Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
'Call of Duty 4' and 'Civilization IV: Colonization' Hit the Mac App Store
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Its possible it will scare people away, I know if games were 50 on my gaming platform I would look elsewhere.
CoD4 is the highest-grossing game right now, so I don't think so. Mac users like to spend money for the sake of convenience.
While the price for such an old game is ridiculous, the following two sentences sum it all up:
umm Seriously?
http://store.steampowered.com/agecheck/app/7940/
Steam COD4 = $29.95
WTF would buy COD4 from the mac app store and steam is $20 less!
http://store.steampowered.com/agecheck/app/7940/
Steam COD4 = $29.95
WTF would buy COD4 from the mac app store and steam is $20 less!
Funny thing, I bought Civilization IV complete for 6.99$ on Steam during the holidays. That includes the base game, all expensions and Colonization. 
Steam is still the best place for games.
Steam is still the best place for games.
What kind of question is this? You don't understand why people aren't like you? Some people like to own content. It's as simple as that.
Edit: By the way, I did get it cheaper, via Steam. $14.99 sale price! At prices like these, I'm content with purchasing digital content.
Funny thing, I bought Civilization IV complete for 6.99$ on Steam during the holidays. That includes the base game, all expensions and Colonization.
Steam is still the best place for games.
Agreed! I love Steam too
Last edited:
The future is coming
That argument is correct if you assume that the processing needs of the desktop environment remain constant. But the processing needs of the desktop environment will continue to increase, as they always have.
Perhaps you weren't around in the old days, when computers did only text - no pictures, no audio, no video. The desktop environment in those days required a certain level of computing power. Spreadsheets and word processors had text only. Let's call this the text adventure era, or the Zork era.
Then they started having pictures on computers - you could have a sketch of something on your computer or a crude drawing. Look at the release of the Mac in 1984 - they promoted the fact that you could make black and white drawings and include them in your letter! Let's call this the graphics adventure era, or the King's Quest era.
Then you started getting sound as a feature. At first it was beeps and boops, but at some point someone figured out out to put music into a computer file so you could play it on your desktop. Let's call this the audio era, or the Napster era.
Around that time they started putting actual pictures (rather than drawings) on computers and the internet. Screen resolutions used to be 340 x 210, but by this time were around 1,024 x 768. More desktop horsepower is required to drive the data. You could log on to Mosaic, click a link, wait 10 to 30 seconds and see - a picture of Saturn! Let's call this the picture era, or the First Porn era.
Then comes video. More horsepower still. Let's call this the Second Porn era.
Now we're up to today. Will the need for more and more desktop power stop? No. Someone will invent something that needs desktop power. Maybe holographic visuals. Maybe some other 3D environment. Maybe smell-o-vision or some full body sensor suit.
Everyone must upgrade.
That argument is correct if you assume that the processing needs of the desktop environment remain constant. But the processing needs of the desktop environment will continue to increase, as they always have.
Perhaps you weren't around in the old days, when computers did only text - no pictures, no audio, no video. The desktop environment in those days required a certain level of computing power. Spreadsheets and word processors had text only. Let's call this the text adventure era, or the Zork era.
Then they started having pictures on computers - you could have a sketch of something on your computer or a crude drawing. Look at the release of the Mac in 1984 - they promoted the fact that you could make black and white drawings and include them in your letter! Let's call this the graphics adventure era, or the King's Quest era.
Then you started getting sound as a feature. At first it was beeps and boops, but at some point someone figured out out to put music into a computer file so you could play it on your desktop. Let's call this the audio era, or the Napster era.
Around that time they started putting actual pictures (rather than drawings) on computers and the internet. Screen resolutions used to be 340 x 210, but by this time were around 1,024 x 768. More desktop horsepower is required to drive the data. You could log on to Mosaic, click a link, wait 10 to 30 seconds and see - a picture of Saturn! Let's call this the picture era, or the First Porn era.
Then comes video. More horsepower still. Let's call this the Second Porn era.
Now we're up to today. Will the need for more and more desktop power stop? No. Someone will invent something that needs desktop power. Maybe holographic visuals. Maybe some other 3D environment. Maybe smell-o-vision or some full body sensor suit.
Everyone must upgrade.
I'm just amazed how stupid people are to pay more for data they cannot do anything with than the same data on a physical item for less money and which they can do as they wish with.
I can't think of anything other than stupid as a term to use, sorry.
It would be like me saying you can look at the photo I have made for $12, but you can't actually take it away or do anything with it, but you can look at it whenever you want.
Or give me $8 and I will mail you a real copy of the photo that you can do anything you like with, take it round your friends house to show them the photo, even sell the photo when you don't want it any more.
And you picked the $12 option. I'd be happy, as I made more money from you for giving you less and secretly think you are a mug.
Agreed! I love Steam too
Not to mention buying from Steam gives you access to both the Windows and Mac games when both are available. Mac App Store ? Yeah...
Anyone serious about buying games shouldn't even click on the Mac App Store and Apple should just make the "Games" section redirect to Steam.
Mac gaming has a huge flaw that cannot be overcome until Apple decides to fix it.
Most people buy mini's and iMac's and the video is always a generation behind.
Even if Apple made the iMac's video upgradeable they would get a market. I'd play Mac games but I have a Hack Pro with a 5870. In true Apple terms the market for those who drop 3K on a Mac Pro so they can play a game with a modern video card as well as on the PC is non-existent.
Steam is a great concept but the implementation sucks. I will never, ever, buy another STEAM required game again.
I bought Just Cause 2 for Windows. Tell's me I must have Steam, not wants, MUST have it. No where on the box did it say I had to have Steam.
So I build my Hack Pro and now it recognizes my version of Windows as a different machine, old machine is gone. I cannot reinstall Just Cause 2 until I write a code they sent me on the back of the instruction manual where the CD key is, scan it, and send it back to them.
