Someone who's awesome in Maya, and someone who's awesome in Max, if tasked to model a complex shape, could probably both finish at exactly the same time.
I'm 100% sure that's not the case. I can't say for certain which person would be faster, and it's certainly possible that some types of objects are faster in Maya and some are faster than Max, but you're definitely not gonna get exactly the same results from two different programs.
The good news is, that's all opinion, not fact. Someone who's awesome in Maya, and someone who's awesome in Max, if tasked to model a complex shape, could probably both finish at exactly the same time. I think you just have the type of mind that works better with max, maybe, while others have the type of mind that works better with Maya. Some people can even switch back and forth and love both for different reasons.
Me, I have the mind for Maya. I used Max a lot in College, and never could understand the logic behind the modifier stack. I could use it well, but I always came away feeling like it was roundabout, inefficient, and clunky. But I know many people swear it's one of the biggest blessings in Max, and who find Maya's history system clunky. In max, I always felt like I was working through a glass wall, or something. Never actually touching the model, or directly working on it. In Maya, I feel like I'm pretty directly interacting with my work. I don't know why it feels like that, but for me, it does.
Basically, I agree wholeheartedly with Arkaria.
Both do their job really well, more or less equally. Each does some things better than the other, but in total, they're pretty equal. And if you feel otherwise, well, maybe you're biased.
I disagree with this too! I think that most modeling tools in Max work much better than their Maya analogues, and I say that in an objective way, it's not my biased opinion, it's just how they work. That means faster times, and I didn't say anything yet about the modeling stack.
For instance (I used Maya extensively from version 2011 up to 2015), Maya's target vertex weld tool can let you "weld" vertex from the mesh you're working on to any other mesh - it doesn't actually weld them, it just snaps one to another...so this in combination with the new selection model in newer version (which you can't disable when you use the modeling toolkit) means you'll accidentally "weld" something you don't ever want to weld. One fix is using vertex snap to snap what vertex you want to weld to the other, then select all vertices and weld with a low threshold - that's very inefficient.
If you have let's say, a box, inset one face, then delete it, if you try to chamfer one vertex on the new border loop, it behaves as expected, if you try to chamfer two vertices at the same time, it's happening in a different manner. I remember another issue when beveling an edge that terminated in a hole in the mesh, Maya added polygons to the hole, so I stopped using the standard bevel tool (but instead the new Bevel from the toolkit, but that comes with another round of problems) because I wasted too much time deleting those faces.
If you use Isolate selection to work on a sub-element of your mesh, if you create/delete faces, or sometimes when you even use the cut tool, portions of your mesh will appear/disappear...so you make some operations, then your isolation gets messed up, you have to exit isolation mode, reselect what you were working on and isolate again. That never happens with Hide Selected/unselected in your Editable Poly in 3dsmax.
The smooth mesh preview is pretty cool, but when you want to bake, your smoothed mesh preview doesn't appear as smoothed in Transfer Maps. You have to use Mesh - Smooth, but remember to duplicate your unsmoothed mesh, because if you want to change something to your high poly you won't be able to unless you delete the node, but remember not to delete history, because you will lose your unsubdivided mesh.
If you combine/detach/separate meshes you'll end up with a load of nodes in your outliner that you have to remove/delete history. With max these things are one click operations and you're good to go. At the end of the day, you'll waste a good half hour deleting history or nodes. An example of the software helping you: if you make a selection in 3dsmax on your high poly, then subdivide (or apply other modifiers), the selection will propagate up the modifier stack, making it so easy to make more operations on what you want - it's a pain to reselect everything every time.
I could go on and on, but the bottom line is - Maya's modeling tools have great ideas behind them, but most of them are poorly implemented, with quirks and issues that just slow you down. Now with the included Modeling Toolkit, you have two types of move gizmos, two types of tools, three types of viewport renders (each with it's own benefits and quirks) etc ...it feels like a clunky mess (I can say that's valid to some extend in 3dsmax too, with the mess of the graphite modeling tools). Some of the tools have very much improved in later versions, in a couple of years they may be the same, but then 3dsmax will still has the advantage of the modifier stack. If you find the stack inefficient, you can use it for the minimal things - like symmetry. A couple of clicks and you're done - how much longer that takes in Maya?
agreed that maya feels like using a technicians toolset when trying to accomplish an artistic task but one other part about it is also the weak performance it shows when modelling. i suppose that's inevitable with scripts upon scripts being used throughout the app and it sure is very noticeable.
...You know you can turn off the click-and-drag primitive creation in Maya? That's one feature I never understood. Only gets in the way, for me and my workflow, at least.
two words : modifiers and quadchanfer ( ok its also a modifier but you get the point ) .
Makes working on highpoly models super easy and non destructive as everyone on the team can edit the model without having to remove control loops or a bend modifier or FFD that is used ontop of the stack. Saves soooo much time .
Meshfusion is cool, but from what i saw ( modo users please correct me because im probably mistaken ) it creates too dense collapsed meshes, so if you need to edit any details you will have to redo everything , unles you savd before you did any meshfusion operation.
I had meshes where meshfusion was used and they were a mess to edit , lots of parts had to be redone.
oh definately , inside modo it makes total sense ,bl what i mean is if you send it to maya or max , its pretty much unuseable if you want tk edit , but like you said you have to be smart about it .
i am talking mostly about other artists to be able to easily edit your work in other packages , but i think that might be another matter.
I like to think that there's being good at your software by circumventing all the quirks to soothe out a workflow and there's avoiding the things that make it crash to extract some productivity from it. Max is absolutely great with modeling and UVs and such but some of the simplest things make it crash. Thank god for autoback.
The thing about these types of debates, is that there's never really a winner. The views are very subjective and a matter of opinion because people just get into their way of working, in a package they like.
I've been using Maya, Max, and Softimage since they first released, which is some time ago now. Of those 3, Max is the one I've always disliked the most. As much as I've not been a fan of Max, I'm not ignorant enough to not tip my hat to some its modelling features. Do I like the workflow, hell no, I've never been able to quite get on with it, and I don't find it as intuitive. But, on the flip side, that's because the majority of places I've worked haven't been Max, so my exposure hasn't been quite the same.
Now, I can work in Maya just as much as I can in Soft or Max. Can I work in Maya the same way as I can in Soft, or Max? - well no. The workflows are different, the UI is different, the way those packages handle their data are different and I have to adapt in some areas, accordingly. And this is where many people go wrong, they jump into another package and despite the UI being different, expect some things to work the same. Fact is they aren't. If I had a pound for every time I've heard 'well xxxx does it like this, xxxx works like this' I'd be rich.
