Does anyone else think this is getting out of hand?
Okay, so as of late, Autodesk hasn't had the greatest track record when it comes to updating our favorite software packages. But here in this thread, we have had several developers from the company personally listen and respond to our criticism. This is exactly the kind of thing that needs to happen for development to be steered back into the right direction.
So rather than using this as an opportunity to dispense vitriol about all of the ways the Autodesk Corporation has disappointed us in the past, we should be having a thoughtful, positive dialogue about the direction the software should take in the future. The former solves nothing, the latter has the potential to benefit everyone.
It gets out of hand because people are frustrated, not because they arbitrarily decided to be dicks. So, track record has influence here. This isn't the first time Autodesk developers have surfaced and asked for open dialogue and talking to the users and so forth ... people are frustrated because this happens every 6-9 months and nothing comes of it. Well, other than an egg spline.
Maybe this time will be different! That would be awesome.
I love Modo and I think given a few more versions they will be at the level they need to be to start stealing Max users in a big way. It's close. Autodesk should sense that.
But I also like working in Max. I think it has the simplest baking tools out there and gives me the most consistent results when modeling. There's a lot of improvements to be made, however, and I think the UI changes in 2014 are a good step in that direction. UI is Max's weakest aspect, IMO.
The main reason for launching Maya LT was the requirement of mobile game developers, who often require multiple/cross platform support for Mac and PC. Many develop for iOS on a mac.
I can understand the polycount limit - even though personally I would rather not have MR or nCloth or stuff like that if I would develop for mobile. But no plugins and MEL is still something I don't understand. Even as indie you'd probably love to have at least a simple pipeline and some neat helper scripts to make your life easier.
Yeah as Shawn has said its tricky balance to get right.
The lack of scripting was always going to be a hot potato, and I see many comments from people stating that Maya is unusable without it. Personally I wouldn't quite 100% agree with that, but coming from a TD background myself, I get what people are saying.
Alot will depend on peoples work and the assets they're creating. MayaLT isn't really meant for big AAA pipelines. I did a Unity workshop not so long ago, and I was knocking assets out and into Unity, without going anywhere near scripting. So I think in a certain context, MayaLT might be an attractive offering to some people.
I think MayaLT isn't a bad start and as Shawn says, we'll monitor things to see if we can maybe build upon things going forward.
For the plugins is there something we could do to maybe work with third parties to help get the community favourites built for LT?
that wont work!
how do you get community favorites, by using sites like myfeedback ? so far it has had seriously bad effect on development of Mudbox in my opinion. what used to be a dedicated sculpting pipeline tool is now trying to be jack of all trades.
so relying on community favorites wont work since most likely you wont get a fair representation of the actual community. what you need is someone with development experience and some common sense about understanding what feature are absolute must in a production environment.
no MEL and no PLUGINS is a complete deal breaker for 80% of your target market and should be common sense for any developer. in this age of evolving technology there will ALWAYS be new scripts, new plugins that are becoming important additions to our production pipeline. putting a lock on the applications capability to grow its tool set is not progressive at all.
Sorry for the delayed post here but I want to thank everyone for their honest input so far.
Derek: Thanks for the input! Do you find clients are requesting 100k+ for single meshes? Obviously we need to be very careful on how we position this as to not cannibalize Maya itself but I'm keen on more information from your side of things. We assumed that if you were to assemble an asset in Maya LT that you'd still be able to use FBX to export the "chunks" of the asset so for a car you could break out body, wheels, interior, tires etc or an environment could be exported in quadrants or specific asset bundles.
Uncharted 2's character polycounts sat at around 40,000, and that game came out 3 years ago. My main concern is buying this as a freelancer right on the cusp of a new console generation and later getting character work with 50,000+ poly limits.
The poly limit specifically hurts character artists because characters aren't typically split up like the prop pieces of an environment, and usually have much highter polygon budgets. I think somewhere around 100,000 seems like a reasonable limit that will keep most game artists happy right now, but still force your film VFX customers to buy the full Maya package.
would xNormal's SBM be one of the plugins you cant install in Maya LT ?
also, Maya core is a product that is over priced given its stability.
it crashes on every type of hardware, even on certified hardware with certified drivers.
how do you expect people to trust their investment on such an unstable tool with such high price, and to counter that you release a lite version of the tool that is basically handicapped from growing.
seriously, you guys dont see anything wrong with this picture ?
I think loading plugins (something like Xnormal SBM plugin) is something people are worried about rather than creating them. To be honest python scripts and SDK are pretty fast and I havent found the need to compile as a plugin though Im just speaking as a regular tech artist.
