What is Digg?Sponsored by HTC
You and You and You. view!
youtube.com - You don't need to get a phone. You need a phone that gets you.
339 Comments
- miniboss, on 10/26/2007, -33/+554How the hell can anyone defend Apple's decision NOT to give 1mill for Valve themselves to port such a huge franchise?
Especially with the recent Bungie/MS news, Mac users are dancing around in the excitement that Bungie may now make Mac games. But what people are forgetting is that Bungie started out making Mac games and the reason they left and sold out to MS is purely because Apple didn't do a thing to keep them happy.
Small things like paying Valve a mill for Half-Life or not embracing Bungie as a Mac developer is precisely why the Mac isn't a gaming platform. And from what we've seen so far, there's no indication that Apple is going to actively pursue quality gaming to Mac. (Unless you consider EA's Harry Potter to be a quality game. If so then Mac iz 4 gam3rz!) - cquinnd, on 10/26/2007, -14/+214A million dollars is nothing compared to the profits Apple would have gained from the increase of their stock value, and making a solid step into the $10 Billion+ gaming industry.
I think your post here sortof proves Gabe Newells point. It wasn't about the money, it was about the willingness to make a commitment to that industry. This wasn't just about Half Life, it was most likely also about porting the Steam distribution service (and many of the games supported there) over as well.
It is perhaps ironic that Apple has recently announced a deal with EA to distribute games for the Mac, when EA has been the retail distributor for Valve since 2005. Probably long before the "talks" broke down over the idea of Valve porting games to the Mac.
What really makes this digg lame though, is that its a direct copy of the article that it references as its source:
http://www.digitalbattle.com/2007/10/07/valve-want ...
(without the cool HL2/Apple graphic). - kenvsryu, on 10/17/2007, -8/+137Microsoft easily paid 50 fold just for downloadable extras.
http://blog.wired.com/games/2007/06/take_two_gets_ ... - dgblackout, on 10/10/2007, -3/+124people who want native games.
- dweeb79, on 10/17/2007, -15/+117"On the other hand, one can certainly understand Apple’s decision - a million dollars is a million dollars."
LOL a million dollars is pennies to a company like Apple, and if Apple wasn't so RETARDED they would realize that the million dollars would bring in new customers who have can't justify the price for performance. Besides its not Apples money its the shareholders money and shareholders only care about one thing... "MONEY" - SirNoobius, on 10/17/2007, -16/+109first of all there is absolutely no proof for the claims made here. second, 1 million is peanuts compared to the amount of money that goes into development of major games.
I personally would have paid them 5 million just to get TF2 released on mac same time as windows if I was apple and I am a self proclaimed apple hater. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -3/+78Why is it selling out when Apple has had a habit of pissing off or doing nothing with vendors it works with?!
That's kinda why most games are for PCs. Why does Autodesk supports MS 64 bit but Apple only gets the 32 bit (3ds Max and Maya)? Why hardware manufacturers like Nvidia have support for SLI or ATI with Crossfire for MS but not OSX ? Its not a great conspiracy, its because MS always has had collaboration and Apple has not.
Apple has always had this bad habit of making developers on every front go elsewhere. - noots, on 10/10/2007, -4/+73also take into consideration Valve are probably being generous, the development costs on making their library work natively on a mac will exceed 1million. Not to mention they won't make much of it back in sales, because Apple has a minute share of the gaming market.
- nunofgs, on 10/17/2007, -24/+93Yeah, I'm calling BS on this one. 1 million dollars is nothing.
Apple would have paid this amount easily, had this been true. - guise, on 10/17/2007, -5/+74$1 million for steam support?
Apple would seriously be idiotic NOT to accept. One of the best developers around, and the best platform for digital distribution.... a lot more attractive then a few ***** EA games that no one cares about. - warriorscot, on 10/10/2007, -1/+49It isn't even allot of money from apples perspective, and investment wise its a smart move it wouldn't just be HL2 and its sequels but pretty much any source engine based game of which there are a few not to mention all the amazing mods that use the engine. Valve asked for a token gesture as much as anything else and Apple just weren't committed in the first place.
- jcaino, on 10/10/2007, -1/+49yea, that really puts it into perspective.
- AvidPreatorian, on 10/17/2007, -3/+45Anyone else having trouble understanding this title... who wrote this.
- TotalHalibut, on 10/26/2007, -4/+43Looks like a bit more agenda-pushing by the uninformed with this article. How's 1 million anything at all in this industry? If anything this VALIDATES what Gabe was saying, Apple doesn't take gaming seriously. If they think $1mil is anything for one of the biggest FPS franchises in the world, then they're living in dreamland.
- fentanyl, on 10/10/2007, -1/+37Get past more blog spam, this is the original source: http://www.insidemacgames.com/features/tuncersblog ...
- fryguy1013, on 10/11/2007, -6/+40DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS?
- MagicCake, on 10/10/2007, -4/+36None of that matters. The bottom line is $1 million is a very small amount to pay for Half-Life, and anyone in their right mind would have done it.
- jordn, on 10/11/2007, -3/+34I couldn't agree more. However Apple has definitely been making some stupid decisions of late. $1 Million to port Half-Life/Steam is small change seeing as their profits are into the hundreds of millions. This would have been easy money, and could have scored them more hardware sales in the long run.
The gaming market is finally ready and willing to commit, and Apple is turning their back on them. - 13tongimp, on 10/10/2007, -11/+42And this is why no Apple OS will ever break out of the 10% range.
- kingkilr, on 10/11/2007, -10/+38People who don't want to buy Windows?(Or pirate it, for the criminals in the room).
- iirrkk, on 10/17/2007, -4/+31That's a lot of freakin' apples.
