You guys are missing out on a small part of the market because you do not have this running for Mac. I would love to play this game but the computer I had to buy for school is a Mac. I heave read that you are working on it. Could you give me a eta or something? It would make me feel better. Thank you for reading.
That's the reason why not. The costs would be too much and too little money would be made off of the efforts required.
I'd still like to see studies on this.
The question is not, for me, the size of the Mac market.
It's how many PC players only play games with their hardline Mac friends and how many non-traditional gamers you get from Mac support. And a tertiary question of whether Mac users are more loyal or whether you have less competition.
The first is about social network influence on PC players. The second is about market growth potential.
I suspect Mac support is a big part of what made WoW a hit.
It's not that there are many of them. It's that I'd venture:
- You have less competition in courting them.
- They're more loyal than PC gamers.
- They spend more.
- You lose PC gamers by not having native Mac support for their friends.
I have a number of friends who are serious geeks. But you can't get most of the group to try a game without native Mac support for maybe two Mac purists out of the 15 or so.
Its already possible to run STO on a Mac, so it would be a total waste of resources to port a native copy, regardless of the number of possible new players.
Add that to the fact that Mac is a tiny marketshare, it will never happen.
I once again match my character. Behold the power of PINK!
Valve has the studies on this. Most of them are not public, but they're available to developers looking to put games on Steam. Their data has been the reason a number of developers have given for dropping mac support. Not quite as bleak as their Linux data, but still pretty depressing.
So does Blizzard, in fact. Since you mention WoW, I'm sure you remember that they were planning to drop Mac support until they lost a third of their userbase and couldn't afford to lose what was left of the 5% of accounts that were accessed primarily from a mac.
shush dont insult there mac gods they will get angry.
But in all seriousness, I'm sorry to burst your bubble but the hardcore truly loyal playerbase of any game is actully based on the PC. We still play Teamfortress for Quake 1, we still mod Doom, and at any given time there are over 500,000 people minimum playing CS 1.6. No other platform actully inspires this level of loyality. I will never understand why anyone buys a mac, the world runs on Windows, major corpartions there firewalls are linux, there data servers, email servers ect are all for the most part on windows. 95% of all commerical software is written soley for Windows. You can always use the newest and greatest tech with a windows based PC, you arn't limited due to lack of driver support like you are on linux and mac.
In all seriousness unless your doing media content creation you have no bussiness using a mac.
I think the biggest issue for getting games working in some form on Mac and Linux is that most games are coded for Direct-X, which means they would completely have to port the entire source code for the graphics to something which is Mac and Linux compatible.
Then, they would either have to convert the Windows version to that same graphics routine or maintain two completely separate codebases.
At least with the Mac, there is a pretty limited amount of hardware and software configurations they have to support. With Linux, it is pretty bad.
I mean, in theory this game could probably run on some of the newer smart phones, like that quad-core Galaxy that was just released, but there is a point of diminishing returns.
Valve has the studies on this. Most of them are not public, but they're available to developers looking to put games on Steam. Their data has been the reason a number of developers have given for dropping mac support. Not quite as bleak as their Linux data, but still pretty depressing.
So does Blizzard, in fact. Since you mention WoW, I'm sure you remember that they were planning to drop Mac support until they lost a third of their userbase and couldn't afford to lose what was left of the 5% of accounts that were accessed primarily from a mac.
I don't think Valve's studies cover what I'm talking about or that Valve's metrics would be valid or effective at what I'm talking about.
I have Steam. Even when I use it to play games, very little of my social networking is evident through Steam and certainly not real life social networking.
Again, I think the issue is not Mac users. The issue is PC users who are in real life or external social networks with Mac users who can't or won't use Wine or Bootcamp.
Valve doesn't have the necessary metrics to test that based on Steam usage. You need a real life study to be commissioned with qualitative and ethnographic dimensions and possibly, at the very least, access to non-gaming related social network activity.
Although you might get actionable results with actual data from companies like Blizzard, if you go in and examine guild participation by OS and whether dips in Mac activity influence socially linked PC players.
I don't think Valve would have any more valuable data than anyone else for the specific data I'm talking about, which requires hands on qualitative surveys/interviews or actual access to in-game data.
