I’m doing some research for school on AWAY3D but i cant find te reason why shomeone would chose AWAY3D in flash above other 3D software.

In my experience AWAY3D is slower and harder to use. Is there something i’m missing?

Sorry if this topic already exist please redirect me if so.

Can you define your “experience”, what you did try and how easy it was in other “flash 3D softwares” to be achieved compared to Away?

Open source, that’s reason enough for me.

Comparing Away3D to Alternativa3D (this goes for the Flash Player 11 versions too ).
This is also coming from someone who isn’t amazing at programming, but this still applies.

Alternativa3D was much easier to understand, and classes did what they were named.

I didn’t need any tutorials to figure out Alternativa3D just the API documentation, but Away3D on the other hand took a very small amount of looking up to figure out.

There are some other things I’m not sure if Away3D has ( Maybe I just couldn’t find them, but you could tell me please ).

Like welding all vertices setMaterialToAllFaces.

I don’t know maybe I’m just nitpicking…

Away3D would be my choice for a much larger project, because its always been free, and it’s opensource!

I plan to use Away3D for all of my molehill needs.

@empend classes did what they were named Like welding all vertices…
What about using the class called… Weld?

Sorry I didn’t explain my last post too well.
I didn’t have much time to write it.

Why should welding vertices require another class?
It just feels messy to have to do things that way.

With Alternativa3D I don’t have to worry about things like that.

I learned Alternativa3D first then I learned Away3D, so maybe its just weird having learned Alternativa3D first.

No matter how many times I try Away3D, it still always feels like Alternativa3D is easier, or simpler.

My only request is that is be as clean feeling as Alternativa3D.

I’m not saying you did a bad job at ANYTHING.
This is all just opinion.

Don’t hate me. :(

Away3D is the most featured Flash 3D engine and it is OPEN SOURCE.If you wrote a couple of lines of code in your life you should get the meaning of those words.Regarding the performance ,you statement is pretty arguable .
See my benchmark of the 4 top notch engines (Away3D,Flare3D,Alternativa3D and NOOB3D) and read the comments below .

http://blog.alladvanced.net/2011/07/29/performance-comparisonaway3dflare3dalternativa3d-and-noob3d/

In some case Away shows slower results and in other it outperforms the rest.It really depends on such factors as your PC,coding proficiency and the nature of the application.Still ,because the engine internals are open you can take a lead and fine tune the performance to your app.You can’t do the same with the rest of the engines.
Eventually if your code a crappy code even the best engine in the world will yield the worst FPS and Away3D gives you a full control to tweak and adjust the framework according to your needs/skills.

PS:BTW,regarding the simplicity of usage,have you tried to set the animated characters in Alternativa3D 8x ? If you had ,I am not sure you would still have said its architecture is simple

Alternativa3D 8 I picked up quickly, and through most of it I felt like I was coding for Alternativa3D 7.

I was able to easily add animated models, lighting, and whatever else they actually had in the engine ( Not that many features yet compared to Away3D4 ).

I some what wish adding lighting in Away3D 4 was as easy as it was in Away3D 3.x, and/or Alternativa3D 7/8.

It was just quicker to put together before.

For Away3D 4 I’ll probably make another API that simplifies the newer Away3D API’s…

I’ve said this before, and I’ll say it again.
Away3D is making a 3D engine, but Alternativa3D is making a 3D engine for games.

“For Away3D 4 I’ll probably make another API that simplifies the newer Away3D API’s…”

Why don’t you just write your own 3D engine from scratch if it bothers you that bad? There’s two kinds of people: those that sit around bitching about what they don’t like, and those that work to make things the way they want them. The premise of this thread is completely negative and non-productive

Did I say I wanted to write another whole 3D engine?

“There’s two kinds of people: those that sit around bitching about what they don’t like, and those that work to make things the way they want them.”

After reading your post, it sounds like you’re the first one.

The only reason I started comparing the two engines was because the thread creator was comparing it to another unknown engine.
I was also complimenting both engines, so you need to calm down.

I think I’m able to have an opinion, especially if someone publicly makes a thread asking everyone for it.

OK be sure and let us know when you release the New & Improved Away3D 4.0 API

Are you sure you should even be on these forums?
I hear nothing positive come from you.

I like how you talk poorly/sarcastically about someones abilities, which you have never seen before.
You have no idea about what anyone is capable of.

Quit trying to make yourself feel better and get a life…

Willem, for your post you have chosen Away3D 3.x for software version. The first thing you should be aware of when analysing the market is that Flash 11, and Away3D 4.0 are a world away from Flash 10 and Away3D 3.6.
This is down to the fact that Flash 11 supports hardware acceleration, which is the major difference you will have experienced if comparing Flash with say, Unity3D. Flash 11 is expected to be released during the Max conference which is under way right now.

It’s healthy to question the viability of your development platform once in a while, and I really do pity the developer who has to choose right now, without much experience of any of them.
I myself have wrestled with the question of Flash vs. Unity, and if it wasn’t for Molehill, I would definitely have switched for 3D projects. Having chosen to stick with Flash, there’s only one 3D framework that comes close to my needs and that’s Away3d 4.0 (and before that Away3Dlite).

Away3D is a framework put together by very experienced AS3 developers and it’s major plus point is the sheer range of features available to the developer, and the rapid expansion of the engines capabilities. Unfortunately, but understandably, the documentation lags behind. But this is where Open Source comes into it’s own. You can at any time delve into the code to see how things are working, and even change the way things are working if they don’t quite match your needs. I often extend or replicate the Away3D classes, making my own copies, so that I can update the main framework without losing my changes. From that point of view, Away3D is perfect for me, though that doesn’t mean it’s perfect for everyone.

empend, you seem in two minds about Away3D, and that is again understandable. You point out Alternativa is simpler, but at the same time say you would use Away3D for larger projects. That’s a fair strategy, choosing the simplest technology to do the job. For someone developing a “one-off” project in 3D, there may be easier frameworks than Flash/Away3D, but for developers that intend to make many 3D projects Away3D is clearly the most flexible framework.
Flexibility and Simplicity tend to oppose one other, and the art is to make things as simple as possible, without making them so simple that they become restrictive. I feel Away3D strikes a good balance there.
As far as the number of classes, vs. size (e.g. Weld as class instead of function). Yes, you could put all your functions into one class, but that not only makes it harder to maintain and expand, it also means you’re compiling masses of code that probably won’t be used which is inefficient for compile times, transfers over the net, and memory usage.

There is no real answer to the question “What technology is best?”. That question always belongs within the context of a particular project and not least, the experience of the developers working on that project.
Despite working with Away3D 4.0 pretty intensely for 6 months, I haven’t tried all the features yet. It’s not something you will learn in a weekend. On the other hand, the possibilities are endless.

You said it best, theMightyAtom.

“You point out Alternativa is simpler, but at the same time say you would use Away3D for larger projects.”

The only reason I say that I would use Away3D for larger projects is because I’d rather not deal with an engine that isn’t open source, and wasn’t always free for something I may want to update over time.

Not because it takes me a little longer to code for it.
I just said I like how Alternativa3D API is.

I hear you, price is always a consideration too

Worth remembering though, the cheapest on paper isn’t necessarily the cheapest in practice. I use 3D studio MAX, proprietary, closed, and very expensive, but for me a great deal easier and quicker than Blender, so in the long run cheaper for my clients.

Away3D is better and cheaper, imho. If there was a better proprietary framework, I wouldn’t dismiss it on price alone. From everything I’ve seen and tested so far, there just isn’t one.

one of the Flar3d developers answered the question “how to choose your flash3d engine” like this:

“How you choose? In the same way that you choose a woman when you go to a disco. Try everyone!!!
You choose the first that says youre nice?
No!
There is a flavour for everyone!”

i really like the statement!

[edit:] if all flash3d-engines happened to be girls, than away3d would be a very cute one, with nice features and doesnt wanna get paid for sex, but shows you everything.