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]
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. ;D
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
Somehow, I have a feeling that I know whom that might be. ::)
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.
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.
Quote from: WAS on January 16, 2020, 03:07:04 PMThis 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. :)
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!
Quote from: Dune on January 17, 2020, 02:21:18 AMWell, 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.
Correct. It were better if this guy would show his work here and ask what he can do to get it beyond primary school.
Quote from: Dune on January 17, 2020, 02:28:18 AMCorrect. 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.
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.
Quote from: pokoy on January 17, 2020, 08:14:11 AMI 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?
Radically aging? Well, Jo was there before, so programming is up to Matt now.
Quote from: Dune on January 18, 2020, 03:12:38 AMRadically 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. :P
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...
Quote from: Dune on January 18, 2020, 06:10:20 AMI 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...
What should we do? All we can do, and should do, is suggest what we want that would make the program more tangible to a broader audience, which would only subsequently bring in better income to Matt. And as far as I know there have been approaches to help Terragen by some amazing minds in the industry, now working in other great projects.
Terragen is a great program and is the only one I'm truly interested in, but you can only be so positive. I can't just ignore what I know I, and hundreds of others need from TG, and hope we get better focus on what the community needs of TG rather than what PS wants to throw on People. This is one of the reasons other companies have conferences, or digital seminars on upcoming stuff. So they know they aren't drifting from their consumers needs.
There's also terminology of concern representative of TG, like "advanced shaders" when the shaders are all relatively the same as any other software, like functions, and when it comes to landscape generation the noise shaders are pretty much 30 year old basic noise flavors. Not advanced at all. Often compared to the customization inputs and settings in software like Blender, in some cases some shaders are pretty basic.
Quote from: Dune on January 18, 2020, 03:12:38 AMRadically aging? Well, Jo was there before, so programming is up to Matt now.
Yeah, and he's now somewhere below the equator....
Indeed, explaining what's needed and could be better is good, but in a positive way. No nagging and moaning, but carrying forward possible solutions, ways to think. Terminology is always a bit over the top, purely sales strategy. If you'd advertise with "well, I tried to put together a reasonably working program with some ordinary shaders, but it's not perfect yet", who will buy? And, speaking of noise, I have no idea how complex it is to add different noise shaders. If it were easy, I'm sure Matt would have done it already.
Quote from: Dune on January 19, 2020, 02:16:50 AMIndeed, explaining what's needed and could be better is good, but in a positive way. No nagging and moaning, but carrying forward possible solutions, ways to think. Terminology is always a bit over the top, purely sales strategy. If you'd advertise with "well, I tried to put together a reasonably working program with some ordinary shaders, but it's not perfect yet", who will buy? And, speaking of noise, I have no idea how complex it is to add different noise shaders. If it were easy, I'm sure Matt would have done it already.
You are really attached to Matt's hip Ulco. Lol That's not how it works with sales. You don't also want to lie (false advertising) in contrast to the market you are advertising too where there are obvious and better options. People are well versed in these fields and routinely compare features to know what they are getting, and TG isn't hiding anything. It has a relatively feature rich freeware version. And if adding a noise flavor is hard, I'm not sure what Matt thinks he's doing. Or think he can charge what he does, especially for upgrading. I'd watch comments like that.... Doesn't serve him any good and furthers conversation in the wrong direction. And besides Matt felt very confident about Manhattan Voronoi, whether he puts time to it is another story.
I just think Matt does a good job (all by himself), and I am a contented user, though surely I'd like to see some of (my) feature preferences included. As for the advertising, I don't think Matt is lying in what he says TG can do and has as features.
Coming back to the initial grumper; I actualy wonder what he wanted to produce that goes beyond 'primary school' TG work. Never got that from him.
Quote from: Dune on January 20, 2020, 03:06:26 AMI just think Matt does a good job (all by himself), and I am a contented user, though surely I'd like to see some of (my) feature preferences included. As for the advertising, I don't think Matt is lying in what he says TG can do and has as features.
Coming back to the initial grumper; I actualy wonder what he wanted to produce that goes beyond 'primary school' TG work. Never got that from him.
