Jump to content


No more mac-only networking games!


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
161 replies to this topic

#21 electricdawn

electricdawn

    Legendary

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 959 posts
  • Location:Kaiserslautern, Germany

Posted 19 October 2004 - 08:17 AM

Somehow I think you really don't want to understand the situation we're in...

1. If I want C&C, I buy C&C, not UT2k4. These are vastly different games. If I want to buy a strategy title (especially THIS title), I'm not going to buy a FPS. Remember, a lost sale on a strategy title doesn't automatically mean a gained sale in any other department.

2. A lost sale means less money for the Mac publisher, porter. That means less money to buy triple A titles, hire good employees, or even keep the current company up and running.

3. If the publisher/porter folds, no more Mac gaming goodness for you, your friends and, most important of all, all Mac gamers.

4. There is only one way, where we have the slightest chance of influencing the quality of Mac gaming titles. Buy the friggin' game! Even if it doesn't support Mac-PC networking, buy it anyway. I already explained the reasoning behind this, I won't go through this again. If you still have a different opinion, fine. I won't argue with you any longer. Just keep in mind that you are actually hurting the Mac community with your attitude, not helping it.

Greetings, Andreas.

[edit]
I have the feeling that you think the Mac publishers/porters do this to actually tease you. Let me tell you, this is NOT true. Of course they want to bring you every title with Mac-PC networking. But it just doesn't work that way sometimes, may it be DirectPlay, may it be other issues (C&C), sometimes it's just simply impossible! Do you really think they don't care? Think again.
[/edit]

#22 jamesa

jamesa

    Fan

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 47 posts
  • Location:Canberra, Oz

Posted 19 October 2004 - 08:26 AM

Quote

Somehow I think you really don't want to understand the situation we're in...
I'd say the same of you ;)

Quote

1. If I want C&C, I buy C&C, not UT2k4. These are vastly different games. If I want to buy a strategy title (especially THIS title), I'm not going to buy a FPS. Remember, a lost sale on a strategy title doesn't automatically mean a gained sale in any other department.

If I want to play a good game against my PC using friends, I don't buy C&C because it won't work. I'm limited to buying UT2k4, because it does.

That guy at the Apple store obviously felt the same way.

Quote

2. A lost sale means less money for the Mac publisher, porter. That means less money to buy triple A titles, hire good employees, or even keep the current company up and running.
I'm not running a charity! I want to play with my friends, not by myself. So I buy games that work with them. If the existing mac publishers don't provide this, then they can go the way of the dinosaurs for all I care - a new group will spring up to take its place and will cater for me. That's how a free market works.

Quote

3. If the publisher/porter folds, no more Mac gaming goodness for you, your friends and, most important of all, all Mac gamers.

Not true. There are a number of porting houses on the Mac at the moment, and there've been a number rise and fall in the past. More often they start to fall when they cease listening to their customers, and start making decisions like "well, we can't release a product that works with everyone else, but we've done all this work so let's just throw it out there and see if we can make any money back". I'm not buying products like this any more. I mean, from what I've read here, HW2 has problems even with Mac->Mac networking!

Quote

4. There is only one way, where we have the slightest chance of influencing the quality of Mac gaming titles. Buy the friggin' game! Even if it doesn't support Mac-PC networking, buy it anyway. I already explained the reasoning behind this, I won't go through this again. If you still have a different opinion, fine. I won't argue with you any longer. Just keep in mind that you are actually hurting the Mac community with your attitude, not helping it.

You're missing the point! By blindly accepting everything that you're being offered, you're the one that hurts the mac gaming community! What incentive does a publisher have to do a good job if they know you're going to buy the game even if it doesn't do what you want, or it's a poor port, or whatever?

Like I said, I'm not going to buy another mac game that doesn't include PC compatibility.

-- james

#23 jamesa

jamesa

    Fan

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 47 posts
  • Location:Canberra, Oz

Posted 19 October 2004 - 08:28 AM

Quote

[edit]I have the feeling that you think the Mac publishers/porters do this to actually tease you. Let me tell you, this is NOT true. Of course they want to bring you every title with Mac-PC networking. But it just doesn't work that way sometimes, may it be DirectPlay, may it be other issues (C&C), sometimes it's just simply impossible! Do you really think they don't care? Think again.
[/edit]

I think they, by now, have a very good idea before (or just after) they start porting of whether the game will be capable of supporting mac/pc gameplay. There are a lot of AAA titles out there on the PC - my plea is for them to focus on those titles that will support mac-pc gameplay.

that's all

-- james

#24 electricdawn

electricdawn

    Legendary

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 959 posts
  • Location:Kaiserslautern, Germany

Posted 19 October 2004 - 08:29 AM

You're not getting it. That's fine. I rest my case...

