[EFFENDI]

Ok, as I have hinted at in some of the other sections of this forum, I am in the process of "switching" my younger brothers to the Mac platform. I've thought of buying them a B&W G3 to play on. But here is the dilemma, they are dead set on getting one of these cheap eMachines PCs for gaming.

[rant] Personally, I don't play games on a computer, and I don't see the point of them buying a new PC "just" for playing games, I mean thats what consoles are for (and they are cheaper). I don't see the future of PC gaming getting any better than it currently is, as the so-called advent of Windows Vista is no more than a blatant imitation of OS X's long-featured innovations. [/rant]

I have tried explaining to them the advantages of the Mac platform from a computing standpoint, and for the most part, they understand and appreciate them. They do want a Mac, but are not convinced that gaming will be the same. When it comes to gaming on the Mac, I am at a loss for defense tactics. The following are my best arguments. So now, I am asking for your help.



Their arguments are:
a) A Mac costs more They feel they can buy a cheaper PC now, and later upgrade the graphics card, ram, etc. to meet the specifications of the latest games.

- I explained to them that a Mac is more of an investment, and that the upgrade cycles are far less frequent than in the PC world. Not only that, but most modern Macs are (or they should be) up to par with equivalent PC graphics.

b) Macs are slower

- Now, since I know little about Mac gaming, I can only assume that if a developer/publisher ports a game to the Mac platform, that they are going to want that game to play on the majority of Macs, and hence, would code the game to maintain the same playability and an equal level of performance and overall experience as on the PC.

c) There are no good games on the Mac

- I explained to them that there is overall, a less amount of games on the Mac, but the majority of popular titles are available, playable, and enjoyable on the Mac.



As a side note, I do think that sooner or later, windows will be running native on the Intel Macs...so can one assume that gaming on the Mac will also, sooner or later become more prevalent?

[torifile]

You should not try to convince a PC gamer to switch to the Mac. It's just silly. So is throwing money away on an eMachines, though, so I guess it's a wash...

[EFFENDI]

Originally Posted by torifile

You should not try to convince a PC gamer to switch to the Mac. It's just silly. So is throwing money away on an eMachines, though, so I guess it's a wash...

I should point out that they are what can be called "casual" gamers, MMORPGS, racing games, etc.

Gaming (as well as cost of Apple hardware) is their only reservation about the Mac platform. So maybe my question is not specifically gaming-related

[Big Mac]

Yeah, I don't think you're going to be able to convince your brothers to switch over if they like PC gaming. They'll constantly whine about all of the games they're missing out due to listening to you instead of getting their eMachine. The only way you could pull it off would be to wait for someone to figure out how to hack Windows on to the Mactels, because then they could run Windows natively.

[lookmark]

Agreed. There's still a qualitative difference between PC gaming and console gaming, and if your brothers are expressing an interest in the former instead of the latter, I'm not sure they're as "casual" as you think.

e.g. If they like MMORPGs, there's pretty much *one* big one for the Mac, World of Warcraft. Sure, it happens to be the biggest and best (IMO), but if that's really their interest, some people like having options.

I look forward to the point when Windows (which is looking like it will probably be Vista) can dual-booted on an Intel Mac, but until that time, your dilemma is only solvable if the games they want to play are available on the Mac and/or they are really and truly casual gamers.

[eevyl]

Indeed, do not try a PC gamer to switch to Mac, you might actually succeed at it and lose a friend.

Your bets are better headed if you try to make them the switch from PC gaming to console gaming, then they might realize the computer can do more things than Excel, Blue Screens of Death and Solitaire.

And I'm 100% serious and trying to be helpful.

[designbc]

I personally play on my imac, never got used to the consoles (but that's a personal issue)
There is a huge delay in the release of the Mac versions of games and now that you can play almost anything online, we Mac users are in disadvantage compared to PC people. I have a friend who used to play Battlefield 1942 with me. Now he has moved to Battlefield 2. Whenever is is released for Mac, he'll have more experience and skills than me.
My opinion: If you are gonna play in your computer, get a PC. If you need a computer for anything else, get a Mac.

