Well, they could start by improving their documentation. It's in a pitiful state. Apple, if you are reading this, hire me, I will whip you into place
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.
Future for Mac games in M1 era
- Thread starter cocoua
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Well, they could start by improving their documentation. It's in a pitiful state. Apple, if you are reading this, hire me, I will whip you into place
If few cryptic sentences here and there and a badly formatted PDF without hyperlinks counts as well documented...
But to be honest, Microsoft's DX12 documentation is not any better and don't let me even start about Vulkan, which is completely unreadable unless you are already an advanced user. Metal is probably the easiest to get in for a beginner but finding information on more advanced topics is very difficult.
I have lost all hope for Macs to be a gaming machine, even the under dog one. After I got my MBP 2015 and saw how it suffocates to run the simplest of games and CPU temp reaches 90C/194F that was it for me. Not to mention the complete lack of games, we are living on whatever Feral or Aspyr decide to port some years later after their release.
Currently the top selling games on App Store is The Sims 2 , a 17 year old game for $30 🤣🤣 this just shows how bad the situation is when it comes to Mac gaming.
-If they buy Sony they also buy the studios they own hence they can force them to publish to the MacOS platform. If they use M chips and Metal for the next Playstation, this also means games published on PS will be easier to port for MacOS/iOS just like Microsoft is doing with DirectX on Xbox and Windows.
-I will believe it when I see it, if 80% of Metal is about gaming I do not see it utilized on MacOS. Maybe its for iOS which makes a lot of sense because AFAIK games are the biggest money maker on iOS so much so that Apple made a dedicated section to it on the App Store.
That being said I also have seen many companies develop things that never get truly utilized like the Xbox Camera, PS3 motion controls, Vulkan that does not seem to be used by Windows games nor MacOS/iOS games, Photo Booth on MacOS?
@leman
if you say is true about metal 80% for games and the games driven GPU, and how powerful the M1 chip is inside iPad Pro...then this is very plausable to me:
Sketchy Rumor Claims Apple Developing Nintendo Switch-Style Gaming Console
if you say is true about metal 80% for games and the games driven GPU, and how powerful the M1 chip is inside iPad Pro...then this is very plausable to me:
Sketchy Rumor Claims Apple Developing Nintendo Switch-Style Gaming Console
This sad topic reminds me of the ATARI Jaguar in the 90s. No matter how great the hardware is, its success depends on widespread, long-term support through quality software titles. The fans wanted it, ATARI wanted it and it didn't happen. In the case of macOS the manufacturer of the platform doesn't even give a ****. How is anything going to improve here?
How would you explain the success of the PC then? In the early days of PC gaming Microsoft was anything but a gaming company (apart from the MS Flight Simulator series). I think the PC platform offered a combination of advantages that no other console/homer computer could compete with and which finally made it so successful: much more processing power and memory (games got bigger and better) at more and more reasonable prices and the openness and modularity of software and hardware configurations allowing for innovations like 3D GPUs. Reasonable prices and modularity are the opposite of what Apple has to offer.
That's why I keep my MP 5,1 for as long as possible, catch up with older titles like the Dark Souls trilogy, enjoy several Metroidvanias and hope for a soon-to-be-announced release date of Hollow Knight Silksong.
How would you explain the success of the PC then? In the early days of PC gaming Microsoft was anything but a gaming company (apart from the MS Flight Simulator series). I think the PC platform offered a combination of advantages that no other console/homer computer could compete with and which finally made it so successful: much more processing power and memory (games got bigger and better) at more and more reasonable prices and the openness and modularity of software and hardware configurations allowing for innovations like 3D GPUs. Reasonable prices and modularity are the opposite of what Apple has to offer.
That's why I keep my MP 5,1 for as long as possible, catch up with older titles like the Dark Souls trilogy, enjoy several Metroidvanias and hope for a soon-to-be-announced release date of Hollow Knight Silksong.
ATARI Jaguar was a failed gaming console that only sold a handful of units. On the other hand, macOS is the second most popular personal computing system in the world, with hundreds of millions of active users as well as a substantial market share among premium-class machines. I don't see how you can compare the two.
At the same time, it can be argued that the success of Windows and companies that produce gaming hardware has actually slowed down the rate of innovation. Windows is overly obsessed with backwards compatibility and the GPUs are locked into a fight between two vendors that basically use identical technology. One problem with popular platforms is that they create a lock-in, which makes it very difficult to innovate beyond a certain point. Also, don't forget that you are referring to a time when GPU technology was in it's infancy — there was a great need, and companies rushed in to fill the void. It's a completely different situation today, with this technology being on the peak of it's maturity.
Apple instead is taking a different path via vertical integration. This allows them to innovate where PC cannot, because Apple can introduce new technologies while also integrating them directly into the platform. I think the GPU technology is a great example. Vertical integration allows Apple to implement a radically different GPU architecture, which IMO is the most significant innovation in desktop GPU space since the advent of programmable shaders. And since Apple is doing it's own thing, it is not subject to the limitations of the collaboratively designed APIs such as Vulkan or DX12 that have to cater to the least common denominator. Which again means that they can deliver a programming environment that is more consistent, more user friendly and more close to the actual hardware while allowing the developers to fully utilize its unique features.
