1. Features that will not be implemented for a long time:
    Phisics integrations(two way fluid/soft/rigid body)
    improvement of NURBS
  2. Blender is compariable to 3ds max or Maya, but there is no way to prove whether Blender beats Maya/3ds or not.
    3.Blender takes a fair amount of time to learn, but so do commercial apps.
  3. Despite high demand for N-gons, no one is willing to devote thier time to help implement it. (personally, I don’t care much about N-gons)
    5.Blender will never get to version 5.0 or higher, but version 3.8, if Blender gets there, will have many features beyond all our wildest dreams.

Hmmm, I think Blender could make it to 5.0…but it seems almost too far away. I would hope it does.
Anyway, some good thoughts

I’ll make an alternate prediction. As Blender improves, users of proprietary software will find they are paying big big bucks for fewer and fewer exclusive features, and they’ll be features they don’t use 95% of the time. Blender will make it to 5.0 and beyond and proprietary tools will eventually disappear.

Hmmm, I think Blender could make it to 5.0…but it seems almost too far away. I would hope it does.

By then, global warming, worldwide famine, and the evil robot insurection will have obliterated most of humanity, and no one will care for 3d graphic media.

1: Well, patience is good to have, sometimes :slight_smile:
2: Yes, Blender is comparable to 3ds/Maya as a Honda is comparable to Mercedes (both are 3D apps/cars, respectively). Blender can produce some amazing things, no doubt, it’s just not “there” yet. Ok, I’m biased since I use Maya as part of my job, and been using it for ~5 years, but the only word I can think of right now, is that Maya feels complete, perfect even. I don’t like 3ds max’ workflow, but I bet it feels as complete to its users. Believe me, I don’t want to start a flamewar! :o So I just stop here…
3: I have immense problems learning Blender, and it frustrates me, because I really would love to express myself with this tool (free creativity!), and I know what can be done in it. I’ve been trying since Blender was liberated (not hard enough you might say), and only managed to finish (well, almost) one image back in version 2.36. I’m sorry to say, I did not enjoy the process - the then new face/edge selection was what kept me going… Of course, some commercial apps are very complex as well (Houdini is plain crazy), but I must defend Maya: It’s all about the workflow. 90% of the time my hand doesn’t move from the “WASD” position, and I can do everything I need. Well, this belongs in the “Blendergo” discussion. But sure, it takes time to learn the “Attribute Editor” in Maya.
4: N-gons is #1 on my wish list. I’m very sorry to hear that nobody wants to touch it :frowning: A good “split poly” tool in Blender would make me a happy man!
5: Blender 5.0… Whoa! :eek: No matter what, Blender is Free Software, and that’s all that counts! :smiley:

Yes, Blender is comparable to 3ds/Maya as a Honda is comparable to Mercedes (both are 3D apps/cars, respectively).

What can a Mercedes “Do” that a Honda can’t?
If only Honda’s were free…:slight_smile:
Seriously, possibly Blender hasn’t concured Maya, but I think overall Blender is better than Z-Brush. That brings an interesting point, just because Z-brush is not as good as Blender doesn’t mean that Z-brush is going byby, because Z-brush has features that Blender lacks. It’s not a choice between Z-brush or blender, because no matter what one buys, he’she can always couple it with Blender.

Not much, but it is a completely different driving experience. Arguably, the care and engineering expertise that went into the Mercedes creates a driving environment that allows a good driver to be even better. Not saying that the Honda doesn’t have care/expertise behind it, just that it’s of a different order.

Blender Is an amazing tool, but there are many things it doesnt have in comparison to Maya. We should all just get over that. 5000$ software is just going to be better then open source(at the moment), but over time, I think it would be possible to shorten the gap between the two. I think its lame when blender users get offended about someones comments saying that Maya is better. Its not an insult, its fact. Blender is free, and worth wwwaaaayyyy more than it costs.

So just be happy with that.
Drew ::cool:

Oh no, not again… Is’t there just a comparison chart these people can check out?
I guess money is no issue for some folks… but apparently functionalyty isn’t either.
People choose Blender because it fits their needs and not because it’s free.

Ive read numerous comparisons of CG software. One such comparison had Blender up against such programs as CInema 4D, Maya, lightwave, and 3DS Max. Blender scored quite high, sometimes above a few of the said highend apps.
Blender Also has great functionality, the price is a bonus. I was putting that out there for people who believe that price=quality. Personally, I dont think it does.
And yes, The whole reason I use blender is because it fits my needs.
Not trying to start an argument here, just stating my opinion, apologies if I offended or annoyed anybody

I wonder why comparison of blender to 3-5K software is such a touchy issue, it’s fine for me.
Is the general concensus that Blender is beat by 3-5K’ers? But Blender is rarely compared to $500-1000 software. Does that mean that Blender is superior to that price range?

Idea for N-gons: get an N-gon team together and code it in.

I like it. That’s like the advice in Better Off Dead on how to ski the K-12.

