How is it different for Steam to install a game as opposed to downloading and doing it yourself? Why do you need Steam to uninstall it? Sorry, but this concept is not clear to me.
Ok, so you're saying the share of steam users behind a mac should be higher then 8% since loads of them are contributing to the windows statistics?
The stats deal with OS. Have some Steam users been using a Mac only? Sure. What does that have to do with games on Steam for the Mac OS? You're mixing apples and oranges and grapes and whatever.
Is whether or not Valve gets enough revenue from Mac users to continue supporting the platform. I am thrilled that more games are coming to the Mac. I played portal for the first time on my Mac and I am playing through the HalfLife 2 games again.
I think 8% for a new platform is pretty huge. You have to figure that some Mac owners still don't know about it. I don't know how much it costs to support the Mac from here on out. Porting to the Mac I am sure to a lot of man hours. Supporting it going forward, I don't know how expensive that is. Plus more casual gamers may be tempted to buy a Mac as more and more games support it.
But the key is to have it be a big enough revenue source for Valve to continue supporting it. They have already spent the money to port it. Lets hope the get enough support from Mac users to keep it going.
I think the question meant were these 8% new to Steam altogether, or does it include people who dropped using Windows for OS X, that were already using Steam?
Since it is obvious to you, perhaps you can shed some light on the 8% statistic by breaking it down as to what percentage was new to Steam, and who stopped using Windows Steam for Mac Steam? Also, who stopped using Windows on their Macs out of that group?
I expect most of the 8% were already familiar with Steam and most of those already running Steam in Windows (vm or bootcamp).
There are very, very few Steam games available for the Mac OS. Unless the folks who were using Windows have decided to stop playing current games and only play the older games that are now just coming out for the Mac (and some second and third tier stuff that most Windows users ignore), seems obvious that adding Mac-compatible games doesn't replace the more current Windows-only stuff.
DirectX sucks. It's a complete joke. The problem with many Mac titles is that there isn't actually a port to the Mac it's a wrapped DirectX game that has to translate on the fly to OpenGL hence the performance hit. Play a game specifically written for OpenGL and you notice a massive difference in favour of OpenGL.
Something tells me Apple is holding off OS X 10.7 purely to gauge gaming on 10.6 where full potential of 64bit can be seen then they will start using OpenGL 4. It makes sense and I think working with Valve is going to make that even more of a reality.
No, Apple's support of OpenGL is pathetic, and their drivers suck. My PC has better OpenGL support than any current Mac (full 4.0 support), and it gets better frame rates (part of the main thing that matters with games, especially current ones).
And all of Valve's games are OpenGL-based, always have been, and they still run worse on OSX, than Windows. For an OS that is wrapped around OpenGL, you'd think otherwise, but ATI and Nvidia have much better driver support for Windows, than what Apple currently offers.
Apple can't start using OpenGL 4.0, until they actually start using DX11 compatible GPUs (they have the same HW req's), and Apple has to step up their game on video drivers (BTW, OSX doesn't even support all of the features of Open GL 3.2/3.3 yet, even though the newer GPU's would support it). Most of that is driver-related.
And Steam on OSX is only as good as devs that releases OpenGL games; if most games are still DX-based, you'll still be dual-booting.
And if pure performance matters, you'll still be dual-booting, even for OpenGL games.
So is GameSpy. Sorry but I am still struggling to understand the significance of Steam, or why anyone cares about it at all.
From what I've seen, it tries to be a combination of store and community.
You can check the list of available games & DLCs, search for games you might be interested in, check forums, download manuals for the games, and get automatic updates to games you have purchased, and the Steam application itself.
I haven't tried it, but there are prompts to start "live" chat with others who are currently online.
For the few multiplayer games which are Mac compatible, you can play against/team with players who are running on Mac or PC.
I just played-though Half Life 2, for the first time - and the game's save files are all saved to Steam's "cloud" each time you quit. So, I can play the game on a different Mac, or a PC, and be able to access all of my saved files - without having to start a new game.
