List of app development tools - help a girl out

If you are at ease with Mudbox, indeed stay with it.

 

Yeah - I'm glad we have multiple options to choose from. I've attempted Zbrush several times, and the UI just grates my nerves. I'm very impressed with the artists who develop content in that software. Not only from the awesome creations they produce, but also the ability to work in Zbrush, an ability I lack.

 

I think that is a thing of the past.... people complained loud about it in the 3D Coat forums, and the dev took that fineprint out AFAIK.


Just to make it clear: tswalk refers to a passage in the EULA (I think it was in the EULA) of 3D Coat that tried to stop people from using the application for creation of "improper" assets.

I don't remember the exact terms anymore, I think they were kind of vague, but it was clear from the pages about the dev that he was a deeply religious christian, so people started wondering in the forums what would or would not fall under the terms.
Would sculpting a devil or demon offend the dev? What about... ehr... the more skimpy clad models?

In the end the dev took the terms out if my memory serves me right (and he hasn't ninja edited his terms since). Guess he came to the conclusion that it was financial suicide to leave the terms as is, and a nightmare to police.


And before someone start shooting against the dev: hes a great guy, works hard on 3D Coat (managed to get it within quite close distance of ZBrush working alone or with a small team lately), and extremly helpful when no one else can help with 3D Coat problems. I also wasn't to fussed about these terms when I started using 3D Coat, don't think it ever was a good idea to mix personal beliefs with business in such a manner (should have developed a different application where people couldn't build anything they can imagine then), but I never held it against the dev, and was quite happy to continue using 3D Coat when he took the terms out.

Pulled the trigger on a ZBrush license after testing it for some weeks... some of the ZBrush tools and brushes really make some things that take quite a while and a ton of skill to sculpt in 3D Coat a breeze.
And exporting the high poly sculpt is a breeze too, which I haven't found a way to do until now in 3D Coat. Thanks to that, for models where edgeflow isn't so important (like rocks), sculpting these in ZBrush, exporting to an .obj or .fbx model, decimate in Blender to get a retopo mesh base, import into 3D Coat as Highpoly voxel model and low poly retopo mesh, cleaning up the low poly mesh, and baking to the paint room turned out to be a surprisingly quick way to create rocks and similar assets for me.

On the other hand, I found 3D Coat easier for general sculpting. So, yeah, I am also surprised how someone can work with ZBrush as their main Sculpting, Retopo and painting tool.

 

Funny, but that's already #1 on the page. Have you looked at the list yet?

 

Thanks for elaborating on that subject.. and yes, that was the case. If it is no longer, good. The tool is awesome, but after reading the EULA (and that was several years ago), I dropped it and moved along. I'll revisit it if it has changed because it did look like a great tool.

 

3D coat voxels is limited by memory and speed, i got it crashing when there is some few high poly models, and it slows down a lot as you increase resolution to a reasonnable level of detail.
While Zbrush is the sculpting tool, it stays lower on memory and is always faster to manipulate high density models.
Using both with low hardware , 3D coat becomes too slow or start memory crash while Zbrush run as a breeze.
Once you get accustomed to Zbrush you find you sculpt anything and faster, 3D coat becomes more a retopo and paint tool. Anyway this is again a matter of preference to use one or both.

 

Thanks for clarifying. Seems an odd thing to put into eula - who's the deciding person to say what is improper. The software seller? I don't think so. Anyway - glad that nonsense was removed, but it wouldn't have effected me anyway, as I use it same as zenGarden, for retopo and painting.

Yep - exactly what I use it for.

 

So, I added some of your recommendations to the article https://blog.appnext.com/2017/01/app-development-tools/
I came to some some conclusions:

1) Doing these kind of lists requires extensive research in order to actually benefit
2) I think its better to have separate articles that focus on different tools and aspects of development instead of combining them
3) You guys are awesome.

This list is a working progress and exposed me to a bunch of tools I didn't know. Just want to thank all of you for your time and knowledge

 

@Edenbeinart89
In your article you mentioned WWisse, but you forgot about FMOD (competitor in SFX/Music), there is also free alternative for CrazyBump ( AwesomeBump ), also Speedtree is worth to mention i think (support for Unity/Unreal) Simplygon (Unity/Unreal) for makings LODs hope you can choose something

 

Just because I was to lazy to check the facts in my last post, I went into "internet history" mode and unearthed the offending EULA paragraph from waaaay back (well, actually it was the first hit on google, somebody copied it to a blenderartist.org thread... good old internet. Hello 2008).

