Are Weapon/Hardsurface Artists In Game Studios Like Activision Using CAD?

Bozurk

Hello,

Just as the title says.  Are weapon artists in these Triple A studios using CAD to save-time? And no, I'm not talking about Junior 3D Hardsurface/Weapon Artists, I'm talking about Senior level here. I'm sure a senior who has a lot of experience can, or probably should be allowed to use the software of her/his choice if it gets the job done faster. I've heard from someone that most outsourcing studios are using CAD programs like MOI3D or Fusion360.

sacboi

"Are weapon artists in these Triple A studios using CAD to save-time? And no, I'm not talking about Junior 3D Hardsurface/Weapon Artists, I'm talking about Senior level here."

This fragment is a misnomer. Bearing in mind that seniority doesn't always necessarily supersede the former in terms of expertise generating quality content but rather, would typically have already accrued sustained experience working within high end production environments. So yes, in answer to your question there are people who utilize, double precision solids within their personal workflow. In fact a hard surface - weapon artist, an active member on these boards attained his first job at Infinity Ward (progenitor studio for the CoD franchise) four or five years ago, atm escapes me when exactly?! however most if not all advice he'd posted was bang on the money! occasionally helping me out, as well plus taking into account was a fair while, prior to accepting an Industry role.

EDIT:

I assume result of which was a motivating factor, he also switched over to working with CAD data.  

Bozurk

sacboi said:

"Are weapon artists in these Triple A studios using CAD to save-time? And no, I'm not talking about Junior 3D Hardsurface/Weapon Artists, I'm talking about Senior level here."

This fragment is a misnomer. Bearing in mind that seniority doesn't always necessarily supersede the former in terms of expertise generating quality content but rather, would typically have already accrued sustained experience working within high end production environments. So yes, in answer to your question there are people who utilize, double precision solids within their personal workflow. In fact a hard surface - weapon artist, an active member on these boards attained his first job at Infinity Ward (progenitor studio for the CoD franchise) four or five years ago, atm escapes me when exactly?! however most if not all advice he'd posted was bang on the money! occasionally helping me out, as well plus taking into account was a fair while, prior to accepting an Industry role.

EDIT:

I assume result of which was a motivating factor, he also switched over to working with CAD data.  

Sorry, I wasn't clear enough about the seniority requirement. What I actually meant by that is, When getting hired as a junior weapon artist, they don't allow the junior to be rather flexible. And use different software/tool and stick with the standard. But now I know that it is not really required to use the standard software as long as the assets meets quality expectations and standards. Thank you!

Klunk

I don't think it's common practise, if at all, if you need someone to pick up half way through for some reason (illness, holiday, leaving etc) you don't want to be loading custom softare just to see the progress, hey boss I need a license for AutoCAD to see Joes mg. And everything saved on the servers must be accessable to everyone else for obvious reasons.
Though I've worked in studio's where some have "lied" about experience with particular software, and have installed their own versions of a different package to do the work 

Bozurk

Klunk said:

I don't think it's common practise, if at all, if you need someone to pick up half way through for some reason (illness, holiday, leaving etc) you don't want to be loading custom softare just to see the progress, hey boss I need a license for AutoCAD to see Joes mg. And everything saved on the servers must be accessable to everyone else for obvious reasons.
Though I've worked in studio's where some have "lied" about experience with particular software, and have installed their own versions of a different package to do the work 

Interesting! Thanks for the heads up Klunk, Is Maya used more in game studios? Or Is it 3DS Max still?

Klunk

https://polycount.com/discussion/222631/whats-your-primary-3d-app-these-days#latest

pior

"I've heard from someone ..."
Who was that ?

"... that most outsourcing studios"
That's a very bold claim

"... are using CAD programs like MOI3D or Fusion360."
Just because CAD might be suited for a a given task or production, doesn't mean that it is suited for all.

And even though they are both CAD packages, MOI and Fusion are completely different beasts in the way they operate. MOI is very intuitive and is very tightly designed, but it is 100% destructive. Fusion is completely parametric in nature, but comes with an incredibly badly designed UI/UX that can be very detrimental to one's workflow (and sanity) - but of course people who never experienced anything else will be 100% convinced that it is "just fine" and will act as evangelists.

Anyways. All you have to do is to remain curious and willing to use the best workflow possible. And don't worry about things "you've heard" if it doesn't come from people who actually have production experience.