I can't find his username on the forum. I know he asked about something pretty straight forward with canyons and stratas and I believe was telling people that their ideas wouldnt work and basically wanted someone to send a finished file. Think Rene was used as an example too with his image based Mesa.
Also I'm curious if you could tell me about a shader Terragen has is inherently advanced compare to any iteration of it out there?
I mean take something as simple as a voronoi noise shader in another program like Blender: https://docs.blender.org/manual/en/latest/render/shader_nodes/textures/voronoi.html Instead of one flavor, in 3 set types, we get a basic generator to output unique noise based off distance, scale, exponent, randomness, smoothness, etc (odd they can apply blurring to a finite procedural non-raster noise where Matt said this wasn't possible). Heck, even most their basic functions include extra features, like clamping, and even modulatable values
Even abilities like evaluating the noise in 1d, 2d, 3d, is amazing. I've asked about "slices" of noise to apply over areas like a blanket before. Especially important if you're building off shader previews for material/texture like in Blender. What you See is What You Should Get (except obviously in 3d/4d when looking at 2d)
I don't know what shaders would be called advanced, fake rocks perhaps. Depends on the definition of advanced. Anyway, I don't care really.
Quote from: WAS on January 20, 2020, 01:18:17 PMAlso I'm curious if you could tell me about a shader Terragen has is inherently advanced compare to any iteration of it out there?
Cloud layer v3. FWIW, is a shader yet unrivaled.
Regarding surface layers I think the discussion is more about TG's basic 'lambertian' type of shading versus more advanced BRDF's like the popular GGX.
KyL, another user here, did some tests with Arnold renderer and TG and managed to get Terragen's output look very very similar to Arnold's output.
So I think these kind of discussions are absolutely justified, but there's definitely also the role of the artist not to be ignored.
If I look around at what's being made with TG then I see different things lacking than lack of advanced shaders or noise flavors.
I'm with Dune on being content, but also wish for some features to be implemented.
My main preferences now are mostly workflow related and not so necessarily "tech-like", like shaders/noises.
If I can do more in the same amount of time I can also learn quicker.
Quote from: Tangled-Universe on January 21, 2020, 04:22:33 AMIf I look around at what's being made with TG then I see different things lacking than lack of advanced shaders or noise flavors
I agree with that. There are always great debates around shading and lighting in general, not only in Terragen. Honestly with what we have now, I am quite confident TG can match most, or outperform (especially with clouds) other renderers. I see the same difference between Terragen and Arnold as between Arnold and Renderman, or Vray and Reshift and so on.... They are all slightly different, but on the end each one can do the job.
Many people forget how good Terragen is with Volumetric. Don't forget that even the simple scene reproduce the correct behavior of the sun, it is not a simple HDRi. Try to replicate the same thing in another renderer, with a planet the size of the earth and a proper atmosphere around it...
There is plenty of softwares out there with fancy features nobody won't use next year because they will jump on the next "cool" thing. Terragen is the opposite, built around a solid core of what *really* matters for environment creation. There are of course features I wish to have, but I rather like NOT to have useless add-ons and something solid in the long run. I can still open a scene 10 years old and press render. And I know I will be able to do so in another 10 years.
The thruth is that there is a very steep learning curve, and I am quite convinced nobody will ever know everything there is to know except perhaps Matt himself. Of course I wish some features would finally be implemented such as the multi-object populator, or that the UI becomes unbearably slow with large number of nodes, but every software has its weaknesses.
"A contented user"
Well said, KyL!
A lot of things have already been said, but I have to reply as well. I watched the Youtube video before Pablo deleted the link, and I was really upset! The only thing I don't disagree is, that there's still a lack of documentation. Yes, but I remember when we started with the TG2 Technology preview (or whatever it was called), we had almost no instructions, except a little introduction. So, I'd say less than primary school. It took quite some time for all of us to learn to create something good.
What does this guy want? To be breast-fed until he creates a marvellous image? It's a bit like buying a piano, and then complaining, that there's no instruction included to play Chopin within one week.
So he says, there's only a handful of people who are able to create fantastic images. This guy must have a lot of fingers!! And he repeats over and over "including the makers of Terragen". What does he want to express with that?
