Second Take: The Future of Mac Gaming - Page 2

until we can build macs with whatever parts we want, gaming just isn't going to happen. PC gamers love to build and customize their rigs, and taking that away is like spitting in your face. it's bs.

Direct X will never come to mac since ms owns it, but if another better graphic engine was developed it'd be great. Personally, as a graphic designer, the only thing that has kept me back from going mac is that there are no games and I can't pick and choose my hardware. I really hate vista with a passion and was considering switching, but I don't think macs will ever get the games. And lets face it, openGL is not as good looking as dx. it's just not.

This is the dumbest thing I've ever read. Don't you realize that gamers are what keeps the high end PC market going? Regular users aren't going to spend $10,000 on a computer or even $3,000. Unless your doing heavy duty encoding, video processing, or gaming, there is no need. Gamers are what keep the hardware market flowing. If there weren't games, the vid card market would dry up. Gamers spend butt loads of money on hardware and stick with windows because it allows them to do so. The idea that there is no money in gaming is moronic. Gaming is where the money is.

there's much more cost than the os price. m$ looks to restrict users just as much as macs...

Hmmm I guess it now depend on your definition of gamers...

For me, PC gamers are the folks who regulary runs PC games on their PC machine. I don't have any hard data, but I feel that if you include customizing their machine or building them in the definition, the number drop big time.

It goes the same for the ones who always buy the latest video card monster, run their games on ultra resolution at insane fps with all goodies and settings at high. Those aren't the PC gamers imo. Those are the hardcore PC gamers, the enthusiat.

I think most PC gamers are running mainstream hardware. And mainstream hardware runs game just fine! Not at the settings all cranked up, but they do. Games developpers are making sure their games runs on mainstream hardware because this is where the money is.

Now, for the price of a low end Mac, you get a quite good mainstream gaming PC. True. Someone who wants a new machine to mostly play games is better served on the PC and at lower cost. But if, for whatever other reason, you think a Mac would be better for you, then the NO GAMING POSSIBLE sticker isn't appropriate anymore.

Actually... how many games do you think Mac have right now? PC have much more. Yes. But there IS games on Mac. And I'm not even talk about Bootcamp.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Macintosh_games

Fair enough.

But I wasn't building a case needing hard evidence. Wiki still offer quick and dirty data. You can also look at games store for reference.

http://www.macgamestore.com/search [...] uctType=SW

with anything from apple. not only are their products expensive, there expensive to own. due to the many limitations

and we have to face it, gamers aren't rich, we may dump a lot of money into building a good system but not many gamers are willing to build a completely new system ever year or 2 just to run the latest games. we like to buy the latest compatible processors, get the latest compatible video cards, add better cooling for the new hardware. add liquid cooling and overclock and do multiple case mods fun fun before building a entirely new system


with a mac, you will be more likely to just buy an entire new system


PS with vista, many of the features in windows xp were removed in vista.
and the locations of settings were changed so instead of all sound options being in 1 spot, it was spread out in multiple locations, and lots of other little things microsoft did to make the OS more annoying

I think it depends on what you like to play, and how long you're willing to wait for a game that came out over a year ago on a pc. I dunno if it actually takes that long, but pc's get them much sooner than macs. That would bug the crap out of me. You'll always be behind the times. Plus all the really nice graphical games seem to be using direct x which unfortunately is limited to m$, and dx10 unnecessarily requires vista which drives me insane. I've thought about giving up gaming cause of that. freakin hate m$.

And I thought about the post earlier that pc gamers are the ones who do mid range systems to play. The majority probably is that, but it's a trickle down effect. First you get the high hardcore systems, and from that you'll get the mid range and then low end. With how fast the hardware cycle moves, you can't have one without the other and the drive for the best graphics in a game is what fuels that cycle. So regardless of hardcore, midrange, or low end; there is a ton of money to be had in gaming.

and not that your question was directed at me, but a good framerate is 60 fps or more. Anything below that is noticable to the human eye and you'll see video slow down.

But doesn't that defeat the whole argument? The whole thing is about macs for gaming. If you use bootcamp then you're just converting to windows to play a game and not really playing on a mac. Yeah mac hardware, but at that point it's essentially just a windows machine with lackluster parts. If you're going to use bootcamp, why not just get a pc?

