What is Digg?94 Comments
- shrewduser, on 10/12/2007, -7/+61"The switch to Intel processors has made it MUCH easier for developers to create games for the Mac. If companies start publishing more games for the Mac, it will significantly broaden the appeal of being a Mac owner."
Its actually more or less the same. Porting code to the mac platform regardless of the fact that it now runs on x86 is still just about as difficult, perhaps the reason more developers are looking at the mac is an increase in market presence? - SirShane, on 10/12/2007, -4/+42I currently work full time developing 3D game engine technology for Windows. I would love to use and develop for macs, but I have major concerns about OpenGL. I've used OpenGL quite extensively, as well as unix-like environments such as MacOS and Linux. None of these environments provide the level of support that Direct3D on Windows does. OpenGL has a hard time keeping up with new hardware features in a standard way. Hardware vendors often extend OpenGL using non-standard extensions, which tend to be completely different across different vendors. Direct3D on the other hand provides a single API for all features (This is even more so with Direct3D 10). This makes the job of a game developer a lot easier.
A good example is hardware instancing (The ability to render multiple objects with a single render call). DirectX, since version 9, has a pretty decent standard API for this feature. OpenGL has none. There are ways to do it in OpenGL, but it's different between vendors. nVidia I know has a way to do this, but I don't think ATI does yet. These types of situations make it very difficult for developers to easily support all hardware on the PC platform.
Anyway, I just wanted to try to make it clear that OpenGL + MacOS/Linux/Unix is not really the same thing as Windows with Direct3D. There's a reason developers like to use Windows for developing games. Besides the fact that it has the greatest market share, it's actually a really fantastic API for developers to work with. OpenGL is useable, but I just wouldn't compare it in quality to Direct3D. - pathy, on 10/12/2007, -4/+34Gawt,
Eh, Mac has OpenGL, which is fine to make games with - iDs games spring to mind. DirectX is 'easier' because it wraps everything together, graphcis, audio, etc. They've both got their ups and downs, but OpenGL is perfectly useable.
Apple could easily slot in a few higher end GPUs, I'm sure, if people started creating the games for Macs that is. - shrewduser, on 10/12/2007, -4/+28good for you, making a decision not to buy any future products from a company for a completely rational and logical reason...
- davidlow, on 10/12/2007, -4/+20Early in your life, were your parents killed in a horrible Macintosh accident?
- lonnieh, on 10/12/2007, -12/+27why blame directx? if anyone is at fault, it is the fault of the developers for wanting to use a solid set of multimedia APIs. dx is a good product.
- reticulate, on 10/12/2007, -4/+19Look, I like Macs.
But they aren't gaming machines, period. Not now, and not while they use closed-box, warranty-practically-voided-if-you-open-it consumer desktops.
You can't really change the video card on an iMac, because even the 24" uses a slot you can't really buy video cards for unless you're willing to drop a big-ass premium over identical parts for a PC (and pretty much forgo any driver support, natch). So unless you're suggesting I drop $4000 (AUD) on a middling gaming platform like the Mac Pro (and that's before I bother to stick the *single* X1900 in it), there really isn't an option.
So the real question is, does Apple sell - what are for all intents and purposes - PC's in a fancy box, and totally throw the iconic and instantly recognisable form factor they use now out the window; or do they forgo silent heatsinked boxes for something that can actually use a commodity GPU heatsink and fan combo, not to mention a power supply, motherboard and related components that would actually support them?
If Apple wants gamers, they have to come to the party. Your icon of industrial design will have to become another PC box with boring expansion slots and all the fun and games that comes from trying to support all the stuff you can plug into them (see Windows). - Balanced, on 10/12/2007, -5/+14Less than 10% of the market can definitely be worth it if you are smart. It's 10% with a lot less competition, as opposed to 90% of a very saturated market.
- jackmaninov, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10The Mac Pro is currently the only machine with expansion slots :(
Apple really needs to come out with a home tower that they can put a good graphics card in and bundle with an Apple display. Sure Mac Minis are good enough for a lot of people, but there are games out there and now's the time to start catering to them. - Spankov, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10"but my first impression is that Apple’s switch to Intel chips and the company’s “Get a Mac” advertising campaign have combined to generate a lot of interest among game developers about the potential for supporting the platform."
So, no actual evidence, just a guess/wish/hope from the journo...? - interg12, on 10/12/2007, -6/+13Just give me back Nanosaur and i'll be good.
- gquaglia, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8I guess less then 10% is good enough for the likes of MS, Intuit, Adobe and others that make Mac software. If your argument held true, there would be nothing for the Mac, except what came from Apple.
