[nordsieck]

It is a little funny... but the combination of pretty good integrated graphics and (potentially) large amounts of on package ram mean that macs are actually a pretty inexpensive way to get access to a GPU with lots of graphics memory.

[braymundo]

I wish gaming on Mac became more popular due to the same reason.

[heliophobicdude]

What are some broken-down reasons why gaming on Mac didn't take off. I'm sure it's a few different reasons all together

[dagmx]

A lot of people will likely blame APIs etc, but that’s just an easy scapegoat for people outside the game dev industry.

The reality is likely just market share, hardware and the makeup of that market share.

Macs used to actually be a big gaming platform once upon a time. Myst was a Mac exclusive (built with HyperCard) and Bungie used to make games for macs first before getting bought by Microsoft.

But windows got the upper edge:

1. Much larger slice of the market

2. More of the market is made up of gaming enthusiasts than Macs which are usually either targeting light use, education or professional.

3. You can make affordable gaming PCs with windows. You can’t really do it with any kind of Mac because there’s no product for that market between the Mac Mini and iMac (which were targeted at more casual users) up to the Mac Pro and iMac Pro (which were targeted at professional users)

It’s easier to target the biggest piece of the pie and the one that will buy your products.

That’s why the “API” reason never makes sense, because iOS is THE dominant gaming platform despite having the same APIs as a mac. Game engines often need to support multiple graphics APIs anyway.

So Mac gaming did take off, but it fumbled and never recovered. Part of that is that Apple themselves fumbled as a company, on the verge of bankruptcy before the return of Jobs. What made them successful post his return is also what killed gaming on their platforms: they targeted a different audience.

[pier25]

You can't ignore API reasons though.

Before Metal, macOS used to ship with old OpenGL versions. I remember around the Tiger days (10.4) OpenGL was 4-5 years old compared to the version shipped in Windows. And with DirectX, Windows had a better API about two decades before Metal for macOS was released.

I do agree with your other points. Macs are expensive so they are always going to be a niche market. And in most countries, Apple products are luxury products.

Another point is really that Windows GPUs have always been more powerful. If you wanted to play the latest AAA games at good quality and fps you had to be on Windows.

And there's also an ouroboros vicious circle. Devs don't put effort into the Mac because there aren't many gamers on it, and there aren't many gamers on it because dev don't put too much effort. And it doesn't help the decisions that Apple has taken to further ostracize themselves form the desktop gaming market.

> iOS is THE dominant gaming platform

In the US. Worldwide iOS has like 28% market share I believe.

Nevertheless, Apple could really become a gaming powerhouse outside of mobile. If they released an AppleTV with a gamepad and an M3 chip, they bought or partnered with a couple of good console/desktop game studios (not mobile game studios).

The AppleTV already has games but there's not a lot of good content and Apple doesn't even provide an official gamepad. It's clear Apple doesn't care much about gaming outside of iOS.

[barbariangrunge]

They are making such a device. It’s called a Mac mini.

Seriously though, one hiccup for gaming in macs is the screen resolution: it’s not until recently you could get good performance at such high dpis in games, especially on a laptop. Now that gpus can push those pixels better than before, it will start being more viable to make games for macs

Also, macs are all about being premium while enabling ecosystem lock in. When they have to compete with diy desktops with hot swappable, upgradeable hardware, how can apple possibly charge such a premium for their gaming machines? How can they differentiate via software when gamers don’t care about their os — they want their os to get out of the way so they can game? Apple can’t. So they don’t even try. It would hurt their brand to be seen struggling like that

They won’t compete until they see a way to use their playbooks to gain a platform advantage. Eg, ar/vr with m3 chips

[dagmx]

I just don’t think API matters if the capabilities are there. Look at Linux gaming, OpenGL was up to date and prevalent, but the majority of games are actually translating DirectX to Vulkan and using WINE.

Most games are using off the shelf engines that support Metal anyway, so I think api would only matter for the small subset of games using custom engines.

