3D BLOG/ARTICLES/RENE MITCHELL-LAMBERT ON DESIGN INTENT AND WHY MAYA WORKS OUT OF THE BOX

Rene Mitchell-Lambert on Design Intent and Why Maya Works Out of the Box

May 24, 2025

Article by Yuri Ilyin

RenderHub sat with Rene Mitchell-Lambert, a Hard Surface concept designer, and talked about his work, the Star Citizen video game, how it differs from other projects, the peculiarities of hard surface modeling, and the threat from AI.

Strix Division Fortress by Rene Mitchell-Lambert

Please, tell us about yourself. How did you start your career in 3D?

I'm a Hard Surface concept designer with 7 years of industry experience. I currently work at 1047 Games on Splitgate 2, which is launching this summer. Alongside this, I also run a mentorship program on my Discord channel.

I've had an obsession with fast cars and motorbikes from a young age, my dad had car and superbike magazines growing up, so I'd look at them all the time. He also played video games, so I was introduced to them early! Like many children, I thought I wanted to be a racing driver, MotoGP racer, or a pilot. However, as you can imagine, you need rich parents for all of these.

I was also fascinated by how things work. From as early as I can remember, I would binge offline encyclopedias we had on the computer, before I had the internet. Once I did get online access, I would stay long after school browsing HowStuffWorks. I spent HOURS searching for information like "how do car engines work," "how does a processor work," and "how does RAM work."

I was into sports, obsessed with high-performance machines and speed, as well as the human body. I constantly questioned the mechanics of it all - from vehicles to high-end computer tech, and even to running 100 meters. I used to do athletics and sprint a lot, but I hate jogging - it's too slow. So I've always had an innate obsession with speed, aesthetic design, and functional design (like computers).

Overall, my formative years were filled with school sports, Xbox video games (Star Wars, FPS shooters like Halo Reach, and driving games like Forza), drawing from observation, and questioning life itself.

I was obsessed with the future as a child, both in terms of science fiction and in my personal life. In the short term, I wondered what I'd do when I was older; in the long term, I pondered the future of transportation and life in general.

I wanted to do many things, so I tried different subjects and kept pivoting when I hit personal limitations in each field. Being a racer, for example, required an insane amount of money. Athletics heavily relies on genetics, and my hard work was often in vain. Computers required an advanced understanding of math, and I struggled to keep up with the more complex concepts of higher computing.

As time passed, I realized I was great at understanding abstract concepts, but not the heavy math side required of engineers. I'm more visual than theoretical, very logical in a holistic way, but with limits on how deeply I can get into technical theory.

By 15, I decided it would either be a pilot, architect, or game developer. I leaned toward architecture and even had an internship at 15 years old. But I found out it wasn't for me either. However, while I was there, I was introduced to The Third and the Seventh by Alex Roman - an iconic architectural visualization piece. It was the first time I saw truly photorealistic architectural visualization, and it sparked my obsession with 3D.

My uncle is a pilot. Today, he flies the biggest plane in the world, the Airbus A380, for Emirates. He was kind enough to give me a flight lesson in a small plane when I was 16. While it was a very memorable experience, it wasn't how I imagined it (due to the height, there's no sense of speed). I thought it would feel like flying in a dream, but in reality, the cockpit blocks the view. I suspect flying an F-22 would be a different story, but I'm not becoming a fighter jet pilot.

Between the ages of 15 and 19, I didn't have any long-term access to a PC. That sounds crazy today since everyone has good computers, but back then, getting decent processing power was a struggle. So I didn't start 3D properly until I was 19.

I began my 3D journey in 2014 while attending the University of Hertfordshire in the UK. At the time, I could only place primitives and do very basic extrusion operations, but I didn't understand topology or anything like that.

Did you choose your specialization - a vehicle concept designer - from the very start, or was it something that you came to organically? Do you have an engineering background?

I knew I wanted to be a hard surface modeller from the beginning, as I loved Transformers, iRobot, and films like that. But once I started studying at university, I realized that I didn't like modelling other people's concepts, which is what a VFX modeller would be doing. I wanted to do my own designs, which is more a concept artist's than a modeller's territory. So over time, I would add my design style if I had to work using a reference or design it all from scratch myself.

I met Alex Senechal in 2016 (before he even posted his first gun), and he became my mentor for the following years. He advised that I should do props to get my foot in the industry, so that was what I focused on alongside vehicle work!

This is why I was a prop artist for my first job at Ubisoft, as props were the thing that would get you hired more easily.

University Final Project - Props

Once I was in the industry, however, my passion for vehicles took over, as I found vehicle shapes more engaging than those blocky shapes, which you can probably see in my work. So I focused on that after work, with personal projects. Unfortunately, I don't have any engineering or industrial design background. I think that would be amazing to have, but I'm self-taught. I just study a lot due to that obsession with how things work.

