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

Vista Experience Score 09 Quad 2.66MHz

jmpage2 said:
That's typical egotistical BS.

You don't think Mac users play games? Figure out how many Mac users have a console or PC for gaming.
Click to expand...

The only BS is that you don't realize that companies like Aspyr were making next to no profit porting games over except for AAA titles, and even then not much. Even if the games ran with 20 more FPS, they wouldn't have sold any more copies.

Would you stop using a PC gaming rig if there were 3 more games available for OSX and they ran a little better than they do now?

Do you think developers will spring to OSX as soon as an Active-X equivalent is released? Do you think they'll sell another 100,000 copies of their game by porting it over?

Here's a quote for you from a game developer (audio): http://www.battlegroundeurope.com/files/wwiiol/WWIIOLRatChat031009.mp3
56 minutes in
We work in like an area where it's like, "Oh! 99.5% of your players don't have a mac, so why are we one of the only game companies that give all this cool **** to macs... because we're morons!"
Click to expand...
 
jmpage2 said:
If Apple makes gaming a priority we would see some dramatic work done in just the next 12 months.
Click to expand...

And why would they make it a priority if there were no developers? No sales = no developers.

Your talking about a chicken or the egg scenario and saying "if you kill the chicken, you'll get the egg".
 
Abidubi said:
The only BS is that you don't realize that companies like Aspyr were making next to no profit porting games over except for AAA titles, and even then not much. Even if the games ran with 20 more FPS, they wouldn't have sold any more copies.

Would you stop using a PC gaming rig if there were 3 more games available for OSX and they ran a little better than they do now?

Do you think developers will spring to OSX as soon as an Active-X equivalent is released? Do you think they'll sell another 100,000 copies of their game by porting it over?

Here's a quote for you from a game developer (audio): http://www.battlegroundeurope.com/files/wwiiol/WWIIOLRatChat031009.mp3
56 minutes in
Click to expand...

The problem with your logic is that Apple is now getting 10% share of all new home computers being sold, and that percentage appears to be still increasing.

How many more people would choose Apple over PC if there were;

1. More/Better games
2. Faster video hardware

?

There's a simple solution here in the gaming area. If Apple decides to mature this market then they can take a cue from the MS play book.

1. Buy a couple of small but promising developers
2. Build Active X equivalent for OS X
3. Release some games and see how they do

I think that the Mac crowd typically underestimates the demand for entertainment applications. I don't think that the Mac is in any danger of becoming the rig d'jour for the hard core competitive gaming crowd who wants to build their own custom rigs, but there's probably a huge market out there for better games than what currently exists.
 
I would never have ordered my Mac Pro (when will it arrive goddammit!!!!) if I was unable to game on it. So if Macs didn't run on intel hardware now, and thus I was unable to install Windows to game on... I would never consider the purchase as one I would make.

But seriously, even if Apple announced today a DirectX equivalent, and all the developers started enthusiastically pumping out great games for mac, it would'nt matter. Just like the console wars it would all become a battle of exclusive games. The mac would need to have 2 or 3 incredible games that everyone HAD TO HAVE for that were exclusive to the Mac for people to even start to investigate how much it would cost to switch to mac. And then most people would be put off by the price.

So in all 3 things are needed for mac gaming to take off;
- A directX equivalent that is just as easy to develop with
- Some incredible exclusive games
- FAR more freedom in graphics card choice.
 
At least someone is kind enough to review a quad 2.6, all everyone seems to be getting are the Octo systems, which are a tad out of my range.

Now if there was only an easy way to use third party cards in OSX huh.
 
seer said:
I would never have ordered my Mac Pro (when will it arrive goddammit!!!!) if I was unable to game on it. So if Macs didn't run on intel hardware now, and thus I was unable to install Windows to game on... I would never consider the purchase as one I would make.
Click to expand...
me netiher when i ordered it one year ago. i was thinking, ****, GTAIV is due to be released in half a year... i need a decent computer to try it, and then again, i need an awsome computer to work on day-to-day...

ive ran windows last time 5 months ago.. and im not planning to do it again any time soon.
i would buy a mac even if i couldnt touch windows with a ten foot pole. i dont know why the hell do i even keep the windows partition up... only takes space.
 
