[quote name='"Blackgold' date=' post: 47924"']Anything higher than 64 is overrated in my opinion.[/quote]
I don't think that word means what you think it does. How can texture packs over 64x be overrated when there's only 19 of them listed in the Minecraft Forums and they're almost impossible to use because of the out of memory errors they create? Every time any newbie starts Minecraft and wants a texture pack everyone starts jerking off over Painterly Pack and I've never fully understood why. Yeah it's customizable,but a lot of the options are just crap (holiday themed items,gag tools,special needs mobs) very few of the options looked good to me even when I was forced to use 16x packs.
If anything,packs below 64x are overrated simply due to the over-saturation of packs available and of people who defend 16x packs exclusively with their claims that anything realistic "ruins the feel of the game.". I get the idea of less-than-modern graphics having their own charm when done is a specific way,but Minecraft looks like ass once you've upgraded it's textures and gone back. I dunno about the rest of you,but spiders are far more fearsome for me when they actually look like spiders. I like the LB Photo Realistic lava better than vanilla lava because not only does it have an awesome heat distortion effect in it's animation,but it actually looks like lava and not glowing Kool-Aid.
Lately I've been hearing a lot of support for Sphax and I'm finding that to be unimpressive despite it's support for up to 512x simply because of it's flat,cartoony textures. It's like someone looked at Frendan's pack and decided to make it bigger. Did I mention that I hate Frendan's pack to? Those "clean" texture packs always bug me,why would you want flat,featureless textures?