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 state of Mac gaming
- Thread starter MacGamerHQ
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Mac gaming has improved, but I agree it still lags well behind Windows. I don't see that changing much.
Even with computer-keyboard generic AAA titles (ie. classic games that won't work well on console), after all these years we've still only 2 Total War ports: Rome & Empire, despite both apparently selling well on Mac.
Credit to Feral who are a great company, but they're relatively small & there are still far too few dedicated Mac games companies of anywhere near that calibre.
One reason seems to be that Microsoft's development of DirectX & support for PC gaming companies far excels Apple's indifferent approach to OpenGL & gaming on the Mac in general. That won't change.
Also, losing Rosetta support & with it many older classic titles (eg. AoE 2, Rise of Nations, Starcraft, etc.) hardly helps, esp as most of these still run well in newer Windows versions (W7 or W8), with relatively little tweaking needed.
Overall, for more dedicated gamers, building or buying a gaming PC still seems the better option.
I agree. Over the years, Mac games seem much more prone to spoilage as the OS advances, than with Windows games.
I'm rather insulted by the implication that "enjoying gaming" strictly means the latest and greatest AAA releases. I and the majority of people over on the GOG forums would probably take exception with this.
I'm on a Core Duo MacBook with a 64 MB GMA 950 running Snow Leopard, and I'm having a great time enjoying gaming on my Mac using WINE and/or CrossOver (both of which have become compelling options for running Windows games on OS X, and have strong communities, which you continue to ignore in your article), be it with Alpha Centauri, Planescape: Torment, Sacrifice, Baldur's Gate II, Eador: Genesis, Giants: Citizen Kabuto, Fallout 2, or Soul Reaver 2...and that's only scratching the surface. Thanks to the work of Alun Bestor on Boxer, and the DOSBox team, doh123, CodeWeavers and the WINE community, I've been able to play and enjoy a huge amount of excellent games from places like Steam, GOG and GamersGate. And on top of that are some truly fantastic Windows indie games like The Blackwell Series, and Gemini Rue, and Mac-native games that have come out from the indie scene: games like Drox Operative, FTL, and Defender's Quest being a few off the top of my head. Yes, many of them are old. Yes, they don't look like Skyrim. That doesn't make them any less meaningful or substantial as gaming experiences. Arguably, they may very well actually provide *more* gaming entertainment compared to a lot of big budget releases.
For a lot of people, and for a lot of games, "the coolest modern games available today" consist of titles which are poor console ports, saddled with (often exploitative) DLC, (often restrictive) DRM, and criminally short single-player campaigns plagued with poor writing and scripted events. That's not to say that all modern AAA games are like that, but it'd be hard to argue that those aren't the problems plaguing modern gaming today.
To imply that the only and best way to play games on a Mac is to play AAA games on unsupported hardware through unsupported hacks is, frankly, selling Mac gaming short, and selling the Mac platform short as a whole.
Last edited:
That great and all, not going to argue that there are a number of old games that in terms of overall quality beat out the churned out crap nowdays.
But to try to give the state of gaming on a platform credit on the basis of its ability to run 6-15 year old games is absurd.
Even your 5 year old laptop should be able to handle emulation/wrapping pretty much regardless of efficiency on a game thats launched when clinton was in office.
River raid was a great game too, but at this point it wouldn't exactly be worth mention that a phone can run it without a hitch.
I'm by no means saying that the Mac as a gaming platform should be gauged by the ability of a crazy few to get unsupported 15 year old Windows games to work using a nutty open source project relying on clean-room reverse-engineered Win32 APIs. What I am saying is that it's absurd to say that the only way that you can enjoy games on a Mac is to lust after the latest and greatest AAA releases through making a Hackintosh.
In fact, I'll go one step further and say that it's absurd to even think of the Mac as a serious gaming platform at all, in terms of developer support, hardware choice and hardware performance.
In fact, why stop there? I don't even see the point of differentiating "hardcore" gamers from "everyone else who plays games" at all.
Indeed. Mind, I don't think there are any good guys, bad guys, here. It's strictly business. But for both games developers & non casual gamers, Microsoft's business plan seems much more favourable.
As Apple further intergrates iOS with OS X, not hard to imagine much more "spoilage" with future versions of OS X (or whatever it's called then). Locking out most stuff that can't be bought via downloads from the App Store, thus increasing Apple's profits, for eg. AoE 3, etc. may well be Apple's plan.
OTOH, Microsoft makes so much money from sales of new versions of Windows, they really can't afford to lock out too many people reliant on using older software, gamers included. Otherwise many more PC users simply won't upgrade their version of Windows, or even downgrade if buying a new PC. Still loads of cheap legit copies of Windows XP knocking about to make the latter option viable & that's unlikely to change for many years.
I think you are focusing too much on the hackintosh part of the article (in the second WAY more in depth article, hackintosh is barely mentioned). The conclusion of the article is that to play games without limiting yourself, you need a powerful machine. Your choices are a high end iMac, Retina Macbook Pro, Mac Pro or a Hackintosh Pro.
