What would YOU change about BuildCraft?

[asiekierka]

@asiekierka

Ok man, here is the thing. The majority of the new textures in Buildcraft 7 are freakin awesome; with three exceptions: engines.

The new. Where engine textures are no longer reflective of their vanilla textures/materials.

The old, were buildcraft material textures reflect Vanilla textures.

See my issue? Why are you changing the engine textures from solidarity with Vanilla minecraft? No disrespect to Cynidx, but his Unity resource pack textures for wood, stone, and iron should not be the reference.

The new engines are made to fit with themselves, not Unity. Check it! Also, it's not just engines... Auto Workbench, Filtered Buffer, etc.

I am generally a fan of pastel coloring. Also, I don't think an engine should have the exact properties of the material it's made out of - it's poor for contrast and it makes for example wood engines look bad in oak wood locations.

We also want to be able to put the textures under Creative Commons, so we cannot derive from Mojang's work.

 

[CyanideX]

@asiekierka
See my issue? Why are you changing the engine textures from solidarity with Vanilla minecraft? No disrespect to Cynidx, but his Unity resource pack textures for wood, stone, and iron should not be the reference.

Chests look nothing like the wood they are made of. Yell at Mojang.

Also, these textures are not that of my Unity pack, they were created by both Asie and myself.

 

[TheLoneWolfling]

Bleh, pastels.

...So is there going to be a resource pack for the old textures? Because, props to you for BC7 and all, but I really don't like the new ones.

 

[SlightlyVisible]

Chests look nothing like the wood they are made of. Yell at Mojang.

Also, these textures are not that of my Unity pack, they were created by both Asie and myself.

The old wooden engine resembles the wooden chests, and by doing so looked natural to minecraft. Iron ingots also look nothing like caldrons, hoppers, and anvils all share a common texture for the sake of consistency. Buildcraft's old engines looked like they were part of vanilla. The new engines do not.

The new engines are made to fit with themselves, not Unity. Check it! Also, it's not just engines... Auto Workbench, Filtered Buffer, etc.

I am generally a fan of pastel coloring. Also, I don't think an engine should have the exact properties of the material it's made out of - it's poor for contrast and it makes for example wood engines look bad in oak wood locations.

We also want to be able to put the textures under Creative Commons, so we cannot derive from Mojang's work.

How did the old engines not fit within themselves? They fit better with mineraft than almost every other tech mod's machines. To say that they don't fit with your new textures, is to say your new textures don't fit vanilla.

 

[asiekierka]

The old wooden engine resembles the wooden chests, and by doing so looked natural to minecraft. Iron ingots also look nothing like caldrons, hoppers, and anvils all share a common texture for the sake of consistency. Buildcraft's old engines looked like they were part of vanilla. The new engines do not.

How did the old engines not fit within themselves? They fit better with mineraft than almost every other tech mod's machines. To say that they don't fit with your new textures, is to say your new textures don't fit vanilla.

You didn't read the entire post.

We CANNOT use original Mojang textures and use BuildCraft textures outside Minecraft - and we are considering moving further than just Minecraft with BuildCraft. Doing so would be a violation of the EULA. We want the textures available freely to use for all under Creative Commons and we CANNOT use copyrighted textures.

BuildCraft should look natural to itself, not natural to vanilla. I much prefer this to the mix-and-match of styles we've had before.

 

[CyanideX]

The old wooden engine resembles the wooden chests, and by doing so looked natural to minecraft. Iron ingots also look nothing like caldrons, hoppers, and anvils all share a common texture for the sake of consistency. Buildcraft's old engines looked like they were part of vanilla. The new engines do not.


How did the old engines not fit within themselves? They fit better with mineraft than almost every other tech mod's machines. To say that they don't fit with your new textures, is to say your new textures don't fit vanilla.

You're also just contradicting yourself. Saying that certain elements of Minecraft match each other for consistency but then you say Buildcraft shouldn't match the rest of Buildcraft. I understand what you're saying though; Buildcraft's new textures don't look Vanilla blocks, but that was the idea. There are a lot of mods out there that don't resemble vanilla Minecraft so this isn't anything new. Asie asked me for something unique and defining and this is the result.