They also have acheivements added to the games, so that any of your online "friends" can see what you have accomplished in the game. Based on my playing of HL2, some of them are basic mileposts that anyone would have to do to complete the game, but some of them are challanges that you would have to go our of your way to accomplish.
I just like the fact that it lets me play - so far - a couple of older PC-only titles that I always wanted to play, without also requiring me to buy a copy of Windows to install under Bootcamp, or a license to Crossover Games.
It didn't hurt that I got in early and so Portal was free, and HL2 at a slight discount [it was already cheap - since it is an old game].
I downloaded the trial of Crossover Games - to do a head-to-head OSX vs WINE comparison on Portal and Torchlight... and while the WINE version of Torchlight had an extra option in the video setting, missing from the OSX version, and the screen was a little sharper, I didn't think it was worth COG's $40 license fee to get that small improvement.
Not a lot of Mac titles yet, and a lot of them seem to be pretty light-weight games, so it has been fun to play some new-to-me, inexpensive games while I'm wating for StarCraft 2 to arrive.
If you have access to Windows-only games via Bootcamp, Parrallels, VMware, or Crossover Games - then Steam will be a non-starter for you - unless you like the online community, and save files in the "cloud".
Go to steam.com and take a look. It will become more clear to you.
I already have, and it hasn't. Based on what has been explained here, it doesn't seem to have any value at all. If it has value, nobody has been able to say what that value is.
From what I've seen, it tries to be a combination of store and community.
I suppose all of this seems to be of limited value to me. It appeared to be a somewhat exciting development for Mac gaming but once I saw how little new it offers, I could not see how it will do anything to bring more games to the Mac except for some really old titles perhaps.
No, Apple's support of OpenGL is pathetic, and their drivers suck. My PC has better OpenGL support than any current Mac (full 4.0 support), and it gets better frame rates (part of the main thing that matters with games, especially current ones).
Yes but like I said, with Valve helping Apple to develop the drivers this will be an inevitability. Valve's games still play awesomely on my MacBook Pro compared to EA's Cider wrapped DirectX games. I see no drop off but then I don't have the graphics cranked up to high because I don't need them to be.
Quote:
Originally Posted by guinness
And all of Valve's games are OpenGL-based, always have been, and they still run worse on OSX, than Windows. For an OS that is wrapped around OpenGL, you'd think otherwise, but ATI and Nvidia have much better driver support for Windows, than what Apple currently offers.
Yes and when you see an OpenGL game beside a DirectX game the difference is hugely in favour of the OpenGL which was my point about DirectX sucking.
Quote:
Originally Posted by guinness
Apple can't start using OpenGL 4.0, until they actually start using DX11 compatible GPUs (they have the same HW req's), and Apple has to step up their game on video drivers (BTW, OSX doesn't even support all of the features of Open GL 3.2/3.3 yet, even though the newer GPU's would support it). Most of that is driver-related.
They are. They're the same video cards as what's in PCs. Why do they have to support DirectX when OpenGL has nothing to do with DirectX? That's just clutching at straws.
Quote:
Originally Posted by guinness
And Steam on OSX is only as good as devs that releases OpenGL games; if most games are still DX-based, you'll still be dual-booting.
And if pure performance matters, you'll still be dual-booting, even for OpenGL games.
Or wrapping them in Cider. There's no need to dual-boot.
the seemingly lucrative PC market which is really nothing more than a Saharan mirage in terms of profitability.
I love this forum!
When you look at it nuts and bolts you're going to make more money from consoles and Macs which have lower numbers than you would with PCs. Why? Because on Mac and console owners are willing to spend money which is what I said except you decided to partially quote me which removes context. Good for you. You really are intelligent.
There's a whole culture of piracy on the PC platform. For every 1 title sold on a PC there would be 10 on consoles and Macs. Meanwhile there would still be 10 PC gamers playing that game. Tell me how that makes great business when only 1 in 10 people buys your game? (I am pulling these numbers out of my bum but you get the point).
