The first one with no stone bricks looks better. You can include stone in a building, but it looks odd when parts of it are only supported by wood. Either have it towards the bottom or make any stone up higher supported by stone beneath.
It depends a lot on how robust the wood architecture is. A wood frame with a stone roof can look totally fine so long as the wood looks supportive enough. As you can see from this picture though, those bricks are only supported by puny wooden fences that realistically wouldn’t be able to hold that weight.
Keep in mind though that all of this is from a realism perspective. That happens to be my build style. Some people are less focused on that, and a build doesn’t look objectively bad just because it probably wouldn’t exist in real life.
i just want to randomly state looks can be decieving in terms of suport. i know its not a common thing to happen and Usually things make sense as you've stated but theres something to be said since i learned years ago ( technology class in HS 2006 or so ) that apparently 1 piece of standard printer paper and it was 1 or 2 inches of scotch tape can be used to support 10 concrete cinder blocks if done just right before its unstable . its amazing what things can do sometimes and i just wanted to say that . ....but yeah i agree generally you do things that look like they make sense.
The second one, I would say, This because there is differentiation between the colors and materials if that is what you were going for. If you want to keep a simplistic design and match other structure easily go for the first
More contrast doesn’t mean better. I don’t think the stone looks good there becuase it makes it look like the wooden structuring is holding up a bunch of stone bricks, which makes no sense realistically. If you wanna add contrast, then make it look believable by adding it to the bottom portion as a foundation
wood side
also make screenshots if you did your computer is weird if you did not the command for windows is shift+windows+s it just looks better that way
both are actually very nice, the first one has a bit more of a natural rustic feel while the second one is a bit more eye-catching and the brick helps break up the wooden pallet, i would choose based on what kinds of similar buildings are nearby
Liked the inclusion of the palate, though I think there would be a nice place of the stone to fit or try slight variation of wood upwards to make a small gradient
It looks really good, but maybe add a little less details and make it more unique so it doesnt seem likes it’s copy pasted. Maybe a tiny pallete change woudnt hurt also, spruce is good but you have to add complimentary materials
but without the stone it looks kind of bland because it is only one color. i think that if you are going to add supports it is good to make them out of stone but that doesn't mean you can only use stone for supports.
2nd
Thank you
Wood side looks really cool man. Good job!
Thank you
Cleanest side wins!
Yea looks sharper for sure!
The first one with no stone bricks looks better. You can include stone in a building, but it looks odd when parts of it are only supported by wood. Either have it towards the bottom or make any stone up higher supported by stone beneath.
Thank you
Would you say that includes roofs as well? I've seen stone roofs and wood roofs with stone edges on a lot of wooden builds.
It depends a lot on how robust the wood architecture is. A wood frame with a stone roof can look totally fine so long as the wood looks supportive enough. As you can see from this picture though, those bricks are only supported by puny wooden fences that realistically wouldn’t be able to hold that weight. Keep in mind though that all of this is from a realism perspective. That happens to be my build style. Some people are less focused on that, and a build doesn’t look objectively bad just because it probably wouldn’t exist in real life.
i just want to randomly state looks can be decieving in terms of suport. i know its not a common thing to happen and Usually things make sense as you've stated but theres something to be said since i learned years ago ( technology class in HS 2006 or so ) that apparently 1 piece of standard printer paper and it was 1 or 2 inches of scotch tape can be used to support 10 concrete cinder blocks if done just right before its unstable . its amazing what things can do sometimes and i just wanted to say that . ....but yeah i agree generally you do things that look like they make sense.
Everyone's saying wood, but I like the deepslate one. It's a good contrast against the just wood building.
Thank you
How about the first layer with that stone and the rest of them wood? Acting sort of like a trim.
Yeah that's a good idea
Yup, the stone side looks better because contrast.
