The error was that it didnt save as a ZIP. That said, I zipped it and now see in in the MC menu but it doesnt look like it's enabling... it's all greyed out, see pic.
That said, I repeated everything from the very first step and same thing so something is still goofing on me or I'm just being a dumb ass and am missing something.
[No need to repost image - Neb]
Ok, did you zip Misa's folder or its content? If you zipped her folder that makes a problem, if you zipped the content inside the folder it should have worked.
For example if you zipped her folder it would look like this path to minecraft
C:\Users\Ben\AppData\Roaming\.minecraft\texturepacks\what ever name you used\misa
Again, useless breaking extra folder.
If you zipped content it would look something like this to minecraft
C:\Users\Ben\AppData\Roaming\.minecraft\texturepacks\what ever name you used
This is the way minecraft likes it (or at least mc patcher likes it).
Ok, did you zip Misa's folder or its content? If you zipped her folder that makes a problem, if you zipped the content inside the folder it should have worked.
For example if you zipped her folder it would look like this path to minecraft
C:\Users\Ben\AppData\Roaming\.minecraft\texturepacks\what ever name you used\misa
Again, useless breaking extra folder.
If you zipped content it would look something like this to minecraft
C:\Users\Ben\AppData\Roaming\.minecraft\texturepacks\what ever name you used
This is the way minecraft likes it (or at least mc patcher likes it).
This is what the direct ath looks like...
C:\Documents and Settings\Owner\Application Data\.minecraft\texturepacks\iLividSetupV1.zip
If you saw the pic, you'll see that it's there in spirit but not heart "working condition".
Edit: Too much on my late at one time, got the wrong damn zip so that might explain things. Be back with better news soon I hope lol...
Edit 2: Problem solved, had wrong zip LOL.
Any way, this thing freakin rocks. Now i just need a better system but the lag fest is well worth it with this pack. For what it's worth, I lag fested before this was installed so wether or not this pack makes it worse is yet to be seen but again. Just from the new smoother look alone I could care less if this thing snail'd me all damn day !!!
Ps; I can honestly say this will be the only textture pack I ever use unless I wana tweak soemthing like water or whatever. I saw this one mod in a video that had literally realistic shimmering water. Need to find that if it's not a part of this.
I hope I don't get completely bombarded for this, but I figured it'd be nice to give you a chance to talk about something other than just your texture pack.
What's your race in Skyrim and how are you "speccing" yourself? Personally I'm an Argonian named Dra'ir. My principle focus is Archery (I've even had people in game refer to me directly as "archer," which is neat). Supplementing that I am utilizing Enchanting (I have no less than 3 or 4 bows on me at a time; one fire, one frost, one shock, and one for filling soul gems). I'm also heavy on the Sneaking, particularly firing while hidden.
At close range I utilize a one-handed sword and shield, again with enchantments (fire sword, frost sword, etc.).
And in conjunction with all this? Heavy Armor. It's completely ludicrous and stupid and not something I'd do if it weren't for the fact that the extra protection really helps me out. It's been working decently so far; just have to get my sneak up some more so that the armor becomes completely negated.
So what are you focusing on?
And because I have to mention Minecraft somewhere, have you found the "Notched Pickaxe" yet?
Her name is Lovely Lucy. She is a Battlemage specialized in Bartering, Mysticism, Acrobatics and Ladies Professional Golf.
Actually it's a level 50-something Redguard, mostly passive thief type. Maxed stealth, pickpocketing, lockpicking, speech, etc. No magic, very little combat. Bow and dual daggers only when needed.
Thank you so much for this download. I have only been playing since the day before the release party.
I had been going back and forth about downloading these. Mainly because MCPatcher looked a bit complicated for me. (42 year old that is wary about doing such things)
Read your very clear instructions, completed the patch and POOF!!!! Detailed world!!!!
You have made my time on Minecraft worth learning the ropes and now I have very enjoyable graphics, due to you.