“Go that way, really fast. If something gets in your way… turn.”

That was my original point, It bugs me when people get antsy about the fact that blender isnt as good as real highend software. Up against 500-1000$ software, it scores as high as most.
The general consencus is that Blender is beat by highend software, but it offends a lot of people, who I think should be happy that blender is considered (and is in many ways)so powerful as to be compared to Maya, etc, in comparisons by some of the bigger CG websites/communities.

Blender is terrific. Yes, it lacks many things compared to other apps, like the afore mentioned N-gons (which I would like to see soon as well).
People thinking that there is a linear connection between price and quality are wrong, of course.
What you should take into consideration is that every app:

  1. Usually has different strong points and features
  2. Has a different philosophy and work flow.

The folks contributing to Blender are without a doubt working on making Blender more accessible, among other things. I mean, the test builds of the new Blender are out already and just 6 months ago blender 2.42a cam out. Isn’t that speedy development?

In the long term Blender will be on the same line as the commercial high-level apps, so if you can get used to it now, the less trouble you’ll have once Blender reaches the mainstream mass.

That’s my take on the matter.

I agree with that completely. Good choice of words.

Hi all
My 0.02 local currency…

Maya is, in my opinion, the best 3d app available. But it has behind it over hgalf a century of R&D (from the two companies Alias and Wavefront that created it). It also has the greatest international user-base of any of the major 3d apps, and is represented in every field.

I agree that Maya feels complete, nothing is missing. And the workflow is exsquisite. Maya is primarily used by companies who could loose thousands upon thousands for every day or week of wasted time, and the workflow that this kind of environment demands is one of pure efficiency. New features are second only to strability and efficiency in this respect. Casual users who are exited by new rigging, shading and paint tools but are bored by a 50% interface drawing performance boost don’t buy 200+ licenses at USD$7000 each, are are small for fish for ALias (and especially Autodesk).

However, Blender is easily the second best 3d app available (with all financial considerations aside), and I don’t think your going to get a better app unless you shell out for one of the four major ones, which all cost USD$2000 at least.

Also though, as said in 3D world recently, most of the major discoveries in 3D graphics have been made, mostly by comapnies like Alias and Autodesk, so there aren’t going to be many ‘hero-features’ to come. Maya 7 was a landmark release, but Maya 8 dissapoints, and I imagine Maya 9 and so-on will not live up to the several thousand dollars upgrade per-seat. Maya 7 will be a Damn Fine App for many years to come.

So, as was said earlier, companies have a choice of paying for continual upgrade which mightn’t be worth it, or looking at things like blender which form a perfectly suitable choice for many applications and are only getting better and better. And hopefully will continue to for ever.

I seriously believe that the next major cultural revolution (and it is starting now) will be in Open Source Software. But people need to stop beleiving that something is either good or bad BECAUSE it’s free. I think it is just as insulting to say Blender is good because it is free as it is to say it’s bad beacause its free.

Thanks for reading my rant (if you did)


Well, currently Blender is pretty far behind apps like Max and Maya. Most people aggree with that.
One problem that most posters in this forum seem to miss is the fact that Blender’s development is really pretty slow compared to the commercial ones like maya and Max. Max, for instance gets a new release every year, not just some bug fixes, but a complete new release. I’m not bashing Blender here, but I would really like to understand what makes anyone think that Blender is going to catch up, if its development is actually slower than the others?
Go, read on Autodesk’s site and just look at the new developments in the latest version of max. Then understand that that is just this year’s release, next year there will be another release, and so on and so on. Blender is still stuck on 2.42, when can we expect 2.43? Where will the others be by then?
I’m sorry if I sound negative, but we do need to be realistic too.

What bullshit. Do you have any idea how many features were packed into 2.42? Many said it should have been 2.5 at the very least, not 2.42. Ever since 2.3, each blender release has exceeded my expectations. I’ve thought to myself, “Wow, no way can any release be better then this!” for every one–every one!–since then. Now, of course commercial releases can have even more stuff; after all, they have more money. But by no means is blender’s development slow just because companies with dozens of programmers are ahead of us.

And what makes you think Blender is being slow in development? there’s usually 2-3 releases per year! Here are the links to the (3!) releases covering one year and one month (heh it’s exactly one year and one month :slight_smile: ), you can see all the changes that happened in that time. Notice especially softbody, fluidsim, compositor, render layers, material nodes, and the video sequencer.

June 15, 2005:

December 22 2005:

July 15 2006:

You guys sound like Blender is your whole life. Don’t worry too much.

sorry ebow3d, but your statements are wrong:

as an 3,5 year maya user i know, that the great features were done until v5 or v6… like fluids or hair… since then, it costs thousand dollars per seat, to get an new mental-shader or a new polygon tool.
and the autodesk statement: autodesk had never a good developement… max was since ever: copy from others, don’t innovate… the real developement is done by alias, sidefx and softimage.