Gaming Passing Us BY Now

Washac

macrumors 68020
Original poster
Jul 2, 2006
2,431
86
Have the days of what Mac gaming we had now passing us by.

Apple do not seem interested in bringing out a half decent desktop that we can expand at our leisure, nor do they seem interested in the graphics side of things that games require.
 

Macman45

macrumors G5
Jul 29, 2011
13,196
133
Somewhere Back In The Long Ago
I agree, but I was the guy who didn't care too much about the gaming side of Mac's. We have a gaming PC that we put together for that purpose. Modern high end GPU structure needs cooling and space. Two things that require room so the only Mac really capable of getting through the barrier would be the Pro, and Apple don't let you upgrade the GPU in that either. In short, Mac's aren't great at the latest games, but they will play quite a few of the established older ones.
 

keysofanxiety

macrumors G3
Nov 23, 2011
9,471
24,220
Macs aren't designed for gaming. But then that depends what you class as gaming. If you're talking about 60FPS on the new DOOM game, then no. But for light/casual gaming, or even playing larger games like Civ 6, most modern Macs can handle that. Macs are far easier to develop on now than they ever were too. You find so many games on Steam that have also been written for macOS. It's far less exclusive or time consuming than it was back on the PPC days.

Regardless, gaming was never a priority for Macs. The fact there are a host of supported games is incidental.
 

antonis

macrumors 68020
Jun 10, 2011
2,075
903
Macs aren't designed for gaming. But then that depends what you class as gaming. If you're talking about 60FPS on the new DOOM game, then no. But for light/casual gaming, or even playing larger games like Civ 6, most modern Macs can handle that. Macs are far easier to develop on now than they ever were too. You find so many games on Steam that have also been written for macOS. It's far less exclusive or time consuming than it was back on the PPC days.

Regardless, gaming was never a priority for Macs. The fact there are a host of supported games is incidental.
I think that OP's whole point is that a computer should not be locked to specific priorities. E.g. a PC with a weak GPU does not prioritise games as well. But it can do it if you change the GPU. Macs, although they qualify as computers, cannot prioritise games, even if their user would want them to.
 

keysofanxiety

macrumors G3
Nov 23, 2011
9,471
24,220
I think that OP's whole point is that a computer should not be locked to specific priorities. E.g. a PC with a weak GPU does not prioritise games as well. But it can do it if you change the GPU. Macs, although they qualify as computers, cannot prioritise games, even if their user would want them to.
Very good point. However it's important to consider that by 'unlocking' the priorities to make it more versatile, it will have a knock-on effect on the essence of the product. As an example: dedicated or more powerful GPUs across the board would have an impact on battery life, pricing, thickness, weight, failure rate, and many other things.

Apple stick with what they believe is the best balance of the most powerful hardware specifications possible, with the best possible battery life, in the thinnest possible machine. Whether or not you and I think this is the best course of action is beside the point; whether you mind a thicker or heavier MacBook is completely inconsequential. What is undebatable is that substantially increasing the graphics performance will negatively affect the criteria mentioned above.

Again, not for or against Apple's decisions. But they've always stuck to form over raw hardware performance, so it's nothing new.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MrUNIMOG

Gav.Winters

macrumors member
Nov 15, 2016
53
22
It's funny you say this because I realised the other day that the Mac Pro is the only desktop still on Apple's site. Maybe there's just no call for them anymore.
 

wubsylol

macrumors 6502
Nov 6, 2014
353
304
Apple Gaming is alive and well...

http://www.yaabot.com/24098/apple-going-promote-mobile-gaming-2017/

Mac gaming is essentially an afterthought...

(heck, so is AppleTV gaming...)
That's some pretty impressive clickbait right there.

"Apple, which is currently under the supervision of CEO Tim Cook, has always made sure that iPhones doesn’t disappoint gamers."
How??

"The Metal API allows developers intense low level access to the GPU on devices running iOS – allowing for easy native graphic reproduction without having to rely on third party APIs."
A nice link to a totally unrelated GitHub project, which I don't believe even uses Metal.

"Yes, its iOS equipped with Metal API has always been one of the most sought after platform for mobile gamers."
Based on what evidence?

"but it is this same kit that allows console-level gaming on mobile devices"
Console level gaming lol. Nice marketing speak.

"Metal remains one of the best APIswe can find for intense mobile gaming, as it allows smoother multiprocessing and better high-resolution graphics rendering."
Nice marketing speak.
 

