Great times ahead for mac-only game developers.
No change for games slated for the biggest possible audiences (The Sims, WoW, ...)
Great news for gamers stuck on mac, they get a good game engine almost for free - OK, in most cases really for free, who are we kidding?

Some confusion maybe for regular apps, but not to worry.

Remember Quark fucking over its loyal install base? See them scramble now to gain back market share that Adobe took away from those customers not willing to stake their whole pipeline on NT's. I mean a LOT of people have found out they don't need Quark after all. A lot of people are also happy Quark is back, so in the end, we're all happy...

For every high end app that won't port to mac any more, there will be others to make them sweat and reconsider.

And for every high end app that hasn't ported yet, there will be more reason now to port than before. Since a substantial part of their customers are now running OS X after all. And maybe won't like the dual boot enough to not at least consider the mac competition.

Sure, Apple is betting. But it's a very very small risk really. They won't lose any of their existing customers and the potential for growth now is bigger than before.

BTW intel has just released a shitload of power tools geared at large developers to make C++ and Fortran transition to intel macs doable.

So, maybe those Windows only applications won't ever be universal, why should for example autoCad start dabbling in XCode?

But now they stand a fair chance of getting ported. The tools are there, we think market share will rise, especially among power users and those who wanted to switch for so long but still NEED some Windows apps... So who's wasting time being pessimistic about it?

Don't forget the truly remarkable apps that apple has already brought to the Mac platform that are part of that "mac" experience: iTunes, iPhoto, iWork, iLife, Final Cut and others. Most consumers will spend most of their time in these, their browser and "apple" mail. It'd be foolish to open yourself to the viri & malware of IE in windows (and the inevitable cleaning and reinstalliing) by working online in Windows. I think that "switching" people will boot the mac system and play with the installed Apple apps - realize that they do most everything they need and only boot windows for that "must have" windows app. or game.

Game (and application) development is all about market share. I see this as a boon for apple, apple developers and apple users. The investment in Windows Applications that a user has made used to be a big reason keeping them away from OSX (whether they use the software or not). No more.

JP

I don't recall seeing this mentioned prior so I'll chime in. If Boot Camp has the effect of selling more Macs then the potential audience for porting games to the Mac platform becomes larger, which means more, not less, game development for the Mac. It is crucial, however, that those games play as well as on the Windows platform.

I'm sticking with Mac games.

I remember when Coke thought to beat Pepsi it needed to change it's flagship product, COLOSSAL mistake and gamble.

When or if the majority of Macs are able to run Windows natively, ports of games to the Mac OS will compete directly with the Windows versions. If a port is allowed to exist, expect to pay a premium to make up for the Windows version you didn't buy, or a compelling, possibly ugly reason to buy both versions.

While Boot Camp is brilliant economic jujitsu, and the great equalizer for Mac gamers, I sympathize with Mr. Smith from Freeverse Software about the industry of porting games to the Mac: Those folks are screwed, and will be for a while. Time to find a new niche, and fast, because the near future is not going to be pretty.

Maybe there is such a niche: Improve the Windows gaming experience for the Mac user. Some ramp-up for the programmers, perhaps an ethical dilemma or two, but I bet one could keep quite a bit of an existing company intact and profitable. And sell more Macs.

The hardcore gamer contingent is a small but disproportionately influential portion of the computing market. As a group, they like the most powerful, shiny hardware they can get, and so should be an ideal target for high-end Macs. And now they can be. Get them shouting about it being a pain in the ass to boot into Windows ... priceless.

{V}4xx0rZ R 1337! It could happen.

Seriously, people really think that all Mac gamers are going to gleefully shell out $199 to go buy a copy of XP so they can dual boot and run PC games??? C'mon now.

A few will, but there will still be PLENTY of market for the Mac game makers to sell to. Maybe even more than before, if Boot Camp helps Apple expand market share, which it should.

Rather than changing the formula of Coke to be like Pepsi, this is like letting Pepsi put one bottle of their stuff into every six-pack of Coke. Go on, drink the Pepsi ... we dare you.

