Microsoft XNA

[Dravalen]

Looks like microsoft announced today that they are in the process of creating a DirectX-esque API for games called XNA. Of course there are alot of quotes to support it(mostly from managers and CEOs) and McIGN is over it like white on rice.

However, as far as I can tell all it will provide for developers is a easy way to develop for the xbox(2) and PC at the same time, which doesn't exactly excite me. The FAQ gives little to no information, and avoids the question of pricing quite well unless you examine it very closely. However if you read the interview you get a clearer idea:

J Allard: The licensing thing will be handled partner-to-partner. Some vendors will go Source-code license, some will go binary obejet6 only, some will do a hybrid, and some will do custom deals. I think it's imperative that you leave the tools' system in a very competitive state. It's a meritocracy today. No one game is developed on one tool and that's not going to change. We just want to make it a lot easier. The business model will remain very different depending on who you are and how you're licensing.

I can be clear about our business model. We're not building a tools business -- it's about licenses. On Dean's side of the house, it's about selling Windows licenses; one my side of the house, it's about collecting game licenses. That's our business model.

The real kicker is farther down the line there is a question about how independent developers fit in. They say that they are totally for small development teams(1-6 people) and yet make no mention whatsoever as to how much those developers may have to pay to get XNA.

Now I maybe I'm missing something here but it seems to me that XNA is little more than a ploy to get more developers creating games for both the PC and XBox. I'd rather see titles developed with a specific target in mind(console or PC) and use the strengths of that system than a whole bunch of half-assed ports.

[daveNYC]

Perhaps some mechanism to bring the quality control of PC games up to a similar level to that of the X-Box?  Perhaps combine XNA developed software with XNA complient hardware?

[Dravalen]

Honestly, I don't think anything with XNA is going to help quality control at all. The advantage XBox has is it's one single piece of hardware where as a PC can be a multitude of vendors and such. Even with such things as DirectX and such it still is a large problem.

[Margalis]

There are two problems with quality control on the PC.

One is diversified hardware and moving targets. This is a quite overstatement impediment to quality. The reality is in a typical PC game only 5-10% of the problems are related to hardware at any level. (It IS a pain in the ass, but it doesnt' explain lame gameplay, glaring logical bugs, etc)

Second is nobody gives a shit about quality on the PC. That's really a cultural thing. PC games are mostly about bullet points, engines, "real time destructable terrain," "rag doll (retarded looking) physics", etc. Features and quality is a basic tradeoff, and PC games lean towards more features. Making console games DEMANDS discipline.

---
The XNA thing is basically repackaging. Porting some XBox tools and code to PC and vice-versa, some better samples, etc. I guess it's useful if you are looking to pump out pc/xbox duplicates.

[HaemishM]

I think that's a good thing. Developers who are currently only PC based can create games using the same tools as the X-Box, essentially making porting a non-issue. That means more devs can do X-Box games, which are more profitable than PC games.

How is that a bad thing again?

[Bunk]

Are you trolling to restart the mighty PC vs. Console war again?

Fans of PC gaming will never be happy about easy porting or "Simultaneous Development" as long as the consoles are operating under limitations that force the removal of features that inherntly make PC gaming more in-depth.

Overly reused case in point - Deus Ex 2:
Small levels, non-mouse interface, low resolution, excessive loading...

All as a result of having to work within the limitations of the XBox.

Now if you can get MS to put out the XBox 2 with enough power to at least compete to a PC of the same era,  I'll stop complaining.

Maybe.

[HaemishM]

Not trying to troll, but seriously, I don't see it as a bad thing. There are some things a console will never do well, such as the whole modding community thing.

If a developer can make more money with one game by developing it once and selling it on the PC AND X-Box, that's more money they'll have to produce more games. Some of which might be PC only and made for modding communities, such as Bioware with NWN. I mean, Bioware made some serious bank on KOTR for the X-Box, then released a PC version. I'd imagine that had not LucasArts been such fuckheads, KOTR on the PC would have allowed NWN style mods.

In either case, good devs being able to make more money by easy cross-platform releases means more good games for gamers.

[Alrindel]

Uh, wasn't Microsoft playing this card right off the drawing board? I was under the impression that as far back as 2000 Microsoft was touting the Xbox's Intel/Nvidia/Windows architecture as a major strong point in attracting game developers, who would be able to either switch their game's target platform from PC to Xbox, or at least port effortlessly and release on both at minimal cost to the dev studio.

So, in other words, this is nothing new.  Or have I missed something?

[Margalis]

It's already pretty easy to make XBox/PC games. The main problems are problems that this doesn't solve. Different input devices, different memory limitations, different resolutions and color display, etc. A unified input system doesn't make any difference if PC users use mouse/keyboard and XBox users use a pad.

[Soukyan]

I don't even know if you could call XBox stable. At least not from the hardware perspective. What about all those CD drive issues? They used 3 different manufacturers for them. Sounds to me like they need to make that one next time and make damn sure that it isn't the shitty vendor that gets picked. Otherwise, sure, stability due to standardized hardware and whatnot.

[Alluvian]

Overly reused case in point - Deus Ex 2:
Small levels, non-mouse interface, low resolution, excessive loading...

All as a result of having to work within the limitations of the XBox.

Funny that the levels in Ninja Gaiden look much better, have far better textures, and the game has very little loading delays because of heavy hard drive use.  The fuck up that was Deus ex 2 was fucking bad coding.  Not xbox issues.  If shoebox sized levels is a requirement of the xbox why does it have morrowind?  And dozens of other games with large levels.


Xbox not stable?  I have heard far more problems with PS2's clunking out in the cd drive area than the xbox.  All the current consoles had bad batches with heavy hardware fallout early on to my knowledge.  I certainly have not read anything that wasn't from some other console fanboi that has given any facts on Xboxs having larger HW failure rates than the other two consoles.  If you have a link I would be interested in reading it, since all I have to go in is that neither me nor any of of my friends have had any problem (including xbox live that is about 20 people, but still pretty darn anecdotal)

[Phred]

Morrowind works because it loads areas on demand. It doesn't do it very well though, which is part of why they tried to force you to walk everywhere with the stamina use thing. Running a character around with boots of blinding speed on is painful even on a fast pc because of the pauses ever 40 feet to load the next level.

Playing with the editor show's you how small the levels actually are in Morrowind.

[schmoo]

Dunno what XNA really is, but it seems that B McQ's baby Vanguard is the poster child for XNA.