Quote - > Quote - > Quote - How does free app companies like blender etc etc stay in business ?

It's a nonprofit organization, established for the sole purpose of making the Blender app. The app came first. The foundation to help it came later. It does not "stay in business" as you put it. As a business, it is a complete failure.

I'll grant that it wasn't successful as shareware and was a failure as a commercial app.  But it appears to be thriving as an open source app.  Isn't the open-source model based on paying the foundation/community for support and specific development requests?  If it can succeed as a longterm viable tool while failing as a business, then I do agree with you.  

 

You're saying it's a successful application, a statement I agree with. I said as a business, it is a failure. Not the app - the business. They make no profit. They do not grow. They have no shareholders getting rich, nor a private fatcat with a huge bank account smoking cigars. It's not a business - it's a charity.

Note - I understand that the word "business" covers non-profits as well, but in the context of RorrKonn's question, in which he asks among other things "Aren't they exspecting to make a profit at some time " the answer is no - they are not expected to make a profit - they are not following the rules required to "stay in business". 

wikipedia says:

Quote - Designation as a nonprofit does not mean that the organization does not intend to make a profit, but rather that the organization has no owners and that the funds realized in the operation of the organization will not be used to benefit any owners.

However, I think in this case they have no intention of making a profit..

Quote - Where kinda stuck on blender and thats allright but there's a lot of free apps.
Aren't they exspecting to make a profit at some time ?
By adventualy selling the app when it's good enought ,add's ,something ,anything ?
Why would anyone worry with a business that's a complete failure there hole lifetime ?
and how could ya pay the bills like that.there's got to money some where ,don't there ?

 

Most free apps either sell the data they know about you for a profit, or they borrow your eyeballs to show you advertising, for which they get paid by the advertisers, yielding a profit.

Google apps do both. That is why they are "free". They're not free at all - you pay big with your privacy and with your willingness to be subjected to advertising.

A lot of heads of non-profits get very rich running non-profits. Especially since they're running on donations and grants. The goodwill is a non-profit, yet the CEO of Goodwill makes millions per year. The NFL is another non-profit organization (along with all the other major sports leagues). How many billions do they make?

If Blender were released today I'm sure it would do very well as a commercial app. Didn't it start out as a nurbs modeler? Most sane people hate working with nurbs, which is why you rarely ever see them being discussed or demonstrated (yes there are others who swear by them. But there are people who still insist Betamax was a better machine than VHS too). But it, and its developers, are doing very well as a non-profit, so there's really no reason to change it. Sounds to me like the best business model they've come up with. 

I don't mean to have an endless discussion about this, but I'm compelled to ask what do you mean by "it, and its developers, are doing very well as a non-profit"? Are you saying they are earning a healthy income, or do you mean, as I already agreed, that the application is popular?

According to http://www.blender.org/foundation/development-fund/, they are currently collecting donations at a rate of 4225 Euros per month. (* excluding main sponsors, whatever that means) I wouldn't get out of bed for that money, and I'm just one person. They are 4.

PoserPro2014 GD arrived. It's released. :)

PPGD upgrades only $40.00 "pocket change" till 8.31.14

RorrKonn is now taking donations to rase $40.00 ;)

AmbientShade I think we should start a non-profits conglomerate :)

think im probably the only one interested in the Kinect bit

Its says "Kinect for windows" does this mean that plugging in my 360 Kinect is not an option?

I guess if you've installed the Microsoft SDK it should work. All MS Apps work with the XBox kinect. Just the Kinect from the XBox one won't work, probably. But you may use the XBOX Kinect just for non-commercial things with the MS SDK. For commercial purposes, you will have to buy the Kinect for Windows, IMHO.

But we will see.

I'll tell you in a couple of hours if it works, downloading right now.... :biggrin:

I've been doing some google research on this. Apparently XBox Kinect worked with windows up until sometime in 2012 or 2013 when MS stopped allowing it to work (?) I'm assuming in order to promote/encourage the (higher priced) kinect for windows and its SDK. 

Kinect for windows v2 just released on July 15, 2014 and the SDK available on their front page is a beta v2. From what I'm digging up so far, v2 doesn't work with windows 7. It's only Win8.1+ compatible, which lets me out, as there's no chance in frozen hell I'm ever upgrading to the pOS that is win8. So I'll be waiting for win9 to see if that gets me to upgrade. I wonder however if the new kinect will work on the sdk v2. Most likely not.