But is there a best, well not really. The fact is they're all very capable. Anyone who simply says that one is the best over another, probably isn't really considering things in a very balanced way. In reality Maya is more than very capable, it's always been very good at modelling. But like anything you have to really know how to get the most out of it. In Maya, the trick is really mastering the marking menus, they are very powerful. But even now I see veterans not using them correctly. Another myth is Maya's use of scripts. Sure Maya is very extendable with scripts, but then so is Max. People often say that Maya is unusable without scripts, which I don't fully agree with (but I get the point). However you could easily apply the same to Max and its use of plugins, of which there are many.
So really things balance out and ultimately there's many people out there producing great work in Max and Maya. Personally in terms of a really intuitive piece of software, Softimage has always had that edge. Even now its been retired by Autodesk, it can run rings around both Maya and Max in several areas. It always was a very well designed application. Autodesk could do no worse than literally take stuff from Soft and put it into Maya and Max, and in fact they've actually done this with Maya with some recent additions.
3dsmax "spacing tools" "converting edge to tubes" "select and place tool" is a very basic tools... but i think its too advance for maya. as maya user too, just because i know the "workaround" to archieve those tools it doesnt mean i am a better artist. and of course it didnt mean maya can be called to be have more advance set up than 3dsmax.
speak with 3 years of 3dsmax, 1 year of maya. with no doubt, 3dsmax way more superior at modelling than maya.
enlighten me, if im wrong, and better if someone willing to describe what tool that maya have more efficiency than 3ds max at modelling workflow?
3ds max has some serious issues, one of them is how long it takes Autodesk to update the UI fully so it has one unified and coherent panel, they should take the entire right bar and put it into graphite modelling bar for one, shortcuts are annoying, assigning them is even worse. There are plenty of bugs too, there isn't a minute where I notice something odd happening. Overall the best version of 3ds max is 9 then after that it simply started getting bloated.
3ds max is more powerful with tools like RappaTools and Quad Chamfer Plugin. Once you learn and get used to them, you don't want to use another software. People say modo is faster but i feel very slow without these tools cuz i just got used to them. It's personal opinion of course.
I would only wish "Ignore Backfacing" in 3ds max for selection would work better.
i will say, without the graphite tool, max legacy tool are still better and simply than maya. IMHO. can u imagine create a 100 steps concrete stair with maya? OMG... even maya insert a multiple edge loop need more step than 3dsmax, i mean its very basic tool but so many workaround steps, not to mention attribute editor and channelbox, why they no merge it into one. duplicate special, mirror and symetry are spreading everywhere. i have play with max, and substance node... but maya node behavior is the worse. but again that just my opinion.
Creating a 100-step stair in Maya would actually be pretty easy. Just make one step and duplicate once, transform it to the place of the next step then duplicate with transform for the next 98 (which means that you just have to hold the key down for a few seconds.) Pretty straightforward.
Having used Maya since school way back when, I can confidently say that the correct answer to this is Modo. Always Modo, except for UVS, then its Maya.
Maya users will say Maya, Max users will say Max, you will have to figure it out on your own. Don't get deceived by anyone's opinions. Try yourself, both can do the SAME! Even if people say Max/Maya is better for this and that, they probably don't know both on its entirety. Or even better! Get used to both!
I feel like we've heard the "just use what you're comfortable with" and the "it doesn't matter! you'll be learning new tools your entire career!" kind of responses over and over again but everyone just kinda wants to fight and banter anyways. Sometimes someone just throws a chair and people just start fighting because they're bored and have perfectly good fists to punch with. Look at all the Maya vs. Max threads this forum has had in it's life-time and they all kinda have that pattern to them
might be a little late to get into that: last time i tried to run mirai on a compatible system, izware's license for their choice of lisp interpreter had expired.
These threads are just a bunch of people worried for their job security really.
Heh. You're usually using whatever modelling package the studio uses anyways.
This
Exactly, and this is important to remember. I've often read on forums people painting an idealistic picture of you being able to choose what you use, but in my experience I've never ever seen this happen. You use whatever a studio uses and if that perhaps isn't your tool of choice, then swallow your pride and learn. Imo, its a positive because it makes you a more flexible and useful asset to your employer.
What i mean is concrete stair, which every box become taller, not inhouse stair, say u have modeled it next u have to weld every single step. If u say making stair is pretty easy in maya, then i bet u never make stair in max , after all this is 2016, and yet maya dont have spacing tool, maya duplicate special is not the same as spacing tools, if u wanna it work perfectly must involve animation tools and tweak those animation curve to get the duplicate even along the curve path.
I've been using Max for 20 years, I customize quad menus, I added 60 shortcuts and i did some interface changes, believe me I model texture lighting and render very very fast. In a yesterday world, Clients will love you if you deliver renders as fast as I do. What matters is how you customize your software to work for you. Max is pretty Robust, I barely have a crash, and if i have a crash i always know how to solve it. While in the road I have used Softimage and Maya, I found Softimage really cool, maybe the most intuitive one. and Maya integration to windows crashes a lot by that time, I mean a lot! compared to Softimage and Max. Maya was more robust in a Unix plataform. Maya was always better at Nurbs, and Softimage and Max at Poly. As i wasn't interested on Nurbs, goodbye Maya ! See you in the next life ! Then I stay on Max over Softimage because of Vray, Vray was only supported on MAX, and at that time Vray was so much superior to Mental Ray, nowadays both are very good, but 10 years ago, Vray was a Giant in terms of speed and Quality. I think Vray is the ruler nowadays too. The programmer leader Vladimir will do history.
Softimage used to had the best Mental Ray integration, which was the best render engine before vray, Another reason to Skip Maya. Nowadays vray develop its releases first for 3dmax, then if they have time they translate the releases for the others. So Vray vanguard = 3dmax
The next software I will use is Blender. Blender is Kicking Ass year by year. it's really powerful and customizable. Take a look at this forum http://blenderartists.org/ go to finished projects Forum, You will have a jaw drop. As Linux fun I was looking how Blender was growing year by year for the last decade. I'm just waiting they develop some more tools I use it a lot in Max and vray and then I will jump to blender. Forget about paying thousands and thousand of dollars in software. Blender is Just Free and extremely light and powerfull. Autodesk software is ridiculously over pricey. Do you know how many programmers did program 3DMAX 1 back in 1995? just 1 programmer! Do you know how many licences they sold? as much licenses to get money enough to buy Softimage and Maya and build a 3D Monopoly. Every time Autodesk sells a license at 5k is laughing at you while they uncork champagne! They add stupid and unnecessary tools every year in order to justify a customer buying update. That's something that vray doesn't do. And blender will never do either. As everything change, I think Blender will be leading after 2020. Autodesk will have a heavy drop price in order to compete with blender. As many teens are learning blender at High school right now. Do you think they will jump to max or maya in future? I don't think so. I think they will stick to blender. Their generation will slowly change the market towards it.