"I'm sure a senior who has a lot of experience can, or probably should be allowed to use the software of her/his choice if it gets the job done faster."
Not necessarily. A studio may be paying for a certain piece of software because it comes with a support package that another doesn't have. Or perhaps a studio has some strict IT policies for software deployment, even if it is free or open source. Every place is different, so don't worry about it. Just focus on doing the best possible work.

Bozurk

pior said:

"I've heard from someone ..."
Who was that ?

"... that most outsourcing studios"
That's a very bold claim

"... are using CAD programs like MOI3D or Fusion360."
Just because CAD might be suited for a a given task or production, doesn't mean that it is suited for all.

And even though they are both CAD packages, MOI and Fusion are completely different beasts in the way they operate. MOI is very intuitive and is very tightly designed, but it is 100% destructive. Fusion is completely parametric in nature, but comes with an incredibly badly designed UI/UX that can be very detrimental to one's workflow (and sanity) - but of course people who never experienced anything else will be 100% convinced that it is "just fine" and will act as evangelists.

Anyways. All you have to do is to remain curious and willing to use the best workflow possible. And don't worry about things "you've heard" if it doesn't come from people who actually have production experience.

"I'm sure a senior who has a lot of experience can, or probably should be allowed to use the software of her/his choice if it gets the job done faster."
Not necessarily. A studio may be paying for a certain piece of software because it comes with a support package that another doesn't have. Or perhaps a studio has some strict IT policies for software deployment, even if it is free or open source. Every place is different, so don't worry about it. Just focus on doing the best possible work.

Thank you for taking the time to write this insight Prior. I will keep that in mind, I've heard from my friend who is learning from freelancer, or a professional (I dot know, don't quote me), And that person told my friend that in Activision, the weapon artists most of them used CAD software to create those modernized complex weapons. I've made this thread because I'm at the moment choosing my tool and trying to become (Industry Ready) if need be, I know how to model and use Both Maya and Blender and Zbrush but, at the moment I'm learning 3DS Max and I've been tempted to jump into cad modeling with Plasticity. (Which by the way, is a new kid in the block for CAD workflow). Should I stick with Maya? Thanks!

Unknown

This content has been removed.

Klunk

the weapon artists most of them used CAD software to create those modernized complex weapons.

possibly, but it may  be as simple as  they get the CAD drawings from the manufacturer.

pior

Well I think that when people mention CAD in this context, it's pretty much always about the benefit of being able to add/cut in details without worrying about meshing. So in that regard the OP is on the right track (as indeed these workflows *can* be very useful).

@Bozurk I'd say simply focus on being as efficient as possible with mesh-based modeling, while *also* practicing the CAD package you feel the most comfortable with (very likely a pick between of MOI, Fusion and Plasticity. And perhaps Solidworks if you have access to it. There's also Rhino, but MOI is pretty much its spiritual successor).

In my experience MOI is absolutely the most intuitive to pickup and opens up great workflows very fast. Fusion is very powerful but as said I also find in incredibly awfully designed in terms of UX, making some simple operations infuriatingly frustrating to perform. Plasticity seems extremely promising, especially with the way the author seems to understand that CAD applied to game art/scifi fantasy designs involves a lot of freeform input (like drawing guide lines directly in perspective), which is something that both MOI and Fusion are quite poor at by default.

sacboi

@Bozurk

My apologies, lately more often than not misinterpret what I read or become fixated upon a certain train of thought, too the detriment of all else so frankly a to be clear what I wrote was wrong. 

Not absolutely sure is related to a diagnosed mental health condition incurred when a lot younger since I'm not a trained healthcare professional although do regularly attend therapy sessions.

Again, disregard my earlier comment. 

Sidney Eliot

Don't forget Plasticity, it's a CAD / Nurb based modeling software with focus on actual entertainment artists unlike the other CAD tools. I haven't heard of any studios that use it yet, but do believe that it will slowly but surely take off and become a staple in the games industry at some point. At least for hard surface artists.

EarthQuake

CAD software is becoming more common for hard surface work. I'm seeing some really cool examples of people combining CAD + bevel shader baking (new in Toolbag 5 but also possible in some other apps) as an alternative to the traditional high poly/sub-d workflow.

