Sign in to follow this  

Do many people still use C# + DX?

This topic is 3451 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

If you intended to correct an error in the post then please contact us.

Recommended Posts

I use C# with XNA Game Studio which is built on DirectX. And if XNA Game Studio were to not exist, I would likely be using SlimDX instead. I just prefer C# over C++ so much that there's very little that would cause me to choose C++ over C#.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by NickGravelyn
I use C# with XNA Game Studio which is built on DirectX. And if XNA Game Studio were to not exist, I would likely be using SlimDX instead. I just prefer C# over C++ so much that there's very little that would cause me to choose C++ over C#.


Cool sounds good. I have only looked at XNA briefly, would you say it was easier to pickup than just standard DirectX? or both really the same?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
XNA is much, much easier to pick up and get started with than standard DirectX (or Managed DirectX, whichever you meant). XNA is a whole framework for making games. I highly recommend giving it a shot over C++/DirectX. It has to be at least 50x easier and 20x faster (at least for me, heh).

Also, XNA 3.0 Beta is out (Community Technical Preview) and it is fully compatible with Visual Studio 2008. Check that out, or if you're using Visual Studio 2005, use XNA 2.0 (latest stable release)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by soarah
Cool sounds good. I have only looked at XNA briefly, would you say it was easier to pickup than just standard DirectX? or both really the same?


It's hard to say. DirectX is just a set of libraries you can use to build your game whereas XNA Game Studio provides a lot of higher level things such as managing the graphics device for you and providing a content pipeline. So it's not quite an equal comparison. But by and large people are usually able to get a game up and running faster and easier using XNA Game Studio than with native DirectX. Exceptions are always there (particularly where people know C++ much better than C#), but XNA Game Studio does make things a bit easier to get up and running.

[Edited by - NickGravelyn on June 22, 2008 8:51:26 PM]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks for the good replies!

Quote:
Original post by Exershio

Also, XNA 3.0 Beta is out (Community Technical Preview) and it is fully compatible with Visual Studio 2008. Check that out, or if you're using Visual Studio 2005, use XNA 2.0 (latest stable release)


Great because I had 2008 installed, and XNA 2.0 didn't like that at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Only catch to the XNA Game Studio 3.0 CTP is that Xbox 360 support isn't included. It will, of course, have Xbox 360 support with the RTM release of XNA Game Studio 3.0, but the CTP does not include it. So if Xbox 360 development interests you, stick with 2.0. If you just want to do Windows (or Zune) development, ignore this message. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
After experiencing the power and (relative) simplicity of XNA, I'll never go back to straight C++/DX/OpenGL. At least not willingly. =)

Additionally, the creators.xna.com message board is invaluable for assistance. They give concise answers to nearly every problem I've posted very quickly.

What's up Nick. =)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Molle85
Simplicity _often_ results in loss of control


Thankfully XNA gives you access to the lower levels to get that control back when you need it. You still have access to shaders, vertex & index buffers, and you can still use wrappers around native code, so there aren't too many issues.

The programming interface for C# is just so much cleaner than C++, and besides, code colouring pwnz! Not to mention never having to type ->

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by qingrui
I use C# + SlimDX.
C++? No. The only single time I touched it again in latest 2 years is playing with CUDA.


Its good to see so many people use C# at the moment. Would you say in the actual game development industry they are still stuck using C++ ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by soarah

Its good to see so many people use C# at the moment. Would you say in the actual game development industry they are still stuck using C++ ?


I wouldn't say "stuck" because they have good reason to keep using C++. After all it would take lots of work to rewrite all of that middle-ware in C#. I once heard Unreal Engine is over 750,000 lines of C++ code. That would take forever to port over to C# and then make efficient. Legacy code is a big part of why they don't switch. In addition a lot of the industry is made up of people who are better with C++ than C#. And last, C++ has been around much, much longer. C# has only existed for about eight years I believe and so naturally it will take some time to see whether or not it ever becomes the dominate language over C++.

Personally, I don't really know if it ever will, but that also has no bearing on my decision. I don't care what Epic or Bungie use to make games. I prefer C#, so I use C#.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by soarah
Quote:
Original post by qingrui
I use C# + SlimDX.
C++? No. The only single time I touched it again in latest 2 years is playing with CUDA.


Its good to see so many people use C# at the moment. Would you say in the actual game development industry they are still stuck using C++ ?


