|
which library for a game |
Elverion
Member #6,239
September 2005
|
When it comes down to it, what benefit does XNA have over other tools that accomplish exactly the same thing and do not lock you to one operating system (and console)? Sure, being able to write code that will run on an XBox will be fun for awhile, but when will you actually need that? By the time you get good enough at it to do anything worth-while, it'll be out-dated. At least when writing for the PC, you're virtually guaranteed that it will still be relevant in a year or two. -- |
Karadoc ~~
Member #2,749
September 2002
|
Albin Engstrom said: I reuse code a lot. Why do you reuse code? Don't you like programming? Typically, the goal of a programmer is to write a program to perform a specific task. The goal is not to write as much code as possible. Tool and techniques for getting the job done faster and easier should be welcome. Also, just in case you are interested, I'd like to draw to your attention that there may be a mindset difference between a programmer who writes games and a game designer who programs games. (Maybe the "game designer" actually dislikes programming, but sees it as a necessary chore.) Elverion said: Sure, being able to write code that will run on an XBox will be fun for awhile, but when will you actually need that? By the time you get good enough at it to do anything worth-while, it'll be out-dated. At least when writing for the PC, you're virtually guaranteed that it will still be relevant in a year or two. When will you actually need that? You'll need it when you want to make a game that runs on the XBox! For hobbyist programmers maybe it is a waste of time, but if someone is serious about making Xbox games... ... ----------- |
imaxcs
Member #4,036
November 2003
|
Quote: When it comes down to it, what benefit does XNA have over other tools that accomplish exactly the same thing and do not lock you to one operating system (and console)? I accomplish my goals faster and I have more fun doing so.
|
Kibiz0r
Member #6,203
September 2005
|
Quote: By the time you get good enough at it to do anything worth-while, it'll be out-dated. While Microsoft does strike me as the type of company to abandon spotlight technologies, I doubt they'll let XNA fall into obsolescence just because of a new iteration of the console. After all, you know whatever platform they offer is going to be .NET, so why wouldn't they make it XNA while they're at it? --- |
montdidier
Member #10,238
September 2008
|
Albin Engstrom said: The repeated argument in this thread for XNA is less code.. That's a good point. People should understand that XNA has a low barrier to entry. It doesn't write your game for you. It gets something on the screen fast with little understanding. Which is great, particularly great for newbies. They can start to do something interesting without too much knowledge. For the same reason, It's great for professionals because they can start working on the good stuff immediately. I dont' like XNA for other reason. I feel it restricts me, to platform, to language and locks me into a distribution channel. Those things nullify it's benefits for me. Saying that, it can be fun just to experiment or prototype in XNA. Quote: No, by commercial devkit standards that would be bloody fantastic Actually Microsoft do a very good support service, that's one of the main reasons they've had such traction this generation. Sony have had to up their game as well, but have been a bit slower doing so. RenderWare used to have fantastic support. Pity EA nixed them. Very strategic on their part. However conceding somewhat to the point, considering how much one pays for Professional Game Development equipment the support is very poor. |
Kitty Cat
Member #2,815
October 2002
|
Quote: It gets something on the screen fast with little understanding. Which is great, particularly great for newbies. That's horrible. Especially for newbies. If you're programming, you should understand/have a basic idea of what you're programming. Start low, and work up. Just like Java shouldn't be a beginner's programming language, neither should .NET, regardless of their usefulness for experienced programmers. XNA shouldn't be a beginner's graphics API in the same way. -- |
montdidier
Member #10,238
September 2008
|
Kitty Kat said: That's horrible. Especially for newbies ... You have an angle, but I'd say for most it's as much about not discouraging those who are learning about a new endeavour. If they can see the fruits of their labour early, they will be more likely to persevere with it. Also the newbies probably signed up for games programming, not "setup your dev environment", or writing code for bmp loading. Get them into the goods quickly, give them a taste without distracting them with a lot of boring stuff. My first language was for some crazy reason a functional language similar to Haskell. If you made it to the end of the course, it only got better. |
