1
Are Shaders false advertising
ymirpeak456
Leeberator
Shaders are really nice and give stuff more of a realistic feel and have a realistic sun and realistic clouds. People use shaders to advertise their texturepacks and they look really nice.... until you download it and there are no realistic clouds or a realistic sun or any of that stuff, just the blocks. this got me wondering is shaders are false advertising because they didn't texture any of those realistic clouds or make the shadows. Shaders will get you more views and downloads because people want the realistic clouds or the realistic sun. I think they might be false advertising because they didn't texture any of the realistic stuff and its not part of the texturepacks.
What are your thoughts about this,post your thoughts.
What are your thoughts about this,post your thoughts.
Create an account or sign in to comment.
23
1
I can't run shaders
So I make renders =D
Shaders can only improve your presentation so much. Many times you can still tell a build is low quality even when shaders were used in the pictures posted.
So I make renders =D
Shaders can only improve your presentation so much. Many times you can still tell a build is low quality even when shaders were used in the pictures posted.
1
I don't mind at all if people use shaders on their texture pack images. However, if someone asks them to provide unshaded pictures as well they should comply.
1
-snip-
1
The shaders are nice to show off the packs, but it would be nice if they had pictures without them as I can't run with the shaders. I wouldn't call it false advertising as they are just giving them a nicer presentation rather than "Here is A, you're getting B."
1
No, but if you are going to use shaders for the images, you better have some non-shader images too.
If I use shaders, I usually use them for the featured image and a couple other. But I do add some without shaders too.
If I use shaders, I usually use them for the featured image and a couple other. But I do add some without shaders too.
1
I use shaders for my builds because honestly people bug me if I don't. Not only that but it makes your post look more professional.
1
Shaders can make something look prettier but it takes away the original minecraft- like gameplay, in terms of showing off a resourcepack a balance of both is needed, with the balance of screenshots without shaders to a screenshot with shaders shows for both and balances it out nicely
1
It's not false advertising if you use shaders.
1
I can use shaders with 1 fps ooooOOOOHHH Yeahhhh!
1
lol hahaha
1
AzieTastyYoghurtAzieMost of the time this "it's not fair" argument comes from people who don't have a good enough computer to use shaders.
How do you know the specs of their computers? Do you just assume?
On the occasions I've discussed this with other people, many of them have claimed themselves that they can't run shaders.
I know i can't run shaders in-game, as it would fry my graphics card. The renders are the extent of what my computer is capable of, and those take at least 10-15 minutes each
1
The actual shaders don't change the actual textures of the blocks that you textured. It just adds realistic shading to the landscape itself. So your original work is still showcased but it just looks prettier.
1
This.
If you want realistic clouds/a sun, use a 128x/256x/512x texture pack alongside the shaders mod.
If you want realistic clouds/a sun, use a 128x/256x/512x texture pack alongside the shaders mod.
1
TastyYoghurtAzieMost of the time this "it's not fair" argument comes from people who don't have a good enough computer to use shaders.
How do you know the specs of their computers? Do you just assume?
On the occasions I've discussed this with other people, many of them have claimed themselves that they can't run shaders.
1
AzieMost of the time this "it's not fair" argument comes from people who don't have a good enough computer to use shaders.
How do you know the specs of their computers? Do you just assume?
1
I did a blog on this a while ago, and i am all for shaders to use for projects, and to some for resource packs. With a project, there is an effort to make your build look as nice as possible, you are essentially advertising for your project, and what better way than to make some really great looking images. Azie is completely right, it is used to showcase your posts. But it also is beneficial in another way as it allows you to see more than what you would see in-game, particularly with large maps. I have a city i have been working on, and even in MCEdit, it is impossible to see everything in it. Rendering software allows me to show everything in a project.
In a resource pack, it is a little hazier for me because a resource pack for most people is to be used in game, and yes, most people won't see the wonderful skymaps or the reflection on glass due to computer limitations or lack of the necessary mods. But i also use texture/resource packs for my rendering software, which i do like to see how a pack will appear with active shaders and realistic lighting. But i also think there is a need to include in-game screenshots so as to satisfy those using these in-game without shaders. It is in no way dishonest for the pack, as the shaders even show the textures properly (so long as you are able to look past the shading), but to appeal to more people, and ease what some could perceive as deception, it is wise to include shaderless images for resource packs.
In a resource pack, it is a little hazier for me because a resource pack for most people is to be used in game, and yes, most people won't see the wonderful skymaps or the reflection on glass due to computer limitations or lack of the necessary mods. But i also use texture/resource packs for my rendering software, which i do like to see how a pack will appear with active shaders and realistic lighting. But i also think there is a need to include in-game screenshots so as to satisfy those using these in-game without shaders. It is in no way dishonest for the pack, as the shaders even show the textures properly (so long as you are able to look past the shading), but to appeal to more people, and ease what some could perceive as deception, it is wise to include shaderless images for resource packs.
1
When I see resource packs that use only screenshots with shaders, I'm not really all that impressed.
Sure, resource packs can look great when paired with shaders, but I feel like more of the Minecraft community plays without shaders. The preview screenshots for a resource pack should be showing off the resource pack itself - not how it looks combined with a shader that not everyone will be playing with.
What use are the previews if I don't know how the pack will look for me?
Sure, resource packs can look great when paired with shaders, but I feel like more of the Minecraft community plays without shaders. The preview screenshots for a resource pack should be showing off the resource pack itself - not how it looks combined with a shader that not everyone will be playing with.
What use are the previews if I don't know how the pack will look for me?
1
Shaders are shaders. It's smart to use them to showcase your uploads. Most of the time this "it's not fair" argument comes from people who don't have a good enough computer to use shaders. It's completely fair. Competition, folks!
1
As always, Azie's got all of the answers. (Looks like Jetra does, too, but Azie was first. Azie is always first.)
Yeah, shaders totally aren't false advertising.. Neither are texturepacks.. But it's nice to be able to look at something with vanilla textures and no shaders, because shaders and textures do distort the image a little and some shaders even make it impossible for some people to tell what's going on..
it's entirely up to the person posting the images, but a lot of people (myself included) will love it all the more, if you throw in one or two vanilla screenshots.
Yeah, shaders totally aren't false advertising.. Neither are texturepacks.. But it's nice to be able to look at something with vanilla textures and no shaders, because shaders and textures do distort the image a little and some shaders even make it impossible for some people to tell what's going on..
it's entirely up to the person posting the images, but a lot of people (myself included) will love it all the more, if you throw in one or two vanilla screenshots.
1
I agree with this to a degree. The problem with shaders is that they can make really anything look decent. I prefer when builds have screenshots with shaders on and off, it shows you what you're REALLY downloading.
1
My computer can run shaders. I was just wondering if they were false advertising and it looks like it is false advertising.
1
Shaders are really nice and give stuff more of a realistic feel and have a realistic sun and realistic clouds. People use shaders to advertise their texturepacks and they look really nice.... until you download it and there are no realistic clouds or a realistic sun or any of that stuff, just the blocks. this got me wondering is shaders are false advertising because they didn't texture any of those realistic clouds or make the shadows. Shaders will get you more views and downloads because people want the realistic clouds or the realistic sun. I think they might be false advertising because they didn't texture any of the realistic stuff and its not part of the texturepacks.
Yeah i agree. It's kinda stupid, like when you see a cool resource pack with advertised shaders you go to download it and bam, blocks. No cool sun. They are dumb!
1
i dont know but i see it alot