Huntn

macrumors demi-god
May 5, 2008
17,038
16,520
The Misty Mountains
Macs aren't designed for gaming. But then that depends what you class as gaming. If you're talking about 60FPS on the new DOOM game, then no. But for light/casual gaming, or even playing larger games like Civ 6, most modern Macs can handle that. Macs are far easier to develop on now than they ever were too. You find so many games on Steam that have also been written for macOS. It's far less exclusive or time consuming than it was back on the PPC days.

Regardless, gaming was never a priority for Macs. The fact there are a host of supported games is incidental.
Two reasons that support your statement:
  • High price.
  • Lack of mainstream video cards.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ssgbryan

DevNull0

macrumors 68020
Jan 6, 2015
2,255
4,337
Very good point. However it's important to consider that by 'unlocking' the priorities to make it more versatile, it will have a knock-on effect on the essence of the product. As an example: dedicated or more powerful GPUs across the board would have an impact on battery life, pricing, thickness, weight, failure rate, and many other things.
So because some people want a lower power less capable machine, it's best to just make it impossible to throw in a decent GPU?

Individual PC vendors have the market covered from $300 cheap grandparent machines to $1500 macbook killers to $6000+ power boxes. With every combination of price/power/size you can think of in between.

is it really beyond the capability of a $650 billion company to provide a choice of a lower power sleek machine and a powerful beast?
 

Pakaku

macrumors 68020
Aug 29, 2009
2,157
2,128
So because some people want a lower power less capable machine, it's best to just make it impossible to throw in a decent GPU?

Individual PC vendors have the market covered from $300 cheap grandparent machines to $1500 macbook killers to $6000+ power boxes. With every combination of price/power/size you can think of in between.

is it really beyond the capability of a $650 billion company to provide a choice of a lower power sleek machine and a powerful beast?
eGPU can solve the weak graphics problem if Apple would support it better (if they haven't already), and the rest of a typical mac will handle games fine because gaming rarely focuses on CPU power, RAM is cheap, iMacs have pretty good screens built in... The only real obstacle left would be to pick up an acceptable keyboard and mouse.

But then there's still the matter of game devs bothering to support OSX, which I think won't change for a while if ever.
 

DevNull0

macrumors 68020
Jan 6, 2015
2,255
4,337
eGPU can solve the weak graphics problem if Apple would support it better (if they haven't already), and the rest of a typical mac will handle games fine because gaming rarely focuses on CPU power, RAM is cheap, iMacs have pretty good screens built in... The only real obstacle left would be to pick up an acceptable keyboard and mouse.

But then there's still the matter of game devs bothering to support OSX, which I think won't change for a while if ever.
A built in discrete GPU is a better solution than this mythical eGPU. Either way, Apple doesn't want you to have a GPU. In the PC world build in and eGPUs are available everywhere.

RAM is cheap yes, unless you buy a Mac with it's soldered RAM at 1000% markup. Even then, they limit you to a miserly 16 gig. 32 gig for my PC was barely over $100 on black friday. The Apple tax is one thing (and not a problem) but their RAM prices and limits are beyond absurd.

iMacs have pretty good built in screens yes if you like glossly, if you don't need anything special like precise color fidelity, super fast response, etc. But Monitors are very cheap.

The only reason the keyboard and mouse is an obstacle now is Apple forces you to buy dongles for them.

tl;dr - the hoops Apple makes you jump through for decent game performance aren't worth it and you're still too limited.
 

steve23094

macrumors 68030
Apr 23, 2013
2,615
1,331
eGPU can solve the weak graphics problem if Apple would support it better (if they haven't already)
It wouldn't solve the problem in the slightest. Number of Mac owners vs Windows = very small number. Number of Mac owners who game = vanishingly small. Number of Mac owners who game and would also own an eGPU = infinitesimally small. Number of Mac owners who game, own an eGPU and decide to buy your game = forget it.

The potential market size for any developer wouldn't be worth them spending any time on it.
 

Irishman

macrumors 68030
Nov 2, 2006
2,646
580
It wouldn't solve the problem in the slightest. Number of Mac owners vs Windows = very small number. Number of Mac owners who game = vanishingly small. Number of Mac owners who game and would also own an eGPU = infinitesimally small. Number of Mac owners who game, own an eGPU and decide to buy your game = forget it.

The potential market size for any developer wouldn't be worth them spending any time on it.
I remember that, some years ago, there were tech writers calling for the death of PC gaming because the sales numbers were downright dismal, compared to console game revenue. If Microsoft and Windows game developers had listened to the naysayers, then we wouldn't have a PC gaming industry, much less a smaller Mac gaming industry, and a smaller yet Linux gaming industry.

Just because you're not the biggest dog in the yard, doesn't mean you can't succeed.