Some key points:
No upgrade path from LT to other products.
MEL removed but custom toolbars will still work.
Work with 3rd parties to make game dev related plugins available.
No Max or Softimage LT.
Basically LT was aimed at people creating sprite sheets and models, and they wanted cross platform, so Maya was chosen.
Gotcha. Another question -- is there any Python support?
I'm in a scenario where I need a few contractors to have Maya licenses for a short period of time. It's fairly straightforward work that isn't heavily dependent on MEL or plugins, but we do use Python limitedly. A monthly license cost for the duration would be a lifesaver, and I'm wondering if Maya LT could help me there. Any information on this would be greatly appreciated. We can take it offline if it'd be better.
I couldn't imagine using Maya without the handful of nifty timesaving MEL scripts I've accumulated over time. So many core functions in Maya work in weird unhelpful ways and there are plenty of buttons in my shelf that have no menu or tool to correspond to. Personally I'm not terribly concerned about plugins and Python but Maya without MEL is crippled beyond belief.
I think loading plugins (something like Xnormal SBM plugin) is something people are worried about rather than creating them. To be honest python scripts and SDK are pretty fast and I havent found the need to compile as a plugin though Im just speaking as a regular tech artist.
yep. same here.
I don't think a small shop will compile plugins. They may use 3rd party ones. And even then I could imagine that working without using compiled plugins is definitely possible.
But working without MEL/Python scripts just sounds extremely annoying.
I'm really happy to see Shader FX on Maya and I want to try it as soon as possible.
Anyway I can't download the trial version,it's seems that I have a connection issue with autodesk's server. Does anybody else have the same issue ?
Abitbol
I'm having the same issue but was thinking it might be the firewall at work. Maybe the servers are too busy right now?
So I hear this a lot and obviously stability is going to vary based around complexity, hardware and other factors but I'd be curious to know what your stability concerns are. I used Maya as a production artist from v1.0 through to 2008 before I joined Autodesk so I've experienced my share of bugs but I run Maya every day off my Macbook and push it quite hard without much failure. If you've got specifics or bug #'s/CER #'s I'm happy to look into this stuff and see what's going on or where we can improve.
I actually disagree that LT is handicapped from growing as that would imply that we do not plan on continuing to develop it. My presence here should show you that this is a very serious venture for us and we're very focused on growing this tool and meeting the needs of the mobile/indie game developers while also soliciting feedback from medium and AAA shops on what we can improve around Maya core. LT has lots of room to grow and as a designer on the project I've got a lot of lofty goals I'd like to achieve with it so I ask for a little bit of patience and trust as we go forward with this.
if you work with highpoly and smooth preview on you would get crashes very often, no matter when you use a certified Quadro card or a certified FireGL card. I have tested both quadro and firegl cards and i have seen numerous other users report exact same fatal error crashes while using smooth preview and doing dense poly modeling. this is just weak opengl support in general.
as for growth, i wasnt talking about Maya LT growing internally inside Autodesk. ofcourse it would grow internally inside Autodesk, that is what all the subscription scheme is all about.
i am talking about adding customized scripts and installing third party plugins in-house without the need to wait for Autodesk support or without any further involvement from Autodesk at all.
also, i am assuming you would ask customers to purchase subscription to get support for installing third party plugins, right ?
To be honest, as a student who is currently working and making script in Maya and who plan to work as an indie developer later, this new light version of Maya is not interesting at all.
While I can understand the limitation of the FBX file, I think 25K is a bit low, not all indie dev are on mobile. What about UDK projects ? Cry Engine projects ? Or even Unreal Engine 4 project that will come in the future ? And indie dev that will have access to the new consoles generation (PS4/XB1) ? Do you think 25K is enough ? I know of course you can split an asset in multiple parts (even if it's not always possible), but that is where scripting comes to make the export more easier and straightforward.
Anyway, the total absence of scripting is a no-go. Check my signature : I made scripts to make Maya compatible to my own workflow, I made tools designed to my projects. That's why I love Maya, because it's easy and fast to enhance it with simple script. And allowing user to create JUST new UIs is clearly not enough.
And what about custom rigging scripts ? Not everybody want to use HumanIK (especially me).
sorry if that looked like "pot shots" to you but my comments are not directed at you personally but your company.
many others here i believe are talking about upper management(not product mangers) who never visit these forums and are only interested in making annual subscription money for their corporations. this whole annual subscription model with tiny updates are mainly focused at profit rather than innovation. it is no longer safe to invest for long term, everything is for short term profit. it is like Apple, releasing a new iPhone every season.
i can understand loyalty to your employer but i find it confusing how you could not understand the problem with "no plugins" as explained clearly. developers need to be able to install any and all plugins at will without any production delay what so ever or waiting for customer support.
