Suspected PayPal Hackers Seek Deal To Stay Out Of Prison
Did A Google Earth Mistake Cause A Couple's Brutal Murder?
Microsoft set to destroy Apple in every games market
Still with me? Basically: your desktop computer, console, phone and music player are all computers, but built and managed in very different ways. Interoperability between devices is usually via a communication standard such as USB, Firewire or Ethernet -- their operating systems are just too dissimilar to communicate in any other way. It would be like using a keyboard with your toaster. But Microsoft has just changed that; that's why the video you see in Jay's story is so damn impressive. It's the same game, the same code, compiled to run on three different Microsoft devices. It's integration or hardware feature creep -- GPS, a stopwatch, calculator and mobile phone -- but for software.
Apple, with its locked-down, isolated sandbox is in trouble. Do game developers have any reason to continue working on games for the iPhone or iPad now that Microsoft is offering so much more?
Not only is this a huge boon for developers -- all they have to do is write different code for the device's inputs -- it's also massive for gamers. You can be playing a platform game on your Xbox, save it, and continue playing on your mobile phone on the way to work. Now, given Microsoft's renewed focus on cloud computing, imagine saving your game to the cloud -- head over to your friend's house and continue playing on their Xbox. Or their PC, if they don't have an Xbox.
Can Apple really see themselves competing, with a minuscule desktop market share and 25% of the smartphone sector? Steve Jobs has announced Apple's intent to move into mobile gaming, but can you really see developers siding with the iPhone when Windows Phone 7 is just around the corner? The iPhone has an installed base of about 9 million users in the USA -- would you like to guess at the combined figures of Windows and Xbox?
Interoperability and cross-platform applications are really cool. You hear that, Apple? Whatever happened to the 'unified architecture' of the desktop Macs?
Finally, like the gouging rusty handle of a spoon that seals the deal, is the crusty monstrosity of Apple's iTunes App Store; dog-slow approvals and draconian rules on what constitutes acceptable content. Have you seen Xbox Live and its hippy easy-lovin' Marketplace? Can you begin to imagine the joy of buying a game there, and being able to play it on your PC, console and phone?
Microsoft has already broken the gaming ice, they're no longer the new guys of the gaming industry -- and boy did it cost them a lot with the loss-leading original Xbox -- and now with Windows Phone 7, I think the iPhone has just lost any chance of its continued existence as a gaming platform.
Comments
100
Subscribe to commentsRobertMar 7th 2010 1:18PM
Wow, defensive much?
Do gamers really want to play the exact same game on multiple platforms? I can't imagine playing Modern Warfare 2 on a large HD TV and then trying to play the same game on a phone. Or be playing a game of Canabalt on your phone and then decide that the gaming experience would be better with everything pixellated on a large screen? And don't get me started on the wars between console and PC gamers.
An Xbox 360 and a Windows Mobile 7 phone are DRAMATICALLY different in processing and graphical power. So, a game developer would have to code two different versions of the game. And I would rather them spend their time making one good version instead of trying to shoehorn the game on to a platform it was never meant to be on.
Oh, and don't think that this will all be sold in one box. You are going to have to purchase the game for each platform separately. Am I really going to want to spend $60 on a new console game and then go buy a $60 PC version of the same game followed by a $20 phone version? If you do, you must have too much money for your own good.
Being able to play with your Xbox Live account across multiple devices is cool. If there was a mini-game that came with a console game, it would be neat as well. And at least Microsoft is learning from Apple that having a similar set of architecture is helpful for developers, instead of following the Windows Mobile 6 and Android model of having an incredibly fragmented hardware base.
Yes. This will make gaming better on the Microsoft family of products. But don't paint it as the silver bullet that will bring down the Apple system. It just isn't happening.
(P.S. Did you really try to compare the sales of a cell phone to the combined sales of a PC operating system and a game console? Seriously?)
Sebastian AnthonyMar 7th 2010 1:23PM
Hm, the only fair comparison to make here is iPhone gaming vs. Windows Phone 7 gaming.
Apple has stated they want to do gaming on the iPhone (and iPad). They don't have any serious competition... other than Windows Phone 7.
If Live Marketplace games can be played on Windows Phone 7, this is a _huge_ thing.