Older games run perfectly well on M1 Macs, either in a Windows 10 ARM VM or under Wine/Crossover.
Yes, the ATARI Jaguar sold poorly (I got a SNES instead). It's a hen and egg problem with new platforms: no buyers -> no incentive to develop -> no buyers. And other factors like how hard it is to develop for a platform. SEGA Saturn and Sony PS3 come to mind. Of course, macOS is many orders of magnitude as widespread as the Jaguar was, but that alone doesn't improve the gaming situation. My point of comparison was that in the case of macOS the manufacturer doesn't care about gaming, whereas in the case of the Jaguar it was the only purpose of the system and it didn't work out.
I agree with your point of view on the Windows way and the new Apple way of integrating GPU power. But again, success will depend on support of the software companies.
The purchase of an M1 mac is not an option for me atm if it's just about running older games perfectly.
I agree with your point of view on the Windows way and the new Apple way of integrating GPU power. But again, success will depend on support of the software companies.
The purchase of an M1 mac is not an option for me atm if it's just about running older games perfectly.
NVidia and AMD’s developer support is honestly a lot better than Microsoft’s for DirectX. When we made games towards the end of the project we would often have engineers around from them, who would help us with some of the more advanced topics, and you can learn a lot from the developer samples that are part of the graphics card vendors dev support.
If Apple are serious about making their own GPU’s, they should have a dev support section which does these kinds of jobs.
Well apple are pumping billions into ATV+ , rumors are that they put half a billion usd into new games that are being developed (rumors) , as everything with developers , it’s about money , and money upfront is the money they love best, let’s see how this plays out in the upcoming year or so!
And this is further exacerbated by the fact that consoles are just that, consoles. They have no utility beyond gaming, so a software developer must be very sure of the platform's success in order to justify an investment. This is absolutely not the case with Macs that will be around gaming notwithstanding.
As I said before, I don't think the comparison with new consoles makes much sense here. Macs are a stable platform and there is no doubt that they will remain a successful product for years to come.
Also, Apple absolutely does care about gaming. They have developed state-of the art GPUs that focus on games as primary feature and they offer a good software development platform. They obviously don't intend to turn the Mac into a dedicated gaming station, but that's not the point either. Apple sees the Mac as a multi-purpose productivity and entertainment system, and gaming is a first-class citizen on the platform.
This is absolutely the case. And this support has never been better, with more and more gaming companies committing to supporting the Mac. It is still a far cry from the primary gaming platform (Windows), but it's better than it was jut a few years ago.
Oh, but they do. There are multiple support channels where you can directly communicate with engineers on the GPU team. And they do offer direct support to companies such as Larian, unsure about the conditions though.
Hence the use of first-party exclusives to drive early adoption. Most people will buy a new console with two or three AAA titles, and if one or two of those hook them and stand up to repeated play then they consider their purchase a success even if the base machine cost 300 euro’s.
We will have to wait and see how Apple approaches gaming in the M1 era. The cpu+gpu package is more than powerful enough to be a good gaming platform, but to make any of the hardware types a destination for gaming will require more than just decent hardware.
But I do think it is encouraging. There is a limit beyond which more processing power only contributes a little to an improved experience, and I think integrated GPU’s in particular are slowly starting to edge up to that point. The difference between a game running at 60 fps and one running at 120 fps is minimal and it’s essentially something for the hardcore to worry about, and those people are not Apple’s main audience.
Apple’s audience does want to play games, it is just a question of working out what kind of games they want to play. Mobile is its own thing, it is evolving all the time. But Apple’s other platforms are underserved.
We already know how Apple is going to approach this by looking at history. iMac G3's and G4's and the iBooks came with BUNDLED GAMES. Were they AAA games? No, but they were at least there and Cro Mag Rally is a more fun game than you'd think. Heck, they even came with AppleWorks, which is another surprisingly robust piece of software. None of the "Pro" models (PowerMac and PowerBook) came with bundled ANYTHINGS.
The Apple of today doesn't do this at all. You get nothing. They haven't bundled like that since the PowerPC days for some reason or another, likely licensing issues. Their excuse now can be, "Well, the App Store has tons of free crap," but it isn't the same as seeing the games and other fun goodies that came with your computer.
More soapboxing from me...
Honestly, the Mac mini could have been the ultimate "disposable game machine." You use it until the next gen comes out, sell the previous gen, and get the newest.
It really did start out that way with the G4 mini. The ads even dared you to try to play Halo on a bargain basement PC of that era. Then came the Intel era and those same minis got reduced to dog turds thanks to those awesome GMAs in there! By the time NVIDIA came in to save Apple's butt, the damage was done and the mini was seen as a dog turd for games. ATi had a good hand at saving their skins in those 2011 models also, but then Apple went right back to Intel Integrated Crapware. I still have my 2011 Radeon mini, mainly because Intel Integrated Crapware is a bad experience. Metal can't save you when you are faced with Integrated Crapware, no matter how good the API is.