4 RESTRICTIONS

4.1 The 3D-Coat software should not be used in the production of any lewd or obscene materials as well as of any products which propagandize hatred against people. We understand that we are not able to check you, this is on your conscience, but we warn you about responsibility before God.


Jap... the dev most probably never really expected to be able to enforce it, and just put it in there for "fun" (or keeping a clear consience given his religious beliefs).
So basically, it was kind of a non-issue from the start unless you sent the material to the dev or posted it on his forum (even then, he could have deleted the pics or not used them for advertising 3D Coat, but most probably not much else)... people where still pissed, because that is not what should be put in an EULA.

Guess at some point he decided it wasn't worth the hassle. EULA changed and these paragraphs removed start of 2009, according to other sources.

 

Sorry to derail, but that's kind of what we do here in General Discussion...

Other than the added comment about God, how is this really any different from Facebook prohibiting nudity or obscenity or inciting hatred against others? Or Twitter or any other company that has similar provisions in their policies? I'm not saying I agree with it being in there or not, just genuinely curious how this could be perceived differently from those policies.

 

Well, I'll go with it for one more post, then I'll stop the OT-ness.


I am theorizing here, because I never was as pissed about it as other people. I mean, as long as the dev isn't colleccting data and trying to shut down my copy of 3D Coat if I violate the terms, I never was going to bother. Not that I was doing anything that broke the rules, but an unenforcable EULA isn't even worth the harddrive space it's saved on. It is garbage.


Now, personally, I think there are 3 things that play into this:

1. Mentioned god. Big mistake. You immidiatly alienate a good portion of your userbase. All the atheists that HATE everything christian with a passion... people of a different faith. Even some liberal christians.

Lets not forget, in MANY parts of the world (not the US, not even in some parts of switzerlands where they kick out teachers when they take down the crosses in their schoolrooms), you don't mention god or religion in public. Its fine in Church, its fine in private conversation. It's not ok in politics or business to do so, BECAUSE this paints you as a rather extreme christian in these parts of the world if you have to mention god in a completly unrelated topic.
The "god bless america" mantra every POTUS seem to have to mention at least once in every official speech seems pretty alien to many of us europeans.

Sure, you could make the same argument about evolution theory or a ton other stuff (altough in this case, mostly extreme christians would be offended, buddhists for example don't seem to care much about evolution). That most probably would also not be appropriate in an EULA.
He COULD have worded it differently, so that it wasn't clear if it was in there for law reasons or religious ones. People would most probably have reacted differently. This is what Twitter and Facebook do. And people do react differently to that.

2. An unenforcable rule in the EULA. Whats the point? Will he ever TRY to police it? Can he police it?
Even though it was clear at THAT time that he probably didn't have the means to police it, it created an unsure situation as to the future and what he would and wouldn't try to finally enforce this rule. Don't forget, Facebook and Twitter DO try to enforce their no-nudity rules and whatnot.

This part of the EULA was a ticking timebomb. Maybe never to go off. But as long as it was there, nobody knew what the dev was working on in the background to blow it up in the face of his users. And if he would try, everyone would be affected, not only the ones in violation, because he would have to collect data from his users and somehow look at the data to catch the ill-doers.
This is NSA BS and seriously tinfoil hat territory. Most probably no sane individual would ever do that. But: you really want to spend your money on an application that threatens to do this in the future, even if it most probably never will work, or take ages to do so?

3. Facebook and Twitter already are the big bad corporations. You don't trust them anyway and expect them to pull NSA BS stunts. Not allowing nudity is quite mild compared to what crap rules they could spring on you, and you would have to suck it up (unless enough users would be pissed about it and petition the evil corporation into backpedalling). They could most probably enforce all the crap they came up with too.

Here we are talking about a small oneman shop (at the time, now he has some additional workforce, still a small business). He was alway seen as a nice guy, really helpful and all. He made this amazing 3D App that could hold its own against the big ones in the industry for a very nice price.
And now this guy is putting stuff like this in the EULA? Even though he is WAY more depended on the goodwill of his users than say Pixology or Autodesk?


Now, I am not saying I hold any of these views, altough I too was a little bit puzzled at what he was thinking putting this part into his EULA. I respect the man wanting to keep a good consience by knowing his "Baby" is not misused for purposes his religion is treating as a sin.
But: at the same time he treated it as a business, and he was in the business of creating an app people could create anything they imagined with. If he wanted to keep things kid-friendly, he should have created a different app.