Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple CAN’T do AAA gaming [Merged Megathread]
- Thread starter Admiralbison
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I saw that video, yesterday. Food for thought, certainly.
If I remember correctly, in that video, he starts off by saying that, because the Mac Studio can’t run Nintendo games under Dolphin emulation faster than 100+ fps because it’s not using all of its cores, that that’s a “bad start here”.
He then moves on to call out Firaxis not helping to make a native port for Civ 6, something which is a Firaxis thing, not an Apple thing.
Then he jumps on to an OpenGL game running through Rosetta 2 - CS:GO, then complaining that it can’t do better than 97 fps.
Finally, he does get around to a newer game, using Metal 2 (although still a Rosetta 2 game): Shadow of the Tomb Raider, pulling in 112 fps on the hughest settings.
And lastly, he winges about Total War: Warhammer III and how Feral can’t make the online libraries used for multiplayer games, run natively. He reacts with a huff and sighs after reading Feral’s explanation of how the Rosetta 2 performance should be aa good as native, but does nothing to prove them wrong, using any kinds of deeper dive.
In fact, he shows game performance of 67 fps, in Ultra, yet he seems let down by the performance. He touches briefly on EVE Online (as a AAA native M1 game), but only to say that he doesn’t know how to play it, nor how to benchmark it. Then, on to WoW: he doe’s admit that his lack of knowledge of the game invalidated their last attempt at benchmarking it. He then tried to claim that this was the first time that anyone had gotten frame data out of a Mac game.
Cherry-picking of the worst kind going on here. And, there’s no way that he didn’t know about the imminent arrival of Metal 3 and Resident Evil: Village, the new GRID Legends, No Man’s Sky.
I’m just not optimistic that Linus’s very own Mac guy will give us a meaningful follow up on this video after Ventura and Metal 3 come out. He should have just waited until then and did it right!
Have you played many Feral games?
I have, and I can confirm that their ports are of outstanding quality. I have measured performance, compared it against Windows versions, and experienced the stability of their games. They come with expansive controller support, and integration with the OS is better than every othe company.
Be careful about your offhand comments here, or I won't take you seriously much longer.
Jeanlain, thank you!
GrumpyCoder, do you think that Feral’s port of Alien: Isolation was done in a quick and dirty fashion? Their ports of the new Tomb Raider trilogy?
Have you played them?
Last edited:
LTT doesn’t typically follow up unless it’s a huge trend or something.
Aside from that, I’m not optimistic that Ventura or Metal 3 will improve the situation. If devs can’t put forth the effort to use Metal over OpenGL then they’re certainly not going to use Metal 3. And ports already done aren’t likely to be updated.
As for the raw performance of Apple’s gpus I’m not shocked. Considering that their gpu technology was already pretty different than the big two, and focused on efficiency over raw number crunching it shouldn’t surprise anyone that any program that doesn’t take advantage of the unique architecture would fall behind.
Frankly it’s just pure clickbait to dig up gaming benchmarks and make claims of “********tery” and not attempt to explain the discrepancy. (As I’ve said before, LTT is particularly bad for this, which is why I typically go to Gamers Nexus).
Although with that said, Anthony is a class act and the most willing to give Macs a fair shake at LTT. I will stand for no slander towards him.
well, per statements you and others have made, there’s really no point in going that extra mile.
Fully agreed. It will take years before titles using Metal 3 will become ubiquitous. Overall, it should make porting quicker and easier, because the API itself is less restrictive, but of course it depends on the multiple factors.
Yes and no. It might be possible to get extra performance/efficiency out of optimising for Apple's unique features, but these GPUs are no slouch to begin with. The M1 Max should be roughly comparable with a desktop RTX 3060 for games, so if it performs significantly worse in a title that's a good sign that something went wrong on the software side.
I’m terrible at predicting the future, but here I go anyway:
If Apple’s statement about the MacBook Air being the best selling laptop is accurate, then I believe the quality and amount of ports will increase.
I’m convinced the inherent factor isn’t Macs themselves, it’s marketshare vs. ROI.
Always the answer to complex questions.
I’m curious to know what the bottleneck would be. As I recall during the release of the AMD Vega series they had a huge discrepancy between their tflop performance and their graphics performance, and it eventually turned out the hardware scheduler just couldn’t keep up with the amount of execution units.
I imagine Apples architecture to be smaller amounts of execution units, and without huge amounts of data that would bottleneck gpus with less memory they fall back to their expected performance. (I think this made more sense in my head, like the architecture relies on the unified memory to be speedy over cramming a ****ton of vram and units together)
In any case I’m just throwing ideas out trying to understand why their gpus seem to be underperforming what they should be.