Because OSX and iLife and other fun apps to manage and edit your photos and videos is nice to have. Like I said before I am a pc gamer and my high end machines are PC based.

In the perfect world I would have a quadcore MAC Pro using bootcamp having a seperate drive for each O.S. and toggle between the two depending on what I want to do.

There is no doubt OSX is much more powerful then windows. And especially when Leopard comes out.

I never liked macs until last year and now I think they are great. I am curious to see what this transgaming technology will do to allow games to run within OSX.

Even Linux, look at what Linux did with wobbly windows, and glass desktops, and you dont need much hardware to do it. Then Vista comes out with areo glass and they want a higher end card for a feature that isnt that great.

It sucks that DX is the gaming standard, it would of been awesome if OpenGL became the standard then we would have OSX, LINUX and Windows gaming. And I bet if that was the case, Windows would have the worst performance.

Jeez, I can't believe Jobs has conned so many people into thinking photo and web site editing are more fun than being able to play every single game created. I have both a Macbook Pro and an SLI PC. Before I had a G5.

Mac OSX sucks, plain and simple. I bought my Macs to be compatible with my company(I use Logic). Ask any Mac user how many OS9 programs they can still use. Windows users can still use most Windows 98 programs and even a ton of Windows 95 stuff. Just the move from OS 10.3 to 10.4 rendered half their software useless, then the move from PPC to Intel rendered the other half useless. I couldn't use ANY of my PPC 10.4 Logic plugins with my Intel Macbook Pro. Some of them posted upgrades for Intel Macs, some charged for upgrades(Apple included!) and some just gave up. I was particularly pissed that my $1000 NI Symphonic Orchestra plugin is now useless on Mac OS, and this was all moving just from 10.4.3 to 10.4.4! The friend that talked me into switching spent over $100,000 on his Pro Tools system for 10.3. That system doesn't work with 10.4, so he's stuck with a 16 bit system. If he wants
to move to a 24 bit Pro Tools system, he has to spend another $100,000, oops, but 10.5 comes out in October to screw him again! Oh, and another thing: more music software works on the WIndows platform than Mac OSX now, and it's not changing anytime soon because Leopard is coming in October to break everything all over again. Stable OS my ass! It changes every year before software is even developed for it!

here's a gem:

On Apple's own site they touted how the Intel Processors were 2.5 to 4 times faster than the old PPC processors. The PPC processors *never* ran faster than the intels, the Intels were running slow because code wasn't optimised for them yet, but they were still faster than the PPC'S.

for the price of the 7600GT 24 inch model
I could buy: a 24" LCD with dual inputs
a decent PC with a 7600GT
and a xbox 360

MAC Gaming... Right

Yeah I see your point.

You will find tons of benchmark and articles that will prove only one thing: PC wins hand down. They offer more for less. But it isn't about comparing Mac to PC, performance and price wise.

The point is to figure out if you can have a decent gaming experience on Mac. Is people who buy Mac can also play games decently? Is the Mac gaming situation truly gets better or worse?

You have an old MacBook pro? And you seriously consider a laptop as a gaming platform?? Oh come on! Even VERY expensive Windows based laptops can't do games compared to a well equiped desktop simply becauses of the power requirements.

Anyway, so what DX10 games have you PC fan boys played lately that have justified your Vista purchase.

To ignore ID is foolish -- it really is, you don't toss aside someone that made 3D shooter what they are today.

Man, these guys really are ignorant -- I wonder if any of them have actually opened up a MacPro and figure out how to make a 8800GTX work in it? Geeez -- considering this place is about folks tweaking hardware, these tools haven't figure out how to put a top end graphics card in a MacPro??? Oye, this is almost unbelievable!!!

This place really is HUMP Microsofts leg!! Why, and for what?

Rob.

I think if you had read the majority of the posts you would see this statement is incorrect. We're talking about the problems with macs and gaming, not bragging about m$. If this topic was about m$ you'd see plenty of posts ripping them to shreds about vista.

