Topic: XBOX II demo

[jedi0utkast]

I did watch the demo and I was not impressed. Given that the demos always depict what the system is supposed to do on optimal conditions that is why the actual games will never get to that level of detail. Given that I don't see how the XBOX 2 can claim is the most powerful console in the coming second round.  PSX3 and GC2 are more likely to come up on top. Right now my bets are on the GC2 because of ATI, the CELL processor for the PSX3 seems powerful but complicated, it can give a big surprise, I just ruled out the XBOX 2, what I have seen can be achieved easy with a high end card, and a nice computer. I didn’t see anything out of the ordinary, at least by today standards.

Sorry Billy, It looks like u are about to lose more money, on this round too.  
the demos can be seen at
http://www.microsoft.com/xna/

[thecubedcanuck]

LOL, lets all pass judgement on something that we wont touch for 2 more years.

[KDR_11k]

XNA != XBox 2.
XNA is a sequel to DirectX with even more proprietary lock in.

[SearanoX]

Exactly what KDR said.  XNA is DirectX 10 with a different name.  However, the XBox 2 will fully support XNA, which means many of the effects will be available.  The XBox 2 wouldn't be able to do anything that well, though.

[ThePerm]

personally i think those demos look pretty spiffy.. i mean the style sucks...but the gfx look spiffy. Im pretty sure games will look like that...but not much better. That i suppose is good enough for me. Id like to see mario in that level of detail like in the film noir video...that ladies curves....His nose may look very curvy...

[animex]

those demos look stupid

[BlackNMild2k1]

This is old news as I already posted about it last month
Look here

[MysticalMatt517]

[sighs...]

Is anyone in here a programmer? Does anyone have ANY programming experience? Sorry, but your l33t HTML and Visual Basic skills don't count...

There are certain things that all programs have in common, yes including video games. Beyond that there are things that all video games have in common. In an ideal world you would be able to just write the code to do these things once and then reuse it for every project - at least this is one of the goals of object oriented programming. Unfortunately the developing for any platform is often times like trying to hit a moving target, consequently reusing even the best code can be a painstaking process. Usually what ends up happening is the developers just throw out the old code and start over

XNA is an attempt to stop developer from reinventing the wheel each cycle. It attempts to provide a standard that developers can use to automatically perform these mundane details for them. Back before Direct X came out each game had to be programmed specifically for the hardware it was running on, even if it was running windows (there are some exceptions but I'm leaving them out for simplicity). Microsoft had a disaster when they tried to ship this Lion King game with Windows on Compaq computers, unfortunately at the last second Compaq decided to change the hardware which in turn broke the game. Consequently the idea was born that developers would interact with Direct X, and Direct X would deal with interacting with the hardware. It prevented developers from having to do all the low level stuff.

XNA is the next evolution of this. Adding support for things like Xbox Live-ish features for Windows games, a common controller interface, and unifying other related tools. XNA is an attempt to identify the things that developers do over and over again, and automate them. IF Microsoft delivers on it's promise this could be the next big revolution after Direct X. Of course in these forums Bill gates could sent everyone a check for $1,000,000  and you guys would find something to complain about.

Those movies were just proof of concept stuff. They wern't supposed to be showing off any graphical advances. I still liked the car one though.

Let the flaming of Mystic Matt begin ;-]

[joeamis]

I agree with what you posted matt,

I was just thinking before I read your post that the developers of consoles should
create their own game engines and include them with development kits.
If Nintendo created excellent game engines with their development kits they would
make developing for their console alot easier and user friendly.
They probably do this already to some extent, but I imagine fully vamped up
game engines without need for time consuming further development.
This would result in more people making games for the console because it's
much easier and a helluva lot less expensive.  It would allow the developers
to concentrate alot more on the game itself, rather than spending half the
development time by creating a game engine.

[MysticalMatt517]

On a smaller scale than what you're describing this kind of happens. It's not unusual for development houses to license their engines to other developers. Heck, that's how ID makes a lot of their money. The sheer number of games built off the Quake and Doom engines is amazing. The makers of Unreal also licsense their engines frequently. I've not heard of first parties doing this often though. Yet I can't help but wonder about some of the things we would have seen if Nintendo would have let third parties use the Mario 64 engine.  

[Ian Sane]

"Of course in these forums Bill gates could sent everyone a check for $1,000,000 and you guys would find something to complain about."

Of course I would complain.    If I deposited a $1,000,000 check the government would find out about it right away and rape my ass in taxes.  I would want my million dollars given to me in Canadian 20 dollar bills so I could spend it like normal cash and routinely deposit a small amounts at a time in multiple bank accounts.  Another option is for it to be given to me for winning a "contest".  In Canada the government doesn't take a percentage of your winning.  You get to keep ALL of it.

"If Nintendo created excellent game engines with their development kits they would make developing for their console alot easier and user friendly."

Though I'm not very familiar with how game engines work I think that's a great idea.  There's just one problem.  Nintendo has lately taken a really half-assed approach to graphics and sound.  For example they've used to same low-detail Mario model in all of his Cube games despite there being a vastly superior one available in SSBM.  If their engines limit the potential for graphic detail then I don't really see a reason to even share their engines with anyone else.

[joeamis]

Yea thats true, for this generation only a few Nintendo game engines
would fulfill the requirement: Windwaker's, Metroid Prime's,
SSBM, and F-zero GX, among others.

[KDR_11k]

Ian: SSBM has four players onscreen at max, that allows for more polies per char than when you have, say, twenty chars onscreen.

XNA will probably lead to further lock in, after MS noticed that things such as SDL (a crossplatform dev kit, used for games like UT2004) and the like threaten their monopoly on games and would make Linux a viable alternative in the distant future. Thus they decided if they provide a platform that is so abstract that it makes development easier but porting to non-MS systems impossible. A game developed with XNA can likely not be ported to Linux easily (because critical parts are platform specific), while with SDL it's almost just flicking a compiler switch. I think that's a reason why iD prefers OGL over DX, because they can port their OGL engines to other OSes and reach a larger customer base.

[VAVA Mk-2]

Dude, first of all XNA is software development tools that MS is offering to EVERYONE, including Sony and Nintendo. Second, why would GC2 have better graphics and power than MS?  MS has connections with computer companies, has 3 IBM processors, a custom graphics chip by ATI (yes I know GC2 will have IBM and ATI) and online.  Possibility for built in storage.  Nintendo, if you read their articles and statements from Miyamoto and Iwata or however you spell it, are concerned about software design getting bad in place off beefing up the tech, as they stated at the E3 press conference.  Nintendo is more likely to focus on some alternative or innovation in gaming instead of horsepower.