[rslifka]

I lived PCs and PC gaming for 10+ years, prior to January when I sold my laptop and bought this iMac G5 (which I love). I knew going into this that the Mac wasn't a gaming platform, but I didn't know it was *this* bad. Call of Duty? Halo? Neverwinter Nights? Homeworld 2? Damn, I mean, it's 2003 calling and they want their games back.

Is there some treasure trove I'm yet to unearth? GoGamer has DOOM 3 as their *only* coming soon game. Unless playing it on the Mac makes it not get boring after an hour, I think I'll pass on that too.



Rob

[Captain Egotist]

Hence the problem. You are a consumer, you bought a CONSUMER mac, and it can't play any modern games.

Apple = Retarded.

If your imac had an upgradeable graphics card, you could play the modern games, and people would actually MAKE mac games since there would actually be a market for them.

- Rob

[rslifka]

So you're saying I better develop a taste for the classics?

How many times can I replay NWN?

[sigh]

Rob

[Arkham_c]

Just get World of Warcraft (Warcrack). It's the only game I have played in 9 months.

[Rev-O]

There are obviously no where near the number of Mac games as there are PC games, but for the most part, I can live with it. I don't get to game on my computer nearly as much as I would like, so I don't burn through games in a hurry, but there always seems to be an exciting prospect available or just around the corner. Right now, I'm playing Rise of Nations, which is a hoot. When I tire of it, I'll pick up Doom 3. Plus First to Fight should be out soon, as well as X2: The Threat. Star Wars: Battlefront, Myst V, Stubbs the Zombie are out there lurking. And Mac gamers can keep their fingers crossed for a Neverwinter Nights 2 and Knights of the Old Republic 2 port (Both of which should be extremely easy ports). There always seems to be something to occupy my time.

The one game that won't see a Mac that is going to kill me, is Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion.

[Madison]

There are nowhere near as many games for the Mac as for the PC, that's true, however...have you ever gone into a store and looked at the selection of games for the PC? For every very good game, there are 5 that are complete garbage. How many F-22 flight sims does one platform need? Honestly, aside from the games going to the PC first, at least we have good quality games to pick from. If you are a lunatic gamer, then you should be gaming on a console anyway...

Tom

[- - e r i k - -]

World of Warcraft on the mac. Grand Theft Auto: SA on the PS2. How many games do you have time for really?

[rslifka]

If I'm playing World of Warcraft, I won't even have enough time for that I stay away from MMORPGs because I found they substituted for real life things to do. Instead of having a bunch of things I wanted to do in RL, I had a to do list for WoW. Hell of a good time, but after my trial expired, I stopped playing.

I very much agree with the sentiments of everyone else - very, very few games are worth playing on any platform (xbox, ps2, pc). It just stings when the few that are, aren't available on the Mac

Anyway... once the Xbox 360 comes out this fall/winter, I won't even be thinking about gaming on the 'puter. I'm just hoping for a few things to do in the meantime.

Rob

[- - e r i k - -]

Do develop a taste for the classics

Try games like EV:Nova, Warcraft III+FT, Call of Duty, Deus Ex, Civilization II etc.

[rslifka]

I never got around to conquering BG2 on the PC, something I've always regretted. I wish there was more of a used market for mac games on ebay (no copies of BG2 available)...

Rob

[Caesar2099]

I remember when mac gaming was starting to look decent, I mean call of duty had just come out we had all the hits...ish...

This is why I moved to Xbox. Trust me, almost all of the hit pc games come out for the xbox, it's got amazing graphics and it's cheeper then buying a brand new top of the line pc.
I actually got xbox to play halo 2, which after a few months of playing I came to this conclussion: Halo 2 is booooring. There are maybe 3 maps and they all suck. They some how found away to make blood gulch boring as hell, Blood Gulch for christs sake!.

Today I just played the Unreal Championship 2 demo, and I gotta tell ya, this demo alone is better then all of halo 2.

[rslifka]

Originally posted by Caesar2099:
I remember when mac gaming was starting to look decent, I mean call of duty had just come out we had all the hits...ish...