MS pulled the kinect out of the new xbox due to customer complaints about its "always on" features or some such. Not clear on the details around that but there was a bit of a stink about it a few months back. That dropped the price of the xbox one by $100, but now people are complaining that the new kinect is $200. While the old kinect for Windows is still about $250, with less features, but win7 support. So I'm failing to see the problem people are having here. 

I'll be interested in seeing if I can get this to work with Kinect on OSX.

http://www.alan-pipitone.com/index.php/en/blogeng/apple-mac/item/84-use-kinect-with-mac-osx

I don't think that they support the new Kinect V2. The SDK is brand new and beta only, and yes, you would need Windows 8 for it. The new Kinect transfers a lot of data, it seems that the USB 3 driver was changed in Windows 8.

They told the alpha developers that there would be a Win 7 version of the SDK, but they could not get it to work. It's too much data for the (slower) USB 3 implementation of Windows 7 (all according to MS)

The V1 version works on every Windows PC, if you have the SDK installed. It does not matter if you have the Xbox or the "for Windows" variant, both work. The "for Windows" variant has the near mode, and you may use it for commercial projects.

You can get both Kinects on Ebay. The XBOX-Variant is pretty cheap (I've got mine for 30 Euro), but you will need an adapter to connect it to the PC. The "for Windows" variant is around 200 Euros here. 

The SDK works for both. I've done 3d-Scans with my XBOX-Kinect, using the MS SDK.

I'm still downloading, so I could not check if it works. But I suspect you can use the cheaper XBOX Kinect, if you don't plan to work commercially.

There is an open driver for Mac, no idea if Poser supports that. If it does, both V1 Kinects will work, along with Primesense and Asus sensors.

Is this PP2014 with extras or are there any differences?

Like the idea of the Kinnect integration for poses but wouldn't use the external facilities.

Good price for the 'upgrade' but will it remain an add-on for the current PP product or diverge into another product?

This seems to be PP with extras.  It removes the old version and installs a new one, the new features don't appear unless you enter the new serial. The splash screen changes, then.

The Kinect Capture works with V1 Kinects, the XBox Kinect is supported. It uses the Microsoft SDK, so I guess it won't work on Mac, but I'm not sure about that.

Cannot say much about the quality of the capture, there isn't much room here in my working space, so capturing is a bit difficult.

(AmbientShade) 

Quote -   Kinect for windows v2 just released on July 15, 2014 and the SDK available on their front page is a beta v2. From what I'm digging up so far, v2 doesn't work with windows 7. It's only Win8.1+ compatible, which lets me out, as there's no chance in frozen hell I'm ever upgrading to the pOS that is win8. 

     The Poser Game Dev uses the v1 Kinect;  it does not support v2.

All this talking

Where's the .jpg's & videos :)

(RorrKonn) 

Quote -   All this talkingWhere's the .jpg's & videos :) 

     Pictures, or it didn't happen! 

     My weapon of choice for mocap ,Galadriel, is still out of commission (finally tracked it down to a bad BIOS chip on the mobo).  She's being rebuilt with a later revision motherboard, and I just hope that all that node-locked software accepts her as being the same computer.

     Anyway, the local Sonic is having a rollerskating contest, and I'll see if I can schmoose/bribe a carhop or two into skating for mocap.  But video?  That won't come until after cleaning up the mocap, setting up a scene, and then rendering all those frames.

i wait with baited breathe for your findings Bantha

The Game Dev only "officially" supports Kinect for Windows.  However, it works fine with the XBOX Kinect.  You need to install the 1.8 Kinect SDK.  If your Kinect for XBOX only has the orange plug, you need a power adapter, which comes with a USB converter.  Luckily I have a standalone version of Kinect for 360, which has the proper wazzit - at the time it was the new thing.

SDK is Windows 7 or higher. http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=40278

I posted already in the other thread, my kinect for XBOX works. I don't have enough space here for serious mocap in my actual working room, so I can't show pictures, but the plugin does work with the Kinect.

Just don't install the OpenNI-Framework. You need the MS drivers with the MS SDK.

I haven't read all the replies to this, but I definitely see the benefits of these features, especially with animation and even more so with scenes that feature large numbers of characters.

