As a 3D modeller, animator, and mapper, (and not a coder) I agree with what Jed said 100%.
Jed, can you please just go work for Valve? great, thanks! On Fri, Jul 24, 2009 at 12:23 PM, Jed <[email protected]> wrote: > No I wasn't advocating an 3D app -> MDL path. Simply adding support > for a more common/cross platform 3D format to those that StudioMDL > supports. > > The problem with the SMD format is that it's an old format from and > old engine and requires plug-ins to be written for 3D apps to support > it. This leaves it down to Valve to write them. > > Take Max for example - a plug-in for one version does not > automatically work with another, it needs to be recompiled against the > new versions SDK. A shop like Valve is probably only going to have one > version and not upgrade every time a new one comes along. Therefore > SMD plug-ins for other versions are going to have to be made by the 3D > app users themselves. > > Now there are plenty of suitable cross-app 3D formats such as DAE, > FBX, etc. that Valve could add support for to the StudioMDL compiler > (and I've vocally expressed this to Valve many times) in *addition* to > the SMD, OBJ and MRM formats it already supports. > > So why should they do it? > > - Common file format means more 3D apps that can produce content > out-of-the-box or via publisher made plug-ins. For example DAE/FBX is > supported by XSI, Maya, Max, Blender, Milkshape3D, etc, etc. > - Gives modders/studios/licensees choice to use the 3D app of their > choice to create content. > - Valve doesn't need to produce plug-ins for apps, just support the > format in the compiler. > > Simply put SMD format is binding end users to the few apps that write > it and the generosity of community users such as myself, Prall, et al. > to write these plug-ins for the 3D apps we want to use. > > Interesting case in point - a Canadian studio approached me once > asking me when my plug-ins would be available for 3DS Max 2009 because > that was their in-shop 3D content creation tool and they had invested > a lot of money in software and training and didn't want to have to > move to something else. Their apparent decision to purchase a Source > license for their title was hanging on the availability of plug-ins > for Max. > > My main issue with some of the SDK tool is that that it feels like > Valve aren't being smart about it. Good tools means wider adoption > which might result in more licensees and from a modders perspective, > more people getting into it and maybe making the next CSS/TF2/Portal > that Valve can snap up as their IP. I think Valve should have a > dedicated tool guy (not me) turning out polished useful tools - not > this rehashed crap that's hung over from Half-Life 1. > > - Start over with StudioMDL - make it a GUI app from the start (and > adding batch/scripting to it wouldn't be hard) > - Make HLMV a proper MFC of WPF app and get rid of the old buggy mxtk > GUI from Mete's HLMV. > - Add support form more 3D modern file formats and eventually phase > out SMD, etc. > - If for license/NDA reasons you can't release all the source code for > apps, at least release parts of it. A lot can be learned from even > partial code that could help us as modders make our own apps. > - Add some SDK tool API stuff - for example code to render a 3D window > like in HLMV. It can still require steam but make it accessible so > that developers can add support for model rendering in other apps. > - Polished tools will make the SDK/Engine more attractive to end > users. Modding shouldn't be a right of passage but a warm welcoming > experience to inspire the next great ideas. > > I could go on but you get the general idea... > > - Jed > > > 2009/7/24 Jorge Rodriguez <[email protected]>: > > On Fri, Jul 24, 2009 at 2:41 AM, Minh <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> The .smd format is extremely robust the way accomodates reference > meshes, > >> AND skeletal animation. So you want a method to go straight from 3d > model / > >> animation -> .mdl ? > >> How is that going to work with parametric animation? where you can > combine > >> multiple .smds to make an animation? > > > > > > Minh, while the capabilities of the studio compiler are formidable, it > still > > leaves much to be desired in terms of file format and syntax. Don't tell > me > > you've never struggled with the qc format. I am constantly having > problems > > with its limitations. It's a rather robust system that allows for > combining > > animations in many interesting ways, but the syntax still pisses me off > > quite a bit, and the technicality of it leaves it out of reach of most > > artists. I hear Valve wrote some simple tools around it, but I'm > surprised > > they haven't replaced it entirely. > > > > The SMD format is perhaps a bit clunky, but I don't have too many > problems > > with it, because it does exactly what is needed, even if it does it in a > bit > > of a backwards way. > > _______________________________________________ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > please visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders > > _______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders
