digg

Join DiggAbout

The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.

See the original image at gamedaily.com —

Will Apple Ever Get Serious About Games?

gamedaily.com — The focus of this week's Macworld Expo is naturally not gaming. Nevertheless, while Apple has been the subject of many a rumor in the gaming industry over the last few years, we've yet to see any real substantial move into the video game space from Microsoft's arch nemesis.

show profanity settings
expand all
  • anderzole, on 01/18/2008, -6/+23Although Apple has never been that serious about mac gaming, Maelstrom remains an all-time great!
    • Flashman, on 01/18/2008, -0/+4Here's an OSX port of Maelstrom: http://thomascl.free.fr/Maelstrom-3.0.6-MacOSX.zip
    • soot, on 01/18/2008, -1/+1Power Pete and Space Ace were better.
      • tlm2021, on 01/18/2008, -0/+1Hell yeah. I miss Power Pete. I could play that for hours. Where are those damn bunnies.
    • norman619, on 01/18/2008, -0/+3I'm not a Mac fan but I have to agree. Maelstrom is one of the best interpretations of Asteroids I've played. I foudn out recently there is a PC version of that game. :-)
    • parkermauney, on 01/18/2008, -6/+2But how would you play games with only one mouse button!
      • KMartSheriff, on 01/18/2008, -5/+5The same way Windows can't play games because of constant BSOD's.
      • jasarien, on 01/18/2008, -2/+2Stop being so damn ignorant. Any person with half a brain cell knows that virtually any USB mouse will work in both Windows AND Mac OS X. Also many of the high end mice that are available to buy from manufacturers such as Logitech (yeah, you Windows gamers love Logitech don't you), also provide drivers for some of their products for Mac OS X.
      • TomFrost, on 01/18/2008, -1/+2Not to mention that the mouse the ships with macs by default is touch-sensitive and has two buttons while appearing to only have one... but I guess you like your hardware clunky and with as many movable parts as possible?
      • iiBeLiEvE, on 01/21/2008, -1/+1Will you fanboys calm down? parkermauney was clearly being sarcastic, then you bottom two had to go and jump ugly.
    • r3negadeX, on 08/11/2008, -2/+9I can imagine an Apple game console .... It would cost $2000, would have a controller with only one button, and would only play games created by Apple.
      Oh, and it would be considered "the next great innovation in gaming"... :D
      • Nitesmoke, on 01/18/2008, -1/+7They say the Apple iConsole will only be 1/32" thick!!!
        • r3negadeX, on 08/11/2008, -1/+6Unfortunately the optical drive is to be sold separately....
  • matu666, on 01/18/2008, -27/+13na they never have been serious and I dont think they ever will
    they have the market they want and to be honest I dont think they want spotty little kids using there producs.
    • coheedcollapse, on 01/18/2008, -4/+21"I dont think they want spotty little kids using there producs"

      Although they don't mind people with bad grammar skills who make false assumptions about gamers.
    • xRand0mx, on 01/18/2008, -1/+16I don't know what it is with most Apple users. This "I'm better than you" attitude gets very tiring. But back onto your comment. You clearly have no idea what the average age of the computer gaming market is. My complete guess is that it is probably somewhere in the 30s because thats what the current PC market seems to be catering to. Your comment seems to be referring to console gamers who average maturity age is about 12.

      And please check your spelling and grammar before making a sentence like: "they have the market they want and to be honest I dont think they want spotty little kids using there producs."
      • inkswamp, on 01/18/2008, -6/+6> I don't know what it is with most Apple users. This "I'm better than you" attitude gets very tiring.

        I don't know what it is about non-Apple users. This broad brush "most Apple users" attitude gets very tiring.

        Do you really think *most* Apple users think they're better than others, or do you focus too intently on the few who do because that's what you expect to find? (And I bet there are just as many percentage-wise on other platforms too but you don't go looking for those.)
        • bagelmaster, on 01/18/2008, -3/+4Yes, I really believe that most of them think they're better.
        • Nitesmoke, on 01/18/2008, -0/+5Maybe not all Apple users think they're better, but those ones never speak up, the only ones we hear repeat the same iPropaganda and constsantly remind us how stupid we are for using a PC. Look at the "I'm a Mac, I'm a PC" commercial; I could slap the smug look off that little hipster pecker head. "oh look at me, I dress in bluejeans and have cool hair, not like nerdy, square PC guy."
          • inkswamp, on 01/20/2008, -0/+1So humor me here. Those ads are supposed to represent the computers, not the users, and yet you take them personally. So answer some questions.

            1. At any point in those ads do they say anything about how stupid PC *users* are? Yes or no. No creative or abstract interpretations. Do the ads say PC users are dumb?

            2. Do you take the Alltel ads that personally too? I mean, assuming you're using one of the phone service providers (Sprint, Verizon, etc.) represented by one of the bumbling fools in the ads? Do you feel the Alltel ads are attacking phone users or the phone companies?

            See, I think a lot of this is overly sensitive PC users looking for offense where none exists.
    • KSUdesigner, on 01/18/2008, -0/+10Better check your facts before you comment next time. Your average gamer is in his 20's and 30's, hardly a spotty little kid (though there are quite a few who act like that).
    • bitspace, on 01/18/2008, -0/+10That sounds like it was written by a "spotty little kid."
    • Matteos, on 01/18/2008, -0/+5"to be honest I dont think they want spotty little kids using there producs."

      Yeah, products like the iPod, and iPhone.

      P.S. There is a spell check button.
    • sauron256, on 01/18/2008, -0/+8"to be honest I dont think they want spotty little kids using there producs."

