Significant Development/Gaming News from Microsoft
Wednesday, March 24th, 2004 - 1:22pm
According to EuroGamer (link from EvilAvatar), Microsoft plans to roll out development tools that span all game-capable Microsoft OS devices (namely, PC, XBox, XBox 2, and even mobile devices). This means that, potentially, titles could be produced that work on the XBox 2 and PC, no porting required. Plus, Live on Windows XP. Wow. Talk about starting the GDC off with a bang...
Everything can be debated, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's debatable.
--Chuck Klosterman, Fargo Rock City
Wow that would be pretty awesome, it will be interesting to see how well it works out though. It seems to me that you would have to sacrifice platform specific performance to use these tools.
PSN ID: Stric9
Good for large devs, bad for PC gamers. I suspect we''ll see lots more examples of DX:IW from this. But will small devs do the extra work to make their games sanctioned to run on XBox? Probably not.
Oh, wait a sec. Isn''t this just .NET Compact Framework? Maybe they''ve added DirectX as native objects to it.
Quotation is a serviceable substitute for wit. - Oscar Wilde
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur. (Whatever is said in Latin sounds profound.) - Roedy Green
Yeah it seems like .NET for gaming. One problem I see with it is that .NET is acceptable where performance isn''t a critical issue. Unless they fix the performance, there''s going to be major problems.
Also anybody who thinks that you''re gonna be able to port from XBox2 (PowerPC) to XBox (x86/specialized GPU) to Mobile (ARM) to PC (x86/Several Video cards) without rewriting alot of code is drinking the kool aid. This may be a useful technology, but it''s only gonna be for Microsoft platforms (which aren''t the overwhelming majority they are in the PC space) and it''s usefulness will be limited by hardware requirements. Something that is built for a 42"" plasma screen TV isn''t going to work on a Mobile 4"" LCD. It''s just physics.
However it could help further gut big name PC gaming support by making it easier to make a console game and port it to the PC. That''s all I want, more console ports.
"If I was Obama I'd have made a joke about that. Then again, if I was Obama I'd have f*cked up my own campaign long ago by making c*ck jokes." - 1Dgaf
"Poor Achmed, only three days away from retirement ... from Jihad." - Mike Nelson
Um, isn''t drinking kool aid what you''re supposed to do with it?
MechaSlinky wrote:
-on L4DMy favorite flavor is Red
Aint nothing new about the world order..it's been playing since the day they put George Washington on a quarter
85's face the truth you're too dumb.
http://www.myspace.com/armyofthepharaohs
The ""special"" kool aid.
"If I was Obama I'd have made a joke about that. Then again, if I was Obama I'd have f*cked up my own campaign long ago by making c*ck jokes." - 1Dgaf
"Poor Achmed, only three days away from retirement ... from Jihad." - Mike Nelson
MMMMmmmm! Purpleberry blast!
Being fangoriously devoured by a gelatinous monster.
I''ve been working with .NET for a few months now, and the biggest performance hit that I see is when the OS has to load up the framework on initial use of a .NET component. This can take a few seconds on slower machines, and once the framework is loaded into memory it doesn''t have to be loaded again until you reboot. Once we are on a .NET native OS (Longhorn, and from what I''m reading possibly the XBOX2) this goes away.
Why move to .NET in the first place, especially to write games? All that ''increased developer productivity'' marketing stuff that they say is actually true. The framework is awesome, and C# takes away all of the memory-management gotchas that everyone hates in C++. You can always use mixed-mode projects (which are a major bitch to work in, thanks MS) for performance-intensive work in C++. We have our C++ guru doing this for the intensive I/O areas in our product, and we haven''t noticed any performance difference yet. I would assume that most game code would be written like this.
There are other benefits like cross-platform compatibility, but I think I''ve evangilized enough for one day.
I never minded piracy. Anyone who minds about piracy is full of sh*t. Anyone who pirates your game wasn't going to buy it anyway! -Warren Spector
There''s a Q&A session about this over at IGN.
PSN ID: Stric9
""You will be assimilated""
-Griffon
Did Samurai Jack ever get back to the past?
Ditto to everything minase said about .net.
It rocks.
SteamId = RevenantKel
I think it''s a great idea. The number one goal is reducing the time it takes to get the project up and running. Stop recreating the wheel.
I''ve also gleaned a few things from all I''ve read about their announcement today:
1. MS is predicting that Sony will yet again completely rework their hardware to max out their performance. Going from the PS1 to the PS2 was a NIGHTMARE.
2. This will result in the PS3 being more powerful than the Xbox 2. Bet me on it if you like.
3. So they are going after developers and publishers in a big way. They are making it cost a lot less to develop a game on the Xbox. And, you can take that code and run it on a PC, which opens another channel of money.
I think it''s a smart move, and it makes Sony and Nintendo look bad in the process.
Which is why I was saying that you will have to rewrite alot of code to port to different platforms. I didn''t say it wouldn''t be useful, but that we shouldn''t be buying the marketing crap of ""compile once, run anywhere"" especially when it comes to games.
Let''s see, it runs on Microsoft, and Microsoft and ... oh yeah, Microsoft. Yup it''s cross-platform. And Win32 is cross-platform by that definition. You mean ""across different versions of Windows"", which is the way it''s supposed to work in the first place. .NET simply is better at it than Win32. Don''t get me wrong, the tech is definitely more advanced than Win32 and it''s possible for it to be cross platform if you port all the class libraries to every platform. But it''s not currently cross-platform. Java is cross-platform.
