[Bf-gamedev] The future of FBX and/or other formats in Blender
metalliandy
metalliandy666 at googlemail.com
Tue Feb 9 23:58:42 CET 2016
I'm not sure I understand where you are coming from, Owen. This isn't
about stragglers who are refusing to adopt new standards. We are talking
about stopping support for the most widely use interchange format in the
industry, not dropping an old obsolete feature.
FBX is the de facto format right now and whether we like it or not there
simply isn't another format to replace it with at the moment. In a few
years (5+) this might change, but currently Blender just doesn't have
the clout or professional userbase to call these kinds of shots, so if
we want to be taken seriously we have to follow where others lead and
use the format that everyone else is using.
The problem isn't moving to a new interchange format. It's moving to a
new interchange format alone. I'm not suggesting we don't work on a
replacement format in the meantime of course. :)
Cheers,
-Andy
On 09/02/2016 22:40, Owen Hogarth II wrote:
> Physically based rendering is coming in full force and most if not all
> artists professional or hobby have to just adopt it or get left in the
> past. Opengl Vulkan is coming and eventually you adapt to it or die.
> One thing I don't get about this back and fourth is the idea that this
> less evil is better than that greater evil. Why not live w/o the evil.
> There will always be stragglers, there's still people out there
> writing programs with fixed pipeline opengl. There are people still
> running windows XP out there who do not want to upgrade to linux. It's
> my opinion that no matter how long you wait, it will never be a good
> time to switch to something new.
>
> FBX export in blender works, leave it where it is and move on to
> something new. As far as which new format to use, that can be up for
> debate but the idea that you're still asking should we or shouldn't we
> move past FBX is quite a shame. Chicken or the egg problem, artists
> won't just get up ad adopt something new. I'd say implement one of the
> new formats and keep it moving.
>
> Best,
> Owen
>
> On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 6:30 AM, metalliandy
> <metalliandy666 at googlemail.com <mailto:metalliandy666 at googlemail.com>>
> wrote:
>
> Hey everyone,
>
> I have mixed feelings about this to be honest. While I don't agree
> with the way FBX is licensed (it should be open sourced ASAP,
> IMHO), the fact remains that it is still the current interchange
> format and will be for the foreseeable future, no matter who owns
> the standard or how much we dislike it.
>
> I would hate for this to turn into another crusade against
> Autodesk, where we all just start blindly sharpening our
> pitchforks and blindly head into the foray, because such things
> only end up hurting our users in the long run. Yes, it would be
> awesome to support other formats such as glTF, Alembic and USD,
> but it wont mean anything if no one else within the games industry
> uses them too. We would just end up with a Blender only pipeline
> and "Blender is for Blender users" crap that flew around a few
> years ago. Such protectionism can only hurt Blender as you are
> effectively working against de facto industry standards rather
> than with them. Having a program that can't talk to other software
> restricts the use of said software, and studios are simply not
> going to adopt Blender only pipelines so a competent interchange
> format is essential.
>
> Yes, standards do change, but this takes a _very_ long time to
> happen. Remember when Collada was meant to be the new standard?
> Look what happened there...
> As of now no other format (aside from the ageing and less feature
> rich OBJ) comes close the the level of industry support that FBX
> has & even Pixologic, who have been the bastion of OBJ support
> (even extending the format to support vertex colours), have
> recently implemented FBX support in the latest version of ZBrush
> to aim interop. between applications.
>
> This is unfortunate of course, but unless we want to alienate
> Blender from the rest of the 3d world stopping support for it
> would be a bad move. Blender has made so many giant leaps forward
> in terms of gamedev use over the past few years and having FBX
> slowly break over the next few years will do nothing but hurt
> Blender usability and reputation. Most people simply don't
> understand or care that we can't use the FBX SDK within Blender
> and will simply assume that Blender is buggy.
>
> It's not just about current users either...we have to think about
> future users that are migrating over to Blender from Max/Maya who
> expect something like FBX to just work. If they cannot simply load
> an FBX into Blender without issue, they will also assume that
> Blender is buggy as it can't even support FBX correctly.
>
> Next we have to think about people who use Blender on a
> professional level too for things like freelance work. 80% of the
> time I get meshes for texturing/baking from clients the low poly &
> block out mesh part of the asset are in the FBX format. It would
> be extremely embarrassing and unprofessional of me to request OBJ
> in the place of FBX and potentially jeopardise the possibility of
> future work with new/especially picky clients (FWIW, I used to use
> FBX converter to go from FBX to OBJ, but this is ironically no
> longer supported by Autodesk).
>
> In addition to the above we also have the problem of fixed
> pipelines. It is usual for studios to define a pipeline during
> pre-production and maintain it rigorously at the low level at
> least until the current project ends. Many studios also run
> staggered production of multiple projects using the R&D &
> pipelines of the previous "lead" project and if we assume that a
> project will last between 2-4 years we are probably talking
> between 3-6 years before pipeline changes are considered for
> something as integral as interchange formats. Granted this is more
> likely a problem for AAA studios and not many of them use Blender
> as a main tool, but they do have freelancers who use Blender,
> which will be a problem for them. It will also rule out Blender
> for such studios if they were ever to think about moving over
> (assuming they use FBX ofc.)
>
> Ignoring the problems with FBX isn't going to help anything really
> as the problems will only get worse over time and there is nothing
> we can realistically use to replace it with.
>
> I guess that I find it hard to see how anyone can seriously think
> that maintaining FBX is a waste of time because such support is
> essential for the many people that use FBX on a day to day basis.
> Wouldn't it only be a waste of time if no one used it?
>
> Cheers,
>
> -Andy
>
>
> On 09/02/2016 19:33, Piotr Arlukowicz wrote:
>> Standards can change, and the sooner, the better. World should be
>> open and friendly, not closed and cluttered with crap from huge
>> companies. As I don't have to use FBX, I vote against it every
>> possible time. Let's make something valuable instead of
>> supporting those bastards. They are famous but their so called
>> standards are nothing more than bad habits. Yes, I blame autodesk
>> and the others for being closed, money greedy and unfriendly to
>> the community. That's mine five cents.
>>
>> pio
>>
>> Piotr
>> Arlukowicz, BFCT
>>
>> **YT:*_/user/piotao?feature=guide_*
>> *FB:*_/polskikursblendera_ *TW:* _/piotao
>> _
>> *Blender Network:* *https://www.blendernetwork.org/piotr-arlukowicz*
>> *Polski Kurs Blendera:* http://polskikursblendera.pl
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 2016-02-09 13:16 GMT-05:00 Bastien Montagne
>> <montagne29 at wanadoo.fr <mailto:montagne29 at wanadoo.fr>>:
>>
>> Well, once more time: I do not ask to drop FBX, I ask to stop
>> investing time in it. Means we would keep it working in
>> current state, but not try to add/support/fix new things.
>>
>> Le 09/02/2016 18:18, Cremuss a écrit :
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> As evil as FBX is, and I totally understand why you think
>>> it's a dead-end (and it is, truly), I feel it is a necessary
>>> evil for now.
>>>
>>> Many of us pro Game Artists rely on FBX file format because
>>> there's simply no other choice yet. I export a lot of
>>> animated stuff to UE4 and Unity, and dropping FBX support in
>>> Blender would mean I'd most certainly have to buy and use a
>>> proprietary 3D software to work, which is a shame.
>>>
>>> A minimal FBX support would still work for me though,
>>> because, /personally/, I just need to be able to /export/
>>> animated meshes and armatures, mostly to Unity and UDK/UE4.
>>> So dropping support of the FBX importer, as well as the
>>> support of lights, cameras and any other fancy stuff
>>> wouldn't affect me or my work at all. But that's just me.
>>>
>>> However, I'm all for supporting an open format if it will
>>> allow me to export animated data to Unity/UDK/UE4 by the
>>> time we fully drop FBX support. But as far as I know,
>>> there's no open FBX yet :/
>>>
>>> I know Unreal has donated to the Blender Foundation to work
>>> on the FBX exporter so they seems open and friendly to me.
>>> Maybe there's a way to talk to them and see what kind of
>>> options we have.
>>>
>>> Anyway, that's just my honest opinion!:)
>>>
>>> Le 09/02/2016 17:49, Fillippe Chiniara a écrit :
>>>>
>>>> I think its a bad move for the game developers that use
>>>> blender, you would abandon all of us because fbx is THE
>>>> standard for game dev , we cant use anything else with the
>>>> modern engines, at least nothing with the same level of
>>>> support.
>>>>
>>>> On Feb 9, 2016 14:42, "Bastien Montagne"
>>>> <montagne29 at wanadoo.fr <mailto:montagne29 at wanadoo.fr>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> So, lately there's been a lot of FBX-related issues
>>>> reported to our
>>>> tracker. Most of those are either:
>>>> - Known (half-)broken things (like cameras/lights
>>>> orientation issues),
>>>> over which I do not intend to spend more time, since
>>>> those are not
>>>> critical features to support imho.
>>>> - Broken corner-cases in an area that globally works
>>>> rather well
>>>> (thinking about skeletons here).
>>>> - Mysterious third-party applications-related issues
>>>> (scaling, skeletons
>>>> again, etc.), that is, bugs that show with one app but
>>>> not another.
