Vig: Autodesk is where plugins go to die. Since 2005, Autodesk's innovation in all sectors, not just M&E, has been driven by acquisitions. They get acquired, integrated, die a slow death (slow because, as Biped has shown, shit has to get REALLY bad before people start to look for alternatives from the shit AD feeds them), and then get replaced.
In the meantime, they don't fix fundamental problems or expand core functionality- they add new features they acquire from other companies, and when people get upset with the eventually outdated offerings, they buy another company.
If you find this business model acceptable, Vig, then yes I think you have the right roadmap. For me, it stifles innovation and is a despicable behaviour.
All I know is that buggy unstable plug-ins each with their own schedule for updates (and or not) have been rolled in, made more stable and will work with every subsequent versions of 3dsmax on release with no extra effort on my part.
I dreaded bringing work home for the weekend and I had to start gathering up licensees and sending out emails about a week in advance, the following Monday was pretty much a wash also as I pestered far off devs for license transfers again... Kees was the only one that ever made the process easy and the only one that ever provided timely support. The rest, it was like yelling into a dark cave... sometimes the only answer you got back was your own email echoing back at you.
It was a major pain in the ass every time 3dsmax was updated or we had to jump back to an older version of max to work on some files for an older game so they can be localized by people with ancient versions of 3dsmax.
On release of a new version of 3ds some plug-ins worked, or were buggy, or worked on their own but not with other plug-ins or 64bit support was "coming" but no one knew when. The fixes where coming from a bunch of 3rd party devs that worked on their own schedule not mine and none of them where working together. Now they'll work and work together and I won't have to be the QA go between.
Honestly I just want shit to work, and I don't want to be hassled while I'm trying to be creative. So far its removed more roadblocks and freed me up more then its tied me down. If they don't want their code owned by "the man" then don't sell it to him.
The plugins I mentioned have been dead for a while and really they do what they where designed to do and don't need to be improved, and weren't. Nothing is stopping the authors from expanding their work and selling that to AD, or coming up with new stuff and selling that to AD. As long as it works and continues to work I don't care who does the work. I do know that AD is on the hook to make sure anything they roll in works on release. 3rd party devs could throw in the towel at any point and it was pretty risky relaying on them.
I know its made my life easier having the plug-ins I use rolled into max. I'm sure if I was more plugged into the plug-in author scene I would actually care or have an opinion but really, I want shit to work, and keep working. At the bare min they will do that.
I think it would be a bigger FU to the plug-in community if they didn't buy up what was out there already, and just wrote their own version basing the idea off of another persons hard work. You yourself have recommended using existing libraries or code bases, why reinvent the wheel right? Why screw people over and waste time rewriting things when you can look it over, make some tweaks and pat the person on the back?
At least there is some incentive that if the idea is well received that there could be some major pay off. The pay off also normally comes at the end of long history of pretty good sales. If a plug-in is going to die, thats a pretty good way to go out. It's a lot better then just giving your customers the middle finger and saying "sorry guys there's just not enough new sales", or "heres a worthless update so I can pay my rent". It's not hush money, its a reward for being creative and doing a good job. No one locks them up and says they can't do it again. Look at polyboost, they are working with him to make it as great as it can. I doubt they would slam the door in his face if he came up with some new ideas or something entirely different that kicked ass.
Actually I think it was mentioned on cgtalk that this is finally fixed.
I'll have to take your word on it, cuz there's way to much text and bullshit on that cgtalk thread. Dude, if this is true, I will be most pleased.
"edit"
Inresponse to specific bugfixes:
Ken Pimentel said: ,"I have no idea. All I know is something like 300+ legacy defects were fixed. Probably the most important is that our Dev manager personally fixed selection so that it works as expected - with completely predictable results!"
Actually I think it was mentioned on cgtalk that this is finally fixed.
Whooaah there guys. Where are the comments saying 'this isn't a prollum u need to set Ignore Backfacing', and then when you explain that you did, those that go 'You UR a LIar!1'?