This is why I moved to Xbox. Trust me, almost all of the hit pc games come out for the xbox, it's got amazing graphics and it's cheeper then buying a brand new top of the line pc.
I actually got xbox to play halo 2, which after a few months of playing I came to this conclussion: Halo 2 is booooring. There are maybe 3 maps and they all suck. They some how found away to make blood gulch boring as hell, Blood Gulch for christs sake!.

Today I just played the Unreal Championship 2 demo, and I gotta tell ya, this demo alone is better then all of halo 2.

I'll check it out, thanks!

Stranegly enough, I beat Halo 2 co-op just last night with a friend of mine. Just like Halo, the last 25% of the game is running and jumping over everything. Short, terrible plot, crappy maps (I really didn't like the Covenant city) and strange volume choices - I couldn't understand a decent portion of those strange deep voices and there were some times the music completely drowned out the voices.

Rob

[goMac]

The biggest problem for Mac gaming right now is the Havoc engine. Havoc is the physics engine behind many games such as Half Life 2, Deus Ex 2, Myst Uru, etc. Basically every major PC game released in 2004. There is no reason Havoc can't be ported to Mac, aside from that the developer of Havoc wants an ungodly sum of money to do it. So any game released using Havoc cannot be ported to Mac. This is why Mac gaming is stuck in 2003. However, all the game developers that care about the Mac have started ditching Havoc. Myst 5 is built on the Uru engine, yet Cyan has announced they ditched Havoc for all future projects. Havoc promised them a Mac port for Uru, and then pulled the promise at the last minute, so Cyan isn't exactly happy with them.

On a bad note, a lot of upcoming games still use Havoc, including Age of Empires 3. I hope the Mac gaming companies get together and all pitch in to pay the gobs of money needed to get the engine ported.

[Cadaver]

Hopefully fewer big-name titles will use platform-specific engines and stick to more cross-platform (read: Mac) friendly game engines like Doom 3's engine, UT2K4's engine, etc.

However, if you're really a hard-core gamer, then perhaps you'll want to hang on to your PC for entertainment while using your Mac for everything else. I'll be the first to admit I have a functional PC on which I can play Half Life 2 (AthlonXP 2600+, 1GB RAM, Radeon 9800 Pro). I actually don't really play that many games, just fool around for an hour or two maybe once a week, and will only buy a title for the PC when there is no hope of a Mac port; otherwise, I tend to wait for the Mac version (like Doom 3).

[goMac]

Originally posted by Cadaver:
Hopefully fewer big-name titles will use platform-specific engines and stick to more cross-platform (read: Mac) friendly game engines like Doom 3's engine, UT2K4's engine, etc.

The problem is even then companies may tie in the Havoc engine into those games. Doom 3 has a physics engine, but its no where near as good as Havoc.

[exca1ibur]

Originally posted by goMac:
The problem is even then companies may tie in the Havoc engine into those games. Doom 3 has a physics engine, but its no where near as good as Havoc.

Being the Doom3 engine, EXISTS on the Mac I dont think how good the Havok engine is, matters much.

The main issue with Mac gaming is the issue of everyone blaming each other instead of addressing the damn problem. The marketshare is small... Okay fine, yet Blizzard has been doing cross-platform as well as ID for years and find it viable. Sure you can argue that they are bigger houses that can support it, yet this is why we have port housees like Aspyr to cut the developement cost and allow these companies to create a Mac presense with no Mac team on board. Why is this? Political, Personal... who gives a sh*t. There have been some lame excuses from developers and Apple about a lot of things. As a consumer I could care less, as a consumer all we care about is that the issues are ADDRESSES. To me it seems more an issue with the PC developers than anyone, but like I said... Issues need to be addressed and not pointing fingers on who's fault it is. If we want the marketshare to increase and more games to come, someone is gonna have to step up and shut up, not sit back pointing fingers on who's fault it is and bitching about marketshare. Even a market of 5 million or so OSX users is a lot of money for just a port license of a PC developer who wouldn't have to write a line of Mac code.

[goMac]

Originally posted by exca1ibur:
Being the Doom3 engine, EXISTS on the Mac I dont think how good the Havok engine is, matters much.

