Is Blender good to modeling/make games/animate?- Blender is open source, and you can use it for free.- I've been practicing low poly with it and is easy as hell.- You can program in Python with it, and create games (I don't know if this language is great tho).- You can also animate with it.- I have it downloaded on Steam, so it updates automatically (I think this is important).It feels like an all-in-one program, sounds great!Do you have any ideas and/or comparisons?Is it possible to just do everything with Blender? (and maybe Photoshop to create textures?)I am just wondering if there is something more convenient and/or easier.
>>551066>Blender game enginedon't use that. for the love of god use something else.>Modeling choose what you like to use or works best for you. I use wings3d and metasequoia for modelling both high (15K+) and low (sub 1K) poly models.>texturingyou may be able to do simple textures in blender but photoshop and other apps can't be beat for quality textures.The only things I feel Blender excels at are uv unwrapping and animating. These are just my personal opinions so take them with a grain of salt. Except for the blender game engine. Seriously, use something else.
The more I learn about blender the more I understand that is truly a beast of a product for the low price of free. It is the only thing I know in life that is free and genuinely good. The only thing that has stopped me from using it is pretty case specific stuff. I switched over to maya because of their unwrapping tools, humanIk rigging and motion capture animation support, and also there morph target support is nice as well.. All things that will come in handy for game development. However, you can handle any task needed when it comes to 3D in blender. Not to mention I probably put in 1000+ hours on blender between learning and making placeholder art for a current project, switching over to maya from blender to me, felt so counter-intuitive. Once you learn the hot keys in blender your workflow seems to move at blazing speeds. Now that I have spent some time in maya I am liking it though, but god damn box modeling in blender is fucking nice. Also the dyntopo sculpting is top notch if you can learn how to tame that beast. If you are going to continue in blender, especially for game development. I would just suggest to invest in the add on called "retopoflow". Absolute gem for retoplogy tasks. Once I had that I truly felt like I had everything in blender (until I watched the maya lt overview video).Finally if you have never heard of it, cgcookie.com is a gold mine of tutorials, you have to pay but if you subscribe and start taking tutorials with them you will LOL at some of the shit they show you because it seems like common sense after they reveal a trick or technique to you. They make blender a lot less intimidating.Good lucko bucko
Forgot to mention for textures I would highly recommend substance painter. https://www.allegorithmic.com/products/substance-painterPretty sick stuff, the first time I painted metal directly onto a surface I made, it made my nipples harder than that metal surface I just made.
Blender is a typical generalist, which means that it can do everything up to a good quality, but isn´t leading in any of those categories. It´s a good and free tool for 3D starters, but it´s not, I repeat, NOT used in the industry (I can´t stress this enough!).I´d recommend working with 3dsMax or Maya under a student licence (which is basically the same as a normal licence). It´s practically free since Autodesk is pretty relaxed when it comes to fake-students, saying that "people can practice with it until they can afford it". In other words: as long as you´re not making a fortune with maya/3dsmax, you´re legally good to go. I personally use maya for modeling and 3dsmax for rigging/animation.Python is a good language, but it´s rather used for scripting afaik. If you want to make games as a single person/in a small team, go for Unity and C#, you´ll love it.
>>551126>but it´s not, I repeat, NOT used in the industrywrong. but you get the point across
>>551126Maya for modeling and Max for rigging/animation? I thought it was the other way around
Blender is, and always has been, the best free 3D modeling software. Modeling being the keyword. It's an alright renderer, but stay away from it for game creation. It's a tool to create 3D models more other game engines, and a fine one at that.
Blenderfags gonna suck as usual.Povray is free too, doesn't mean it doesn't suck to work with.Just leave us alone or use a real app like Houdini.
to all the people shitting on the game engine:yeah its not unity or unreal but you can make sidescrollers and simple style games much easier, it got a logic bricks system that's easy to use and you can integrate python too.
>>551151it is, that guy has never worked in the industry.
>>551066YES. IT IS. Many games on steam have been made using blender.
>>551126>In other words: as long as you´re not making a fortune with maya/3dsmax, you´re legally good to go.>you're legally good to go.Nooooooooooooooooooooo.Legally you're fucked if anyone ever finds out you're making a profit using an educational license.Please don't advise people to do things like this.And don't assume any big company, especially Autodesk, is your friend, or would be on your side when it comes to legal matters like this. They are fully capable of legally ripping you a new asshole, even if only to set an example.Are they likely to send a team of lawyers after you for making a small indie game with a student license?Probably not.Could they?Absolutely.
