Topic: Steam on the Mac - Updated on 7/30/2010

[MysterD]

NEW - 7/30/2010:
Valve is offering up their graphics code on the Mac for those willing to join them and partner-up with Steamworks.


OLD:
Steam is going to the Mac in April 2010.
Not only that - Source Engine is going to get Open GL Support.

Steam Coming to Mac in April, Portal 2 This Fall
by Chris Faylor Mar 08, 2010 12:17pm CST tags: Valve, GDC 2010, Mac, Steam, Team Fortress 2, Left 4 Dead, Left 4 Dead 2, Portal, Portal 2, Counter-Strike, Half-Life, Half-Life 2, Half-Life 2: Episode One, Half-Life 2: Episode Two, Half-Life 2: Episode Three, Steamworks

After some heavy-handed hints, Valve today confirmed that it will be bringing its previously Windows-only digital distribution platform Steam to the Mac in April 2010.

Said the company: "Steam and Valve's library of games including Left 4 Dead 2, Team Fortress 2, Counter-Strike, Portal, and the Half-Life series will be available in April."

Future Valve games will hit PC and Mac simultaneously, beginning with Portal 2.

Both PC and Mac versions will be bundled together, meaning that buyers get both editions of the game for the price of one--a feature that Valve calls Steam Play. Furthermore, games with support for Steam Cloud server-side save storage can be started on one platform (say, PC) and continued on the other (in this example, Mac).

"We looked at a variety of methods to get our games onto the Mac and in the end decided to go with native versions rather than emulation," said Valve's John Cook, explaining:

    The inclusion of WebKit into Steam, and of OpenGL into Source gives us a lot of flexibility in how we move these technologies forward. We are treating the Mac as a tier-1 platform so all of our future games will release simultaneously on Windows, Mac, and the Xbox 360. Updates for the Mac will be available simultaneously with the Windows updates. Furthermore, Mac and Windows players will be part of the same multiplayer universe, sharing servers, lobbies, and so forth. We fully support a heterogeneous mix of servers and clients. The first Mac Steam client will be the new generation currently in beta testing on Windows.

"Checking in code produces a PC build and Mac build at the same time, automatically, so the two platforms are perfectly in lock-step," added Portal 2 lead Josh Weier. "We're always playing a native version on the Mac right alongside the PC. This makes it very easy for us and for anyone using Source to do game development for the Mac."

Update: Valve has provided us with a few more details on Steam Play:

    [Steam Play] will allow Mac gamers to play against PC gamers and -- for our games and any of our partners who are interested in using the feature -- be able to obtain any game they purchase on either system without the need to purchase two copies. So, for example, if you already own Left 4 Dead 2 on the PC you won't need to purchase it again for the Mac.

Update 2: Unsurprisingly, Valve's official blog offers word that the original Left 4 Dead will be joining Left 4 Dead 2 and everything else that the company is bringing to Mac.

[Quemaqua]

* Quemaqua cares.

[MysterD]

What's interesting is Valve and Steam is a major player - love them, hate them, or sometimes a little of both.

They seem to be going for Microsoft's jugular here - as now since they are aiming for the Mac market, they're also going to be using Open GL. Why not use OpenGL for both Macs and Windows PCs? I'm wondering if they will.

VERY interesting. Could we see a re-emergence of OpenGL on the Windows PC? It'd be funny if they give the Windows PC gamer the option in their Source Games to pick b/t using DX or OpenGL for rendering. You know what'd be even funnier? If they totally ditched DX for OpenGL.

[scottws]

Wow this is pretty big news, actually.

[sirean_syan]

Idol and I were talking about this for a bit earlier. We don't think it's really any different than one of the other major PC developers putting their game on the Mac (like ID, Epic, Fraxis, EA (the Sims), Blizzard, ect). They've all got the resources to port their game over to a similar platform and make some extra profit. It this case, it's just a whole bunch at once.

I personally wouldn't see it differently than someone announcing a game on both the 360 and the PS3.

[MysterD]

Wow this is pretty big news, actually.

Yeah - I mean, I'm sure some computer owners who have both PC's and Mac would be very happy to see their Source games work on either the PC or Mac. They won't have to re-buy them. I'm sure that is a factor that has always helped Blizzard's sales and all, as they launch their games normally for both flavors - as gamers don't have to "re-buy" their games for the other platform.

Steve Jobs might be wishing he had some sort of IGames Platform like Steam...Wait - does Apple have one?
 

[scottws]

Idol and I were talking about this for a bit earlier. We don't think it's really any different than one of the other major PC developers putting their game on the Mac (like ID, Epic, Fraxis, EA (the Sims), Blizzard, ect). They've all got the resources to port their game over to a similar platform and make some extra profit. It this case, it's just a whole bunch at once.

I personally wouldn't see it differently than someone announcing a game on both the 360 and the PS3.

What a strange brush-off.  Comparing a game company announcing several games will be ported to a platform almost entirely devoid of games as well as reinvigorating an alternative graphics API to a game company porting a single game from one game machine to another?  It's not even in the same universe.

[MysterD]

Idol and I were talking about this for a bit earlier. We don't think it's really any different than one of the other major PC developers putting their game on the Mac (like ID, Epic, Fraxis, EA (the Sims), Blizzard, ect). They've all got the resources to port their game over to a similar platform and make some extra profit. It this case, it's just a whole bunch at once.

I personally wouldn't see it differently than someone announcing a game on both the 360 and the PS3.

This Steam Play is different than most - this is on Blizzard's level of selling games, as they sell their games w/ support for both Win and Mac out the box. You don't have to buy the other version to play it on the other system's OS. You throw down your money - boom, both Mac and Windows support. No re-buying necessary.

