Boot Camp and Mac Game Developers?

[weazle1098]

Thinking Different?

Whatever happened to think different, this whole thing just seems like the begining of the end of MacOS. Sure there are some good things, but running windows on a Mac just makes it an Apple branded PC not what is a Mac. This better be a step toward simply running windows based programs in MacOS, because, now thats thinking outside the box which is what MacOS is all about.

 

[peharri]

This may be true, but remember that oftentimes there is 6 month or more lag between the PC version and Mac version of a game. I'm not convinced that people will wait 6 months to experience a game when they could run down to Best Buy, pick it up, and play it on the day it is released. There are no UI advantages in running the game in OS X versus in Windows. While I would prefer the native Mac version for stability and easy access, I suspect that Boot Camp may indeed have a negative effect on Mac game producers.

You're largely right. I'm not suggesting that most OS X users wouldn't prefer an OS X game - rebooting is a pain (the OS 9 version of Unreal Tournament runs much more smoothly in OS 9 than the Carbon version in OS X, but I run the Carbon version for the most part because I don't want to switch operating systems just to play a game, closing down my web browser, terminal sessions, etc.), but I think given the straight choice of:

1. Wait 3-6 months for the Mac version, if it ever appears at all.
2. Order the Mac version by mail, spending $30-50 on it.
3. Growse about the lack of significant PC features in the Mac version (like the lack of a map editor in all Unreal games)

vs

1. Get PC version
or
1. Wait 3 months, and get the PC version for $10.
2. Growse about rebooting once in a while. Ultimately semi-permanently switch to Windows if it becomes necessary.

I think people will end up doing the latter for the most part. And that's sad and unfortunate, but it's inevitable too.

There are a couple of things Apple can do to make this easier.

They could work on the virtualization systems for Windows, so that at least the reboot isn't necessary. It may be a big "Sorry dudes, but, y'know..." to the Mac game porting industry, but, on the other hand, the ports were never an ideal way of running many of these games anyway.

They could work on building OS X's market share, and put the same kind of efforts into Mac based gaming that Microsoft did when they developed DirectX. This is a two pronged approach. How do you build OS X's market share? Well, there are a bunch of ways of doing this, some they'll consider, some they will not:

- You can sell Mac OS X for whitebox PCs (not likely)
- You can sell desirable, commodity-priced, Macs. The Mac mini is kind of there, but if the aim is to increase marketshare so the platform is more attractive to the game porting/producing community, then the Mac mini isn't suitable. It's the direct opposite. At the very least, every Mac should powerful enough for modern gaming.
- You can lower the barriers to entry that the Mac has by, for instance, oooh, off the top of my head, producing a dual booting solution so that users who are worried about not being able to run key Windows applications, and the very latest games, can run Windows as a last resort. Erm. Ok. Well, I think we're going to have to agree this one's a double edged sword. It's also the one of the three that Apple's actually doing.

What kinds of efforts can Apple engage in to make porting easier?

- Well, they could work with one of the existing console makers on implementing similar APIs so that games can easily be ported from one to the other. Nintendo is the obvious candidate as neither compete with one another. Sony is a direct competitor to Apple, and Microsoft is an indirect competitor in some markets, and direct in one or two.
- OpenGL and OpenAL need to be the best they can be. I think Apple's doing this as much as possible, but it needs saying.
- Apple needs to work on helping port major game engines to OS X. The engines matter more than anything else, most games run over a handful of common engines and just require some tweaks and a recompile to get running. I don't mean to trivialise the amount of work involved in such a port, but few would disagree that it's generally the game engines themselves that need the most amount of work.

The question is: Does Apple care? Will dual-booting be "good enough" and Apple not consider it a potential threat down the line to have many OS X users switch to Windows as their primary OS once they get fed up with chosing between high prices/low availability and rebooting?

