I've read a few places now that you have to be using 3DS Max 2011.
This is becoming very hard to get hold of. I have easy access to versions 2012 through to 2015, but NOT 2011....
Can I use a more recent version, or do I really need to get hold of a 4 year old version of the software to do some modelling?
The real reason that you need 3dsmax 2011 is the "reactor engine". "Reactor Engine" is a physX simulate engine which very like PhysX (NIVDIA) and SC2 and many other games use it in their ingame simulation too.
But in 3dsmax 2012 and higher versions the Autodesk used PhysX instead of "Reactor" so change the version of 3dsmax means no further support on the simulation of Death animations.
In my opinion PhysX is easier to use and much fast to get the right results you need btw.
The real reason that you need 3dsmax 2011 is the "reactor engine". "Reactor Engine" is a physX simulate engine which very like PhysX (NIVDIA) and SC2 and many other games use it in their ingame simulation too.
But in 3dsmax 2012 and higher versions the Autodesk used PhysX instead of "Reactor" so change the version of 3dsmax means no further support on the simulation of Death animations.
In my opinion PhysX is easier to use and much fast to get the right results you need btw.
Sorry man but this is false. Physics simulation of Sc2 is done within Sc2, 3dsmax's engine has nothing to do with it.
The real reason why Sc2 Art Tools only works for max 2011 has to do with 3ds max's SDK. 3ds max plugins come in two flavors: Maxscript plugins which have forward compatibility and C plus plus written plugins which need to be recompiled for each version of 3ds max. sadly, if blizzard wanted to recompile the Art Tools for newer versions, they would need to purchase new licenses of 3dsmax and visual studio, plus they need to dapt the old code to the newer SDK.
@BlinkHawk: Go
Well, my point isn't just "Art tool can only work on 3dsmax 2011 because blablabla", that maybe a conclusion but not explains why. What I was trying to explain is the SC2 model development needs 3dsmax 2011.
Of course I know " Physics simulation of Sc2 is done within Sc2", but if you really did some models, you will find that you still need tons of physics simulations in 3dsmax before handling them to SC2 simulation. For example, we saw a tank exploded, and we knew the fragments are in SC2 physics simulation, but their initial velocities are from 3dsmax physics simulations.
Meanwhile, the Reactor (in 3dsmax 2011) and Havok (in SC2 and some other games) are the same engine, SC2 uses Havok to simulate the Death animation and force affects. Since some players choose turning off the physical effects, so SC2 models needs both RTS animation and ingame PhysX simulation to fit the game, and in order to match them, the obviously way is using Reactor in 3dsmax (it's not the only way but we knew Blizzard chose this solution. )
You can change the code to match the new version but you can never get another full functional Reactor engine on 3dsmax 2012. If Blizzard chooses to use some higher versions of 3dsmax, they will loose the tool what they are using right now.
@BlinkHawk: Go Well, my point isn't just "Art tool can only work on 3dsmax 2011 because blablabla", that maybe a conclusion but not explains why. What I was trying to explain is the SC2 model development needs 3dsmax 2011.
Of course I know " Physics simulation of Sc2 is done within Sc2", but if you really did some models, you will find that you still need tons of physics simulations in 3dsmax before handling them to SC2 simulation. For example, we saw a tank exploded, and we knew the fragments are in SC2 physics simulation, but their initial velocities are from 3dsmax physics simulations.
Meanwhile, the Reactor (in 3dsmax 2011) and Havok (in SC2 and some other games) are the same engine, SC2 uses Havok to simulate the Death animation and force affects. Since some players choose turning off the physical effects, so SC2 models needs both RTS animation and ingame PhysX simulation to fit the game, and in order to match them, the obviously way is using Reactor in 3dsmax (it's not the only way but we knew Blizzard chose this solution. )
You can change the code to match the new version but you can never get another full functional Reactor engine on 3dsmax 2012. If Blizzard chooses to use some higher versions of 3dsmax, they will loose the tool what they are using right now.
First Blizzard does not use Reactor. Reactor bakes the physics simulations, just like PhysX. This means that all the physics transformations are turned into standard position/rotation animations. I've used it in Wc3. Second, Havok is no longer Sc2's physics engine, they now use the Domino Physics engine which is theirs and is the one responsible for the ragdolls in Sc2, Diablo 3 and WoW (WoW's Physics are still being incorporated for that search for .Phys .m2 wow format).
