Baldur's Gate 3 Now Available on Mac

It’s alright, but I wish they would at least let you switch to a gamepad when exploring. The mouse-driven top-down view is ok for combat, but really hard for navigation.
 
Umm... the system requirements previously said i7, yet now they're saying M1? I have an i9, so am I suddenly blocked from the game now that it's out of early access?

Edit: It's still compiled as universal, at least for now.
Metal works differently on Radeon GPUs. They might not test it. Maybe because pretty much only the last generation of Intels is still supported by Apple.
 
Why should apple configure its lowest end configuration Mac to be gaming machines. That is not the rule of thumb in PC so why should it be that way for Mac? Gaming PC are high end, high performance machines. Gaming machines are incredibly computers but they are far from lowest-cost entry-level offerings.

If You don’t like the lowest end Mac configuration then don’t buy them. If people stopped buying 8GB configuration, Apple would stop offering them.

I’m not going into the non-upgradable Apple memory argument except that limitation is known and shouldn’t be a surprise. Think before you buy. If you are unhappy, frustrated or angry about the situation then protest with your pocketbook.
That’s true from a purely consumer standpoint, but OP is right if you’re Apple and want more games running on Mac. A lot of people use Macs as study/work/design machines (which 8GB could be perfectly adequate for) but may occasionally play a game or two if their machines are up to the task. More Macs with higher end specs means more potential customers for Mac games, and thus more developer interest in ports.
 
Last edited:
If only Starfield and Cyberpunk 2077: Phantom Liberty were released on the Mac too, then all the really great 2023 RPGs would be playable on Apple Silicon. šŸ¤ž

I know it’s not the same, but I’ve played both on those on my iPad using Game Pass Cloud Gaming for Starfield and PS5 Remote Play for CP2077.

If I’m at home, the experience is pretty damn good most of the time. Cloud gaming gets less reliable during busy times, but PS5 Remote Play has been pretty solid.
 
This is why Apple needs to make 16GB of RAM standard across the board if they're truly serious about gaming on the Mac.
No, this is just one reason why folks buying new Macs should up their choice of RAM amount, and Apple should continue to make higher RAM levels available [like they already do with 96 GB available in MBPs]. It says nothing about whether or not an 8 GB option should exist for granny with email-only and K-12 admins, both needing lowest cost boxes.
 
Why should apple configure its lowest end configuration Mac to be gaming machines. That is not the rule of thumb in PC so why should it be that way for Mac? Gaming PC are high end, high performance machines. Gaming machines are incredibly computers but they are far from lowest-cost entry-level offerings.

If You don’t like the lowest end Mac configuration then don’t buy them. If people stopped buying 8GB configuration, Apple would stop offering them.

I’m not going into the non-upgradable Apple memory argument except that limitation is known and shouldn’t be a surprise. Think before you buy. If you are unhappy, frustrated or angry about the situation then protest with your pocketbook.
Nintendo Switch has a chip with poor performance. Your argument already failed. Not all games are highend especially since the majority of people are still using mid to low-end computers. You can check the fact from Steam.
 
No, this is just one reason why folks buying new Macs should up their choice of RAM amount, and Apple should continue to make higher RAM levels available [like they already do with 96 GB available in MBPs]. It says nothing about whether or not an 8 GB option should exist for granny with email-only and K-12 admins, both needing lowest cost boxes.
8GB is a joke and yet, upgrading to 16GB for almost $200 is also a joke. Do you really think the memory chip is expensive to add? Not at all. All Macs should start at 16GB with a same price.
 
Who says a thin and light laptop that comes without a fan has to be the main gaming rig? Why can't it be used when the person is away from their main gaming rig and just wants to play a quick game to kill some time?

A smartphone isn't the main gaming rig for a lot of people, yet many use it to play games while on the move. It's embarrassing that the iPhone 15 Pro has just as much memory as the base MacBook Air.
We disagree. I will continue to argue
A) that users need to choose more RAM when buying new boxes, and
B) that Apple needs to give users a cheap low-RAM choice (currently 8 GB) and also fat RAM options (currently 96 GB in MBPs and 24 GB in lower-end MBAs).

