*Note: Some of this might be outdated; check the download page for Up-To-Date info.
Minecraft has always had too many pixels, so let's just bring it down to 8-bit.
Instead of making everything super HD and cool looking, this resource pack goes into the opposite direction. This resource pack brings back the 8-bit genere, and every block and item is 8x8 pixels. If you ever though your game could run faster, here is the resource pack to do just that. This improves the speed of minecraft almost 3 times, which is amazing for a resource pack. It sounds bad, but give it a shot; you might just change your mind.
Obligatory rant: 8-bit is referring to color depth, not the number of pixels in the width and height of the image. Please read up on what 8-bit color actually means and stop spreading misinformation and ignorance. We'll all be better off. Thank you.
But more to the point "default down-sized" is, frankly, not good. There are a lot of obvious artifacts of the process. Things like the dark stripes on the dirt stick out and just make the texture look bad. You've really taken the worst aspects of default, and made them more obvious. I'm guessing this is because you just used a resize command rather than recreating them intelligently.
The 8x default concept can be made to work, but like all art it requires effort rather than just rubbing a button on the textures and calling it a day.
Obligatory rant: 8-bit is referring to color depth, not the number of pixels in the width and height of the image.
In the case of what many people reference it to (old game consoles), it's actually much more convoluted and specific than that. Typically the 'bit' referred to the CPU, the colors available were typically less/more than 'bit' either because it was done via the CPU directly (thus only SOME of the bits are used for color) or done via less/more powerful chips.
For instance, the NES had an 8-bit CPU but didn't use it for color, from Wikipedia:
The NES[88] uses a custom-made Picture Processing Unit (PPU) developed by Ricoh. All variations of the PPU feature 2 kB of video RAM, 256 bytes of on-die "object attribute memory" (OAM) to store the positions, colors, and tile indices of up to 64 sprites on the screen, and 28 bytes of on-die palette RAM to allow selection of background and sprite colors. The console's 2 kB of onboard RAM may be used for tile maps and attributes on the NES board and 8 kB of tile pattern ROM or RAM may be included on a cartridge. The system has an available color palette of 48 colors and 6 grays. Up to 25 simultaneous colors may be used without writing new values mid-frame: a background color, four sets of three tile colors and four sets of three sprite colors. The NES palette is based on NTSC rather than RGB values. A total of 64 sprites may be displayed onscreen at a given time without reloading sprites mid-screen. The standard display resolution of the NES is 256 horizontal pixels by 240 vertical pixels.
On the other end, the Game Boy Color had an 8-bit CPU but 15-bit color, however it couldn't use most of the available palette without using tricks (normal high seems to be 56).
So for use referencing 'retro' games (the closest term you CAN use) is that games had graphics that were made to work within (or even to the max of) their limitations.
On a side note, I'd like to know if OP has any numbers on that '3 times' number in the OP. I'm under the impression that the textures actually don't have that much of an impact, unless maybe you're using a really bad system that's struggling with memory usage...
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"I'm an outsider by choice, but not truly.
It’s the unpleasantness of the system that keeps me out.
I’d rather be in, in a good system. That’s where my discontent comes from:
being forced to choose to stay outside.
My advice: Just keep movin’ straight ahead.
Every now and then you find yourself in a different place."
-George Carlin
In the case of what many people reference it to (old game consoles), it's actually much more convoluted and specific than that. Typically the 'bit' referred to the CPU, the colors available were typically less/more than 'bit' either because it was done via the CPU directly (thus only SOME of the bits are used for color) or done via less/more powerful chips.
Except if you're going by this logic wouldn't that automatically make this a 64-bit pack on my computer because my graphic's card's architecture is 64-bit?
Operating system/processor "bit" and color depth "bit" are not the same thing. One applies here and the other definitely does not. Again, confusing them is just silly and trying to justify that confusion is not helping matters.
On a side note, I'd like to know if OP has any numbers on that '3 times' number in the OP. I'm under the impression that the textures actually don't have that much of an impact, unless maybe you're using a really bad system that's struggling with memory usage...