      Don't fool yourself, Apple don't care if it's a business professional, Justin Long, or a "spotty little kid" using their products, provided that the revenue is coming in. Apple is a business, no more, no less.
    • norman619, on 01/18/2008, -0/+2Well there really isn't anything in it for them to look at gaming seriously. Who makes the AAA game titles? Before these companies would look at the Mac as a viable money making gaming platform for them the Mac user base needs to get much bigger. It costs too much to port a PC game over to the Mac for it to make good business sense. I wouldn't expect Jobs or whoever will take his place to look at gaming on the Mac until more people are actually using Macs. I'm not slamming Apple in any way. It's just the way it is.
  • Traziun, on 01/18/2008, -15/+45I would argue that Macs already have great games. Maybe not some epics like Bioshock, but we do have Command & Conquer 3, Battlefield 2142, Guitar Hero 3, and WoW. With greats on their way such as Call of Duty 4, Unreal Tournament 3, Spore, Gears of War, Starcraft II, and Rage. Still, I would have agreed with this article.. if this was the year 2003.
    • Mejogid, on 01/18/2008, -5/+32It's not just the games - the hardware itself is lacking if you consider the price. To get a vaguely feature proofed gaming system you're going to have to get a mac pro, and that's cost prohibitive for most of us. Not to mention getting ports a minimum of 6 months after most other systems is a bit of a let down (with some notable exceptions, obviously). A lot my favourite games/series just aren't there yet - most obviously Valve, Bethesda, Creative Assembly and a decent port of Civilization 4, which I can't stop going back to.
      • 4degrees, on 01/18/2008, -10/+3why does it matter how soon ya get to play? >:-P
        • Mejogid, on 01/18/2008, -0/+8Often it doesn't, but when a great game I've been following for a while finally comes out, I'd rather not wait for a port that will most likely be more buggy and perform worse. With on-line games in particular, by the time they reach the Mac the communities often passed its peak and some even force you to play on separate servers (looking at you, Age of Empires).
      • RyeBrye, on 01/18/2008, -2/+1"feature proofed" or "future proofed"?
    • MusicalGenius, on 01/18/2008, -14/+5I also would say that it isn't that they don't have games. THEY CAN'T RUN THEM. Apple's lack of opening up will be their own downfall someday.
      • SniperGX1, on 01/18/2008, -6/+2....did you just imply that between Microsoft and Apple, it's Apple that isn't open? Kinda ironic that "Genius" is part of your username.
        • Syphon8, on 01/18/2008, -1/+6Apple's open? Last time I checked they had forced PROPRIETARY HARDWARE.
        • norman619, on 01/18/2008, -1/+6He is refering to the hardware reqs. Don't get me wrong the guy you are replying to is an idiot but between OSX, Linux and Windows, OSX is the most restrictive. Both Linux and Windows will install onto damn near any PC hardware config out there. The same can not be said of OSX.
    • ioral, on 01/18/2008, -3/+4.
    • ThreeDee912, on 01/18/2008, -0/+6All of this is mainly because the game developers don't want to bother with coding for Macs. Some games (like Blizzard's recent games) work very well on a Mac. Other devs just write a sloppy port with a ton of bugs. Others don't bother with Macs at all.
      • Traziun, on 01/18/2008, -6/+1Wrong. There are popular tools out now that let programmers code for the PC and Mac at THE SAME TIME thanks to the Intel chips. People, please stop living in pre-2004.
      • lucasmaximus, on 01/18/2008, -0/+0TBH, Visual Studio IDE makes coding complicated stuff easy, I wouldn't wanna bother with anything else after using visual studio.
    • slinky317, on 01/18/2008, -3/+1And all of these games came out at the same time if not earlier on PCs. Apple loves to market their stuff to the average, home/casual user. And casual users play games, and Apple can't even compete in the gaming market compared to PCs. Their overpriced systems don't even include the hardware that will be able to reliably run new games.
    • jabberwolf, on 01/18/2008, -0/+1The games you mention ARE OLD OLD OLD !!!
      The newest Apple releases for games are usually 1 year old AT VERY VERY BEST !
      OSX will never get serious about games because that would involve dealing with others ( developers) and Apple is HORRIBLE at dealing with vendors, software and hardware-wise. Why do you think there is no SLI or Crossfire support for graphic cards??!!
  • clak, on 01/18/2008, -9/+43I think Boot Camp was the answer for games. I know people say they don't want to boot in Windows just to play a game, but my question is: Why Not? I can play a good game for eight hours, if I'm really into it. If you're going to play a game for a significant amount of time, why is a one minute reboot such a big deal?
    • bittermang, on 01/18/2008, -26/+19Because being in Windows actually angers me. Once I've made it in to the game, you're right, we're off having fun times and capturing the intelligence. It's all those parts in the middle though, from the reboot, to some Windows Updates, to waiting on the occasional Steam patches, to Steam telling me I need new graphics drivers, to the odd problem of Windows downright refusing to port forward a range that the Pirates MMO beta wants. I just despise Windows, as a user experience, as an operating system, as a platform, as a general nuisance.

      Windows is why I bought a Mac in the first place. The Orange Box is the only reason I installed Boot Camp. If Valve would make a Mac OS port, I'd dump my entire Windows partition. But then that takes us back to stories like this:
      http://digg.com/apple/Valve_wanted_1m_Apple_to_por ...
      • oMeSSiaHo, on 01/18/2008, -3/+21Does Windows handle port forwarding? I thought that was your router. I also dont see why its Windows fault Steam updates itself.

        Also pesky pesky Microsoft. Always updating its software to add features and fix bugs. I'm sure you've never downloaded an update for OSX.
      • screwzluse, on 01/18/2008, -2/+17Those reasons are relatively bad reasons. I would have been satisfied that you just didn't want to reboot and such but excuses such as steam patches, port forwarding, etc aren't Windows problems. Port forwarding doesn't involve Windows at all. Windows updates are important for security updates. Hell, I believe OSX has updates too. It's weird how you don't have to actually install either.

        A good reason would be that you're able to keep running your mac apps (like adium and such) without losing those apps to play Team Fortress. None of the reasons you listed are good reasons.
      • jedikv, on 01/18/2008, -1/+6"to the odd problem of Windows downright refusing to port forward a range that the Pirates MMO beta wants." - I am sorry but thats the fault of your (probably) ***** router.
        • bagelmaster, on 01/18/2008, -2/+2I had this same problem actually. Regardless of how '*****' my router is, the game is obviously doing something wrong if the user even has to configure his router himself. I never did that for WoW or any other online game, so WTF.
        • jasarien, on 01/18/2008, -0/+1Then it's the game's fault, not Windows.
      • Syphon8, on 01/18/2008, -0/+4"e occasional Steam patches, to Steam telling me I need new graphics drivers, to the odd problem of Windows downright refusing to port forward a range that the Pirates MMO beta wants"

        Yes, all of these are OBVIOUSLY Windows problems.
      • norman619, on 01/18/2008, -0/+2Yes it's time you get your router's manual and look up port forwarding and UPnP.
    • clak, on 01/18/2008, -13/+3Good point, bittermang.
    • bluenullity, on 01/18/2008, -4/+10Why is that a good point? Steam/WoW on Windows or OSX will still have to update itself. Graphic drivers still need to be updated and port forwarding is done thru the router not at the OS level (depending on UPnP).
    • threemagic, on 01/18/2008, -4/+12Excellent point and what I do with my Mac Pro. Sold my old mac and pc...