Again, it's not about what percentage of people play on Macs. It's about the influence Mac players exert on PC players, particularly through outside social network groups like message boards, chat rooms, and real life where the social network isn't platform skewing.
If you look at number of Mac players, it's probably not worth it. If you look at PC gaming communities, it's probably not worth it.
I'm just not convinced that the actual Mac players or PC gaming communities have anything to do with whether native Mac support is desirable or cost effective. I think it's a social domino effect.
I don't think Valve's studies cover what I'm talking about or that Valve's metrics would be valid or effective at what I'm talking about.
I have Steam. Even when I use it to play games, very little of my social networking is evident through Steam and certainly not real life social networking.
Again, I think the issue is not Mac users. The issue is PC users who are in real life or external social networks with Mac users who can't or won't use Wine or Bootcamp.
Valve doesn't have the necessary metrics to test that based on Steam usage. You need a real life study to be commissioned with qualitative and ethnographic dimensions and possibly, at the very least, access to non-gaming related social network activity.
Although you might get actionable results with actual data from companies like Blizzard, if you go in and examine guild participation by OS and whether dips in Mac activity influence socially linked PC players.
I don't think Valve would have any more valuable data than anyone else for the specific data I'm talking about, which requires hands on qualitative surveys/interviews or actual access to in-game data.
Again, it's not about what percentage of people play on Macs. It's about the influence Mac players exert on PC players, particularly through outside social network groups like message boards, chat rooms, and real life where the social network isn't platform skewing.
If you look at number of Mac players, it's probably not worth it. If you look at PC gaming communities, it's probably not worth it.
I'm just not convinced that the actual Mac players or PC gaming communities have anything to do with whether native Mac support is desirable or cost effective. I think it's a social domino effect.
I think you're making it too complicated and/or over thinking it...
For this particular IP, the kind of computer one is using compared to ones friends, isn't really that big a concern...
Being a Trek Fan, almost always will be the deciding factor, no matter what kind of hardware is involved...
Having ones friends also able to play along is an added benefit, but is probably not a really big factor compared to just being a Trek Fan and being able to play a Trek game.
Sometimes the simplest reasons are the most rational.
STO Member since February 2009. I Was A Trekkie Before It Was Cool ... Sept. 8th, 1966 ... Not To Mention Before Most Folks Around Here Were Born! Forever a STO Veteran-Minion
Don't most people playing games on a Mac generally dual boot Windows via bootcamp anyway? Hardware wise there shouldn't be any major issues.
This presupposes that the target for MMOs is largely "people who like to play desktop computer video games." I'm sure they'd overlap on a Venn diagram but I'm not sure they do by how much. I'd suspect MMOs have a large appeal with people who don't otherwise play desktop computer games, for a variety of reasons.
Keeping a dual boot is one thing if you're a desktop computer gamer. It's totally different if you're absolutely not interested in desktop gaming aside from 1-2 MMOs and either don't game at all (which could be social players and explorers, who typically make up the bulk of an MMO's population) or are console gamers who make exceptions for social games.
I think DCUO is a great game that botched the chat interface/social element and that the passive/hyper-casual social scene has been unfortunately pretty weak in most MMOs since WoW. It's partly instancing. It's partly socialization that is combat oriented or anti-social. It's partly hard to read or difficult to use chat interfaces, hard to access emotes, hubs designed to HOLD lots of people without really painting scenes where other players are immersive and interesting to look at.
STO has great customization but I always found the chatbox hard to read, emotes buried, and hubs that seem like cargo bays for other players where I rarely saw them doing anything but idling, shooting, or breaking character wildly until we got adventure zones.
I still think a major way to go would be to develop a third control scheme alongside ground and space called "social" that emphasizes social engagement, minigames, and activities. That's how I see ship interiors working. It's how I see friendly socialization working.
I think if you look back at City of Heroes or WoW, our social hubs are no better developed in modern MMOs and in many cases are worse because we have fewer character animations, less travel restrictions, fewer unique tasks to perform in hubs. lack of vendor diversity, and less overall social hub map personality.
