Is combustion right for me?
by Tristan Olson
on
Aug 7, 2009 at 8:38:49 pm
Hi Everyone,
I am building a production department currently and I am trying to work my way through all the potential programs out there.
Basically, I want to be able to handle all color correction and compositing work in-house. This includes basic to complicated rotoscoping. Would combustion be a good solution? Keep in mind that I am not producing blockbusters (so, unfortunately no inferno for me!)but I want to be able to put together broadcast worthy projects with the ability of fixing mistakes (ie taking people out of the shot) later.
Re: Is combustion right for me? by Don Nash on Aug 9, 2009 at 6:04:40 am
Combustion is outstanding in those areas, but the program on the whole, is being neglected by Autodesk because Toxik was supposed to be AD's next generation compositor (which is perplexing as it can't do a number of things Combustion does, and nobody knows if they ever intended for it to).
Now that AD rolled Toxik into Maya, as Maya Composite, I expect Combustion to be killed off by them as well...any day now. And quite frankly, if they don't plan to develop it any further, they are literally f**king over anyone who would dare purchase it.
If it's not illegal to do so, it's still highly unethical, in my opinion. They are probably making the excuse that it still has some good features and capability. Well, you could say the same thing about 3ds Max v1...but try to sell that now with all the other up-to-date programs on the market. Who wants to invest in a product they know has no future?
Their self-fulfilling prophecy is working just as they planned it. They don't communicate with their customers...leaving them to hang out in the wind for years upon years without a single word as to what their plans are, I don't know how anyone can recommend any Autodesk compositing software at this point, and in fact, I nominate Autodesk for the 2009 Middle Finger Award for taking a dump on their desktop compositors.
After Effects sucks at rotoscoping, and instead of fixing that, they just licensed a good rotoscoping/tracking program as a companion...Mocca for AE. I would give that a trial run and see if it meets your needs. Nuke is a bit expensive at $3500, but it is looking more and more like it's going to be the industry standard for high-end compositing (not a motion graphics tool) henceforth.
Re: Is combustion right for me? by Eric Craft on Aug 10, 2009 at 5:11:45 pm
Or buy Maya for $3495 and get Toxik for free.
Combustion is a very capable compositor and does a good job at basic motion graphics. Though AE is great at motion graphics and can handle compositing as well. AE has a much larger 3rd party community so you will fin more plugins available and supported for it. As has been said development on Combustion has be stagnant for years, so don't expect there to be any new development anytime soon, or possibly ever. However, only Autodesk knows how they plan to play this out.
Re: Is combustion right for me? by Alan Okey on Aug 10, 2009 at 7:29:41 pm
Tristan,
Combustion would be a horrible solution because it's a dead product, and it's owned by Autodesk. You have a better chance of lying down on a busy highway and still being alive the following morning than you do buying an Autodesk product that lasts even half that long. Autodesk is truly a "Toxik," arrogant company that treats its customers with nothing but contempt.
Look into Nuke and Fusion for modern, well-supported high end compositing applications with a real future ahead of them, along with Imagineer Systems' Mocha for tracking and roto work.
The best color grading application under five figures is Apple's Color, formerly Final Touch. You could buy a complete tricked-out Mac Pro system with Final Cut Studio and still have money to burn compared to what you'd spend for the closest competitive color grading solution.
Re: Is combustion right for me? by Eric Craft on Aug 11, 2009 at 3:57:55 pm
Alan, if you want to help people then do it. But you don't have to be so vocal about your hatred to Autodesk at the same time. There is one thing about being honest, there is another thing about being slanderous.
Did you think that maybe Toxik has a better life being included with Maya, and possibly other Autodesk products in the future? Maybe the sales for Toxik weren't supporting the development and instead of just killing it they attached it to a product that was selling. Now development can continue without the fear of it not making the sales requirements the company has set out for it.
Instead of always looking at the downside of things you may want to see how this could be beneficial. Maya users not get a feature film compositor for free and force 3rd party packages like Nuke and Fusion step up and be even more competitive. On top of that from my understanding there were companies at Siggraph showing interest in Toxik, now that it comes with every seat of Maya, that may have not looked at it before.