[PBG4 User]

Just another "If they want to game, PC > Mac" post. That's just the way it is, and probably will be unless DirectX somehow makes it into OS X. Even if DX made it into OS X, there's still a 6 month to a year lag between PC release and Mac release of almost every game.

[lookmark]

The only answer to this problem will be when someone gets (a) Vista bootable on an Intel Mac, or (b) some smart programmers put together a fairly easy to use version of WINE for OS X that's focused on working well with the most popular games.

Otherwise, it's WOW (and other Blizzard games), 6-12 mo. waiting for ports, and casual games.

[EFFENDI]

Originally Posted by eevyl

Indeed, do not try a PC gamer to switch to Mac, you might actually succeed at it and lose a friend.

Your bets are better headed if you try to make them the switch from PC gaming to console gaming, then they might realize the computer can do more things than Excel, Blue Screens of Death and Solitaire.

And I'm 100% serious and trying to be helpful.

That is the response I was looking for then.

[EFFENDI]

Originally Posted by designbc

My opinion: If you are gonna play in your computer, get a PC. If you need a computer for anything else, get a Mac.

My sentiments exactly, except I would substitute a console for a PC. I personally see a dim future for the PC world, I mean, Vista's only advantage to them would be that its a OS X clone that just happens to support PC games.

[EFFENDI]

Originally Posted by lookmark

Agreed. There's still a qualitative difference between PC gaming and console gaming, and if your brothers are expressing an interest in the former instead of the latter, I'm not sure they're as "casual" as you think.

e.g. If they like MMORPGs, there's pretty much *one* big one for the Mac, World of Warcraft. Sure, it happens to be the biggest and best (IMO), but if that's really their interest, some people like having options.

I look forward to the point when Windows (which is looking like it will probably be Vista) can dual-booted on an Intel Mac, but until that time, your dilemma is only solvable if the games they want to play are available on the Mac and/or they are really and truly casual gamers.

\


Thanks for this helpful post. And I do think that dual-boot may help the situation some. But one can only speculate at this point though.

[CaptainHaddock]

Well, those gaming kings Tycho and Gabe are pretty much convinced.

Penny Arcade

[demibob]

i was concerned about there not being any good games for mac to when i switched.
But now iv realised almost all the games i would consider buying are on the mac too. Halo, doom3, world of warcraft, unreal tornement (now in universal binary) and ev nova.

[11011001]

And how long did we have to wait for those games?

There are many games that I would like to play that will never come out for Mac, and there are many that I would like to play at the same time that my friends are. I could only ever justify purchasing a Mac if I was buying for it's quality, usability and in my case, the APIs. I'm a diehard Mac fan, but I realize the reality of the gaming situation.

WINE/Dual Booting/Virtualization are all going to change things in the next couple of months however. I feel sorry for Aspyr.

[smoke-tetsu]

Originally Posted by EFFENDI

My sentiments exactly, except I would substitute a console for a PC. I personally see a dim future for the PC world, I mean, Vista's only advantage to them would be that its a OS X clone that just happens to support PC games.

Maybe you're seeing a dim future for PC gaming because you want to see it. There are a lot of games coming out now and in the future for the PC. A lot more games than for the mac. It's not going anywhere regardless of whether or not vista is coming out. In fact I see it picking up more than going away. Mac gaming on the other hand's future is a lot more uncertain but I'm sure that it might pick up now that it is switching to intel. Everytime a new wave of gaming consoles comes out people always predict the death of PC gaming and it never happens.

Have you considered asking yourself why you need to convince them to switch to anything other than what they want anyway? Why can't you just let them make decisions for themselves? Although giving advice is ok I personally wouldn't push it trying to "convince" them if they resist. Are you getting kick backs from Apple or something?

[smoke-tetsu]

Originally Posted by 11011001

And how long did we have to wait for those games?