Have fun, look at the horizon and enjoy the road, which all is about! Tricota
As someone who is going almost crazy with perfecting topology on hard surface models, I'd say, go for Max in that particular aspect. I started with Maya and am now partly shifting towards Max. It has so many more tools and 'sliders' for stuff. People always say that you can be good in either of them and it really bugs me. Because you were asking for hard surface modeling in particular and I can guarantee you that Maya will leave you frustrated with your topology a lot. I still use Maya though because 2016 Version is awesome and just looks nice and modern, whereas Max looks intimidating So learn them both and use them for what the smart people here pointed out they're good at. Plus, watch the tutorials by Arrimus3d on Youtube, to not get frustrated with topology.
As someone who is going almost crazy with perfecting topology on hard surface models, I'd say, go for Max in that particular aspect. I started with Maya and am now partly shifting towards Max. It has so many more tools and 'sliders' for stuff. People always say that you can be good in either of them and it really bugs me. Because you were asking for hard surface modeling in particular and I can guarantee you that Maya will leave you frustrated with your topology a lot. I still use Maya though because 2016 Version is awesome and just looks nice and modern, whereas Max looks intimidating So learn them both and use them for what the smart people here pointed out they're good at. Plus, watch the tutorials by Arrimus3d on Youtube, to not get frustrated with topology.
Hey Nico,
Could you tell me about some hard surface tools you find yourself using a lot in Max that Maya lacks?
I love Maya. It's weird I know, but let me explain:
I'm a hard surface modeler mainly. I use a 3d mouse. Wacom in the right, 3d mouse /buttons on the left. No Keyboard. Maya is really fast in the sense that it has a few tools that fit into the palm of my hand and they do almost everything. That and almost everything is accessible through the marking menu's. My Maya loads and remains with no UI. No titlebar. Who needs that stuff when you can just gesture and Maya picks up on it. Sure modo and max have pie menus and quad menus but nothing like a quick gesture that gets you to two sub sets of menu's and to the right option in two hand motions. I love it because mainly.. RSI.
With Maya and the 3d mouse I'm super quick, for the first time a modeling application's operation is faster than my thoughts. I'd dare say I'm slower with a pencil.. which is usually not the case.
I'm not saying one is better. It's def. a personal issue.
I'm writing this because I hear lovely things about Modo and Max, and I've tried both but I just can't get used to them. Neither feels as fast (WITH my set up). I imagine if I was using a mouse and keyboard or wacom/keyboard I'd lean in on Modo or Max. But what bugs me is how there are so many tools.
I don't know though, if it really is helpful in terms of getting better quality hard surface, strictly sub-d type modeling I mean.. I'll keep giving max and modo a chance. I want to.. because all I hear is Maya sucks haha! Poor maya..
2 things that really keep me from switching:
1. SNAPPING. I love how Maya snaps to closest possible point. It's super quick because you have to be less accurate with it.
2. Shift+MMB tool handle operation. I know Max has a lock axis, and modo lets you cntrl-move in some modes, but neither have it as good as max or maya. IMO, that and snapping are literally what I need as much as a move rotate and scale tool, and a good knife. (multi cut).
I'm a basic b*tch. Quad Chamfer is sexy, even Modo has a flat bevel, so I thought I could switch. Gave it a week or two.... so slow compared to Maya. Maya if you lay out and fence your edges at the end with good topology, its super quick, not as quick as quad chamfer, and not in a modifier stack (drool), but I'm willing to go without that because I literally snap and gestural move handle every button click.
If anyone can suggest how to work around these issues though I really do want to try a "better"modeling app.
In my experience this is super uncommon, but I use almost straight up vanilla 3ds Max. The only addition I use (and it's seldom) is a batch export tool. I don't even really bother learning hotkeys beyond a few basic ones. From looking at others as they work I'm not any slower either. Honestly I think people care a little too much about their comfy setup. To the point that if they have a software problem and have to reinstall or something shitty like that, work is halted completely until they can get everything back to their standard.
Not to say that there's no reward in tailoring your tools to work best for you, just that I think many key reasons behind that such as "spending 1 second each time moving your mouse to click a button adds up" tend to be very exaggerated.
just now maya 2016 ext 2 now can convert nurbs to tubes, without paint effect... and it's in bonus tool... yeah that super basic tool are in "bonus" section. i think maya modelling department crew are so poorly get attention from adsk. sad...
3dsMax...oh wait this was supposed to be a discussion? ^_^ Maya is coming into it's own and even though I was originally taught Maya, I still find making anything that isn't organic much easier in 3ds. I haven't used it that last few years but from what I've seen Maya looks solid, did they ever fix the clunky implementation of symmetry?
i've been playing with 2016 ext2 recently and saw that for some modelling tools they now have an eyesore floater that pops up in the view that strongly reminds me of the 3ds max caddies. any way to get this thing out of my sight for good and instead adjust stuff in the channelbox as per usual?
That's not new to ext2; it's been there a few versions already. To turn it off, go to Display > Heads Up Display > In-View Editors, and uncheck that box.
Dive, what kind of 3d mouse do you use? I used to work with simple Space Navigator, but only two side buttons seemed to be not enough to perform all actions. Maybe there're some tricks? ))
Dive, what kind of 3d mouse do you use? I used to work with simple Space Navigator, but only two side buttons seemed to be not enough to perform all actions. Maybe there're some tricks? ))
Hey Pasha,
I use a space pilot pro. I think 3d connexion just released the enterprise so space pilot is cheaper now. I went for that because obviously you need as many keys as possible ideally so you use the keyboard less. It has 31 keys just like the enterprise so def my favorite. I'm also a heavy marking menu user, thats one of the few things that Maya does really really well.
The only thing that is such a drag is that the company has yet to release maya extension 2 drivers so I'm still on 2016 sp6.
I can model 14 hours a day with that and a large wacom day in and day out, i still use the keypad on right side of the keyboard occasionally but 95 percent of my operations are through the pilot/wacom. It's stupid fast. So fast that its kind of addicting / really hard to switch to other apps and set ups haha.
There are certainly quirks here and there but i'm pretty well versed with few minor bugs and have my own workarounds in maya, so if you ever need help or set up advice feel free to hit me up.
Dive, what kind of 3d mouse do you use? I used to work with simple Space Navigator, but only two side buttons seemed to be not enough to perform all actions. Maybe there're some tricks? ))
Hey Pasha,
I use a space pilot pro. I think 3d connexion just released the enterprise so space pilot is cheaper now. I went for that because obviously you need as many keys as possible ideally so you use the keyboard less. It has 31 keys just like the enterprise so def my favorite. I'm also a heavy marking menu user, thats one of the few things that Maya does really really well.