What level of poly counts are we talking about here? The key here is getting the details so we can reproduce it on our end or even better if you crash you'll get a CER # on submission that I can then go into our system and look at the stack trace.
It sounds like you work more in the high poly/AAA market currently? I'd be curious what area of the market you currently work in.
not very high polycount, even something like 5k model could crash it.
here is a possible scenario:
you are working on a gun model, you extrude some faces, do a little bevel around the edge, go to face mode and try to select some of the faces you just extruded, BANG! CRASH, FATAL ERROR, all work lost! i have seen it happen to me, many other, seen it reported in many forums for many years now.
as for bug reports, sorry i have no faith in it. these Maya crashes have been in there for more than 6 years or longer. if you want me to think that no one ever reported these extremely common crash then i find it absurd. i reported them several time when i was working at THQ, nothing came out of it.
also, should it matter if i work in highpoly/AAA or indie or somewhere in the middle ? these crashes are not specific to any type of developer. anyone doing any polygonal modeling will get these crashes.
just google "maya crash smooth preview" or "maya fatal error"
Seems like a lot of people here don't really have any idea the actual costs of making games - indie games are low spec because of time & money, not any hardware limitations.
Just trying to be of help and see if I can fix some of these stability issues and crashes you're having. As I said before - send me the CER # and I'll look into it.
what if you dont get a CER window to report it ?
last time when i was trying Maya2014 with certified AMD Firepro drivers it still gave me fatal error crashes with smooth preview and face/edge selection. I make a habit of deleting history often so it isnt that either.
anyways, back to topic. couple questions if you can please answer:
1. if I wanted to get xNormal SBM plugin installed in Maya LT what would be the process ? (I dont want to purchase subscription)
2. If someone made some scripts like the ones made by Froyok, would i be able to use them in Maya LT (without asking help from Autodesk customer support) or am i stuck with only whats inside Maya LT ?
would xNormal's SBM be one of the plugins you cant install in Maya LT ?
also, Maya core is a product that is over priced given its stability.
it crashes on every type of hardware, even on certified hardware with certified drivers.
how do you expect people to trust their investment on such an unstable tool with such high price, and to counter that you release a lite version of the tool that is basically handicapped from growing.
seriously, you guys dont see anything wrong with this picture ?
Again, like Shawn I also hear this alot and I'm not sure I fully agree. I've also been using Maya since v1.0, so I've seen alot of changes to the software and stability. I'm loading many different scenes and data types, whilst jumping between windows and linux and I haven't been experiencing many failures, hardly any in fact. I've also seen some notable studios upgrade to 2014, dues to its stability compared to previous versions.
However that isn't to say that issues and bugs don't exist, as there are many factors that contribute to crashes and bugs appearing. And whilst many will naturally expect us to catch every bug, there will always be some that slip through. Which is why I always say to anyone (regardless of what ADSK software you use) please log bugs with us, send in those CER's. The more information we have, then the easily it might be to fix stuff. And if might related to something 3rd Party, we can follow up with them.
I couldn't imagine using Maya without the handful of nifty timesaving MEL scripts I've accumulated over time. So many core functions in Maya work in weird unhelpful ways and there are plenty of buttons in my shelf that have no menu or tool to correspond to. Personally I'm not terribly concerned about plugins and Python but Maya without MEL is crippled beyond belief.
I think crippled is a strong work, but yeah I get what your saying. I read on another forum (perhaps this one) that they hadn't tried Maya out of the box with no scripts, well I do this all the time in demos, presentations and even day to day work. Though there are lots of demo tricks you can use, I never like 'hiding' things from the audience, so I don't rely on scripts or secret hotkeys to show things working and its never really hindered me.
I do confess to having my own Maya shelf containing some small timesaving scripts, but I don't have anywhere near the number I used to have. Like many who've been using Maya for sometime, in the relatively early days, there was a tendency to 'overscript'. You'd create scripts and buttons for really small things, which in hindsight didn't actually save you a great deal of time.
I've spoken with a few small indie guys recently, and some don't always have the breadth of TD knowledge for scripting. Many are just building assets, getting them into something like Unity and then doing everything in there.
Personally I'd like if we could somehow find the right balance, but keep the feedback coming.
if you're a startup for mobile and don't have to deliver artwork to a client then even Blender would be a better choice. At least there's scripts available and no weird poly limits.