My point which you choose to ignore is that PCs have never been a great gaming platform. People think it is because you have the potential to sell lots of titles but the reality is you sell far less than you should and it can be a complete pain in the butt to set the games up. Hell, you only have to look at how difficult it was back in the day when the best graphics you could get were 8bit with crapy audio. As soon as the better graphics and audio cards came along it was a complete nightmare to get them running and then even more of a nightmare to get the game to run. It's not much better today. The more people have to mess around with their computer to play your game the more they are going to give up and play something else. Controlled hardware is ALWAYS a better way. It worked for the Amiga, it worked for the Atari ST, it works for consoles and it is now working for the Mac.
So is GameSpy. Sorry but I am still struggling to understand the significance of Steam, or why anyone cares about it at all.
It's the same as XBox Live or Sony's PSN in that it's both an on-line community (much like Gamespy) and it records your gaming achievements, but it's also a digital store. There's no subscription and Steam client is sort of the gatekeeper to your whole games library. You can install the steam client on any of your PCs and have access to your entire games collection and are able to re-download past purchases.
I suppose all of this seems to be of limited value to me. It appeared to be a somewhat exciting development for Mac gaming but once I saw how little new it offers, I could not see how it will do anything to bring more games to the Mac except for some really old titles perhaps.
Same for me, actually.
I've wanted to go back and see how well Deus Ex holds-up [I think my copy needs OS9 to run], but just couldn't bring myself to pay for the game - again - plus the cost of Crossover Games or an OEM copy of Windows 7 (since the Steam version isn't currently ported to OSX).
I got Portal for free, Torchlight on sale for ~$10, and HL2 on sale for ~$8 - so it wasn't very expensive to try the few Mac-compatible games I was interested in.
It will be interesting to see what Portal 2 sells for, when it is released.
[QUOTE=lowededwookie;1647187 For every 1 title sold on a PC there would be 10 on ... Macs.[/QUOTE]
You are completely incorrect. Indeed, likely you have things exactly backwards, with PC software selling 10 times more volume than Mac software, but I don't have the figures handy.
This is objective reality. There is no need to "figure things out" to arrive at the answer. This is simple fact-based stuff.
I've wanted to go back and see how well Deus Ex holds-up [I think my copy needs OS9 to run], but just couldn't bring myself to pay for the game - again - plus the cost of Crossover Games or an OEM copy of Windows 7 (since the Steam version isn't currently ported to OSX).
I got Portal for free, Torchlight on sale for ~$10, and HL2 on sale for ~$8 - so it wasn't very expensive to try the few Mac-compatible games I was interested in.
It will be interesting to see what Portal 2 sells for, when it is released.
What confuses me is this concept of a "Steam version" of a game. Apparently there is no such bird. From what I am hearing, Valve only sells games which the developers have already ported to the Mac. How this is supposed to lead to more Mac games mystifies me greatly.
Actually many game developers go with DirectX because it is in fact better than OpenGL, especially when you're designing a game for Windows. Microsoft has always been great about working with other companies, and I've heard they don't fall short in this quality when helping developers get their games running correctly with DirectX.
It does seem to me that there needs to be an open standard for 3d rendering, but MS has had directX for a while now and they won't let that go easily.
DirectX at the moment does not suck, and it is definitely not considered a joke.
What confuses me is this concept of a "Steam version" of a game. Apparently there is no such bird. From what I am hearing, Valve only sells games which the developers have already ported to the Mac. How this is supposed to lead to more Mac games mystifies me greatly.
I'm not sure you can install things like Half-Life 2 and Left4Dead without Steam, so steam helps bring access to those games at least.
What I like most about steam is having all my game purchases tied to a single account so I can easily download them to whatever machine I want (just can't be logged into the steam account on two different computers at the same time.) I also like how it automatically applies updates. It's basically the app store of computer games lol
Is this a surprise? Many Mac OSX users dual boot just to get the PC games. With Steam there's less reason to boot into XP, Vista, or Windows 7. If you bought Steam for Windows then Steam for the Mac is free.