The only thing that is such a drag is that the company has yet to release maya extension 2 drivers so I'm still on 2016 sp6.
I can model 14 hours a day with that and a large wacom day in and day out, i still use the keypad on right side of the keyboard occasionally but 95 percent of my operations are through the pilot/wacom. It's stupid fast. So fast that its kind of addicting / really hard to switch to other apps and set ups haha.
There are certainly quirks here and there but i'm pretty well versed with few minor bugs and have my own workarounds in maya, so if you ever need help or set up advice feel free to hit me up.
Dive, Thanks for detailed explanation )) I've got the point. i'll remeber to hit you for sure - if I decide to try this ))
And as for "Max or Maya". When it comes to tell which software is better, I always see the same picture again and again. People quickly jump from "better software" to "better artist" and "with this script X is better than Y". That's all wrong matter. Everyone can do identically high quality models in Maya, Max, XSI, MODO, Blender, C4D and so on. If someone got used to work within one package he knows all weak spots and strong features, has certain workarounds for his specific workflow. Btw, the workflow of hardsurface artist is quite different than the workflow of organic artist. Yes, we often mix different workstyles, but still. So, as for me, the only correct question is "Which 3d modeling package gives YOU maximum possible benefits?"
I had a long working experience in Max, Maya and XSI. I'm still using XSI although it's retired. It's hard to explain, why XSI - it just offers the most smooth workflow out-of-the-box. I've written just 20-30 scripts to assist me, reassigned hotkeys. And tha't it. With a pretty small set of tools I can create almost all I want without any stress.
Now I'm switching to Maya. I've already written about 100 scripts to do some thing, many of them were in XSI initially! Do you feel the difference? INITIALLY! But in Maya I have to re-invent the wheel. Thanks to my programmer's degree I can easily write script on Maya API with Python. But is it userfliendly? I think, No. But Yes, Maya gives me tons of new exciting ways to improve my toolset and workflow in general, and it's extendability looks really stronger than XSI's, but the price is high. I have eigher deal with some retarded tools and remind the ways to avoid millions of shortcomings OR write my own scripts and tools. Actually, I'm gonna be a better artist - not a coder. That's a problem. But in terms of my initial understanding of what is better - Maya is really better. Because it gives me just a POTENTIALLY better perspective in my work.
Finally, why not Max? Well, I'll try to explain. Many of max-users will disagree, though. That's a question of benefits, right? So, first, I just couldn't adopt the ways 3ds max works, it was freaking inadequate for me. The key concepts of working in Max were invented decades ago by the programmers, not artists at all. Too unstable, too stupid, too slow, too old - for me. Second, I discovered Maya and XSI. As I said, Maya is pretty awkward out-of-the-box too, but the key concepts of working are much more convenient and clear. XSI was highly optimized, fluent, very-very fast and insanely robust toolset. Guys, who worked in XSI at least 1 year+ understand what I'm talking about. Maya can get very close to this bar - but with intensive coding and tuning.
Everything is relative. "What's better" is just "better for you". What's YOUR bar of efficiency? How many efforts are YOU going to spend for tuning your app of choice? What are YOUR expectationg and requirements in the work? Everyone will answer differently, that's it. For me the answers were obvious, but now they're not. XSI was an absolutely better than Maya or Max. Coming along with Maya with my high requirements to the modeling environment means spending much time on scripting and improving the tools. I still haven't tried Modo - heard many good things about it. Max is not a way to go.
Finally, why not Max? Well, I'll try to explain. Many of max-users will disagree, though. That's a question of benefits, right? So, first, I just couldn't adopt the ways 3ds max works, it was freaking inadequate for me. The key concepts of working in Max were invented decades ago by the programmers, not artists at all. Too unstable, too stupid, too slow, too old - for me.
Can you expand on this please? With maybe some examples of workflows from Max that do not suit you?
Just wanted to drop in here and say that I totally agree that XSI is the king of modeling and the good news is that the same developers of XSI who made a lot of the really great tools that we all love are now developing Maya. If you notice 2016 extension to adds a lot of XSI style features. Including full symmetry across all tools. Revamped selection algorithms and an all new bevel to name a few. I've spoken with the developers on many occasions and they are very open to suggestions of porting over more modeling tools from XSI. I feel like maybe in another two versions we will have an extremely solid modeling package.
Right now I already feel it's equal with Max. Can't wait to see it surpass it . I've used a lot of both packages and max is just too clunky. Adding a modifier to even open the uv window? No thanks...
My biggest problem with Max is that it's a node-based program that doesn't let you view the actual nodes in anything but the modifier stack. Everything is constantly hidden and you have to go digging for the information .
Just wanted to drop in here and say that I totally agree that XSI is the king of modeling and the good news is that the same developers of XSI who made a lot of the really great tools that we all love are now developing Maya. If you notice 2016 extension to adds a lot of XSI style features. Including full symmetry across all tools. Revamped selection algorithms and an all new bevel to name a few. I've spoken with the developers on many occasions and they are very open to suggestions of porting over more modeling tools from XSI. I feel like maybe in another two versions we will have an extremely solid modeling package.
Right now I already feel it's equal with Max. Can't wait to see it surpass it . I've used a lot of both packages and max is just too clunky. Adding a modifier to even open the uv window? No thanks...
My biggest problem with Max is that it's a node-based program that doesn't let you view the actual nodes in anything but the modifier stack. Everything is constantly hidden and you have to go digging for the information .
Joel, you are right, the latest AD's moves toward open development (mayafeedback.autodesk.com is awesome indeed!), for the first time they made me feel respect to their decision. I noticed a partial reincarnation of XSI tools in Maya 2016.5 and it's awesome.
Finally, why not Max? Well, I'll try to explain. Many of max-users will disagree, though. That's a question of benefits, right? So, first, I just couldn't adopt the ways 3ds max works, it was freaking inadequate for me. The key concepts of working in Max were invented decades ago by the programmers, not artists at all. Too unstable, too stupid, too slow, too old - for me.
Can you expand on this please? With maybe some examples of workflows from Max that do not suit you?
Sure. I'm not gonna dive deep into specifics of some workflow, but for me everything starts with simple selection and very low-level operations like cut. So I've attached two comparison gifs.
Actually, it's not about getting used to Max's tools. I just don't understand why must I suffer such pain in the ass if I can easily avoid it by using comfortable (for me) 3d modeling tools. Suffering isn't somewhat honorable at all, it only distracts from really important things. It's ok for me to struggle agains art and design problems - but not ok at all to fight with stupid sotware malfuctions which nevers get fixed... Hope it makes sense.
