Victoria 6 has been released.

1121315171820

Comments

  • Joe CotterJoe Cotter Posts: 3,234
    edited June 2013

    You can't, that's the point. DAZ has always been very close to the chest about what they plan to do going forward, which is why I was trying to make clear that all of that was just speculation and hopeful ruminations on my part.

    [Edit] Well technically, if you become a PA you would get access to some near term vision information, but then you would be limited in what you could say about it of course.

    Post edited by Joe Cotter on
  • KatteyKattey Posts: 2,899
    edited June 2013

    Gedd said:
    Not just gender specific, think of a base fantasy figure like Troll, Elf, Dwarf, where the base mesh is optimized for that character and the morphs off of that are all from that optimized base mesh. The amount of detail in various versions of that character style could be amazing.

    The idea of taking the concepts of Genesis into individual specific Mesh forms is powerful, and a separate one from keeping a central base mesh that can cross genres. This concept is at the heart of the two branches I've been writing about, the next step I believe in the revolution in character creation.


    Are you saying that your vision of good future is to take everything that Genesis stands for, and split it to separate meshes like it was back in Millenium 1 generation?
    Post edited by Kattey on
  • Joe CotterJoe Cotter Posts: 3,234
    edited June 2013

    I am saying that I believe there is room in the market for both visions, particularly if the tools were there to move things between the base meshes as per my previous post (not quoted above.)

    Having said that, the fact that it took a PA to provide support for V4 is not encouraging in that direction, nor is the fact that the basic morphs were a separate purchase. In the vision I outlined, V6 would have been a separate purchase complete with base morphs and support for V4/Genesis content, and optimally the ability to still use the Genesis morphs, albeit with no guarantee of results due to a different base mesh... there would have been no G2F. I am glad there is a free version of G2F though on a personal note.

    Post edited by Joe Cotter on
  • KatteyKattey Posts: 2,899
    edited June 2013

    Gedd said:
    I am saying that I believe there is room in the market for both visions, particularly if the tools were there to move things between the base meshes as per my previous post (not quoted above.)
    But if it was DAZ3D intention, where is official Genesis autofit clone for G2F clothes? Support for Genesis is already second priority, therefore "one universal figure with parallel specific branches" isn't what they want. Besides, from marketing standpoint, why to give users tools for users comfortably move morphs and clothes all around figures by themselves, instead of marketing to them new morph set all over again every time because "this time it is truly musculine/feminine, we promise" (see Generation 4, Genesis, Genesis 2 marketing).

    Edited to add:
    Having said that, the fact that it took a PA to provide support for V4 is not encouraging in that direction, nor is the fact that the basic morphs were a separate purchase. In the vision I outlined, V6 would have been a separate purchase complete with base morphs and support for V4/Genesis content… there would have been no G2F. I am glad there is a free version of G2F though on a personal note.


    As much as I like this to be true, from business point of view it makes more money for company to make users to buy big/basic essential things like Evolution morphsets and basicwear over and over again (for new generation, for new "figure" of new generation, then again for new generation and new figures of new generation) than to improve a figure up to the point that such big purchases are no longer needed by majority of users. Users has to be tethered to "new therefore better" mindset and if DAZ3D with tools that they'd have but, ideally, users won't, would be able to make new "figures" with less effort each time, it makes more money than to make just one sculpt for previous figure, regardless of how good this sculpt is.
    Post edited by Kattey on
  • Joe CotterJoe Cotter Posts: 3,234
    edited June 2013

    Because there is more then enough market for new product. Think of historical clothing alone... there is almost no good historical content... the market is huge. Trying to make money on a limited outdated set of content only makes sense if you are a monopoly like AT&T was, in which case you can sell rotary phones 50 years after they make no sense.

    Think of V4 skins... using new shaders, the ability to make skin/eyes etc.. much more realistic, stylized etc.. is there. Providing a port for V4 skins shouldn't really effect the future market as the real market is in coming out with skins that make use of all of the advances the new shaders and other advances are that we've had recently. The same goes for all of the content really. There are new methods, new understanding of what makes a good mesh... that content has a limited shelf life. Sure there are people using Gen 2 content... but how many percentage wise? Always look to the future or we will get swallowed up by the past.

