I would disagree, the gaming market was there before on the PC side of things before windows even came out. I mean the first person shooter was a DOS game, Wolfenstein. Yes, Macs did have games back in the day, but it never caught on to the mac user base. Plus there has always been a smaller mac user base.

Then MS developed Direct 3D, Direct X, and gave game developers APIs to help them develop their software. Apple has not, until recently with Leopard. So, its not even like apple even tried to get that market.

Also, to quote Steve Jobs, he said that gaming is a market they won't get into because he thinks console systems are the wave of the future. Obviously jobs has never tried to shoot anyone with a analog controller versus a mouse and keyboard.

Yeah, I have seen all the trailers, read all the articles since I am a huge fallout fan. However, I am worried that Bethesda will royally screw it up. I thought Oblivion was okay but it lost its luster very fast for me. Where as I can install and play Fallout 1 and 2 today and still have a blast playing it. They also took out targeting the croch, and now its real time queue based game play, like knights of the old republic. Fallout was so awesome because it was its own genre, and you never really say strategy/RPG/Post apocalyptic games. I will still buy it, but if it sucks I will definitely complain about it!

That's what I'm saying. If as a Mac user, you don't demand Mac games, but are instead willing to build/buy a PC to play them, why would Apple or any game developer make an effort to provide Mac games?

That is the whole point. If the Mac users want to play games why not let them? Why not give them more video card support? Why not give developers APIs?

It may actually sway some gamers to switch over to Mac if they were pondering the idea anyway. I don't see apple not benefiting from it.

Here's how they don't benefit:
1. Mac users demonstrate that they're willing to build/buy PCs or consoles to get games.
2. Apple makes an effort to make the Mac more attractive to game developers.
3. Game developers don't bite, because they'd rather develop for one platform, and they figure that Mac users will keep buying PCs or consoles to play the games.
4. Apple has then wasted time & money on pushing Mac games.

OK, I can turn that right around

1) PC gamer is sick of windows, considers buying mac, no game support, no dice, lost a customer - loss of potential money

2) Apple makes half assed very late effort in 2007 after the gaming market has been established. Change won't happen over night

3) Game developers don't like Steve Jobs because he is against computer gaming. He keeps saying consoles are the only future in gaming. When the head of Apple says that, it does not attract game developers.

4) Apple wastes money all the time, and in all honesty creating a set of APIs, how hard is that? Not to mention those set of APIs can be used for so much more than just gaming. Any audio/video application could utilize it, and we all know there are plenty of audio/video applications out there for OS X. These APIs are not limited to gaming.

So why prove Jobs right? If he says consoles are the future and Mac users go out and buy them, how could that encourage game development on the Mac? It seems to me that if we reduce the demand, the suppliers will respond by reducing their efforts.

Trust me Apple is far from narrowing the demand of PC gamers. They are a pretty die hard crowd and they won't be dying down any time soon, in fact it is increasing every year.

The fact is that Jobs has no vision of this, he isn't a gamer and doesn't understand. Apple doesn't seem to be run by committee either. They are more like a dictatorship, at least that is my impression.

You can dress it up any way you like it, but the Mac is not a competitor in the gaming market. Also, consoles will never kill the PC for many reasons. Just look at Crysis, the most advanced video game out to date, it only runs on the PC. The developers, crytek, claim they could eventually port the game over to the current next gen consoles but it wouldn't be as high tech or as cutting edge. Platform issues are also a pain in the butt when dealing with consoles, but they do offer some things which are nice. I own a xbox 360 and a Wii and I like them but prefer certain games on a PC, and I don't see how a console can compete with certain games.

Huh? I'm talking about Mac gamers. I know, you're thinking: "What Mac gamers?" and that's my point. If Jobs says that games aren't needed/wanted on the Mac, and Mac users agree by buying PCs and/or consoles, why would a developer make a Mac game?

I think SJ could definitely do more to attract game developers, but I think Mac users could do more too.

There is the crux of the matter, eh? I couldn't agree more.

