EClark1894 posted at 12:26PM Wed, 07 August 2019 - #4358884

Can't argue that one. Especially since, again, iirc, Poser actually beat DS to the punch on several features. Btw, and we can argue semantics, but I don't consider a "plug-in" or a "Script / python" to be a true feature of that program. But that's just me, I guess.

Thought I should clarify, because I'm not quite sure what plugins or scripts you're talking about. DS now has integrated dynamic cloth (dForce) that both users and vendors can make dynamic cloth with (not a plugin). DS has integrated strand based hair now that both users and vendors can create/style hair (not a plugin) but dynamic hair creation is limited to DAZ PA's only (using dForce). DS also has an integrated full featured key frame editor and graph editor (not a plugin anymore, apparently they acquired the plugins from GoFigure, and integrated them into DS, with some improvements). Just an FYI, they have also finally address some of the long standing IK issues, and issues with pining (sliding feet).

But here's the thing that no one seems to be getting. If DAZ is losing money on DS, but making money on content, then why cut out Poser? They'd make even more money by making Poser compatible content, wouldn't they? In fact, they've appeared to go after other markets that are even more incompatible than Poser. So, it's not that it can't be done. They just don't want to. Switching to DS was never really in the cards for me anyway, as DS never ran on my Mac, to get Genesis, I would have to load DS on my Mac to get it. But DS wouldn't run on my Mac, so... I tossed the idea of making a Poser compatible model, but was dismissed almost before I wrote it down.

I think if you take the 20,000 ft. executive overview of this, the answer is quite evident. Yes, they could have made a semi functional version of Genesis for Poser. So you need to ask yourself why a business would not do so to ensure a continued revenue stream. The only logical answers I can come up with are 1) the estimated return on investment (ROI) was ether less than the estimated profit from sales, or 2) while there may have been and estimated profit from sales, it was still viewed as a overall potential negative ROI due possible negative impressions from a less than fully functional figure in Poser. Keep in mind, DAZ was at Genesis 3 before they completely dropped support. No doubt by then they felt they had already lost significant numbers of the Poser user base. The problem with Poser is that it doesn't have dual quaternion skinning, and also needs to "break" the figure apart into several vertex groups. These two factors, along with probably a very small Poser only user base at the time of the introduction of Genesis 3, may have made the decision easy. Not enough ROI to make it worth while.

Why work to get Genesis in other markets? Seems to me that is a part of trying to expand the user base beyond markets where it currently resides. Maya has the proper skinning method (dual quaternion) to accept a fully rigged (including JCM and MCM) Genesis 8 figure without any conversion to another skinning method. Plus, much of the heavy lifting was already done by the original script creator, so one would think that DAZ will have very little real investment in this. So, while the ROI is an unknown, the investment is most likely relatively small. The original plugin developer may still be the one doing all the work, with assistance as needed from DAZ, This may also be viewed as a way to understand what hooks into DS need to be created for others to write similar plugins, which may expand the market even more with no additional investment by DAZ (third party importers). Of course this is all speculation, but it makes sense with my limited cranial capacity.

__________________________________________________________

My Rendo Gallery ........ My DAZ3D Gallery ........... My DA Gallery ......