The real point is not to encourage hackintosh, but to point out the real problems of Mac gaming:
- Less performance than PC versions of games
- Release dates months or even years later than for PC
- Prices
Also, I never intended to define what a hardcore gamer is or to say that only the latest and greatest games matter.
However, at the end of the day, the casual gamer doesn't care much about anything if he still can play his favourite game (even if it is 10 years old).
The "hardcore" gamer can enjoy the classics too (I do) but he also wants to play the latest games, those pushing his system the most.
The mac platform is obviously lagging but I wouldn't discard it just yet. Just look at the fact that more and more games are coming to the Mac. The future is uncertain but certain developers / publishers are still cranking more and more games every year. From the moment they continue, mac gaming has a future.
Good points.
Bootcamp and Hackintoshes are fine for running games where a MacOSX version does not exist. Or when the Mac version is a terrible port.
But, when a MacOSX version is available and it runs quite well, then I'd prefer buying the Mac version. Not just for the convenience factor, but also for the sake of supporting Mac games developers. Once you stop supporting the Mac developers/programmers, then the software will disappear completely. No one here wants to see that happen.
Not when your only choices of computers are the 4 you listed in that same post. Hey, I like Macs just as much as anybody else here but Macs are just not good gaming platforms when you have to shell out at least $2,000+ for a computer that can play the latest games at the best settings (and 2 of those choices are basically throw away computers that won't be good enough in 3 years to play the latest games then).
The only way I can see this changing is if/when the day comes when integrated graphics get so good that they render discrete graphics obsolete for everyone except the really die hard gamers or graphics professionals. In other words, when a Mac Mini or the cheapest iMac is good enough to play the latest games at the best quality. I'm convinced that day will come but not for years.
Sure. We all know we can play 10 year old games just fine on anything. We're talking about playing the latest releases at the same time that the PC versions are released and at the same quality.
I'm satisfied with Apple's hardware for gaming. In the laptop arena, my MBP (see signature) is a gaming trooper offering me ease of running two operating systems with good gaming performance.
Some complain that Apple laptops are expensive, but not when you compare to equivalent Windows hardware. Check out this Alienware from this link. It seems to be competitive to me. What am I missing?
Last edited:
I'm satisfied with Apple's hardware for gaming. In the laptop arena, my MBP (see signature) is a gaming trooper offering me ease of running two operating systems with good gaming performance.
Some complain that Apple laptops are expensive, but not when you compare to equivalent Windows hardware. Check out this Alienware from this link. It seems to be competitive to me. What am I missing?
So true, couldn't have picked a better example!
And guys, after all, if we were "only" gamers, we would probably not be here. We all have Macs for several reasons and some us also happen to really enjoy gaming. That's the whole point of encouraging Mac gaming.
And if we want to play the "money" card all the way, PC gaming shouldn't exist at all neither because you still need more than $1000 to build a "hardcore" machine, when you can pay $300 for a console and play 95% of the same games (let us not forget that most games are multi-platform now so the extra power of high-end PCs is not even explored).
Well, Wine and Crossover games are always going to be a limited solution, because they have limitations that non-native Mac OSX games will have. For example - one game over at GoG (Dungeon Keeper) is a port of the 640x480 non-3D accelerated DOS version of the game from the late 90s. Great game. Not a great port. There are better ports available.
I agree. Given a strict choice of buying either a MBP or one of those high-end gaming PC laptops, I'm sure most here, I included, would choose the MBP for a number of reasons.I'm satisfied with Apple's hardware for gaming. In the laptop arena, my MBP (see signature) is a gaming trooper offering me ease of running two operating systems with good gaming performance.
Some complain that Apple laptops are expensive, but not when you compare to equivalent Windows hardware. Check out this Alienware from this link. It seems to be competitive to me. What am I missing?
However, those high-end laptops seem a selective example, which doesn't detract from the general point that gaming on a PC remains more viable for many dedicated gamers, some of whom also own Macs.
For eg. if one doesn't need high-end portability, buying a Mini for serious work & a cheaper, decent enough gaming PC (not high-end) may be an acceptable compromise. One can always upgrade it later.
Check out eBay (UK site as it's where I am) & you'll find PC hardware sellers with 100% ratings, some numbering over 10,000 (so they seem reliable enough), who'll build you a gaming desktop PC with branded components (Asus, etc.) with a 7750 video card for under £400, with option of 3 year guarantee for extra £50 (collect & return). In US currency, that's well under $1000:
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Gaming-Co...t=UK_Computing_DesktopPCs&hash=item23275f7e9b
Factor in the relatively cheaper cost of PC games, quicker release dates & a much wider availability of choice, then assuming one has all the peripherals, monitor, etc. & it seems even more feasible.