GLSL shaders *MIGHT* be coming out soon, and I know that you supported the bumpmap thing with that before it got delayed, are you going to do the bumpmapping textures again?
GLSL shaders *MIGHT* be coming out soon, and I know that you supported the bumpmap thing with that before it got delayed, are you going to do the bumpmapping textures again?
Already answered this. Go back a page or two.
Quote from darkwithin »
links 1 & 2 are broken.its a shame, wanted to adf.ly!
They seem to be working now. Mediafire was likely undergoing some temporary maintenance on the database that stored my file last night.
Misa, I've been frequently watching the development of this Pack, but I don't feel the ambition of wanting to use it because you only have it in x64.
I think it has the most potential out of all the other packs out there to make a great x256 Texture Pack.
If you could please, PLEASE consider doing this, I would greatly appreciate it; and my friends and I would most definitely start using this pack alone.
Actually if anything his looks like mine. Mine was released in 2010, his 2011, he's also using my mobs, not the other way around. (It's actually obnoxious how often I get accused of stealing his mobs when I made them to begin with and he even credits me for my work on his thread. Not to imply that that's what you're doing.) As far at textures go though, the similarities are at best limited to the desaturated and darkened colors. His appear to mostly be separate stock photographs converted into tiling textures, mine aren't as photographic and have more of a hand-made quality to them. Generally everything in my pack is built off of itself to have a more cohesive visual theme among all my elements rather than going for the photographic realism his pack does. Either way I'm glad you like both of our packs.
Quote from Cannabin0l »
Misa, I've been frequently watching the development of this Pack, but I don't feel the ambition of wanting to use it because you only have it in x64.
I think it has the most potential out of all the other packs out there to make a great x256 Texture Pack.
If you could please, PLEASE consider doing this, I would greatly appreciate it; and my friends and I would most definitely start using this pack alone.
If you're just watching the thread and haven't actually tried the pack, you're missing out on a lot. My thread's media is rarely updated, and it can't really do justice to all the features like custom animations or all the varied mob textures. As far as making a higher resolution pack goes, this has been answered in detail many times before. But I guess it's been awhile since I last made a post on this, so I'll do a little update on my explanation now! Here's hoping some people actually take the time to read, it.
First of all I feel I should probably make it clear that 'higher resolution' =/= 'better graphics.' It all really boils down to the application of the textures. And technically you could do a 512x512 texture pack that looks exactly like the vanilla textures for Minecraft with no visual difference. In regards to application, Minecraft has textures that tile repeatedly over small areas rather than large chunks as they would in many other games. In most 3D games that have a more realistic look to them, higher resolution textures can greatly improve the look of the game due to the way they're handled. They're generally applied to meshes (3D models) and have no need for tiling due to the fact that you can just assemble your worlds on those games out of detailed model pieces. These textures also make use of advanced shaders to properly reflect lighting and appear to have a 3D surface.
In Minecraft, textures are applied to a grid and repeated ad nauseam. In the case of higher resolution textures, without adequate mip-mapping (Optifine's 'mip-mapping' doesn't remotely cut it.) or 3D texture shaders (Normals, height maps, speculars, etc.) a very distracting grainy noise effect is produced in the distance and on the edge of tiles a few blocks away from the camera. Even my 64x64 pack has this, but to a degree that I feel is manageable. So it's really not the best idea to judge a texture pack's quality by its resolution, but rather its style, features, and practicality. By practicality, I mean its ability for each tile to be easily recognizable quickly without much of an adjustment required and its ability to be easy on the eyes after extended periods of play.
Why I ended up settling on 64x64 had more to do with the scale of objects in the game than anything. In Minecraft, the more resolution detail that's put into each texture, the smaller it appears. An illusion is produced that makes the player almost feel like a giant. This pack started off in 2009 as 16x16, and moved up to 32x32, then 64x64. Each time I went up I had to ensure the scale felt right, and briefly before release, the pack was actually 128x128. I didn't like the 'giant illusion' so shrunk what I had back down to 64x64. By that time, 2D textures with transparency were commonplace, and the idea of wanting to keep some degree of transitioning pixels (From the flat grass to the 3D grass for instance) required keeping things a little blocky. Basically things like blades of grass I wanted to be no thinner than a 64x64 scale pixel. Without a full range of transparency, keeping things from getting too thin due to excessive detail became a bonus feature of lower resolution packs. It also kept some degree of voxel consistency with the way held items are rendered.