With regards to removing unseen polys, isn't this the same as 'shrink-wrapping', which can be done with models that are to be 3D printed? I pretty much imagine it like taking a fully clothed figure and applying a vacuum sealed wrap around it, then taking that wrap and applying all the textures to it, effectively creating an entirely new mesh with a new, all-in-one map, depicting only what is seen on the surface.

Couple this with the motion capture and you've got one exciting looking package on the way! I'm envisaging a much smoother experience making my animation with this, though I'm not sure when I'll be able to afford it, lol!

 [EDIT]

Does Kinect work with facial expressions?

Glen.

*     Remove unseen polys* is very distinct from shrink wrapping.  Poser Pro 2014's fitting room does do shrink wrapping, if you want it.

     No facial expression capture.  GameDev uses the v1 sensor;  you only get limb/torso motion.

Quote - With regards to removing unseen polys, isn't this the same as 'shrink-wrapping', which can be done with models that are to be 3D printed? I pretty much imagine it like taking a fully clothed figure and applying a vacuum sealed wrap around it, then taking that wrap and applying all the textures to it, effectively creating an entirely new mesh with a new, all-in-one map, depicting only what is seen on the surface.

I think the term 'shrink-wrapping' is being used for more than one type of feature.  Poser's Fitting Room will 'shrink wrap' one existing mesh around another.  Poser's Morph Brush tool will assist with this as well, without the automation of the process in the Fitting Room.  Whereas generating a new 'airtight' model with no surface gaps, suitable for 3D printing, would be generating a new mesh over the surface of the original (often using voxel fields, as I understand it).  You could perhaps attempt to create such an 'airtight' model using Poser's 'shrink-wrapping' tools, but you would be hampered by the resolution and topology of whatever mesh you're shrinking onto the other.  (There's a special term for these 'airtight' models, which evades me at the moment.  :unsure:)

Poser's Fitting Room is designed to... well, 'fit' one figure to another, and it's a very useful feature.  Poser once had a plugin available which could generate the voxel field type skin (notably without transferring any surface UV mapping), but it only worked in Poser 5.  So Poser does have useful 'shrink-wrapping' of one type available, but not the sort of 'shrink-wrapping' that you've described.  :sad:

Quote -   There's a special term for these 'airtight' models... 

Topologically closed.

Quote - Topologically closed.

That seems suitable, but there's another one.  Maybe the term is "manifold"?  :unsure:  Not that it's crucially important.  :lol:

[quoteThat seems suitable, but there's another one.  Maybe the term is "manifold"?  :unsure:  Not that it's crucially important.  :lol:

Yes, that's true.  It's a term commonly used in 3D printing, to refer to models that have been created in compliance with 3D printing technology, which mostly require a solid, closed surfaces.  For decades, people were using techniques to save polygons by not modelling parts of models that would never be seen by a virtual camera, etc..  It's also a good strategy for today's physically accurate render engines, where the quality of the lighting, and realism can rely heavily on the realism of the objects in the scene.  Using manifold topology can help with complex physical light calculations, and calculating certain physical surface shaders, etc.

Quote - > Quote - Topologically closed.

That seems suitable, but there's another one.  Maybe the term is "manifold"?  :unsure:  Not that it's crucially important.  :lol:

That is the term I thought you were looking for.  One of the cooler aspects of Wings 3D, once you appreciates its usefulness, is that it is a manifold modeler.  Every operation of Wings is based around the idea that there is the space around the model, and there is another distinct space inside it.  That is why Wings by default produces (almost?) exclusively watertight models.  In order to create a one sided or "open" object in Wings, you practically have to use "export selected" on a set of faces.  And when these objects are imported back into Wings, the models are actually closed during conversion to a winged edge data structure.

Bantha, when you say you've done 3D scanning with your Kkinect, do you think it's posssible to have this aid ini charaer creation in Poser? Only for my over ambitious animation project, I'm going to want myself as a character, so being able to 3D scan myself would be useful, especially if I could convert that scan to a mesh and use it as a guide for morphs in Poser. Just a thought.

Quote - I kind of wonder if that mesh is meant to illustrate the Polygon Reduction system...?  :unsure: ....

If that is how the system handles poly reduction you can count me out. I'd like to see other peoples actual screenshots before pulling the trigger. If it does it symetrically (and I can tell it the amount of reduction) it is worth the $$$!!