      and PS.. I know I get dugg down everytime I say it, because for some reason no one believes me, Apple is a HARDWARE company.. they compete with Dell and HP not Microsoft.
      • santaliqueur, on 01/18/2008, -1/+10Funny, the real reason I buy only Apple computers is not the hardware (which is great). I buy Apple because of OS X.
        • threemagic, on 01/18/2008, -0/+11I own an tech company. We have HUGE vendor shows all the time. Last summer was a big Microsoft show (they were the main attraction, they got the training room for actual shows). While HP, VMWare, Cisco and Apple are the other BIG players that were there. Apple is the only one that has a stipulation.. that stipulation is simply they HAVE to have as much visibility and time as HP, they didn't even ask about Microsoft. They never do.
      • iofthestorm, on 01/18/2008, -5/+6Personally, I think they don't sell hardware or software, but membership into a cult.
        *ducks*
        But seriously, maybe the reason you get dugg down is because they make both hardware AND software? Or do OS X, i(program), Final Cut etc. come out of nowhere?
      • norman619, on 01/18/2008, -1/+8Sorry but Apple is both Hardware AND software.
      • tlm2021, on 01/18/2008, -0/+7norman619 is completely correct. And honestly, it's why Apple lots so much marketshare to Windows on the software side, and Dell, HP and others on the hardware side.

        But it's also why they tend to have such polished products. It's much easier to make a product if you don't have to worry about supporting a wide range of hardware preferences and possibilities. For every variable you can eliminate, that's man hours that can be reassigned elsewhere.
        • GreyICE, on 01/18/2008, -0/+1Or extra money you can shove into your pockets.
      • noctu, on 01/18/2008, -0/+3lets see what makes the new macs? ausus motherboards, intell chips the only thing left of apple is the OS
      • satanguy, on 01/18/2008, -0/+3Apple sell the complete package, software and hardware, the experience. They most definitely compete with Microsoft (as well as Dell, HP etc)
    • Timmaay, on 01/18/2008, -0/+9Damn, Eight hours.
      • norman619, on 01/18/2008, -1/+3It's not hard to do when you are into a really good game.
    • merreborn, on 01/18/2008, -1/+8Personally, I picked up a macbook about a year ago, having not touched a mac since the release of windows 95, and I definitely fall on the side of those who would like to see games ported to macOS. I've already adjusted to using OS X for *everything*. As such, I really don't want to have to maintain a second OS on my macbook just for a few games -- it takes up over 20% of my dinky harddrive's space, and if I want to check email/IM/browse, I have to maintain a second installation of all the appropriate software.

      Also, in my experience, bootcamp has some flaws when it comes to cooling -- the fan seems to run to slow, causing overheating during processor intensive tasks (like gaming), which in turn leads to the thing choking periodically. Fan control in OS X is much better.

      I actually stopped playing the Windows MMOs I was playing in favor of WoW, becausing playing WoW via the OS X client was a much more pleasant experience -- all my other apps are still right there when I want them, and I don't have to deal with bootcamp's quirks. I don't even have a functioning bootcamp installation anymore, due to some stupid windows licensing issues.

      ...So please, bring good games to OS X. I'd rather play a decent game without having to use bootcamp, than play a great game in bootcamp.
    • MacSuxWindozSux, on 01/18/2008, -0/+2Rebooting into windows would screw up your ability to have your favorite bittorrent running in the background.

      You'd have to have the windows version of your IM software.

      If you have any network sharing, you'd have to have it also configured in windows. and remember to change settings in windows to match any mac changes.
    • jasarien, on 01/18/2008, -0/+2I agree. I think that Apple's move with Bootcamp was to pull down the barrier of not being able to play games on a Mac without having to spend the resources and time in actually porting titles to OS X.
      If you look at it from the point of view of the Company, it makes much more sense to just enable an installation of Windows, that can already run every game you want ported, than to actually pay people to do the porting.
      I also agree that booting into Windows just for gaming is a sacrifice worth making. If I can have my games now, instead of 6 months later, cool! Oh no I have to boot Windows? So what? Once you're in the game, what's the difference? You don't see anything related to Windows, and the game doesn't change at all if you run it in Windows as opposed to Mac OS X?

  • anderzole, on 01/18/2008, -2/+9prince of persia and glider on os7 were fun games
  • nico623, on 01/18/2008, -5/+12I've just never thought that Apple considered the Gaming Industry that big of a deal. I'm not saying I'm blind and can see otherwise. But you'd think since Microsoft came out with the Xbox & 360 that Apple would give in somewhat to the gamer. I've never truly understood the Mac-fanboy...and I probably never will..
    • clak, on 01/18/2008, -6/+13Microsoft loses money on the Xbox and 360 (as does Sony). Apple isn't in the loss leader game. Ever wonder why Apple has half the market capitalization of Microsoft with only 7 percent of the market? High margin hardware, that's how. If Apple competed in the console space, they would have to drop a console on the market at less than production costs, hoping to make up for the money in developer taxes and high margins on games. That's just not how they roll.
      • Mejogid, on 01/18/2008, -5/+8Apple has a high market capitalisation because it has a perceived priority for growth and is doing very well in the music distribution and MP3 player markets. MS has a profit margin of around 25% and Apple of 5% - and that's including MS's huge expenditure in the console business.
        • clak, on 01/18/2008, -2/+7Apple profit margin is 17% Net. You don't know what you're talking about. It has nothing to do with "perceived growth." At the end of June, Apple's assets were valued at $21.6 billion, with $13.8 billion in cash and short-term investments. As of the end of September, those numbers had swelled to $25.3 billion in assets with $15.4 billion in cash. Of course, I know all this because I'm a stock holder.
        • MacSuxWindozSux, on 01/18/2008, -8/+3Lets just agree you both aren't CFO's and you don't really know ***** about what you're talking about.
          • KMartSheriff, on 01/18/2008, -1/+2Maybe, but we can all agree you don't know *****.
      • Matteos, on 01/18/2008, -1/+3With AppleTV they have entered the console market, Xbox live created it (sort of), Sony will follow, and Apple is bringing up the rear. To really make them a competitor in that market they need the games. Getting more games on their computer products is a first step towards that goal. Don't be surprised if there are some major things announced this year with Apple and gaming.
      • MacSuxWindozSux, on 01/18/2008, -3/+3MS Loses money on the consoles per unit yes, but they take a cut of every 360 game sold.
        Your argument is meaningless.