Ultimately, I had a choice to have the some blocks remain unchanged or retexture everything in the mod to maintain continuity throughout. I chose the latter.

 

[KingTriaxx]

I agree with both sides of the argument. Ultimately, the only way to get a consistent theme between vanilla and mods is to use a third-party pack bound by it's own rules and not those of either. JSTR is consistent, because it's one texture idea for both, for example.

 

[CyanideX]

There will be a resource pack available for those who wish to go back to the classic Buildcraft.

 

[Golrith]

Looking at the posted picture above, I'd say my only complaint with the new wooden engine texture is the wood is a bit grey. I think it could do with a bit more saturation so it's somewhere between where it is now, and the saturation/colour of the minecraft colours.
Iron texture could do with a slight saturation increase too.

 

[CyanideX]

Looking at the posted picture above, I'd say my only complaint with the new wooden engine texture is the wood is a bit grey. I think it could do with a bit more saturation so it's somewhere between where it is now, and the saturation/colour of the minecraft colours.
Iron texture could do with a slight saturation increase too.

Grey can't be any higher in saturation.

 

[Golrith]

Grey can't be any higher in saturation.

Brightness then Jeez, picky artists

 

[CyanideX]

Yeah, I could up the saturation a bit for the redstone engine. But if I up the brightness for the iron engine I would have to do that to all the other blocks that use the same base texture.

 

[Bagman817]

I must be in the minority, but if I'm thinking about a mod and what I might change about it, textures (assuming they're not completely awful) are the last thing I'm looking at it. Since 1.25, the only time I can remember thinking "wow, this is ugly" is Pneumaticraft 1.6.4. If you can make your textures amazing, that's great, but personally I'm far more concerned with utility, fun factor and balance.

Full disclosure, I'm the guy that routinely disables Chisel and Carpenter's Blocks, because they're useless.

 

[asiekierka]

I must be in the minority, but if I'm thinking about a mod and what I might change about it, textures (assuming they're not completely awful) are the last thing I'm looking at it. Since 1.25, the only time I can remember thinking "wow, this is ugly" is Pneumaticraft 1.6.4. If you can make your textures amazing, that's great, but personally I'm far more concerned with utility, fun factor and balance.

Full disclosure, I'm the guy that routinely disables Chisel and Carpenter's Blocks, because they're useless.

A different developer was handling the textures. While Cyanide was doing the art, I was doing code.

Also, the textures bring some utility functions - BuildCraft machines now have LED state indicators.

 

[psp]

Is there a possibility for having a texture pack for 6.4.6

I must be in the minority, but if I'm thinking about a mod and what I might change about it, textures (assuming they're not completely awful) are the last thing I'm looking at it. Since 1.25, the only time I can remember thinking "wow, this is ugly" is Pneumaticraft 1.6.4. If you can make your textures amazing, that's great, but personally I'm far more concerned with utility, fun factor and balance.

Full disclosure, I'm the guy that routinely disables Chisel and Carpenter's Blocks, because they're useless.

I have to agree with you; however, good textures can only make a mod better, not worse.

 

[asiekierka]

Is there a possibility for having a texture pack for 6.4.6

No. The texture format changed far too much. Just wait for 7.0 Stable.

 

[Wekmor]

We could just take a 7.0 beta version and copy the textures over I guess?

 

[CyanideX]

We could just take a 7.0 beta version and copy the textures over I guess?

The renderer has changed in BC 7 so the textures structure is drastically different. That being said, it is still possible to use the textures in a similar fashion.

 

[asiekierka]

The renderer has changed in BC 7 so the textures structure is drastically different. That being said, it is still possible to use the textures in a similar fashion.

The renderer, the resource pack format, the icon registration process, and sometimes even the models...

 

[Bagman817]

Just watched DW20's episode today, and I was reminded of the mining well. Obviously, he's using a bunch of cross-mod interactions to make it ridiculous, but one wonders: in a world with just Buildcraft, what's the point of the mining well? Does anyone use it, or, more likely, is it just a crafting component for a pump?
I guess that'd be on the list of things I might consider changing.