Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Game Innovation by the Bedroom Coder

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the why-code-in-your-bed dept.

scriptedfun writes "The BBC reports on how bedroom coders might regain their place in the game development world by providing the industry 'an injection of imagination.' Microsoft's XNA Game Studio Express (covered previously on Slashdot) is given a special mention, but the article points out that 'the concept behind XNA is nothing new,' citing Sony's Net Yaroze as another example. With user-generated content fueling innovation in many aspects of technology, current initiatives by the major players to provide easy access to game development tools may just redefine the face of next-gen gaming. Peter Molyneux, creator of Populous, says: 'It's 100% down to the passion that people have, and the ability to perhaps bring in other people, maybe from all around the world on the internet, and create something.'"

6 of 47 comments (clear)

  1. XNA is sitffling ? by jfclavette · · Score: 3, Interesting

    What the hell... Except the fact that it is limited to Managed code, there's nothing stiffling about XNA. The only thing it does is provide you with a Game class you derive from, and the Start()/Update()/Draw()/End() methods. The other components, including even the Graphics component, are entirely optional, and if you find them 'stiffling', just don't use them. The architecture for a 'we need to suit all kind of games' product is very good.

    1. Re:XNA is sitffling ? by MBCook · · Score: 2, Interesting

      XNA would have been great years ago when I was always trying to make games. I've looked at it and other than the fact it's from MS it looks quite nice. In fact, my biggest complaint is that if you use it to develop for the 360, only other XNA users can play your games (so if you make a game for the 360 and you want your friend to be able to download it and try it, they have to have an XNA subscription too). That limitation seems VERY arbitrary to me. Otherwise it seems quite well done.

      But even if you don't think so, at least they are trying to do something. Apple doesn't seem concerned with games at all (based on graphics card choices). Linux doesn't have a central authority who can push something like this. Nintendo keeps their consoles perfectly closed, and while Sony will let you develop in a locked down environment (Net Yahorze, PS2 Linux, PS3 Linux) they don't make it nearly as easy as XNA seems to be (unless that changes for the PS3).

      Gotta give MS some kudos.

      --
      Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
    2. Re:XNA is sitffling ? by digitalgiblet · · Score: 2, Interesting
      I do find it annoying that XNA only supports ONE type of game pad... the XBox 360 controller.

      There are workarounds, but the 360 controller is the only first class citizen... It looks like a nice controller, but come on! DirectInput is nice because of how easy it is to abstract the input devices. For XNA to be viable for PC games, it really has to support legacy hardware...

      I also haven't been impressed with graphics speed. I'm just getting started with XNA, so I'm really making the graphics statement based on the SpaceWar starter kit. It is probably not the best example, but it is the only one I've looked at in depth.

      Another option for bedroom programmers (who came up with THAT name???), is Phrogram. It was called Kids Programming Language, but my how it has grown. The new commercial version (which I think runs about $60) can compile MSIL code, so it can run in the .Net JIT CLR. I've seen better samples from Phrogram than XNA, but that could change since XNA is still in beta.

      I think it would be great to lower the development bar so that a greater number of creative people could get involved. Think of how many great mods there are for existing games. The best games aren't always made by the best programmers...

    3. Re:XNA is sitffling ? by Osty · · Score: 2, Interesting

      In fact, my biggest complaint is that if you use it to develop for the 360, only other XNA users can play your games (so if you make a game for the 360 and you want your friend to be able to download it and try it, they have to have an XNA subscription too). That limitation seems VERY arbitrary to me. Otherwise it seems quite well done.

      Give it time. The current beta can't even target games for Xbox 360, so when V1 releases with 360 support (for subscribers) that'll be huge. And surely there are plans to do much more with this. The thing is, this is really new to Microsoft. They know how to manage development communities (been doing it for years with Windows), and they know how to monetize a platform (again, been doing it for years with Windows), but what's new is allowing their development community into a tightly controlled platform (Xbox 360, Xbox Live Arcade) without jeopardizing the existing monetization efforts. I'm sure they'll get there, perhaps with something like a $5/mo "XNA User" subscription that will let you play community-created games (a subset of the $100/year "XNA developer" subscription that allows you to develop games as well). I think this is one area where you can safely bet on Microsoft doing well.

      My biggest complaint is that the 360-centric focus of XNA means that you're forced into using shader code that is widely unsupported outside of the Xbox 360 or higher-end video cards. My relatively powerful year-old laptop chokes on XNA games at 1-2fps. I can understand the limitation, but it means that I can't build my own games until I upgrade my laptop (it's my main development environment, and I don't have a desktop with a more powerful video card anyway).

  2. mmorpg over hybrid p2p... by kbonin · · Score: 3, Interesting

    There's plenty of private groups doing neat things...

    <plug>

    I run a small group, some of us game industry veterans, creating a MMO system over p2p. Cross platform front end w/ CgFX shaders over OpenGL or DirectX (= portable to next gen consoles), back end is hybrid of p2p with very few database and certificate authorities, all secured by very strong crypto. User content, fully scriptable (Lua now, Java soon, C++ if core group signs it), art paths for Max and Milkshape. Network includes IM, social network, bt based content and file exchange, voice chat, and micropayments with gateways back into traditional credit card processors. Plan to release as free for non-commercial use, most source will be opened (later.) And all development funded by the developers, who are tired of knowing how to do something really cool, and watching it destroyed by our previous employers (Accolade, EA, OnLive, and others...) We're getting ready to go public with demo, could use a few more experienced game coders, really need artists, but figure demo will attract all we need. :) email kerry at vscape.com if interested...

    </plug>

  3. there's still innovation all over the place. by cowscows · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I don't think that innovation or creativity is gone from the game industry. It's probably at an all time high. It just appears to be lacking because their are lots of "me too" titles being put out as well, often with a lot of publicity and hype. There are plenty of companies that are perfectly happy to churn out franchises and incremental sequels, and there's nothing wrong with that. There's obviously a market for continously refined gameplay, or else companies would stop producing them. It just so happens that those sorts of games are quicker to make, so we hear about them more often, and they're generally produced by well funded companies that can advertise a lot, and so we see a lot of them.

    Add in the fact that a lot of the "easy" innovations, the real big shifts in game play, have already happened. There are a lot of different genres out there, almost any worthwhile idea that you have is going to be similar to something that already exists. Which isn't to say you're not innovating, just that it's not likely to be some sort of earth-shattering revolution. Something significantly different than we're used to, like non-tradition control schemes(Exhibit A: Nintendo), will allow even the more conservative developers to innovate in more blatantly obvious ways. These innovations will have a great "bang for your buck" ratio, because there's a lot of uncharted territory. A nice example being EA and their madden game on the Wii. Having you actually motion like you're throwing the ball to pass is an obvious direction to take the game in, yet it'll be a very new way of playing for gamers. Compare that to trying to write an innovatively intelligent AI for an FPS, which is likely to be much more difficult to pull off, and at the same time be something that you'd need a good amount of gaming experience and play time to really appreciate.

    Innovation is still very much alive and going strong, it's just harder to see amongst the crowd of more standard stuff being produced today, and the huge library of stuff produced in the past.

    --

    One time I threw a brick at a duck.