Comments on: What Microsoft Should Do With XNA http://www.doolwind.com/blog/what-microsoft-should-do-with-xna/ Pragmatic Thoughts On Game Development Fri, 27 Jan 2012 00:53:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Mcdrewski http://www.doolwind.com/blog/what-microsoft-should-do-with-xna/comment-page-1/#comment-580 Mcdrewski Wed, 20 Feb 2008 21:46:16 +0000 http://www.doolwind.com/blog/?p=91#comment-580 You mean something like this? http://kotaku.com/358723/liveblogging-microsofts-gdc-presser http://kotaku.com/358793/visual-walkthrough-of-xbox-360s-xna-interface Way to make a blog post that's outdated within days Doolwind -d You mean something like this?

http://kotaku.com/358723/liveblogging-microsofts-gdc-presser

http://kotaku.com/358793/visual-walkthrough-of-xbox-360s-xna-interface

Way to make a blog post that’s outdated within days Doolwind

-d

]]> By: Doolwind http://www.doolwind.com/blog/what-microsoft-should-do-with-xna/comment-page-1/#comment-579 Doolwind Fri, 15 Feb 2008 00:51:05 +0000 http://www.doolwind.com/blog/?p=91#comment-579 Ryan- That's not a bad idea. It would also be good for a developer to get a good reputation so that when their new game comes out it generally starts out higher on lists than other games. It will be interesting to see what other sites (sandbox, digg etc) Microsoft looks at for inspiration. Ryan-

That’s not a bad idea. It would also be good for a developer to get a good reputation so that when their new game comes out it generally starts out higher on lists than other games. It will be interesting to see what other sites (sandbox, digg etc) Microsoft looks at for inspiration.

]]> By: Doolwind http://www.doolwind.com/blog/what-microsoft-should-do-with-xna/comment-page-1/#comment-578 Doolwind Fri, 15 Feb 2008 00:49:55 +0000 http://www.doolwind.com/blog/?p=91#comment-578 David- I agree that the barrier of entry should be low, but not so low as to allow games that no one will play, or that will harm the portals reputation. The viral part is a big one for XBLA games and I think it'll be even bigger for XNA games, which is a good thing. I think keeping the barrier of entry low for gamers is the important part here rather than for the developers. David-

I agree that the barrier of entry should be low, but not so low as to allow games that no one will play, or that will harm the portals reputation. The viral part is a big one for XBLA games and I think it’ll be even bigger for XNA games, which is a good thing. I think keeping the barrier of entry low for gamers is the important part here rather than for the developers.

]]> By: Doolwind http://www.doolwind.com/blog/what-microsoft-should-do-with-xna/comment-page-1/#comment-577 Doolwind Fri, 15 Feb 2008 00:47:52 +0000 http://www.doolwind.com/blog/?p=91#comment-577 Chen- I'd assume that the general populous could decide whether a game should be sold or not. I'd really like to see it the home of good solid indie games, I don't see any reason why there has to be "free crappy little games" on XNA, that's what all the flash game sites are for. Chen-

I’d assume that the general populous could decide whether a game should be sold or not. I’d really like to see it the home of good solid indie games, I don’t see any reason why there has to be “free crappy little games” on XNA, that’s what all the flash game sites are for.

]]> By: Ryan http://www.doolwind.com/blog/what-microsoft-should-do-with-xna/comment-page-1/#comment-576 Ryan Fri, 15 Feb 2008 00:03:40 +0000 http://www.doolwind.com/blog/?p=91#comment-576 Mozilla had to solve a similar problem when they rolled out their upgraded Mozilla Addons site last year. How do you keep the poor (or unstable or malicious) add-ons from diminishing the reputation of the Firefox? The answer was the (too harshly criticised) Sandbox. https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/pages/sandbox The Sandbox encourages developers to create add-ons, and the same developer community ultimately decides whether the public should see the add-on. It's then the public that decides which add-ons are most popular. The good stuff naturally filters to the top. Not that I am suggesting that Microsoft would ever adopt something from Mozilla... Mozilla had to solve a similar problem when they rolled out their upgraded Mozilla Addons site last year. How do you keep the poor (or unstable or malicious) add-ons from diminishing the reputation of the Firefox? The answer was the (too harshly criticised) Sandbox.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/pages/sandbox

The Sandbox encourages developers to create add-ons, and the same developer community ultimately decides whether the public should see the add-on. It’s then the public that decides which add-ons are most popular. The good stuff naturally filters to the top.

