Developers here, What impact does XNA have?
- Thread starter gosh
- Start date
- Status
As much as I like Microsoft for DirectX and their excellent Xbox development SDK and tools I have to say that currently XNA is simply just marketing BS. They just clumped together all of their existing game-related SDKs and tools and dubbed it XNA to lure gamers and the press and to scare Sony.
The only real XNA product as I know of is XNA Studio which is special version of Visual Studio 2005 Team System. Haven't seen any details yet of what the actual difference between it and Team System is, but could be interesting since everybody uses Visual Studio anyway.
But if the Visual Studio team really was interested in supporting developers they could start by fixing 2-3 year old bugs and severe performance problems with the IDE and dependency checking first tough, that would instantly help 90% of all game developers.
Will be interesting to see how the XNA initiative turns out in the long run. It's a great idea and I really hope they will create new concrete and usefull tools and technology that will help development on all (MS) platforms.
The only real XNA product as I know of is XNA Studio which is special version of Visual Studio 2005 Team System. Haven't seen any details yet of what the actual difference between it and Team System is, but could be interesting since everybody uses Visual Studio anyway.
But if the Visual Studio team really was interested in supporting developers they could start by fixing 2-3 year old bugs and severe performance problems with the IDE and dependency checking first tough, that would instantly help 90% of all game developers.
Will be interesting to see how the XNA initiative turns out in the long run. It's a great idea and I really hope they will create new concrete and usefull tools and technology that will help development on all (MS) platforms.
therealskywolf
Regular
Xna Wont be available until later in the year, right now XNA is still in development.
therealskywolf
Regular
gosh said:
Well, Xbox didnt had XNA, but still they developed games for it right?
Right now the tools available to ease development on the Xbox 360 are "Place olders", just like Alpha kits dont consist of final hardware.
gosh said:
Show a little courtesy. You didn't ask for Tim Sweeny or Ubi's opinion, you asked for the opinions of devs here. And one just gave you his. Great appreciation there
Methinks you just want to be told what you want to hear, only those opinions that match up with what you want. If your mind's already made up on it, that you have to view it in a certain light, why even bother asking for more opinions?
Sorry if I'm being harsh, but someone gave you what you were looking for, and all you could give was a snooty reply, seemingly because you didn't like what he was saying :? I'm not saying you couldn't bring up Sweeney's comments or the like, but don't try to invalidate or dismiss others' in the process. You could have started by thanking repi, and then asking for example, how his experience compares to specific things Sweeney or Ubi mentioned.
ShootMyMonkey
Veteran
As it is, the only thing that we really have at this time are tools that anyway existed on Xbox and PC, which are now available in general for both PC and 360. There's nothing really new in there yet. It's been much ado about nothing for the time being.
I think the big thing that is missing is the fact that as much time as tech development may take up, money-wise, it's a relatively small part of the cost of game development. The art is the big cost that is constantly growing and constantly demanding larger staff dedicating more time to the creation of content. If you really want to help game developers save time and money, make good artist tools.
I think the big thing that is missing is the fact that as much time as tech development may take up, money-wise, it's a relatively small part of the cost of game development. The art is the big cost that is constantly growing and constantly demanding larger staff dedicating more time to the creation of content. If you really want to help game developers save time and money, make good artist tools.
Of course not... they're getting little benefits (like all the devkits they could ever ask for for no charge) as long as they keep saying good things about XNA. It's just like that interview where Tim is asked "R520 or G70?" and he just says "G70 for sure"... hmmmm, considering his ties to nVidia, what are the odds of that?
I do believe that was more of a call for more information and/or why you would disagree with them or what you all think they were referring to specifically. (After all, they might be referring to the "big picture" while you're talking about "right now as you see it.")Titanio said:Show a little courtesy. You didn't ask for Tim Sweeny or Ubi's opinion, you asked for the opinions of devs here. And one just gave you his. Great appreciation there
repi's answer was pretty concise and to the point, and we've certainly seen different comments coming out of prominent developers, so I think gosh's comment was more of a "what do you think about their comments" rather than a "you fools, you disagree with their sheer majesty!"
Though admittedly, it came off poorly. (And could certainly use a link for the specific comments he wants to highlight.)
Titanio said:gosh said:
Show a little courtesy. You didn't ask for Tim Sweeny or Ubi's opinion, you asked for the opinions of devs here. And one just gave you his. Great appreciation there
Methinks you just want to be told what you want to hear, only those opinions that match up with what you want. If your mind's already made up on it, that you have to view it in a certain light, why even bother asking for more opinions?
