Support NeoGAF

[DCharlie]

"Don't worry, I like avoiding the DCharlie patented moment: "DCharlie drinks" "DCharlie posts on GA" "DCharlie's reality starts matching again with our reality" "DCharlie starts freaking out" "DCharlie fixes his post removing the tons of leaks he made while drunk"."

actually, it's more likely a lack of sleep will be responsible for any slips.... fecking World of Warcraft... how dare it be so addictive.

 

[gofreak]

Don't worry, I like avoiding the DCharlie patented moment: "DCharlie drinks" "DCharlie posts on GA" "DCharlie's reality starts matching again with our reality" "DCharlie starts freaking out" "DCharlie fixes his post removing the tons of leaks he made while drunk".

.

A an uneditable log of DCharlie posts should be kept Though something tells me Pana already has his own private log..

 

[Rob]

I agree. XNA is not going to write the physics, AI, & other CPU related tasks for you. That's where Middleware will play a HUGE freaking role this generation. Deformation engines, animation engines, etc.

I'm not saying that XNA will provide software solutions to hardware problems. What I'm saying is that it might allow developers to code 'closer to the metal' so to speak on Xbox 2 than what developers can get out of PS3. Giving the illusion that powerwise, the Xbox2 and PS3 are all but on equal ground. Even though the PS3 might out perform the Xbox2 on paper. If history repeats itself, the PS3 could very well be a bitch to program for.

The current generation is a terrific example. Look at the best Dreamcast titles v.s. the early PS2 titles. Games like Soul Calbur, Sonic Adventure, NFL 2K, Dead or Alive, Shenmue, and Resident Evil: Code Veronica looked every bit as good (and in some cases better) Than Madden, Tekken Tag, and Ridge Racer. Even though from a technical standpoint the PS2 blows the DC out of the water, the early games simply did not reflect that. It wasn't until Grand Turismo 3 came out that we finally started to understand what was under the hood of the PS2. And just NOW are developers finally starting to make the PS2 do all that Sony promised it could do back in 2000.

 

[sonycowboy]

I'm not saying that XNA will provide software solutions to hardware problems. What I'm saying is that it might allow developers to code 'closer to the metal' so to speak on Xbox 2 than what developers can get out of PS3. Giving the illusion that powerwise, the Xbox2 and PS3 are all but on equal ground. Even though the PS3 might out perform the Xbox2 on paper. If history repeats itself, the PS3 could very well be a bitch to program for.

XNA is just a remarketed Direct X. It's primary focus is graphics, sound, & input. It's also designed to not let you get "closer to the metal".

The PS3 will almost undoubtedly be more difficult to program for, but the PS2 was damn near impossible to program for. I remember American developers bitching to high heaven. There was no English development documenation, the documentation they did have was reams and reams of low level libraries available without enough higher level libraries to let them know how the different parts were supposed to work together.

It was just a mess. However, it did get alot better after a few years and some new libraries were distributed and developers learned how the parts really worked together.

I think the general thought is that Sony has learned from this and will deliver much better tools this next generation. Not better than Microsoft's, to be sure, but far, far beyond what was available for the PS2.

 

[DCharlie]

"I think the general thought is that Sony has learned from this and will deliver much better t
ools this next generation"

you'd have thought so huh?
the US side of things sounds much more organised though, thank god.

 

[gofreak]

XNA is just a remarketed Direct X. It's primary focus is graphics, sound, & input. It's also designed to not let you get "closer to the metal".

Hehe, exactly. XNA is MS's biggest abstraction to date. Anyone wanting to get anywhere near the metal will steer clear of it.

As I understand it, XNA is just a very very flexible game engine that lets you pick and choose from components. Will most developers trust MS's game engine to be the most efficient around? I don't know. It'll certainly help some developers, but for other (larger) developers, I can see them rolling their own or outsourcing to one of the big names (iD, Epic etc.)

 

[doncale]

They are manufacturing-capability conscious though: they will not skimp on good multi-media features and they will afford that by going with a bit smarter and less brute force approach. They are showing it with the CELL chip from what birds sing and IMHO it is a philosophy they have taken with the whole system.

Sure they spent money in R&D, but potentially the whole Sony can benefit from it: while some do not believe a word he says, I do believe when Kutaragi says that he wants Sony to grow as a semiconductor company and to be able to manufacture much more IC's in house while co-developing or licensing IP's from external companies when it is most convenient for Sony.

This much, from Kutaragi, I do believe. it's perfectly reasonable. it makes sense and every indication is, that it is happening. Kutaragi sometimes talks nonsense IMO, but this much I can take at face value.