>>551183is there an example of autodesk fucking people over?
>>551190cease and desist orders are not uncommon
>>551190they have sent the swat team and kill my cousin manveer for pirating license
>>551190That isn't even remotely the point. The point isn't if they will, the point is that they can.Telling someone "well legally you're fine lmao autodesk doesn't care xd" is terrible advice, because "legally" you are not fine.You're just banking on the fact that Autodesk doesn't care enough to make an example of you.It's not a guarantee that they will, but it's a guarantee that they *can*, and that's something that can't be debated.Specifically, though, the biggest case I could find was Adobe suing Forever 21 for using a pirated version of Photoshop a few years ago. Apparently Autodesk was involved as well, but I can't find any details about their end of the lawsuit.
>>551066>it updates automatically (I think this is important).damn youngsters
>>551066i work with the guy who does promo art for blender and he prefers blender.So it's good.
Is there a difference between steam version and normal blender?
>>5512813rd party DRM.I guess It doesn't actually uses the steam DRM though, so it's just basically an other way to download it. It's till fucking retarded regardless. The only reason is there is to inform the retards using steam it exists.
>>551066>modelingYes>texturingthere's better options but can do the job>make gamesit can be integrated in lots of pipelines as modelling-texturing or animation tool, gameengine lol no>animateYes, but have some paid addons that should be integrated blender like the muscle systems.>Problem with blender:blender developement is based in donations, the google sumer of code and the most imnportant what the blender fundation need for their current project wich is the most important to them.A year ago they try to drop the fbx exporter, wich is a paid developement becuase they r not interested and don't need it, the same with the layers, they want them but without any standard 4 photoshop cause they don't need, ngons 8 years in developement because they think they don't need it, OpenSubdiv etc ...
>>551293all of the problems you listed have already been addressed :p
>>551296>have already been addressedSomehow, but any futher developement is based only in what the BF need not in what the user base need, people doing games, compatibility with comercial software... they don't give a fuck about them they only care about their current project, fuck, they didn't even want to be on steam, and now they can pay with steam 2 developers with the donations of the store of dota and tf
>>551296And don't get me wrong, is a nice little 3d software, and could be great if weren't in the hands of these retards
>>551299i agree that they should focus on the basic tools and stop developing cycles and the crappy node system.
>>551332I agree cycles is a waste of time as well as the game engine but you need a node system to do proper animation. Also unfortunately the open development model means people just work on whatever they feel like, there's not much top down direction.
is blender good for making lolis?
>>551336>the open development model means people just work on whatever they feel likethat isn't rigth, the development of blender is based on the needs of the blender fundation projects, they r doing now a long film and need more complex things 4 handle a long production. Isn't like u write code, send that to the bf and they integrate that, and you have always to adapt to "their" vision of blender, that why there's no left click select, no colored wireframe, no uniform menus and so on
>>551355well, there is a review system, but that is how every software project in existence works.If you just add functionality or fix bugs, it is as easy as sending in the code and it'll get accepted and that's that. If your code meets basic quality standards, it'll pass no problem.If you want to change something more fundamental with the user experience, then yeah, it's probably gonna be controversial and result in lots of discussion and possibly rejection of your code. The blender foundation adds a lot of features, but there are lots of devs working on blender who are outside of the BF, so the BF doesn't have ultimate control over development or anything. It's still pretty community-driven, I think.things like how the basic UI works (no left click select etc) have been in blender for decades before the blender foundation even existed, btw. Blender used to be an in-house animation tool in the 90ies before it got open-sourced, that's when these decisions got made, mostly.As for OP questions, as others have pointed out, blender game engine is pretty trash, for the rest of the things you wanna do, blender is good/suitable/passable. You just have to learn to use the basic UI, navigation & hotkeys, otherwise you'll always have grief. If you come from MODO there is a guy on vimeo who compares the two which might help, there are probably other tutorials out there for people coming from maya et al.