Sure it does. If a game uses Doom 3 engine for graphics and Havoc for physics, its unportable to Mac. All the major games I have seen so far for PC have used Havoc. Halo 2 also uses Havoc, meaning if a computer version comes, it may not come to Mac.

Half Life 2 is double not portable to Mac. Valve, iirc, has stated they want a million dollars for a license to port Half Life 2 to any platform. Once you port Half Life 2's engine, you still have to port the Havoc's physics engine it is based on, which is again, a large sum of money.

[exca1ibur]

Originally posted by goMac:
Sure it does. If a game uses Doom 3 engine for graphics and Havoc for physics, its unportable to Mac. All the major games I have seen so far for PC have used Havoc. Halo 2 also uses Havoc, meaning if a computer version comes, it may not come to Mac.

Half Life 2 is double not portable to Mac. Valve, iirc, has stated they want a million dollars for a license to port Half Life 2 to any platform. Once you port Half Life 2's engine, you still have to port the Havoc's physics engine it is based on, which is again, a large sum of money.

But, my point was its not on the Mac. I agree the Havok physics as better, but it isn't an option on the Mac, so... it doesn't matter for a Mac user.

[exca1ibur]

DP - oops

[redJag]

Originally posted by exca1ibur:
Blizzard has been doing cross-platform as well as ID for years and find it viable. Sure you can argue that they are bigger houses that can support it

Just a quick comment here, but Blizzard supported the Mac platform even for WarCraft : Orcs and Humans. At that time they were but a few people.

[Leonard]

You've listed some of the older games - especially Halo.

Newer ones are UT2004, Star Wars Battlefront, Command & Conquer: Zero Hour, Postal 2, Spiderman 2, ... I'm sure there are others.

Of course there is usually a 6 month delay between when they appear on the PC and when they appear on the Mac, ecept for maybe Blizzard's games. Sometimes the delay is a bit longer for those less popular titles.

Then again, you're comin' from the PC so you'll probably be board for the next 6-9 months or so.

[goMac]

Originally posted by exca1ibur:
But, my point was its not on the Mac. I agree the Havok physics as better, but it isn't an option on the Mac, so... it doesn't matter for a Mac user.

Yeah, but it still means games using Havoc will never come to Mac. Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you're saying, but you can't simply use the Doom 3 physics engine instead. It would break multiplayer, and probably break most of the elements in the game. You'd end up shipping a different game.

Here is a short list of games which cannot come to Mac because they use Havoc:

Auto Assault
Half-Life 2
F.E.A.R.
Ghost Recon 2
Lord of the Rings: Middle Earth Online
Medal of Honor Pacific Assault
Pariah
Torque: Savage Roads
Tribes: Vengeance
Full Spectrum Warrior
Thief: Deadly Shadows
Painkiller
Armed and Dangerous
Deus Ex, Invisible War
URU: Ages Beyond Myst
Max Payne 2

This list is no where near up to date. Havoc is a huge problem for Mac gaming.

[exca1ibur]

goMac, I think we are missing something. I too am saying that Havok will never make it to the Mac causing a void in games as mentioned in your list. Not sure where the confusion came in.

Just a quick comment here, but Blizzard supported the Mac platform even for WarCraft : Orcs and Humans. At that time they were but a few people.

I have bought ALL Blizzard games, starting with that one. That proves my point to the letter, that there is a market. If they take action, and not sit back complaining about it like some of the developers out there are doing. Help grow the market. We hear enough bitching and complaining from them. Famous quote from Field of Dreams... If you build it they will come.

[Captain Egotist]

The reason the 'market' is so shitty is that anybody who wants to play a game decently has to buy a PC. Why? The ONLY macs that are anywhere NEAR acceptable at gaming are the ultra expensive professional line.

What needs to happen?

Apple needs a consumer model with a CHEAP processor, modest hard drive, screen etc, and either an UPGRADABLE GRAPHICS CARD, or a graphics slot.

Once that happens, there will be a HUGE market for mac gaming.

