Without Ordinary To re-state from the comments below and the OP: No one is suggesting making a "basic copy of Blender in the viewer". The OP clearly states the objective of this Feature Request. In fact, one of the purposes of this request is to avoid the complexity of Blender. However... if a featured mesh-maker could be offered with similar power to the existing Edit box (with abilities to combine mesh pieces into one object, link, etc) and if it were as easy to use as the Edit box, that would be great.

Nelson Jenkins The answer is covered in the original post and echoed in the comments below: because Second Life from the start has been an in-world environment, with in-world creation tools. Sitting alone by oneself with your head buried in Blender isn't the same experience as creating in-world.

External 3D creation software existed before Second Life, but they still invented the SL prim editor. Same concept for mesh. We're not asking for an extremely-complex Blender-level tool. Just something that can create a versatile mesh shape and texture.

This isn't "reinventing the wheel". It's making the wheel more accessible and easier to use in the SL virtual environment.

Eren Padar But who exactly benefits here? Experienced modelers do not need this. Inexperienced modelers would be throwing their time away learning a proprietary modeling program that most likely won't do much more than Mesh Studio.

I'm not saying Mesh Studio is the best solution, but I am saying... what would incentivize LL to want people to have a small chunk of modelers keep their SL window in the foreground instead of the background while they work?

And even if anyone substantially benefits - why in the world would LL want to start developing an entire 3D modeling suite for free when there are already better, free-er, more flexible, and comprehensively maintained options?

Nelson Jenkins I understand that you don't personally see the value in such a tool-- and that's what this discussion is for: to get opinions, pro and con. But perhaps you would care more about this concept if you didn't already use external mesh programs and were just an everyday user wanting to make mesh objects. (Others here indicate such a desire.)

Many of your questions and points have already been answered (even in the OP), so I'm not going to re-hash those items. But to point out (again)-- no one is suggesting LL develop "an entire 3D modeling suite". Re-reading the original post will establish what is actually being requested. Why / if / how they would do that... is up to Linden Lab. If they see value in providing the everyday-user such a tool (just as they've provided prim-creation tools), that will be their decision.

You ask "even if anyone substantially benefits...". That's a self-answering question. Several people here expressing their desire for such a tool and the attention this is getting is likely a tiny representation of the actual number of people that would welcome such a tool. It might be noted that this has caught Linden Lab's attention as a potentially legitimate concept-- since it was included in the latest Feature Request email for populace examination. Undoubtedly this is not the first time Linden Lab has heard this request.

In all the posts here I've seen against this concept, I have yet to see a valid reason to not employ such a tool (aside from Linden Lab's time and investment in developing it of course). I believe that time and investment would be recovered. While I can imagine mesh creators not wanting to put the power of mesh in the hands of the everyday person... that's not a valid reason to deny such a tool to the general populace.

So thus far, I've not read one real, valid reason to not have such a tool. "External third party tools already exist" isn't reason to not create an easy-to-use in-world tool for all SL users. It would allow creation as never before.

An in-world mesh tool would allow us to create shapes-- in world-- that could not be created prior. This would allow ANYONE to build far more attractive creations at no cost and far less of a learning curve than Blender. Undoubtedly, more attractive and varied creations would be a benefit to Second Life. It would set in-world creation of objects to a whole new level.

I doubt that many people would legitimately object if such a tool suddenly appeared as part of the Second Life builders toolset. ; )

Eren Padar You keep using phrasing like "suddenly appeared" as if all LL has to do is snap their fingers and an entirely new 3D modeling tool will just... suddenly appear.

I have read your original post and all the comments, you're just describing digital sculpting, which isn't typically used for game dev because it's inefficient, imprecise, and unoptimized. So I assume you mean some middle ground between prims and actual mesh models - or, in other words, a SketchUp clone. Something not designed for developing models for use elsewhere, but also no more intuitive or capable than anything else - in fact, much more limited.

Except Linden Lab maintains it, because... why?

What is actually the use case for someone needing intermediate modeling tools in realtime in-world, and how is that use case so profitable to LL that it would justify a whole team of devs working full-time for months, if not years, to develop it?

How is that any different than just keeping the windows side-by-side? Again, what's the value add? Just not having to alt-tab to answer an IM?

Nelson Jenkins When I said "suddenly appeared" it should be evident I didn't infer that the development would be sudden. The intent of that statement was that users would be "suddenly" introduced to the mesh tool when the project was completed and released. I would think that obvious.

