Anyone interested in gaming on a Mac should just get a Shadow subscription and cut the hassle of worrying about ports, external GPU, bootcamp, parallels and whatever.
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.
The final blow for real gaming on the Mac, or the beginning of a new era?
- Thread starter Frankied22
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The service is limited to only a few countries, and it’s not possible that many people would like to pay at least 14.99 USD every month.
For those who played games on the 13"Mba or 13" mbp, this arm chip will be even greater
Craig said clearly that the dev Kit with the ipad pro chip, is just a basic chip for the dev to see how something without even trying works. So even rosseta 2 will take around 10% performance, those who played games under macOS, will still be able no issues.
The main question is if windows and apple talked, and microsoft will allow after Sept to buy Windows 10 arm
and bigger question, if apple will still offer dGpu AMD for the imac line and the 16" MBP
Craig said clearly that the dev Kit with the ipad pro chip, is just a basic chip for the dev to see how something without even trying works. So even rosseta 2 will take around 10% performance, those who played games under macOS, will still be able no issues.
The main question is if windows and apple talked, and microsoft will allow after Sept to buy Windows 10 arm
and bigger question, if apple will still offer dGpu AMD for the imac line and the 16" MBP
What would be the point? Windows 10 on Arm is worthless for games, unless you really pine to play Solitair.
We're definitely at the end of the era of triple-A titles also coming out for Mac. I'm not optimistic about Steam moving to ARM macOS either. I think we'll have Blizzard, a handful of games that managed to survive Catalina's culling and then everything else will be apps designed to be Universal ports from iOS and iPadOS. I agree that it's going to get a shot in the arm with Catalyst and iOS/iPadOS app support, but I also think that the era you talked about ending happened when Catalina killed 32-bit apps and not with ARM or macOS Big Sur on ARM. Certainly, I don't see Big Sur on x86 changing anything from Catalina; that's where the damage was done heaviest.
But then again, the Apple development model doesn't suit software that doesn't change regularly. I've been an Apple person since 2001. In that time, I've seen apps go from Carbon to Cocoa, Mac OS 9 to Mac OS X, Mac OS X on PowerPC to Mac OS X on Intel, 32-bit to 64-bit, and now macOS on x86-64 to macOS on ARM64. That's how many times apps have needed to be rewritten or recompiled and re-released or patched to be made native on the newer platform. That does not favor games that are released and then patched for incidental stability issues. The reason why Blizzard's games have not had issue is that most of them get regular updates and microtransaction updates. Were it not for that, I'd be sad about StarCraft II or Hearthstone losing support for Catalina. So, yeah, if your development model means that you're going to be updating your games regularly, then great. Otherwise, it wasn't ever a great deal to make Mac games anyway.
But yeah, as far as games also being out for Xbox and Windows and PS4, I do think that we're about to see the end of that on the Mac. Killing 32-bit one year and then releasing a whole new architecture the next has to make a Mac developer feel crappy.
But then again, the Apple development model doesn't suit software that doesn't change regularly. I've been an Apple person since 2001. In that time, I've seen apps go from Carbon to Cocoa, Mac OS 9 to Mac OS X, Mac OS X on PowerPC to Mac OS X on Intel, 32-bit to 64-bit, and now macOS on x86-64 to macOS on ARM64. That's how many times apps have needed to be rewritten or recompiled and re-released or patched to be made native on the newer platform. That does not favor games that are released and then patched for incidental stability issues. The reason why Blizzard's games have not had issue is that most of them get regular updates and microtransaction updates. Were it not for that, I'd be sad about StarCraft II or Hearthstone losing support for Catalina. So, yeah, if your development model means that you're going to be updating your games regularly, then great. Otherwise, it wasn't ever a great deal to make Mac games anyway.
But yeah, as far as games also being out for Xbox and Windows and PS4, I do think that we're about to see the end of that on the Mac. Killing 32-bit one year and then releasing a whole new architecture the next has to make a Mac developer feel crappy.
For game developers, releasing games for PlayStation 5 and Xbox Series X should be much more profitable than porting to macOS.
Given the apple silicon install base is several hundred million devices: Yes?
The total market for apple games that run across all devices is now much larger than any other platform.
Certainly if Apple is leaving the x86 party. A lot of games came to the Mac because Apple had finally joined the architecture everyone else was using. Them switching to ARM, barring iOS and iPadOS porting, will be much like going back to PowerPC in terms of getting triple-A titles ported to the Mac platform, if not worse.
