Possible Bungie departure would open door to Mac games

1235

Comments

  • Reply 81 of 111
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by kim kap sol View Post


    What does it matter anymore...



    Alex Seropian and most of the original Bungie team left a long time ago to form Wideload, leaving Jason "Kiss Ass" Jones as the only remaining original Bungie developer in the hands of MS. I dunno how much Jason had an impact on the Pathway into Darkness story, the Marathon story or the Myth story but I'm guessing not that much. I think Jason Jones was the lead programmer so all the creative goodness went to Wideload. It kinda shows too. The Halo serie had a somewhat lackluster storyline.



    Jason Jones was not only the programmer on all the games mentioned above, he developed all the story lines for Pathways, Marathon, Myth, and of course, Halo. Jones is the lifeblood of Bungie and a true genius.



    I have no doubt that if this story is true, it's all because of Jason, who I'm sure is not happy working for Microsoft. His name isn't even in the credits for Halo 3 (just a thank you) so I'm guessing he's been working on something other than Halo for the last few years.
  • Reply 82 of 111
    vineavinea Posts: 5,585member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by e1618978 View Post


    WoW plays on the mac, Tolkien online does not. What other MMORPGs run on the mac?



    I think later I said in bootcamp for other than WoW...but yes, only WoW has a native port. Most MMORPGs aren't all that graphic intensive or at least play well on lower settings.
  • Reply 83 of 111
    gongon Posts: 2,437member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by vinea View Post


    I've rambled long enough. The point is that PC box sales indicate that PC gaming is not all that and of the major strengths on that platform the big moneymaker (WoW) runs on the Mac. Others will run in Bootcamp.



    So if you aren't a hardcore FPS or RTS gamer the PC game advantage is largely illusory if you happen to also be a console owner.



    Pretty much all strategy, adventure and simulation are PC domain. So is poker with real money.



    I don't see mods on consoles ever getting to the point they are at on PC's, that is, free to release and free to install, allowing a measure of creative chaos and allowing new kinds of gaming to try its wings. Only things that are considered to be of interest to relatively many people will make it into XBox or PS online. Those that do, will be censored and otherwise altered to suit the "console demographic".
  • Reply 84 of 111
    gongon Posts: 2,437member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by vinea View Post


    I think later I said in bootcamp for other than WoW...but yes, only WoW has a native port. Most MMORPGs aren't all that graphic intensive or at least play well on lower settings.



    If I understand correctly, WoW's probably the least graphic intensive of the bunch, and it only runs tolerably on iMacs and Mac Pro in OS X. Of those, Mac Pro is insignificant. I wonder what percentage of Macs are iMacs?
  • Reply 85 of 111
    gustavgustav Posts: 826member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by thebeat View Post


    Sorry guys, but Wakashizuma is right.. Mac is not great at Gaming at all. I think MAC should just stay as a machine for designing Graphics and audio/film editing. They shouldn't be a machine to play games. You guys want to play games? Go buy a PC.



    What does MAC stand for? Are you a friend of Wakashizuma? Or are you Wakashizuma yourself.



    No self-respecting Mac geek will ever call a Mac a MAC.



    In fact, when I wanted to play games, I bought a console - not a PC. PCs are ridiculously expensive if you are just going to use it for playing games. And I use my Mac for everything else a PC can do.
  • Reply 86 of 111
    Okay, plain and simple, Macs as they are today are NOT capable gaming machines, unless you pay big $$$ on a Mac Pro + graphics card. However the "then go and buy a PC" and "then go and buy a PS3" comments aren't well-founded.



    If Macs are capable of doing all the great things that you pundits have said they should be doing instead (medical research, movie edited, etc, whatnot) why should they banished from the gaming world as well? Actually, it makes LESS sense that they "shouldn't" be allowed to game. We've all used Macs and all know the great performance we get from them. If the performance was only geared toward graphics processing (AND IF WE HAD DRIVER SUPPORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!), Mac-loving gamers (like me) could have their cake and eat it too.



    The other side to this (beyond gaming performance & driver support) is physical design. For obvious reasons, you can't stuff a high-performance GPU in an iMac. Moreover, I would bet that few gamers can afford a Mac Pro, especially when it's so cheap on the PC.



    Case in point: I maintain a self-built PC for non-hardcore, but still graphics-heavy gaming (currently GTA III & spin-offs, Sims 2, Sim City 4). Every few years, I spend about a hundred bucks upgrading it with a new graphics card. For a hundred bucks you can get last year's best model. Aside from the intermittent Mo-board/CPU/RAM refresh (~$300 for last year's best), it is a very cheap way to stay on top of the PC gaming scene.