-Andreas.

#25 jamesa

jamesa

    Fan

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 47 posts
  • Location:Canberra, Oz

Posted 19 October 2004 - 08:31 AM

Quote

You're not getting it. That's fine. I rest my case...

-Andreas.

what aren't I getting? that I should be buying games that won't work with my PC using friends, which is the only reason I'm buying the games in the first place?

-- james

#26 a2daj

a2daj

    Uberspewer

  • IMG Pro Users
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3400 posts
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 19 October 2004 - 08:31 AM

If a game is good, I want it regardless of crossplatform networking.  Is Homeworld 2 a good game without the multiplayer aspect?  Hell yeah.  Is C&C:G?  I'm having a lot of fun with teh solo campaigns.  Same goes with Age of MythologyAnd when I do play, I usually play with Mac gamers.  Would a game be better with crossplatform networking?  It would be nice, but for me, far from a deal breaker.  I'd hate to lose a great game like Raven Shield because the PC developers used proprietary networking libraries.  I'm really glad it did get ported.

If a networkable game were to ship without any networking and there were no promises of ever getting it implemented, I would agree that the price should reflect it.  However, if there is networking, regardless of crossplatform compatibility, that still took time to implement and test.  

In a game where networking is fundamental to gameplay, like Quake 3, UT2K4, BF 1942 and EQ, crossplatform networking is much more crucial since multiplayer gameplay is crucial.  Would BF 1942 sales have been worse without CP NW?  Most likely yes, significantly.  Would EQ sales have been better with CP NW?  I know a lot of people who would say hell yeah.  Would JKII or CoD sales have been significantly worse without CP NW?  Harder to say since both games have good single player campaigns.  I for one would have bought both games because of the single player campaigns.
Dual 2.5 GHz G5-RADEON X800 -4 GB RAM-Revo 7.1
MBP 2.0GHz -Mobility RADEON X1600-2 GB RAM

#27 jamesa

jamesa

    Fan

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 47 posts
  • Location:Canberra, Oz

Posted 19 October 2004 - 08:38 AM

Quote

If a game is good, I want it regardless of crossplatform networking.  Is Homeworld 2 a good game without the multiplayer aspect?  Hell yeah.  Is C&C:G?  I'm having a lot of fun with teh solo campaigns.  Same goes with Age of MythologyAnd when I do play, I usually play with Mac gamers.
Well, it's not like we have any choice with these Mac-Mac only games! :)

Quote

If a networkable game were to ship without any networking and there were no promises of ever getting it implemented, I would agree that the price should reflect it.  However, if there is networking, regardless of crossplatform compatibility, that still took time to implement and test.

Mac-Mac would obviously take less time to implement and test than Mac-PC as well - there are more permutations to test. By that logic, we should be at the least paying less for Mac-Mac only...

Quote

In a game where networking is fundamental to gameplay, like Quake 3, UT2K4, BF 1942 and EQ, crossplatform networking is much more crucial since multiplayer gameplay is crucial.  Would BF 1942 sales have been worse without CP NW?  Most likely yes, significantly.  Would EQ sales have been better with CP NW?  I know a lot of people who would say hell yeah.  Would JKII or CoD sales have been significantly worse without CP NW?  Harder to say since both games have good single player campaigns.  I for one would have bought both games because of the single player campaigns.

You're defining where networking is fundamental to gameplay by whether there's mac-pc support already there!

yes, you can get away with focusing on single player (if the game has it) and only include mac-mac networking. but if 60% of gamers play online (as identified earlier), and we all know what happened to mac everquest because of mac-mac only, I wonder what effect this mac-mac only is having on other mac gaming titles.

there are people out there who want to play with the rest of the world. in fact, I think you'd be hard pressed to find a mac gamer who isn't at least vaguely peeved by the mac-mac only. it's a big thing for me.

-- james

#28 Endymion

Endymion

    Master Blaster

  • IMG Pro Users
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1693 posts
  • Steam Name:Aleksael
  • Steam ID:Aleksael
  • Location:Miami, FL
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 19 October 2004 - 08:41 AM

This thread is dumb.

James, you are preaching to the choir and this is why you have nothing but dissent against your opinion.

Nobody here disagrees with you that we should have compatible networking with PC games whenever possible.

Your fatal mistake is your presumption that it is the responsibility of the Macintosh publisher to make this happen.