Finally, why not Max? Well, I'll try to explain. Many of max-users will disagree, though. That's a question of benefits, right? So, first, I just couldn't adopt the ways 3ds max works, it was freaking inadequate for me. The key concepts of working in Max were invented decades ago by the programmers, not artists at all. Too unstable, too stupid, too slow, too old - for me.
Can you expand on this please? With maybe some examples of workflows from Max that do not suit you?
Sure. I'm not gonna dive deep into specifics of some workflow, but for me everything starts with simple selection and very low-level operations like cut. So I've attached two comparison gifs.
Actually, it's not about getting used to Max's tools. I just don't understand why must I suffer such pain in the ass if I can easily avoid it by using comfortable (for me) 3d modeling tools. Suffering isn't somewhat honorable at all, it only distracts from really important things. It's ok for me to struggle agains art and design problems - but not ok at all to fight with stupid sotware malfuctions which nevers get fixed... Hope it makes sense.
I think both programs have their own limitations in their tools, starting with the basic and with the more complex, but is my general impression that Maya is the one lacking (slightly, as of 2016). I've been a user since Maya 2011, and since then they've made tons of improvements to some of their tools, including the Multi-Cut.
Max's Cut tool has been unchanged for so long, but it always worked as you expected, with repeatable quirks and limitations (I would not say malfunctions). I had more "malfunctions" in Maya's tools in that regard across the versions I used. There was Polygon split tool, then the Multi-Cut, but that caused another set of issues in combination with the new selection highlight which seemed to have a mind of it's own sometimes (I think it's fixed in the new extension though) and it could not be turned off when you were using the Modeling toolkit, which was the only place where some of the new essential tools were added, like edge slide for example, which replaced the clunky Set to edge or Set to face. *deep breath*
Max doesn't have the Camera based selection or Ignore backfaces at tool level, but it had one click
Polygon shell (or edge border) select and deselect for years and years. Or convert polygon selection to edge boundary; or Edge or Face constraints and many more. I
don't think you can say that its tools are old or stupid since only the past couple of versions they made an appearance inside of Maya (with the Modeling toolkit).
I'd also argue that Maya struggled with their integration (at one point there was a double set of some tools, legacy and new and with each version you had to hunt back your tools in the newly arranged menus). And I'd also argue about malfunctions that are never fixed, how many versions of Maya had the messed up Isolate mode that still let you select or use tools over hidden faces? Or let you "weld" one vertex from one mesh to one from a completely different mesh? And how distracting from the art is the problem of constantly deleting history or hunting, unparenting and cleaning nodes from the outliner after attaching / detaching or other operations?
Do you happen to have a solution for this by the way?
I think both programs have their own limitations in their tools, starting with the basic and with the more complex, but is my general impression that Maya is the one lacking (slightly, as of 2016). I've been a user since Maya 2011, and since then they've made tons of improvements to some of their tools, including the Multi-Cut.
Max's Cut tool has been unchanged for so long, but it always worked as you expected, with repeatable quirks and limitations (I would not say malfunctions). I had more "malfunctions" in Maya's tools in that regard across the versions I used. There was Polygon split tool, then the Multi-Cut, but that caused another set of issues in combination with the new selection highlight which seemed to have a mind of it's own sometimes (I think it's fixed in the new extension though) and it could not be turned off when you were using the Modeling toolkit, which was the only place where some of the new essential tools were added, like edge slide for example, which replaced the clunky Set to edge or Set to face. *deep breath*
Max doesn't have the Camera based selection or Ignore backfaces at tool level, but it had one click
Polygon shell (or edge border) select and deselect for years and years. Or convert polygon selection to edge boundary; or Edge or Face constraints and many more. I
don't think you can say that its tools are old or stupid since only the past couple of versions they made an appearance inside of Maya (with the Modeling toolkit).
I'd also argue that Maya struggled with their integration (at one point there was a double set of some tools, legacy and new and with each version you had to hunt back your tools in the newly arranged menus). And I'd also argue about malfunctions that are never fixed, how many versions of Maya had the messed up Isolate mode that still let you select or use tools over hidden faces? Or let you "weld" one vertex from one mesh to one from a completely different mesh? And how distracting from the art is the problem of constantly deleting history or hunting, unparenting and cleaning nodes from the outliner after attaching / detaching or other operations?
All programs have limitations, weak and strong sides. Once more, my opinion is not that Max is bad, I just think that it's bad FOR ME (actually, I think, not just for me though) )) I can workaround almost everything for sure, I can get used to limitations and use some tricks. But the main question is "Why?" If I have an opportunity to avoid it, then I choose a better way.
I understand that if everything's working predictably, you can use it and consider it more or less robust, but everything is relative - as I written above. Unlike Maya, Max has some critical architecture problems, it's no secret - Max is a frankenstein. It's build of tons of side party scripts and pieces of code built by hundreds of various people. That's why it is so unstable, and it's API is so messy. At some point (when keeping this monster alive will cost more money than it can bring) AD will retire it for sure, 5-6 years or so - they understand all that, may be they are greedy guys, but not idiots at all. From version to version Max gets more and more badly integrated staff, the old bugs remain unsolved... I don't wanna migrate to a new package once again )) At the same time there's a strong positive trend to improvement since Maya 2015, many XSI features appeared in Maya recently.
All things you listed are either under fixing by AD, or already fixed in Ext2, or can be easily beaten by scripting. Anyway, all this can be solved. That's a difference. Maya has a lot of problems (especially, after XSI), but they can be solved. In Max I have to get into the way of avoiding known pitfalls, I can do nothing with them, just be used to or avoid. In Maya I can even write my own cut tool, or deformer or something else from the ground - just Maya API and Python, without any C++. Can I do it in Max that easily? No.
P.S. BTW, I compared Max and XSI, not Maya - on the gifs.
Do you happen to have a solution for this by the way?
Oh, this looks crappy )) This bug kills usability for sure. I'd also leave an idea at mayafeedback or report to the support. I've already reported some bugs last year and found them fixed in the latest version.
Pasha's script works just fine. But just fyi there is this option in the chamfer vertex tool options (click the rectangular box): check remove face (it is on by default).
and 2 unlock the locked attributes, once you chamfer the vertex you will have to do so in the attribute editor. See my screen shots.
