Gaming MacBook Rumored coming 2016

[antonis]

Besides the generic comment that apple does not care about gaming (which is proven on its own), people keep ignoring some more specific facts. What does it mean a "gaming laptop" ? Someone would say that's easy to answer; a laptop with a latest dedicated gpu and a decent cpu, capable to cover the latest AAA titles' h/w requirements. But would that be enough ?

Let's just say for a moment that apple actually releases such a laptop, bypassing their obsession for thinness, power autonomy and minimization of features. What s/w is this laptop going to run in order to be considered a "gaming" laptop ? Is it going to run OS X ? I don't think so. OS X is lacking optimized drivers, frequent updates (to drivers), porting of most AAA titles, and - on top of everything else - a proper API for games, equal to DirectX. So, even if they did release such a machine, why on earth would anyone buy it instead of a gaming pc ?

Would it run windows as a main OS ? Ok...apple will never make a windows machine, I think we can all agree to that

As written so many times before, Apple does not lack a gaming machine. Apple lacks a gaming ecosystem. So, releasing such a machine out of the blue would be ultimately pointless and even people asking for it would not actually buy it.

 

[e93to]

While I doubt gaming laptop (or any form of gaming computer with OS X) will be released by Apple any time soon, I am pretty sure Apple wants piece of gaming industry. How would Apple achieve this? By rewriting OS X for optimization with graphics cards drivers? Or by letting users customize the OS any way they want? By supplying beefy graphic cards? By releasing gaming mouse and keyboard? And what about the games? Will developers rush to release Mac-exclusive games that are optimized for Retina display? Will Bethesda suddenly develop games that are only for OS X, which only consists of 10% of computer market?

Well, that's too much hassle, and return is not guaranteed. Furthermore, in the eyes of publishers, console games are now top priority. PC gaming is taking a back seat. This could be advantageous for Apple.

Apple is now moving forward with Apple TV, which could have double duty as Apple's game console. It will probably take years to take shape as a proper game console. And Apple will want to distinguish its game console apart from XBOX and PS, so we might see some interesting features like integration of accelerometer, use of iPhone/iPad as certain form of controller, etc.

 

[saturnotaku]

Apple is now moving forward with Apple TV, which could have double duty as Apple's game console. It will probably take years to take shape as a proper game console. And Apple will want to distinguish its game console apart from XBOX and PS, so we might see some interesting features like integration of accelerometer, use of iPhone/iPad as certain form of controller, etc.

The remote and its implementation requirements will doom the Apple TV to failure as a gaming platform.

 

[Dirtyharry50]

Tautological philosophy aside (it is what it is, they are what they are, a chair is a chair), there's no reason to think that Apple will never do anything other than what they are doing now. There is a long history of not supporting gaming on Macs, although you could say that the existence of Bootcamp is Apple's big concession to gaming, but that doesn't mean nothing can change. I agree that a gaming laptop from Apple is very unlikely in 2016, but that doesn't mean it could never happen. But it never will happen if people don't express their desires, so I find the thread interesting and not pointless. Those who find it pointless don't have to read it.

Well, of course it could happen but considering what it is presently known it seems quite unlikely that it will happen anytime soon if at all. Would you disagree with that? Do you think a few people posting their wishes on a forum that is not likely to be a subject of study by decision makers in Apple management is really going to bring about the desired change? In light of that how productive is this exercise?

I do find people's views interesting or I wouldn't be here. Thank you for the reminder about where the exit door is though. I will keep that in mind.

 

[Dirtyharry50]

The remote and its implementation requirements will doom the Apple TV to failure as a gaming platform.

Well, it is only in its infancy and might evolve into something more capable with the passage of time. I hope so but I am cautiously optimistic about that. I think it is a nice little value add feature just the same.

 

[venom600]

Tautological philosophy aside

I just have to say, your use of that word was so awesome it gave me chills.

Well, it is only in its infancy and might evolve into something more capable with the passage of time. I hope so but I am cautiously optimistic about that. I think it is a nice little value add feature just the same.