- Ca$h

[exca1ibur]

What also needs to happen is someone also needs to step up and offer more video cards besides Apple and ATi. nVidia is a chipset and vendors license and make cards. I would have figured by this time some third party would come along and make 3rd party nVidia cards. More cards in the market would push Apple to include better ones stock. Not to mention over the last year or two there has been no mid range card. Excuses is the problem with the 'market', we need solutions not a list of 'shoulda, coulda, woulda'. Someone needs to step up, whether it is Apple, a third party, or a developer. I could care less. Not all games need a G5 that are out that can be ported. So thats not the total issue, but a part no doubt.

[rslifka]

I think it's pretty simple really. Apple is still hanging out at like what, 2% of home PCs? If the cost to develop for this platform exceed revenue estimates, then not much gets developed.

With a lot of titles buggy, incomplete (i.e. patchware) and late on *one* platform, I can't imagine anyone but the largest shops targeting this platform.

Rob

[exca1ibur]

And if people dont take action it will stay that way. I look at it in terms of numbers not percentage. 5 million or so users isn't that small to bitch at. If it was we'd have 0 developers. Blizzard doesn't see it that way, ID doesn't as well. The excuses have to stop and action has to happen. Like I said, if the developer doesn't want to take the risk, this is why we have port houses like Aspyr. License the game out then this marketshare thing everyone is so damn caught up on holds a smaller value. That becomes the issue of the port house on which projects to take on.

[Goldfinger]

Listen to Ca$h, he's right. We need a Cube/Mac mini hybrid machine.

[Captain Egotist]

Originally posted by Goldfinger:
Listen to Ca$h, he's right. We need a Cube/Mac mini hybrid machine.

How about this?

Mac Mini uses a laptop harddrive, optical drive, and I'm assuming, ram. Those are all $$$.

Make another mac using ... heck, it doesn't have to be all that small, the old MDD G4 motherboard. Put a g4 in it, from 1.24-1.42ghz just like the mini. Same chip. Use a REGULAR hard drive (CHEAPER), regular optical drive (CHEAPER) and viola: You can now sell it for MUCH LESS than the mini, and it'd have a graphics slot.

[freakboy2]

if CS had even gotten to the Mac I know about 50 people who never would have gotten PCs..

even now.. i need to have a PC to play CS now and then. can't do it on a mac.

recently i've been playing civ3 which runs great on my cube.

[spacefreak]

I've often wondered if it would be possible to make an external (firewire?) graphics accelerator-type thingie that would enhance the Mac gaming experience.

It may be completely impossible to create such a contraption... I don't know.

[Captain Egotist]

Originally posted by spacefreak:
I've often wondered if it would be possible to make an external (firewire?) graphics accelerator-type thingie that would enhance the Mac gaming experience.

It may be completely impossible to create such a contraption... I don't know.

I asked the same question back when I was into modding my 1st gen imac in 1999-2000. Firewire doesnt' have anywhere NEAR the bandwidth required for 3d graphics card use. Sorry.

- Rob

[exca1ibur]

PCI 66MHz - 127 MB/s
PCI 133MHz - 508.6 MB/sec

AGP 1x - 266MB/sec
AGP 2x - 533MB/sec
AGP 4x - 1066MB/sec
AGP 8x - 2133MB/sec

PCI Express 1x - 250 [500]* MB/s
PCI Express 2x - 500 [1000]* MB/s
PCI Express 4x - 1000 [2000]* MB/s
PCI Express 8x - 2000 [4000]* MB/s
PCI Express 16x - 4000 [8000]* MB/s
PCI Express 32x - 8000 [16000]* MB/s

Firewire 400 - ~100MB/sec
Firewire 800 - ~200MB/sec

[UPDATED]
* If bi-directional data is sent.

[discotronic]

Originally posted by exca1ibur:
AGP 2x - 533MB/sec
AGP 4x - 1066MB/sec
AGP 8x - 2133MB/sec

PCI Express 1x - 250 [500]* MB/s
PCI Express 2x - 500 [1000]* MB/s
PCI Express 4x - 1000 [2000]* MB/s
PCI Express 8x - 2000 [4000]* MB/s
PCI Express 16x -4000 [8000]* MB/s
PCI Express 32x - 8000 [16000]* MB/s

Firewire 400 - ~100MB/sec
Firewire 800 - ~200MB/sec

* If bi-directional data is sent.

