Microsoft XNA compatibility

i dont even understand what the big deal about xna is, except for maybe the ability to make open development for the xbox a little closer to realisation. Its not like there isnt the same type of system in several other places... ogre, crystal space, all of them do the same thing and more for free, there actual full fledged engines, not just framework api's that aid making a 3d engine, if there is anything, it will just make it easier to make a 3d engine.

Ogre is only a rendering engine. You have to add everything else from other sources, although there are WIP engines that use Ogre available via their links page.

well yeah, but im just saying thats just one part that is free anyways, i just dont understand really aside from the xbox thing, what everyone is making such a big deal about?

Look at this treat at the RakNet Forum:
Here you go...

Rak'Kar has combined serveral free projects, Ogre 3D 1.2.2 Dagon (p1), fmod 4.04.20, ois 0.7.2, RakNet 3.0 (clear ) - Thats really a great pice of source.

And he points on some tools to use with the engine.

That's a nice package for someone who knows how to program(beyond c-script) and doesn't want to hunt down all of these libraries and set it all up. It'll be even nicer if it is maintained.

I seriously doubt XNA will be a competitor for Gamestudio. Gamestudio mainly targets hobbists and small independent developers, and schools (at least that's how I see their market).

And XNA is basicly for companies and skilled developing teams.

I appreciate all of your feedback, but the truth is I feel that the XNA your talking about osnt the same XNA I saw been reported on the BBC program, "click online", and the target market stated in the program was hobbists and small independent developers. The XBox compatabitilty comes through a subscription service, where by all accounts they will convert the software for you... or something.

How old is your information, I saw this the day before the original posting. Anyway I hope im wrong... but what if im not?

Ah, nope, you must heard of sth else then I read.

Juset to add, if it is a case of developing tools for make the software more user friendly, then that is what is sounds like they have been doing.

Just an update on this, I have now checked it out and, it's quite dissapointing, They still have a lot of work to do on it, I got this from their website...

"XNA Game Studio Express enables individuals and small teams to more easily create video games using new, optimized cross-platform gaming libraries for Windows and Xbox 360. This beta release targets the development of games for Windows. The final version of XNA Game Studio Express will be available this holiday season and will enable development of games which target Windows and upon purchase of a XNA Creators Club subscription, the Xbox 360 as well.

While we’re very proud of this Beta milestone, it does not represent all of the great features we are enabling in XNA Game Studio Express which will be available in final release form by this holiday. Some of the key feature areas that were not able to make it into this beta include:
- The XNA Framework Content Pipeline feature is not present in this release of XNA Game Studio Express (Beta). It will be made available in a future beta release of XNA Game Studio Express
- Support for retail Xbox 360 game development. This feature will be made available upon final release of XNA Game Studio Express later this holiday
- Additional starter kits and tutorials will be made available upon final release of XNA Game Studio Express
"
food for thought?

Isn't a future version of A6/A7 going to be refitted to support the XNA framework? That's what jcl said, I think. So unless I've got it wrong, the XNA framework isn't a 'threat' to the acknex engine. Oh but I think you are talking about the 'XNA Game Studio Express', which must be a tool kit or something? If acknex supports XNA, who needs a toolkit?

If that were the case then wouldn't A6/A7 have to be ported to .net managed code?

Yes. XNA Framework links with .net Framework.

This leads me back to my earlier point that for now, conitec's market share of the indy development industry is secured, but for the future, lets say XNA base their new development packages on the same basis as 3d game studio, so that will be user freindly, cross compatable, high level of support and an established community, what do you get in the longrun?

You may have a viable alternative to the 3d game studio software.
With all the talk about the cross compatability you all mention, you cant ignore this applies to ONLY exisiting 3d game studio developers in a future where XNA is as estabished and developed as 3d game stuio was 2 editions ago,

do you really see the target market of hobbyists and students choosing to pay for software that has all the same features as a free microsoft product?

I dont mean to be a party-pooper, but I think im' saying it as it is.
In business terms the only thing Conitec can do to counter this IS (if not on price) counter this threat in terms of features & benefits, in other words what it offers the user. They would also do well with increasing the profile of the package, maybe they could support or develop software themselves, with an eye to getting one or more titles developed with their software, into certain markets top ten sales. European, American... the usual suspects...

I guess this is where we can all play a part to make this happen... a community project for example?

I have a degree in business, and although that dosnt entitle me to say im an expert in this matter, I know enough to say that XNA Game Studio, would surley cause major problems for Conitec in the future, in terms of market share, and then leading to revenue

But 3dgs is by no means out for the count yet... in fact the fight hasnt started yet, but remember the words of Sun Ztu (Art of war) "A true warrior wonders amoungst his enemies, like a snake through the grass".

there already are viable options, irrlicht, torque, crystal space, and the other 50 million free/indy priced game engines, really xna is not that big of a deal and not that cool and poses almost no problem.. The only reason it might be wanted over 3dgs is its xbox support be that will probably even be quite hard to set up and not worth it for an indy developer.

Plus, C#, as the language that I want to program on. Those who want to write in VB.net will have an advantage over 3DGS, when there's VB.net support in XNA Game Studio Express.

C#, VB.net, .Net Extensions for C++ known as C++/CLI, etc.

But right now, with XNA Game Studio Express, it's C# currently at the time of release.

Cool, so they won't have to revamp the entire 3DGS game engine into a whole new language then? Just add the XNA support at some point? is that correct?

no, you can't just compile a6 (which is written in c/c++) to the cli (.net common language infrastructure).

a6 would have to be converted to c++/cli (c++ for .net) which kind of is a different language but i am not sure how much work that would be. quite a lot i guess.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C%2B%2B/CLI
looks like jcl would have to add lots of ^ to the code.