Synchronous Posted January 3 Report Posted January 3 (edited) Volumetric Shading Refreshed doesn't count. I'm talking about halfway decent shaders. Why don't they exist? Is it just something that VS players don't care about? The *only* reason my family plays Minecraft is because of shaders and mods, and mods like Distant Horizons. I think VS is great. In fact, I've purchased VS for my entire family. But we all refuse to play without shaders. We just want the game to look decent, you know? I get it, good graphics are not for everyone. But we get physically ill playing with how it currently looks - it gives us a headache and its just hard to see. But why does there appear to be so little effort in introducing shaders? I feel like the VS player base could 2-10x by having them. I'm probably wrong, but I rarely encounter anyone who still owns computer hardware that our ancient ancestors used to first boot into MC. You know what I'm saying? Edited January 3 by Synchronous
LadyWYT Posted January 3 Report Posted January 3 11 minutes ago, Synchronous said: We just want the game to look decent, you know? Out of curiosity, have you tried playing around with the game's graphical settings? By default they are set to High quality, but they can be turned up further. Do keep in mind though that the higher you crank up the graphics, the beefier your computer will need to be in order to handle it. 12 minutes ago, Synchronous said: I feel like the VS player base could 2-10x by having them. For the record, graphics alone do not a game make. There are plenty of games that have pretty visuals but don't retain players. Likewise, there are plenty of games that have "bad" visuals but are very popular. 14 minutes ago, Synchronous said: But we get physically ill playing with how it currently looks - it gives us a headache and its just hard to see. With all due respect...if you're suffering legitimate health issues from playing the game, you should see a doctor. It might just be a headache/something minor, but it could also easily be a symptom of something more serious. 1
pigfood Posted January 3 Report Posted January 3 5 hours ago, Synchronous said: But we all refuse to play without shaders. We just want the game to look decent, you know? I get it, good graphics are not for everyone. But we get physically ill playing with how it currently looks - it gives us a headache and its just hard to see. I find your post baffling. IMO, Minecraft looks absolutely horrible with its Amiga 500 style pixel graphics. It looks like a game with graphics from 30 years ago, when 3D GPU rendering wasn't a thing (shader pack or not). I'm fine with the VS graphics. It's amazing, what's possible with chiseling at a very small performance impact.
Diff Posted January 3 Report Posted January 3 11 hours ago, Synchronous said: Volumetric Shading Refreshed doesn't count. I'm talking about halfway decent shaders. Why don't they exist? Is it just something that VS players don't care about? The *only* reason my family plays Minecraft is because of shaders and mods, and mods like Distant Horizons. I think VS is great. In fact, I've purchased VS for my entire family. But we all refuse to play without shaders. We just want the game to look decent, you know? I get it, good graphics are not for everyone. But we get physically ill playing with how it currently looks - it gives us a headache and its just hard to see. But why does there appear to be so little effort in introducing shaders? I feel like the VS player base could 2-10x by having them. I'm probably wrong, but I rarely encounter anyone who still owns computer hardware that our ancient ancestors used to first boot into MC. You know what I'm saying? Vanilla VS already has a lot of shaders. The game supports third party shaders, but so far there's been no interest in much beyond what vanilla provides. What specifically are you missing?
tinyoverflow Posted January 3 Report Posted January 3 The game itself already does a lot of things on higher graphic settings. I play on maximum settings with 1536 blocks view distance and it just looks good. I understand that Minecraft looks flat without shaders, but imho Vintage Story already does already most of the things shaders for Minecraft do. You have shadows, moving leaves and plants according to the wind, bloom, volumetric clouds, godrays, particles, dynamic lighting, fog and more. Is there any specific thing you're missing? You can also play around with the sliders like gamma, contrast and bloom to further customize how damp or bright your game looks. Not every game has to look like the latest Doom, Call of Duty or Battlefield to be a beautiful game. The way the game looks is how it's developers want it to look. This is true for both Minecraft and Vintage Story. Might be not your style, but that's personal preference. I personally like Vintage Storys visual appearance a lot. I mean, there are enough Fiat Multipla on the road to see that taste is very different and some people simply don't care about or even want AAA graphics. 1
Thorfinn Posted January 4 Report Posted January 4 On 1/2/2026 at 10:28 PM, LadyWYT said: By default they are set to High quality Maybe? At least in the past, I think it sensed your hardware and selected the most appropriate. I think my last full install on this machine set Very High, and I bumped it from there because I'm not all that put off by framerate. My nephew's copy came up as Medium, but that was several versions ago. 2
Recommended Posts