Luvs said, he was trying to work with TG for five years. Five years!!!!! I'd say, maybe he has absolutely no talent? Give me a Stradivari, and I'll promise you, you won't hear anything that sounds like music in five years, even if I'd have the best teacher!
And he says, we don't share. In the file section he can get loads of premade stuff for free. He says, there's noone who explains him the node stuff. Maybe he's a bit like me. I don't understand this node stuff as well, but sometimes I use files that contain it, and somehow it works. So, it's not essential, that you know all the mathematic details.
But I had to chuckle a bit, when he was trying to find some posts of users asking questions without getting answers, to demonstrate how arrogant the handful of successful users are (including the makers of Terragen!!!! ;D ;D ;D ), but couldn't find any, except some posts regarding some announcements about NWDA.
Did he alter his voice digitally? He sounded a bit like a giant, or maybe someone who has some hormonal problems? In case he did, he seems to be a coward, who doesn't want to be recognized.
So. let's just ignore him. There will always be someone, who feels good, when there's something to rant about...
Except some parts in that he is right and you already said above,
this guy is probably like some people who think when they buy Zbrush (for example)
they will do things like this in no time with no struggle at all:
https://www.artstation.com/artwork/3WZzo
Quote from: Kadri on January 21, 2020, 01:28:39 PMExcept some parts in that he is right and you already said above,
this guy is probably like some people who think when they buy Zbrush (for example)
they will do things like this in no time with no struggle at all:
https://www.artstation.com/artwork/3WZzo
Reminds me when sculptris came out. People didnt realize with that free app YOU make the brushes cause they gave up on it for Zbrush and all their plans for it got drained with the developer. Only basic inflate and pinch and draw and smooth and stuff. And than dealing with the subdivision.
Quote from: Tangled-Universe on January 21, 2020, 04:22:33 AMQuote from: WAS on January 20, 2020, 01:18:17 PMAlso I'm curious if you could tell me about a shader Terragen has is inherently advanced compare to any iteration of it out there?
Cloud layer v3. FWIW, is a shader yet unrivaled.
Regarding surface layers I think the discussion is more about TG's basic 'lambertian' type of shading versus more advanced BRDF's like the popular GGX.
KyL, another user here, did some tests with Arnold renderer and TG and managed to get Terragen's output look very very similar to Arnold's output.
So I think these kind of discussions are absolutely justified, but there's definitely also the role of the artist not to be ignored.
If I look around at what's being made with TG then I see different things lacking than lack of advanced shaders or noise flavors.
I'm with Dune on being content, but also wish for some features to be implemented.
My main preferences now are mostly workflow related and not so necessarily "tech-like", like shaders/noises.
If I can do more in the same amount of time I can also learn quicker.
I think I already mentioned it's unrivaled basically. For example all the rave in Houdini is meh to me. They are using a smoke generator and that's what it looks like to me. Especially if anything moves. Wrong physics.
Also Im glad you are content. But you, and others that are; are a few people that have been here since release and know the program well, with personal relationships between developers and staff, etc. I'd say your contentness is fine, but entirely bias in regards to state of the software and new consumers.
I thought I would chime in on this.
I am new Terragen user and I have also used Flame way back when Discreet owned it and now since Autodesk are in charge. I also use Nuke and Modo by Foundry. All those are amazing products by very large companies with pretty steep learning curves and I love using them and all have their problems especially when it comes to feedback regarding bugs or other issues. I am blow away by what this small company has produced and by what the software itself can produce. Also by the personal touch I feel from the feedback Matt and Oshyan have provided on this forum. Not to mention the feedback and assistance I have received from users on this forum without which I would lost, or at the very least I would be spending much more time scrawling through the internet for tips and not creating visuals.
And yes the learning curve is steep but the reward visually more than warrants the time and effort. I got Terragen for a specific purpose and with three months of sporadic use and with the help I have received here on this forum I am close to being at a stage where I can produce what I need.
The wonderful thing about this software is you kind of feel removed from the digital nature of it. It is like moulding putty or clay. And with every step I take which gets me closer to what I want a whole plethora of new possibilities become apparent and I realise the scope for creativity is endless, which is at the same time daunting and inspiring.
Cheers.
James.
Quote from: james adamson on January 21, 2020, 05:36:42 PMI thought I would chime in on this.