And I am not trying to slander him. You are welcome to vouch for Anthony, but I’m not bound by your sense of the man’s integrity. All I can do is call this video as I see it. Maybe you’re right, and maybe he needs to find a better boss?!
Apple Silicon can brute force their way through a lot of unoptimized code and cruft, which is a huge part of why I am so excited about developmental paths for MacOS gaming specifically. Ventura and Metal 3 are showing me that Apple is coming around to a more intentional and deliberate approach to gaming. Apart from budget, my only other thing keeping me from getting my hands on one, is my worry that MacOS will stop supporting Rosetta 2 sooner rather than later.
Yeah, that and of course the cultural factor. People are emotional, not rational.
Sometimes it's as simple as a software stalling the GPU with an unnecessary barrier or dependency here or there. That's a popular way to fix issues — you mess up your dependency logic, the frames are garbled, you put some barriers and now everything works fine — just in time to ship the product. But yeah, these things can be tricky. Between crappy legacy code, the need to support multiple platforms and tight time schedules, I can imagine that many real world codebases consists of bandaids upon bandaids — and I wouldn't' be surprised if almost nobody bothers with debugging the GPU timeline. That and optimising the low-volume Mac version is probably not the highest priority.
I thought that Vega's problem was that it simply wasn't as good at rasterisation workflows? Like tons of compute performance but not enough fixed function hardware to keep supplying those pixels to the shaders?
My bad, I meant the “no slander” thing in a joking manner. My humor didn’t come across in text.
Oh, that’s cool! There is one thing that I do agree with Linus about and that is we share the same taste in AV gear. Nice, neutral-sounding speakers with flat frequency responses, and Denon AVRs with industry-leading Audyssey room correction!
See:
I don't see any evidence supporting your claims here.
Care to quote someone else sharing your opinion on their work? This should be easy, since Feral is apparently "known" for its crappy ports.
"Titles that don't look good"? What about RoTR, Shadow of Mordor or Alien Isolation? These were quite good looking when they were released.
Anyhow, given that no other house ports AAA games to the Mac, I'm not sure what your reference is. And I'm not sure which porting house does a better job at optimisation. If Feral were doing "simple ports", they would just use MotlenVK or some JIT translation layer based on Cider, like others do. But they alway do native Mac apps, so that's another baseless claim from you.
Their Metal games perform generally between 80% and 100% of the windows versions on the same hardware. That's quite a bit better than average Mac games.
Oh, and what other companies went though the effort of re-porting openGL game to 64-bit Metal, just for compatibility with Catalina?
If you don't care about honesty, they you should stop speaking from authority here. No one here can contradict you about game development except Leman (and he just did).
In the one case where I could check the validity you claims (I don't do game development, but I have played Feral games a lot), it appears that they were baseless.
Last edited:
On Apple Silicon or intel? Because on intel, their Metal games perform quite well in my experience.
Note that I don't play strategy games.
Who's tired of waiting for decade(s) old PC game to get ported to MacOS? How about something new for once on latest game engine like Unreal Engine 5?
No one, since it never took a decade to port a game to the Mac. Unless you have examples?
I’m not surprised that M2 is much faster for games. Bandwidth is most likely the biggest limitation for M1, especially with lower quality software that does unnecessary memory copies, and the massively increased bandwidth and caches of M2 will have a big impact.
That was exactly it. Great compute performance, terrible raster performance. Which is why they changed things up with RDNA.
Never even heard of this, looks like generic trash. But whatever tickles your pickle, I guess.
Just like the movies, this style or genre of game is very distinct (from other game types), but also lends all games based on it to more or less look/feel the same.
So first you keep saying that it’s not cheap or profitable for devs including yourself to port AAA PC games to an additional platform like Mac and that’s why there is no interest among the devs and nobody even mentions Mac at dev conferences and among the people you know but now it’s cheaper and profitable if devs build their PC games with additional platforms like Mac in mind from the start? Why don’t all those devs saying it’s not worth it just build their games with the Mac in mind from the start then to make it profitable like the popular AAA franchises I mentioned?