 

[esaleris]

First of all, nobody is going to pay a 20% premium on hardware to run Windows. When you're buying Mac, you're buying the whole package. I think BootCamp is a "get your foot in the door"-type deal for those on the fence. Jobs is counting on getting users ON the machine in the first place, then he/she can compare Windows XP/Vista and OS X side-by-side for themselves.

Personally, when I'm in the OS X environment, I don't want to leave. The interface is consistent, clean and extremely well-thought out. The applications - even freeware - are amazing and perform great. It's a really refined experience, in terms of the user. You don't see that in Windows, where things can draw from 20 years of legacy code and display information in all sorts of ways.

All Apple's done is leveraged Boot Camp as a way to showcase OS X to drive Mac hardware sales. If it succeeds, there will be plenty of game developers who will code for Mac from day one. If not, OS X won't disappear - you'll just run have Mac users run around with dual-booting machines. Either way, they're buying your friggin' machine!

 

[yoshiii]

Good for you! Mac games will suffer with boot camp and that's a fact. Anyone in his/her right mind will boot into windows to play their games, as there are currently only 8-9 proper osx native games for the Intel Macs. There are thousands of amazing games for windows right now!




I disagree! Now that you can run windows natively with the support of apple there is absolutely no reason why developers should port any more apps for OSX. Remember the AutoCAD and 3d Studio MAX petitions? No way AutoDesk will ever even consider
Porting anything to OSX anymore!



If Windows users start buying the imacs and MBPs just because they prefer their looks over the Sony and Dell equivalents then it wont be long before OSX users are in the minority.



You do realize that an OS is only a means to an end right? I mean what good is an OS when you have nothing to run on it? It's pretty pointless defending a mouse cursor and a window manager don't you think? Windows has A LOT more software, which is readily available. OSX could never compete with that. As for iLife... I'd choose ACDC over iPhoto anytime!



OSX is a very visually pleasing OS, however if time and budget are tight then this kind of luxury is not really a priority. Besides you'll find that not many people are willing to become Apple's crusaders anymore.



The rest of your comments sound like words of comfort to me...

PS> having said that i do pray that all your comments come true!

Why do you even own a mac?

 

[foofreaknfighte]

The reasons I finally bought a pc gaming machine after using macs for ten years. I love my mac by the way, lets not forget why we got them in the first place, it not just cus they looked pretty. It's also not the reason we recommend them to people. The thought of my mom owning a PC makes cringe when I think of my phone bill. Anyway, the reasons I bought a gaming pc...when I already own a top of the line mac.

1. Going to the game store and seeing they only had 3 games for the mac.
2. Going to the game store and seeing they didnt have ANY games for mac.
3. When finally finding a game, realizing it sucked ass.
4. Gaming is a cutting edge hobby, macs graphics cards are way behind on this front, so even if a perfect port were done (which there never are) it still would not run as well.
5. Upgrading is nearly impossible on a mac...I don't want to have to buy a new computer every year in order to run the latest games.


I have been saying for years "macs are great, except for games" or "Macs suck for games". Im sorry folks, but I welcome this dual boot thing. I would love to go to the apple store and piss on the game shelf. I hope they get rid of it...I dunno...maybe they could keep the tetris.

Also, when it comes to gaming, the Macbook Pro is not the fastest notebook out there. The x1600 is not even close to the graphics cards coming out for the laptops that real gamers would be buying. Perhaps when the Pro towers come out, with the big boy graphics cards.....

 

[Damek]

The hurdle of installing Boot Camp/Windows

Come on, people, how many Mac buyers are going to bother going through the hurdle of using Boot Camp and installing Windows in the first place?

If mom and pop hear their sons and daughters are all getting Macs, and they need a new computer, they're going to get a Mac, too, but they're not going to bother about Boot Camp and Windows and all that crap unless their kids do it for them.

Then there's the obstacle of dual-booting in the first place. I know so few people who actually do it. Dual-boot Linux basically means "Windows all the time" for most people.