- caliform, on 10/12/2007, -4/+11Saying that Apple is to blame because they have no frameworks for graphics is like blaming the Pope for being a heretic. Please, look at the Core Services. I've never seen a friendlier bunch of furry API's all rolled into one. It's much more market share and lock-in that makes DirectX so powerful, but I have faith in VMWare Fusion (DirectX 8.2 support in last beta) and that we will eventually have enough developers who use OpenGL in combination with system-specific API's. It's not as hard as it -seems-, we just need to learn something -new- once in a while, instead of sticking to your out-of-the-book DirectX knowledge.
- Stevethegreat, on 10/12/2007, -4/+11What most Mac fans can't get is that games never comes to Macs because they are (most of them anyways) cutting edge and requires equally cutting edge hardware. Since the 80% of Gaming hardware is the Graphics Card and since Apple continuously neglected that part when manufacturing their computers providing them with a middle-low solution -at best- in the graphics department, I don't think games developers have a serious reason to go the Apple-way. Also, I don't have to refer -again- to the number 1 reason Apple loses to PCs, close architecture ....
- wvaughan, on 10/12/2007, -27/+34The switch to Intel processors has made it MUCH easier for developers to create games for the Mac. If companies start publishing more games for the Mac, it will significantly broaden the appeal of being a Mac owner.
- KibibyteBrain, on 10/12/2007, -9/+15@GawtMilk OpenGL and other UNIX technologies for multimedia rendering are as good if not better than DirectX 9 from a technical standpoint. The problem is that video card manufacturers focus mainly on DX performance on their gaming-centered cards(not the pro cards, which are GL optimized). If there were more demand for OpenGL performance among gamers, video card manufactures would deliver. And if more cards were good with OpenGL, game developers would deliver...its a chicken and egg problem that will be hard to crack. I wouldn't go thanking a technology for making your games fast unless you at least understand how to code in it...
Also to others, while Apple might not have any SLI options of uber high end cards, they are still sadly probably better than what 90% of gamers who play modern games use. Sadly, most people just have to crank down the resolution and effects, as most people just don't have the option to or cant brign themselves to spend hundreds on their gaming habit a year. - jackmaninov, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Wine's DirectX implementation keeps getting better and better. Game developers should begin looking at official releases that have been tested against Wine. Someone like CodeWeavers or Cedega should start selling a supported Wine for OSX. Or Apple should start shipping Wine in the same way they ship an X server. That could suddenly make a lot of games playable.
That or Parallels/VMWare can finish their virtualized hardware acceleration (and have it be reasonably fast).
Edit: Codeweavers *IS* already shipping for Mac and supporting Steam games: http://www.codeweavers.com/products/cxmac/ - FunkyWitDaSysTm, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6@arc
probably. it's much easier to port from *nix to MacOS and vice-versa (except cocoa apps) than from windows to anything else. - KibibyteBrain, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7I'd say the bigger problem with why Core Services can't beat DX is not so much that any one is better but that DX is better supported by Microsoft. Apple does not seem to consider spending the millions of dollars a year MS spends supporting developers worthwhile to their business model. I can't blame them either, as I think it would take a long, long time for apple supporting game development to be anything but a money pit for the company, as their current user base is mostly professionals who don't spend too much a year on gaming.
- directive0, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6I game on my pc...
I do everything else on my mac : - gquaglia, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8From what I've seen, money is no object for serious gamers. Anyone willing to shell out $400+ for just a video card, would certainly pay the $2000+ for the Mac Pro, if it was a hot gaming machine. I do agree though that Apple needs to make a $1000 machine with expansion capabilities.
- Vlatro, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5@archonsg
Just because a game is Mac compatible, doesn't mean it will be an easy Linux port. It's not the software, but rather the hardware that hangs it up. When you develop for a Mac, there is a very small and specific list of possible hardware sets you're working with. Linux on the other hand can run easily on hardware from many possible vendors. OpenGL lacks the wide variety of hardware support that DirecetX has. While OpenGL is capable of providing the same functionality as DirectX, the methods that must be used will vary from one hardware set to the next. As any experienced Linux gamer knows, that means a ton of additional libraries to satisfy dependencies, possibly separate compiles, and the use of specific drivers for your hardware. The newest driver for your video card may be required for one game, while you are forced to roll back to an old driver to support another game. Mac has an advantage over Linux as far as standardization goes, yet oddly enough there are more developers willing to write games for Linux than there are for OSX. It's a moot point though, as Linux users can successfully run most windows games under Wine, and Mac users just dual boot with windows.
