Apple Improving Open-GL?

[shyataroo]

I did. I just bought an XBOX and a PSP as well. The only thing I miss out on is Half-Life 2. That alone almost made me regret it!! SUCH a good game, and no PC for me to play it on... or mac version!! Maybe companies like ID have demanded that Apple improve opengl support so they can release better games, or at least not have embarrassing minimum specs.

Half Life 2 is coming for Xbox

 

[Sol]

Frame rate limit

Doom 3 frame rates don't seem to go past 50 fps which tells me Apple's drivers need to be overhauled. It might go deeper than this, right down to the abstraction layer.

I remember reading that the Doom 3 engine has this limitation on Windows as well. A more powerfull computer will not be able to display more than sixty frames every second, at any resolution.

 

[Abstract]

🙄
....If you look at a 'normal' person who doesn't live to play games or play with their computer you're going to find them running an inexpensive, stripped down, Intel 'graphics' that use main memory system bought at Best Buy.....

(snip)

.....or even video editing could be improved some by Open GL improvements. It's not only the games, not by a long shot.

So according to you, the games market isn't that big, and so OpenGL improvement is not meant mostly for games? You serious?!? Games are a HUGE issue, and yeah, the market is big enough for Apple to worry about.

And from your logic, I'd bet that video editing is an even SMALLER part of the market than gaming. After all, most "normal" people are buying inexpensive, stripped down machines with Intel integrated graphics anyway, right? So maybe Apple shouldn't bother improving OpenGL for video editing either.

 

[jiggie2g]

I'll be happy once we see the results of any OpenGL improvements on the Mac. For now, this is all talk.

If Apple really wants gaming to catch on, they should make their games site (apple.com/games) as a tab on the front page. Then at least it would be advertising correctly.

The only "optional" thing I want Apple to do now are ditch the low-end cards (9200 and FX 5200, for examples) and get some mid-level cards for the iMac and 12" PowerBook. I don't mind seeing iBooks, Mac Mini, and eMac with the low-end cards (you seriously shouldn't think about any serious gaming with those machines in the first place), but the iMac and low-end PowerBook are the middle of desktop and laptop lines, so they deserve better.

Anyways, this might be a step in the right direction for gaming. It's quite possible CoreImage and CoreVideo and Quartz are the APIs that'll benefit, however they seem to be quite good as is. Have you tried getting a PC to draw the GUI using the graphics card? Go to nVidia's control panel on a PC, tell it to draw the windows and even make them transparent if you want. It's choppy as hell. Quartz is leaps ahead of that technology. With Longhorn, they might catch up though. Longhorn as Avalon which is Quartz's equal, pretty much. But it requires 64MB of VRAM, more than Quartz Extreme. They haven't shown too many interesting demos with it though.

But, I still think games will be reaping the benefits. It's good news for everyone really.

I Don't think an extra 64MB Vram will be a problem , can u even find a video card with less then 128MB . maybe at a bargin bin or ebay u might find an old Geforce 4 MX or Radeon 9000. even the crappy cards these days come with 128MB and are moving to 256MB.Quartz only requires 32MB because it was developed at a time when 32MB vram was still considered acceptable. now i dare u 2 find a PC with less then 128MB Vram , even the intergrated intel crap used 128-256MB of your system ram for video.

you can be sure by late 2005. 256MB vram will be standard once ATI and NVIDIA put out thier new cores and 512MB vram is placed in high end cards.

 

[loneAzdgari]

I just thought I'd leave my input on this discussion.

I'm a writer for Inside Mac Games so I've got a lot of experience with the front end of Mac games, as well as the workings behind them. I think the Mac platform is an excellent vehicle for gaming, although it is often misunderstood.

As far as I see it, the main problem with the Mac gaming market is the perception that all innovation comes from the PC side of things. People look at the latest Battlefield 2 movies over on PC systems, then load up the 2 year old mac port of Battlefield 1942 on their top-end G5 and cry. If people keep using the age old adage "Macs aren't for playing games", nothing will change.

As the Mac stands, it is an excellent platform for independent and innovative game development. The tight integration with OpenGL, excellent support for Altivec, Dual Processors and the possibility of 64 bit, along with the excellent relationship between ATI, nVIDIA, Apple and nearly every game porting/dev house out there shows great potential. 90% of the time when a Mac game runs slower than a PC game, it's down to proprietary decisions by guys over on the PC side. You just have to look at the Quake 3 port. This was an excellent example of a cross platform game done well. At first release the game was slightly slower on Macs compared to equivalent PCs. The game got worked on by OS X friendly guys, and in it's present state no PC can come close to a top end G5 running this game. Dual processor support and Altivec has been implemented. Hopefully this OpenGL news will bring speedier deliveries to OS X ports.

