lol my software is better than yours
Blender beats anything for polygon modeling except it misses on some features that max has and it's a viewport resource hog on high poly models, the first addons can fix, the second only a complete overhaul to the viewport renderer can.
If we're going by how easy poly modeling is then I would vote modo for absolute best. I'm learning it now.
My hardware sucks ass now that my computer is like 4 years old and worn to so much shit I can't even play garry's mod correctly yet it can still run Max in like OpenGL. (DirectX doesn't work for me anymore on anything)
Wow max on that sounds p bad lol.
I can run gmax (and I assume around max 7 or 8) on my 3 year old netbook
I think I slightly prefer the Max UI, but I'm being taught Maya now, and it is fine too. They're both great programs.
[QUOTE=DOG-GY;38115998]imo it's hard to take blender seriously because it's just not industry standard. while it may have the same features as industry standard software, and may have features that some don't, it doesn't really fit into any of the pipelines studios use. Anything developed in blender would need to be checked for consistency with other assets, and that makes it difficult to use professionally. Especially with normal maps because you can not assure that it is synced to [I]anything[/I]. The good thing about using industry standard software is that engines get tailored to them, and the software devs tailor their modeling apps to the needs of game devs[/QUOTE]
Not taking a software seriously because it's not the industry standard is the most daft reason I've heard of. Why do you think Autodesk has most 3d artists by the nuts? Luckily there are people who realize that autodesk isn't the only company creating or owning good 3d software. Modo isn't the industry standard either but that's not a reason to take it lightly.
In what way would you need to check models for "consistency"? That's just silly. It doesn't matter in what software you model as long as it's polymodelling and you know what the heck you're doing. Normalmaps aren't "synced" to anything?
What now?
I know you know a lot of stuff and no offense but sometimes it seems like you pull "facts" out of your ass.
you do know that in a production pipeline you need to check for consistency with art assets, and that what programs are used can play a big part in that, right? there's so many program specific things that are done to assets in a given studio's pipeline. also, if you don't understand what I mean by normal maps being synced then you've got some reading to do (i'll also cover this in the tutorial i'm doing). start here: [url]http://www.polycount.com/forum/showthread.php?t=107196[/url]
honestly i dont know why you'd think i would pull things from my ass. I have no motives other than helping other people. I do like a lot of the featureset of blender, and as i said a couple pages back I'm using it on a small personal project, but it's just not to the point where it makes sense in a production pipeline.
I take modo seriously because it is beginning to become pretty prevalent for modeling/uving in the film and game industries. From what I see, it's an incredible tool for modeling while I honestly have not seen the same results out of blender. i also definitely wouldn't say autodesk has artists by the nuts. artists could [I]easily [/I]go to alternative applications, but they don't. maybe you should ask the question of why that is.
you're coming off kinda hostile, i might be mistaken but if you are then pls slow ur roll.
Whoa guys calm down, there's no need for arguments about the seriousness of things like Blender.
On another topic, I want to see the system specs and the price of your computers, tell me to go to hardware and software subforum if you want me to.
[QUOTE=DOG-GY;38119752]if you don't understand what I mean by normal maps being synced then you've got some reading to do (i'll also cover this in the tutorial i'm doing).
[/QUOTE]
When will this tutorial be out?
[QUOTE=DOG-GY;38095124]well i started on it. i think i'm gonna make it a video so i typed up a rough script. i'm literally starting from defining normals and normal maps talking in detail about everything from why we use them to how a computer understands them. I plan to make some p good visual aids so hopefully by the end of it i'll have something intelligible by most everyone.
it could be done and uploaded over the next few days, depending on my school workload. I also finally sought help from my college's counseling for my ADD, which is pretty severe and has been left unmedicated my whole life (i was only diagnosed a couple months ago). I've gotten to the point where I am completely unproductive and am at risk of jeopardizing my school career. i guess dealing with that'll take some of my time up for probably the following week.[/QUOTE]
Short answer is idk, I'm still doing the script/outline for it
I have absolutely no idea what to model.
Model your avatar.
My pc is about 3 or 4 years old as well now, but runs max 2013 like a dream :p
[QUOTE=kaine123;38120380]I have absolutely no idea what to model.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=DOG-GY;38108419]As for the model, can you post the wires? overall it seems like you've got some shading issues due to smoothing, but from what i can tell so far it doesn't look too bad for a first actual. If you want to find cool stuff to model, I suggest start collecting an inspiration folder. I usually read the stickied threads of polycount's Pimping and Previews a few times every day (as well as the individual work threads) and save everything into an inspiration folder on my computer with the filename being the artist's name/username and where I found it (it's always important to pay respect to the concept artists and stuff!)[/QUOTE]
??
