Discontented User

[PabloMack]

This guy seems pretty upset. Many know that I am not the most satisfied user of Terragen, but this guy seems to think there is some sort of conspiracy among all of you advanced users. I understand that Planetside is a small company with limited resources. It is admirable what ya'll have accomplished! It would be nice, though, to have an an easier learning path.

[I removed the YouTube link because I think that the user is not trying to be helpful]

[luvsmuzik]

This diatribe seems to be about a year old. Further reading shows the user has tried for 5 years to learn Terragen. As you all know, I am challenged when it comes to using the blue node networks. That said, I have asked questions in this forum and am pleased to say, been given an answer every time. Usually someone will even post a file share demonstrating the action I request complete with a node network and sometimes even project assets. This disgruntled individual posting on YouTube must surely have a very limited primary education about terrain to be so critical of the software. I agree that TG experts posting here are now fewer than in the past, but life changes seem to have forced this.  I am grateful for those faithful and generous individuals not critical or jealous of their talent and education. Too bad comments are turned off on these three posts by a disenchanted user. I would love to give a rebuttal. 

I am also trying to stumble through the "new and improved" node explanation section that I am sure will prove very useful.......thank you Hetzen!







1

[N-drju]

Somehow, I have a feeling that I know whom that might be.

[Hetzen]

Thanks Lm. I'm heavy into another project at the moment, I'll get back to the function descriptions when I'm clear.

Yes, odd channel in the OP. No comments. 6 videos of the same content. Seems more of an 'attack' review.

[WAS]

This has been brought up a few times here now.

There are certainly areas of concern he brings up that are true, but most of his issues seems to be entirely for lack of actually trying.

While an attack it surely is, it does drive some points that are discussed religiously by people avoiding Terragen, and why it's not a industry leading software. Has little to do with development drive, but what people actually need to make them want to purchase. Basic workflow conventions, lack of basic object support like FBX that everyone has. Not to mention the myriad of requests needed for people to do there work.

Terragen very much seems like a personal project that is completely out of touch with consumers needs. I mean there are still public topics almost a decade old about features that should be needed and added to the road map, never to materialize and be buried. And when it's brought up again by another user needed the same thing it's just "It's on the roadmap".  TG2+ has very little to show for itself in a decade. V3 clouds and Path Tracing, and SSS. Really about it. Rest has been bug fixes and changing UI elements without warning. Oh and optimization. Lots of optimization...

I mean look at any consumer product... it adheres to the consumers... not what they want to force on consumers. Those businesses fail.

And I remember when this video had a couple dozen views, from us. It's got nearly 5k now. Yikes.

[luvsmuzik]

This has been brought up a few times here now.

There are certainly areas of concern he brings up that are true, but most of his issues seems to be entirely for lack of actually trying.

While an attack it surely is, it does drive some points that are discussed religiously by people avoiding Terragen, and why it's not a industry leading software. Has little to do with development drive, but what people actually need to make them want to purchase. Basic workflow conventions, lack of basic object support like FBX that everyone has. Not to mention the myriad of requests needed for people to do there work.

Terragen very much seems like a personal project that is completely out of touch with consumers needs. I mean there are still public topics almost a decade old about features that should be needed and added to the road map, never to materialize and be buried. And when it's brought up again by another user needed the same thing it's just "It's on the roadmap".  TG2+ has very little to show for itself in a decade. V3 clouds and Path Tracing, and SSS. Really about it. Rest has been bug fixes and changing UI elements without warning. Oh and optimization. Lots of optimization...

I mean look at any consumer product... it adheres to the consumers... not what they want to force on consumers. Those businesses fail.

And I remember when this video had a couple dozen views, from us. It's got nearly 5k now. Yikes.

I was just thinking about how in the days of classic TG we exported our terrain maps and painted objects on a grid map to use in other programs.....Unfortunately I am so old we called card objects "sprites" and they were used to save the number of polygons in a scene. Now we are using 8K resolution, rather than trying to keep image size under 2kb. I laugh to myself when I remember the restrictions in the old days. Now, (and for quite some time) TG imports objects and size no longer causes the server to crash. (In most cases)

Patience will always be a virtue, but progress is not always swift.....hang in there peeps.

[Dune]

Well, this guy doesn't sound too intelligent, I'm afraid, (and extremely upset indeed) and I must admit that using TG requires some thinking. Same like buying an airplane, and expecting to do rolls and loops with it in no time; it just doesn't work that way. I've said this before; TG is too complicated to explain everything in simple straightforward samples, or written explanations, or node views. There's so many ways, and maybe not all perfect for each situation. It's a toolbox, not a click-and-render software. And that's a choice. But to go ranting like that is certainly a no-go, IMO.
It's also a one/two developer-business (Matt and Oshyan), afaik, not a huge organization, and given that, it's amazing what has been rolled out in the years past. I couldn't do it!