Ask Microsoft.
 

steve23094

macrumors 68030
Apr 23, 2013
2,615
1,331
I remember that, some years ago, there were tech writers calling for the death of PC gaming because the sales numbers were downright dismal, compared to console game revenue. If Microsoft and Windows game developers had listened to the naysayers, then we wouldn't have a PC gaming industry, much less a smaller Mac gaming industry, and a smaller yet Linux gaming industry.

Just because you're not the biggest dog in the yard, doesn't mean you can't succeed.

Ask Microsoft.
You're comparing the number of Windows installed PCs which allowed Microsoft to support gaming to the number of Mac users that might buy an eGPU? Seriously?

eGPUs, if they're ever officially supported, are never going to make one ounce of difference in the decision making process of Mac game developers on whether to support the platform. Because the user base would be ridiculously small only a fool who wants to throw their company's money away would develop solely for an eGPU. Those decisions will be made on exactly the same criteria as they are now, which has nothing to do with eGPUs.
 

antonis

macrumors 68020
Jun 10, 2011
2,075
903
Having a proprietary (and half-baked for that matter) locked down API doesn't help either. Since the market share is too small and investing on Metal would have a minimum profit (if at all) why should anyone bother ?
 
  • Like
Reactions: MacAlien

Irishman

macrumors 68030
Nov 2, 2006
2,646
580
Having a proprietary (and half-baked for that matter) locked down API doesn't help either. Since the market share is too small and investing on Metal would have a minimum profit (if at all) why should anyone bother ?
You do realize that the very same criticisms could have leveled against Microsoft when they released Direct X 1 in 1995?
[doublepost=1487078061][/doublepost]
You're comparing the number of Windows installed PCs which allowed Microsoft to support gaming to the number of Mac users that might buy an eGPU? Seriously?

eGPUs, if they're ever officially supported, are never going to make one ounce of difference in the decision making process of Mac game developers on whether to support the platform. Because the user base would be ridiculously small only a fool who wants to throw their company's money away would develop solely for an eGPU. Those decisions will be made on exactly the same criteria as they are now, which has nothing to do with eGPUs.
Nope. Not saying that at all.

I'm saying that there is reason for optimism that matters can improve.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MrUNIMOG

steve23094

macrumors 68030
Apr 23, 2013
2,615
1,331
I'm saying that there is reason for optimism that matters can improve.
You could say that, but it won't happen. There are a number of decisions Apple could have already made to better support gamers: stronger GPU BTO options, support for Vulkan, updating to a version of OpenGL that's less than six years old and the aforementioned eGPU support. They have chosen not to do that because they have opted for a different strategic path that's not gamer friendly.

I'm not expecting anything to change and have made peace with that fact.
 

rampancy

macrumors regular
Jul 22, 2002
121
27
Have the days of what Mac gaming we had now passing us by.
I vividly remember a time where, for a long time, 'Mac gaming' consisted of a few dusty and/or neglected shelves in my local CompuCentre/CompuSmart or CompUSA, with one or two titles.

Now, my GOG and Steam backlogs are so full of games that I have absolutely no idea how or when I'm going to finish them all...and that's on top of the games I play in CrossOver or Wineskin. What makes matters worse are the new games coming out in the near future. So yes, the days what we used to have for Mac gaming are long gone. And thank goodness.



In all seriousness though, you act as if this is some new crisis; it isn't. The Mac gaming market has always been a very small subset of what itself has always been a subset of the greater PC industry as a whole. It's even smaller if you want to think of 'Mac gaming' as being limited strictly only to AAA gaming (which so many people on this board constantly insist on doing).

If anyone was ever into 'hardcore gaming' they wouldn't be on the Mac in the first place, or if they were; they'd either have a console or have a dedicated gaming PC.

Gaming has never been Apple's focus, arguably not since the mid-1980's when Apple was struggling to establish the Mac as a legitimate platform for business and professional environments. They fought long and hard to overcome the perception of Macs as being toys for schools and children. Arguably, Apple never won that battle as some people still disparagingly refer to iOS devices as toys.

There was some hope things would change with Apple's resurgence in the late-90's/early-00's but it was only half-hearted at best, especially since most of the people buying up iMacs, iBooks, and Power Mac G3/G4s were home users, education customers, and power users/creative professionals, not 'hardcore' gamers. By that time the dedicated home computer gaming market had been pretty much poisoned on the Mac anyway.

In any case, while the situation for gaming and graphics support on the Mac is far from perfect, gaming on the Mac is by no means doomed, and it's by no means a wasteland. Well, unless all you want are the latest and greatest AAA titles. In that case, people who'd want those kinds of games would have gone elsewhere.