[QUOTE=DOG-GY;38115840]maya is honestly not a modeling program
my school uses and teaches it though every computer has a copy of 3ds max. students literally have to ask professors to teach max if they have time, and they will very rarely run a 3ds max workshop.
it's fuckin bullshit, especially for us game design majors who actually need to learn max as it's the most used in our industry.
using maya to model is a waste of time imo, when the returns from max are such greater. you have to think of it this way: 3ds max was created with the intent to be a modeling and rendering program. it's modeling centric, and that's why it's so good.
[editline]20th October 2012[/editline]
also a lot of the professors are max users, but have to teach maya instead because that's the curriculum.[/QUOTE]
I use maya because my college decided to merged the 3D animation students with my game course, so it's all I know how to use other than zBrush. :L
I am a Maya user but I don't understand why the modelling workflow is so bad compared to 3ds Max for instance.
I have used 3ds Max for some basic modelling and I didn't feel that much of a difference.. not enough to say which is better anyway.
3ds max is non-linear and non-destructive in its workflow. the modifier stack is designed so that you can easily go up and down the stack (assuming you understand how to not break some of the modifiers ie changing vertex numbering) and edit all the properties you could possibly want. it's really intuitive for poly modeling because the majority of the tools are under 1 modifier: editable poly. the graphite modeling tools are kinda poorly implemented IMO as they don't really mesh with the rest of the UI design, but it's pretty straightforward otherwise. really you've got 6 tabs with which you can create and modify most everything on an object and sub object level. the rest of the options are up in the menus.
it's not too much to remember, far better organized than maya, and it's easy to model things with tight control.
[editline]21st October 2012[/editline]
have some content:
[img]http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mc990od0881qk6eteo1_1280.png[/img]
early WIP on an isometric game concept i have to develop for class.
[QUOTE=DOG-GY;38122206]??[/QUOTE]
I found something I want to make, so nvm.
[QUOTE=DOG-GY;38119752]you do know that in a production pipeline you need to check for consistency with art assets, and that what programs are used can play a big part in that, right? there's so many program specific things that are done to assets in a given studio's pipeline. also, if you don't understand what I mean by normal maps being synced then you've got some reading to do (i'll also cover this in the tutorial i'm doing). start here: [url]http://www.polycount.com/forum/showthread.php?t=107196[/url]
honestly i dont know why you'd think i would pull things from my ass. I have no motives other than helping other people. I do like a lot of the featureset of blender, and as i said a couple pages back I'm using it on a small personal project, but it's just not to the point where it makes sense in a production pipeline.
I take modo seriously because it is beginning to become pretty prevalent for modeling/uving in the film and game industries. From what I see, it's an incredible tool for modeling while I honestly have not seen the same results out of blender. i also definitely wouldn't say autodesk has artists by the nuts. artists could [I]easily [/I]go to alternative applications, but they don't. maybe you should ask the question of why that is.
you're coming off kinda hostile, i might be mistaken but if you are then pls slow ur roll.[/QUOTE]
Nah you just came across as a Max fanboy but maybe I'm wrong. From what you've posted earlier it seems you think Maya is shit, Blender is useless and everything else you don't know or want to learn is bad.
Yeah you have to check the assets but the software used for creating them does not affect the final outcome. Even if you make everything in Max you'd still have to check how it looks in game so it's hardly a problem with the modelling software. Maybe I missed your point?
The syncing seemed interesting although it's quite a subtle improvement. Thanks for the link.
Why artists don't move from one application is probably for several reasons.
If an artist is employed at a company it doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the software in itself but the companies they work for. If you have a pipeline set up for eg. Max it's quite a huge task to switch to Maya, Modo or Blender since all inhouse plugins etc. would have to be remade.
Why some people (freelancers for example) don't want to try anything but the stuff they're used to is often because they're stubborn and don't want the world to change or bother to learn anything new even if it was for the better. These people hold the progress back. I don't just mean people using commercial software but the Blender fanboys who think Blender is perfect are just as bad for improvement.
The last reason is probably that a software doesn't have some specific feature but that's a lot rarer than the previous reasons.
And yeah maybe I was a bit blunt and interpreted what you said differently than what you meant.
Sorry about that.
Who thinks blender is perfect?
There are crazy people out there who start whining if anyone suggests an improvement on any feature. That reminds me. Another reason some people don't like Blender is because a lot of the users are complete idiots.
[QUOTE=ben_lind;38129092]There are crazy people out there who start whining if anyone suggests an improvement on any feature. That reminds me. [B]Another reason some people don't like Blender is because a lot of the users are complete idiots.[/B][/QUOTE]
What a dumb reason not to like a program.
64 new posts! Time for some delicious content!
