Good stuff, though it's kind of funny that Softimage gets Lagoa, Max gets iray, and Maya gets some procedural textures and generic mocap. Yeah, I know, oversimplification; perhaps the Craft plug-in will come in handy at some point. In either case, I appreciate that Autodesk is committed to providing value to subscription customers. It's even nicer that people such as yourself make an effort to reach out to the community and provide information/gather input. I wish the Maya team had a more public presence... you're making them look like hermits :P
The funny thing is that max users got the mocap library and the craft plugin already on the 2011 DVD - but probably don't realize it. So, you can't read too much into it.
How does it seem like a plugin? The modeling toolset is just as complete as Maya and that hasn't been updated in a while either. The texture editor has gotten pelt mapping along with several updates since. Polygon modeling tools have almost come to a standstill it seems.
I say like a plugin because when ICE was implemented, they've only concentrated on the dynamics side of the program. Theres still no decent volume shader for rendering particles, hence the new nCache support for Maya. So you either have to export to Maya or Max for krakatoa.
Another point is its now included in the premium suites with either Max or Maya. Why not a standalone Softimage premium suite if they classed it as a complete package?
The extrude tools and deformers could use some work and some additions like a shell tool would be great. Maybe when ICE can generate geometry we may get some new modeling tools?
I totally understand, the thing with ICE is they have a long roadmap with implementation in all aspects of the program. They are focusing on FX first then moving into animation/rigging and eventually modeling.
The premium suite from what I have read is eventually coming, but right now in the western market Softimage just isn't used enough to warrant a premium suite. In Japan they market a premium suite for Softimage because it's used in many game companies there. It's definitely continuing as a standalone application.
I'm not sure about the extrude tools but yes the deformers could use some updating. There's a plugin for the shell modifier at http://rray.de/xsi/ even though Softimage does need to make it out of the box. How about inset, local rotation, surface normal manipulation and saved component selections in Maya? Softimage has had these for years while Maya, being a standalone package, lacks these basic tools.
I just wish they'd add a few tools to the modeling toolset to keep us that use the package in that area a bit happier. Coding some modeling tools shouldn't take a great amount of development compared to the ICE stuff. Unless there planning on rewriting the whole modeling toolset in ICE, once ICE is able to generate geometry, in that case I'll be a happy chappy.
Don't know why XSI isn't as popular in the western market?
Don't get me started on Mayas poly-tools, gives me the shivers just thinking about them.
Substance Procedural Textures:
This looks to be the most promising of the featured updates. I already work this way with standard procedural materials and bake them out as a base to start painting on. Having a more fully featured material that focuses on the things I normally duct tape together, is going to be nice. Thanks guys!
I'm not sure if I assign a procedural map and pump in to normal map slot of a high poly object, if that will be captured during baking with a projection cage to a low or if other methods and post baking compositing will be required? I'll have to test it out when it gets released.
PhysX:
Not really all that excited about this, it still relies on you to break up the models and doesn't do any further fracturing as part of the simulation. Seems like stuff we already do fairly easily with other physics that are involved.
Maybe if each chunk had substance/material parameters and would break apart based on forces applied and material substance. I guess if someone wants to take it a step further they can learn reactor, particle flow or half a dozen other plug-ins like RayFire, Thinking particles bla bla bla which offer a lot more solutions to a lot more problems.
iray:
Pretty cool, not really useful to game artists, as most render'ers are ignored by game artists. At HI we do a lot of rendering for our 3D games so I'm sure we'll be testing this out. I like it as a first layer, but wish it had a deeper feature set that allowed for more flexablity. I like fire and forget but I also like being able to tweak settings and get into the core to change results. Part of what makes this artistic is being able to do things a little differently with a wide range of settings this becomes possible.
I'm not sure the solution to "WTF do all these sliders and check boxes do!?" is to give people one button. Maybe help them understand with tooltips or visuals (not hidden in help or web docs) when they're trying to decipher what "Interpolate Over FG Num. FG Points" set to 30 actually does. If there was a place for the over active ribbon tooltips its probably in the complex rendering settings.