Abidubi said:
Because Microsoft admits that even with the most powerful system, your experience with vista will only be a 5.9/10.
Click to expand...

That's a good one; I hadn't heard that. :cool:

grue said:
Meanwhile, I'm happy to reboot to Windows to game, I just wish I could get a better video card so that I wouldn't have to switch the DVI cable between cards every time.
Click to expand...

What card do you have for Windows? I don't remember.

jmpage2 said:
Has it been determined with 100% certainty that you will not be able to add a 2nd 4870 to the MP without cooking it?
Click to expand...

It isn't possible. You need an external power supply.

If you can put in a 2nd 4870 and cable it for SLI, even if OSX can't take advantage of it, you would have a pretty blazing fast setup for Windows gaming.
Click to expand...

CrossFire. Not SLI. SLI doesn't work at all.

When I get my machine, I'll report my Windows 7 Experience Index for those of you curious about what lies beyond 5.9.
 
Tallest Skil said:
What card do you have for Windows? I don't remember.
Click to expand...


XFX GTX260 Core 216 Black Edition (factory overclocked). I had pulled it once the 4870s were found to be earlier-Mac Pro-compatible, figuring the relatively minor performance hit would be worth not having to switch back and forth, but put it back in once I looked at 4870 benchmarks for Flight Simulator X. :eek:
 
seer said:
I would never have ordered my Mac Pro (when will it arrive goddammit!!!!) if I was unable to game on it. So if Macs didn't run on intel hardware now, and thus I was unable to install Windows to game on... I would never consider the purchase as one I would make.

But seriously, even if Apple announced today a DirectX equivalent, and all the developers started enthusiastically pumping out great games for mac, it would'nt matter. Just like the console wars it would all become a battle of exclusive games. The mac would need to have 2 or 3 incredible games that everyone HAD TO HAVE for that were exclusive to the Mac for people to even start to investigate how much it would cost to switch to mac. And then most people would be put off by the price.

So in all 3 things are needed for mac gaming to take off;
- A directX equivalent that is just as easy to develop with
- Some incredible exclusive games
- FAR more freedom in graphics card choice.
Click to expand...

I don't think that Apple needs blockbuster exclusive titles. All they need is more gaming capability and more parity with PC in the gaming area in order to convert more Windows users to Mac over the next few years.

Does Apple really want to lose potential sales over this hole in their software capability? PS3 has far less market share than X360 and yet most titles are still ported to it. You would think that Apple would come up with a Direct-X equivalent to make this easier on developers, who I'm sure would like to sell an extra 100,000 or more copies of their game if they could sell to the Apple community.

Hopefully this is something on the roadmap to be addressed after Snow Leopard ships. Apple certainly has seen how much revenue they can get from games for the mobile platform.
 
Abidubi said:
Do you think developers will spring to OSX as soon as an Active-X equivalent is released? Do you think they'll sell another 100,000 copies of their game by porting it over?
Click to expand...

lol, wtf?
That's not the technology you're thinking of.
 
Abidubi said:
And what technology am I thinking of? I was replying directly to a comment that not having Active-X is one of the many reasons that game developers aren't porting to OSX.
Click to expand...

You are talking about Direct-X, which is the hardware access piece of Windows that makes it good for gaming.

Active-X is a web controls system.
 
jmpage2 said:
You are talking about Direct-X, which is the hardware access piece of Windows that makes it good for gaming.

Active-X is a web controls system.
Click to expand...

I'm not talking about anything. It wasn't me who said Active-X had anything to do with anything. I said why would 1 program change everything.

And OpenGL is the equivalent of Direct X. Yes, they are very different, but they do the same thing. If you design a game to run with OpenGL, there is no Direct X involved at all and vice-versa.
 
Abidubi said:
I'm not talking about anything. It wasn't me who said Active-X had anything to do with anything. I said why would 1 program change everything.

