Which 3D Modelling Software?

[JobberBVE]

Hi

This is my first post on the Kuju section of this forum, so hello.

Just to add my two penn'orth I think the issue of a straightforward and cheap 3D object builder would be crucial if I were to develop routes for the Kuju simulator.

I have a lot of experience in building routes for the BVE simulator (Bakerloo/Circle/District lines and help with other routes). I can say for me that shaping and skinning objects is the single most time-consuming and awkward task in building routes. Creating the actual bitmaps for BVE was easy (and very enjoyable). Nothing but paint and notepad were needed.

Hard-coding the placement of objects in the route was easy by comparison! I say that as a non-programmer (but fairly advanced computer user.)

The GUI interface for route building sounds very promising for the Kuju sim, but it would be of limited use if creating objects were difficult and/or timeconsuming.

I look forward to seeing the simulatir. As a BVE developer, I can completely appreciate why some things are being kept under wraps - I did the same myself when developing routes.

Cheers

Paul

[bigvern]

Essentially KRS must support a plugin for Gmax or they need to look at working with the creators of TSM to produce a KRS equivalent of TSM, a proprietary app which retails for around £30.

[3DTrains]

Essentially KRS must support a plugin for Gmax or they need to look at working with the creators of TSM to produce a KRS equivalent of TSM, a proprietary app which retails for around £30.

Which probably wont happen because:

1) The expense in licensing the AutoDesk gMax plugin
2) That AutoDesk has discontinued gMax support

[bigvern]

Fair comment, I knew there were issues with Gmax availability but hadn't kept up to speed with the latest developments. I guess they have seen the number of retail products (esp. for MSFS) being sold that have been created with the programme and decided they want their cut!

It will be a bit of a bummer if the ability to create 3D objects is restricted only to those who can afford high end apps, as routes built by the little guys will be limited to default items or those uploaded by modellers fortunate enough to own the relevant software - no independence. Effectively it could mean decent routes will reside solely in the purview of commercial groups or consortiums?

[peterholton]

I feel certain that any company that has made a commitment to community addon development would not then immediately restrict the modelling software required to one that costs £3000+

I'm sure a straightforward conversion utility from a standard 3d export format would not be beyond their capabilities, which would enable something like Blender, which is a superb, free modeller to be used.

Not sure if there isn't a touch of misinformation being spread here.

Peter

[bigvern]

Hopefully they will let us know, Peter. I would be quite happy with a suitably modified TSM!

Should just add if KRS follows similar progress path to MSTS then after a while there will be plenty of non default objects available. However some degree of self sufficiency is necessary if only to insure against recent events where a certain modeller withdrew his consent to items being included in routes distributed by certain means...

[andrewgadd]

Herein lies the rub!

If the new Sim were to be a success then it would probably need to include many of the features MSTS. This would have to include the facility to allow us, the common user; to be able to add to the Sim newly made 3d models. This is, after all, the main force behind the UKTrainSim site and others.
However, a good support for good 3d software at a reasonable price does mean that any commercial developers would have access to the same “cheep 3d softwareâ€

[KlausM]

Kuju promised to be open in respect to their file formats and I simply assume that this includes the format of the mesh files also. Besides the train software (MSTS, Trainz) there are many examples that openness and the ability of the end user to extend the program increases its value a lot, and I have no doubt that Kuju's intentions for their Rail Simulator are the same. However, while they represent the first step, open file formats do not guarantee the support of various kinds of 3D software. And I agree to you that this is a critical factor.

From a end user's perspective, the Discreet/GMax model was IMHO nearly perfect, with the exception that now at the end of the lifetime all existing models are locked up in a proprietary format. It is sad that this business model did not pay off for Discreet. I personally wouldn't mind to pay some money for such a powerful program, so in secret I hope that Discreet will revive its application somehow, maybe with a different business model. Maybe some other payware, shareware or freeware editor could take over GMax' position, but I have to admit that I don't have enough knowledge about other programs to argue which this could be.

