Quite possibly. And an interesting train of thought!Raiyan 1.0 said:If they have automated manufacturing facilities, wouldn't they have 3D models to fees into their computers?Yvl9921 said:No, it doesn't work that way. Furniture makers are gonna have blueprints, but they're not gonna hire a freaking 3D modeler for something that can be done on paper.Raiyan 1.0 said:Here's another idea - how about furniture manufacturers letting the game developers use the 3D models/textures/normal maps of their furniture (I'm pretty sure they have those during the conceptual/manufacturing phase)? The developers won't have to spend time on creating these assets and potentially not pay for them either, as they work as in-game advertisement.snave said:snipped for space
In fact, stretch this idea to other facets of asset development as well. It's a win-win situation for everybody!
I suspect some of the fancier arteur-type designers would have things 3d modelled first. I think any 3d models designed for manufacturing would be in pieces though and only the frame; although likely easily recombobulated, if a bit polygon heavy in results (then you get into the time cost of micromanaging components vs. building from scratch). The point about encouraging manufacturers to release models is interesting, although I wonder if any form of advertising discounts (where would the branding go?) would offset the level of micromanaging asset "purchases" from a plethora of companies. I suspect if things ever went this way, it'd be games developers subcontracting (rather purchasing) models to a monopoly or duopoly of catalogue-spewing virtual-life warehouses, which in turn may independently procure or reconstruct designs from legitimate physical design companies.