There are many games that I would like to play that will never come out for Mac, and there are many that I would like to play at the same time that my friends are. I could only ever justify purchasing a Mac if I was buying for it's quality, usability and in my case, the APIs. I'm a diehard Mac fan, but I realize the reality of the gaming situation.

WINE/Dual Booting/Virtualization are all going to change things in the next couple of months however. I feel sorry for Aspyr.

WINE is hardly a solution for running PC games especially not in the next couple of months even if it gets opengl support, neither is virtualization if you look at the speed and what type of hardware it emulates. Dual booting would work if people could actually get it to work. But either way I don't see that killing the need for native games for those who want to play them. It's way too early to start feeling sorry for aspyr. It's so easy to say that if you can dual boot everyone will and then they won't want mac native games but that's not really so true.

[silverbullet]

If they are dead set on getting a PC (and not a mac or Xbox360/PS2/3) Then I would do all I can to convince them NOT TO BUY AN E-MACHINES!

They are cheap, break down all the time, generally the hardware sucks and is not made for gaming and even with the right hardware they are better off buying a better PC than a emachines.

[EFFENDI]

Originally Posted by silverbullet

If they are dead set on getting a PC (and not a mac or Xbox360/PS2/3) Then I would do all I can to convince them NOT TO BUY AN E-MACHINES!

They are cheap, break down all the time, generally the hardware sucks and is not made for gaming and even with the right hardware they are better off buying a better PC than a emachines.

Exactly. I would be less inclined to influence them to buy a Mac, were they purchasing a better PC. I've heard nothing but horror stories about eMachines.

Originally Posted by smoke-tetsu

Have you considered asking yourself why you need to convince them to switch to anything other than what they want anyway? Why can't you just let them make decisions for themselves? Although giving advice is ok I personally wouldn't push it trying to "convince" them if they resist. Are you getting kick backs from Apple or something?

As you have insinuated, I do not control their lives or their decisions, for the sake of security, ease-of-use, reliability of hardware/software, integration and other numerous advantages, I have tried my best to convince them to get a Mac. Notice (the title of the thread) this discussion is about convincing, not controlling....I can't win them all, nor do I intend to. I figured I would try and find some answers here, since I knew very little about Mac gaming. I found the help I needed, and have since moved on with life. I suggest the rest of you (you know who you are) do so as well, instead of trying to scrounge up some drama out of a dead conversation.

[EFFENDI]

Originally Posted by smoke-tetsu

Maybe you're seeing a dim future for PC gaming because you want to see it. There are a lot of games coming out now and in the future for the PC. A lot more games than for the mac. It's not going anywhere regardless of whether or not vista is coming out. In fact I see it picking up more than going away. Mac gaming on the other hand's future is a lot more uncertain but I'm sure that it might pick up now that it is switching to intel. Everytime a new wave of gaming consoles comes out people always predict the death of PC gaming and it never happens.

You are right, it hasn't happened yet, nor will PC gaming ever become completely extinct. The reason I see a dim future is because consoles are basically becoming PCs, as they increase in performance, they increase in finctionality. The Xbox360 is a perfect example. Most of the popular games that are released for PC are ported to the Xbox. The Xbox has downloadable content, mods, characters, demos, etc. Traditional console gaming and PC gaming is slowly converging into one central device. I see a dim future because PCs do the same thing for more money than a typical console, and the experience is so close to the same on each platform (if not better on a console).

As a sidenote, I mentioned Vista. With Vista coming into the equation, maybe I am questioning why people will want to upgrade to an operating system that is so much like OS X, when it has been available for almost 5 years. Has anyone seen the "Real Windows Vista" videos? I feel like for gamers, if XP ain't broke (which it most certainly is), why fix it?

So, as most have pointed out, the ONE thing that seems to be missing on the Mac is gaming. With the market share slowly rising, I am positive that gaming on the Mac will also slowly rise. Personally, I could care less. I am not a gamer. But at the same time, who I am I to say what computers should and shouldn't be used for. I just think that consoles provide a better experience, if gaming is what you want to really do. That's my opinion, and I am certainly entitled to it. As you are yours.