It requires a $70 controller to play anything meaningful. That means that at the very least you are looking at a $220 "console" with no games. You can buy an Xbox One or PS4 bundled with games all day for $300, and they have the advantage of all of the major functionality of the AppleTV (plus both support live TV streaming of the kind that Apple was unable to do) and a library of AAA games. The Apple TV stands as much a chance of being a legit gaming platform as the FireTV, Roku, and nVidia Shield TV did before it.

 

[saturnotaku]

The Apple TV stands as much a chance of being a legit gaming platform as the FireTV, Roku, and nVidia Shield TV did before it.

At least with the Shield TV you can run most emulators and run them well, even the Dreamcast one.

 

[Dirtyharry50]

I just have to say, your use of that word was so awesome it gave me chills.

It requires a $70 controller to play anything meaningful. That means that at the very least you are looking at a $220 "console" with no games. You can buy an Xbox One or PS4 bundled with games all day for $300, and they have the advantage of all of the major functionality of the AppleTV (plus both support live TV streaming of the kind that Apple was unable to do) and a library of AAA games. The Apple TV stands as much a chance of being a legit gaming platform as the FireTV, Roku, and nVidia Shield TV did before it.

The Apple TV is not at least presently a gaming platform that in any way attempts to compete with existing consoles. I would not imagine anyone buys the Apple TV primarily as a gaming system. It's a set top box that as an added value can now also play games, sort of the reverse of a console that can also stream Netflix if you will. An important difference to some is unlike any other setup, Apple TV integrates into the Apple ecosystem, iTunes libraries of music, movies, television series including those purchased and owned there as well as movie rentals via iTunes. Content from one's Mac or other Apple devices can stream to it, etc. The new one now supports apps along with games which opens up a lot of interesting possibilities not seen elsewhere at least presently. So it does distinguish itself in these ways and is not simply a lame incapable gaming system that should be laughed off in favor of a real one such as the XBox One as one example.

I've owned the previous generation Apple TV for a long time now and I've enjoyed having it for a variety of content. For a lot less money than cable, I can enjoy CBS Televison live anytime along with their library of existing shows going way back, HBO Now, Showtime and Netflix and all of this only costs me just over 40 bucks a month. For me, that covers everything I care about being able to access at a bargain price and I can also rent movies as desired, watch You Tube stuff on it, stream my iTunes library to it and when family visits for holidays I can stream photo albums and videos to the big screen for fun too with Airplay from my Mac. The thing cost me under a hundred bucks. I forget what it was.

I am going to upgrade to the new one, enjoy some gaming fun on it probably but it isn't going to replace my XBox or Playstation certainly, and I'm sure I'll like the feature of using Siri for navigation, the better remote and it will be interesting to see what developers come up with for apps.

By the way, I don't consider buying the lowest end consoles with the most minimal disk space for 300 bucks to be a wise choice. You need to spend more than that if you don't want to have to worry about having enough storage over the life of the system in my opinion. I'm going to be purchasing the new XBox One Elite Edition which among other things sports a 1 TB hybrid drive for improved performance and plenty of room but that's probably going to run me about 500 bucks which is quite a bit more than an Apple TV but that makes sense. One box is a gaming machine first and foremost, the other is a TV set box first and foremost.

TLDR: Apple TV is not a console and comparisons to consoles are like comparing apples to oranges.

 

[venom600]

At least with the Shield TV you can run most emulators and run them well, even the Dreamcast one.

Huh. I didn't consider that. I am seriously considering buying one of those throwback consoles to play old NES, SNES, and Genesis games... maybe that would be a better choice....

TLDR: Apple TV is not a console and comparisons to consoles are like comparing apples to oranges.

I tend to agree. I got the 1TB Forza Edition Xbox One for effectively $200 after gift cards, discounts, and free games. I was literally on the way to buy an Apple TV and changed my mind on the spot... it does everything I wanted the AppleTV to do plus it has HDMI passthrough so I never have to switch inputs.

 

[saturnotaku]

Huh. I didn't consider that. I am seriously considering buying one of those throwback consoles to play old NES, SNES, and Genesis games... maybe that would be a better choice....