Agreed. Blender is actually a far better modeler than Maya, and without the plug ins, mel scripts and size limit... i cant see much of a point in this when theres clearly a better alternative with no cost at all.
If those limitation in Maya LT didnt exist, I would have thrown down $700-800 on the spot. I wouldnt need everything Maya has to offer, such as dynamics and external rendering, but If anyone were to buy maya, a fully functional version streamlined version of it makes far more sense.
Still a push in the right direction, just not good enough.
Really interested in this! I use maya at work to make mobile games and we sometimes export a large chunk of a level(made of seperate models) as one fbx to unity, this can sometimes exceed 40000 tris. Also I have one or two mel scripts I really wouldnt want to loose. Im still thinking LT could be a good buy for home use though.
Cool! I was just thinking I would like to use maya at home to do a few things: 1.try out the latest tools and workflows that we dont try at work. 2.Enter competitions and hone my skills. 3.Use other game engines we dont use at work eg cryengine and udk and any other cutting edge stuff - these may require plugins?
More importantly, what I don't completely understand is why Autodesk doesnt just go for quantity rather than less sales at a higher price point? Clearly their development style is disgusting (buy out x plugin or y software, toss it in, ask for more money next year...rinse and repeat), but if they just hit that market of users, many of which come out of trade schools with maya skills, and sell more copies to them for less.... it just seems like far more revenue would come in from a few $3500 sales that only a select few would pay for.
I wonder if they know that the general feeling is that people cant wait to wash their hands of autodesk, in part because they dont feel any consumer to publisher/developer trust. Does a large chunk of revenue made even go back into R&D? From what I have read it doesnt seem like it at all.
I think the issue with plug and mel support is to look at what functionality game engines require for exporting in general. People use files other than fbx. Cryengine has their own plugin support for exporting. So, is that unusable at launch? UDK has plugins for the binaries that are included (FaceFX for example).
I think the idea of different groups working with you to make plugins sounds great...if you don't actively use those plug ins. Otherwise you're waiting around for something that frankly, may never come. I'm also curious as to what happens if Maya LT isn't profitable. If Autodesk decides two years from now to drop it, is everyone that purchased it out in the cold? It's not as though you'll have a community creating plugins for it as workflows change and adapt to the next console generation...
The price is still too hefty and has weird limitations. At that point you may as well use Blender. Though at least they're trying a new model, I guess. I probably don't even use 1/10th of the functions and features in Maya.
So I downloaded the demo and I just assumed that there would be OBJ export, because I couldn't fathom any 3D app not having it, but there isn't an OBJ export. This makes it completely useless if you bake in an external app like xNormal or dDo, or if you need to go back and forth with Zbrush. Even if I simply wanted to render something in Marmoset for my portfolio, there's no way to get it into the program.
No OBJ export just doesn't make any sense. Modo or Blender are looking like better options.
What? Not to rain on your...rain, but Marmoset uses FBX. I've never had an issue with it. The other stuff though, totally legit concerns.
Marmoset and xNormal have some problems with the FBX format. I have myself had some problems with FBX inside marmoset. OBJ works much better for me since it's a much simpler format.
Anyway, not being able to work with OBJ is, well, weird ? How do you work with zBrush ? Via Maya ascii ? What about GoZ ?
Well that narrows it down to Zbrush compatibility, but I suppose Autodesk wants you to use Mudbox as a sculpting app. Using this program for any kind of freelance work would be impossible though. While some clients have asked for an FBX deliverable as an extra, the vast majority have required OBJ as the primary 3D file.
To be honest, as a student who is currently working and making script in Maya and who plan to work as an indie developer later, this new light version of Maya is not interesting at all.
While I can understand the limitation of the FBX file, I think 25K is a bit low, not all indie dev are on mobile. What about UDK projects ? Cry Engine projects ? Or even Unreal Engine 4 project that will come in the future ? And indie dev that will have access to the new consoles generation (PS4/XB1) ? Do you think 25K is enough ? I know of course you can split an asset in multiple parts (even if it's not always possible), but that is where scripting comes to make the export more easier and straightforward.
Anyway, the total absence of scripting is a no-go. Check my signature : I made scripts to make Maya compatible to my own workflow, I made tools designed to my projects. That's why I love Maya, because it's easy and fast to enhance it with simple script. And allowing user to create JUST new UIs is clearly not enough.
And what about custom rigging scripts ? Not everybody want to use HumanIK (especially me).
