Slashdot Mirror
Doom 3 Announced for Mac
thelemmings writes "Aspyr today announced that it will (finally) publish Doom 3 for the Macintosh. The game is scheduled for release Q1 2005 and the system requirements indicate that a G5 processor will be required, which seems quite surprising as it will leave iBooks and Powerbooks owners on the side of the road. Too bad iD Software didn't release a free OSX client like they previously did for linux version of the game."
It's funny they say you need 10.3.6... because it doesn't exist yet.
Nice thing is, this means the iMac G5 can play Doom 3.
I got nothin'.
I would like a small blurb on the Aspyr website as to why this very assertive requirement was necessary.
I hardly see why a 1.25 Ghz G4 with a 64MB or better video card could not handle this game.
A 1.25 G4 with 512MB RAM and a 64MB video card is equivalent to the PC and Linux requirements - at least as far as speed and price point equivalency (benchmark tests would indicate so)
I especially can't see why Aspyr can't write something for Dual G4 optimization like Unreal and Call for Duty have.
Yell & scream & rant & rave... it's no use... you need a shaaaave ~ Bugs Bunny
You do realise that Doom 3 was originally shown on a Mac, right? And a GeForce 3 IIRC.
For most other ID software games (afair) they've just released a Linux executable. You still use the same CD that came with the Windows package. So I guess the market is easy to reach once the game is developed.
Either it's a typo or Aspyr knows something we don't. There are no 1.5 GHz G5 computers currently sold by Apple.
This must mean that either 1) there will be new eMac G5 running at that speed or 2) That's the entry speed for the PowerBook G5s when released (probablly in time for Doom3) or 3) both 1 and 2.
Let the rumors begin!
I'm going to get modded down to hell and back but I think Aspyr's ports (coincedentally) are less optimized than from different publishers. Maybe they have different requirements, I don't know. It seems macsoft and others have much more complete and functioning ports.
It's a sad state when they first release a game and it has bugs after these things have been on the pc side for so long. Knights of the Old Republic was the first game that I bought from them that had such a bug. The autosaves were broken on release (not such a big deal) and sound was completely broken on their patch (a bigger deal). You revert, but it reeks of sloppiness.
Please read about Carmack's battle with D3D and Microsoft. The bottom line is that he's the main reason that we've still got OpenGL. This technology enables game developers to deploy 3D gaming engines to multiple platforms quite easily.
Make no bones about it - there is no substantial non-Windows gaming market. No sir. Carmack does this for two reasons - because he can and because it really throws mud in the eye of Microsoft.
As a side note, if you haven't purchased this game, then go out and do so... even if you won't use it. Without id software (and some other keys), gaming would be Windows-only right now.
Life is the leading cause of death in America.
What matters is profitability, not market share.
The costs of porting a game are significantly lower than creating the game in the first place. Aspyr need not worry itself with level design, for instance. (I'm not saying it is easy to port a game but it's easier.)
It is also possible that due to the relatively low Mac market share, warez isn't such a big issue in Mac gaming market. (Dunno about the numbers, I'm pulling this out of my hat.) And of course, if you can afford a Mac, then how can you not afford a game?
I am of course only speaking for myself, but if a suitable game (such as Rome: Total War or Star Wars Battleground) would be released for the Mac, I'd buy it in an instant. In the meanwhile I play Master of Orion 2 on an emulator :-)
[ Antti Rasinen ]
There is a good (heated) discussion on IMG (Inside Mac Games) about why Doom 3 for Mac has much higher requirements than on other platforms. Basically there are two sides:
i cl eID=10390
1) Because, as usual, the Mac port by Aspyr sucks rocks or
2) Becasue, as usual, the Mac port by Aspyr sucks great big rocks
Actually, there are also people who think it is "normal" for a port to require vastly more processing power, but those posts are from people who like bloated crappy software.
Here is the link:
http://insidemacgames.com/news/comments.php?Art
This does, however, make moving platforms easier. I have a copy of the original Quake. It came with a DOS executable. Later, I started using WinQuake and playing it in Windows NT 4. When I got a VooDoo^2, I downloaded the GLQuake executable and got 3D acceleration. When I started using FreeBSD on my `work'station I was able to compile and install the GLQuake executable for X, and continue playing. When I got a Mac, I downloaded another GLQuake executable and, again, continued playing. Since the game engine code (progs.dat / qwprogs.dat) for Quake 1 was interpreted bytecode, I was able to move between CPU architectures without any problems - at most a download and compile. No other game that I've bought has had this much portability, and since I no longer own a Windows machine, a lot of the games I own are useless.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Well except for that whole Altivec thing.... (re G3 vs G4)
it's doesn't need 64bit on a PC, why would it need it on a Mac?
The problem really is that games won't switch to linux/mac because they see no reason to. Games work on the machine I already have and glory be it does everything else I need to. And since I've yet to get a virus or spyware and since Win2000 I don't see blue screens anymore why would I switch?
Doom 3 came out only in early August. Knowing how id Software makes fairly tight code, it should not take Aspyr more than 2-3 months to port this baby, based on my experience with how they port. In the Mac world, that's not a bad wait; although Blizzard holds the best release record with Diablo 2 in my mind since the Mac version was out maybe 6 weeks after the PC game release.