Klaus

[johndibben]

No one's mentioned 3D Canvas.

I could forsee a successful sim without any third-party content as I'm sure the vast majority of MSTS buyers have never heard of that which exists. Could be wrong though

Games appear in shops and people buy them, play them for a while and then they're forgotten. I assume all new sims will be sold in stores like Game and if so, that's where the vast bulk of the income will come from.

Add-ons could be provided by the original developers. In fact they'd probably make far for money doing so.

Yes, add-ons, can increase sales but why not do it yourself?

Neither are MS who appeared to lose interest and are so large they could afford to.

The 'community' is a rich recruiting ground, cheap labour and adds to sales but I presume it's still a very small percentage of the target customers.

BVE and others can provide an actual 'in cab' true simulator for free which would meet the needs of many if fully exploited.

UKTS and the other groups' membership is very focussed but it would be unwise to over-estimate their importance although 'in the thick of it', year in, year out, I'm sure it appears indispensible.

Having said all that, I'm sure all sims will include the 'community' and provide tools and utilities to develop third-party content and so there's no need to worry.

While the 'community' is an asset it will be of value for everyone.

The only problem would be if it continued to turn in and against itself and became a liability. Stepping back and looking at things from outside, that sometimes looks likely and I'd be more worried about old MSTS ways being carried over into the new sim. It's not MSTS, the likes of EA market many games as stand alone with add-on packs and I honestly don't think it pays for us to be demanding to the point of impudence.

Kuju are the experts and I've confidence in them.

I can request but wouldn't dream of demanding anything with the suggestion the sim will fail if my wishes arn't met

Cheers

John

[decapod]

I hate to say it, but while 3D canvas is relatively stable, the support for it from the author has been lacking lately.

I have had to help several people with problems that Amabilis support should have sorted out.

Richard is busy with V7 (there has been no upgrade for a year now) and we have seen an alpha version of 7, but no news since.

I may be worrying too much as V7 promises to be a big improvement as the technology behind the scenes is changing.

However, at the same time other big players are moving into the cheap/mid range 3D market.

[NeutronIC]

I seriously doubt that there will be any updates to TSM for KRS given the lack of support from Abacus these days - In fact I don't think they even deal with MSTS anymore do they?

I'd hope that 3DCanvas will be supported, I dare say it won't take long before a .S converter becomes available within the community either; which will bring support for TSM and so forth as Tim has said over in the TMTS forums.

There are lots of other modeling tools out there that are free though such as the aforementioned Blender, which i've had a play with and seems to be quite good after an hour or so's fiddling.

While I don't know the results of their investigations, I do know that they've been investigating lots of options in this area - they seem well aware that 3D Studio can't be the only supported modeller and certainly when I last spoke to them on this subject they were keenly looking at a number of options.

So, tbh, I don't think there's anything to worry about on this point, you might need to change the tool you use because a specific one like TSM might not be supported but there should be options at the right "price point" (i.e. close to or actually free ).

Matt.

[MartinvK]

I would like to add my support for an inexpensive (free) program to create game objects. While many worry about how realistic the physics will be or how accurate the driving experience will be, there are some who enjoy creating more than driving. I hope this side of the hobby will not be forgotten in the rush to produce the best simulator.

[bigvern]

See the PhysX thread for my added concerns on this aspect.

TSM was crude and simple but effective for those of us who wanted to create buildings etc. that resembled those on our chosen prototype route. However I somehow can't see a £30 modelling programme incorporating features that will interface with the advanced ideas being put forward.

[GenmaSaotome]

> I seriously doubt that there will be any updates to TSM for KRS given the lack of support from Abacus these days - In fact I don't think they even deal with MSTS anymore do they?

I'm told by people who I beleive are in a position to know that TSM is dead, dead, DEAD, as far as any new sim is concerned. YMMV.

[ForburyLion]

It's not unusual for dead software to be given a new lease of life if someone offers to buy the rights to it.