OK, big words there. But compare the cost of Windows to that of a next generation game console. For only $200 more, you can get an Xbox 360 with a hard drive and everything!

Running Windows as a dedicated gaming platform on an Intel Mac makes financial sense, and you can bet that this will hurt the number of games for OSX.

OEM versions of windows home are less than $80.00 with CD and legal serial number. Since this will be a fresh install, users have the legal ability to purchase the OEM version from places like Newegg.com and others. In fact.... Windows Media Center Edition and XP Pro are both under $130.00 in the OEM version.

Not to mention you are forgetting that gamers are typically the highest percentage known for OS piracy. It is not long before Windows piracy on macs is just as common as on the wintel boxes.

If I was a mac developer... i'd close shop now or switch to making PC gamers very very quickly.

"If Boot Camp has the effect of selling more Macs then the potential audience for porting games to the Mac platform becomes larger, which means more, not less, game development for the Mac."

That's not true.

Any Mac that Boot Camp sells will obviously dual-boot with Windows XP, so the potential audience for porting games to OS X will actually SHRINK...

Because games for Windows XP will reach the new Mac users.

So why bother porting to OS X?

This isn't good for Mac gaming, and it's bad for computer gaming in general. It means ports to OS X will grow more and more pointless until they'll be essentially phased out, and we'll be stuck running newer generations of games under the dysfunctional nightmare that is Windows.

If you are going to buy a gaming PC then surely you would stick with the windows OS just for the compatability and higher gaming performance hardware, driver support etc. Not forgetting the cheaper costs to run games on WIndows rather than a Mac.

Well, thing is, there are overlapping groups.
the 100% gaming crowd won't buy dell or mac or sony, they build or make custom order or buy alienware (bought by dell, I know).
for the rest there is a huge overlap. most people who buy computers play the occasional game. now the mac crowd can play ANY game on the market. kind of cool. which is a good selling argument for that group of people that
- is in the market for a new "brand" computer
- plays the occasional game
- likes good looks
- is tempted by the whole apple and os x thing

and as I pointed out in my 'first post', there is a group of developers that stands to gain, the mac only game developers. they alone can offer the best possible mac games instead of ports that always seem to lack something

I've always wanted a mac, I love the OS and all the features it has.
But being able to play games has always been the drawback.

Now though, I'll be able to do that. And I don't need to spend any money on winXP because I already have a copy.

Quote

Guest wrote:

Because games for Windows XP will reach the new Mac users.

So why bother porting to OS X?

Completely disagree.

First of all, this will increase Mac's desktop share, without a doubt. People who are on the fence, or have this one app they have to run, now have the option to try out Mac. What they are very likely to discover is that they like it better than Windows. Once the Mac share is bigger, game developers will target it as a platform.

Second, Mac users will put up with dual booting for now. It's better than having no games at all, or having to buy a second computer. But the pressure will grow on the developers to give them OSX native games that don't require rebooting to play.

Anyone around here remember the early days of Windows 95? Game developers kept creating games in DOS, which meant you had to reboot in DOS mode (not just a DOS shell either). At first, this was fine, but as time went on, gamers got more and more impatient with having to reboot to play a game. Game developers began to create Windows games in response, and the games requiring a DOS boot became dinosaurs.

errr... I think for most people the going rate for Windows XP is $0, plus the miniscule risk of a trip to court if they get picked as the lucky 1-in-ten-million who get sued for piracy.

Sounds like a good way of giving Mac users the best of both worlds...

errr... I think for most people the going rate for Windows XP is $0, plus the miniscule risk of a trip to court if they get picked as the lucky 1-in-ten-million who get sued for piracy.

Sounds like a good way of giving Mac users the best of both worlds...

If you're willing to pay twice as much for Mac Hardware, you can handle the extra $90 you can pick up XP for.

Quote

Intruder wrote:
But since I am divided into three parts (OSX, Windows, DATA), what should I write to NTFS and FAT32. Unfortunately, FAT32 is not used by OS X, so let's make fun of it.

Will our Dynamic Duo escape the evil clutches of the Joker?

Anyone have a clue?

