Jump to content

Recommended Posts

oooer ... Epic Games is working on a browser-based app called MetaHuman Creator that allows game developers to create high fidelity human characters in "less than an hour."

... 

Users will also be able to choose a starting point by selecting from a number of presets, and also fine-tune their creations by choosing from a variety of hair-styles, clothing, and body types. 

Once the finishing touches have been applied, devs will be able to download a fully rigged asset via Quixel Bridge, meaning it can be used immediately for animation and motion capture in Unreal Engine (complete with LODS). Source data will also be provided in the form of a Maya file. 

Edited by rasterscan
  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...

I do by educating their customers to expect more value for what they pay and how much more they get from having mod rights. It adds so much yet cost so little to creators that it if it isn't due to ignorance, one has to conclude that it must be a mixture of arrogance, greed, paranoia and contempt.

And who in their right mind would willingly endorse creators like that?

 

Edited by Dakota Linden
[Moderator Edit: Quoted Text Removed]
  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Kyrah Abattoir said:

I do by educating their customers to expect more value for what they pay and how much more they get from having mod rights. It adds so much yet cost so little to creators that it if it isn't due to ignorance, one has to conclude that it must be a mixture of arrogance, greed, paranoia and contempt.

And who in their right mind would willingly endore creators like that?

Just this morning I had occasion to compliment a mesh (clothing) creator for selling Mod products. In this particular case, it made it extra easy to diagnose a tiny flaw in the model, and to work around it by alpha-ing out the problematic surface, but there are just so many advantages to customer and creator alike, and I like to encourage good behavior when I see it.

(It kinda sucks that it's rare enough to even warrant the compliment, but as it stands, they earn it.)

Now, as to the no-Mod creators? There's absolutely nothing to prevent us from organizing a grid-wide boycott of their businesses, even naming names (just not on LL properties, per TOS). It certainly wouldn't be "slander" to do so. In fact, it's not slander if I state an opinion that all no-Mod creators are despicable scum, and claim to have objective proof.

Sue me.

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see where someone who is using components created by others would want to make something no mod so that the tiny object that shows them as creator doesn't get lost by an accidental unlinking and end up with other creators being hassled because customer forgot who the creator was and only looked at the unlinked parts. They contact everyone in the world except the one person who actually put the thing together and made it work. It has happened before and it will happen again.

The way I see it we have a choice. We can either set things copy/no mod and not have to worry about the additional CS load for customer breakage OR we can set things copy/mod and never have to offer much in the way of CS since all they need to do is rez in a new one. 

If that makes me despicable scum, then so be it. If I sell something no mod and a customer would prefer to have mod, they can ask or look to see if I offer the item as mod. I won't mind sending a copy/mod depending on the customer and the situation. It's all no trans anyway.

I would like to see this "objective proof" that ALL no mod creators are despicable scum though.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Qie Niangao said:

if I state an opinion that all no-Mod creators are despicable scum, and claim to have objective proof.

Most of my items are mod except a few (a handful) of my Dinkie dresses and shoes.  For one, Dinkie's can only wear one size and we had no alpha until BOM and I don't even know if we have an alpha now as the Dinkie's I love are are a Dinkie-mod and are not BOM so I am not up to speed on BOM for Dinkies.  These dresses were created pre-BOM.  The dresses are mostly dark in color or have a print on the top that really cannot be tinted and since when I made these we, as Dinkie's, have only one size for all Dinkies and had no alphas whatsoever, it was better to have them no-mod as they are too dark to tint plus other issues.  Sometimes there is a reason actually is all I am saying.  But, other Dinkie dresses that are lighter I have as mod.  But, to state that about all no-mod items is going a bit over-board, imo.  Plus, why would one buy a mod Dinkie dress from me just to re-texture it when they don't have the maps and it would look awful?  

Edited by FairreLilette
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, FairreLilette said:

Plus, why would one buy a mod Dinkie dress from me just to re-texture it when they don't have the maps and it would look awful?  

It's only very rarely about re-texturing, and in my case the tinting I do is probably invisible to most people's eyes, but keeps me from going crazy when I pair two almost compatible colors. What's probably more visible is tweaking I do to fix Materials, especially specularity. But there are many other reasons for attachments to have Mod perm, especially for those of us who obsess about adding/removing/replacing scripts in clothing items we wear.

Speaking of scripts, auto-hide is one thing I've seen creators very often get wrong. Sure, we can try to contact them for fixes, but honestly those no-Mod creators usually won't even bother to respond, or say "you tried the demo, you got what you paid for" -- which would be true, if I'd thought to check whether a t-shirt would auto-hide legs.

I don't know from Dinkies, but you mentioned BOM and that's kind of a sore point specifically about a particular no-mod mesh body (Belleza) and its retrofitted, not really supported BOM functionality. Unfortunately, because the body is no-mod, it's impossible to set it up correctly to handle alpha masks, so even the BOM version is stuck only capable of the clunky old alpha-cuts ability. I didn't know enough to test that first, so I have a couple alts with that body and no way to do proper, alpha-masked BOM, which would be trivial to fix if I could just get in there and flip a bit. Anyway, the point is Mod perm is a way to future-proof products, at least to some platform changes.

