I suggest you watch them - they are just amazing Maybe I did wrong paying 200 U$ ? I mean AWB is 400 U$ (and has about 100 plants) while vue has only 40-45 (including the added plants) will come to 300 !

You can't really, "go wrong" with Vue, but I do have to say I have seen some AWB animations that are exceptionally good. However, in my opinion, Vue still images seem to generally seem more realistic. I have no idea what is capable with the AWB plants, but remember, the Vue ploants are this "Solid Growth" thing based on algorithims, and as such, are never identically the same. Plus, varying texture and trans maps, makes for even more variety, so to say that Vue has a limited number of plants is simply not true. AWB is an excellent product, from what I can tell, but I honestly don't think either program is "better" or more "worth it" than the other, because they are different. It all depends on how you go about it.

Both programs are fantastic. We use them both at my office because they each have their own strong points. Actually, we're going to be getting into each of these programs more in depth shortly. I DO know that we'll never (at least at this point) go exclusively with one or the other. Regarding the number of plants - with the variations that forum members here have created and offered for FREE I'm sure that the quantity of plants is comparable. Check them out!

There's two areas in which World builder is now superior: import of Poser animations, and the animations features such as water ripples/splashes, water going round stones, etc. as it shows in the frog animation. On the other hand, World Builder has a Phong renderer. This means it doesn't have raytraced shadows, and is also inferior in all those things where ray tracers excel, such as refractions, caustics, transparencies, volumetric materials... I own both and so I can say: don't let the number of plants/trees in WB fool you: many of them are variations. And only a part of them are superior quality, most look just adequate and some look really poor. On the contrary, almost all of Vue's vegetation looks great. At this moment, I'd say this: WB is better for animations, Vue is better for stills. More or less what Mike said.

I'd have to say both are great but I like Vue's look in all ways, from the menus to the final rendered image. Both outputs images that can be grainy and very CG like but I did a few animations in Vue that are not bad at all although I hate the way you animate a camera. I'd love to see grass/trees animated in Vue like it does in WB and if the animation is improved I will be a happy camper. :) Cheers!