[WAS]

Well, this guy doesn't sound too intelligent, I'm afraid, (and extremely upset indeed) and I must admit that using TG requires some thinking. Same like buying an airplane, and expecting to do rolls and loops with it in no time; it just doesn't work that way. I've said this before; TG is too complicated to explain everything in simple straightforward samples, or written explanations, or node views. There's so many ways, and maybe not all perfect for each situation. It's a toolbox, not a click-and-render software. And that's a choice. But to go ranting like that is certainly a no-go, IMO.
It's also a one/two developer-business (Matt and Oshyan), afaik, not a huge organization, and given that, it's amazing what has been rolled out in the years past. I couldn't do it!

I'd say Blender is by far more complex by leaps and bounds (just to name one), yet, here we are, with a plethora of tutorials and documentation... In general it has the same basic noise plus tons more. TG is just a flippin' sphere, dynamic displacement, and basis, very basic, fractals... (before obvious clouds and atmospherics)

I know of no render software that's click and render... they all require massive work, plus work around, and faking stuff, etc,, just like in TG.

No offense, but this excuse holds not merit except for the one-man-show bit.

[Dune]

Correct. It were better if this guy would show his work here and ask what he can do to get it beyond primary school.

[WAS]

Correct. It were better if this guy would show his work here and ask what he can do to get it beyond primary school.

Honestly I think he was here asking for help, and if I remember correctly started some rage topic against TG. And I think the first time this was posted (the video) was by a rogue account that was probably his.

His accent too, is very similar to another person I saw doing tutorials (in other software) that someone showed me thinking it was him as well (accents and way of talking is almost exact minus voice modulator). I'll have to see if I can dig up the convo.

[pokoy]

I tend to think he's got a point... but for the wrong reasons.

TG is hard to master, no doubt. Still, it's fairly easy to get your first render in TG and from then on it's on the user to explore, and in general the low hanging fruits are rare.

I think TG needs to overhaul some areas - navigation, terrain preview accessibility, scattering abilities, materials (there should be one material that covers all needs), scene content representation. But the team would probably need to grow to deliver this in any reasonable time frame. I agree that considering how small the team is TG is an extremely capable app.

I've heard that argument very often - people just don't know where to start when they open TG for the first time, it's over their heads, and some of them were really talented tech-oriented 3d wizards.

[WAS]

I tend to think he's got a point... but for the wrong reasons.

TG is hard to master, no doubt. Still, it's fairly easy to get your first render in TG and from then on it's on the user to explore, and in general the low hanging fruits are rare.

I think TG needs to overhaul some areas - navigation, terrain preview accessibility, scattering abilities, materials (there should be one material that covers all needs), scene content representation. But the team would probably need to grow to deliver this in any reasonable time frame. I agree that considering how small the team is TG is an extremely capable app.

I've heard that argument very often - people just don't know where to start when they open TG for the first time, it's over their heads, and some of them were really talented tech-oriented 3d wizards.

One thing I'm very confused about.

How the hell did TG2 materialize? It seems like such a technical feat, yet after ten years now, the software is statgnate with little change.

How did Matt even initially do this, to now say the surface area is too large, or admitting he hasn't touched shaders in almost a decade (zero code management and maintenance; you'd think like normal programming you'd always revisit old code to make sure, as you yourself learn, cannot optimize or do things better... or heaven forbid add some new noise flavors of functionality to shaders).

How was this even possible than, if all the requests and fixes we need are so much work???

Was TG2 built by a team that no longer exists and Matt is left with radically aging software?

[Dune]

Radically aging? Well, Jo was there before, so programming is up to Matt now.

[WAS]

Radically aging? Well, Jo was there before, so programming is up to Matt now.

I don't know how versed you are with other rendering programs for environments, but yes Terragen is lacking a lot of basic stuff. Grouping, light populations, (modern) object support like FBX, better handling of materials, proper alpha, gradient maps (no surface layers are no real substitute and a reason for them), modern noise flavors, scattering shaders/textures, interactive timeline, actually use EXR and TIFF formats properly and include alpha/layers, cloud modeling (though I'm curious if TGC will offer something to that effect)

I could go on in depth but I'm on narcos and just back from the ER.

I'm not saying TG sucks or anything, to the contrary, I just know it's missing a bunch that would ultimately put it on the map.

I'm so tired of explaining what Terragen is to other CG artists.

[Dune]

I was just hoping people were a bit more positive about TG. Of course it could be better, but as said; it's in the hands of only one guy. Everyone complaining should do something about it, instead of moaning. Learn how to write plugins, whatever...