This isn't about 'top end' games, or frantic shooters. The iPhone isn't aiming to capture THAT market either. This is about indie/casual games, something the iPhone has done very well with so far. I don't see developers working on iPhone titles when there are much better uses of their time.
P.S. Yes I did! But it was a bit of a joke, so don't worry :)
boisroMar 7th 2010 1:34PM
Having interoperability between Live Marketplace games and Windows Mobile 7 would be great for the platform. From what I have seen, Windows Mobile has historically not had great gaming, but this could really set it up to compete with the iPhone in ways that Android doesn't seem to be able to.
But, I don't think this will kill iPhone development. I mean, the Playstation 3 hasn't killed Xbox 360 development, or vice versa. As long as both phones sell well and they are easy to code for, developers will still make games for both of them. The only thing that will kill iPhone game development is if people stop buying iPhones.
ArnieMar 7th 2010 4:39PM
Actually taking your own example Robert, the Call of Duty game does exist on the iPhone and from what I have read online at respected websites it has been a solid success for Activision. It is not the same game but it is for sure a similar experience even though the control scheme would suck.
I think you obviously did not look at the entire video in the previous article cause you would not have mentioned pixelation on your TV. The "code" is the same except for the control object (which is literally one class file in XNA) but the images are files which are scaled in resolution of the device on which it is supposed to play. That is why the presenter said 90%. In games images are almost done high resolution first and the scaled to fit the env. So theoretically you could start with an image in 1080p resolution and start scaling down for the different hardware specs thereby also reducing the game footprint on your mobile devices.
AlexMar 8th 2010 7:43AM
You obviously missed the point of the article. MS has set it up so that all you have to do is program for one system then remap the buttons for the other system and "viola" it is done. They have the software to make it playable across the platforms, saving you time in recoding and making your game available to many more people. Second, not everyone that plays a game in one format is going to play it in another I agree with you on that but. There are millions of people that play only phone games and do not own a console and vice versa. SO for example if you wanted to sell the game Zuma, which is available on Xbox Live now there are millions of new people that will be able to play it on their phone or PC becasue it was coded for one game and made playable on several. Got it?
Eric HMar 8th 2010 1:38PM
They are referring to the casual games market, and comparing the hardware that support casual games.
DeoWulfMar 8th 2010 6:09PM
You're probably misconstruing the purpose of this architecture. It's not for hardcore console games, it's for simple casual games that won't tax your phone any more than your Xbox or PC. Essentially, that's what the XNA Games are. As an XNA developer, I can tell you a few things--
1) Games won't be pixelated on the big screen. XNA studio allows you to add as many different sets of textures as you want, so you can keep high-res and low-res copies of all your images
2) No, those high-res images won't take up space on your phone, or vice-versa. The images, sounds, and other content are packaged individually with each 'deployment' of a game-- Xbox, Windows, and Zune / WP7.
3) Xbox, PC, and Zune/WP7 all handle graphics and content in pretty much the same way through XNA. So, even if you DID code a game which was too processor- or graphics-heavy for a mobile device, you use the same code with conditional compiler directions (#if WINDOWS, #if XBOX, etc) which tell the compiler what to include (or leave out) depending on the destination platform. Even in more complex cases, you really will end up with about 90% identical code, which is a dream come true.
This isn't going to revolutionize the game industry or let you play COD on your phone. But, it will give Windows/Xbox/Zune/WP7 a very distinct advantage to Apple's somewhat limited system, which is essentially what Mr. Anthony was hyperbolizing.
bug frawgMar 7th 2010 1:51PM
"but still, internally, it's PC hardware."
That's not entirely true.
The processors in a typical desktop pc are x86 and amd64 while the 360 uses a triple core 64bit PPC architecture. So no, a 360 is not internally the same as a desktop pc.
JoePalmaMar 7th 2010 2:24PM
No. It is a PC. PC is Personal Computer. It is a computer that is personal.
PC's are more than just Intel based machines.
bug frawgMar 7th 2010 2:58PM
Hence why I said 'typical'
ArnieMar 7th 2010 4:22PM
I think the author wanted you to look at it from a coders perspective. The XNA framework on which the demo was built uses C# which like Java is a virtual machine code and the compiler takes care of the machine code for the 3 different platforms so in that sense they are almost the same.
bug frawgMar 7th 2010 4:51PM
"I think the author wanted you to look at it from a coders perspective. The XNA framework on which the demo was built uses C# which like Java is a virtual machine code and the compiler takes care of the machine code for the 3 different platforms so in that sense they are almost the same."
