Atreiya Posted March 6, 2012 Share Posted March 6, 2012 That would be because in computer gaming land, Macs are in the minority. It's unfortunate, but you can't really expect every developer of every game to make Mac-specific versions. *shrug* And really, it's sort of unfair to paint EA/BioWare as bad guys. In fact, your saying that this was "insulting" is just plain ridiculous. You could just as easily make the same "argument" (if you can call it that) about Bethesda not making a Mac-specific version of Skyrim. Maybe you should go complain on their forums about how they're being "insulting" by not giving Mac users a Mac port of Skyrim? Because they're obviously forcing you to spend <x> dollars on Bootcamp too. *rolleyes* Personally, if I were you, I'd be happy with even having a way to run non-native programs on my system. You chose a minority platform that has historically not been dominant in gaming - sorry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lethality Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 That would be because in computer gaming land, Macs are in the minority. It's unfortunate, but you can't really expect every developer of every game to make Mac-specific versions. *shrug* And really, it's sort of unfair to paint EA/BioWare as bad guys. In fact, your saying that this was "insulting" is just plain ridiculous. You could just as easily make the same "argument" (if you can call it that) about Bethesda not making a Mac-specific version of Skyrim. Maybe you should go complain on their forums about how they're being "insulting" by not giving Mac users a Mac port of Skyrim? Because they're obviously forcing you to spend <x> dollars on Bootcamp too. *rolleyes* Personally, if I were you, I'd be happy with even having a way to run non-native programs on my system. You chose a minority platform that has historically not been dominant in gaming - sorry. The comment was absolutely insulting, and since their largest competitor runs natively on a Mac, since day 1, it's just another feature not delivered but expected. Add it to the list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Serbegorn Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 -snip- Every time you say, as Daniel Erickson did during the Guild Summit Livestream, that "Bootcamp works just fine," while discussing making this game accessible to as many systems as possible is "you bought an expensive computer that can run this game like a champ....clearly you can afford another $100, and therefore you are not a priority market for us. On the other hand, letting your grandmother run it on her 10 year old PC is an important demographic." -snip- What they should have said is, "You bought a mac, clearly you're not a serious gamer. Therefore your opinion will be seriously devalued". Just sayin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Onyx Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 Okay here's the truth... Mac users bought a status symbol. Period. End of discussion. You bought a logo. A PC can do everything a Mac can do at a 1/3 of a price. You bought an over priced status symbol to make yourself feel good about who you are. The other 90% of us with PC's just laugh at you. Then you come on a gaming forum and whine about not having the game programmed in OSX for you? If you can waste that much money on a Mac, then you can afford to buy a Windows OEM license. Hell, the Mac population is so small, even the Russians won't write viruses for them. That's why there are no viruses for Macs, there's no profit in it. Not that the operating system is so robust, it isn't. There's no profit in it, the amount of Macs out there is too small to make any money at it. So... Feel good about you purchase. If you've got that much money to waste, you're doing well. Or, we started owning and using Macs before Windows even existed and still prefer that platform;) Not only have I been using Macs that long, but many of the applications I use every day (such as the first and second WYSIWYG versions of MS Word and the first versions of Excel, Photoshop, Illustrator, and many others) were developed and available on Macs years before their DOS and later Windows-based counterparts. Seriously, all these people trying to pigeon-hole all users of all systems into one category or another are simply showing ignorance and single-mindedness. There are numerous reasons why people own Macs. Just as there are numerous reasons why people own Windows-based PCs. Then there's those of us who own both as well as a few other types of machines. Yes, we are currently in an era of Windows-dominated gaming. But it wasn't always that way. And who knows about the future. Now if we get a Mac-native client, sure I'll be using it. But like many others that doesn't hinder me from playing now, nor will I be fanatical about pushing for it. I will, however, dispel myths and inaccuracies in the arguments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ounkeo Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 That would be because in computer gaming land, Macs are in the minority. It's unfortunate, but you can't really expect every developer of every game to make Mac-specific versions. *shrug* And really, it's sort of unfair to paint EA/BioWare as bad guys. In fact, your saying that this was "insulting" is just plain ridiculous. You could just as easily make the same "argument" (if you can call it that) about Bethesda not making a Mac-specific version of Skyrim. Maybe you should go complain on their forums about how they're being "insulting" by not giving Mac users a Mac port of Skyrim? Because they're obviously forcing you to spend <x> dollars on Bootcamp too. *rolleyes* Personally, if I were you, I'd be happy with even having a way to run non-native programs on my system. You chose a minority platform that has historically not been dominant in gaming - sorry. Th eproblem is that the Mac community will