Can Apple Be Competitive in VR/Gaming?

Huntn

macrumors demi-god
Original poster
May 5, 2008
17,054
16,543
The Misty Mountains
I’m thinking this might be one area where the premium price of Mac hardware will bite it. Apologies for sounding negative, but when I look at my $1000 PC Build, I see bunches of USB connections and multiple HDMI connectors and wonder just how compatible an iMac is?
Looking at https://www.apple.com/imac/specs/, I don’t see a HDMI connector, it has 4 USB3s, 2 thunderbolts, 1 SDXC CardSlot, and a gigabit Ethernet.

My Occulus Rift requires, a USB, HDMI, and a seperste USB connection for each of the 3 sensor, besides having multiple external drives each requiring a USB connection. Is there something on the iMac that can use an adapter to get the HDMI connection?

My previous MBP had a mediocre dedicated graphic card (sold for $2400). The new iMac top of the line graphic card is a Radeon Pro 560X with 4GB of GDDR5 memory. Is that competitive?

My PC has an updated Gigabyte GeForce RTX 2070 Windforce 8G Graphics Card, 3X Windforce Fans, 8GB 256-Bit GDDR6, GV-N2070WF3-8GC Video Card. Now granted this sells for $480 and pushes the cost of my original build up by $280 to $1280.

So there are 3 things I can ask:
  • Are there popular VR apps out there for non-gaming purposes?
  • Can a new iMac have the connections to run an Occukus Rift, and without an external GPU that runs $400+?
  • Just how much money must be spent to get VR gaming on a Mac? And is it competitive in this regard even when paying a significantly larger purchase price?
 

a2jack

macrumors 6502
Feb 5, 2013
363
206
Ignore my last post I screwed up. LOL>

Huntn. Got any more clips like that train drive? Wife liked it too. a2
 
Last edited:

a2jack

macrumors 6502
Feb 5, 2013
363
206
Huntn. Are you planing to upgrade your Oculus Rift to the wireless Quest ?
 

a2jack

macrumors 6502
Feb 5, 2013
363
206
"VR for Mac CAD/CAM/CAE/Science but not Gaming.."

Yes, looks like that's going to be the bottom line for Mac for a long time to come.

I'm disappointed, as I hoped this could be done within my Apple system knowledge and not have to get back into the Windows world.

I do feel VR will play a big role in the lives of modern men and women in the very near future.

For some, this will be a better life than the reality they now live in. For others, just a pass-time. Either way it is happening now in our techie world, and it's power will continue to grow. a2
 

Huntn

macrumors demi-god
Original poster
May 5, 2008
17,054
16,543
The Misty Mountains
Huntn. Are you planing to upgrade your Oculus Rift to the wireless Quest ?
I’ve not thought about it at this point. While the Occulus is impressive, the resolution needs substantial improvement, and honestly I’d describe it as more of a novelty than my primary gaming device. My biggest issue is the inability to conveniently reference gaming notes and crib sheets. For most games, I keep a quick reference sheet of commands. In World of Warships I’ve got a visual reference for ship armor.
[doublepost=1561730479][/doublepost]
Very true. Your presence is greatly missed. a2
Sorry about that. Quotes or citing me (with@) do abetter job of getting my attention. :)
[doublepost=1561730805][/doublepost]
"VR for Mac CAD/CAM/CAE/Science but not Gaming.."

Yes, looks like that's going to be the bottom line for Mac for a long time to come.

I'm disappointed, as I hoped this could be done within my Apple system knowledge and not have to get back into the Windows world.

I do feel VR will play a big role in the lives of modern men and women in the very near future.

For some, this will be a better life than the reality they now live in. For others, just a pass-time. Either way it is happening now in our techie world, and it's power will continue to grow. a2
I like Apple and love my MBP. I used to love it for gaming when it had a dedicated graphic card, but Apple’s price is now too high for such things now that I no longer travel regularly, and the incentive is no longer there to game on the road.

Apple does many things right, but gaming is not one of them, and it just can’t compete with PCs in this regard.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: a2jack

gkarris

macrumors G3
Dec 31, 2004
8,002
699
"No escape from Reality..."
Plus rumors have it that Macintosh will eventually go Apple ARM processors, leaving Intel/Windows behind - hardly anymore gaming on those machines...
Huntn. Are you planing to upgrade your Oculus Rift to the wireless Quest ?
You have to remember that on that wireless Quest headset, it is STILL a MOBILE platform so you're probably not gonna get the VR graphics fidelity that say a PC or PSVR will give you...