_________________
Collectors see my scratch and sniff email collection...

And now I have to cut, paste and mangle posts from other threads. I must be getting really desperate for attention. And I must show my ignorance about, well, everything in the known universe.

Oh, yeah. I'm a troll. I am desperate for attention by definition.

Brutno, Boot Camp my sell more Macs but that doesn't necessarily mean the potential audience for Mac games is going to increase. It could mean the opposite... the potential audience for PC games might increase.

Quote

Guest wrote:
OK, big words there. But compare the cost of Windows to that of a next generation game console. For only $200 more, you can get an Xbox 360 with a hard drive and everything!

Running Windows as a dedicated gaming platform on an Intel Mac makes financial sense, and you can bet that this will hurt the number of games for OSX.

Don't agree. Your average gamer just doesn't look at it as getting an Xbox 360 at a discount. It isn't even the same anyway, as console gaming is very different from PC gaming.

The avg gamer just wants to buy the game they're drooling over for 50 bucks and PLAY it. Tell 'em that they have to pay 250 bucks (or whatever) to play it (Win XP + the game), and they'll look at you like you're crazy.

The Mac gaming market will be just fine. Only the hardest of the hardcore are going to try to PC game on a Mac, due to the price, and the fact that most of the big PC games come to Mac anyway, sometimes simultaneously (hi Blizzard and Id).

Quote

Guest wrote:
OEM versions of windows home are less than $80.00 with CD and legal serial number. Since this will be a fresh install, users have the legal ability to purchase the OEM version from places like Newegg.com and others. In fact.... Windows Media Center Edition and XP Pro are both under $130.00 in the OEM version.

Not to mention you are forgetting that gamers are typically the highest percentage known for OS piracy. It is not long before Windows piracy on macs is just as common as on the wintel boxes.

If I was a mac developer... i'd close shop now or switch to making PC gamers very very quickly.

I don't think Mac developers have too much to worry about. The price of XP is still too high for the average gamer. Some of the hardcore gamers might switch, but that should be balanced by Apple's increased marketshare.

Look at the stock price... Wall Street seems to be making the same bet.

Quote

Guest wrote:
"If Boot Camp has the effect of selling more Macs then the potential audience for porting games to the Mac platform becomes larger, which means more, not less, game development for the Mac."

That's not true.

Any Mac that Boot Camp sells will obviously dual-boot with Windows XP, so the potential audience for porting games to OS X will actually SHRINK...

Because games for Windows XP will reach the new Mac users.

So why bother porting to OS X?

This isn't good for Mac gaming, and it's bad for computer gaming in general. It means ports to OS X will grow more and more pointless until they'll be essentially phased out, and we'll be stuck running newer generations of games under the dysfunctional nightmare that is Windows.

I hear ya, but that's a bad assumption.

That particular doom n' gloom scenario assumes that the majority of Mac gamers are really hot to shell out $100-$200 (depending on where you buy) to get a copy of XP just so they can buy PC games... in many cases, hit PC games that will be on the Mac shortly, or were released simultaneously Mac/PC.

That's just not a good value, unless you're a very hardcore computer gamer. And if you're a very hardcore computer gamer, you probably did not buy a Mac to begin with, now did ya?

If people are going to be able to load Windows onto their Macs, why would developers with bother to spend time and money on porting over games to the Mac OS? They would just assume that since everyone has Windows available to them, there is no need to develop for other OSes.

So unless you are Mac fanboy, and want to feel good about this development, there is no way in hell you can consider this a good thing for gaming on the Mac OS.

Quote

Guest wrote:
If you're willing to pay twice as much for Mac Hardware, you can handle the extra $90 you can pick up XP for.

Cute. But Mac hardware really doesn't cost 'twice as much', unless you're comparing apples-to-oranges, literally.

But by all means, lets keep comparing the latest eMachines ghetto special with a high-quality, beautifully designed Mac, lol.

Quote

Guest wrote:
If people are going to be able to load Windows onto their Macs, why would developers with bother to spend time and money on porting over games to the Mac OS? They would just assume that since everyone has Windows available to them, there is no need to develop for other OSes.

So unless you are Mac fanboy, and want to feel good about this development, there is no way in hell you can consider this a good thing for gaming on the Mac OS.