always blame Windows and MS; always blame game developers, blame the whole world before they blame themselves for making the decision to buy an expensive system that doesn't do what they want it to do. And of course, they'll never put beloved Apple's feet to the fire and ask for Apple to focus on their 3D graphics/GPU drivers and have better support for it. They just won't. The Macs in its current form simply are no tdesigned or built to play games. Again, I bring up for the 3rd time in this thread, that anandtech has done tests for this that caused quite a big stir with the Mac users who, till this day, still refuse to accept that their $2000 machines aren't as powerful for gaming as its Windows cousin. Hence we have posts like these, blaming and demanding other companies to make their computers viable gaming machines when this is completely up to Apple. They will counter this and a whole slew of excuses will follow. I've seen it too often when it comes to gaming. Apple can do no wrong. It's everyone's fault cool things don't work on my expensive machine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toxen Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 There is so much misinformation in this thread... Here are some hard facts: Malware There are no Mac OS X viruses. There are a few trojans that work under Mac OS X running around, but they all require the user to be fairly stupid and not paying attention to even work. And even when they do, they can't do anything harmful to the OS. Built on a Unix core, Mac OS X simply isn't as vulnerable as the hobbled-together Windows code. And the OS isolates the main parts of the system in such a way that a virus can't do on a Mac what it's designed to: replicate, spread, access hardware, etc. And Macs are becoming safer all the time. New app requirements for Macs include sandboxing, which means even 3rd-party program code can only access hardware and file system functions that it's designed to. And the next OS, Mountain Lion, uses a program called Gatekeeper to avoid even the user-errors that allow trojans to do their thing. I won't claim that the smaller market share of Mac has nothing at all to do with the fewer attempts at Mac malware. But more important than it's smaller marketshare is the fact that it's just damned hard to write malicious Mac code. The system is too smart, and users have to be practically brain-dead, to allow them to function as intended. Hardware There is a difference. Sure, at face value, the two systems look very similar. You can pull all the components out of a Mac and install them into a PC with no problem (assuming you can find Windows-compatible drivers for them, which you can if you look). This is why programs like Boot Camp work. It uses native Windows drivers for every piece of hardware in the system to run whatever version of Windows you want. But just because the specs of a PC you buy off the shelf at Best Buy for $899 are the same as the specs for the $1799 iMac doesn't mean it's the same hardware. Apple tests the hardware that goes into their systems rigorously for dependability, consistency, compatibility, longevity. You pop open a Mac, and you won't find last year's generic doodad that they could get from Korea for the cheapest price. You'll find what they know, through thorough testing, is the best fit, physically and functionally. Price You get what you pay for. Sure, that iMac costs $2600. Now open it up and look at all the parts (well, don't actually, or you'll void the warranty). Go buy a PC from Dell that has the same components (not just the same specs, but the same quality components), and you'll pay $1500 - $1600. Maybe more. "But that's $1000 less!!!" Sure it is. Now go buy a 27" 2560x1440 LED-backlit LCD monitor from Dell to go wit your PC. How much was it? $1000? Hmmm... So where's the cost savings? Actually, for some models, Apple is a whole lot cheaper than the competition. Find a comparably-equipped and spec'd notebook sporting SSD and HD graphics as the 13" MacBook Air for $1399. Not...gonna...happen... And resale? A $2000 PC is worth less than $400 after two years. A $2000 Mac? usually around $1400. You do the math. User-Experience You just can't understand this until you've used one for a time. But there is no comparison. I'm typing this on a 15" MacBook Pro running 10.7.3 (Lion). My browser is full-screen, encompassing one of 8 desktops currently open on my Mac. With one simple gesture and one tap (less than 1/2 second) I can move with ease between this, my email program (also running full-screen), my workspace for a presentation I'm building at work, my graphics editor (also running full-screen) producing graphics for my presentation, my primary desktop housing my calendar, the App Store (because I'm downloading some new software), and the dictionary app, and several other desktops running things like AutoCad (for floor plans I'm working off of for my presentation) and several clip-art browsers, amongst other things. It's seamless. No lag. I tap my trackpad, or swipe, and instantaneous results. Shortcuts in every program are unified (except for PowerPoint...frackin Microsoft). Menus always arranged the same way so I always know how to find something, even if I've never used the app before. I hit print and it prints out to an HP printer located several doors down, wirelessly, with 0 setup (opened "Printers" and there it was. Made it my default. No driver installation, no config). I could write pages about why Macs are superior to Windows machines in usability. The above just scratched the surface. Never mind in-line autocorrect, dictionary, thesaurus, and wiki-linking across the entire OS, or that it *never* crashes (according to my dashboard, my Uptime on this *notebook* is 65 days, 3 hours; I turned it off for the last long trip I took), or that it's been dropped twice and sat on once, with no adverse effects. Again, I could go on and