4 ms·

Is there a particular reason that web-based 3d editors failed to find a market? Is it just that those working in the modelling space are already well-versed in

Is there a particular reason that web-based 3d editors failed to find a market? Is it just that those working in the modelling space are already well-versed in actual editing tools, so they don't really have a need for something like this, while the average nontechnical/nonspecialist consumer has little reason to edit 3d? Because Figma seems to have taken off despite having largely a similar model. Would a collaborative version of the 3d editor concept be more of a success?

bhouston 4y ago
One major limitation is memory. The browser only gives you about 1gb of memory to play with. But blender lets you play with as much as you have on your device. As well multithreading is limited or very difficult in the browser. On desktop it is a lot more flexible. Also we are competing now with Blender which is fast moving and free. Blender is now a seriously alternative to 3Ds max and Maya. A web based editor is at many disadvantages. Figma isn’t competing with an effective open source tool. Also its resource requirements are much lower so it isn’t limited. Its market is also larger. Not saying it is impossible to compete but it isn’t simple. Even if you are feature competitive, which is hard, you are likely slower and more resource constrained and also how can you charge much if Blender is free? Paying for an inferior experience? That is a hard sell.
- brutus1213 4y ago
  Good points. One way to compete with blender could be simplicity. I want to encourage myself and my wife+7 year old to get into 3 D modeling (basic level stuff so we have fun with it in VR/AR or maybe print out models). It all seems a bit inaccessible without some serious effort. When there are too many features, taking some out + not having to do an install is compelling.
  - bhouston 4y ago
    A simple product though won't likely be used commercially by professionals, and then you are stuck at the low end serving students/dabblers, which is not a place were you will make much money. Remember for software tools, it is usually only those who are making money using your tool who are willing to pay for it.
    - touchpadder 4y ago
      Same issue in progress here! I've been working for a few years on an editor(forked from Three.js editor) for my browser game bad.city and now I'm separating the editor, rewrote it in react and the current goal is making an easy-to-start-with game level editor with many assumptions. We'll see how that goes
    - kaveh808 4y ago
      We are developing an open source 3D system, and what could set it apart from existing tools such as Blender is an interesting question. In our case we are taking a different tack by developing in Common Lisp, which will give us a powerful REPL and whole-system extensibility. Though the web was a tempting platform, we are keeping it as a desktop app for now. Based on the comments I read here that may have been a wise decision. We shall see if there is a niche for a system such as ours. A brief trailer: https://youtu.be/i0CwhEDAXB0 https://youtu.be/i0CwhEDAXB0

bhouston 4y ago

One major limitation is memory. The browser only gives you about 1gb of memory to play with. But blender lets you play with as much as you have on your device. As well multithreading is limited or very difficult in the browser. On desktop it is a lot more flexible. Also we are competing now with Blender which is fast moving and free. Blender is now a seriously alternative to 3Ds max and Maya. A web based editor is at many disadvantages. Figma isn’t competing with an effective open source tool. Also its resource requirements are much lower so it isn’t limited. Its market is also larger. Not saying it is impossible to compete but it isn’t simple. Even if you are feature competitive, which is hard, you are likely slower and more resource constrained and also how can you charge much if Blender is free? Paying for an inferior experience? That is a hard sell.

brutus1213 4y ago
Good points. One way to compete with blender could be simplicity. I want to encourage myself and my wife+7 year old to get into 3 D modeling (basic level stuff so we have fun with it in VR/AR or maybe print out models). It all seems a bit inaccessible without some serious effort. When there are too many features, taking some out + not having to do an install is compelling.
- bhouston 4y ago
  A simple product though won't likely be used commercially by professionals, and then you are stuck at the low end serving students/dabblers, which is not a place were you will make much money. Remember for software tools, it is usually only those who are making money using your tool who are willing to pay for it.
  - touchpadder 4y ago
    Same issue in progress here! I've been working for a few years on an editor(forked from Three.js editor) for my browser game bad.city and now I'm separating the editor, rewrote it in react and the current goal is making an easy-to-start-with game level editor with many assumptions. We'll see how that goes
  - kaveh808 4y ago
    We are developing an open source 3D system, and what could set it apart from existing tools such as Blender is an interesting question. In our case we are taking a different tack by developing in Common Lisp, which will give us a powerful REPL and whole-system extensibility. Though the web was a tempting platform, we are keeping it as a desktop app for now. Based on the comments I read here that may have been a wise decision. We shall see if there is a niche for a system such as ours. A brief trailer: https://youtu.be/i0CwhEDAXB0 https://youtu.be/i0CwhEDAXB0