In terms of talent, the Mac has more than it's fair share of excellent game developers. People like Brad Oliver and Ryan Gordon go out of their way to bring popular or interesting games to OS X. You only have to look at the recent OS X port of the free game, Enemy Territory. If you look on the credits list for the OS X port, ONE GUY is listed amongst a sea of PC programmers.

If people just went out looking for games, they'd find the Mac is a goldmine. There are so many excellent games that have little publicity it's nearly a crime. A good example of a obscure game getting rare publishing/publicity is Kill Dr. Cote. A uDev Games entry a while ago that recently got made into a commercial game by Freeverse. The Mac has a good deal of influence in the gaming world. You just have to look at Bungie. In their time as a Mac exclusive publisher they made classics like Myth, Marathon and Oni. I still play all three of these game series on a regular basis in arranged games. Could you necessarily say that you play nearly every game from a PC exclusive house upto 6 years after each game was made?

Sorry if I ranted a lot, but I get sick and tired of hearing my work in the Mac gaming industry is a waste of time. By the way, I also own an Xbox. (Halo 2 kicks ass 🙂 )

 

[a2daj]

Apple, ATI, and NVIDIA have been trying to hire more OpenGL engineers well before the Doom 3 issues. They've been understaffed for a long time. This is nothing new. The only difference this time is that a consolidated job posting was sent to their developer list. Unfortunately, not enough people have stepped up to the plate to fill in the teams.

 

[eji]

Waaaay back when, games like Caesar and Sim City almost always had screenshots of the Apple versions on their packaging. I remember the sinking feeling I had when the game on my computer looked nothing like the flashy images on the box.

This nostalgic foray has little to do with OpenGL, but it might counter the perception that Apple computers have never been worth their salt in the gaming category. And though I no longer play anything but the rare fruitless hour or two (or three, or four) of Civ III, improvements to OpenGL are always welcome. I'd also like a decent GPU in the iMac (been waiting six months for the update before buying) to take advantage of future OpenGL improvements instead of being outdated from the day of purchase.

 

[Machead III]

Here's a three step guide to Apple and gaming success:

1) Make graphics a priority, this way you can kill both the high performance gaming and 3D graphics rendering birds with one stone. My 1Ghz iMac only just plays the original Deus Ex comfortably, when by all rights it should be whipping through it without a nanosecond of slowdown.

2) Develop some kind of software foundation that allows developers to make only minor tweaks to their games for it to run on a Mac. Rather than forcing them to re-write it all, meet them as half way as possible.

3) Advertise the **** out of games on the Mac. Game adverts always conclude with a screen displying the logos of each system its compatable with, but even in the unlikely event this game is available for mac, I see no Apple logo!

Do all this and you'll double the number of switchers by the end of the year. If Apple are going after the consumer market, look at the price of their hardware, low end net-sufers are not going to want one when Dell can provide it for 50% of the price. Geeky gamers spend thousands on their hardware, convert them and you'll start pulling in the casual gamers (such as myself) too.

 

[BillHarrison]

I would bet the gaming industry is much bigger than many people feel. I would wager that the number of people who buy PC's for gaming is either equal too or more than the number of people who buy macs altogether! Even if only 5% of pc owners buy them for gaming, thats still more Computer market share than the entire mac industry.

Games are big, and have surpassed the motion picture industry in income. So anyone who dismisses them as "niche market" is completely off base.

Personally, I have never done much "computer" gaming, I have always been a console fan. Flip the switch, play - Turn it off... come back to it 2-3 days later, pick up where i left off. I own an XBOX, and love the halo series, and look forward to picking up Doom 3 for it when its available. I am seriously looking forward to the XBOX 2 / Next, with its PPC processors 😛 (Even Microsoft knows where the real power is😛)

But gaming industry revenues are truly big, and for apple to dismiss their piece of the pie is rather stupid. I think things are happening for Apple, and this is just another step in the evolution. Focus on the things that made them great, but grow by becoming great in areas they were not before!

 

[ziwi]

This is a step in the right direction, but I think that people have been reading into it too much as far as gaming is concerned.

