<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: Any plans for a MAX version of Maya LT? in 3ds Max Forum</title>
    <link>https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/3ds-max-forum/any-plans-for-a-max-version-of-maya-lt/m-p/5562276#M89661</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;I think that depends mostly on how the whole MayaLT calculations turn out for Autodesk ( in the business sense). It's always a certain risk to provide a stripped, but cheaper version of a big package. Sure people might buy in easier, but at the same time it might cannibalize user counts away from the main package. And i'm not sure how good ( in sales numbers) the whole Maya LT for indies turned out to be.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I don't trust any vague comment from Autodesk at all in that regard, if they want to push and market something, they will praise the product and their success to the skies. Same goes for subscription numbers and simmilar things...&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;So as long as their balanace sheet for Maya LT does'nt turn out to be heavy on the positive side, i think they will not spend much thought on the other general 3d product to follow that path ...&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Just for completeness: don't forget that they already did stripped down releases 10-15 yrs back:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;First with Plasma, a seriously stripped down Max version for modelling, animation &amp;amp; rendering and with gMax, a free (but stripped ) version for game modders&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Sun, 29 Mar 2015 07:13:45 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>spacefrog_</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2015-03-29T07:13:45Z</dc:date>
  </channel>
</rss>

