Filed under: Gaming, Interviews
Molyneux - "Apple needs to get behind games"
Last week I carried out an interview with Peter Molyneux (the founder of Lionhead Studios which has games like Black & White, Fable and The Movies to its name) over at TUAW sister site Joystiq. I made sure to ask him a question or two about the state of Mac gaming because one, I *used* to be a relatively hardcore Mac gamer and two, Lionhead has a track record of bringing all of its games to the Mac. That isn't changing with Microsoft's recent acquisition of the company (haven't we heard all this before?!).The relevant part of the interview:
"There's this Catch 22 situation where not many people play games on the Mac and therefore developers don't want to make games for the Mac.
Exactly. I think it would need Apple to get behind games. There's nothing in their operating system that panders to games at all and I take my hats off to Microsoft. I think they've realized that games are important."
Macworld's Peter Cohen suggested that Molyneux was referring to Apple's lack of a unified application programming interface that would make the jobs of game programmers much easier. I think this suggestion is spot on, but not the only thing that Molyneux was referring to. One passive improvement could include getting Apple to kick its recent integrated graphics habit (Molyneux called my MacBook "a perfect thing" in the interview - pity it can't play games). Sure, we'd all like an iTunes Games Store, a mid-range upgradeable Mac with a decent graphics card and an Apple that publishes games, but it ain't gonna happen while you-know-who is still around.
Unless Apple gets off its arse and gives game developers more than the bare minimum of support, Mac gaming is going to disappear thanks to the rapid emergence of easy access to Windows games via Boot Camp or GPU virtualization (when it finally appears). Only then will we see articles on Apple.com about how awesome Ghost Recon: Advanced Warfighter looks on the Mac, instead of long features about how the GRAW music was composed using a PowerMac G5.
![TUAW [Cafepress]](http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.tuaw.com/media/tuaw-cafepress-promo.png)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Cameron Majma said 2:17AM on 7-18-2006
I think that Apple's biggest problem is varying APIs. I bought RollerCoaster Tycoon 3 by Aspyr back in December, and it worked fine. I updated to QuickTime 7.0.5, and RCT3 stopped working.
It finally started working after QT 7.1.
(I also believe this is Aspyr's fault, but less)
Reply
Twist said 2:34AM on 7-18-2006
Wouldn't hurt if Apple started including a non-prehistoric version of OpenGL in Mac OS X as well. Last I checked the version of OpenGL shipping with Mac OS X was many years out-of-date. Oh yeah decent drivers for the decent GPU's some Mac's come with is another needed improvement. The same basic hardware running Windows with drivers provided by the GPU manufacture can pump out more frames-per-second while also doing higher levels of FSAA and other things. As far as API's go Apple just needs to make a deal with Microsoft to get the Direct API's ported to Mac OS X. I am hoping that when Microsoft ports the Windows Presentation Foundation (http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20050919-5325.html) to Mac OS X (probably to be included with a future version of office) that we will get a version of DirectX (along with a few other goodies like XAML). Of course being able to boot Windows on Intel Mac's pretty much makes all talk of high-end commercial Mac gaming a moot point (as I predicted after the Intel chip announcement http://www.twistedtechnology.net/mt/archives/articles/the_death_of_mac_gaming.php).
Reply
Twist said 2:47AM on 7-18-2006
As Cameron Majma pointed out that is another big issue with Mac gaming. Developers can't rely on the API's they have because they are in such a state of flux. Apple needs to make it so that developers that rely on something like Quicktime don't have to worry about their games being broken when Apple updates the component. By keeping multiple versions of the API's around and allowing developers to choose which version they wish to use this issue would be solved (I believe this is done pretty often in OSes like linux and BSD where you will often have many different versions of a single framework available). If this is possible it could solve the OpenGL issue as well. Apple could keep the dinosaurian 1.4.7 version they are currently using around for Core Image and such while other developers could have newer versions available (I believe that the only thing stopping Apple from upgrading to OpenGL 2.0 or even 1.5 is fear that the hacks they have done to 1.4.7 won't be compatible with newer versions).
