Hi all,

I think Sidefx should push a little more to become the number one tool for indie game devs. Currently, there is Apprentice HD which comes with export functionality to dts, the model format for GarageGames Torque3D engine. The licence allows to use these created dts assets commercially in a game. This is very nice as long as you use Torque3D.
However, there are many more indie friendly engines out there, like unity and UDK, which are probably the most prominent right now. Problem is, to get content from Apprentice HD into any of these, there is no easy way, because of file formats. Most engines work well with fbx and/or collada. Even Torque3D switched to collada, however it still supports dts.

It would be very nice if SideFx could offer a Houdini version which would be cheap like the Apprentice HD, ut at the same time would allow export to collada or fbx. I guess the problem with this is that if Apprentice would support export to fbx and collada and use the assets commercially, it would directly compete with Houdini Escape.
But maybe Sidefx could come up with some licence specifically for indie game devs? Like allowing only commercial use of created assets in games? Contrary to Apprentice HD, it would be more than sufficient to have only the functionality of Houdini Escape, but rendering could be watermarked and limited in resolution.

I think Houdini has lots of potential in game dev, but unfortunately, most indies are not even trying it because there is no way to export to fbx or collada. But you get nowadays all Autodesk products with this functionality for free with an academic licence, so many turn to these. I think there is a niche here which could be filled nicely by Houdini, but as it is now, Houdini is not even looked at or considered by many Indie Game devs.

What do others think? What is the opinion of Sidefx in this regard?

+1

Houdini Escape isn't that expensive and can export .fbx. I have used .fbx to go to UDK.

I think the issue is that once you are exporting .fbx (or other useful geometry or image formats that can go into Maya or other packages) you can start easily doing commercial work for others, which Apprentice isn't supposed to allow. I think its great that they allow Torque export from the non-commercial Apprentice, but understand why they don't do .fbx.

As a Unity games developer I can second this request.

More importantly, as someone who watches of the advancement of Houdini, I wish SideFx would consider an additional revenue stream for indie types - folks how can't afford to pay $7K and then $4K each year to stay current.


I'm not broke but being an individual who enjoys 3D as mostly a hobby, I certainly can't justify those prices for Master.

I may get the odd job here or there for a coupla hundred or so to spruce up a co-worker or family member's camcorder videos with motion graphics and sound effects, but certainly not enough money to afford the asking price.


I've installed Houdini about 2 times now, and each time I find myself liking the package but then I come to terms with how much it would cost where I could use it to replace say Particle Illusion in my video edits - I can't afford it since you're not supposed to use the free or Apprentice versions for paid work.

So I immediately uninstall it until I hear about something else new (v12 is what has me here poking around now…)

Another thing is yes, Escape is within my reach but then I'm missing out on all the effects that is really what attracts me to this package to begin with.

This is again why I uninstall the package - why spend time on learning it if I can never really use it for anything - I'm not trying to build up my portfolio or get a “Houdini job” somewhere, I'm a lone wolf kinda person.


I'm sure there are a BUNCH of us out here who would love to give SideFX some money but it seems like they're not interested!


Why not an Apprentice Indie version for say $600 - $800 or so (with upgrades in the $300 - $500 range) and allow folks to use it commercially for an income cap of say $10K for example.


I'd love to take the time to learn Houdini and see what it can do for me - I simply can't justify any time learning it since I can't afford to own it were I can use it for the stuff that I do…

-Will

Thanks for all the ideas proposed in this forum. While I don't have anything to share at this point, I wanted to acknowledge that the suggestions are being read and will help us make future plans.

One comment often brought up is “why learn houdini if I can't afford the software when I go pro.” Something to consider is that Houdini gives you a good understanding of what is going on under the hood in CG - things that other programs protect you from. That in-depth knowledge will be beneficial no matter which 3D app you end up using down the line.

Thanks for your interest,
Robert

rmagee

One comment often brought up is “why learn houdini if I can't afford the software when I go pro.”

Robert

And also, just to throw in my opinion, places where you might get hired for your Houdini (or any other SW) expertise usually have at least a licence available for the artists they hire.
If on the other hand you go pro as a freelancer I think you can get a tax deduct for your required equipment in most countries.

So enjoy discovering your skills !!!

freeflyklown
I think Houdini has lots of potential in game dev

Can you elaborate on this?
What advantages do you think Houdini has over, say, 3DSMax?
I don't mean general gamedev, but for independent developers specifically.
Is it:
modeling (characters, environments?);
rigging and animation (char/mechanical?);
lighting (say, lightmap baking);
scripting, batch processing, versioning;
gameplay data editing;
image processing, particle effects, something else;

All of the above

The advantage here is not even so much whether “program x has a better extrude than program y”. It is simply how you are able to attach together any operators to make your own custom operators and serve your specific needs without heavy scripting or plugin writing. This is especially apparent when your game requires lots of sets of data that can be described with common, small sets of parameters (IE stadiums, cities, lots of gear matched to different styled bodies, etc). The biggest gains I have seen is in how it allows for quick iteration of mass amounts of assets, how it allows for artists to be more independent, how it allows for experimentation and late changes, etc