Personally I chose 96 even though 64 would totally suffice at this stage of my M2 MBP's life cycle.
 
Last edited:
Might grab this and run on M2 Max. Should run well enough?
It no doubt depends on what well enough is to you, and perhaps also how much RAM is in the M2 Max. I may try it with 96 GB, but am not an experienced gamer so I probably cannot really differentiate good/bad performance.
 
8GB is a joke and yet, upgrading to 16GB for almost $200 is also a joke. Do you really think the memory chip is expensive to add? Not at all. All Macs should start at 16GB with a same price.
IMO 8 GB is not a joke; Mac OS makes it work for undemanding usages. But I certainly agree it would be helpful if RAM upgrading cost less.

Apple's baked-on-chip UMA RAM is hella more complex than basic RAM would be, so we really do not know what it costs Apple to add RAM.
 
We disagree. I will continue to argue
A) that users need to choose more RAM when buying new boxes, and
B) that Apple needs to give users a cheap low-RAM choice (currently 8 GB) and also fat RAM options (currently 96 GB in MBPs and 24 GB in lower-end MBAs).

Personally I chose 96 even though 64 would totally suffice at this stage of my M2 MBP's life cycle.

Basically I agree with you with one exception. For some users, the fat RAM absolute maximum of just 192 GB (Ultra Mac Pro and Mac Studio) is significantly under powered. The previous Intel power Mac max out at 1500 GB (1.5 TB). Although this is NOT a gameplay concern.
 
Uh…what? Steam isn’t real? Of all the app stores, Steam may be the most real. It pre-dates the ā€œrealā€ (I presume you mean the Mac App Store) by at least seven years. In many ways it was the FIRST App Store for games.
Actually try iTunes in 2003, the same as Steam. Then again as for Steam that was JUST for Valve’s games and didn’t open up to 3rd parties until 2005 for limited runs but kept expanding. For Mac users the Mac App Store is just a detached iTunes…
 
I don't know why anyone would be seriously considering a thin and light laptop that comes without a fan as a gaming rig? Spend the $200 on a used PS4 or a Nintendo switch and you'll be much happier.
Yep, M1 and M2 gets crushed anyway, doesn’t worth the money for gaming.
 
I've been playing video games since I was 2 years old. I'm 43 now and this is easily the best RPG I've ever played, and one of the best video games of all time.

I've been playing RPGs since Final Fantasy 1 on NES, and 45 minutes into this game I requested a Steam refund because it's one of the most trash games I've ever played.

To each their own.

PS: I was playing on a MacBook Pro 16" w/ M1 Pro. The performance was fine, I just found the graphics and gameplay to be trash an hour in.
 
I wonder how do M chips deal with Act III. AMD's V-Cache helps a little. Still stutters. Even cutting edge stuff like 7800x3d.
 
I won't think Apple will ever be truly serious about gaming on the Mac (feels like a contradictio in terminis....)
Apple love gaming on iOS as it delivers easy money.
The Mac? Nah... never has been, never will. And I am saying this as someone who refuses to buy a gaming PC, as I love to "play" whatever I can on my Mac Studio....
I think Apple wants the Mac to be at least adequate for gaming. They wouldn’t have released a Wine-based porting app if they were content with the current situation. Since the Mac uses Apple Silicon now if it isn’t adequate at gaming it makes iOS look bad by comparison.
 
Umm... the system requirements previously said i7, yet now they're saying M1? I have an i9, so am I suddenly blocked from the game now that it's out of early access?

Edit: It's still compiled as universal, at least for now.
Yes, your i9 isn't powerful enough. 😁

I've got an M1 with 8 core GPU but I need storage for it, and even with a 1 TB drive, I'm just under the requirement. I'm going to end up putting it on Steam Deck instead. In a year, it should run better on a Mac.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Back
Top