Re: Is combustion right for me? by Alan Okey on Aug 11, 2009 at 4:17:38 pm
[Eric Craft]"Alan, if you want to help people then do it. But you don't have to be so vocal about your hatred to Autodesk at the same time. There is one thing about being honest, there is another thing about being slanderous. "
What's slanderous about stating my opinion? As long as this is a public forum, I will state my opinions and assume that any intelligent reader will regard them as such - opinions, not slander or defamation.
In my opinion, Autodesk has shown repeatedly that it will kill a product without warning and with total disregard for its customers. Autodesk provides little or no information regarding product roadmaps, and hides behind inane gibberish about legal responsibility to its shareholders to not divulge future plans. In my opinion, Autodesk is a massive, soulless company without any real artistic passion, devoted solely to profit. Despite this, there are some very talented, well-meaning people working for Autodesk. But Autodesk acts in spite of, not in support of the fine work that they do.
I'm sorry that you disagree with my opinion, but I believe that Autodesk deserves all of the ill will that it has brought upon itself.
If you'd like me to precede every statement that I make on a public forum with giant boldface disclaimers stating "THESE ARE SOLELY MY OPINIONS, NOT FACT" then I'm sorry, but I will have to disappoint you. Again, I assume that anyone reading these forums has the intelligence and understanding to regard any posts as such.
Re: Is combustion right for me? by Eric Craft on Aug 11, 2009 at 9:56:33 pm
The thing is your rants only help you feel better about your decision. Your aren't helping to answer the user's question. They didn't ask for your rant on if Autodesk was a good company, they asked if Combustion could do what they needed. The answer is yes it could, and yes there are other options. You can answer the questions without the rants, this is a professional forum.
Re: Is combustion right for me? by Alan Okey on Aug 11, 2009 at 10:24:52 pm
[Eric Craft]"The thing is your rants only help you feel better about your decision. Your aren't helping to answer the user's question."
In my opinion, purchasing Combustion today could be a very bad investment for anyone who looking for a good product with a healthy prognosis for future longevity and development. In my opinion, I am doing the original poster a favor by steering him away from a dead product with a very shaky future sold by a company with a poor track record in regard to EOL-ing its products.
I don't see your name listed as a moderator on this forum. It's not your place to police this forum for opinions that are different from your own. You can chide me all you want, but I'll continue to express my opinions as I see fit. There is nothing "unprofessional" about offering my opinions in what is a very public, open forum. The Cow is not owned and operated by Autodesk. If the moderators have a problem with me expressing my opinions, then they'll let me know. As far as I am aware, this forum isn't under the watchful eye of the Politburo, and differing opinions were welcomed. If you know different, Comrade, then by all means enlighten us.
Re: Is combustion right for me? by Eric Craft on Aug 11, 2009 at 10:53:43 pm
Tristan, I hope you are smarter than to listen to a whiny uninformed ranter like Alan. In most part he has absolutely no idea about Autodesk's plans for their products. I tried to help by letting you know what other options there are, rather than this crying over things that we have no control over. The only thing he will tell you is that Autodesk is the devil and ran over his child, or something like that.
So to reiterate yes Combustion can do what you want, however development of the product has been very stagnant. So there is no guarantee what will happen with the package in the future. Your other options are AE, Nuke, Fusion, and possibly even the standalone Boris tools could do what you need. All of the packages have their advantages and disadvantages. You will need to find the one that will work best for your company.
Re: Is combustion right for me? by Alan Okey on Aug 11, 2009 at 11:18:10 pm
[Eric Craft]"In most part he has absolutely no idea about Autodesk's plans for their products."
That's exactly the point. No one who isn't bound by an NDA or collecting a paycheck from Autodesk knows what its product plans are. Autodesk does a terrible job of communicating its product plans to its customers.
[Eric Craft]"Tristan, I hope you are smarter than to listen to a whiny uninformed ranter like Alan."
If you're so informed, Eric, then please enlighten me along with the rest of the uninformed peasant masses - just what, exactly, are Autodesk's plans for Combustion? What inside information are you privy to that makes you so smug and superior to the rest of us? Oh, and please feel free to continue calling me names - it's very "professional" of you to do so on this professional forum.
Re: Is combustion right for me? by Eric Craft on Aug 11, 2009 at 11:38:23 pm
I was just expressing my opinion of you, since that is ok and everything. It is ok isn't it? Or can you only express your opinion about what you want? Remember you started with the name calling and unhanded comments to me. Don't dish it if you can't take it. Also, you have yet to provide anything of value to this conversation. If you want to be helpful list some alternatives, not your hatred.
