Do many people still use C# + DX?
Author
Hey,
Just was wondering if any people still use C# + DirectX or have all completely moved to C++?
Cheers
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#.
Author
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?
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)
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)
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]
Author
Thanks for the good replies!
Great because I had 2008 installed, and XNA 2.0 didn't like that at all.
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.
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. :)
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. =)
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. =)
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 ->
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