I actually have a Shield TV Pro (500 GB) with stand I'm not using any more that I'd make you a deal on. Hit me up with a private message if you're interested.

 

[bbkr]

do you think apple can crack PC gaming?

They had a chance but they screwed up by introducing Metal and giving up on OpenGL. I can bet that there won't be single AAA game released in 2016 that will use Metal. Finding programmers to port game to this exotic API for 1% of market (Mac owners with non-mobile GPUs that play games)? Come on. It was already risky move with OpenGL.

So now with extremely outdated OpenGL and unpopular forced Metal API Mac gaming will slowly die.

 

[Ferazel]

They had a chance but they screwed up by introducing Metal and giving up on OpenGL. I can bet that there won't be single AAA game released in 2016 that will use Metal. Finding programmers to port game to this exotic API for 1% of market (Mac owners with non-mobile GPUs that play games)? Come on. It was already risky move with OpenGL.

So now with extremely outdated OpenGL and unpopular forced Metal API Mac gaming will slowly die.

Firstly, I have not seen any of these rumors about a "gaming" laptop from Apple. I want it to exist, but as other users have stated, it's probably not going to be marketed as such. I mean 3D content creators also use Macs and the hindrance in GPU and 3D rendering APIs on OS X has affected those users as well.

In regards to this, I'm very disappointed with Metal's adoption rate.

The problem with OpenGL was that it wasn't a truly cross-platform API. OpenGL has a huge complexity of redundant APIs that did the same thing but slightly differently. So it was just a matter of knowing which platform/gpu rendered which way faster and picked that for the OS/vendor that the user was running. It had numerous platform specific bugs and issues that basically required the Mac to often have custom OpenGL rendering pipeline anyways. Often breaking down the platform into vendor (AMD, NVIDIA, INTEL). A lot of games had to work around these bugs and they were just "tricks of the trade" to run at a semi-decent speed.

The Metal advantage is that Apple has control over the API and thus can maintain better control over how to do compute/rendering on their hardware. The downside is that it appears to be suffering from the same bugs and vendor driver support issues on OS X that OpenGL did. The good news is that since it is only related to a relatively small API, the bugs will eventually get fixed instead of get "replaced" by another API and be left in broken states. Regardless, someone is dropping the ball here whether it's Apple or the 3rd-party hardware drivers, but Metal performance on OS X is slower than OpenGL3/4 which is slower than OpenGL 2.1 according to some testers for WoW (which obviously isn't a testament to the latest/greatest rendering, but still a good benchmark).

However, as long as there is the multitude of 3D hardware vendors on the platform, there are going to be vendor driver problems that Apple has no control over. With iOS Apple writes the GPU drivers for their A# PowerVR chips and they are at the top of the industry in terms of performance. Also, Apple being tied to the Intel roadmap is probably not something that they are particularly happy about. Sticking a raw A9X chip into a Mac laptop isn't going to really cut it for a lot of their users, so I wouldn't be surprised to see if they can work with AMD or Intel to design their own custom A# chip with x86 instruction hardware. This assumes quite a bit though. One is that they want to get into an arms race with Intel over a shrinking/stagnant PC market. This also assumes Apple sees any future in their Macintosh division, which recent trends seem to put into doubt. It's probably cheaper for them to be wed to Intel as they do all of the R&D and fabrication. Even if doing a custom chip series would free them from Intel's release schedule, 3rd-party vendors, and sub-par integrated graphics solutions.

Edit: Another option for Apple might be to drop Intel and use an AMD Zen APU with integrated HBM (assuming that the performance of the integrated memory makes up for the CPU decrease). This could also have been a reason for Apple's switch from Nvidia to AMD dedicated GPUs a couple generations back if they had these timetables and they wanted to be the first to jump on the tech. http://wccftech.com/xbox-one-may-be-getting-a-new-apu-based-on-amds-polaris-architecture/

 

[koyoot]

All you need to get that API working is to get API driver properly. It will handle itself with the rest. Netkas is right about it being low-level, but not that low-level as it could be. It has some level of application abstraction, to handle the applications properly. It is needed, from Apple perspective, to not make GPU crash if something goes wrong. Metal in current form lacks few features: Shader Model 5.0 and Tessellation, but as someone said, maybe future iteration of it will bring them, because A9 and A9X SoC's are having PowerVR 7 series GPUs that have all this, there is no software solution for it, yet.

