3ds max is getting serious about node based modelling

It looks useful for quick and non destructive asset generation

i request comment from Lukas Tonne.

At least, this major upgrade shoots down, for the time being, the rumors that max was the next on the chopping block.

Nodes everywhere, my idea of heaven.

What makes you think 3DS MAX is next to be dropped?

Still not as powerful as ICE…

In the immediate aftermath of Softimage death there were insistent rumors to this effect. Now I think that ADSK intends to keep 3DMax around together with Maya.

I would have preferred they drop Max and kept Softimage but they only ever bought Softimage to stifle competition since XSI started to make serious in-roads into the game market and if ICE is any indication would have done something for the effects markets as well. I spit on AVID to this day (not only because of Softimage but because of what they’ve done to ProTools as well).

How is Autodesk preventing Max and Maya from cannibalizing each other’s sales if there continues to be more and more overlap in functionality between the two (now they’re giving it sizable animation improvements which is usually Maya’s turf)?

Regardless of that, it looks like both Max and Maya are getting significant updates this year amid their major effort to improve user feedback between users and developers (Autodesk developers are everywhere on the Maya and Max CGTalk forums for instance, they’re actually beating the BF in this department).

I am sure they are beating BF, because not only AD has a way more software engineers working on the products, but they are also making the tools for the users. BF pretty much making tools for their open movies. So as a user and game developer, I’d definitely not interested in advanced hair system and some other stuff. And what I am interested in, BF isn’t (even if they are, they just don’t have the resources to work on that).

Not to go off-topic, but finding Python programmer who either knows Blender API (and more or less Blender itself) or is willing to dig the API is a major problem. It’s not so much of a problem with Max/Maya (C++ or MEL).

As for cannibalism, the suite model just about hedges against the threat of that. Besides, Max is good at different things from Maya. Closer Revit integration has me all excited. And I look forward to seeing what might be possible with scripting and all those new tools.

It’s better than it used to be at least, especially since the crackdown on circular and unproductive debates on this forum (a major reason why this site was dismissed as ‘noise’). It was unpopular, but it is starting to pay dividends in the commit logs.

If it was still like it was a year ago then I would’ve vouched for Ton to publish a written apology to Carl Bass for berating his company (since they were actually doing a better job in listening to users).

I find it sad that so much money is spent on artists and so little on developers. There should have been about 6 months of pure dev work (hair from scratch, particles from scratch, despgraph, linking, etc) and only then movie should have started. Developing such big things such as hair during production is just silly, no wonder they had to hack the current systyem instead of designing one properly… ah… and so many people using blender in production, yet they need to make a whole movie… i
Autodesk is stronger now, no longer BF has the advantage of being open and friendly, and listening to users. Now autodesk does that, and is coming veeery strong. I really hope next time development prior a movie proyect is better organized and taken more seriously BEFORE production.

Ideally. However, crowd(funders) want to see tangible things, like a movie. It’s really hard to crowdfund software development of a specialized software package.

Happens with most free software projects. Users are absolutely nothing for developers, they couldn’t care less about them. That’s the only way you can explain how utterly broken the Blender UI was and how it is way behind even now. Or why the viewport issues aren’t a priority. Or why almost every feature seems ready to kick you in the teeth when you’re trying to do something new.

If you’re going to bash Blender development, at least try to be educated on what’s currently being funded and worked on…

https://developer.blender.org/diffusion/B/browse/GPU_data_request/;26e5c28d399eb57696529dc96eb2bf439a7df0cb

The thing with Blender though is, if they decided to do feedback in the way that Autodesk developed (that is a multiple choice voting system). Most of the votes would come from hobbyists and people just playing around in 3D rather than from people who use it for serious production work (which could lead to the impression of highly skewed priorities from their perspective).

Autodesk doesn’t have that issue because their apps. see a lot more professional use and the pricing tends to weed out the hobbyists and especially the kids and young teens. The BF has to find a way to balance the requests between both segments.

I’m all for giving the Blender Foundation a little stick for their (lack of) focus outside the Blender Institute projects Ton heads up. Hell, I cop quite a bit of flak for it. Thing is, do we really need to derail this thread to do it? There are plenty of threads where that is the subject and it’s easy enough to start another one if we really need it.

Do I think AutoDesk is beating Blender Foundation in listening to it’s users? Yeah, even with the amazing inroads Campbell has been making on the issue.
Do I think Ton choosing to lead the Blender Institute or the Blender Foundation (not both) would help with the issue of focus on the open films? Yes.
Do I think the subject of “3DS & Node Modelling” needs to be derailed over it? Not really. I’d much rather it didn’t :slight_smile:

So on the actual subject, I love node-based modelling. Thing is, cool as it is, I didn’t see many examples of it helping much outside what look like very basic game-level workflows. A good thing and all, but I’d much rather see a shared nodal modelling library that allows me to create the repeated hallways, streets, etc in the graphics application and export those settings (as opposed to the full geometry) to the game engine.

The procedural building generation that one can play with in UE4 is amazing. Being able to extend it in a similar manner as seen in the 3DS MAX demos of their nodal modelling workflow would be a major boost to game/level content generation workflows.

I once posited the idea of Ton stepping down completely from the Blender Foundation, but the end result was that no one could think of a person who would be a better fit for the job.

Also, one of the key points is that the BF is improving on listening to user feedback and is improving on its ability to get patches reviewed, and part of this is due to the work that the administrators here at BA are doing to help improve the environment to make quality feedback sessions possible (the work that caused some to cry ‘censorship’, do they still think so now?).

What is the BF not focusing on that you wish they were?

A lot of game dev related things, including making baking better and more robust, a few tools aimed to aid animation/mocap, etc. It’s off-topic though and starting another makes no sense as I chatted/e-mailed with some of the BF members directly and there is no way they will be doing this (lack of resources I mentioned earlier).

Note that I am not saying Blender is useless for game dev. But there are things that need to be ironed and be more robust in general, even before any advances in animation tools could be made.

And I get it, a great sculptor/artist can create a masterpiece with a rusty nail and a piece of chalk. But commercial game dev / movie / animation production pipeline is time sensitive substance and having tools that do the job fast and efficient beats having less efficient tools, even though someone with talent and a lot of free time on their hands could create awesome things with those less efficient tools. Time = money, in other words.