[Tomchu]

Originally Posted by silverbullet

If they are dead set on getting a PC (and not a mac or Xbox360/PS2/3) Then I would do all I can to convince them NOT TO BUY AN E-MACHINES!

They are cheap, break down all the time, generally the hardware sucks and is not made for gaming and even with the right hardware they are better off buying a better PC than a emachines.

I don't know about their desktops, but their laptops are top-notch. I have an eMachines laptop that I got 2-3 years ago, and it's still running completely solid. It was a great deal for its time, and was pretty powerful, but decently thin. They eventually came out with an Athlon 64-based series that was available for a steal -- a lot of companies didn't like that. Gateway eventually bought eMachines' laptop business.

[goMac]

They're very foolish if they are buying an E-Machine for games.

[frylock]

...

[webb3201]

If the user is a major PC gamer who uses the computer rarely beyond the basics of computing, don't try and switch them. Gaming is the one area that PCs are still superior (performance , availability, etc).

If they are a power user of the system, and like gaming as a secondary part of the picture, then by all means move the over the macs.

As much as we love our macs, we need to understand that each system has strengths and weaknesses. If they are hardcore gamers, they will not be happy on Mac.

[Brad Oliver]

Originally Posted by PBG4 User

Just another "If they want to game, PC > Mac" post. That's just the way it is, and probably will be unless DirectX somehow makes it into OS X. Even if DX made it into OS X, there's still a 6 month to a year lag between PC release and Mac release of almost every game.

DirectX on the Mac would have very little impact. Most games are ported with DirectX libraries - and it's been this way since I started doing ports back in 1999. DirectX is not a major hurdle - licensing the games and paying money to the original publishers is.

[©öñFü$íóÑ]

man... i remember when the majority of mac games available were limited to shareware titles.....

I visited my friend's place and marveled at how many first-person-shooters he had on his Packard Bell (windows pc) (hahaha.... bet you haven't heard that PC brand in a long time ) Not to mention WELL-KNOWN companies like Capcom were porting their arcade-level games like "Street Fighter Alpha 1 & 2", Mega Man X, and even Puzzle Fighter for the PC..... man, i was so jealous.

Even to this day, you'd still stop to ask why another well-known video game maker, Konami, makes their "Dance Dance Revolution" game available for PC and not for the Mac. :'( Come on Mac users...... DANCE! Oh, and even their Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles games.... I spent so many quarters on it in the arcades.... and like how many years later, they make new versions of that game with killer graphics and tons of replay value and added bonuses..... available for mac? no!! ='(


*sigh*.... but at least we had Bungie's Marathon Trilogy and Myth to keep us occupied..... and halo.... and doom 3..... and prince of persia....

BAH! LONG LIVE OPENSOURCE!!! >=')

[DekuDekuplex]

Originally Posted by EFFENDI

[comments deleted]But here is the dilemma, they are dead set on getting one of these cheap eMachines® PCs for gaming.

Getting an eMachines® PC for gaming is just silly. That's like getting a Dell™ for multimedia, or going to McDonald's® for gourmet dining.

I'm a hardcore gamer who also happens to be a games discussion moderator on MetroMac Alliance, a Manhattan-based Macintosh User Group.

If they want a PC for gaming, they're definitely not "casual" gamers, and they'll be wasting their money if they go with eMachines®. They should go all the way and go with either an Alienware® PC or a Sony® VAIO®. They'll be spending more money, but at least they'll get a PC specifically designed for gaming. Along the way, I'd also recommend their getting a PS3® and an XBOX 360™.

Personally, I sincerely hope that the Mac gaming experience will improve with the release of Intel®-based Macs, but I wouldn't count on it. (I even wrote an article, "Why Apple Can't Afford to Ignore the Gaming Industry," to try to convince Apple to promote more Mac gaming, but it wasn't very effective.) Most of the current problems are DirectX®-related, not processor-related, and the only viable solution would seem to be to run a faster Windows® emulator on the Mac, but that just brings the buggy Windows® and blue-screen-of-death problems to the Mac world. Unless some rich company is willing to become a pioneer and sacrifice wealth for fame in bringing something similar to EverQuest® II or Final Fantasy® XI Online to the Mac, the situation is unlikely to improve very soon.