Very fair points and you're correct, not all indie devs are on mobile, however a great deal are and there's independent data to support this. They're not using technologies like Unreal/UDK, CryEngine or aiming for the next gen consoles. They're aiming at the mobile market. MayaLT was designed to help meet the needs of those indie and mobile game developers. If you need to expanded capabilities from your 3D package, for your pipeline, then you should continue to use 3ds Max or Maya.
So I downloaded the demo and I just assumed that there would be OBJ export, because I couldn't fathom any 3D app not having it, but there isn't an OBJ export. This makes it completely useless if you bake in an external app like xNormal or dDo, or if you need to go back and forth with Zbrush. Even if I simply wanted to render something in Marmoset for my portfolio, there's no way to get it into the program.
No OBJ export just doesn't make any sense. Modo or Blender are looking like better options.
no OBJ export, really ? are you sure you double checked this ?
that makes absolutely no sense. even a hobbyist will need OBJ export.
how is OBJ export feature considered something that would only be needed by AAA studios or high-end studios ? i mean how do you justify removing a basic feature like OBJ export ?
no OBJ export, really ? are you sure you double checked this ?
that makes absolutely no sense. even a hobbyist will need OBJ export.
how is OBJ export feature considered something that would only be needed by AAA studios or high-end studios ? i mean how do you justify removing a basic feature like OBJ export ?
Just double checked. It only exports to FBX and the MayaLT format. My mind is blown as well.
Is it really about the indie developers needs (mobile)? or is it more about exploiting/tapping into a market thats been using other tools for asset creation?
Is it really about the indie developers needs (mobile)? or is it more about exploiting/tapping into a market thats been using other tools for asset creation?
People can by all means choose whatever they want, that's what so good about having a varied marketplace.
For many developers (as I'm sure many of you know) working on mobile platforms, some teams/studios are very small. 10+ can be seen by some as big. Some of the games these guys are making are can be very simple, basic, but very compelling games and they need a high quality level. Games can basically look 2D, but devs are using 3D software to produce the content (for example, sprites).
People may want to use something like Maya, but the price point is too high for their budgets and the software contains alot of features that they simply wouldn't use. So now with MayaLT, they have something that could suit their needs, with flexible licensing options.
Of course, there will be some indie mobile devs who are developing quite complex and high quality games and assets, and so LT perhaps isn't an option for them. However for some people it is and at least now they have an option when previously they didn't.
You can freely convert FBX to OBJ (and vice versa) with our free FBX converter for mac and windows.
so i am curious why remove OBJ from Maya native export at all ? what was the thought process behind removing it ? obviously ADSK has left an alternate way to get OBJ meshes like you mention above...
however, when exporting mesh for baking or to software like Marmoset toolbag, it is important that the file format exports/retains all tangent space information accurately.
fbx has had problems in that aspect, and exporting + converting it to OBJ will most likely give even more poor tangent space results for baking or normal map accuracy.
Of course, there will be some indie mobile devs who are developing quite complex and high quality games and assets, and so LT perhaps isn't an option for them. However for some people it is and at least now they have an option when previously they didn't.
I agree its good there is an option for them but is this maya LT a viable option for people who want to use maya for home use? For example a lot of people on polycount are on a never ending quest to improve thier skills and portfolios, constant art competitions etc. If this maya LT has the necessary tools to help them on that quest then I could see it being massively popular here. Simply put that means people need to be able to make the latest most jaw droppingly beautiful characters and environments in the latest game engines. It will take me at least a few months to save the money but if maya LT is good for home use I will definitely get it.
I know this is for LT, but if a similar subscription model is adapted for the full version of Maya, which includes each update - I'd be super interested in that. I've already subbed to Adobe CC because they found a sweet spot.
I am tempted in LT at the moment for small personal projects, and 50$ with no annual contract is nice.
so i am curious why remove OBJ from Maya native export at all ? what was the thought process behind removing it ? obviously ADSK has left an alternate way to get OBJ meshes like you mention above...
I can't comment regarding OBJ export, but I see FBX as a more flexible option when it comes to getting data exported from MayaLT and into something like Unity.
@Ged
Yes MayaLT could certainly be a viable option for home use, especially for someone at an entry level.
"Yes MayaLT could certainly be a viable option for home use, especially for someone at an entry level."
I dont see how putting a "crippled" version of a program that out of the box already needs alot of cleanup to be able to be used in production decently a viable option...
seems pretty stupid the great thing about maya is mel and python scripting, i have thosands of lines of my own custom python scripts and plugins for maya 2012, and i shudder to think how it would be to use maya with out them.