Last edited:
At the moment, the install base of Apple Silicon in the non-mobile sector is precisely zero, not counting development kits.
And beyond that, the limitations imposed on apps for iPhones/iPads/tvOS regarding installation size and support for control methods make these platforms at least unattractive, if not impossible to support by the developers of modern triple-A games. There's a reason why the Apple TV never took off as gaming platform, despite being absolutely able to compete technically with current gen consoles.
It’s pretty much given. If you care for pc games, buy a pc. Apple’s business model is not meant for gaming. Their market share is not enough, they really don’t care about using the best parts meant for gaming (aka nVidia), and suddne change in architecture pretty much throws all the long term consideration.
Really, it’s much better to spend more and use a pc for pc gaming. You don’t have to wait for whatever games to appear in Mac OS, the performance is much better with nVidia, and all the mods, utilities whatnot are more friendly on PC.
End of story.
As for possible ios based game moving to mac OS, that’s different story, but even with iphones and ipads, ios gaming is pretty much in !@#$. All they got nowadays are pay to win stupid mobile games. Who cares about these games?
Really, it’s much better to spend more and use a pc for pc gaming. You don’t have to wait for whatever games to appear in Mac OS, the performance is much better with nVidia, and all the mods, utilities whatnot are more friendly on PC.
End of story.
As for possible ios based game moving to mac OS, that’s different story, but even with iphones and ipads, ios gaming is pretty much in !@#$. All they got nowadays are pay to win stupid mobile games. Who cares about these games?
Out of curiosity I searched for a comparison of graphics between WWDC's Tomb Raider demo and an Xbox game walkthrough on this is what I got on YouTube:
Xbox from 2018:
WWDC:
The underwater scene is more stark:
Granted details are scarce, and I concede what Apple has achieved on an A12Z is technically impressive; but if it doesn't at least match something from 2018's console then to a buy-side average end user (I'll count myself included), technical achievements won't mean much. After all doesn't Apple like to hide technicalities to us? I won't even compare to PCs on high settings.
For me, I'll now stream games or just get a Windows machine. Boot Camp + eGPU was a nice option while it lasted.
@RoundaboutRider I just realized how mean I looked. I didn't mean it that way. I mean, Apple's GPU is pretty good. It seems to have accurate lighting by looking at your screenshots. Apple was even working on their version of ray tracing during early 2020. Were they applying it during Keynote? I'm not sure.
I only hoped Apple would not leave AMD if AMD makes better GPUs than Apple. It might be better for Apple to stay with AMD, until Apple's GPUs are very good. But that's my opinion. My apologies to Apple.
So I was happy when I read this article! https://www.tweaktown.com/news/7346...-bigger-geforce-rtx-3090-destroyer/index.html It seems like Apple and AMD were working on Navi 3x since early 2020. Navi 3x might not have constraints on when to release like Navi 2x.
I only hoped Apple would not leave AMD if AMD makes better GPUs than Apple. It might be better for Apple to stay with AMD, until Apple's GPUs are very good. But that's my opinion. My apologies to Apple.
So I was happy when I read this article! https://www.tweaktown.com/news/7346...-bigger-geforce-rtx-3090-destroyer/index.html It seems like Apple and AMD were working on Navi 3x since early 2020. Navi 3x might not have constraints on when to release like Navi 2x.
You're right that Blizzard hasn't been releasing their latest games on Mac, even though they used to be very supportive of the platform. That was part of my larger point: PC devs were already turning away from Mac gaming on Intel; the transition to ARM should bring in others actually eager to be on the platform. Which is better for the Mac in the long run.
My point is that many current macOS games will not support Apple Silicon and other PC game developers will still not port games to macOS.
On a meta level I have to wonder, if Apple really starts consistently hitting it out the park and leave Intel/AMD Windows floundering, will Microsoft have to take Windows on Arm more seriously? Traditional Windows is currently a strong near monolithic OS, there's still a lot in its favour, but things can change dramatically and quickly, as iPhone showed with the smartphone market.
Microsoft have been scratching around for a while on a more modern consumer OS free of the legacy millstone traditional Windows has to drag along with it - 10S, 10X, Windows on Arm - but it really hasn't committed to getting behind any one and actually pushing it, it seems more like they're just waiting for something to stick, and it's not happened yet. If Apple starts to run rings around them with cheaper, more performant Macs, will they try to respond in kind or stay indecisive and suffer death by a thousand cuts and the slow passage of time?
