Everything you wanted to know about XNA

[§ôµÏG®ïñD]

umm no, i understand perfectly. I\'m trying to get a simple point across and its falling on deaf ears...

because it\'s a stupid point.

[§ôµÏG®ïñD]

pfffft, we shall see..... we shall see... muhahahahahaha.

Originally posted by §ôµÏG®ïñD
Then theres games like for example, max payne, extremely well made game. Then games like the matrix that looked pretty much the same graphically but just sucked monkeys balls. Was poorly coded, needed way higher hardware just to even get close to the same framerate.  Now, what if every company based there games of that engine,  ohh goodie...  Same is said with SDKs, a shitty one can = us paying through the nose just to play games that could easily run on half the system if it was just done better.

You do know that XNA is not a game engine, right?  It is a tool, a pipeline that can be found in ANY 3d studio house, however it hasn\'t been done on this grand a scale.  XNA will allow, not force, developers to share assets.

Take all the big boy 3d animation packages (Maya, Softimage, 3dsmax), with them you\'ll find lots of prebuilt assets and all of them are customizable to the artist\'s liking.  Why build a new human model when a perfectly good one is already available?  Tweak it to your liking and run with it.  XSI/Softimage for example has alot of prebuilt bone structures for different types of models (humans, animals, and variants thereof).  Why on earth would you go through the time consuming project of building a new bone structure with inverse/forward skematics when a perfectly functioning one is just a button away?

Same with the rain example someone brought up, as long as these presets are entirely customizable then there\'s nothing to worry about.

Yes, there have been, are now, and always will be lazy developers who just plug and go for a quick buck.  (cough...EA...cough)  However there are still artists in the industry and always will be, those who have a love for the craft of game making.  Tools like XNA will only make their job easier and give them more time and resources to be creative.

So they have the tools now , all they need to do is make the games that people are willing to buy and play.

That also go\'s for Sony and Nintendo..in fact in games in general.


God I hate Techno Babble and vapourware talk.

Originally posted by ooseven
So they have the tools now , all they need to do is make the games that people are willing to buy and play.

The tools are there but the infrastructure to use them is not readily available. Developers have to spend resources to get the tools to WORK before they even get to use the tools. That is counter productive.

Originally posted by Ginko


Same with the rain example someone brought up, as long as these presets are entirely customizable then there\'s nothing to worry about.

 

Ginko in what way will it be customizable though?
For example although both in Splinter Cell and MGS2 the specific effect represent rain they are totally different from each other.They are different effects that both represent rain.
It doesnt necessarily mean that the rain effects found in Splinter Cell cant be customized to look like MGS2\'s

Originally posted by Unicron!
Ginko in what way will it be customizable though?
For example although both in Splinter Cell and MGS2 the specific effect represent rain they are totally different from each other.They are different effects that both represent rain.
It doesnt necessarily mean that the rain effects found in Splinter Cell cant be customized to look like MGS2\'s

Rain is super easy to set up in a 3d animation program.  You simply set up a particle generator, with that comes MANY variables as to how the particles act, and then define the objects it will be deflecting off of.  The trick to getting a certain look is tweaking the behavior.

Some examples of particle variables are size, speed, life, count, and many more.  Then you get to define how those particles behave on the objects they come in contact with (friction, bounce, and others)  Not to mention that if you want to you can write your own right there in the program, then have it as a preset for future use.  Even with that preset you can still go in and customize it.

I won\'t pretend to know how it\'s achieved in games since my experience is only that from rendered cg animation, though I can\'t imagine it being entirely different.

Wasn\'t XNA just a new name for DirectX?

[§ôµÏG®ïñD]

Originally posted by Ginko
You do know that XNA is not a game engine, right?  It is a tool, a pipeline that can be found in ANY 3d studio house, however it hasn\'t been done on this grand a scale.  XNA will allow, not force, developers to share assets.

ehh i know that, its a SDK, guess what game engines are made with, i was using a friggin example..  a shitty SDK = shitty games just like a Shitty Engine = shitty games.  All i\'m saying is all these companies jump on the XNA bandwagon, yet what else is there really to compare it too, how do we know it is the best type of "tool" out there.
Think of it like, if you\'ve ever only used one companies chisels, how do u know that theres not a better chisel making company around.  I can\'t put into anything easy to understand then that..
Another example, say only Ps2 came out, no Xbox, No GC, No DC.  Would u know any different?

