[SOLVED] Java VS C#+XNA 4.0

[jonjava]

Hi jgo community o/

I've made a game and also been working with groups of people that have been developing games for WP7 using C# and XNA 4.0.

It's very portable and all the games work well on the phone. I've realized I can achieve a lot with just C# and XNA 2D.

I'm wondering if this is comparable to standard Java. Using AWT, Swing. That is, not using OpenGL or other libraries.

Bluntly you could put it this way:

The exact same game made in both Java and C# with XNA 4.0 is run on a Windows Phone 7 ( or anything, I just want to point out that the hardware isn't exactly top notch ). Which game will run "better"? ( Faster? ).

Putting aside things like which one is easier/faster to code on ( Which depends a lot on the IDE ) although XNA already has done a lot of work for us, it's ( sorry for being so blunt ) pretty much like an empty Canvas in Java.


I'm sorry if this is obvious, but afaik XNA is built on DirectX - would it be correct to assume that DirectX > Java AWT? And therefore that DirectX == OpenGL in performance? And ultimately C#+XNA >>> std Java?


Input appreciated, thanks!
Jon

[Riven]

Why do you keep comparing [C# with XNA] with [Java without OpenGL], saying Java without OpenGL would lose.

Well doh, I mean, what did you expect?

[Cero]

XNA is cool and all obviously

but who the f**k cares about f**king Windows Phone 7

Games published by our own members! Check 'em out!

[gouessej]

Hi jgo community o/

I've made a game and also been working with groups of people that have been developing games for WP7 using C# and XNA 4.0.

It's very portable and all the games work well on the phone. I've realized I can achieve a lot with just C# and XNA 2D.

There won't be any support of XNA in Windows 8 as far as I know. It is not portable like Java. Even XNA on XBox and on phones does not work in the same way.

I'm wondering if this is comparable to standard Java. Using AWT, Swing. That is, not using OpenGL or other libraries.

No, in no way it is comparable with Java. Mono .NET implementation for GNU Linux and Microsoft .NET implementation are noticeably different.

Bluntly you could put it this way:

The exact same game made in both Java and C# with XNA 4.0 is run on a Windows Phone 7 ( or anything, I just want to point out that the hardware isn't exactly top notch ). Which game will run "better"? ( Faster? ).

C# is slower than Java. Just compare Quake .NET and Jake 2...

Putting aside things like which one is easier/faster to code on ( Which depends a lot on the IDE ) although XNA already has done a lot of work for us, it's ( sorry for being so blunt ) pretty much like an empty Canvas in Java.


I'm sorry if this is obvious, but afaik XNA is built on DirectX - would it be correct to assume that DirectX > Java AWT? And therefore that DirectX == OpenGL in performance? And ultimately C#+XNA >>> std Java?


Input appreciated, thanks!
Jon

You compare cars with tomatoes   OpenGL is faster than Direct3D according to Nvidia and XNA is going to die, why do you still use it?
reference (in French, sorry, use Google Translate or an equivalent service)

[jonjava]

Aha, well, thank you everyone for clearing that up. gouessej's post was particularly helpful:)

[feelingtheblanks]

Whenever I see someone comparing Java with C# / .NET, I can't stop laughing because of this : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FiRZwBX3wZo

[Cero]

I just can't take Microsoft seriously
everything is a copy

its like for every popular thing there is, a microsoft equivalent exists, created after the original was popular.

hey I have an idea, lets all write games in f**king silverlight (and use bing to search)

@ windows 8 XNA RIP article
what does it matter ? XNA cant write METRO apps
nobody. cares. about. metro.
It's a graphical interface specifically for touch devices

your work and games will look the same, everybody is going to use classic view, if people use 8
your IDE will look the same, your openOffice(granted MS Office might slightly differ), you maya, your photoshop
it will all be the same

Every time its like this with a new windows. People talk about the graphical features.
Generic article back then: Windows Vista & 7: New Features: Visual Calendar on the Desktop !!!!!   GENIUS
And now its the same thing, people talk about win8 and the only thing the mainstream focuses on is METRO - who cares ?

An OS is about the kernel...

Do you really thing major corporations will work with a new graphical interface, using metro, just because... well its there ? (and win8 will probably cost $1000 or so again)

Hell most companies I know, still use windows XP

[RylandAlmanza]

hey I have an idea, lets all write games in f**king silverlight (and use bing to search)

*Searches for Silverlight tutorials on Bing*

[ra4king]

And now its the same thing, people talk about win8 and the only thing the mainstream focuses on is METRO - who cares ?

The mainstream media and non-nerdy people care!

An OS is about the kernel...

Try telling that to your non-nerdy friends, they'll start looking at you funny about this "kernel" thingy


People don't care about the inner workings. All they care about are that it looks "shiny" and that It Just Works [tm].

Windows 8 is brilliant for the dumb ones and just Windows 7.2 for us nerds.

[Cero]

People don't care about the inner workings. All they care about are that it looks "shiny" and that It Just Works [tm].

To quote AVGN

It's a gleaming silver turd. It might not look like shit, but it sure smells like it.

Games published by our own members! Check 'em out!

[gouessej]

@ windows 8 XNA RIP article
what does it matter ? XNA cant write METRO apps
nobody. cares. about. metro.

No support for Metro = no access to Windows Marketplace

Is that clear now?

[Cero]

@ windows 8 XNA RIP article
what does it matter ? XNA cant write METRO apps
nobody. cares. about. metro.

No support for Metro = no access to Windows Marketplace

Is that clear now?

there is a windows marketplace ? =D

[princec]

There is but like Windows Phone it will fail miserably.

Cas