Why Valve games are not coming to Macs..

[Dreamer2go]

I think the graphics card in my MBP is ok...not too bad, not the best...it can handle gaming well enough for me...
if you really want to play valve games, just...boot camp...

as for gaming in macs, I dont really care, because the only game I really play is WoW by Blizzard....if I wanted to play a lot of PC games, I wouldn't have though of getting a mac...

I'm actually interested in playing TF2...and I read people posting respectable FPS with Half Life 2 source engine games....using boot camp.
So I'm guessing it'll be fine.

 

[NewSc2]

Good call. The serious gaming guys that I know drop $5k into their systems easy...they aren't picking up $999 MacBooks and MacMinis. Other guys saying things like "the new iMacs come with crappy cards!" won't be able to find anything good in the crappy, low end trash the PC makers spew out, either.

Um.. I considered myself a serious gamer at one point, and I was spending $1k on my gaming system.

 

[NewSc2]

This thread has too many people going "f** valve, we don't need them." I love Macs, I love OSX, I love Blizzard games, but Half-Life, HL2, and CS were some of the best games I've ever played. I'd really appreciate an OSX port.

 

[Evangelion]

My Mac is going to be joined by a(nother) console and a dedicated TV. I used to be a serious PC gamer, but tired of the time/expense wasted on the PC just to get it running games. With consoles getting more decent PC ports, and there being more console exclusive titles, it's just not worth the hassle to keep a PC.

Well, that's all fine and dandy, but for many people consoles are not a replacement for PC's, and I can't understand why many people think that "Dude, if you want to play games, get a console!". While I have been thinking about getting an Xbox360, t would NOT replace my PC-gaming in any shape or form. Fact of the matter is that consoles SUCK when it comes to many of the games I like to play. Hell, consoles do not have those kinds of games avalable AT ALL.

Just because consoles are built for gaming does not mean that they are built for playing the types of games I want to play.

 

[slughead]

Nice for you that you run a game on your laptop.

Counterstrike source is years old. It should run on a modern laptop of Apple quality.

The Macbook is the top selling Apple computer. If the majority of computers on a given platform can't run it, why bother porting it?

 

[ViveLeLivre]

Apparently, people have a very short memory.

Steve Jobs CAN NOT STAND GAMES ON HIS COMPUTERS. He thinks they are a complete and utter waste of time. Period. End of story.

His belief, stated over and over again, is why play games when you can do something creative like create music, design, art, whatever. He is all about creation. And the company follows that in its products.

He tolerates games today because people actually want them. But he is definitely not going to bend over backwards for them.

This has been the attitude since at least 1984.

Apple makes great products, but its foolish to think your going ever going to have gaming parity on the Mac. The only way that way that would happen is if Mac share went to 70%. At that point, the game developers would suck it up and develop because the money would be too big. But today? Why bother, when you can develop for a console and make 20 times what you would make on a Mac release. Actually, that thinking is also starting to apply for PC games...

QFT.

While I appreciate singularity of vision and purpose, this is one area where Jobs has never had a firm handle on the big picture: not all of his customers are/aspire to be creative artists. As Mac's market share increases, as any Apple CEO should hope, the more this is true. Apple's consumers expect more from their Macs because 1) the Mac is capable of much more 2) we're not all mindless photoshopping drones devoid of other interests.

Today's Macs aren't one-trick pony design stations--if they ever were--they're powerful PCs with Intel dual-cores. PC/Mac hardware now being equal, and OSX (arguably) surpassing Windows in many categories, what exactly is the holdup on gaming support? After all, Windows somehow manages it, despite its tendency to BSOD weekly.

There's no excuse, except that Jobs just doesn't get it, and I'm convinced this is what holds Apple back and perhaps had a hand in his firing years ago. The Mac has always been capable of so much more than Jobs tidy, short-sighted plans for it. In the interest of building 'clean' systems by controlling their software and development, Apple's proprietary emphasis has all but killed consumer choice, and severely stunted the platform's growth.

Wake up Jobs.