I thought before, and spoke about it on this forum in another thread, that in my view Metal was something designed for CUDA-like approach to executing of data, and therefore I thought that in future Nvidia GPUs may come back. Now tho, as I dug a bit about upcoming AMD GPUs, and seeing how the API handles the data I think that it is directly designed for this world of Processing in Memory, streaming data through execution engines, with asynchronous capabilities.

The problem is this. We need all this RIGHT NOW, not in future, and Metal development is slow.

 

[aliensporebomb]

When you really look into it Metal was all about maximizing battery life on portable devices (phones, tablets, laptops), not positioning Apple as the big dog in computer gaming. By maximizing graphical efficiency it translates to longer battery life. That translates to sales ultimately.

Perhaps down the road Metal could be what some have envisioned it as but not now.

Some have said that Metal today is roughly equivalent to OpenGL 3.x. I wish Apple would spin OpenGL off to someone who wants to develop it independently. We're still behind the current OpenGL standards as they already are.

There still will be people who try to use Macs to game and do use them to game. I do it mainly due to space considerations and I found myself with a new Mac before I'd even heard about metal moving to MacOS.

And then there are the crazy people who don't care what anyone thinks and are running higher end gaming cards in thunderbolt2 PCI cages and running them under bootcamp (and some under Mac OS):

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=216776

 

[phrehdd]

I doubt Apple will make a "gaming" laptop. Look how long it took before they "bent" to the competition for their ATV to do more than just be a simple front end to rental/purchase from iTunes. However, given that some gaming might occur on ATV, you never know if Apple will bend and realize an entire market out there that is not fully exploited. It isn't always about what profit one makes from a widget but making sure the same coin doesn't go into a competitor's pocket (like Lenevo).

 

[koyoot]

Well the rumor may be right in the end. AMD has shown new architecture and new GPU called Polaris.

It will come in March:

It is likely that this is the first Polaris GPU being brought up (after only 2 months I’m told) and could represent the best improvement in efficiency that we will see. I’ll be curious to see how flagship GPUs from AMD compare under the same conditions.

The question is still, how good the GPU is at max performance. Because so far we know that at 1080p while averaging 60FPS in mid settings in Star Wars Battlefront it draws between 25-35W. So it is perfect for Macbook Pro.

 

[venom600]

The more I think about it, the internal GPU argument will be moot in the coming months. Thunderbolt 3 features support for external GPUs, and every Skylake machine ships with thunderbolt 3. There are already a handful of thin and light PC laptops that have external GPU docks with full desktop graphics, and now with every notebook shipping in the next year or so having that capability built in I expect the eGPU market to take off in a big way.

 

[Dirtyharry50]

The more I think about it, the internal GPU argument will be moot in the coming months. Thunderbolt 3 features support for external GPUs, and every Skylake machine ships with thunderbolt 3. There are already a handful of thin and light PC laptops that have external GPU docks with full desktop graphics, and now with every notebook shipping in the next year or so having that capability built in I expect the eGPU market to take off in a big way.

I have a hard time believing that is going to have much impact because of the cost associated with it. I don't personally see expensive peripherals as a good solution for the majority of consumers.
[doublepost=1452048582][/doublepost]

As written so many times before, Apple does not lack a gaming machine. Apple lacks a gaming ecosystem.

Oh, Apple has a gaming ecosystem alright and they are expanding this highly profitable ecosystem too. Mobile gaming huge and Apple is a major player here. iPhone, iPod Touch, iPad and to some extent now Apple TV all run these games and they will probably be ported to OS X more and more often with Metal everywhere.

This might not be our idea of gaming utopia but that doesn't change how very popular it is with other people who spend all kinds of money on it. Apple has made a decision to focus on one area of gaming and to try to do it well. This is in keeping with the direction Steve Jobs set the company on quite some time ago and I would not expect to see it change anytime soon if at all.