I'm not saying STO is a total failure in this regard. I'm just saying that this is an area of MMO design that I think calls for thinking outside the PURE GAME DESIGN wheelhouse and so has tended to shrink rather than innovate over the last ten years of MMOs, rather naturally as online games become a centerpiece of game design rather than the weird hobbyhorse they were for innovators and theorists they were ten, twenty, or thirty years ago.
Actually, if I had a consulting budget and a day with somebody like Richard Bartle, I'd probably focus his consultation on social hub and social feature design. It's a strength MMOs can leverage but has atrophied quite a bit as graphical MUDs and MMOs attracted more and more action-oriented video game developers and fewer RPG designers and sociologists. The irony being that I feel like the action-oriented folks actually reduced the level of action, twitch activity, and player performance found in social and non-combat mechanics. They went in thinking that stuff was boring and wound up making it more boring than it was before they started adjusting it.
Text, for example, was not the entirety of what MUDs did nor was it a break in action/player input in MUDs. But nowadays, the action grinds to a halt for text. Which makes text boring. But text is more boring than it was in MUDs because it's rarely the "real" action. If you progress through reading and typing, that CAN be fun. Pulsepounding even. But if reading/typing halts action, people view it as an irritation and rightly so.
Yeah, but using wine you get a double penalty, one for wasting money on inferior hardware, and a second for the emulation.
At least using BootCamp you only have to deal with the fact you paid more for less.
You need to chill with the trolling. This thread is a valid discussion not an excuse to come in and hate on Mac users.
Cheers,
[On Topic]
I run my STO through Wine on my Mac, though I tend to prefer boot camp as it's more driver friendly, that said I think even making the wine version accessible through the official download page would be a welcome move for now. We know Devs are working on it, both from Dan's Q&A response, but also one of the devs (damned if I remember who...) has posted discussing it in the past.
I've little doubt it'll come, but I can honestly accept it's way down their list of priorities.
I'm a linux user and STO is the only reason why i have a crappy OS like windows installed on my computer. This makes me sad. If there is a mac version, a linux one would be welcome too. Unfortunately, since the game uses directx it's unlikely to happen. Studios enjoy paying microsoft licences, and it sucks.
I must admit I haven't tried yet (just got a new PC, and the old laptop was just to slow to warrant trying) but I hear STO runs acceptably in Wine under Linux.
I may just have to break down and get Linux on the new PC to test it out...
Edit: And you misunderstand. I don't hate on Mac customers, I hate on Apple Computer for ripping those customers off. I'm well aware that most people really do not understand what is going on inside the magic box on their desk and Apple takes advantage of that fact to sell the uninformed weaker hardware for a higher price, and then charge you extra to make the mess work with a real machine... Apple is evil.
If complaining about a company on a forum is wrong, I think the internet will be shut down by the end of the day.
I once again match my character. Behold the power of PINK!
as of now, changed to a win computer cause the mac is NOT the superb graphics machine anymore. the tech inside is not worth the money. i really do hope cryptic is not considering wasting time and resources for a mac version of the game.
You guys are missing out on a small part of the market because you do not have this running for Mac. I would love to play this game but the computer I had to buy for school is a Mac. I heave read that you are working on it. Could you give me a eta or something? It would make me feel better. Thank you for reading.
Boot camp + Windows 7
I run STO on an iMac with Windows7 installed, with the exception of issues where the low texture is all the will load, works pretty well.
If you're a student with a budget, frankly you're first mistake was blowing that budget on the apple hardware markup. If you must run Mac OS, it's entirely possible to run on any PC now - plenty of hacks exist to bypass the crippleware bios check (and for the last two years you haven't even needed access to a mac to prepare the partition table first like you did with earlier hacks). A stat-identical PC and a copy of Mac OS will save 20-60% over just buying a mac outright, and since you probably got windows license with the PC meaning no additional cost to set up dual boot.
Comments
I think you will be very happy together.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boot_Camp_(software)
Fleet Admiral Space Orphidian Possiblities Wizard
I'd still like to see studies on this.
The question is not, for me, the size of the Mac market.
It's how many PC players only play games with their hardline Mac friends and how many non-traditional gamers you get from Mac support. And a tertiary question of whether Mac users are more loyal or whether you have less competition.
The first is about social network influence on PC players. The second is about market growth potential.
