BrickLink Studio replacing LDD
Posted by CapnRex101,
LEGO Digital Designer has received little support since 2016 and LEGO has today announced that BrickLink Studio will become its digital building program of choice, meaning LDD will no longer be available for download soon.
The press release, which explains this inevitable change, follows:
LEGO BrickLink Studio to replace LEGO Digital Designer as the LEGO Group’s official 3D building app
The LEGO Digital Designer website will shut down at the end of January. BrickLink Studio welcomes LEGO Digital Designer users.
Billund, Denmark – January 12th, 2022: Today, the LEGO Group announces that BrickLink Studio will replace LEGO Digital Designer as the official virtual LEGO building software going forward. The LEGO Digital Designer (LDD) website will close on January 31st, after which time LDD will no longer be available for download. While downloaded versions of the LDD application will continue to work, people are encouraged to download BrickLink Studio, import their LDD files, and use Studio for 3D LEGO building files, and use Studio for 3D LEGO building.
LEGO Digital Designer was released in 2004 as the LEGO Group’s 3D building tool. LDD pioneered real-time rendering of LEGO bricks, virtual brick connectivity, and the compact LEGO Exchange file format (LXF) which made LEGO models built in LDD light and portable. It has played a prominent role in various offerings, from LEGO Factory, LEGO Design ByME, LEGO video games and movies. Now after almost twenty years since its conception and eighteen years in distribution, LEGO Digital Designer will retire and pass the mantle to BrickLink Studio as the officially supported and maintained 3D building application.
"Our initial vision for LEGO Digital Designer back in 2002 was to make building on a computer accessible and fun for children – to play with and share their creations online.” said Ronny Scherer, producer of the first-generation LEGO Digital Designer. “I am so impressed with how the community of creators has evolved. Builders—enthusiasts and professionals alike—have used LDD in wonderful and unexpected ways. They took ownership and created the most amazing virtual LEGO models and have grown the virtual building ecosystem. I am so proud of the team behind LDD and the greater virtual building community. They have truly inspired a generation of digital LEGO creators.”
Tormod Askildsen, head of AFOL Engagement for the LEGO Group, has been intrigued by digital building since using LDD to bring alternate model instructions for the LEGO Factory Hobby Train set to market in 2007. “When the LEGO Group acquired BrickLink,” Askildsen said, “one of the things that impressed and inspired us was their purposeful development of the Studio software. For digital building to be not only a nice feature for some, but a meaningful part of many people’s LEGO building experience, it must be an integrated and useful part of both the design, the building and the sharing experience. The talented team behind Studio see this clearly and continue relentlessly to further innovate and improve the Studio experience”.
In 2014, then-independent BrickLink created the BrickLink Studio software as a free virtual LEGO building tool. Studio was built on the industry-standard Unity gaming engine and is designed to integrate with the BrickLink Marketplace. Its .io file format is based on the fan community-developed LDraw standard with part connectivity data added to give digital bricks clutch power. Users can import LEGO models built in LDD, LDraw, and other popular tools. Studio includes useful features like model stability checking, built-in photo-realistic rendering, and an integrated instructions maker.
“Studio was created because at BrickLink, there is a great belief in how digital LEGO building could unlock true potential of everyone’s creativity by lowering the entry barriers and motivating people to inspire each other,” says Casper Thingholm, Head of BrickLink. “Going forward, the Studio team will continue to focus on making digital building as intuitive as physical building, and encourage even more builders to share their creations to inspire and help each other.”
Which program do you prefer for digital building and what features from LDD, if any, would you like to be replicated in Studio?
140 likes
90 comments on this article
God I hope they don't kill Studio
Congratulations to the Studio developers. It must be very vilifying for this home-brewed alternative to be adopted as the official solution.
You ask "what features from LDD, if any, would you like to be replicated" and I'd point immediately to LDDs groups feature. The Groups in Studio behave in a totally different way and don't let you do what LDDs did, which is just to straightforwardly organise you model.
Aside from not being able to auto-generate layer-by-layer instructions, Stud.io has always been easier to use (at least for me personally) and with better render settings, so I see this as a positive move.
...honestly I thought LDD was already killed off, surprised its still been hanging on 'til now!
@MisterBrickster said:
"God I hope they don't kill Studio"
How do you draw that conclusion from this announcement?
Interesting...
I stopped using LDD a few years back and switched to Studio, and when I updated my computer, I couldn't even run LDD anymore (although Studio can still read .lxf files). Though I'm sad to see LDD go for nostalgia's sake, its time has come and gone, and Studio is superior in almost every way.
