3 ms·

Anyone works in games/films will know how useful low-code tools are. And they're ubiquitous. I can list more than 10 of them out of my heart: - Unity and Unrea

Anyone works in games/films will know how useful low-code tools are. And they're ubiquitous. I can list more than 10 of them out of my heart: - Unity and Unreal's material/shader graph. - Unity's VFX graph/Unreal's Niagara - Unreal's blueprint - Blender's composition node and shader node - The whole Houdini - Substance Designer - PureData - Bitwig's grid - Nuke - Fusion At this point I think it's a bit ridiculous that people still are arguing whether low code tools are helpful or not.

acutesoftware 4y ago
In terms of Unreal blueprints they may be low syntax but they are not low code - you still need to know software development techniques or you will end up in a pile of garbage very quickly (which you can also do with any other language).
- capableweb 4y ago
  What is required when using Unreal Blueprints is game development domain knowledge, which makes sense for all those tools, doesn't make them less no-code. To use Houdini effectively, you need to know vfx and a bunch of other domains, just like you need to understand shaders if you're gonna use the shader nodes in Blender. All of those things can be achieved with coding as well, and that's the difference. One you write code, the other you don't. Both are backed by code, obviously, but it's hidden from the user but usually extensible by code.
tjpnz 4y ago
Can't speak for game development but in film (specifically VFX) the coding side can get rather involved. In a large studio your pipeline will hinge on dozens of in-house Python scripts or even tools in their own right. Often they'll have their own data access logic for working with databases, asset management tooling or production data APIs. That they're loaded as Maya/Houdini/Nuke plugins is incidental at that point. It's no coincidence that your most effective TDs will also be strong coders, and that some may even come from a more traditional software background.
- raincole 4y ago
  Yeah. I think the strength of these kinds of tools is they allow you to separate your team into one that is fluent with code and one that isn't, without the "coding team" spending time on building a GUI for the "no-coding team". Houdini is probably the best example for this cause it has a built-in "interface builder" (the parameters panel for HDA).
hermitcrab 4y ago
These are low-code tools that are specific to a particular domain. And I think low-code tools can add a lot of value here (I work on a low-code, boxes and arrows, tool for data transformation). Where things fall apart is where low-code tools are offered as all-purpose tools for solving any kind of software problem. Especially when they are over-sold by salesmen eager for commission.

acutesoftware 4y ago

In terms of Unreal blueprints they may be low syntax but they are not low code - you still need to know software development techniques or you will end up in a pile of garbage very quickly (which you can also do with any other language).

capableweb 4y ago
What is required when using Unreal Blueprints is game development domain knowledge, which makes sense for all those tools, doesn't make them less no-code. To use Houdini effectively, you need to know vfx and a bunch of other domains, just like you need to understand shaders if you're gonna use the shader nodes in Blender. All of those things can be achieved with coding as well, and that's the difference. One you write code, the other you don't. Both are backed by code, obviously, but it's hidden from the user but usually extensible by code.

tjpnz 4y ago

Can't speak for game development but in film (specifically VFX) the coding side can get rather involved. In a large studio your pipeline will hinge on dozens of in-house Python scripts or even tools in their own right. Often they'll have their own data access logic for working with databases, asset management tooling or production data APIs. That they're loaded as Maya/Houdini/Nuke plugins is incidental at that point. It's no coincidence that your most effective TDs will also be strong coders, and that some may even come from a more traditional software background.

raincole 4y ago
Yeah. I think the strength of these kinds of tools is they allow you to separate your team into one that is fluent with code and one that isn't, without the "coding team" spending time on building a GUI for the "no-coding team". Houdini is probably the best example for this cause it has a built-in "interface builder" (the parameters panel for HDA).

hermitcrab 4y ago

These are low-code tools that are specific to a particular domain. And I think low-code tools can add a lot of value here (I work on a low-code, boxes and arrows, tool for data transformation). Where things fall apart is where low-code tools are offered as all-purpose tools for solving any kind of software problem. Especially when they are over-sold by salesmen eager for commission.