Replies
Maybe this time will be different! That would be awesome.
I love Modo and I think given a few more versions they will be at the level they need to be to start stealing Max users in a big way. It's close. Autodesk should sense that.
But I also like working in Max. I think it has the simplest baking tools out there and gives me the most consistent results when modeling. There's a lot of improvements to be made, however, and I think the UI changes in 2014 are a good step in that direction. UI is Max's weakest aspect, IMO.
I agree that is probably true.
Unfortunately it does make it less likely we will get anything good out of this Maya LT thread, but I do understand your voiced frustrations
The main reason for launching Maya LT was the requirement of mobile game developers, who often require multiple/cross platform support for Mac and PC. Many develop for iOS on a mac.
Are there any details yet about how Maya and Maya LT interact, or the upgrade options from LT to the regular version?
The lack of scripting was always going to be a hot potato, and I see many comments from people stating that Maya is unusable without it. Personally I wouldn't quite 100% agree with that, but coming from a TD background myself, I get what people are saying.
Alot will depend on peoples work and the assets they're creating. MayaLT isn't really meant for big AAA pipelines. I did a Unity workshop not so long ago, and I was knocking assets out and into Unity, without going anywhere near scripting. So I think in a certain context, MayaLT might be an attractive offering to some people.
I think MayaLT isn't a bad start and as Shawn says, we'll monitor things to see if we can maybe build upon things going forward.
*edit*, if people want to see the main documentation, you can read it here: http://docs.autodesk.com/mayalt2014/en_us/
that wont work!
how do you get community favorites, by using sites like myfeedback ? so far it has had seriously bad effect on development of Mudbox in my opinion. what used to be a dedicated sculpting pipeline tool is now trying to be jack of all trades.
so relying on community favorites wont work since most likely you wont get a fair representation of the actual community. what you need is someone with development experience and some common sense about understanding what feature are absolute must in a production environment.
no MEL and no PLUGINS is a complete deal breaker for 80% of your target market and should be common sense for any developer. in this age of evolving technology there will ALWAYS be new scripts, new plugins that are becoming important additions to our production pipeline. putting a lock on the applications capability to grow its tool set is not progressive at all.
At present (though I'm fairly sure) there isn't currently an upgrade option from LT to Maya, but we'll again monitor possible needs on that.
MayaLT community site: http://area.autodesk.com/mayalt
Uncharted 2's character polycounts sat at around 40,000, and that game came out 3 years ago. My main concern is buying this as a freelancer right on the cusp of a new console generation and later getting character work with 50,000+ poly limits.
The poly limit specifically hurts character artists because characters aren't typically split up like the prop pieces of an environment, and usually have much highter polygon budgets. I think somewhere around 100,000 seems like a reasonable limit that will keep most game artists happy right now, but still force your film VFX customers to buy the full Maya package.
also, Maya core is a product that is over priced given its stability.
it crashes on every type of hardware, even on certified hardware with certified drivers.
how do you expect people to trust their investment on such an unstable tool with such high price, and to counter that you release a lite version of the tool that is basically handicapped from growing.
seriously, you guys dont see anything wrong with this picture ?
http://www.gamefromscratch.com/post/2013/08/28/Maya-LT-officially-launches-An-interview-with-Autodesk-reveals-more-information.aspx
Interview is below the official press release.
Some key points:
No upgrade path from LT to other products.
MEL removed but custom toolbars will still work.
Work with 3rd parties to make game dev related plugins available.
No Max or Softimage LT.
Basically LT was aimed at people creating sprite sheets and models, and they wanted cross platform, so Maya was chosen.
I'm in a scenario where I need a few contractors to have Maya licenses for a short period of time. It's fairly straightforward work that isn't heavily dependent on MEL or plugins, but we do use Python limitedly. A monthly license cost for the duration would be a lifesaver, and I'm wondering if Maya LT could help me there. Any information on this would be greatly appreciated. We can take it offline if it'd be better.
yep. same here.
I don't think a small shop will compile plugins. They may use 3rd party ones. And even then I could imagine that working without using compiled plugins is definitely possible.
But working without MEL/Python scripts just sounds extremely annoying.
I'm having the same issue but was thinking it might be the firewall at work. Maybe the servers are too busy right now?
if you work with highpoly and smooth preview on you would get crashes very often, no matter when you use a certified Quadro card or a certified FireGL card. I have tested both quadro and firegl cards and i have seen numerous other users report exact same fatal error crashes while using smooth preview and doing dense poly modeling. this is just weak opengl support in general.
as for growth, i wasnt talking about Maya LT growing internally inside Autodesk. ofcourse it would grow internally inside Autodesk, that is what all the subscription scheme is all about.
i am talking about adding customized scripts and installing third party plugins in-house without the need to wait for Autodesk support or without any further involvement from Autodesk at all.
also, i am assuming you would ask customers to purchase subscription to get support for installing third party plugins, right ?