The real question if new the versions have everything needed, is actualy true. They do have it and more, the only thing is that there are no good tools available which can export to m3 format, since we haven't finished reverse engineering them.
I made a topic conscerning Art Tools for newer versions, I suggest you look at it. I'm specialy looking for programmers to help out developing them as i finish reverse enginering the m3 format (80% done).
Of course Blizzard uses Reactor, this also means that you didn't research their max files carefully. Yes, Reactor can bake animations to TPS so when it finished the job, Blizzard deleted them with only baked animations left, but some time there will make mistakes and left their falseworks in the max files.
Second, there is a new Domino Engine doesn't means you don't need to care about the old models that already there, also the new simulations need to match the Havok simulations roughly so that it doesn't look like two world things. So they still need to do all this from the beginning - use the Reactor which only 3dsmax 2011 offered.
Btw, if you are working on the m3 reverse enginering, why don't you go to PrintIn? it's 99% done now.
Of course Blizzard uses Reactor, this also means that you didn't research their max files carefully. Yes, Reactor can bake animations to TPS so when it finished the job, Blizzard deleted them with only baked animations left, but some time there will make mistakes and left their falseworks in the max files.
Second, there is a new Domino Engine doesn't means you don't need to care about the old models that already there, also the new simulations need to match the Havok simulations roughly so that it doesn't look like two world things. So they still need to do all this from the beginning - use the Reactor which only 3dsmax 2011 offered.
Btw, if you are working on the m3 reverse enginering, why don't you go to PrintIn? it's 99% done now.
Let me rephrase myself "Blizzard does not use reactor as part of their engine". Obviously you can use Reactor or any other physics simulation engine, but you are not binded to that tool, you can use any simulation engine as far as it bakes the animations.
Second, there is a new Domino Engine doesn't means you don't need to care about the old models that already there, also the new simulations need to match the Havok simulations roughly so that it doesn't look like two world things. So they still need to do all this from the beginning - use the Reactor which only 3dsmax 2011 offered.
Once again in-game physics simulations have NOTHING to do with Reactor. They are defined by Sc2 Physics Helpers and Ragdoll systems which are part of the M3 format and as their interpreted, they are fit to whatever engine blizzard uses. This means that old models are actualy read and passed into domino engine.
Now some models have obviously some physics baked animations. This is done for Medium and Low settings models
Btw, if you are working on the m3 reverse enginering, why don't you go to PrintIn? it's 99% done now.
Genius that's a printing format >.>, that's not MDX 3's Blizzard Entertaiment propietary format aka M3 Model files. Just because they have the same name, it does not mean
The most advanced documentation now-a-days is this one and it's filled with unknowns everywhere: M3 Format Specification
All these viewpoints and feedback is great, but has left me a little confused.
If my primary objective is to make modifications to existing units, do I need to use 2011 to get the job done?
It sounds like 2011 is primarily needed for animations and exporting to .m3?
If the original file is already in .m3, does that mean I don't need to worry about exporting\converting it?
Is everyone here using 2011?
at what point will I get stuck (or have a really hard time) if I don't use 2011?
Thanks again for your continued answers :) (however different they may be from eachother :P )
I have gotten a 404 error and my unfinished reply disappeared with it...
I don't want to repeat that any more (it's too long @_@), so I want to make it short this time.
Blizzard chose Reactor at the beginning, we know that's not the only solution, but they chose it, therefore all next step needs to be compatible with that.
I said this because in Blz's max files they forgot to delete Reactor helpers after baked the animation. And because of that, the 3dsmax version is limited to 2011.
I never said that you can only do physic simulation on 3dsmax 2011, my point is, Blz chose that solution, and that might be the reason why art tool fits the version 2011 only, since they have the solution already, they don't need a higher but different physX engine in 2012 or higher.
I knew how SC2 physics simulation (ingame) works, and it still needs the 3dsmax simulation to import the initial velocities. It's not a supposition, both Blizzard's max files and my death models Assets/Tests can prove it.
I am going to be busy, I may won't relay this anymore.
@XViper: Go Hi XViper, I use Blender, but some of the modelers I know that use 3DS max decided to use the third party plugin whenever they can, specially because Art Tools doesn't seem to have a model importer.
It's not the only option, you can use other solutions, such as changing the art tool codes (As I know, more that 3 different groups are working on it.) or use Blender as well. All other solutions won't be as convenient as choosing 3dsmax 2011, it's not the only one but the easiest solution.
To your situation I suggest you to use 3dsmax 2011 or Blender,
In 3dsmax 2011, you can use m3plugin to import exist unit, which is also fit 2dsmax 2011 too, but the m3plugin and Art tool can't be installed in one 3dsmax (you need to install two 3dsmax 2011 in different index if you want to use them both and at same time.)
In Blender, you can use m3addon, it can import edit and export m3 files.
There seem to be many so many 'choices', with different plugins, things that work for certain versions and things that don't.
I don't know where to start :(
I had a look at PrintIn's Blender tutorial, and it seemed a little overwhelming, and there were ALOT of people asking questions and talking about errors coming up.
I can have a 'better look' for 3DS Max 2011, if that will be the best option. (I don't really want to have to change programs that's all).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I've read a few places now that you have to be using 3DS Max 2011. This is becoming very hard to get hold of. I have easy access to versions 2012 through to 2015, but NOT 2011....
Can I use a more recent version, or do I really need to get hold of a 4 year old version of the software to do some modelling?
The real reason that you need 3dsmax 2011 is the "reactor engine". "Reactor Engine" is a physX simulate engine which very like PhysX (NIVDIA) and SC2 and many other games use it in their ingame simulation too.
But in 3dsmax 2012 and higher versions the Autodesk used PhysX instead of "Reactor" so change the version of 3dsmax means no further support on the simulation of Death animations.
In my opinion PhysX is easier to use and much fast to get the right results you need btw.
Sorry man but this is false. Physics simulation of Sc2 is done within Sc2, 3dsmax's engine has nothing to do with it.
The real reason why Sc2 Art Tools only works for max 2011 has to do with 3ds max's SDK. 3ds max plugins come in two flavors: Maxscript plugins which have forward compatibility and C plus plus written plugins which need to be recompiled for each version of 3ds max. sadly, if blizzard wanted to recompile the Art Tools for newer versions, they would need to purchase new licenses of 3dsmax and visual studio, plus they need to dapt the old code to the newer SDK.
@BlinkHawk: Go Well, my point isn't just "Art tool can only work on 3dsmax 2011 because blablabla", that maybe a conclusion but not explains why. What I was trying to explain is the SC2 model development needs 3dsmax 2011.
Of course I know " Physics simulation of Sc2 is done within Sc2", but if you really did some models, you will find that you still need tons of physics simulations in 3dsmax before handling them to SC2 simulation. For example, we saw a tank exploded, and we knew the fragments are in SC2 physics simulation, but their initial velocities are from 3dsmax physics simulations.
Meanwhile, the Reactor (in 3dsmax 2011) and Havok (in SC2 and some other games) are the same engine, SC2 uses Havok to simulate the Death animation and force affects. Since some players choose turning off the physical effects, so SC2 models needs both RTS animation and ingame PhysX simulation to fit the game, and in order to match them, the obviously way is using Reactor in 3dsmax (it's not the only way but we knew Blizzard chose this solution. )
You can change the code to match the new version but you can never get another full functional Reactor engine on 3dsmax 2012. If Blizzard chooses to use some higher versions of 3dsmax, they will loose the tool what they are using right now.
Thanks for those replies guys. What if I only intend to make modifications or new variations of existing units? Will I still need to use reactor?
First Blizzard does not use Reactor. Reactor bakes the physics simulations, just like PhysX. This means that all the physics transformations are turned into standard position/rotation animations. I've used it in Wc3. Second, Havok is no longer Sc2's physics engine, they now use the Domino Physics engine which is theirs and is the one responsible for the ragdolls in Sc2, Diablo 3 and WoW (WoW's Physics are still being incorporated for that search for .Phys .m2 wow format).
The real question if new the versions have everything needed, is actualy true. They do have it and more, the only thing is that there are no good tools available which can export to m3 format, since we haven't finished reverse engineering them.
I made a topic conscerning Art Tools for newer versions, I suggest you look at it. I'm specialy looking for programmers to help out developing them as i finish reverse enginering the m3 format (80% done).
Of course Blizzard uses Reactor, this also means that you didn't research their max files carefully. Yes, Reactor can bake animations to TPS so when it finished the job, Blizzard deleted them with only baked animations left, but some time there will make mistakes and left their falseworks in the max files.