>>551360>all the comunity want colored wireframes>a guy inside the BF make a patch with the colored wireframes>BF > lol colored > not today ladand that's how worksleft click select has been requested since the 2.4 and we maybe get that in the 2.8 or no, fixing the menus and had a clear interface shouldn't be that hard but who cares, is just free software
>>551360and I'm not saying to change the interface just put the interface in order, not all spread in 27 submenus in 30 different places
>>551363i think its pretty organized.Mesh/object/selecteverything else that's being added goes into the specials menu (W)the UI is fucked, i don't understand why they have normal smoothing objects in object data and some in the mesh menu and some in the left/right panel
>>551364modelling as example, before the ngons u can get all from the header menu, click the dropdown and there u have all, and also have a few in the t panel, and now not anymore, and they don't care, they just add a random shortcut alt+ctrl+k+j and there is the tool, wtf!
>>551365>and also have a few in the t panel*but were in the header menu too
>>551360>BF doesn't have ultimate control over development or anything. It's still pretty community-driven, I think.But that's just wrong. BF decides what makes it into the main branch. BF also literally pays / contracts developers using the annual donation money to have specific things worked on. >>551362>fixing the menus and had a clear interface shouldn't be that hardYou don't know shit about programming. And what the fuck is with this "no left click select" meme? You can change it in the god damned options menu, and in the future they're having that option enabled by default.So many disinfo falseflag bullshit posts in this thread.
>>551681Coding is not the difficult part. It's the UI design work that's hard and the political capital necessary to get the community to accept changes to the UI.I mean people complain about it but I don't think there's a solution that people will accept. "Straight up copy Maya's UI" would be great for a lot of new users but most existing users don't want that. So it's mostly political and figuring out how to make objective improvements.
>>551066Yes and no.On the one hand, it can do a lot of things pretty well, like animation, modeling and materials, plus it can open .obj files with no issues.On the other, it's still got limitations the developers haven't (and may never) gotten to. Sculpting tools are pretty limited and the UI's still pretty shitty, even after the constant revamps (been a user since the 2.4 days). And unless you got a good graphics card, You can't really take advantage of everything it can do. I'm still struggling with the dynamic Topology add-on.Regardless, if you can get past the UI and the high learning curve, it's a decent enough program, and powerful for something that's free. But don't go in expecting it to be something like Maya or the like.
>>551688It'd be nice if the entire UI was fully customizable (as in 3rd parties can make them based on some blender API). It is what it is, though.
>>551066There is nothing more convenient than blender to make sweet duks
>>552595blender can be used as a professional tool.people like max puliero and george turmanidze are good examples of what blender can do when you push it to the absolute maximum. and if you ask me, i bet those guys are self taught since there aren't many blender schools to begin with (there will be more in the future)
>>551066blender on steam?>it's realwhen did that happen?yes you can do everything in blender, with addons, even 2d animation.
they build runescape using blender. do people really have to keep asking>hurr durr is blender good
>>551190They killed my family for pirating Maya. I use Blender now. RIP.
>>551346It's good for making Judys. http://www.blendswap.com/blends/view/83856
>>551126I find it funny how people often use "The Industry" to add heft to the notion that Blender is somehow not up to snuff. The reason it's not used as much as Autodesk products is that it hasn't really been competitive for as long as they have. Currently it's as good as any other top-tier package, so which one you choose comes down to your personal preference and very specific use-case. I think that it being free an accessible to people who are currently just starting out will likely make it the top choice for professionals in the next decade.
>>552642I didn't say it couldn't be. I'm just saying don't go in expecting it to be an Autodesk program due to how it handles certain things.
>>551066Some people can do some impressive stuff with it.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AhcDmBhSL6Y
>>553221Blender game engine looks fucking horrid. Can't speak for the performance as I've never used it, but the actual graphical quality of the lighting is absolute shit.
>>553227Lighting IS shit but this is pretty impressive for Blender.
>>553228so was the guy making the mona lisa in paint, doesn't mean it's useful
>>553221too scary i'm gonna choke on my chicken
>>552999Just passing through, but I think this is an important point. I've been in "the industry" for years. I use Maya at my day job because it's what everyone uses. For freelance and personal projects I use Blender exclusively (for modeling). They're both good programs and no one in "the industry" cares as long as you get your work done well and in a way that doesn't create more work for other people.It's always good to be comfortable with more than one program, because it'll help you learn why programs do things certain ways, and there are absolutely situations where you'll do something poorly or slowly because you're not aware of the right tools.But avoiding Blender (or really any program or tool or programming language or WHATEVER) because some person tells you it's not the "industry standard" is not going to help you grow your skills.
