):

    There's no CTM for all the fence types, however those textures and block models/states have been posted here before, which is where I obtained them. I can't remember who made them and on what page they are, though, and the Forum search is being as helpful as always, giving me results from 2012 and 2013 only...



    The CTM for the tripwire wasn't working properly last I checked (on Optifine B2U 1.8). I've since deleted it from my local copy so I can't tell if you've tried fixing that or not. The hook itself is fine, but the wooden box and the little wooden arm had missing faces on all orientations (I tried fixing it myself but I have only very basic understanding of the properties file).



    I don't think the CTM for flower pots works any more, either? Since metadata was removed from flowers IIRC. It has to be done with block models/states now I think. Alternatively, the pot will just use whatever base texture is on the 'textures\blocks' folder, so the temporary fix is to switch the single-flower textures back to base and leave the bush-style ones as CTM only.



    The brown mushroom has one extra tile variation set in the properties (0-3 instead of 0-2 -- also in the flower pot folder, but that one doesn't work any more I don't think), for a total of 4, but there's only 3 brown mushroom textures. The red one is the one that has 4 textures. This results in some mushrooms showing a black and pink checkers texture. I'm surprised nobody has noticed that yet in-game... maybe it only happens with Optifine?



    The CTM for the repeaters wasn't working for me, it was causing the redstone torch on the block to become invisible, except for the red tip.

    Also, there are a few GUI bugs/missing textures:

    achievement\achievement_background.png: missing the four arrows below the long rectangle at the bottom.



    container\enchanting_table.png: still the old enchantment table interface. The input slots are now two rather than one, and it's missing the 1/2/3 level/EXP cost icons, both highlighted and dimmed.



    icons.png: the green and blue bars are one pixel too tall (no idea if it has any noticeable effect, but still); the vanilla file also has a duplicate of the green bars below the crosshair, as well as one food/chicken leg (?) icon above what on Dokucraft is the first skull icon (no idea if these are actually used, though).



    server_selection.png: the arrows are misaligned -- the two big arrows on the left need to be moved 6 pixels towards the other two arrows, to be 4 pixels apart; and the four small arrows need to be moved 15 pixels to the left (assuming 256x256 resolution). Basically right now they're aligned the same way as the resource_packs.png file, but in vanilla they are not aligned the same way, hence the issue.



    widgets.png: missing the six difficulty lock icons.



    particles.png: missing the lens flare, but is that even used by Minecraft?

    Also, not an issue, but what does the CTM for the dropper/dispenser actually do? I have yet to notice any difference in-game.
    Posted in: Resource Packs
  • 2

    posted a message on [1.8] Suddenly I'm getting HORRIBLE fps.
    Quote from Nobody_1707»

    Actually, VBO's reduce CPU usage by sending the data to the card all at once instead of using a costly function call per vertex attribute. They don't have much effect on GPU usage at all aside from possibly reducing the amount of time it spends loading things from RAM. If the code is causing you lag in 1.8 it has nothing to do with the VBOs and everything to do with the fact that they just rewrote the entire renderer from scratch. It's probably a weird edge case issue that didn't show up in any of the official testing machines.

    I'm not talking about VBO's. I don't even have that option activated while running the game (and activating it makes no noticeable difference).

    However, you will notice that, as per LeslieGilliams's observations and side-by-side graph comparisons, update 1.8 is making significantly less use of the GPU compared to the snapshots up to w29 IIRC, and the 1.7 versions -- and as far as I've noticed, this is true regardless of the VBO option.

    I suppose if you have a better CPU than a GPU, or if both are great, you won't notice the performance drop, but for those who have better GPU than CPU, or overall weaker hardware, it's more noticeable.

    Now, the question still stands: is the GPU being less used because some of the burden was shifted to the CPU instead (and, in that case, this should definitely be a toggle so that we can set that option depending on our hardware), or is it just not being used by anything at all, thus resulting in a performance drop due to the hardware not being used at its full potential?