Originally posted by §ôµÏG®ïñD
ehh i know that, its a SDK, guess what game engines are made with, i was using a friggin example..  a shitty SDK = shitty games just like a Shitty Engine = shitty games.  All i\'m saying is all these companies jump on the XNA bandwagon, yet what else is there really to compare it too, how do we know it is the best type of "tool" out there.
Think of it like, if you\'ve ever only used one companies chisels, how do u know that theres not a better chisel making company around.  I can\'t put into anything easy to understand then that..
Another example, say only Ps2 came out, no Xbox, No GC, No DC.  Would u know any different?

Time will tell, but gauging from the responses given it seems that it\'s capable as the partners seem excited to be a part of it.  Will someone come out and do it better?  Possibly, but I have no doubt that MS, and being the software guru they are, will continue to improve upon XNA.  Afterall, they want it to become a standard tool in the industry.  One can\'t accomplish that by having an inferior product.

Originally posted by Ginko
Rain is super easy to set up in a 3d animation program.  You simply set up a particle generator, with that comes MANY variables as to how the particles act, and then define the objects it will be deflecting off of.  The trick to getting a certain look is tweaking the behavior.

Some examples of particle variables are size, speed, life, count, and many more.  Then you get to define how those particles behave on the objects they come in contact with (friction, bounce, and others)  Not to mention that if you want to you can write your own right there in the program, then have it as a preset for future use.  Even with that preset you can still go in and customize it.

I won\'t pretend to know how it\'s achieved in games since my experience is only that from rendered cg animation, though I can\'t imagine it being entirely different.

You didnt get me.You described how you can utilize a rain effect but I was comparing two different effects.MGS\'s effects and Splinter Cell\'s are two different effects that represent rain.They are different.Its not the same rain effect programmed to look differently.
If you watch closely they are using different methods.It looks like they are using different kinds of particles and techniques.Its not  the same method adjusted to look more realistic.
Because the rain effect and particles were created from scratch the programmers could make it look and programm exactly just like they wanted and create their own methods from zero.
When tools are created for general use they are trying to offer the appropriate library to be able to create nice effects easier.Its not made under specific preferences, and style and flexibility reaches as far as the tool is enabling.You ll be getting better gerater results but sooner or later you ll be getting diminishing results.Only the best developers can counter this problem becuase they have complete ability to create code and surpass.

While this seems like a good thing since it can let developers show their creativity otherwise couldnt we will be seeing a huge amount of good looking games that play crap since there is a huge amount of developers that arent as talented or as hard working being mixed with the games that come from hard working talented developers.You can see this in PC gaming.Support is HUUUGE surpassing console\'s support by difference but there is a greater amount of crap games at the same time or mediocre games with better graphics that all play the same.The wow factor in both graphics and gameplay isnt as extensive as in the console market even when PC gaming shows a game that surpasses most grate console games in every aspect.

In the console market though its diferent.Great graphics and great gameplay describe each other more often.The work of talented developers is more often evdient and distinguishable becuase of that.

Can you imagine how gaming would have been in the console market if we got 100 gothic games that look as good  or better than DMC or 100 games that look as good or better than GT4  but may lack in gameplay?
The wow factor of true class games is reduced.Because so far gameplay and graphics keep up with each other in console gaming.
 Its easier to distinguish the good game from the bad in console gaming  compared to PC gaming

And XBOX had a similar problem to that of PCs.While a mediocre multiplatoform released game looked bad on PS2 it looked 10 times  better on XBOX because it was more powerful and  directx friendly.Xbox had tons of games that looked better than many PS2 games that lacked in gameplay.
I mean the XBOX was released with games that displayied graphics not seen on PS2 back then yet there was lack of quality games.DOA2 is nowhere as good as TTT but is greater in graphics in all aspects
On PS2 though sucky games usually were sucky looking.

That\'s a very long post and there\'s alot I\'m going to address from it,  however it will have to wait until tomorrow.  Until then...

ok

[§ôµÏG®ïñD]

Originally posted by Unicron!
DOA2 is nowhere as good as TTT but is greater in graphics in all aspects
On PS2 though sucky games usually were sucky looking.

expect the player models. TTT had wicked models, Namco themselves said they\'d never do them like that again though.