On the topic of being informed:
1) If I could share anything I might know it wouldn't be with you.
2) I have no idea what the plans are for Combustion. So I can't comment on that.
Re: Is combustion right for me? by Don Nash on Aug 11, 2009 at 10:12:25 pm
If there is good evidence that they are still developing it, that's great...but history seems to indict AD for doing just the opposite.
The reason I hope they do add it with Max (Softimage has its own built-in compositor, so there may not be much of a need or want), is to force Fusion and Nuke to drop their prices dramtically. I like Fusion a lot, but that price tag is too steep for me in this economy.
Re: Is combustion right for me? by Eric Susch on Aug 12, 2009 at 7:58:57 pm
Eric,
Wow. What Alan said was extremely mild compared to the reputation that Autodesk has earned for itself over the years.
Myopic optimism may be the way you do business but most other professionals have to at least consider the downside of any purchase. Personally I always want to know about a company's reputation with customers before I buy software from them and if I were the original poster I would have found Alan's comment a valuable contribution.
Re: Is combustion right for me? by Eric Craft on Aug 12, 2009 at 8:47:47 pm
I have no problem with him expressing his opinion, but it was over the top and didn't provide any alternatives. It is one thing to dislike a company, but the whole "I will never buy another Autodesk product" statements are over the top and unneeded. Also, you can't base Autodesk's reputation on 2 products, who at times, were managed by people who are no longer with the company.
Trust me I love Combustion and I wish it would come back, but if something isn't giving its ROI companies usually get rid of it. Also, Toxik has a much better future than Combustion. The amount of work it would take to get Combustion of to the standards of Nuke or Fusion, would well make it Toxik.
If you really wanted to get the answers to some information you could. Beta testers and other individuals will always have access to privileged information. This is how all companies operate, its not like Adobe is out there spreading all the information about what will be available in CS5. If don't believe me read this thread on the Adobe forums.
So yes I have a problem with people who make one sided claims if you are going to say Autodesk doesn't provide their customers with information make sure you do the same for them all. I would have less of a problem if he actual provided some information beyond his hatred.
Re: Is combustion right for me? by Eric Susch on Aug 12, 2009 at 10:52:30 pm
[Eric Craft]"...didn't provide any alternatives."
Actually he did. You need to go back and re-read the second and third paragraph. Alan's post was balanced about 50-50 between his non-recommendation of combustion and other alternatives.
[Eric Craft]"the whole "I will never buy another Autodesk product" statements are over the top and unneeded."
I disagree. They may be unneeded for you but everybody is different. I for one want to know people's experience with a company I'm interested in. If their experience was bad enough to never do business again I want to know that too. Don't worry, one poster's opinion is part of a chorus and I'm intelligent enough to figure out what's going on. I'm sure others are too.
[Eric Craft]"Beta testers and other individuals will always have access to privileged information."
This is not necessarily true. I know from personal experience that it isn't true at Autodesk. I can tell you that when Autodesk fired the edit and combustion teams, the beta testers, developers, and dealers never saw it coming. It was six weeks before two highly anticipated releases and it didn't make any sense at all.
Then for the next few months Autodesk handled it all very, very badly insisting that nothing had changed even though everyone was given a pink slip, that kind of nonsense. Autodesk got a lot of grief for this and deservedly so. Unfortunately it seems the only thing they learned from the experience was to be even more secretive about future plans. Apparently they feel that if they don't say anything about the future then the customers can't complain no matter what happens. Of all the companies I've dealt with in this space Autodesk is by far the most secretive. Even Apple is more open which is saying quite a bit.
Getting back to the point... I really think the best thing to do on a professional forum like this is to call people out only when they have their facts wrong. Berating people on and on because you don't like the style of their writing seems unproductive to me.
Re: Is combustion right for me? by Don Nash on Aug 13, 2009 at 2:13:40 am
I'm with Alan and Eric S. on this. Toxic was never aimed intended to be a replacement for Combustion. If it were, they would've included most if not all the capability Combustion users were accustomed to.
Toxik may have been what AD wanted them to upgrade to, but it's like trying to sell a hammer to a customer looking for a screwdriver. They are apples and oranges, and it's been one insult after another to be told Toxik is the answer to those who have been waiting year after year...after year...after year...after year...for a modicum of development on the product they invested their time, talents and treasure on.
what's more insulting is that Apple had the decency to tell their customers that they were no longer developing Shake and dropped the price down to where it's very affordable to anyone.
