Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive Arrives for Mac on Steam

In a sense, i find it silly that this game wont play on a 2011 MBA. Shame on Apple, shame on Valve. Why couldnt they have learned from the success of the original game that it isnt graphics, but gameplay that matters, and added a "****-ugly mode" for those willing to stand it? =(
 
divinox said:
In a sense, i find it silly that this game wont play on a 2011 MBA. Shame on Apple, shame on Valve. Why couldnt they have learned from the success of the original game that it isnt graphics, but gameplay that matters, and added a "****-ugly mode" for those willing to stand it? =(
Click to expand...

I was told by some gentleman that if your machine can run CS:S it will run GO. Guess he was wrong.
 
munkery said:
Seems strange that PCs of equal spec to those lower spec Macs are excluded.

Arbitrarily forcing users of older Windows PC hardware still capable of running the software to upgrade despite still being capable of running the software.

That seems like something only Apple would be accused of doing.
Click to expand...

Nothing is surprising in the world of PC gaming. Magically, over time and with each new version, CS used more and more resources, requiring better and better computers. In a world not up-side-down one would assume that developers would learn to use game engines more effectively over time, not the other way around. Then again, the world of PC gaming has probably never been tipped the right way. Maybe someone should send them a bunch of stickers saying "this side up".
 
I'm surprised at how well this runs on my 2009 MacBook Pro (9400m). Valve has been a great company all the way since the original Half Life. They know how to do software and how to make it run well!
 
Counter Strike is hands down an awesome game that anyone can enjoy! I'll admit if you're a new player, you'll have a rough time at first because of the skill level of some players (people have been playing this game for almost a decade now).

FPS on Macs are questionable though. My 2010 MBP would only get around 100~+ and dip to 60 on high settings. Build your own computer.
 
gotluck said:
Definitely a multiplayer game. The best shooter there is!
Click to expand...

If there's no campaign/single player, I definitely disagree with you on "the best shooter" claim. I enjoy large bosses and puzzles mixed into my shooters, like Half Life 2 or Quake 4. Time Splitters probably has the best multiplayer shooter experience I've ever had... Quake 4 wasn't bad... I'm not much of a judge for the category of online shooter though, because as I stated already, I'm not a big fan of them. I try them for a few hours, then I get bored and forget about the game.
 
divinox said:
Nothing is surprising in the world of PC gaming. Magically, over time and with each new version, CS used more and more resources, requiring better and better computers. In a world not up-side-down one would assume that developers would learn to use game engines more effectively over time, not the other way around. Then again, the world of PC gaming has probably never been tipped the right way. Maybe someone should send them a bunch of stickers saying "this side up".
Click to expand...

You don't know what you're talking about. Valve is well known for constantly updating their Source engine, adding new features and optimizing it. They actually keep from using the latest technologies in order to allow people with older computers to play their games.

Counter-Strike: Source has gotten more resource intensive because Valve keeps updating the engine over the years. They added HDR, multi-core rendering, they updated to the Orange Box engine, added detail textures, added a dynamic shadow system, etc. They slowly add these things in so, unless you only upgrade your computer every 4 years or so, chances are you'll still be able to play the game just fine.
 
You mean I DON'T need Windows 8, Nvidia GTX 690 Quad SLI, and a $1k Intel processor to game? :rolleyes:. Valve spends a few months building a Linux client and learns it can get better performance on Linux than on Windows. This could actually change the way Linux/OS X gaming is done in the future.
 
Will this run on my 2011 BTO 27" iMac with a 3.4GHz quad-core core-i7, 2GB AMD Radeon 6970M, and 16GB of RAM?

And can I use my Magic Trackpad for controls?
 
Bought the game and regret it 100%. My new MBA can run it just fine but this game is terrible and hasn't improved 1% since the original. I would even go as far as saying it is worse than the original. Back to Battlefield 3 I guess...
 
Requirements

Hey guys, has anybody tried to run this game on Mid 2011 Macbook Pro 13"
with i5 2.3GHz and Integrated Intel HD 3000?

I really want to play this game.
 
Kiwidaniel said:
I am able to play everything mostly on high. My computer is currently off but I remember low shader and AA off and vertical sync off.


I played PERFECTLY...heck even better than my Alienware m11x r2
Click to expand...

Nice! Is this at native 1440 x 900 resolution? Also, are you running the Mac version or Windows version?
 
Too bad i only have a 2011 MacBook Air right now, LOL makes me want to buy it and play again, i used to play CS 1.6 and be pretty good at it a couple of years ago when I stopped but I know my mac won't handle it. Who else is on the same boat I am? ^^


Maybe next year if I get myself an iMac.
 
battlefieldfan1 said:
Look, I'm just saying dropping $2000 on a facebook machine to play CS when you can get a better-looking PC at 10x the performance at $1000 is a gigantic waste of time and money.
Click to expand...

Can you give a concrete example of this? 10x the performance for the same price, really?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back