Mac Game Developer's Reaction to the Intel Switch
by Conrad Quilty-Harper 
{ Jun 13th 2005 at 4:25PM }
OK, so Mac gaming is hardly a mainstream affair, but I'm sure the
average Joystiq reader can understand that people that own Macs like the ocassional game now and then. Add to this
premise the news of the Mac switching to an Intel based x86
line-up. What do you get? According to Mac game developer
Brad Oliver, a lot of unanswered questions and several
possible scenarios. Ever seen a developer faced with the possible death of a platform they've devoted their career to?
Now's your chance.
On a more serious note, the switch has some interesting possibilities for the future of Mac gaming. With OS X's Unix core, a WINE style program could feasibly be created, allowing a vast library of Windows games to be run on any Mac. Even if your average Mac gamer doesn't have the will to debug that kind of an application, they could easily install Windows and run Half-Life that way. All your Windows games are belong to us?
_thumbnail.jpg "Dynasty Warriors Strikeforce (Ryu)")
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
chill @ Dec 18th 2005 9:41PM
You mean there are Mac gamers.....J/K
nod @ Dec 18th 2005 9:41PM
"Ever seen a developer faced with the possible death of a platform they’ve devoted their career to?"
A tad dramatic, no? I read his blog entry and there is nothing dire about it. Why are you trying to create drama where there is none?
Conrad Quilty-Harper @ Dec 18th 2005 9:41PM
"The second scenario is that the Mac enters a death spiral due to Windows running on the Mac hardware."
"If Mac users start showing a real willingness to do this [play windows games on their macs], the trend could become irreversible."
It doesn't take much to find these statements dramatic and dire for the Mac platform. Luckily this is only one possible scenario. But there definitely is the possibility for the death of Mac gaming.
Barclay McInnes @ Dec 18th 2005 9:41PM
Make no mistake: This is an earth-shattering event for most of the Mac software developers out there. For ages they've had a niche carved out where they could build software and because the Mac market was so "small" a lot of the bigger players never bothered to come in and invest in porting to a different platform. Now the porting issues will be a lot smaller, or perhaps even non-existant, which lowers the bar for the x86 software makers to come over and offer Mac software.
It's rather analogous to what happens when you have a small town of 10000 people going about things for decades, and then a WalMart opens up a couple of miles away. You think Bob the Blacksmith can compete on hardware with the Chinese factories turning it out for pennies a pound? Same thing will probably happen with the Mac software makers. Some will survive. Most will not. A few will even cross over the other way.
But most will die over time.
Azalyn @ Dec 18th 2005 9:41PM
Well, actually, you're mistaken in thinking the processor architecture is the largest problem when dealing with porting of games.
The largest issue when porting many Windows games to OS/X and/or Linux, has always been Direct3D.
Microsoft's stupid little API has essentially created a developer lock-in situation, which was likely the reason they came up with it in the first place (Direct3D had been incredibly inferior to OpenGL for years upon years, yet Microsoft kept pushing it, with only the more recent 8 and 9 versions reaching any real level of credibility, and in my opinion still not enough to make for significant gains against OpenGL).
This is why games like the ones that Id makes are a no-brainer, since they're OpenGL it's practically childs play to make a port.
Where as porting a Direct3D-based videogame engine to use the OpenGL API requires rewriting practically half the engine (this may or may not be an exagerated estimate, find a second source if you wish to verify), since after all, the bulk of a 3D engine *is* after all, code that states how to draw things on screen, which is what these two 3D API's are for (OpenGL and Direct3D).
So this doesn't change the playing feild. There are two ways that gaming could become more realistic for Mac's (and Linux) in the future. One is to convince more big-time developers to make the switch to OpenGL, if not Mac. For now it would pay to start small, just tell'em you want OpenGL support, this could be justified by the fact that nVidia cards perform better on OpenGL (ATI does better on Direct3D), so supporting both API's would be better for performance nuts. Once they've started supporting OpenGL in their engines, then you can start bugging them about a Mac port. Although a Mac port may be a tough sell, recent trends have shown that Linux has better luck at scoring ports lately, but even a Linux port is a good start due to the similarities between both it and OS/X. Since all of Linux's usual API's are multiplatform (like OpenAL and SDL), a Mac port would be almost as easy as a recompile if they've already got a Linux one.
Microsoft have just been spinning the truth and making their API look as if it's better, where as it really isn't. But hey, I suppose MS's BS marketing is more important then facts. :|