Hi everybody. This is Nick Hatzichristos, I am the writer of the review this thread is all about.

I decided to reply to this thread, which just came to my attention, in order to show that maybe some of you guys are reading the review wrong.

First of all, like a few of you have already pointed out, the Vue line of products is marketed as landscape/scenery generation software, and Vue 5 Esprit was reviewed as such. If you, the experienced users believe, or know, that it is more than that, I respect that knowledge. But I urge you to understand that the review was based on its landscape generation features.

About Vue 5 Esprit being a "light version"... Vue comes in two flavors, Esprit and Professional. Esprit looks like Pro, works a lot like Pro, and its only differences are it costs a fraction of the price of Pro, and misses a number of the features of Pro. If all those aren't typical characteristics of a "light version", I don't know what is.
Being a "light version" is not a bad thing, by the way - I don't see why anyone would consider calling an app "light" such an insult.

I also don't see how some of you thought I tried to present myself as the ultimate 3D expert. I did not try to present myself as anything; I wasn't the object of the review, Vue 5 Esprit was.

Wabe said in post #3, "show me one other application that makes it especially beginners so easy to do excellent images". That's exactly the point, and one clearly illustrated in my review. That Vue 5 is excellent for beginners, making it very easy on them. At the same time, however, that's the drawback - all images, as wonderful as they may be (and they are), have that distinctive "Vue" look. If you want to get past that and create something trully original or realistic, then it takes a lot of work. The bottom line, Vue 5 has a click-and-wow side, and a deep-and-technical side. Which is an odd balance to say the least, and that is exactly the point made in the review.

The "school essay" writing style was deliberate, as I 'm tired of the usual writing style of many other reviews. Imagination regarding what can be done with Vue was restricted by its advertising as landscape software (you can do landscapes in Lightwave, should it be reviewed as landscape generation software, when it's not advertised as such ?). As for the historical background, I don't see "heritage" as a reason to not fix something when it's wrong. And in my opinion, some things are off. History shouldn't hold developers back.

Petshoo said in post #4 that "I find the review shocking. If I summarize the article, all you can do with Vue 5 is use presets". Petshoo, read again. There is so much in that review that emphasizes the exact opposite, while commenting on e-on for adding such a great collection of presets for everything (which makes it easy on beginners).

MikeJ's point #1 in post #5 : "I can criticize Vue, because I understand it, and yes, even love it. :) This guy's bugging me when he does so". Mike, anyone who either loves or hates a product is the wrong person to review it. I did the review bias-free, telling everything like I believe it is.
Point #2 says "the customizable interface thing, well, it's not a make-or break thing", and "he seems to imply that somehow "pros" need to be able to do so..." . Not at all. First of all, no one, and certainly not I, ever brought any amateur/pro disputes into this, so please don't do it now. As for the interface, sure it's not a make-or-break thing, but it is really annoying when everything is set in stone in that area. Still, I never presented it as a showstopper, just as an annoyance. And I did point out the good things in the interface. Maybe you missed those parts, but they 're there.
Point #3 : "You set your atmosphere settings before you do anything else... Who made that rule?".
No one made any such rule. I 'm just reflecting the classic workflow. Is it a coincidence that the atmosphere presets come up by default every time you hit the "new scene" button ? And I did mention that you can go back and edit everything, any time.
Point #4 : You believe I claimed that "it's unprofessional because of the lack of interface customizability"... Well, I don't know how you came to this conclusion, but it's not what the article says or even implies, my friend. Later on you imply that I believe that "you have to think too much to make something good" - again, it's not the thinking that bothers me, it's the difficulty in executing your thoughts.

I do admit to one thing though. I did spell "imitate" wrong right in my second sentence :)

Nanotyrranus said in post #7 that "he compliments it and then slams it down". Yes, more or less. I complimented it on its great features and "slammed down" (actually, criticised) its shortcomings. That's what a review is supposed to be like.

As for me judging an app by its price tag, that is just plain wrong. I use and rely on $300 apps in my work every day, and I only have the best things to say about them. And by the way, REALVIZ MotionBuilder's interface is very customizable, hein (post #10), although that wasn't what made it a reliable tool.
Do I "think [I am] the center of the world and that [my] words are the words of god" ? Of course not, I don't know where you got that from, kwanou (post #11). If you don't agree with what I have to say, that is fine, different people have different opinions.

Finally... I think some of you guys here need to re-read that review. Try to stay objective while you do it, too. I appreciate the civilized comments of some of you (note taken, thank you guys). However, there is something very insulting here which I will not tolerate, and that isn't the review - it is the name-calling, hostile attitude towards me by a minority of Vue users posting here, just because I "dared" to call e-on on what I thought where some bad calls, and point out the product's weaknesses. A few of you seem they haven't even read the good things I had to say. A few of you seem they haven't even read, period.

I 'll apologize for one thing, and that is the length of this post. It is not my intention to start a flame war, only to try and make things a little clearer.

Thanks for reading. I 'm open to constructive criticism, as well as any clarification on any specific parts of the review you believe I was flat out wrong in.

nick