Autodesk won't admit Combustion's been dead for years and yet they are still trying to charge the same price as After Effects ($1,000) for a corpse that should be worm food by now. And yet you blame a user who got crapped on, and dares to be vocal about it?
He's right on, and AD needs to hear it when they commit such a cock-up....and it's not about simply shedding a product that wasn't producing a profit. It's about leaving it's users hanging out in the wind for years, with no warning that actually they killed the product over 5yrs ago (a CG lifetime).
Re: Is combustion right for me? by Eric Craft on Aug 13, 2009 at 4:07:43 pm
I guess it is just certain people here get under my skin. Here is another thread on the same topic with input from various people, including myself, over at CGTalk. So this will be the end of my tenure in this thread at least.
Re: Is combustion right for me? by Adam Benson on Aug 26, 2009 at 3:49:30 am
Combustion is a fantastic product. In my opinion it blows AE out of the water. Yes, AutoDesk has almost completely stopped any upgrades to Combustion. Part of this is because Combustion works. Why fix it?
The rumors that Autodesk is going to kill off Combustion are not new. This rumor was buzzing around after Version 3 when it was still under the Discreet name. Discreet was owned by Autodesk and was at the time. Then all of a sudden version 4 came out. And instantly, new rumors that they were going to kill off Combustion. Then several years later Combustion 2008 comes out and instantly the rumors started flying again.
I have spoken personally to the Autodesk reps on several occasions, sometimes while having drinks with them. Whenever I ask about the rumors, they look at me like they're not going to disclose anything and say, "Ok"
Yes, they're pushing Toxik right now, and Toxik does have some intriguing features. It also has some disappointing features. Again, talking these over with the reps they tell me that these issues are being resounded all over and they can't tell me what they're doing about it, but the complaints being heard are being heard across the board. For instance, my biggest complaint has been with their Raster Based Paint program. Combustion's painter is freakin' amazing and then Toxik has this janky piece of crap paint software. I mentioned it to them, they told me that is a common complaint, and the guy who knows what they're doing about it is around here somewhere, but they can't find him right now.
My opinion... I used Combustion 3 for several years after 4 came out and found it to be perfectly robust. I upgraded to 4. I have been using it for years. It's perfectly robust. When I do have to use AE I'm always frustrated and disappointed with it and go right back to combustion.
For the price, for what you're doing... Combustion is a great choice. Unless you just get off on upgrading EVERY TIME a company comes out with a few updates.
Adam Benson
Visual Effects Artist/Musician/Sound Engineer/Editor
http://www.SleepDeprivedProductions.com
http://www.SleepDeprivedFilms.com
Re: Is combustion right for me? by Alan Okey on Aug 26, 2009 at 3:12:31 pm
[Adam Benson]"Yes, AutoDesk has almost completely stopped any upgrades to Combustion. Part of this is because Combustion works. Why fix it?"
Adam, I agree with you as far as Autodesk adding new features to Combustion. Combustion has a great toolset, and despite a desire from some users that it be a 64-bit app or have a faster render engine, we know that realistically this isn't possible without a complete rewrite that will never happen.
Where I disagree with you is that Combustion is in need of fixing due to several outstanding issues and bugs. There are some major issues that really need to be addressed.
The Color Warper (at least in the Mac version) does not currently work properly with anything over 8-bit footage. Since the Color Warper was the main selling point of C* 2008, I think it's pretty underhanded of Autodesk not make it a priority to fix the tool that they made such a big deal about promoting to get people to upgrade.
The Mac version of C* 2008 is frozen in time, because it is only supported on OS X v10.4 (Tiger) or below. Tiger has been obsolete for nearly two years. Some of Apple's Final Cut Studio apps require technology that is only present in the newer version of OS X, v10.5 (Leopard). It's not a reasonable expectation that Mac users who use other modern post apps should dual-boot into an older OS version simply to use Combustion.
Keep in mind that Autodesk is still selling Combustion 2008 with these limitations. I think it's patently ridiculous that Autodesk would sell a new product that is only supported by an operating system that was obsoleted nearly two years ago. If they don't have the resources to patch or fix Combustion to run on OS X v10.5 (Leopard) or better, they should stop selling it.
