[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Home]
Settings Home
/3/ - 3DCG

Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.

File: 34343446.jpg (86 KB, 1280x720)
86 KB
Why do you mayafags blenderfags 3dsmaxfags whateverfags keep fightning when objectively the best 3D software is Houdini?

The combination of Houdini+Blender is cheaper than other softwares while being better at fucking everything
As a beginner with Blender, can you give me a quick rundown how Houdini could improve my workflow? I'm hobby game dev and would like to improve my 3d skills.
Procedural creation of..everything (you can change everything everytime you want, also makes it easy to create modular assets), better simulations than in every other 3d software combined. If you know Python you can customize and add whatever shit you want to it. Great interface, amazing redshift support which is a big one for me but not useful for games. Really if we talking about gaming shit with houdini then:

Procedural assets

Basically maya but cheaper doesnt kill your hard drive and can simulate shit.
Thanks, I will have a look at it, don't even know what procedural assets are so far.

Btw. I'm generally a bit frustrated about how tiresome the workflow from 3d software to game engine and back is. They should all have a common interface by now, instead of manually importing and exporting shit all the time. I know that some software has features like this, but it's very limited.
costs money.
therefore can't be best.

Shitty blenderfag logic. Is your computer free too? Is your food free? If so stop eating it and become homeless, because it's free so it's better.
>don't even know what procedural assets are so far.
I’ll try and give some examples, maybe by the end you’ll be shitting bricks. Let’s say you’re making a pipe and need to make some bolts going around the side; in a traditional package you model the bolt, align it to the top and make an array of them going around. Now what if you need to change them? The mesh is easy enough if they’re instances, alter one and the others change. But what about count? You would have to delete them and make a new array. And what if you wanted them to be spaced in twos, or alternate in a zig-zag pattern? What if you changed the length or width of the pipe? In a true procedural system everything would be created and positioned using rules and constraints, not “I want this to be here right now”. With everything generated according to rules set as to how something must exist, any other operation you do will naturally propagate down the line, and you can always go back and change anything at any time. Make one object and create countless variations.
So how does this apply to games? Procedural systems are good at powering through complex arrays of objects, but can generate massive geometry counts in a minute, which is something not really desirable in games, as you want your assets to be optimal as possible. It is likely best used as an auxiliary supplement for tasks normally too tedious to do by hand. For example, you can take a spline, spawn compound blobs along its length, fetch the bounding boxes and generate a mesh of evenly spaced quads and use those quads as reference for loading in content. The result? A spline tool that you can use to draw things like rooms and corridors, with floor, wall, corner pieces loading in accordance with the spacing you set up.
This type of creation does require a lot of thinking outside the box though, because you have to always think of the big picture instead of getting caught up in details, proceduralism is bad at details.
This sounds extremely interesting, I will certainly give it a shot. Especially since I already struggled with spline based meshes in unity. I think unity is kinda odd, when you start doing lower level stuff by code. I often feel like the engine is mostly done for designers and not so much for programmers. Not sure if there would be a better engine for me. Unreal seems to suck even more with c++ and those stupid blueprints.

But first I need to improve my blender skills a bit, otherwise I will unlearn everything again in a couple of weeks. Currently I'm still struggling to create usable meshes with ease. I always fuck something up and make a mess and have a hard time correcting everything. When I'm more confident in the basics, I will see what Houdini and those procedural things can to for me.
houdini's still king for game vfx right? I need to get into that pretty soon and was looking for a program.
>Is your computer free too? Is your food free? If so stop eating it and become homeless
>if so
well, dumbass, if they're free now, why would i need to go homeless to get it for free?

you're so assblasted by free thingsthat you can't even use proper syntax?
you sound like a commie.

Those aren't exactly selling points for a gamedev... I'm happy you're enjoying your Houdini anon, but it's not for everybody.
houdini shills pls go. All you have is some lame sims, which Autodesk is already fixing. When Bifrost is updated, you will be totally obsolete
So you're saying instead of creating something powerful using models from max that would go into games or movies I could make simultations for something like a middle school teacher showing his class an animation of the water cycle?
This must be the true power of Houdini!
Oh it's this guy again
You see the nice thing about Houdini is that not only you can easily create powerful models like in max but you can also do simulation that don't look like absolute fucking shit and do it without additional costly packages like max needs! And houdini is even cheaper!

Autodesk shills just can't win
So, all it does is simulations? Why bother, then?
Its THIS guy again
I guess you guys are missing the point. Houdini has in fact a plugin for UE4 and Unity. So you don't need to manually reimport everytime, you can just click "refresh" or something. Also the procedural meshes can come in extremely handy.

Check out this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HrN_usfkDIQ

I'm the guy he originally responded to and at least I am sold on this workflow. I know that Maya also has some kind of plugin feature but I don't think it's this cool.

So does Blender, you keep a .blend file in Unity's game assets folder and it updates every time you save. It's not something specific to Houdini.

ok didn't know that, thanks for the hint. However the procedural thing can still be cool, although I have no clue how hard it is to make and for which type of assets it could be useful.
File: Capture.png (468 KB, 1278x973)
468 KB
468 KB PNG

Hey nice, am learning Houdini.
Currently am trying to procedurally delete all the backfaces of pic related, it does take a while to get used to it.

Also, how do UVs work with the boolean op, do I have to reUV the hole?
No, Maya + Adobe After Effects is better.
>Currently am trying to procedurally delete all the backfaces of pic related
Try using the Group SOP. Enable the Keep By Normals option, select a normal vector and change the spread value.

>Also, how do UVs work with the boolean op, do I have to reUV the hole?
I just tried it out with a couple UV'd cylinders. Looks like it will keep your existing UVs and place cuts along your new intersections.
>After Effects
Not a node based compositor.
This must be bait.
>Visual scripting
Learn cg pls

>it works
Thanks anon.
Am really liking Houdini, after XSI got killed seems this is the future.
OP, if you're still there I have a question
I copied a bunch of geometry but before doing so I UV'd it, now I have a bunch of stacked UVs that wont react to the uvlayout node-
Do you know how to separate all the stacked UVs?

Fug, I had to use a convert node before the uvlayout.
Why? Who knows desu famsenpai
>Houdini is the new blender shitposting
Oh im laffin

Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.