Let's have a little faith in the supremacy of OS X over Windows - I really think gamers who start buying Macs so they can use OS X *AND* have access to Windows for games will start buying new games in OS X because they'd rather stay there and not dual boot.

Sure not everyone will follow that route, but I think overall this will be a positive for Apple, and they must think so, too, or they wouldn't be bothering helping people run Windows on their machines.

 

[oingoboingo]

Am I telling you that people leave all their applications and documents open? Yes. Yes, I am. I have lots of notes open, TextEdit files, Word documents, PDF files, Terminal applications etc. I will have to close all of them down, disrupt my entire work flow, purely to play on one game, even if it is for an hour. It takes me a fair amount of time to sort everything out when software updates come out to reboot, so I won't be doing it everytime I'm bored and want to play a game.

Truly champagne quality comedy! You're talking about setting off for an hour or so of gaming, right in the middle of a very important work session, and then you're whining about having to shut down your desktop and save Word files, text files etc and spend precious time opening up all your files again. Gold!

In any event, it seems that Windows XP virtualization software has now been released (check the front page for more details), so you will be able to productively spend an hour or two pissing around playing games during your working sessions without <raises a dramatic hand to the forehead> wasting precious seconds reopening documents due to rebooting!!!!

I salute you, MacMyDay! A true warrior for workplace efficiency!

 

[Macmaniac]

From a gamers perspective I don't care about platform, I care about performance. That being said I would never use Windows as my primary machine, I have been Mac only since I started using computers, and the same is true of Mac games. However I am frustrated by the lack of good Mac games, Blizzard being the only one IMHO who does a good job with ports.
If I were to buy a new MacBook or iMac I would install Windows on it without hesitation. I will run Blizzard games under OS X, but all other games I will run in Windows. Games like Battle For Middle Earth II and Star Wars Empire at War will never be ported to OS X, and even if they are they will run slower under OS X vs. Windows. I am sick of buying expensive ports of games that are slower, and don't allow network play with PCs. C&C Generals, and Rise of Nations being a couple. I paid full price for these games, when they were already 2-3 years old, and a PC version cost $19 vs $49 for the Mac.

This is my dream come true, I can keep OS X for video editing, and boot windows when I want to play games at a good speed with good frame-rates, no more third rate expensive ports! (except Blizzard who is God for making their games as good on both PC and Mac)

 

[peharri]

Truly champagne quality comedy! You're talking about setting off for an hour or so of gaming, right in the middle of a very important work session, and then you're whining about having to shut down your desktop and save Word files, text files etc and spend precious time opening up all your files again. Gold!

I'm trying to work out what's "funny" about the above.

I have a Powerbook at home. I use it exclusively for home stuff. I have windows open all the time - TextEdit.app notes, Firefox (with 5-30 tabs depending on how long it's been open...) and a bunch of terminal windows.

Like I said a few posts above, despite the fact Unreal Tournament for Carbon (OS X) is inferior to UT for OS 9, I do not go through the trouble of rebooting to play UT. I don't want to close all those windows. No, I'm not "in the middle of a very important work session", but that doesn't mean there's not stuff open I don't want to leave open.

I'm guessing you use your computer exclusively for playing games. Or maybe you never use it for playing games. Either way, your patronising "rebuttle" to the GP isn't a rebuttle at all, most of us reading it recognized the situation right away.

 

[nagromme]

A lot of people discussing boot camp (be they trolls or merely frightened by change) seem to suggest that Windows is good enough, and Mac OS and iLife have no benefits. They assume Mac users will switch to Windows en masse, caring only about the Apple hardware.

Some people are, in essence, saying that Mac-to-Windows switching will occur faster than Windows-to-Mac switching.

I think if you stop and think about that, you realize it's a silly proposition. I have no such fears. The switching trend will stay in Mac's favor. Boot Camp will help Switchers and Adders alike.