    Post edited by Joe Cotter on
  • KatteyKattey Posts: 2,899
    edited June 2013

    Gedd said:
    Because there is more then enough market for new product. Think of historical clothing alone... there is almost no good historical content... the market is huge.
    The market for historical clothes is tiny because comparatively to a number of people who buy sexy armor, people who buy historical armor is much less - or, at least, this is what PAs keep telling me.
    For example, which historical period? Say, I'm into Napoleonic Wars period and Garðaríki period of eastern Europe. How many people from poserverse are also into this? From the other hand, how many people do fantasy renders where armor doesn't make any practical sense but exposes midriff and has high heels? I believe second group of people would be much larger than first one, and for vendors to make the maximum profit they have to go with chainmail bikini. This isn't a competition of two or three big companies over 10% of the market where smaller group of consumers still matters.

    Trying to make money on a limited outdated set of content only makes sense if you are a monopoly like AT&T was, in which case you can sell rotary phones 50 years after they make no sense.
    With transferred rigging Genesis can bend just as well as G2F - therefore, rigging could have been improved on unisex shape. G2F has unisex shape (hidden, identical to Genesis), therefore G2F could have been made into unisex figure even with this rigging and sculpt. Evolution expressions and morphs, when transferred back to Genesis, look 99% identical, so those could have been done without improved mesh, although I understand the desire to improve it. What I'm saying that G2F has improved, yes, but I don't see why, aside of strategy to entice more sales with "gender-specific, therefore better this time, promise" marketing, G2F could not have been done as true Genesis 2 unisex figure from technical standpoint. I don't see technical validation for G2F being female only, only marketing one.

    Think of V4 skins… using new shaders, the ability to make skin/eyes etc.. much more realistic, stylized etc.. is there.


    Do you mean reflective sphere? I cannot comment on that because I'm yet to see G2F render with more believable eyes than Genesis had.
    New shaders can be used on V4 skins in DS 4.6 just as well as on new V6 skins, if V4 skin has SSS maps and other needed maps - which some recent V4 skins do provide.
    There are new methods, new understanding of what makes a good mesh… that content has a limited shelf life.
    My point, (sorry for reiteration) that I don't see a quality jump in G2F comparatively to Genesis, like a quality jump between Genesis and Generation 4 or Generation 4 and Generation 3, or Generation 3 and Generation 2/1, and with cut functionality I'm finding G2F be user-unfriendly in sense of cost and effort, and I firmly believe that policy of splitting new or next generation into "specific" figures is very harmful on long run to users. G2F mesh isn't even rebulid, it is adjusted. Nicely adjusted, but I don't think it contributes enough to "new understanding of what makes a good mesh" which was a case with Genesis/Gen 4, and Gen4/Gen3 shifts.
    Post edited by Kattey on
  • Joe CotterJoe Cotter Posts: 3,234
    edited December 1969

    Second point first, I won't get into the merits of V6 vs Genesis(1) with the transferring of weight mapping etc.. that topic has been beat to death and people have come to their own conclusions by now or have plenty of material to do so, so it doesn't serve any purpose to continue to beat the dead horse as they say.

    As to the first, again... the argument centers around the current market. If one doesn't expand their market then they stagnate and die. All of the major studio houses used to use custom built software for their movies/fx etc... now, custom built software is a niche area in most of them, or they are using the custom built software to feed product they are selling in the general market to some extent. The comment about using off-the-shelf software is not a generalized statement but comes specifically from online discussion recordings by leading people from Pixar, ILM, etc... It is only a matter of time before content is a mix of custom built and libraries subscribed to. These studios are not interested in the content DAZ has at the moment for the most part, but what they could have going forward. DAZ is potential not yet realized. Understand, I am not suggesting that big studio houses are the sole future of DAZ, but rather, what would 'work' for them gives a hint of a direction that would serve the future market as a whole.

  • Joe CotterJoe Cotter Posts: 3,234
    edited December 1969

    Kattey said:
    ... from business point of view it makes more money for company to make users to buy big/basic essential things like Evolution morphsets and basicwear over and over again...

