Yes, this first release is liquids-focused (note: *fluids* are an entirely different solver, which we call the 'aero' - aerodynamic -- solver). Future releases could encompass more types of solvers (rigid, cloth, fluid, liquid, etc, all interacting). And from there, it would be amazing to see more procedural geometry generation, destruction and stuff like that.
But we gotta take this one step at a time, and design the foundation carefully if we want to accommodate all that. Adrian From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of joshxsi Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2014 6:09 PM To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: ICE - When will we have todays functionality in Maya? Part of what made ICE so successful (in my mind) was the large amount of built in nodes and compounds that were included as part of the base system that were used in mostly non-simulated contexts (raycasting, geometry locations, etc). >From the sound of the development stages, the first two releases will be fluid >focused, do you expect that the final release will include the non particle >functionality that ICE became so useful for? It sounds like you're expecting the users to build a more generic set of functionality using the API? (mesh deforms, curve based flow tools, IK solvers etc) Thanks again for the information as well. On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 11:48 AM, David Gallagher <davegsoftimagel...@gmail.com<mailto:davegsoftimagel...@gmail.com>> wrote: Yes, definitely giving them a chance! If they turn Maya/Bifrost into something great that can give me back what I just lost, believe me I will be one happy guy. On 3/20/2014 6:29 PM, Raffaele Fragapane wrote: The product will be released within the quarter. To be fair, that info if you were on beta has been consistent and available for quite a while now, so it's not some last minute stunt. Marcus, Adrian and the rest of the team are nice guys, give them a chance. On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 11:17 AM, David Gallagher <davegsoftimagel...@gmail.com<mailto:davegsoftimagel...@gmail.com>> wrote: This email was fascinating. I'm curious though; we've been told we can't hear roadmaps because they run afoul of SEC rules. And yet, here we get a somewhat detailed roadmap. Dave G
<<attachment: winmail.dat>>