alethiophile
Member #9,349
December 2007
|
I think that something that does all the dry-as-ditchwater stuff like bitmap loading, etc. is good. The whole IDEA of a library is to allow you to reuse code that other people have written; there's no point in writing/using a game programming library that doesn't give you the basics. However, XNA locks you into one platform and may (I have never used it) take away some options. I really don't like the 'only one platform' idea, so I wouldn't use XNA. -- |
Matt Smith
Member #783
November 2000
|
Quote: It gets something on the screen fast with little understanding. Which is great, particularly great for newbies. I never objected to prototyping ideas in QBasic. Same deal, really. I'm still annoyed they dropped QB from all releases. They stopped being the M$ I used to love when they did that. EDIT: LET M$="MicroSoft" <--- swear filter ports QB to VB |
ixilom
Member #7,167
April 2006
|
I respect the personal opinions like, XNA was built for xbox/windows. It does most of the mundane tasks for you, why should you have to reinvent all the boring stuff? The answer is, you want to learn how it works on a deeper level. But some, like me don't care. I want results, not wasting my time on something that has already been created, for me. Try working in a team with the mindset "I want to make everything", I wish you good luck ___________________________________________ |
clovekx
Member #3,479
April 2003
|
Thank you for all your comments. Anybody who uses something other than DirectX/XNA, can you please write a few cross-platform libraries that are good for 3D game developing? NOTE: I'm not against XNA, I just want to know other options. --- |
GullRaDriel
Member #3,861
September 2003
|
Quote: cross-platform libraries that are good for 3D game developing? Done. OpenGL, Ogre, Iirlich,... "Code is like shit - it only smells if it is not yours" |
ixilom
Member #7,167
April 2006
|
Sorry for keeping the derailing topic alive But as GullRaDriel, I also recommend anything that uses OpenGL as it is supported on lots of platforms. ___________________________________________ |
clovekx
Member #3,479
April 2003
|
Quote: Done. OpenGL, Ogre, Iirlich,... That's for rendering. What about other things like audio/3D audio, video playback, network, etc.? I know there are libraries like OpenAL, theora, RakNET, but does anybody here use them? What are your suggestions or notes? --- |
Kitty Cat
Member #2,815
October 2002
|
Quote: I know there are libraries like OpenAL, theora, RakNET, but does anybody here use them? I use OpenAL. I also use theora, though indirectly (through a more general wrapper that handles multiple formats). -- |
GullRaDriel
Member #3,861
September 2003
|
clovekx said: ...that are good for 3D game developing?
me said: OpenGL...
clovekx said: That's for rendering. At which point exactly were you talking about anything else than rendering before ? NM, I am just up today. "Code is like shit - it only smells if it is not yours" |
clovekx
Member #3,479
April 2003
|
GullRaDriel, I was not trying to say that you are wrong. I just wanted to say, that rendering is only one part of the game. --- |
OICW
Member #4,069
November 2003
|
Quote: Done. OpenGL, Ogre, Iirlich,... I'd add Torque (I presume that I mentioned it earlier, but it was probably engulfed in the flames), but this one is not free. If I'm not mistaken Ogre, Irrlicht and Torque are full blown game engines/frameworks. So rendering, loading models/graphics, networking and sound are implemented in them. Irrlicht supporst some physical engines and I think it can be interconnected with nearly anything you need. [My website][CppReference][Pixelate][Allegators worldwide][Who's online] |
Kitty Cat
Member #2,815
October 2002
|
Quote: If I'm not mistaken Ogre, Irrlicht and Torque are full blown game engines/frameworks. So rendering, loading models/graphics, networking and sound are implemented in them. At least for Ogre, I don't believe it handles sound. It handles model/texture loading, scene generation, shadowing, etc, but AFAIK, you still need something else for input, sound, networking, and physics. -- |
Elverion
Member #6,239
September 2005
|
Irrlicht is not a full-blown game engine, either. However, it is far more than just rendering. So I'm not sure what you would call it. Irrlicht itself has no sound support, but has an add-on library, IrrKlang, for that. Irrlicht does have some basic physics and collision in it, but it is recommended that you use a "real" physics library to do anything fancy. It does not contain any networking or have any true add-on libraries that I know of. -- |
Trezker
Member #1,739
December 2001
|
They're called 3D engines methinks. If you combine them with allegro 5, you have a good base to develop stuff. Then you slap on something for networking and gui if needed. |
|
|