What does Lightwave need to bring us up to par with the big guns

prometheus

REBORN
So is Microsoft Word. That does not mean there is an extraordinary skillset required to use the tool. KeyShot remains marketed to a more casual 3D user. Any LightWave artist could figure out the basics of KeyShot in an hour or two. Then they can spend 10 hours looking for non-existent functions they know are present in LightWave. Even with CPU/GPU render options, KeyShot can still be slower.

I'm not sure why there's an issue with a distinction of "rendering inside Lightwave" versus outside. The gains of LOD and realtime rendering in a game engine cancel out any hassle you might perceive.

Boy do we have different views on things :)

I don´t see a point in argueing about wether or not anyone has an extraordinary skillset for keyshot ..word or not, you either know the software or don´t.

yes there is an issue with rendering inside of lightwave versus outside, there are functions, workllows and features you can´t render the same in a bridge to a game engine, volumetric stuff with required fractals, could be particles, could be instant dynamics you need to work with along with fluids.
 

skycgi

New member
what if newtek takes another look at lightwave core from 10 years ago? modernize lw make it 1 app.
 

prometheus

REBORN
what if newtek takes another look at lightwave core from 10 years ago? modernize lw make it 1 app.
They can´t handle the variations on what customers really want, and besides..to do that, they would need to start communicate about development, and they have their foot stuck in cement that they do not do that, so they can´t walk any further, case closed on Core.

What if they had motivation and intention, cream top it with competence, and being communicative, that is the ammunition they first need to get, then put it in the Big Guns, and that would consequently mean breaking the cement ..and start walking.

Before they do anything about the software, that is the first thing they need to do, it´s not easy considering they tried before, but got fobic about it after that, they need to get up on the horse again from which they once fell.
 

Rayek

Well-known member
what if newtek takes another look at lightwave core from 10 years ago? modernize lw make it 1 app.
It was left unfinished, and abandoned. The code is a decade old, and probably must be partly rewritten once more.

From an economic business perspective it would seem to be a terrible venture to even consider, though. What company would be willing to invest a decade of development money and people power while no revenue is generated from it and hope for the best that ex-LW users will return to the fold and new users will be willing to pay for a DCC in development when Blender is a free feature-rich option (and imagine where the competition will be at in 5-10 years from now)?

Realistically it would take at least another 7-10 years before a new DCC would be somewhat competitive in the market. And at the time quite a few LW users weren't happy with the direction Core was headed for. It would not be LightWave, but a different app, LightWave all but in name.

Even IF LightWave were to be sold to another company, they'd still face the same dilemma: LightWave needs a core update to be able to compete in this market. It must become a unified app. Which means the core parts of the app must be rewritten. But Modeler and Layout do not share the same code base. So what to do? Add modeling tools to Layout? You'd still have to deal with that old code base. Patching an entire modeler on top of it probably wasn't / isn't feasible, otherwise they would have done it by now.

Create an off-shoot development branch for a complete new DCC? 'Core returns'? See above: unless the company's cash grows on trees, not a terribly attractive business proposition. Unclear outcomes, assured high development/business costs.

Open sourcing LW was mentioned as well in these threads, but licensing issues pose insurmountable odds against taking that path.

It's like the chicken and the egg: LightWave must be revitalized in core parts and unified to be able to compete on the market and earn revenue. To achieve this, a steady influx of cash is required. But to be an attractive alternative in the market, it must be updated first.

If we were talking 15-20 years ago, the user base would have been there to finance this. Perhaps. That is no longer the case. Most have switched or are in the process of switching to other DCCs anyway. And any newly developed paid-for generalist DCC must be able to compete with Blender, which was possible 15 years ago, but is becoming increasingly difficult.

It wouldn't state that it is impossible in the current DCC market, but I'd say chances are incredibly slim. Which are probably all reasons why LightWave is seemingly no longer being developed and updated.
 

Tim Parsons

Well-known member
Yeah any new DCC app would need to be developed as a passion project in a vacuum and then once it's somewhat mature it might be able to break into the market. But no one in their right mind would fund such a project in hopes of gold at the end of the rainbow. This thread has run its course as no one is around to "bring LW up to par with the big guns."
 

JohnMarchant

Active member
what if newtek takes another look at lightwave core from 10 years ago? modernize lw make it 1 app.
I doubt it would make much difference. Core is old, would need a lot of rewriting to even get it to work now. Most of the LW devs have moved on or move within the company. The longer they wait the less attractive it will be, i would say that there is probably no one who would want to buy it now either.

The LW we know is probably dead and apart from updates if there are any major gotcha's i doubt we will see any updates on it at all.

Who knows what the long term plans are if any but i doubt most of us will care by then.
 

quakebox

Member
  1. Retopology
  2. Normal Baking
  3. Fix the Undo System
  4. Fix the Bevel Algorithm
  5. Modifier Stack
  6. Modeler and Layout joined to one
  7. Sculpting tools
  8. Better UV tools
 

vncnt

Well-known member
It would be a logical step to combine LightWave with 3DCoat.
3DCoat is still being developed.

Start rebuilding and integrating from there.
 

sami

Active member
It would be a logical step to combine LightWave with 3DCoat.
3DCoat is still being developed.

Start rebuilding and integrating from there.
In many ways 3DCCoat is light years beyond LW - heck, even with their 2021 low poly modelling additions - somthings are better than LW. I would love this, but code-wise, I imagine they are soooooooo far apart, there'd be no way. Besides - many of 3DC's customers are from z-brush and blender world - I can't imagine this would be a good decision for them and would slow down their development, as much as I'd love some gret devs to take hold of LW.
 

Markc

ack ack
In many ways 3DCCoat is light years beyond LW - heck, even with their 2021 low poly modelling additions - somthings are better than LW. I would love this, but code-wise, I imagine they are soooooooo far apart, there'd be no way. Besides - many of 3DC's customers are from z-brush and blender world - I can't imagine this would be a good decision for them and would slow down their development, as much as I'd love some gret devs to take hold of LW.
As much as I love 3D Coat for texture painting (which is all I really use it for), I really can't get to grips with the modelling workflow.
 

lwanmtr

Lwanmtr
LW's modeling workflow works for me, even if I end up taking them into other apps like Houdini or Blender. Scene setup is also more intuitive, thankfully fbx will transfer the important things I need anywhere....now if someone made a USD exporter, thatd be great.
 

Markc

ack ack
DB&W may be able to do this.
They offer a plugin creation service.
We would have to do a group buy-in or something maybe.
 

raymondtrace

Founding member
A third party developer would assume too much financial risk to add ACES or USD support. What happens if an OS update breaks compatibility with LW and NewTek doesn't care to offer a patch? What happens if NewTek is already developing ACES or USD support and offers as competition it in the next release?

NewTek has made it too much of a gamble to commercially develop for LW. If you don't believe this statement, ask any of the developers in my signature.
 
Top Bottom