        It's Microsoft. If they weren't making money they wouldn't be making the console.
  • alfonzzo, on 01/18/2008, -13/+17the only thing that apple do great is marketing. and gaming industry requires much much more
    • UKsHaDoW, on 01/18/2008, -5/+6like?
      Most games are marketed like there going to take you to promised land.
    • Mejogid, on 01/18/2008, -0/+11Previously, I'd have agreed with you - but Kane and Lynch broke the 1,000,000 mark...
  • flipmeat, on 01/18/2008, -5/+27No. They don't care. They have a hugely profitable business already. Some game developers allegedly demand huge sums for the privilege of starting a conversion, which Apple ignores. It's nice that EA is doing some Mac titles. Next question.
    • Terr01, on 01/18/2008, -4/+4I tend to think of Mac as the strategic ally of the "console gamer", as odd as it sounds. I mean, they're not buying PC titles, because heaven forbid there might be more buttons than they can safely memorize.

      There, now we can have a Mac/Windows and Console/PC arguments :P
      • jedikv, on 01/18/2008, -1/+3As both a PC and Console gamer - I find the smugness of that first statement is idiotic
    • lotus22, on 01/18/2008, -8/+3you are gay.

      next question.
    • merreborn, on 01/18/2008, -1/+2"They don't care. They have a hugely profitable business already."

      Companies always want to be more profitable. Always. There is no point at which a company will say "We're making enough money. We'll just stop right here". The shareholders would oust the CEO immediately, were such a thing ever to happen.
    • ThreeDee912, on 01/18/2008, -0/+1Wasn't EA making sloppy Mac ports using some WINE-like program?
  • REUYL, on 01/18/2008, -11/+26They'll get serious about gaming when they can sell overpriced games as "hip" and "trendy."
    • Tenoq, on 01/18/2008, -0/+6You mean $100 for a game is a fair price? :p
  • deadbaby, on 01/18/2008, -2/+13Does anyone really care anymore? Get a console or dual boot Windows.
  • UKsHaDoW, on 01/18/2008, -3/+21Game develepers have everything they need. OpenGL, and OpenAL. There constantly develeped. I don't really see the problem.

    I know they asked to valve to port source. But they asked for a lot of money. Which is a bit stupid really saying that it increases there market, yet apple has to pay them for it.
    • rojano17, on 01/18/2008, -1/+2Welcome to Digg.com AKA grammar police headquarters, please have a sit.
      • UKsHaDoW, on 01/18/2008, -1/+2I'm writing a quick comment on digg. Not writing a new blog entry.
        This kind of really annoys me, when someone comes and says something completely unrelated spelling/grammer check like oh err... you missed comma there and here, while everybody else trying to have discussion.
        Imagine you was conversation, and someone said you should paused there for a moment, oh..oh and there. You didn't pronounce that word properly there, oh and that word.

        Sometimes I feel like they can't contribute, so they nit pick the grammer/spelling.
        • tehmoth, on 01/18/2008, -2/+1But yet you must think "they're", "their" and "there" sound the same, so for you, I probably would interrupt the conversation.
        • UKsHaDoW, on 01/18/2008, -2/+1Since there indicates place and position i didn't get anything wrong. Using completly different words, is entirely different a animal to simple grammer/spelling mistakes.
        • Saiing, on 01/18/2008, -2/+1You write English like a 5-year-old. I'd really stop arguing if I were you. Every time you add another comment, it just makes you look more stupid.

          Making an occasional mistake is one thing. Not being able to get to the end of a single sentence without messing up, is just ignorant.
          • UKsHaDoW, on 01/18/2008, -1/+2I don't really give a crap if i come across ignorant. What really matters is that I can wright like if i choose. Its not up to you.

            Screw you. Seriously. stop telling people what to do.
          • UKsHaDoW, on 01/18/2008, -1/+1"wright like if i choose" Genius...
          • digudown, on 01/18/2008, -0/+1Are you an *****? By your standards all non native English speakers should be excluded from digg.
      • UKsHaDoW, on 01/18/2008, -0/+3"Welcome to Digg.com AKA grammar police headquarters, please have a seat"
        Fixed that for you.
        • potterboy, on 01/18/2008, -0/+1"Welcome to Digg.com A.K.A. grammar police headquarters, please have a seat"
    • iofthestorm, on 01/18/2008, -4/+8No, not really, because it costs Valve to port their DirectX engines to OpenGL and OS X, and for a rather marginal increase in potential customers. The thing is, one of the reasons keeping people from switching to OS X is gaming, and the people who do switch are more likely to not care about gaming, and so out of the maybe 5-10% of people using Macs, 1% might actually want to buy those games (i.e. 10-20% of the Mac population) which would not be anywhere near profitable for Valve to do. Sure, Blizzard and id do ports but that's their choice, and it garners them good will, and Valve has just chosen to save money and capitalize on their existing markets rather than add a rather small one. They are definitely willing to do ports, see Orange Box on the 360, but only when they think it would benefit them.
      Also, are you saying that it wouldn't benefit Apple at all if one of the top PC developers started porting to OS X? That's just being stubborn.
      • TritonX, on 01/18/2008, -3/+2id is not doing mac port anymore, as anyone who wants to keeps their sanity intact, they are developing on mac and "porting" to windows. Did you pull these number from your a..?
      • srg13, on 01/18/2008, -0/+1Ummm.. Considering that most of source runs in the Linux server (the physics etc.), and it has already been ported to PS3 (which uses OpenGL), I reckon one good developer or two could quite easily do Linux and Mac OS ports in 1 to 3 months.