 

[BKKbill]

It’s interesting to see how things change over time. Just recently on this form if anyone said anything that had to do with gaming they immediately became hard core gamers and we all know Apple doesn’t make gaming consoles. Well Apple still doesn’t make gaming computers and all of a sudden these same people are not called hard cord but have a legitimate reason to complain.
When Valve people say they asked Apple more that once to do three things to improve the gaming experience for Apple owners why would I not believe that. It’s not what the three thing were but that Apple never did anything after saying it was a good idea. Different teams same result. It seems we are hearing from more and more companies how Apple is doing things with an eye only on the profit bottom line over it’s loyal customer base. One starts to think the Jobs is getting too many irons in the fire.
I’m only saying it would be nice to be able to play a few games on the iMac that I plan on picking up on the 31st. Hopefully the video drivers are some of the problem.

 

[Anonymous Freak]

Yeah, whiny tard.

...we have this pattern with Apple, where we meet with them, people there go "wow, gaming is incredibly important, we should do something with gaming". And then we'll say, "OK, here are three things you could do to make that better", and then they say OK, and then we never see them again.

Uh, yeah, but what are the three things? If one is "support DirectX", then of freakin' course not. If one is "put GeForce 8600 or Radeon 2600s in your lowest-end machines, and x800 or x900 class hardware in your mid-to-high end machines," then of course not. If it's "help us tune our code to run better on OS X", then they have a valid complaint.

 

[Freyqq]

Uh, yeah, but what are the three things? If one is "support DirectX", then of freakin' course not. If one is "put GeForce 8600 or Radeon 2600s in your lowest-end machines, and x800 or x900 class hardware in your mid-to-high end machines," then of course not. If it's "help us tune our code to run better on OS X", then they have a valid complaint.

frankly, if they feel that there aren't enough machines in the lineup that can run the game they want to make...it is a plenty valid complaint. Why make the game for the os if the machines to run it can't handle it?

 

[ikir]

It's because Apple has very strict policy on programming for OS X. Value Software is just too messy with it's programming

Valve do great games, but their programming skills sucks hard time. I even worked for internet point with Valve gaming points.

If Valve release their games for Mac i guess don't need crossover anymore.


APPLE COULD DO MORE, i agree but stop with this gfx-card madness. New iMacs has a good (not excellent) 2600HD Pro, the old Macs had a x1600. The new one is faster. Only the old 24 with optional 7600 were faster. I agree it is weird, but new iMac are faster and you are compagind well developed drivers versus new, bugged AMD drivers.

Apple should care more about 3D drivers but Valve should shut up.

For anyone who want to play HL1/2 & mods, check Crossover.

 

[Freyqq]

Valve do great games, but their programming skills sucks hard time. I even worked for internet point with Valve gaming points.

If Valve release their games for Mac i guess don't need crossover anymore.


APPLE COULD DO MORE, i agree but stop with this gfx-card madness. New iMacs has a good (not excellent) 2600HD Pro, the old Macs had a x1600. The new one is faster. Only the old 24 with optional 7600 were faster. I agree it is weird, but new iMac are faster and you are compagind well developed drivers versus new, bugged AMD drivers.

Apple should care more about 3D drivers but Valve should shut up.

For anyone who want to play HL1/2 & mods, check Crossover.

actually..when halflife 2 was released...the general feeling was that the coding was very efficient. The demo ran clean at high settings on my old 2.4 ghz p4 with a 9600xt and 1 gig of ram. The graphics were considered on par with doom 3 at the time as well...top notch graphics at the time...which ran horribly in comparison.

 

[ddubbo]

Sounds like BS. In order to port some soft to Mac, you don't need any specials from Apple stuff.

 

[IscariotJ]

There is no Mac and PC version of WoW - the included discs have BOTH the OS X and Windows binaries on them.

Oh, thanks for pointing that one out The point I was making; there were retailers selling the SAME box, but listing it seperately for a PC and Mac, but charging more for the "Mac version".

Well, that's all fine and dandy, but for many people consoles are not a replacement for PC's, and I can't understand why many people think that "Dude, if you want to play games, get a console!". While I have been thinking about getting an Xbox360, t would NOT replace my PC-gaming in any shape or form. Fact of the matter is that consoles SUCK when it comes to many of the games I like to play. Hell, consoles do not have those kinds of games avalable AT ALL.

Just because consoles are built for gaming does not mean that they are built for playing the types of games I want to play.