Your ArtStation account carries quite a few assets made apparently for the still-upcoming Star Citizen game. Can you share a bit of details about what it is like to work for this project? How different is it from, well, any other?

I loved my time at Star Citizen. It was the best fit for me in terms of my design taste, and tonight I'll be playing it a bit after I finish. I'm a big fan of the project, and I think their level of ambition is necessary to push the industry forward.

The biggest difference, as you can tell from how long the game's development has taken so far, is the attention to detail and the scale at that level of attention to detail is simply unmatched! When I do concepts for games, they have quite a high resolution. I model everything and animate it too. I put a lot of attention and care into intricate curved surfaces and modelling quality. But in most games, this gets reduced once I pass it on to production, either due to poly count limits or time restrictions. Star Citizen matches the concept quality in the game, no corners get cut. This is part of the reason I love going into the game to look around. It's the benchmark for design, and, in my opinion, it is only matched by Cyberpunk 2077. Yet Star Citizen's scale is, well, another planet... quite literally planetary levels of scale!

Other than Tom Clancy's The Division 2 and Star Citizen, have you been involved with other gaming projects?

Yes! For the last 3 years, I've been working on the upcoming Splitgate 2 game, which is going to get released this summer! It's been a great experience, it's the longest I've been at a company as well!

Quite a few people on the team worked on Star Citizen, as well as Halo and other major AAA studio projects. So it's been an incredible experience meeting people I've heard of from many studios!

Reference: Splitgate 2 Hover Car

Hard surface modelling is often considered a particular specialty. What, do you think, makes it that distinct, and why?

Hard surface modelling is quite distinct because it favors a brain structure that doesn't fit everyone, the one that prefers structure over overall freedom. It also attracts people with a passion for machinery and machines. Unlike organic modelling like ZBrush, hard surface modelling always has some form of constraints and defined structure or limitation. Poly modelling has aspects like topology and edge flow. CAD has somewhat fewer restrictions, it depends on the software and the client's requirements. However, there's still more structure than with ZBrush or 3D-Coat, for example. For some, it's unintuitive. For me, it was a fit!

What, do you think, is more challenging for a beginner artist: getting a firm hold of hard surface modelling or organic modelling?

I think it depends on the type of artist and how their mind works. Hard surface modelling seems to be more challenging for the majority of beginner artists because most artists don't approach art structurally, but rather expressively. Organic modelling allows more expression as it doesn't have strict constraints like edges or faces. This allows a beginner to see visual feedback faster, they push and pull a ball, and suddenly they can see a sensible result, bad or good. They make progress and get a positive feedback loop quite quickly. Whereas with poly modelling, it's very hard for a beginner to get a sensible result like shape from a block. So if they don't push through that hard part, they may never bother to stick with it at all.

What tools do you use (other than Maya) and what was behind your choices?

I used to render in Keyshot. These days I only use Maya, and I don't actually render anything for work, the viewport is enough most of the time.

My showreel was a playblast from Maya's viewport, actually. I push the lighting as far as I can. I use Photoshop sometimes for paintovers as well. For moodboarding, I use PureRef; I also use it for quick line-overs.Before the Blender cult comes after me, I don't use Blender at the moment for the same reason I don't render things: my focus isn't on software or even pretty pictures. It's all about design at the moment.

I'm investing all energy into designing in a software-agnostic way, so it doesn't rely on high-end tools. I don't use plug-ins or custom short-keys, it's plain Maya out of the box. I rarely do booleans. If you look at my work, you'll notice I have zero greeble pieces, no unnecessary or unintentional panel lines, and my topology always flows. It's quite a purist approach.

Strix Division Prototype Laser - SL04 by Rene Mitchell-Lambert

It's not about having much of an ego for being a purist, I just like knowing I can do EVERYTHING by myself without reliance on plug-ins or tools. Ego comes from knowing that whatever I create is 100% my creation, every brushstroke (almost like painting with the standard round brush).

There are some amazing Boolean-based or upcoming CAD software like Plasticity, but I'm personally focused on the core design principles, and Maya is more natural to me than using a pencil, so it allows me to focus on highly intentional design.

Can you share a bit about your methodology and approaches in creating the models?

Yeah, sure! I design fully in 3D, I don't do sketches or iterations and silhouettes. My mind comprehends 3D form, so with 2D there's just a disconnect for me. Whatever I may sketch is not going to be my style, and it won't be great, because I don't think in 2D.

I do 2D for work if my client demands it, but I don't think it represents my design language well. Most people who are amazing at drawing don't design like me, so considering I'm not even amazing at drawing, there's no chance I'll design like me in 2D.