This is a major liability in the gaming arena as Microsoft can''t even pretend to have the lions share of the market in this instance. Write using this and you can kiss the PS2/3 and GC goodbye. It''s useful for PC devs wanting to do a console game but it''s not going to be useful for alot of dev houses.
"If I was Obama I'd have made a joke about that. Then again, if I was Obama I'd have f*cked up my own campaign long ago by making c*ck jokes." - 1Dgaf
"Poor Achmed, only three days away from retirement ... from Jihad." - Mike Nelson
Funny, there are already other cross platform toolsets out there, specifically SDL, Allegro, Lua, etc., that support 3D games. The idea isn''t new, just another instance of Microsoft looking at existing ideas and claiming ""look what we found!""
They are all PC devs.
What do you think they write the games on? and with?
.NET framework for Linux: http://www.go-mono.com/
I''ve heard talk of a Darwin port as well, but I''m not holding my breath on that one.
As long as the platform supports the CLR you should be able to run any .NET assembly. Install Mono on your Linux machine and you have cross-platform capability.
I never minded piracy. Anyone who minds about piracy is full of sh*t. Anyone who pirates your game wasn't going to buy it anyway! -Warren Spector
Hey! That''s my line!
Money can't buy you happiness...but it can buy you a boat big enough to sell right up next to it!-David Lee Roth
Just noticed this regarding input devices (thanks for the link, Stric9!):
Nice! If they can deliver on just one goal (making it extremely easy to target both the PC and XBox with a mostly identical code base), that will result in some major competitive advantage for MS vs. Sony and Nintendo. ""2 platforms for the price of 1"" would definitely prick up the ears of many cost-conscious developers.
This announcement is also a significant signal to developers and competitors: MS is in this for the long run, and is devoting a tremendous amount of time/$$ to the gaming community. The Xbox 1 was just the first step in that plan. Avoid development for their platforms at your peril.
Everything can be debated, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's debatable.
--Chuck Klosterman, Fargo Rock City
If you''ll take another look at what I said, the possibility is there. But Microsoft isn''t porting all the class libraries over to each system. So you can write a .NET program for Linux but if it''s anything but the simplest program it won''t run on another platform because it''s using classes not present in the Windows version. Again, that''s not cross-platform. Which is fine because Microsoft doesn''t want it to be cross-platform, just like this new thing. They want it only to work on Microsoft products.
Again, what I said was that the performance necessity of natively implemented code will create alot of code rewriting between platforms when it comes to gaming. Also the class problems I mentioned above would require some rewriting between Windows and Linux.
"If I was Obama I'd have made a joke about that. Then again, if I was Obama I'd have f*cked up my own campaign long ago by making c*ck jokes." - 1Dgaf
"Poor Achmed, only three days away from retirement ... from Jihad." - Mike Nelson
Color me stupid but isn''t this just a helping hand for developers? Not that that isn''t a good thing.
I mean when I think of unified tools, etc. at first I was thinking ""so I will be able to throw the game CD in the PC or the Xbox and it would work in either?""
Then I realized that no it just means it will be easier for developers to port from Windows to the Xbox. Well maybe it is hard now but they seem to be doing a pretty good job. I mean almost all Xbox games seem to be put out on the PC pretty quickly so what is the big advantage?
This is a joke, right?
Panem et circenses
"You really need to smoke a tree first to appreciate that one." - Sanjuro
Java isn''t truly cross-platform either, what is available to you is highly dependant on the vm.
**EDIT**
OOHHH YEAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!
Spiderman wouldn't sneak, Spiderman would go. -Elysium
XBL: TheZedian
^^ Damn you! ^^
Exactly. I''m not saying this is a horrible thing, just that it''s main purpose is to help PC devs become XBox devs and get XBox games ported to PC quicker. It won''t work outside of MS platforms which keeps it from being really great. If some 3rd party had come up with this, it''d be awesome news.
"If I was Obama I'd have made a joke about that. Then again, if I was Obama I'd have f*cked up my own campaign long ago by making c*ck jokes." - 1Dgaf
"Poor Achmed, only three days away from retirement ... from Jihad." - Mike Nelson
I like the attitude of the whole thing. It''s a step in the right direction.
When the PS2 came out Sony THREW it at the game devs and said, ""here, you figure it out. Oh, and you can forget all that code you wrote for the PS1"".
Developers had to get down on their hands and knees and start writing freaking assemble language to get it to work.
Being a developer myself I''m very happy with what they are saying.
You guys seem to see it as some big PORTING trick, it''s a lot more than that. It''s biggest goal is to get games off the ground faster.
Just read the interview - link
Xbox2/PC ports are meaningless..
You people have to get used to the idea that games are games are games are games..
I couldnt care a less what platform its on...just as long as its good..
And for certain...MS doesnt want their DEV''s producing on Sony or Nintendo..
They want more exclusive Xbox2 titles and we PC gamers will have to live with the ""ports""
We''ll see in the end if Microsoft is successful in convincing Developers to use their tools to produce exclusive Xbox 2 titles..
Aint nothing new about the world order..it's been playing since the day they put George Washington on a quarter
85's face the truth you're too dumb.
http://www.myspace.com/armyofthepharaohs