And they wonder why piracy is so high. I took the game back, bitched up a storm and got a refund.
I reboot into Windows simply to play games, no other reason.
Most people buy mini's and iMac's and the video is always a generation behind.
Even if Apple made the iMac's video upgradeable they would get a market. I'd play Mac games but I have a Hack Pro with a 5870. In true Apple terms the market for those who drop 3K on a Mac Pro so they can play a game with a modern video card as well as on the PC is non-existent.
Steam is a great concept but the implementation sucks. I will never, ever, buy another STEAM required game again.
I bought Just Cause 2 for Windows. Tell's me I must have Steam, not wants, MUST have it. No where on the box did it say I had to have Steam.
So I build my Hack Pro and now it recognizes my version of Windows as a different machine, old machine is gone. I cannot reinstall Just Cause 2 until I write a code they sent me on the back of the instruction manual where the CD key is, scan it, and send it back to them.
And they wonder why piracy is so high. I took the game back, bitched up a storm and got a refund.
I reboot into Windows simply to play games, no other reason.
are you high?
as long as you have the steam client and logged in you can play any game in your steam library. unless the game has it's own DRM that prevents it
Well I do agree with you that digital content should be cheaper than physical. As I've posted in my edit in previous post, I acquired CoD4 for $14.99 via Steam. And I'm very happy with my purchase. I love CoD4 enough to own it and I'll settle with that price.
I like digital content more because I strive for minimalism. I personally enjoy the idea of not having to maintain physical libraries and saving space. However for movies, it's just a different story. This is where common sense kicks in, which is why I just haven't adopted iTunes HD movie or TV content yet. I can have the same film on blu-ray with better quality at 50% cheaper than in iTunes just by shopping around on places like Amazon. In fact, I think the iTunes movie business is a just a joke right now. Limited selection, lower quality, higher prices. This is just bad business and I'm not sure why people buy those. And then they're is netflix and hulu...
And I do agree that $49.99 is a crazy price, but there is a bigger picture to this that is emerging. For example some game companies like EA are trying to negate the used video game market by having their games unlocked and registered online and have them tie to your account. If this trend continues to grow, then consumers will find they have no choice but to swallow that $49.99 price tag (unless they're smart shoppers and use Steam instead of the Mac App Store.
).it is but its garbage, the optimization in that game is so bad my computer cant even get 60fps (its a dirty console port)
if my gaming rig cant do it, no mac can
Core2duo E8400@4.04GHz
8GB DDR2@1200MHz
Dual GTX470s in SLI
2048x1536 23" Samsung monitor
i wouldn't know, i play it on the x-box
except for some old stuff i have like civ 4 and total war games i'm not playing games on a computer again.
going forward is cheap laptop to hold data, iphones/ipad for mobile, x-box/ps3 for most games
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPad; U; CPU OS 3_2_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/531.21.10 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.4 Mobile/7B500 Safari/531.21.10)
I'll stick with Steam for my cross compatible games for now but this could be a good distribution medium for Mac exclusive gamers.
I'll stick with Steam for my cross compatible games for now but this could be a good distribution medium for Mac exclusive gamers.
I agree with your point but your era names are a bit off. The first music on computers came a long time before napster - maybe even before the guy that wrote napster was born.
Ahhh, my first SoundBlaster. I still miss Dr. Sbaitso.
HELLO [UserName], MY NAME IS DOCTOR SBAITSO.
I AM HERE TO HELP YOU.
SAY WHATEVER IS IN YOUR MIND FREELY,
OUR CONVERSATION WILL BE KEPT IN STRICT CONFIDENCE.
MEMORY CONTENTS WILL BE WIPED OFF AFTER YOU LEAVE,
SO, TELL ME ABOUT YOUR PROBLEMS.
Everyone keeps saying that competition is good. Doesn't this also apply when Apple competes with Steam ?
Why all the complaints that Apple is selling games on the Apple App store. The people who know about Steam will get their Mac games through Steam and the rest will get them through the Apple app store.
Why all the complaints that Apple is selling games on the Apple App store. The people who know about Steam will get their Mac games through Steam and the rest will get them through the Apple app store.
It's not satire. It's my opinion. For those who read this idea as ridiculous, tell me why. Do you know why the iPhone exploded as far as it has? Because ANYONE can pick it up and use it. ANYONE can go to the app store, find new things to do, click a button and go. This is why the app store has proven to be as successful as it has as a distribution model.
You and I might be aware of where to go to find the best prices and software, and WE might know to look on Google for a piece of software that can fill a function we need. But, the fact is, the majority of computer users out there don't know how to do this. For these users, a central repository of all software and solutions would not only make it easier to install and manage new programs, but to become aware of these programs.
Most people don't know what macupdate is, or how to use a dmg file, or where to store applications, or what shareware is... They just want to find applications and use them - just like iDevice users.
This is why the Mac App store came to be. The problem right now is the fragmentation. It would be a GOOD thing to simplify this process - for all users.
As far as not "owning" the products you download, you never own the product. You're only licensing one use of the product for yourself. The App store does the same thing, except it makes it harder to break the licensing agreement, since it's tied to your account. Also, you can always re-download anything you purchase, so you don't have to worry about install discs. Purchasing and installing is one click, and you don't have to go anywhere else to view reviews, or view similar products to compare. So, for the user, win.
Current OS X developers have a tough job of marketing to an already small user base. Small developers have it even worse, they need to setup payment methods, control serial numbers, bandwidth, marketing and so on. On the App store, Apple does this all for you, and takes 30%. If that's the only negative, I haven't heard one developer complain about the 30% for the service Apple provides. Developers, win.
So, who loses?