The common problem with ports is the misconception that there is an OpenGL Standard. It's actually more a collection of tweaks, patches, and hacks wrapped up in a simple framework. If things are going to change for Mac games, it'll be a while before we see it. It will take initiative of OEMs to standardize (something ATI and Nvidia have refused to do in the past) Once a standard set of functions and some good developer support emerge, you'll see more games appearing on the Linux front. Those games may then be easily ported to the Mac. - Eoxx, on 10/12/2007, -9/+14@ GawtMilk
Graphic framework = Direct 3D not = to Direct X
yes there is a graphic framework that exists and works for decades [that exists before Direct 3D] it is Opengl !! It works on any platform with a c compiler ...
Microsoft should not be seen as the inventor of the wheel .. he just copied it and wants to copyright it ... No more no less ...
What you probably meant is that there is no framework like Direct X (3D + input devices + network etc ..) for the Mac ..
Nevertheless games engines like Quake engine exists and run on multiple platform - it means that it is not "so difficult" to do it .. the problem is more the number of users/gamers using Mac in comparison with Windows ... - Stevethegreat, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6@lowrentdiggs: You are right but game manufactures develop their games with extreme gamers in mind. I have no $6000 PC nor I ever had, but I welcome the fact that games are being made in the highest possible reach of hardware because it pushes both software and hardwate industries on. Game developers make the hardware developers to progress very fast (there is demand for their hardware), while rapidly growing hardware itself pushes the remaining gaming industry to be afoot. Either you like or not PC games are one of the main reasons that consumer hardware progresses so fast. If game developers were based on Mac hardware to produce their software the PC hardware that is available right now would be of half the sophistication.
- reticulate, on 10/12/2007, -5/+9Now you just need a Mac with a decent video card.
And no, the Mac Pro doesn't count. Not at that price.
And neither does the 7600GT in the 24" iMac. You won't be able to play many newer games at anything like native resolution with that card. I should know, I own one. - BlackCow, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7Just the thought of going to a LAN party and seeing everyone with the same old boring un-modded, not custom built, mac computer is kind of depressing :-(
If they want to move away from Microsoft then Linux is the way to go, not OSX (unless Apple decides to let you run OSX on your PC) - GMorgan, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6Lets be fair games for the Mac means easier porting to Linux as well. Really this is something where Apple and the OSI should get together and nail down a competing standard to DX. We already have OGL and OAL which are at least as good as D3D and DS but we still need a good library for handling input among a few other things. Then they need to look at development tools and documentation for that platform.
If we can do this then suddenly it will be much easier to write games that can easily be compiled for all three platforms. The problem Apple have is that they are currently quite dependent on MSO being available for OSX and while MS make a worthwhile profit from it gaming is the biggest lock for the MS platform. It would be more cost effective for MS to drop the OSX MSO port than lose that lock in long term. - dgh1973, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3The idea that Mac's aren't gaming systems because they don't have interchangeable video hardware is IMHO a fallacy.
Many gaming geeks enjoy upgrading their video hardware to keep up with new games, but I'm certain another large percentage are just as happy buying a computer that has enough RAM, GPU and CPU power to handle what ever games they enjoy playing and leave it at that. By the time that 256MB video card isn't handling the latest and greatest games the entire machine is getting long in the teeth and could use an upgrade anyhow.
No, IMHO the problem of gaming on Macs is simply porting... directx API's vs. OpenGL as stated by other folks here. You don't need to have interchangeable hardware to create a gaming platform... you just need capable hardware and a good selection of gaming software. Macs have the former, but not the latter. - ridiculoufish, on 10/12/2007, -6/+9Why does a Mac have to be some dedicated "gaming machine" to make a successful market for gaming?
The Sims is the most successful PC game in history. World of Warcraft is the most successful MMORPG ever made. These games aren't succeeding by appealing to the SLI water cooling crowd, folks, but to casual gamers - and I count myself in that number.
Look at the stats for the 10 best selling PC games of 2006: http://www.gamingtarget.com/article.php?artid=6489&gameid=2726 . Eight out of ten are available for the Mac today, nine out of ten by the end of the month. (Oblivion the one exception). Maybe the hardcore gamers aren't on the Mac - but from a sales and marketing perspective, clearly the Mac is a viable gaming platform.
/ love that Civ 4 - hockey, on 10/12/2007, -1/+410% of the market still equates to millions of users which means potentially millions of new customers.
- unreal32, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3The statement that game developers are taking another look at the Mac doesn't really say much.
I bet every year every major game developer studies the Mac and Linux markets and tries to decide if this is the year they will port their popular games to those platforms. They look at Mac sales numbers, probably try to profile who these people are, and see if there is enough of a market.