To be considered is that as many times as this has been discussed on SL, LL might already have some ideas on the drawing board, and may already have some concepts in mind. Surely this is not a brand-new, totally fresh idea they've never considered before. ;D

Digital sculpting can take many forms. It isn't by nature inefficient, imprecise or unoptimized. (In reality tortured prims are a form of "digital sculpting".) LL could actually build an optimization tool into the system which would eliminate unseen vertexes... thus saving system resources and LI count.

This Feature Request does not at all describe a Sketch-UP clone. I believe the original feature suggestion to be worded very clearly, is it not? I must admit growing tired of having nay-sayers trying to twist the concepts of this proposed feature. To what agenda?

You ask how this is any different than keeping windows side-by-side? I think I've already answered that, more than once, but I'll answer it again:

Because such a tool would be easy to learn, easy to use, and wouldn't have a straight-up learning curve like Blender and wouldn't have the extreme expense of Maya. The value-add is that it would be available to everyone (even beginner builders), IN-WORLD-- just like the prim editing window. Anyone who wanted could make a mesh shape and incorporate it into their build, thus adding to the variety and unique appearance of Second Life.

Personal preference and experience in using external mesh tools doesn't negate the overall value of those concepts. This tool will sound more attractive to someone who doesn't know how to use Blender or similar complex external products.

This mesh creation tool has the initial concept of simply making mesh shapes available to the populace. If they combine those mesh objects, an optimization function could eliminate internal vertexes (for obvious reasons). That is a far more basic tool than Blender... but still of significant value.

In addition, we wouldn't have the upload fees of current mesh objects. We could create a mesh just like we create prims, link the mesh, optimize it, texture it, finished project... but more awesome than plain prims.

Why then would Linden Lab do this? Because 1) It would make the world more varied, beautiful and interesting (which is always a benefit) 2) Beginning merchants could sell their mesh items on SLM 3) It would even the building playing field somewhat... and make SL more fun again 4) We would be creating mesh items IN-WORLD, which means we could immediately size them to properly fit and not have to test and test and test again.

It doesn't take much thought and imagination to see the value of such a tool if one has an open mind and isn't already immersed in a mesh-creation system that they personally prefer.

To be fair, there are questions I might ask you in return:

Why are you so dead-set against such a tool? I can see that content creators might not like having mesh tools in the hands of the average person... but what skin would it be off anyone's nose if the everyday user could make mesh objects easily and in-world?

Why do you care whether or not Linden Lab decides to invest in the development of such a tool? If they see the value in the concept, it's their corporate decision.

What detriment would a basic mesh-creation tool present to the Second Life platform? (Especially when compared with the numerous advantages listed above.)

These are questions I do not see answered in any of these comments. I have presented several benefits... but aside from personal opinion and bias I've yet to see anyone present a truly valid reason against such a tool. "I like to do things this way already" really isn't relevant to this concept.

What is relevant is that this tool would be available to the average everyday user, within the Second Life environment, easy to use, and would improve the creative potential of ALL Second Life builders.

Those are major pluses any way you look at it.

Consider this scenario: how popular would Second Life have become if from the very start Linden Lab had said, "Modeling tools already exist outside of SL so we don't need to create a prim editing system".

I'm pretty sure I would not have taken much interest in SL, I would never have become a scripter, creator or merchant... and I believe that would have been the case for tens of thousands of other users. In-world building tools were a major part of what put Second Life on the map.

I hope this answers your questions. I realize you already have your own preferred methods for creating mesh objects. That doesn't negate the significant value an in-world mesh-creation tool would present to the entire populace... and thus Second Life as a platform.

That said, I believe I've explained and defended this concept about as much as it can be. The advantages of such a tool should be clearly visible at this point.

"Why are you so dead-set against such a tool?"

I'm not. I think LL's development resources would be better spent on features that would make new things possible, not recreate existing industry-standard software that practically every other game dev is familiar with and already has a plethora of training resources, plugins, etc.

"What detriment would it create to the Second Life system?"

Linden development time is a finite resource, unless it's your suggestion that LL should pay someone else, or hire new staff, to do this, despite it not having much identifiable value other than "it'd be cool and convenient".

"Why do you care whether or not Linden Lab decides to invest in the development of such a tool?"

Because there are other features that creators could benefit from that haven't been implemented since before mesh was a thing.

"What detriment would a basic mesh-creation tool present to the Second Life platform?"

Ignoring that you repeated the same question 3 times basically, in terms of a concrete detriment, I don't see the point of packaging a rudimentary and proprietary 3D modeling interface on top of the existing one built into the game already.

If LL wants to expand prims, great. All for it. But to task them with somehow distilling Blender into an easy-to-use, intuitive app, that can only be used to upload Second Life models...