This isn't the proper way to go about these things, damn it!
So yeah, I have that problem, and I'd be very happy if it'd finally be fixed.
Replies
In the meantime, they don't fix fundamental problems or expand core functionality- they add new features they acquire from other companies, and when people get upset with the eventually outdated offerings, they buy another company.
If you find this business model acceptable, Vig, then yes I think you have the right roadmap. For me, it stifles innovation and is a despicable behaviour.
I dreaded bringing work home for the weekend and I had to start gathering up licensees and sending out emails about a week in advance, the following Monday was pretty much a wash also as I pestered far off devs for license transfers again... Kees was the only one that ever made the process easy and the only one that ever provided timely support. The rest, it was like yelling into a dark cave... sometimes the only answer you got back was your own email echoing back at you.
It was a major pain in the ass every time 3dsmax was updated or we had to jump back to an older version of max to work on some files for an older game so they can be localized by people with ancient versions of 3dsmax.
On release of a new version of 3ds some plug-ins worked, or were buggy, or worked on their own but not with other plug-ins or 64bit support was "coming" but no one knew when. The fixes where coming from a bunch of 3rd party devs that worked on their own schedule not mine and none of them where working together. Now they'll work and work together and I won't have to be the QA go between.
Honestly I just want shit to work, and I don't want to be hassled while I'm trying to be creative. So far its removed more roadblocks and freed me up more then its tied me down. If they don't want their code owned by "the man" then don't sell it to him.
The plugins I mentioned have been dead for a while and really they do what they where designed to do and don't need to be improved, and weren't. Nothing is stopping the authors from expanding their work and selling that to AD, or coming up with new stuff and selling that to AD. As long as it works and continues to work I don't care who does the work. I do know that AD is on the hook to make sure anything they roll in works on release. 3rd party devs could throw in the towel at any point and it was pretty risky relaying on them.
I know its made my life easier having the plug-ins I use rolled into max. I'm sure if I was more plugged into the plug-in author scene I would actually care or have an opinion but really, I want shit to work, and keep working. At the bare min they will do that.
I think it would be a bigger FU to the plug-in community if they didn't buy up what was out there already, and just wrote their own version basing the idea off of another persons hard work. You yourself have recommended using existing libraries or code bases, why reinvent the wheel right? Why screw people over and waste time rewriting things when you can look it over, make some tweaks and pat the person on the back?
At least there is some incentive that if the idea is well received that there could be some major pay off. The pay off also normally comes at the end of long history of pretty good sales. If a plug-in is going to die, thats a pretty good way to go out. It's a lot better then just giving your customers the middle finger and saying "sorry guys there's just not enough new sales", or "heres a worthless update so I can pay my rent". It's not hush money, its a reward for being creative and doing a good job. No one locks them up and says they can't do it again. Look at polyboost, they are working with him to make it as great as it can. I doubt they would slam the door in his face if he came up with some new ideas or something entirely different that kicked ass.
Actually I think it was mentioned on cgtalk that this is finally fixed.
I'll have to take your word on it, cuz there's way to much text and bullshit on that cgtalk thread. Dude, if this is true, I will be most pleased.
"edit"
Inresponse to specific bugfixes:
Ken Pimentel said: ,"I have no idea. All I know is something like 300+ legacy defects were fixed. Probably the most important is that our Dev manager personally fixed selection so that it works as expected - with completely predictable results!"
but that doesn't mean its not fucked
Goddamnit.
Well if that isn't the most fitting comment I've ever read...
Vig, I ain't done with you yet, but don't have the strength tonight...
Aniceto hit the nail on the head with that animation. I doubt they'll ever fix that, for so many years that has been "as designed".
Whooaah there guys. Where are the comments saying 'this isn't a prollum u need to set Ignore Backfacing', and then when you explain that you did, those that go 'You UR a LIar!1'?
This isn't the proper way to go about these things, damn it!
So yeah, I have that problem, and I'd be very happy if it'd finally be fixed.