Some games Aspyr have ported, like Splinter Cell, took freaking forever to migrate--I would guess that the game used a lot of proprietary code within its XBox and Microsoft game origins. DirectX is a blessing on the PC side, but a curse on Apple gaming since OS X has no successor or counterpart to its past GameSprockets technology in Mac OS 9.
Older Quake-engine games such as Return To Castle Wolfenstein, Jedi Academy and, of course, Quake 3 itself run very well on Macs, even with menial 16MB video cards since the computer processor and video processor try to share the load better, in my opinion, than some stock PCs. It's not surprising that this game will need some real horsepower in video rendering that even challenges the typically graphic-happy Macs.
Vos teneo officium eram periculosus ut vos recipero is.
BreakOut, Super BreakOut... (photoshop) ?
Currently XIII
I would have thought that the PC market would have been bigger than the PS2 market but if that were the case, I think they would have started with the PC.
I can imagine the development costs were up there though I don't think it will take long to recover those costs. Then, they can begin to work on PC, XBox, Mac, and whatever other platforms they choose to support.
http://www.busyweather.com/
An interesting question is, WHY should gamers switch to linux/Mac? For once the major criticisms levelled at Windows/x86 (often with some justification) seem to bounce back as strong arguments for why a Windows PC is the best option for games by a country mile:
./ for 'BSD' or 'Gnome AND KDE' for more details.
- bad at multitasking: I have one task, blasting hell knights in 3D
- controlled by evil Windoze Empire (tm): good, so the Evil Windoze Empire will make sure I have up to date drivers and a relatively good 3D API to run my games with for the widest possible range of gaming hardware
- boring beige boxes and huge market of faceless south-east asian technology clones: excellent, excellent. The priority is surely on getting the fastest technology at the best price as soon as possible, rather than longevity or overall build quality (although arguably that comes through careful component choice). But the average gaming rig is good for about 2 years of cutting edge games, tops, so it's really more important that the price is good and the market highly dynamic rather than everything being perfectly reliable
On the other hand, the key strengths of Mac and Linux are not so important for games.
E.g. Mac:
- border of LCD screen is artistically colour-neutral to allow perfect visual reproduction of colours on-screen (no shit, this is what it says on the Apple website, and yes, I'm being facetious but the point is, Mac features are clearly pitched at the graphic design/artiste market and people who colour coordinate their entire lives)
- entire computer can be crammed into a very small, white rectangle: well, that's bad for upgrading every 6-12 months, bad for cooling, and makes serious competition for upgrade components etc pretty unlikely. But it saves desk space and looks cool, not priorities for the average gamer (yes, case modding is supposed to be 'cool', but you know what I mean, how many case modders build beautiful white objects rather than glowing neon monstrosities?).
- computer is 'lifestyle' accessory: people who play Doom III typically have no discernable lifestyle other than cramming cheese doodles into their already-Mountain-Dew-filled maws and occasionally leaving to sleep or ablute
E.g. Linux:
- it's free: I'm springing $2000 for a games PC and $50 for every game... I think $200 for Windows is not too much of a stretch. Alternatively, I steal everything including the game, Windows, and possibly the PC if I've played too much GTA. Either way, not a big factor.
- run by a horde of nerds who all make up their own standards then engage in massive and endless wars about whose is the gre@test 3733t way of doing things: refer to Evil Windoze scenario above, or search
- most useful features hidden through inherent 'security' though obscurity (i.e. most non-programmer types can't run xclock, let alone install and configure Doom III): su>ors when U just wanna kill something
Anyway, just my thoughts. I see no real reason why people should be encouraged to move away from Win/x86 just to play games, other than the usual 'Bill Gates is satan' reasons.
Read Pynchon.
Um, why would I buy a game I'm not going to use? If ID isn't releasing games I want on a platform I own, then they should go out of business.
If it turns out the market doesn't care about OpenGL for games, the people have spoken. If that means MS wins, well they played their cards right, I suppose.
But why the hell would I spend $50 just to make a statement no one will hear and, frankly, no one outside the set of people who do that would care about?
I'm pretty certain that Quake III was released for Mac BEFORE it was released for Windows.
Free Scotland!
It may be the only reason we have OpenGL for games, but openGL is never going to go anywere.
Why?
Because DirectX only works on Windows, the industry of 3-d imaging, movies, 3-d applications like MRI type stuff, rendering clusters...
All Unix (and now Linux). All OpenGL.
Also remember that OpenGL and DirectX are not equivilent. OpenGL deals with 3-d only, DirectX deals with 3-d + keyboard/mouse + sound + much more. Typical monolythic Windows mentality vs Unix specific tools/software abstraction layers.
Well, except for the whole 64-bit instructions thing...
OS X 10.4 is supposed to be the first 64bit version of OS X, so I doubt that is the case if it requires OS X 10.3.6.
While I recognize the humor of the original post... tt's not the lack of good games:
Railroad Tycoon 3
Civ 3
Simcity 4
The Sims
Medal of Honor
Jedi Academy
Ghost Recon
Rainbow Six: Athena Sword
Splinter Cell
Halo
Neverwinter Nights
It's the speed at which they are released.
I don't do this for karma, I do it for cash. It's much better.