Equally absurd are the assertions that most new Mac buyers in future won't use OS X or iLife. They'll pay for them but never try them? Or are we back to "Windows is just as good as OS X"?

Now put yourself in a game developer's shoes. It's harder than before to justify the incremental development and support costs to sell a Mac OS X version because many of your customers can already use the Windows version.

That could happen, but it's a question of math. Let's say one third of all Mac gamers buy Windows in the next four years. (I think that is an unrealistic high number.) To make up for that loss in game sales, the Mac market as a whole simply has to grow by 50% in the same timeframe.

Actually it doesn't EVEN have to grow by 50%. Because some fraction of Mac gamers ALREADY use Windows for gaming. So they will be no loss to Boot Camp.

The Mac market growing by something a little under 50% in the next four years is very likely I think. HELPED, in fact, by Boot Camp.

That's the break-even point if one-third of Mac gamers buy Windows. That's the point at which Mac game companies can maintain current sales. If fewer buy Windows, or if the Mac market as a whole grows faster, then sales can increase. Time will tell.

Nobody could argue that Windows won't harm Mac game companies. It will. My reason for optimism is that other factors will HELP them at the same time.

(Also, I'd like to note that a forum thread on dual booting is not a representative sample of the game-buying public. A lot more people on here, vs. the general public, will be willing to buy and install Windows during gaming. A lot of people want to buy a game off the shelf and play it. My sister, for instance, would love to play Fable: The Lost Chapters--a current and mainstream title--but she'd never think of buying and installing Windows to make it happen.)

 

[milo]

It all boils down to one thing. Are the mac versions competitive with the PC version?

If companies want their mac version to sell, they need to release close to the PC release date. They also need to keep pricing competitive between the two platforms.

Even with this, I still consider a cross platform game to have a competitive advantage.

If two games are released on the same day, one is pc only and one is both platforms (even a hybrid disc), if the games are equally good, which is going to sell more copies? Won't the cross platform game sell better since there's a bigger base of users that can buy it?

 

[MacMyDay]

Thanks, peharri. Nice to see someone has sense.

I have tens of Terminal windows open connected to different servers,in the middle of different projects, with different notes connected to them, and different Safari tabs open related to the development of these projects. If this doesn't makes sense to you, please don't reply with some smart-arse comment. Closing down everything I'm working on to load a game is not such great "champagne quality comedy!". I really cannot see how you could be so stupid to negate the point I'm putting across. It does NOT take seconds, or even minutes. Please go login to multiple servers and work on multiple projects via SSH, with different work loads, different windows of notes arranged and reboot for me, and work out how long it takes to get it working again.

What would you prefer? To reboot your phone everytime you wanted to send a text message, or load it up via your phone? I run my own company, and my work will always be loaded to resume again, just like with my PowerBook for personal use. It could be 9pm at night, which is not "right in the middle of a very important work session". I simply do not want to reboot my computer. Can you see a problem with that?

Truly champagne quality comedy! You're talking about setting off for an hour or so of gaming, right in the middle of a very important work session, and then you're whining about having to shut down your desktop and save Word files, text files etc and spend precious time opening up all your files again. Gold!

In any event, it seems that Windows XP virtualization software has now been released (check the front page for more details), so you will be able to productively spend an hour or two pissing around playing games during your working sessions without <raises a dramatic hand to the forehead> wasting precious seconds reopening documents due to rebooting!!!!

I salute you, MacMyDay! A true warrior for workplace efficiency!

 

[ImNoSuperMan]

I just cant figure out why would any company (other than apple itself) develop software for OSX if a good enough number of Mac users already have windows. No company is here for social work. Everybody wants to increase their profits. Developing a software costs some real money.

Take for eg Photoshop. We do have an OSX version available. But I m sure they sell at least 50 copies for windoze and 1 for OSX. They may still be selling 1000`s of Mac copies. But once they know that even Mac users can install the same windows version, Why will they ever bother with an OSX version. That will cost them extra $$ to develop and support. Photoshop is a great software. If I want to buy PS and I dont find an OSX specific version then I`d simply buy the windows version. It(PS) can`t be any worse than what the rest of the world is using,if not better.

