Building Together 10/2023 - The bits we don't talk about...

[DGSketcher]

So a big improvement over last years launch, and nice to see a coherent strategy, however much I disagree with the bloating of AC by other disciplines. A few answers in the Q&A were given the usual non comital "we're working on it". But the one area that really troubles me amongst all these different software data exchange opportunities is the complete lack of engagement on the basics. It's no good having fancy data sharing ecosystems when the user is faced with poorly maintained and under developed basic CAD functionality. The addition of the Search function has been a positive step, but over many years there have also been multiple requests to simplify & improve the basics. Simply posting your request is WISH-13202 doesn't really offer a lot of reassurance.

@Marton Kiss When are Graphisoft going to start noticeably fixing the bugs and delivering the many basic improvements that are regularly requested on this forum?

[Funfun Yan]

I have to say that exporting DWG files is extremely troublesome, especially when it comes to dimensions. After exporting DWG, they are almost impossible to make further modifications for other people.

[Rex Maximilian]

I was struck by how much was rationalized last night, or an answer was misdirected from the original question. My question about the imbalance of MEP/S development for tools and features compared to Architectural features was answered by them simply stating why MEP/S tools were needed in the first place; which wasn't the question. How "coincidental" that right before my question was asked, there was another "non-question" about how much they loved the new architectural tools. Uuuummmmmm... ooookay.

Also, the question about why Graphisoft can't participate more on the Community Board was answered by saying they didn't want to quash or discourage the responses from other community members. The questions that are usually asked "TO" Graphisoft are mostly policy or development questions, which can "only" be answered by key personnel at Graphisoft. These largely go unanswered.

Both responses should have been:

1) We hear you. We will look into the balance of development between interdisciplinary tools and features. We agree that our focus should be on architectural tools at the forefront and will promise to do better.

2) Yes, we consider the community board a very important communication conduit between Graphisoft and our users. We will be better at interacting with all of you there, in particular regarding questions directed to us.
(* they did say they would try to "do more," but they need to understand that when questions are asked "TO" them, "THEY" need to respond).

Marton was tagged in the original post by DGSketcher, so we shall see.

One thing was clear however. We'll continue to see what most will consider over-development of MEP/S integration into ArchiCAD on a yearly basis; while much less by comparison will be developed for Architecture.

[Alison_007]

Unfortunately, it seems like GS is getting lost. Even a tool as basic as Morph and terrain seems archaic. See what Autodesk did with Revit terrain tool, splendid. Graphic Options, free modeling similar to Vectorwork. In other words, there is no shortage of references to improve, it's just a matter of listening to users and wanting to improve.

[Strawbale23]

It would appear that like many businesses, GS is beholden to the Sales and Marketing people: "We need to be able to show that the latest version of AC has these big and impressive sounding, all singing and dancing features, in order to make the bulk sales to big architectural firms".

They are trying to play the arms race game with the big boys, by  puffing up what AC seems to be capable of.

My dream for AC would be, that the developers would instead focus on creating the best user experience possible for us, the users, putting it on a whole level above the competition. This would make AC stand out, as the reference for being the gold standard in the industry. The ppl who would have to use the software would demand that AC be purchased.

The wishes system is pretty much pointless as it stands. In order to be in anyway effective it needs to have an organized ranking table with votes. Not just likes. There needs to be a ranking table permenantly at the top of the wishes page showing the top wishes, as voted for. With a member of GS activley present.

And I will go further.... a commitment from GS that at least one of the wishes in the current top five should be implemented with every update!

[jl_lt]

What did they do? Terrain modelling was one of the things one could say sucked in both softwares

[jl_lt]

I must keep insisting that there are probably 20-25 issues, big and small, that, if addressed, would solve probably around 70-80% of the main demands and needs users have.    There have been some attempts at identifying and agreeing on them, but to no avail as of now.      But im sure with a little bit more effort they could be listed (most of the ones i can think of are things that should have been addressed by now).     

My take on why they havent bothered to address most of them (it wouldnt be fair to say there hasnt been improvement) is rather bleak and ill keep it to myself, yet, I still hope they would focus on these issues before moving onto more sui generis wishes and more advanced stuff.

[Strawbale23]

The terrian modelling in AC is painful. I dread using it. It feels like it has not been updated since AC V 1.0!

[Strawbale23]

Simple things....

 In the 3D window, the ability to rotate the angle of the sun without having to go into settings.

[Marton Kiss]

@DGSketcher  & all thanks for pulling me in into this conversation and also for staying for the Q&A on our digital event yesterday.

I would reflect to the raised points in this thread with reference to what and how we delivered in Archicad 27:

• Our public product roadmap was built following all the feedback we received from our user base, combined with the market & technology trends we identified relevant.
• We introduced a revamped beta test and an open Technology Preview program, so we could validate the to-be-delivered scope and content through real-life usage. We received an overwhelmingly positive sentiment on the identified scope and lots of usage hours that helped us to fine-tune and optimize our solution ahead of release.
• While scoping Archicad 27, many community/wish-list initiated functionality came up winners in our internal scoring, including:
  • our headline feature - Design Options, which answers our most popular wish-list item - optioning, design variations and is set up for many other workflows such as phasing support
  • our multi-year journey on updating attribute management workflows, where we are mid-way in delivering the full functionality set
  • smaller but super useful improvements, such as the dimension text foreground/background control, search, FBX support, tracker calculations, schedule formatting improvements

Public voting on our roadmap - we definitely want to introduce this, but only when we can make it right, to avoid bias and steering effects - so we ask for your patience on this.

As a closing thought for my post: we would love to include all the feature request we receive in our short term roadmap, understanding the relevance of these for your everyday workflows. Our product managers are tasked to perform a careful balancing act on what to prioritize in our product increments, considering existing, formulated needs, market/technology trends and so on. 

We hope that through our long time dedication you see our solutions shaping in a direction that helps and supports your existing and future workflows.

Regards form Graphisoft HQ,
Marton