# Mac vs. PC's on Highest Games



## Qion (Mar 8, 2005)

I figure this has already been posted in some form, but I would really like some input on why the PC's kicked the s*** out of the Macs in Halo, Doom 3, UT04, AND Quake. You can see the bench's here: http://www.barefeats.com/mac2pc.html 

I don't know about you guys, but I want the ability to buy a Mac that not only has super OS prowess to PC's, but also be able to laugh in their face when it comes to games. Even if you buy the latest G5, you can't even touch the latest PC. I love Macs, but I find it sad that the PC whores are owning us in games.


----------



## texanpenguin (Mar 8, 2005)

It's because the games are written on the x86 platform. Aspyr, who ports them, does a phenomenal job, but it's just not going to be able to do the same things that the original code can.

Plus, many games utilise Microsoft DirectX (which is fantastic at what it does). To run on OS X, the video engine has to be ported to OpenGL.


----------



## Pengu (Mar 8, 2005)

It's largely because games are made for Wintel, and when they are ported, they aren't necessarily using the most efficient code for OSX/PPC.


----------



## Qion (Mar 9, 2005)

Got ya guys. I've known that there have always been porting issues, and usually OS X gets the brunt of it. I heard that Direct X is going to be used in the xbox 360(if thats what they are gonna call it), so even more porting issues! YEY! I will always stay true to Mac, but maybe sometime in the near future all the hot games will finally run like they should on the best machine out there.


----------



## Pengu (Mar 9, 2005)

Um. i think you'll find that the current xbox probably uses DirectX.. 

and in THEORY, the new xbox should make porting EASIER, not harder. any CPU specific code is more likely to be easier to port to Mac than X86, as it will already be PPC code. not PPC mac, but PPC none-the-less.

also what 6.1 system are you using?


----------



## Lycander (Mar 9, 2005)

Just food for thought:

There's still no hardware audio acceleration for Mac games. Much of the audio processing is being done by the CPU. CreativeLabs did create a sound card for Macs, but it was a flop. I think there was a thread in this here forums in which someone said "turning off sound in XYZ game boosted framerates."


----------



## Qion (Mar 9, 2005)

Alright, Pengu got me with Xbox already uses DX. But, I don't know if I agree with the new Xbox making ports easier. I read in an Xbox-specific site(a friend showed me) that the new 360 is going to use technology that WILL make porting harder to a Mac(seeing that Apple doesn't adopt MS-like code). If I find this article again, I'll post it. 

As for my audio system,

I knew when I bought the system(Logitec X620) that my Mac couldn't  technically support the full 6.1, but I was going to work around that. I just got on eBay and bought an audio splicer. I have the splicer hooked into the Mac's headphone jack, with two of the three speaker inputs plugged in. I use the built-in support on the speakers that combines two channels to run all of the speakers at once anyway. I have the speakers arranged so that I have two center channels, right front, left front, and I have the two rear L+R speakers on the sides of me. It's pretty sweet sounding in games or with music, even without full audio support. It makes ME happy


----------



## Pengu (Mar 9, 2005)

sorry.. im not suggesting the porting will necessarily be easier, given the use of DX (most likely).. but i meant that anything CPU specific (there must be some code that makes direct CPU calls) these are more likely to map to G4/G5 CPUs than to X86...

as for audio.. i wouldn't have thought game audio was such a big drain.. but then look at my specs, i can't say i've noticed in CoD or Postal2..


----------



## texanpenguin (Mar 10, 2005)

Pengu is right; theoretical processor calls should be easier (a little bit, anyway) to port. That having been said I highly doubt anyone will write code which directly utilises processor function calls in their games (meaning porting the games is exactly as difficult as it is now).

On top of that, the PPC chip used in the XBox isn't going to be IBM's PPC970 chip (the G5), so it'll probably have a different instruction set anyway.

It's a good sign for development, though, that Microsoft USES G5s to develop the XBox architecture (to my knowledge). Maybe we'll get DirectX ported to PPC? Yay .


----------



## JetwingX (Mar 10, 2005)

as i can see it right now... i think we may have more of a issue with porting with the next x-box. lets take Halo 3 for example.

first it is going to get ported from x-box to PC. then we might get a port from PC to mac. which means there will probably be more problems than less.


----------



## HoZ (Mar 10, 2005)

pceepeople should be shot..... thats just my opionion

I TAKE IT BACK!!!!


----------



## Zammy-Sam (Mar 10, 2005)

HoZ said:
			
		

> pceepeople should be shot..... thats just my opionion


ufff, that's a really stupid comment, HoZ! You are no different than all those childish users from many pc forums. Sorry, that's just my opinion..


----------



## HoZ (Mar 10, 2005)

ah.. pardon my stupidity pccc users hear call me gay because i use a mac..... so i thought thay were ik that everywhaere.... soo uhhh sorry....


----------



## HoZ (Mar 10, 2005)

i feel increadbly stupid.... can i take it back??????

sorry for the double post....


----------



## Lycander (Mar 10, 2005)

Back on topic.

id is one game maker well known for using Assembly coded routines - thus CPU specifc - for squeezing out every last drop of performance out of their code. But generally speaking it's not very common for game makers to resort to such techniques. It's somewhat safe to say that high profile games use C++ as the preferred language. C++ can be easily ported.

The biggest concern as far as porting is the simple fact that x86 CPUs are little endian and PPC CPUs are big endian. Perfect example: the original MD2 model loading code (Quake2 engine) was endian specific. They had to patch that code when ported to Mac. The data files themselves don't need to be changed, but when they're loaded into memory, the bits have to be rotated in order for it to make any sense on the PPC platform.

Xbox2 being PPC will at least eliminate the "oh did you remember to check for endian?" in the code. DirectX is just the graphics/audio/network layers. Those layers can be abstracted and replaced (think lego blocks). The bulk of the code that goes into a game is other things such as physics, AI, a scripting engine, and generally speaking the logic of the game. If all that is coded in clean C++ then it should be very easy to port.

I'm convinced that the lack of games ported to MacOSX is because of business politics, not technical hurdles. Who exactly pays for MacSoft or Aspyr etc. to port those games? Does the original publish pay or does MacSoft/Aspyr/etc have to pay/license the game? Either way, money is involved and some companies just aren't committed enough to shell out the $$ to port all these games.

Believe me, given the source code, anything can be done. There is nothing technical that stops developers from porting anything. It just takes time and money. So obviously it's the time/money factor that's holding back the ports.

And I also think that Xbox2 being PPC based will NOT affect the ease of portability.


----------



## Qion (Mar 10, 2005)

A little bit deeper than I figured this thread would go, but you made a good point. There is DEFINITELY a time/money factor to all this. I'm interested in the comment that texanpenquin made about MS using G5's to develop Xbox, never heard THAT one before.(But, you know, ya learn something new every day)


----------



## Lycander (Mar 11, 2005)

One of us would have to do a really good search (me points to nose and says "not it") but yeah I saw an article in which MS bought and sent out PowerMac G5 systems to developers as part of the "development kit." Kinda like how other consoles have special dev units outfitted with debugging tools and such that make them different from retail units.

It's not really MS themselves who are using the PowerMacs, they just supplied PowerMacs to their premiere game dev'ers.


----------



## texanpenguin (Mar 12, 2005)

Well there was also the Microsoft employee who was fired for posting photos of a shipment of G5s into Redmond. But then, those may have been going to the MacBU.


----------