While I can understand the limitation of the FBX file, I think 25K is a bit low, not all indie dev are on mobile. What about UDK projects ? Cry Engine projects ? Or even Unreal Engine 4 project that will come in the future ? And indie dev that will have access to the new consoles generation (PS4/XB1) ? Do you think 25K is enough ? I know of course you can split an asset in multiple parts (even if it's not always possible), but that is where scripting comes to make the export more easier and straightforward.
Anyway, the total absence of scripting is a no-go. Check my signature : I made scripts to make Maya compatible to my own workflow, I made tools designed to my projects. That's why I love Maya, because it's easy and fast to enhance it with simple script. And allowing user to create JUST new UIs is clearly not enough.
And what about custom rigging scripts ? Not everybody want to use HumanIK (especially me).
many others here i believe are talking about upper management(not product mangers) who never visit these forums and are only interested in making annual subscription money for their corporations. this whole annual subscription model with tiny updates are mainly focused at profit rather than innovation. it is no longer safe to invest for long term, everything is for short term profit. it is like Apple, releasing a new iPhone every season.
i can understand loyalty to your employer but i find it confusing how you could not understand the problem with "no plugins" as explained clearly. developers need to be able to install any and all plugins at will without any production delay what so ever or waiting for customer support.
not very high polycount, even something like 5k model could crash it.
here is a possible scenario:
you are working on a gun model, you extrude some faces, do a little bevel around the edge, go to face mode and try to select some of the faces you just extruded, BANG! CRASH, FATAL ERROR, all work lost! i have seen it happen to me, many other, seen it reported in many forums for many years now.
as for bug reports, sorry i have no faith in it. these Maya crashes have been in there for more than 6 years or longer. if you want me to think that no one ever reported these extremely common crash then i find it absurd. i reported them several time when i was working at THQ, nothing came out of it.
also, should it matter if i work in highpoly/AAA or indie or somewhere in the middle ? these crashes are not specific to any type of developer. anyone doing any polygonal modeling will get these crashes.
just google "maya crash smooth preview" or "maya fatal error"
what if you dont get a CER window to report it ?
last time when i was trying Maya2014 with certified AMD Firepro drivers it still gave me fatal error crashes with smooth preview and face/edge selection. I make a habit of deleting history often so it isnt that either.
anyways, back to topic. couple questions if you can please answer:
1. if I wanted to get xNormal SBM plugin installed in Maya LT what would be the process ? (I dont want to purchase subscription)
2. If someone made some scripts like the ones made by Froyok, would i be able to use them in Maya LT (without asking help from Autodesk customer support) or am i stuck with only whats inside Maya LT ?
Again, like Shawn I also hear this alot and I'm not sure I fully agree. I've also been using Maya since v1.0, so I've seen alot of changes to the software and stability. I'm loading many different scenes and data types, whilst jumping between windows and linux and I haven't been experiencing many failures, hardly any in fact. I've also seen some notable studios upgrade to 2014, dues to its stability compared to previous versions.
However that isn't to say that issues and bugs don't exist, as there are many factors that contribute to crashes and bugs appearing. And whilst many will naturally expect us to catch every bug, there will always be some that slip through. Which is why I always say to anyone (regardless of what ADSK software you use) please log bugs with us, send in those CER's. The more information we have, then the easily it might be to fix stuff. And if might related to something 3rd Party, we can follow up with them.
I think crippled is a strong work, but yeah I get what your saying. I read on another forum (perhaps this one) that they hadn't tried Maya out of the box with no scripts, well I do this all the time in demos, presentations and even day to day work. Though there are lots of demo tricks you can use, I never like 'hiding' things from the audience, so I don't rely on scripts or secret hotkeys to show things working and its never really hindered me.
I do confess to having my own Maya shelf containing some small timesaving scripts, but I don't have anywhere near the number I used to have. Like many who've been using Maya for sometime, in the relatively early days, there was a tendency to 'overscript'. You'd create scripts and buttons for really small things, which in hindsight didn't actually save you a great deal of time.
I've spoken with a few small indie guys recently, and some don't always have the breadth of TD knowledge for scripting. Many are just building assets, getting them into something like Unity and then doing everything in there.