Question to you instead. Why does that app have to be built into the viewer? Realtime mesh modeling in a multiplayer environment would be a groundbreaking feature. If you want LL to make a 3D modeling app, why does it have to be built into the actual Second Life client?

Once again - what EXACTLY is the value add for that, beyond it historically being in the spirit of what Second Life is "supposed" to be? What time is saved? What methods could be improved?

If your suggestion starts and ends at "make a modeling tool" that's fine. I'm asking you, if you were tasked with making a modeling tool for Second Life, what features would be unique to it that can't already be done, and how would they work?

Nelson Jenkins I believe I've already answered every question you posted above, so with respect I'd suggest re-reading if you still have those questions.

I do understand what you're saying about finite resources, but in truth the purpose of this thread is to discuss the potential of this project. It is up to Linden Lab to decide where to allocate resources.

Every project they tackle could be met with someone claiming that other things are more important. But we're not in charge of the company. Eventually LL decides what they will or will not implement. If they regularly declined projects because "something else is more important"... we perhaps would see no new features at all.

As prominent examples:

Windlight already existed, yet LL decided to devote resources to developing the new Environment system. Were there other "more important" things that needed to be tackled? Probably yes, but they made the decision, and people seem to love the Environment Editor.

Pathfinding was already handled to a large extent by already-existing pathfinding script systems. Still, they invested resources in developing Pathfinding. Why did they do that? According to WIKI: "Up till now, content creators had to use resource-intensive scripting workarounds to emulate intelligent character movement. With the addition of pathfinding, content creators will have a much easier and better performing way of creating characters that can move around in the world." So LL made the call, devoted the resources, and created the Pathfinding system... although a method already existed.

That's very similar in concept to this Feature Suggestion: mesh creation made easier and more available.

The new glTF PBR graphics enhancement system was for visual enhancement only... to make the system look better. Brighter, shinier, more realistic. Were there more important things to tackle? Possibly, but were they to just ignore enhanced graphics because other projects needed tackled? That was Linden Lab's decision to make. In all such situations, Linden Lab makes the call.

You stated, "despite it not having much identifiable value other than "it'd be cool and convenient"." I would think "cool and convenient" would be enough to at least warrant consideration.

In this thread I point out the advantages and benefit of in-world mesh creation. Those advantages should be obvious. If we debate setting priorities, nothing will ever be accomplished. At some point or another, Linden Lab has to make the call.

Feature suggestions are to present an idea before Linden Lab... and then let them decide the value of the concept. Yes?

I (and others) consider this project proposal to have significant value. I've posted the numerous advantages of an in-world mesh-creation tool. I recognize that you disagree, but I think you disagree for the wrong reasons. You're concerned with Linden Lab's finite resources. I leave resource management to Linden lab and instead consider instead Second Life activities and improvement of tools.

I think the concept of an in-world mesh design tool rocks. Hopefully LL sees the advantages of such a tool as well.

Andromeda Quonset I think it highly unlikely (ie impossible) that LL will ban mesh objects, nor should they. They are very valuable items. I do agree the prim count on a region could be increased. Opensim has proved this, and numerous tests have proved beyond all doubt that "prims don't lag". I would like to see LL allow at least 45,000 prims per region as is often seen on Opensim, but that could greatly affect land economy dynamics... and in the case of inexperienced builders, might increase lag by way of using too many textures and scripts along with that prim increase. That said, such increase could be allowed on private sims where builders would only affect their own region... and likely would increase the desirability of owning a private sim.

That said, I own two very prim-rich regions on Opensim that have over 90,000 prims each with no lag-- because I keep textures and scripts reasonable.

But as far as mesh goes, I think we can be assured it's here to stay, and we'll never see a 500,000 prim count on any region (nor is such even remotely needed. I've never seen a region with even 100k prims).

Eren Padar, I agree with your opening message about building and the sense of community, and how it mostly seems all-lost with everyone resorting to offline mesh building. I also happen to think that 500,000 prims is an unreasonable prim count to ask for, but given some of the huge constructs I've seen in mesh, it is the range of prim count that I suspect would be needed to replace some of these huge constructs, and have some place to park them. This is all just to give some idea of how badly an in-world mesh creation tool is really needed, despite it being a huge coding project. You put a space station above a sim, a few starships, and some buildings on the ground, and you have more than what a current sim can hold. I own 1 sim in Second Life. I also have several instances of openSim that are instanced on my how computer for when I need the resources for working on a project.