Reply
Henry said 2:54AM on 7-18-2006
He has more than one hat on?
Reply
jose said 6:31AM on 7-18-2006
"Only then will we see articles on Apple.com about how awesome Ghost Recon: Advanced Warfighter looks on the Mac, instead of long features about how the GRAW music was composed using a PowerMac G5."
Is it such a bad thing that the Mac world is centered around things like audio and visual productions, and Windows is specific to gaming. Personally I kind of like not being so innudated with the gaming culture so prevelant in the Windows world.
And now thanks to the Intel Inside Macs, gaming is never more than a reboot away. Maybe thats as close as gaming needs to come to the Mac world.
Reply
Conrad said 6:46AM on 7-18-2006
Jose, that's a great point. I know lots of people who are happy to only play the ocassional games on their Macs. However, I think a gaming Mac would have more advantages than disadvantages. Faster graphics performance means faster performance in 3D modelling applications and many other creative applications on the Mac.
Still, you can accept that I have a moderate level of bias being that I am an ex-hardcore Mac gamer, plus the fact that I write for the biggest gaming blog on the web. :-)
Reply
takagawa said 6:49AM on 7-18-2006
Also agree, the way Apple has tight control over their hardware makes it sensible for gamers to use Macs. Put it this way, consoles have a fixed set of hardware within their lifetime. PCs on the other hand, you have to cater for differing hardware. Macs you don't have to cater for this.
When someone goes to the store, they would expect a particular game to come out to work well on their machine. But that's not the case. Some games just don't work 'right' on their machine because there's some quirk with their hardware combination.
Mac hardware is consistant and predictable in the same way consoles are. Macs actually have the advantage in this respects over PCs and I think its high time Apple realises this.
Reply
Brandon said 7:24AM on 7-18-2006
Regarding the "iTunes Game Store" - check out Aspyr's Gamerhood, coming this fall...
http://www.insidemacgames.com/news/story.php?ArticleID=13711
Reply
Matt Bland said 9:08AM on 7-18-2006
I remember years ago Apple spent a considerable amount of time on Game Spockets which was they're equivalent to DirectX, before DirectX existed (I think it was still WinG back then). This was around the time that the PowerPC first took off and the Pippin was due to come out.
I would love for Apple to do two things. Firstly, update the abomination of an OpenGL implementation they have and even add extras for feature parity with DirectX 9 or X. Secondly, come up with a new Spockets 2.0 (or something) for OS X with simplified interfaces for performing common game related stuff, such as a joystick/gamepad API, etc. that will work with Java, ObjC/Cocoa, C and C++.
Reply
Matt Bland said 9:09AM on 7-18-2006
sorry, I meant "sprockets" not "spockets"
doh
Reply
Matt Bland said 9:16AM on 7-18-2006
Further to my comments, it looks like Apple does have some API's floating around for Game development, as seen here: http://developer.apple.com/referencelibrary/Games/index.html
I think it might be a good idea for them to unify them under a name geared towards Game development. Who in the PC world has not heard of 'Direct X'. If Apple promoted 'Sprockets' as part of the OS like they do OpenGL, Bonjour, Aqua, Cocoa, etc. people who are interested in that type of thing would recognise that Apple have embraced Game development through the branding of the API's and gamers could expect 'Sprocket Powered' games to work on virtually any version of the OS that was supported. Upgrades for Sprocket API's could be downloaded separately to the entire OS whenever required to keep compatibility for games across different versions of the OS whenever possible (nothing worse than a game breaking when you've spent over £100 on a new version of the OS).
I'm not saying that they need to use the name Sprocket(s) but hopefully you get the idea.
Reply
GmanMac said 9:22AM on 7-18-2006
5. I agree with you .
a $300.00 XBox, PlayStation or Nintendo System is far better dedicated gaming machine than any computer out there ever will be.
Why devote precious resources to trying to become a player in a lock up but dead end market?
