Sign on Options
Theme:
To Dark

XNA boss: We've got Web 2.0, we need Games 3.0

Microsoft's Chris Satchell believes that user-generated content is just the start, but games won't really become mainstream until, like movies, anybody can easily make one.

BRIGHTON, UK--Microsoft's XNA Express development tool has made game design an accessible task for the first time for many, but XNA general manager Chris Satchell isn't satisfied. The executive explained his creative vision for the games industry's future to members of the industry as part of his keynote address at the Develop Conference on the UK's south coast, saying, "XNA Express helps, but we have to go farther."

Satchell likened the evolution of the industry to that of the Internet, which is now popularly said to be "Web 2.0." According to Satchell, Web 0.5 represented the first beginnings of the Internet by a select group of academia and technology companies, and 1.0 as similar to television, where a small number of people make content for the masses to passively read. Web 2.0 then, is sites, like You Tube and Flikr, where the users themselves create the content, and anyone can participate, and 3.0--which might be what it looks like in the future--he envisages as going a stage further, with the masses perhaps combining Web sites to create not only user-generated content, but unique ways of accessing that content too.

Games should also follow this model, believes Satchell. He said Games 0.5 consisted of Web sites developed around a game, for example fan sites. Games 1.0 would be an in-game community such as a clan, a leaderboard, or a friends list. Games 2.0--the stage we are currently at--involves people creating some of their own content, for example making Forza 2 car skins. And Games 3.0 will dawn when the community can create its own games, of which XNA Express has been a start.

Satchell said, "This new creativity is vitally important. We want to expand the gaming audience, but to do that, we need to get all those niche industries and then that long tail." The way to do this, he believes, is to expand the amount of people out there able to make games, and the niche titles will follow and thus attract a wider audience.

However, opening up the market to any Joe Blog will have its challenges too. Satchell confessed, "It's the policy and IP (intellectual property) problems that scare me the most. The others are technical challenges." These challenges include such things as people using game tools to create and release offensive material, IP infringement, whether companies give up creative control, who gets paid what, and how much.

He said, "Is it difficult? Absolutely. But if you could do it, think of how many people you would enable to be creative."

51 Comments

  • chibi-acer

    Posted Jul 26, 2007 5:10 pm GMT

    XNA is awesome. It's like the DirectX 9 SDK times 10. Most computer game programming books you'll find in the bookstore are out of date by the time they're printed, and use mostly crappy game engines as a base. The XNA kit is the best free dev kit by far, and even beats several commercial ones.

  • ctg867

    Posted Jul 26, 2007 1:52 pm GMT

    I'm sorry, but so far XNA has tanked, and is gonna take a lot more then some BS speech on Game 3.0 to bring it back. Microsoft is really, really bad with user created content, and that's where Sony can make some serious ground on them. Maybe not beat the, but UT3 with custom maps, LittleBigPlanet with custom levels, and Home with custom everything isn't going to be beat by the garbage that is XNA.

  • mehoff88

    Posted Jul 26, 2007 12:28 pm GMT

    No one cares about sony....

  • halo2_4_pc

    Posted Jul 26, 2007 12:14 pm GMT

    I heard sony's gonna try to do something with homebrew http://www.pspfanboy.com/2007/07/25/sony-looking-for-a
    -way-to-safely-support-homebrew/

  • barom

    Posted Jul 26, 2007 10:58 am GMT

    @legacyzero

    Although I agree this is a cool feature but its nowhere near being "the nail in the coffin for Sony". How many gamers actually is into programming probably like 1%. Of all the gamers I know (a number close to a hundred). I'm the only one interested. besides I hear Sony is coming out with Playstation Edge or something.

  • legacyzero

    Posted Jul 26, 2007 10:41 am GMT

    VVV I agree with this guy. I think this would be the one thing that would put the nail in the coffin for Sony. If Microsoft were to release a standard, basic, way for the End-user to make games. None of this coding crap. Sure Coding can be an option. But Game 3.0 can be better if the creative minds can get a hold of an actual Microsoft basic game engine to create games. IE Rpgmaker. Only 1 billion times to freedom. I just got done using the map editor for Far Cry Instincts Predator for the first time. EVERYTHING COULD BE THIS BASIC! But in depth and challenging at the same time. I would not longer PLAY games. but MAKE them.