That assumes that everyone is going to shell out a hundred or two hundred bucks to buy Windows just to play the subset of PC games that don't make it to Mac (which does get the big hits games more often than not). Don't think so.

It also assumes that the people who DO want to shell out that kind of money just to play the PC games they can't get on OS X (i.e. the hardcore gamers) will be a far larger group than the number of new gamers that Boot Camp will bring to the Mac through increased marketshare. Not a good bet either.

And it also ignores the fact that if you were a hardcore gamer, you probably didn't get a Mac to begin with.

And y'know, its not really about being a Mac fanboy, its about common sense. Which no one has a monopoly on, n'est pas?

Quote

Guest wrote:

Quote

Guest wrote:

Because games for Windows XP will reach the new Mac users.

So why bother porting to OS X?

around here remember the early days of Windows 95? Game developers kept creating games in DOS, which meant you had to reboot in DOS mode (not just a DOS shell either). At first, this was fine, but as time went on, gamers got more and more impatient with having to reboot to play a game. Game developers began to create Windows games in response, and the games requiring a DOS boot became dinosaurs.

I agree with that aassessment. I recall going through that myself. At that time I could not understand why game developers were still writing dos-native games. I mean, why didn't they just get with the program, go through the learning curve process, and write win95-native games.

I think that as apple's market share increases, and I think that's very likely to happen, people who have switched from pc to apple are going to discover that they like the mac environment more. They're going to become annoyed at having to reboot to play a windows-only game. Who knows how far down the road it will be before you can run mac and windows apps along side each other? I think more games are going to be ported over to the mac, and sooner.

Quote

Guest wrote:

Quote

Guest wrote:
If you're willing to pay twice as much for Mac Hardware, you can handle the extra $90 you can pick up XP for.

Cute. But Mac hardware really doesn't cost 'twice as much', unless you're comparing apples-to-oranges, literally.

But by all means, lets keep comparing the latest eMachines ghetto special with a high-quality, beautifully designed Mac, lol.

Ghetto specials rule! I got compaq SR1710NX for $170 after rebate. My compaq came with...

AMD 3200+ Semperon
100 GB SATA drive
256 MB RAM
5 in one meida reader
2 Firewire ports

I swapped in 1GB PC 3200 RAM from my old PC. With the money I saved I bought a Sapphire X800 GTO2 for $180... I unlocked all 16 pipes and overcocked the core to 550 stable. I got myself a more than decent gaming rig for less than $400 and I had fun doing the research putting it together and learning new things along the way. This is something Mac useres will never understand cause you can only buy what Apple makes available at whatever price Apple wants. There is nothing to research... nothing to learn... just pull out your wallet, pay inflated prices and fool yourself into believing that you payed for quality. Surpise, you bought an Intel CPU with PCxxxx RAM & an off the shelf HD inside a fancy case.

BTW... I am very familliar with OSX and Macs. As part of my job, I maintain a PC and a Mac lab for testing software. I create Windows and OSX images and I run run servers that distribues these images to users. I have an Intel based Mac at work. Yeah, my mac at work looks nicer than my compaq but so far im not impressed by it's performance, I can't imagine how horribly games would run on that thing.

Quote

Guest wrote:

Quote

Guest wrote:

Quote

Guest wrote:
If you're willing to pay twice as much for Mac Hardware, you can handle the extra $90 you can pick up XP for.

Cute. But Mac hardware really doesn't cost 'twice as much', unless you're comparing apples-to-oranges, literally.

But by all means, lets keep comparing the latest eMachines ghetto special with a high-quality, beautifully designed Mac, lol.

Ghetto specials rule! I got compaq SR1710NX for $170 after rebate. My compaq came with...