Thanks for the stats. What about regular PCI?

[exca1ibur]

Updated for you there.

[omar96]

Originally posted by exca1ibur:
What also needs to happen is someone also needs to step up and offer more video cards besides Apple and ATi.

Dunno if you've looked at the PC landscape recently, but all non-ATi/nV offerings are awful...Xaber? BZZZZT! Delta Chrome? BZZZZZT! Kyro? Hasn't been updated in years. I wouldn't give my mom any of those cards...in fact, I didn't; I gave her a Radeon 7500 in her PC.

[discotronic]

Originally posted by exca1ibur:
Updated for you there.

Thanks

[wuzup101]

If you're a gamer, not even a really hardcore one, you probably have a pc around. Now believe me, I use my powerbook for everything that invloves me being productive. But when I play games, I like them to run well. I do have a usable PC that I pretty much only use to play games. PCs are a pain in the arse... but they do serve a purpose when it comes to gaming. I definitely agree, if all games were just as playable on a mac as they were on a PC, I'd definitely have just the mac. However, when a sub $1000 home built PC can spank a Dual 2.5 G5 in any game on the market, one has to consider what is in their best option.

[exca1ibur]

Originally posted by omar96:
Dunno if you've looked at the PC landscape recently, but all non-ATi/nV offerings are awful...Xaber? BZZZZT! Delta Chrome? BZZZZZT! Kyro? Hasn't been updated in years. I wouldn't give my mom any of those cards...in fact, I didn't; I gave her a Radeon 7500 in her PC.

nVidia makes chipsets not the actual video cards. Who says it has to be these guys? Remember when Formac used to make cards? Can be a new company that sells video cards, can be an established company expanding into video cards. The point is options. We have 2. Both are on the 500 and up club. For $500 you can get a PS2 AND an XBox and games for both. My point is we need that middle market back. There should be some solid cards in that $150 range.

[demograph68]

Originally posted by Captain Egotist:
How about this?

Mac Mini uses a laptop harddrive, optical drive, and I'm assuming, ram. Those are all $$$.

Make another mac using ... heck, it doesn't have to be all that small, the old MDD G4 motherboard. Put a g4 in it, from 1.24-1.42ghz just like the mini. Same chip. Use a REGULAR hard drive (CHEAPER), regular optical drive (CHEAPER) and viola: You can now sell it for MUCH LESS than the mini, and it'd have a graphics slot.

Would a 1.4 Ghz processor be adequate for todays games? I doubt it. Even the G5 isn't as good compared to Intel/AMD. For games, nothing can beat a PC.

[Captain Egotist]

Originally posted by exca1ibur:
There should be some solid cards in that $150 range.

Geforce 4 titanium.

It can be overclocked also.

- Rob

[wuzup101]

It's not only the hardware. The games arent' designed to run on osx. And, while the ports are usually pretty decent, they aren't as efficient as the native game on a PC. That being said I've just started playing world of warcraft, and I have to go so I can get my 16hrs in today Awesome game that runs smooth as butter on my powerbook Great job Blizzard!

[exca1ibur]

Originally posted by Captain Egotist:
Geforce 4 titanium.

It can be overclocked also.

- Rob

I'm more referring to present generation, not last generation nor (discontinued/close-outs) True now you can get GF 4Ti for nothing if you can find them. Plus normal users shouldn't have to risk overclocking. Us tech nuts might be into doing that, but for the average user thats not an option and shouldn't have to be.

Example....

GeForce FX 5600
GeForce 6600GT
GeForce 6800 (Not GT or Ultra)
GeForce 6000
GeForce FX 5500
GeForce FX 6600
GeForce FX 6200
GeForce FX 5700

These are just a few I've found. Sure some are PCI-Express, but if there was a Mac card maker they can be moved to AGP, I'd think. But the main point it to have a range of cards in that mid range (This generation) That are in that voided ($150) range. I remember when ATi was in that market a lot time ago, before nVidia was even in the market.