But I m not saying that this wud be a bad move for Apple or OSX. Steve Jobs is a wise man. He knows his job pretty damn well. Everything which is being discussed here would`ve been through his mind 4 years ago. May be he wants to discontinue software development(very Unlikely but possible) and concentrate on hardware. Or may be he`d be reducing Mac to just a home entertainment device. Great for web surfing, emailing, blogging, music, iMovie, iChat, iPhoto, iLife etc. I m sure home users wont find any need for Windows if they already have such great software. Except may be for gaming. But then Gaming on Macs was never a priority for Apple.But if you still want more you can always use windows.

Or may be he wants to annihilate MS completely. Give users and developers the choice of both OS and let them decide which will rule the world. And there is every possibility that this may work in Apple`s favour. Finally Apple may be able to compete with MS on better grounds.

All of these are wild guesses. If I can know what Steve is upto then I might well be Apple CEO. Which I definitely aint, and can never be. So all we can do right now is just wait n see what happens. And till then just keep guessing. One thing is for sure that Steve is upto something big.

REALLY BIG..........

 

[foofreaknfighte]

Does anybody know if there are any benchmarks out for any of the intel machines? I would like to see what 3Dmark05 does on the new pro.

 

[ImNoSuperMan]

Hi All!

Installed XP on my 2.0 Ghz MBP last night using Boot Camp, followed closely by Battlefield 2

After running the patches for BF2 it worked a lot better than expected, in fact after pumping the settings up to High across the board it still performed way beyond expectations.

Filmed a movie of the game playing on the MBP but have nowhere to put it online, anyone got a suggestion?

Upload the file to http://www.rapidshare.com or turboupload.com and post the link here.
I personally favour rapidshare.com

 

[macpastor]

I have seen a couple sites where they are giving some thought on gaming. I am not a gamer, but I wonder, is the gaming on a Windows PC that much better and why? If, as they have said thus far, that gaming is great on the Mac using Boot Camp, is that a reason for alot of gamers to switch?

 

[daddy-mojo]

This may be true, but remember that oftentimes there is 6 month or more lag between the PC version and Mac version of a game. I'm not convinced that people will wait 6 months to experience a game when they could run down to Best Buy, pick it up, and play it on the day it is released. There are no UI advantages in running the game in OS X versus in Windows. While I would prefer the native Mac version for stability and easy access, I suspect that Boot Camp may indeed have a negative effect on Mac game producers.

yah, but what about all the people who are running ppc macs. we still need ported versions. that would kill off a whole market wouldn't it? just because of intel macs and boot camp doesn't mean we all own intel macs now or even plan to purchase in the next year or so. a few years from now, maybe, but then again, who knows what the OS will be like by then.

 

[twitsami]

its not something that happens over night

Maybe im crazy but i see this as giving developers a reason to develop for macs. This is only going to increase Apples market share, the #1 reason games have to be ported to mac in the first place. Once the market share goes up, MacOS X will become a more favorable option. We all know that buying a Mac means your probably going for the OS. If the operating system you use 95% of the time is OSX, your honestly going to find it a pain to reboot, just to play a game... thus the push to have OSX games. Developers have no excuse other than market share, and i see that changing.

 

[dubnluvn]

I skipped the last few pages so someone may have covered this:

I think a lot of you are missing something. Releasing games for Mac simultaniously with PC versions is not happening overnight. This is going to take some time. There will be no fewer mac ports available in the short term. The real key here is Apple building market share by exposing Windows users to OSX with the 'safety net' of being able to play their games and run their software and do the other things they *think they may not be able to do on a Mac. As the number of people running OSX increases so does the likelyhood of software companies delivering concurrent game releases for both Windows and Mac. Another thing is, by apple making the worlds first computer that runs both OS's natively, software devs. may realize that it is a lot easier to make the same software for mac than it has ever been. Add in a little intuition by these companies that the Mac's market share is on the rise, what we are looking at is a long term solution to increased market share for the Mac and OSX and expanding the horizon of available software previously unavailable or seriously delayed. JMHO.


haha twitsami beat me to it

 

[j26]

I just cant figure out why would any company (other than apple itself) develop software for OSX if a good enough number of Mac users already have windows...