I missed this, but I'm actually kinda curious about it as well. In my own tests low-res packs have never had that much of a difference. Some improvement, yes... but not 3x speed by any metric I can observe.
Obligatory rant: 8-bit is referring to color depth, not the number of pixels in the width and height of the image. Please read up on what 8-bit color actually means and stop spreading misinformation and ignorance. We'll all be better off. Thank you.
But more to the point "default down-sized" is, frankly, not good. There are a lot of obvious artifacts of the process. Things like the dark stripes on the dirt stick out and just make the texture look bad. You've really taken the worst aspects of default, and made them more obvious. I'm guessing this is because you just used a resize command rather than recreating them intelligently.
The 8x default concept can be made to work, but like all art it requires effort rather than just rubbing a button on the textures and calling it a day.
I agree, I do need to put for effort into this pack. I'll do that, definitely. At the moment I was worried about updating it to 1.10 though, so yes I will definitely work on the textures. What do you think about the sounds though? I put quite a bit of effort into those. Of course, they're not done, but I still put effort in. So it is updated to 1.10, but I'll be working on it for a while now. Thanks for replying though!
Except if you're going by this logic wouldn't that automatically make this a 64-bit pack on my computer because my graphic's card's architecture is 64-bit?
Operating system/processor "bit" and color depth "bit" are not the same thing. One applies here and the other definitely does not. Again, confusing them is just silly and trying to justify that confusion is not helping matters.
Well, I'm not advocating for the usage so everything you just said is exactly my point. Anything related to bits is too technical for referencing art, so honestly it does no good to label it as such. Particularly it does not make sense when you're covering such a large scope such as just a 'retro' style.
Related to my last post, the only acceptable use of bit within color would be the actual bit-depth of palette you're trying to mimic. Like if you were using the NES palette you would say 6-bit color (although as I stated it's actually less than 64 colors, wiki says 53-55 depending on how you count it/circumstance)
You said the pack "improves the speed of minecraft almost 3 times"... I have never seen a number like that anywhere, and I can only assume that if you're gaining that much of a benefit you must not have a very good system. So system specs and actual FPS numbers (same conditions, no no major background programs running, multiple tests etc) would be good to have on a claim that could just end up being placebo or coincidence.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"I'm an outsider by choice, but not truly.
It’s the unpleasantness of the system that keeps me out.
I’d rather be in, in a good system. That’s where my discontent comes from:
being forced to choose to stay outside.
My advice: Just keep movin’ straight ahead.
Every now and then you find yourself in a different place."
-George Carlin
Well, I'm not advocating for the usage so everything you just said is exactly my point. Anything related to bits is too technical for referencing art, so honestly it does no good to label it as such. Particularly it does not make sense when you're covering such a large scope such as just a 'retro' style.
Related to my last post, the only acceptable use of bit within color would be the actual bit-depth of palette you're trying to mimic. Like if you were using the NES palette you would say 6-bit color (although as I stated it's actually less than 64 colors, wiki says 53-55 depending on how you count it/circumstance)
You said the pack "improves the speed of minecraft almost 3 times"... I have never seen a number like that anywhere, and I can only assume that if you're gaining that much of a benefit you must not have a very good system. So system specs and actual FPS numbers (same conditions, no no major background programs running, multiple tests etc) would be good to have on a claim that could just end up being placebo or coincidence.
I see, okay. Yeah, if you're playing on a super bad computer (my friend calls those toasters), then it will improve the speed because there are less textures and bits to load.
*Note: Some of this might be outdated; check the download page for Up-To-Date info.
Minecraft has always had too many pixels, so let's just bring it down to 8-bit.
Instead of making everything super HD and cool looking, this resource pack goes into the opposite direction. This resource pack brings back the 8-bit genere, and every block and item is 8x8 pixels. If you ever though your game could run faster, here is the resource pack to do just that. This improves the speed of minecraft almost 3 times, which is amazing for a resource pack. It sounds bad, but give it a shot; you might just change your mind.