No he didn't:
"Did you know that the Xbox 360 is just a PC in a box? Sure, the inputs are different and you generally attach it to a TV -- but still, internally, it's PC hardware."
SugarDaddyMar 7th 2010 10:10PM
@Arnie: Almost correct. Java and C# are not actually compiled to machine code. They're compiled to code that runs in the CLR for .NET or the JVM for Java. Technically nothing is compiled to machine code. That's what an assembler is for.
The advantage with those types of languages is that Sun or Microsoft can write a JVM or CLR for whatever platform and the code can be platform independent.
Joshua OchsMar 8th 2010 4:41PM
@JoePalma:
Except Macs and iPhones *clearly* aren't PC's, because... some convoluted hand-waving argument, right?
Oh, I'm sorry - it's only a PC if it runs Microsoft software, right?
AdvancedN0obMar 7th 2010 1:58PM
damn i love you guys... ya'll just hit it sometimes
SerneumMar 7th 2010 2:06PM
I'd also like to point out that Windows has been doing this for quite some time. XNA is used to code for 360, Zune and Windows. You can write a game for Zune and easily translate it to 360 with just a few minor tweaks.
WiWMar 7th 2010 2:10PM
Wow, this isn't even about gaming. It's a bummer that everyone here thinks that all technological advancement is aimed at the gaming segment of the market. He even said in the video that he was showing a gaming scenario, and he also showed a productivity scenario. This is not about gaming (or at least not entirely). Can you imaging programs that normally only run on Windows that can now run on your phone as well? I mean, the SAME programs, not mobile versions of them. This is about merging three platforms that we always thought were different and separate.
If we thought that phones were only meant to do social, and consoles were only meant to do games and media, and the PC was meant to be the powerhouse, then we were proven wrong by Microsoft!
This is a huge step forward in making the client more relevant in the face of the cloud, and the "three screens and a cloud" is so much more compelling to me now.
And btw, you can do a lot with a 1.5Ghz Snapdragon on a phone. My guess is that %90 of games can run on 1.5Ghz (the %10 being high-end graphic-intensive games, which can probably run on 1.5Ghz on very low-res anyway). And once the mobile industry matures from infancy, it won't be such a big gap between desktop and mobile.
essjayMar 7th 2010 2:21PM
I think you've missed the point of 1) what MS are proposing here and 2) what's made the iPhone such a successful gaming platform. As pointed out by other commentators, the MS demo happened to show gaming as an example, but it wasn't the focus of the technology on show, and neither should it be.
The iPhone has blown the other mobile phones out of the water precisely because it offers a unified platform, along with the iPod Touch. The games are designed with it in mind. I don't want a scaled down version of a PC or Xbox Game with botched controls on my phone. They're completely different usage scenarios. On one, I'm sitting down, at home, and I have ample time to focus on the game. When I'm gaming on my phone it's for short bursts, and the games have to be designed with that in mind. Until the iPhone, this point seemed largely lost on most mobile games developers.
Just because something can be done, doesn't mean that it should be done.
hazardMar 7th 2010 10:37PM
I think Eric Rudder demonstrates this point nicely in the video from the previous article around 0:40 when he shows the game on the phone and dies immediately ..
Nonetheless, there's huge potential for having a mobile versions of Desktop games; have characters and/or levels that can only be accessed on the mobile version, ancillary features, content and mini games, etc ..
BTW Sebastian is a shameless attention seeker .. Gaming on OSX is set to blossom regardless of what MS does purely because the user base of OSX is only getting bigger.
Sebastian AnthonyMar 7th 2010 10:41PM
Good points, essjay :)
Hazard -- come now, I might be shameless, but I'm not an attention seeker. Low blow!
'Blossoming' is a good word. Just remember the market share of Mac vs. Windows. Yes, gaming is about to blossom on OS X, but only relative to its self. It's still tiny compared to Windows -- and the better question is whether developers will invest money into OS X. I don't see why they would, given the choice... but maybe!
(This is all moot really, because the main growth sector is frickin' social Flash games. The numbers dwarf everything else by a huge margin.)