[DeveloperX]

XNA

I'm currently learning C# and XNA.

With Microsoft releasing Visual Studio 2005 Express for FREE, I simply had to take a look at this new effort on their part to do things right. So far this XNA stuff is looking very cool. And who can say that the ability to develop indie games for the XBOX 360 is not cool? :D

I have been so anti-microsoft my whole life, yet this time it looks like they actually got something right. Its a big leap for me to go from being biased against microsoft, and now wanting to learn and use their software but what the hell can I say? I'm intrigued.
I'll keep you guys posted on my developments.

For the record, I'll never stop coding with Allegro & C++ ......but this new stuff may be taking up some of my time......as most new toys do. :D
_________________
Principal Software Architect
Rambling Indie Games, LLC

See my professional portfolio

[Terry]

It is kinda weird. For gamers, at the very least, Microsoft and Sony have switched places.

Nintendo are still cool though. They've always been cool.
_________________
http://www.distractionware.com

[Nodtveidt]

XNA is interesting but an unfortunate step in the wrong direction for game development.
_________________
If you play a Microsoft CD backwards you can hear demonic voices. The scary part is that if you play it forwards it installs Windows. - wallace

[tunginobi]

C#: it's like Java without the suck. I think you'll like it.

[RedSlash]

[DeveloperX]

[DeveloperX]

[RedSlash]

[Nodtveidt]

[cowgod]

I normally use Java, but I did buy a C# book earlier this year just to see what it's like.

Both languages have their pros and cons, but they're essentially the same. Java gives you precisely what you need so that it's harder to screw stuff up, while C# adds shortcuts that allow you to write shorter but (often) less readable code. The main thing with me is that I had already written alot of game code in Java, so I stuck with Java.

Compiling to bytecode works out ok, but you have to distribute the JRE (or the .Net libraries for C#) with your application. Both are usually available on Windows computers, but usually are older versions. To use cutting edge features, you need to indlude the JRE or .Net libraries.

C# doesn't work so well on non-Windows platforms, even though it's theoretically cross-platform.

But the bytcode itself is ok. The overhead is offset by the just-in-time compiler's improved ability to optimize the code. There is still a noticeable few second wait for start up sometimes.

Once, on an old computer several years ago, I tried to show a Java game I made to someone, and she said "There's nothing there." and walked away before it started up. :)

[LeoDraco]

[RedSlash]

[Nodtveidt]

I have quite a beefy computer here, capable of anything I throw at it, including top-end 3D modelling software (Maya, 3dsmax, etc). Yet in the grand scheme of things, it's a completely inadequate piece of antiquity. No dotnet program I've ever used runs with any decent performance. Fortunately, the only dotnet-based program I need to use regularly is Shipping Assistant 3.0, a program provided by the USPS primarily for corporations who do a lot of postal shipping. It's easily one of the slowest programs I've ever used, and when I say slow, I'm referring not to calculations or anything like that but in the actual speed of the GUI. You can actually SEE the elements drawn out onto the screen, and you have to wait around for it to finish putting everything where it needs to go. The same program, if it were written in VC6 or any other competant compiler, wouldn't have such terrible performance. Couple that with the massive framework you need to run the damn thing to begin with...and I think you can understand why I think all of this has headed in the wrong direction.

The root of the problem is that systems are running slower than ever despite processors that are more powerful than ever. Why is that? While I'm not a major fan of spending 30 hours optimizing 2000 lines of code to gain a 0.1% performance increase, it seems that coders these days rely way too heavily on compiler optimizations. In fact, some of the so-called "experts" will swear up and down, left right and diagonally that you should ALWAYS write vanilla code, foregoing all manual optimizations because something in their broken brains assume that the compiler knows all and no human could ever write tighter code. There's also the false accusation that manual optimization interferes with compiler optimization (whoever started this one needs to be shot in the bunghole with a lawn dart).

Speed is king. Period.
_________________
If you play a Microsoft CD backwards you can hear demonic voices. The scary part is that if you play it forwards it installs Windows. - wallace

[DeveloperX]

[LeoDraco]

The plural of anecdote is not data: I can just as easily point out that dotnet applications that I use (both ones that I write at work, and ones that I use to facilitate doing my job), run extremely fast on my work machine.

Pointing to a single application written in a framework which happens to be poorly written, and claiming that the framework itself must suck because that application runs poorly, is disingenuous.