If you want AAA computer gaming you can have some on Macs certainly and these days you actually have quite a lot of choice but of course nowhere near the choice Windows or console users have when it comes to high profile AAA games. If you really want that, if that is really very important to you, rather than wishing on stars and imagining possibilities unlikely to happen it would be better to adapt to the reality of the situation is my feeling. How you want to do that is a highly subjective thing but the obvious choices are: build or buy a Windows gaming rig, buy one or more consoles or mix and match various options for whatever coverage you want.

I doubt very much we will ever see a world of AAA computer gaming on Mac computers that comes anywhere close to Windows. I love mine but I do not expect this to ever happen. That's why the 27" iMac I own now is probably the last iMac I'll ever buy. I know whatever I get next time whether it be a MacBook Air or maybe a Mac Mini, the GPU in a future model will be good enough to run the many legacy games I own for both Windows and OS X that aren't killed by Apple's annual OS upgrades. Hopefully whatever is current for GPUs in those Macs will be enough for some OS X stuff but whatever. Otherwise, I am turning to console going forward personally because the hardware is cheap. It lasts a very long time. Titles do not become obsolete with OS upgrades. The hardware is a fixed known quantity to developers which prevents a lot of problems for end users. There is no shortage of excellent AAA gaming to be had there including exclusives not to be had anywhere else that appeal to me. So, that's just my own take on how to have fun and not be disappointed or unhappy with the way things are.

Feeling as I do now is the result of a long evolutionary process. At one point I was content to live with the limitations of gaming on a Mac with on again/off again feelings about using bootcamp, virtual machines, Wineskin, Boxer, etc. I think what really tipped the scales for me was when I realized the next 27" iMac was going to run me about three grand outfitted the way I'd want it to be and for all that money this Mac while very nice would only be a mid-range gaming machine on the day it was brand new and would soon not even be that. I can't do that. I won't do that. Once gaming is taken out of the equation and I only evaluate a Mac based on my other computing needs everything changes. Suddenly, I can spend a lot less initially, get a machine i am just as happy with for all regular apps, etc. and best of all that machine will likely be satisfactory for my purposes for 5 plus years. That doesn't work with gaming and being unable to upgrade a three thousand dollar computer. It doesn't work for me anyway but then I am not wealthy. Maybe if I was I wouldn't care.

I am not at all down on Apple or Macs or even gaming on them within their limitations. I think they are great but Apple just doesn't do the kind of gaming computer gamers want really. They don't do it good enough for core gamers and they aren't going to is the thing. That's just the way it is and this doesn't even get into the entire market share issue and what that means for games development on the platform which is also a major issue itself.

 

[antonis]

I have a hard time believing that is going to have much impact because of the cost associated with it. I don't personally see expensive peripherals as a good solution for the majority of consumers.
[doublepost=1452048582][/doublepost]

Oh, Apple has a gaming ecosystem alright and they are expanding this highly profitable ecosystem too. Mobile gaming huge and Apple is a major player here. iPhone, iPod Touch, iPad and to some extent now Apple TV all run these games and they will probably be ported to OS X more and more often with Metal everywhere.

This might not be our idea of gaming utopia but that doesn't change how very popular it is with other people who spend all kinds of money on it. Apple has made a decision to focus on one area of gaming and to try to do it well. This is in keeping with the direction Steve Jobs set the company on quite some time ago and I would not expect to see it change anytime soon if at all.

If you want AAA computer gaming you can have some on Macs certainly and these days you actually have quite a lot of choice but of course nowhere near the choice Windows or console users have when it comes to high profile AAA games. If you really want that, if that is really very important to you, rather than wishing on stars and imagining possibilities unlikely to happen it would be better to adapt to the reality of the situation is my feeling. How you want to do that is a highly subjective thing but the obvious choices are: build or buy a Windows gaming rig, buy one or more consoles or mix and match various options for whatever coverage you want.