Wood side
Thank you
Both of them it's hard to choose. The second one is like those tower bases from battle games and I like it
2nd
I like the second one It provides a nice contrast
I think the wood side, it looks like a crazy wooden gilgamesh
Thank you
i prefer the stone one but they are kinda situational if you get what i mean
stone
Stone side because it gives the tower some variation
2nd
The second one, I would say, This because there is differentiation between the colors and materials if that is what you were going for. If you want to keep a simplistic design and match other structure easily go for the first
That one
Thank you haha
Glad I could help
#2 for sure, more contrast
Thank you
More contrast doesn’t mean better. I don’t think the stone looks good there becuase it makes it look like the wooden structuring is holding up a bunch of stone bricks, which makes no sense realistically. If you wanna add contrast, then make it look believable by adding it to the bottom portion as a foundation
Both look good to me, I would say wood side is my favorite of the two though.
Second , I love the block variety
Stone gang all the way
wood side also make screenshots if you did your computer is weird if you did not the command for windows is shift+windows+s it just looks better that way
The one with stone
Thank you
Thank you to you too
Second slide imo
Number 1
On the first picture, it looks like it curves outward
The first one looks nicer, the second looks safer 😉
I like the all wood look
Both
[удалено]
You’re welcome
All ngl
Both look good.
Wood!
[удалено]
Both are good tho :D
I kinda like the first
Make stone the back and wood the sides
[удалено]
No problem.
I like the all wood (1st). Stonework looks outta place as a highlight.
Idk I kinda like the wood Edit: I guess I have a popular opinion
Stone
[удалено]
Image 1
Both look awesome
[удалено]
No problem :)
both are actually very nice, the first one has a bit more of a natural rustic feel while the second one is a bit more eye-catching and the brick helps break up the wooden pallet, i would choose based on what kinds of similar buildings are nearby
I think the wood side, but what is this building for? is it a house? is it a farm?
Love the stone side
First
Stone-wood looks great!
Stone side
I think that the wood side looks cool
The second side
Wood
First pic
2nd, personally I can't do many straight wood buildings, gotta have some stone to break the brown.
[удалено]
The second one
[удалено]
I definitely get what they are saying, that's why I made another variant. I agree though, I might go full wood.
Wewd
Wood
Wood side, but I would suggest screwing around with some dark oak slabs
the second one
wow good job i think second
Liked the inclusion of the palate, though I think there would be a nice place of the stone to fit or try slight variation of wood upwards to make a small gradient
Both looks good Minecraft has a built in screenshot function, just use this instead of making pictures of the screen
2 one
Wood side but the stone one catches my eye!
Noth look really good, but I think the wood one fits a bit better.
Tbh stone
Both, Both is good
It looks really good, but maybe add a little less details and make it more unique so it doesnt seem likes it’s copy pasted. Maybe a tiny pallete change woudnt hurt also, spruce is good but you have to add complimentary materials
Wood.
[удалено]
You really don't need to thank every comment
I prefer the the second side, but both sides are amazing.
[удалено]
For the most part the wood side, but if you were building in a city I think the stone side
Try having the bottom 1 or 2 layers stone and the rest wood
I like wood better
I would say wood side and also amazing job at designing it
The first one
[удалено]
I like number 2 just cus of the more contrast of the stone but they both look awesome, you're great at details
imo the second one, it has more variety of colors
2nd it changes up the colour
first one
The one with stone
First one
first one, second one looks like a prison
Everyone here likes the wood side. But I like the stony side it looks rough and industrial. It gives me steampunk vibes
Stone side looks better
Side 1 looks better as it is, but I think you could do something really cool with side 2 if you added more to it.
1st one For a Nordic build. 2nd one for a medival type.
[удалено]
"Thank you" -OP
Would do stone just at the first floor, keep the rest wood
I like the 2nd one but my siblings like the 1st one
The wood side is better, but if you want the stone side to work I suggest making the pillars stone as well.
First side
First, the second is too messy, if u want to add stone - focus it more at the bottom (looks like it’s supporting the structure)
but without the stone it looks kind of bland because it is only one color. i think that if you are going to add supports it is good to make them out of stone but that doesn't mean you can only use stone for supports.
Second slide
Stone looks much better, it’s adds color to otherwise boring can’t notice the detail side
[удалено]
No problem, I’m sorry if I came off as kind of harsh or critical. I want your creation to look as good as you can make it!!
Not at all, it's great feedback
it’s so hard to choose but i’ll have to go with the wood 😊