The Macintosh publisher does what they can whenever they can.

The PC publisher does what they can whenever they can. Unfortunately, it is the PC publisher's decision of what they can do which determines the decision that the Macintosh publisher has to make. You have categorically denied any other user's opinion in rule of networking here. You don't want Half Life without PC networking compatibility so you are happy we never got it?

SPEAK FOR YOURSELF.

I got Half Life on the PS2 all because I never could play it on my platform of choice. I can't even think about networking my Half Life game with my PS2. Yet I play it almost any time I turn on that poorly designed pile of plastic.

So to summarize:

1. You are an island. If networking is the only thing you want in any game you purchase you are obviously a minority. The derision in this thread tends to prove this.
2. Put your request where it will be of some use and tell the PC publishers about it. The PC publisher is the only body that can make what you want happen. When the Mac publication and development is third-party, the decisions the Mac publisher makes can only necessarily flow from the ones the creator already made.

Your angst is misplaced here, and misplace towards Mac publishers and developers. If you put it where it belongs for a change, who knows, you might actually convince a PC publisher to develop Mac games themselves! Then they would more easily be able to ensure compatibility for the life of the game.

#29 jamesa

jamesa

    Fan

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 47 posts
  • Location:Canberra, Oz

Posted 19 October 2004 - 08:51 AM

Quote

This thread is dumb.
And yet here you are posting in it. Very constructive.

Quote

James, you are preaching to the choir and this is why you have nothing but dissent against your opinion.

If I was preaching to the choir I think most people would agree, not disagree with me.

Quote

Nobody here disagrees with you that we should have compatible networking with PC games whenever possible.

Your fatal mistake is your presumption that it is the responsibility of the Macintosh publisher to make this happen.
When did I say they make this happen? In my first post I said:

Quote

Now, if there are reasons why some games won't be able to support network play with everyone out there

I realise they can't make it happen always. But I bet they do have a good idea if it will be able to happen at the outset!

Quote

You don't want Half Life without PC networking compatibility so you are happy we never got it?
SPEAK FOR YOURSELF.

Actually, Gabe Newell didn't want Half life on the Mac without PC networking, so he didn't release it. He didn't want Mac users to be treated as second class citizens. I think that a few porting houses could take a leaf out of that book.

Quote

1. You are an island.
Ha! The irony! You're the one espousing that not compatible games should be published! That puts us on an island, with the rest of the PC gaming world laughing at us!

Quote

If networking is the only thing you want in any game you purchase you are obviously a minority. The derision in this thread tends to prove this.

Go check out that survey above. 60% of people play multiplayer. That means you're the minority, despite you people being a very loud minority.

Quote

2. Put your request where it will be of some use and tell the PC publishers about it. The PC publisher is the only body that can make what you want happen. When the Mac publication and development is third-party, the decisions the Mac publisher makes can only necessarily flow from the ones the creator already made.

You're assuming I'm not doing this already...

Quote

Your angst is misplaced here, and misplace towards Mac publishers and developers. If you put it where it belongs for a change, who knows, you might actually convince a PC publisher to develop Mac games themselves! Then they would more easily be able to ensure compatibility for the life of the game.

Angst is not misplaced. They're the gatekeepers - they decide what comes through from the PC world. I'm sure they were a bit surprised that C&C wouldn't multiplay with the PC, but I'd be surprised now if they didn't have a very good idea (or couldn't ask a specific technical question) which meant they knew whether the game would Mac-PC game. All I'm asking for them to do is focus on the games that are compatible with the vast majority of PC gamers.

I've also stated that I'm only spending $$$ from now on, on games that are compatible.

-- james

#30 Endymion

Endymion

    Master Blaster

  • IMG Pro Users
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1693 posts
  • Steam Name:Aleksael
  • Steam ID:Aleksael
  • Location:Miami, FL
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 19 October 2004 - 09:05 AM

[quote][quote]This thread is dumb.[/quote]

And yet here you are posting in it. Very constructive.[/quote]

And here you are, trying to get your own thread locked, would seem.

[quote]If I was preaching to the choir I think most people would agree, not disagree with me.[/quote]

You're telling us you have all the answers. Answer: never make another non-PC networkable Mac game! Wrong answer, dude. We agree with you that Mac games should be networked whenever possible. We don't agree with your wonderful solution that gives us fewer games.

[quote]When did I say they make this happen?[/quote]

When you told us we shouldn't buy non-networkable games.

[quote]I realise they can't make it happen always. But I bet they do have a good idea if it will be able to happen at the outset![/quote]

Then you do not have a good idea of how well a game can sell for us even if it doesn't network with PCs.