The only way LDD is better than Studio is that I recall one could test out moving features in the application, which Studio cannot do. On all other fronts, however, Studio takes the cake. It has a better interface, allows the importation of inventories of any LEGO set, and one can render models on it.
I'll probably still do the bulk of my building in LDD, but use Studio for posing, coloring, and rendering. Studio's UI wonky for me and I loathe how things are grouped/ordered in it.
I don't have a basement full of LEGO. If not for Stud.io, I wouldn't be able to create with LEGO! I love building on Stud.io and then using Bricklink to get the actual parts needed. It's an AMAZING thing, Bricklink & Stud.io... I really hope it doesn't get taken away ever
I'll definitely miss LDD. This is great news, however the usability and accessibility of both BrickLink.com and Stud.io remain extremely frustrating and user-hostile and I really hope that focusing resources on developing BrickLink's offerings will result in tangible improvements. But I have to be honest, I'm not very hopeful.
I'm not one for digital building myself, but I was under the impression LDD died a long time ago. Certainly it was horribly buggy when I used to use, but I'm sorry for the people who kept it as their main program. It must be incredibly gratifying for the Stud.io designers though, that their program was picked over the in house version! Congrats to them.
I know it's not going to happen, but I would love to see a parts update for LDD before they shut it down permanently.
Personally, I like building in LDD better than in Stud.io, but this is mainly due to the parts grouping. I don't like all the scrolling I have to do just to get to a certain part. Guess I'll just have to get used to it.
Great. Does BrickLink studio work on Mac? I haven’t been able to look at my LDD files for years since OS updates made LDD obsolete on Mac.
@Endigo_Vandane said:
"I know it's not going to happen, but I would love to see a parts update for LDD before they shut it down permanently.
Personally, I like building in LDD better than in Stud.io, but this is mainly due to the parts grouping. I don't like all the scrolling I have to do just to get to a certain part. Guess I'll just have to get used to it."
That really is my biggest gripe with Stud.io and why I haven't fully switched over.
this is very exciting news, hopefully we'll get missing/new printed pieces/mold put into stud.io (like for example, last time I checked only one ghostbusters torso is in stud.io), overall, good move lego
@JDC said:
"Great. Does BrickLink studio work on Mac? I haven’t been able to look at my LDD files for years since OS updates made LDD obsolete on Mac. "
It does. That's where I've been using Studio for the past few years.
LDD with unofficial part updates for me.
Any time I work with Studio for something, some part of it manages to feel fiddly and annoying.
Imagine having a chromebook and not being able to use studio. Couldn't be me
@fakespacesquid said:
" @MisterBrickster said:
"God I hope they don't kill Studio"
How do you draw that conclusion from this announcement?"
Lego: We are officially going to use Studio for everything.
Random user: OMG, they are going to kill Studio!
@KotZ said:
" @Endigo_Vandane said:
"I know it's not going to happen, but I would love to see a parts update for LDD before they shut it down permanently.
Personally, I like building in LDD better than in Stud.io, but this is mainly due to the parts grouping. I don't like all the scrolling I have to do just to get to a certain part. Guess I'll just have to get used to it."
That really is my biggest gripe with Stud.io and why I haven't fully switched over."
In Stud.io you can create favourites & your own palettes of parts to avoid the scrolling. Very useful feature.
Personally, I've never used LDD as I thought it was already obsolete.
I like the features of Stud.io and am really impressed with the rendering and instruction maker. Biggest headache is dealing with flexible parts.
I haven't used Studio in a while, but my main annoyance was that when importing existing sets, it'd give errors for the minifigs and printed parts.
Importing sets is one of my favorite upsides of Studio as it means you can try alternate builds before taking sets apart etc.
(but i do realize that adding each print / sticker / minifig is impossible)
I use what I started with, which is LDraw on the MLCad was interface. You know, one of the programs that actually “pioneered real-time rendering of LEGO bricks” years (decades?) before anyone even thought of creating LDD.
I still can’t get used to the differences in Studio but this is the killing blow for me, if LEGO is gonna adopt it as their official program I might as well learn how to use it. While Mecabricks is the superior renderer Studio doesn’t make you pay for details like scratches so it’s really a matter of preference. I never learned how to use Ldraw as someone who is younger than average on here and I doubt I ever will.
I use Studio and Mecabricks which is online. Studio is easier to use and I think covers most needs. But Mecabricks rendering system is awesome (Because it’s actually dedicated server hardware).
I will say that Studio’s GUI is always a little blurry which I’m guessing is an Electron thing and how it renders. This doesn’t effect the brick area but just the menus and text.
