Steam to End Support for macOS Mojave and 32-Bit Games

[GeneralChang]

Think about all the old software that was developed by single enthusiast developers who did no longer have the time to create a 64 bit version or simply died many years ago. I still remember the Apple keynote with an old grandma that had developed an app. Not sure if she is still alive, but at least her app should live forever. That is especially true for desktop apps. I still use some software from 1998 on my windows PC. It can only work with a single core, but at least it still works.

There also is a lot of software that does not really have any advantage from 64 bit.

Operating systems should support all software indefinitely. Sometimes you spent money on software two decades ago, but it would still work great today, if it still was supported. I do not want to buy new software just because of the operating system, as I hate any kind of updates. I still run Photoshop CS2, which is 18 years old.

Honestly I'm not even going to disagree with you here, but rather just point out that in that case you may as well just keep running it on the hardware you bought it to run on. If you're using 20 year old software there's no reason you can't keep using it on a 20 year old OS running on 20 year old hardware exactly as well as it ran when it was new. Just make sure you keep up on maintenance and part replacements and you should be good.

And if folks are doing that here then this won't really affect them. Sure you might lose the ability to connect to Steam online eventually, but if the game is installed it should still run offline or in LAN configurations just fine basically indefinitely as far as I'm aware. It's unlikely it was getting any meaningful updates at this point anyhow.

 

[tubular]

Around 2016 I saw the writing in the gaming wall and build a midrange gaming PC that’s still in service. But over the last year or so I’ve also gone for the Steam Deck, which is great, and the Switch, which is also worth it, and that’s where I’ve been doing my gaming lately.

Having said that, the Godot game engine supports Mac in a cross-platform way, and just maybe some of the work Steam has done supporting Linux ARM gaming for the Deck will start to pave the road to the Mac.

Edit: there isn’t much in the world more ephemeral than a game studio, so some of these guys are just long gone, bought out, consolidated into the void.

 

[Spaceboi Scaphandre]

Why not add support for iPhone? The user base is certainly larger enough

Until sideloading arrives that ain't happening.

 

[CarAnalogy]

They still make games lmao. Did people seriously forget about Half Life Alyx?

Uh...yep. Sure did.

 

[bradman83]

Why do we even need an ARM native version of Steam ? It runs well in Rosetta 2 and shouldn't affect the performance of the actual game being played.

Rosetta 2 will eventually go away so Steam will need to make a Universal/Native version at some point anyway.

 

[Spaceboi Scaphandre]

Uh...yep. Sure did.

Bad CarAnalogy. Bad.

Maybe time to get a HMD and play that masterpiece.

 

[Spaceboi Scaphandre]

Rosetta 2 will eventually go away so Steam will need to make a Universal/Native version at some point anyway.

There is no evidence that Rosetta 2 will be cut. That's speculation from people who's source is they made it up, or it was told to them in a dream. There is no evidence that Apple will end Rosetta 2. Why would they end Rosetta 2 when the majority of Mac software is x86 and since Apple is allowing Linux distros to run Rosetta 2?

This thought process comes from the fact Rosetta 1 was discontinued, but that was different circumstances. Rosetta 1 was a compatibility layer for PowerPC to x86. PowerPC was on the decline as the only organizations using it was Apple with the Mac, and the 7th gen game consoles the PlayStation 3, Xbox 360, and Nintendo Wii (and later the Wii U becoming the last PowerPC device ever.) When Rosetta 1 was officially axed, PowerPC was a dead architecture. IBM announced all development for PowerPC was over, and no software was being developed for it anymore. There was no reason to keep Rosetta 1 anymore since the majority of Mac software moved to x86, so there was no reason for Apple to keep supporting a compatibility layer for an architecture that was dead

x86 ain't dead. Not even close. x86 is still the standard for the majority of developers since the PC still uses it with the Mac being realistically the only consumer ARM computer worth a damn. A lot of software critical on Mac are x86 and will most likely be x86 for the forseeable future. Not to mention unlike Rosetta 1, Rosetta 2 actually works. People forget Rosetta 1 ran like ass and half the time didn't even work, so PPC programs ran worse through Rosetta than on a PowerMac. Rosetta 2 on the other hand there's practically no loss in performance whatsoever, and in many cases x86 applications run better on the M Series Macs through Rosetta than they do on a 2019 Mac Pro natively. And Rosetta 2 doesn't even need any changes, and isn't even preloaded on Macs like Rosetta 1 was. You can just download it with the push of a button through a macOS prompt or from Apple's download repository.

Now you may say "so developers are using it as a crutch and Apple should get rid of Rosetta 2 to force developers to make native ARM applications." Yeah good luck with that. Apple does that, and it's corporate suicide. The professionals who use macOS and find out their software that's x86 no longer works because Apple cut Rosetta 2, they're gonna move to Windows. There would be a mass developer exodus bigger than the macOS Mojave and Catalina exodus when OpenGL and 32 bit app support got axed. You can tell developers where and when, but you can't tell them how. You tell them to take your way or the highway, they'll take the highway.

tl;dr: It's highly unlikely Rosetta 2 is gonna get cut, because there's realistically no reason to cut it since x86 is still widely used. Rosetta 1 got cut because PowerPC was a dead architecture.