They'd be foolish if they did not examine *every* console and desktop operating system platform out there and analyze the potential. Its just smart business. - hockey, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Another reason why development for OpenGL (which means both for Mac and Linux) has stalled is because of what DirectX at its core is.
DirectX (and Direct3D) is a API built from the ground up for game development.
OpenGL is a generic 3D API that can be used for games.
Direct3D is a 3D gaming API that can be used for generic apps.
See the difference? - colincornaby, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3"Its actually more or less the same. Porting code to the mac platform regardless of the fact that it now runs on x86 is still just about as difficult, perhaps the reason more developers are looking at the mac is an increase in market presence?"
It's not the same. There is no more endian swapping now, which is one of the major hurdles. If you look at interviews with the porting houses, most of them already have their own in house DirectX libraries that abstract the functionality to OpenGL (much like Cider does). The Intel Macs do significantly reduce the work of porting.
This is why Star Wars Empire at War for Mac is Intel Mac only. - MacParrot, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2One of two things to do.
1. Buy an OS X disk. 10.4 is coming down in price now that 10.5 is around the corner. It sounds like you know what to do once you have it.
2. "Borrow" an OS X disk, change the default admin password. Once you know the password, you'll never need it again. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+51. You can't even upgrade your video card on most Macs (except for the Mac Pro, which is way too pricey for a gaming machine).
2. Most Macs come with a slightly outdated video card (Radeon 1600) or a video card not suitable for playing newer games in the first place (GMA950).
So, Mac gaming... ummm... Think again. - craig4, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Games don't mess up PCs, people mess up PCs.
-Also a Mac, PC owner - jsp317, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Hey i just got a imac g5. It's second hand but new to me. Ive never owned a mac. It had an admin account that i didn't know the password so i couldn't do much with it. I did a google search and found a way to to make a new account with admin privileges. That worked great till i had to reboot for updates. Now I'm stuck in darwin/bsd login nothing works. I don't have a osx disc. If anyone can help me. I would appreciate it. I know I'm off topic but I'm lost. I was really starting to enjoy it. HELP
- ArchonSG, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4What I really want to know is that if they are going to look at the Mac as a viable platform and that the Mac OS is more or less FreeBSD, would that mean that the games they are going to make are all Linux compatible?
Hmnnss..... - schoate09, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Apparently "lowrentdiggs" doesn't understand corporate VLK IT licensing which doesn't require activation or reactivation.
- foolfromhell, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Unfortunately, you are wrong.
An x1600 Mobility cannot possibly hold up games like Oblivion or Crysis, and a Merom chip cannot possibly hold up games liek Supreme Commander.
For teh same price of a $2000 iMac, I got a Conroe, 2GB of DDR2800, and an 8800GTX. Much, MUCH better performace. - Bootes, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2How many serious gamers are there though? The majority of gamers spend around $1000 for their computer and upgrade it when needed to play the latest games. What Apple needs to do is release a lesser version of the Mac Pro that doesn't use Xeon processors, they're just too expensive.
- DforSpiD, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2yes they were... yes they were
it's nice to see people with such finely tuned sarcasm detectors as well - BlackCow, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"Games don't mess up PCs, people mess up PCs."
QFFT!
-PC builder, Windows and Linux user - jsp317, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1hey macparrot I'm using my mac happy as hell. Ty dude.
- fuzzynyanko, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I'm trying to figure out what Transgaming Cider is. At one side, it sounds like it loads any .exe into memory and then translates it. On another side, it sounds like it works by having an implementation of the Win APIs (that converts to Mac OX's APIs) and then they release a version of the game with Cider.
- ponzudigital, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4"You are right but game manufactures develop their games with extreme gamers in mind"
Some games do that but most companies develop their games to make the most money and reach the broadest audience. It's a balancing act between making the game they want and ensuring a paycheck.
Here's your chance to shine: list the games that will not run on the default setup of the Mac Pro http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/AppleStore.woa/wa/RSLID?mco=2CB5E8C0&nclm=MacPro - jsp317, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Thanks it's on the way. I don't know anyone with a mac so i decided to buy it. who knows I'm sure ill need it again. I like to tinker with things. Thanks
- Dakk, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I just wish a non-operating system tied API would've gotten the foothold. Instead, Microsoft leveraged their userbase to sway developer support for DirectX. Unfortunately, since then, OpenGL has languished. The OpenGL of today is not what it could have been if Microsoft would've played well with others.
- pyrates, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Mac Pro only comes with Xeon CPU's. How about a Mac Pro with a desktop Core 2 Duo where I can select which widescreen monitor I want. You don't need Xeon CPU's to game.
-
Show 51 - 93 of 93 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is