        How much would that cost? Probably less than $20, 000 - a little less than the million dollar bribe they expected Apple to pay them
        • digudown, on 01/18/2008, -0/+1I pray you never manage a project. Your developers will commit suicide.
      • Smoozle, on 01/18/2008, -0/+1About Blizzard and iD, they don't make Mac ports of their games, they develop them in platform agnostic way.
      • lucasmaximus, on 01/18/2008, -0/+0Xbox 360 has direct X on there so the port probably didn't take them a huge amount of time.
    • BrandonMills, on 01/18/2008, -1/+1They didn't ask for that much if I recall. It would have been worth every penny. Apple *still* would benefit greatly from having Source ported.
      • srg13, on 01/18/2008, -0/+2Someone from Apple revealed that Valve wanted a million dollars - I'll try to find a link to the source
  • Itazura, on 01/18/2008, -4/+7Apple IIe was as serious as it got.
    • johnpaul191, on 01/18/2008, -0/+2Loderunner!
    • Myztry, on 01/18/2008, -0/+2That funny little shoot over the hill game with parachute soliders. Last game I played on an Apple but it was strangely fun.
  • whataboutdave, on 01/18/2008, -6/+80No.


    Digg me down, but I just saved you five minutes.
    • bitspace, on 01/18/2008, -2/+1But you also saved me the amusement of the experts who post replies with thoughtful commentary. Actually, I was going to answer the same thing, but scrolled down a bit and saw that you had already. Lots of whining periodically on Apple's games-dev mailing list (yes, there is one!) but it seems clear Apple's not ever going to get behind gaming.
    • Archer007, on 01/18/2008, -0/+6Why is it that 90% or more of the people who say "digg me down" are regularly dugg up?
      • jedikv, on 01/18/2008, -4/+1Irony?
      • iofthestorm, on 01/18/2008, -3/+1Maybe it's because the ones that are dugg down aren't visible automatically.
      • endlessoul, on 01/18/2008, -4/+2It's a reverse-psychology thing. I've done it with varying degrees of success. The key is to be mildly flippant while saying that you want to be dugg down. It works most of the time.

        Of course, you have to be speaking some sort of truth in said post for people to digg you up.
    • atlex2, on 01/18/2008, -2/+2Not now, watch.
      ***** you all! DIG ME DOWN!

      See, by inserting a curse phrase at the general public I will become dug-down.
    • desistere, on 01/18/2008, -0/+3Hmm.. if I digg up, then I make Archer right. If I digg down, atlex is right. I don't think I'll do anything. =)
    • calon9, on 01/18/2008, -0/+3No is right. It's entertaining that this question keeps on coming up every now and then since I bought my first Mac in 1985. As the mac market share increases, more games will come out for it, but since Apple will never officially endorse Mac gaming (with hardware and developer support), the Mac will never be a serious gaming machine. And Apple will never endorse games because Jobs will never do so. I still have a windows machine and bootcamp on my imac just so I can play TF2.
  • mattyd12466, on 01/18/2008, -7/+1I think apple would love ot get into games...but lets be realistic, theres just not enough mac user to make it worth the while of the developers.

    and there alway bootcamp which works fine for me
  • phantasyhero, on 01/18/2008, -13/+21Macs aren't meant for gaming, their PC counterparts will always be more powerful, and cheaper for gaming.
    • threemagic, on 01/18/2008, -9/+1Good day...

      I SAID GOOD DAY!
    • kyuuseishu, on 01/18/2008, -6/+0It may be true now that PC's are better for gaming. But never say never...
    • merreborn, on 01/18/2008, -5/+5I don't know what you're talking about.
      My macbook runs WoW better than the last two $1000 HPs I owned did.
      • Syphon8, on 01/18/2008, -2/+9And a new HP for the same price as your Macbook will run it better.
      • bagelmaster, on 01/18/2008, -0/+7WoW isn't exactly a computer killer...
    • MacSuxWindozSux, on 01/18/2008, -3/+9Building a PC part by part is far cheaper than any ***** stock computer you are going to pull off a DELL or APPLE website.
      You also get to have a computer far far better in every aspect.

      That's the Gaming Trump Card. And Apple can't touch it unless they stop locking in their hardware.
      The hardware lock in is what gets apple all their inflated hardware sales. And thats most of their money there.


      The catch? Most people don't know how to build their own PC, and instead replace the whole thing every 3 years.
  • kinship, on 01/18/2008, -4/+12here's a question, do they need too?
    • s3Canuck, on 01/18/2008, -3/+3yes sir =(
    • Kelmon, on 01/18/2008, -0/+2Given the way that Macs are practically flying off the shelves these days I think we can safely say that the answer to your question is "no" or at least "not yet". If the growth of the platform starts to slow down then maybe getting "serious about games" will change that around but at the moment there is no real incentive to make changes since what they are doing is clearly working. The thing is that gamers tend to think that they are some big and important market but they're not.
      • poppieprong, on 01/18/2008, -0/+1The video game industry, according to the Entertainment Software Association, is a $7.4 billion industry (http://tinyurl.com/2saqtk), and I don't think that includes hardware. Compare that to other industries: the music industry, according to Wikipedia (so, yeah, take it with a grain of salt), was a $4.8 billion industry (http://tinyurl.com/2ef2nr); I ran out of time trying to research all the rest, such as camcorders and digital cameras. But games are a bigger industry than music, and Apple is ignoring a large, and growing, market segment.
    • slinky317, on 01/18/2008, -0/+1If they want to live to their marketing as "the computer for the home user" than yes, yes they do. Home users play games.
  • sark666, on 01/18/2008, -2/+26Well the first question is will developer's ever get serious about opengl again? Microsoft pushed direct3d even when it was inferior to opengl. They tied developers and in turn users to one platform. Personally, I don't give a ***** about mac's (or mac gaming for that matter). But I'd like to see this happen because if developers start thinking about mac game development well then you have developer's thinking cross platform. Then linux game development becomes more viable.

    Id software has done it for years, c'mon developers it is possible.
    • MacSuxWindozSux, on 01/18/2008, -4/+4Here's your answer:
      OpenGL is harder to work with. Even though DirectX was graphically inferior, (and not drasticly so), it was a complete API, that included controls, sound, and graphics.

      The DX Format for 3D models, and the DDS format for 3D surfaces are far better today than anything available in with openGL.
      They are powerful and easy to work with.

      The Development Kit from Microsoft allowed games to be created far faster and easier than in OpenGL, it was a more economical solution.

      OpenGL can be great and it's PORTABLE! John Carmack at ID Software is a god!
      If you are doing a cross platform game, then you need OpenGL.

      Most game studios are dirt poor. They get a couple hundred thousand dollars from a distributor like Activision, and they have to use that to pay their people. They can't afford to release games when they are done. It needs to be as fast as possible. If they run out of money, the game gets released anyway.
      OpenGL programmers are less common, more expensive and the job often takes longer in openGL.