[quote]Actually, Gabe Newell didn't want Half life on the Mac without PC networking, so he didn't release it. He didn't want Mac users to be treated as second class citizens. I think that a few porting houses could take a leaf out of that book.[/quote]

Actually, I want Half Life, period. I think you could take a lesson from that and show Gabe a clue.

[quote]Ha! The irony! You're the one espousing that not compatible games should be published![/quote]

If it's a great game, you're damn straight.

[quote]That puts us on an island, with the rest of the PC gaming world laughing at us![/quote]

Just what do you do for fashion, really? Do you look in the mirror or are your buddies' opinions more important?

[quote]Go check out that survey above. 60% of people play multiplayer. That means you're the minority, despite you people being a very loud minority.[/quote]

You're assuming I don't do multiplayer. I do. What you are saying, however, is that no non-multiplayer games should be published, or no non-PC compatible games at all. Have you played Dungeon Siege? How many C&C:G games did you play before you returned the game? You know, there's a great thing that your computer can access. It's called the internet. You should try gaming on it sometime. You'll find we have this thing called Game Ranger, where we can find players that we actually can network our play with. Play the games you can play with your buddies. But why turn a blind eye on a great game if your friend doesn't have the same computer? Or if it's a single-player title?

[quote][quote]
2. Put your request where it will be of some use and tell the PC publishers about it. The PC publisher is the only body that can make what you want happen. When the Mac publication and development is third-party, the decisions the Mac publisher makes can only necessarily flow from the ones the creator already made.[/quote]

You're assuming I'm not doing this already...[/quote]

You're spending so much time on your line-item replies here that it's hard to see where else you could be spending your effort. If all this angst were put where it belongs (i.e. not Apple, not Aspyr, not Mac fans, etc. etc.) you might have accomplished something already.

[quote]Angst is not misplaced. They're the gatekeepers - they decide what comes through from the PC world.[/quote]

No they don't. The PC game creators that allow their games to be ported do. You're shifting the decisionmaking responsibility left of centre.

[quote]I've also stated that I'm only spending $$$ from now on, on games that are compatible.

-- james[/quote]

Wonderful. I'm off to buy 7 copies of Dungeon Siege for my LAN. Have a nice day.

#31 jamesa

jamesa

    Fan

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 47 posts
  • Location:Canberra, Oz

Posted 19 October 2004 - 09:19 AM

[quote]You're telling us you have all the answers. Answer: never make another non-PC networkable Mac game! Wrong answer, dude. We agree with you that Mac games should be networked whenever possible. We don't agree with your wonderful solution that gives us fewer games.[/quote]

Why do you think it will give us fewer games? There are plenty of PC games that can be ported, and from the number that are ported a significant proportion of these still have Mac/PC compatibility. All I'm saying is that these should be the focus of the limited resources of the porters.

[quote][quote]When did I say they make this happen?[/quote]
When you told us we shouldn't buy non-networkable games.[/quote]

Sorry, when did I say that you shouldn't?

[quote][quote]I realise they can't make it happen always. But I bet they do have a good idea if it will be able to happen at the outset![/quote]
Then you do not have a good idea of how well a game can sell for us even if it doesn't network with PCs.[/quote]

If you look at the biggest selling games on the Mac, all of them have included Mac-PC compatibility. Which I find hardly a coincidence.

So what was your point again?

[quote][quote]Actually, Gabe Newell didn't want Half life on the Mac without PC networking, so he didn't release it. He didn't want Mac users to be treated as second class citizens. I think that a few porting houses could take a leaf out of that book.[/quote]

Actually, I want Half Life, period. I think you could take a lesson from that and show Gabe a clue.[/quote]

Show him a clue? :roll:

It's only one of the most popular PC games of all time, I think he has more than enough clues. He's sold more games than all the Mac porting houses put together.

[quote][quote]That puts us on an island, with the rest of the PC gaming world laughing at us![/quote]

Just what do you do for fashion, really? Do you look in the mirror or are your buddies' opinions more important?[/quote]

I know what you're trying to say here, and you're wrong. People play games to play against eachother. This isn't just about what other people think, it's about [url="http://www.google.com/search?q=network+externalities"]network externalities[/url]; the benefit derived from something depends on how many people participate in it. How much use would a telephone be if you were the only one to have one?

[quote][quote]Go check out that survey above. 60% of people play multiplayer. That means you're the minority, despite you people being a very loud minority.[/quote]
You're assuming I don't do multiplayer. I do. What you are saying, however, is that no non-multiplayer games should be published[/quote]

No, I never said that! What I'm saying is, if part of the game is multiplayer, then it should work - not with 1% of the population, but all of it!

