Autodesk 2014 What's New?
mod
If you haven't had a chance to check out the new features about to hit the market soon (normally in mid April) you should check em out now.
http://area.autodesk.com/2014unfold/index.html
http://area.autodesk.com/2014unfold/index.html
Replies
I see a lot of things added to Maya that should have happened years ago, but its nice to finally have them.
Nex and other modeling tools finally added. I'll give them a spin the first chance I get and hopefully they match or even exceed what I can do in max. I might dump max... I'm forced to animate with it at work and I don't wish that on anyone, but straddling the divide just to model and then animate is a pain I look forward to not dealing with someday, either max gets its act together or Maya does I really don't care...
Grease Pencil is cool and useful it will probably be nice to stop using 3rd party scripts and software to do the same thing. Having it all integrated and working with normal commands is pretty cool. I see non animators using it to critique environment and character art. As an animator who uses max I'm a bit jealous, all we have is a 3rd party script that isn't all that fluid.
http://docs.autodesk.com/3DSMAX/16/ENU/3ds-Max-Help/index.html?url=files/GUID-AA81EA1A-B4E1-4B47-B3AE-7C4AD62E24FF.htm,topicNumber=d30e3789,hash=GUID-F10EB01A-C1B8-422F-AE10-5AC53854C9EE
Navigate:
Modeling > Surface Modeling > Editable Poly Surface > Editable Poly Settings >
The new Particle Flow features seems really cool but they really need to make
some more improvements in there.
As Mark said there's some improvements but I'd rather wait a couple of years to a new version with some more new stuff and some bugs that have been there for years solved.
no upgrade from me!
Kees is in the maya team now...
Damn, that would be so cool.
I would love a full UDK style (Except faster) visual material editor to go along with their DX11 viewport.
-Kees
Is this what you're looking for?
Did they fix the normal map tangent space mismatch? Looks like they might have went beyond that as well.
Scroll down to see a bunch of videos showing some of the new features.
I'm personally more exited about the maya updates than the max ones. SO glad Nex is finally a part of the software. Can't wait, really.
I suspect autodesk has no vision of how to develop the products. Softimage gets downgraded from a full 3D modeling animation package to some ICE playground and a "character animation package"??? This is what happens when you own 3 competitive products and cannot decide which will be the leader.
I think that the products can be improved much more over one year development period (think luxology modo) if the company had clear vision of where the product is going.
Adding DX11 viewport into a crossplatform Maya makes the linux and mac os versions feel a rip-off too. Turtle baking also a windows only (Suite only) feature....
Also nitrous supports dx11 and hlsl like the maya 2.0 viewport but it's not being showcased. I guess autodesk have their marketing priorities..
Most of the maya updates were needed years ago and there's still plenty to do there
I'm surprised there's no official open subdiv support in either though.
There's perhaps a few too many wild assumptions there, but of course that's totally your prerogative.
If you go the link first posted on this topic, you can see Cory Mogk (Maya's Product Manager) offer some insight onto things Autodesk are working on. Unfortunately, due to various business rules (because Autodesk is a public listed company), we can't unveil full and detailed roadmaps.
On the new modeling toolkit, we haven't just dropped Nex into Maya and left it, we've actually built upon on it, so it can work better and we can colaborate to make improvements. Over the last few verions of Maya there has been some improvements to modeling (nips & tucks), and this is all part of an ongoing revamp of modeling and other usability projects for Maya, so there is 'resource' working on things.
We are of course aware of things like Open Subdiv, which personally, I would love to see intergrated in some way, but this isn't an overnight task.
On Maya's DX11 integration, this is great addition and long overdue (imo), and though the linux/max users are initially missing out, this is all part of Maya's ongoing Viewport 2.0 improvements. Even without DX11 features, there's still alot there in VP2.0 at the moment for linux and mac users.
Also, VP2.0 has an API that users can use to get into things, we also use the same API to implement things which is all about making Maya open for incorporating into pipelines.
This is not correct.
Maya's DX11 support goes far deeper then what you will find in 3dsMax.
The 3dsMax implementation will allow DX9 shaders to be converted into DX11 shaders, but the new features of DX11, such as tessellation, compute shaders etc will not be possible in 3dsMax.
Therefor I think it was the right call for the 3dsMax team not to boast this too much in marketing because there is still more work to do there.
As for Autodesk buying plugins and dropping those in to complement new releases, I can tell you first hand you could not be more wrong. Usually a lot of effort goes into taking a 3rd party plugin and making it part of the Maya build. I will spare you to details, but the programking effort behind such a thing is usually pretty huge.