I mainly used LDD until it bricked [pun intended] after I upgraded to a 64 bit OS. I downloaded Studio and used it to refine some models I created in LDD. I found Studio to be a bit clunky but that's probably due to unfamiliarity. Studio seems to be much more capable. Glad to see this news and I'll have to get more acquainted with the program.
I always used LDD - how easy / user-friendly for non-professionals are the interfaces of these other programs?
I'd like to see more support for studio by LEGO, especially when it comes to integrating new parts.
The studio staff just can't catch up...
I have used LDD from day 1 and will miss it. I only use Studio to import my model so I can render it.
Nice. I was reluctant to give up LDD at first because I was so used to it, but once you get past the learning curve for Studio, it really is the superior program. I love it.
On the one hand, Studio has a much larger parts library, the built in ability to check part availability, and all sorts of fun rendering options.
On the other hand, LDD has much snappier and more satisfying building, and easier menu navigation.
Given LDD's been in the dust for half a decade I've been trying to get into Studio for a while now. Guess this is the nail in the coffin!
It's been inevitable. Phil Collins has been singing about it for years.
@KotZ said:
" @Endigo_Vandane said:
"I know it's not going to happen, but I would love to see a parts update for LDD before they shut it down permanently.
Personally, I like building in LDD better than in Stud.io, but this is mainly due to the parts grouping. I don't like all the scrolling I have to do just to get to a certain part. Guess I'll just have to get used to it."
That really is my biggest gripe with Stud.io and why I haven't fully switched over."
Never really got to actually using LDD, as I didn't find starting it up very intuitive. Studio was much simpler initially, so I used that from the start. For getting a certain part, I often just type in a few characters in the search bar, so that it will show up on the screen right away.
Studio has a lot of better features than LDD but there are still some wonky controls in it that were just more streamlined in LDD. Maybe it's just because I'd formed habits, but things that would take me just one click or keyboard shortcut now take multiple clicks to achieve, ext. Only recently transitioned but still getting the feel for it.
Honestly I already thought LEGO had discontinued support for LDD, guess they consider taking it off the webpage to be the official end to it now. So crazy that it's been around since 2004!
Question for the folks in the LDD group; how do you get around the lack of most modern elements from the last 4 years? Every time I open an LDD file in that program and try to make some changes there is a huge gap in the modern part portfolio. Studio might not have every new element on the day it releases, but the patches are pretty regular and the support for retired parts is also phenomenal.
As someone who has about 5,540 files on my computer in LDD format since 2010 or before, I am not happy about this. I've been using LDD since 2005 (on another computer, long since lost) and can not stand Studio. I will not be able to transfer everything over, and as it stands the conversion to Bricklink is not the greatest: parts missing upon opening the converted file, parts aligned improperly vs. where they were placed, etc. My brother renders things for me sometimes in that program and it's a mess to get them converted. (if you can)
This is a disaster. I haven't free-built in my entire adult LEGO career, and don't order things unless I know they work and where they will go.
I can only read this post and hope for a reversal. Because as it stands, I don't know what I'm going to do.
LDD is the superior program when it comes to the building experience. I personally can't stand Studio unless it's for minor enhancements to an LDD project or rendering. It's simply not fun to build in. I will continue to use LDD for as long as possible unless Studio gets a drastic overhaul.
@Murdoch17 said:
"As someone who has about 5,540 files on my computer in LDD format since 2010 or before, I am not happy about this. I've been using LDD since 2005 (on another computer, long since lost) and can not stand Studio. I will not be able to transfer everything over, and as it stands the conversion to Bricklink is not the greatest: parts missing upon opening the converted file, parts aligned improperly vs. where they were placed, etc. My brother renders things for me sometimes in that program and it's a mess to get them converted. (if you can)
This is a disaster. I haven't free-built in my entire adult LEGO career, and don't order things unless I know they work and where they will go.
I can only read this post and hope for a reversal. Because as it stands, I don't know what I'm going to do."
Can't you just continue using LDD? Make sure to backup the installer, and you can just carry on using it.
@Galaxy12_Import said:
"Question for the folks in the LDD group; how do you get around the lack of most modern elements from the last 4 years? Every time I open an LDD file in that program and try to make some changes there is a huge gap in the modern part portfolio. Studio might not have every new element on the day it releases, but the patches are pretty regular and the support for retired parts is also phenomenal. "
A team over on Eurobricks Forums figured out how to import pieces (as well as decorations, new colors, etc.) into LDD in early 2020 and has consistently been releasing large batches of new and old parts every few months since then.