You can't understand why people get a console to play games? And you like to play? Solitaire? Hearts? Yup, can understand why you stick with a PC

Seriously, the more I think about this article, the more I think it's like a publicity stunt ( oh, what's that game coming out soon? Oh, yes, Orange box ). There have been no valid reasons given for not releasing any games. The only sticking point I could think of, was HL2's use of Havok, but that became a non-issue the minute OSX moved to Intel ( no PPC port of Havok was UT Ryan's main gripe, and the reason Mac AA stalled ). It can't be because of DX ( there's no DX on a PS3, yet Orange Box is headed that way ). It's not because of Apple insistance of using low end video cards, as people are running HL2 quite merrily under BootCamp on many of these.

Until Gabe steps up with valid reasons, then I think the article is just FUD.

 

[Evangelion]

Apparently, people have a very short memory.

Steve Jobs CAN NOT STAND GAMES ON HIS COMPUTERS. He thinks they are a complete and utter waste of time. Period. End of story.

His belief, stated over and over again, is why play games when you can do something creative like create music, design, art, whatever. He is all about creation. And the company follows that in its products.

OK. Why should I waste my time listening to music then? Why is it OK to listen to music, or watch a movie, but it's NOT OK to play a game? SJ wants me to "create" something? What if I want to create a game? artwork for a game? Music for a game? Is that not "creation"? But what point would there be in doing all that if I and others could not enjoy it? Why would it be OK for me to create music in GarageBand, but it would not be OK for me to create a game?

If games are "utter waste of time", then so are music and movies. And books. And comics. Really, what's the difference between games and those other forms of entertainment?

 

[Evangelion]

You can't understand why people get a console to play games?

You better work on your reading-comprehension, pal. I CAN understand why people buy consoles. I have been thinking of getting a 360 myself for Bioshock, Halo3, Gears of War etc. What I CAN'T understand is the people who feel that consoles can replace PC as a gaming-device. It can supplant it, but it's can't really replace it. Yes, you can play games on both PC's and consoles, but that does NOT mean that one is a replacement for the other. Sure, you might only like console-games, and that's fine. But others might like PC-games and for them, console is not a replacement for a PC.

And you like to play? Solitaire? Hearts? Yup, can understand why you stick with a PC

Let's see....

- Il-2 Sturmovik. Are there ANY flight-simulators on consoles?

- Europa Universalis 3. Are there ANY strategy-games of this magnitude on consoles?

- Combat Mission-series. Again: a no-show on consoles

- And to list few more games that are either not available on consoles, or are of the type that would positively SUCK on a console: Civilization 4, Starfleet Battles, Half-Life2, Opposing Force, Flashpoint Germany, Hearts of Iron 3 etc. etc.

Solitaire my ass.

 

[miniConvert]

I don't want Apple to bend over and take whatever criticism games developers may have for the platform, neither do I want them to devote massive amounts of time to meeting their demands, but I do think Apple needs to take gaming on the Mac more seriously. There are probably small(ish) things that can be done to help pacify developers such as Valve. Adding a few higher-spec video cards to the BTO options would probably go a long way, too.

 

[Mac Kiwi]

I think it really boils down to how much overall profit is made by the graphics cards in the new Macs.When they can add,really up to date cards and keep the same profit ratio or better,then we will see true interest in gaming...jmo

 

[takao]

Let's see....

- Il-2 Sturmovik. Are there ANY flight-simulators on consoles?

- Europa Universalis 3. Are there ANY strategy-games of this magnitude on consoles?

- Combat Mission-series. Again: a no-show on consoles

- And to list few more games that are either not available on consoles, or are of the type that would positively SUCK on a console: Civilization 4, Starfleet Battles, Half-Life2, Opposing Force, Flashpoint Germany, Hearts of Iron 3 etc. etc.

Solitaire my ass.

i second your emotion
seriously until strategy games _really_ hit consoles (that means more than 3 releases in 5 years) they will never be a replacement for a PC

and i'm not talking about dumbed down versions (like the coming civ version) either ...

just look at Medieval 2: Total War or the upcoming Empire:Total war .. i guess i'll have to wait until the next generation of consoles already to get anything close ...
or the recent Silent Hunter etc.

as somebody who likes a lot of different game genres i'm stuck with buying both: console and a PC (and to make it worse there are also great hand held games)

 

[igazza]

games ?

apple dont need games get a playstation or xbox.

 

[Masquerade]

That should come as no surprise to anybody.

