I think the only failure of the node architecture was that it wasn't meant to be used by artists. Had they had that in consideration, we would've had something like ICE or close to it ages ago. There are still some cool thing you can do in the Hypershade today, but it's unwieldy compared to applications that knew nodes was going to be tinkered with by artists.
Maya strengths are still it's quick interactive ability to build stuff and animate. Since this is an XSI list, we've all had a taste of what animation could be due to some really nice "quality of life" features. However, XSI never in the time I've done 3D ever caught up in terms of animation performance. It is still king of interactive performance at the cost of shoddy user experience. Before, Maya was the do-it-all tookit and still can be today. And a lot of the early technology that went into the Maya side were far better implemented than in any other package. The strength was indeed ubiquity, and it was attractive to plug-in developers alongside 3DS max. Shave had more functionality in Maya before it was integrated into XSI. Syflex had more functionality in Maya than the XSI integration too. nCloth is still used in both conventional and unconventional ways because every other out of box cloth solver just isn't good. We still rely on nCloth heavily and it's second only to something like Qualoft. nCloth is definitely a strength to leverage. Also, Maya + Window = new tech hotbed. Syflex, Shave, Comet Muscles, and now FE/Splice. Anything that seems promising usually begins it's early stages as a plug-in for Maya. No guarantees that these fledgling tools would be production worthy, but I'm the first to admit I've grabbed a plug-in and blindly marched into production many times. Maya's other strength is it's large user base. If you want a CG army that puts ancient Persia to shame, go with Maya. You are almost guaranteed you'll find someone to fill an empty seat if your shop is a Maya one. And though that pool may not be as experienced or agile as artists in other packages, you definitely have the advantage of choice and can cherry-pick to your hearts desire. To be fair, there are good Maya users out there with their own Maya knick-knacks that can still put up good work. And to that point, if you're a Maya user, you're almost never out of a job if you're smarter than the average bear. I still don't like it. -Lu On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 9:26 AM, Sebastien Sterling < [email protected]> wrote: > In fairness the architecture is admirable, i don't think anyone ever made > a fully nodal DCC after maya, to bad so little of it reaches its full > potential. > > > On 22 May 2014 17:15, Luc-Eric Rousseau <[email protected]> wrote: > >> 20 years.. 4/5 years late..adjusted for inflation I guess ;) >> >> On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 11:11 AM, Jordi Bares <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > Maya was ahead of its time 20 years ago, the novel architecture and a >> long list of historical events and mismanagement from Softimage (owned by >> Microsoft at the time) meant XSI arrived at least 4/5 years late to the >> party, which was a death sentence and big facilities by then did the full >> switch (not all but the majority). >> > >> > The genius side (and the part I don't like) was the viral nature of >> Maya in which you have to write stuff for pretty much everything which >> meant everybody was building tons of software (and complex ones too) on top >> of Maya so by the time XSI was starting to pick up pace it was an >> impossible fight. >> > >> > Was maya great for character animation? Yes, It has always been very >> good at that because the animation editor and dope sheet were very nice, >> also very fast with multiple characters and some versions very robust. >> Manipulators made life a pleasure (remember XSI introduced them late) so it >> was not a myth, but today it XSI is imho way superior for animation, shame >> the envelop deformers were never looked after properly. >> > >> > Jordi Bares >> > [email protected] >> > >> > On 22 May 2014, at 14:25, "Leendert A. Hartog" <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > >> >> Okay, a more specific question. Back in the day I always heard that >> Maya was the most useful tool for Character Animation (discounting >> Softimage from the equation). Was this just myth or is it just outdated >> info? >> >> >> >> -- >> >> >> >> Leendert A. Hartog AKA Hirazi Blue >> >> Administrator NOT the owner of si-community.com >> >> >> > >> > >> >> >