Give an update when the share goes up beyond 10%. That'll be a real story.
if it got to 8% with just a few games, it will probably hit 10 when they port Team Fortress 2 and Counterstrike. All signs point to those coming out in a relatively near future.
Still, the fact that 8% of steam gamers own macs is kind of amazing. Of course, the Valve guys knew this beforehand (from hardware profiles), which is likely why they bothered to start supporting the mac.
My guess is that the percent will end up a bit shy of 15% once more games come online.
What confuses me is this concept of a "Steam version" of a game. Apparently there is no such bird. From what I am hearing, Valve only sells games which the developers have already ported to the Mac. How this is supposed to lead to more Mac games mystifies me greatly.
Because if it is successful it means that more developers like THQ, 2k and EA for example will start to develop for the mac meaning when they create a new game they will release it at the same time on a windows and mac. You have to remember that the pc game market is basically moving, if it hasn't already in terms of majority of sale, to digital. Steam basically holds the vast majority of that market share, I have heard from some of steam competitors that Steam holds around 70-75% of the digital market share for pc games.
Valve currently right now is porting their back catalog of games to mac, there games are some of the most popular games right now on the pc. Valve right now is working on a new game called portal2, portal 2 is going to be released at the exact same time on windows, mac, and 360.
So how does this lead to more mac games? Basically is this, the industry is watching how successful valve games are on the mac, valve is a huge player in the pc games market. If valve games take off on mac it means that developers will take the mac platform more seriously and when you factor that mac uses pretty much the exact same hardware and you factor in that they have the biggest digital distribution system for games(Steam) and you have Mac os x sales growing at phenomenal rates its like a perfect storm in terms of incentives or a list of why they should be developing for the mac. What ever steam does basically dictates in some ways how the industry and or market is going to move. Steam could signal the beginning of mac being taken seriously for development of AAA games.
Comments
How is it different for Steam to install a game as opposed to downloading and doing it yourself? Why do you need Steam to uninstall it? Sorry, but this concept is not clear to me.
Steam is DRM.
Ok, so you're saying the share of steam users behind a mac should be higher then 8% since loads of them are contributing to the windows statistics?
The stats deal with OS. Have some Steam users been using a Mac only? Sure. What does that have to do with games on Steam for the Mac OS? You're mixing apples and oranges and grapes and whatever.
So is GameSpy. Sorry but I am still struggling to understand the significance of Steam, or why anyone cares about it at all.
Go to steam.com and take a look. It will become more clear to you.
I think 8% for a new platform is pretty huge. You have to figure that some Mac owners still don't know about it. I don't know how much it costs to support the Mac from here on out. Porting to the Mac I am sure to a lot of man hours. Supporting it going forward, I don't know how expensive that is. Plus more casual gamers may be tempted to buy a Mac as more and more games support it.
But the key is to have it be a big enough revenue source for Valve to continue supporting it. They have already spent the money to port it. Lets hope the get enough support from Mac users to keep it going.
How is it obvious?
I think the question meant were these 8% new to Steam altogether, or does it include people who dropped using Windows for OS X, that were already using Steam?
Since it is obvious to you, perhaps you can shed some light on the 8% statistic by breaking it down as to what percentage was new to Steam, and who stopped using Windows Steam for Mac Steam? Also, who stopped using Windows on their Macs out of that group?
I expect most of the 8% were already familiar with Steam and most of those already running Steam in Windows (vm or bootcamp).
There are very, very few Steam games available for the Mac OS. Unless the folks who were using Windows have decided to stop playing current games and only play the older games that are now just coming out for the Mac (and some second and third tier stuff that most Windows users ignore), seems obvious that adding Mac-compatible games doesn't replace the more current Windows-only stuff.