    It's sort of a chicken-and-egg conundrum, though. Right now there aren't enough good games for Mac that make it worth switching, cold-turkey. I see Apple taking the right steps, though. The first was making the Mac dual-bootable into Windows. The catch, however, is that current graphics cards must be Mac & Windows compatible. That would be the next step. The following step would be a unit that was easily upgradable. (Just because I like my Macs to run for 6 years, doesn't mean I want to suffer through the last three.) If you build it, [they] will come. (Mac game developers.)



    -Clive
  • Reply 87 of 111
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by 4metta View Post


    When did I say Valve invented modding?



    Oops, very sorry, I misread one of your posts. However just swap out modding with daily updates and there ya go, same story. Neither of them started daily updates to games to improve on small things. The idea itself has been around for a while.



    Very sorry about how I misread your post though.
  • Reply 88 of 111
    vineavinea Posts: 5,585member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Clive At Five View Post


    Okay, plain and simple, Macs as they are today are NOT capable gaming machines, unless you pay big $$$ on a Mac Pro + graphics card. However the "then go and buy a PC" and "then go and buy a PS3" comments aren't well-founded.



    Quote:

    Case in point: I maintain a self-built PC for non-hardcore, but still graphics-heavy gaming (currently GTA III & spin-offs, Sims 2, Sim City 4). Every few years, I spend about a hundred bucks upgrading it with a new graphics card. For a hundred bucks you can get last year's best model. Aside from the intermittent Mo-board/CPU/RAM refresh (~$300 for last year's best), it is a very cheap way to stay on top of the PC gaming scene.



    Are you seriously saying that the 2400XT can't run GTA III, Sims 2 or Sim City 4 in all its glory? I ran WoW on my old old G4 Quicksilver and GeForce card even with BC (tho' laggy sometimes). The MBP ran WoW fine with the X1600.



    If you are non-hardcore the iMac is fine in bootcamp or with native Mac games.



    And the "go buy a PS3" or 360 are well founded as much of the gaming market has gone exactly that way and the casual PC games run fine on a 2400XT.
  • Reply 89 of 111
    emig647emig647 Posts: 2,448member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post


    A very unusual crowd came out for this story.



    Let me get this right, buy an expensive computer AND an expensive console is a better solution than an a properly spec'd expensive computer that can do both. The dual system setup had better be much better because it's a lot more expensive overall.



    +1. Rare times when we're 100% on the same page for more than 1 post a day
  • Reply 90 of 111
    gongon Posts: 2,437member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by vinea View Post


    Are you seriously saying that the 2400XT can't run GTA III, Sims 2 or Sim City 4 in all its glory?



    Those games are about a year old, two years old and four years old. Sims is the newest and the game genre is remarkably light on graphics. These days even the simplest casual-aimed RTS is going to need some graphics power.
    Quote:

    If you are non-hardcore the iMac is fine in bootcamp or with native Mac games.



    "Casual" vs "hardcore" is in my opinion better understood as skill/intensity level and time investment. Only those games e.g. ultrarealist simulators that require too high knowledge and skill barriers of entry from the casual player are off limits to him. Otherwise you'll find mr. Casual and mr. Hardcore often in same games, just playing different difficulty levels, in different company, or perhaps the exact same thing with different outcomes (they might find the same Halo match great fun, just one winning and one primarily getting his ass kicked, for example).



    The only link to hardware we can make is that the casual player won't have *very* powerful hardware since they don't care so much whether they're in high resolution, surround sound, shaders on, HDR on, anti-aliasing on, and so forth. It simply makes no sense to pay for the ultra high end gear.



    Still, you can be a casual player and still play the latest Madden or Bioshock because both looked like nice distractions at the store. You don't need much of a machine for it either - $700 will do just fine. You do need to make a conscious decision that you'll be gaming a little, so you make sure some of that money goes towards graphics.



    Here's what I consider good enough hardware to market to a "casual gamer":

    It must run every game on the store shelf at time of purchase. Maybe it has go to low resolutions and turn all effects off to accomplish that, but the game must run at playable framerate, say 20 minimum.



    2400XT isn't enough.
  • Reply 91 of 111
    rickagrickag Posts: 1,626member
    Why the contention. Apple hasn't been the best gaming platform for a long time. Everyong knows this. It is OK for casual gaming and can provide hours of entertainment except for the more demanding 3d games.



    What is only contentious is it would take very little on Apple's part to offer a machine that could play the more demanding games. Apple chooses not to for whatever reasons. This is not news.



    Bungie's possible exit from Microsoft is also not news. It won't magically get Apple to offer anything but AIO and Mac mini consumer desktops, Bungie won't care, Apple won't care.
  • Reply 92 of 111
    freakboyfreakboy Posts: 138member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by tuncer View Post


    Jason Jones was not only the programmer on all the games mentioned above, he developed all the story lines for Pathways, Marathon, Myth, and of course, Halo. Jones is the lifeblood of Bungie and a true genius.