>>>>
>>>> I think later point is a good demonstration that FBX
>>>> itself is a failure
>>>> and a dead horse - if even rather big and serious
>>>> companies like Unreal
>>>> or Unity cannot get a reliable FBX importer working
>>>> using official FBX
>>>> SDK, then how are we supposed to do it without even
>>>> that SDK?
>>>>
>>>> Further more:
>>>> - In past two years a lot of time and energy was
>>>> invested (lost) in FBX.
>>>> - </rant> I’m just dead sick of that format, of hitting
>>>> any possible
>>>> table corner when trying to walk my way in that
>>>> non-sensible pitch black
>>>> box, etc. </rant>
>>>> - Knowledge I gained of this format and its evolution
>>>> is **not**
>>>> encouraging at all (stupid things like supporting two
>>>> different and
>>>> complex transform systems [3DS max and Maya ones, btw
>>>> ;) ], a very weird
>>>> inconsistency at binary level, etc.). I do not have any
>>>> feeling this is
>>>> a sane format, nor that it is evolving in a sane
>>>> direction. It seems to
>>>> be defined a bit as needs arise, piling up new stuff
>>>> over old ones, etc.
>>>> To summarize: no clear design behind it, and a very
>>>> dirty way of
>>>> handling new versions of it.
>>>>
>>>> So I would claim to stop relying on and developing it.
>>>> It would not mean
>>>> we just remove it from Blender, but think it’s time to
>>>> switch to
>>>> something more modern and open - am aware of at least
>>>> to possible
>>>> alternatives, which could even be quite complementary.
>>>>
>>>> I) glTF
>>>> Promoted by Khronos group
>>>> (https://www.khronos.org/gltf), it aims at
>>>> being the open exchange format for games (from simple
>>>> asset to complete
>>>> scene description).
>>>> Think it’s still very new stuff, not much widely used
>>>> yet, but it seems
>>>> to have some support from several major companies
>>>> (including Microsoft
>>>> and even - rofl - Autodesk, see http://gltf.autodesk.io/).
>>>>
>>>> II) USD
>>>> Promoted by Pixar (http://graphics.pixar.com/usd/), it
>>>> aims at being
>>>> some kind of generic pipeline format for CG studios (it
>>>> also has
>>>> integration of Alembic e.g.).
>>>> I have no idea of its acceptance currently, but sounds
>>>> like it could be
>>>> a valuable option for our 2.8
>>>> 'pipeline/inter-application exchange' goal?
>>>>
>>>> (as a side note, interesting to see that those two have
>>>> a similar
>>>> approach, they are not monolithic files but rather a
>>>> combination of
>>>> binary data and textual descriptions…)
>>>>
>>>> Anyway, those are very early reflections, would like to
>>>> get your
>>>> feelings about those two formats/projects (or others
>>>> you may have in
>>>> mind! ;) ), but I’m feeling much more enthusiast at the
>>>> idea of spending
>>>> time on modern, open-designed (or at least,
>>>> open-specified) formats,
>>>> than on piece of proprietary crap!
>>>>
>>>> Again, even if we end up deciding we stop trying to
>>>> fully support FBX as
>>>> our main exchange format, it would keep being supported
>>>> in its current
>>>> status at least for one or two years - just I would not
>>>> try to add
>>>> support for new versions (2016 one seems to have some
>>>> incompatibilities
>>>> with our code already), nor would try to understand and
>>>> fix more stuff
>>>> in that format.
>>>>
>>>> And that’s a long enough mail, thanks for reading it!
>>>> Bastien
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Bf-gamedev mailing list
>>>> Bf-gamedev at blender.org <mailto:Bf-gamedev at blender.org>
>>>> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-gamedev
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Bf-gamedev mailing list
>>>> Bf-gamedev at blender.org <mailto:Bf-gamedev at blender.org>
>>>> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-gamedev
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Bf-gamedev mailing list
>>> Bf-gamedev at blender.org <mailto:Bf-gamedev at blender.org>
>>> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-gamedev
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Bf-gamedev mailing list
>> Bf-gamedev at blender.org <mailto:Bf-gamedev at blender.org>
>> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-gamedev
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Bf-gamedev mailing list
>> Bf-gamedev at blender.org <mailto:Bf-gamedev at blender.org>
>> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-gamedev
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bf-gamedev mailing list
> Bf-gamedev at blender.org <mailto:Bf-gamedev at blender.org>
> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-gamedev
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bf-gamedev mailing list
> Bf-gamedev at blender.org
> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-gamedev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.blender.org/pipermail/bf-gamedev/attachments/20160209/0640cd5f/attachment-0001.htm
More information about the Bf-gamedev
mailing list