DirectX sucks. It's a complete joke. The problem with many Mac titles is that there isn't actually a port to the Mac it's a wrapped DirectX game that has to translate on the fly to OpenGL hence the performance hit. Play a game specifically written for OpenGL and you notice a massive difference in favour of OpenGL.
Something tells me Apple is holding off OS X 10.7 purely to gauge gaming on 10.6 where full potential of 64bit can be seen then they will start using OpenGL 4. It makes sense and I think working with Valve is going to make that even more of a reality.
No, Apple's support of OpenGL is pathetic, and their drivers suck. My PC has better OpenGL support than any current Mac (full 4.0 support), and it gets better frame rates (part of the main thing that matters with games, especially current ones).
And all of Valve's games are OpenGL-based, always have been, and they still run worse on OSX, than Windows. For an OS that is wrapped around OpenGL, you'd think otherwise, but ATI and Nvidia have much better driver support for Windows, than what Apple currently offers.
http://gizmodo.com/5540716/steam-for...is-much-faster
Apple can't start using OpenGL 4.0, until they actually start using DX11 compatible GPUs (they have the same HW req's), and Apple has to step up their game on video drivers (BTW, OSX doesn't even support all of the features of Open GL 3.2/3.3 yet, even though the newer GPU's would support it). Most of that is driver-related.
And Steam on OSX is only as good as devs that releases OpenGL games; if most games are still DX-based, you'll still be dual-booting.
And if pure performance matters, you'll still be dual-booting, even for OpenGL games.
So is GameSpy. Sorry but I am still struggling to understand the significance of Steam, or why anyone cares about it at all.
From what I've seen, it tries to be a combination of store and community.
You can check the list of available games & DLCs, search for games you might be interested in, check forums, download manuals for the games, and get automatic updates to games you have purchased, and the Steam application itself.
I haven't tried it, but there are prompts to start "live" chat with others who are currently online.
For the few multiplayer games which are Mac compatible, you can play against/team with players who are running on Mac or PC.
I just played-though Half Life 2, for the first time - and the game's save files are all saved to Steam's "cloud" each time you quit. So, I can play the game on a different Mac, or a PC, and be able to access all of my saved files - without having to start a new game.
They also have acheivements added to the games, so that any of your online "friends" can see what you have accomplished in the game. Based on my playing of HL2, some of them are basic mileposts that anyone would have to do to complete the game, but some of them are challanges that you would have to go our of your way to accomplish.
I just like the fact that it lets me play - so far - a couple of older PC-only titles that I always wanted to play, without also requiring me to buy a copy of Windows to install under Bootcamp, or a license to Crossover Games.
It didn't hurt that I got in early and so Portal was free, and HL2 at a slight discount [it was already cheap - since it is an old game].
I downloaded the trial of Crossover Games - to do a head-to-head OSX vs WINE comparison on Portal and Torchlight... and while the WINE version of Torchlight had an extra option in the video setting, missing from the OSX version, and the screen was a little sharper, I didn't think it was worth COG's $40 license fee to get that small improvement.
Not a lot of Mac titles yet, and a lot of them seem to be pretty light-weight games, so it has been fun to play some new-to-me, inexpensive games while I'm wating for StarCraft 2 to arrive.
If you have access to Windows-only games via Bootcamp, Parrallels, VMware, or Crossover Games - then Steam will be a non-starter for you - unless you like the online community, and save files in the "cloud".
Steam is DRM.
And this is supposed to be a good thing?
Go to steam.com and take a look. It will become more clear to you.
I already have, and it hasn't. Based on what has been explained here, it doesn't seem to have any value at all. If it has value, nobody has been able to say what that value is.
From what I've seen, it tries to be a combination of store and community.
I suppose all of this seems to be of limited value to me. It appeared to be a somewhat exciting development for Mac gaming but once I saw how little new it offers, I could not see how it will do anything to bring more games to the Mac except for some really old titles perhaps.