The overall theme of lighten the feature set so its super simple to use, is helpful to a certain extent in that it attracts people to use it because its simple. But it leaves them there by not really taking it any further. I'm a fan of keeping things simple but I also like layers of detail that allow you to have more than just "Mongo make art".
Your first layer is idiot proof, what you have now. Push button something very limited but mildly impressive happens. Higher ups are happy they can replace knowledgeable users with underpaid slugs.
Your next layer might require some trial and error but will give the user more flexibility.
The next layer requires more training, more trail and error but ultimately gives the user the power to exactly what they want.
I'm left wondering if these will be fleshed out more and ultimately more useful and versatile, or just added and forgotten and later culled in another focused diet...
Replies
http://groups.google.com/group/xsi_list/browse_thread/thread/c1ef25844792e043/000a4dbde7e33741#000a4dbde7e33741
Another point is its now included in the premium suites with either Max or Maya. Why not a standalone Softimage premium suite if they classed it as a complete package?
The extrude tools and deformers could use some work and some additions like a shell tool would be great. Maybe when ICE can generate geometry we may get some new modeling tools?
The premium suite from what I have read is eventually coming, but right now in the western market Softimage just isn't used enough to warrant a premium suite. In Japan they market a premium suite for Softimage because it's used in many game companies there. It's definitely continuing as a standalone application.
I'm not sure about the extrude tools but yes the deformers could use some updating. There's a plugin for the shell modifier at http://rray.de/xsi/ even though Softimage does need to make it out of the box. How about inset, local rotation, surface normal manipulation and saved component selections in Maya? Softimage has had these for years while Maya, being a standalone package, lacks these basic tools.
Don't know why XSI isn't as popular in the western market?
Don't get me started on Mayas poly-tools, gives me the shivers just thinking about them.
Substance Procedural Textures:
This looks to be the most promising of the featured updates. I already work this way with standard procedural materials and bake them out as a base to start painting on. Having a more fully featured material that focuses on the things I normally duct tape together, is going to be nice. Thanks guys!
I'm not sure if I assign a procedural map and pump in to normal map slot of a high poly object, if that will be captured during baking with a projection cage to a low or if other methods and post baking compositing will be required? I'll have to test it out when it gets released.
PhysX:
Not really all that excited about this, it still relies on you to break up the models and doesn't do any further fracturing as part of the simulation. Seems like stuff we already do fairly easily with other physics that are involved.
Maybe if each chunk had substance/material parameters and would break apart based on forces applied and material substance. I guess if someone wants to take it a step further they can learn reactor, particle flow or half a dozen other plug-ins like RayFire, Thinking particles bla bla bla which offer a lot more solutions to a lot more problems.
iray:
Pretty cool, not really useful to game artists, as most render'ers are ignored by game artists. At HI we do a lot of rendering for our 3D games so I'm sure we'll be testing this out. I like it as a first layer, but wish it had a deeper feature set that allowed for more flexablity. I like fire and forget but I also like being able to tweak settings and get into the core to change results. Part of what makes this artistic is being able to do things a little differently with a wide range of settings this becomes possible.
I'm not sure the solution to "WTF do all these sliders and check boxes do!?" is to give people one button. Maybe help them understand with tooltips or visuals (not hidden in help or web docs) when they're trying to decipher what "Interpolate Over FG Num. FG Points" set to 30 actually does. If there was a place for the over active ribbon tooltips its probably in the complex rendering settings.
The overall theme of lighten the feature set so its super simple to use, is helpful to a certain extent in that it attracts people to use it because its simple. But it leaves them there by not really taking it any further. I'm a fan of keeping things simple but I also like layers of detail that allow you to have more than just "Mongo make art".
- Your first layer is idiot proof, what you have now. Push button something very limited but mildly impressive happens. Higher ups are happy they can replace knowledgeable users with underpaid slugs.
- Your next layer might require some trial and error but will give the user more flexibility.
- The next layer requires more training, more trail and error but ultimately gives the user the power to exactly what they want.
I'm left wondering if these will be fleshed out more and ultimately more useful and versatile, or just added and forgotten and later culled in another focused diet...