SceneCity 1.5 adds Blender 2.80 Support
Arnold Couturier writes:
Version 1.5 of SceneCity, the city-creation addon for Blender, is out!
What’s new
It’s a port for Blender 2.80. There are no new features. A few minor bugs have been fixed. The previous version 1.4 is still available for those who are still on Blender 2.79.
It took me longer than expected, Blender 2.80 is quite different under the hood for addons developers.
What’s next
After this compatibility release, it’s time to add new features and polish the existing ones. The plan for 1.6 is to start adding the first features for more realistic road networks: not completely random, but not totally axis-aligned either. I’ll give you more info as I go.
Have fun and happy city-blending! :)
Arnold
Links
Congratulations on the 1.5 release. Does Blender 2.8 compatibility mean EEVEE compatible materials?
Normally yes, as Eevee materials are the same as Cycles materials, if I’m not mistaken.
Addon materials use the Principle shader?
Not yet. But in the next release yes. Better assets will also be included progressively.
Will there be a simple tutorial on youtube soon?
Thanks!
Freddy
ill make one in a week or so for 1.5. I have a very basic on for 1.4 https://youtu.be/3qLh81C_Wfs
Thank you Markom :)
I really like the addon, i would pledge for better generation features rather then assets. Can’t wait for the road generation.
Thank you. Noted!
As a customer I follow SceneCity pretty closer. I’ve not used it yet, I’ve put off using blender until 2.8 comes out as I found it more daunting than other programs I’ve used… But anyway…
I’d like to see perhaps less specific assets as well. I guess in my mind I would model those myself. I think a library of basic urban items is expected, but I’m also thinking of alien and futuristic cities, and mixing future and retro styles. What I’m curious about is user created libraries and using stock content as placeholders to gauge placement and density of those items procedurally. I’d like to be able to work on the layout of and density of the buildings perhaps in one session while replacing the stock items with original assets gradually.
Also, have you ever thought about natural city zoning? I’d love to see ports and warehouses in industrial zones, downtowns that are distinct from uptowns, with various suburbs across a range of economic classes. Or maybe zones could be user created sets that items could be added to and removed from and each item could have a frequency of use within each zone?
>I think a library of basic urban items is expected, but I’m also thinking of alien and futuristic cities, and mixing future and retro styles.
Noted!
>What I’m curious about is user created libraries and using stock content as placeholders to gauge placement and density of those items procedurally. I’d like to be able to work on the layout of and density of the buildings perhaps in one session while replacing the stock items with original assets gradually.
You can do that already yes, no problem.
>Also, have you ever thought about natural city zoning? I’d love to see ports and warehouses in industrial zones, downtowns that are distinct from uptowns, with various suburbs across a range of economic classes.
City zoning is already working. But if by natural city zoning you mean zoning derived from a growing city simulation, this is not available yet, but it’s on the roadmap.
>Or maybe zones could be user created sets that items could be added to and removed from and each item could have a frequency of use within each zone?
This is already possible. Each building can be given a relative probability of appearance compared to other buildings in the same district type. For example, you can specify that a particular building will appear twice as much as the others, in industrial zones. But the zones cannot be directly created (spatially placed) by the user, only procedurally placed with user control. That is on the roadmap.
Thank you for the feedback, do not hesitate if you have more comments / questions :)
Hi Arnold,
You’ll find in [removed] a link to an unpaid cracked version of your work. Jut want to let you know, hope you can close it, and make some money in peace.
Hey Mate
Thank you for letting him know. I have also sent him an email directly and a link to the page
Thank you once again.
Cheers
Thank you Alejandro :)
I don’t know what [removed] is, but I probably won’t be able to do a thing about it. It looks like it’s their specialty, sharing pirated software?
Thanks for reporting! I removed the site name to not encourage people to find this copy.
Not that I encourage people getting something for free without helping the developers who put in a lot of work but calling it ‘cracked and pirated’ is kind of misleading. Blender Plugins all have to be under the GLP license. They have to. Only if something is distributed separately and as an external app it can be copyrighted. Otherwise copying GPL software is NOT pirating and is absolutely legal. There has been a whole discussion about this where even Ton stepped in to say this: GPL software canot be pirated. It is the inherit right to redistribute it or even resell it.
Which is also in contrast to the this on the site: “SceneCity is written entirely in the Python programming language, with zero external dependencies, except for Blender itself. It is therefore very easy to install, and works everywhere Blender does, ie on Windows, Mac, and Linux.”
And right below it: “Each unit of SceneCity bought is for one user only. If several persons must use SceneCity in your studio or workplace, then you must buy as many units as the number of people using the program. Therefore you can’t redistribute the program to others, if they haven’t bought their own copy already.”
Not true. You can. You shouldn’t – but legally you can. Of course they should buy it to support you. The definitely should because the plugin looks awesome and like a lot of work but the term above is null and void. If you want to discourage people from giving your work away for free rather ask to buy more seats but don’t claim it’s legally binding.
See also this discussion:
https://twitter.com/machin3io/status/1073318108193005568
with this reply:
https://twitter.com/stephenthomas0/status/1073534420848656384?s=20
https://blendermarket.com/products/car-rig-pro-blender-kit
“You can join this server to get feedback from other users, get help or share your créations. In order to fight against illegal copies, all users will first have to identify themselves by sending me a message on the “Blender Market”. No assistance will be provided to users who have not legally purchased my products on the Blender Market.”
Completeley legitimate and I wouldn’t do it any other way myself. Also completely separate and unrelated from the Plugin license. I am furthermore not saying anything about the moral aspect of the discussion with my statement, either.
No matter what – for a GPL software you can neither claim that a number of seats has to be bought or defining that not buying a GPL plugin is ‘illegal’ or even ‘piracy’, though. All three are false.
GPL has to be free and has the absolute right to be redistributed to everybody as as long as the same conditions are met:
the source remains open and freely available and that whoever gets it can redistribute and/or sell them tehmselves under the same conditions. Anything added to the code or if some of the code is used somewhere else then this softare has to become GPL licenses as well. Period.
It should probably say:
“You can join this server to get feedback from other users, get help or share your creations. In order to join, all users will first have to identify themselves by sending me a message on the “Blender Market”. No support will be provided to users who have not purchased a car-rig-pro support plan on the Blender Market.”