In reality, the only way that Gaming will come to the Mac is if Apple makes a move. It's just like launching a new console into a world that already feels it has enough (like the Xbox v. the PS2 and Nintendo GameCube and Sega Dreamcast for example). Apple has to do two things to make it work.

One -- a big exclusive. If Halo 1 had come to Mac first (like it had been intended to...:(,)then we wouldn't be having this problem. Apple has to land a few games that onlycome to Mac. That way people will buy Macs for gaming, regardless of their 'lack of flexibility'.

Two -- Apple has to make game development easier and more interesting. Microsoft kicks Apples but at this, they develop and maintain DirectX line. Apple only has OpenGL and the all new CoreAnimation. OpenGL is not really maintained that well, and CoreAnimation is too new (plus no one really can tell if it's for games or what...) In my opinion it would be best for Apple to develop CoreAnimation into an exciting, easy to use gaming API. That way Apple has an exclusive on the 'coolness' as it were.

If Apple does these two things game sales will go up for Mac, that will broaden the market, and we'll see more developers working on Mac games. The egg will have been hatched, if you will.

Edit: Sorry, for some reason I did not see the second page until after writing this post. I still think it's relevant, so I left it here. Just consider that I did not read the second page before writing it.


And as a quick response to tlarkin-- I think the reason that PC's will always be a viable market is because they are absolutely cutting edge. And game developers like, and need, to push the boundaries in order to develop better games. Since consoles are locked, more or less, PC's will always have to be there to keep things current. Consoles, in reality, depend on this model as well, I think they'd be sad to see the PC market die.

It's all Jobs. He thinks there is no place for gaming on a Mac. The user base has nothing to do with it, and since when has apple really listened to their user base? They are more like the architect and give you a platform that you choose to do, where MS is more like the committee that puts the features you ask for. There was a huge article about this on some tech site I can see later if I can google it. It made some great non biased opinions about how Apple and Microsoft run their businesses.

The point you are discussing now is very interesting.
I must agree with the idea cwtnospam expressed: why should developers think about writing games on Macs, if people meaningly buy PC versions. 95% of the game market is PC-oriented (if not more).
I think it is kinda prejudice - apple computers are more serious, they're initially are not intended for gaming. People who want to get a computer solely for gaming will not be ready to spend a huge amount of $ for a Macbook Pro. Mac is just a more serious companion than PC

I followed your link, and your wish list is empty.

I would like to know exactly what your $1,000 PC gaming system would be comprised of. Please give us the whole breakdown, part-by-part, and we'll assume for this thread that you already have a Mac system that does everything you need to do, except gaming. To help save money on your $1,000 PC, you can even consider networking with the Mac to eliminate purchase cost on the PC side (example: sharing an optical drive, if that's possible).

I'm requesting this information because I would be very interested in building a gaming only PC which supplements my current PowerBook, or possibly a MacBook.

We can even start this in a new thread if it's more suitable.

Thanks!

Perhaps a new thread?
 

.
Now that is a fascinating topic, Zalister!

For the sake of visibility, I think it would be an excellent idea starting a new thread.
You were thinking then of the "shared resources" aspect of this, no?

-- ArcticStones

Sorry, ArcticStones, could you include the original text in a quote balloon? I'm not sure which of Zalister's comments you are remarking about.

oops that was a temp wish list so its now expired.

I was basically this

intel Q6600 C2D processor
Asus Motherboard
PNY 512mb 8800GT
2gigs of RAM

It was right around 750ish with that hardware right there. HD optical drive and more RAM can always be added later, and you can use generic parts. So just buy the cheapest optical drive. Powersupply will cost you around another $100. The rest is really negotiable, and I am also taking into consideration you have a monitor you can use.

Well, right off the bat, I notice that the PNY 8800 GT card is about $90 dollars cheaper than the 8800 GT offered at the Apple Store. Both cards have 512 MB of VRAM.

Interesting development (found at BF):

If you still want to order the GeForce 8800 GT, go to the Apple Store USA and search on "MB137Z/A" to find the kit. The price is $349. If you are very unhappy about it not working on your "old" Mac Pro, then sign our petition asking Apple to create a version that will.

I respond to you by saying you should read my post near the top of this page :).