I actually quite like this thread. Since you already have a lot modeling experience and (understandably) high expectations, I think that great suggestions can come out of it. And I think I understand your frustrations
Now of course a lot of the suggestions being made in this thread will be strongly biased, since people who mostly used one application for years are bound to praise it over the other ones despite glaring weaknesses. I'll try to share my 2c and be as objective as possible. Note that I cannot make any comment about scripting, APIs and tools authoring, as I am not a programmer.
- First of all, I agree with your opinion about Maya as far as modeling goes. I actually quite like the program when it comes to the way it structured and exposed, but indeed things like the implementation of the recent "modeling toolkit" are just nonsensical. Now of course these NEX interactive tools are great ... but the fact that they rely on yet another panel to be turned on or off in order to step in and out of this special mode is just not acceptable. Adding to that the way that Maya can be very finicky at times when it comes to selection (like, allowing one to hit and select an object while effectively working at the vertex level of another one), I just cannot recommend it and understand your issues with it. The *only* instance where I found it to be elegant and powerful is when I saw Rich Diamant use Maya with his own modeling tool, which he wrote from scratch over the years and tailored precisely to his needs. All other modeling demos I have seen, even by highly regarded professional modelers who swear by the app, were very underwhelming and painful to watch.
- Max could still be an extremely powerful program ... if only AD could get rid of all the UI glitches and micro-stuttering which appeared over the years. I've had the opportunity to use older versions of the program for years at various studio jobs, and ended up with an extremely customized UI and workflow allowing for fast modeling speeds. So, if you can find a license of 2009/2010 this could be a good fit for your needs. Of course it would require a lot of customization and tweaks to make it viable, and there are lots of problems with the program, but people here on this forum can help. I just don't know if I can recommend newer iterations of it, as I've had bed experience with them.
- Modo keeps being brought up even tho you clearly stated that you've had bad experiences with it. That too I can understand : I have always been very tempted to use it, even bought the Steam version, but I keep getting small micro glitches with it which alters my trust in the program. I also keep hearing about it's unprecedented modeling speed, but my (admittedly short) tests didn't reflect that. If I remember correctly I was disappointed by the lack of a fast interaction mode letting me freely manipulate components in screen space, but I might be wrong and there might be scripts to go around the issue. I am personally willing to give it yet another go since people like EarthQuake, Seneca Maynard and Tor Frick all use it. The following video shows some powerful tools - I just find the overall user interaction to be a bit finicky and kind of slow, with all the preselction highlighting going on.
- I tried Blender too, and even tho the graphical interface is extremely odd with its nonsensical paradigm of pulled-out panels coming out of nowhere, I found the program to be interesting as whole ... but only after being walked through by a friend in a live Hangout session, and after a few months of not using it I pretty much forgot everything Also, and I know it might sound petty, but I have a hard time "trusting" a program with such terrible default lighting and fisheye FOV (similarly to your distrust in Modo because of its odd default trackball rotation). First impressions matter a lot. On a side note, a lot of die-hard Blender users seem to praise its keyboard shortcuts ... which is something I just don't quite understand that, since every 3d environment allows for custom shortcuts anyways.
- Now there are a few underdogs. XSI always looked quite solid to me, and the locked interface has a certain charm (which also means that resources are not wasted on that). You might want to have a look at Vitaly Bulgarov's excellent video about it.
- Then there's the extreme underdog : Anvil/Voidworld. I never quite took the time to experiment with it, but the attitude of the developer is in a league of its own. You might want to check the main thread about it :
It is definitely something to keep an eye on. The biggest thing against it is that there is close to no content about it, which in turn raises the barrier of entry. But it might be worth a try. I am also tempted to bring up Mirai ... but that would be a bit of a stretch.
I hope this helps ! I am very curious to see what will come out of this thread. And I hope you had a good night
I love modeling in Softimage XSI, but I have trouble recommending it because it's been killed off by Autodesk, and isn't commonly used inside the industry outside of a few studios.
Honestly - Do not use wings or Milkshape If I recall they are no longer supported by their developers anymore.
Blender -
Here is why I recommend it -
100% FREE under the GPL.
Open Source - You can get the source code and extend it yourself.
Lots of knowledge able community members to help you out.
Gaining Industry support - Companies such as VALVE and EPIC Games have made sizable contributions to the Blender foundation to improve it.
Cross platform - Windows, MacOSX, and Linux Support.
Multi-Screen support for modeling, animation, composting, Sculpting, etc.
Also -
If you are coming from MAX or Maya here are a few addons that are a must have if you choose blender.
- First of all, I agree with your opinion about Maya as far as modeling goes.
I think Max and Maya work in fundamentally different ways, and some people enjoy Maya's modelling methods, and others enjoy Max's; honestly, I learned Max in school and tried to work with it, when I thought Max was the only industry-guaranteed software. But after learning Maya, which I'd known for a few years beforehand, Max just felt chaotic, bulky, and overly convoluted. I really didn't like the stack, and the tools didn't feel intuitive at all. So after a while, I went back to Maya. It just makes more sense to me, and I run into fewer problems. The history system makes far more sense to me than the stack.
I know I'm biased, now. But I really do think different brains work better in different software, and Maya just works for me. Feels right, and I'm able to work fast. Max never gave me the same feeling, even after trying for months. They require different ways of thinking.
Same goes for Modo; people either love it right away and think it's the best modelling tool around, or just can't get into it, and think it feels imprecise and backwards. I'm trying to learn it now, and I really like certain things about it, and dislike other things, but it hasn't been long enough to say how I really feel about it yet.
And I fully agree that the modelling toolkit in Maya was just tacked on; I don't particularly mind it, since all I do with the tools is retopo, which works fantastically. But it definitely still feels like a plugin, and takes up valuable screenspace.
I like to try new software in order to find an ideal tool or at least steal new workflow concepts and adapt them to 3dsmax which i use as my main app.
I really try to stay openminded while evaluating something new.
But still i can't find something to substitute max.
Modo is the closest thing. Workplane is awesome. But, besides tons of bugs and crashes, it lacks quite a few basic things to call it a good modeler.
Symmetry while is there just doesn't work. One have to use instances instead.