Oh..
[QUOTE=DOG-GY;38127668]3ds max is non-linear and non-destructive in its workflow. the modifier stack is designed so that you can easily go up and down the stack (assuming you understand how to not break some of the modifiers ie changing vertex numbering) and edit all the properties you could possibly want. it's really intuitive for poly modeling because the majority of the tools are under 1 modifier: editable poly. the graphite modeling tools are kinda poorly implemented IMO as they don't really mesh with the rest of the UI design, but it's pretty straightforward otherwise. really you've got 6 tabs with which you can create and modify most everything on an object and sub object level. the rest of the options are up in the menus.
it's not too much to remember, far better organized than maya, and it's easy to model things with tight control.
[editline]21st October 2012[/editline]
have some content:
[img]http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mc990od0881qk6eteo1_1280.png[/img]
early WIP on an isometric game concept i have to develop for class.[/QUOTE]
That looks awesome. Loving the style.
Isometric is orthographic with a fixed angle, right? So couldn't it be 2D? Or is the camera only locked on one axis?
[QUOTE=ben_lind;38128895]Nah you just came across as a Max fanboy but maybe I'm wrong. From what you've posted earlier it seems you think Maya is shit, Blender is useless and everything else you don't know or want to learn is bad.[/QUOTE]
Well Max is my favorite modeling program so far, but I'm just starting to get into Modo (which looks even better). I like how it looks so far and plan to fully incorporate it into my workflow once I grasp it better. My opinion is that Maya is not a good modeling program (for a lot of reasons which I've talked about countless times). How I see it is that it's great for animation, level dressing, rendering, materials and a bunch of other stuff, but is not designed to be conducive to modelers. It lacks a lot of the modeling features of Max, and the workflow feels crippled when modeling. While that's obviously an opinion from what I've read and heard it seems like this opinion is the general consensus on the two applications. I could outline a lot of reasons why I (and a number of my classmates and a lot of industry pros) think this, and I'd like to, but I frankly don't have the time right now.
I like a lot about blender, but for the reasons i've already stated I dont feel that it can be taken very seriously in the industry. It easily could for a startup, but for an established studio making a middle-high budget to AAA game it just doesn't make sense. It's just the reality that they rely heavily on application specific workflows.
[QUOTE=ben_lind;38128895]Yeah you have to check the assets but the software used for creating them does not affect the final outcome. Even if you make everything in Max you'd still have to check how it looks in game so it's hardly a problem with the modelling software. Maybe I missed your point?[/quote]
Application specific features are the main issue here. Also you have to realize that workflows can influence the resulting model considerably. IE if you do sculpting passes in mudbox and your team sculpts their assets in zbrush, there may be disparity between your content.
[QUOTE=ben_lind;38128895]The syncing seemed interesting although it's quite a subtle improvement. Thanks for the link.[/QUOTE]
It can be astronomical depending on the asset. The examples in the link only show the difference between hard/soft edges, where the results are synced regardless. If you were to pull those same examples into a game engine that didn't have synced tangents you'd see a huge difference (ignoring the differences that would be due to better compression when using hard edges).
[QUOTE=ben_lind;38128895]Why artists don't move from one application is probably for several reasons.
If an artist is employed at a company it doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the software in itself but the companies they work for. If you have a pipeline set up for eg. Max it's quite a huge task to switch to Maya, Modo or Blender since all inhouse plugins etc. would have to be remade.[/QUOTE]
I agree completely, but also that there's a lot of program specific features that a dev may be using that are absent in other software.
[QUOTE=ben_lind;38128895]Why some people (freelancers for example) don't want to try anything but the stuff they're used to is often because they're stubborn and don't want the world to change or bother to learn anything new even if it was for the better. These people hold the progress back. I don't just mean people using commercial software but the Blender fanboys who think Blender is perfect are just as bad for improvement.
The last reason is probably that a software doesn't have some specific feature but that's a lot rarer than the previous reasons.[/QUOTE]
I also agree with this, but it's not necessarily the case, obviously. There's plenty of people open to learning new software (me!!). I find that software specific stuff isn't really that rare of a reason, though. IMO you have to consider workflows as also being a software specific thing. Considering workflows, there's a considerable difference between apps.
[QUOTE=ben_lind;38128895]And yeah maybe I was a bit blunt and interpreted what you said differently than what you meant.
Sorry about that.[/QUOTE]
No problems at all.
[editline]21st October 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=~ZOMG;38129309]That looks awesome. Loving the style.
Isometric is orthographic with a fixed angle, right? So couldn't it be 2D? Or is the camera only locked on one axis?[/QUOTE]
isometric games aren't true isometric projection as they're 2px over for 1px up, but they're always orthographic.
it could be done in 2D, but doing the art that way doesn't really work for the vision I have for the game. I'm not sure if i'm going to lock the camera's orientation or not.
