Bedrock has always seemed like a rather ugly texture to me, and it ruins the look of builds it pokes up into. While aesthetically I'd much prefer some sort of paste or other item I could apply directly to bedrock to change its texture, I suppose such implementation of this would result in the use of entities and thus increase lag (and increase it dramatically when used en masse). Therefore, if bedrock is exposed to air on top and has a non-bedrock block in one of the 16 spaces surrounding it (same y level and 1 level lower) it would use the non-bedrock texture instead.
Alternatively, this could be a worldgen option (almost like a texture pack, but not quite), with retexturing only happening if a material vein would have included the bedrock block position. for example, if you chose to make bedrock appear as smooth stone and worldgen caused a vein of granite to generate (in such a way as to include where the bedrock was) then only those pieces of bedrock that would have occupied the vein would take on the vein texture. Ore and liquids would be exempt, possibly block lights as well (light blocks without light values would not make sense, and I'm not sure if those properties can be transferred to non-light blocks).
I mean, personally I would just say the Bedrock texture should get changed to something less ugly. Based on the entirely new textures we got recently Mojang is clearly okay with making changes to the appearance of items that have been in the game forever. That seems like the easier and less resource-intensive fix anyways. Plus this could get really confusing to have blocks that look breakable but actually are not.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want some advice on how to thrive in the Suggestions section? Check this handy list of guidelines and tips for posting your ideas and responding to the ideas of others!
Bedrock texture doesn't bother me, and it is distinctive…
I don't understand what it is felt would be advantageous about having bedrock change texture depending on the presence/absence of an air block 'nearby'…
Without a qualifying air block, one would still have the disliked texture…
Creating the needed air block to remove this texture would (in at least some cases) expose the bedrock of a lower layer – which does not seem to me a net gain…
Possibly I'm missing the intended point of this behavior?
Given the age of the texture, the comparative ease of using texture/resource packs to change it, and the hullabaloo that I expect any change to something 'better' would generate…
… I see individuals changing the texture to their preference (or covering the offending blocks in carpet, etc.) as preferred solutions.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Why does everything have to be so stoopid?" Harvey Pekar (from American Splendor)
WARNING: I have an extemely "grindy" playstyle; YMMV — if this doesn't seem fun to you, mine what you can from it & bin the rest.
Bedrock has always seemed like a rather ugly texture to me, and it ruins the look of builds it pokes up into. While aesthetically I'd much prefer some sort of paste or other item I could apply directly to bedrock to change its texture, I suppose such implementation of this would result in the use of entities and thus increase lag (and increase it dramatically when used en masse). Therefore, if bedrock is exposed to air on top and has a non-bedrock block in one of the 16 spaces surrounding it (same y level and 1 level lower) it would use the non-bedrock texture instead.
Alternatively, this could be a worldgen option (almost like a texture pack, but not quite), with retexturing only happening if a material vein would have included the bedrock block position. for example, if you chose to make bedrock appear as smooth stone and worldgen caused a vein of granite to generate (in such a way as to include where the bedrock was) then only those pieces of bedrock that would have occupied the vein would take on the vein texture. Ore and liquids would be exempt, possibly block lights as well (light blocks without light values would not make sense, and I'm not sure if those properties can be transferred to non-light blocks).
I mean, personally I would just say the Bedrock texture should get changed to something less ugly. Based on the entirely new textures we got recently Mojang is clearly okay with making changes to the appearance of items that have been in the game forever. That seems like the easier and less resource-intensive fix anyways. Plus this could get really confusing to have blocks that look breakable but actually are not.
Want some advice on how to thrive in the Suggestions section? Check this handy list of guidelines and tips for posting your ideas and responding to the ideas of others!
http://www.minecraftforum.net/forums/minecraft-discussion/suggestions/2775557-guidelines-for-the-suggestions-forum
Bedrock texture doesn't bother me, and it is distinctive…
I don't understand what it is felt would be advantageous about having bedrock change texture depending on the presence/absence of an air block 'nearby'…
Without a qualifying air block, one would still have the disliked texture…
Creating the needed air block to remove this texture would (in at least some cases) expose the bedrock of a lower layer – which does not seem to me a net gain…
Given the age of the texture, the comparative ease of using texture/resource packs to change it, and the hullabaloo that I expect any change to something 'better' would generate…
… I see individuals changing the texture to their preference (or covering the offending blocks in carpet, etc.) as preferred solutions.