I doubt very much we will ever see a world of AAA computer gaming on Mac computers that comes anywhere close to Windows. I love mine but I do not expect this to ever happen. That's why the 27" iMac I own now is probably the last iMac I'll ever buy. I know whatever I get next time whether it be a MacBook Air or maybe a Mac Mini, the GPU in a future model will be good enough to run the many legacy games I own for both Windows and OS X that aren't killed by Apple's annual OS upgrades. Hopefully whatever is current for GPUs in those Macs will be enough for some OS X stuff but whatever. Otherwise, I am turning to console going forward personally because the hardware is cheap. It lasts a very long time. Titles do not become obsolete with OS upgrades. The hardware is a fixed known quantity to developers which prevents a lot of problems for end users. There is no shortage of excellent AAA gaming to be had there including exclusives not to be had anywhere else that appeal to me. So, that's just my own take on how to have fun and not be disappointed or unhappy with the way things are.

Feeling as I do now is the result of a long evolutionary process. At one point I was content to live with the limitations of gaming on a Mac with on again/off again feelings about using bootcamp, virtual machines, Wineskin, Boxer, etc. I think what really tipped the scales for me was when I realized the next 27" iMac was going to run me about three grand outfitted the way I'd want it to be and for all that money this Mac while very nice would only be a mid-range gaming machine on the day it was brand new and would soon not even be that. I can't do that. I won't do that. Once gaming is taken out of the equation and I only evaluate a Mac based on my other computing needs everything changes. Suddenly, I can spend a lot less initially, get a machine i am just as happy with for all regular apps, etc. and best of all that machine will likely be satisfactory for my purposes for 5 plus years. That doesn't work with gaming and being unable to upgrade a three thousand dollar computer. It doesn't work for me anyway but then I am not wealthy. Maybe if I was I wouldn't care.

I am not at all down on Apple or Macs or even gaming on them within their limitations. I think they are great but Apple just doesn't do the kind of gaming computer gamers want really. They don't do it good enough for core gamers and they aren't going to is the thing. That's just the way it is and this doesn't even get into the entire market share issue and what that means for games development on the platform which is also a major issue itself.

Yes, they do have the strongest mobile gaming ecosystem, nobody can deny that. But this is mostly because of their solid iOS framework launched along with the rise of their smartphone and a well-timely launch of the respective store. But mobile gaming is an entirely different world.

Of course, under this thread's context, by saying "gaming ecosystem" I was exclusively referring to desktop gaming (or AAA-class gaming, as we all like to call it). And under that context, apple lacks a gaming ecosystem entirely. The only reason people are still able to play games on their macs is because OS X and the apps running on top of it need to display graphics, hence they require a gpu. But there's no other effort made towards this direction, by apple.

I agree with everything you wrote, and even more. I was biding my time just like you for years, trying desperately to see something that just wasn't there. Having a Mac for everything, trying to convince myself every time that it's ok, if a PC user can upgrade his/her gpu, I can just as easily sell my old Mac and get a new. But the bubble eventually burst. Building a gaming PC last year reminded me what the term "gaming ecosystem" really means. And these characteristics are not needed (yet?) on the mobile side of things, hence apple still goes strong:

1. A real gaming-oriented API that constantly evolves around modern GPUs and vise-versa, like directx does
2. Constantly upgraded gpu drivers, with new release for almost every AAA title launch, containing optimizations for this title
3. Multi-gpu support
4. Wide variety of desktop-class GPU choices
5. Ability to upgrade gpu and keep going with latest titles

While, on the other hand, apple respectively has:
1. Abandoned OpenGL, the API that is the only hope of catching up with PCs and it's the 2nd most popular and available to all platforms. Even before that, they were falling behind for years regarding OpenGL support.
2. Rarely upgraded gpu drivers and, even when they do it, they do it for any reasons other than gaming
3. No multi-gpu support, although they release a dual-gpu machine (just wow!)
4. No desktop class GPUs. Even worse, they have a tenacity for integrated gpus for all their models save the high-end ones that are equipped with a mediocre mobile-class gpu
5. No upgrades, period

And that's just the top-5 of the list. So, nope, I don't think apple will ever release a gaming machine and even if they did, I wouldn't bother with it. Macs are great for everything else but when gaming is in context, PCs know how to do it right, Macs do not.