What would be awesome (if someone wants to script) is to have chamfer vertex be an absolute distance from the initial selected vertex. Currently chamfer vertex performs the operation relative to each edge length. Cinema 4d has a vertex bevel that does this and its great for punching in circles.
wow this is a long thread! I learned Maya first because I got a free copy at work but eventually switched to 3Ds Max because the poly tools seemed more streamlined. Looking back though, I wish I learned Zbrush first since learning zbrush menu system was confusing af for me coming from maya/max
Just wanted to drop in here and say that I totally agree that XSI is the king of modeling and the good news is that the same developers of XSI who made a lot of the really great tools that we all love are now developing Maya. If you notice 2016 extension to adds a lot of XSI style features. Including full symmetry across all tools. Revamped selection algorithms and an all new bevel to name a few. I've spoken with the developers on many occasions and they are very open to suggestions of porting over more modeling tools from XSI. I feel like maybe in another two versions we will have an extremely solid modeling package.
Right now I already feel it's equal with Max. Can't wait to see it surpass it . I've used a lot of both packages and max is just too clunky. Adding a modifier to even open the uv window? No thanks...
My biggest problem with Max is that it's a node-based program that doesn't let you view the actual nodes in anything but the modifier stack. Everything is constantly hidden and you have to go digging for the information .
I'm getting this vibe too.
Maya 2016 Ext2 was a bigger release than Max 2017 looking at the release notes
If you look back at the core changes and upgrades to Maya over the last couple of years, it's easily the most radically developed program Autodesk have got going now (at least their big apps AutoCad, Revit, Max). Porting to qt was the start of it all. There are a few big changes coming up too from what I hear. Good times ahead!
Right now I already feel it's equal with Max. Can't wait to see it surpass it . I've used a lot of both packages and max is just too clunky. Adding a modifier to even open the uv window? No thanks...
My biggest problem with Max is that it's a node-based program that doesn't let you view the actual nodes in anything but the modifier stack. Everything is constantly hidden and you have to go digging for the information .
Can you tell me when exactly do you need more information from nodes in 3dsmax? What type of hidden information would you want access to? I'm trying to see the usefulness of it / how the workflow would go like.
its got quick access shelves and the same stuff in menus. its just cluttered. for no reason at all. not to mention all the plugins you need.
Maya kind of operates on the premise that "here's the entire UI... hide things until you like it". Marking Menus are there, or the shelf, or just the standard menu.
It's up to you which is a good way instead of being forced to work a particular way. After years of built up custom marking menus you can never go back to vanilla maya. For instance there was recently bug in V-ray for maya 2016.5 where marking menu font disappeared, I found, that I could still use Maya because I never actually read menus or actions, it could use it by muscle memory which I found interesting. Yes, most of Maya is plugins - that's the concept of being modular.
Replies
For instance (I used Maya extensively from version 2011 up to 2015), Maya's target vertex weld tool can let you "weld" vertex from the mesh you're working on to any other mesh - it doesn't actually weld them, it just snaps one to another...so this in combination with the new selection model in newer version (which you can't disable when you use the modeling toolkit) means you'll accidentally "weld" something you don't ever want to weld. One fix is using vertex snap to snap what vertex you want to weld to the other, then select all vertices and weld with a low threshold - that's very inefficient.
If you have let's say, a box, inset one face, then delete it, if you try to chamfer one vertex on the new border loop, it behaves as expected, if you try to chamfer two vertices at the same time, it's happening in a different manner. I remember another issue when beveling an edge that terminated in a hole in the mesh, Maya added polygons to the hole, so I stopped using the standard bevel tool (but instead the new Bevel from the toolkit, but that comes with another round of problems) because I wasted too much time deleting those faces.
If you use Isolate selection to work on a sub-element of your mesh, if you create/delete faces, or sometimes when you even use the cut tool, portions of your mesh will appear/disappear...so you make some operations, then your isolation gets messed up, you have to exit isolation mode, reselect what you were working on and isolate again. That never happens with Hide Selected/unselected in your Editable Poly in 3dsmax.
The smooth mesh preview is pretty cool, but when you want to bake, your smoothed mesh preview doesn't appear as smoothed in Transfer Maps. You have to use Mesh - Smooth, but remember to duplicate your unsmoothed mesh, because if you want to change something to your high poly you won't be able to unless you delete the node, but remember not to delete history, because you will lose your unsubdivided mesh.
If you combine/detach/separate meshes you'll end up with a load of nodes in your outliner that you have to remove/delete history. With max these things are one click operations and you're good to go. At the end of the day, you'll waste a good half hour deleting history or nodes. An example of the software helping you: if you make a selection in 3dsmax on your high poly, then subdivide (or apply other modifiers), the selection will propagate up the modifier stack, making it so easy to make more operations on what you want - it's a pain to reselect everything every time.
I could go on and on, but the bottom line is - Maya's modeling tools have great ideas behind them, but most of them are poorly implemented, with quirks and issues that just slow you down. Now with the included Modeling Toolkit, you have two types of move gizmos, two types of tools, three types of viewport renders (each with it's own benefits and quirks) etc ...it feels like a clunky mess (I can say that's valid to some extend in 3dsmax too, with the mess of the graphite modeling tools). Some of the tools have very much improved in later versions, in a couple of years they may be the same, but then 3dsmax will still has the advantage of the modifier stack. If you find the stack inefficient, you can use it for the minimal things - like symmetry. A couple of clicks and you're done - how much longer that takes in Maya?
Makes working on highpoly models super easy and non destructive as everyone on the team can edit the model without having to remove control loops or a bend modifier or FFD that is used ontop of the stack. Saves soooo much time .
I had meshes where meshfusion was used and they were a mess to edit , lots of parts had to be redone.
i am talking mostly about other artists to be able to easily edit your work in other packages , but i think that might be another matter.
Max is absolutely great with modeling and UVs and such but some of the simplest things make it crash. Thank god for autoback.
I've been using Maya, Max, and Softimage since they first released, which is some time ago now. Of those 3, Max is the one I've always disliked the most. As much as I've not been a fan of Max, I'm not ignorant enough to not tip my hat to some its modelling features. Do I like the workflow, hell no, I've never been able to quite get on with it, and I don't find it as intuitive. But, on the flip side, that's because the majority of places I've worked haven't been Max, so my exposure hasn't been quite the same.
Now, I can work in Maya just as much as I can in Soft or Max. Can I work in Maya the same way as I can in Soft, or Max? - well no. The workflows are different, the UI is different, the way those packages handle their data are different and I have to adapt in some areas, accordingly. And this is where many people go wrong, they jump into another package and despite the UI being different, expect some things to work the same. Fact is they aren't. If I had a pound for every time I've heard 'well xxxx does it like this, xxxx works like this' I'd be rich.