I agree with wuzup101 there. All games are designed for Windows first with all their optimizations. They can't be carried over to OSX so naturally the optimization cant be there unless it was being co developed from the start with portable code at the low level. Only game that really has happened with was Quake3. It was fully optimized for both Windows and OSX, and it showed. Doom3 is more for Windows, then handed off to Aspyr instead of being done in house like Quake3 was. I was surprised Doom3 ran as well as it did, I expected lower numbers to be honest.

[robco]

Doom 3 also runs more slowly under Linux compared to Windows - on the same hardware. It's likely a combination of software (different compilers, better video drivers) and hardware issues.

[rslifka]

Originally posted by exca1ibur:
And if people dont take action it will stay that way. I look at it in terms of numbers not percentage. 5 million or so users isn't that small to bitch at. If it was we'd have 0 developers. Blizzard doesn't see it that way, ID doesn't as well. The excuses have to stop and action has to happen. Like I said, if the developer doesn't want to take the risk, this is why we have port houses like Aspyr. License the game out then this marketshare thing everyone is so damn caught up on holds a smaller value. That becomes the issue of the port house on which projects to take on.

Dude, it's not an excuse, it's *business*. ID and Blizzard don't exist to bring gaming to the masses in some sort of do-right-by-humanity-mandate, they exist to make a profit. That comes as a bit of a shock to most gamers.

In one sentence you say it shouldn't be a numbers game, but then you cite two insanely successful companies as examples; ones that can easily afford the porting expenses. Diablo II is still so damn successful (having appeared in the top 10 a few times last year with the release of 1.10) Blizzard could probably not release another game for years! And they probably won't, knowing them

Your mistake is one frequently made. Just because 5 million Macs are out there doesn't mean every single one is a possible purchase. Even with the hundreds of millions of PCs out there, the grand, grand majority of titles don't move anywhere near less than a percentage point of that.

Rob

[exca1ibur]

Dude, it's not an excuse, it's *business*. ID and Blizzard don't exist to bring gaming to the masses in some sort of do-right-by-humanity-mandate, they exist to make a profit. That comes as a bit of a shock to most gamers.

In one sentence you say it shouldn't be a numbers game, but then you cite two insanely successful companies as examples; ones that can easily afford the porting expenses. Diablo II is still so damn successful (having appeared in the top 10 a few times last year with the release of 1.10) Blizzard could probably not release another game for years! And they probably won't, knowing them

Your mistake is one frequently made. Just because 5 million Macs are out there doesn't mean every single one is a possible purchase. Even with the hundreds of millions of PCs out there, the grand, grand majority of titles don't move anywhere near less than a percentage point of that.

This proves my point, of what I am saying. They put the effort in and it pays off. A half ass port is not gonna sell copies, bottom line. If the time and effort is put in you have a better chance to sell your product. THAT is business, good business, at that in a compeditive market.

I didn't say just because there is 5 million it would be a 100% sale. I said that is a good chunk to market to. Nothing more. My whole point, you are missing, is you make a quality game and get it done right it will sell. Not sit there barking over who's fault it is for not working up to par. I don't care who's fault it is. Address the problem and fix it, don't sit there bitching and pointing fingers about it.

[rslifka]

Originally posted by exca1ibur:
This proves my point, of what I am saying. They put the effort in and it pays off. A half ass port is not gonna sell copies, bottom line. If the time and effort is put in you have a better chance to sell your product. THAT is business, good business, at that in a compeditive market.

I didn't say just because there is 5 million it would be a 100% sale. I said that is a good chunk to market to. Nothing more. My whole point, you are missing, is you make a quality game and get it done right it will sell. Not sit there barking over who's fault it is for not working up to par. I don't care who's fault it is. Address the problem and fix it, don't sit there bitching and pointing fingers about it.

Let me attempt to address your points:

(1) "My whole point, you are missing, is you make a quality game and get it done right it will sell."

I'm not missing it, you're simply incorrect. "...distribution has a lot more to do with a game�s success than anything else. If Take 2 Interactive publishes your game, you�re definitely going to sell more than 5 times as many copies as you would have on your own." - Brad Wardell, developer of Galactic Civilizations and veteran of the gaming industry since the days of OS/2 (i.e. he's been doing this a long time and has released many games).

