(• I don't speak English "by default", so... )
This week Autodesk has launched a new version of their comprehensive 3D animation and creation software Maya in a new version called Autodesk Maya LT which has been created specifically for indie developers and smaller companies.
Features of the new Autodesk Maya LT software include full support for all of Maya’s 3D modeling tools including NURBS and subdivision surfaces, Maya’s Hypershade surface editor, ShaderFX for the creation of HLSL and CGFX shaders and export to FBX format of up to 25,000 polygons per scene.
Other features of Autodesk Maya LT include import of .ma, .mb (Maya ASCII and binary formats), .mlt (Maya LT format), OBJ and FBX 3D formats, import of BMP, PNG, DDS, EXR, TGA, and TIFF as textures and import of AI and EPS structures drawings as objects.
It would have been great, but so far few are buying into it due to the restrictions. Really, no mel scripting is a deal breaker for most maya artist, even the ones who only use it for modeling and exporting. Toss in the random 25k poly count export limit… stupid since next gen game assets can easily surpass that.
Autodesk devs are actually responding right now to the critism of this move, they love the idea of the LT but find it crippled to the point of not being worth it. In this threadyou will find the shaderfx dev and the product designer for the LT responding to the complaints.
IF they did this right, it would have put a dent in Blender’s growth on the pro side. Surprisingly in that thread a lot of users are saying that they will just stick with Blender for home use rather than move back over to Maya.
Kind of odd, trying to push the one app that most people (except maybe SaintHaven) do not want to model in as some sort of modeling-only application for game developers? Without scripting, this is a joke for any game pipeline.
Really, forget about marketing or rebranding Blender, our biggest allies in the industry are the incompetent Autodesk product designers. Cheers to you, lads!
The 25,000 poly limit does seem to be a bit limiting when you discover that the design of today’s game assets can lead to you quickly running out (which I think seems to be one of the major factors that makes the $795 price-tag hard to swallow).
Does anyone remember the pre-Autodesk days when there was a software for game assets based on 3DS Max called Gmax, why can’t Autodesk just make a spiced up version of that old program instead (as it saw a lot of use in the game development community)?
Had Autodesk put a lot of their focus on good pricing, good service and intense R&D for one major DCC app. (instead of going on a buying spree), the door wouldn’t seem near as wide open for Blender to penetrate some sections of the markets that they have been dominant in. Maxon and Luxology are also slowly starting to chip away at their userbase by continuing to show some major development in their apps., but hey, their loss can be seen as Blender’s gain.
Did you even read the thread? Do you ever get out of these forums and see what many professional modelers use as their tool of choice? Maya is high on that list, yes even for modeling. I am hardly alone in being able to model in Maya, nor is it nearly as bad as you think it is. Really your bias shows way too much. A lot of maya users like working in Maya, they dont like working with autodesk. Dont forget autodesk products are just bought out, its not like they originated with AD owning them.
I am hardly alone in being able to model in Maya, nor is it nearly as bad as you think it is.
So, even you (the nr.1 maya proponent on this forum) doesn’t go as far as saying “it is good” and “you’re wrong”, but rather “people are able to use it” and “it’s not as bad as you think”? Kind of proves my point, doesn’t it?
How am I magically the number one maya proponent? I spend half my time on other forums just getting people to try and use Blender. What I am however, is someone who can, from experience, defend maya from false allegations made by users like you who often just sit around and mock an application you clearly have no experience in. Its just silly. Maya, to explain it properly is solid. It has direct approach to modeling, which for some seems odd. It works, and if it didnt work some of the best environment artist and character artist wouldnt be using it. I’m sorry you cant see why thats relevant. I wont get into the same old debates I have had with you regarding this subject. Just be objective for once will ya? This isnt a sports match between apps. Artist should have a focus on the field, not which tool they root for.
CGTalk’s Maya forum is still pretty active with people who use it as their main tool (one of the more active forums there with few threads that regard any sort of complaint with Maya’s modeling tools).
The truth is, the Maya developers in general have had a lot more time and resources to develop new tools that make use of Ngons and the like (while Blender’s modeling tools languished for at least a year or two waiting for the very slowly progressing Bmesh system until Campbell took over its development).
Heck, Autodesk is still believing in enhancing its modeling toolset through its extensions concept (though some are complaining they are doing this at the expense of Max and especially XSI users).
Maya modelling tools becoming interesting only in release 2014, where they included NEX plugin (the usual ADSK move) in regular release.
I’m not the only said so, the some words was expressed by Luceric (one of the maya developers).
TBH without plugin I found it pretty awkward and boring. Blender modelling tools, without bmesh, was just more fast ( I mean the bases and the idea behind the tools).
SaintHaven, if you have only tried MAya tools (and using it a lot at work), is obviously it appears good tools. When they presented NEX ops… I mean new modelling tools inside release 2014 many users said phrases like “finally don’t need more modo or topogun”
IMO this can be a game cage. Maya is wide used in industry, a real King of the hill (or queen?). Where MAya and ADSK in general lost ground is in freelance and small studios, where cinema, modo, lightwave and blender are very strong (and practical don’t exist at all in big production, expect some production and in any case are Maya companion). Is clear ADSK trying to regain consensus in this field, but is very hard, ADSK don’t listen the user bases, but only meet big studio needs.
ShaderFX is very interesting (if I’m not wrong is the old plugin called Turtle), but for 20$ you can buy Marmoset and really don’t think you need Maya only for this (or I totally misunderstood what is shaderfx?)