I suspect Mac support is a big part of what made WoW a hit.
It's not that there are many of them. It's that I'd venture:
- You have less competition in courting them.
- They're more loyal than PC gamers.
- They spend more.
- You lose PC gamers by not having native Mac support for their friends.
I have a number of friends who are serious geeks. But you can't get most of the group to try a game without native Mac support for maybe two Mac purists out of the 15 or so.
Its already possible to run STO on a Mac, so it would be a total waste of resources to port a native copy, regardless of the number of possible new players.
Add that to the fact that Mac is a tiny marketshare, it will never happen.
Fleet Admiral Space Orphidian Possiblities Wizard
So does Blizzard, in fact. Since you mention WoW, I'm sure you remember that they were planning to drop Mac support until they lost a third of their userbase and couldn't afford to lose what was left of the 5% of accounts that were accessed primarily from a mac.
Pre-Orders on sale now!
Fleet Admiral Space Orphidian Possiblities Wizard
Enjoy.
(UFP) Ragnar
a lot of people running mac prefer not to bootcamp
it just has...issues when it comes to drivers and cooling
wine and VM's are much easyer
At least using BootCamp you only have to deal with the fact you paid more for less.
Fleet Admiral Space Orphidian Possiblities Wizard
But in all seriousness, I'm sorry to burst your bubble but the hardcore truly loyal playerbase of any game is actully based on the PC. We still play Teamfortress for Quake 1, we still mod Doom, and at any given time there are over 500,000 people minimum playing CS 1.6. No other platform actully inspires this level of loyality. I will never understand why anyone buys a mac, the world runs on Windows, major corpartions there firewalls are linux, there data servers, email servers ect are all for the most part on windows. 95% of all commerical software is written soley for Windows. You can always use the newest and greatest tech with a windows based PC, you arn't limited due to lack of driver support like you are on linux and mac.
In all seriousness unless your doing media content creation you have no bussiness using a mac.
Then, they would either have to convert the Windows version to that same graphics routine or maintain two completely separate codebases.
At least with the Mac, there is a pretty limited amount of hardware and software configurations they have to support. With Linux, it is pretty bad.
I mean, in theory this game could probably run on some of the newer smart phones, like that quad-core Galaxy that was just released, but there is a point of diminishing returns.
ty for that laugh I needed that I was just about to rage on the I clones .....err mac users
I don't think Valve's studies cover what I'm talking about or that Valve's metrics would be valid or effective at what I'm talking about.
I have Steam. Even when I use it to play games, very little of my social networking is evident through Steam and certainly not real life social networking.
Again, I think the issue is not Mac users. The issue is PC users who are in real life or external social networks with Mac users who can't or won't use Wine or Bootcamp.
Valve doesn't have the necessary metrics to test that based on Steam usage. You need a real life study to be commissioned with qualitative and ethnographic dimensions and possibly, at the very least, access to non-gaming related social network activity.
Although you might get actionable results with actual data from companies like Blizzard, if you go in and examine guild participation by OS and whether dips in Mac activity influence socially linked PC players.
I don't think Valve would have any more valuable data than anyone else for the specific data I'm talking about, which requires hands on qualitative surveys/interviews or actual access to in-game data.
Again, it's not about what percentage of people play on Macs. It's about the influence Mac players exert on PC players, particularly through outside social network groups like message boards, chat rooms, and real life where the social network isn't platform skewing.
If you look at number of Mac players, it's probably not worth it. If you look at PC gaming communities, it's probably not worth it.
I'm just not convinced that the actual Mac players or PC gaming communities have anything to do with whether native Mac support is desirable or cost effective. I think it's a social domino effect.
I think you're making it too complicated and/or over thinking it...
For this particular IP, the kind of computer one is using compared to ones friends, isn't really that big a concern...
Being a Trek Fan, almost always will be the deciding factor, no matter what kind of hardware is involved...
Having ones friends also able to play along is an added benefit, but is probably not a really big factor compared to just being a Trek Fan and being able to play a Trek game.
Sometimes the simplest reasons are the most rational.
I Was A Trekkie Before It Was Cool ... Sept. 8th, 1966 ... Not To Mention Before Most Folks Around Here Were Born!