Regarding your point of the US, I should clarify that I didn’t mean by market share, though I suppose that’s also true in the US. I meant by profit.

According to the WSJ , Apple makes more from gaming than Nintendo, Sony, Microsoft and Activision combined worldwide.

[pier25]

>Look at Linux gaming

Linux is just non existent from a mainstream audience perspective, let alone the gaming market.

>Most games are using off the shelf engines that support Metal anyway, so I think api would only matter for the small subset of games using custom engines.

Today yes, it's easy to make a Mac game wit UE or Unity. But back 15-20 years ago?

BTW I'm not arguing API is the main reason Mac failed as a gaming platform. Just that it cannot be ignored.

>According to the WSJ , Apple makes more from gaming than Nintendo, Sony, Microsoft and Activision combined worldwide.

Don't me wrong, Apple is huge, but that's incorrect. Sony still makes more money than Apple.

https://www.gizmochina.com/2022/06/01/apple-rank-3rd-gaming-...

Maybe the figure you're thinking about is that iOS enabled the most consumer spending? (not the actual money Apple mades from gaming)

[__alexs]

> iOS is THE dominant gaming platform despite having the same APIs as a mac

The problem with OpenGL ES AIUI (especially in the early days) is that it exposes lots of hardware specific weirdness. The reason this works for iOS is the same reason it works for Nintendo etc. Millions of devices with identical hardware.

[Maursault]

I don't think the race is over yet, but it is really entirely up to developers, not Apple. Apple Silicon isn't quite 3yo yet, and it is hard to say right now what the gaming landscape will look like in another five years. Technically, however, though it is somewhat of a cheat, as soon as Apple released the first M1 Mac, the new platform instantly had nearly an order of magnitude more games than PC. While there are something like 50K games available through Steam, and x86 Macs only had like 7K, as soon as the M1 was released, early Apple Silicon Mac users had access to something like 450K AppStore games from iOS and iPadOS. Plus, Steam was ported to macOS, and Rosetta 2 allows many x86 PC games to run adequately in emulation (virtualized + emulation). This may not be satisfactory for hard core gamers than need massive fps, but I don't think it can be honestly claimed anymore that Macs suck for gaming. At the very least, they're competitive, and that's only going to get better, though how much better is, again, up to developers.

[braymundo]

I don't know, but if I had to guess it would that Apple was never really interested in it or in supporting it. I fondly remember some companies (like Blizzard) who would always support Macs, until they stopped (looking at you, Diablo 4).

[ajmurmann]

I think it might be a chicken/egg problem. Most Macs of don't come with hardware that's good for games. That doesn't matter though because no consumer asks for better gaming hardware in new Macs because there aren't many games. People who care about games, know they don't get it on Macs and thus have either a console or a gaming PC in addition. I play games, but generally it's just a nice surprise if I see that a Steam game supports macOS. It's so far away from being a viable primary gaming system that it's just accepted at this point.

[__alexs]

No DirectX support.

[ChuckNorris89]

More like no Vulkan support.

[__alexs]

Apple had long given up on games before Vulkan was even on the drawing board.

[ChuckNorris89]

The good thing about SW is you can always choose to change things in the future. Nothing is stopping Apple to implement support Vulkan now if they wanted to. It's not like they can't afford the engineering effort.

Windows supports both DirectX and Vulkan.

[dagmx]

The list of games that directly support Vulkan is incredibly small. As much as it gets bandied about as the solution, it’s not really used all that much without translation layers.

[smoldesu]

...and with those translation layers, you get "free" coverage of DirectX 9 up through most of 12.

So someone either rewrites DXVK to support Metal (fool's errand) or we add Yet Another Translation Layer to the mix. Something tells me the industry and users would be better off if Apple supported both Metal and Vulkan at a hardware level. Seems plausible for a company of their size.

[andrewmcwatters]

The biggest reason is that Steve Jobs hated games. It’s well documented. John Carmack also had some words to say about graphics on Macs.

[barbariangrunge]

Such as?