Are you saying those game are not optimized and don’t look good? There are several games on my mentioned list that say otherwise. It doesn’t make sense either because you’re suggesting that the devs deliberately would risk a good optimized port for the huge PC market where the money is for the sake of making a cheaper port with worse performance and graphics just to be able to reach a few more platforms, particularly such a small one as the Mac which according to yourself doesn’t generate much profit, if at all. If they would release the ports for all platforms including the Mac at the same time it could justify them being cheaper and not well optimized but almost all of the games on my list had separate release dates for PC and Mac meaning they didn’t rush one platform or the other to make it cheaper. We also know how hardcore gamers react to bad ports like Cyberpunk and that devs work hard for a long time even after the release to optimize their games’ performance. Settling for a worse port to make a bit more money from small platforms like Mac sounds very illogical. Feral is well known for its good quality ports and excellent customer support, contrary to your claim about them being ”known” for crappy ports. I can only think of two ports with performance issues, the recent Warhammer 3 and the old OpenGL based Sleeping dogs but both of them had also bad PC ports to begin with.
You and other devs here have also said several times that porting even simple Unity games to Mac is not just like flipping a switch. It takes lots of debugging, optimizing and customer support and it’s not worth it. Now it’s suddenly a matter of flipping a switch when it comes to AAA franchises like Tomb Raider, Deus Ex and Metro? And those games have simple engines and graphics? Shadow of the Tomb Raider, Deus Ex MKD and Metro Exodus? Really?
You imply that the reason for AAA games I mentioned coming to Mac is that the game engines supported Mac from the start and it made it easy otherwise the games wouldn’t get ported, but it’s not as if the Foundation or Dawn engine was created by God or just existed since the birth of the Big Bang. The devs must have made the decision for the first engine after careful consideration meaning they found the Mac’s small user base still profitable despite the huge costs of porting the engine and the AAA games. It’s all about making good profit as everyone here says. If they did it back then and were successful it must be easier now for other PC game devs when the Mac market share is even larger and Apple Silicon and Metal 3 are more capable than before.
Also previously when I criticized your game list for being based on a wrong premise containing mostly console or Microsoft exclusive games, franchises that never had existed on Mac, developers that had never released Mac games before or many game engines without Mac support you said it was fair to take any game as an example of the lack of Mac support and interest among the devs. Now you admit that it’s indeed unlikely that such games would come to Mac and much more likely that devs and franchises with past Mac support and engines would continue to support Mac? That was kind of my whole point back then which you disagreed with.
That was when they were developing Shadow of the Tomb Raider. So what you are saying is that if the first two games weren’t ported to Mac the RTX integration in the SOTTR would have made it impossible for the game to get ported? Are you saying that the lack of RTX support on Macs is one of the reasons stopping PC games from getting ported? As far as I know the RTX feature in PC games has never been a problem for making Mac ports. SOTTR was first released in Sep 2018. RTX support was added in March 2019. The Mac port came in Nov 2019. As far as I know when PC games have some extra features that lack Mac support, like RTX, those features are simply not included in the Mac port later. They don’t have to go back and change things to make the Mac port possible. Another example is Metro Exodus. The Mac/Linux port was out April 14 and the enhanced edition with ray tracing for PC was released three weeks later. The Mac port simply don’t have ray tracing. Another lacking feature in Metro Exodus Mac is Nvidia hair works.
Yes, I read all that on Wikipedia before your post but it’s not quite the same story as you tell. To say Capcom didn’t update anything and RE Engine always supported Mac is a clear understatement. The first iOS game made with MT Framework Mobile was released in 2014. They made only 5 iOS games until 2017. That’s during the time of iPhone 6 and X and more than three years before M1 Macs. Although they have kept the mobile games updated the main MTFW engine was never ported to Mac. Its been in use since 2006 but no Mac games been made with it.
So MTFW Mobile is not the same as MTFW and the latter is not much like RE Engine. In fact in an interview with Capcom’s lead programmer Tomofumi Ishida he explained how they had to build a brand new engine since MTFW was not useful anymore for Resident Evil 7. So RE Engine is not just MTFW with three updated features you mention. Many features in RE Engine didn’t ever existed in MTFW and even less in MTFW Mobile. So no, RE engine never supported Mac because it’s a new beast with many new features apparently only recently ported to Mac for RE Village.
So you're implying that Capcom been sitting on its Mac engine since 2014 and could have easily just flipped a switch, made a cheap port with apparently poor graphics and made easy money off the starved Mac gamers but for some reason didn’t show their Mac support until Metal 3 suddenly was announced and that has nothing to do with the new features in Metal 3, like Mesh shaders, Fast Resource Loading API and MetalFX upscaling?