I am new Terragen user and I have also used Flame way back when Discreet owned it and now since Autodesk are in charge. I also use Nuke and Modo by Foundry. All those are amazing products by very large companies with pretty steep learning curves and I love using them and all have their problems especially when it comes to feedback regarding bugs or other issues. I am blow away by what this small company has produced and by what the software itself can produce. Also by the personal touch I feel from the feedback Matt and Oshyan have provided on this forum. Not to mention the feedback and assistance I have received from users on this forum without which I would lost, or at the very least I would be spending much more time scrawling through the internet for tips and not creating visuals.
And yes the learning curve is steep but the reward visually more than warrants the time and effort. I got Terragen for a specific purpose and with three months of sporadic use and with the help I have received here on this forum I am close to being at a stage where I can produce what I need.
The wonderful thing about this software is you kind of feel removed from the digital nature of it. It is like moulding putty or clay. And with every step I take which gets me closer to what I want a whole plethora of new possibilities become apparent and I realise the scope for creativity is endless, which is at the same time daunting and inspiring.
Cheers.
James.
I don't think this discussion is to much about Terragen's final products being supbar. Quite the contrary. As far as detail to photorealism of the atmosphere and clouds and planetary body. But things can be made to be fair simpler given small additions of changes.
I mean imagine gradient maps alone for texturing; "holy beautifying!". Especially combined with surface layers, colour functions and warping. Doing this manually however is so tedious, and than again for another project at diff scales and colour points. TGCs only go so far to help.
Noise flavors is a big one for me. Terrain generation is Terragens main focus area, and we are still using old noises from the late 70s, 80s, and 90s as a consumer noise. There are so many great new noises which are literally meant for terrain generation that TG simply doesn't have. And when I asked about it I got a reply about "having wrote those shaders 10 years ago" and basically not wanting to mess with them for age/time/confusion or whatever. Which imo is an admission of failed code management and maintenance, which definitely puts confidence in consumers minds knowing that the software is being actively optimized where code is aging. I'd think again Matt has come a long way since then and could probably do things better for same outputs plus things like new noise flavors.
There are these little area where TG could see vast improvement with imo little change by way of addition.
;D I liked your post, Hannes.
Thanks, Ulco! :)
I personally am really happy with TG, and it helps me to produce some stuff that I can't get elsewhere. As some said, the volumetric rendering is really good and the atmosphere model is stunning. I have loads of images shot high up in the air and it's kind of amazing to see how well TG reproduces most of the things i'm after, totally love it.
If the procedural approach is down your alley, TG will shine. However, and that's where some decide to part ways, if you think 3d apps are about a viewport and moving things with control over every vertex it's time to either dig deeper into TG or say goodbye.
We got an amazing path tracer update. I think it's time to tackle the accessibility aspect now, be it in the way of consolidating nodes and shaders to be more intuitive, or taking care of a better 3d preview (it's outdated, many years have passed and you CAN get realtime displacement that would be enough for a preview), or making sure we get better tools for designing like a better scatter.
In general, things need to become more intuitive, currently TG's approach is blocking users from direct manipulation without touching noises, nodes and math. Think 'I want a mountain here, a lake there and I need to have the cloud look exactly like this, this area is grass, this is all rock, the hero tree is here, the rest of the trees follows a line down in the valley.' In most 3d apps you'd create these and place them exactly where you need them to be. In TG, you kind of have to think backwards and may end up with node spaghetti that you won't understand a few weeks later, plus many things are based on random noises that may or may not give out what you want. And you don't see anything without waiting for the preview to tessellate first, and then the camera navigation isn't too easy. It IS a very different approach, and anyone expecting TG to behave like other apps may end up being frustrated enough to give up.
Still, Matt and the team have my deepest respect for doing this and making sure TG users get new things to play with.
Exactly this Pokoy! + what KyL said.
The tech related discussion kind of camouflages/disguises the bigger issue, but why investigate in your own techincal and artistic shortcomings if you can blame someone else.
Also, it was insinuated that having a good relationship with Planetside makes a difference, but it is irrelevant.
I'm 100% with Pokoy and KyL on what's lacking and I have been very vocal about it and despite of having a good relationship with Planetside it did not make a difference.