I have used Maya’s stock modeling tools and they are fine, though with the large assortment of 3rd party plugins it becomes better. This obviously includes NEX. If you need to see proof of stock maya tools, just hit up any of gnomon videos with known artist showing you how they model without those plug ins. Modeling in Maya without additional plugins shines with snapping, history stack, basic core tools and curves/nurbs to polys. Its a bit different but no less effective. This isnt to say other applications are bad at modeling, in fact quit ethe opposite. Blender is a great modeling app along with Modo. My defense of Maya has more to do with explaining that the modeling doesnt suck in maya, not that other apps suck at modeling. Different apps, different approaches, same results.
That said, I own a copy of marmoset toolbag. It costs $59, not $20. They are also planning a new major release will which cost more/ require an upgrade fee.
I just read a response from another one of their developers… as usual they totally farked it up. Apparently their target audience for this LT release is developers who make casual games for the iphone/ipad and other tablet devices. In short not something they want the indy artist to use outside of that platform, this severely restricts the level in which they expect assets to be made.
If I were to make another major software purchase it would probably be modo at this point, though thats still on hold. Not a big fan of the modo workflow, rather it feels weird.
No, please, I don’t want blaming you at all. If you like maya tools ok, what the problem? I tried it and, back in the days, I used one DVD from gnomon (Alvarez? Don’t remember) for learn it a bit, then I saw Bulgarov work and his Gnomon dvd and feel in love with softimage…
I brought marmoset with a special offer (20$), I was pretty sure was the regular price was not so different
About modo I have a modo seat, TBH, I hate it… one of the weird workflow ever tried, need a lot of customization (toolpipe) but the tool is not so spectacular and in any cases you need to click continuously around the sexy but very poor friendly interface. Where shine is rendering side, very good.
I agree with that assessment completely. Its still pretty functional and clocks in at half the price of the usual contenders. Though tbh after spending more time with Blender, I dont think I would make that switch to Modo. I might buy a seat for my gf though, she likes it and has to use it alongside nuke for vfx work.
www.gamedev.net just gave a rather glowing and praise-filled review of Maya LT, even suggesting that the 25,000 polygon limit is no big deal whatsoever.
Now the people that write these reviews give very high marks to everything made by Autodesk, no matter how small the update is. I don’t if that should be considered a disclaimer or not, but there might be a chance that Autodesk will catch wind of things like this and get the idea that there are no changes needed to how they’re presenting the product now.
The Fact Autodesk have done this shows a little desperation. Maya’s interface was never a selling point but more having to be accepted for the fact it’s rock solid in a production environment for most tasks and most importantly PRODUCTION ROOM RENDERING (just about every rendering environment was crash and burn including max which would constantly die under heavy load, Maya could generally push on through). What a surprise to see Sainthaven on another thread attacking, Zalamander was correct, Maya was never about being a nice environment to work in. Just the RAW ability to deliver on rendering tasks. Blenders modeling tools are better without question in modern builds in my eye’s, And the fact Autodesk has been near to unseen at the recent industry expo’s shows they realise they have a fight on their hands.
I’m pretty sure that Autodesk hosts their own events where all of the news and reveals is about them, the fact that they’re such a big company allows them to do something like this and still get a high level of attendance.
Also don’t forget that even if Autodesk’s M&E division fades out, they still have a mammoth presence in the CAD industry as well as a growing influence in the 3D printing industry, they’re even starting to work on algorithms to visualize tissue growth in 3D in order to dominate the market in organ printing and tissue reconstruction.
Actually Autodesk generally has some of the biggest, best and most expensive space at major industry events such as Siggraph. They are certainly not desperate. I did a bit of inquiry and confirmed that what they are doing is trying to tap into/exploit a market of mobile devs which generally use other software packages. They kept saying how LT was designed around the needs of the indy developer, but when you start grilling them on it the truth comes out. There are no needs, just an untapped market autodesk wants to be a part of. Thats it.
As usual, 3Dluver is off to provoke and cause trouble in the neighborhood.
@Dragon, Have to say ive also been very interested in this market. Autodesk have no patents that could stop any other company developing the same tools, Just today been reading about the new research of growing a mini brain from stem cells for mental health issue research & other fields. The medical 3D and biological engineering industry is going to go massive in the next 20 years, But if you think Autodesk will have rights that trump others your wrong, such things are decided at the governmental level within each country when it comes to Health.
I’m not saying that Autodesk will have a monopoly, just that they are the first software vendor to start producing the required tools and thus would have a natural advantage in the market if their product is the first out the door.
On top of what SaintHaven said, I believe there’s been posts on this forum from over ten years ago that made the naive assumption that Blender will herald the death of commercial 3D software now that it was being developed by the community under the Open Source banner, only to find out that Blender didn’t do anything at all to really put a dent in the revenues of the commercial 3D vendors in spite of its incredible pace of development in recent years.
Well don’t put me in that bracket of Blender will destroy other commercial apps, I didn’t say that. What i said was (and as most know) that apps like Blender are going to pull large chunks of market share away from the norm (e.g Autodesk products, In hindsight i think they may not of bought so many other platforms). Lower market share = Lower sales = lower profits & investor returns, The closer apps like Blender get to the commercial alternatives the more worried they should be. Commercial software will probably always be the pinnacle of the market (and i have no issue with that, ill use what app is needed) but Blender building fast puts pressure on others to increase quality to justify the price tags. The Ground truth of all 3d app dev is (thankfully) becoming a joint and shared endeavour.