I don't like how box modelling typically means that the mesh resolutions of the arms, legs, torso, and head are all tied together.How can I avoid this?Alternatively, how should I handle it?
>>553254you can add more resolution as needed and then either terminate the loops or loop them back in
>>553258Yeah, but with any sane topology the loops cross between various body parts.I have never seen a topology where the arm and leg resolution doesn't factor into the torso resolution.
Fuck, is still alive! I'll answer >>551681.>You don't know shit about programming. I've been codding some interface patches to me in order to "work" with the VSE I know is not a big deal >no left click select as defaultYes that should be default has been requested hundred of times, when u change that lots of things don't work
Blender is free forever. Maya may die. Max may die. If any of the software you use suddenly drops support, you're basically fucked. All your learned skills will be for naught. Blender is forever free and open.
>>553296lol maya or max won't die.its still got a strong foothold in the commercial industry.what will change is sculptors using different programs for retopology and baking other than max or maya
>>553341Maya and Max will eventually die out. Their codebase is OLD, and is something that has been carried over since the 90's, when the first iteration of Maya was for IRIX and MAX's was for DOS and the best you could do was 32bits on x86 and 64 on IRIX/MIPS. While it's been interesting to see them both iterate and adapt the code to modern standards, they are both growing long in the tooth and it is beginning to show, and I bet you internally Autodesk has something that will end up rolling both of them up together into a single product. There are more modern paradigms for work, and these tools are slow to adapt to the needs of these pipelines. Take for instance PBR, the only real contender is Substance. Even Softimage, which Autodesk killed, had superior modeling tools and a more modern approach to the stack, which is not to say that Maya hasn't had a chance to catch up, I mean they did once they absorbed the Softimage team. Autodesk has, of late, been only innovating via their checkbook, just buying shit left and right but not really coming up with anything of substance, and you can only do that for so long until somebody outpaces you or your luck just runs out.
>>553611the huge amount of plugins is keeping it up.personally i don't know what max or maya problem is but i heard they have crashes and problems with history/backup. when blender gets a real more plugins for vfx and rendering we will start see a shift. if you ask me i assume that people will migrate to modo (if blender won't fix that UI) and blender eventually get bigger with more addons for vfx and rendering.
>>553296>If any of the software you use suddenly drops support, you're basically fucked.anyone who isn't completely retarded can learn new 3d software in a week, provided it's not introducing some entirely new concept of doing things, such as poly modelers going into sculpting or whatever.In 3d you need to be constantly adapting to whatever software is best anyway. You're fucked if you don't adapt.
>>553611>>553616I don't think Max or Maya is looking at much trouble at all. They keep getting better, significantly so. Well I don't use Max so I can't speak to it. But Maya's strength has always been its utter flexibility and openness as a platform. You can change the UI any way you like, the ascii file formats have always been human-readable, the APIs are excellent and every studio is able to write whatever it wants using Maya as a substrate. I'd love for something to overtake Maya because it is such a buggy crashy piece of shit but I don't expect that to happen for another 10 years. Until there are good alternatives to my favorite plugins I'm sticking with it.Btw as far as Maya being old and crufty... well first off Blender is older than Maya by a few years. Python scripting in Maya is excellent and very fresh. And Maya 2017 just ported to Qt 5... a port like that means seriously revamping your code base. I don't see how Maya can be seen as lacking momentum or stuck in the past at all.
Is Blender good if I want to make low poly models and UV maps to use them in a game? Are simpler programs like Wings 3D better for that?
>>551066I would argue blender is the best one out there.In terms of practical use, it's on par with most others, but unlike the rest, it's free.
>>553616>if blender won't fix that UIThey already fixed the UI... You can customize nearly everything and make it work the way you want. I'd say Max has a bigger UI issue as it's still stuck using a legacy Win32 base.
>>553646>In 3d you need to be constantly adapting to whatever software is best anyway. You're fucked if you don't adapt.thats not how it works.Talent is talent
>>553748That's what he's saying - talent is irrespective of software, so to fully harness talent you need to adapt.
