Are LCs dead already?

It has been almost 4 years since LCs were announced and honestly LCs seem like a really good idea but were executed pretty poorly imho. The whole documentation for them is really lacking and so is their functionality and actual practical use atm. Will there be any further developments to this like being able to turn a DC into a LC or at least making them a bit more friendly to develop by adding more documentation about them, because in the current state i dont think a lot of people are willing to invest this much effort into learning something that might not even see further development.


Imo they dont really have much benefit over dynamic components and i really hate that LC need to hit the cloud whenever a change is needed. To this day, i dont believe i have seen any live components being more detailed then DC and all that i have seen have been very simple and not usable for archviz.


Yes, a “relaunch” of dynamic components (which are also useless for me in their current state) with a quick and easy to use graphical setup inside SU like dynamic blocks in AutoCAD (maybe including some more complex operations like in Revit) would have been much better. But it looks like their main interest was to tie it to the cloud…

1 Like

Dynamic Components are what work for me. LCs just didn’t cut it. Just update DCs. It’s been years…

LC’s are more capable and run in all platforms of SU (Pro, iPad and Web), whereas DC’s only work on desktop versions. That said, I have yet to see a LC that I can actually use in my work. LC’s look a lot like Grasshopper in Rhino, and I’ve seen lots of great things done with that. I don’t really know enough to compare the two.

Exactly, all of the models are so simple and useless. Honestly they look more like a gimmick than an actual feature and seem half assed.

Same, DCs all the way. But having an online configurator that even people without any knowledge can use is an amazing idea. Just wish LCs would offer a lot more functionality for how complicated they are to build.