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.
OS X Battlefield 3 and 4 coming to Mac?
- Thread starter Jeffylew77
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Depends what kind of Macbook Pro. Besides, Battlefield 3 looks the exact same on high and ultra, it's kind of silly.
No, note quite. Ultra has some nice lightning effects for example that aren't there on High. But if you loose FPS, it's not much of a difference on going High.
if this does come to mac i can finally blow up my bootcamp partition and really say sayonara to ol bill gates
I hope both game will be launched for Mac soon. Although I don't think this going to happen at least soon.
Interesting! Probably for BF4.. I don't know if they would bother investing in BF3 when BF4 is coming next year. I would love a mac version though, i never get tired of BF3, and i could get rid of my bootcamp.
I don't know if i will buy BF4 but we'll see. I would have to get a new iMac to be able to play it anyways
. Let's hope more games will come to mac in the future!
I don't know if i will buy BF4 but we'll see. I would have to get a new iMac to be able to play it anyways
. Let's hope more games will come to mac in the future!
Do not loose your hope yet. Maybe They'll launch BF4 for Mac after it will be launched for PC.
Either way it will be awesome.
I have preordered for PC version. I don't think I will regret over with that decision.
Valve's Source games (Half-Life 2 + expansions, Portal 1/2, Left 4 Dead 1/2, etc) are not native ports. If you check in the SteamApps folder, you'll see that the downloaded files are the same as what you'll find if you install the game on Windows.
They are native ports. Files being the same does not mean that the port is not native. PC/Mac/Xbox/Playstation games all usually share the same data files. My Mac native copy of Quake 3 from years ago has the exact same files as the PC version.
What matters is only the executable file being native, and all the Source games have native executable files.
I can play HL2 and the like at native resolution, full AA and AF, with vsync on and stay locked at 60 fps all day long when running Windows. Switch back to OS X on the exact same hardware, and I have to lower everything to get similar performance. If all that's needed is an executable to make something a native port, does it simply come down to Apple's lousy OpenGL support that accounts for the vast difference in performance? I don't entirely buy that because Call of Duty: Modern Warfare runs basically the same whether I'm using the App Store version on OS X or Steam on Windows.
I'm not trying to make it sound like you don't know what you're talking about, far from it. I genuinely want to know. Are the performance issues with Source more Valve's problem or Apple's?
I'm not sure where the problem lies, but I guess it's a combination of the ATI and Nvidia drivers in OS X, how well (bad?) OpenGL is handled in OS X, and how well the port from Direct3D to OpenGL is done.
Maybe it's more about first two, since even with Blizzard's games (they are supposed to be developed in parallel, Windows/Mac) there's worse performance in OS X. I just did a small test with World of Warcraft (all settings maxed out) on my computer which runs OS X 10.8.3 and Windows 8 and while the top frame rate for some reason was higher in OS X (around 90 FPS tops) it also got a much lower lowest frame rate: 20 FPS.
The same test in Windows yielded a more steady result with 60-70 FPS at max and in the area where OS X got its lowest (around 20 FPS) I got 40 FPS in Windows 8. Quite a lot better.
This is the problem I see with most Mac versions of games compared to Windows. It can seem equal at first glance, but as soon as you view a complex scene (a lot of polygons) or turn up the settings and when there's a lot of action the frame rate always go lower in OS X.
It's possible that there are some games where the difference isn't as big between the two operating systems. If the game never gets demanding enough for your computer's hardware so you'll notice the frame rate dip in OS X compared to Windows. Maybe Call of Duty 4 is one of them? I also remember it as playing fairly similar in OS X vs. Windows.
The thing is, the Source engine upon which HL2 and its ilk are based is older than that of Call of Duty. Also, given that Valve did the porting for OS X themselves, you would think that performance would be much better given that CoD 4 was done by Aspyr.
Apple's poor OpenGL implementation and support is certainly part of it. I have no doubt games would run much better if they actually put in some OpenGL 4.0 extensions into OS X since recent Mac hardware is capable of running it.
Extensions are useless unless developers actually take advantage of them.
Valve complained about the lack of OpenGL 3 on OSX as one of the reasons why performance wasn't great (in addition to poor performing drivers), yet when Apple shipped OpenGL 3.2 on Lion, Valve didn't update any of their games... And still haven't.