Smoothing tools is awful. There is excellent farfarer's toolbox but why one have to rely on thirdparty tool to accomplish such a basic task?
Cut tool is very basic. And bad alpha sorting in viewport.
Still modo can be an option because it's more than twice cheaper than max.
Maya. It's said enough in this thread.
Cinema4d. Looks promising. Haven't actually tried it yet. But videos show some major modeling improvements in recent versions.
Nvil. outstanding toolset. I'd gladly use it but performance is very bad. It starts freezing on importing 200k mesh.
So really looks like niche for modeling tool is vacant.
No matter what you choose, you're going to have to put aside your prejudices about other apps not working quite like Maya. There are going to be things that you'll have to get used to in any app when you're just starting out with it, and particularly with old grizzled Maya users I often see a dismissal other software because of a few things that don't work the exact same way that Maya does things.
If you don't like the way that something works, try to live with it for a week and understand why it is the way it is, and how you can remain productive while using the software in its vanilla state. If you still can't stand it and it drives you crazy, look for an option, or a plugin, or a workaround. For example, Modo is great, but you'd have to be crazy to use it for game art without the vertex normal toolkit. Same goes for Blender. If you can get over the humps of active textures and datablocks, and get some practice with the hotkeys, you'll be quite able to work with it. But you have to have patience to get used to the way things are done in a new program.
I would recommend XSI if you're willing to relocate to Japan and don't mind having to learn something else eventually. Otherwise, give Modo a try. Blender is quite good too if you can wrap your head around it, and I personally couldn't live without it.
Joopson, if I may ask (and sorry for derailing the thread), could you elaborate on how you feel that the modeling methods in Max and Maya are different ? I keep hearing people mentioning it, but I do not quite understand that statement.
Of course if we are talking about overall object operations (like, the very unique and quite elegant way Maya allows the user to pick a "master" object when selecting objects in a particular order), things are indeed different ; but when it comes to core modeling tasks (like, running a bevel operation, extruding a face, merging verts to center) I find that the process to launch the operation is exactly the same in Max and Maya (that is to say : press the instantaneous keyboard shortcut, or click the UI button, or run the command from the popup menu).
Now of course, the tool panel on the right-hand side of the Max *does* look convoluted and filled with buttons when in EditPoly and EditSpline modes, but I think that is irrelevant to the discussion here since we are talking about optimized modeling workflows, which almost always rely on keyboard shortcuts.
I would say that the actual differences happen after that initial shortcut/click - in the way the manipulators work to interact with the tool, and from there, how efficiently the tool lets the user go back to what was being worked on before. For instance, it makes sense to me that a tool being run on an edge should bring back the user to edge selection mode once the operation is finished.
Been too excited about a project to go to sleep, so back again. Really apologize for my sarcasm, I get like that when my head is cloudy from being tired mingled with frustration at autodesk and an all too common case of shit-aint-working.
- First of all, I agree with your opinion about Maya as far as modeling goes. I actually quite like the program when it comes to the way it structured and exposed, but indeed things like the implementation of the recent "modeling toolkit" are just nonsensical. Now of course these NEX interactive tools are great ... but the fact that they rely on yet another panel to be turned on or off in order to step in and out of this special mode is just not acceptable. <shortened to save screen space>
One of the things that made my skin crawl since the modelling kit / NEX integration is the ray casting for component selection. If two are close and especially when at different levels of depth (even slightly) it is extremely common for it to think I am selecting vertex 1 when I have the mouse over vertex 2, and vice versa. Sense it does make not.
I haven't exactly gone and made a whole plugin for my modelling tools but I have a lot of marking menus, scripts, hot keys, etc. and I model extremely fast in Maya to the point that anything else in any other application feels like a snail's pace. Obviously I am fully aware that it takes time but that's patience (and deadlines!) that aren't always there. Comes down to a timing thing.
The primary thing for me is a high degree of efficiency as well as powerful tools. The exact moment when an application inhibits my workflow's efficiency it loses a LOT of points. If I can fix that by changing things, then that's great.
In Maya I use marking menus and hotkeys almost exclusively, I have no use for the menu bar and various other space wasting elements. I only keep a shelf as a place to put things that I use sparingly and don't require fast access to.
So a few options present itself that a lot of other people don't have. Why? Because I know python and C# fluently, C++ not fluently, begun recently but learning quick, and other languages that aren't much use in this context.
In terms of rigging I've already customized Maya from a tomato into a banana. And there's good / obvious reason for that. However in terms of modelling I can take a similar approach and that's simply to make a few tools of my own but there problem here is nothing I do will circumvent the fact that it's built on a horrible foundation and crashes a lot.
I could make Modo work like Maya via plugins so I'll have the efficiency and familiarity of Maya but the power of Modo - presumably, would have to research.
However, there's one more possibility that requires investigation and actually a few days ago without my even considering this, presented itself on a silver platter. Maya's modelling tools are basic enough that even I could make them. And if I'm going to be making my own tools that I want to be in Maya, why the hell don't I just make my own modelling application with obj export. There are problems with this, such as the extra work required to build a scene graph, saving, loading, exporting, shader support is definitely good for modelling, and the list goes on. And that's where the silver platter comes in, I came across SceniX from Nvidia which is an API that is essentially a base for making a 3D application. A non-shit one from the looks of it. I'll start there and see where it goes.
Yikes, a couple points based off reading this OP and the responses that follow.
1. I agree with the sentiment that Autodesk eventually intends to push everyone on Maya, and this will include the decrease in development of 3ds Max. I dont think its a matter of IF but a matter of WHEN. They clearly think its more profitable in the long run to just have to worry about the cost of maintaining one 3d application over many. Just my opinion... in a better world it would be sold off to some group that actually cares about its development.
2. The Modo recommendations are not a coincidence. I think instead of being frustrated outright (which I can relate to), just look for the solution or how others have adapted. Many just turn off trackball rotation under the viewport options, make use of the Maya control scheme in the properties window, and just learn the short cuts. IT IS a bit clicky and even slow sometimes when starting out due to Modo having methods which open up after you familiarize yourself with how to customize it a bit. I think it begins to evolve a bit as the artist evolves, so to speak.