 

[movielad]

I'm patiently waiting for an AS native Steam client, please Gabe

Indeed. I have multiple Universal Binary games in my Steam collection (though also Intel ones such as Two Point Hospital - somewhat ironic because Two Point Campus from the same developer is Universal) and it doesn't make much sense for the store's client application to still be Intel only after three generations of Apple silicon.

No Man's Sky (which is a Universal Binary) is Steam only. As is Two Point Campus. They're not available to buy in the Mac App Store. If third party stores are going to be supported on the Mac (or any other device), then the developers of those stores have got to pull their fingers out and support them properly - even if it's a pain in the arse. Or ditch Mac entirely.

 

[Nicole1980]

I still like to dial up games like Half-Life or Left for Dead or whatever, so I have a couple computers that are going to stay on Mojave indefinitely.
One thing though, you actually CAN play those old games on an M-series Mac by using Crossover. Since we're talking older games, the framerates don't take too huge a hit and they're definitely playable.

 

[CarAnalogy]

There is no evidence that Rosetta 2 will be cut. That's speculation from people who's source is they made it up, or it was told to them in a dream. There is no evidence that Apple will end Rosetta 2. Why would they end Rosetta 2 when the majority of Mac software is x86 and since Apple is allowing Linux distros to run Rosetta 2?

This thought process comes from the fact Rosetta 1 was discontinued, but that was different circumstances. Rosetta 1 was a compatibility layer for PowerPC to x86. PowerPC was on the decline as the only organizations using it was Apple with the Mac, and the 7th gen game consoles the PlayStation 3, Xbox 360, and Nintendo Wii (and later the Wii U becoming the last PowerPC device ever.) When Rosetta 1 was officially axed, PowerPC was a dead architecture. IBM announced all development for PowerPC was over, and no software was being developed for it anymore. There was no reason to keep Rosetta 1 anymore since the majority of Mac software moved to x86, so there was no reason for Apple to keep supporting a compatibility layer for an architecture that was dead

x86 ain't dead. Not even close. x86 is still the standard for the majority of developers since the PC still uses it with the Mac being realistically the only consumer ARM computer worth a damn. A lot of software critical on Mac are x86 and will most likely be x86 for the forseeable future. Not to mention unlike Rosetta 1, Rosetta 2 actually works. People forget Rosetta 1 ran like ass and half the time didn't even work, so PPC programs ran worse through Rosetta than on a PowerMac. Rosetta 2 on the other hand there's practically no loss in performance whatsoever, and in many cases x86 applications run better on the M Series Macs through Rosetta than they do on a 2019 Mac Pro natively. And Rosetta 2 doesn't even need any changes, and isn't even preloaded on Macs like Rosetta 1 was. You can just download it with the push of a button through a macOS prompt or from Apple's download repository.

Now you may say "so developers are using it as a crutch and Apple should get rid of Rosetta 2 to force developers to make native ARM applications." Yeah good luck with that. Apple does that, and it's corporate suicide. The professionals who use macOS and find out their software that's x86 no longer works because Apple cut Rosetta 2, they're gonna move to Windows. There would be a mass developer exodus bigger than the macOS Mojave and Catalina exodus when OpenGL and 32 bit app support got axed. You can tell developers where and when, but you can't tell them how. You tell them to take your way or the highway, they'll take the highway.

tl;dr: It's highly unlikely Rosetta 2 is gonna get cut, because there's realistically no reason to cut it since x86 is still widely used. Rosetta 1 got cut because PowerPC was a dead architecture.

I hope you're right. Apple is ruthless though. They've definitely never given a public cut-off date, but more and more they are trash talking their own Intel Macs. Even Microsoft is struggling toward the ARM direction.

I still notice a lot of developers seem to be having trouble finding that super easy switch to recompile for ARM that Apple keeps telling us about. I definitely don't think it's going away tomorrow, but I wouldn't be surprised if Apple already has an expiration date penciled in somewhere.

If and when it ever becomes a competitive advantage, if and when the balance tips more toward ARM, you can bet they'll drop it like it's hot.

 

[Spaceboi Scaphandre]

I still like to dial up games like Half-Life or Left for Dead or whatever, so I have a couple computers that are going to stay on Mojave indefinitely.
One thing though, you actually CAN play those old games on an M-series Mac by using Crossover. Since we're talking older games, the framerates don't take too huge a hit and they're definitely playable.

Thought about getting a Steam Deck? Those old games run better on it.

 

[Spaceboi Scaphandre]

I hope you're right. Apple is ruthless though. They've definitely never given a public cut-off date, but more and more they are trash talking their own Intel Macs. Even Microsoft is struggling toward the ARM direction.

Which is more reason why it's highly unlikely nor logical to cut Rosetta 2, since everyone relies on it, even Microsoft

Well hey if Apple does it, Asahi Linux and GPTK exist so we have an insurance policy.

