Slashdot Mirror
The Future of Windows Gaming
GameDaily.biz has up an interview celebrating the tenth anniversary of DirectX. Their talk with Chris Donahue covers how DirectX has evolved, where the industry is going, and some discussion of Microsoft's XNA initiative. From the article: "With XNA, which incorporates both DirectX and the Xbox/Xbox 360 Development Kits, we're making the tools to make it easier to make games for Microsoft's gaming platforms. We're looking to the game development community to surprise gamers with new ideas of what they can do with these tools--and of course, we're helping developers build games that can take advantage of the huge power of the next generation of hardware, both Xbox 360 and Longhorn."
[...] and of course, we're helping developers build games that can take advantage of the huge power of the next generation of hardware, both Xbox 360 and Longhorn
Longhorn isn't next generation hardware. Longhorn will probably require next generation hardware to run well. Quote from I, Cringely, "For Intel to keep growing, people have to replace their PCs more often and Microsoft's bloatware strategy just isn't making that happen, especially if they keep delaying Longhorn."
You may not agree with Cringely's conspiracy theories but it's been fairly obvious that the Windows/Intel duopoly has long been a mechanism to drive unnecessary computer upgrades under the guise of "innovation". Looks like Chris Donahue agrees that we'll be seeing more of the same.
The NSA: The only part of the US government that actually listens.
Windows gaming is kind of the Energizer bunny of gaming platforms--it just keeps going and going. And it keeps on innovating. Windows is where new and innovative technology happens first, and it's where new and exciting game genres show up first.
Are all Microsoft employees required to incessantly spout the same crap over and over again. Microsoft has made some good products, but that last thing I want to hear over and over again is the same BS line about how Microsoft keeps innovating. I can't even look out the window anymore without some Microsoft goon shovel feeding me the same line about inovation.
Honestly, I can never really recall any great innovative product ever really being made by microsoft. I know that they've made some good products, but it seems to me that they've all been done before.
OS software was around long before Microsoft ever stuck its foot in the door. Internet browsers were around before IE came around. Text editors, spreadsheets, and other Office software had been developed before Microsoft made their versions. Gaming consoles and video games had been around a lot longer as well.
Windows and IE aren't the best products in the world, but I'm quite happy with Word and my Xbox. I just wish they'd stop thinking I was born yesterday and will believe that they're revolutionizing the world with every single thing they do. It's almost gotten to the point where someone craps in a box and starts heralding it as the next big thing.
If Microsoft wouldn't hype their stuff up so much, maybe some folks wouldn't be so let down when it doesn't live up to all the promises.
Well, Bill, actually this gives a lot of people a reason to buy our console. Little Jimmy will have a much easier time convincing his parents to buy him a $300-$400 console than a $1000+ gaming rig. If most of the big PC gaming hits are ported to the 360, we'll have a lot of would-be PC gamers buying 360 instead, since it's cheaper, and they can play it on any TV!
And for that you use SDL
"A truly wise man realizes he knows nothing."
"If people had put even half the same effort into using real standards that work on multiple platforms we might be seeing much more interesting and innovative games now."
While I, too, would like to see OpenGL/SDL utilized for compatibility's sake, I fail to see how it would help developers create much more interesting and innovative games.
DirectX isn't anything more than a loosely connected set of components. There is essentially zero connection between the components (except for DirectMedia, which is really just a load of audio / video codecs that are conventionally connected to DirectSound / DirectDraw). The different DirectX APIs have exactly four things in common.
1 - They're all made by Microsoft.
2 - They're marketed, branded, and distributed as one piece.
3 - They all use COM.
4 - They all have really stupid naming conventions (derived from Hungarian notation...)
The first two aren't that important, unless you happen to want a 100% Microsoft solution. Some developers seem scared to use anything that isn't made by Microsoft, so maybe that's important to them. It shouldn't be though.
Oh yes... Nobody uses DirectPlay (the DirectX networking component) anymore. There's just no point. It offers exactly nothing above the standard socket networking APIs, while being absolutely no easier to use. So, your average DirectX game only uses Direct3D, DirectSound, and DirectInput.
The important point is that these are all completely separate components, and they have absolutely nothing to do with each other. You can use them individually, or not at all. It doesn't matter.
So why is labelling them under the name "DirectX" at all relevant. They are completely separate things. A lot of games don't even use DirectSound directly (they use third-party APIs that add lots of additional useful features), and only use DirectInput because there is no other way to access joysticks in Windows. There is no integration, no advantage in using them exclusively, directly, or even at all (in the case of D3D).