    I have no doubt that if this story is true, it's all because of Jason, who I'm sure is not happy working for Microsoft. His name isn't even in the credits for Halo 3 (just a thank you) so I'm guessing he's been working on something other than Halo for the last few years.



    Haha.. common Tuncer, he didn't do all the story for Marathon.



    But I agree about Jason being a genius.
  • Reply 93 of 111
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by vinea View Post


    Are you seriously saying that the 2400XT can't run GTA III, Sims 2 or Sim City 4 in all its glory? I ran WoW on my old old G4 Quicksilver and GeForce card even with BC (tho' laggy sometimes). The MBP ran WoW fine with the X1600.



    If you are non-hardcore the iMac is fine in bootcamp or with native Mac games.



    And the "go buy a PS3" or 360 are well founded as much of the gaming market has gone exactly that way and the casual PC games run fine on a 2400XT.



    Sure they'll run today's games and the games I listed just fine. They're older games. But what about next year’s games? I will definitely want to plat StarCraft II. I have a NVidia GeForce FX 5500 (a 2004 card) which plays the games I listed beautifully and will probably handle SCII on lower settings. Will the 2400XT, with that legendary Apple graphics card support (*laughs*) be able to play new games four years from now? Errt. Try again.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gon View Post


    Those games are about a year old, two years old and four years old. Sims is the newest and the game genre is remarkably light on graphics. These days even the simplest casual-aimed RTS is going to need some graphics power."Casual" vs "hardcore" is in my opinion better understood as skill/intensity level and time investment. Only those games e.g. ultrarealist simulators that require too high knowledge and skill barriers of entry from the casual player are off limits to him. Otherwise you'll find mr. Casual and mr. Hardcore often in same games, just playing different difficulty levels, in different company, or perhaps the exact same thing with different outcomes (they might find the same Halo match great fun, just one winning and one primarily getting his ass kicked, for example). The only link to hardware we can make is that the casual player won't have *very* powerful hardware since they don't care so much whether they're in high resolution, surround sound, shaders on, HDR on, anti-aliasing on, and so forth. It simply makes no sense to pay for the ultra high end gear. Still, you can be a casual player and still play the latest Madden or Bioshock because both looked like nice distractions at the store. You don't need much of a machine for it either - $700 will do just fine. You do need to make a conscious decision that you'll be gaming a little, so you make sure some of that money goes towards graphics. Here's what I consider good enough hardware to market to a "casual gamer": It must run every game on the store shelf at time of purchase. Maybe it has go to low resolutions and turn all effects off to accomplish that, but the game must run at playable framerate, say 20 minimum. 2400XT isn't enough.



    Finally! Someone who understands me!



    I don’t require the best resolutions and break-neck framerates. I just want to play, and I want to be able to play games for the next few years… Not like my circa 2002 top-of-the-line 800MHz G4 iMac which couldn’t even play Unreal Tournament 2003. On lowest settings, I had about 5 frames per second. Sad.



    -Clive
  • Reply 94 of 111
    vineavinea Posts: 5,585member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gon View Post


    Those games are about a year old, two years old and four years old. Sims is the newest and the game genre is remarkably light on graphics.



    Those are the games he listed. Pick different ones.



    Quote:

    These days even the simplest casual-aimed RTS is going to need some graphics power.



    I finished single player of World in Conflict on medium on the 7300GT. The ATI HD 2K series sucks but the 2400XT should be on par. Don't have one to test so I'll try it on my old X1600 but I bet it at least runs in low. I was running medium.



    WIC is hardly a wimp when it comes to graphics.



    Quote:

    "Casual" vs "hardcore" is in my opinion better understood as skill/intensity level and time investment. Only those games e.g. ultrarealist simulators that require too high knowledge and skill barriers of entry from the casual player are off limits to him. Otherwise you'll find mr. Casual and mr. Hardcore often in same games, just playing different difficulty levels, in different company, or perhaps the exact same thing with different outcomes (they might find the same Halo match great fun, just one winning and one primarily getting his ass kicked, for example).



    Except that on the PC the hardcore is differentiated by the level of hardware they have.



    Quote:

    The only link to hardware we can make is that the casual player won't have *very* powerful hardware since they don't care so much whether they're in high resolution, surround sound, shaders on, HDR on, anti-aliasing on, and so forth. It simply makes no sense to pay for the ultra high end gear.



    And the 2400XT is about par for what the casual player has right? Its a lower middle of the pack chip. Other than ATI/AMD suckage at the moment the older iMacs were middle of the pack at the time as well.



    Quote:

    Here's what I consider good enough hardware to market to a "casual gamer":

    It must run every game on the store shelf at time of purchase. Maybe it has go to low resolutions and turn all effects off to accomplish that, but the game must run at playable framerate, say 20 minimum.