  • GSVale

    Posted Jul 26, 2007 10:26 am GMT

    If you really want to make it accessible to everyone you should be thinking along the lines of the RPG maker series or the WCIII/Unreal editors instead of Visual Studio. All Visual Studio does is make it easier for people who already know how to code or are just a little lazy.

  • Paul_TheGreat

    Posted Jul 26, 2007 10:05 am GMT

    Sony has beaten you to the punch Microsoft.

  • zash

    Posted Jul 26, 2007 9:52 am GMT

    $99 dollars for an entire year?! Someone stop the madness!!!! Lol!!

    It's really not that big a deal.

  • Yuck_Too

    Posted Jul 26, 2007 8:31 am GMT

    If $99 a year is holding you back then all I can say is you've never written code before...and I'm glad you won't be contributing to XBLA any time soon.

  • MrSickVisionz

    Posted Jul 26, 2007 8:10 am GMT

    @Keilis

    I've heard that you actually can program for the PS3 after you load Linux onto it. You can't use the gaming hardware yet, but they plan on opening it up eventually. Thats what I read at least. However, like you said, Sony hasn't gone as far as making SDKs available to the public. I think they're hesitant because with Linux, you've turned the PS3 into a PC... and PCs can pretty much do whatever you want them to do. They'd be in a tight spot if you could access advance features of the device and somone released a PS3 "emulator" for it or had a Blu-Ray Ripper/H.264 encoder actually running on the system itself. MS was wise to basically let you program (and encourage programming) for the system, but still keep the system closed up to where you can't just do any and everything with it.

    I can't wait to see some of the apps that eventually come out once the super indie guys with XNA stop thinking about making games. A web browser.

  • Reetesh

    Posted Jul 26, 2007 6:14 am GMT

    I remember hearing something VERY familiar in GDC by the Sony Guys.... with the same comparison with the whole Web2.0 and all

  • Keilis

    Posted Jul 26, 2007 6:10 am GMT

    barom said:

    "Man, this is the only reason I want an X360. Wonder if Sony is gonna put out stuff like this "



    Unfortunately I don't think Sony will ever do this. I was an avid Sony fan with a PS1, PS2, and PSP. I made some simple games for the GBA and was looking forward to doing the same with the PSP.



    Sony, however, continuously shuns the homebrew community and every firmware update closes the holes that people have found to get their own content on there.



    As soon as I heard about XNA and that Microsoft was not only OK with people making their own games, but they supply the libraries and tools necessary to do so, I jumped ship to Xbox 360.



    Unfortunately Sony is only out for money and not improving the gaming community. This was further illustrated when they announced that you could buy PS1 games (without multiplayer..... lazy) for your PSP, but you have to buy a PS3 to copy the games to the PSP. That is the dumbest thing I've ever heard. The PSP can connect to the internet by itself. Why can't we just download them directly? Even if that isn't possible (it is though), my PC has lots of USB ports, why do I need a PS3?



    Oh right.... Sony needs more money so we have to buy a PS3 so we can play PS1 games on our PSPs..... *puke*


    SmokeSignal

  • TTDog

    Posted Jul 26, 2007 4:58 am GMT

    I thought when Sony mentioned Games 3.0 that they were talking about the number of half decent games they were releasing for the PS3?

  • MrSickVisionz

    Posted Jul 26, 2007 4:50 am GMT

    I think games are too difficult for the average person to make. You don't need a hyper advanced skill set or anything; a 15 year old who's read programming books and has a real interest in programming could do it, but a person who's totally clueless about it can't just make a game.

    Similar to how you can't just make a film if you don't even know how to turn a camera on or if pressing the record button baffles you. Even then, your film will likely be 100% crap unless you're a person with a real interest in film making and takes time to read up on and study /practice the craft.