Also, the work that went into supporting DX11 will djrectly benefit users on other platfofms. The API for thing such as tessellation are not platform dependent. But you are mistaken if you think that OpenGL enjoys the same level of implementation on for example MAC as DiredtX 11 does on windows. That is just not true. I dont think you could even run OpenGL 4 on a MAC if you wanted too. At least not easily.
Bellsey, it'd be great to see opensubdiv support but i understand there's quite a bit of work involved in getting it supported in the software. Still good to see you guys are looking at it. Thanks for the update!
For all we know, they could have fixed every little tiny issue on hand, insane, I know, but still, lets not become Kotakuists in here.
I agree that i went a little over the edge, but I always liked maya and don't see the old package growing as some of the newer packages. It just seems to me that people developing it are out of creative ideas...
I think there are still things with maya that need to be modernised and this is most important that some added features, so I also agree with that. If an update just fixed that, it will be worth it.
What i don't understand is when Maya is a complete product, why when buying a suite we get turtle baking and there is NO way of getting it in a Maya stand alone. I understand this is a motivation to get a suite, but for a zBrush user, this means paying for mudbox, and that is a problem.
I certainly don't know how such thing should be adressed by autodesk, but I am only expressing my opinion.
Isn't that how they tend to operate? It usually seems like they stop innovating once they acquire a software package, and then just rely on incorporating other plugins or features from their other lineup. Like Softimage, which since it was acquired has only really seen the addition of ICE modeling and Kinematics (which were already being worked on prior), a UV unwrapping plugin, the FACEROBOT plugin, the usernormal addon being included into the main program, and then features from other programs such as the view cube. It just seems like other companies such as Pixologic put Autodesk to shame every time they upgrade their respective programs.
I'm all for the efforts taken to make their products play nicer with each other, I just don't see why the prices keep climbing when all we seem to get is something as minimal as the camera sequencer.
On one hand you are moaning about Maya integrating plugins instead of building its own tools from scratch, then you are bitching about not getting access to Turtle, which was also a 3rd party plugin.
I am usually among the disappointed when it comes to Maya releases, but this year it has gotten a lot of good additions. I also participated on the Maya feedback site, and got e-mails notifying me that a bunch of stuff is "fixed" in 2014.
Obviously there is going to be stuff that people want that doesn't get implemented, or on the flip side stuff added that you didn't think anyone wanted (Grease Pencil), but this year I don't think anyone can complain about Maya too much.
I also think that having a creative vision about a product directly implies that you come out with original ways of solving the problem the product has, that is better than a third party product, because as a developer you must understand the product better.
I think Grease pencil is a good and useful tool, I only said that it seems like too little development work for a company as autodesk to put into one of its flagship products... I think there should be at least 3-4 more grease pencil tools in a version update of a software. I think such update should be included for free for previous version owners.
I agree that some features please some people and not the others. Modo also ignores many game dev requests release after release
The problems crop up when integrating the 3rd party stuff. Sometimes the 3rd party author had to do a bunch of crazy work arounds because they where not 1st party and those issues don't get resolved because it all just works.
Or they just couldn't come up with a better way to work it, not as well versed in a few programming techniques, or where just getting familiar with the language and program, had a full time job, figure they will get around to it someday, or they only interact with an object in a particular way "Sorry this object needs to be collapsed to editable mesh" great... I've got a stack I really don't want to collapse.
Once the plug-in is acquired if no one takes care of those crazy work arounds and everyone just carries on because on the surface it all just sort of works, then as time goes other people go to build on whats there and its a total nightmare. 18 different ways to do the same thing all of them coming from different systems and all of it tangled together by a bunch of 3rd party people who had different levels of interest in making their code usable by other people.
A prime example of this is sitting inside 3dsmax.
Editable Mesh (original legacy)
Editable Poly (3rd party)
Polyboost/Graphite Modeling/Ribbon Tools (3rd party)
What happens is there are 3-4 different ways just to interact with the same things, sometimes the interface is identical but the code is using a completely different system, to do the exact same thing. Chamfer, loops rings, Slice ect...
What about the UV editor, want to convert a selection of edges to verts or polys? Can't hold down a key and press the icon like you can in a bunch of other tools, even through the conversion methods are actually coded into the UV editor, they just aren't hooked up to operate the same way.