3. With Modo, and many other applications, I think you have to stop thinking about recreating Maya methodology and learn to see how Modo (or whatever other application) approaches it. I know with Modo, trying to approach it the same way I would with Maya will cause some frustrations. Then again, working in Modo for a bit, going back to Maya trying Modos approach will do the same thing.
4. Modo is better at somethings, and worse at others, especially compared to Maya. One thing we can rely on though, its NOT AUTODESK. Thats really the crux of the issue isnt it? With that you get a more consumer friendly business model with Modo, you are not penalized for not upgrading and can do so at any time to any new version at a flat rate. Service packs are free, meaning if you bought into Modo, the SPs are part of that purchase, unlike autodesk which keeps wanting you to pay more for things they should have fixed in the first place.
5. Modo has a future, every year, something new. Just keeps on growing. For some this is comforting.
6. Regarding Blender, its a tough sell. Some will hype it to be more than it really is. What it is, is a good 3d application that wont cost you anything but time. What it isnt is a reliable 3d application with a consistent development path or even pro-commercial philosophy. Its a wild card, and I find it makes a better companion app than a main 3d content creation package...for now. It seems like the OP wants something a bit more commercially reliable, and if you have the money to invest in commercially reliable 3d applications, Modo is clearly the number 1 choice outside of the Autodesk stranglehold.
7. Modo needs more game artist, needs more voices demanding some attention, no rather priority, given for this particular field. That can only happen when the user base begins to fill up with more game centric artist.
I could make Modo work like Maya via plugins so I'll have the efficiency and familiarity of Maya but the power of Modo - presumably, would have to research.
I would actually recommend NOT doing that. Just learn the MODO way of doing things - that's what the program is best at and trying to bend it so it feels like another app that you're already familiar with is going to lead to lots of little things that aren't the same and make you wonder why you bothered switching in the first place.
Embrace what MODO does well, and customize the stuff you don't like.
Allow yourself to be slow and clunky at first. It'll pass. You'll "get it" and you'll be flying with MODO in no time.
IT IS a bit clicky and even slow sometimes when starting out due to Modo having methods which open up after you familiarize yourself with how to customize it a bit. I think it begins to evolve a bit as the artist evolves, so to speak.
This is very true as well. For example, most people complain about having to activate tools after selecting them and how that's clicky and slow ... and it is ... until you learn about the tool pipe and setting tools to auto-activate and using "select through" where you need it. Also, tricks like holding "W" while inside of a tool allows you to use the transform widget until you let it go again and it flips back to the current tool.
Sort of techy, power-usery things for sure but you don't get there without toughing out the initial slog of the default settings.
7. Modo needs more game artist, needs more voices demanding some attention, no rather priority, given for this particular field. That can only happen when the user base begins to fill up with more game centric artist.
Isn't that backwards? Shouldn't they be courting game artists? The Foundry in general doesn't seem that interested in the needs of game artists.
I don't like the idea of plunking down a couple grand in the hopes that they will get around to meeting my needs.
Isn't that backwards? Shouldn't they be courting game artists? The Foundry in general doesn't seem that interested in the needs of game artists.
I don't like the idea of plunking down a couple grand in the hopes that they will get around to meeting my needs.
Yes and no, we probably shouldnt have to make noise. I mean, the game industry brings in more annual revenue than film, tv, and music do combined for their primary markets, on top of that, the market for 3d applications that focus on games isnt as saturated as other markets.
So you think it would be common sense to go for the market with such little competition and high rewards.
That said, its not like we have much options. Right now its Autodesk or bust, and I think Modo has come the closest to being the competition so far. Additionally I dont think its a matter of IF for this as well, rather when. Modo devs will get around to games sooner or later, but the goal I'm getting at is to get that priority level changed so its more of an immediate concern rather than an after thought.
Lets see what happens, but also if we care about the result we need to be active in making it happen as well.
Modo seems to be a good choise for many out here nowadays, but I'm not sure is it actually an industry standard, are my thoughts right? If not, then I'll use Blender forever.
Exclusively? I thought larger studios allowed artists to choose between the most common DCC apps (Maya, Max, Modo, etc), and not force them to use one.
Pior, It's been a few years now since I've used Max at all, so I can't give too many specifics, but for me, most of my frustrations were due to the stack; it just didn't mesh with the way my mind thought of things. As a simple example, the fact that I had to convert a model to an editable poly before changing anything, or add a UV node before UVing, just felt like unnecessary steps. To me, it felt more like I was piling up nodes, instead of using tools; because of this, and it may seem weird, but Maya's history system makes me feel like I have more freedom, while Max's makes me feel bogged down. Like I said, I've forgotten most specifics, maybe someone can explain more, because I know a lot of people feel similarly.
In Maya, I actually use very few shortcuts; I use the Shelf a lot, and the modelling menus a lot. Even without shortcuts, I'm able to work really efficiently. Everything I need is very easily accessible. While in Max, that thing on the right is so full of buttons and things, and with the addition of the ribbon (which made it more usable to me, actually, but also cluttered the screen), that it takes me a long time to find what it was I needed to find. That's something I found a bit weird while using Max. Though I admit, Maya has its clutter too.
The best I can explain is that there's something fundamentally about the stack that feels unnatural and unintuitive to me.
Thank you for clarifying this Joopson - I understand your point better now, as I think we were talking about two different things. Indeed, having to stack up a modifier on top of model to access UV editing tools doesn't make much sense at all, and I think this is a perfect example of the kind of workflow annoyances that the OP is trying to avoid. It certainly is something that should have been changed a long time ago, as it is, to some extent, contradicting the (very powerful) concept of a modeling stack to begin with. It personally never quite bothered me much, but I can see how it could be jarring.
But yeah, what I was talking about (and what I thought most people were referring to when talking about modeling tools and workflows) are things like efficiently selecting/tweaking vertices, running bevels, extruding faces, and so on - core operations executed hundreds of times a day which don't involve access to the Max stack or the Maya history/nodes in any way, and are performed through regular shortcuts and/or simple UI interactions.