No, Apple's support of OpenGL is pathetic, and their drivers suck. My PC has better OpenGL support than any current Mac (full 4.0 support), and it gets better frame rates (part of the main thing that matters with games, especially current ones).
Yes but like I said, with Valve helping Apple to develop the drivers this will be an inevitability. Valve's games still play awesomely on my MacBook Pro compared to EA's Cider wrapped DirectX games. I see no drop off but then I don't have the graphics cranked up to high because I don't need them to be.
And all of Valve's games are OpenGL-based, always have been, and they still run worse on OSX, than Windows. For an OS that is wrapped around OpenGL, you'd think otherwise, but ATI and Nvidia have much better driver support for Windows, than what Apple currently offers.
Yes and when you see an OpenGL game beside a DirectX game the difference is hugely in favour of the OpenGL which was my point about DirectX sucking.
Apple can't start using OpenGL 4.0, until they actually start using DX11 compatible GPUs (they have the same HW req's), and Apple has to step up their game on video drivers (BTW, OSX doesn't even support all of the features of Open GL 3.2/3.3 yet, even though the newer GPU's would support it). Most of that is driver-related.
They are. They're the same video cards as what's in PCs. Why do they have to support DirectX when OpenGL has nothing to do with DirectX? That's just clutching at straws.
And Steam on OSX is only as good as devs that releases OpenGL games; if most games are still DX-based, you'll still be dual-booting.
And if pure performance matters, you'll still be dual-booting, even for OpenGL games.
Or wrapping them in Cider. There's no need to dual-boot.
the seemingly lucrative PC market which is really nothing more than a Saharan mirage in terms of profitability.
I love this forum!
When you look at it nuts and bolts you're going to make more money from consoles and Macs which have lower numbers than you would with PCs. Why? Because on Mac and console owners are willing to spend money which is what I said except you decided to partially quote me which removes context. Good for you. You really are intelligent.
There's a whole culture of piracy on the PC platform. For every 1 title sold on a PC there would be 10 on consoles and Macs. Meanwhile there would still be 10 PC gamers playing that game. Tell me how that makes great business when only 1 in 10 people buys your game? (I am pulling these numbers out of my bum but you get the point).
My point which you choose to ignore is that PCs have never been a great gaming platform. People think it is because you have the potential to sell lots of titles but the reality is you sell far less than you should and it can be a complete pain in the butt to set the games up. Hell, you only have to look at how difficult it was back in the day when the best graphics you could get were 8bit with crapy audio. As soon as the better graphics and audio cards came along it was a complete nightmare to get them running and then even more of a nightmare to get the game to run. It's not much better today. The more people have to mess around with their computer to play your game the more they are going to give up and play something else. Controlled hardware is ALWAYS a better way. It worked for the Amiga, it worked for the Atari ST, it works for consoles and it is now working for the Mac.
So is GameSpy. Sorry but I am still struggling to understand the significance of Steam, or why anyone cares about it at all.
It's the same as XBox Live or Sony's PSN in that it's both an on-line community (much like Gamespy) and it records your gaming achievements, but it's also a digital store. There's no subscription and Steam client is sort of the gatekeeper to your whole games library. You can install the steam client on any of your PCs and have access to your entire games collection and are able to re-download past purchases.
I suppose all of this seems to be of limited value to me. It appeared to be a somewhat exciting development for Mac gaming but once I saw how little new it offers, I could not see how it will do anything to bring more games to the Mac except for some really old titles perhaps.
Same for me, actually.
I've wanted to go back and see how well Deus Ex holds-up [I think my copy needs OS9 to run], but just couldn't bring myself to pay for the game - again - plus the cost of Crossover Games or an OEM copy of Windows 7 (since the Steam version isn't currently ported to OSX).
I got Portal for free, Torchlight on sale for ~$10, and HL2 on sale for ~$8 - so it wasn't very expensive to try the few Mac-compatible games I was interested in.
It will be interesting to see what Portal 2 sells for, when it is released.
You are completely incorrect. Indeed, likely you have things exactly backwards, with PC software selling 10 times more volume than Mac software, but I don't have the figures handy.
