|
By toonsunlimited - 8 Years Ago
|
Greetings Ola,
Is there a way we can get a list of Alpha and Beta Tester in case we want to send PM's to each other?
Currently, the only way to see who is apart of the Test team is when they respond to a thread.
Some people aren't as chatty as others, but it would be nice to see who is about of the entire collaborative team.
Janel
|
|
By Sen - 8 Years Ago
|
Hi ,
   
|
|
By jlittle - 8 Years Ago
|
I'm still here from the Alpha!!!
Jeff
|
|
By garrypye - 8 Years Ago
|
Still here also!
|
|
By Ibis Fernandez - 8 Years Ago
|
I'm not as cool as you guys. I'm late to the party.
|
|
By etourist - 8 Years Ago
|
|
Yeah, I'm here too.... now.
|
|
By toonsunlimited - 8 Years Ago
|
Sen, Ibis, and David! I'm glad you could join the team!
Hope you like all the cool new features.
|
|
By lesdodds - 8 Years Ago
|
|
Here, installed and reading.
|
|
By Ibis Fernandez - 8 Years Ago
|
I'm not exactly impressed by the new g3 character thing. I honestly think its going to create a lot more confusion once the product is released. I love the mesh warping and bone mapping, and envelope tools for the face, were all features i begged for in the wishful features area.
But calling these armatures g3 characters is more of a disservice to the user who will expect a lot more from them. Generation 3 implies better and more advanced than the previous "Generation 2" In actuality this is a sort of step backwards along side the G1 characters that are limited to one angle at a time, no 3d bone structure, limited sprite switching capabilities and so on. If anything they should be referred to as G1.5 characters or simply as "armatures. and its my personal opinion they shouldn't be placed in the same folder or directory structure as the g2 characters which even without the added bone stuff are still the more advanced and complete characters. By referring them as "characters" people are going to expect them to behave like the previous characters.
The ability to make a quick armature for characters when you need a specific angle will come in handy for advanced users and professionals, but because the majority of RL's user base is the type of folks that depend of pre-rigged stuff and prefabricated motions, this is gonna cause a lot of chaos. They are going to demand that all the motions they have purchased and previous assets be compatible with these newer "characters" and they will being for a rude awakening.
There should also be a sort of way to match up or rename bones of these new armatures so that they may actually attempt to be made backwards compatible. For example if a new armature can be made to at least be somehow remapped to accept all the previous bones, at the very least most previous motions will be somehow compatible, at least as in 2d terms. A bone remapping panel might be handy such as the one found in 3dxchange.
.
|
|
By Andy Boy - 8 Years Ago
|
Denmark are so ready to test CTA3. My main goal is to make som good health explainer videos. Hope that CTA3 will do the work for me.
Anders,
Denmark
|
|
By lesdodds - 8 Years Ago
|
|
Ibis Fernandez (10/7/2016)
I'm not exactly impressed by the new g3 character thing. I honestly think its going to create a lot more confusion once the product is released. I love the mesh warping and bone mapping, and envelope tools for the face, were all features i begged for in the wishful features area.
But calling these armatures g3 characters is more of a disservice to the user who will expect a lot more from them. Generation 3 implies better and more advanced than the previous "Generation 2" In actuality this is a sort of step backwards along side the G1 characters that are limited to one angle at a time, no 3d bone structure, limited sprite switching capabilities and so on. If anything they should be referred to as G1.5 characters or simply as "armatures. and its my personal opinion they shouldn't be placed in the same folder or directory structure as the g2 characters which even without the added bone stuff are still the more advanced and complete characters. By referring them as "characters" people are going to expect them to behave like the previous characters.
The ability to make a quick armature for characters when you need a specific angle will come in handy for advanced users and professionals, but because the majority of RL's user base is the type of folks that depend of pre-rigged stuff and prefabricated motions, this is gonna cause a lot of chaos. They are going to demand that all the motions they have purchased and previous assets be compatible with these newer "characters" and they will being for a rude awakening.