As for supporting Mac game developers. FWIW, I did it for years. Thanks to Rosetta being dropped, I now have hundreds of pounds worth of Mac-native games which are completely useless to me, unless I buy an older, pre-Lion Mac, or else simply sell the games & use those proceeds to buy a better PC than the one I exampled above.
BTW, I'm not saying that gaming on the Mac purely with Mac-native games, or rebooting into Windows, isn't perfectly fine for some people, as your example reinforces. But getting the best of both worlds without rebooting is also doable for many.
With Apple's focus increasingly on iPad & iOS, not least integrating the latter into OS X, frankly, I no longer trust this company when it comes to the future of gaming in OS X.
I agree, for desktops and looking to save money, you can do better with a PC. I just prefer the MacOS and fortunately I can afford Macs. I've had a gaming PC before and I'll confess, I'm considering getting another, but my Mac gives me a feeling of well being that I don't get when running Windows, even on my Mac.
Yup, true..
Although using a Mac Pro with a PC graphics card is nice as well (but expensive)
Your position of relative contentment seems a good place to be.I agree, for desktops and looking to save money, you can do better with a PC. I just prefer the MacOS and fortunately I can afford Macs. I've had a gaming PC before and I'll confess, I'm considering getting another, but my Mac gives me a feeling of well being that I don't get when running Windows, even on my Mac.
For most of my non-gaming stuff, I feel the same way. Generally, I'm just more productive in OS X. Hence, as I suggest in my previous post, there's some temptation here to just pick up an older, pre-Lion Mac, stick to Mac-native games where possible & just bootcamp the PC stuff not available on Mac.
Not that I'd knock Windows 7. FWIW, I already have a non-gaming W7 PC laptop, which works better for me than Mac for some heavy flash-based financial sites, for eg. those streaming lots of live data. But that apart, I'm heavily invested in OS X & ideally I'd like that to remain. As I say, I've loads of PPC games, et al, many of which I'd still like to play.
The one quandary: gaming & what compromises - ie. there are usually some compromises somewhere for most of us, unless one can buy everything to suit ones needs - to make that'll also cover all my current & future gaming needs. The alternative to an older Mac is of course a gaming PC, but I'm not sure what other purposes that'd serve... unlike an older Mac, which I'd use for much more.
Just a pity there aren't a few more Mac games companies like Feral about as that'd improve the state of Mac gaming no end. Sadly, Apple's attitude hardly encourages such a prospect.
not exactly a viable solution with the age of the current mac pro lineup vs price though.
the 3.1 mp was a different story.
Your position of relative contentment seems a good place to be.
For most of my non-gaming stuff, I feel the same way. Generally, I'm just more productive in OS X. Hence, as I suggest in my previous post, there's some temptation here to just pick up an older, pre-Lion Mac, stick to Mac-native games where possible & just bootcamp the PC stuff not available on Mac.
Not that I'd knock Windows 7. FWIW, I already have a non-gaming W7 PC laptop, which works better for me than Mac for some heavy flash-based financial sites, for eg. those streaming lots of live data. But that apart, I'm heavily invested in OS X & ideally I'd like that to remain. As I say, I've loads of PPC games, et al, many of which I'd still like to play.
The one quandary: gaming & what compromises - ie. there are usually some compromises somewhere for most of us, unless one can buy everything to suit ones needs - to make that'll also cover all my current & future gaming needs. The alternative to an older Mac is of course a gaming PC, but I'm not sure what other purposes that'd serve... unlike an older Mac, which I'd use for much more.
Just a pity there aren't a few more Mac games companies like Feral about as that'd improve the state of Mac gaming no end. Sadly, Apple's attitude hardly encourages such a prospect.
Got my laptop and xbox360. Good to go for now. When it's time to upgrade to new computer, it will be a desktop, most likely an iMac.
It depends, you could get an used Mac Pro for a good price and use the profits (compared to buying new) to get a spanking GTX670 or something like that...
Of course this technique is riskier every week now with the Mac Pro getting older and older...
I've got the 3.1 octo mp. Considering its 5 years old its been an absolutely fantastic box, pcmark wise its basically taken to the current generation for the consumer apple lineup to match/beat/compare it. When it was new you couldn't build a comparable box for the price, the same can't be said of the mp lineup anymore.
Never have I had a 5 year old computer that was still viable and relatively "good" overall. But specifically for games, swapping the same 560ti card in boot camp between that and a i5 sandy bridge is no contest.
In most games atleast in the past you're better off with less cores and higher clock speeds than a bathtub full of slower cores.
I'm looking to sell the mp for around 1.3k with ssd, extra ram and drives. For that kind of cash you can home brew a pretty good hack.
Last edited:
Buying a used MP4.1 is actually a good investment.
I'm running a hackintosh now, and if you need something that just works, I don't recommend it. It's running super fasrt and pretty stable so far, but compared to my previous 4.1 there are always a few little things that you need to adjust. The MP is a working animal. It just does what you throw at it.