This is objective reality. There is no need to "figure things out" to arrive at the answer. This is simple fact-based stuff.
Same for me, actually.
I've wanted to go back and see how well Deus Ex holds-up [I think my copy needs OS9 to run], but just couldn't bring myself to pay for the game - again - plus the cost of Crossover Games or an OEM copy of Windows 7 (since the Steam version isn't currently ported to OSX).
I got Portal for free, Torchlight on sale for ~$10, and HL2 on sale for ~$8 - so it wasn't very expensive to try the few Mac-compatible games I was interested in.
It will be interesting to see what Portal 2 sells for, when it is released.
What confuses me is this concept of a "Steam version" of a game. Apparently there is no such bird. From what I am hearing, Valve only sells games which the developers have already ported to the Mac. How this is supposed to lead to more Mac games mystifies me greatly.
DirectX sucks. It's a complete joke.
Actually many game developers go with DirectX because it is in fact better than OpenGL, especially when you're designing a game for Windows. Microsoft has always been great about working with other companies, and I've heard they don't fall short in this quality when helping developers get their games running correctly with DirectX.
It does seem to me that there needs to be an open standard for 3d rendering, but MS has had directX for a while now and they won't let that go easily.
DirectX at the moment does not suck, and it is definitely not considered a joke.
What confuses me is this concept of a "Steam version" of a game. Apparently there is no such bird. From what I am hearing, Valve only sells games which the developers have already ported to the Mac. How this is supposed to lead to more Mac games mystifies me greatly.
I'm not sure you can install things like Half-Life 2 and Left4Dead without Steam, so steam helps bring access to those games at least.
What I like most about steam is having all my game purchases tied to a single account so I can easily download them to whatever machine I want (just can't be logged into the steam account on two different computers at the same time.) I also like how it automatically applies updates. It's basically the app store of computer games lol
Is this a surprise? Many Mac OSX users dual boot just to get the PC games. With Steam there's less reason to boot into XP, Vista, or Windows 7. If you bought Steam for Windows then Steam for the Mac is free.
Give an update when the share goes up beyond 10%. That'll be a real story.
if it got to 8% with just a few games, it will probably hit 10 when they port Team Fortress 2 and Counterstrike. All signs point to those coming out in a relatively near future.
Still, the fact that 8% of steam gamers own macs is kind of amazing. Of course, the Valve guys knew this beforehand (from hardware profiles), which is likely why they bothered to start supporting the mac.
My guess is that the percent will end up a bit shy of 15% once more games come online.
What confuses me is this concept of a "Steam version" of a game. Apparently there is no such bird. From what I am hearing, Valve only sells games which the developers have already ported to the Mac. How this is supposed to lead to more Mac games mystifies me greatly.
Because if it is successful it means that more developers like THQ, 2k and EA for example will start to develop for the mac meaning when they create a new game they will release it at the same time on a windows and mac. You have to remember that the pc game market is basically moving, if it hasn't already in terms of majority of sale, to digital. Steam basically holds the vast majority of that market share, I have heard from some of steam competitors that Steam holds around 70-75% of the digital market share for pc games.
Valve currently right now is porting their back catalog of games to mac, there games are some of the most popular games right now on the pc. Valve right now is working on a new game called portal2, portal 2 is going to be released at the exact same time on windows, mac, and 360.
So how does this lead to more mac games? Basically is this, the industry is watching how successful valve games are on the mac, valve is a huge player in the pc games market. If valve games take off on mac it means that developers will take the mac platform more seriously and when you factor that mac uses pretty much the exact same hardware and you factor in that they have the biggest digital distribution system for games(Steam) and you have Mac os x sales growing at phenomenal rates its like a perfect storm in terms of incentives or a list of why they should be developing for the mac. What ever steam does basically dictates in some ways how the industry and or market is going to move. Steam could signal the beginning of mac being taken seriously for development of AAA games.