on... Gaming The components are there. The latest iMac has an option for a 2GB AMD ATI 6970HD card, which is more than adequate to run SWTOR on max settings, at 2560x1440... All that's missing is the OS support. Which would require them to adapt the code for OpenGL. And that's why it hasn't been done. But don't tell me there's no difference. There is a huge difference, and people are starting to notice. Sales of Macs have outpaced sales of PCs, year over year, for the past five years. Macs are gaining marketshare, and driving PC vendors like HP to leave the PC business. Marketshare for Macs is now over 10% in the US, and climbing yearly. More than 60% of the computers purchased last year for or by US college freshmen in August were Macs (not iPads; Macintosh computers and laptops). I'm not criticizing you for not knowing. I was right there with you all 5 years ago. I thought Mac users were a bunch of elitist snobs that used inferior, overpriced computers just to be different. Then I was forced to use one at work. And within a month I'd given my home PC to my cousin, sold my Gateway laptop on eBay, and had purchased an iMac and MacBook Pro. They really are that much better, and you just will never know until you use one for a little while. Apple is the most valuable company in the world. And it's not there by accident. Sure, their success of late had been driven by the iPad and iPhone. But customers who buy those devices are also buying into the Apple ecosystem, and tiring of the insecurity, incompatibility, and instability of the Windows platform. Macs are gaining marketshare. Bioware would be wise to note the trend and support the largest growing computer demographic in the world... HP isn't getting out of the PC business. They are pushing PCs harder than ever this year: a 27" all-in-one, two new ultrabooks, and even a new gaming desktop. Other than that, I agree with everything you've said. One cannot truly understand a mac until they've sat down and used one. It just works. BTW, I find it funny that PC users call Mac users "fanbois" when most of them basically start foaming at the mouth the moment anyone mentions a non-windows platform. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dayfax Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 HP isn't getting out of the PC business. They are pushing PCs harder than ever this year: a 27" all-in-one, two new ultrabooks, and even a new gaming desktop. Poster was referring to HP's announcement last August that they are dumping their consumer PC business. http://blogs.wsj.com/deals/2011/08/18/hewlett-packard-to-computers-drop-dead/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverGriffon Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 (edited) Luckily for me I got an upgrade disc of windows for $10 at my college and they showed me how to use a windows 7 upgrade disc to get a legal full version to set up my bootcamp. So thankfully paying an arm and a leg for school payed off and saved me some money and allowed me to play swtor instead of doing my assignments thank you UC. Edited March 7, 2012 by SilverGriffon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LionRa Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 I own three Apple-branded systems and two Intel-based PC systems running Mac OS X, and I just built a rather ridiculous Windows-only system for gaming. Here's why: Apple makes a fine OS for serious computing tasks. It has, however, proven time and again for many years that it has no interest in gaming performance. Apple provides official support for cards two generations out of date (the top-end official card for the Mac Pro--their flagship workstation/performance system--is the AMD Radeon 5870, current as of September 2009). They maintain control of the drivers and do not allow the video chipset manufacturers to provide direct driver downloads, placing you at the mercy of Apple to decide to produce a driver update (which they do rarely) and tying you to old hardware as new chipsets aren't supported. Driver bugfixes and performance optimizations are nearly non-existent on the Mac platform. The drivers that are provided are often rife with rendering and corruption issues in 3D applications, which go unresolved unless they affect 3D design and rendering software. Mac OS X also has no DirectX support, instead employing OpenGL as its 3D graphics application interface. Unfortunately, Apple is also way behind on supporting the latest OpenGL revisions, and currently provides support only for OpenGL 3.2, a full revision behind the current 4.2 standard supported by modern video chipsets. This would be the equivalent of Windows 7 not supporting DirectX 11, and limiting developers and end-users to DirectX 10. This constrains the advantages of modern GPUs that the Mac is able to take advantage of, which in turn plays into their unwillingness to keep abreast of the latest hardware releases. I ran WoW for years on Mac hardware, and agree with folks that there was little performance difference in that engine. The caveat there is the age of that engine and its heavy reliance on CPU rather than GPU calls, which made it run equally poorly on whatever semi-modern system one used. Perhaps SWtOR will end up in the same camp, with its less-than-impressive engine, but it certainly stresses the GPU far more than did its predecessor. SWtOR is playable on an AMD 5870, but it certainly performs better on the 7970, which is well beyond anything that Apple will allow you to run in their OS. The years of being held hostage by Apple to what hardware they were willing to allow me to run is ultimately what prompted me to move away from gaming on their systems. A company with commitment to gaming wouldn't be sitting on their hands for nearly three years while technology marches by. Apple, under Jobs or since his passing, doesn't care about gaming. Not surprising that game developers in turn don't much care for their choices. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koalachan Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 When my guild moved over from WoW, we lost our main tank. He really wanted to play, but he has a Mac. He isn't exactly made of money to be affording a program just to run the game that he would also have to pay for. It seems to me that BW could make a huge market improvement by offering a Mac port, much like they improved their market by releasing it in more countries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toxen Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 Poster was referring to HP's announcement last August that they are dumping their consumer PC business. http://blogs.wsj.com/deals/2011/08/18/hewlett-packard-to-computers-drop-dead/ Ah. well luckily the new CEO reversed that decision: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/technology/2011/10/hewlett-packard-computers-pc.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dayfax Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 Ah. well luckily the new CEO reversed that decision: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/technology/2011/10/hewlett-packard-computers-pc.html Yeah, but it's still HP, which is technocrati for colossal mess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morthis Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 (edited) Why do people still keep parroting the "Macs are more secure" line. Both OSX and Win are vulnerable to exploits, this is highly unlikely to ever change. All you can do is practice some common sense and keep your OS up to date. If you still doubt OSX can ever be exploited, look up Charlie Miller (the security researcher). For each year's Pwn2own he's been able to gain full control over a computer running the latest version of OSX by having it visit a website using the latest version of Safari. Just visiting a website, no stupid downloads or anything. If you are buying a Mac because you truly believe OSX and Safari cannot be exploited, you're just buying into the BS they try to feed you in their commercials (specifically the mac vs pc ones). Really, I don't care what kind of computer you want to buy, just don't spread misinformation about Macs being more secure or not crashing. Neither computer is secure, and both are plenty capable of crashing (which often has nothing to do with the OS and everything to do with the software you're running containing some rare crash bugs). Either computer, when maintained well, will continue to run great without issues, and with a little bit of common sense, both are perfectly safe for a normal user. The decision about Mac vs PC running another OS should be about which OS you prefer, and what you plan to use the computer for. Gaming is part of that consideration, if you buy a Mac, you have to accept that you are buying a platform that gets limited support for gaming (both from games developers and Apple themselves). Edited March 7, 2012 by Morthis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prudy Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 (edited) I've done all the math over the years in previous threads, and I know you were there for some of them. If the game is great it's a no-brainer to make it for the Mac - guaranteed ROI. No. The gamers with a Mac use Bootcamp or have a dedicated Windows gaming rig. They already bought SWTOR - like you and all the others here in this thread. Only a few Mac users on the edge will only buy the game when there is a Mac port. The ROI is way lower than you project, because many/most dedicated gamers with Macs will buy the game (and bootcamp) anyway. P. Edited March 7, 2012 by Prudy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kennkra Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 Tons of noobs, there are so many ppl that comes here and start taking about things they dont have a clue, just because they heared from the tv or someone. Ppl calling Linux "unix" Just made my day To keep it simple no mac user can say his computer is more Powerfull or faster, more productive or user friendlier than a pc with Windows or linux, the only thing they can say is his computer is prettier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rami__ Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 Did you just rage at a game company for being mainstream and not providing a build for your favourite OS? Where is my Linux distro? I want this to be able to run on Slackware too?! Oh wait, no, I accept that mainstream gaming is centered around Windows and have set up my gaming rig as such. Posted from my Macbook Pro. ps: Did you really? Mind boggling these shenanigans! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toxen Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 Why buy a Mac when I can get a PC for cheaper? Ok. Why get a lawyer who graduated from Harvard Law to defend you in court when the guy from Devry will do it much cheaper? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spoonguy Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 Why buy a Mac when I can get a PC for cheaper? Ok. Why get a lawyer who graduated from Harvard Law to defend you in court when the guy from Devry will do it much cheaper? Id amend that to: Ok. Why get a lawyer who wears a white suit to defend you in court when the same guy but wearing a black suit will do it much cheaper? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuQu Posted March 7, 2012 Author Share Posted March 7, 2012 Did you just rage at a game company for being mainstream and not providing a build for your favourite OS? Where is my Linux distro? I want this to be able to run on Slackware too?! Oh wait, no, I accept that mainstream gaming is centered around Windows and have set up my gaming rig as such. Posted from my Macbook Pro. ps: Did you really? Mind boggling these shenanigans! What is mind-boggling is the complete lack of reading comprehension in these threads. What I said was that within the context of a discussion of making this game run on the largest number of computers possible, even to the point of bragging about just how terribly old a PC they got it to run on, they laugh about their refusal to support the game for Mac. If their stance was "We have no intention to support an OSX client because we do not feel that hardware is optimized for gaming," I would have said nothing. To an earlier poster, this is why I have no complaint about a lack of OSX Skyrim. Their stance was internally logically consistent and I simply bought the Xbox version. When you come out and say "We are doing everything we can to allow this to run on the crappiest PCs we can find in our basements, so we can increase market share by reaching out to non-traditional gamers who don't have high-end rigs," and then someone says "In that case, what about Macs?" and you reply "Them? Screw em, let em pay an extra $100 and use Bootstrap [sic], and no we don't intend to provide support if they do." There is a pretty obvious distinction in those two responses... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apocalypsezero Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 (edited) What I said was that within the context of a discussion of making this game run on the largest number of computers possible This stood out to me. Best way to allow a game to play on the greatest number of computers possible would be to make it browser based. http://unity3d.com/webplayer/ (a link from the galaxy map part of the SW:tOR website) Edit: of course unity3d is only one possible route. Edited March 7, 2012 by Apocalypsezero Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terebor Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 As i see it they are having already to much on their todo-list that they don't want to be bothered to release a mac client. They are allready overstrained by the problems to solve on PC. tho i am a mac user (macbookpro) i still have decent gaming desktop just because i know exactly that MacUsers in most cases aren't counted in the strategy for gaining more subs. I believe if this game survives with some 2-3m players or more...in 2y time they prolly give it a thought...reason is cause the number of MacUsers increases year by year. Tho i must say i dont believe in the surviving if they not drastically change their way to take in the opinions of their recent costumers, but thats another topic anyway and i really hope that BW proofs me wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuQu Posted March 7, 2012 Author Share Posted March 7, 2012 As i see it they are having already to much on their todo-list that they don't want to be bothered to release a mac client. They are allready overstrained by the problems to solve on PC. tho i am a mac user (macbookpro) i still have decent gaming desktop just because i know exactly that MacUsers in most cases aren't counted in the strategy for gaining more subs. I believe if this game survives with some 2-3m players or more...in 2y time they prolly give it a thought...reason is cause the number of MacUsers increases year by year. Tho i must say i dont believe in the surviving if they not drastically change their way to take in the opinions of their recent costumers, but thats another topic anyway and i really hope that BW proofs me wrong. And if that was their answer, the Mac community would be happy. Mac users are used to getting games later, although some industry defining companies wisely put them out at the same time allowing them to get larger first quarter sales and advertise based on the increased success. Of course, those companies are planning with the assumption of success, and so eat the Mac client cost upfront so Mac sales are maximized via the PC hype, instead of waiting to try and tap the Mac market later when all of the hype has died down as a final "perhaps we can get some money from here now that the PC market dried up" effort. If they said "we have some high priority items on our plate, but once those are resolved we are currently planning on devoting resources to a Mac client but cannot provide an eta," the Mac community would rejoice, even though it could be 2 years out. However, that is not what they said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lethality Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 Just throwing this out there, since no one caught on to my previous point. The iOS is a subset of Mac OS X. Think about it, and get back to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morthis Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 Just throwing this out there, since no one caught on to my previous point. The iOS is a subset of Mac OS X. Think about it, and get back to me. It means that Apple can lose the OS race again, only to Google instead of Microsoft this time? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lethality Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 It means that Apple can lose the OS race again, only to Google instead of Microsoft this time? It's not a race. No one has to win anything... there are already over 300 million iOS devices sold and in the hands of consumers. That's far, far too big of a market for software developers to ignore - any of them. And you know what all of these developers are doing? Specifically the game developers? They're creating games. Without Direct X. Without dev kits from Sony, Nintendo or Microsoft. They have a larger potential audience than all of them. And do you know where these games can ALSO run? Mac OS X. Next-gen MMOs? iOS. Apple is coming around the corner and the big players in the game industry aren't even aware of it. As a side note, Google will never get it together... Android will always be a science experiment, not a consumer experience anywhere close to iOS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts