No offense, templargfx, but I think both of those pictures look quite terrible, and not like any real cloth I've come across, except maybe spandex. From what it looks like, the stretch resistance seems way to low (Edit: or maybe it just seems plasticky because of the material settings?). Sure, that'll make the randomized mesh look a bit more wrinkly  because it has more ways to bend. But that alone doesn't make it realistic. I'm sure randomized meshes are good in certain situations, or 3dMax wouldn't offer them. But at this point, I'm still not convinced that they are right for most types of woven or knitted cloth.

And people, you need to test things in Poser if that's what you'll be working with in practice. Cloth simulation is ridiculously complicated. Your results will depend significantly on the implementation you're using. If Delaunay works best in 3dMax, that does not mean it will in Poser, which for all I know could be optimized to deal with quadrangles exclusively. Besides, if someone can dish out several thousands of dollars for a high-end application, they might in fact use specialized add-ons for things like cloth simulations if and when they really need them to work, and never touch the one in the base program at all. So, the "it must be good because it's expensive" argument is not necessarily something I'll buy into.

What I'm saying is, we need to do the research, or we'll just keep guessing. We need to do it in Poser, and we need to use parameters that make sense for the kind of cloth we are interested in.

I'll see if I can whip up some test meshes with a range of regular and randomized topologies over the weekend, so you guys can do some serious testing if you want. I'll have a play in the cloth room myself, but I'm not well-versed in the art of setting up a simulation and picking the right combination of parameters.

-- I'm not mad at you, just Westphalian.