From reading the OP I am getting the feeling that this is the kind of things that he/she is hoping to find an elegant solution for (like, not having to guess a value, type it in, undo and start again, which indeed can be a massive slowdown), therefore I am very curious to see what Vii is going to come up with
Yes and no, we probably shouldnt have to make noise. I mean, the game industry brings in more annual revenue than film, tv, and music do combined for their primary markets, on top of that, the market for 3d applications that focus on games isnt as saturated as other markets.
The Foundry has several products that all focus on high end film VFX. I don't see them making the investment in Modo to make it more suited for games because game developers really don't have a use for the other Foundry products, except for Mari, which is frankly overkill for games as the features that make Mari special aren't applicable to games. Sales of Modo to game studios isn't going to grow into sales of Nuke, Hiero, Katana etc. I
Maybe I haven't been looking hard enough but I don't see anything special, new or unique about Modo for games, other than not being an Autodesk product. And the most recent developments out of the Foundry don't give me any indication that the games industry is on their radar at all. Yay more versions of Nuke.
On the other hand there is SideEffects with the Houdini Engine, which bundles Houdini into the mother of all Trojan horses to let it run inside another 3d package like Maya, or Max AND a game engine like Unity or Unreal Engine 4. Now there is something unique and new and this relevant to game devs. I can start coming to grips with Houdini, without disturbing the existing pipeline at all. I can't wait to see what gets unveiled for the next version of Houdini, they have supposedly been listening very carefully to their few game development customers. After all they don't have any other products to rely on, they have to grow.
Oh and I can learn their software for free, no ridiculous time limited pay to try demos.
p.s. Houdini's modeling currently sucks for games :poly127: except for maybe terrains.
Exclusively? I thought larger studios allowed artists to choose between the most common DCC apps (Maya, Max, Modo, etc), and not force them to use one.
Oh I don't know about exclusively but I know Snefer and I think PAnick both use it. They're a pretty small team (I think it was 8-10 environment artists in the credits of The New Order) so I wouldn't be surprised if the whole env. team uses Modo.
I don't understand this idea that Autodesk intends to stop development of Max. It's their highest grossing product in the M&E division. Also, wouldn't it make more sense to maintain both Max and Maya to battle outside competition? If they forced everyone on Maya, wouldn't that just make it easier for another product to become a greater threat? I understand why they axed Softimage, it had an incredibly small market share.
I can understand the vast amount of complaints against Max's development in the last 4-5 years, it's been pretty rocky. But I don't think that should be synonymous with cancelling it, from what I've read they have increased development team size in the last year.
I can understand the vast amount of complaints against Max's development in the last 4-5 years, it's been pretty rocky. But I don't think that should be synonymous with cancelling it, from what I've read they have increased development team size in the last year.
Yea I heard rumors about them trying to combine the two. I just have no idea how any of that would work.
The workflows in both software could not be more different. Hell, even V-Ray is insanely different between the two. In Max you have little nodes which are pretty cool to use and in Maya to have to use the Hypershade and figure out that you need to use limit texture range to get the same effect as Max for parts and it just gets more and more different from there.
As Blender is my main 3D application, I wouldn't mind to learn certain tools (apart from pure modeling tools) in a different 3D application if needed in studio circumstances, such as custom rigging tools in Max, Maya or Modo, for example. Normally I'll go with Blender as much I can.
I can understand the vast amount of complaints against Max's development in the last 4-5 years, it's been pretty rocky. But I don't think that should be synonymous with cancelling it, from what I've read they have increased development team size in the last year.
I don't think it'll be cancelled but Max hasn't gotten anything but lip service in the form of meager updates in the last 4-5 years. For example, they finally added quad chamfer in the last update ... and it's not even as good as the script everyone's been using for years and years already.
If it doesn't read as cancellation pending, it at least reads as apathy.
Or even a science lab. I don't know what they actually plan for that game engine they announced but my gut feeling is that isn't going anywhere productive. It seems like a weird direction.
On the flipside, watching MODO deliver TONS of updates every year shows a company that's hungry and wants to gain and retain customers.
I don't think it'll be cancelled but Max hasn't gotten anything but lip service in the form of meager updates in the last 4-5 years. For example, they finally added quad chamfer in the last update ... and it's not even as good as the script everyone's been using for years and years already.
If it doesn't read as cancellation pending, it at least reads as apathy.
Or even a science lab. I don't know what they actually plan for that game engine they announced but my gut feeling is that isn't going anywhere productive. It seems like a weird direction.
On the flipside, watching MODO deliver TONS of updates every year shows a company that's hungry and wants to gain and retain customers.
I am torn with this sure max hasn't had the vigorous dedication it should, and modo does continue to impress me, but theres something holding me back from jumping on modo, its something about the way it handles, makes me feel like I am kind of drunk while navigating in the viewport.
mind you I think I first felt this way when using zbrush too.
Turn off the turntable rotation. :P That'll sober you up...
That seems the main complaint. As mentioned earlier is right it's mentioned in the 5th-ish page of the viewport tutorial when you first open the program!!
Btw, you can disable it across the board by going to System > Preferences > Display > OpenGL and under Viewport Rotation, untick Trackball Rotation and tick Override Viewport-Level Trackball Option.
Saves you having to disable it on a per-viewport basis.
As a non-animator having to tweak animations and share skeletons I'm really enjoying the CAT system they added to Max. Most of my career has been Max 8 and then 2009, I only just started at a studio that's using 2014; switching from Nitrous to legacy DX9 and turning off gamma/LUT correction got me back to the 2009 goodness that I've enjoyed for so long.
modo is looking awesome to a lot of people because it's a fairly new app that is building up on features. We'll see how long they can keep up "amazing" people without price hikes and how well they can update and maintain their code. I'm all in for Autodesk to get a serious run for its money but I think you guys are giving modo too much praise. I understand Max and Maya users are jaded and annoyed but I think there's too much hysteria too soon. I prefer to be cautiously optimisstic.
At any rate, if only for the modeling tools I'd say modo is one of the best apps out there because besides Max I think the rest of the pack stopped trying long ago.
Repete : that's actually very interesting that you would say that - does that mean that Tor uses a lot of tools or shortcuts that are not easily accessible with a default Modo install ?
Repete : that's actually very interesting that you would say that - does that mean that Tor uses a lot of tools or shortcuts that are not easily accessible with a default Modo install ?