    Needless to say, if all of us can run 1.7 (and snapshots up to w29) without any issues, and 1.8 was supposed to improve, not reduce performance, then there is definitely a coding problem here (be it a bug or just a bad choice). Plus, it doesn't make sense to update hardware dramatically over internal changes on how the game works that don't actually improve the game's visual quality. If it ain't broken, then don't try to fix it -- and the game was definitely not broken in 1.7 compared to the way it is now, and nothing of value was gained by these changes (or, rather, whatever value was gained was highly offset by the losses experienced by others).

    EDIT: Also, considering the sheer number of players that have been reporting this issue, I would hardly call it a "weird edge case". I know Mojang probably tests updates on powerful machines, but we don't all run similar machines -- in fact, I dare say that a huge chunk of Minecraft's player base has more humble computers, especially laptops -- but even that doesn't really excuse this mess up, because these things can be noticed.

    If you notice significant changes in how the game handles your resources, and if you notice a performance drop, even if it doesn't affect you, you should be quite capable of realising that while on your machine the impact might be minimal, on the rest of the player base that might not be the case, and you need to code updates with those people in mind, not just the... edge case ones that have powerful, high end machines.
    Posted in: Recent Updates and Snapshots
  • 4

    posted a message on [1.8] Suddenly I'm getting HORRIBLE fps.
    There's definitely something going on that is affecting performance, though, and it has actually been present for a long time now, since the era of 1.7.

    I remember getting close to 60fps on vanilla, with all settings on maximum (except render distance, that was on normal), with an HD texture pack with all the MCP/Opti fluff turned on (and well over 100fps with just the vanilla texture pack), this on 1.6.4, for instance.

    In 1.7.10, the same configuration gives me around 40fps (around 100fps with the vanilla texture pack). A drop, but still passable.

    But in the pre-releases, with just the vanilla texture pack, and all options on minimum, I get around 50fps if standing still, less than 20fps if moving around, and if I dare step on water (even more so on an ocean monument), I get a delicious 2fps all the time. Yes, two. You read that right. I checked.

    Hell, I tried loading a customized Ocean World preset and it was as if I had loaded the newest PS3-ported game into a toaster from last century. This is completely unjustified when I can run the game speedily at even 1.7.10, let alone 1.6.4 and prior. The update changes really shouldn't cause this much a performance drop into literally unplayable levels short of a bug or a severe lack of optimisation -- and, like, I'm sorry, but you really can't use the "updates may cost performance and increase system requirements" excuse when the features do not nearly justify it, not even close.

    (also, for the record: responding to these reports with "but you're still in playable ranges! stop complaining!" is thread derailment, which is spam, which I'm pretty sure is against the rules. The point isn't whether people can still play the game or not (and a lot of us actually can't, so that's supremely irrelevant), it's that this big a performance drop may be indicative of a bigger issue which affects us all, and thus needs to be addressed)
    Posted in: Recent Updates and Snapshots
  • 2

    posted a message on OptiFine HD (FPS Boost, Dynamic Lights, Shaders and much more)
    Quote from Jageby


    I had a strange happening with this mod today. I installed it with MagicLauncher and started messing around with the settings. Everything worked well until i pushed F11 to go fullscreen. Then my screen said( yes my screen not my computer) "Out Of Range". I tried Ctrl Alt Del and Esc but it did not help. So then i pushed the off button on the computer part and after that i restarted it. But what could be the problem with the fullscreen? I did change the settings away from the Default option for 19something and something.

    PS. While i was writing this post, i tried to check the resolution i changed to but when i started MC with the MagicLauncher the game crashed before the Mojang logo.

    Hmm. My LED flatscreen sometimes displays an "out of range" message as well when I switch between fullscreen and windowed mode in some applications, but I usually quick-fix it by just restarting the monitor (not the computer). Try turning it off and back on if it happens.

    As for your crash, we'll need a crash log before any further help can be provided. Magic Launcher should have an option for that. If not, check your crash reports folder in the Minecraft application data folder, or try using this offline error test launcher (via Equivalent Exchange thread).


    Quote from Arthandas

    When you make random block textures (via terrain.properties files) the connected textures for glass and bookshelves stop to work. Any idea how to fix it?

    You can't combine basic CTM with extended CTM I believe, so if you create your own custom CTM, you'll have to do the same for glass and bookshelves. Glass panes will still use the basic CTM method and won't require configuration, if I remember correctly. Try adding custom CTM properties for glass and bookshelves and see if it works.

