Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft's Real Plan For XNA Gaming Domination?
h0tblack writes "While many have heard about the XNA 'game software development platform' from Microsoft's announcements at GDC earlier this year, the full scope of their plans are only just becoming clear. Eurogamer has a surprisingly candid interview with J Allard covering the latest plans from Redmond. XNA isn't a rehash of DirectX tools for the Xbox2, PC and WinCE devices after all, it's a full-on assault on the gaming world, with the prize being complete dominance of the market. The site also has a BitTorrent of the interview, since it was originally recorded in video form."
"It wants to create the entire standard of gaming across every platform. Scratch that. It wants to own the entire standard of gaming across every platform. This isn't about warring between incompatible standards, it's about creating a standard - a VHS-standard of ubiquity." Except this VHS will only work in one company's VCR...
Before the Xbox was released, Microsoft tried to sell Sony a development kit that would allow Sony (and their 3rd party developers) to develop games on a standard platform.
;).
If you read the book "Opening the Xbox", Bill Gates was pretty irritated and confused when Sony turned them down flat. Why would they turn down Microsoft? Oh, sure - it would also make these games easier to port to a MS based system in the future - but MS was trying to help Sony!
Anyway. Sony saw through the game. And while XNA might be the greatest thing in the world to folks who want to port games between the Xbox, the PC, the Pocket PC - it's probably not something that Sony and Nintendo give a big rats ass about.
That's not to say that Microsoft's plan is a bad one. When Thief III comes out, I'll probably get the Xbox version. I've got a Pentium 800 as my old "game" machine, and I haven't turned it on for about 6 months now (I made the OS X switch some time ago). The Gamecube, PS2 and Xbox let me play what I want and I don't have to spend $300 - $600 every 12 months to keep up my video card/ram/processor/motherboard/whatever.
MS probably realizes this; I'm willing to bet their seeing higher Xbox sales on Xbox/PC titles (such as Knights of the Old Republic). So for games, I'll expect to see more of their emphasis to the Xbox.
Which is kind of a problem - it's still a major money loser for MS. It could be a winner in the long run, but will that means they'll have to open it up a bit and start letting people use it as a PC like system, which could eat into their PC sales profits? That could be a dual edged sword, since that means people could get used to using a "console" as a computer.
Eh. Either way, I'll just keep my eye on the situation. The best games will rule (which looks to be Nintendo for the next 9-12 months, with some nice looking gems on the other platforms), and I'm not about to give up my Powerbook any time soon
52 Weeks, 52 Religions with John Hummel
Now is the time, if any, for people to start making games work in Linux as best as possible. If something isn't done soon, all the gaming manufacturers will start building games to work with this system and make them completely unusable in Linux.
What!? Do we have to try and make *everything* run great on Linux just because Microsoft has entered (or is expanding) a certain line of business? Sure, [L|*]nix is great for lots of stuff, but do we always have to pull out the Linux sword and slash at MS' knees just because they're breathing? (Keep reading before modding me down.)
Don't forget, MS already owns the PC gaming platform market (the PC itself) for the most part. In comparison, they only have (I'm guessing) 30-40% of the console gaming platform market with the Xbox.
As long as computers receive electricity, there will probably be *thousands* of gaming manufacturers (read: indies) developing for a wide range of systems. In fairness, I think your comment is in reference to the mainstream developers and publishers. But hey, if you were them, and you wanted to stay in business, earn a profit for shareholders, etc...: Would you develop for a relatively small niche market accustomed to getting stuff for "free"? OR, would you develop for an installed base in the millions who are accustomed to paying $30-$50 per title?
BTW: I'm all for indie game developers -especially on Linux. I still believe thats where a lot of the great *game play* still originates. Graphics, mo-cap, glitz, and licensed music is neat, but I STILL appreciate the feel of my Asteroids and Lunar Lander ships! (Yes, I know they didn't originate on linux, but you know what I mean. :-)
This one gang kept wanting me to join cause I'm pretty good with a bo staff.
I can't see why Microsoft are going to charge extortionate fees or demand additional royalties for using something like this. Look at the model for Visual Studio. Does it make development easier? Yes. Do MS expect royalties from distributables? No. Does it tie you in to using Windows? Yes. The purpose of XNA is to make it easier for people to create games on Microsoft platforms. MS then make money on the OS or, in the case of consoles, from the sale of the game itself (just like Playstation get money from every PS game sold). Seems pretty transparent to me and hopefully good news for the smaller development studios.
Don't you understand? In Playstation vs. Xbox vs. GameCube, Playstation II sales are 71.3million, Xbox at 13.7million, and GameCube at 13.9million. With 75% market share, most developers are interested in getting their titles on the Playstation platform first, and Xbox or GameCube or both second. But when MS brings out the next version, the developers are presented with this option: Develop your game for the Xbox, and it's also ready for Windows! So now instead of looking at Xbox vs Playstation market share, they're looking at Xbox + Windows vs Playstation. And with Windows XP alone at 210 million units sold, the tables are quickly reversed on Sony. This is Microsoft yet again leveraging their monopoly on the desktop to beat the competition, instead of developing a truly superior product.
Where have you been for the last decade.
MS will do ANYTHING it can to defeat the competition. And it will use any cludge, any leverage, threat or intimidation to do so. I didn't see anything in that article implying that XNA will be a free and open standard that anyone can use without permission.
Wanna bet the license fees will be under NDA and depend on how nice you are to MS and if you have any naughty ties to MS's competition.
Previously:
Oh My! You want to sell computers with linux/beos/etc pre-installed? Shoot, looks like we'll have to renogotiate your license agreement.
New and Improved with XNA:
Oh My! You want to release a linux/mac/etc client with your game? Shoot, looks like we'll have to renogotiate your license agreement.
Unless XNA becomes independent of MS, it will eventually be used as a weapon. This IS about domination.
Could of course be that they think their is a market, there isn't, could be they think it will win them customers, it doesn't. OR just maybe these companies don't enjoy they idea of being locked onto a OS made by a company that is DIRECTLY competing with them and has a very long history of wiping out competition.
It has far less to do with promoting linux as not ending up in the pockets of Microsoft.
For now DirectX is pretty open and you have the half-life people saying that the PC is for them more profitable because of the lack of license fees wich are needed for console titles. If MS every comes to truly own the gaming world how long do you think this will last?
You are living in a dream world. Small independent game companies are going bust. The Xth rehash of ancient games does NOT count. It is the orignal new stuff that is getting more and more owned by the BIG companies. Companies that can afford a string of money losing titles without going out of business. Would you enjoy a future where games are owned by only the big boys? I wouldn't.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.