While it cannot be said that Mac users aren't game fans, the majority of Mac users (historically) actually use their computers. Unlike hardcore gamers on the PC (Wintel) side who use their computers primarily as game consoles and secondarily for internet access (i.e., porn, MySpace, email and P2P downloads).

Has no one noticed Steve Jobs trying to encourage users to spend more of their free time making, mixing and sharing their movies, photos, music with friends and family while every other PC manufacturer pushes gaming and recording TV shows for their users?

Apple's approach is more about encouraging the social, rather than antisocial experience.

If you want to play games, buy a game console.

I do not belong to a mass I'm a person. i like to play and work. I have a PC and Mac. I'm not a hardcore gamer. I still using office 2007 in my pc because my imac gets slugish around the time that i insert objects on pages. PS and AE are real fast compared to the G5. I bought booth computers at the same time.

 

[IscariotJ]

You better work on your reading-comprehension, pal. I CAN understand why people buy consoles. I have been thinking of getting a 360 myself for Bioshock, Halo3, Gears of War etc. What I CAN'T understand is the people who feel that consoles can replace PC as a gaming-device. It can supplant it, but it's can't really replace it. Yes, you can play games on both PC's and consoles, but that does NOT mean that one is a replacement for the other. Sure, you might only like console-games, and that's fine. But others might like PC-games and for them, console is not a replacement for a PC.

You had better work on your sense of humour, and your recall.

I can't understand why many people think that "Dude, if you want to play games, get a console!".

Yup, my reading comprehension is fine, thanks.

As for your list of games. Civ's on it's way to consoles, as is HL2 ( Orange Box ). You're right though, with regards to the other types of games. Some suck on consoles, or are just not available. BUT, that list is getting less, and less. Least you backed it up with titles, this time instead of being all Gabe....

As I said before:

If Valve want to ignore Macs, that's fine. I'll playing the Orange Box on consoles, and GoW/UT3 on my Mac.

I'll support the game devs that DO release Mac games. If it means waiting for a Mac port, so be it.

 

[Evangelion]

Yup, my reading comprehension is fine, thanks.

No, it's not. If you actually understood what I wrote, you would see that I was talking about was "not understanding people who say things like this". I did NOT say "I don't understand people who buy consoles". I DO understand people who buy consoles. I do NOT understand people who think that console can be a 1:1 replacement for a PC as far as gaming is concerned.

As for your list of games. Civ's on it's way to consoles, as is HL2 ( Orange Box ).

Well whooppee! Only after three years of waiting! So had I wanted to play HL2, I would have had two options:

a) Enjoy the title right from it's launch on PC on Novermber 2004

b) wait three years for it to appear on consoles.

Some suck on consoles, or are just not available. BUT, that list is getting less, and less.

And still, the games I play are nowhere to be seen on consoles... Some of them are, and I could easily see myself enjoying GOW or Bioshock on a 360. But that doesn't change the fact that many of the games I like are NOT heading to consoles any time soon, if ever. I honestly don't see how game like Europa Universalis could work on a console. It's not a "couch-game" that consoles excel at.

Even if the list of "PC-only"-games is getting shorter, it does not matter to me, if that list still includes my favourite games. Even if that list only included one game, and that game would be my all-time favourite game, I would still need a PC to play that game.

 

[Dont Hurt Me]

Gabe makes some very good points, 1st one is Apple really isnt interested. I blame arrogant Jobs, He doesnt understand gaming nor the TV. So we get Mac products that cant game and have almost no TV support. Apple is to blame not Valve on this one. Halflife2 is the best FPS I have played bar none. If your pissed with the state of gaming, the state of drivers from ATi and Apples lackluster support for gaming write arrogant Jobs a letter or two.

 

[takao]

BUT, that list is getting less, and less. Least you backed it up with titles, this time instead of being all Gabe....

for shooters: yes
for everything else on PCs: not really

for civ on consoles: they already said it's going to be more "action oriented" and "shorter to play" which for 90% of PC Civ fans equals to "dumbed down"

 

[IscariotJ]

I can't understand why many people think that "Dude, if you want to play games, get a console!"

I did NOT say "I don't understand people who buy consoles".

So your quote was wrong? Or you didn't write what you meant?

Nevermind.

/goes off looking for Evangelion's sense of humour as he missed the smiley before....