Seneca Menard he had a hot key setup that would melt your head !
That's the beauty of modo.
Yeah, the beauty of it when new version comes out and you need to redo all shortcuts because modo freezes on importing old config file.
Oh, and modo devs are so smart that all your settings and shortcuts are saved in one file which grows every time you change something in modo... until something bad starts to happen like crashes. No problem, just delete config modonauts will say. Easy!
I'm thinking of getting the Modo Steam edition. The only thing that has me worried right now is the 7k poly export limit. Also no Meshfusion possibilities, which is fair enough. Is it worth spending £115 on it if I have no interest in creating workshop items and will only use it for personal projects?
I wish Modo just had a subscription model, or a cheaper non-commercial version without limits. Or maybe some day I'll win the lottery and be able to afford all the software I want (even though I don't play)
Yeah, the beauty of it when new version comes out and you need to redo all shortcuts because modo freezes on importing old config file.
Oh, and modo devs are so smart that all your settings and shortcuts are saved in one file which grows every time you change something in modo... until something bad starts to happen like crashes. No problem, just delete config modonauts will say. Easy!
That does suck but that's one of the things you customize as a power user. I don't keep my hot keys or my custom forms/menus in the main config file. I just move them version to version and everything "just works". I don't re-import anything either.
That doesn't excuse the "delete your config file" solution to everything but it DOES show that it's manageable with a little effort on the users part.
I don't know for sure but I am willing to assure you that Seneca has custom config files.
You can actually copy-paste from configfile to configfile, I always just copy over my hotkeys and setup-stuff manually, works like a charm. Also sometimes create otkeys straight in the textfile by copypasting stuff : )
I have a redirection file in my MODO config folder that tells MODO to look in my DropBox folder for my config files and hot keys and forms. This way they are the same between versions and I get the same config at work and at home.
I also do pretty much all my customization work in the config files themselves in a text editor.
Can you modify configuration via python in modo? If that's viable rather than modifying config I'd just have a python script that does it and use that instead. Then if the file corrupts / new version / or whatever goes wrong, just re-run the script. Modifications would be so easy.
Anyway, currently have my C++/Qt modelling app under way. So far if you open it up in terms of UI you get a gray slate which will have no title, menu, or anything except a side bar for tool settings. Everything will be done via a marking-menu-esque system and hotkeys. If maya was designed optimally it would not have a shelf system and simply expand on marking menus. Furthermore, if it was designed for advanced users it would not really require much of an interface at all* - like mine. Newbies beware, sort of thing.
Time spent is around 25-30 hours so far.
Completed:
- Scene graph & rendered to a window
- Camera controls (Rotate around Pivot / Pan / Zoom)
- Directional Light / Spot Light / Point Light
- Diffuse and Blinn shaders w/ transparency & texture capability
- Default scene has a dodecahedron (because I can) with shader
- Wavefront OBJ Export capability
To-do:
- Marking menu system (not hard, thanks to QT)
- Modelling tools (... a lot)
- A multitude of what can only be described as general additions
- A lot of other things
If I actually get near a level of usability I'll make a dedicated thread for it but I'm still at the not 100% committed stage. A few hours ago things fell into place and I started getting paranoid when my code didn't have errors for extended periods of time, didn't feel right heh.
* I'd use hotkey sets, so if you move onto rigging you switch to a rigging set. This would change what marking menus appear as well.
I can understand the vast amount of complaints against Max's development in the last 4-5 years, it's been pretty rocky. But I don't think that should be synonymous with cancelling it, from what I've read they have increased development team size in the last year.
The writing is on the wall...
Why just yesterday www.maxunderground.com went dark. It's gone, wiped out, swimmin with the fishes see...
Ironically, the site that replaced it covers Modo.
Fair enough, it wasn't the most popular Max site out there. I guess what I was trying to get across is that consumer confidence in the future of Max isnt really doing so well right now, where on the Modo side it seems to be the exact opposite. Its less of a 3DS problem and more of an autodesk problem though.
Well, Autodesk has the image of the stodgy old guard while MODO has the image of the young upstart. Most people will rally behind the upstart - I mean, if movies have taught me anything.
Replies
Now of course a lot of the suggestions being made in this thread will be strongly biased, since people who mostly used one application for years are bound to praise it over the other ones despite glaring weaknesses. I'll try to share my 2c and be as objective as possible. Note that I cannot make any comment about scripting, APIs and tools authoring, as I am not a programmer.
- First of all, I agree with your opinion about Maya as far as modeling goes. I actually quite like the program when it comes to the way it structured and exposed, but indeed things like the implementation of the recent "modeling toolkit" are just nonsensical. Now of course these NEX interactive tools are great ... but the fact that they rely on yet another panel to be turned on or off in order to step in and out of this special mode is just not acceptable. Adding to that the way that Maya can be very finicky at times when it comes to selection (like, allowing one to hit and select an object while effectively working at the vertex level of another one), I just cannot recommend it and understand your issues with it. The *only* instance where I found it to be elegant and powerful is when I saw Rich Diamant use Maya with his own modeling tool, which he wrote from scratch over the years and tailored precisely to his needs. All other modeling demos I have seen, even by highly regarded professional modelers who swear by the app, were very underwhelming and painful to watch.
- Max could still be an extremely powerful program ... if only AD could get rid of all the UI glitches and micro-stuttering which appeared over the years. I've had the opportunity to use older versions of the program for years at various studio jobs, and ended up with an extremely customized UI and workflow allowing for fast modeling speeds. So, if you can find a license of 2009/2010 this could be a good fit for your needs. Of course it would require a lot of customization and tweaks to make it viable, and there are lots of problems with the program, but people here on this forum can help. I just don't know if I can recommend newer iterations of it, as I've had bed experience with them.