    But ehh, all this is kind of funny. These guys say that user created content is where we should be at... but they release FPSs and Racing games yet don't have any titles that include something as simple as a level editor.

  • jayme22

    Posted Jul 26, 2007 3:30 am GMT

    isnt XNA GAMES 3.0 anyway he says that web 2.0 is like youtube getting members to create the content. XNA is exactly the same therefore it is games 3.0 he really dont know wha he is talking about

  • barom

    Posted Jul 25, 2007 11:35 pm GMT

    Man, this is the only reason I want an X360. Wonder if Sony is gonna put out stuff like this

  • magicalclick

    Posted Jul 25, 2007 10:25 pm GMT

    If only they can make a simple 3D Engine and Model Editor For all of us. XNA is nice, but you still have a lot of things to take care of. Not a casual kind of creation process. At least some shader effects already created for us to plug-in.

  • Pete5506

    Posted Jul 25, 2007 8:51 pm GMT

    ok wow this could happen

  • lew_0911

    Posted Jul 25, 2007 6:07 pm GMT

    This may be a coming debate between purists and the others. It would be a fight between ease of use and power. Too much power would overwhelm the users, too much ease of use... well... would make everybody churn out the same game, giving the illusion of them actually making a game.

    So what it will be people?

  • Omnisugarius

    Posted Jul 25, 2007 6:03 pm GMT

    I think this is a pretty cool idea! I've always wanted to get into game programming. Currently I'm going to college for Animation, but games would be fun. Now I know programming games is hard, my friend does it for a living, but like anything else in life, you've just got to have the time and patients (Money helps too...) to see it to the end and learn. I'm slightly afraid of the YouTube "crap" affect as well... We'll have to wait a and see....

  • Rentago

    Posted Jul 25, 2007 5:45 pm GMT

    I thought of trying to recreate "Starcraft: Ghost" or something
    HOWEVER! Though it might be possible, the problem is, your one man not 200.

  • HAMMER261266

    Posted Jul 25, 2007 5:31 pm GMT

    Even if most of the games created were crap, the great ones would make it worthwhile. Small XNA games could grow into fresh new console franchises which the industry desperately needs. After all, look at all the repetitive racing games, sports games and first person shooters that are cranked out year after year. One great / fresh idea per million would make it worthwhile.

  • axia_777

    Posted Jul 25, 2007 5:08 pm GMT

    PSdual_wielder, they all ready can do this. It is called just getting into the Industry. That is diffrent. This is just going to flood the world with masses of crap with a gem in between here and there. But that is just how I see it. Theer are too many sh*t games all ready. This will just make more.

    And to Guis-Wa, it is hard. Leave real games to real game devs. it is just better that way. I have gotten a degree in Game Art and Design. it is a full Bachelors of Science. If people want to learn how to make games, they too can go to school now to do it. It is how people get into the video games industry these days.

  • Guis_Wa

    Posted Jul 25, 2007 4:42 pm GMT

    I've never made a game but from what I've seen in Making Of videos its kinda... hard. The fact of the matter is that if they want everyone to be able to make games they'll have to do away with things like programming, making 3D models and level design. These things take way too long to learn for just anyone to do it. Seems to me this guy either hasn't thought about this that much or is REALLY sick of having to pay real developers.

  • PSdual_wielder

    Posted Jul 25, 2007 4:14 pm GMT

    axia_777 Contrast to you, I think this vision is quite neat. Even the "talented" people have to start from somewhere. If everyone has access to tools that will easily bring out their visions, we will see way more of these "talented" people rise out from the average crowd and eventually have them make even more fastatic pieces. You have to give credit to Microsoft for attempting to change the world, even though at this stage its still all talk.