Reply
aj said 10:43AM on 7-18-2006
GmanMac makes a great point. The gaming industry itself is in such flux - there are no sure bets at the moment. Sony may not be on top of the next-generation console market this time around - and who'd have expected Nintendo to come out with such a great strategy (gaming for the rest of us - sound familiar?)
That said, the visibility of a wide selection of really good games is important for the perception of a platform as mainstream, particularly at retail. Ever try to find Mac games at Best Buy? If you're lucky, you can find some old Myst or Warcraft bundle that has a hybrid Win/Mac CD -- in the Windows section, naturally.
Unfortunately, this is a catch-22, where in order to "buy" shelf space or endcaps at retail you have to already have money, which implies you already have sales, but if you can't afford to buy your way into the big chains (with co-op marketing dollars, etc.) then how do you get the visibility to sell in the first place? Are the stores even going to have Macs running hot game demos in kiosk mode? Not likely either.
Apple must, long-term, make gaming - or at least the visibility of games - a priority item if the platform is to gain acceptance. I'd love to see a Mac Arcade in every larger Apple store (black lights and hits-of-1978 soundtrack optional). They can certainly get some co-op marketing dollars together with game publishers - and Mac game publishers in general can pool their dollars and buy their way into Best Buy en masse, rahter than try to do so independently.
From the development point of view, what Apple's strategy would be - following past successes - is to buy in the required technology and talent. Some have mooted Nintendo as a possible takeover target -- I would actually think Sega might be a better fit, as they've moved to producing software for multiple platforms.
Another interesting tactic might be to adopt the open-source arcade emulator, MacMAME, and devote a team to turning it into a first-class Mac app - striking deals with original arcade publishers to bundle licensed ROMfiles, accelerate the development of emulation modules for different arcade hardware, optimizing drivers for Mac-specific GPUs and sound hardware, etc. Maybe even bundle console emulation into it as well, within the hardware limits (everything up to, say, PS1 and Dreamcast?)
This could tie into an online purchase or subscription-rental store (iGames Store), much as exists on the Windows platform - the Sympatico internet service in Canada offers this under the GamesMania and Kidsmania brands, for instance - imaging managing all your games through an iTunes-like interface with standardized artwork, arcade cabinet 'skins,' etc. And eventually, games for the iPod as well - it could be a revenue stream like games for mobile phones are today.
Apple's already shown its strength in negotiating with content owners, I can't see any objection on their part to getting money for their old titles, especially considering widespread ROM piracy and the bad quality / availability of downloads - it's exactly where MP3s were before the iTunes music store arrived.
Reply
The Jeremy said 1:40PM on 7-18-2006
Perhaps after Apple drives Creative into bankruptcy over the patent lawsuits, Apple can pick up both the EAX and A3D APIs and integrate the best features of each into OS X.
If OpenGL is not their forte, perhaps they could negotiate to pick up Nvidia's discarded graphics API that 3dfx worked on to replace GLide with prior to their acquisition.
I still would like to see Apple buy up Atari, Inc. from Infogrames and not only run it as a publisher, but use Atari's brand to launch a gamer-friendly line of OS X machines to take on the likes of Alienware and FalconNorthwest and establish OS X as a great gaming platform.
Reply
Leonard Nimrod said 5:23PM on 7-18-2006
I think Nintendo and Apple would be a much better pairing than Atari and Apple, plus doesn't MS already a own (or at least have rights to a big chuck of Atari's library) as they are offering a free classic game every week for the XBOX 360?
The last time Apple had a killer game made for them (read: Halo) the company was bought up by MS who ported it to their up-and-coming XBOX console.
Reply
Gazbin said 8:02AM on 8-06-2006
Has Apple already missed the boat with the whole entertainment convergence thing. I was expecting to buy an Apple "media center" to run all my movies & music and quietly hoping for games too. But all they have is iPod.
The idea put forward by "The Jeremy" sounds good. Atari is willing I'm sure and whilst Nintendo is probably not interested in being purchased nor could Apple afford them anyway - what about licensing Wii to be used in the Apple magic box?
Reply
Mag said 10:53AM on 9-17-2006
Since when Apple gave games industry such attention anyway.
Reply