    2400XT isn't enough.



    When Oblivion came out no "casual" gaming PC was going to run that sucker with 20 FPS. The X1600 is fine for current games at low settings on any but the most hardcore engines.



    Vinea
  • Reply 95 of 111
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Wakashizuma View Post


    Truth hurts indeed....Doesn't it?



    It sure does, seeing how bad it hurts, surprised you're still around.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mdriftmayer


    You created an account to talk smack about what you speculate on. Your life must truly be dull.



  • Reply 96 of 111
    vineavinea Posts: 5,585member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Clive At Five View Post


    Sure they'll run today's games and the games I listed just fine. They're older games. But what about next year?s games? I will definitely want to plat StarCraft II. I have a NVidia GeForce FX 5500 (a 2004 card) which plays the games I listed beautifully and will probably handle SCII on lower settings. Will the 2400XT, with that legendary Apple graphics card support (*laughs*) be able to play new games four years from now? Errt. Try again.



    Finally! Someone who understands me!



    I don?t require the best resolutions and break-neck framerates. I just want to play, and I want to be able to play games for the next few years? Not like my circa 2002 top-of-the-line 800MHz G4 iMac which couldn?t even play Unreal Tournament 2003. On lowest settings, I had about 5 frames per second. Sad.



    -Clive



    One. Your G4 can't bootcamp.



    Two. I loaded World in Conflict onto my Rev 1 MBP with X1600 and ran the benchmarks.



    In 800x600 low I got 52FPS average, 130 mac and 9 min (nuclear explosion).

    In 800x600 medium I got 25 average, 43 max and 9 min

    In 1400x1050 low I got 39 average, 104 max and 10 min

    In 1920x1200 very low I got 39 average, 90 max and 9 min

    In 1920x1200 medium I got 9 average, 14 max and 6 min



    The 2400XT should be better. (note, these were all on the external monitor designated as primary).



    As a RTS/RTT it's not a wimp graphics wise.



    Three. Since I think the 2400XT and 2600 Pro are DX10 parts they should be able to run games at low in 4 years.



    Macs are by no means stellar game machines. But they can run casual games or hard core games in "casual" (low rez) mode. Enough for a casual gamer not out for ladder glory or in a laid back clan. Those somewhere in between casual and hardcore can supplement with a console.



    For true hardcore you need a PC and a decent one at that.



    Vinea
  • Reply 97 of 111
    rokerroker Posts: 4member
    I forgot to mention how MMORPGS are played on PCs



    I forgot to mention that MMORPGS are for super nerds
  • Reply 98 of 111
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by vinea View Post


    For true hardcore you need a PC and a decent one at that.



    Those somewhere in between casual and hardcore can supplement with a console.



    This was my first point! I said it didn't have to be that way! Macs *COULD* be capable of medium to high-end gaming, and *COULD* be stellar at it, but Apple won't take the simple steps needed to court SW and HW developers to make it happen!



    Is it too much to ask that Apple do this?



    -Clive
  • Reply 99 of 111
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by roker View Post


    I forgot to mention how MMORPGS are played on PCs



    I forgot to mention that MMORPGS are for super nerds



    I love when people say that. You'd be surprised at the huge variety of people you will find in an MMO. Is hardcore 7 nights a week raiding for the super nerds? Ya, for the most part. But the majority of people, in my estimation, just enjoy playing a game that has somebody else on the other end of it. Most of the game time is spent socializing over voice chat. It's more fun, casual, and normal than most people think.



    As for the people telling us to grow up and stop playing games: Do you watch TV? Maybe follow an NFL team? Race cars? Work on your car on the weekend? Build things? Models maybe? GROW UP and start doing something worthwhile with your time! See? It's the same stupid, inflammatory argument either way, and you should be intelligent enough to understand that people like to enjoy their free time in different ways. Just because you don't like their choice is no reason to flame them.



    Now, back to Macs and gaming. If Apple were ever to listen to it's customers and release a mini tower design with a single upgradable GPU slot, it would be a potential gamers paradise. CPUs stay good for a few years, GPUs do not. It would allow for the necessary upgrading that gamers need, which is mainly the GPU, without the added expense of a Mac Pro. Will we ever see one? Perhaps not, but I really wish we would.
  • Reply 100 of 111
    splinemodelsplinemodel Posts: 7,311member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by kim kap sol View Post


    What does it matter anymore...



    Alex Seropian and most of the original Bungie team left a long time ago to form Wideload, leaving Jason "Kiss Ass" Jones as the only remaining original Bungie developer in the hands of MS.



    This is irrelvant, since neither of them develop games anymore. However, with a long history of success and creativity, Bungie HAS hired a great team. They are definitely a valuable company with or without the other founders.
Sign In or Register to comment.