I'm not a fanboy, but dx10 graphics are quite impressive. dx10 games have not come out yet, but the previews for them are very enticing. However, this still hasn't been enough for me to want to buy vista. I won't upgrade to vista until I have no choice, and even then I may switch platforms.

Who's ignoring ID?

I have not. Tell me, how easy was it and how well did it perform? The problem is that macs don't have the drivers for the best compatibility. Just getting them to work isn't enough. They need run to fullest of their capability, otherwise it's not even worth the time or money. So how well did it run, and how did you get it to work?


I think if apple opens up their hardware choke hold and lets people easily build, and mix and match their own system parts they'd easily grab a lot more of the market. If you have to hack a card or driver to get it to work, that's not really the same thing now is it.

good link.

V8VENOM chill.

Don't worry Vista Sucks.

My comments referred to the fact that the more affordable macs are legacy free {but you can always upgrade your mac with ram }.

I do expect ID Games showing up might have to do with some secret thing about the next mac line like they maybe getting the Intel® Graphics Media Accelerator X3000 Joking aside I hope to see macs having upgradeable graphics and better {and quieter} cooling. Hopefully the 7600GT is the starter and we can see some better upgrade options with more support for graphics cards.

PC fan boys :?: do you even know what site your on :?

ignoring ID Games? I've probably played over 1000hrs on DOOM 2 alone.

I use a mac for work, but a couple game titles wont have me praying to Steve Jobs.

DX10 is great, but it sucks because it's not backwards compatible, and M$ {AKA Micro$hit} isn't giving it to XP. I am going to skip Vista because I am no hypocrite so that pretty much leaves me in limbo and maybe {unlikely} M$ will do something right with Vienna .

I just hate hearing from mac-fanboys / card-carrying-cult-members telling every one how superior their hardware is as if we all eat lead paint chips for breakfast.

hint:
designed in California & assembled in China doesn't equate to: sprinkled with magic pixie dust

-nuff said

coldmast,

Chilling is done via TEC with 2 power supplies and two independant water loops on my PC. I know how to make my 4Ghz X6800 burn thru the benchmarks -- but that takes work and a lot of prep work for the motherboard but has not required any voltage mods.

Anyway the MacPro -- you can upgrade your Mac with more than just RAM. And you can buy your parts from NewEgg or a host of others. What I see here is a lot of "old school" notions of what the Mac's used to be like -- and I'll agree the Mac's used to be very proprietary. But that WAS several years ago and they have Intel CPUs now, with Intel Motherboards using Intel chipsets -- no matter how Apple try to control the EFI you still have Intel components under the hood.

But the point being, I see people talking about a Mac -- don't qualify which Mac they have (Just assume all Mac's are the same) and proceed to say all Mac's can't do games. The new MacBook Pro line has a nVidia 8600 which is VERY capable of doing games. The MacPro has X1900XT which again is VERY capable of doing games.

Quieter cooling?? The MacPro line is extremely quiet considering the performance it has -- are you refering to the old G5 line of Mac's -- yes they were noisey? But again I see more information about Mac that is OLD very OLD.

You have 3 "official" options of video cards for the MacPro line, 7300, X1900XT, and the FX4500. I've successfully got 8800GTX and X1950XTX. Others may have got SLI to work but I would think Crossfire would be a more workable solution since the MacPro is using Intel chipset. But I don't have first hand experience with SLI nor Crossfire in my MacPro.

There are two options for making the 8800GTX work in a MacPro -- both require you install a 3.5" Powersupply 300Watt min you can get these from: http://www.sidewindercomputers.com/samam32inpsu.html

Option 1:
8800GTX only for use in OS X and Windows via Boot camp -- you will need to do an EFI mod and get modified Linux drivers. You will need some serious Mac knowledge (with the EFI) to make this happen, good luck!

Option 2: (preferred and easier)
use the 8800GTX for use in Windows only via Boot Camp and then use a standard 7300GT for OS X side. So you have your Mac and PC all in one nice box and it'll do anything you toss at in on both OS worlds.

Vista's real sales number clearly point to just how bad that OS is, seems to be on par with WinME in terms of real sales numbers and not Microsoft's out of context sales numbers.