(2) "I didn't say just because there is 5 million it would be a 100% sale. I said that is a good chunk to market to."

Dude, did you even read what I wrote?

Even with the hundreds of millions of PCs out there, the grand, grand majority of titles don't move anywhere near less than a percentage point of that.

...which means that it is *not* a good chunk to market to because the percentage of people who buy is so small, even for "good" games (moving ~50k copies) and as we know, most games are farrr from good so they'll sell even less.

...which means that in order to recoup a similar investment on the Mac, it would have to be a blockbuster from a well-funded company. Hey and look at that, I'm right! The Mac typically gets PC blockbusters from well-funded companies.

...which answers the question to the "why" of this whole thread - good business is not spending time and money on something when you might not recoup those costs.

Rob

[exca1ibur]

I still stand by what I said.

Bad game = bad sales
Good game= more sales

If a company or developer wants to bitch about it, do something about it, or move on. If they want to create a half-ass port and complain why it sold 2 copies, more power to them. There are such things as high budget flops (Diakatana)? (Edios, Atari(The original), Akklaim - High distibution, weak game line up - all in trouble or gone), Good games sell copies, are you saying different? A good distributed, bad game will sell the most copies? My point as I'll state it again is do something about it or move on. Sure each case is different because each company is different. Look at teh gamespy issue. Most developemetn is dont by the port house not Gamespy. With the Havok engine who knows... the point here is that instead of trying to blame everyone about it. Aspyr got off their ass and looked for solutions and may have found one with Aegia running on the Unreal3 engine. Before you go postal on this one, I am not stating that ALL companies should do this, no solution is 100% or there wouldn't be ANY games on the Mac. Also the blockbuster companies most of the time AREN'T the ones doing the port. Take Epic games they have a team of PC developers and one guy Ryan Gordon doing the Mac and Linux version along side. Solutions are there, is all I'm saying for some companies, not ALL companies.

[Powerbook]

Originally posted by rslifka:
I lived PCs and PC gaming for 10+ years, prior to January when I sold my laptop and bought this iMac G5 (which I love). I knew going into this that the Mac wasn't a gaming platform, but I didn't know it was *this* bad. Call of Duty? Halo? Neverwinter Nights? Homeworld 2? Damn, I mean, it's 2003 calling and they want their games back.
...

It's all about a programmer's time/dedication. OS, API, drivers... This is the best example (from http://www.barefeats.com/mac2pc.html ):




"The performance gap also has to do with how much effort developers put into optimizing (or re-writing) the game code to take advantage of the unique features of the G5 and Mac OS X. Quake 3 Arena, though considered obsolete by hard core 3D gamers, is a good example of the potential of the G5 Power Macs to do well in 3D gaming:

One of the lead programmers at Id Software (Graeme Devine) took a personal interest in optimizing the Mac version to take advantage of the Power Mac's Velocity Engine and Dual Processors."


PB.

[bleee]

Originally posted by rslifka:
I lived PCs and PC gaming for 10+ years, prior to January when I sold my laptop and bought this iMac G5 (which I love). I knew going into this that the Mac wasn't a gaming platform, but I didn't know it was *this* bad. Call of Duty? Halo? Neverwinter Nights? Homeworld 2? Damn, I mean, it's 2003 calling and they want their games back.

Is there some treasure trove I'm yet to unearth? GoGamer has DOOM 3 as their *only* coming soon game. Unless playing it on the Mac makes it not get boring after an hour, I think I'll pass on that too.



Rob

Hahaha, ya I learned the hard way too a few years ago when I bought my first Mac it was an iBook 600 (late 2001) I tried to install starcraft for it and man that was the biggest pain in the butt also Macs were in this OS9 to OS X transition phase.

Keep your PC around for games thats all I can say until Mac's gain more ground in the Gaming industry you'll end up buying games that have been released a year earlier on the PC thats been crappily ported to Mac with fewer optimizations which means it runs slower on Macs.

World of Warcraft is the only recent Mac game I've seen done really well because blizzard released it themselves.