Frankly speaking Tile's answer is so stupid and his manner so disagreable that he does not deserve even an answer
You are so mean to not tell me the name of the pills. Must be great stuff
You should not start to flame and insult just because you run out of arguments my friend
FBX include much more information , a lot of them being of no use for game programming
Fourth time asking. What informations are you referring to? But forget it. I know why you cannot answer. You don't know the answer, you just guess. And you guess wrong
quote
Modeling Optimized Characters
Your character should use only a single Skinned Mesh
You also want to keep the number of Materials on that Mesh as low as possible
we strongly recommend you use around 30 bones per character.
Anything between 500-6000 triangles is reasonable
Seperate out IK and FK
This is no bad advice in general, but forgets totally about the different genres and needs. And so it is nothing else than hot air
As you can see ,despite the progress of hardware , the specifications for real time charactes are still quite low
Different story for movies whereas animators can afford the luxury to use models made of thousands tris and hundreds bones not to mention the possibility to export the whole scene
Max,Maya, Cinema4d etc mainly target this market segment
They can be used also for games, of course, but they are redundant for this application
As told before, cutscenes are also gameneeds. Normalmaps may need the high poly version. And what was high poly before a few years is low poly nowadays. Especially Max and Maya are the standard 3D packages when it comes to games. When a game company searches for graphics artists they usually don't search artists that are familiar with Milkshape. They search for Maxer or Mayans. It is simply not true that they mainly target the movie market. And they are of course not redundant.
... redundant for our use
You don't speak for me here nor do you speak for the masses. This is simply wrong
If you you vist tthe sites of other engine you can see yourself how many people are complaining about Input \ ouput from these advanced packages
There is a reason, I suppose
The explanation is, in my opinion, that these file format are extremely complex but as I already said, redundant for our use
If someone has a better explanation. please let me know
The reason is much simpler. Development costs time. And time is money. Means im and exporters are sometimes not exactly made by specifications. But just up to the point where they somehow works. And the point where the trouble arrives is where the exporter from the one package doesn't fit the importer from the other package. One or both haven't cared about the whole specification. This can by the way also happen with the Milkshape format.
Sometimes one company even have to break the specification so that the export arrives intact in the other software. This is a chicken and egg thingie. Because now a third company may need to break it too to stay compatible.
This problem is very dramatic with X. There are a ton of different versions and derivates around. This is also an issue with FBX and Collada. FBX and Collada has much fewer versions and derivates than X though.
To blame is not the format. There are specifications for good reason. When a FBX file doesn't arrive intact then i would contact the company where it fails. And send them the file and ask if they can have a look at.