Which is good I think, because otherwise people start saying nonsense like just happened.
It's ill-founded instigating insinuation and my 6000+ posts prove this.
Right!
Yeah sorry, I had to let that get off my chest.
People seem very confused between change and improvement. Lmao Being happy or content is fine, but is subjective, it's also no excuse really to not improvement or act like everythings fine now, just relax. If you're content, then you are content. What's added shouldn't interfere with you. Lol To willfully inhibit a failing product, however, is really just negligent, especially considering Terragen's position, and maintaining the software is fine and doesn't need improvement (which seems to be the general conveyance and arguments).
There is a lot that Terragen simply doesn't have that it needs, or could very much help with peoples workflow, and heck, may even make your contentment more content. Lol And continuing to come back to talk about how you're fine doesn't help with Terragen's images. Your usernames are very versed in the forums, and bias to any subjective outside perspective, which... is how you make sales... A lot of peoples attitudes here creating a air of contment has really held Terragen back in reality, and many Terragen users have left for lack of improvement. In fact, the majority of them! We are literally grains compared to the user-base, and past galleries on renderosity, deviantart, shadowness, etc. A hollowed reflection of an optimistic and excited past.
You guys are the strongest driving force in Matt's life, and you are fine with how the software is failing, and that's not good encouragement for Matt and inevitably his career lifeline. We should be encouraging change, obviously not harassing him, but encouraging the development and advancement of the software to help it succeed. As it is you are all always fine, out of friendship, respect, and your personal workflows developed for years, and from the help of those for years / the beginning. Which means you're the most powerful driving force behind Matt's effort. Don't abuse it and hurt the potential, whether unkowingly or not.
You should also always be open to peoples ideas, or concerns, and not shut them down with "I'm fine" like you're an authority in the software, further making the community and software inhospitable to change and concern. Too often are topics shown down with "I like it the way it is" (when it often doesn't entail changing their workflor) or some other encouraging sentiment that does no help to TG, the community, or new users concerns.
To summarize. Stop (in good faith) inhibiting Planetside as a business, commercial product, and stop inhibiting Matt as a developer and spearhead of it all. You gotta understand your power in his drive, compared to the actual goals of Planetside as a business and Terragen as a commercial product. Terragen is not your personal tool, it should not be Matt's personal tool. It's a product. And needs to adhere to feedback, or it will continue to drag its ass. Currently Terragn and it's Community has a area of notoriety, and it needs to be addressed. And a big part of that is its direction, outside of scope of consumers needs, which inherently keep sales extremely low.
:o We won't stop or inhibit you any longer, Matt! Please continue working on TG.
Edit: this is so tiring...never mind...
Good job. Continue to instigate the exact problem.
Should really take a step back and look at Terragen and how you guys are it's biggest problem. Your held aside. You don't want it to succeed. That's clear. Which is ironic considering your respect for Matt's efforts.
Terragen IS failing. Planetside IS failing. Over 10 years of nothing really. And besides what YOU want (from past topics) you're content. Lmao
Guys all who are here around want the best for Terragen. No need to take it to extremes.
Jordan your writing is a little on the sharp side :) but i know you and that you want the best for Terragen.
Have a look at this post from Matt from 2014:
https://planetside.co.uk/forums/index.php/topic,18285.msg177343.html#msg177343
Now Oshyan is leaving too.
No need for pessimism but there could be much more.
Quote from: WAS on January 23, 2020, 01:53:03 PMGood job. Continue to instigate the exact problem.
Should really take a step back and look at Terragen and how you guys are it's biggest problem. Your held aside. You don't want it to succeed. That's clear. Which is ironic considering your respect for Matt's efforts.
Terragen IS failing. Planetside IS failing. Over 10 years of nothing really. And besides what YOU want (from past topics) you're content. Lmao
And yet you moaning on every other thread is helping how? I don't understand why you spend so much energy here?
Ignorance is Bliss;
If you don't know, or aware, have the competency to understand, you simply don't worry.
It's easy to see why it wouldn't matter to so many when it's not their fields, and are content anyhow.