 

[0098386]

ill probably get sectioned for this

but i had a dream last night about Nintendo helping Apple with their OpenGL... and i think i know why; because both companies use PPC. 🙄

anyways this can only be a good thing. heres hoping my 12" PB will be blasting out Doom 3 in 1024x768 on ultra quality with UT2004 and Halo on in the background! *crosses fingers*

personally im not fussed about mac gaming. Ive got a fairly decent gaming PC in the study, ive got an Xbox and Gamecube in my bedroom. I actually bought HL2 and Doom 3 for PC (the first 2 games ive bought in a looong time) and ill be damned if im buying them again for Mac.
And i reaaally dont like Halo 2. well, compared to the original. 🙂

 

[csubear]

Here why apple is know looking to improve OpenGL. For the last 5 years apple has been working like crazy to OS X out of beta (pre 10,10.0,10.1) and into release (10.2,10.3). What they have done is brought us a stable OS with a UI that has been better in each version. What they haven't done is touch there OpenGL implementation for maybe 4 years, Until the last set of 10.x updates. Now that they have a very stable UI, and Core OS. They can start tinkering with the various sub-systems.

 

[rickvanr]

Yes that would rock.... although large games wouldn't have room for both platforms on 1 CD/DVD 🙁

I've read many PC and Mac games files are nearly identical, and iirc, with Return to Castle Wolfenstein, it was only a mature of changing a few small files to make the PC version Mac compatible. I'm sure this is the same with other games as well.

 

[BenRoethig]

I've got a serious question (please no flames).

Personally, if I was going to get into games, I'd get an Xbox or something - its sole purpose is to play games (and much cheaper than putting a gaming computer together),

Why are so many Mac users dead-set on playing games on this platform?

(I'm seriously curious.)

Why are so many Mac users dead-set against playing games on this platform? When you buy a general purpose home computer you expect that it should be able to do all the task you want including playing games. Also, the go buy an xbox line is really akin to telling a baseball player to go play hockey at the local rink if the field isn't quite up to spec. They may both be sports, but the way they play are entirely different animals.

 

[M@netic]

climbing the last hurdle...

*puzzled*

why would anyone vote negative?

After Apple gets the best opengl performance, maybe they should allow some piracy on purpose since it's the thing that pc users like the most, then they will really dominate.

 

[Bendit]

For me there are two reasons.

1. I can't afford a console, as I'll also need to buy either a TV or a video capture card in order to use it (unless newer consoles have VGA or DVI ports).

2. I need a mouse! I simply cannot 'point' by using a stick.

You can afford a $200 console but you can afford an expensive Mac which requires ridiculously expensive video-card upgrades to play latest games? And you're willing to buy a TV or video capture card as well?

A console is cheap.

 

[swissmann]

I think the gaming is a big part of this but more important to Apple in my opinion is their dependancy on the graphics card with their pro apps like Motion etc.

Also, as my iPhoto library grows 6097 photos and with a 6 MP camera it really seems slow on my Dual 2 GHz G5 PowerMac. I have 1.5 GB RAM but only the stock 9600 (?) 64 MB card that came with it. Would a better graphics card speed it up, or is it more RAM? I kind of doubt it is the rest of the computer.

 

[a2daj]

Here why apple is know looking to improve OpenGL. For the last 5 years apple has been working like crazy to OS X out of beta (pre 10,10.0,10.1) and into release (10.2,10.3). What they have done is brought us a stable OS with a UI that has been better in each version. What they haven't done is touch there OpenGL implementation for maybe 4 years, Until the last set of 10.x updates. Now that they have a very stable UI, and Core OS. They can start tinkering with the various sub-systems.

Um... Apple has been constantly adding features to OpenGL since the beginning. Probably the biggest noticeable change was when 10.2 came out and that was due in large part to the features needed for Quartz Extreme. Each OS release has included not just bug fixes (and new bugs) but new features and optimizations. I really don't know how you can say they haven't touched their OpenGL implementation in four years.

 

[Eric5h5]

I've read many PC and Mac games files are nearly identical, and iirc, with Return to Castle Wolfenstein, it was only a mature of changing a few small files to make the PC version Mac compatible. I'm sure this is the same with other games as well.

Yes. The actual GAME, even these days, is generally only a few megabytes or so. 99.9% of the space used on the disc is graphics and sound files, which are platform-independent. There is no issue with having the Mac and PC versions on the same disc.

--Eric

 

[Flickta]

Halo certianly doesn't stand up to today's games!!!
Haven't you played Half Life 2??

HL2 is s***
Halo was also, but with Halo you desperately sought what was left of Bungie in it, of the old idea of the game with a borderless ring-world filled with ancient mysteries...
And when you saw some small glimpses of light, you were soooo happy, and could've even forget that long history of Bungie's demise...

HL2? Technology maybe... No GAME.

