Please continue to work on XNA. It's a great way for indie game developers like myself to make games and give them to the world. XNA gave us the ability to put our games, easily, on the most popular platforms, and to just dump XNA would be therefor heartbreaking... I implore you to keep working on XNA so we C# developers can still make amazing games!
wake up microsoft, make XNA 5.0 :(((((
It's obvious from all the comments and votes that XNA 5 is wanted. Please just let us know whether you are going to develop XNA 5 or not.
There is no reasonable replacement product for XNA, please continue its development.
мс вроде искала людей для разработки апи, подобного xna. Может, знает кто, чем дело закончилось?
ShadpDX.ToolKit << к сожалению, и с шарпдх не все гладко. Вроде как автор над проектом более не работает.
I just don't understand why MS would kill XNA, it was a great platform. If they had XNA 5 with support for Windows 8, Windows Phone 8, Desktop, Xbox One, DirectX 11, and .NET 4.5 MS would have MANY great games popping up on the stores. Can we at least have some sort of response?
Winston potgieter commented
Is your competitors application written in .NET. Would you like to see how their code is written to better your program. Try This: http://architects.dzone.com/articles/decompiling-net-applications
Скорее всего, вряд ли выйдет XNA 5, так как для DirectX 10 / 11 нужен совершенно другой api. Надеюсь, что через какое-то время ShadpDX.ToolKit тоже будет иметь полноценную поддержку content pipline. А пока что альтернативы для XNA я никакой не вижу.
XNA man commented
Unity3d is not a replacement for XNA. XNA is a framework rather than an engine. The nich is empty. Please bring back XNA. It doesn't have to be a rich editor. An API + Content Pipeline is just enough. Or at least open-source it to make MonoGame life easier.
Ademolu Oluwafẹmi Adeleke commented
XNA introduced me to Windows game programming. C++ is too hard to learn. Someone was saying it was like XP; it had to die. DirectX existed before XNA but it's being improved every year or so. I believe XNA has more users than DirectX. Don't kill it, please.
XNA is, in my mind, the easiest framework out there. Honestly, i don't think anything compares to it for a beginner-level framework. XNA allowed me to create my first ever game, and I credit XNA for my love of coding today. Without it, i do not think I would not have been as interested in game development. Please continue to inspire other people with XNA.
If there was no XNA, I would never have learned C# and become a Windows Phone/Windows Store developer.
I recently got my Microsoft Certification. I accredit XNA to starting my career. Thanks. Please bring it back and create more MS developers
Benjamin Schäfer commented
The thing is, that with XNA it was very easy possible to develop for WP, XBox360 and the PC at the same time. You don't need a expensive devkit for the XBox, just an developer account. Then it is very easy to develop your first small game within a few hours. And the most important thing is, that there is nearly no limitation. You can do everything, you own the sourcecode of everything. This is not possible with Unity or many other game creation kits.
I like .NET. It makes RAD possible in our company. Yes, we could move on to Monogame. But there is no content pipeline, so you have to create a workaround. Then our projects are not 100% compatible. We cannot just load our project, remove the XNA-directions and replace them with monogame. Just try to run your project, there is a cance of around 95% that it won't. It's a great project anyway, but it needs much more time to reach the state of XNA.
XNA is just a easy way for Microsoft to bind Developers to their platforms - if they make it possible to deploy on XBox One and make it possible to develop for all of their platforms. HTML + JS sucks, C++ isn't that easy as .NET and XNA. There are so many traps in C++ development. If you aren't really experienced in developing with C++, it is really pain **********.
I think the best way for Microsoft would be, if they get on with .NET Native. Enable it for Desktop Applications and especially for XNA (5). THAT would be really great and developers like me are really looking forward for it.