But is there a best, well not really. The fact is they're all very capable. Anyone who simply says that one is the best over another, probably isn't really considering things in a very balanced way. In reality Maya is more than very capable, it's always been very good at modelling. But like anything you have to really know how to get the most out of it. In Maya, the trick is really mastering the marking menus, they are very powerful. But even now I see veterans not using them correctly. Another myth is Maya's use of scripts. Sure Maya is very extendable with scripts, but then so is Max. People often say that Maya is unusable without scripts, which I don't fully agree with (but I get the point). However you could easily apply the same to Max and its use of plugins, of which there are many.
So really things balance out and ultimately there's many people out there producing great work in Max and Maya.
Personally in terms of a really intuitive piece of software, Softimage has always had that edge. Even now its been retired by Autodesk, it can run rings around both Maya and Max in several areas. It always was a very well designed application. Autodesk could do no worse than literally take stuff from Soft and put it into Maya and Max, and in fact they've actually done this with Maya with some recent additions.
as maya user too, just because i know the "workaround" to archieve those tools it doesnt mean i am a better artist. and of course it didnt mean maya can be called to be have more advance set up than 3dsmax.
speak with 3 years of 3dsmax, 1 year of maya.
with no doubt, 3dsmax way more superior at modelling than maya.
enlighten me, if im wrong,
and better if someone willing to describe what tool that maya have more efficiency than 3ds max at modelling workflow?
I would only wish "Ignore Backfacing" in 3ds max for selection would work better.
can u imagine create a 100 steps concrete stair with maya? OMG... even maya insert a multiple edge loop need more step than 3dsmax, i mean its very basic tool but so many workaround steps, not to mention attribute editor and channelbox, why they no merge it into one. duplicate special, mirror and symetry are spreading everywhere. i have play with max, and substance node... but maya node behavior is the worse. but again that just my opinion.
Look at all the Maya vs. Max threads this forum has had in it's life-time and they all kinda have that pattern to them
Mirai!
everything after is just icing.
might explain why Izware does not respond to my emails to update my lic anymore
Exactly, and this is important to remember. I've often read on forums people painting an idealistic picture of you being able to choose what you use, but in my experience I've never ever seen this happen. You use whatever a studio uses and if that perhaps isn't your tool of choice, then swallow your pride and learn. Imo, its a positive because it makes you a more flexible and useful asset to your employer.
While in the road I have used Softimage and Maya, I found Softimage really cool, maybe the most intuitive one. and Maya integration to windows crashes a lot by that time, I mean a lot! compared to Softimage and Max. Maya was more robust in a Unix plataform. Maya was always better at Nurbs, and Softimage and Max at Poly. As i wasn't interested on Nurbs, goodbye Maya ! See you in the next life ! Then I stay on Max over Softimage because of Vray, Vray was only supported on MAX, and at that time Vray was so much superior to Mental Ray, nowadays both are very good, but 10 years ago, Vray was a Giant in terms of speed and Quality. I think Vray is the ruler nowadays too. The programmer leader Vladimir will do history.
Softimage used to had the best Mental Ray integration, which was the best render engine before vray, Another reason to Skip Maya. Nowadays vray develop its releases first for 3dmax, then if they have time they translate the releases for the others.
So Vray vanguard = 3dmax
The next software I will use is Blender. Blender is Kicking Ass year by year. it's really powerful and customizable. Take a look at this forum http://blenderartists.org/ go to finished projects Forum, You will have a jaw drop.
As Linux fun I was looking how Blender was growing year by year for the last decade. I'm just waiting they develop some more tools I use it a lot in Max and vray and then I will jump to blender. Forget about paying thousands and thousand of dollars in software. Blender is Just Free and extremely light and powerfull. Autodesk software is ridiculously over pricey. Do you know how many programmers did program 3DMAX 1 back in 1995? just 1 programmer! Do you know how many licences they sold? as much licenses to get money enough to buy Softimage and Maya and build a 3D Monopoly. Every time Autodesk sells a license at 5k is laughing at you while they uncork champagne! They add stupid and unnecessary tools every year in order to justify a customer buying update. That's something that vray doesn't do. And blender will never do either. As everything change, I think Blender will be leading after 2020. Autodesk will have a heavy drop price in order to compete with blender. As many teens are learning blender at High school right now. Do you think they will jump to max or maya in future? I don't think so. I think they will stick to blender. Their generation will slowly change the market towards it.
Have fun, look at the horizon and enjoy the road, which all is about!
Tricota
In my experience this is super uncommon, but I use almost straight up vanilla 3ds Max. The only addition I use (and it's seldom) is a batch export tool. I don't even really bother learning hotkeys beyond a few basic ones. From looking at others as they work I'm not any slower either. Honestly I think people care a little too much about their comfy setup. To the point that if they have a software problem and have to reinstall or something shitty like that, work is halted completely until they can get everything back to their standard.
Not to say that there's no reward in tailoring your tools to work best for you, just that I think many key reasons behind that such as "spending 1 second each time moving your mouse to click a button adds up" tend to be very exaggerated.
i think maya modelling department crew are so poorly get attention from adsk. sad...
Maya is coming into it's own and even though I was originally taught Maya, I still find making anything that isn't organic much easier in 3ds. I haven't used it that last few years but from what I've seen Maya looks solid, did they ever fix the clunky implementation of symmetry?
To turn it off, go to Display > Heads Up Display > In-View Editors, and uncheck that box.
And as for "Max or Maya". When it comes to tell which software is better, I always see the same picture again and again. People quickly jump from "better software" to "better artist" and "with this script X is better than Y". That's all wrong matter. Everyone can do identically high quality models in Maya, Max, XSI, MODO, Blender, C4D and so on. If someone got used to work within one package he knows all weak spots and strong features, has certain workarounds for his specific workflow. Btw, the workflow of hardsurface artist is quite different than the workflow of organic artist. Yes, we often mix different workstyles, but still. So, as for me, the only correct question is "Which 3d modeling package gives YOU maximum possible benefits?"
I had a long working experience in Max, Maya and XSI. I'm still using XSI although it's retired. It's hard to explain, why XSI - it just offers the most smooth workflow out-of-the-box. I've written just 20-30 scripts to assist me, reassigned hotkeys. And tha't it. With a pretty small set of tools I can create almost all I want without any stress.
Now I'm switching to Maya. I've already written about 100 scripts to do some thing, many of them were in XSI initially! Do you feel the difference? INITIALLY! But in Maya I have to re-invent the wheel. Thanks to my programmer's degree I can easily write script on Maya API with Python. But is it userfliendly? I think, No. But Yes, Maya gives me tons of new exciting ways to improve my toolset and workflow in general, and it's extendability looks really stronger than XSI's, but the price is high. I have eigher deal with some retarded tools and remind the ways to avoid millions of shortcomings OR write my own scripts and tools. Actually, I'm gonna be a better artist - not a coder. That's a problem. But in terms of my initial understanding of what is better - Maya is really better. Because it gives me just a POTENTIALLY better perspective in my work.