  • PEELEDbanana

    Posted Jul 25, 2007 4:12 pm GMT

    Hmm... This is really a dillema. On one hand, i wish it was easier to create games. That would rock, i have a lot of awesome ideas. On the other hand, it will turn into youtube. That being (For all of u guys who dont know) a lot of crap. There is about 20% good, thoughtout videos. The rest is crap. This is where the problem lies. Looking at Youtube as a test to this "Games 3.0," there is still tv and movies, so it isnt the fall of production companies. I dont know. What i think would be better than all this "i wanna create a game" crap would be just editors on games. I know that it is already on the computer, but what about consoles? Halo 3 with forge is what i am think of. I find that to be what Game 3.0 would be.

  • axia_777

    Posted Jul 25, 2007 4:04 pm GMT

    No, no, no no. As easy as anyone making a game? Yah, so the world can be flooded with crap. This is a stupid idea. Leave game making to talented people, not the "Joe Public". This idea will water down the video games industry and it LAME.

  • RichardSim8192

    Posted Jul 25, 2007 3:55 pm GMT

    The problem is that creating content for modern, let alone future, games is incredibly hard and time consuming. Very few people have both the required skills and time (or enough time to both learn those skills and to create content).

    Re-texturing a car is very simple compared to his "dream" that anyone can create games. I call BS. If you have small groups of people creating games due to the complexity... well, you have indie developers. Gee, that's new. Not.

    Definitely one of the most misguided keynotes I've seen in a while - I wouldn't be surprised if it was written on the flight to the conference.

  • AngelCage

    Posted Jul 25, 2007 3:55 pm GMT

    ganon546

    It's awesome that their giving gamers the chance to express their ideas.
    .-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-..-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.


    Giving???? MS don't give a chance to express nothing to anyone, they are SELLING the chance. $99 per year is the price (which i think is pretty stupid).

  • Bgrngod

    Posted Jul 25, 2007 3:47 pm GMT

    Ugh.. I am jus thinking of all the user created GARBAGE that will have to be played through just to find the real gems. User created content is 99% pure junk and useless. Of the 1% left over, a small fraction is really really good. I am assuming everyone has seen myspace pages.... do you want your games to have that same user created "look?" God no.

  • gamenux

    Posted Jul 25, 2007 3:42 pm GMT

    Until they dummy-proof it, then I will believe it.

  • inomyabcs

    Posted Jul 25, 2007 3:30 pm GMT

    99 dollars for a whole year to be able to publish games to XBox Live is not very community orientated. If he is thinking about this already, then he needs to have a solution and quick if he wants this to take off.

  • hotlavaman

    Posted Jul 25, 2007 3:21 pm GMT

    wtf why can't i find out how to use this stuff???? and why isn't it advertised on the 360?

  • rokkuman09

    Posted Jul 25, 2007 3:18 pm GMT

    The XNA thing is not so amazing, I don't understand why they think it is such a great idea. It's just visual C..

  • fmobliv06

    Posted Jul 25, 2007 3:07 pm GMT

    hooray for games 3.0.

  • rahstar

    Posted Jul 25, 2007 3:04 pm GMT

    Game 3.0 is already here. Hasnt he seen little big planet.

  • living420

    Posted Jul 25, 2007 2:55 pm GMT

    This has existed in some extent for quiet some time in some forms. Counter Strike is a good example of a game made by users via publishers tools. other games such as starcraft and Warcraft III took tools meant for building Campaigns and created games with their own unique objectives. I think this is an exciting prospect to push this concept further but could also lead to less desirable outcomes such as the playing community split between so many online games that the communities are fragmented and minuet. This can also create quality control issues and even make large publishing companies and epic game titles obsolete. A good balance of user and publisher made games will satisfy everyone while putting pressure on developers to create new and exciting concepts.