DX10 is not backwards compatible because Microsoft made it that way to leverage Vista sales -- there is absolutely no techincal reason it wasn't during the development process of DX10, in fact initial builds were done on Win2K3 platform sooooo....

I hate hearing from people commenting on Hardware they don't have 1st hand direct experience with. How many of you folks posting in this thread actually have a MacPro?? No an older MacBookPro (laptop) is NOT a MacPro (desktop).

You wanna do games, get a MacPro. You wanna do games on the road get a newer MacBookPro with 8600 card. But please don't post false information and make comparisons with older tech Macs -- you don't see me posting how slow my PIII is.

Mac games -- unless this entire thread is about Mac UB (universal binary) games only? But I didn't see any indication the Mac Games referred to ONLY OS X?

Why is loading Windows on a Mac eating crow? Seems to me you get the best of both worlds -- you can't load OS X on a PC? (well you can if you know how to and select the right components).

No mobile graphics card be it PC or Mac is equivalent in performance to a desktop -- never said it was. No MacBookPro doesn't have SLI -- it's a laptop and last I checked very few PC laptops have SLI or crossfire and those are based on mobile GPUs also and those will set you back $3K.

Yes, Mac's are PC - they're personal computers hence PC.

And who defines "consumer model"? You? The most popular selling Macs are not iMacs, they're MacBook and MacBookPro -- they've out sold Dell and HP laptsop which is pretty impressive considering the size of the Windows market. iMac and MacPro sales are not the meat of Apple's computer market but with that said, MacPro sales have increased 61% last quater and the new 8 CPU units are selling strong as well.

iPod is overpriced, Vista is overpriced, Intel top end CPUs are overpriced (be it for PC or Mac), nVidia 8800GTX is way over priced -- so not really sure what your point is on "overpriced". You get a top end MacPro is cost you money, you get a top end PC, it costs you money. The price comparision between a MacPro 4 core and equivalent offering by Dell or HP came out with the MacPro costing less -- compare apples to apples not to oranges.

XBOX360 is a joke - it can't do best HD resolutions of 1920 x 1080 -- and now Microsoft are tossing a dead end HD-DVD format on the XBOX360. Hello Microsoft, Blueray is selling at 70% market share. But then again, I expect nothing less from the KMart of software -- aka Microsoft.

here's my problem with this in the mac gaming argument; that's not gaming on a mac. That's still just windows gaming. "Mac games", imo, should be just that. You shouldn't have to shell out money to m$ to make a "mac game" run. Running windows on the mac hardware is just saying that OSX doesn't have what you need so you run windows. And if you do that, what's the point of having OSX if you're just going to spend money on windows?

If you're going to go through all that trouble and money, why not just buy windows and windows supported hardware, rather than spending twice the money trying to support both?


I think the idea that running bootcamp is "mac gaming" should be considered false. That's still windows gaming.

the upgrades are overpriced, and macpros as gaming machines is expensive and limited if that is what your intention is for it as computer+os, does having to run two separate graphics cards for two os's make sense?

I was actually stating V8VENOM isn't an apple nut because he states that he likes some apple stuff but not all apple stuff. Sure you can state that apple computers are great at some stuff, but saying "better at everything" is crazy.

I like OSX -
10.3.9, before the slow down.

Mac gaming would be good if you have the money to buy a new $2000 computer every 2 years

the funny thing is that new macs are now more hardware-to-software backwards compatible with windows software then mac software.
that why people collect macs, so they can run all their software.

do you use safari beta as you web browser, of course not it's beta

Ghost9,

Your arguement doesn't make much sense to me as posted? You seem to have made some strange logical connections and assumptions that just aren't correct. You don't have to shell out money to M$ to make a Mac game run?? You do have to shell out to M$ to make an M$ game run on your Mac -- but that's because the game is only available for M$ OS.

On the Mac game front, I think you will see changes in the Mac UB games (this is what I assume you mean by "Mac Games" ) -- there will be more available because Mac's now have the graphics hardware to make that possible and over 21 million Macs is still a lot of potential revenue for game developer companies. Toss in the ability of iPOD's and soon to be iPhones that can run games (I honestly think iPhone will help drive the gaming market for OS X) and the market suddenly becomes A LOT bigger than just 21 million Mac computers.