@Galaxy12_Import said:
"Question for the folks in the LDD group; how do you get around the lack of most modern elements from the last 4 years? "
I used LDD quite a bit while Lego was releasing active updates and for a few years after they dropped support...throughout that time I don't recall unsupported elements being an issue for me. If they were I could easily make do with another piece or combination of pieces. This of course is relative to whatever you're building but it was never an issue for me, even after they stopped supporting. I should note I used the Extended element menu which gave more of a selection but default modeled everything in red. Colors could be manually edited.
@Murdoch17 said:
"As someone who has about 5,540 files on my computer in LDD format since 2010 or before, I am not happy about this. I've been using LDD since 2005 (on another computer, long since lost) and can not stand Studio. I will not be able to transfer everything over, and as it stands the conversion to Bricklink is not the greatest: parts missing upon opening the converted file, parts aligned improperly vs. where they were placed, etc. My brother renders things for me sometimes in that program and it's a mess to get them converted. (if you can)
This is a disaster. I haven't free-built in my entire adult LEGO career, and don't order things unless I know they work and where they will go.
I can only read this post and hope for a reversal. Because as it stands, I don't know what I'm going to do."
I don't believe they'll be deleting the program from your computer, nothing will be stopping you from using it offline
I didn’t use LDD much after they stopped letting you actually order the parts from within the software. If they let me order from the new combined B&P/PaB store (rather than only Bricklink, which I hate using), I would LOVE that!
@PicnicBasketSam said:
" A team over on Eurobricks Forums figured out how to import pieces (as well as decorations, new colors, etc.) into LDD in early 2020 and has consistently been releasing large batches of new and old parts every few months since then."
I can't say well enough how grateful I am for these folks, so many parts they've added.
@fakespacesquid said:
" @MisterBrickster said:
"God I hope they don't kill Studio"
How do you draw that conclusion from this announcement?"
Experience of Lego history with IT?
I switched to Studio about two years ago from LDD, and as someone who uses industry-grade CAD programs on a daily basis the comparison is night and day, so this isn't surprising really. My only hope is that new parts will be released at the same time as the set in which they first appear is released.
@kyrodes said:
" @fakespacesquid said:
" @MisterBrickster said:
"God I hope they don't kill Studio"
How do you draw that conclusion from this announcement?"
Lego: We are officially going to use Studio for everything.
Random user: OMG, they are going to kill Studio!"
@kyrodes There's no need to be rude about it. This isn't reddit.
@fakespacesquid It's not a conclusion, it's a worry. TLG is going to take over running what was originally a relatively fan-focused tool. Studio is going to have to earn its keep. If the company decides it's not making enough profit for it, they'll can it, like they've canned half a dozen other bits of software that weren't profitable. Anyone else remember Lego Universe? Frankly, TLG owning Bricklink at all is less than positive.
I'm a fan of the company, but they fundamentally have to act in their own interests.
I’ve not gotten into digital building at all really, but hopefully official support for Studio will equate to greater resources for updates, perhaps factoring in some features of LDD. It’d also be great to see an iPad version.
On one hand, I love Studio's integration with Bricklink and fantastic in-built renderer, so it's great to see it become the official LEGO tool. On the other, I have a lot of fond memories of LDD, and still find it to be a nice simple tool for making quick mockups when I don't really need a heavyweight tool like Studio.
Any prospect of it going into the Microsoft store? I can't use either on my 10S laptop, something I only realised after I switched. :o(
I found LDD’s part grouping and overall UI to be extremely clunky and frustrating to use compared to Studio, so it’s a welcome change for me.
@MisterBrickster said:
" @kyrodes said:
" @fakespacesquid said:
" @MisterBrickster said:
"God I hope they don't kill Studio"
How do you draw that conclusion from this announcement?"
Lego: We are officially going to use Studio for everything.
Random user: OMG, they are going to kill Studio!"
@kyrodes There's no need to be rude about it. This isn't reddit.
@fakespacesquid It's not a conclusion, it's a worry. TLG is going to take over running what was originally a relatively fan-focused tool. Studio is going to have to earn its keep. If the company decides it's not making enough profit for it, they'll can it, like they've canned half a dozen other bits of software that weren't profitable. Anyone else remember Lego Universe? Frankly, TLG owning Bricklink at all is less than positive.
I'm a fan of the company, but they fundamentally have to act in their own interests."
I still can't quite see where the worry comes from. Lego led the way and created LDD a decade before Stud.io, and supported LDD until it was clear that the community had made stronger alternatives. I just don't see any motive or reasons they'd have for purposefully negatively affecting Stud.io. No, they don't have the golden touch when it comes to technology, but I just don't see how this compares to an open-world game or a theme-connected app
This is very bad. While LEGO Digital Designer has an old database, Studio is way behind LDD in terms of usability.