I also work with planes, not boxes, as boxes make me feel restricted to boxy designs. I prefer to use thin planes to form lines, and then with Subdivide on, I can extrude and bend them, like drawing a line in Photoshop. It's definitely not a normal approach, but it's in line with how I think. Mesh density-wise, I model mid-poly for concepting as it gives me more flexibility (this is visible in my 2025 showreel where it starts with the wireframe). Once the model is finished, and if a high-poly version is required for a render, then the edge flow is already correct, and I just do an edge loop pass to reinforce the flow and ensure it smooths well.

Reference: Star Citizen 2 GREYCAT STV

What is your stance on realism in video game graphics? Is it something video game developers should pursue?

Realism? YES! YES! YES! YES! YES! Where is Crysis 4???? Why does this generation look so lacklustre five years in? It's VERY disappointing!

In my opinion, different games exist for different purposes. I think there's a misconception that all games are made to be "fun." This is outdated. In the beginning, when processing power was lower, that was a fitting paradigm. However, today some games are made for immersion. Think of God of War, these are games that are practically interactive movies. They can be fun, but that's not their primary purpose.

Some games like Elden Ring or Dark Souls are challenging, they're made to be overcome, not necessarily "fun." Many people torture themselves with games like this, but they give a different level of accomplishment once completed!

Sure, some games like Nintendo games are made for fun. I'm a graphics fanatic, I've watched Digital Foundry videos for years, and I loved Crysis for the graphical push, and more recently Cyberpunk 2077 with its path tracing. These are necessary steps, in my opinion.

I finished Crysis 2 and 3 and the entire game was a gross visual experience (if any Crytek people read this, let them know I'd love to design something for them one day, haha).

Shameless plug aside, I have a passion for high-performance PC systems. I follow laptop and desktop GPU progression closely. The relentless pursuit of greatness both in hardware and software like games is fun to watch. So games like Crysis and Star Citizen are a passion of mine.

Does every game need great graphics? No. But I do think there should always be a few games in production that push the bar continuously! Otherwise, what's all that high-end GPU pricing for?? High refresh rate for previous generation titles?

What do you think are some mistakes that beginner artists can and should avoid?

I think beginner artists can start on projects that are too big! Often when asked this, people say "you should learn the fundamentals first." That's correct in hindsight, but a beginner doesn't begin because they care about fundamentals. They begin because they're inspired by the eventual result, and the thing that inspired them is likely very complex or has that "WOW" factor. It might be a Star Citizen ship, for example.

So what I teach in my mentorship depends on the person's aptitude for learning fundamentals. I'll either teach them from the bottom up, fundamentals first, then how to apply them. Or from the top down: make a ship that's bad and I'll explain what's wrong with it and why, then apply the fundamentals to their work to prove my point. Some people learn better by doing and learning from the job. It just depends on their learning method!

Strix Division Autonomous Covid-19 Truck by Rene Mitchell-Lambert

Can you share your stance on generative AI in the CG world? Do you consider it a useful tool or a threat, and why?

Haha, the big question! I haven't touched any generative AI like Midjourney, Kling, or any of these things. I watch them closely to see how they progress, though.

I did try an image-to-3D model website once, uploaded an image of a car piston to see how well it would work, i.e., how replaceable I was. The result wasn't great, so there's hope for me yet.

As you can tell from prior answers, I don't even enjoy the overuse of booleans or the fact that people don't know how to do proper topology anymore. So AI is way beyond my boundaries. I take a lot of pride in the high-level intention I put into my work down to each panel line, so AI is as far away from my intention as anything can be.

Do I consider it a threat? Yes and no. It does endanger my career and those of others, absolutely. It will be detrimental long-term, both for art quality and for people's livelihoods.

Is it a threat to my internal pursuit of design? No. It's irrelevant, just like Blender or any other tool. My personal art goals are about the internal pursuit, the struggle before the Eureka! moment, the pride in knowing I created something entirely from nothing. AI wouldn't give me any satisfaction, as I know the design wasn't mine to begin with.

Is it likely that the industry will adopt AI and leave my old-fashioned approach behind? Yes, most definitely. Just like how Blender has taken over. This is the game, adapt or die. I just choose to go in my own direction regardless of knowing how the game works!

Streetfighter SB03 by Rene Mitchell-Lambert

I've seen some very good designs made with AI, yet all it does is motivate me to use my brain in better ways! My initial thought is: why didn't I think of that design? I see it as a challenge. Speed-wise, there is no challenge, of course, it's faster than me. But so are people who use Blender tools. That can't be stopped. So my focus is on pushing quality and depth, incredible designs inside and out.

This is why my models have internals. I design with intention, taking into account the relationship between every part. AI can't do this, yet, and I hope this level of care will be appreciated by art directors and clients in the future.

Follow Rene Mitchell-Lambert on ArtStation, YouTube, X to see more of his incredible work. If you are interested in mentorship, join his Discord.

‹ BACK TO ARTICLE LIST

on offSubscribe