>>553749you dont need to adapt or change anything, thats just masturbatory. Just like you could use photoshop 1. This is the art world
>>553747>They already fixed the UI... You can customize nearly everything and make it work the way you want. I'd say Max has a bigger UI issue as it's still stuck using a legacy Win32 base.Max uses .NET not Win32. I mean it is still very much tied to Windows but theoretically they could port it to be cross-platform someday if there were demand.
>>553764It uses .NET but there's still a ton of Win32 crap from the 3dsmax 2.5-3 days that predates .NET. It's possible that they ported it at some point but knowing Autodesk... i doubt it.
>>553648>well first off Blender is older than Maya by a few yearsi wouldn't say that, maya was named differently program before it became maya.but yea blender is very old at this point.>>553747didn't mean the UI. the problem is so many features are crammed into all these different places.im lucky that youtube have good tutorials on blender but its still missing a few subjects. i might make my own tutorials of stuff that's missing.>>553734blender is good for that. i wouldn't recommend wings because it got slow as shit workflow.
>>553296Yes and Blender will probably suck forever in terms of usability and funcionality.However the critcism towards Autodesk is not unjustifief and slapping on new 3rd party addons to Maya does't make it better or more modern. The sad thing is that Autodesk is more or less a monopole. Yes there are still Cinema, Houdini and Modo, but their codebase is similary old now.
>>553812blender will keep sucking if the development team won't shift focus to core tools and encourage scriptwriters with incentives.this fucking render engine, cycles is sucking alot of dev time and they could simply integrate another existing render engine to blender.the thing is people most of the blender community are render artists so this is the trend now
>>553810That's what the layout presets in the top bar are for - you have one for modelling, video editing, animation etc. Main difference with Max is that Max opens all this stuff in a new window whereas Blender tries to keep it in a single one as much as possible. Having used both i'd say that... it doesn't matter. New windows can save space but can also be annoying, and "all-in-one window" can be tidy, but confusing if you dont know where everything is.>>553814Which renderer do you propose? Have in mind that there are very few which are non-proprietary and compatible with Blender's GPL license. You're free to use V-ray with Blender, but don't expect it to come bundled by default. You also need to consider that prior to ~2012 the way other engines integrated into Blender was really bad. One of the goals with Cycles was to code it in a more "generic standalone manner" in order to make Blender more easily adaptable for 3rd party renderers. Cycles uses a much more perimissive Apache license compared to Blender's GPL for a similar reason - to make it easier to use with Max, Maya, Modo etc.
>>553825blender as it is right now is somewhat a finished product. its not missing any critical features but it still got some road ahead.i proposed some changes in blenderartists.net like to improve the baking process and control the size of increment snapping. also recently i found that its very easy to do projection painting if you use a stencil. you can paint in ortographic which is something substance can't do.im fairly happy with the UV unwrapping. i think its one of blender biggest strength's. modeling is up there too.for rendering, i don't really know how long it takes to develop a render engine, id say a long time actually. so far the best results we seen from cycles are from few select prominent artists and mostly from the blender trainers who makes the short films. there need to be an actual professional masterclass for using cycles if people want to utilize it, not just shady youtube tutorials
Longtime blender user here. Allow me to correct the record.Pros:>Free>Great for modelling/rigging/animatingCons:>Terrible camera controls>Terrible texture painting. And by this, I don't mean painting the models to create a texture, I mean the act of painting one or more textures onto the mesh, like when a level blends from grass to sand. No matter what GPU you have, the textures always turn out low definition and pixelated.
>>553833Auto UV packing algo could use some serious love tho.
>>553833>so far the best results we seen from cycles are from few select prominent artists and mostly from the blender trainers who makes the short films. there need to be an actual professional masterclass for using cycles if people want to utilize it, not just shady youtube tutorialsFirst of all, www.blenderartists.orgSecond of all, Cycles isn't some difficult enigma rendering engine. It's actually quite easy to learn and figure out, my best guess is that you haven't put any time towards doing so.
>>554439i didn't say cycles is difficult or mysterious im just saying that vray for example have better results per average user. tha's mostly because experienced people in vray actually share their knowledge and with cycles they give you some tips here and there and never actually go through the whole process of creating an appealing scene
>>554451have anything to back that up
>>554452ill just give you one example that is cgmasters which is the most notorious website for learning blender at expert level. you have some modeling + rendering exercise called "environment modeling and texturing" which im sure is a good watch but the final render looks like something from 10 years ago. (no offense christopher)
>>554453is english your first language ??