And OpenGL is the equivalent of Direct X. Yes, they are very different, but they do the same thing. If you design a game to run with OpenGL, there is no Direct X involved at all and vice-versa.
Click to expand...

Apples and Oranges.

OpenGL can't talk to the network hardware, the audio hardware, etc. All it does is speed up graphics operations by talking directly to the video card.
 
jmpage2 said:
Apples and Oranges.

OpenGL can't talk to the network hardware, the audio hardware, etc. All it does is speed up graphics operations by talking directly to the video card.
Click to expand...

I forgot that there is no way to program audio or networking on OSX, sorry. Guess I should throw out my speakers then...


It's like saying.

"I can't write my essay in OSX because there is no word-perfect in OSX"
"You can use MS Word in both, it's cross-platform"
"Ya but the buttons aren't in the same place"
"So why don't you learn where the buttons are"
"But I don't want to write the same thing twice"
"So just write it in word, then it will be cross-platform"
"I don't want to use word"
"So then your stuck with with windows only"
 
Abidubi said:
I forgot that there is no way to program audio or networking on OSX, sorry. Guess I should throw out my speakers then...
Click to expand...

What you fail to appreciate is that the reason that games that are developed (not ported) for both OS X and Windows run faster on the same hardware under MS Windows is because of Direct-X, which MS has spent years and millions of $$ developing. It's not as simple as writing software that can play sounds through your Mac's speakers. It's putting a game into an environment where it can talk to audio/video/network/etc hardware much more directly resulting in a dramatic speed boost by bypassing much of the normal OS baggage to do these tasks.

If you go back in time 12 years Windows was just as sloppy of a platform to game on as OS X is now.

Apple has thus far ignored this user segment and certainly they can continue to (I'm not here to tell Jobses how to run his company). It's my personal opinion though that if they raised the bar on making OS X easier to develop games for that they would sell more boxes.
 
Tallest Skil said:
When I get my machine, I'll report my Windows 7 Experience Index for those of you curious about what lies beyond 5.9.
Click to expand...
Please do, I would like to see how it compares to my i7 running W7 (I'll post it when I get home if I remember)
 
jmpage2 said:
games that are developed (not ported) for both OS X and Windows run faster on the same hardware under MS Windows is because of Direct-X, which MS has spent years and millions of $$ developing.
Click to expand...

And I agree, but it wont make developers or gamers flock over to OSX.

The only way that would happen is for OSX to be "unlocked" on any system, apple to spend years optimizing the OS for games, prices of apple hardware to drop, and for major developers to develop both platforms at once, and make a point to release all game 2 weeks earlier in the Mac every time. Thats the only way the Mac gaming situation will dramatically change... and that wont happen.

What is much more likely is if apple can really grab market share, indie developers become very successful and eventually grow into AAA title producers releasing OSX only games (because they are so familiar with the OS). With the larger market share it becomes profitable and there becomes less reason to avoid OSX for gaming. More dual-boot systems will be out there and gamers will become more familiar with OSX, encouraging PC developers to release mac versions.

That would take 10 years I'm guessing.
 
jmpage2 said:
You are talking about Direct-X, which is the hardware access piece of Windows that makes it good for gaming.

Active-X is a web controls system.
Click to expand...

I used to code Active-X all the time. It's mainly used to describe COM based visual controls, normally packaged in OCX's. They can be used on the web, although many browsers may block them due to security settings.

I've primarily used them in enterprise level desktop systems, where they can be re-used by multiple applications.

Games primarily use Direct-X which has many interfaces supporting all sorts of things from graphics to sound. Only recently dabbled in this to write an ancient battles simulator (http://ancientarmies.spaces.live.com/). It is my understanding that for the Mac you can use OpenGL for the graphics side of things.

It seems to me, that the performance difference between the two systems probably has more to do driver maturity than anything else.

RobP
 
Well would you believe it but my score is 6 . . . out of 7.9 though. Disks let me down a bit.
 

Attachments

  • W7.jpg
    W7.jpg
    139.3 KB · Views: 78
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back