    Only in a very limited, we don't care about the future type of scenario.
  • KatteyKattey Posts: 2,899
    edited June 2013

    Gedd said:
    Second point first, I won't get into the merits of V6 vs Genesis(1) with the transferring of weight mapping etc.. that topic has been beat to death and people have come to their own conclusions by now or have plenty of material to do so, so it doesn't serve any purpose to continue to beat the dead horse as they say.
    Considering that the topic is like two-three days old, the horse had died of sudden stroke, it seems.

    These studios are not interested in the content DAZ has at the moment for the most part, but what they could have going forward. DAZ is potential not yet realized.


    I can't show DAZ3D/Renderosity page to any business client or professional artist, because of overabundance of "sexy" with blank stares on all pages - if I want to show them flying ships, like 1971s makes, I have to save the picture separately. And while I'm finding 3D purists be too arrogant, from professional standpoint, as it is now, they are at least partially right: mass-marketing assets aren't valued as much as custom-build and if there is an opportunity to costume-build something, this option is preferred. If this situation is changing (like in comics I saw recently, where still images were heavily postworked), it is a very slow change and at my believe DAZ3D breach into mainstream industry won't be possible when products still made with current userbase in mind - but products will have to be made as such for the company and PAs to survive because not much else sells as well as this on mass-market.
    Post edited by Kattey on
  • Dino GrampsDino Gramps Posts: 0
    edited December 1969

    Kattey-

    The whole Gen1 Gen2 horse is near death, but I just want to say I agree with you on all points. I believe that there are a lot of us who think that way, which will not be good for DAZ.

    Gedd -

    Unless the Poser market jumps on board with Genesis, which is not likely unless DAZ or SM come up with a better solution than DSON, I do not believe there is enough market for Gen1 & Gen2 to florish.

  • JOdelJOdel Posts: 5,731
    edited December 1969

    On consideration, the real issue for the average user is autofit. It's better than it was when it launched. But it needs to be better than it is. And it needs to keep up with the market. Every new figure needs its autofit clone or plug-in, or whatever the feature uses. And it needs to work on at least the majority of the items you try to run through it.

    Yes, a slew of individual figures would be a nuisance. A slew of individual figures whose morphs couldn't be blended At All would be more than a nuisance. But I don't think we're likely to be going all the way back to that. That's just so Gen 3. The host program IS going to need a better way to organize morphs inside the program than we have at present if things are going to start being split along the lines of Genesis 1 morphs as opposed to Genesis 2 morphs, Gen X-transfered morphs, and on ad infinitum, but I really don't think we're going to be hurting for morphs, per se. We just need to be able to sort and *find* them where we can get at them.

    What matters is that the different figures should be able to wear each other's clothes. I don't like the potential splitting of content by gender, but let's face it, the content is already split by gender. That's not going to change. But it doesn't matter so much if the figures are different meshes if it's possible to make the clothes fit. Most modern sportswear is effectively unisex, so it ought to be autofit-worthy. If gen 3 and 4 (and earlier) clothing can be refitted through CrossDresser or Wardrobe Wizard (it says in the fine print. I never got it to work), gen 5 and 6 clothing ought to be refittable through autofit.

    I'm beginning to suspect that original Genesis was always intended as a sort of halfway stop designed to enable people to transfer and recommission older content to be going on with. I know I'm a lot more willing to put an old V3 outfit on V3 Genesis than I am to use V3.

    Admittedly, I still dislike the idea of separate meshes for figures that don't need separate meshes. Particualry for use in DAZ Studio, where the scaling works. And I will be a lot slower to adopt the new character packages when they are released. But nobody is really asking me for my input.

    Just keep the improvements on autofit coming, and I'll still be using your software.

  • Richard HaseltineRichard Haseltine Posts: 72,570
    edited December 1969

    It would, at least in principle, be possible for figure creators to make AutoFit clones - and indeed they would be the only ones with the right to do so, since a clone involves copying the figure shape. However in many cases they would gain nothing from doing so (assuming they or their employers are looking to sell the figure itself).

  • cecilia.robinsoncecilia.robinson Posts: 2,208
    edited December 1969


    The longer I think about Gen2, the more confident I become that it's mainly designed for people whose art is very gender-specific.

    I would probably say that it is designed for people who want gender specific enhancements that may not have been viable with the gender neutral world. It's not so much that the art is gender specific, you can have a man and a woman in a scene together. But you may want each figure to really showcase the gender as best as possible.

