C'mon, haven't you ever thought that it would be cool to write a game for the Xbox 360 or Windows, if only you had the time? Microsoft's new XNA Game Architecture is designed to make game development modular and easy. Throw in developer tools, such as XNA Express, and you have no excuses to create the next DOOM. Matthew David shows why game development is only a few key strokes away.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-10-02
There is no innovation here on the part of Microsoft. They are merely creating a new area for Vendor Lock-in. That's the only area Microsoft has ever innovated in.
Most games developers wants to be free from all that hoola-boola called Game API. They will be happier with SDL/OpenGL or just plain directX.
XNA is primarily a gift for those of you, who cannot handle abstract thoughts.
Member since:2005-07-10
dylansmrjones: I know you hate microsoft but don't let the hate cloud your judgement.
Microsoft has built the new platforms and they are building a new cool game development framework for that.
How is it any different from all the various frameworks you get. Sorry if Linux doesn't have a good framework don't ask Microsoft to stop developing one.
You are so biased in your thoughts that instead of crediting people who worked hard, you flat out say they are doing all for just vendor lockin.
At least learn to be honest and give credit where it is due.
Now mode me down as you always try to do:)
Member since:2006-06-24
RE[4]: Nothing to do with OpenGL or DirectX
Member since:2006-06-01
There is no innovation here on the part of Microsoft.
The cult does not own a dictionary. They refuse to even consider that their propaganda may be lies. So they threw away all their dictionaries so they can't look up the word innovation.
These are not people you would trust in a data center to make rational decisions.
Member since:2006-01-01
If you would like to go over a program written using C++ with DX and C# with XNA and compare the level of abstraction present in both I think your audience would love to see the decrease in abstraction present in the latter as illustrated by you.
The level of abstraction is not the motivating factor, nor even the presence of a "game api" since most developers do not work on engine code and thus are always subject to "game apis," but that interoperating with managed code in the lower level aspects from unamanged code that will compose the rest of the engine is simply not worthwhile when the platform interface is such a small part of a game. It would be a reversal of abstraction, where higher-level languages are usually used to describe high-level aspect of the game, since there is almost no chance that any studio is going to just start coding everything in C#. If there's a big resurgence in arcade games, there might be more interest.
XNA is a gift to Microsoft's games division, since I am sure that their hope is that it will sell more 360s by reducing the conceptual barrier to entry of development. If it sells more copies of Visual Studio in the process, that's icing on the cake.
Member since:
2005-07-06
And without this supposed lock-in you can more easily make games for both PS3 and Wii?
I do not see what you are complaining about.
Why stick to something that isn't as good when you can actually innovate something (yes, Microsoft is actually innovating here).