 

[Algus]

The API issue (OpenGL/Metal vs. DirectX) is not an insignificant problem that will write itself away if Apple slaps whatever Nvidia card is popular at the time into the 13'' Pro. I have plenty of games that run terribly on OS X but flawless on my Bootcamp partition. Same hardware but vastly different ways of doing things. We have small companies like Aspyr doing some awesome work to bring us (often older) games but the EAs and Activisions of the world aren't interest in the small potatoes. EA's idea of an OS X native app is to slap a cider wrapper around it and bugs be damned as long as it runs (sort of).

Windows and its associated hardware will remain the place you want to be as a AAA PC gamer for the foreseeable feature. Game developers are all programming for that environment and the sizable DIY crowd would probably rather give up gaming than go to a hardware environment controlled by Cupertino.

 

[Dirtyharry50]

I did have an idea of what you meant. When I see the term ecosystem when it comes to electronics I think of a family of devices that work well together as Apple's do with software that is familiar across the devices and available often in versions for each. That of course describes Apple's family of products. I know one can actually put together similar solutions in the Windows PC world although the parts would come from a variety of vendors. They would still be focused on working well in a Windows centric world when it comes to desktop/portable computer end of things.

While pricey, Apple does do a really great job in their areas of focus and I really like their products. For everything but gaming I'm really happy with the Mac and even there I am happy with it a fair amount of the time presently but it isn't enough on its own for me and I don't expect it ever will be as I talked about. I guess I've just come to accept that and I'm fine with it. It took me forever to warm up to the idea of console gaming and getting used to a controller but as I have I can really appreciate the virtues of them despite some limitations. Nothing is perfect i guess but they have an awful lot going for them and have come a long, long way. I find it a very fun experience too lazing on the couch playing versus sitting at a PC or Mac. Something I really appreciate is the stability of the platform. Once you purchase one for considerably less than any decent gaming rig would cost, you are golden for the life of the system and years beyond that because operating system software does not change and break things. I am still enjoying PS2 games now and if the machine breaks, I can buy another for dirt cheap they are so plentiful. There is no issues with whatever is running on the system, what hardware I have, etc., etc. Everything is fixed. It's great really. No wonder they are so popular. I will always like gaming on a computer too but with the library of classics I own I could do that on any Mac for many years to come and never get through them all anyway. So that's my own plan and I'm fine with it.

Even if Apple made a gaming computer the problem would be the thing would cost so much you'd be better off considering the same options you might consider today rather than game on an Apple system. Again though, the odds of them doing that are next to none in my opinion.
[doublepost=1452092349][/doublepost]

The API issue (OpenGL/Metal vs. DirectX) is not an insignificant problem that will write itself away if Apple slaps whatever Nvidia card is popular at the time into the 13'' Pro. I have plenty of games that run terribly on OS X but flawless on my Bootcamp partition. Same hardware but vastly different ways of doing things. We have small companies like Aspyr doing some awesome work to bring us (often older) games but the EAs and Activisions of the world aren't interest in the small potatoes. EA's idea of an OS X native app is to slap a cider wrapper around it and bugs be damned as long as it runs (sort of).

Windows and its associated hardware will remain the place you want to be as a AAA PC gamer for the foreseeable feature. Game developers are all programming for that environment and the sizable DIY crowd would probably rather give up gaming than go to a hardware environment controlled by Cupertino.

I think you are right although it will be interesting to see if Steam OS really takes off or not. When I first heard about it I thought who is going to support this but now I see plenty of support for it although major players are holding out for the time being. It is kind of hard to imagine it overtaking Windows gaming but who can predict the future, you know? I'm surprised it has gotten as much support as it has really.

Even if Steam OS took off though, ideas about how that might benefit gaming on OS X are I think misguided. Porting to OS X may or may not be easier depending on what the graphics API in use winds up being down the road in the Steam OS and Linux worlds. My guess is Apple deprecating OpenGL and going exclusively with Metal over time will leave Mac users in either the same or possibly an even worse spot than they are in now depending on how other things unfold. My point being, whatever the future holds none of it looks especially bright in terms of core gaming changing on the OS X platform.

