Why were the sexes split up in genesis 2?
dodgerrecords
Posts: 123
Hey everyone, I was just wondering, why the decision was made to not group the sexes together like in genesis 1. I loved having all my morphs together, and the pointless thing about it is it seems like g2f and g2m are the same thing, their morphs are interchangeable, but it makes it harder for less advanced users who may not know about transferring morphs.
Was it done out of a motivation for profit? double the figures equals double the addons(even though it honestly seems like the addons are just made once, labeled twice, and sold as two products when really they are the SAME EXACT THING).
I could be speaking out of total ignorance here, but I just don't see the point, it's an avoidable headache, and I don't recall anyone having a problem with genesis 1 and the way it was setup. Why go back to a fragmented platform?
Daz 3D is part of 
Connect
DAZ Productions, Inc.
7533 S Center View Ct #4664
West Jordan, UT 84084
Licensing Agreement | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | EULA
© 2025 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Comments
Basically genesis 2 solves the issues in Gen 1:
1. It was more difficult to make certain gender-specific clothing. (making female clothing on a figure with no breasts)
2. Making gender specific morphs required a lot of correctives due to one weightmap and androgynous base.
3. Figures never looked quite female or male, due to the androgynous base. Can make more gender-specific morphs due to each base having a slightly different distribution of the same polygons.
If I recall, it has to do with the technology under the hood that end users dont see. By splitting the sexes it simply makes it easier for each figure to be geared towards that sex in all areas.
Personally speaking, I prefer the split bases as I prefer working with G2F and own next to nothing for G2M. My biggest problem with Genesis 1 was that between both sexes, there were way too many morphs to search through and I didn't always know which one was male or female.
There was quite a lot of debate about this in the forums when G2F and G2M were first released, they have been around for more than a year now, so it is buried a bit, but you may be able to find it with a search.
These are some good points that have been made. I guess I wouldn't be complaining except for the fact that the amount of female content vs male content is like 3:1, and I use almost exclusively male characters, females get tons of morphs for genesis 2, while males barely get any. That's why I loved genesis 1, because it gave me so many damn options, and I like androgynous looking characters anyhow.
It is possible to convert the morphs for G2F to work for G2M, though the results will obviously vary in effectiveness.
I've found some problems with the split. I preferred the torso musculature on genesis to what is made from gen 2 male. I also don't care for the thin heads the men have that are based on M6.. Genesis seems to have addressed these areas better and provide more variety options.. In general I think genesis seems more versatile for me in the area of men's shapes than gen 2.
While we're on the topic, I'm curious why they stuck with T-Pose rather than A-pose for Genesis 2? I've always found doing anything shoulders to be difficult with T-pose. I suspect it makes it easier to support automatic conversion of clothing from previous generations.
These are some good points that have been made. I guess I wouldn't be complaining except for the fact that the amount of female content vs male content is like 3:1, and I use almost exclusively male characters, females get tons of morphs for genesis 2, while males barely get any. That's why I loved genesis 1, because it gave me so many damn options, and I like androgynous looking characters anyhow.
I understand the pain, but most stuff from Genesis autofits Gen2M easily. You can also fit Generation 4 items if you have M4 for Gen2M (or fit them to Genesis, save as a wardrobe asset, load it and autofit to Gen2M). I admit I didn't like Gen2F at first, most stuff for her wasn't my cup of tea, but when Gen2M hit the stage with FW Darc... well, I got hooked. I combine Genesis with Gen2M and Gen2F in my renders on a regular basis now. Genesis is still much better for fantasy creatures and kids, but Gen2M and Gen2F give nice results when it comes to adults.
The chest bugs me to tears too lol I think Lee made an effort to improve the chest, but they should have fixed the source, it doesnt eliminate the issue at all. I also liked Genesis 1's shoulders better too, seemed more realistic to me, not the underarms though G2 certainly improved that, although theres still issues in that area its somewhat reduced. Maybe Genesis 3 with have some sort of system that will allow collisions on itself, but also determine where the soft tissue is and where the bones are closest to the skin (Dreaming LOL)
I love both (all three rather) Genesis figures, they each have their strengths and weaknesses, all the same as generations prior :)
This would significantly improve shoulder seams on conforming clothing, I know many big name games handle it the same way with A-pose rather than T and the shoulder seams are near spot on in all the models. I have found myself asking the same question, because I see the issues in bought clothing, and I get the issues when attempting to make my own. But It would impact the UV mapping and rigging process, the autofits and Morph sculpting, I would imagine, especially since everyones so used to the T-pose. Still, it would be an improvement since we lack Dynamic cloth in DS.
The real reason? PA's and merchants at other sites. It's a lot easier to model clothing over a T-Pose than it is over an A-pose, unless you're doing shrink-wrapping (which is a no-no). Add to that is the fact that keeping a T-pose means legacy poses can be used by an end user with only minor tweaking (usually the hands and feet).
Weird. I mostly use G1 males because G2 look horribly unrealistic to me, not really androgynous, but more like hermaphroditic, having characteristics of both genders. In particular, as others have already pointed out, the hands and pectorals are disturbingly feminine.
Weird. I mostly use G1 males because G2 look horribly unrealistic to me, not really androgynous, but more like hermaphroditic, having characteristics of both genders. In particular, as others have already pointed out, the hands and pectorals are disturbingly feminine.