- Modo keeps being brought up even tho you clearly stated that you've had bad experiences with it. That too I can understand : I have always been very tempted to use it, even bought the Steam version, but I keep getting small micro glitches with it which alters my trust in the program. I also keep hearing about it's unprecedented modeling speed, but my (admittedly short) tests didn't reflect that. If I remember correctly I was disappointed by the lack of a fast interaction mode letting me freely manipulate components in screen space, but I might be wrong and there might be scripts to go around the issue. I am personally willing to give it yet another go since people like EarthQuake, Seneca Maynard and Tor Frick all use it. The following video shows some powerful tools - I just find the overall user interaction to be a bit finicky and kind of slow, with all the preselction highlighting going on.
http://www.twitch.tv/torfrick/b/543265305
- I tried Blender too, and even tho the graphical interface is extremely odd with its nonsensical paradigm of pulled-out panels coming out of nowhere, I found the program to be interesting as whole ... but only after being walked through by a friend in a live Hangout session, and after a few months of not using it I pretty much forgot everything
- Now there are a few underdogs. XSI always looked quite solid to me, and the locked interface has a certain charm (which also means that resources are not wasted on that). You might want to have a look at Vitaly Bulgarov's excellent video about it.
http://www.thegnomonworkshop.com/store/product/544/Character-Design-and-Modeling-for-Next-Gen-Games
- Then there's the extreme underdog : Anvil/Voidworld. I never quite took the time to experiment with it, but the attitude of the developer is in a league of its own. You might want to check the main thread about it :
http://www.polycount.com/forum/showthread.php?t=74005&page=82
It is definitely something to keep an eye on. The biggest thing against it is that there is close to no content about it, which in turn raises the barrier of entry. But it might be worth a try. I am also tempted to bring up Mirai ... but that would be a bit of a stretch.
I hope this helps ! I am very curious to see what will come out of this thread. And I hope you had a good night
Blender -
Here is why I recommend it -
100% FREE under the GPL.
Open Source - You can get the source code and extend it yourself.
Lots of knowledge able community members to help you out.
Gaining Industry support - Companies such as VALVE and EPIC Games have made sizable contributions to the Blender foundation to improve it.
Cross platform - Windows, MacOSX, and Linux Support.
Multi-Screen support for modeling, animation, composting, Sculpting, etc.
Also -
If you are coming from MAX or Maya here are a few addons that are a must have if you choose blender.
BMAX Tools
Just a few things of note -
You will need to customized your hotkeys with blender before you start and save your preferences.
Also In b4 Blender Sucks...
If you do not want to spend money on MODO or Lightwave Blender is your best bet
I think Max and Maya work in fundamentally different ways, and some people enjoy Maya's modelling methods, and others enjoy Max's; honestly, I learned Max in school and tried to work with it, when I thought Max was the only industry-guaranteed software. But after learning Maya, which I'd known for a few years beforehand, Max just felt chaotic, bulky, and overly convoluted. I really didn't like the stack, and the tools didn't feel intuitive at all. So after a while, I went back to Maya. It just makes more sense to me, and I run into fewer problems. The history system makes far more sense to me than the stack.
I know I'm biased, now. But I really do think different brains work better in different software, and Maya just works for me. Feels right, and I'm able to work fast. Max never gave me the same feeling, even after trying for months. They require different ways of thinking.
Same goes for Modo; people either love it right away and think it's the best modelling tool around, or just can't get into it, and think it feels imprecise and backwards. I'm trying to learn it now, and I really like certain things about it, and dislike other things, but it hasn't been long enough to say how I really feel about it yet.
And I fully agree that the modelling toolkit in Maya was just tacked on; I don't particularly mind it, since all I do with the tools is retopo, which works fantastically. But it definitely still feels like a plugin, and takes up valuable screenspace.
I really try to stay openminded while evaluating something new.
But still i can't find something to substitute max.
Modo is the closest thing. Workplane is awesome. But, besides tons of bugs and crashes, it lacks quite a few basic things to call it a good modeler.
Symmetry while is there just doesn't work. One have to use instances instead.
Smoothing tools is awful. There is excellent farfarer's toolbox but why one have to rely on thirdparty tool to accomplish such a basic task?
Cut tool is very basic. And bad alpha sorting in viewport.
Still modo can be an option because it's more than twice cheaper than max.
Maya. It's said enough in this thread.
Cinema4d. Looks promising. Haven't actually tried it yet. But videos show some major modeling improvements in recent versions.
Nvil. outstanding toolset. I'd gladly use it but performance is very bad. It starts freezing on importing 200k mesh.
So really looks like niche for modeling tool is vacant.
If you don't like the way that something works, try to live with it for a week and understand why it is the way it is, and how you can remain productive while using the software in its vanilla state. If you still can't stand it and it drives you crazy, look for an option, or a plugin, or a workaround. For example, Modo is great, but you'd have to be crazy to use it for game art without the vertex normal toolkit. Same goes for Blender. If you can get over the humps of active textures and datablocks, and get some practice with the hotkeys, you'll be quite able to work with it. But you have to have patience to get used to the way things are done in a new program.
I would recommend XSI if you're willing to relocate to Japan and don't mind having to learn something else eventually. Otherwise, give Modo a try. Blender is quite good too if you can wrap your head around it, and I personally couldn't live without it.
Of course if we are talking about overall object operations (like, the very unique and quite elegant way Maya allows the user to pick a "master" object when selecting objects in a particular order), things are indeed different ; but when it comes to core modeling tasks (like, running a bevel operation, extruding a face, merging verts to center) I find that the process to launch the operation is exactly the same in Max and Maya (that is to say : press the instantaneous keyboard shortcut, or click the UI button, or run the command from the popup menu).
Now of course, the tool panel on the right-hand side of the Max *does* look convoluted and filled with buttons when in EditPoly and EditSpline modes, but I think that is irrelevant to the discussion here since we are talking about optimized modeling workflows, which almost always rely on keyboard shortcuts.
I would say that the actual differences happen after that initial shortcut/click - in the way the manipulators work to interact with the tool, and from there, how efficiently the tool lets the user go back to what was being worked on before. For instance, it makes sense to me that a tool being run on an edge should bring back the user to edge selection mode once the operation is finished.
I'd love to hear more about that !
One of the things that made my skin crawl since the modelling kit / NEX integration is the ray casting for component selection. If two are close and especially when at different levels of depth (even slightly) it is extremely common for it to think I am selecting vertex 1 when I have the mouse over vertex 2, and vice versa. Sense it does make not.