You have full control about the amount of reduction.
Unfortunately, it is not symetrical.

Quote - You have full control about the amount of reduction.
Unfortunately, it is not symetrical.

Not symetrical............................................................ not going to see me then probably. I love the fact it will update the uv map to keep textures (assuming). I can see it being useful.

But (and I don't want to rant) SM has yet to fix so so so many long lasting bugs and issues for content creators with the core features of the software. I think it bold of them to dive into a new market, a new use of their software... I just think it will not "work as expected" for some time. I would LOVE to think it will work with no issues, but I am still waiting to do much "simpler" things with their current software (features that have been in for multiple versions that still don't work like they should).

I will keep my eyes peeled and watch to see how it works! I don't want to be seen as a "nay-sayer"..... I am just "protecting" myself from upgrading once again and not having it work as presumed from the products description. But, like I said, I will watch and see what you all say about it!! Mind open (wallet closed for now).

DarkSealStudios- It's $40.  We aren't talking a lot of money here - I don't animate at all, but the polyreduction and poly hiding features alone make it worth owning to me.

If I can shrink a fully clothed figure from 95Mg to 25 Mg, it's a go in my book - and I have just started to peruse the GameDev Addendum - there is a lot of information in it to read & process.

The people that are demanding answers from the early adapters need to buy their own damn copy - I only know about what I have read & how that will affect my production workflow.

Quote - DarkSealStudios- It's $40.  We aren't talking a lot of money here

Buy it then, I'm not stopping you...

Quote - If I can shrink a fully clothed figure from 95Mg to 25 Mg, it's a go in my book - and I have just started to peruse the GameDev Addendum - there is a lot of information in it to read & process.

mg... milligrams? microgerbils? Hey, I got an idea, manybe a video on the features and how they work! ...before the upgrade offer is over...

Quote - The people that are demanding answers from the early adapters need to buy their own damn copy -

So happy to see you support your fellow conent creators! With this winning atitude anything is possible!

Does it sound good? Sure. Will it work as advertised? Not sure... the core program doesn't (and issues persist from version to version unfixed), why should I just assume the plugin/addon work 100% out of the box?

Would be pretty sweet if an "early adapter" (adopter maybe) would show us what's what so people know what they are getting..... or maybe even the software company that makes it could do this.... and "upload" it to the "internet" to a "video hosting site" and "facetweet" it to possible "customers".

1 screenshot of a badly reduced figure with no textures and BAD topology does not have me sold no matter how CHEAP it is. Do you see clean edge loops? You think you (not you since you don't animate) are going to ANIMTE that in a game setting!??!?!?!?!??!?!?!!?!?!?!?!?!?lol??!??!??!?! You know.... what it is MADE FOR.

I'll wait for more info, thanks.

I haven't seen an "automatic" polygon reduction system thus far that does a miraculous job.  However, it's been several years since I've looked at them so if anyone has examples to post where you're going to get amazing results without re-topoing a mesh instead, please do.  I am honestly curious.

Except for Symmetry, which I do feel it should have, I think it does a decent job, considering the disadvantages of using poly reduction in the first place - careful placement and creation of a low poly object would be better from the start instead of expecting automated poly reduction to get it right.

I'd like to know what the lost lasting bugs are -- maybe I or others could help?  Apart from oddities or feature requests, which I agree more can be done there, the core program works here and isn't broken.

Quote - > Quote - DarkSealStudios- It's $40.  We aren't talking a lot of money here

Buy it then, I'm not stopping you...

Quote - If I can shrink a fully clothed figure from 95Mg to 25 Mg, it's a go in my book - and I have just started to peruse the GameDev Addendum - there is a lot of information in it to read & process.

mg... milligrams? microgerbils? Hey, I got an idea, manybe a video on the features and how they work! ...before the upgrade offer is over...

Quote - The people that are demanding answers from the early adapters need to buy their own damn copy -

So happy to see you support your fellow conent creators! With this winning atitude anything is possible!

Does it sound good? Sure. Will it work as advertised? Not sure... the core program doesn't (and issues persist from version to version unfixed), why should I just assume the plugin/addon work 100% out of the box?

 Would be pretty sweet if an "early adapter" (adopter maybe) would show us what's what so people know what they are getting..... or maybe even the software company that makes it could do this.... and "upload" it to the "internet" to a "video hosting site" and "facetweet" it to possible "customers".

