Details.

[Rusalka Writer]

Just ending three weeks of travel and trying to catch up to what's been going on with mesh. Looks rather dodgy, but I'm starting to understand some things I've been hearing at the mesh meetings for the last year from the Lindens about mesh's role in building, with a curious emphasis on using mesh for "architectural details." It now sounds like we were being told in subtle ways that building- or tree-sized mesh was not going to be part of the future. You could have mesh gargoyles on a prim cathedral, but not a mesh cathedral.

I spent a considerable amount of time this spring building my RL house in mesh. Now I'm thinking it will be a template against which I'll have to build the house again in prims. I won't have the prim count on any future piece of land to support the house in mesh. A very strange result, not one I expected a year ago, and rather tragic. And now SL offers a range of non-human avatars that fill the range of mesh avatars many of us hoped to produce and sell? As a mesh creator and would-be mesh business owner, I'm not feeling the love. As a sculpty-maker, all is right in my world.

[Nix Manx]

I guess we will have to wait and see what they say at Mondays meeting, but as of right now, it is not looking promising at all.

[DanielRavenNest Noe]

It works like this:  with sculpt maps, in theory you can get 2048 triangles for one prim.  With mesh I can get around 100-300 triangles per prim for moderate size objects (it depends on a lot of factors), so roughly mesh starts out with a ten times higher cost for the amount of detail.  So you have to work very hard to find cases where mesh wins on land parcels.  For avatar attachments it's a different story, prim count does not matter there.

[Tapple Gao]

I think there really must be a mistake in the prim costs. I can't immagine why they went to the trouble of implementing complex physics shapes if they don't intend users to be able to make builds big enough to walk around in