On one hand, one of the two formats supported by the XNA content pipeline was the X file format. The other was a binary, propietary Autodesk-only format (FBX).

On the other hand, the November 2007 version of the DirectX SDK doesn't include the support needed to write X files anymore.

I haven't really seen any communication about X file support being dropped; it just happened. Although it's been in decline for a long while, ever since they replaced the DirectX Mesh Tool with that horrible DirectX Viewer (which doesn't let you select animations, or view hierarchy, or other such niceties).

 

---

--
Jon Watte, Direct3D MVP
kW X-port 3ds Max .X exporter
14 days after getting my RROD box back, it's going back for service again. Grr.

Whilst I agree that it's a shame about the dropping of various X file format features from the SDK, I just wanted to point out that the FBX file format is not binary (like X file format it has both a binary and ASCII representation) and that the SDK for working with the file format is just as available as the SDK for working with X files. Does it matter that it comes from Autodesk instead of Microsoft?

Having said that, there are problems with the FBX file format that the X file format handles well - such as different vertex formats. FBX stays true to its DCC origins and loses out when compared to a real time graphics orientated file format like the X file format.

---

XNA UK User Group - XNA Goodies

There are open source implementations for reading the X format, but not for the FBX format.

Anyway, what irks me is this continual movement towards WORSE support of existing features, and trying to re-invent a better wheel, but ending up with nothing but a square block. Compare the old DirectX Mesh Tool's support for examining the structure and animations to the lame implementation in the current DirectX Viewer, for example.

It starts feeling like Visual Studio 2002, which was so broken nobody could use it, even though it was supposed to replace Visual Studio 6 ('98). It wasn't until 2005 that the build system was usable again for multi-project solutions.

---

--
Jon Watte, Direct3D MVP
kW X-port 3ds Max .X exporter
14 days after getting my RROD box back, it's going back for service again. Grr.

Its a shame really, the X file format has the potential to be the best one out the lot. Maybe what it needs is somekind of community to build on whats already there. Like, maybe, some higher level objects to turn it into a truer gaming format. Adding support for kinematic animation would be cool since quite a few editors use that kind of thing.

(forward) kinematic animation is already supported.

Inverse animation is something that operates on skeleton data, not meshes, and thus can be solved orthogonally from the .X format.

Honestly, the reason I maintain kW X-port is that it's a well-supported format for getting content into the Xna Content Pipeline. However, if .X is dying the slow death of neglect and aborted re-engineering, then it might actually be less work long term to just write a COLLADA importer instead.

IMO, that's what the XNA team should have done from the get-go, but it's easy to be wise in hind-sight.

---

--
Jon Watte, Direct3D MVP
kW X-port 3ds Max .X exporter
14 days after getting my RROD box back, it's going back for service again. Grr.

Definately a sad thing killing off the .X file format. I agree, the DirectX Viewer thing is pretty useless for anything except quick viewing of a simple 3D object. Obviously most game studios will create their own file formats or use proprietary ones like Autodesk FBX, so having the .X file format filled the purpose of giving access to a simple 3D file format to 1 man team projects like me and I'm sure others like myself. Thank god I only use it for reading, I didn't even know you could write X files till reading your post. I never liked writing file parsing code, and having D3DXLoadMeshFromX() saved me from writing my own file format and code to parse it. Someone should do something to preserve this kind of simple functionality. Maybe write some XML or OOXML or hybrid .X file solution. The less code I have to write the better. :) Long live .X!

 

Its not like that this is life old things die and new stuff evolve X file format missed some stuff it was not as felxible as the new XNA structure requires which means that MS has to do more work so that they parse data from XNA to fit in thier XNA while FBX format is just what XNA needs(altough i don't like its binary thing which permits parsing it manually) but you have to be realistic why do you need the old X file format which need more work and time while you can just use the FBX format with its cool features however you got nothing to lose.

---

Ashour

I don't use XNA. I use DirectX. I know XNA means "XNA Game Studio/Technologies + DirectX", but even your wording shows how this still hasn't caught on. Open the file:

"C:\Program Files\Microsoft DirectX SDK (November 2007)\Documentation\DirectX9\directx_sdk.chm"

Do a search on FBX. What do you come up with? No topics found. Some of us still code in C++ and don't touch managed code. How does FBX help us? Please point me to the FBX for DirectX C++ and I'll be delighted to use a D3DXLoadMeshFromFBX() with all the capabilities that .X D3DXLoadMeshFromX() had (especially binary AND txt file support), plus all this new stuff you claim is there. Unfortunately, thats not how things developed. C++ dev for those features aren't being added for whatever reason(read: check the subject of this thread). I hope they someday are, but until then, unless I "convert" to "XNA", what are my options? Besides, I don't NEED any new features, and backwards compatibility is one of MS strong points isn't it? So please show me how I can use the FBX format with DirectX and C++ without using "XNA". Thanx.

 

X file format missed some stuff it was not as felxible as the new XNA structure requires

That's not even true.

---

--
Jon Watte, Direct3D MVP
kW X-port 3ds Max .X exporter
14 days after getting my RROD box back, it's going back for service again. Grr.

So I recently became interested in what's going down with the November deprecation of the needed files.

Its the fact that the templates for the RM stuff is gone, right? Was there never a definition for templates that weren't RM? It seems so bizarre that there wouldn't be. I googled a few things and am looking around for any info on this stuff.

Sorry to revamp an old thread, but this is just too bizarre to let go.

The .X format was built as part of the Retained Mode API. Hence, the files/functions needed to read/write the format were part of the retained mode.
Over time, the X format migrated to be a more generic mesh file format, used for SDK samples, and used when saving/loading geometry files in the D3DX library.
Because Microsoft has now finally removed the retained mode API from the SDK, the files needed to declare those templates are also removed.
What I think SHOULD have happened, would be that the template files got moved into the D3DX API, rather than just removed.

---

--
Jon Watte, Direct3D MVP
kW X-port 3ds Max .X exporter
14 days after getting my RROD box back, it's going back for service again. Grr.

jwatte:

The .X format was built as part of the Retained Mode API. Hence, the files/functions needed to read/write the format were part of the retained mode.
Over time, the X format migrated to be a more generic mesh file format, used for SDK samples, and used when saving/loading geometry files in the D3DX library.
Because Microsoft has now finally removed the retained mode API from the SDK, the files needed to declare those templates are also removed.
What I think SHOULD have happened, would be that the template files got moved into the D3DX API, rather than just removed.

 

*Channelling the d3d program mgr*

"You can always copy the headers/src/dlls from an older DXSDK."

This particular issue doesn't annoy me nearly as much as the deletion of statically-linked d3dx libraries from the dxsdk and their replacement by the ever-changingly-named d3dx dlls in the name of 'security'.