That is correct. ICE introduces a lot of risk because it is still molding into shape. We must be as risk averse as possible.
Matt From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Sergio Mucino Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2014 8:35 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Survey - how would you do this? I think that what Matt meant is that ICE is fairly young tech, and therefore, still prone to possible changes, whereas constraints, using his example, are very old tech that is pretty much not going to change... ever. I can understand his point, but on the flip side, I'm also aware that nothing lasts forever. But policies governing how assets are handled I'm sure are not Matt's to set up, so anyway... I'm starting to ramble, but I think I made my point. Now, back to your original programming :-) . [cid:[email protected]] On 13/02/2014 11:25 AM, Emilio Hernandez wrote: I will drink that beer in this one with Eric. I am not on the game side but on the film and advertising, so I only know the basics of a gaming engine and I found your survey challenge just to take a look back at the legacy tools and solve the problem, because as the rest of us I believe ICE is the word and the way to think how to solve a "simple" task as the one you describe. I use ICE for a lot of things, not only particles fx. And I am no erudit as Mr. Mootz, Thiago, Paul Smith, Ola Madsen, etc. I will say I am an average ICE user more on the artist side. And really ICE never stops surprising me. I find it very stable, and I use it very often, even for very simple projects. And it allows me to change things as a line of shopping bags vanishing to the horizon in a breeze with client's request such as.... "No, let's make the bags bigger. More bags, less bags. Can we see two rows of bags, perhpas three?..." I can hardly imagine the 2020 release of Softimage, ICE dissapears out of nowhere. For me, it is like saying the render tree will vanish. Porting to a game engine from Softimage, is something that I can't speak a word. But in my regular workflow ICE rules! Cheers! [http://img694.imageshack.us/img694/8965/erojamailpleca.jpg] 2014-02-13 8:19 GMT-06:00 Eric Thivierge <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>: So you need to hire robots then cause all workflows involving humans are prone to error, you just have to reduce it as much as possible. I'm with Brad regarding ICE. It's stable and mature for the bread and butter work that is done with it (an example is your asteroid task). Otherwise, how is real work getting done with it? Eric T. On 2/12/2014 6:01 PM, Matt Lind wrote: The point is we cannot subscribe to workflows which are prone to human error. --
<<inline: image001.gif>>