The graphics in .NET are pretty good...up to a point. I was working on a non-game project with extensive drag and drop icons. I managed to get it working smoothly in GDI, but only by doing some extensive caching to minimize the need for painting (the number of base objects was in the hundreds, and number of graphics objects could be in the thousands). Unfortunately, any action by the user that required a total screen repaint took 15-20 seconds. I then switched to XNA and was able to scrap the caching entirely, as directly drawing all the objects each time took a fraction of a second.
The point is that there is likely to be an increasing number of icon-driven programs as people move to more touch-based programs. This can put an unbearably heavy burden on the GDI system, so there needs to be some means to allow for better graphics systems. XNA fills that role, currently. I don't really care whether there be XNA or something else, so long as there is a means to get at high-speed graphics in .NET. Creating something new when XNA is already so far along, seems like a poor choice.
Graphics have driven computers for decades now, like it or not. Windows supplanted DOS for a reason (not just the memory model, either). Games are usually equated with graphics, and games are certainly one of the primary uses for computers, but graphics is the bottom line driver of lots of applications. GDI works for most apps, and for the rest....well, we need to have something. XNA is the most reasonable option.
RB Whitaker commented
The fate of XNA and classic VB are not inseparably intertwined, even if the ultimately share the same eventual fate.
There are a lot of differences between classic VB and XNA. For starters, VB was retired 15 years ago, whereas XNA is only a little more than a year out at this point. (OK, the last update was 2.5 years ago.)
Besides, VB was replaced with something (VB.NET) that was a clear successor, even if a lot of people didn't like it. XNA doesn't really have that yet. MonoGame is too unstable, too buggy, and is being developed too slowly to be a replacement. Unity is just a completely different beast altogether. There's no real successor to XNA, and there needs to be.
Lastly, I want to come to Microsoft's defense a little bit here. While they've pretty thoroughly spat out and rejected new versions of VB (yes, despite a fairly significant wave of support), over the last little while, they've actually reconsidered pretty significant decisions, like the Xbox One's requirement to always be connected to the Internet, or their stance on DRM. With a new CEO, it's well within reason that XNA could see new and interesting updates in the future.
At this point, I think the most constructive thing we can do here is leave comments that (a) explain why we like XNA, (b) describe why other options like MonoGame or Unity aren't cutting it, and (c) how XNA can help Microsoft (this can't be just a one way street; ultimately, it's a business decision and the math has to work out).
Not really. First, they had already guaranteed support until at least 2024. Second, it is the same language as VBA which is still part of Office, and will continue to be. And third, it will continue to run as long as Windows continues to use the Windows API.
We had asked that Microsoft add the same modifications to the VB6 programming language that they have already added to VBA.
But Paul Yuknewicz stated it is "not possible" to do this. Clearly nonsense - how would it not be possible for Microsoft to modify the C++ source code ?
We further asked that if they would not do this, they should open source VB6. This Yuknewicz stated was "not feasible".
The reality is that Microsoft were embarrassed at how high this request was climbing on this UserVoice site - it had reached fifth place before they stopped it.
With this attitude from Microsoft, it does not look good for XNA 5 or SilverLight 6 either. You simply cannot trust Microsoft. They will destroy your investment without a second thought.
Shaun Tonstad commented
Unity3D is fine if you like scripting. I've used Unity3D and one thing it is not is an API. It's a struggle to wait for the IDE to load when you're an accomplished developer.
I'm saddened that Sony is supporting XNA through MonoGame while Microsoft is quiet on providing an update to their cherished tools and API. The technical barrier of converting XNA to DirectX 11 is inconsequential compared to the continued support of developer's on Microsoft's platform. Adoption of Unity takes developers away from Microsoft as the primary development platform.
XNA 5 would be amazing. Maybe using SharpDX underneath?
Michael Paterson commented
@Sten2005 That's like asking them to continue supporting XP. It has to die sometime.
Microsoft have just declined the call to bring back an updated VB6 at
They did this without even reviewing it, even though it had 7,445 votes and over 1,000 comments.
Clearly you cannot expect fair treatment from Microsoft, they will do whatever they want regardless of us, their customers.