-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
J. Allard interview on XBOX 2, PS3, XNA, and Backwards compatability
- Thread starter Blazing Sword
- Start date
Mr_Furious
Member
Unfortunately in today's marketplace, games are not enough to ensure a console's success alone.MightyHedgehog said:
EDIT: also I don't see much incentive for developers creating exclusive content for the Xbox2 as much as we've seen on Xbox. It's the most powerful system on the market which hooked a lot of developers. I don't think the same will be said next gen and MS can't continue to fork over moneyhats to everyone for exclusive content.
MightyHedgehog
Member
Well, that's an option.jarrod said:
MightyHedgehog
Member
Mr_Furious said:
Options are all you need in that case. If someone deems non-gameplay options necessary, then let them buy them as extra. I don't see Revolution having options outside of games-related features...but that can certainly be the case...as an option. Sony is the only one that I see as having everything they can cram into it...and then that's not a guaranteed thing beyond DVD and BC.
Mr_Furious
Member
Or go with another platform that offers the desired features out of the box.MightyHedgehog said:
MightyHedgehog
Member
Mr_Furious said:
Well, if Xenon launches early, and the rumors saying EA and others are using X2 as the lead-platform next gen are true, you're already wrong. Next gen's really too far out to see that, though.
MightyHedgehog
Member
Mr_Furious said:
Yeah, that's a potential risk, but if they're really willing to wait for another console based on non-gameplay options being built-in, then they weren't really serious about the platform anyway.
Mr_Furious
Member
If the rumors are true it'll only be the case until the competition hits retail. At that point, I have a feeling certain companies may reconsider, but yeah, you're right. It's too far out to know at this point.MightyHedgehog said:
DC ring a bell?MightyHedgehog said:
Mr_Furious
Member
Even Nintendo is disappointed with the GC's performance. How does that translate to "success"?Fujisawa said:
I do want the next XBOX to be backwards compatible. Whether it is straight out of the box or in an add-on (kind of like how Sega did with the Mega Drive/Genesis they had an add-on that allowed you to play Master System games), it doesn't matter to me, but either way I really hope it's capable of doing so or otherwise it will turn me away from deciding to get the XBOX. I don't want to have to have my XBOX games just discarded and it's not like I can easily have all these systems plugged in. I also fear my first XBOX won't last forever, and what then?
So yes, I really want them to have backwards compatability.
So yes, I really want them to have backwards compatability.
Blazing Sword
Member
Mr_Furious said:
Wrong. You forgot about something called XNA
Developers able to make better games cheaper and faster is a HUGE plus for them and XBOX 2.
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
Blazing Sword said:
We all know that the biggest limit for next-generation platforms will be coding and not art/content so XNA solves every problem
: they address part of the issue as they allow smoother content "integration" with the games' engine, but they do not solve problem fully ( same argument for Sony's answer to XNA and DirectX ).Blazing Sword
Member
Panajev2001a said:We all know that the biggest limit for next-generation platforms will be coding and not art/content so XNA solves every problem
*disagrees*. MS designed XNA to eliminate costly basic coding and allow developers to push the parsley leaves aside and dig right into the meat and potatoes of game design. Much more resources and more time for attention to detail, will help make games a cheaper, but tastier meal.
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
Blazing Sword said:
Take Renderware or any middleware solution: content creation will be the single biggest issue that separates your games from showing next-generation platforms' potential.
XNA = DirectX + hooks and fixes to other tools and middlewares so that they all inter-operate close to flawlessly and the programmer does not have to spend time writing plugins and exporters/importers for all the various tools and middlewares to interact with the engine he/she is working on.
Aside from publishing/marketing costs, content creation will be the most expensive portion of next-generation games unless your goal is not to show what the machine can do.
Programmers want money to get paid and their workload will increase as well, but it does really compare to what you will have to spend on content creation ( creating levels, modelling objects, characters, creating textures, etc... ).
Someone needs to model those highly detailed characters and user would also want each character not to be a carbon copy of the others.