Another thing to consider when looking at the cost. Houdini can cut costs in many other areas on which you may require custom programs or plugins. For example, COPs can do some very powerful compositing thus reducing the need of paying for a separate compositor (and are available in the escape version of Houdini). All of these element fully integrated with each other

Also, I must mention that sidefx support is exceptional without having to pay separate fees for special support or “advantage packages”

Well, sure… but that's too general don't you think?
I mean, I understand the sentiment, but I don't think it's enough to get anyone interested.
(For the record, I do think that Houdini has a better extrude - because of the extrude groups.)
The original post says that Houdini is not even considered because of the missing export options.
But surely they will look if there are some demos that show how Houdini can make they life easier. I think a direct comparison with the apps they're already using is absolutely necessary here. What will replace their Animation Mixer and Ultimapper if they're switching from Softimage? In what ways the replacement is better?
Exporting is a minor problem really, a moderately experienced programmer should be able to write a basic Collada geometry/material exporter in 2-3 days using HOM.
BTW, Houdini is very programmer-friendly, and I think this aspect is often downplayed. But we're talking about developers here, aren't at least a significant portion of them are programmers?

Also, I was under impression that independent developers are mostly working on smaller projects, something like Lugaru [en.wikipedia.org]. But large amount assets implies something bigger it seems.
In fact, I'm a bit confused as to the definition of “independent developers”. At least for the purpose of this threads, what kind of groups are we talking about? 1-2 man teams, probably students since there is a mention of Academic License in the original post? Larger groups with some financial backing? What types of games they're making? Do they usually have someone on their team in the “technical artist” position?

>(For the record, I do think that Houdini has a better extrude - because of >the extrude groups.)

Hehehe that is awesome. Never expected this as a reply to my example lol. I myself am a big fan of profile curves

I think the reason I attach so much to the procedural/network capabilities is because it has been the strongest selling point at my studio. When doing direct comparisons with workflows that can benefit from proceduralism, Houdini always gets us there due to its approach of node networks.

For example, the Houdini equivalent of the Maya wrap deformed is pretty good. But both of them do not yield a perfect result, and require a lot of cleanup. In Houdini though, you can combine a lattice node with a radius custom attribute and a VOPSOP to get EXACTLY what you need, with full interactive feedback. In Maya, doing this requires a plugin, which not everyone knows how to code

Your ultimapper example is an interesting case actually. Houdini can transfer any surface information in between meshes via the ray and gather VOPs so you are not limited to the usual surface transfers (you can make your own)
However, this is not as simple to an artist to use as the ultimapper is. So you lose flexibility in favor of ease of use. However, if you have someone tech saavy in your team, they could reproduce the ultimapper in Houdini quite easily, and potentially even surpass it, again, without writing a plugin.

Now this definitely applies to large productions, but my thnking is that any production could benefit to some extent from procedural workflows (IE terrain generation, lods, etc). It really depends on the cost vs gain analysis of the game you are working on, so it may not always be the answer

I agree with your note about the exporters. I was amazed at how simple making an exporter in Houdini is! I was even able to make a Maya scene exporter with very little python

Houdini Indie is now released: http://www.sidefx.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2853&Itemid=66 [sidefx.com]

This is awesome Lucas! had a few questions..

- would regular apprentice still be available to non-students? I got my chops by experimenting with it at home, which then lead into 4 years of successful development with full licenses (and more purchased licenses) at my work

Very cool…exactly what i was waiting for! One more question After one year (365 days), do I have to pay another 199$ to continue using Houdini Indie, or will i just not be able to use the latest Version?

This is most excellent! thanks for seriously listening to us and our concerns! I'll be signing up shortly!

freeflyklown
Very cool…exactly what i was waiting for! One more question After one year (365 days), do I have to pay another 199$ to continue using Houdini Indie, or will i just not be able to use the latest Version?

It's an annual rental program, so it will no longer work after 365 days.

ok, thanks. Still I think it's a much better deal than Maya LT.

I've seen a few grumbles about the idea of a recurring annual fee, otherwise you “lose the ability to open your old work”.

There will of course always be the option of loading your old scenes into the latest version of Apprentice, even if you've stopped paying the annual subscription. You just won't be able to use those old scenes for commercial work until you renew your subscription, which seems absolutely fair and reasonable to me. It's not like you get locked out completely, you'd just get locked out commercially.

my worry here, what if SideFX discontinues Houdini Indie… then what will happen? :?

Well, Apprentice has been around for a long time now and it's still there, while HD has actually evolved into Indie. I can't imagine SESI pulling the plug on it.

They're not like some other company that comes to mind

lucas
Houdini Indie is now released: http://www.sidefx.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2853&Itemid=66 [sidefx.com]

Could you say if it's possible to use one license on 2 machines? For example if i have home and work machines.
Or possibly to use one license on 2 machines at the same time?

I'm just thinking on buying the indie license, but i found no info about license using.

Thanks.