Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - gustavorios2

Pages: [1]
1
.... well probably just look for an alternative.
We just have to accept the fact that no one in the 3D industry other than some of the major Game Dev engines care too much about Indie Developers - we just don't really count - corporations are all about money, which we don't have, so it is no loss to them.

well, there are two ways of making money selling software;
cheap for a lot of people or expensive for a few.

how many substance seats to make a AAA? let's say 80 per studio?
if you look at indiedb there are currently almost 40k games.
"indie game developer" group on Facebook currently holds 114k users.
 Taking into account, not all indie games are on indiedb and facebook (China, Russia) and not all need substance. but looks like a much big number.

Epic games skyrocketed their business after giving software free and changing their business plan.
so, yeah, there are many ways to make money.

2
let me tell you why I think trying to make the indie game industry accept adobe is a waste of time:

Usually, indie game developers live and work with a VERY limited amount of money, and games only pay themselves (maybe) after the release (that sometimes takes years)
Allegoritmic was one of the few companies that offered a very useful software for a cheap and single payment.

Adobe, on the other hand, requires a monthly payment for their products.
It doesn't matter what you say, indie game developers can't give up their games to have a shiny adobe software installed.

The only chance to make this work is if Adobe never removes the lifetime licenses, which I pretty much think its impossible.

I still think Adobe is great for a lot of industries, especially the ones that movement money on short periods of time.
But for indie game development, well probably just look for an alternative.

3
I mean... I can see a substitute for Painter in the near feature... even inside blender.
but designer... oh man... designer was a pink diamond... maybe well have to wait some good 14 years to see something similar and indie friendly.

4
RIP
now I have to find a way to remove the plugin from my game and start looking for an alternative for painter and designer (that I'm pretty sure there isn't yet)
 
sad day... :'(

5
can't make ''skew'' feature work no matter what =(
followed the video tutorial but the result is the same... anyone else experienced this?

6
I wasn't able to generate heightmaps to use in parallax too using a sbar generated in substance designer.
The heightmap the plugin generates has a compression that it's not compatible with parallax.
What I do to workaround this is export the channel as a texture then export as texture.
Don't remember very well but it has to do with the srgb checkbox in unreal

7
zbrush can export to fbx setting polygroups as materials. its very easy then, import in painter and use the textureset as layers.
This is a faster workflow than exporting an ID map, plugging it in the right slot and so.
An alternative that would work for me is if painter have a option on import to automatically generate the ID map and merge the materials automatically


Hi guyz,

I would like to understand what is the goal of merging texture sets at export, and especially what is the workflow behind it:
- why do you need to create several texture sets, if you know that in the end you want to export a single one?
- why don't you make only one texture set from the beginning?

Please understand I am not criticizing anything, I just try to understand why it seems so crucial for some people :)

Thanks for your help!

Pages: [1]