Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Microsoft Announces XNA Game Development Platform

Posted by simoniker on from the one-tool-to-rule-them-all dept.

Thanks to GameSpot for its story revealing that Microsoft is unveiling its XNA game software development platform later this morning at the Game Developer's Conference in San Jose. XNA is "designed for use with future iterations of all Microsoft game platforms, including Windows, Xbox, and Windows Mobile-based devices" to make simultaneous platform development easier and cheaper, and the company is also expected to announce "Xbox Live-style functionality for billing, security, and matchmaking being made available to Windows developers... [and] the introduction of controllers that are compatible with all Windows and Xbox game players" as part of this move. IGN Xbox has an interview with Microsoft's Jay Allard and Dean Lester which explains XNA as being a cross-platform, evolving toolset that will ensure backwards compatibility, giving the example: "...[if] Adobe was writing an application for Win95, and then WinNT came out there were special features they could take advantages of -- they didn't have to throw it all away and start again." Update: 03/25 00:46 GMT by S : Microsoft has made the official XNA site public, including streaming video from unspecified next-generation games.

2 of 384 comments (clear)

  1. Po-TAY-to, po-TAH-to... by parvenu74 · · Score: 3, Informative

    If you are speaking "the Queen's English" then it is indeed correct to say "Microsoft are" because in this case "Microsoft" is logically the collective term used to refer to the people who work for the company. Since the nominative is plural, one uses the plural form of the verb.

    Of course, we Americans don't usually see the people behind the company name but rather tend to personify the company as an individual rather than a collective, hence we are much more used to hearing "Microsoft IS a bad company" instead of "Microsoft are announcing a new piece of crap..."

  2. Re:Killing a game project by Quarters · · Score: 4, Informative
    $3 million is nothing. A 20 person team with an average salary of $60,000.00 will burn through that in 2 years just in salary and benefits alone. Factor in equipment costs, recurring bills (rent, utilities, etc..),middleware and the such and $3 million will maybe get you a year or so into a product. That's maybe a tradeshow quality demo, or possibly a loosely defined alpha (at best)

    The chances are better if some off the shelf solutions (e.g. graphics engine) are purchased and not built. Those cost $, though. Sometimes a lot of money. Last time I was involved in an engine evaluation the big hitters (Q3 and Unreal) were upwards of $250,000.00/shipped title. That's almost 10% of the $3 million just for a graphics engine.

    $3 million isn't a sufficient amount to get very far into a game these days.