- Cymrubeats, on 10/10/2007, -0/+26I understood it fine...haven't you ever seen a $1 million dollar apple before? not as tasty as the $1.5 million dollar oranges you can get, but tasty enough.
- wal9000, on 10/10/2007, -4/+28People who want more than 5 FPS? Have you tried gaming in virtualization? Parallels and fusion may support 3d graphics, but that doesn't mean they're good at it.
- frazw, on 10/11/2007, -7/+30The problem with Apple in general is that Steve Jobs has his own plan for your computer and he'll be damned if he is letting you deviate from it.
- ShrimpCrackers, on 10/11/2007, -7/+29Dude, you saw the commercials, Macs are for "fun stuff", like photos, music, and photoshop.
- robbiekhan, on 10/17/2007, -6/+27I remember when STEAM was really bad, when it was slow and had very few games.
Now STEAM is at the forefront of digital distribution of multiple games from many developers. It offers a unified portal with games and its gamers whom you can play online with and on top of that it's fast and effective!
Apple sure are going to be sorry about passing a chance like this. Valve are an amazing developer and one of the only few who actually listens to the industry and the gamers to bring a product to what it should be.
Mr Jobs, how'd you like them Apples?! - randomgeek, on 10/10/2007, -0/+20The return on the investment would have been people no longer saying, "You know, I'd like a Mac but I can't play my games on it.."
- ryanisnotsuper, on 10/10/2007, -4/+23Apple's not hurting without Valve, but Apple's customers are.
- jakem1, on 10/10/2007, -0/+19The thing is, Valve could just as easily make those profits by selling to Windows users and they wouldn't have to do any more development. Apple stands to gain far more from a deal like this than Valve do.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -1/+19"The gaming market is finally ready and willing to commit, and Apple is turning their back on them."
Yet again!! - lapirata, on 10/10/2007, -0/+17Where could you pay $80 for HL? Seriously...
- Asianwaste, on 10/10/2007, -3/+20I like how you worded that. WHICH ONE FOOL?
- jakem1, on 10/10/2007, -1/+17And they'd be right - there aren't enough Mac gamers from Valve's perspective so they want Apple to make an investment to help improve the situation (and presumably pay for the software to be ported in the process). What's so strange about that?
- jwigum, on 10/10/2007, -1/+17As I recall, HL was a directx or open GL game... Am I mistaken? Also, it's questionable whether or not there was(or is) any market for a multi-platform system, unless you consider consoles. While the mac market share has been rising(or at least becoming more visible), there still aren't nearly enough of them to warrant a completely different build.
- allyant, on 10/17/2007, -10/+26Get past the blog spam:
http://www.digitalbattle.com/2007/10/07/valve-want ... - Scarfy, on 10/10/2007, -1/+16No, dickhole, if he was Apple he would have 5 million.
- Scarfy, on 10/10/2007, -2/+17So what you're saying is that FPS's can run "better" on OS X just... because?
- tubaros, on 10/17/2007, -4/+18$1 Mill is below pocket change for Apple, if this is true. $5 mill would be good value for the things it would bring - it seems all the Mac needs is a centralised place for users to get games, and steam would bring that, even if it were only the source games. Obviously theyd need to bring out more skins for steam - pink, lime, silver, black etc. And of course a few months after it came out, bring out a better version that looks nicer, but for more money...
- dairien, on 10/17/2007, -6/+20Why do I feel like this article doesn't have it's facts together.
- schoate09, on 10/10/2007, -1/+15not even close
- aariel, on 10/10/2007, -3/+16"Small things like paying Valve a mill for Half-Life or not embracing Bungie as a Mac developer is precisely why the Mac isn't a gaming platform."
While I would definitely agree that it's a contributing factor, I'd also cite hardware limitations as another reason. Unless you're willing to shell out thousands for a nice Mac Pro, you simply can't hope to experience games the same way on a Mac as you do on a PC (disclaimer: I own and actively use both a MacBook Pro and a Windows desktop). Upgrade-ability and cutting edge GPUs are both non-existent in the Apple world.. - doubtit, on 10/10/2007, -0/+12Dugg down to counter digg down of anti apple fan boy fan boys.
- DigDugDigger, on 10/11/2007, -13/+25If I want to play HL2 I'll play it like any other PC game... under Boot Camp. Games running under Boot Camp get better performance than their Mac ports do anyway.
- geartype2, on 10/10/2007, -1/+13it's not extortion. Triple-A titles in the games industry can easily cost 20mil to produce, and VALVe doesn't have any tools(and by tools I mean software tools) to develop software on a mac. By giving them 1m(really a drop in the hat for any Major Corp these days) it shows them that Apple is willing support the developer in this venture. By not, they are saying they don't give a *****.
- Spanktacular, on 10/17/2007, -5/+16Um, maybe to tap into that $10 Billion marketshare that already exists?
Christ, but you Mac zealots can't see past your chrome and white noses, can you? - andycr512, on 10/10/2007, -1/+12drakelord: Half-Life was Software, OpenGL, and Direct3D; Half-Life 2 was Direct3D only.
- graviplana, on 10/17/2007, -3/+14I believe it. The truth is Apple should have given them the money!
- n30n, on 10/10/2007, -0/+11I also don't think you understand the work that would need to go into developing a new opengl renderer for the source engine. That would be a job that would take most of their top developers too much time to do when they want to be developing episode 3, left for dead, upgrading steam etc etc.
Apple made a stupid mistake that would benefit a lot of users (linux included; an opengl renderer would open the doors for natice linux ports of vavle's software as well), and Valve made a wise business decision. - strangewill, on 10/10/2007, -1/+12Because there is already a huge market there, duh.
You don't ask "Why should I develop for 95% of the market? I think you need to give me some money first..." -
Show 51 - 100 of 345 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is