I haven't exactly gone and made a whole plugin for my modelling tools but I have a lot of marking menus, scripts, hot keys, etc. and I model extremely fast in Maya to the point that anything else in any other application feels like a snail's pace. Obviously I am fully aware that it takes time but that's patience (and deadlines!) that aren't always there. Comes down to a timing thing.
The primary thing for me is a high degree of efficiency as well as powerful tools. The exact moment when an application inhibits my workflow's efficiency it loses a LOT of points. If I can fix that by changing things, then that's great.
In Maya I use marking menus and hotkeys almost exclusively, I have no use for the menu bar and various other space wasting elements. I only keep a shelf as a place to put things that I use sparingly and don't require fast access to.
So a few options present itself that a lot of other people don't have. Why? Because I know python and C# fluently, C++ not fluently, begun recently but learning quick, and other languages that aren't much use in this context.
In terms of rigging I've already customized Maya from a tomato into a banana. And there's good / obvious reason for that. However in terms of modelling I can take a similar approach and that's simply to make a few tools of my own but there problem here is nothing I do will circumvent the fact that it's built on a horrible foundation and crashes a lot.
I could make Modo work like Maya via plugins so I'll have the efficiency and familiarity of Maya but the power of Modo - presumably, would have to research.
However, there's one more possibility that requires investigation and actually a few days ago without my even considering this, presented itself on a silver platter. Maya's modelling tools are basic enough that even I could make them. And if I'm going to be making my own tools that I want to be in Maya, why the hell don't I just make my own modelling application with obj export. There are problems with this, such as the extra work required to build a scene graph, saving, loading, exporting, shader support is definitely good for modelling, and the list goes on. And that's where the silver platter comes in, I came across SceniX from Nvidia which is an API that is essentially a base for making a 3D application. A non-shit one from the looks of it. I'll start there and see where it goes.
1. I agree with the sentiment that Autodesk eventually intends to push everyone on Maya, and this will include the decrease in development of 3ds Max. I dont think its a matter of IF but a matter of WHEN. They clearly think its more profitable in the long run to just have to worry about the cost of maintaining one 3d application over many. Just my opinion... in a better world it would be sold off to some group that actually cares about its development.
2. The Modo recommendations are not a coincidence. I think instead of being frustrated outright (which I can relate to), just look for the solution or how others have adapted. Many just turn off trackball rotation under the viewport options, make use of the Maya control scheme in the properties window, and just learn the short cuts. IT IS a bit clicky and even slow sometimes when starting out due to Modo having methods which open up after you familiarize yourself with how to customize it a bit. I think it begins to evolve a bit as the artist evolves, so to speak.
3. With Modo, and many other applications, I think you have to stop thinking about recreating Maya methodology and learn to see how Modo (or whatever other application) approaches it. I know with Modo, trying to approach it the same way I would with Maya will cause some frustrations. Then again, working in Modo for a bit, going back to Maya trying Modos approach will do the same thing.
4. Modo is better at somethings, and worse at others, especially compared to Maya. One thing we can rely on though, its NOT AUTODESK. Thats really the crux of the issue isnt it? With that you get a more consumer friendly business model with Modo, you are not penalized for not upgrading and can do so at any time to any new version at a flat rate. Service packs are free, meaning if you bought into Modo, the SPs are part of that purchase, unlike autodesk which keeps wanting you to pay more for things they should have fixed in the first place.
5. Modo has a future, every year, something new. Just keeps on growing. For some this is comforting.
6. Regarding Blender, its a tough sell. Some will hype it to be more than it really is. What it is, is a good 3d application that wont cost you anything but time. What it isnt is a reliable 3d application with a consistent development path or even pro-commercial philosophy. Its a wild card, and I find it makes a better companion app than a main 3d content creation package...for now. It seems like the OP wants something a bit more commercially reliable, and if you have the money to invest in commercially reliable 3d applications, Modo is clearly the number 1 choice outside of the Autodesk stranglehold.
7. Modo needs more game artist, needs more voices demanding some attention, no rather priority, given for this particular field. That can only happen when the user base begins to fill up with more game centric artist.
Embrace what MODO does well, and customize the stuff you don't like.
Allow yourself to be slow and clunky at first. It'll pass. You'll "get it" and you'll be flying with MODO in no time.
This is very true as well. For example, most people complain about having to activate tools after selecting them and how that's clicky and slow ... and it is ... until you learn about the tool pipe and setting tools to auto-activate and using "select through" where you need it. Also, tricks like holding "W" while inside of a tool allows you to use the transform widget until you let it go again and it flips back to the current tool.
Sort of techy, power-usery things for sure but you don't get there without toughing out the initial slog of the default settings.
Isn't that backwards? Shouldn't they be courting game artists? The Foundry in general doesn't seem that interested in the needs of game artists.
I don't like the idea of plunking down a couple grand in the hopes that they will get around to meeting my needs.
Yes and no, we probably shouldnt have to make noise. I mean, the game industry brings in more annual revenue than film, tv, and music do combined for their primary markets, on top of that, the market for 3d applications that focus on games isnt as saturated as other markets.
So you think it would be common sense to go for the market with such little competition and high rewards.
That said, its not like we have much options. Right now its Autodesk or bust, and I think Modo has come the closest to being the competition so far. Additionally I dont think its a matter of IF for this as well, rather when. Modo devs will get around to games sooner or later, but the goal I'm getting at is to get that priority level changed so its more of an immediate concern rather than an after thought.
Lets see what happens, but also if we care about the result we need to be active in making it happen as well.
Off the top of my head, Machinegames uses Modo.
In Maya, I actually use very few shortcuts; I use the Shelf a lot, and the modelling menus a lot. Even without shortcuts, I'm able to work really efficiently. Everything I need is very easily accessible. While in Max, that thing on the right is so full of buttons and things, and with the addition of the ribbon (which made it more usable to me, actually, but also cluttered the screen), that it takes me a long time to find what it was I needed to find. That's something I found a bit weird while using Max. Though I admit, Maya has its clutter too.
The best I can explain is that there's something fundamentally about the stack that feels unnatural and unintuitive to me.