"Capcom’s newest game engine enables photorealistic graphics that rival live-action film, with details ranging from the textures of various objects to motes of dust floating in the air. In RESIDENT EVIL 7 biohazard, Capcom utilizes 3D scanning, employing its world-class, large-scale camera system to create more realistic characters. Up to now, Capcom had built MT Framework, an innovative proprietary development engine used to make high-quality games. However, conventional engine specs were insufficient for bringing the realistic world pursued by creators in RESIDENT EVIL 7 biohazard (hereinafter, RESIDENT EVIL 7) to life. Thus, this time we ended up simultaneously working on the development of both the game and the new RE ENGINE. The main feature of the RE ENGINE is its ability to dramatically reduce the time required for various game development processes. For example, the time required to test program changes has been reduced 90%, and materials made separately by creators can be combined in real time, which enables them to be used to instantly create other materials. This engine also supports the high-resolution graphics required for VR compatibility at a rate of 60 frames per second. We faced numerous difficulties in trying to make these features a reality, however the team pulled together as one to make it happen. Creating an interesting game should not be hindered by development engine constraints. If an artist expresses a desire to do something, the engine must evolve to make it happen.
For this reason, all of us on the engine development team work in constant close contact with the game development team to promote improvements. This kind of flexibility can only be achieved through in-house production and is connected to enhancing Capcom quality. To pursue realism, we created one of the world’s largest scale 3D scanning systems, an important tool contributing to the meticulously crafted reality of our games. Leveraging the merits of possessing such a system in-house, we paid particular attention on this title to technologies that faithfully reproduce human expressions. This degree of reproduction is unlike anything that has come before, achieving realism that is truly human. Using this system, we are able to generate data on expressions from a variety of angles with just one shot, dramatically increasing development speed. However, we are not merely pursuing efficiency or photorealism. On top of overwhelming realism, we’ve added characters and other touches typical of Resident Evil, resulting in a game that appeals like only Capcom games can. To achieve this, the work flow was revised to complete casting, special-effects makeup and costume coordination in the steps prior to character design. In doing so, we further enhanced accuracy and were able to better reflect the feeling of the Resident Evil world in the 3D data, creating reality so convincing it is as if the characters actually exist. I want everyone to play this new title to experience realism in a game like never before"
Last edited:
Agree. Anybody trying to defame Feral by generalizing and claiming they're "known" to do quick & dirty ports with poor performance and graphics can't be aware of their good reputation in the Mac community. Neither can they have played many Feral ports. Feral is famous for its good quality ports and excellent customer support and I'm not speaking only from my own experience.
I haven't played all their games since I'm more into FPS and action but I can only think of two games with "bad" performance, the latest Warhammer 3 and the old OpenGL based Sleeping dogs but both of them had also bad PC ports to begin with.
Speaking of poor graphics it's funny people seem to ignore the fact that Feral was nominated and one of the finalists at WWDC 2022 for Apple Design Award in the category Visuals and Graphics for their mobile port of Alien Isolation. "Winners in this category feature stunning imagery, skillfully drawn interfaces, and high-quality animations that lend to a distinctive and cohesive theme."
Here are some other facts about Feral ports and their graphics quality every game programmer should know before passing judgment:
- Shadow of the Tomb Raider was nominated for "Art Direction" and "Lighting/Texturing" in 2019.
- Life is Strange 2 was nominated for ”Best Graphics” in 2019.
- Hitman won award for ”Best Game Design” and was nominated for another ”Best Game Design” and ”Best Visual Design” in 2017.
- XCOM 2 was nominated for ”Game Design, Franchise” in 2017.
- Rise of the Tomb Raider won award for "Art Direction" and "Lighting/Texturing" and was nominated for "Outstanding Achievement in Art Direction", "Excellence in Visual Achievement" and "Excellence in SFX" in 2016.
- Deus Ex MKD won "Best Game Design" in 2016.
- Alien Isolation won award for ”Lighting/Texturing” and was nominated for ”Game Design” and ”Outstanding Real-Time Visuals in a Video Game” in 2015.
- Shadow of Mordor won award for "Game Design", "Outstanding Achievement in Game Design" and "Excellence in Design and Direction" and was nominated for "Best Design", "Art Direction, Fantasy" and "Lighting/Texture" in 2015.
- Batman: Arkham City won award for "Lighting/Texturing" and was nominated for ”Best Design”, ”Outstanding Achievement in Art Direction”, ”Best Game Design” and ”Best Graphics” in 2011-2012.
- Deus Ex: Human Revolution won award for "Best Design” and was nominated for ”Best Visual Arts” in 2012.
- Bioshock 2 was nominated for ”Art Direction, Fantasy”, ”Game Design, Franchise” and ”Lighting/Texturing” in 2011.