[quote]or no non-PC compatible games at all. Have you played Dungeon Siege? How many C&C:G games did you play before you returned the game? You know, there's a great thing that your computer can access. It's called the internet. You should try gaming on it sometime. You'll find we have this thing called Game Ranger, where we can find players that we actually can network our play with. Play the games you can play with your buddies. But why turn a blind eye on a great game if your friend doesn't have the same computer? Or if it's a single-player title?[/quote]

I love good single player games - this isn't about that. It's about mutliplayer games not working with virtually everyone out there.

I have played C&C on the PC, and to be blunt it's not the kind of game I would buy for single player other than to learn how the units work for multiplayer. The developers know this too, that's why they dole out units mission by mission and don't give you everything at the start...

... as for Gameranger, sure, I know about it. But half the fun of games while you're in college is killing the guy next door in a strategy game and yelling taunts at him :) with all these mac-mac games, i'm the one left out...

The other problem with gameranger is, from Australia the ping to the majority of US servers is ridiculous. If you could play with other Aussie PC users, it wouldn't be a problem...

[quote][quote]You're assuming I'm not doing this already...[/quote]
You're spending so much time on your line-item replies here that it's hard to see where else you could be spending your effort. If all this angst were put where it belongs (i.e. not Apple, not Aspyr, not Mac fans, etc. etc.) you might have accomplished something already.[/quote]

You'd be surprised how fast a typer I am. I've also had the "bring half life 2 to the mac petition" in my signature on the forum where I spend most of my time.

And yesterday I emailed Valve about Half life 2 for the mac. Haven't heard back yet... but sent them the link with the nearly 5000 signatures on it.

What have you done to help?

[quote][quote]Angst is not misplaced. They're the gatekeepers - they decide what comes through from the PC world.[/quote]
No they don't. The PC game creators that allow their games to be ported do. You're shifting the decisionmaking responsibility left of centre.
[/quote]

No. They decide what to port, then ask for permission to do so. They may or may not get it, but the developers don't approach the porters - it's vice versa.

[quote][quote]I've also stated that I'm only spending $$$ from now on, on games that are compatible.
-- james[/quote]
Wonderful. I'm off to buy 7 copies of Dungeon Siege for my LAN. Have a nice day.[/quote]

It's a shame that you need to buy multiple copies for your macs just so you can play against friends. But don't mind me.

You have a nice day too ;)

-- james

#32 stroehman

stroehman

    Fanatic

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 108 posts
  • Location:Luverne, MN

Posted 19 October 2004 - 09:37 AM

Plus most of these Mac to Mac network only compatible games have really good single player game action to boot too.

And for the game quality and optimization I think the Mac publishers are doing a good job. It's a lot of work for them just to port them over and we are thankful. Also must of you the complain about optimization and stuff never programmed in their life and so have no idea how hard it is. I wish some how we could put you guys in the shoes of these guys that do your porting of the games. Then I think you'll really understand how great-full we are to even get these games.

The more we support them the more we'll get!!! It's our pocketbooks that really persuades the publishers and they know it, so they'll do their best to get your money. So how you use your pocketbook will help decide where these companies will go. So if you like the companies choose of game and the support of the game buy it, if you don't then don't buy their game. They'll learn from their sales records of a game, and they will make change the next time on the next game they do to improve the sales.
aka hackintosh

#33 c15zyx

c15zyx

    Heroic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 278 posts

Posted 19 October 2004 - 09:41 AM

If all you care about is cost (games should be cheaper) and compatibility (the guy next door) then maybe you should have bought a PC. Solves all your problems right there. Macs aren't for everyone.

I love (and bought) C&C:G and HW2 knowing full well about the network incompatibility. I play them multiplayer mostly on PC lans but I bought a Mac copy anyway so I can enjoy singleplayer, skirmish, or even multiplayer with the occassional Mac user if I need to.

We should have the right to choose- to be able to select from more games, and to be able to put our money wherever we want to- and I choose to put it into C&C:G, HW2, and all the other good x-platform incompatible we have.

#34 Endymion

Endymion

    Master Blaster

  • IMG Pro Users
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1693 posts
  • Steam Name:Aleksael
  • Steam ID:Aleksael
  • Location:Miami, FL
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 19 October 2004 - 09:42 AM

[quote]Why do you think it will give us fewer games? There are plenty of PC games that can be ported, and from the number that are ported a significant proportion of these still have Mac/PC compatibility. All I'm saying is that these should be the focus of the limited resources of the porters.[/quote]

Then you obviously need to start a Macintosh publishing company. Since you are so certain that the majority of PC games do not deal with DirectX for networking you will have a lot of PC games to port that are not already spoken for, won't you?