1 screenshot of a badly reduced figure with no textures and BAD topology does not have me sold no matter how CHEAP it is. Do you see clean edge loops? You think you (not you since you don't animate) are going to ANIMTE that in a game setting!??!?!?!?!??!?!?!!?!?!?!?!?!?lol??!??!??!?! You know.... what it is MADE FOR.

I'll wait for more info, thanks.

I do support content creators the only way that matters - with money (I stopped counting the costs of Poser when I crossed the 10K spending line) - I have quite a few of your products - and looking forward to more of the Plus series. 

I'm an end user & I bought it the second I saw the announcement that it was available.  Bitching about what SM did or didn't do as far as videos, etc somewhere other than via feedback to SM bug report is simply pointless - which EVERYONE here should know by now.  SM visits here from time to time, but they don't put any weight behind complaints made here - and certainly don't take anything they tell us here as gospel.  (I am still waiting on those Weight Mapped G2 figures that Steve Cooper promised us here in this very forum back in the fall of '12).

The new tools are just like any other tool - you have to learn how to use it & everyone expecting instant results is simply damned foolish.  So far, neither I (nor anyone else) outside of the beta team really know what these new features will do.  I am still working through the very first thing that interested me (hiding polys) to reduce figure size - It will be at least a month or so before I feel comfortable with the new tools.  There is a lot in the GameDev addendum.

Early results are pleasing however......

Quote - I haven't seen an "automatic" polygon reduction system thus far that does a miraculous job.  However, it's been several years since I've looked at them so if anyone has examples to post where you're going to get amazing results without re-topoing a mesh instead, please do.  I am honestly curious.

Zbrush.... I can reduce a mesh to whatever I want. I can make it symmetrical. I can make the texture polypaint and paste it on to the new one... just just I have to re-uv that (automated process is "ok").

This seems to do it all in one, and if I am reading the text right, it will even redistribute the uv maps and make them all on 1, 1:1 uv map... right?

Again...if only there were a video on the interwebs to show me what it can do...

and SSGBryan: Thank you for the support. But it would be nice if someone was nice enough to talk about the program and not go with the "get your own damn copy" attitude. $40 is not a lot..... unless you are say... working from home, for yourself, selling poser content as your main form of income... Not your problem, but a broken tool doesn't fix my sh!t, and it would be nice to know if everything "works as designed" and see it in action.

http://pixologic.com/zbrush/features/decimation/
All tri meshes look ruff so desimated meshes look ruff to.

Zremesher
http://pixologic.com/zbrush/features/ZBrush4R6/ 
I have a hard time with z's remesher & characters

I have better luck with MudBox

Desimate is fastest
Remesh a bit slower but a bit better
Retopolgy by hand is best but slowest

Thanks for the links! Those do look great :)

Yeah, I can re-topo in 3D Coat and certainly it would be the best way to go.  You can import for re-topo, do an automatic retopo, which is often good to decent but at times you still need to get in there and clean it up.

Now, if you guys have access to those tools via Z-brush, why be so concerned about the Polygon reduction aspect of Poser Game Dev?  It's obviously something you wouldn't need.  BTW, Isn't $40 a drop in the bucket compared to the price of Zbrush? (Though yes, you could have bought it long ago).  Even so, from what I saw, yes it could probably still use improvement (and symmetry for sure) but for an $8 tool if you divide the features, it's not bad.

BTW, I work from home and Poser is my main source of income as well and I do understand that the summer months can be brutal but still it's not all the money in the world and maybe it has things you might not need.

Also, I think Cooper might be playing catch up if he's back in the office.  He had an accident a few days before the Game Dev launch.  For all I know, it's caused delays elsewhere such as extra promoting and videos.

Quote - Yeah, I can re-topo in 3D Coat and certainly it would be the best way to go.  You can import for re-topo, do an automatic retopo, which is often good to decent but at times you still need to get in there and clean it up.

I never made much use of 3DCoat, but my impression was that the retopo features necessarily changed the UV mapping.  Is there a way to avoid that?    Poser's decimation is nice, in that it does retain the mapping.  When I've built game figures before, I started with MakeHuman, then used some... really awful and awkward decimation tools that borked up the mapping.  Poser's new stuff could really save some work.