This isn't to say I could never see myself going above 64x64. In fact I have a working file for 256x256 that while it looks good on paper, looks like a horribly grainy mess in-game. Realistic textures just have a lot of problem with that lack of mip-mapping due to the initial noise required for realism. Given the limitations of the game, it's not likely that that project will make much progress anytime soon. While 64x64 is a good middle-ranged high resolution pack that most people can use without much of any performance hit, if I had things my way, I'd have a 'badass gaming machine version' of the pack as well. In order for me to keep my consistent style at a higher resolution though I'd need several things to happen:
-True hardware mip-map support.
-A proper dynamic lighting engine that advanced textures can make use of.
-Support for advanced shader texture maps: Normals, Speculars, Height, Glow, etc.
-Full gradient alpha channel support instead of the current binary transparency.
The above would be absolutely necessary for high resolution textures to look good on Minecraft in my opinion, but several other things would also be greatly desired for me to have the full motivation to redo my entire pack to support this:
-Voxel or full polygonal model support for all objects in the game.
-Textures that span multiple similar-material blocks to eliminate excessive tiling.
-Better handling or customization of particles.
-Texture crossfading.
-Full 2D and 3D animation support.
So unless someone is a coder who is capable of making this all happen, please try to tone down the constant requests for me to make my pack a higher resolution. Without any solutions or means provided to make it actually work well, I don't see it as a way to improve my pack so much as just something that clashes with my sense of cohesive design as an artist.
I must truly say Misa, you are an outspoken artist to your words.
I wasn't trying to come off as a critic, the boat I'm currently sitting in is LB Photo Realism, and this work of art that isn't in my preference of resolution.
Of course, your work is in no way based around the requests of one measly fan.
That being said, if you could maybe pm me the x256 file so I could see how it looks and possibly use it myself, or if by all means necessary, you could attempt something like Scuttles is working on with his pack.
You raise points that are high in validity, but the fact that Scuttles has done such an astonishing job making his x256 pack look clean, and neat; and not to mention less then grainy, I'm led to believe that you are easily capable of creating the same work of art you have in x64 resolution in the aforementioned higher schemes.
But I digress... I simply don't like how giant I feel compared to the blocks going from a super texture pack like LB Photo Realism to a x64 pack.
In all honesty, this pack is a 11/10 and is outstanding, and I can tell that without even using it personally. Maybe some day soon enough I'll be able to enjoy the best of both worlds if you decide to pursue a larger scale resolution.
Still, thank you for the reply and as well as for giving me a better understanding as to why you don't take your skill to the x256 genre, as it appears to go against your style. I'll still be closely following the packs development in any case.
I love this texture pack it's awesome! But, I have a question for Misa. When are the Shaders for this pack going to be updated for 1.0.0? I love the bump mapping and all the other upgrades the shader does to the pack and I want to know when it will be ready for 1.0.0. Thanks!
Ok, did you zip Misa's folder or its content? If you zipped her folder that makes a problem, if you zipped the content inside the folder it should have worked.
For example if you zipped her folder it would look like this path to minecraft
C:\Users\Ben\AppData\Roaming\.minecraft\texturepacks\what ever name you used\misa
Again, useless breaking extra folder.
If you zipped content it would look something like this to minecraft
C:\Users\Ben\AppData\Roaming\.minecraft\texturepacks\what ever name you used
This is the way minecraft likes it (or at least mc patcher likes it).
C:\Documents and Settings\Owner\Application Data\.minecraft\texturepacks\iLividSetupV1.zip
If you saw the pic, you'll see that it's there in spirit but not heart "working condition".