Personally I'd like if we could somehow find the right balance, but keep the feedback coming.
Agreed. Blender is actually a far better modeler than Maya, and without the plug ins, mel scripts and size limit... i cant see much of a point in this when theres clearly a better alternative with no cost at all.
If those limitation in Maya LT didnt exist, I would have thrown down $700-800 on the spot. I wouldnt need everything Maya has to offer, such as dynamics and external rendering, but If anyone were to buy maya, a fully functional version streamlined version of it makes far more sense.
Still a push in the right direction, just not good enough.
I wonder if they know that the general feeling is that people cant wait to wash their hands of autodesk, in part because they dont feel any consumer to publisher/developer trust. Does a large chunk of revenue made even go back into R&D? From what I have read it doesnt seem like it at all.
I think the idea of different groups working with you to make plugins sounds great...if you don't actively use those plug ins. Otherwise you're waiting around for something that frankly, may never come. I'm also curious as to what happens if Maya LT isn't profitable. If Autodesk decides two years from now to drop it, is everyone that purchased it out in the cold? It's not as though you'll have a community creating plugins for it as workflows change and adapt to the next console generation...
No OBJ export just doesn't make any sense. Modo or Blender are looking like better options.
What? Not to rain on your...rain, but Marmoset uses FBX. I've never had an issue with it. The other stuff though, totally legit concerns.
Anyway, not being able to work with OBJ is, well, weird ? How do you work with zBrush ? Via Maya ascii ? What about GoZ ?
Very fair points and you're correct, not all indie devs are on mobile, however a great deal are and there's independent data to support this. They're not using technologies like Unreal/UDK, CryEngine or aiming for the next gen consoles. They're aiming at the mobile market. MayaLT was designed to help meet the needs of those indie and mobile game developers. If you need to expanded capabilities from your 3D package, for your pipeline, then you should continue to use 3ds Max or Maya.
no OBJ export, really ? are you sure you double checked this ?
that makes absolutely no sense. even a hobbyist will need OBJ export.
how is OBJ export feature considered something that would only be needed by AAA studios or high-end studios ? i mean how do you justify removing a basic feature like OBJ export ?
Just double checked. It only exports to FBX and the MayaLT format. My mind is blown as well.
Oh no so you cant even use this to make a basemesh for zbrush? We are sometimes using normal maps at work even for mobile stuff
People can by all means choose whatever they want, that's what so good about having a varied marketplace.
For many developers (as I'm sure many of you know) working on mobile platforms, some teams/studios are very small. 10+ can be seen by some as big. Some of the games these guys are making are can be very simple, basic, but very compelling games and they need a high quality level. Games can basically look 2D, but devs are using 3D software to produce the content (for example, sprites).
People may want to use something like Maya, but the price point is too high for their budgets and the software contains alot of features that they simply wouldn't use. So now with MayaLT, they have something that could suit their needs, with flexible licensing options.
Of course, there will be some indie mobile devs who are developing quite complex and high quality games and assets, and so LT perhaps isn't an option for them. However for some people it is and at least now they have an option when previously they didn't.
You can freely convert FBX to OBJ (and vice versa) with our free FBX converter for mac and windows.
so i am curious why remove OBJ from Maya native export at all ? what was the thought process behind removing it ? obviously ADSK has left an alternate way to get OBJ meshes like you mention above...
however, when exporting mesh for baking or to software like Marmoset toolbag, it is important that the file format exports/retains all tangent space information accurately.
fbx has had problems in that aspect, and exporting + converting it to OBJ will most likely give even more poor tangent space results for baking or normal map accuracy.
I agree its good there is an option for them but is this maya LT a viable option for people who want to use maya for home use? For example a lot of people on polycount are on a never ending quest to improve thier skills and portfolios, constant art competitions etc. If this maya LT has the necessary tools to help them on that quest then I could see it being massively popular here. Simply put that means people need to be able to make the latest most jaw droppingly beautiful characters and environments in the latest game engines. It will take me at least a few months to save the money but if maya LT is good for home use I will definitely get it.
I am tempted in LT at the moment for small personal projects, and 50$ with no annual contract is nice.
I can't comment regarding OBJ export, but I see FBX as a more flexible option when it comes to getting data exported from MayaLT and into something like Unity.
@Ged
Yes MayaLT could certainly be a viable option for home use, especially for someone at an entry level.
I dont see how putting a "crippled" version of a program that out of the box already needs alot of cleanup to be able to be used in production decently a viable option...
Fuck logic right ?
They tried that a while back and it was called GMax - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gmax - it didn't do to well...