Other than the particle effects (which are cool!) and recipe, this is a standalone copy of xdecor's Ender Chest. A lot of the code differs, but the functionality is the same. As a standalone mod, if you aren't using xdecor, this works pretty well.
What a silly and useless review. Yes, you just complimented the module for the unique offerings that it brings (particles and recipe), which are great, yes, and the entire point of this standalone mod. But then knock it for really odd things like the texture and a "feeling" that it doeos exactly what it is intended to do.
"this is a standalone copy of xdecor's Ender Chest. Perhaps that should be noted somewhere."
But if you would have simply read the readme for the mod that you are supposedly reviewing, you'd see:
I think you've completely missed the point and left a really unfair review.
This mod simply adds a void chest to the game and allows for some simple settings to control it. I've represented the mod and credited the sources. I don't understand your criticisms and unfair negative review.
My review is not criticizing your fork or functionality, it's criticizing that it is too close to existing mods. Whether this is actually a problem or not is subject to debate: I don't know what CDB people think of forks that are very close to the originals, but put under a different namespace. I'm willing to hear you out if you have any information up that alley- but if I somebody added a few extra particle effects and functionality to a popular mod - say, Draconis or i3, and republished their fork on the CDB, I don't imagine it would even get through the approval phase?
In my view, this mod does not give any extra functionality as compared to (for example) the ender chest from xdecor - I do not think of the particles (which happen to cause a considerable amount of lag, esp. in a server setting) or differing recipe as functionality - and therefore I am not reccomending it.
Your criticism is similar to saying something like Notepad++ is a bad program because you can just install Windows and have notepad. Or fries are bad because you can just get them in a combo meal.
This mod is for a player who wants to add a void chest to their game without having to add an entire bloated mod like xdecor to get that. Void chest allows for a small modular design that allows for granular customization to games. It's simple, compact, clear, modular, and extensible as opposed to a monolithic mod design. It's the best void chest mod on the ContentDB. If you had actually checked out the mod, you'd also have noticed that there are settings that allow a player to customize particle effects, something you cannot get with other mods. You want to be negative about this, that's fine, but you don't have to be unreasonable about it. It didn't click with you, you don't get it, you didn't really even check it out, it's fine. There will always be some level of unhelpful reviews on any sites/post/product. Thanks for your feedback.
The attitude isn't helping anything. From a server-admin perspective, it's not hard to cherrypick a feature out of a mod, hence why I wasn't thinking about that. I agree that having a standalone mod is useful, as long as there aren't any others (and indeed, this appears to be the only standalone void chest on CDB). After searching through CDB, I have found an awful lot of forks, some with very few modifications.
That begs the question- what if somebody severely abuses this? I know of plenty of bugs in most of the top-50 mods, some of them extremely dangerous, and if a player could simply fix these bugs, add a few cherries on the top, and publish the mod as "player's fork of x mod" on the CDB, this undermines the use of git - these forks should be merged into the master branch! (note: I'm not talking about this mod. I'm speaking generally)
The only way that a fork seems like it should be published on it's own is if:
(1 the git repo owner is gone and/or doesn't upkeep the mod, accept merge requests, etc
(2 the git repo owner does not want your groundbreaking features
... maybe something else that I can't think of.
Another problem is that it feels like you can always make a smaller version of a given mod and re-publish it: for example taking draconis, cherry-picking out the wyverns, and calling it a new mod "Wyvernis", lol. Because some people will just want the wyverns!!
Maybe the forks on CDB follow these unwritten rules, but- I'm worried, and I'm a git fanatic myself. I may have misjudged this mod because it adds no new content for server-admins, but okay, I see that it would add content for other people.
The attitude comes from frustration. I feel like you're bending backwards just to lay down criticisms of this simple mod. I don't agree with your opinions about forked mods or ContentDB. This mod is meant to provide a simple well and well functioning void chest for players and games. You have even said it accomplishes that.
I see that it would add content for other people.
I agree that having a standalone mod is useful, as long as there aren't any others (and indeed, this appears to be the only standalone void chest on CDB).
You read me wrong, then. My whole criticism here was based on the fact that this mod was too close to existing mods, I even write in the OP that this works pretty well as a standalone mod. I'm updating my original review to a +1, as we've established that there is no better alternative (well, no alternative at all) to this mod on the CDB if you're looking for a standalone.
The reason I continue, is that I am particularly curious now into how CDB manages forks and close-to-original mods. And what don't you agree with me about? What is your opinion on forked mods and CDB - I would be happy to hear you out.
Thank you for the revision. Sorry for the frustrated responses. I'll be working hard to improve the mod further and will consider texture revisions and additional essential features in the future. I think forks should be allowed on ContentDB, provided they have some changes, and users should be able to download, use, and review themselves to allow the best mods to come to the top.
No worries- looking forward to mod progress :) Thanks for your opinion: I personally see something of a loophole in allowing all forks because of changes, but hey, nobody's abused it so far. Hoping that day is far away or never to come.
On the topic, I felt inspired to upload my fork of 3dforniture (a small, ancient furniture mod) to CDB, because the mod doesn't have any prescence on CDB yet. Same with the old soccer mod by kaeza, but that's All Rights Reserved. Curious to see how the process goes.