Apple is in a position to market those minis again as a "disposable game machine," mainly because M1 Integrated Graphics mop the floor with Intel Integrated Crapware. It can be the "mean green gaming machine," because those chips have serious horsepower and don't warm the planet via massive heat like Intel chips do. Yet here we are, spinning our wheels because Apple is either too obstinate or just too stupid to realize the potential.
I think this is a little misleading. Yeah support has never been better, but you’re starting from near bottom. Compared to Windows, there is still a lot of progress that needs to be made. The progress made by Apple for more serious gaming (i.e demonstrating converting hardcore PC to Mac) has not been monumental.
On the face of it, Apple gets great Indie game support, but poor “big studio” support. If Apple wants to be considered a player in the current 3 horse race that is “real” gaming, they need to do a whole lot better.
iThink Blizzard is about the only big name to support the macOS publicly. And that isn't even fully supported as some of their stuff won't run outside of Windows.
The fault lies with Apple for not thinking people play. The fault lies with Apple for poor documentation i.e. Metal. The fault lies with Apple for INTEL INTEGRATED CRAPWARE in "pro" systems. The fault lies with Apple for not showing off games on an M1 (framerates, etc) in a way that consumers can EXPERIENCE instead of just reading benchmarks. Developers can only do so much.
Having M1 Mac-based Twitch streamers (especially with those M1 minis) would do hardware sales more good than any benchmark data...
Apple was always the second most popular system in the world with millions of users, 30 years later it doesn't seem it helped much
Because you are confusing market share and success. The overwhelming majority of PCs are cheap, low-quality devices targeted at consumers who have only one requirement: spend as little money as possible. Apple never cared about that part of the market. They only ever targeted the premium segment, and they do very well there. I could not find any sources looking at only premium PCs, but eyeballing the sales data, Apple probably takes 50-70% of the premium market ($1000 and up). It's just like with the phones: Apple's market share is less than 20% but their revenue is over 40% of the global smartphone market. Because even "budget" Apple devices are still premium devices.
Apple is very comfortable with their market share, and they don't care about being number one global. They target the relatively wealthy customer, who is willing in spending money on software and services, and they actually dominate that part of the market. Increasing the global market share would targeting low-cost devices and less "generous" customer, and Apple has no interest in that for obvious reasons.
What generally happens is that software developers make their games for the largest market, and that the extra sales from being on the smaller markets get picked up afterwards with ports. That’s why you see late titles that are not always well-adapted to more limited hardware capabilities, the budget for a port is based on projected sales. Because the titles are late and adapted, the platform is seen as not being a premier destination for games, and people don’t buy the platform in order to play its games.
The PC consumer market is largely driven by games, the cutting edge caters to a gaming crowd — the gaming hardware is there, the developer tools are there, so the software developers go there. Apple doesn’t participate in that market, and that is fine, but if they want games software to be a first class citizen in their market they need to take a different approach to style and content.
Take The Witcher 3. It was developed for PC in a photorealistic style, it sold 27m copies over a number of years, and in 2019 it was brought to the Nintendo Switch. It was criticised for low draw distances and popping-up of important things in the view, and it sold 700k copies in the first three months, which would be the bulk of its sales. On the PC it was a premier title, AAA, something people would buy a new computer for, yet it didn’t sell massive amounts on the Switch because the audience was different and the port suffered from technical compromises.
The Switch market approaches the style of titles differently from the PC market, the two are quite distinct. Apple have not tried to define a style for the Mac games market, they have left it to other people to develop in a kind of free-market approach, and as a result it has been surviving on a steady diet of ports.
I agree 100% with you and I think the Mac should not have its own style as the PC style is its own style, the Switch user base is targeted towards people who rather play kiddy games like Mario Kart and Animal Crossing over Wither 3 and DOOM-2016 .
None the less, this does not prove that Macs being the second most popular OS with millions of users will help it in the games market. I think Apple 100% realise this that people who want to game will get the more capable and cheaper PC, and enabling games on their platform- while will make the current user base happier - it will not make them grow or make more revenue.
Mac users will continue to own Macs, having games will make them happier Mac users but will not divert them away to buy a PC instead.
Its less about "style" and more about economics and focus as you mention. For nearly the entire history of the macintosh, gaming was at best a second thought. With a tiny market share AAA game publishers do not see the value in spending what could amount in 2021 is hundreds of thousands of dollars for what would turn out to be a small subset of the 10% market share. That is the Mac only has 10% and of those, only a small portion will choose to buy games.
Now streaming is becoming a thing, and that imo will further hurt the Mac platform for native gaming. Why spend the money to develop a game on macOS when those people (and others) can just simply use a streaming service to play. This segment of gaming playing is still in its infancy, but I believe it will be yet another reason why most game publishers will simply stick with Windows and consoles.