If you are looking for just smaller experiences or simplified VR graphics without wires then the Quest VR is for you.

The games and stuff I like requires a minimum of a PS4 Pro for me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: a2jack and Huntn

Huntn

macrumors demi-god
Original poster
May 5, 2008
17,054
16,543
The Misty Mountains
Plus rumors have it that Macintosh will eventually go Apple ARM processors, leaving Intel/Windows behind - hardly anymore gaming on those machines...


You have to remember that on that wireless Quest headset, it is STILL a MOBILE platform so you're probably not gonna get the VR graphics fidelity that say a PC or PSVR will give you...

If you are looking for just smaller experiences or simplified VR graphics without wires then the Quest VR is for you.

The games and stuff I like requires a minimum of a PS4 Pro for me.
Replied to here upon mention of PS4 Pro: :)
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/virtual-reality-in-gaming.1966757/page-6#post-27506392
 

TheFluffyDuck

macrumors 6502
Jul 26, 2012
496
1,143
Apple doesn't understand gaming. Nor does it care too because supporting it in any real fashion would require putting in graphics cards, rather than integrated intel garbage. This will affect their margins. Sadly VR needs some good hardware to run (although quest and PSVR do a good job), so thats why we wont get it.

Supporting games = less profit margin on hardware.

Their hope is with this subscription model which will fail horribly. Gamers don't want a subscription to games, they want to support indie developers, get on board with pre-release betas, and be involved with the game. Everypatch is a new adventure. Gamers want to be at the forefront of game innovation, story and core gameplay mechanics. Not only that many gamers are benchmark fanatics. Macs cant hold a candle to a similar priced PC.

There is currently a backlash to greedy publishers and AAA titles thanks to all the "loot creates" and IAP, something Apple helped facilitate rather than police and ultimately killed enthusiasm for mobile gaming in quick fasion. Sadly, all these games are going to be mobile equivalent so they can run on all apples lowest common denominator hardware, Apple TV through to an iMac, so we are talking about mobile games for the casual market. But a casual gamer buys a couple of games, they don't want a subscription, and gamers as a hobby don't want garbage mobile games. So I don't know who this subscription is aimed at.

I don't think Apple could support gaming in any real capacity, their company is already associated as 1) expensive, 2) incompatible, and 3) underpowered hardware, thats three strikes as far as most gamers are concerned.

Apple had a chance with the iTunes store, but allowed it to become a graveyard of IAP shovel ware.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Huntn and a2jack

ErikGrim

macrumors 601
Jun 20, 2003
4,228
2,769
Brisbane, Australia
The VR hypetrain seems to have departed for this round. I expect it to have another resurgence in 15 years or so when people forgot about why it failed yet again.
 

Huntn

macrumors demi-god
Original poster
May 5, 2008
17,054
16,543
The Misty Mountains
Apple doesn't understand gaming. Nor does it care too because supporting it in any real fashion would require putting in graphics cards, rather than integrated intel garbage. This will affect their margins. Sadly VR needs some good hardware to run (although quest and PSVR do a good job), so thats why we wont get it.

Supporting games = less profit margin on hardware.

Their hope is with this subscription model which will fail horribly. Gamers don't want a subscription to games, they want to support indie developers, get on board with pre-release betas, and be involved with the game. Everypatch is a new adventure. Gamers want to be at the forefront of game innovation, story and core gameplay mechanics. Not only that many gamers are benchmark fanatics. Macs cant hold a candle to a similar priced PC.

There is currently a backlash to greedy publishers and AAA titles thanks to all the "loot creates" and IAP, something Apple helped facilitate rather than police and ultimately killed enthusiasm for mobile gaming in quick fasion. Sadly, all these games are going to be mobile equivalent so they can run on all apples lowest common denominator hardware, Apple TV through to an iMac, so we are talking about mobile games for the casual market. But a casual gamer buys a couple of games, they don't want a subscription, and gamers as a hobby don't want garbage mobile games. So I don't know who this subscription is aimed at.

I don't think Apple could support gaming in any real capacity, their company is already associated as 1) expensive, 2) incompatible, and 3) underpowered hardware, thats three strikes as far as most gamers are concerned.