RIP desert background
@fakespacesquid said:
"I still can't quite see where the worry comes from. Lego led the way and created LDD a decade before Stud.io, and supported LDD until it was clear that the community had made stronger alternatives. I just don't see any motive or reasons they'd have for purposefully negatively affecting Stud.io. No, they don't have the golden touch when it comes to technology, but I just don't see how this compares to an open-world game or a theme-connected app"
That's the problem - TLG isn't the community. We want to enjoy our hobby, they want to make money (that's not a criticism, they're a for-profit company, they have to). There's no guarantee it will carry on as it has done. I *hope* it will, but they fundamentally have different goals to ours.
Hmmm, so within 1-2 years, the tech group that runs and maintains Lego.com and the shopping site will be looking after Stud.Io?
I'm sure we're all looking forward to that..............
@MisterBrickster said:
" @fakespacesquid said:
"I still can't quite see where the worry comes from. Lego led the way and created LDD a decade before Stud.io, and supported LDD until it was clear that the community had made stronger alternatives. I just don't see any motive or reasons they'd have for purposefully negatively affecting Stud.io. No, they don't have the golden touch when it comes to technology, but I just don't see how this compares to an open-world game or a theme-connected app"
That's the problem - TLG isn't the community. We want to enjoy our hobby, they want to make money (that's not a criticism, they're a for-profit company, they have to). There's no guarantee it will carry on as it has done. I *hope* it will, but they fundamentally have different goals to ours."
Again, they created their version before Stud.io or really any viable alternatives existed, and maintained it until the alternatives were better. If getting rid of building programs was in their interest, LDD would have never existed and Stud.io would have been gone as soon as they acquired Bricklink. But none of those happened. Because there's no reason that it would be in their interest. If Stud.io was super costly to upkeep, maybe, but I haven't seen anything that would suggest that at all.
Lego made a basket. Then someone else made a basket that was eventually better than Lego's basket. Lego has now shifted their eggs to the new basket. I cannot see, at all, a reason that Lego would now want to get rid of the new basket. And I haven't seen anyone provide reasons outside of "What if Lego makes the worst possible decision that doesn't benefit them at all"
If this was a concern of "Lego might trash Stud.io, the better tool, in favor of their in-house LDD" back when the merger was announced, then sure, I could see where you're coming from. But that's the opposite of what is happening here.
@fakespacesquid said:
" @MisterBrickster said:
" @fakespacesquid said:
"I still can't quite see where the worry comes from. Lego led the way and created LDD a decade before Stud.io, and supported LDD until it was clear that the community had made stronger alternatives. I just don't see any motive or reasons they'd have for purposefully negatively affecting Stud.io. No, they don't have the golden touch when it comes to technology, but I just don't see how this compares to an open-world game or a theme-connected app"
That's the problem - TLG isn't the community. We want to enjoy our hobby, they want to make money (that's not a criticism, they're a for-profit company, they have to). There's no guarantee it will carry on as it has done. I *hope* it will, but they fundamentally have different goals to ours."
Again, they created their version before Stud.io or really any viable alternatives existed, and maintained it until the alternatives were better. If getting rid of building programs was in their interest, LDD would have never existed and Stud.io would have been gone as soon as they acquired Bricklink. But none of those happened. Because there's no reason that it would be in their interest. If Stud.io was super costly to upkeep, maybe, but I haven't seen anything that would suggest that at all.
Lego made a basket. Then someone else made a basket that was eventually better than Lego's basket. Lego has now shifted their eggs to the new basket. I cannot see, at all, a reason that Lego would now want to get rid of the new basket. And I haven't seen anyone provide reasons outside of "What if Lego makes the worst possible decision that doesn't benefit them at all"
If this was a concern of "Lego might trash Stud.io, the better tool, in favor of their in-house LDD" back when the merger was announced, then sure, I could see where you're coming from. But that's the opposite of what is happening here."
I mean I've explained my reasons, I'm kinda done here, but dude have you not heard of LDraw? LeoCAD?
@MisterBrickster said:
" @fakespacesquid said:
" @MisterBrickster said:
" @fakespacesquid said:
"I still can't quite see where the worry comes from. Lego led the way and created LDD a decade before Stud.io, and supported LDD until it was clear that the community had made stronger alternatives. I just don't see any motive or reasons they'd have for purposefully negatively affecting Stud.io. No, they don't have the golden touch when it comes to technology, but I just don't see how this compares to an open-world game or a theme-connected app"
That's the problem - TLG isn't the community. We want to enjoy our hobby, they want to make money (that's not a criticism, they're a for-profit company, they have to). There's no guarantee it will carry on as it has done. I *hope* it will, but they fundamentally have different goals to ours."