      But if you aren't a video game developer you just don't know.
      • Myztry, on 01/18/2008, -0/+1As with anything half decent, Microsoft kept to it's talents and got the wallet out to acquire DirectX.
      • srg13, on 01/18/2008, -1/+2"OpenGL is harder to work with"

        Having been programming with OpenGL for a few months now, I find that exceedingly difficult to believe...
  • WWWoody, on 01/18/2008, -0/+7They don't appeal to gamers (at least, it isn't one of their main goals), they appeal to people who enjoy simplicity and style. This isn't to say that people can't do some amazing, complicated things on a mac, but it just isn't what they're marketed for.
  • Mahoney07, on 01/18/2008, -3/+7Apple will get serious about games when they come out with a computer with the upgradability of the Mac Pro and a Core 2 Duo processor instead of a 8 core server processor. All for $1500 or less.
  • Tapewormz, on 01/18/2008, -19/+2No! Mac is only for Photoshop... Oh wait... The exact same ***** program works on PC too... Well...That makes Mac completely useless...
    • bagelmaster, on 01/18/2008, -2/+4Haha, not sure why people are digging you down. Must be those pesky fanboys, because what you said it completely true. Everything a Mac can do a PC can do just as well or better.
      • srg13, on 01/18/2008, -0/+1Three words - Final Cut Pro.

        Oh, and Shake (although that runs on Linux also)
  • digdug2008, on 01/18/2008, -5/+1They got flipwords.. ;)
    http://www.apple.com/downloads/macosx/games/cards_ ...

    On serious note, its time Steve knocked on nintendo WII's doors to get some serious games on MAC
  • tian2992, on 01/18/2008, -5/+2They will, for 20$
  • djrbx, on 01/18/2008, -4/+5I don't think that Apple will ever create a gaming machine. I say this because Apple love to know what goes into their computers. And If they were to create a gaming machine, it would mean that they would need to allow the consumer to put what ever graphics card they want if they decide to upgrade. Apple's current state of business doesn't allow this. What you see is what you get..
    I could be wrong though
    • Mahoney07, on 01/18/2008, -1/+1Are you sure you can't put a new graphics card into a Mac Pro?
      • TritonX, on 01/18/2008, -1/+3Last time I check you had 3 choice of cards, and if you didn't upgraded at the purchase time, it's way too expensive for what you get.
  • misterhat, on 01/18/2008, -4/+8Cool hipsters dont play video games
    • rjett, on 01/18/2008, -0/+1Cool hipsters play NES and games they bought on ebay because retro is in.
  • Memnochxx, on 01/18/2008, -1/+7This is a non story. Buried.
  • davewelsh79, on 01/18/2008, -0/+4Now that you can finally get a decent video card in a Mac Pro (8800 GT), you can play all the games you want (using Windows). Even if Apple didn't sell systems with high-end video cards, if drivers were at least made available to upgraders I'd be happy.
    • TritonX, on 01/18/2008, -0/+1You can get a 8800GT in a MacPro, did I miss something, where can I get one with the special bios?
      • davewelsh79, on 01/18/2008, -0/+1It's an option at the online Mac Store, at least in Canada. I assume you can choose the 8800 GT on a Mac Pro in any country though.
  • Tempest261, on 01/18/2008, -0/+11Apple? Who cares. *Linux* needs to get more serious for games.
    • bitspace, on 01/18/2008, -1/+5It's not up to "Linux" to get more serious about games. It's up to any of the hundreds or thousands of developers out there to decide they want to write big-title games for Linux.
      • Tempest261, on 01/18/2008, -4/+2Thanks for teaching me that Linux is not a corporation! I had NO ***** CLUE!!
    • MacSuxWindozSux, on 01/18/2008, -2/+1Hahah... I think Linux needs a common platform, so developers don't need to work so hard to make software.
      The whole thing about compiling the code on the users computer is a real sore spot.

      It takes a long time, it's very complicated, and it's extremely error prone.
      • srg13, on 01/18/2008, -0/+1Yea... no - things aren't generally ever compiled on the user's own computer - everything comes as binaries.The developer just compile it for a certain architecture etc. You'll generally find that most games only have one or two packages.

        I only have one application on my computer that I compile from source, (I compile the latest git tree daily for testing) and given how long that takes, I can safely say that nobody would use Linux if it meant anything more simple that a text editor had to be compiled on installation...

        As for a common base, it's pretty much OpenGL and SDL, which make up the equivalent of DirectX.
    • bagelmaster, on 01/18/2008, -0/+1Com-*****-pletely agree.
    • MattBD, on 01/18/2008, -0/+1I think Linux could potentially be a better OS for hardcore gamers if it was as well supported by publishers as Windows. It always seems a bit strange to me that the real hardcore gamers will spend loads of time and money customising their PC to make it run these games really well, then they have to put a standardised Windows install on it. If you were using Linux, there could be distros designed specifically for running commercial games in order to get better performance. Or you could use something like Gentoo and just customise your entire OS to get the absolute most out of it. The fact that you can compile Linux yourself means it can be far better suited to individual hardware than Windows ever is.
  • saggygrandma, on 01/18/2008, -3/+5Now that I can play games in 1080p on a big TV i've completely lost interest in computer games, once it all gets cheaper I think the industry is going to more and more away from computers to consoles.
  • mikesown, on 01/18/2008, -3/+1I think Apple will get serious about gaming in June(WWDC). The key thing Apple needs to do is make it easy for people to port games to Mac OSX. So, in other words, Apple needs to either buy up transgaming(for their Cider product), or develop a solution of their own to implement near-100% of the DirectX APIs in Mac OSX. At this point, it would become a no brainer for companies to port stuff to OSX. Doing that, however, is also very difficult. I would be surprised if Apple didn't have 100+ engineers working on porting DirectX APIs to Mac OSX right now.
    • bitspace, on 01/18/2008, -0/+4You know Cider is the reason EA is able to release games for Mac OS X.
    • srg13, on 01/18/2008, -0/+1Why would they want to buy Transgaming when their product is inferior to the open source project Wine?
  • borez, on 01/18/2008, -5/+4I don't have one game on my Mac G5 and, to be honest, with all the creative ability the machine has, I just don't think I'll ever feel the need for one.