---
If you think it's "moaning" that's fine. But let's not pretend they aren't doing the same, and moaning about change anytime any suggestion topic is made or this same-type topic is made every year for the past decade. Thinking it's going to ruin their workflows or the software, how selfish.
Being content means you aren't helping anything. You're fine sitting on the sinking ship without even raising a hand for its benefit for being fine with their own personal workflows, representing so few it's not an argument compared to the industries.
(https://static01.nyt.com/images/2016/08/05/us/05onfire1_xp/05onfire1_xp-videoSixteenByNineJumbo1600-v2.jpg)
All I see is a talented artist blaming his tools. There are different brushes out there.
That's the point here, Hetzen... there are other brushes out there. Entire professional "art kits"... and people are buying those instead...
Oi vey.
Also where have I actually blamed TG except spoke about what it could use that people will buy, which doesn't hurt anyone here, so why they are even here to "moan" is insanely negligent and serves no purpose but to argue.
Maybe people should stop feeling so personally attacked by beneficial change that doesn't even entail changing much if anything they are currently doing... Jesus man. Anytime anyone has a suggestion or this topic is recreated, you can count on the TG Rangers to get involved and shut things down, unknowingly shutting TG down and sales.
Quote from: WAS on January 23, 2020, 03:23:41 PMThat's the point here, Hetzen... there are other brushes out there. Entire professional "art kits"... and people are buying those instead...
Exactly. So why are you moaning here? Most of those kits will work with Terragen as well.
Quote from: Hetzen on January 23, 2020, 03:37:32 PMQuote from: WAS on January 23, 2020, 03:23:41 PMThat's the point here, Hetzen... there are other brushes out there. Entire professional "art kits"... and people are buying those instead...
Exactly. So why are you moaning here? Most of those kits will work with Terragen as well.
Huh? Most of those "kits" are competing software. Lol
And I love how you are essentially saying PabloMack, anyone wanting change and improvement, coming with suggestions, are just moaning, showing how you simply don't understand how this all works, and are part of the real problem. Lol
Just because I don't shy down from people, doesn't mean I'm moaning, Hetzen. If anything you are moaning. You have no purpose here but to moan at me. Lol Any people that think I could care about them instigating or arguing with me, is wrong. I could go on for days. You'll never get anywhere, especially when you're fundamentally so wrong on basic business let alone this software.
Like honestly, do you think you're being clever here? Lol Talking about moaning, what's your point, your end game?
I mean what will you all do when TG isn't making enough sales to pay Matt's rent or worse? Still be just as content? Like I said, you're all the biggest drivers in Matt's work. And when you're fine when PS barely exists... Just wow.
Seems the community has created Matt's comfortableness and what's come of the software rather than him willfully ignoring what should be done or suggestions.
Quote from: WAS on January 23, 2020, 03:49:13 PMAnd when you're fine when PS barely exists
You seem to have a better insight than many of us here, or maybe you are aware of things many of us don't know.
Quote from: WAS on January 23, 2020, 03:41:10 PMI could go on for days.
Please don't. The fire here is already burning quite strong and it doesn't bring anything. All I see is frustration pouring over, and even though I have a hard time (as many here) understanding it, I think we all want Terragen to keep going strong and improve in the next years!
If the same energy arguing here was put into proper documentation and tutorial, every human being on earth would already be a terragen master.
I can't comment on conferences or personal conversations directly, but yes somewhat.
It seems clear that's not the case with every time a suggestion is made, or this topic rebirthed; that the same people are "content" or fine with what TG as is, and usually don't even admit there need improvement if not for argument. That's not encouraging to development when these people are familiar with Matt, it inherently encourages focus away, as to the important people, things seem fine.
At the end of the day Terragen is a product. It inherently calls for critique, criticism, review and opinion. And it sells on that basis, creates fame based on it, or notoriety. Currently, TG is shrouded in notoriety.
And again, I'm not sure why documentation falls on me, or anyone else. That just falls down to Product Liability (something terragen meets all three categories in from the state Planetside is registered; not gooood). It's an admittance that development was not adequately tracked to not have documentation. These things should be documented as they're added, from the development side. And easily translatable to product manual/documentation. Same for any product legally sold. It must have some sort of manual shipped with it, or on it's packaging.