    You probably don't need this information, but for bookshelves I used "method=horizontal", "source=/ctm.png" and "tiles=12-15", and for glass I used "method=ctm" and "source=/ctm". These should work if you have the default ctm.png configuration (regardless of HD textures).
    Posted in: Minecraft Mods
  • 1

    posted a message on Mojang is Out of Touch: Why Jeb and Dinnerbone need to go the way of Notch.
    Quote from vasouv

    Caelann, you're 3 years younger than me. What the hell?

    Anyway, I don't have a problem with your opinions, I have a problem with opinions presented as "facts"! And demanding a company to do stuff!

    Negative feedback is one thing, but pure hatred is a totally different one. Get it now?

    I was being ironic, in case it wasn't obvious enough. Assuming you're 25, since when does that make you old enough to call other people "youngsters"? But that's beside the point.

    Well, I'm terribly sorry but this thread did not begin, in any way, as a hate thread. It's the die-hard raging fanboys that turn it into one by spamming incessantly their burning idolatry of Mojang whenever someone dares to as much as point out something negative about it, or Minecraft, or just about anything that may rustle their jimmies.

    Just because you or anyone else like something the way it is doesn't mean everyone agrees. Likewise, just because we dislike something doesn't mean everyone agrees. However, neither case gives anyone the right to bash on others and call them "hate-posters" or anything of the like. We're all entitled to opinions, and if these whiners had read the relevant thread OPs, they would have realized no one's suggesting their beloved terrain to be removed, just optimized so it can cater to everyone's tastes - or at least try.

    A forum is not meant to have nothing but positivism and praise, it's meant to be a place where, among many things, criticism is provided. If you (general "you") don't like it, well, perhaps you should go out and play, or something, rather than bothering us with your nonsense.


    Quote from Nerevar

    "Notch is amazing. Thank you for making Minecraft!"

    "I'm so happy Notch stepped down and let Jeb take over."

    "Jeb is getting lazy. Dinnerbones looks pretty cool, though."

    "Dinnerbones, you need to go the way of Notch." ( gets 28 rep)


    This community. Oh my god.

    Add to that:

    "It's Mojang's game! Thou mustn't complain! Burn the witch!"

    "OMG! Developing is diffacewlt! Be patient! Don't even dare suggesting things, just wait for them to magically appear in the devs' heads!"

    "I liek eet the way eet iz! Don't be steelin mah pocky!"

    "Groooaaaaaan another complainer! Zomgz why do these people even exist! *groangroangroan*"

    Et cetera, ad nauseam.

    Pardon the off-topic moderators, but this has got to be said. It's infuriating.
    Posted in: Discussion
  • 1

    posted a message on Dinnerbone's "Featurecreeping"
    Quote from Slay3R?

    -snip-


    Exactly. Adding new features is good, but when so many glaring bugs are kept bugging around, I'd say it's time to Spring clean and leave the workbench for later. Besides, let's not forget the randomness of the recent additions; do we really want Minecraft to be dotted with random, flavor-of-the-day additions or something that actually makes sense?

    Adding utilities like item frames or flower pots is good. Adding Halloween-themed content is bad. Why, you may ask? Because adding things for the sole purpose of a holiday will eventually become old and it may not appeal to everyone's taste. That's the kind of thing that is left for custom content / DLC for all other games, why should it be any different with Minecraft and be a part of core content?

    Think back to the Nether: it was Halloween-themed but it managed to grow into a whole new idea, like the Aether or any other dimension mod. It has a spirit of its own. Adding little pieces of a greater whole here and there isn't adding quality, it's dispersing potential.

    The sad thing is, frankly, who really cares for the witches and withers? They'll just be Yet Another Monster of the Week, and Minecraft will start looking more like a bad-rated TV show than what it was supposed to be (or FarmVille). Sure, you may like them, but what about when the novelty cools off?

    If they want to add fantasy mobs, they might as well just make a new dimension and stuff it all in there. At least then it'd have a point and wouldn't clutter the Overworld with 9001 different mob types.
    Posted in: Recent Updates and Snapshots
  • To post a comment, please .