[Adam Benson]"Yes, they're pushing Toxik right now, and Toxik does have some intriguing features."
You mean "Maya Composite?" There's no such thing as "Toxik" anymore, it's been absorbed into Maya.
[Adam Benson]"My opinion... I used Combustion 3 for several years after 4 came out and found it to be perfectly robust."
No arguments with you there. The only problem is, C* 4 was never patched to work on newer operating systems, so it remains frozen in time.
Consider this hypothetical scenario: You're on a PC, running Windows 2000. New versions of some of the other apps you depend on require you to upgrade to XP. These new versions are arguably better than the last, and will improve your workflow. Unfortunately, one of your favorite apps won't work properly on XP. You need all of your apps. It's extremely inconvenient to dual boot between operating systems just to keep using that one app. Three months after XP is available, a new version of that particular app comes out. Unfortunately, it is still only supported on W2K. 22 months later, that app is still being sold, and still is only supported on W2K. Do you think this is reasonable behavior from the company selling the app? That's that situation with Combustion on the Mac.
As much as I love Combustion, it frustrates me to no end that Autodesk completely dropped the ball and stranded Mac users in 2007. The fact that they are still selling Combustion 2008 in this state is highly unethical, if not criminal, in my opinion.
Re: Is combustion right for me? by Eric Craft on Aug 26, 2009 at 7:49:47 pm
[Alan Okey]"The Mac version of C* 2008 is frozen in time, because it is only supported on OS X v10.4 (Tiger) or below. Tiger has been obsolete for nearly two years.
Be sure to place some blame on Apple then, too. I am running Combustion 4 on Vista x64 without any problems. You can't place all the blame on the software developers when the OS developers are dropping the ball. BTW, how is PS x64 on OSX, oh wait another place where Apple dropped the ball and left developers out in the cold. The question is would you being the Product line manager for Toxik and Combustion be willing to pull your already limited resources to make fixes on something that the OS developer is probably just going to break again.
Some of Apple's Final Cut Studio apps require technology that is only present in the newer version of OS X, v10.5 (Leopard). It's not a reasonable expectation that Mac users who use other modern post apps should dual-boot into an older OS version simply to use Combustion."
Apple likes to do that, they don't force you to upgrade, but if you want to use their new stuff you are forced to. Yet, let me guess you don't see it that way?
Now that is out of the way. I agree with you that Combustion isn't fully functional in its current states. It out has crashes still, but I have learned to work around most of those even in C*4. However, there are limited resources to handle the development of both apps. So someone has made a decision that the best bet is to put development into Toxik, this has paid off for Maya users. It is going to continue to develop as well, so my guess is you are less likely to see Combustion development now that the number of Toxik users has jumped exponentially thanks to it shipping with Maya.
Re: Is combustion right for me? by Alan Okey on Aug 26, 2009 at 9:27:05 pm
[Eric Craft]"Be sure to place some blame on Apple then, too. I am running Combustion 4 on Vista x64 without any problems. You can't place all the blame on the software developers when the OS developers are dropping the ball. "
How can I blame Apple for Autodesk's lack of support of an OS that began shipping in October of 2007? I didn't expect C* 2008 to be fully supported on Leopard only three months after its release. However, 19 months later I am shocked and dismayed that nothing has changed.
I am in no way an Apple apologist. I agree with you completely that Apple totally burned Adobe by changing its mind with regard to 64-bit Carbon support. But I think it's highly unethical for Autodesk to knowingly sell a Mac version of Combustion that's broken unless it is run on OS X Tiger, an OS that hasn't been shipped on a new Mac in almost two years.
[Eric Craft]"Apple likes to do that, they don't force you to upgrade, but if you want to use their new stuff you are forced to. Yet, let me guess you don't see it that way?"
Of course I see it that way, and I made no suggestions to the contrary. It's up to every user to determine whether or not any features offered by new versions of an application are compelling enough to upgrade to a new OS. In my case, it was worth it. Leopard is a substantial improvement over Tiger, just as Final Cut Studio 2 was a major improvement over FCS 1.
It's unfortunate that Autodesk has not only been unable to leverage Apple's newer technologies to deliver compelling product upgrades, but that they have not seen fit to patch Combustion to run properly on a nearly two-year old OS.
I'm glad that Toxik has been given new life as Maya Composite, but Maya Composite doesn't offer the tools that I have come to love and depend on in Combustion.