Edit: Too much on my late at one time, got the wrong damn zip so that might explain things. Be back with better news soon I hope lol...
Edit 2: Problem solved, had wrong zip LOL.
Any way, this thing freakin rocks. Now i just need a better system but the lag fest is well worth it with this pack. For what it's worth, I lag fested before this was installed so wether or not this pack makes it worse is yet to be seen but again. Just from the new smoother look alone I could care less if this thing snail'd me all damn day !!!
Ps; I can honestly say this will be the only textture pack I ever use unless I wana tweak soemthing like water or whatever. I saw this one mod in a video that had literally realistic shimmering water. Need to find that if it's not a part of this.
What's your race in Skyrim and how are you "speccing" yourself? Personally I'm an Argonian named Dra'ir. My principle focus is Archery (I've even had people in game refer to me directly as "archer," which is neat). Supplementing that I am utilizing Enchanting (I have no less than 3 or 4 bows on me at a time; one fire, one frost, one shock, and one for filling soul gems). I'm also heavy on the Sneaking, particularly firing while hidden.
At close range I utilize a one-handed sword and shield, again with enchantments (fire sword, frost sword, etc.).
And in conjunction with all this? Heavy Armor. It's completely ludicrous and stupid and not something I'd do if it weren't for the fact that the extra protection really helps me out. It's been working decently so far; just have to get my sneak up some more so that the armor becomes completely negated.
So what are you focusing on?
And because I have to mention Minecraft somewhere, have you found the "Notched Pickaxe" yet?
To dig dig dig dig dig dig dig is what we like to do!
Her name is Lovely Lucy. She is a Battlemage specialized in Bartering, Mysticism, Acrobatics and Ladies Professional Golf.
Actually it's a level 50-something Redguard, mostly passive thief type. Maxed stealth, pickpocketing, lockpicking, speech, etc. No magic, very little combat. Bow and dual daggers only when needed.
I had been going back and forth about downloading these. Mainly because MCPatcher looked a bit complicated for me. (42 year old that is wary about doing such things)
Read your very clear instructions, completed the patch and POOF!!!! Detailed world!!!!
You have made my time on Minecraft worth learning the ropes and now I have very enjoyable graphics, due to you.
They seem to be working now. Mediafire was likely undergoing some temporary maintenance on the database that stored my file last night.
that is creepy.
i cant dl it right now because im have a crappy pc that can only take 32x XD
Ask in PM for record-keeping purposes.
I think it has the most potential out of all the other packs out there to make a great x256 Texture Pack.
If you could please, PLEASE consider doing this, I would greatly appreciate it; and my friends and I would most definitely start using this pack alone.
Why do you think it will be an "upgrade" ?
If you're just watching the thread and haven't actually tried the pack, you're missing out on a lot. My thread's media is rarely updated, and it can't really do justice to all the features like custom animations or all the varied mob textures. As far as making a higher resolution pack goes, this has been answered in detail many times before. But I guess it's been awhile since I last made a post on this, so I'll do a little update on my explanation now! Here's hoping some people actually take the time to read, it.
First of all I feel I should probably make it clear that 'higher resolution' =/= 'better graphics.' It all really boils down to the application of the textures. And technically you could do a 512x512 texture pack that looks exactly like the vanilla textures for Minecraft with no visual difference. In regards to application, Minecraft has textures that tile repeatedly over small areas rather than large chunks as they would in many other games. In most 3D games that have a more realistic look to them, higher resolution textures can greatly improve the look of the game due to the way they're handled. They're generally applied to meshes (3D models) and have no need for tiling due to the fact that you can just assemble your worlds on those games out of detailed model pieces. These textures also make use of advanced shaders to properly reflect lighting and appear to have a 3D surface.
