Operating Systems and Game Development, My Second Thread

He wants to stay with XP in a C++ based tool environment as long as he can, meaning forever if he could - LOL.

It really doesn't matter in which environment a developer feel comfortable as long as
1. it is not enforced by corperate guide lines (homogeneous developer envrionments),
2. it has not an effect on the target plattform where the game should run,
3. it has not an effect on the tool selection.

The choice of operating system depends more on your target audience I think. It's perfectly possible to write high-end software and games which can be compiled for all major platforms, be it through actual platform-independent code or wrappers which can use different backends (eg. rendering systems which can use both DirectX and OpenGL backends)

When it comes to languages themselves you shouldn't consider them linked to a specific OS. If you take C++ for example you'll see that the 3 major operating systems (being Windows, OSX and Linux) support the C++ standard library, with other cross-platform libraries like Qt available for general cross-platform development.

For personal projects the choice of operating system mostly comes down to personal preference of the development tools and libraries available for said systems. When we again look at C++ you'll find a varying range of development tools available for different platforms, be it GCC on unices and unix-derivatives (eg. linux and OSX) or MSVC (or a windows GCC environment) on windows platforms, each with corresponding IDEs which support them, like Visual Studio, Qt Creator, Xcode, etc.

The notion that C++ development is easier on windows might come from the fact that Visual Studio is just an excellent windows-only IDE, and there aren't really any tools available on other platforms which can match it. I'm definitely not saying that there aren't any good IDEs available on other platforms, but it's pretty much a fact that Visual Studio is the optimal choice for an IDE.

On the point of using sticking with XP for game development: XP is an outdated platform and its support period will officially end in april 2014, which is less than 2 years from now. XP has no support for some more recent libraries (like D3D10-11) which are becoming more and more prominent in the gamedev scene. I know there are a lot of people who don't think too highly of the newer iterations of windows, but sticking with an outdated and soon to be unsupported platform is not a good choice, especially when it comes to software development.

An interesting thing is that I know someone personally who insists on XP for game design and had conversation with him saying that I really like Win 7. He wants to stay with XP in a C++ based tool environment as long as he can, meaning forever if he could - LOL.

He is a programmer resisting progress and evolution, as I always say, a contradiction difficult to explain. I wouldn't waste my time working with such an individual as he is clearly unable to move on and learn new ways of doing things.

[quote name='3Ddreamer' timestamp='1344586966' post='4968008']
He wants to stay with XP in a C++ based tool environment as long as he can, meaning forever if he could - LOL.

It really doesn't matter in which environment a developer feel comfortable as long as
1. it is not enforced by corperate guide lines (homogeneous developer envrionments),
2. it has not an effect on the target plattform where the game should run,
3. it has not an effect on the tool selection.
[/quote]

Ashaman73,

The far sightedness that you show in your points is good.

1) Creativity seems to thrive in environments with the least restrictions possible, so I agree with your first statement, but is it really possible to enforce truely homogeneous environments?

2) Different platforms must require adaptations in every case, I would think. We have used software which handles the compatibility of the creative platform toward the end user platform. Making tools or modifying existing ones must surely be far more demanding on the developer than using software as is. On the other hand, making tools and modifying others opens much more flexibility for the end product, isn't this true? Obviously the more different the developer platform is to the end user platform, then the more work to bridge compatibility. Time spent on compatibility is time taken from direct game development.

This area of decision making seems to me to have a huge potential in long term results and the finished product.

3) Tool selection could be heavily impacted by platform choices both in terms of technical demands and tools available.

If a game developer wants to do things very specific which are not available features in the tools, then the person will no doubt have to make major changes.
Is the homogenous nature of being limited to one set of tools worse than corporate homogenous environment? In other words, is it not possible for the game developer to make a sefl-imposed homogeny? Would the risk of self-imposed homogeny be greatest by relying too much on software solutions instead of coding solutions?

These seem to all be important to at least consider.

Thanks,

3Ddreamer

Radikalizm and kunos,


Perhaps this is the main consideration for dev platform to end user plaform:

Game Dev Platform > Game Engine > API > End User Platform = Making choices with End User in mind

Am I on the right track?


3Ddreamer

it all depends on your time/budget/expectations. In theory you look at the world, choose a target market(s) then you choose the best tools to create the software to sell in those markets. Sometimes other constraints come in to place, ie. if you work with a dev that is not familar or not willing to get into a new platform that becomes a cost that has to be taken into account.
Of course there is cross platform, but that brings a huge number of complications and, IMO, is often overrated... at least considering what the situation has been in the last 15 years, you want to target Windows as your main platform, everything else (if you stay on the "PC" market) is not going to bring you much revenue... so perhaps it's better to focus on the main platform and maximise the quality and time usage (ie. tools) on that.

Things might change in the future, so it is possible to go "all in" and bet on The Year Of Linux On The Desktop , and try to be there when money start to come in... but I am not a gambler, are you?

LOL

No! I am not a gambler.

However, with Apple being so strong now as the most capitalized company in the world, I want to be ready in position when OS X shows steady increase in market share. There are recent indications of Apple being more open to computer games than in the past. Some of the Chinese suppliers to Apple have made it clear of their desire in opening more gaming market share in general including mobiles, implying Apple collaboration in it.


3Ddreamer - Dream on!