>vertex/box model a character >is ready for games/animation

If I can remeber correctly, the first commercial modeling tool to feature something similar to modern "scuplting" was Caligari TrueSpace on the Amiga. So, like, scuplting 3D isn't a new thing and since then, it's still a niche. That should tell you something.

>>576018
non artists really need to stop coming to this board.

>>576018
What kind of retarded workflow are you thinking of?
>poly model game/animation-ready asset
>send it in to sculpt application for detailing
>bake results into maps
>apply baked detail back onto original mesh

If you want to start in ZBrush or Mudbox and then decimate your way down to a low-res asset, that's your choice and really one of many when it comes to sculpting programs. Most of the time though, you import assets that are already partially finished.

File: 1466474807488.png (165KB, 639x462px) Image search: [Google]

165KB, 639x462px

>>576018
yeah m8, the retopo is a pain in the ass, but sculpting still offers two major advantages:
>its way easier to work out your proportions and move things around without worrying about any technical shenanigans (concepting/blocking/modeling)
>you get a kickass normal or displacement

Shouldnt be a locked workflow though, each project can be different and benefit or not from this method.

Also, the thing is, with sculpting you can pretty much have your final goal approved and worry with all the technical shit after. Imagine poly modeling a whole character and your client comes back with a gazillion feedback; it messes everything up and renders a lot of what you've done useless. If you retopo an approved sculpt though, you're fairly sure to do it only once. It sucks and takes time, but it's a sure shot.

>>576031

If you're just going to go right ahead and apply baked maps back onto the original LP mesh you sent to your sculpting application - why not just do it in Substance Painter and save the hassle?

Seriously - why put yourself through all the bullshit of Zbrush and fucking around with geometry and stressing out that you're gonna break the silhouette... just to get the same normal map out of it that you'd get if you just painted straight into a normal map in Substance where you can see exactly what your height detail is gonna look like in a PBR engine *as you're creating it*

Using sculpting apps on your LP box model, just to just come up with a normal map for that exact same LP box model is utterly fucking pointless these days.

>>576113
>implying that painting a heightmap in a software limited to a 4k-resolution is the equivalent of sculpting fine details on tens of millions of polygons

>>576146

>limited to a 4k-resolution
It can handle 8k and 16k in some instances.

>sculpting fine details on tens of millions of polygons
Which is then just gonna get compressed down into a 2/4/8k bitmap.

Yeah - you may get a little bit more fidelity with a sculpting application but the trade off of speed and simplicity is WAY worth it.
And anyway - the limitations of 3D painting applications are gonna become total non-issues in the very near future.

Sculpting surface detail just for the sake of creating a normal map is going to become a thing of the past very, very soon.

>>576157
I hope you're right m8

>>576146
> limited to a 4k-resolution

Isn't limited to 4K anymore and supports UDIMS, anyway, so you can have separate 4K maps for each tiny little bit of your mesh if you're that concerned about microscopic detail.