______________________
Rated the news positive. Perhaps not games... But maybe the interface will be smooth.

 

[Eric5h5]

Why are so many Mac users dead-set on playing games on this platform?

(I'm seriously curious.)

I see other people have said basically the same thing, but just to reiterate, console games tend to be short and shallow, whereas computer games tend to be more complex and involved. Not just the games themselves, but related areas: making maps, mods, etc. Can't do that on a console. Also there's the opportunity for smaller independent games on computers that don't necessarily have to be marketed to the biggest audience possible, with the dumbing-down and lowest-common-denominatorism that often implies. Plus some entire game genres are nearly non-existant on consoles....

Not that I have anything against console games (got Bionicle for the Mac recently), but I would hate to be stuck with no choice.

--Eric

 

[wrldwzrd89]

One thing, mainly: keyboard and mouse will always beat gamepad. Try playing Halo on a PC/Mac against people on Xbox. They won't stand a chance.

I wish/hope the next consoles will have something like a speedpad n50 and a mouse. Not optionnal, or at least make all games support it as a requirement (first person shooters at least).

I only partially agree with you here. For FPS games, you're correct. The exact opposite is true for racing games and flight simulators, though.

I would be all for making FPS support on consoles for accessories like the ones you mention mandatory. However, I wouldn't want to be REQUIRED to have these things, since I don't play games that could make good use of them.

 

[0098386]

I wish/hope the next consoles will have something like a speedpad n50 and a mouse. Not optionnal, or at least make all games support it as a requirement (first person shooters at least).

one world; Revolution 😎

but seriously about controllers, maybe its just me but i find using a controller a better experience and more user friendly. Halo is a daunting experience on PC/Mac i find because all the keys are dotted round and in the heat of battle I sometimes get confused. unlike the Xbox version which i took to almost straight away. And im a seasoned PC game player.

the only added bonus of playing a game with keyboard and mouse is the aiming, obviously a mouse is an amazing tool for shooting with. then again i find the DS to be the greatest for aiming, it is unbelievably easy to aim using a touchscreen. could Smash Bros Melee be played with a keyboard and mouse? no. the kind of games i play are controller orientated.

 

[csubear]

Um... Apple has been constantly adding features to OpenGL since the beginning. Probably the biggest noticeable change was when 10.2 came out and that was due in large part to the features needed for Quartz Extreme. Each OS release has included not just bug fixes (and new bugs) but new features and optimizations. I really don't know how you can say they haven't touched their OpenGL implementation in four years.

Yes OS X's pdf/postscript(Quartz/Quartz Extreme) rendering engine has seen vast improvements over the last 5 years, but these are core, can't have a GUI without these, modules. OpenGL is a subsystem that they had to have, but once they had it, it wasn't on the high on the list for performance enhancements. Drawin,Cocoa,Quartz where on the list for performance enhancements.

 

[Kelmon]

Something more than Call of Duty?

This is definitely "Good News", although that hardly needs to be said. I switched from a Windows XP system about 18-months ago because it was driving me barking mad and trying to screw-up my part-time MSc by refusing to boot. At the time it was almost top-of-the-line and breezed through any games that I bought, with the curious exception of Neverwinter Nights that chugged despite games like UT2003 and Halo flying along. With the prospect of moving into our own house that had bugger-all space for a full PC, I bought a 15" 1GHz Titanium PowerBook and hoped that I might be able to play at least a couple of games on it. So far, unfortunately, the only game that I've bought that runs acceptably has been Call of Duty (no bad thing as it's by far the best shooter that I've played), although UT2003/UT2004 will run OK in wank-o-rez where you are attacked by blobs.

While a PowerBook is never likely to be a gaming powerhouse like my old PC was, I was kinda hoping that it would have been better than it is. An improvement to overall OpenGL performance would be most welcome since it would no doubt benefit my existing hardware, assuming that the Mobile Radeon 9000 won't be left out of the party, and a new Mac that (wife-willing) might be bought next year. I'm not massively fussed that the Mac misses out on a lot of games since what it does get tends to be pretty stellar and most of the big names in PC gaming tend to allow their games to be ported or make their own versions themselves (Blizzard, iD and Epic particularly spring to mind). However, being able to play what is available on something that, at the time, set me back a lot of money would be nice.

Something else that might need addressing is the price of Mac games. Not sure what the prices are like elsewhere but one of the principle reasons that I only own 1 game is because most games cost £40.00 whereas PC games regularly go for £25-30. I went to a store in Antwerp a few weeks ago and almost all the games were EUR 40-50, even ones like Diablo 2 that are like 5-years old. Mental...