Well there are plenty of reasons to want Personal Computer to do it all, one is you save on cost of monitor(s) and/or monitor switching devices (don't have to duplicate mice/keyboard, etc.), two you can run the best software from both worlds -- Final Cut Pro 6, Shake 4.1 and Logic Pro 7 IMHO are considerably more effective video/audio composition packages than anything available for Windows and they use 64bit OS with no 4GB RAM limit like you have in 32bit flavor of WinXP and Vista and you get much better 4 CPU and now 8 CPU performance than you do on bloated WinXP or Vista systems. But when I go shopping for software right now, I don't have to think about which platform does it support -- and I like that -- give me the most flexibility.

Installing and using Boot Camp is a brain dead simple operation. You hold down the ALT key when the Mac boots and pick Mac or Windows HD icon and that's it.

But don't use TG as your guide of what goes on in the real world of consumer purchases. Consoles exist because people hate dealing with personal computers (be it Mac or PC). Game sales on smart phones and PDA's is taking off (probably one reason why ID are looking and coding for that market) -- the world of gaming is far bigger than Windows based computers. Gaming on the PC is no longer the dominate market -- times are changing.

And I'm not spending twice the money either. Like I said, the price arguement is pretty much a dead end road if you start to compare apples to apples. Get your upgrades for your Mac from NewEgg or various other sources -- price is inline with same components for a PC.

This is what i'm trying to say. "Mac Games", imo, should be limited to the definition of games that are playable on the apple OS. Otherwise, you are just playing a windows game and you still have to deal with m$ to do it. Mac gaming should be about games intended for use on a mac without having to deal with m$ at all.

This is what i'm trying to say. "Mac Games", imo, should be limited to the definition of games that are playable on the apple OS. Otherwise, you are just playing a windows game and you still have to deal with m$ to do it. Mac gaming should be about games intended for use on a mac without having to deal with m$ at all.

Ok, you think it should, but why? Why is it bad? Is it some sort of profanation to deal with Microsoft to runs games using Microsoft engine? Does it makes a mac machine turning dark?

What if a super duper game only available on Linux would be out next week? Would you consider a sacrilege to install Linux on your PC and play it? Would you say that isn't PC gaming because you go through Linux?

And what if OSX was easy to install on any PC, without any hardware limitation due to lack of drivers? Would you say "yeah it's not really PC video editing because you have to go through OSX and Final Cut to do it"

Those are just OS, hardware, software, codes. You can runs whatever you want!

Why?

Yeah I too thought that this was bout Mac Gaming because they had mentioned Boot Camp in the video. But I think the video was more about the potential for running true Mac UB games -- in which case I would say yes!! The graphics hardware is there in the Mac to make the gaming experience a very good one.

I've run the following Mac UB games with VERY good results:

Quake IV
Call of Duty 2
Age of Empires III
Star Wars Battlefront
Homeworld 2
Doom 3
Prey
BattleField 1942
Civ III / IV
C & C
Age of Mythology
F/A -18
XPlane

Waiting for Colin McRae Ralley to come out and Age of Empires III Warchiefs expansion (due out very soon).

Good source for Mac games: http://www.macgamestore.com/detail.php?ProductID=732

here's my problem with this.. If that link is the same ralley you're talking about, that's a 2 year old game. I would hate to have to wait that long to play a game that everyone else can play on windows.

64bit OS has been out in OS X for some time.

http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/64bit/

http://developer.apple.com/macosx/64bit.html

This should give you more insight on how Apple is doing 64bit application development while retaining 32bit compatibility for legacy -- this is a fairly old article (March 2006). XCode is now 2.4 or 3.0 if you do Leopard development.

Final Cut Pro is 64bit app. Not sure about Shake 4.1 it might be 32bit.

both in essence. It is of my opinion that if apple is going to do mac gaming right, they'll need to match the schedule of windows gaming. Or atleast come within months, not years.

64bit has been for DARWIN fool, Leopard will be the first mac OS with a 64bit GUI

What are the chances that Linux games become viable, and Mac Games come along for the ride?