Apple had a chance with the iTunes store, but allowed it to become a graveyard of IAP shovel ware.
Apple’s pricing model has and will continue to hold them back with gamers and there are a lot of gamers. My guess is their sales are so good with iOS hardware, they don’t care.

Regarding subscriptions, I have tolerated, but have always disliked them. Ironically the game model that I have spent the most money on, are two free to play games. World of Tanks and World of Warships which both use the same brilliant finance model.

If not interested in those games details, you can stop here or keep reading. :)

You can play for absolutely free, up to a point, but if you want to own more than 8 ship, you will buy ship slots, which are cheap, a dollar each or something like that. I currently own 50 ships. And the game is not pay to win, however it is pay to advance faster.

Where they make their big money is selling premium ships, that do one thing consistently, they have a higher rate of earning in-game credits, the credits you use to outfit ships you own and buy new regular ships and unlike the regular ships, they cost real money to buy, anywhere from $10 to the highest price I’ve seen is $140, maybe $180. Along with being able to train commanders from any ship of a particular nation they come from, they have an attractive feature of some kind, a wicked offensive ability, and most of them have weaknesses that give them a disadvantage over the regular ships that are earned, but there is much greater potential to earn credits. Now you can buy a ship alone, or buy a ship, with an experienced commander, and a bunch of flags that give economic benefits during battle. The extra goodies are what drive the prices up. These ships are divided into tiers, the higher the ship the stronger it is.

I’ve probably spent $450 in 6 months of playing, that would be $75 a month, 5x as much as I would be paying for a World of Warcraft subscription, so I can progress faster. The most expensive ships I have are $50 each and some $30 ships. I believe Star Citizen will also be using this model. It is devious and sinister if the goal is prying money out of players. ;)
 

TheFluffyDuck

macrumors 6502
Jul 26, 2012
496
1,143
Apple’s pricing model has and will continue to hold them back with gamers and there are a lot of gamers. My guess is their sales are so good with iOS hardware, they don’t care.

Regarding subscriptions, I have tolerated, but have always disliked them. Ironically the game model that I have spent the most money on, are two free to play games. World of Tanks and World of Warships which both use the same brilliant finance model.

If not interested in those games details, you can stop here or keep reading. :)

You can play for absolutely free, up to a point, but if you want to own more than 8 ship, you will buy ship slots, which are cheap, a dollar each or something like that. I currently own 50 ships. And the game is not pay to win, however it is pay to advance faster.

Where they make their big money is selling premium ships, that do one thing consistently, they have a higher rate of earning in-game credits, the credits you use to outfit ships you own and buy new regular ships and unlike the regular ships, they cost real money to buy, anywhere from $10 to the highest price I’ve seen is $140, maybe $180. Along with being able to train commanders from any ship of a particular nation they come from, they have an attractive feature of some kind, a wicked offensive ability, and most of them have weaknesses that give them a disadvantage over the regular ships that are earned, but there is much greater potential to earn credits. Now you can buy a ship alone, or buy a ship, with an experienced commander, and a bunch of flags that give economic benefits during battle. The extra goodies are what drive the prices up. These ships are divided into tiers, the higher the ship the stronger it is.

I’ve probably spent $450 in 6 months of playing, that would be $75 a month, 5x as much as I would be paying for a World of Warcraft subscription, so I can progress faster. The most expensive ships I have are $50 each and some $30 ships. I believe Star Citizen will also be using this model. It is devious and sinister if the goal is prying money out of players. ;)
Subscription models can work for a game. An individual game that a company can pour everything into. Those games you have mentioned are fairly graphically intense and continue to offer constant content. From what we see about the Apple games is they are lower quality games, and one offs, and instead of new content we just get new games.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Huntn

Huntn

macrumors demi-god
Original poster
May 5, 2008
17,054
16,543
The Misty Mountains
Subscription models can work for a game. An individual game that a company can pour everything into. Those games you have mentioned are fairly graphically intense and continue to offer constant content. From what we see about the Apple games is they are lower quality games, and one offs, and instead of new content we just get new games.
Subscriptions worked well for World of Warcraft. There is nothing I’ve found in the App Store that was compelling enough for any long term play. For Apple device owners who care about gaming without spending a fortune, the choices are clear, a $300 Console or a $1000 PC, not a $3000 MBR that a $1000 PC runs circles around.

Now don’t these comments out of context. :) For my activities outside of gaming, my MBR is my go-to device, because I can afford it. But I know many who have declared Macs as too expensive.