  • crazysamz, on 01/18/2008, -7/+1Duh, it's because Apple doesn't Care about gamers. All they have are some crappy ipod games that aren't as good as some of the games I used to play on my old cell phone from 2002. Mac games?? There are barely any of them, and you need a Beefy Mac Pro to run them. Even with boot camp, you aren't going to get as good of a gaming experience, both performance and fun wise, then on a PC, which is actually designed to run games, unlike a Mac. And Gaming on a PC is just easier, which is supposed to be Apple's specialty, right? Easy computers?? Not so much.
    • tehmoth, on 01/18/2008, -0/+4sorry you must be confusing PCs with Consoles, PCs are not 'designed to play games'
    • Kelmon, on 01/18/2008, -0/+2PC gaming pretty much blows when compared to the current consoles - that's a real gaming experience. I would also disagree that the iPod games are crappy. On the contrary, the games may be simple but most tend to be excellent and a heck of a lot more fun to play than many games I've played in the past.
      You also don't need a Mac Pro to play games on a Mac - my MacBook Pro runs current titles just fine and the same will be true of the iMac too.
  • adh3isive, on 01/18/2008, -1/+5Rememer when the best games were on the Mac? When I was a kid I had a box of games for Mac like Indiana Jones, Full Throttle and Day of the Tentacle. Great memories of those ones.
  • psg188, on 01/18/2008, -2/+3No.

    Why do I think that? Because they weren't willing to pay a measly (for them) million dollars to Valve for them to get started with equipment and such for developing on the system. Otherwise one of the greatest developers of all time would be developing for them right now.
    • TritonX, on 01/18/2008, -1/+1Valve's case is an impossible one. I guess they would never switch to OpenGL, because their guy is really sold on DirectX. May I ask tough, how they putted it on the PS3, I am not familiar with the PS3 but I guess it's not running DirectX? And I kinda agree with them refusing to go OpenGl, cause it would imply a lot of things for their engine. But I still think DirectX sucks, and I that every developers should use open standards so they can port easily between different OS and hardware, but money talks.
      • srg13, on 01/18/2008, -0/+1It was ported to openGL actually, but by someone else (It might have been EA, but I'm not sure).

        The point, though, is that they could very easily and cheaply port it, but they are trying to get Apple to pay them!
    • LingNoi, on 01/18/2008, -2/+3Valve? You mean the ex-Microsoft guys that hate the PS3, love the xbox360, think DirectX is better then openGL and handed out the PS3 port to EA because it was "too difficult" for them. Like what they think matters...
      • tdous, on 01/18/2008, -1/+2Don't let their very good games have any impact on the argument...
      • psg188, on 01/18/2008, -1/+1Being one of the best selling PC franchises and the highest rated PC game developer out there I'd say a lot of people care what they think.
    • Kelmon, on 01/18/2008, -1/+3Am I the only one who doesn't think that Valve are actually as good as they are made out to be? Half-Life was OK but I really didn't like Half-Life 2 so I really see no loss in them not developing for the Mac. Mind you, these days I am hard pressed to find any games on the PC that I would want to play since they all pretty much seem to be same games as before and, frankly, I'm bored of them.
      • psg188, on 01/18/2008, -0/+1I think so. Half Life 2 won 35 game of the year awards. So you'd be one of the few that didn't like it.
  • CraigJ, on 01/18/2008, -1/+8Probably not. I really wish they would, but lets face it, the ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO cards in the iMac aren't exactly great gaming cards, and forget about the graphics in the Mac Mini or the MacBooks. Maybe the Mac Pro would make a good gaming machine?
    • threemagic, on 01/18/2008, -1/+5Do you realize how many millions of PC games DO NOT have the top of the line card?
      • CraigJ, on 01/18/2008, -0/+3I think you mean PCs and I happen to have one of those... The point being that it Apple wants to get serious about gaming, they need to offer better cards, at least as options, and work with the developers to get the games in OS X. IMO buying a Mac to run windows to play games would kind of defeat the point.
  • schavira, on 01/18/2008, -2/+6No, but all PC (maybe even console now) games are as clichéd as a Michael Bay film. How many times are they going to repackage the same FPSs and strategy games over and over again, with the only difference being the game's exterior? It's sickening.
    • MacSuxWindozSux, on 01/18/2008, -2/+6Uh... Doom3 is nothing like Half-Life 2. And they aren't anything like Crysis.

      It's kind of like calling all card games the same. They aren't.
      • schavira, on 01/18/2008, -4/+2What's the difference, the guy who's shooting the gun is not the same? The enemies look different? They have different levels? You're paying 50 dollars for a game you already have.
        • bagelmaster, on 01/18/2008, -1/+3Welp, better never buy another Zelda game again, because apparently they're all the same. And COD4 is just COD2 with a different package. Yep...
          • schavira, on 01/18/2008, -1/+2Actually I completely agree with that statement. Nintendo hasn't released something innovative (but not gimmicky) in years, since the N64 in fact. And COD4 IS COD2, just with more direct propaganda and better graphics.
          • Kelmon, on 01/18/2008, -0/+2That's a true statement and proves the point. All Zelda games (well, since A Link To The Past) are the same game, more or less. Explore a map, find a dungeon, find the new weapon in the dungeon, use said new weapon on the boss at the end to defeat, repeat. Different graphics and other aspects but it's still the same game. Some people (well, quite a lot of people in all honesty) like that but I'm not one of them.
        • ThreeDee912, on 01/18/2008, -1/+3In a way, the games basically are the same. A FPS is a FPS. a RPG is an RPG. a RTS is a RTS. There's definitely much better graphics, different storyline, etc... But the main concepts are still the same.
        • tdous, on 01/18/2008, -2/+1That is the stupidest thing I have heard all week. And it's been a long week. You clearly don't play them (and no, you don't so don't pretend), so apart from your complete lack of actual experience and a set of pre-conceived notions and prejudices, where exactly are you coming from?
          • schavira, on 01/19/2008, -0/+1I don't play them regularly, but I've played them many times at my friends house. I just don't see the big difference between games like that. I tried Halo for a couple of weeks on my Mac, and I was like, "This is just Goldeneye in space, and you're not James Bond. What's the big deal?" Another thing, why would I play something I don't like? You expect me to play ***** like COD for days on end until coming to a conclusion on what I think of the game? Playing a few hours in multiplayer in those games several times is enough to convince me of my viewpoint. I don't need to play them on a regular basis to know for sure that they're unoriginal. That's like saying you need to watch Gigli daily in order to conclude that it's a bad movie. Finally, don't assume things about people and then use it as the basis of your argument. Not only do you come out looking like a dumbass, but it's also incredibly rude.
    • Kelmon, on 01/18/2008, -0/+2YES! Dear God someone else has noticed the same thing. I suspect the problem is that I've just been playing games for too long and I remember what I've played before.
    • srg13, on 01/18/2008, -1/+1One could say that all books, movies, games and stories are the same with your logic (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monomyth )
  • mizatt, on 01/18/2008, -1/+1I think next-generation console systems, if anything, make it even less likely that Apple will make a move toward game support. If so many genres are moving toward consoles, what's the draw of going after that market? Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo already have years of experience appealing to gamers, so why would Apple try to play catch-up at the risk of alienating their demographic?
  • modusop, on 01/18/2008, -1/+2any other Mac users out there still rockin' the Quake 3? I know I am...between rounds of Photoshop, of course.
  • Millsee, on 01/18/2008, -2/+3just get a games console..
  • over900000, on 01/18/2008, -4/+2Apple should release Pippin 2 to compete with the Xbox 360.
    • gansito87, on 01/18/2008, -2/+0aw *****, you beat me to it.
    • clak, on 01/18/2008, -0/+3Apple didn't release the Pippin. Christ. This is the oldest myth in the book. They just licensed the technology to Bandai Games.