[quote]Sorry, when did I say that you shouldn't?[/quote]

Look up the term "metamessage."

[quote]If you look at the biggest selling games on the Mac, all of them have included Mac-PC compatibility. Which I find hardly a coincidence.

So what was your point again?[/quote]

That you lay the responsibility for it on the Macintosh publisher. And that this is misplaced. Your comparision really works better the other way around. Of the most popular PC games, more of them included Mac-PC compatibility. When you turn the bone around you can put it to the persons responsible and in the best position to do something about it. Hint: the Mac publishers aren't in the best position to do something about it.

[quote]Show him a clue? :roll:

It's only one of the most popular PC games of all time, I think he has more than enough clues. He's sold more games than all the Mac porting houses put together.[/quote]

Yes. Show his fat-ass a clue.

[quote]I know what you're trying to say here,[/quote]

Then say it.

[quote]and you're wrong.[/quote]

About?

[quote]People play games to play against eachother. This isn't just about what other people think, it's about [url="http://www.google.com/search?q=network+externalities"]network externalities[/url]; the benefit derived from something depends on how many people participate in it. How much use would a telephone be if you were the only one to have one?[/quote]

Your analogy falls apart the moment that I have a single telephone conversation with another human being. Likewise your analogy fails the moment that I play any of the games you have returned with another Macintosh user.

[quote]No, I never said that! What I'm saying is, if part of the game is multiplayer, then it should work - not with 1% of the population, but all of it![/quote]

Then you need to tell the PC publisher to stop using Microsoft APIs! That is the only way!

[quote]I love good single player games - this isn't about that. It's about mutliplayer games not working with virtually everyone out there.[/quote]

See above.

[quote]I have played C&C on the PC, and to be blunt it's not the kind of game I would buy for single player other than to learn how the units work for multiplayer. The developers know this too, that's why they dole out units mission by mission and don't give you everything at the start...[/quote]

Aspyr knew that, too. That's why you can play against any Mac user with specs enough to deal with it.

[quote]... as for Gameranger, sure, I know about it. But half the fun of games while you're in college is killing the guy next door in a strategy game and yelling taunts at him :) with all these mac-mac games, i'm the one left out...[/quote]

Well, you can always get a PC. Think of all the fun you can have putting all of these comments into the PC game warranty cards, to send them off to publishers who will read them and get the picture. Your solutions to this "problem" are still unrealistic.

[quote]The other problem with gameranger is, from Australia the ping to the majority of US servers is ridiculous. If you could play with other Aussie PC users, it wouldn't be a problem...[/quote]

Well, you can always relocate, too.

[quote]You'd be surprised how fast a typer I am. I've also had the "bring half life 2 to the mac petition" in my signature on the forum where I spend most of my time.

And yesterday I emailed Valve about Half life 2 for the mac. Haven't heard back yet... but sent them the link with the nearly 5000 signatures on it.

What have you done to help?[/quote]

I call and write physical letters to game publishers. History and sales show that petitions from persons online do not work, which is to say, the umphteenthousand signatures and emails on a website never, ever translate into good sales. This is why they are ignored by game publishers. Anybody who takes the time to lick a stamp, to pick up the phone and call, is a much better candidate for a focus group or survey in order to make the kinds of decisions on what the product market can bear. Padding "votes" for  product placement is a sure-fire way to spuriously let down a business and no way to run a railroad. I might mention this is also why petitions are not featured on IMG--something a lot of people have questioned in the past.

[quote][quote]The PC game creators that allow their games to be ported do. You're shifting the decisionmaking responsibility left of centre.
[/quote]

No. They decide what to port, then ask for permission to do so.[/quote]

No. They decide what they have the capital to license, and then ask to fill the content creators' pockets for it. This can easily spill the matter of what to port into something that your thread has completely ignored--circumstances. "Oh, sorry, we have an exclusive contract with publisher XYZ so we can't license it again for another three years," or an exclusivity to appear on a certain platform, or a significant portion of IP royalty to another party/creator/benefactor, what have you, that can easily make game X totally non-portable. Mac game publishers don't just "decide" what to port. They have to sift through what is possible, feasible, and easily negotiable. That might sound like "a decision" to you but it's a lot of hard work as soon as you try to do it. The "decision" isn't theirs and can even be very complex within the organisation or business that has the ability to grant the right.

