Content Pipeline in MonoGame: Why I Don't Use It

Introduction

The Content Pipeline is the official way to handle assets in MonoGame. However, there has long been a significant group of developers in the community who dislike it and prefer to load assets in their "raw" form. This approach is especially popular in the FNA community (another XNA 4 implementation) — almost everyone there uses it.

I’ve also been part of this "party" for a long time, and in this article I’ll explain why.

First, let’s go over the real advantages of the Content Pipeline, then its main drawback, and finally — what practical alternatives exist.

Advantages of the Content Pipeline

1. Loading Speed

Assets processed through the Content Pipeline are saved in an optimized binary format (.xnb). They have already undergone all necessary transformations (for example, premultiplied alpha for textures), so they load very quickly.

However, for most indie projects, this advantage is greatly overrated. On modern hardware, even large sets of assets load almost instantly — with or without processing.

Moreover, if you need maximum speed, you can simply pre-convert textures to modern formats (DDS, KTX, Basis Universal) using ImageMagick or other tools.

2. Asset Protection

Some developers consider it important to make assets harder to steal. In this regard, XNB files are indeed slightly better than regular PNG or WAV files.

But let’s be honest: with minimal programming skills, extracting assets from .xnb is quite easy.

Furthermore, strong asset protection has a downside — the more you "protect" them, the harder it becomes for players to create mods.

3. Platform Optimization

The Content Pipeline automatically selects the optimal compression format for the target platform (e.g., DXT, PVRTC, ETC, etc. for images). This point is genuinely useful, and it’s hard to argue against it.

The Main Disadvantage

Despite all the advantages, the built-in capabilities of the Content Pipeline are usually insufficient even for simple games. For example, it has no built-in support for texture atlases.

Hence most likely you'll have to add support for a new asset type. And to do so you'll have to create a full pipeline:

1. Importer — loads the asset into an internal object
2. Processor — processes it (premultiply, compression, etc.)
3. Writer — saves it to .xnb format
4. Reader — loads it from .xnb

Because of this, the amount of code and overall complexity increases dramatically. When loading assets in raw form, steps 3 and 4 are simply unnecessary. Less code means fewer bugs, easier maintenance, and faster development.

Separately, it’s worth mentioning debugging your own pipelines — it used to be a real quest (at least it was several years ago when I tried it).

Alternatives

Fortunately, MonoGame allows you to load assets without the Content Pipeline:

• Texture2D.FromStream() — for images
• SoundEffect.FromStream() — for sounds
• Effect — has a construcotr that accepts a shader compiled via mgfxc (fxc for FNA)
• SpriteFont — has a constructor that accepts a texture atlas and glyph data. In FNA, this constructor is available via reflection.

Based on this, it’s easy to write your own asset loader.

Over the years, I’ve also written and actively maintain several libraries specifically for this approach:

Links

Opinion from the creator of FNA: The XNA Content Pipeline Is Bad and You Shouldn't Use It