 

[CarAnalogy]

Which is more reason why it's highly unlikely nor logical to cut Rosetta 2, since everyone relies on it, even Microsoft

Well hey if Apple does it, Asahi Linux and GPTK exist so we have an insurance policy.

I kept editing after that. Yeah everyone relies on it. They're probably thinking even now about how to turn that to their advantage. They really don't care about running Windows, or any software at all that's not relatively up to date and designed for their platform.

 

[bluecoast]

I have a feeling that Steam regrets even supporting the Mac, sometimes.

I think that we can expect it to be fairly aggressive about dropping intel 64 bit support, when the time comes.

 

[bradman83]

Which is more reason why it's highly unlikely nor logical to cut Rosetta 2, since everyone relies on it, even Microsoft

Well hey if Apple does it, Asahi Linux and GPTK exist so we have an insurance policy.

GPTK relies on Rosetta under the hood, it's basically an Apple-branded implementation of CrossOver so if Rosetta support ends GPTK would no longer function (unless Apple makes an exception for specific apps). Windows on ARM in Parallels would still work for many games since it uses its own x86 emulation layer separate from Rosetta.

 

[Nicole1980]

Thought about getting a Steam Deck? Those old games run better on it.

Two things: I prefer the big 27" screen of my 2019 iMac to some tiny LCD. Secondly, I am used to using the keyboard/mouse to control the game. Additionally, won't Steam Deck eventually also be 64-bit only?

 

[Spaceboi Scaphandre]

Two things: I prefer the big 27" screen of my 2019 iMac to some tiny LCD. Secondly, I am used to using the keyboard/mouse to control the game. Additionally, won't Steam Deck eventually also be 64-bit only?

No because Valve is open to letting developers do whatever they want

Also you can still use a keyboard and mouse and a 27 inch screen. It’s a PC, and you can use any USB-C dock you want

 

[Bampf]

Don't think that they won't drop support of old Steam Deck games over time.

They could give us a way to keep playing our old games on old Macs or old PCs. Just let us run an old client if we want, or create a minimum client that only handles the DRM so you can run your games. But apparently they see nothing wrong with taking away access to games that we bought, and they will keep doing that forever.

The long term answer (if you care about any of this) is to not buy games on Steam.

 

[Fuzzball84]

If Apple can’t be bothered to make decent software on other platforms, why should steam and others bother with MacOS. Where the customer base would be low for games of this sort anyhow.

I’ve had enough of iTunes on windows. 100 percent the worst software I’ve ever came across, period. It’s so so bad, I don’t know why they bother. I don’t know why I even installed it. Its worse than a virus or ransomware 😂

So I’m not surprised developers look at Apples OS and just say… who cares, we will stick with windows and Linux.

 

[anthogag]

If you need steam in your life, iron some clothing.

 

[com.B]

There would be a mass developer exodus bigger than the macOS Mojave and Catalina exodus when OpenGL and 32 bit app support got axed.

OpenGL didn't get axed, they just stopped updating it. Many games, like Minecraft, still use an older version of OpenGL so they can run on MacOS without needing a separate Metal frontend.

 

[Fuzzball84]

If you need steam in your life, iron some clothing.

You have to admit it’s not the same as Gabe Newell!

 

[NEPOBABY]

Just keep old systems and old consoles around if you need to play vintage stuff. It's what gamers have been doing forever.

 

[Canubis]

It's a bit of a bummer as I guess at least some of the games rely on Steam to work.
Otherwise it would be perfectly fine to just keep such an older Mac system as a time capsule and use it just for gaming these games even in 10-15 years when you feel like it – same as you could do with a Game Boy or Nintendo.

Positive take away though is that the latest version of Steam on 10.13 and 10.14 will keep running for some time it seems. It's not like the will intentionally break it from one day to the other.

 

[MRMSFC]

I mean it is Apple's fault. Apple forcing app notarization on every compile even small bugfix updates, forcing everyone to use 64 bit only offering no compatibility modes for legacy software like Windows 11 does, and axing all open source APIs forcing everyone on Metal. Mojave and Catalina did longterm damage to Mac gaming, damage that may never be recovered from. Even with the Game Porting Toolkit for many developers it's too little too late as many still are choosing to boycott Apple.

Here’s some context which you repeatedly leave out, either intentionally or unintentionally:

The axing of 32-bit was done because Apple’s cpu architecture doesn’t support 32-bit operations.

Metal was created after OpenGL stagnated due to disagreement between members of the consortium. Later, when Vulkan was made in the ashes of OpenGL, Apple was an initial member, but left when Vulkan titled toward a programming model that emphasized low level control instead of Apple’s desired high level control.

On to the business aspect:

Somehow, the iPhone and iPad, which are more restrictive platforms with the same limitations, receive far more support than MacOS.

This is because of profitability and market penetration. Simply because there’s far more iPhones in the wild than Macs.

The biggest engines used all support 64-bit only and Metal, so that’s not an issue. There’s nothing in modern engines that require 32-bit operations specifically and nobody is making games using hand optimized, architecture specific instructions.

Stop spreading this garbage about developers being forced out by Apple, when the situation is that they had no intention of supporting Mac in the first place.