But yeah, what I was talking about (and what I thought most people were referring to when talking about modeling tools and workflows) are things like efficiently selecting/tweaking vertices, running bevels, extruding faces, and so on - core operations executed hundreds of times a day which don't involve access to the Max stack or the Maya history/nodes in any way, and are performed through regular shortcuts and/or simple UI interactions.
From reading the OP I am getting the feeling that this is the kind of things that he/she is hoping to find an elegant solution for (like, not having to guess a value, type it in, undo and start again, which indeed can be a massive slowdown), therefore I am very curious to see what Vii is going to come up with
The Foundry has several products that all focus on high end film VFX. I don't see them making the investment in Modo to make it more suited for games because game developers really don't have a use for the other Foundry products, except for Mari, which is frankly overkill for games as the features that make Mari special aren't applicable to games. Sales of Modo to game studios isn't going to grow into sales of Nuke, Hiero, Katana etc. I
Maybe I haven't been looking hard enough but I don't see anything special, new or unique about Modo for games, other than not being an Autodesk product. And the most recent developments out of the Foundry don't give me any indication that the games industry is on their radar at all. Yay more versions of Nuke.
On the other hand there is SideEffects with the Houdini Engine, which bundles Houdini into the mother of all Trojan horses to let it run inside another 3d package like Maya, or Max AND a game engine like Unity or Unreal Engine 4. Now there is something unique and new and this relevant to game devs. I can start coming to grips with Houdini, without disturbing the existing pipeline at all. I can't wait to see what gets unveiled for the next version of Houdini, they have supposedly been listening very carefully to their few game development customers. After all they don't have any other products to rely on, they have to grow.
Oh and I can learn their software for free, no ridiculous time limited pay to try demos.
p.s. Houdini's modeling currently sucks for games :poly127: except for maybe terrains.
Oh I don't know about exclusively but I know Snefer and I think PAnick both use it. They're a pretty small team (I think it was 8-10 environment artists in the credits of The New Order) so I wouldn't be surprised if the whole env. team uses Modo.
Unless Meshfusions install base increases!!
I can understand the vast amount of complaints against Max's development in the last 4-5 years, it's been pretty rocky. But I don't think that should be synonymous with cancelling it, from what I've read they have increased development team size in the last year.
Yea I heard rumors about them trying to combine the two. I just have no idea how any of that would work.
The workflows in both software could not be more different. Hell, even V-Ray is insanely different between the two. In Max you have little nodes which are pretty cool to use and in Maya to have to use the Hypershade and figure out that you need to use limit texture range to get the same effect as Max for parts and it just gets more and more different from there.
Then there's modeling, UVing, etc..
If it doesn't read as cancellation pending, it at least reads as apathy.
Or even a science lab. I don't know what they actually plan for that game engine they announced but my gut feeling is that isn't going anywhere productive. It seems like a weird direction.
On the flipside, watching MODO deliver TONS of updates every year shows a company that's hungry and wants to gain and retain customers.
I am torn with this sure max hasn't had the vigorous dedication it should, and modo does continue to impress me, but theres something holding me back from jumping on modo, its something about the way it handles, makes me feel like I am kind of drunk while navigating in the viewport.
mind you I think I first felt this way when using zbrush too.
That seems the main complaint. As mentioned earlier is right it's mentioned in the 5th-ish page of the viewport tutorial when you first open the program!!
Saves you having to disable it on a per-viewport basis.
I've kinda gotten used to it now, though :P
At any rate, if only for the modeling tools I'd say modo is one of the best apps out there because besides Max I think the rest of the pack stopped trying long ago.
[vv]24273363[/vv]
http://www.twitch.tv/torfrick/profile/past_broadcasts
When I watch tor frick I keep saying "WTF how did you just do that"
So I would say it's a mixture of original modo tools with customisation and definitely some home made scripts. That's the beauty of modo.
[vv]28494269[/vv]
Yeah, the beauty of it when new version comes out and you need to redo all shortcuts because modo freezes on importing old config file.
Oh, and modo devs are so smart that all your settings and shortcuts are saved in one file which grows every time you change something in modo... until something bad starts to happen like crashes. No problem, just delete config modonauts will say. Easy!
I wish Modo just had a subscription model, or a cheaper non-commercial version without limits. Or maybe some day I'll win the lottery and be able to afford all the software I want
That does suck but that's one of the things you customize as a power user. I don't keep my hot keys or my custom forms/menus in the main config file. I just move them version to version and everything "just works". I don't re-import anything either.
That doesn't excuse the "delete your config file" solution to everything but it DOES show that it's manageable with a little effort on the users part.
I don't know for sure but I am willing to assure you that Seneca has custom config files.
I also do pretty much all my customization work in the config files themselves in a text editor.
But I'm a freak so feel free to ignore me.
Anyway, currently have my C++/Qt modelling app under way. So far if you open it up in terms of UI you get a gray slate which will have no title, menu, or anything except a side bar for tool settings. Everything will be done via a marking-menu-esque system and hotkeys. If maya was designed optimally it would not have a shelf system and simply expand on marking menus. Furthermore, if it was designed for advanced users it would not really require much of an interface at all* - like mine. Newbies beware, sort of thing.
Time spent is around 25-30 hours so far.
Completed:
- Scene graph & rendered to a window
- Camera controls (Rotate around Pivot / Pan / Zoom)
- Directional Light / Spot Light / Point Light
- Diffuse and Blinn shaders w/ transparency & texture capability
- Default scene has a dodecahedron (because I can) with shader
- Wavefront OBJ Export capability
To-do:
- Marking menu system (not hard, thanks to QT)
- Modelling tools (... a lot)
- A multitude of what can only be described as general additions
- A lot of other things
If I actually get near a level of usability I'll make a dedicated thread for it but I'm still at the not 100% committed stage. A few hours ago things fell into place and I started getting paranoid when my code didn't have errors for extended periods of time, didn't feel right heh.
* I'd use hotkey sets, so if you move onto rigging you switch to a rigging set. This would change what marking menus appear as well.
Exactly and cfg file I backup once I am happy with my set-up, it's actually pretty logical.
The writing is on the wall...
Why just yesterday www.maxunderground.com went dark. It's gone, wiped out, swimmin with the fishes see...
Ironically, the site that replaced it covers Modo.