Most mac users won't install windows - it's primarily a safety net to induce potential switchers - the "Ah sure I'll try it and if I can't work OS X out, I can run Windows and still have a sexy machine"

 

[guzhogi]

I was just thinking something: what if Apple made a version of xCode for Windows and made it possible to build an application that runs natively on both Macs & Windows? Apple would have to port the frameworks and maybe port .Net to Macs. As for the interfaces, anyone here who's used xCode and Interface Builder would know what Nib files are. For those who do, since you can make localized Nibs for other languages like Spanish, German, whatever, maybe it's possible to make a Nib for Windows and one for Mac just so that it has the operating system's interface. This would significantly help developers. But I don't know if it's even possible.

 

[bilbo--baggins]

It all boils down to one thing. Are the mac versions competitive with the PC version?

If companies want their mac version to sell, they need to release close to the PC release date. They also need to keep pricing competitive between the two platforms.

Even with this, I still consider a cross platform game to have a competitive advantage.

If two games are released on the same day, one is pc only and one is both platforms (even a hybrid disc), if the games are equally good, which is going to sell more copies? Won't the cross platform game sell better since there's a bigger base of users that can buy it?

Maybe this move will polarise the Mac game developers. They will have 2 choices:

1) Give up development for Mac, on the assumption that Mac users will be able to run the Windows version

2) Realise that they will be wasting their money porting to the Mac if the games arrive late or cost more than the PC versions because nobody will buy them.

Already Blizzard fall into category 2 - World of Warcraft was released last year as a hybrid that could install on Mac or PC, and they have given support for Mac users from day 1.

Maybe this will jolt Mac game developers into making a decent effort to match PC games launch dates and price. Those that don't will fall by the wayside. Unfortunately I seem to recall that Microsoft bought the software company that developed Halo - so they're unlikely to choose option 2?

 

[MrCrowbar]

Don't worry about the lack of Mac games - just get a Nintendo Revolution later this year. If it turns out to be as good as it seems, then the Revolution will be the Mac of game consoles.

The Revoution will officially be called "Nintendo Go"...
Anyway, I like the idea of having an OS for Work (OSX) and Windows for games. Expirienced Windows users know that the more stuff you install, the slower your system is. A game may run at 50 fps on a fresh XP install, after 6 months it's down to 20 when you do a lot on the system.

But if you only have games on the XP partition, windows would live a lot longer. I've trief Half Life 2 on the low end Mac Mini today. You can run it full details on 1024 x 768. I think that's impressive for a mashine with integrated graphics. Kudos to apple for these little mashines. Just tape one on the back of a flat panel display and go on LAN parties with it

 

[progx]

just like the game developers have said, let's see where this goes.

i mean, it's a two way street: good and/or bad. the worst thing that could happen is it backfires and everyone deletes OS X from their Macs and puts on Vista.

i doubt it will happen. this is part of the switch campaign, making the transition even easier for former Windows users who buy Intel Macs. hell, Linux users have had to dual boot for years, but there is still a game market there!

relax and just watch. if we lose Mac games and the Mac all together, well it was fun while it lasted. until then, relax!

 

[bhibbert]

No bluetooth = new keyboard and mouse

This would be great but I am 8 balled because I use an Intel iMac with the Apple wireless keyboard and mouse. Bootcamp requires a wired keyboard and mouse.

I hope that Apple will support bluetooth in a revised beta or the final product.