Simple fix NEVER been done, not even when it was overhauled err... re-skinned a few versions back. Some 3rd party guy is going to do it with a new set of buttons and that new button is going to get tacked on as a new method right along side the old way, what-do-ya-wanna-bet?
Polyboost was the same way it was originally designed so you could hide the command panel and ignore the edit poly commands. As a result polyboost had a bunch of duplicate and only slightly improved functions all of which should have been rolled into edit poly. But instead it was duplicated into a ribbon. Brilliant now we have loop, ring, bevel and chamfer functions hogging up even more screen space in two places.
Everything that was in polyboost should have gone into improving Edit Poly.
Everything that was in Edit poly should have gone into improving Edit Mesh.
SoundTrax was dumped in max as prosound, nothing else changed other than the name. It still has it's goofy 100 sound file limit, which technically you can get around by adding 99 and then adding 2-3-400 more. It still has some functions that say they do one thing and don't do anything and it still has somethings that aren't quite exposed as they should be making them useless.
This all leads to all kinds of confusion especially around the 3rd party folks who are actually doing the innovating. Because there isn't a cohesive base that gets upgraded, it's actually corrosive to the user base.
So far all I see is window dressing and papering over of some core issues that have been there for a very long time. I'm sure they are complex and difficult to tackle but they should be dealt with.
No doubt in response to this, we'll get another ribbon...
Don't joke like that! You'll vex it!
Awesome! This was a much needed fix. Mind you there is a scriptable fix in the 2012 Design version
I do wonder why Softimage has such a huge hold over Japan.
The additions in the new software sounds fairly nice. Not too keen about the new logos but that's not really relevant in the grand scheme of things.
2. Sooo, no catmull-clark for Max??... really?
3. No talk about the new 'Enhanced Menu' system(which looks really cool and fresh)?... I had to dig my way through help files to get a better look at them...
4. Aaand Maya gets a set of modeling tools, how about a decent Node editor for Max, for gods sake...
I agree with this. Maybe the experience acquired from developing all the packages simultaneously would come to better fruition in a new ULTIMATE package
Some customizable UI / UX would probably be a must though... The backend could be just one.
Ive used max for 8 years now and had maya on the side.
10 years ago my friend once said " Dont use max since maya will be able to do everything but better"
Now I shall be moving over to maya for good.
I can see how that is confusing, but there was a Maya prototype of ShaderFX developed by me which was then acquired by Autodesk (specifically Frank Delise) to further develop.
The Maya prototype was from scratch, so it had nothing to do with the 3dsMax version other then everything I learned from it and wanted to change was changed.
The prototype, at one point, ran both in Maya, 3dsMax and stand-alone(-ish).
At the moment, we are just focusing on Maya.
I think that makes sense and I don't feel there is any Autodesk evilness behind it. Its easier to make it work really well in one app first.
Luckily the code is pretty application independent so if it ever makes sense to make it work in Max I am sure it can be done.
Autodesk didn't really 'kill' the old 3dsMax version.
It was mutually agreed upon to stop its development and focus on the new version.
After about 5+ years of the old version, it really was time to start from scratch.
You can do such amazing things with shaders now and the old version was starting to show its age. The old version was a 'fun idea' that Ben Cloward and I had years ago that kind of grew out of hand because we both loved the concept.
Can you please link me to where I can see this maya shader FX program? (If its publicly availible, that is) I am not a maya user but I would like to see it.
New modeling tools look cool though
Mayax?
Sounds like some kind of Anti-Depressant.
EDIT:
Actually its fairly ingenious the scam Autodesk have. Other than mostly a Monopoly. They make the strengths of one program greater than the other. So a studio in theory to cover all basis has to purchase 2 or more (Don't forget Softimage), network licenses for some boxes versus one.
Appreciate the new modelling updates. I don't think Maya users can get enough modellig updates! But from the previews it now looks like there are now two soft selection tools, two bevel tools, two bridge tools, three split selection tools and two cut tools now? (ie the Nex version and the now legacy Maya version)etc..
I don't expect a message back explaining anything, but please kill off the legacy tools! Since Maya 2014 binary no longer talks to previous versions its a good time to do it
Delissssssse you traitooooor!...lol, I was just really looking forward to Max getting some Shader(FX) love... Thanks for clearing things up btw...
Btw, that Decimation/Auto-Retopo function in Maya's new tools looks really nice, but hey we got ProOptimizer... sigh.
I agree. I think it is similar to what XSI has, where it can keep the quads etc. I was happy to see that in Maya!