This might has been asked and even answered, if so please point me in the right direction.
So after using mObject from motionvVFX for a pretty good while, I decided to update to their mO2 hoping to make live easier.
Boy was I wrong! Now the issues I have with it is: In the previous version I was able to add a 3D object into the Scene as Generator that would work together with all other Apple Motion objects plus cameras and lights.
Now with mO2 it is like its own application, not able to use Apple Motion Elements or objects (camera and such) together with the 3D objects.
Is this the way they designed it or is there a option I have overlooked to actually us the 3D Objects inside the Apple Motion Scene?
At the moment I might have to go back to After Effects.
Yes, it is an application that uses Motion's GUI. It is more responsive, efficient, and you have much more direct control over your elements. Yes, I can be used with other Motion layers, but there are tricks to it. I strongly recommend you join the mO2 Users Group on Facebook. The most experienced and knowledgable users are there. mO2 also has a promised update coming in Dec that will add a lot to it. mOjectx was so limited and such a resource hog, I find mO2 vastly superior. I find I don't need most other things in Motion to achieve what I need. I use it dialy for broadcast television.
As a recent buyer of mO2, I wish I had read your post earlier. It appears you are right. I had hoped it would give me the 3D graphics like you get in a product like Blender, inside of Motion 5. And that it would act like other Motion 5 objects where you could choose and publish their individual parameters to FCPX like most of the objects in Motion 5, BUT...no way! As you said, it is an Application running within Motion 5 & FCPX. You can not make a graphics design in Motion 5 and just publish it to multiple FCPX users, like you normally would in other normal Motion projects. In fact, anything you design in Motion using their generator, will only work in FCPX ..IF...their mO2 application is also plugged into FCPX as well.
For me, as a (want-to-be) plug-in developer for FCPX users, this is useless. Without the FCPX user not having their application in FCPX, any graphics developed in Motion using their plugin will not work in FCPX without their application having also been loaded into FCPX too.
mO2 plugs into both FCPX and Motion and works almost exactly the same in both programs. The only difference I can see is....you have more control of keyframes in Motion that you do not have in FCPX. I can see where it would work well in the scenario mentioned above by FCPX.Guru and it does seem to be fast, as he mentioned. But not a product for someone that wants to develop Motion 5 graphics as plugins to FCPX and distribute to other FCPX users that do not have their mO2 installed in FCPX. They have their own objects buried in their generator such as the camera, text, lights etc. which do not interact with those similar objects in Motion. I can see how it would work very well, in certain situations such as that described by FCPX.guru above, but it is not at all, what I expected.