[casual_games] languages... (that's an 's' at the end!)

[Phil Steinmeyer]

Flash comes pre-installed on 80%+ of new consumer-oriented computers. 
AFAIK, .NET comes pre-installed on 0% or near 0% of new, consumer-oriented 
computers.

And yes, for those without Flash, it's a tiny install, that they'll likely 
already have from visiting a Flash enabled website.  Macromedia's web site 
shows surveys claiming 97% penetration for Flash 6.

See these for details:
http://www.macromedia.com/software/player_census/flashplayer/version_penetration.html

http://www.macromedia.com/software/player_census/flashplayer/tech_breakdown.html


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Austin Haas" <austin at pettomato.com>
To: "IGDA Casual Games SIG Mailing List" <casual_games at igda.org>
Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2005 2:55 PM
Subject: Re: [casual_games] languages... (that's an 's' at the end!)


> This is a good discussion! I was wondering myself what the merits of .NET 
> were.
>
> One thing I'd like to point out, though...
>
> "It is no different a ‘barrier’ than Flash,
> > and I imagine the exact same sorts of discussions went on when it was
> > only a couple years old. "
>
> When Flash 4 came out, it was only a 200kb download. I've heard a lot of 
> people say that it's tiny size was one of the main reasons it was so 
> successful. Directory was already out, and much more powerful, but I think 
> the download for it was upwards of 700kb. Of course, I'm sure there were 
> many factors, and broadband penetration was very low at that time.
>
> -austin
>
> Austin Haas
> Pet Tomato, Inc.
> http://www.pettomato.com
>
> Joe Pantuso wrote:
>> As has been said, from an end-user point of view the nature of .NET is 
>> completely beside the point.  It is no different a ‘barrier’ than Flash, 
>> and I imagine the exact same sorts of discussions went on when it was 
>> only a couple years old.  The reasons to pick it up are similar, 
>> compelling improvements to development capabilities and results.
>>
>>  “that product must confer spectacular benefits to get me to use it” It 
>> clearly does.  Half as much code in some cases.
>>
>>  The biggest reason not to use it for me would be if I had some 
>> self-built libraries that I was already using for game development.  If I 
>> had a bunch of great stuff that I was deeply familiar with or had written 
>> myself that I had already used previously to create games, I’d be nuts to 
>> dump it as part of the price to move to a new language/environment at 
>> this stage.
>>
>>  But, if you are starting from a mostly clean slate, and/or looking for 
>> new tech, new engines, there are a lot of cool things built on top of 
>> .NET that you can leverage already.  3D, game graphics, multi-player 
>> hosting, simplified distribution, automatic updating, etc. etc.  It is a 
>> modern platform and you get with it all the costs and benefits that come 
>> with it.
>>
>>  Viewing .NET as an enterprise thing is missing the point.  And there is 
>> a lot of game development going on with .NET.
>>
>>  No right or wrong here in this thread, just lots of great opinions and 
>> options.
>>
>>  ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Casual_Games mailing list
>> Casual_Games at igda.org
>> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/casual_games
> _______________________________________________
> Casual_Games mailing list
> Casual_Games at igda.org
> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/casual_games
>