Somebody needs to animate all those different characters with realistic and fluid animations: each character should also be quite unique in how it animates.
Someone needs to design all the huge and complex levels the players will want to explore: players will also want these areas to be interactive and have lots of unique detail and not the same look over and over. So someone is needed to create tons of different textures and objects to fill the levels with.
Etc... etc...
Teh costs for content creation are the biggest concern with next-generation platforms.
Blazing Sword
Member
Panajev2001a said:
The whole point of XNA is the focus of design and content by making it much easier and cost effective to lay a foundation for it. Hence, more time and more resources for creating content.
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
Blazing Sword said:
Ok, let's talk about climbing Mt. Everest for a second.
There is equipment you will need and guides to hire.
I will be a good guide and get you the equipment and the guides and I will have everything assembled and ready for you.
I can assure you that getting things ready will be trivial in terms of time spent compared to the time it takes you to go to the area and climb the mountain and come back.
XNA will simplify the coding issue, but that will be a much smaller issue then content creation.
XNA does not make content creation much more cost effective, it simply cannot do it and it is an illusion to think that most of the money spent even in actual games is related to pure coding of the engine.
Blazing Sword
Member
Panajev2001a said:
Actually, I believe it all comes down to the human factor. A great modeler, designer, and animator like at UBISOFT will do much more with XNA than say, the ones who work for ACCLAIM. UBISOFT will probably do it as fast or faster than an ACCLAIM game and it will end up far superior.
If your employees are good enough, XNA will provide alot more bang for the buck. Which is what devs want.
If you're employees are good enough, ANY tool will provide a lot more bang for buck in their hands than in the hands of those less competent. That's hardly an endorsement specific to XNA.
This is the one of the primary conceit's of XNA's stated purpose that I don't think is nearly as significant as they are trying to play it up: that it can dramatically reduce the requirements for basic coding needs and thus allow devs to pump significantly more resources in content authoring.
Looking at the composition of most development teams, they appear to hire plenty of people associated specifically with content - creative directors, game designers, 3d modelers, animators, sound designers, etc. It's not as if there's a lack of resources employed with regard to content design and authoring on most development teams Programmers don't typically outnumber content creators and even if they do, it's probably not much higher than a 1:1 ratio in those cases. So, even on a small dev team of 20-30 people, you're probably going to still end up with at least 10-15 people primarily dedicated to content creation. So where's the deficiency here that supposedly needs to be remedied?
This is the one of the primary conceit's of XNA's stated purpose that I don't think is nearly as significant as they are trying to play it up: that it can dramatically reduce the requirements for basic coding needs and thus allow devs to pump significantly more resources in content authoring.
Looking at the composition of most development teams, they appear to hire plenty of people associated specifically with content - creative directors, game designers, 3d modelers, animators, sound designers, etc. It's not as if there's a lack of resources employed with regard to content design and authoring on most development teams Programmers don't typically outnumber content creators and even if they do, it's probably not much higher than a 1:1 ratio in those cases. So, even on a small dev team of 20-30 people, you're probably going to still end up with at least 10-15 people primarily dedicated to content creation. So where's the deficiency here that supposedly needs to be remedied?
kaching said:
It's more than that. XNA covers content authoring tools as well.
For example, a game that uses XNA for it's audio framework can use the XACT audio tool so the artist can create foley, effects, and music and directly import his work into the engine, without involving the developers writing glue code to import stuff -- this is because XNA defines standards so that the middleware can talk to the tools seamlessly.
Saves developers time cause they don't have to write audio code, nor do they have to write audio tools, nor do they have to write import glue code.
Saves artist time because they don't have to deal with half-assed rushed tools and glue code that the developer writes while under pressure to add a dozen more features to the engine instead.
element
Member
content creation will be the biggest hurdle this coming generation. 3 million poly character don't make themselves, no matter what tool you are using.
XNA will streamline the process of getting assets in game and looking the way the artist intended, but it won't make the artists job easier when actual making the art.