I don't think so.  You're basically building a sheath around the original object.  With Auto Topo, you can define the polygon flow using projected splines.  It's fairly neat.  However, I haven't had the program for too long so I can't claim to be an expert on it.

Yeah, the overall advantage in Poser would be retaining the UVs, the morphs and so forth.  I have faith that the feature set for the game dev will be improved.  Dropping a bug report (I think its possible via web form) would help expedite features folks would like to see (that's not directed to you, just a general thing).

Another thought for ZBrush.  Since the decimation is superior and you have several choices via plugins, does it support FBX?  One could go that route if so.  FBX out of Poser, use Zbrush decimation?

Quote - Yeah, I can re-topo in 3D Coat and certainly it would be the best way to go.  You can import for re-topo, do an automatic retopo, which is often good to decent but at times you still need to get in there and clean it up. Now, if you guys have access to those tools via Z-brush, why be so concerned about the Polygon reduction aspect of Poser Game Dev?  It's obviously something you wouldn't need.  BTW, Isn't $40 a drop in the bucket compared to the price of Zbrush? (Though yes, you could have bought it long ago).  Even so, from what I saw, yes it could probably still use improvement (and symmetry for sure) but for an $8 tool if you divide the features, it's not bad.

Because it preserves the morphs?  Don't think you're going to get that with re-topo in another app.

Quote - Also, I think Cooper might be playing catch up if he's back in the office.  He had an accident a few days before the Game Dev launch.  For all I know, it's caused delays elsewhere such as extra promoting and videos.

Here is hoping Cooper gets his mesh rebuilt as quickly as possible. :m_thoughtful:

other app's auto poly killers where asked about .so I just posted some links for info.

Thinks it's safe to say MudBox ,zBrush repesents poly killer tech for most app's.

I know a lot hear don't use main app's & plugs or know how it all works with them.
and that's OK not everyone wants to build Rockets it's a lot of fun to fly them.

Poser meshes comes with mesh,uvmaps,textures,morphs made in zBrush or it's =.

Poser is the Rocket
zBrush or it's = is NASA that built the Rocket

Hope Cooper is doing well.

Oh, oh, oh!
No, no, o, no!
LOL.

Just some small corections here.

Few , if ANY, native Poser figure have been "build" in Zbrush.

They use a number of tools, and Zbrush in in the workflow, but I am sure the initial modeling was NOT done in the "Brushes from Z".

Many moons ago, they posted their workflow, (at least most part of it), and Zbrush was only a small intermediate step in the process.

Perhaps they use it now, but at the time?

Maya, Lightwave, among others where the main apps if my fading memory does not leave me.

Quote - Oh, oh, oh!
No, no, o, no!
LOL.

Just some small corections here.

Few , if ANY, native Poser figure have been "build" in Zbrush.

They use a number of tools, and Zbrush in in the workflow, but I am sure the initial modeling was NOT done in the "Brushes from Z".

Many moons ago, they posted their workflow, (at least most part of it), and Zbrush was only a small intermediate step in the process.

Perhaps they use it now, but at the time?

Maya, Lightwave, among others where the main apps if my fading memory does not leave me.

Thats why I said zBrush or it's =

It's just shorter then going Max,Maya,Lightwave,C4D,Modo etc etc and plugs. :)

There's different tools,work flows of making meshes.
The gallerys speak for them selfs.
I go with who ever has the best gallery.

Oeps, my gallery is a virgin. LOL.

ZRemesher is the sh**.

Netherworks: Good to know about Cooper, maybe they'll release a video befofe the offer expires? I do like the idea of the add-on, don't get me wrong... it's just... Oh look, Poser 2015 Pro is here 2 months later, want to buy it? Oh yeah, want to buy the game dev version of that too?

@ DarksealStudios

Have you seen this tread?
Please read it top to bottom to discover some of the new PP2014 GD funtions in action.

http://www.renderosity.com/mod/forumpro/showthread.php?thread_id=2883697

PS; Unfortuantely Mr Cooper has had an accident and will be out for some time.
We wish him all the best.

In a previous post he stated: "Poser 10 and PP2014 will be with us for some time to come".
Now you can nosepick whatever you want but I do not think he was talking about days. LOL.

Just finished downloading game dev. Now trying to decide if I should install separately or just do it as a full upgrade. What non-game dev features are improved in SR4 Tony, do you know?