[QUOTE=alien_guy;38129178]What a dumb reason not to like a program.[/QUOTE]
Yeah it is, but there are a some obnoxious blender fanboys who hate Autodesk with a passion so it's somewhat understandable. The community is a great source of information and help so getting hated on for using eg. Max is probably a bit offputting.
It goes the other way too though. CGsociety doesn't (or didn't, don't know about the current situation) really like blender. There are some quite great pieces that haven't been accepted with no other reasonable explanation than that they've been made with blender.
[QUOTE=DOG-GY;38129450]
I like a lot about blender, but for the reasons i've already stated I dont feel that it can be taken very seriously in the industry. It easily could for a startup, but for an established studio making a middle-high budget to AAA game it just doesn't make sense. It's just the reality that they rely heavily on application specific workflows.
[/QUOTE]
Yeah you're right that it probably isn't mature enough in those cases but I got the impression you meant overall for commercial projects.
[QUOTE=DOG-GY;38129450]
Application specific features are the main issue here. Also you have to realize that workflows can influence the resulting model considerably. IE if you do sculpting passes in mudbox and your team sculpts their assets in zbrush, there may be disparity between your content.
[/QUOTE]
Yes if someone else has to pick up from where you left off it's going to create problems but if you are responsible for doing highpoly, lowpoly, texturing and getting it into the game it really doesn't matter how you did it as long as it looks good and is modelled efficiently. A well made poly model is a well made poly model even if it's made in blender, silo, wings or whatever.
[QUOTE=DOG-GY;38129450]
It can be astronomical depending on the asset. The examples in the link only show the difference between hard/soft edges, where the results are synced regardless. If you were to pull those same examples into a game engine that didn't have synced tangents you'd see a huge difference (ignoring the differences that would be due to better compression when using hard edges).
[/QUOTE]
Will have to read up on this a bit. I'd love to see some more extreme examples of the benefits in a synced workflow versus non synced.
I like blender because my workflow seems so much faster in it then when I tried 3ds max, even from the beginning, right off the bat I was able to make a model in Blender and 3ds max is just... it's personal preference. I'm pretty sure 3ds Max is better than Blender in more ways than it is worse, but that's still not enough to make me want to switch. I might switch later on in my life if I ever decide I want to do this professionally (most likely not, you have to have some kind of crazy skills to be able to do it professionally), but other than that, Blender is a great program for...let's say, casual 3d modelers to borderline professional modelers, but in my opinion, it is not a program that would or can be used by professionals (effectively). There are some examples I've heard of where it has, like, I think one guy at Valve uses blender and Blender was used for one of "The Avengers" CGI cutscenes, but I'm not sure if either of those are correct. Although, Blender is improving rather fast, maybe in 1 to 2 years time, it'll be as good, but as it stands, 3ds Max is the better "professional" program imo.
[QUOTE=Eeshton;38130541]I like blender because my workflow seems so much faster in it then when I tried 3ds max, even from the beginning, right off the bat I was able to make a model in Blender and 3ds max is just... it's personal preference. I'm pretty sure 3ds Max is better than Blender in more ways than it is worse, but that's still not enough to make me want to switch. I might switch later on in my life if I ever decide I want to do this professionally (most likely not, you have to have some kind of crazy skills to be able to do it professionally), but other than that, Blender is a great program for...let's say, casual 3d modelers to borderline professional modelers, but in my opinion, it is not a program that would or can be used by professionals (effectively). There are some examples I've heard of where it has, like, I think one guy at Valve uses blender and Blender was used for one of "The Avengers" CGI cutscenes, but I'm not sure if either of those are correct. Although, Blender is improving rather fast, maybe in 1 to 2 years time, it'll be as good, but as it stands, 3ds Max is the better "professional" program imo.[/QUOTE]
I know several people who use blender professionally (including me) so it definitely can be used in that sense. I think it just depends a lot on what you set up your pipeline around.
Some things are made more intuitively in Max and some things are more intuitive in Blender imo. What's intuitive is ofcourse also a matter of opinion but both have their strenghts and weaknesses as do all software.
Why do some 3d programs cost so much, like modo costs $1,000, 3ds max costs $3,000, and zbrush costs like $600, why?
[QUOTE=andololol;38131121]Why do some 3d programs cost so much, like modo costs $1,000, 3ds max costs $3,000, and zbrush costs like $600, why?[/QUOTE]
Because the clients they aim for are bigger companies that can afford them. It indeed sucks buying them as a freelancer. It's not that bad though compared to Inferno that used to go for something around $100k.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
