http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=6664Quote:
Jon Peddie gives us an interesting perspective on the games industry and the efforts being made to make asset exchange as easy as possible.
One the face of it, it should be a simple thing to own what you create and to exchange it. In practice, it doesn’t work out so well.
What is the difference between data exchange in something like COLLADA compared to things teams I've been involved with for game development use, like Perforce?
I think the big deal is that it's an open source standardised approach, meaning no one company has control over what can and can't be exchanged.
3D design asset exchange isn't my forté, however :)
Ah right, inter-company exchange, not intra-company.
I can see how that's an issue when you are licensing middleware etc. but I'd have thought that if you were handling anything licensed you would want control over what can be exchanged.
COLLADA is a data interchange format, for moving assets between tools in your content pipeline.
oo getting nearer to understanding now - it's intra-pipeline then, similar to tools people use to import models from say maya to an animation package? But actually a description format for the data which these packages can hopefully read and write to (this is more up my street, we have the same thing in sequence databases).
edit: yup.. it's an XML schema :)
I'm suprised the Physics Abstraction Layer didn't get a mention. It lets you import COLLADA physics specifications to a number of different physics engines.
Major thread revival?