Ie: https://x.com/KazamiXin/status/1844364753248059534

gnoop

I use cad style of software for anything more complicated than just a box if it's hard surface /non-deformable.   Stopped to use sub-d  for that years ago.    Honestly not sure  why sub-d still alive.  It was once critical for 3d soft  scene optimization , not that important anymore.   Still a source of shading artifacts and puzzles  while CAD  does always perfect  vertex normals  you can always  transfer to in-game triangulated mesh .       Sub-d  models in undivided state  are still having lots of redundant loops you would have to get rid on next LOD  making normal map incompatible. 

  

  But my role is more like material artist than modeller  recent years,   never had to share what I modeled to other artists to input.  What I model  now is procedural mostly.

pior

"Honestly not sure  why sub-d still alive"

Because in actual day to day practice there are many models that are just an order of magnitude faster and more efficient to build in subdiv rather than in CAD, especially if the provided concept isn't a fully locked technical drawing and if the design will be subject to tweaks along the way. Here's an example from a 2010 3december presentation (art credit Martin Punchev) :



A skilled hardsurface modeller could knock this out in a matter of hours/days, without the need of a supertight 2D concept and with everything being very easy to tweak and stretch at any time. Whereas despite how powerful CAD can be, a MOI/Fusion/Plasticity kiddie would be unable to match this turnover rate and flexibility. Sure enough a CAD model may allow for some repositionning of  booleans and editing of fillets, but it absolutely woudn't allow for more organic changes like correcting the rythm of a silhouette or inflating/deflating things here and there. Such tweaks essential for on-the-fly art direction are just not possible with a CAD model *at all*. And 14 years of time hasn't changed that

The same applies to the more recent "straight to final midpoly" workflow too. Cleaning up a CAD model (even coming from a software with a good mesher like MOI) would be a waste of time compared to building things in polies right from the start. If I am not mistaken this seems to be the approach used on the DeadLock characters in their current state.

Neox

"Sub-d models in undivided state are still having lots of redundant loops you would have to get rid on next LOD"

Tell me you are a maya user without telling me. A lot if times if stuff is built with modifiers its just removing said modifiers to kill support loops.
Making LODs on meshes with a quadlike structure is usually pretty quick and easy, if UVs are also layed out with LODs in mind.

But yeah if everything is kinda locked in, its more manual work to get rid of things that help define the higher subdivs.

gnoop

"A skilled hardsurface modeller could knock this out in a matter of hours/days, without the need of a supertight 2D "        Same for CAD , its sometimes just minutes for simple things .   Any export  shading issues  if any  could be fixed  by normal transfer from another hi export .   For unwrap  it sometimes needs just  couple clicks .       In my experience it's  still quicker.     For something like a head  , even robot I would use Zbrush and retopo anyway.      My guess it's  what  you accustomed better for .      And I am not a Maya user.

pior

Well, details like on this helmet absolutely cannot be distorted/elongated/stretched in CAD - that's just not how CAD surfacing works, and that's precisely why I showed this practical example ... Of course a simple grenade or belt buckle (or even a complex firearm, especially if a degree of improvisation is allowed) is quick and easy to knock out in Fusion360/MOI/Plasticity, but this says nothing about why SubD remains relevant.

It really is all about designs such as this helmet here or mech parts like Overwatch's Diva/Pharah needing to be done (and revised) under strict time constraints. Being able to edit such hard surface designs on the fly either because the modeler didn't initially catch some subtleties or because the design needs some tweaks after reviewing it in 3D (and countless of other reasons related to to the constraints of production) is precisely why CAD can't fully replace SuBD for stylized hardsurface. Combining both is pretty great though.

Now setting aside the editing aspect (which IMHO is self-evident), I would certainly admit that the speed aspect is hard to judge, since not everyone has witnessed every modeler at work. But I do believe that how fast one can knock out a prop is less important than it being easily editable. If anything one big reason why Subdiv isn't going anywhere soon is because the models are just incredibly robust.

To the OP : I'd say just learn both if you haven't already. The barrier to entry is very low now (for poly modeling Blender is free, and for CAD Plasticty is cheap, MOI3D is affordable, and Fusion is, well ... Fusion). All things considered neither is that complicated - polies are polies, and surfaces are surfaces

And besides these two methods, being familiar with trim-based/"mediumpoly" modeling is quite valuable as well - because that too is very robust, and extremely fast.