Second, there is a new Domino Engine doesn't means you don't need to care about the old models that already there, also the new simulations need to match the Havok simulations roughly so that it doesn't look like two world things. So they still need to do all this from the beginning - use the Reactor which only 3dsmax 2011 offered.
Btw, if you are working on the m3 reverse enginering, why don't you go to PrintIn? it's 99% done now.
Let me rephrase myself "Blizzard does not use reactor as part of their engine". Obviously you can use Reactor or any other physics simulation engine, but you are not binded to that tool, you can use any simulation engine as far as it bakes the animations.
Once again in-game physics simulations have NOTHING to do with Reactor. They are defined by Sc2 Physics Helpers and Ragdoll systems which are part of the M3 format and as their interpreted, they are fit to whatever engine blizzard uses. This means that old models are actualy read and passed into domino engine.
Now some models have obviously some physics baked animations. This is done for Medium and Low settings models
Genius that's a printing format >.>, that's not MDX 3's Blizzard Entertaiment propietary format aka M3 Model files. Just because they have the same name, it does not mean
The most advanced documentation now-a-days is this one and it's filled with unknowns everywhere: M3 Format Specification
Hey guys,
All these viewpoints and feedback is great, but has left me a little confused.
If my primary objective is to make modifications to existing units, do I need to use 2011 to get the job done?
It sounds like 2011 is primarily needed for animations and exporting to .m3?
If the original file is already in .m3, does that mean I don't need to worry about exporting\converting it?
Is everyone here using 2011?
at what point will I get stuck (or have a really hard time) if I don't use 2011?
Thanks again for your continued answers :) (however different they may be from eachother :P )
@BlinkHawk: Go
I have gotten a 404 error and my unfinished reply disappeared with it...
I don't want to repeat that any more (it's too long @_@), so I want to make it short this time.
Blizzard chose Reactor at the beginning, we know that's not the only solution, but they chose it, therefore all next step needs to be compatible with that. I said this because in Blz's max files they forgot to delete Reactor helpers after baked the animation. And because of that, the 3dsmax version is limited to 2011.
I never said that you can only do physic simulation on 3dsmax 2011, my point is, Blz chose that solution, and that might be the reason why art tool fits the version 2011 only, since they have the solution already, they don't need a higher but different physX engine in 2012 or higher.
I knew how SC2 physics simulation (ingame) works, and it still needs the 3dsmax simulation to import the initial velocities. It's not a supposition, both Blizzard's max files and my death models Assets/Tests can prove it.
I am going to be busy, I may won't relay this anymore.
@XViper: Go Hi XViper, I use Blender, but some of the modelers I know that use 3DS max decided to use the third party plugin whenever they can, specially because Art Tools doesn't seem to have a model importer.
@XViper: Go
It's not the only option, you can use other solutions, such as changing the art tool codes (As I know, more that 3 different groups are working on it.) or use Blender as well. All other solutions won't be as convenient as choosing 3dsmax 2011, it's not the only one but the easiest solution.
To your situation I suggest you to use 3dsmax 2011 or Blender,
In 3dsmax 2011, you can use m3plugin to import exist unit, which is also fit 2dsmax 2011 too, but the m3plugin and Art tool can't be installed in one 3dsmax (you need to install two 3dsmax 2011 in different index if you want to use them both and at same time.)
In Blender, you can use m3addon, it can import edit and export m3 files.
Thanks for all of your replies again.
I'm sorry if some of these questions sound stupid, I literally have NO idea about modelling. I've NEVER used any modelling software before.
If Art Tools only works with 3DS 2011 how do I use Blender to do the SC2 stuff?
So I'm hearing this m3plugin being talked about? So what is its purpose exactly?
Are there any Blender tutorials out there for SC2?
@XViper: Go There's a thir party plugin for Blender by PrintIn. I suggest his tutorials in the tutorials section, they are perfect for beginners.
Thanks guys.
What about this? http://www.sc2mapster.com/assets/m3-export-plugin-3ds-max/
There seem to be many so many 'choices', with different plugins, things that work for certain versions and things that don't.
I don't know where to start :(
I had a look at PrintIn's Blender tutorial, and it seemed a little overwhelming, and there were ALOT of people asking questions and talking about errors coming up.
I can have a 'better look' for 3DS Max 2011, if that will be the best option. (I don't really want to have to change programs that's all).