In other words, if they only dealt with it the way you propose, we would have a lot less games to choose from at all.

[quote]It's a shame that you need to buy multiple copies for your macs just so you can play against friends. But don't mind me.

You have a nice day too ;)[/quote]

It's a shame you have little to no disposable income to afford a Mac LAN of your own to game with your friends. But don't mind me.

Best of luck when you graduate. You'll be surprised how the whole outlook changes.

#35 jamesa

jamesa

    Fan

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 47 posts
  • Location:Canberra, Oz

Posted 19 October 2004 - 09:44 AM

Quote

If all you care about is cost (games should be cheaper) and compatibility (the guy next door) then maybe you should have bought a PC. Solves all your problems right there. Macs aren't for everyone.

that's a cop out! I don't want a PC, but I don't think it's unreasonable to be compatible with 97% of the worlds computers, and 99% of PC online gamers!

I don't mind paying a premium for games - I understand the economies aren't there on the Mac side - but I do think having them work with the PC is a reasonable thing to focus on!

-- james

#36 No One

No One

    Legendary

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1233 posts
  • Location:Hilbert's Hotel

Posted 19 October 2004 - 09:47 AM

Quote

Why do you think it will give us fewer games? There are plenty of PC games that can be ported, and from the number that are ported a significant proportion of these still have Mac/PC compatibility. All I'm saying is that these should be the focus of the limited resources of the porters.

But then we would lose so many good games. Total Annihilation didn't have Mac-PC multiplayer, but I would have missed out on an amazing game if it was never ported. Same for Homeworld 2. I knew from the start that it wouldn't play against PC's. I still wanted it despite that. It is also an amazing game and I would be very disappointed if I never ever got the chance to play it on my Mac just because it is impossible for it to have crossplatform networking.

Just because a game has the possibility to be Mac Vs. PC doesn't make instantly make it a good game that is important to port. I'm more interested in the game itself.

#37 Endymion

Endymion

    Master Blaster

  • IMG Pro Users
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1693 posts
  • Steam Name:Aleksael
  • Steam ID:Aleksael
  • Location:Miami, FL
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 19 October 2004 - 09:58 AM

Quote

that's a cop out! I don't want a PC, but I don't think it's unreasonable to be compatible with 97% of the worlds computers, and 99% of PC online gamers!
Whaleman has already cleaned up your numbers. Please re-read.

Quote

I don't mind paying a premium for games - I understand the economies aren't there on the Mac side - but I do think having them work with the PC is a reasonable thing to focus on!

How do you think that Mac publishers can do this when they do not make the decisions that create PC games which can only possibly be incompatible? How do you think that "by focusing on only compatible games" that we will have more (or better) games? Your wants will only create a giant sucking sound in the place of games that we would have otherwise had.

And just so you know, you aren't covering any new ground here. That's another reason you're getting nothing but derision. You seem to think you're cluing us in but we've had this discussion many times, game set match. All of the myths and presumptions have been hashed, rehashed and regurgitated for years on this very board.

#38 bookman

bookman

    Master Blaster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1580 posts

Posted 19 October 2004 - 10:01 AM

Quote

I don't mind paying a premium for games - I understand the economies aren't there on the Mac side - but I do think having them work with the PC is a reasonable thing to focus on!

-- james

I agree James - so does Aspyr. And MacSoft.

I think where you went wrong is suggesting people don't buy games that aren't PC-Mac compatible. For every person like you that has PC friends he wants to play with, there are people like me who prefer single player or lan based games with Mac using friends.

We all agree with you it should be a priority, but the quality of the game is more important to me than the networking. Would you rather Aspyr port a great game like C&C Generals with Mac only networking, or port Lemonade Tycoon because they can make it cross platform compatible?

I'll take the better game anytime.
Work: MacBook - 2.4 Ghz Core 2 Duo - 4GB RAM - X3100 graphics.
Home: Mini - 2.0 Ghz Core2Duo - 2 GB RAM - GeForce 9400 graphics.

#39 jamesa

jamesa

    Fan

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 47 posts
  • Location:Canberra, Oz

Posted 19 October 2004 - 10:05 AM

[quote]Then you obviously need to start a Macintosh publishing company. Since you are so certain that the majority of PC games do not deal with DirectX for networking you will have a lot of PC games to port that are not already spoken for, won't you?[/quote]

Well, correct me if I'm wrong, but Battlefield 1942 (an EA game, just like C&C) uses DirectX for networking, and it plays multiplayer with the PC... there is a subset of games that use some weird thing that won't work. I'm advocating that these games be avoided...