Feature List:
Future Plans:
Mod Support:
ChiselCarpenters BlocksDownload:
(I don't know how to use the widget with curseforge)
http://minecraft.curseforge.com/projects/bit-minecraft
Images:
Obligatory rant: 8-bit is referring to color depth, not the number of pixels in the width and height of the image. Please read up on what 8-bit color actually means and stop spreading misinformation and ignorance. We'll all be better off. Thank you.
But more to the point "default down-sized" is, frankly, not good. There are a lot of obvious artifacts of the process. Things like the dark stripes on the dirt stick out and just make the texture look bad. You've really taken the worst aspects of default, and made them more obvious. I'm guessing this is because you just used a resize command rather than recreating them intelligently.
The 8x default concept can be made to work, but like all art it requires effort rather than just rubbing a button on the textures and calling it a day.
In the case of what many people reference it to (old game consoles), it's actually much more convoluted and specific than that. Typically the 'bit' referred to the CPU, the colors available were typically less/more than 'bit' either because it was done via the CPU directly (thus only SOME of the bits are used for color) or done via less/more powerful chips.
For instance, the NES had an 8-bit CPU but didn't use it for color, from Wikipedia:
On the other end, the Game Boy Color had an 8-bit CPU but 15-bit color, however it couldn't use most of the available palette without using tricks (normal high seems to be 56).
So for use referencing 'retro' games (the closest term you CAN use) is that games had graphics that were made to work within (or even to the max of) their limitations.
On a side note, I'd like to know if OP has any numbers on that '3 times' number in the OP. I'm under the impression that the textures actually don't have that much of an impact, unless maybe you're using a really bad system that's struggling with memory usage...
"I'm an outsider by choice, but not truly.
It’s the unpleasantness of the system that keeps me out.
I’d rather be in, in a good system. That’s where my discontent comes from:
being forced to choose to stay outside.
My advice: Just keep movin’ straight ahead.
Every now and then you find yourself in a different place."
-George Carlin
Except if you're going by this logic wouldn't that automatically make this a 64-bit pack on my computer because my graphic's card's architecture is 64-bit?
Operating system/processor "bit" and color depth "bit" are not the same thing. One applies here and the other definitely does not. Again, confusing them is just silly and trying to justify that confusion is not helping matters.
I missed this, but I'm actually kinda curious about it as well. In my own tests low-res packs have never had that much of a difference. Some improvement, yes... but not 3x speed by any metric I can observe.
I agree, I do need to put for effort into this pack. I'll do that, definitely. At the moment I was worried about updating it to 1.10 though, so yes I will definitely work on the textures. What do you think about the sounds though? I put quite a bit of effort into those. Of course, they're not done, but I still put effort in. So it is updated to 1.10, but I'll be working on it for a while now. Thanks for replying though!
I'm not sure what you mean by that last part...
Well, I'm not advocating for the usage so everything you just said is exactly my point. Anything related to bits is too technical for referencing art, so honestly it does no good to label it as such. Particularly it does not make sense when you're covering such a large scope such as just a 'retro' style.
Related to my last post, the only acceptable use of bit within color would be the actual bit-depth of palette you're trying to mimic. Like if you were using the NES palette you would say 6-bit color (although as I stated it's actually less than 64 colors, wiki says 53-55 depending on how you count it/circumstance)
You said the pack "improves the speed of minecraft almost 3 times"... I have never seen a number like that anywhere, and I can only assume that if you're gaining that much of a benefit you must not have a very good system. So system specs and actual FPS numbers (same conditions, no no major background programs running, multiple tests etc) would be good to have on a claim that could just end up being placebo or coincidence.
"I'm an outsider by choice, but not truly.
It’s the unpleasantness of the system that keeps me out.
I’d rather be in, in a good system. That’s where my discontent comes from:
being forced to choose to stay outside.
My advice: Just keep movin’ straight ahead.
Every now and then you find yourself in a different place."
-George Carlin
I see, okay. Yeah, if you're playing on a super bad computer (my friend calls those toasters), then it will improve the speed because there are less textures and bits to load.