In Minecraft, textures are applied to a grid and repeated ad nauseam. In the case of higher resolution textures, without adequate mip-mapping (Optifine's 'mip-mapping' doesn't remotely cut it.) or 3D texture shaders (Normals, height maps, speculars, etc.) a very distracting grainy noise effect is produced in the distance and on the edge of tiles a few blocks away from the camera. Even my 64x64 pack has this, but to a degree that I feel is manageable. So it's really not the best idea to judge a texture pack's quality by its resolution, but rather its style, features, and practicality. By practicality, I mean its ability for each tile to be easily recognizable quickly without much of an adjustment required and its ability to be easy on the eyes after extended periods of play.
Why I ended up settling on 64x64 had more to do with the scale of objects in the game than anything. In Minecraft, the more resolution detail that's put into each texture, the smaller it appears. An illusion is produced that makes the player almost feel like a giant. This pack started off in 2009 as 16x16, and moved up to 32x32, then 64x64. Each time I went up I had to ensure the scale felt right, and briefly before release, the pack was actually 128x128. I didn't like the 'giant illusion' so shrunk what I had back down to 64x64. By that time, 2D textures with transparency were commonplace, and the idea of wanting to keep some degree of transitioning pixels (From the flat grass to the 3D grass for instance) required keeping things a little blocky. Basically things like blades of grass I wanted to be no thinner than a 64x64 scale pixel. Without a full range of transparency, keeping things from getting too thin due to excessive detail became a bonus feature of lower resolution packs. It also kept some degree of voxel consistency with the way held items are rendered.
This isn't to say I could never see myself going above 64x64. In fact I have a working file for 256x256 that while it looks good on paper, looks like a horribly grainy mess in-game. Realistic textures just have a lot of problem with that lack of mip-mapping due to the initial noise required for realism. Given the limitations of the game, it's not likely that that project will make much progress anytime soon. While 64x64 is a good middle-ranged high resolution pack that most people can use without much of any performance hit, if I had things my way, I'd have a 'badass gaming machine version' of the pack as well. In order for me to keep my consistent style at a higher resolution though I'd need several things to happen:
-True hardware mip-map support.
-A proper dynamic lighting engine that advanced textures can make use of.
-Support for advanced shader texture maps: Normals, Speculars, Height, Glow, etc.
-Full gradient alpha channel support instead of the current binary transparency.
The above would be absolutely necessary for high resolution textures to look good on Minecraft in my opinion, but several other things would also be greatly desired for me to have the full motivation to redo my entire pack to support this:
-Voxel or full polygonal model support for all objects in the game.
-Textures that span multiple similar-material blocks to eliminate excessive tiling.
-Better handling or customization of particles.
-Texture crossfading.
-Full 2D and 3D animation support.
So unless someone is a coder who is capable of making this all happen, please try to tone down the constant requests for me to make my pack a higher resolution. Without any solutions or means provided to make it actually work well, I don't see it as a way to improve my pack so much as just something that clashes with my sense of cohesive design as an artist.
I wasn't trying to come off as a critic, the boat I'm currently sitting in is LB Photo Realism, and this work of art that isn't in my preference of resolution.
Of course, your work is in no way based around the requests of one measly fan.
That being said, if you could maybe pm me the x256 file so I could see how it looks and possibly use it myself, or if by all means necessary, you could attempt something like Scuttles is working on with his pack.
You raise points that are high in validity, but the fact that Scuttles has done such an astonishing job making his x256 pack look clean, and neat; and not to mention less then grainy, I'm led to believe that you are easily capable of creating the same work of art you have in x64 resolution in the aforementioned higher schemes.
But I digress... I simply don't like how giant I feel compared to the blocks going from a super texture pack like LB Photo Realism to a x64 pack.
In all honesty, this pack is a 11/10 and is outstanding, and I can tell that without even using it personally. Maybe some day soon enough I'll be able to enjoy the best of both worlds if you decide to pursue a larger scale resolution.
Still, thank you for the reply and as well as for giving me a better understanding as to why you don't take your skill to the x256 genre, as it appears to go against your style. I'll still be closely following the packs development in any case.
-Canna.