Andromeda Quonset Oh I understand now. In mentioning that 500,000 prim limit you were describing what would be required to accomplish what we might otherwise accomplish with a basic mesh-creation tool... at far less system resource. Now I gets it... and fully agree. : )

Mark Nova I agree with you Mark that the prim is far from dead. I was speaking from the viewpoint of a merchant who recognizes that mesh objects far outsell prim-based objects (which have fallen considerably in popularity). Agreed for many people prim building is still enjoyable, but in the merchant field prims have significantly lost customer popularity. As you say, a mesh creation tool would be "a great addition that would be a big help and benefit to many".

Eren Padar oh ofcourse, most people wont buy anything these day's if it is not mesh as most think mesh is best in all cases, some cases prim is better, just depending on the application really. I do hope that a good mesh creator tool for inworld will be implemented as it is rather frustrating to have to use programs outside of SL to create things for SL.

Woolfyy Resident I agree that prims aren't totally dead. But when one can make a mesh item of 1 prim that would require 30 regular prims to make the same shape... it's evident that mesh is going to win the day. Mesh avatars are now the way to go.

While I agree that prims can be very versatile... they're not as versatile as mesh shapes. I still have a place in my heart for prim creation. But it's pretty obvious mesh has taken over the market. Thus the need for an in-world mesh creator.

Eren Padar There are still things that prims can do and mesh not ... mesh can be good for some details or furniture but very bad for big structures for example

Woolfyy Resident There are also things that mesh can do and prims cannot. One could debate the value of prims vs mesh all day. That doesn't negate the need / desire for an in-world mesh creation tool.

Eren Padar An easier tool and much more appropriate for in-world mesh building would be a prim to mesh converter.

That way you could assemble prims and generate one multi face mesh from it in spite of trying to adjust faces from a sphere, which will never be as precise as using a tool like Blender or so. The advantage too in the in-world way is that you can even add extra scripted features to ease assembly (for example auto generate colars, flowers etc in different shapes). It could even make some scripters add extra libraries for such a use.

Some tools already got done using a call to a web server to do it though it could have been done the same way fully in-world by LL ...

Woolfyy Resident I agree with you regarding the value of prim to mesh converters... but don't agree they are "much more appropriate". They cannot make "true" mesh shapes. They merely turn prim shapes into a mesh object. Now that is indeed quite a boon, but it's not equivalent to creating mesh shapes.

I have a friend that makes some rather amazing creations using just such a tool. But the point you make about a mesh sphere "will never be as precise as using a tool like Blender" also applies to prim-to-mesh converters (even more so). The reality is there are many shapes that simply can't be made with prims, even with a prim-to-mesh tool. A multi-point sphere may not be as accurate as Blender... but it's more versatile than prim-to-mesh. It's better than what we have now.

I think one of the best examples I can give is creating a dragon avatar. Create one using prims... and create one using mesh. I can guarantee the mesh dragon will be fancier, more impressive, and will sell better. I know this from experience because I am the creator of Dwagons... both the original prim model and the mesh Dinkie model. The mesh model is definitely better... and could not be made with a prim-to-mesh converter.

Your suggestion is good for a short-term semi-solution, but I've heard many people voice a desire for an in-world mesh-shaping and texturing tool... along with wondering why SL didn't provide such from the start in a virtual creation environment. Such a tool would put mesh creation in the hands of people who don't have the time, patience or skills to master a complex (and external) mesh-creation program.

Prim-to-mesh converters is a good suggestion. But I've been a creator and merchant for about 20 years now and have used many such tools to create both sculpties and mesh. I do believe (and many others agree) that an in-world mesh-creation tool would be a significant plus for those who wish to create true mesh items while they are in-world, enjoying the SL environment and association of friends. After all, isn't it to Linden Lab's benefit to have people spend more time in-world rather than offline with their heads buried in Blender? ; )

Eren Padar What i meant is that it is impossible to do what Blender does though it is much easier to use things already existing.

For example, you can first position prims that you then convert to mesh as the positioning tools are already existing. It can work that way also to make a dragon as with the correct scripted tools you can auto generate groups of primitives that at the end make just one mesh.

Moreover it is closer to the way Blender creators work ... In Blender, you don't spend your time using multi-faced balls but at first simple elements that you then make more complex assembling, destorting etc.

Considering that you will never have in SL a tool like Blender it is also important to think creation tooling that can be easy to extend in terms of features for example scripting it, and not just to play with multi faced balls that will quickly look like nothing and be impossible to adjust precisely.

Applying mathematics you can for example create a tail which is no more than a 3D script calculating a curve with elements all along it that you can then adjust manually etc.

And if we want to reuse another tooling already existing, imagine that you can punch your assembled elements converted into mesh in the same way you apply forces on ground.

And once you have done the form that you want you can decide on how many faces your want to add or the roughness etc.

In such an approach it makes a full tooling reusing things already existing ... as LL will never create an in-world Blender and it is not the aim.

Woolfyy Resident The last time I checked the prim to mesh tool was not cheap, nor can everyone afford it. Why are you so against this basic mesh tool request-- a concept that people have discussed ever since mesh was introduced on SL? If LL decides to do this, how is that not beneficial? Personally I would love to be able to make an infinite variety of shapes using an in-world tool.

The "use what we already have" way of thinking would never have brought about many changes on SL, such as the Environment system (and the resulting merchant sales) because "you can already get environments using Windlight". I feel you're missing the point: many people want an in-world mesh creation tool.

To be honest: it seems to me you're promoting your Wizzbox project at the expense of this feature request.

As of this post there are six people who have upvoted this request-- and it's barely 2 days old. There ARE people who want this feature. So how about we take a breather and see what others think rather than trying to kill this concept right out of the chute. ; )

Eren Padar As i have decades of experience in the tech industry, let's point out one thing that any tech company knows and that you seem to forget certainly because you are lacking experience on the business side of that industry : when you want to have a real (useful) project accepted, you need to rely on existing things as no serious manager will accept to spend time and money on things too far away from the main goal of the company ... It is also why i was talking in terms of tool chain etc.

Moreover as far as it is incorporated into the viewer features, it is free ... as i saw that the mesh converter cost was a key problem that you mentioned.

Keep in mind too that 6 people do not make a world anywhere. Also remember that Blender starts with a cube and that rigging simple parts is often visualized too with cubes to easily visualize orientation. It may be funny to play with mesh but it is totally useless if there is no tool chain.

PS: And please don't mismatch things FYI I made my WizzBox (and many other things) first of all for me to relax, doing things that usually do not exist anywhere else. I don't care at all about what others think about it or any other of my projects, i first do it for my own personal use BTW i could even make it totally free including its hundred of themes as i don't need earning any L$ to pay for my SL life ... My motto : you like it, use it, you don't like it, i don't care ...

Woolfyy Resident "As i have decades of experience in the tech industry, let's point out one thing that any tech company knows and that you seem to forget certainly because you are lacking experience on the business side of that industry..."

Wow. Seriously guy...

As far as SL goes, having been a very active member, land owner, scripter, creator, avatar creator, merchant, animation maker, live performer and more on SL for going on 20 years now, I think I have some understanding of how the system works.

In addition, for over three decades I owned a real-life international software and consulting company, developing and selling professional business software, installing and troubleshooting systems, and providing business solutions. (I even have a college degree! Gashp!).

So contrary to your assumption, I do have notable experience in management concepts, the chain of product development and corporate operation, especially in the computer field.

Sometimes a product is built on existing concepts... and at other times it's something that's a whole new branch and takes the market by storm (as an example, the iPhone... from a computer hardware company).

I disagree that this concept is "too far away from the main goal of the company". The goal of Second Life has ALWAYS been to promote in-world creation and building. A mesh-making tool is a next logical step, a predictable and natural part of that process.

"Moreover as far as it is incorporated into the viewer features, it is free ... as i saw that the mesh converter cost was a key problem that you mentioned."

Any mesh conversion done by a viewer makes the worst mesh designs possible, heavy on resources with internal, out-of-sight vertices taking up valuable LI and bounding boxes that make surface recognition impossible. The more prims used to make a complex shape, the worse that problem manifests. That is not a valid alternative to a true mesh tool. As someone having "decades of experience in the tech industry"... you are surely already aware of these issues. A mesh tool would greatly reduce or even eliminate those problems.

Your position is clear, I have stated my position, it's now Linden Lab's decision. I can only hope your negativity hasn't unreasonably influenced that decision. On the other hand, I appreciate the opportunity to counter "solutions" that aren't really solutions... and point out the sensibility of a next-stage in-world mesh-making tool. Perhaps that will have a positive influence.

Eren Padar FYI i'm not negative but business / tool chain oriented. When you were consultant i was owner or top manager of some major companies and there is a huge difference in between managing a real business and consulting, also the reason why i never used consultants but hired people ... And please read what i wrote in its entirety in spite of rewording things that I didn't meant. End of discussion.

Woolfyy Resident This thread is not about comparative RL experience, nor is it about personal bias regarding the value of consulting. You have taken this concept considerably off-track. So yes, it is far past time to end this "discussion".

This thread is about a requested useful feature. There is no real validity in your objections and suggestions-- most of which are aging and increasingly outdated and contain numerous downsides.

An in-world mesh creation tool could be a valuable addition to the SL tool system. Whether that project happens or not is up to LL to decide.