It's a matter of taste of course, but the opposite is true for me. G1 really had dead eye expressions and you couldn't make things really male or female. G2 shapes are actually more realistic; I've recently came across a reference that looks exactly like M6 body frame when working on some new body shapes. The body shapes are more closely anatomy references in G2 than G1. Of course a lot more things are under the hood that make G2 easier to work with than G1 like Mattymax mentioned.
Speaking of Genesis' underarms, has there ever been a fix morph developed? I think there were hand fixes available for original Genesis (although I didn't see the point in them actually), but any other bending fixes?
The real reason? PA's and merchants at other sites. It's a lot easier to model clothing over a T-Pose than it is over an A-pose, unless you're doing shrink-wrapping (which is a no-no). Add to that is the fact that keeping a T-pose means legacy poses can be used by an end user with only minor tweaking (usually the hands and feet).
I completely disagree on the modeling aspect, but that's subjective for each creator, I reckon. I totally forgot about poses, good call.
I think customers and vendors didn't care for the female shapes in Genesis, so Genesis 2 was optimized for more appealing female shape. The number of female G2F figures would seem to support the fact people like her more.
Aside from huge disproportion of bases for G2M compared to G2F, G2 brings in HD capabilities (none of which I actually care for). I'll admit that, looking back, G1 is a bit too doughy in some degrees while G2 have the finer detailing. However, that very same detailing on G2 can prove unattractive if you're trying to something more stylized like an Anime or Toon character, which is what I mostly do...
HIRO 5, PLEASE BE THE NEXT MALE CHARACTER!!!
Yes, the chests are something I am constantly fighting if I dial-in any M6. Agreed about Lee, wish there was a way to just dial-in the chest though. I don't always want the shorter legs and the rest of the Lee shape.
Genesis 2 seems more rigid to me in some ways in facial structure. I think the face- particularly the female or the softer faces have quite natural expressions. the expressions on the men can look sort of off. Kind of wooden. Lee's facial expression for example don't seem as free or as natural as say V6's. Smiles can look very odd on some male characters. I don't know. Diabolical. It just doesn't seem the facial structure or elements are as accommodating to movement as the female faces or genesis was.
I do like a lot of genesis 2 options though. It is still my preferred figure. I just think the geneis 2 male line is flawed and has yet to get fixed in a way that would make it as functional as I'd really like it to be.
Why were the sexes split up in genesis 2?
To prevent Genesis 2 babies?
I think they did that with earlier generations, too, by making the penis detatchable. :D
What is shrink wrapping?
What is shrink wrapping?
You can do this in Blender. It is similar to retopology, in that it uses the original mesh to create a new one over the top. Not usable for selling clothing for copyright reasons.
Shrink wrapping is just as its name implies. It shrinks a generic clothing mesh down to the shape (or as close as possible) of the figure. It is a shortcut modeling technique that could be abused to create a competing figure of the figure it was used on. DAZ's EULA use to forbid using this technique on any of their figures but they have change the language to allow it under the right circumstances.
TL;DR: shirts and spandex mesh that lack the fabric webbing you'd otherwise see on the breast and butt areas of real women's clothing. :)
I'm terribly bad at legalese - could you explain what the "right circumstances" would be?
I'm terribly bad at legalese - could you explain what the "right circumstances" would be?
Maybe if you're NOT using it to create a competing figure of the figure it was used on.
Sooooo does it mean I could legitimately use, say, Silo retopo tools to facilitate making clothes for DAZ figures now?
Sooooo does it mean I could legitimately use, say, Silo retopo tools to facilitate making clothes for DAZ figures now?
No. I believe using a part of the mesh would be for geografting. Pulling mesh from the base then retopo-ing is a no-no.
I am not talking about using the original mesh (if I wanted to reuse someone's meshes, I have JoeQuick's excellent merchant resources for that - and as you know, these are "bodysuits", which are great as a base for certain cases, but those cases are only a few).
I don't know what modeling app you are using, but in Silo, retopo tools are all about surface snapping. Generally they are meant to be used for manually creating meaningfully meshed low-polys out of your hi-res sculpts. Here's a video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B40eeum3dDU
These could be very, very useful if you are making a garment which is partly flowing/billowing, and then partly clings tighter to the body - and particularly for asymmetrical items where you basically can't use "bodysuit" bases, as they are symmetrical and topology just does not make sense if you simply start cutting out parts of them (you need to do a lot of vertex-pushing to remedy this, and actually I find this sort of editing much more confusing and tedious than creating a mesh from scratch).
So I would love to know if using these tools is legit now.
I'd like clarification on this too. Say for something like leggings, ideally you want a mesh that matches the figure in form and topology if it has any thickness.
I decided to avoid the whole issue with my current project by just making a material for G2F's legs. but like Mustakettu85 points out, if said leggings had ripped or flyoff fabric I'd still want the intact areas more or less matching to the figure, I'd instinctively go for duplicated geometry for those areas and work from there.
If you make the mesh yourself it doesn't matter how you get it to be close to the figure's skin, be it a program tool or pushing vert by vert. You just can't copy the figure's mesh and expand it to turn it into clothes. Logic here guys.. A mesh you make doesn't stop being yours because you make it snug, nor does a mesh Daz made stop being theirs if it's copied and made bigger.