Not that I am suggesting that Microsoft would ever adopt something from Mozilla…

]]> By: David Gillespie http://www.doolwind.com/blog/what-microsoft-should-do-with-xna/comment-page-1/#comment-575 David Gillespie Thu, 14 Feb 2008 02:51:01 +0000 http://www.doolwind.com/blog/?p=91#comment-575 I think Chen is right; you keep the barrier to entry as low as possible as invariably there will always be more games than there are people to play them, and you trust the inherently viral nature of game playing (we all tell each other what we do and don't like) to do the work. At the very least you have a good casual CV when you're talking to THAT publisher about a deal. Which reminds me.. I think Chen is right; you keep the barrier to entry as low as possible as invariably there will always be more games than there are people to play them, and you trust the inherently viral nature of game playing (we all tell each other what we do and don’t like) to do the work. At the very least you have a good casual CV when you’re talking to THAT publisher about a deal.

Which reminds me..

]]> By: wazoo http://www.doolwind.com/blog/what-microsoft-should-do-with-xna/comment-page-1/#comment-574 wazoo Wed, 13 Feb 2008 13:38:48 +0000 http://www.doolwind.com/blog/?p=91#comment-574 I dunno. I tend to think that there's too much focus on developers for XNA, and an abysmal amount of effort spent on the actual consumer side of the equation. The developers aren't the problem. We love C#, 'nuff said. But if I had "X" amount of money for developing a game (casual or not), why would I choose XNA over an "online friendly" language such as Blitz or DirectX8.1? Just to have some kind of notoriety inside the Developer underground isn't nearly enough...It's time for greenbacks, (and lots of them) for the amount of effort involved in getting a quality game together. MS has more than enough subsidiaries...why not focus a small dev team on making a few quality XNA games and blitzkrieg them around the online marketplaces? Start to make a real NAME for XNA, and maybe more companies will jump on board once they see actual returns of investment. I dunno.

I tend to think that there’s too much focus on developers for XNA, and an abysmal amount of effort spent on the actual consumer side of the equation. The developers aren’t the problem. We love C#, ’nuff said.

But if I had “X” amount of money for developing a game (casual or not), why would I choose XNA over an “online friendly” language such as Blitz or DirectX8.1?

Just to have some kind of notoriety inside the Developer underground isn’t nearly enough…It’s time for greenbacks, (and lots of them) for the amount of effort involved in getting a quality game together.

MS has more than enough subsidiaries…why not focus a small dev team on making a few quality XNA games and blitzkrieg them around the online marketplaces? Start to make a real NAME for XNA, and maybe more companies will jump on board once they see actual returns of investment.

]]> By: Chen http://www.doolwind.com/blog/what-microsoft-should-do-with-xna/comment-page-1/#comment-573 Chen Wed, 13 Feb 2008 03:39:03 +0000 http://www.doolwind.com/blog/?p=91#comment-573 Who decides if a game is good enough to be sold? There are featured videos on YouTube selected by the administrators but none are ever pay-per-view. YouTube has a reputation for being full of garbage but seems unharmed by it, in the end the viewer/player chooses its own content. Ultimately XNA will be the place for "free crappy little games" but there will be diamonds in the rough who's creators will have a place to showcase their portfolio in a way that was not previously possible. Who decides if a game is good enough to be sold? There are featured videos on YouTube selected by the administrators but none are ever pay-per-view. YouTube has a reputation for being full of garbage but seems unharmed by it, in the end the viewer/player chooses its own content.
Ultimately XNA will be the place for “free crappy little games” but there will be diamonds in the rough who’s creators will have a place to showcase their portfolio in a way that was not previously possible.

]]> By: Doolwind http://www.doolwind.com/blog/what-microsoft-should-do-with-xna/comment-page-1/#comment-572 Doolwind Wed, 13 Feb 2008 03:30:31 +0000 http://www.doolwind.com/blog/?p=91#comment-572 Chen- You could be right. Perhaps games should be free by default, and only the best ones can be sold. So long as there isn't the stigma of XNA games being "free crappy little games". Perhaps there needs to be a section for free games and a section for cheap ones. Chen-

You could be right. Perhaps games should be free by default, and only the best ones can be sold. So long as there isn’t the stigma of XNA games being “free crappy little games”. Perhaps there needs to be a section for free games and a section for cheap ones.

]]> By: Chen http://www.doolwind.com/blog/what-microsoft-should-do-with-xna/comment-page-1/#comment-571 Chen Wed, 13 Feb 2008 03:26:12 +0000 http://www.doolwind.com/blog/?p=91#comment-571 I think charging for XNA content would put too many consumers off. There are inevitably going to be games that are overpriced trash and these will drag everything down. It'll become the ugly Second Life of games. So when people talk about the "YouTube of games", I believe they are referring to unlimited free content where opinions are currency and notoriety is the reward. I think charging for XNA content would put too many consumers off. There are inevitably going to be games that are overpriced trash and these will drag everything down. It’ll become the ugly Second Life of games.

So when people talk about the “YouTube of games”, I believe they are referring to unlimited free content where opinions are currency and notoriety is the reward.

]]>