AMD 3200+ Semperon
100 GB SATA drive
256 MB RAM
5 in one meida reader
2 Firewire ports

I swapped in 1GB PC 3200 RAM from my old PC. With the money I saved I bought a Sapphire X800 GTO2 for $180... I unlocked all 16 pipes and overcocked the core to 550 stable. I got myself a more than decent gaming rig for less than $400 and I had fun doing the research putting it together and learning new things along the way. This is something Mac useres will never understand cause you can only buy what Apple makes available at whatever price Apple wants. There is nothing to research... nothing to learn... just pull out your wallet, pay inflated prices and fool yourself into believing that you payed for quality. Surpise, you bought an Intel CPU with PCxxxx RAM & an off the shelf HD inside a fancy case.

BTW... I am very familliar with OSX and Macs. As part of my job, I maintain a PC and a Mac lab for testing software. I create Windows and OSX images and I run run servers that distribues these images to users. I have an Intel based Mac at work. Yeah, my mac at work looks nicer than my compaq but so far im not impressed by it's performance, I can't imagine how horribly games would run on that thing.

Two problems with that:

1) Your 'ghetto special' still has to run Windows, lol.

2) You had more time than money to do all the research it took to do that. A lot of Mac users aren't in that boat, their time is actually worth a lot in many cases, which is part of why they go Apple... fewer problems, no fuss no muss.

Not saying there's anything wrong with bottom-feeding, but by the same token, there's nothing wrong with having the best (Apple) either.

Quote

Guest wrote:

Quote

Guest wrote:

Quote

Guest wrote:

Quote

Guest wrote:
If you're willing to pay twice as much for Mac Hardware, you can handle the extra $90 you can pick up XP for.

Cute. But Mac hardware really doesn't cost 'twice as much', unless you're comparing apples-to-oranges, literally.

But by all means, lets keep comparing the latest eMachines ghetto special with a high-quality, beautifully designed Mac, lol.

Ghetto specials rule! I got compaq SR1710NX for $170 after rebate. My compaq came with...

AMD 3200+ Semperon
100 GB SATA drive
256 MB RAM
5 in one meida reader
2 Firewire ports

I swapped in 1GB PC 3200 RAM from my old PC. With the money I saved I bought a Sapphire X800 GTO2 for $180... I unlocked all 16 pipes and overcocked the core to 550 stable. I got myself a more than decent gaming rig for less than $400 and I had fun doing the research putting it together and learning new things along the way. This is something Mac useres will never understand cause you can only buy what Apple makes available at whatever price Apple wants. There is nothing to research... nothing to learn... just pull out your wallet, pay inflated prices and fool yourself into believing that you payed for quality. Surpise, you bought an Intel CPU with PCxxxx RAM & an off the shelf HD inside a fancy case.

BTW... I am very familliar with OSX and Macs. As part of my job, I maintain a PC and a Mac lab for testing software. I create Windows and OSX images and I run run servers that distribues these images to users. I have an Intel based Mac at work. Yeah, my mac at work looks nicer than my compaq but so far im not impressed by it's performance, I can't imagine how horribly games would run on that thing.

Two problems with that:

1) Your 'ghetto special' still has to run Windows, lol.

2) You had more time than money to do all the research it took to do that. A lot of Mac users aren't in that boat, their time is actually worth a lot in many cases, which is part of why they go Apple... fewer problems, no fuss no muss.

Not saying there's anything wrong with bottom-feeding, but by the same token, there's nothing wrong with having the best (Apple) either.

Two Good Thing about Boot Camp:
1. You can now run Windows.
2. You don't have to run OSX anymore.

See, this is why I said Apple people will never understand. Yes Macs are good, no doubt. But are they worth their price? I personaly dont think so.

Apple people think computers should be as easy to use as a toaster. In reality computers are more complicated than cars. If you own a car you should know some basic things like how to change the tire, how to check the oil. If you don't know these thing you are goiong to get ripped off. If you want to play games you need to know what kind of video card is in your Mac, you need to know how much ram you've got, what is the future upgradability of your Mac. All of these thing require research which, accroding to you, mac people don't do. I guess Mac users have money to burn.

As I said, I test apps on Mac and Win. I also maintin Mac and Win systems. Beleive me, Macs have problems too. OSX is bloated and slow... this sounds funny but it is more bloated and slow than Windows XP! I can't wait to see benchmarks between OSX and Win on the same platform.