Along the way, if they do wind up becoming Switcher™s, you might want to convince them to try out the original EverQuest® Macintosh Edition on the Mac. While many people dismiss this title as too outdated, Sony® Online Entertainment has recently updated the download process so that the trial version can be installed without contacting SOE for a registration key, and all that's required now is a valid credit card number (which isn't charged until after 15 days). I've been playing it since this February 10, and found it amazingly deep, immersive, and addictive once I discovered where all the players were gathered--they just weren't sitting around at the starting points, but gathered together at the Plane of Knowledge (which took a while to find) or the Bazaar, and chatting on the "alliance" channel (join by typing "/join alliance" [check the in-game help for a way to re-join at every login session], and post by typing "/1 <text>," in-game after login). Reportedly, Final Fantasy® XI Online was based on EverQuest®. Some players posting at the EQmac.com even prefer it to EverQuest® II! I'm quite satisfied with the original EverQuest®, and have no plans of switching to World of Warcraft®.

-- DekuDekuplex

[Brad Oliver]

Originally Posted by DekuDekuplex

Most of the current problems are DirectX®-related, not processor-related...

What makes you say that?

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by Brad Oliver

What makes you say that?

The fact that it's true? Few games are written largely in assembly. But they are written for Windows' DirectX API.

[Rumor]

Best bet for true gaming would be a console. I have an xBox with Live that I use for my "real" gaming. It also depends on what computer games you are interested in. At the moment, all the game I am really interested in are already on Macs i.e. WC3, D2, WoW and NWN. That's plenty of games to keep me happy for quite some time.

[DrBoar]

I have had a mac since 92 (hellcats and wolfenstein) and recently got a low end PC for games. For the price of a Mac ATI 9800 ia got a good PC and a Nvidia 6600. Way more games for the PC and games aviable for the Mac that still are full price are often budget priced now AvP 2 and such.

Having a PC and getting a Mac for gaming is insane unless obsessed with Marathon

I still trust my mac for everyhing important but, gaming on a 1.2 GHz G4 with ATI 8500 becomes more and more limitet. COD2 is out of bounds and many more games will be that to...

[torifile]

I guess this thread deserves a bump since bootcamp makes gaming on the Mac a reality. At this point, I'd say convince away!

[Horsepoo!!!]

Originally Posted by torifile

I guess this thread deserves a bump since bootcamp makes gaming on the Mac a reality. At this point, I'd say convince away!

I'd say points 1, 2 and 3 have been thoroughly shot down now*.

* in certain cases

Some Macs cost *less* (look no further than the Mac mini when compared to competing SSFF out there).

Mac mini and iMac CD can have CPU upgrades. It's entirely possible this was just an interim thing and that the MacBook Pro is a sign that the CPU will be soldered from now on...but if it isn't, the PowerMac replacements are probably going to have socketable CPU and of course upgradeable video cards.

Some Macs can now play all games.

And in some cases Macs are *faster* than PCs with very similar specs (so say the MacBook Pro benchmarks when compared to the competition.)

[EFFENDI]

Well, there certainly have been some interesting developments since the original post - and the litle brothers went out and built their own gaming rig. At the very least I told them to build it themselves with some decent equipment; Athlon 64 X2, 6800 GT, etc. However, they have grown increasingly disappointed due to the increasing costs of owning a PC.

My Mac Mini is being delivered today - they will certainly be watching over my shoulder as I show them what Macs are truly capable of.

[zmcgill]

Originally Posted by EFFENDI

Well, there certainly have been some interesting developments since the original post - and the litle brothers went out and built their own gaming rig. At the very least I told them to build it themselves with some decent equipment; Athlon 64 X2, 6800 GT, etc. However, they have grown increasingly disappointed due to the increasing costs of owning a PC.