>>554454well no. i know 4chan is hosted in america but yo would be stupid to think only americans browse here
>>554453Dude, blenderguru.com has literally been giving you a silver spoon on everything cycles for years now.If you wanna argue about rendering speeds that's a different topic.The whole, "better results per average user" doesn't make any sense. Every render is a case by case basis.
>>554456okay senpai, you are not really reading anything i write and defiantly not observing
>>554457>I can't articulate my point clearly so please read my mind.Try again.
>>554458alright. this was the final result of his two part tutorial, which totaled in 2 and half hours.looks nothing like the result he got. he just said "im gonna do another tutorial on lightning and kinda left everyone hanging with this shitty render.he doesn't want to reveal his pipeline which is completely understandable, its a business and you have to bring in more customers
>>554459He explains how he did the lighting at the end, everything else is easy to figure out on your own. All he did was add some extra assets, if you don't know how to create them yourself than it sounds like a YOU issue.These tutorials aren't meant for you to just copy, because then it's not YOUR work. They're meant to inspire you, and help you understand the tools you already have at your disposal.Instead of figuring out how he got from point A to point B (which is pretty obvious), you honestly expect him to just give something to you which has already been provided in previous tutorials.If there's something missing, ask others help so you can figure out how to do it yourself. Don't just sit there and say, "Well, the render wouldn't be shitty if he just told me the last part."That last part is for YOU anon. It's for YOU to figure out, and if you're honestly stuck and got questions, feel free to ask. But don't expect it all to be spoon fed to you.What specifically do you need help with?
>>554461what you write is nonsense and let me explain why.there are lots of follow by example tutorials, which have good final results. the people that are making these don't just say "oh well i finished half of it now i kinda have to go". you just don't see this kind of shit so i don't understand why are you defending this.as for the tutorial itself, it was just a a basic modeling tutorial i have renders that look better than this and i haven't watched a single blenderguru tutorial. and im a pretty mediocre render artist to begin with, not that i want to be a render artist in the first place, i just want to have a nice render or two under my belt.i do expect tutorial makers to rush through some basic things and not go through every basic function, and using those texture from jewlogon doesn't help his case.
>>551066>Is Blender good to modeling/make games/animate?No, because the UI is garbage and the community is hot trash
>>554462I don't need to defend his reasoning for "cutting it short". He clearly says he doesn't completely understand it, and therefore doesn't want to mislead anyone by explaining something he doesn't fully understand. I believe this turned out to be the "filmic blender" tutorial he recently put out, where he explains how the LUT works there. Other than that, he literally explains what he changed in his lighting at the last part of the video, so I don't see how he is leaving anything out. And again, if you're not willing to figure it out yourself, even after the answer has been given to you, then I don't know how anyone can help you. Let alone a "complete tutorial".> i have renders that look better than this and i haven't watched a single blenderguru tutorialOh, so then why are you complaining?>i do expect tutorial makers to rush through some basic things and not go through every basic function, and using those texture from jewlogon doesn't help his case.He's made videos for different audiences, IE people at different skill levels. As for his texture website, I don't really care for that myself. And to be honest, it looks like most of the textures have been thrown through Bitmap2Material or similar software. The textures are EASY to make yourself, and if you don't know how to do it than I suggest finding tutorials that don't "rush through the basic things".
>>554464the thing is i don't usually watch blenderguru tutorials and the main reason for that is because he uses lots of supplements like those textures or different addons. like his "add dirt to anything tutorials" was lacking. there is a way to add procedural dirt on crevices without baking an AO map.>The textures are EASY to make yourself, and if you don't know how to do it than I suggest finding tutorials that don't "rush through the basic things".don't worry about it
>>553843terrible camera?numpad or shift+f
>>554516Well, I shouldn't say terrible, it's just that, after about 20 or so orbits around arbitrary points, there's a slight nuisance wherein the degree to which the middle mouse zooms in and out becomes wayyy disproportionate to user input. Easy enough to fix with the numpad del key, but still. Also, no shift f in sculpt mode.