    They probably enjoy the idea of gender-specific figures


    Not really, but I do like gender-specific enhancements. And if they have to make separate figures for that, I can deal.

    That's exactly what I meant: some people tend to focus on males or females. That way buying a single figure that suits them may sound reasonable.

  • HellboyHellboy Posts: 1,376
    edited December 1969

    What gender-specific enhancements?

  • Knight22179Knight22179 Posts: 1,194
    edited December 1969

    Hellboy said:
    What gender-specific enhancements?

    From what I can tell with Render comparisons, V6 and BF2 have "slightly" better bending. They also have jaw movements Genesis doesn't have and also "slightly" better emotional expressions but not by much.

    These slight enhancements aren't enough to cover the glaring oversight to split the gender of the 6th generation.

  • KatteyKattey Posts: 2,899
    edited June 2013

    Hellboy said:
    What gender-specific enhancements?

    From what I can tell with Render comparisons, V6 and BF2 have "slightly" better bending. They also have jaw movements Genesis doesn't have and also "slightly" better emotional expressions but not by much.
    But why those rigging enhancements considered to be gender-specific? This is what puzzles me. They are enhancements, true, but what is exceptionally feminine about them? Because I can transfer the rigging and bending back to unisex Genesis, dial up M5 morph and there would be nothing feminine about the the resulting guy.

    Post edited by Kattey on
  • JOdelJOdel Posts: 5,731
    edited December 1969

    Exactly. There's all this whoop de doo about; hurrah, we're giving you gendered models! But none of the improvements they are waving in front of us are specific to either gender. Men have movable jaws too. They have armpits and elbows. They don't bend any differently that I can see.

  • HellboyHellboy Posts: 1,376
    edited December 1969

    That's what I mean! What is "gender specific" about that?
    What would have made Mr. Hyde more masculine and Mavka more feminine if they where separate bases? What are they lacking that separate meshes would correct?
    And how are those corrections enough to threw away Genesis’ best features and go back to the expensive Generation 4 days? (but without Poser compatibility).
    I’m still confused to be honest. But, well, I have Genesis, so never mind.

  • wowiewowie Posts: 1,987
    edited December 1969

    I think it's wiser to see what are the gender specific enhancements in Genesis2Female compared to the Genesis2Male (and not Genesis).

  • JOdelJOdel Posts: 5,731
    edited June 2013

    It's the flap about this being gender specific that bewilders me. I can clearly see that there are improvements to the appearance and function made by adding the polys that have been added, and I get that adding the polys to make it a *different* mesh comes at a price in backwards compatibility with existing content. But it just feels like claiming that this makes it either either necessary or desirable to make the new mesh(es) *gender* specific feels like being forced into something that I don't want, and DON'T NEED. It's got nothing to do with gender. And why is gender being waved at us like a flag to distract us from what is really going on. It all feels like bait-and-switch. Which is NOT a desirable business model.

    Post edited by JOdel on
  • jonfejonfe Posts: 10
    edited December 1969

    Does anyone know when the promotional 30% off (51% off, for PC members) sale ends? I'd like to purchase V6 and the Gen2 morphs early July.

    I'm not receiving any newsletters anymore (although I'm subscribed to them, according to my account notifications page) and the product page doesn't mention anything related to the sale period.

    Thanks in advance.

  • wowiewowie Posts: 1,987
    edited December 1969

    jonfe said:
    Does anyone know when the promotional 30% off (51% off, for PC members) sale ends? I'd like to purchase V6 and the Gen2 morphs early July.

    I'm not receiving any newsletters anymore (although I'm subscribed to them, according to my account notifications page) and the product page doesn't mention anything related to the sale period.

    Thanks in advance.

    I'm looking right now and they still apply. V6 is S19.58 Plus isn't there a new $6 off coupon with $30 worth of purchases this month (for PC members).

  • jonfejonfe Posts: 10
    edited December 1969

    wowie said:

    I'm looking right now and they still apply. V6 is S19.58 Plus isn't there a new $6 off coupon with $30 worth of purchases this month (for PC members).

    Thanks for the reply.

    I can see the promotional price still applies, however, I wonder if they will last until next week. I guess I didn't make myself very clear on that.