  • rulo_rezn0r

    Posted Jul 25, 2007 2:51 pm GMT

    ihope to see some usr generated content for UT3 next year

  • Veritech_Ace

    Posted Jul 25, 2007 2:45 pm GMT

    kyo_tetsuei, absolutely agree. There are plenty of ways for motivated, but not technologically (at least with regards to games) people can create games already. These games are all pretty simple, no way near as sophisticated as Gears of War or even a last-gen game, not because the tools are deficient, but because the amount of effort needed to create the assets that power a more complex game (art, music) is beyond most amateur developers. To use the indie movie analogy, any old guy can get a cheap DV camera, write a script, and shoot a short flick, but if he had to create textures and models for everything he was shooting, it would take a hell of a long time. Unless everyone wants to use the same box of art assets, or there springs up some cottage industry of textures and models for general use, a better XNA is not going to make game 3.0 come any sooner, at least not in providing a caliber of game above what we already see in the casual market.

  • ganon546

    Posted Jul 25, 2007 2:35 pm GMT

    It's awesome that their giving gamers the chance to express their ideas.

  • bossjimbob

    Posted Jul 25, 2007 2:35 pm GMT

    ElvenArcher, content creation tools like level editors (Racing Destruction Set, Activision's Game Maker, etc.) have been around for decades. Until now there has been no easy way to share them. That's what Satchell is talking about--content creation and dissemination via the Internet, but in a way that people aren't simply modding existing games (a la Half-Life/Counter-Strike) but by creating new and original games from the ground up using developer tools.

  • StanleyL GameSpot staff member

    Posted Jul 25, 2007 2:27 pm GMT

    King_Luca: Sony used the term Game 3.0 to describe Home, their vision of next-gen connected gaming, with 2.0 being regular online play and 1.0 being old school videogames. Satchell is using the term in his own way, it's not copyrighted by Sony.

  • Anuebis

    Posted Jul 25, 2007 2:25 pm GMT

    If Microsoft implements its it becomes a standard, which is great. Like the 360 stuff they do. BUT Phil Harrison also had made mention of this and it would be interesting to see how they follow through. Sony me thinks not. Sony is really good at implamenting a lot of cool features but they never seem to standarize things, such as Dolby Digital sound or 480p. Only after the fact do they begin to even offer it.

    Sorry about the Sony rant.

  • darkchaostitan

    Posted Jul 25, 2007 2:11 pm GMT

    Awsome, even though I use different programs mostly, Game 3.0 would be great.

  • comthitnuong

    Posted Jul 25, 2007 2:09 pm GMT

    I like the idea of people being able to create their own content. A prime example is the Starcraft map editor. So many fun custom games were created out of that. The only problem was that it was very difficult and tedious to do. But it payed off for the players, and that is what matters to me.

  • ElvenArcher

    Posted Jul 25, 2007 2:04 pm GMT

    Load Runner from the 80s had a level editor, like Forza's car skin maker. This isn't anything new. It's like comparing home movies to professional movies. The majority of games on XBLA suck, we don't need more like this.

  • King_Luca

    Posted Jul 25, 2007 1:59 pm GMT

    Didn't Sony come up with the whole "Game 3.0" concept at E3 a year or two ago? How come there's no mention of Sony coming up with the concept, instead of making it seem like a Microsoft invention?

  • surferboy2177

    Posted Jul 25, 2007 1:56 pm GMT

    I'm a big fan of the concept of XNA. It's cool to give people the opportunity to create their own games. Sure it's not a new idea, but it's cool to see a major company like Microsoft promoting it for their console. Yeah there will be a lot of bad games that come out, but if one great game comes out of all this than I think it's well worth it.

  • kyo_tetsuei

    Posted Jul 25, 2007 1:48 pm GMT

    To me, it feels like there is a reason why only a select few people are in positions to create games that are widely accepted, but the idea of people creating their own games isn't a new concept at all, just look at all the flash games out there - while there is obviously a ton of dumb games, there are some genuinely good games that many many people can play and enjoy, so in the end, this turns into a glass half full/empty argument, while we're going to get a glut of horrible games with this next step, we're bound to find something that will become as wide-spread and acclaimed as any of the current great titles that we have now.

Subscribe to GameSpot's YouTube Channel

Hot Stories

Newsmakers

Featured Stories

Submit News

Got tips? Send them in!