Finally, why not Max? Well, I'll try to explain. Many of max-users will disagree, though. That's a question of benefits, right? So, first, I just couldn't adopt the ways 3ds max works, it was freaking inadequate for me. The key concepts of working in Max were invented decades ago by the programmers, not artists at all. Too unstable, too stupid, too slow, too old - for me. Second, I discovered Maya and XSI. As I said, Maya is pretty awkward out-of-the-box too, but the key concepts of working are much more convenient and clear. XSI was highly optimized, fluent, very-very fast and insanely robust toolset. Guys, who worked in XSI at least 1 year+ understand what I'm talking about. Maya can get very close to this bar - but with intensive coding and tuning.
Everything is relative. "What's better" is just "better for you". What's YOUR bar of efficiency? How many efforts are YOU going to spend for tuning your app of choice? What are YOUR expectationg and requirements in the work? Everyone will answer differently, that's it. For me the answers were obvious, but now they're not. XSI was an absolutely better than Maya or Max. Coming along with Maya with my high requirements to the modeling environment means spending much time on scripting and improving the tools. I still haven't tried Modo - heard many good things about it. Max is not a way to go.
If you notice 2016 extension to adds a lot of XSI style features. Including full symmetry across all tools. Revamped selection algorithms and an all new bevel to name a few. I've spoken with the developers on many occasions and they are very open to suggestions of porting over more modeling tools from XSI. I feel like maybe in another two versions we will have an extremely solid modeling package.
Right now I already feel it's equal with Max. Can't wait to see it surpass it . I've used a lot of both packages and max is just too clunky. Adding a modifier to even open the uv window? No thanks...
My biggest problem with Max is that it's a node-based program that doesn't let you view the actual nodes in anything but the modifier stack. Everything is constantly hidden and you have to go digging for the information .
Actually, it's not about getting used to Max's tools. I just don't understand why must I suffer such pain in the ass if I can easily avoid it by using comfortable (for me) 3d modeling tools. Suffering isn't somewhat honorable at all, it only distracts from really important things. It's ok for me to struggle agains art and design problems - but not ok at all to fight with stupid sotware malfuctions which nevers get fixed... Hope it makes sense.
Max's Cut tool has been unchanged for so long, but it always worked as you expected, with repeatable quirks and limitations (I would not say malfunctions). I had more "malfunctions" in Maya's tools in that regard across the versions I used. There was Polygon split tool, then the Multi-Cut, but that caused another set of issues in combination with the new selection highlight which seemed to have a mind of it's own sometimes (I think it's fixed in the new extension though) and it could not be turned off when you were using the Modeling toolkit, which was the only place where some of the new essential tools were added, like edge slide for example, which replaced the clunky Set to edge or Set to face. *deep breath*
Max doesn't have the Camera based selection or Ignore backfaces at tool level, but it had one click Polygon shell (or edge border) select and deselect for years and years. Or convert polygon selection to edge boundary; or Edge or Face constraints and many more. I don't think you can say that its tools are old or stupid since only the past couple of versions they made an appearance inside of Maya (with the Modeling toolkit).
I'd also argue that Maya struggled with their integration (at one point there was a double set of some tools, legacy and new and with each version you had to hunt back your tools in the newly arranged menus). And I'd also argue about malfunctions that are never fixed, how many versions of Maya had the messed up Isolate mode that still let you select or use tools over hidden faces? Or let you "weld" one vertex from one mesh to one from a completely different mesh? And how distracting from the art is the problem of constantly deleting history or hunting, unparenting and cleaning nodes from the outliner after attaching / detaching or other operations?
Do you happen to have a solution for this by the way?
All programs have limitations, weak and strong sides. Once more, my opinion is not that Max is bad, I just think that it's bad FOR ME (actually, I think, not just for me though) )) I can workaround almost everything for sure, I can get used to limitations and use some tricks. But the main question is "Why?" If I have an opportunity to avoid it, then I choose a better way.
I understand that if everything's working predictably, you can use it and consider it more or less robust, but everything is relative - as I written above. Unlike Maya, Max has some critical architecture problems, it's no secret - Max is a frankenstein. It's build of tons of side party scripts and pieces of code built by hundreds of various people. That's why it is so unstable, and it's API is so messy. At some point (when keeping this monster alive will cost more money than it can bring) AD will retire it for sure, 5-6 years or so - they understand all that, may be they are greedy guys, but not idiots at all. From version to version Max gets more and more badly integrated staff, the old bugs remain unsolved... I don't wanna migrate to a new package once again )) At the same time there's a strong positive trend to improvement since Maya 2015, many XSI features appeared in Maya recently.
All things you listed are either under fixing by AD, or already fixed in Ext2, or can be easily beaten by scripting. Anyway, all this can be solved. That's a difference. Maya has a lot of problems (especially, after XSI), but they can be solved. In Max I have to get into the way of avoiding known pitfalls, I can do nothing with them, just be used to or avoid. In Maya I can even write my own cut tool, or deformer or something else from the ground - just Maya API and Python, without any C++. Can I do it in Max that easily? No.
P.S. BTW, I compared Max and XSI, not Maya - on the gifs.
Oh, this looks crappy )) This bug kills usability for sure. I'd also leave an idea at mayafeedback or report to the support. I've already reported some bugs last year and found them fixed in the latest version.
As a temporary solution this script will perform just fine
@pasha_sevez
Pasha's script works just fine. But just fyi there is this option in the chamfer vertex tool options (click the rectangular box):
check remove face (it is on by default).
and 2 unlock the locked attributes, once you chamfer the vertex you will have to do so in the attribute editor. See my screen shots.
What would be awesome (if someone wants to script) is to have chamfer vertex be an absolute distance from the initial selected vertex. Currently chamfer vertex performs the operation relative to each edge length. Cinema 4d has a vertex bevel that does this and its great for punching in circles.
Interesting feature) It's useful for quick modeling different, say, spikes ) Thanks )
I'm getting this vibe too.
Maya 2016 Ext2 was a bigger release than Max 2017 looking at the release notes
If you look back at the core changes and upgrades to Maya over the last couple of years, it's easily the most radically developed program Autodesk have got going now (at least their big apps AutoCad, Revit, Max). Porting to qt was the start of it all. There are a few big changes coming up too from what I hear. Good times ahead!
It's up to you which is a good way instead of being forced to work a particular way. After years of built up custom marking menus you can never go back to vanilla maya.
Yes, most of Maya is plugins - that's the concept of being modular.