The future Microsoft envisions for Windows is mostly Windows as a service. Windows on ARM may ironically get a boost in development (no one develops in ernest on Windows for ARM which is why it’s not being adopted) BECAUSE of Apple. Weird to think about but it may help WoA hit critical mass
That said, WoA is NEVER going to have the backwards compatibility needed to replace x86. So WoA may end up being the “clean break” MS might need for their vision of the late 2020’s and beyond ?♂️
Chiming in here, as someone who's been following this site (and Apple-related stuff) for about a decade now. Just checked my join date—it's Jun 20, 2010, so it's literally been over 10 years since I made a forum account (and note that I have been reading this site for a little while before then). Been lurking around for sometime, but this thread is post-worthy.
It's a little surprising that anyone ever took (let alone still takes) gaming seriously on a Mac. Apple never quite prioritized robust eGPU support. Even if ARM Macs have powerful GPUs—which I think can happen due to the total vertical integration that Apple now has here—I wouldn't expect gaming on the Mac to become a big thing until the rest of the entire computing industry aligns with Apple on general CPU architecture.
It's a little surprising that anyone ever took (let alone still takes) gaming seriously on a Mac. Apple never quite prioritized robust eGPU support. Even if ARM Macs have powerful GPUs—which I think can happen due to the total vertical integration that Apple now has here—I wouldn't expect gaming on the Mac to become a big thing until the rest of the entire computing industry aligns with Apple on general CPU architecture.
Yep, Windows Enterprise is always going to be strong, Windows for gaming seems secure (at the moment anyway), but on a consumer front, particularly if Apple can squeeze down into maybe the ~$799 category of ultrabooks I think they might come under a lot of pressure - I don't think MS will want to just let this market segment go. For this though, they need that cleaner, leaner OS, be it 10X (which is being refocused) or WoA...
They certainly may not want to let it go, but organizationally I don’t think there’s any way for them to turn the Tanker. Not without cutting all the things that people insist they love windows for (running 20 year old software if you were to believe this forum).
Consoles are moving back closer in line to x86 due to the Zen processors. So for those game developers, I would think it'd make more sense to capture the broader console + PC market than recompile say Vulkan or OpenGL to Metal and then maintain it for what is likely a small niche of users. And also deal with Swift which some may not know or want to learn given everything is a tradeoff between time, cost, and effort for potentially little gain. And then the question is, will it perform well on Apple Silicon? With say an AMD card, you can at least expect some architectural constants across all platforms. Not sure how open Apple is to unleashing their SoC beyond blackbox and Metal.
It's fine for those who use Unity or Unreal or already Mac developers. The big players run their own in-house engines though and the ever-increasing complexity to porting makes me think it wouldn't be worthwhile to bring over. Especially given how Apple is regarding control.
Except that you'll not be playing Outer Worlds on your apple watch. You're counting every ARM device that device apple produces and its quite evident that apple won't be selling several hundred million Macs. No matter how you slice it, Apple only has a 10% market share for computers (give or take a percentage point) and out of that small number, a tiny niche is only interested in gaming.
No question, but your argument has been used for so many years, even prior to Apple embracing Intel, never mind ARM. Heck, people were excited that with the move to Intel CPUs Macs at last could indeed start seeing some AAA titled games, but sadly, that really wasn't the case. I don't see much changing, but its just my opinion and time will tell.
Last edited:
I understand your point, I just disagree that it makes sense to keep pining for something that isn't coming back. AAA PC Dev support for Mac gaming has been declining for a long time, and I wouldn't expect that trend to change. Even if zero current Mac OS games get ported to Apple Silicon, I think Mac gaming will still be better on ARM over time. There's greater incentive to develop for the iPad, Mac, and Apple TV as one platform, and developer interest is headed in the right direction.
An Intel Mac will always have just a subset of the games available on a PC. You're better off just getting a PC for PC games. At least an Arm Mac will have games not available on PC.
[automerge]1593460152[/automerge]
Apple had sold 360 million iPads as of last year. Mac and iPad sales are about equal, being able to develop for both effectively doubles your reach.
Last edited:
Adding to the removal of 32-bit and the transition to ARM: Apple is not even supporting Vulkan or OpenGL. Some if not all of the heavy lifting to get Mac gaming going at all is done by third-party engines like Unity or third-party libraries such as MoltenVK. Apple just isn’t providing a suitable environment for anyone but iOS or iPadOS game developers. Mid- or high-budget games do not typically originate on iOS or iPadOS either.
I was surprised by the number of games that became unavailable to me on GOG or Steam.