All this said, I don't actually object to all no-mod items. In fact, back when I was an extreme newbie and still sold stuff, I sold a no-mod scripted prim attachment (well, everything was prim back then) because it seemed intractable to retain functionality if the user changed its geometry and/or removed links. (This was long before redelivery vendors, and I wasn't yet equipped to build that kind of record-keeping myself.) But the occasions when no-Mod has any real advantage are few and far between -- especially now.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Qie Niangao said:

I don't know from Dinkies, but you mentioned BOM and that's kind of a sore point specifically about a particular no-mod mesh body (Belleza) and its retrofitted, not really supported BOM functionality. Unfortunately, because the body is no-mod

The Dinkie body itself IS modify as I have added my own script for the eyes. 

But, as far as some dark Dinkie clothing where really one could only tint BLACK because it is that dark and also since it's one color only it has no scripts so there would be nothing to modify but to change it to black or re-texture it which imo would look awful because there are no maps that come with it of course.  

However, I let Dinkie's know when they can tint something and even put it in the description such as Dinkie Halloween Sweatshirts - Can Be Tinted - most of those I sell in the Dinkie groups inworld though, and I try to keep a lighter color on it for tinting because Dinkie's do love to tint.  

However, I am mostly in your camp and understand regarding human clothing but have learned to live with it as much as possible.  There is one company out now that came out with a sweater and in the fatpack she offers a tinter.  It would not be so difficult for sellers of human clothing to offer a tinter as well as a texture changer - many hairs offer both - change texture and tint it.  A business that comes out with this for human's and if the items are good I think stands a chance of doing very well in SL.  I bought one sweater as a fatpack for half price at Seraphim from this creator who is offering texture change and tint and I love it!  As far as if she has a delete script option I'm not sure but I think Addam's and Blueberry offer delete scripts.  Most mesh heads and bodies offer delete scripts too but deleting scripts can make the item no longer work and is confusing to newbies too.

Edited by FairreLilette
Link to post
Share on other sites

Epic Games.. does not provide something for free without expecting something in return :) they will most likely require exclusive publishing rights for your game or product.

They have a history with strange marketing strategies, they are trying to compete with Steam.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/12/2021 at 8:37 AM, Qie Niangao said:

Just this morning I had occasion to compliment a mesh (clothing) creator for selling Mod products. In this particular case, it made it extra easy to diagnose a tiny flaw in the model, and to work around it by alpha-ing out the problematic surface, but there are just so many advantages to customer and creator alike, and I like to encourage good behavior when I see it.

(It kinda sucks that it's rare enough to even warrant the compliment, but as it stands, they earn it.)

Now, as to the no-Mod creators? There's absolutely nothing to prevent us from organizing a grid-wide boycott of their businesses, even naming names (just not on LL properties, per TOS). It certainly wouldn't be "slander" to do so. In fact, it's not slander if I state an opinion that all no-Mod creators are despicable scum, and claim to have objective proof.

Sue me.

I find a good many things are in fact on mod even if mesh, Qie. I mean, I don't know how many houses, hall sets, gatchas etc you happen to buy, but I buy a lot, and I would say most are on mod. For which I'm grateful because I'm not going to sue them in a court of law if I happen to expand their exquisite rock that was 1 prim on the shop shelf but now I've ballooned it to 100 prims in just a few clicks. My bad. Not their problem. Their landlord's problem. Or the landlord's problem. You know? I mean, not sure what is driving this? Yes, some things get strangely distorted and unfixable if on mod and you mess with them. Are they afraid of having their name appear in some kind of bad setting? I mean, you can't have that fear and exist in SL? You know?

On the rare occasions when I am forced to buy a no-mod item for whatever exigency, a customer wants it, or it fits perfectly into a build, I then take a star off in my review. Every no-mod item should at the very least lose a star. Generally, they lose my business, period. Because there is no valid reason for no-mod. None.

I find it especially pernicious when people who sell full-perm items combine this with offerings of no-mod items, as if they haven't heard that you can put mod/copy/no transfer and you are no more likely to be copybotted or have your license violated than otherwise. Truly. I mean I totally get it that there is copybotting and a variety of ways of copying and I combat that when I can in my rentals or through abuse reports or not buying obviously ripped stuff, if I can make that determination.

That is, I think some people put "no mod" on because they think it "stops copyright violations" and they even sell full-perm items despite this fear, thinking their fierce, draconian or confusing licenses or their social ostracism will be a substitute for a DMCA which they don't want to do because it involves using a real name and some work.

They are a good example of what to me, seems a psychological motivation, not an actual one related to true risks and crime and such.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Solar Legion said:

You mean "sanitized".

Which really makes no sense at all considering what goes on inworld and other sites scattered around the internet that, while they aren't officially a part of or affiliated with LL, they are still associated with SL. They'll take someone to the cleaners if they mess up on the forums but let them do the same thing inworld and no one gives a damn. It's obvious LL is trying to hide things from the unregistered masses. LL is fighting a losing battle in a war that never happened. I'm not saying some words shouldn't be censored for the sake of keeping the peace but unless a post or thread is breaking US/CA laws (threatening bodily harm, death etc), they should never be deleted or hidden, except in the case where a mod has been told to lock and hide a thread until someone with the authority to make the decisions can look at it.

That is the correct way to handle these things.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...