Again, they created their version before Stud.io or really any viable alternatives existed, and maintained it until the alternatives were better. If getting rid of building programs was in their interest, LDD would have never existed and Stud.io would have been gone as soon as they acquired Bricklink. But none of those happened. Because there's no reason that it would be in their interest. If Stud.io was super costly to upkeep, maybe, but I haven't seen anything that would suggest that at all.
Lego made a basket. Then someone else made a basket that was eventually better than Lego's basket. Lego has now shifted their eggs to the new basket. I cannot see, at all, a reason that Lego would now want to get rid of the new basket. And I haven't seen anyone provide reasons outside of "What if Lego makes the worst possible decision that doesn't benefit them at all"
If this was a concern of "Lego might trash Stud.io, the better tool, in favor of their in-house LDD" back when the merger was announced, then sure, I could see where you're coming from. But that's the opposite of what is happening here."
I mean I've explained my reasons, I'm kinda done here, but dude have you not heard of LDraw? LeoCAD? "
I have, I'm not usually a fan of downloading 15 programs to run 1 program, LDD and Stud.io are basically all-in-1 and are infinitely more user-friendly
Yes, very sad. Anyway,…
@AdamSenna said:
"Any prospect of it going into the Microsoft store? I can't use either on my 10S laptop, something I only realised after I switched. :o("
You can switch out of S mode in the MS Store.
@KotZ said:
" @Endigo_Vandane said:
"I know it's not going to happen, but I would love to see a parts update for LDD before they shut it down permanently.
Personally, I like building in LDD better than in Stud.io, but this is mainly due to the parts grouping. I don't like all the scrolling I have to do just to get to a certain part. Guess I'll just have to get used to it."
That really is my biggest gripe with Stud.io and why I haven't fully switched over."
They have parts groupings, but if you can't find exactly what you need all you need to do is just learn what the pieces are officially refered to. This can be accomplished by understanding that scrolling through all the elements will give you the proper knowledge of the naming conventions. So stick into it and keep using studio!
Argh! NEIN NEIN NEIN!!
I love Lego Digital Designer. It is very user friendly, and recently I discovered a Eurobricks post where fans have been creating all the new pieces for it.
Studio sucks! It is very very difficult to use, dark and confusing. It also has a very annoying habit of messing up imported LDD files (and it's not because of colours that aren't available or 'illegal' connections).
I will never understand why Lego just abandoned LDD, and now they are welcoming digital building by just bandwagoning onto the fan created Studio. LDD should have always been supported!
I also don't see what the problem was with just keeping the download links available for those that want them. If Lego wants to officially recognise Studio, fine no problem, but there's no reason why that has to mean the official death of LDD.
Give people choice!
TLG killed Modulex, but I'm pretty confident that they will keep Stud.io
It's very much in their own interest.
@Modeltrainman said:
" @AdamSenna said:
"Any prospect of it going into the Microsoft store? I can't use either on my 10S laptop, something I only realised after I switched. :o("
You can switch out of S mode in the MS Store."
Purposely moved to it, just didn't occur to me that LDD wouldn't be authorised for the MS store. The benefits of the walled garden outweigh the benefits of having LDD, for me.
I still regularly use LDD's hinge align tool to connect angled assemblies, and then import them into Studio. LDD's flex tool is also way, way better than Studio's, and as others have pointed out the LDD groups feature is something Studio is lacking.
:(
I get that some people are really angry about this, but on the flip side, it's cool to see people trying to engage in rational discussion about the topic.
I like Stud.io. It isn't perfect, but some of what I run into could be my computer's issues, too. Tried Mecabricks once, never used LDD or any other software, so I don't have much to compare it with.
I do a lot of 'rough draft' work in Stud.io when I'm trying to figure out if something will work, instead of adding to the mess on my desk. I also like that I can put something together there and create a 'want to buy' list of parts. I have some things that I'd love to create as big 'digital only' projects someday, but that's quite a list, and it'll be a while before I have that kind of time on my hands.
TLG obviously only wants to dedicate resources to supporting one digital building tool going forward. Probably a good thing as this will be maintained by the bricklink team and frees up TLG from having to develop a new solution for themselves; why bother when you've acquired a quite serviceable solution like is the norm these days by big corporations.
If the officially supported studio could add support of buying parts directly from lego (like creating a cart in pick a brick) that would be good
A lot of complaining about FREE software. Frankly, I'm surprised Lego kept LDD around as long as they did.