Perhaps their future games will take advantage of this.
Last edited:
Also, they should give Nvidia/AMD the task of making high performance drivers.
The drivers delivered by AMD/Nvidia aren't made for gaming, they are made for boosting work. OpenGL accelerated applications such as most Adobe apps or 3D-moddeling apps are known to work better in an OS X environment than under Windows.
Even today, most Mac users don't really care about gaming. For the ones who do, Apple introduced BootCamp while getting rid of the PPC architecture. And I actually prefer this, because I think if you're a gamer you can use BootCamp. AMD and Nvidia should go on focusing on how to use the immense power of modern GPUs in pro apps to accelerate work tasts of professionals.
I don't see what is wrong about BootCamp, restarting isn't much of a matter with recent technology such as SSDs and the Win8 fast-boot option.
Use OS X for productive work, and switch to Windows for a round of gaming.
And then: I own a 2008 MacBook Pro. With the 9600GT, it's just able to play games on low settings. Why would I want to play games under OS X where the performance is worse than under Windows, where I can get more FPS?
30 FPS is much more comfortable to play than 20 FPS. To get OS X to perform as good in games as Windows, we still got a long way to go.
nope, both drivers and apple OpenGL sucks also for professionals.
-The Foundry has stopped releasing new software on osx because it lacks proper support.
The most ridicolous thing is that their lead software was developed on OSX first
. They simply gave up.-Autodesk software is 2 years behind on GPU features because osx lacks proper Open GL support.
-Adobe is going to the same route, because apple is slow giving support to them - the nvidia 6xx series are still unsupported for advanced GPU rendering (2011 macs with the ati 6xxx series are faster with premiere and after effects).
-Other problems with nvidia 6xx series - the current drivers and OpenGL version fails to render certain effects correctly on most games and 3d software when compared to ati 6XXX cards.
-the 10.6.4 osx update.
That isn't 100% correct. You need to modfiy a little document by simply adding your GPU's name to a list to make CUDA working in AE and Premiere with your GTX6xx cards. I can confirm this, my GTX680 makes After Effects fly (but yeah, editing registries isn't what you bought a Mac for..)
But you're probably right with your other points.
What is with the 10.6.4 update?
That's nice to know, I'll check it out
the 10.6.4 update had nasty bugs on both video drivers and OpenGL framework. 3d games and 3d software performance was very bad with various glitches and errors.
A solution was to downgrade the framework to 10.6.3 by replacing the OpenGL .bundle files, or to reinstall osx up to 10.6.3 version.
https://www.macrumors.com/2010/06/2...ith-nvidia-graphics-cards-on-mac-os-x-10-6-4/
Not to shoot your hopes down, but battlefield is not the only franchise DICE develops.
Honestly I believe that NFS Hot Pursuit port for OS X or a multi-platform development of another NFS title would be more likely than a Battlefield port.
There are not that many so-called 'hardcore' gamers on the Mac side. And even those that fall into that category, they either use a console, have a seperate gaming PC, or use Bootcamp.
The only logical machines to run Any of the newer Battlefield franchise properly would be the higher-end models of the newest iMacs.
You should also remember that the desktop segment alone is very small within Apple's computer sales. Although iMacs have seen a demand spike, I don't think DICE would get enough return of investing in a port for very limited consumer base.
Driving games often hit more casual gamers, as evidenced by the boom of racers in iOS and Mac App store the few years.
I would confidently put my money on NFS port and/or development. Or maybe a Mirror's Edge port for Mac perhaps?
Honestly I believe that NFS Hot Pursuit port for OS X or a multi-platform development of another NFS title would be more likely than a Battlefield port.
There are not that many so-called 'hardcore' gamers on the Mac side. And even those that fall into that category, they either use a console, have a seperate gaming PC, or use Bootcamp.
The only logical machines to run Any of the newer Battlefield franchise properly would be the higher-end models of the newest iMacs.
You should also remember that the desktop segment alone is very small within Apple's computer sales. Although iMacs have seen a demand spike, I don't think DICE would get enough return of investing in a port for very limited consumer base.
Driving games often hit more casual gamers, as evidenced by the boom of racers in iOS and Mac App store the few years.
I would confidently put my money on NFS port and/or development. Or maybe a Mirror's Edge port for Mac perhaps?