Forever a STO Veteran-Minion
This presupposes that the target for MMOs is largely "people who like to play desktop computer video games." I'm sure they'd overlap on a Venn diagram but I'm not sure they do by how much. I'd suspect MMOs have a large appeal with people who don't otherwise play desktop computer games, for a variety of reasons.
Keeping a dual boot is one thing if you're a desktop computer gamer. It's totally different if you're absolutely not interested in desktop gaming aside from 1-2 MMOs and either don't game at all (which could be social players and explorers, who typically make up the bulk of an MMO's population) or are console gamers who make exceptions for social games.
I think DCUO is a great game that botched the chat interface/social element and that the passive/hyper-casual social scene has been unfortunately pretty weak in most MMOs since WoW. It's partly instancing. It's partly socialization that is combat oriented or anti-social. It's partly hard to read or difficult to use chat interfaces, hard to access emotes, hubs designed to HOLD lots of people without really painting scenes where other players are immersive and interesting to look at.
STO has great customization but I always found the chatbox hard to read, emotes buried, and hubs that seem like cargo bays for other players where I rarely saw them doing anything but idling, shooting, or breaking character wildly until we got adventure zones.
I still think a major way to go would be to develop a third control scheme alongside ground and space called "social" that emphasizes social engagement, minigames, and activities. That's how I see ship interiors working. It's how I see friendly socialization working.
I think if you look back at City of Heroes or WoW, our social hubs are no better developed in modern MMOs and in many cases are worse because we have fewer character animations, less travel restrictions, fewer unique tasks to perform in hubs. lack of vendor diversity, and less overall social hub map personality.
I'm not saying STO is a total failure in this regard. I'm just saying that this is an area of MMO design that I think calls for thinking outside the PURE GAME DESIGN wheelhouse and so has tended to shrink rather than innovate over the last ten years of MMOs, rather naturally as online games become a centerpiece of game design rather than the weird hobbyhorse they were for innovators and theorists they were ten, twenty, or thirty years ago.
Actually, if I had a consulting budget and a day with somebody like Richard Bartle, I'd probably focus his consultation on social hub and social feature design. It's a strength MMOs can leverage but has atrophied quite a bit as graphical MUDs and MMOs attracted more and more action-oriented video game developers and fewer RPG designers and sociologists. The irony being that I feel like the action-oriented folks actually reduced the level of action, twitch activity, and player performance found in social and non-combat mechanics. They went in thinking that stuff was boring and wound up making it more boring than it was before they started adjusting it.
Text, for example, was not the entirety of what MUDs did nor was it a break in action/player input in MUDs. But nowadays, the action grinds to a halt for text. Which makes text boring. But text is more boring than it was in MUDs because it's rarely the "real" action. If you progress through reading and typing, that CAN be fun. Pulsepounding even. But if reading/typing halts action, people view it as an irritation and rightly so.
Cheers,
[On Topic]
I run my STO through Wine on my Mac, though I tend to prefer boot camp as it's more driver friendly, that said I think even making the wine version accessible through the official download page would be a welcome move for now. We know Devs are working on it, both from Dan's Q&A response, but also one of the devs (damned if I remember who...) has posted discussing it in the past.
I've little doubt it'll come, but I can honestly accept it's way down their list of priorities.
God, lvl 60 CW. 17k.
I may just have to break down and get Linux on the new PC to test it out...
Edit: And you misunderstand. I don't hate on Mac customers, I hate on Apple Computer for ripping those customers off. I'm well aware that most people really do not understand what is going on inside the magic box on their desk and Apple takes advantage of that fact to sell the uninformed weaker hardware for a higher price, and then charge you extra to make the mess work with a real machine... Apple is evil.
If complaining about a company on a forum is wrong, I think the internet will be shut down by the end of the day.
Fleet Admiral Space Orphidian Possiblities Wizard
have been using several since 2001
as of now, changed to a win computer cause the mac is NOT the superb graphics machine anymore. the tech inside is not worth the money. i really do hope cryptic is not considering wasting time and resources for a mac version of the game.
Boot camp + Windows 7
I run STO on an iMac with Windows7 installed, with the exception of issues where the low texture is all the will load, works pretty well.