XNA will streamline the process of getting assets in game and looking the way the artist intended, but it won't make the artists job easier when actual making the art.
Yes, aaaaa0, I do appreciate all of that is the potential of an initiative like XNA. But my point was that I don't think there are many developers *now* who can be said to be starving from a lack of creative resources because they're all too busy programming or wrestling with engine limitations.
Ironically, it's often the simplest content elements that suffer the worst from poor design. There's no excuse for some of the crappy plotlines and dialogue we've had to slog through over the years, oftentimes juxtaposed against otherwise fantastic presentation and gameplay. Grade schoolers could probably write better story or dialogue than some of this stuff in a matter of minutes or a few short hours. So its not as if writing passable story and dialogue takes too long and must be sacrificed because content creators are spending too long wrestling with "half-assed rushed tools". If they don't have the time to even manage to rewrite some of the terrible lines they insert into dialogue, I can't imagine how they have time to do anything more significant.
Fact is, there's plenty of time in a normal dev cycle to provide better content in some notable areas, but many devs don't.
Ironically, it's often the simplest content elements that suffer the worst from poor design. There's no excuse for some of the crappy plotlines and dialogue we've had to slog through over the years, oftentimes juxtaposed against otherwise fantastic presentation and gameplay. Grade schoolers could probably write better story or dialogue than some of this stuff in a matter of minutes or a few short hours. So its not as if writing passable story and dialogue takes too long and must be sacrificed because content creators are spending too long wrestling with "half-assed rushed tools". If they don't have the time to even manage to rewrite some of the terrible lines they insert into dialogue, I can't imagine how they have time to do anything more significant.
Fact is, there's plenty of time in a normal dev cycle to provide better content in some notable areas, but many devs don't.
kaching said:
I think you underestimate how rushed all development is (not just game development).
There's never enough time to add every feature you want, so anything you can do to save time will help incrementally. And yeah, maybe it won't be a 50% gain in productivity, but I'll take anything you can give me.
Every project ends up coming to the deadline and cutting features that don't work, or aren't done, or can't be finished with the resources allocated.
Bad scripts are not going to be helped by any software tools on Earth.
Even if MS added AutoPlot(TM) and IntelliDialogue(TM) to Word.
You know, one of the most amusing things I found out while on my way to E3 is that MS's technology ends up helping everyone.
I was talking to a developer at Nintendo (from NST), and he said that they love .NET C# and Managed DirectX, because it makes it easy and fast to bang out useful art tools.
Whenever an artist needs an import tool, or an editor of some kind, or a util to tweak art resources or whatever, it takes the developer a couple hours of hacking one night in C# to make something the artist can use, rather than a day or two of time out of the schedule.
It's incremental stuff like this, plus XNA and the prebuilt tools that really helps boost productivity.
And of course, you're absolutely right that none of this tech is a panacea. If your guys suck, they suck, and no tool is going to fix that.
I was talking to a developer at Nintendo (from NST), and he said that they love .NET C# and Managed DirectX, because it makes it easy and fast to bang out useful art tools.
Whenever an artist needs an import tool, or an editor of some kind, or a util to tweak art resources or whatever, it takes the developer a couple hours of hacking one night in C# to make something the artist can use, rather than a day or two of time out of the schedule.
It's incremental stuff like this, plus XNA and the prebuilt tools that really helps boost productivity.
And of course, you're absolutely right that none of this tech is a panacea. If your guys suck, they suck, and no tool is going to fix that.
MightyHedgehog
Member
aaaaa0, what kind of software development do you work in?
All I said was that dev teams don't seem to be starving for lack of bodies focused on content creation. I fully appreciate that the challenges devs choose to accept or willfully put in front of themselves often force them into rushed schedules, but that doesn't mean they lack for creative resources, it just means they're not working within their means.aaaaa0 said:
Agreed. And all I've said is that I believe, in respect to the particular XNA claim I referenced, the improvement will be incremental rather than dramatic.
I don't know, I sometimes wonder if an AI routine like Eliza could write better scripts than what we see in many games...