My Mac Mini is being delivered today - they will certainly be watching over my shoulder as I show them what Macs are truly capable of.

Intel Mac Mini? Please don't show them any games. You will turn them away forever. Intel integrated graphics blow. Anyone planning to play games should not go for the new Mini.

[EFFENDI]

Originally Posted by Gossamer

Intel Mac Mini? Please don't show them any games. You will turn them away forever. Intel integrated graphics blow. Anyone planning to play games should not go for the new Mini.

First of all, I do not play games - specifically why I purchased the Mini and not an iMac. However, it still can play games.

Have you looked at the benchmarks?? Most games are at the very least acheiving around 25-30fps. Which is certainly playable performance. On their PC they aren't doing much better than that.

The real goal here was showing them what Macs are truly capable of. As I've discovered, getting them to switch is a whole other challenge.

[Tomchu]

I guess you have a misconception of what a "gaming" PC is. Hell, even a GeForce FX 5200 beats Intel integrated graphics.

[Tuoder]

Originally Posted by Tomchu

I guess you have a misconception of what a "gaming" PC is. Hell, even a GeForce FX 5200 beats Intel integrated graphics.

I can draw faster than Intel integrated graphics.

[EFFENDI]

Originally Posted by Tomchu

I guess you have a misconception of what a "gaming" PC is. Hell, even a GeForce FX 5200 beats Intel integrated graphics.

Yeah, that must be it.....

[scauntay]

i love my mac, but for gamming i would rather just use my pc, just cause they have more games on it and they are a bit cheaper than a mac.

[Tomchu]

Originally Posted by Tuoder

I can draw faster than Intel integrated graphics.

That is *quality*. I'm putting that in my "awesome quotes" collection. :-)

[torifile]

Originally Posted by scauntay

i love my mac, but for gamming i would rather just use my pc, just cause they have more games on it and they are a bit cheaper than a mac.

In case you missed it, you can now play PC games on your Mac. I'd rather have one computer to play games and do work than have a Mac and a PC. I just got done with a marathon session of BF2 on my Mac. It was great.

Now time to boot back into OS X so that I can actually be a little productive.

[turbopants]

While boot camp makes pc gaming much more convenient for the casual mac and pc gamer, I don't see a mass exodus of pc gamers switching anytime soon, especially with the most affordable Mac, the Mini, have integrated Intel graphics chips. Maybe someday.

[zmcgill]

So it's likely we'll see the end of porting games to Mac. It will save developers a lot of money and the ports are almost always slower on the Mac side.

[breakbeat46]

However, bringing a macbook pro to a LAN would be the coolest sh*t ever.

[scauntay]

is playing pc games only on the MacBook with bootcamp? and is bootcamp only for macbooks or can it be used on PBs too?

[EFFENDI]

BootCamp is software that enables x86 operating systems to be installed on Intel-powered Macs. It is not compatible with the PowerBook, unfortunately.

[Tuoder]

Originally Posted by turbopants

While boot camp makes pc gaming much more convenient for the casual mac and pc gamer, I don't see a mass exodus of pc gamers switching anytime soon, especially with the most affordable Mac, the Mini, have integrated Intel graphics chips. Maybe someday.

It is not that conveinient. I don't think that most people, even gamers will ever bother with boot camp. Maybe when it is out of beta more people will use it, but even then, not that many. I don't see this cannibalising Mac game sales. If Apple sold dual-booting systems from the factory, maybe there would be a problem.

[FurionStormrage]

Originally Posted by Tuoder

It is not that conveinient. I don't think that most people, even gamers will ever bother with boot camp. Maybe when it is out of beta more people will use it, but even then, not that many. I don't see this cannibalising Mac game sales. If Apple sold dual-booting systems from the factory, maybe there would be a problem.

You mean like being integrated into Leopard (OS X 10.5), which it will be?

[Chuckit]

Right, the famous leaker FurionStormrage. How could we doubt it when he says Windows will be part of 10.5?