I think it is telling when both Feral and Aspyr start porting games to Linux, don't you? They're no fools.

 

[venom600]

I have a hard time believing that is going to have much impact because of the cost associated with it. I don't personally see expensive peripherals as a good solution for the majority of consumers.

It's already happening. Dell has had an Alienware that has an external graphics card for a few months, and the new Razer Blade Stealth uses Thunderbolt 3 to power an external graphics card case (you bring your own card), and it isn't the last system at CES that will have a feature like that. A machine the size of an 11" Macbook Air with the capability to drive a 4k monitor for games. What's not to love?

 

[antonis]

Well, since we are talking about Mac gaming, we have to exclude bootcamp. If the chances to see a gaming machine from apple are close to zero, chances of seeing a gaming machine from apple that will focus on windows and advertised as "the only mac able to play all AAA titles...on windows! " would be subzero, if I may say.

Bootcamp worked as a non-official excuse for apple to ignore desktop high-end gaming on OS X. And wine wrappers used officially from game companies made things much, much worse.

External upgradeable GPUs on Mac ? I'm sure we can all agree by now that apple would never officially support such a thing. So, in the best case, we are talking about a problematic solution. And still most AAA titles will not get released for OS X, and still bootcamp will be the only option.

While pricey, Apple does do a really great job in their areas of focus and I really like their products. For everything but gaming I'm really happy with the Mac and even there I am happy with it a fair amount of the time presently but it isn't enough on its own for me and I don't expect it ever will be as I talked about. I guess I've just come to accept that and I'm fine with it. It took me forever to warm up to the idea of console gaming and getting used to a controller but as I have I can really appreciate the virtues of them despite some limitations. Nothing is perfect i guess but they have an awful lot going for them and have come a long, long way.

Exactly. We all have Macs not because they do things PCs cannot, but because they do it better. Why should we use a different logic when it comes to gaming ? PCs / consoles do games much better. It just boils down to that, and I'm also fine with that.

 

[venom600]

External upgradeable GPUs on Mac ? I'm sure we can all agree by now that apple would never officially support such a thing. So, in the best case, we are talking about a problematic solution. And still most AAA titles will not get released for OS X, and still bootcamp will be the only option.

What are you basing that on? External GPUs weren't a good solution in the past because no external bus provided both the speed necessary to get maximum performance out of them AND a way to gracefully disconnect them without shutting down everytime. Thunderbolt 3 solves both those problems, and it's a natively supported feature of the interface. To think that it wouldn't be supported at all, especially given the pro implications makes no sense at all.

 

[Huntn]

It's no denying Macbooks and Macbook pros don't compare to their windows laptop counterparts in terms of pure performance when it comes to pc gaming. I have recently read an online article about a possible reboot of the Macbook lineup next year stating it may come with updated Nvidia graphics performance and other great specs likewise to make it more gaming focused or to have a gaming version of the macbook.
This could be a good opportunity for Apple to showcase what it can do when coming up against some tough competition. There is also question to weather there is much of a market for this kind of thing. I know I would be myself if they do it right because at the moment my macbook really struggles to play anything at a decent frame rate except for maybe....Chess? So if they kept that signature beautiful apple design with a 1080p screen, decent performance to make sure it will be able to run games okay in 3-5 years and that the price isn't crazy high they could be onto something in my opinion.
I was wondering what anyone else thinks?
would you buy a Gaming Macbook?
How much would you spend on one?
do you think apple can crack PC gaming?

I think if they can pull off all that in an affordable package I would definitely be interested in upgrading.

Thanks for reading,

Jack,

This sounds like it would be their top end MBP, currently priced at about $2500.
Link Sept 2015 quote:
Yiba reported that the MacBook 2016 will only boast a bigger RAM and have the same specs as the 2015 version. However, Australianetworknews news reported that the new Apple laptop will be packaged for gamers as it will include the new Nvidia GeForce GTX950 with 2GB RAM. They also said that it will be powered by the new OX X El Capitan and will be powered by the Intel Skylake-U chipset.