Autodesk's lack of activity in patching or updating Combustion leads me to believe that it has abandoned the Mac desktop compositing market at Combustion's price point, which disappoints me greatly as a loyal Combustion user. Autodesk has left me with no upgrade path, unless Maya Composite absorbs Combustion's toolset. It's too bad, that's all.
Re: Is combustion right for me? by Eric Craft on Aug 26, 2009 at 11:05:23 pm
It's not like it is for sale with no demo or anything. They have the demo so that users will know what they are getting before they buy it. Plus there is no use in patching for Leopard now, with Snow Leopard just around the corner.
Just curious which tools are you missing from Combustion? I know there are things in the works for Toxik development.
Personally I think they should refocus Combustion directly against AE and go at it as a motion graphics tool. With the advancements in Toxik enhancing Combustion as a Compositing tool is a waste of time and resources. IMHO, this is the only market where it can compete, but it may be too late to do that now.
Re: Is combustion right for me? by Alan Okey on Aug 27, 2009 at 12:41:00 am
[Eric Craft]"Just curious which tools are you missing from Combustion? I know there are things in the works for Toxik development."
I'd love to see Maya Composite (Toxik) inherit these Combustion tools:
- framebuffer support for popular video I/O hardware (AJA, Blackmagic, etc.)
- full-featured Text operator
- Comprehensive Quicktime file support
- vector paint tools
- edit operator
My primary use of Combustion is as a finishing and visual effects application for video content, like a software Smoke. I rely on Combustion's excellent roto and paint tools, its robust text operator and its excellent frame buffer support for live output to a broadcast video monitor.
Unfortunately, Toxik is not designed for this workflow, it's designed to be a film pipeline compositing solution. Unless it inherits Combustion's tools, it's just not very useful to me.
The real irony is, Combustion addresses all of the shortcomings of FInal Cut Studio as a finishing solution. I just can't really warm up to Motion, although it looks like I'll need to try harder given the lack of options. FInal Cut Studio insists on a cumbersome round-tripping process of sending files to different apps rather than integrating a broad toolset into a single app. Combustion gives me the roto and paint tools that FCS lacks, and an onscreen text composing tool that puts anything in FCS to shame. Apple totally missed a prime opportunity to integrate tools like this into FCP instead of insisting on a stupid round-tripping workflow. Using C* and Automatic Duck with FCP makes for a versatile editing/finishing solution that Apple itself can't seem to muster.
If you want a laugh, check out some of my posts on the Final Cut Pro forum in which rabid Apple fanboys call me an Apple basher just because I don't drink the Apple/FCP Kool-Aid.
[Eric Craft]"Personally I think they should refocus Combustion directly against AE and go at it as a motion graphics tool. With the advancements in Toxik enhancing Combustion as a Compositing tool is a waste of time and resources. IMHO, this is the only market where it can compete, but it may be too late to do that now. "
It probably is too late, unfortunately. Plus, I can't see Combustion ever having the comprehensive level of support of Adobe file formats (especially vector) that AE has. It's a shame, because I think Combustion's UI and toolset are far superior to those of AE. In any case, the discussion is academic since it appears virtually certain that Combustion's development has ceased.
Sadly, I guess there just wasn't enough money being made from Combustion sales for Autodesk to continue its development. Perhaps they lowered the price too much, too quickly. Such is the story of software - Combustion isn't the first great app to die, nor will it be the last. I hope someone comes up with something to fill the void.
Re: Is combustion right for me? by Don Nash on Aug 29, 2009 at 3:21:31 am
It depends on whether AD has reduced the number working on Toxik. If not, I contend that AD could now suspend work on it for quite some time and divert those resources to updating Combustion. I still think a 64bit recompile (with a legacy 32 bit for those that need to use the built-in and aftermarket AE-SDK plugins) that offers some performance enhancements and new Motion graphics tools, could extend it's life further until they could do a re-write.
I also think if they simply worked with Red Giant to port a copy of Particular 2, Shine and 3D Stroke for Combustion, it would breath new life into the product.
Re: Is combustion right for me? by Eric Craft on Aug 29, 2009 at 8:53:32 pm
Development on Toxik/Composite isn't stopping, and with the expanded user base I doubt they will be reducing the number of developers on it. Unless you want to see what happened with Combustion happen to Toxik as well. So like I said my guess is that there is an even smaller chance that Combustion will evolve.