Did they fix rendering support for RTX graphics cards in Studio yet? It was broken last time I did any rendering
@monty_bricks said:
"Did they fix rendering support for RTX graphics cards in Studio yet? It was broken last time I did any rendering"
It worked for me in the latest Early Access version which was updated on the 11th of January.
In the release version it gives me a cuda error message.
I recently downloaded Studio 2.0 after a friend told me about it. I'm looking forward to trying it out.
@Trigger_:
Even though I use LDraw, I fully explain the pros and cons, as I understand them, or all three main digital design systems. For new users, I’ve been recommending Studio for years. For me, I have years of experience with MLCad, which means I’d not only have to learn all the tricks of any new system I try, but more importantly _unlearn_ tricks that are unique to the MLCad interface.
@xccj:
They discontinued support for LDD, yes. They stopped issuing part updates, or patching the code. Now they’re going to stop hosting the installation files, so anyone wanting to try it out will have to find someone who can forward them a copy.
@fakespacesquid:
LDD led the way down the path that LDraw had paved before it? Not wanting to use it does not excuse pretending it doesn’t exist.
As for using LDraw, I think I have at most three programs installed. The first is LDraw, which is just a formality. Nobody actually uses LDraw anymore, because it’s a DOS program, but it established the file formats that are still in use today. The one program I actually use is MLCad. I think there’s a third program that I downloaded at one point, but I can’t even recall what it is, which tells you how much I actually use it. But I only use it as a digital design aide with the intention of building physical models at some point. I don’t make renders of the results, so a lot of the add-on programs hold no interest for me.
RIP LDD
Interesteing news. I never actually used LDD--I came over from using original LDraw (the DOS version!), then to MLcad, then to Studio. I think I gave LDD a try in its early days but I found it lacking. Studio's pretty great, but it's definitely unintuitive in places. Hopefully having Lego behind it will give it a bit of polish. Still, it's capabilities are fantastic and I think it'll be nice to have one standard to rally behind.
Glad I downloaded LDD...HATE Studio. If Studio's interface was closer to LDD, I probably wouldn't; but as it stands: I have a plethora of projects (hmm...poetic:)) saved for/from LDD in one form a "completion" or another (although I mainly use LDD to 'rough out' ideas for builds).
@KotZ said:
"I'll probably still do the bulk of my building in LDD, but use Studio for posing, coloring, and rendering. Studio's UI wonky for me and I loathe how things are grouped/ordered in it."
in this respect LDD was and IS far more convenient, so no way I switch to Studio, except for polishing models with new parts absent in LDD, when 90% done in LDD
Studio needs a lot of work before it will be a decent replacement for LDD. Just trying to place one brick in Studio can be several minutes of work, where in LDD, it's grab brick, possibly change orientation slightly, place brick, done. The worst is trying to incorporate minifigures & accessories into builds. I still do 99% of my work in LDD, then import it into Studio, sometimes spending more time in Studio fixing alignments of parts, before making renders &/or instructions. The rendering processing & instructions is the only area where Studio wins out currently.
In the eternal battle between Studio and LDD (which is now over), to me Mecabricks stands out as an extremely valid alternative
Hope there's some budget from the LDD program to divert towards improving Stud.io then... I love it, but wouldn't it be great some more physics!
My kids enjoyed LDD as seemed intuitive and easy for them to design simple models, which could then be converted to instructions. Studio just seemed too grown up and daunting for them, but I understand why most AFOLs prefer.
As to the previous comment, LDD came from the Lego Factory era, where you could design your own models and then purchase the parts from Lego, with the most popular designs becoming Factory models for others to buy. The former was very expensive for Lego to run at the time so they moved onto Lego Ideas instead, so purchasing directly from bricklink would still likely be far cheaper.
With LEGO's support of Stud.io I hope we can have an integrated system for ordering parts directly from LEGO and not just Bricklink.
Honestly, I didn’t even know Lego was actively supporting LDD anymore anyway.
I tried and gave up on LDD so many times. The first time I used Studio I was hooked. For me, Studio was so much more intuitive. I’m sure there are some features of LDD that are better and I look forward them being incorporated to Studio. I’m optimistic and hopeful that this will provide more and quicker updates to Studio.
I just want this available for Chromebooks or Phones. It's murder to install Digital Designer. If it does I would love it
But will LEGO's designers actually use stud.io? I heard rumors that LEGO has an "internal" version of LDD that they use and that they allowed the animators for video games and movies to use. It would make sense it would run on the same engine as the public version. It's wonderful we got such a robust piece of software it's clear is a valuable business asset of LEGO, even if it is a "lite" version its performance is outstanding.