      From Apple's original Pippin Web Site:

      Pippin is a set of technologies designed by Apple Computer for Bandai Digital Entertainment Corporation in Japan. Pippin lets you run specially-modified Macintosh CD-ROMs on a low-cost player that plugs into a standard television set.

      For more information about Pippin, please contact Bandai Digital Entertainment Corporation at their headquarters in La Mirada, California: 310-404-1600. You can also email them at info@bdec.com.

      For all technical support questions, please contact Bandai's support center at h1pippin@aol.com.
      • over900000, on 01/18/2008, -3/+1Ah yes excuses.
      • ThreeDee912, on 01/18/2008, -1/+1"Bandai's support center at h1pippin@aol.com"

        Uh... aol.com?
  • FoxFaction, on 01/18/2008, -1/+2I wish *somebody* would freaking care about the computer gamers. I don't care who it is.
  • chipa10, on 01/18/2008, -3/+0They will do http://awesome.video.mactanque.com
  • gansito87, on 01/18/2008, -7/+1You fags are even dumber than I thought. Apple is ALL about games.

    Apple Pippin, anyone?
    • clak, on 01/18/2008, -0/+3Apple didn't release the Pippin. Christ. This is the oldest myth in the book. They just licensed the technology to Bandai Games.

      From Apple's original Pippin Web Site:

      Pippin is a set of technologies designed by Apple Computer for Bandai Digital Entertainment Corporation in Japan. Pippin lets you run specially-modified Macintosh CD-ROMs on a low-cost player that plugs into a standard television set.

      For more information about Pippin, please contact Bandai Digital Entertainment Corporation at their headquarters in La Mirada, California: 310-404-1600. You can also email them at info@bdec.com.

      For all technical support questions, please contact Bandai's support center at h1pippin@aol.com.
    • tdous, on 01/18/2008, -0/+1Complete tool. Good job.
  • threemagic, on 01/18/2008, -5/+3Spore , one of the biggest of 2008, will be released on OS X at the same time as the other platforms.
    • r3negadeX, on 08/11/2008, -1/+5WOW! Apple: 1 Microsoft: Um....2000?
      • threemagic, on 01/18/2008, -1/+3I dugg you up.. but it's better than 2000-0, right?
        • tdous, on 01/18/2008, -0/+2Is it? Is it not like one person clapping in a stand up comedy crowd?
  • MattCairns, on 01/18/2008, -6/+3Its called bootcamp. It works perfectly.
    • nycmac247, on 01/18/2008, -2/+1Yes!
    • slinky317, on 01/18/2008, -0/+1No, it doesn't. Besides, the entire nature of Apple is "you don't need Windows anymore at all." Now, it's more like "you don't need Windows anymore at all. Except for certain things, and then you do."
    • xgambetx, on 01/20/2008, -1/+1HA!!! u must be joking
  • kidwithsword, on 01/18/2008, -0/+3I was just wondering the other day what it would be like for Apple to get into console gaming. I am sure it would be something interesting...
    • NonLeftistDiggr, on 01/18/2008, -2/+4It would be a sexy ass box that cost 1000 bucks with a ball and one button and 10 games on the market, that has the option of running an Xbox360 or PS3 emulator at half speed. It would come with a 4 page manual of huge glossy photos of somebody's hand plugging in a power cord into an outlet, page 2 would be a blown up picture of a finger hitting the ON button.....etc.
      • robinthehood, on 01/18/2008, -0/+1The games would also be at least 4 years old.
    • over900000, on 01/18/2008, -2/+3They already have
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Pippin

      and it was a huge flop
    • robinthehood, on 01/18/2008, -0/+1ya... Apple making a gaming console... I'm pretty sure it would look like a WII and play like a Colicovision.
    • MattBD, on 01/18/2008, -0/+1It'd probably be called something predictable like the iConsole. Still, can't rule it out - I mean Sony joined the console market out of the blue when they released the first PlayStation, and they did well.
  • prgmctan, on 01/18/2008, -1/+2I'm not so sure it's advantageous for Apple to design computers for gaming when developers don't really make games for macs. I think they'd have to coordinate with game developers first... but even then, would enough mac users even pay to have their hardware suitable for gaming? The mac users I know don't really care much for gaming in the first place.
  • Karmavs, on 01/18/2008, -1/+3Here's hoping for Core 3D in Mac OS X Lion.
    • Smoozle, on 01/18/2008, -0/+2Core 3D is called OpenGL and is present since Mac OS X Cheetah (10.0).
  • mrSimon, on 01/18/2008, -0/+2I cant see what Apple would find at all commercially appealing to the company, particularly in an incredibly tough market already, and especially since these platforms are really really driven by third party titles that in reality would not be particularly unique to the console.

    I'd expect them to announce some form of handheld console if anything.... However, their (1st party) toe dipping for iPod havn't been particularly impressive...
  • chicofaraby, on 01/18/2008, -1/+2"Serious about games"

    Is it just me?
  • NonLeftistDiggr, on 01/18/2008, -1/+2Will society every get serious about Macs? No. 2 birds 1 stone.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 95 of 95 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.