Which is sad. Blizzard ought to have sufficient in-house expertise and tools available to develop games for Mac. The fact that Overwatch has been ported to Switch but not to macOS makes me expect the worst for Blizzard’s Mac support in the future. Given the Switch port, I doubt that the Mac hardware was the only reason why they ditched macOS.
I was surprised by the number of games that became unavailable to me on GOG or Steam.
Which is sad. Blizzard ought to have sufficient in-house expertise and tools available to develop games for Mac. The fact that Overwatch has been ported to Switch but not to macOS makes me expect the worst for Blizzard’s Mac support in the future. Given the Switch port, I doubt that the Mac hardware was the only reason why they ditched macOS.
First I thought of quoting several people, but I figured I just write out some points. Hope it's not too confusing (It's late here…):
•Apple is releasing new silicon yearly with quite big improvements to an already impressive platform when it comes to performance and energy consumption. I think that it will be very interesting to see those chips in ”full size” computers.
•If we in the Apple silicon Macs get graphics hardware that can compete with what's in the consoles and gaming PC?
I don't see why we wouldn't. MacOS has support for the RX 5700 XT since Catalina 10.15.1 (I have one of those in my Mac Pro from 2010).
•Apple Arcade is a gaming service that works with all Apple's devices, i.e. computers, phones, tablets and their media streamer. Pretty unique?
•There are a lot of game developers (also those who make so called AAA games) already having games on Apple's silicon in the form of games for iOS/iPadOS. If they can their game ”for free” onto a more powerful device in the shape of a desktop Mac – why not?
•This is interesting:
Bring keyboard and mouse gaming to iPad https://developer.apple.com/videos/play/wwdc2020/10617
The iPad being more like a computer for games means the Apple silicon Mac should benefit from it too.
•My feeling is that Apple is ”coming in from the side” when it comes to compete with gaming consoles and computer (Windows) gaming letting games developed for iOS/iPadOS also run on the Mac. We'll see how it goes and if developers care to make adjustments to the games to make use of the more powerful computer, but if Apple will provide the hardware in terms of CPU and GPU performance in not way too expensive Macs (in my dreams, eh?) I think we might eventually get there, also getting some (more) of the bigger titles released for consoles and Windows – we already get some such as the ones Feral Interactive provides. The problem with those games is that despite using Metal on MacOS they still run quite a lot worse compared to the same game on Windows – I've tried and compared a few myself.
Conclusion: I think Apple have some focus on gaming and that it also includes the Mac. If that goes beyond ”you can play our mobile platform games also on your computer” is the question. I think we can be pretty sure it will take some time until we see where the Apple silicon Macs when it comes to this.
•Apple is releasing new silicon yearly with quite big improvements to an already impressive platform when it comes to performance and energy consumption. I think that it will be very interesting to see those chips in ”full size” computers.
•If we in the Apple silicon Macs get graphics hardware that can compete with what's in the consoles and gaming PC?
I don't see why we wouldn't. MacOS has support for the RX 5700 XT since Catalina 10.15.1 (I have one of those in my Mac Pro from 2010).
•Apple Arcade is a gaming service that works with all Apple's devices, i.e. computers, phones, tablets and their media streamer. Pretty unique?
•There are a lot of game developers (also those who make so called AAA games) already having games on Apple's silicon in the form of games for iOS/iPadOS. If they can their game ”for free” onto a more powerful device in the shape of a desktop Mac – why not?
•This is interesting:
Bring keyboard and mouse gaming to iPad https://developer.apple.com/videos/play/wwdc2020/10617
The iPad being more like a computer for games means the Apple silicon Mac should benefit from it too.
•My feeling is that Apple is ”coming in from the side” when it comes to compete with gaming consoles and computer (Windows) gaming letting games developed for iOS/iPadOS also run on the Mac. We'll see how it goes and if developers care to make adjustments to the games to make use of the more powerful computer, but if Apple will provide the hardware in terms of CPU and GPU performance in not way too expensive Macs (in my dreams, eh?) I think we might eventually get there, also getting some (more) of the bigger titles released for consoles and Windows – we already get some such as the ones Feral Interactive provides. The problem with those games is that despite using Metal on MacOS they still run quite a lot worse compared to the same game on Windows – I've tried and compared a few myself.
Conclusion: I think Apple have some focus on gaming and that it also includes the Mac. If that goes beyond ”you can play our mobile platform games also on your computer” is the question. I think we can be pretty sure it will take some time until we see where the Apple silicon Macs when it comes to this.