If "internal LDD" is really a thing, I have a conspiracy theory: LEGO doesn't want us to have LDD. They know it's too good for us. They regret letting a version of their corporate software be free to all. First, they remove the online gallery of downloadable MOCs. That in and of itself was a tremendous blow to the LDD creator community. They tried to sabotage public!LDD with the final update, introducing a plethora of bugs and removing parts and adding nothing. They just left it in that pitiful state, to drive away new and returning users. Which brings us to today. The LDD community on Eurobricks has been instructing users how to install the fully functional penultimate version of public!LDD, which you can still find on the internet... just not from LEGO. And in 2019 and 2020 they cracked the code and were able to hack it to provide fan updates. LEGO discovered this, decides to publicly axe LDD here and declare stud.io to be the "new" "OffICiaL" program to drive everyone away from their own LDD software, which they think is too good for the public to have. And with these Eurobricks hackers saving public!LDD, they decide it's better to have LDD forgotten without a trace than to fill it with bugs to make it look bad.
However, it would be hilarious if LEGO were so lazy and bad at making in-house software they just use stud.io internally from now on. But we know better. They are still using their top-secret super powerful version of LDD!
It's ironic how the fans are now keeping LDD alive and continually updating it while LEGO "adopts" fanmade software.
I last built online through a program over 11 years ago when I was first getting back into LEGO and didn't have a large collection to pull from. I'm sure there are plenty of benefits to seeing how it works in a model, but I much prefer hands approach. Something about in hand that helps me think I guess.
I can see benefits of a program, but if I am going to be sitting in front of a computer all day at work, I don't also want to sit in front of a computer for my hobby.
So I don't think this change will affect me. Although I wish I had my old computer that had some of the previous LDD builds I did just for nostalgia sake.
@Sethro3:
There are things that digital design can do that freebuilding can’t. You can design something, buy exactly what parts you need, and build it. You can easily switch between two alternate builds of part of the model, to see which one you (or anyone else) prefers. You can build with parts that don’t exist or that are too expensive for your budget. You can copy/paste large sections. You can swap out parts in the center of the model without having to risk destroying the whole thing. You can spit out instructions very easily (I’ve done photo instructions for a small Technic model before, and it sucked). And the one that matters most to me is you can design the exterior first, and then build all the internal bits. I do that last one a lot whenever I design a new car, since I find it easier to sort out the internal SNOT once I have a defined space.
I’m not saying there’s anything wrong with freebuilding, It comes with its own set of pluses, I even freebuilt a 6-wide car over a decade ago (it’s the only car I’ve designed that has adjustable headrests on the seats). I’m glad I can say I’ve done that at least once, but I don’t ever see it happening again. That one had only around 200pcs, where two vehicles I’ve designed in the last five years are close to the same size and clock in at 301pcs and 378pcs.
@VorpalRyu said:
"Studio needs a lot of work before it will be a decent replacement for LDD. Just trying to place one brick in Studio can be several minutes of work, where in LDD, it's grab brick, possibly change orientation slightly, place brick, done. The worst is trying to incorporate minifigures & accessories into builds. I still do 99% of my work in LDD, then import it into Studio, sometimes spending more time in Studio fixing alignments of parts, before making renders &/or instructions. The rendering processing & instructions is the only area where Studio wins out currently."
Couldn't agree more. I hope I can keep LDD alive on my current computers, because I far prefer the building process and parts organisation. I've been forced to work with Studio twice, because I participated in both Bricklink designer programs, but I could never get the hang of it and it suffered from soooo many bugs. It's also clear that it was designed for AFOLs whereas LDD can also be used by a younger demographic. I wonder if Studio will come with a 'light' version for this purpose.
@jhs8swd said:
"It's been inevitable. Phil Collins has been singing about it for years. "
This is a terrible joke of which I wholeheartedly approve
That's a shame. I find Stud.i.o just awkward to use. I can never find the parts I'm looking for. It's always a hassle with the colors. LDD was much more intuitive.
LDD still has the more user-friendly interface. It was clearly designed with kids in mind. BLS seems to have been made for people with more of a technical, graphic designer mentality. I hope BLS is redesigned to be more accessible.
Regardless of what platform you use, one benefit that hasn't been discussed here is that, as long as you have the digital files, you can load elements that you’re not familiar with to check scale against parts you know very well. The RPotD for 1-17 is a Technic steering wheel. I’m not the only person who commented on it that they’d expected it to be more minifig-scale, only to learn otherwise when seeing one in person. I’ve used MLCad several times to check size of wheels and tires to make sure I was only looking at ones that were compatible with whatever I was working on at the time. It would suck to order a bunch of parts only to find out that you’d just done the equivalent of buying Duplo parts for your System MOC.