Sorry if I'm being harsh, but someone gave you what you were looking for, and all you could give was a snooty reply, seemingly because you didn't like what he was saying :? I'm not saying you couldn't bring up Sweeney's comments or the like, but don't try to invalidate or dismiss others' in the process. You could have started by thanking repi, and then asking for example, how his experience compares to specific things Sweeney or Ubi mentioned.
well if u look at my first post i said people who have not used or tried a preview of XNA shouldnt reply and that person just said "i havent used XNA but i know its BS" so .well ur wrong. and im right
The thing is... The single fact that they made a name for it implies they were marketing it. The actual differences the new setup makes might very well be very small, however, even the smallest increase is a good thing at this point. I'm willing to bet a lot of it is marketing, but there is probably some substance to the marketing hype.
Honestly, I don't think a lot of people even know what XNA was even marketed/hyped as to begin with. It seems to have gone from the answer to all IDE questions and the second coming of development christ to just a name that encompasses MS' development environment. When they were first announcing it, you'd think MS found some alien technology that allows magical things to happen, but now it just seems like the same old development studio under a new name (which isn't really a bad thing, MS has wonderful IDEs/etc).
That is my opinion, as meaningless as some of you may think it is.
Honestly, I don't think a lot of people even know what XNA was even marketed/hyped as to begin with. It seems to have gone from the answer to all IDE questions and the second coming of development christ to just a name that encompasses MS' development environment. When they were first announcing it, you'd think MS found some alien technology that allows magical things to happen, but now it just seems like the same old development studio under a new name (which isn't really a bad thing, MS has wonderful IDEs/etc).
That is my opinion, as meaningless as some of you may think it is.
gosh said:
I think you missed my point in my reply, IMO there is no XNA yet. I don't consider the existing tools such as the DirectX SDK really part of XNA since they haven't made any changes to it in the direction of XNA. Especially not to help out multi-platform development. But if you do consider all the relabled sdks and tools as XNA, then it's great
repi said:
What in the world are you babbling on about? XNA isn't even out.
Titanio said:Show a little courtesy. You didn't ask for Tim Sweeny or Ubi's opinion, you asked for the opinions of devs here. And one just gave you his. Great appreciation there
Methinks you just want to be told what you want to hear, only those opinions that match up with what you want. If your mind's already made up on it, that you have to view it in a certain light, why even bother asking for more opinions?
Sorry if I'm being harsh, but someone gave you what you were looking for, and all you could give was a snooty reply, seemingly because you didn't like what he was saying :? I'm not saying you couldn't bring up Sweeney's comments or the like, but don't try to invalidate or dismiss others' in the process. You could have started by thanking repi, and then asking for example, how his experience compares to specific things Sweeney or Ubi mentioned.
Uh yeah he gave an opinion on something that isn't even out yet.
Bobbler said:
So what would they call it? "That there development tools"?
ecliptic said:
There are names you give things that aren't marketing centric.
XNA is named for marketing. The letter X is in it -- that should give you a hint as to their intentions. X is one of the most overused acronym letters in the last 5 years.
They put a lot of effort into telling people (people who have no idea what an IDE is even) how XNA is going to revolutionize game development. It's marketing hype -- Hell I hear people spew out shit about how Xbox360 is going to be the best because of XNA.
This was the goal MS had. Developers would be happy with a marginal improvement, so they didn't have to revolutionize anything -- just hype it up and give it a fancy 'acronym' for a name. It served a dual purpose.
gosh said:
Are you trying to tell me something named XNA in this day and age isn't used as marketing? You need to open your eyes... RSX? Athlon FX? DirectX? etc... etc... If it was purely for development and for developers, it would have not warranted a name that the public would want to hear about.
In addition, I didn't say it was only a marketing gimmick -- All I said was it 'could' provide only a marginal boost in development abilities and it would be good, however, that wasn't the only goal of XNA (as obvious by the fact that they went silly with marketing when info was first being released).
Developers can put "XNA" on the game box and people will look at it and get a warm feeling inside because they know and have heard about it.
It's called marketing.
So you ask for developer's opinions on something that isn't even out. Some people attempt to formulate an objective opinion and get bashed for not having the same opinion on said unreleased materials as someone else. More bashing ensues because its not out yet.
Definitely a winning thread.
Definitely a winning thread.
- Status
Similar threads