Also there are inconsistencies throught OSX. My personal pet peeve are the major inconsistencies with keyboard naviagion. You can't tab into many textboxes... you can tab though buttons but, somtimes, clicking [ENTER] or [SPACE] wont click the button forcing you to use the mouse. This is an important feature for some handicapped people for crying out loud and it is one of the most basic features a good OS should have. Overall, the lack of consistent keyboard naviation make OSX feel like a little rinky-dink os (an expensive rinky dink os).

The only positive comment I have on OSX is that it is running Unix. Then again, so is my compaq.

Quote

Guest wrote:

Quote

Guest wrote:

Quote

Guest wrote:

Quote

Guest wrote:
If you're willing to pay twice as much for Mac Hardware, you can handle the extra $90 you can pick up XP for.

Cute. But Mac hardware really doesn't cost 'twice as much', unless you're comparing apples-to-oranges, literally.

But by all means, lets keep comparing the latest eMachines ghetto special with a high-quality, beautifully designed Mac, lol.

Ghetto specials rule! I got compaq SR1710NX for $170 after rebate. My compaq came with...

AMD 3200+ Semperon
100 GB SATA drive
256 MB RAM
5 in one meida reader
2 Firewire ports

I swapped in 1GB PC 3200 RAM from my old PC. With the money I saved I bought a Sapphire X800 GTO2 for $180... I unlocked all 16 pipes and overcocked the core to 550 stable. I got myself a more than decent gaming rig for less than $400 and I had fun doing the research putting it together and learning new things along the way. This is something Mac useres will never understand cause you can only buy what Apple makes available at whatever price Apple wants. There is nothing to research... nothing to learn... just pull out your wallet, pay inflated prices and fool yourself into believing that you payed for quality. Surpise, you bought an Intel CPU with PCxxxx RAM & an off the shelf HD inside a fancy case.

BTW... I am very familliar with OSX and Macs. As part of my job, I maintain a PC and a Mac lab for testing software. I create Windows and OSX images and I run run servers that distribues these images to users. I have an Intel based Mac at work. Yeah, my mac at work looks nicer than my compaq but so far im not impressed by it's performance, I can't imagine how horribly games would run on that thing.

Two problems with that:

1) Your 'ghetto special' still has to run Windows, lol.

2) You had more time than money to do all the research it took to do that. A lot of Mac users aren't in that boat, their time is actually worth a lot in many cases, which is part of why they go Apple... fewer problems, no fuss no muss.

Not saying there's anything wrong with bottom-feeding, but by the same token, there's nothing wrong with having the best (Apple) either.

I grew up poor. I can afford a Mac but I prefer PC. I admire the original poster for getting a good deal and sticking to a budget. I wish I knew about that Compaq deal. There is a certain beauty in accomplishing more for less. Macs just don’t do that. Call it "bottom-feeding" if you wish.

I don't live in a bachelor pad where the computer or a plasma TV not only computer's but center-pieces to the decor. My PC lies under my desk, and I only ever reach down if I need to load a disc. Why can't you Macboys accept the fact that a majority of the world's computer users prefer function over beauty.

I like it that I can take apart my PC and build it back. I can find new parts from hundreds of thousands of online stores, not just the original manufacturer. I can upgrade, downgrade whatever whenever. Bentleys may be the hottest looking cars, but you can't find body kits for them... get it?

Just accept the fact that Bootcamp and other Windows booting hacks might be good for Apple's hardware sales, but they'll just kill the appeal for OSX for those few who actually switch over to the Mac for the "beauty" part. If one is booting into Windows on a Mac, they're not interating with Apple software a bit, and they're least likely to boot into OSX and see how great "the other OS is".

And yes Mac hardware costs double. You wouldn't know because you are an Apple customer, you don't know how to find and get bargains.

And finally, Apple's market share has been slipping ever since Steve Jobs came (not that it was going up, before him). Here's the proof:

http://news.com.com/2010-1041_3-6056161.html

Quote

Guest wrote:


Apple people think computers should be as easy to use as a toaster.

Yes, and they are right.

I have a life, I don't need to, or even particularly want to, babysit my computer. Thats why Macs rule, and are worth a premi