  • Knight22179Knight22179 Posts: 1,194
    edited December 1969

    jonfe said:
    wowie said:

    I'm looking right now and they still apply. V6 is S19.58 Plus isn't there a new $6 off coupon with $30 worth of purchases this month (for PC members).

    Thanks for the reply.

    I can see the promotional price still applies, however, I wonder if they will last until next week. I guess I didn't make myself very clear on that.

    The introductory price lasts one week then it goes to 30% off for one month.

  • Dino GrampsDino Gramps Posts: 0
    edited June 2013

    Daz will do what it wants, but I think 14 days is the normal period for the initial new release price, Proceed at your own peril however, because the last freebie for the bundle is June 30 and DAZ could very well put everything up to full price after that.

    Post edited by Dino Gramps on
  • jonfejonfe Posts: 10
    edited December 1969

    Thank you all.

    I think I'll take my chances. If the introductory price is still up by Monday or Tuesday, I'll get them then. If not, well, there's always another sale around the corner I guess!

  • wowiewowie Posts: 1,987
    edited June 2013

    Here's one example that I could find why gender specfic base is preferable.

    I loaded Genesis with V4 and M4 shapes, pose them so the bones are pretty much aligned between the two and then move them side by side. I then dial up the Heavy morph on all figures (Genesis V4 & M4 shape, V4 and M4). Genesis is the one on the left and Gen4 figures on the right.

    Genesis Heavy morph is unchanged, I only switch on/off the V4 and M4 dials. The first images is Genesis V4 shape and V4. The second is Genesis M4 shape and M4.

    It's clear that Genesis V4 shape don't work well with the Heavy morph, since it's most probably is sculpted with M4 (or at the very least, a male shape) in mind.

    There are fundamental differences between male and female bodies. Skeleton is different, particularly for the pelvic area. Fat distribution are also different. You can make adjustment morphs to account for a different base shape (in this case Heavy for V4 shape), but it adds unnecessary bloat to the figure.

    Plus you still have to account for any differences between the skeleton once you pose the figure.

    HeavyMale.jpg
    800 x 1040 - 137K
    HeavyFemale.jpg
    800 x 1040 - 128K
    Post edited by wowie on
  • anikadanikad Posts: 1,919
    edited December 1969

    Couldn't a morph pack fix the difference in genesis?

  • kyoto kidkyoto kid Posts: 35,913
    edited June 2013

    ...I've just seen details of a well designed female figure mesh and it excites me more than G2F/V6 does.


    ...and this model has a real, not hideous, smile as well as independent toes and more naturally formed hands.

    Post edited by kyoto kid on
  • KatteyKattey Posts: 2,899
    edited June 2013

    wowie, when you dialed Heavy morph on Genesis and Gen4, did you dial native Heavy morphs (one from Genesis Evolution packs and one from Gen4 morphs++) or you transferred morphs between them to compare same shape? Because native morphs are different in shape as they always are in different generations. If we compare V4 native Heavy to G2F native Heavy for example: both morphs made for female base figures but they look different from each other too. Does it mean that one of them is suddenly not feminine just because it is different?
    I attached Genesis and V4 with same heavy (V4 version) on both. Look pretty same to me. If there was an alternative morphpack for Genesis with those morphs done for unisex Genesis base, in conjunction with V4 Iconic shape you'd get pretty same picture as native V4 Heavy.

    There are fundamental differences between male and female bodies. Skeleton is different, particularly for the pelvic area. Fat distribution are also different. You can make adjustment morphs to account for a different base shape (in this case Heavy for V4 shape), but it adds unnecessary bloat to the figure.

    It is true for real bodies, but from my testing, when I transfer supposedly 'feminine' rig from G2F back to Genesis and dial male shapes, its bends don't have noticeably different 'female' weight distribution that isn't suitable for men. I haven't seen the proof that rigging in G2F (while is somewhat better) is as gender-specific as real world weight distribution would be. Morphs - yes, morphs could be more or less feminine, I agree about fat distribution, but two different heavy morphs - one for females, another for males, - can be added to unisex base too and user will be free to dial between them as he/she wants, if Genesis 2 was unisex, which we can't do in G2F.
    Heavyboned.jpg
    1086 x 928 - 158K
    Post edited by Kattey on
Sign In or Register to comment.