Is Houdini still valid, or is it on the slow road to extinction

houdini's not in that situation because it excels in areas that other software does not and fills a niche. for instance it was used for fluid sims for one of the superbowl commercials on sunday.

>>512504
>for instance it was used for fluid sims for one of the superbowl commercials on sunday.
There were literally hundreds of commercials

>>512507
And it was used for one of them.

File: pazzaz.png (647KB, 950x738px) Image search: [Google]

647KB, 950x738px

who deenee is very intuitive. its has many useful options that beat buying plugins for maya/3ds ect.
Im not sure where youre getting the idea that its going to die..

>>512502
Houdini is not a traditional modelling tool. On the other hand you can model procedurally with nodes. So building a skyscraper (or a whole city) from smaller modular parts is the way to go.
Houdini is mostly an FX tool. And its more technical than other DCCs, meaning its made for an TD not an pure Artist.
The ability to sim huge simulations which interact with each other is the main selling point. It has its own powerful and fast Mantra Render Engine.
In TV, Movies, Advertising and Gaming it has an established position, like Maya and Nuke.
Maya & Houdini are an lovely pair, and together, they are unstoppable.
Professional Houdini operators are always needed, welcomed and well paid.

I have no personal experience with Houdini since i can't afford it and i couldn't get the cracked version to run on my machine.

>>512507
I was just pointing out one example where I knew it was used for sure, I'm sure it was used for vfx in other commercials
>>512586 this, basically
if you use Maya, try using the soup plugin and you might get an idea of houdini's power

I feel like Houdini is where Blender is headed: all procedural, all nodes; I know the goal has been procedural modifiers in Blender, and I'm sure it'll go even further with Houdini setting the example

>>512743
> I'm sure it'll go even further
I am now sure you are an idiot.