[quote][quote]Sorry, when did I say that you shouldn't?[/quote]
Look up the term "metamessage."[/quote]

Maybe look up the term "answer the question". The answer to my question, is, of course, I didn't say it. I said I won't be buying any more, and that I encourage you to do the same. I never said that you shouldn't be buying the games - if you want them, you'll buy them anyway, "shouldn't" doesn't come into it.

[quote]That you lay the responsibility for it on the Macintosh publisher. And that this is misplaced. Your comparision really works better the other way around. Of the most popular PC games, more of them included Mac-PC compatibility. When you turn the bone around you can put it to the persons responsible and in the best position to do something about it. Hint: the Mac publishers aren't in the best position to do something about it.[/quote]

Counter Hint: if I stop buying games that have this problem, something will be done about it. If they don't ship something I want, then I won't buy it. Like the poster said above, it's voting with your pocketbook.

[quote]
Yes. Show his fat-ass a clue.
[/quote]

heh :)

[quote]Your analogy falls apart the moment that I have a single telephone conversation with another human being.[/quote]

Because other people have telephones, don't they? Now how much use would a telephone be if you could only call 3% of the population? Or what about the <1% gaming population? If you don't care who you're talking to, or where they are, it doesn't matter so much. But if you do, then it becomes a big problem!

[quote]Likewise your analogy fails the moment that I play any of the games you have returned with another Macintosh user.[/quote]

You're talking to the 1%. The value of the telephone is a lot more if you can call anyone with a phone, not just those with a "mac compatible" phone...

[quote][quote]No, I never said that! What I'm saying is, if part of the game is multiplayer, then it should work - not with 1% of the population, but all of it![/quote]
Then you need to tell the PC publisher to stop using Microsoft APIs! That is the only way![/quote]

Nothing I can say to a PC developer is going to have an effect. That's Apple's job, if anyone. If a whole lot of people start whining that the games won't work with the PC, then maybe Apple will start doing something...

[quote]I have played C&C on the PC, and to be blunt it's not the kind of game I would buy for single player other than to learn how the units work for multiplayer. The developers know this too, that's why they dole out units mission by mission and don't give you everything at the start...[/quote]

Aspyr knew that, too. That's why you can play against any Mac user with specs enough to deal with it.[/quote]

Which isn't very many people in the total scheme of things...

[quote]Well, you can always get a PC. Think of all the fun you can have putting all of these comments into the PC game warranty cards, to send them off to publishers who will read them and get the picture. Your solutions to this "problem" are still unrealistic.[/quote]

I don't want a PC, thanks :)

[quote]Well, you can always relocate, too.[/quote]

Bah! That's a bit extreme :)

[quote]No. They decide what they have the capital to license, and then ask to fill the content creators' pockets for it. This can easily spill the matter of what to port into something that your thread has completely ignored--circumstances. "Oh, sorry, we have an exclusive contract with publisher XYZ so we can't license it again for another three years," or an exclusivity to appear on a certain platform, or a significant portion of IP royalty to another party/creator/benefactor, what have you, that can easily make game X totally non-portable. Mac game publishers don't just "decide" what to port. They have to sift through what is possible, feasible, and easily negotiable. That might sound like "a decision" to you but it's a lot of hard work as soon as you try to do it. The "decision" isn't theirs and can even be very complex within the organisation or business that has the ability to grant the right.[/quote]

So... they decide what to port, then ask for permission to do so?

[quote]In other words, if they only dealt with it the way you propose, we would have a lot less games to choose from at all.[/quote]

unfounded statement. I'm sure these guys have built up a few contacts in the industry by now, they can get a quick handle on whether it's doable very early on...

[quote]It's a shame you have little to no disposable income to afford a Mac LAN of your own to game with your friends. But don't mind me.[/quote]

I won't. I think most people would agree that people setting up their own LAN would be in the minority, and if that's the extreme that you have to go to get people playing on your platform it's a pretty sad inditement.

[quote]Best of luck when you graduate. You'll be surprised how the whole outlook changes.[/quote]

Thank you. But I'd be surprised if my outlook changes at all. I'm not spending money on products that don't do what I want them to, and I see no reason for that to change.

-- james

#40 the Battle Cat

the Battle Cat

    Carnage Served Raw

  • Admin
  • 17373 posts
  • Location:Citadel City, Lh'owon
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 19 October 2004 - 10:37 AM

Holy cow!  This is a thread only a mother could love.
Gary Simmons
the Battle Cat