There should also be a sort of way to match up or rename bones of these new armatures so that they may actually attempt to be made backwards compatible. For example if a new armature can be made to at least be somehow remapped to accept all the previous bones, at the very least most previous motions will be somehow compatible, at least as in 2d terms. A bone remapping panel might be handy such as the one found in 3dxchange.
.
I agree with Ibis, this is not what most were looking for but I like this because it's like an Erector set I use to have and you can expand your mind and build anything. It needs a library of dummy actors that can be modified with bones and sprites.
First Look
|
|
By toonsunlimited - 8 Years Ago
|
Although G3 actors is not really expansion from the G2 Actors, I do love the fact that you can finally create and animate anything you want with out having have it adhere to a human bone structure.
This alone opens up many possibilities. My only concern with that is something I stated earlier in another thread. The new bone template requires you to rely heavily on keyframe animation. Now if your are an animator, this may be heaven for you. However, I am NO ANIMATOR...not by a long shot. I have begun reading and watching tutorials on how to animate but I have a LONG way to go. With that being said....CTA was build for people who did not know a lot about animation. You could use a lot of pre-made motions with G1 actors, and this feature value increased with the release of CTA2, because now you could use 3D imotions. I know people will upset that they can not use G1 motions with the human bone template. Looking at the G3 to G2 comparison chart, there are several distinctive and critical assets lost with the new version which are Vector, Render Style, and G1 motions. These are critical pieces that a lot of people want and need and rely on.
If you can apply render style to a prop, G1 and G2 characters...why can't you do it for the Bone Template or Free Bone template? If the Bone Template naming convention matches that of G1 character, why can't the G1 motions be applied? Vector images are what a lot of people love, you build all of your previous software versions on primarily vector based images...now it's been lost with the new update. Alpha testers did not have all the features that was provided to the Beta testers so there was a glimmer of hope that these features would be included in the final release.
Although the Bone Template and the Free Bone Template will except vector images...you lose the Flexible/Elastic ability to manipulate characters. I personally don't care for the curvy arm and legs, they are TOO cartoony for me. I prefer a more realistic approach. However I do love the template bone and free bone with the flexible/elastic ability for non-human characters and props. I think the biggest asset to this update is the deform tool for the facial features.....I can now animate and move every facial feature. Having 9 points on the deform tool for facial piece is wonderful. You can now do simple things like make a characters hair bounce when running. However for some reason, the body deform tool still remains with 4 points instead of 9....WHY? Please tell me that will be fix before CTA3 is released.
One of my first feature request will be to ask if you can add the flexible/elastic characteristics to G2 characters, even if it can only be done in png format. Vector is still what I prefer, but I think that will make a lot of people happy. This is not an attempt to bash this release in no form of fashion, this is an honest review and I am sure others will agree with some of these issues as well.
I do have a concern on how much of a strain will having a lot of PNG base characters and props put on people computers will trying to animate a scene and how large will characters have to be drawn in order for them to still appears clear for close up animation?
|
|
By toonsunlimited - 8 Years Ago
|
|
Can someone from the Reallusion staff share the new changes that will be added into CTA3?
|
|
By jlittle - 8 Years Ago
|
Will there be a Beta update?
Jeff
|
|
By Ola(RL) - 8 Years Ago
|
|
jlittle (10/17/2016)
Will there be a Beta update?
Jeff
Hi Jeff
Currently, we do not have a planned update in mind, since there is no fatal bug cause crashing.
I am wondering why do you think it should be a update?
Is there any significant error or major suggestion you have in mind that we should fix or modify right away?
|
|
By jlittle - 8 Years Ago
|
I was just wondering if there was going to be any updates for any fixes and additions to the program.
Typically I'm used to multiple updates when Beta testing programs.
Each update is checked to make sure that any changes did not break something else.
Jeff
|