I'm sure many of them use C# for tools internally. But the main-stream for core engine will continue being C++ for a few years. But after that, who knows.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think it sucked how they dropped DX. And I had trouble getting what existed to run on Vista64 (might not be possible?). But using the Tao Framework for OpenGL is really an awesome solution.

/MindWipe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by MindWipe
I think it sucked how they dropped DX. And I had trouble getting what existed to run on Vista64 (might not be possible?). But using the Tao Framework for OpenGL is really an awesome solution.

/MindWipe


Yeah it sucks how they just dropped MDX so I moved on to C++ and DX.
I might start using C# and XNA when 3.0 comes out and they get XNA all sorted out and stabilized. It's just to time consuming to do everything in C++ and I know C# is alot quicker since I used it before and for the 2D game I make the performance difference isn't noticeable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've not really looked into XNA much myself, but I think I'm right in thinking that if it uses C# then it's based on the .Net framework? Which would then mean your code is running on a C++ wrapper and hence slower than pure C++.

I can't imagine it taking off in the games industry for two main reasons:

1) Game devs love fast code.
2) Multi platform issues - It's unlikely there will ever be a .net framework for the PS3 and Wii.

Quote:
Original post by BLiTZWiNG
code colouring pwnz!


??? C++ is code coloured too you know, and Visual Assist pwnz more anyway. :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by theZapper
I can't imagine it taking off in the games industry for two main reasons:

1) Game devs love fast code.
2) Multi platform issues - It's unlikely there will ever be a .net framework for the PS3 and Wii.


1) .NET is not a C++ wrapper, it runs natively by JIT. XNA is.
2) Well, it's unlikely there will ever be DirectX for the PS3 and Wii too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It is highhly unlikely that the games industry will switch to C#. Even most of the tools are written using c++ and MFC (or something similar) to avoid c#. This is because most of the time tools need to use at least some of the exact same code as the finished game will (and that is written in c++).

While c# is faster and easier to develop with it still isn't fast enough at run time to run a full game (small games yes). But you will find that even Rare (microsoft games company) use c++ not c#.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I use C# + SlimDX

XNA is good, but since it HAS to be compatible with Xbox, it has limits based on that, also, no plan on ever (right now anyways) make it DX10 compatible as Xbox dont support that.

Its a minor thing, but i like to know that i can if i choosed it, not cant.

btw Lord of the rings online uses some C# dll's for it lauchers i belive it is.

If you are looking to make small project, or something for xbox XNA is a must, and absolutely awesome for that.

But if you want FULL control, SlimDX is the way to go in my oppinion.

and C# is plenty fast to run huge games, i dont get where everyone goes to think those few milliseconds matters that much, if you program it right its just as fast (and sometimes faster) then c++, it all depends.

Some tests shows C# to be faster then c++, some test shows c++ to be faster then C#.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Some tests shows C# to be faster then c++, some test shows c++ to be faster then C#.


There is to discuss about this.
If C# it's faster then c++ it's only for a library implementation problems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by p0is0n
It is highhly unlikely that the games industry will switch to C#. Even most of the tools are written using c++ and MFC (or something similar) to avoid c#. This is because most of the time tools need to use at least some of the exact same code as the finished game will (and that is written in c++).

Untrue. A large number of studios, from BioWare to EA TIburon, use C# for tools development.

Quote:
While c# is faster and easier to develop with it still isn't fast enough at run time to run a full game (small games yes). But you will find that even Rare (microsoft games company) use c++ not c#.

That's likely due to legacy. Rare wasn't always Microsoft-owned (it was founded in 1982, but only purchased by Microsoft in 2002), and you wouldn't expect them to throw out all of their existing code just because Microsoft purchased them. Plus, C# is still not a vector for non-XNA Xbox 360 development, which Rare does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rare was actually one of the big XNA supporters early on, and were coding with it before almost anyone else. Not for a published title, perhaps, but that doesn't mean they're ignoring it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by BLiTZWiNG
The programming interface for C# is just so much cleaner than C++, and besides, code colouring pwnz! Not to mention never having to type ->


I think VB.NET is cleaner than both of them lol, that's what I use. I haven't experimented with XNA yet, mainly because I want the satisfaction of building my own game engine (which I'm doing with VB.NET.) If that fails though, I'll switch to XNA lol

I was going to stick little XNA lines in with the main engine code so it will work on the Xbox, like for multiplayer and Xbox initialization code, etc. Would this work, or would I have to use XNA for everything?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This topic is 3451 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

If you intended to correct an error in the post then please contact us.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this