Plus, Steam Play will support Steam Cloud, too - and, you can play your same exact saved games on both Mac and/or Windows PC.

About the X360 and PS3 versions - you'd actually have to buy both SKUs here. Hell, if you want that same game on Windows, as well - you'd have to buy the Windows version, too. That'd be 3 different SKUs. Add the Mac version - how about 4 SKUs now?

What a strange brush-off.  Comparing a game company announcing several games will be ported to a platform almost entirely devoid of games as well as reinvigorating an alternative graphics API to a game company porting a single game from one game machine to another?  It's not even in the same universe.

Agreed.

[sirean_syan]

I can't claim to understand how much work would be involved in making the engine work on both platforms, but I imagine most companies who produce games across console platforms do a similar amount of work when they make their engines for cross platform games. Valve is doing this after the fact, but it just seems like a similar move. It might actually be a little easier since Mac vs PC architecture is probably closer than Xbox vs PS3.

This isn't to brush it off, more to say that it's probably not a portent that Valve is shifting away from Windows as much as it is expanding their market. I think games do relatively well on Macs because it is a pretty sparse market and most games that do make to Mac tend to be proven on the PC side of things.

The cross-platform support for saves and multiplayer is kinda cool, although I imagine that won't mean much save for a few really hardcore TF2 players.

[MysterD]

The cross-platform support for saves and multiplayer is kinda cool, although I imagine that won't mean much save for a few really hardcore TF2 players.

If more and more games decide to use The Source Engine, this'll all be an even bigger deal.

With Source and Steam now supporting Macs and PC fully as if they are one big entity here - we might see even more dev's want to use it for their games. Why would a dev cut-off another market when it's there for them to embrace if they just decide to go w/ Source?

Plus, Mac and PC gamers might go head-to-head or play competitively, too - that'd be damn cool, as Steam users will be united. You know, that is the kind of thing is what I figured Microsoft might've done more so w/ G4WL - try to unite their users, which is XBL (console) and G4WL (Windows). I expected more of that after Shadowrun and Lost Planet: Colonies Edition for PC and X360 - but, they didn't really push it enough. Though, take this all next w/ a grain of salt - rumor has it there might be X-Play for Fable 3 for X360 gamers and PC gamers - I'd love to see that, myself; Microsoft ain't published a Triple-A PC title in years. Though, yeah - X360 and PC are two different SKU's for the same game; while Steam (for Windows and Mac) would be all one SKU.

[idolminds]

Source is pretty outdated now, and I'm pretty sure there are better/more modern engines to use that already have cross platform support. But I'm fairly certain this meeting would never happen:

Dev1: Well, we can make this totally awesome game for 360, PS3, and PC if we use Unreal Engine 3. It can look great, has all these awesome features and the tools are easy to use and well documented. Plus our entire team has worked on an Unreal Engine project at some point in their careers.

Dev2: But sir, what about Mac support?

Dev1: Holy shit, you're right! Ok, new plan...

[MysterD]

Source is pretty outdated now, and I'm pretty sure there are better/more modern engines to use that already have cross platform support. But I'm fairly certain this meeting would never happen:

Dev1: Well, we can make this totally awesome game for 360, PS3, and PC if we use Unreal Engine 3. It can look great, has all these awesome features and the tools are easy to use and well documented. Plus our entire team has worked on an Unreal Engine project at some point in their careers.

Dev2: But sir, what about Mac support?

Dev1: Holy shit, you're right! Ok, new plan...

Now, imagine if Unreal Engine added Mac support...

[sirean_syan]

When did Unreal stop supporting Macs? I know UT was cross platform and even play. There was a Mac dude in my dorm who used to play Unreal with us all the time.

[MysterD]

When did Unreal stop supporting Macs? I know UT was cross platform and even play. There was a Mac dude in my dorm who used to play Unreal with us all the time.

Oops, you're right...
*slaps self upside head*

The latest release is the Unreal Engine 3, which is designed around Microsoft's DirectX 9 technology for 32/64-bit Windows XP/Windows Vista/Windows 7  and Xbox 360 platforms, DirectX 10 and DirectX 11 for 32/64-bit Windows Vista/Windows 7, and OpenGL for 32/64-bit Linux, Mac OS X and PlayStation 3.

[idolminds]

Huh, I looked at a page about UE3 and it didnt mention the Mac support. Oops.

Ok so uh...same argument, different engine.

[gpw11]

OpenGL is really the big deal here.  Steam on the mac is great...but 80% of the games on STEAM still won't run on a Mac natively. Also, since Apple went with Intel, gaming on the Mac hasn't been nearly as big of a deal as it was in the past.  Own a Mac and want to play games?  Bootcamp and load up Steam in XP.  Of course, native support is nice, but anyone serious about gaming on a mac is going to be dual booting anyways. So, now they can load up Steam in OSX, but probably only half of their games will work until they boot into Windows. I can't see developers deciding to use Source because of this either. As it's been pointed out - UNREAL has always been an option AND you don't have to deal with the shitty performance of Source if you ever want to port to console.
 
As for OpenGL, that's a nice change of pace but I don't know if it'll be the resurrection that it needs. I agree that any open standard will be better, but it seems like OpenGL just doesn't have the vendor support anymore - hence why it's fallen by the wayside. It'd be great if we start seeing more non-source games focusing on it as well, but I just can't see it surpassing DirectX at this point.

[Xessive]

I think a lot of devs didn't see Mac support as a priority since nowadays you can install Windows on a Mac. Apple flaunts "Windows runs better on a Mac than on a PC!"

I'm kinda glad there's finally some noteworthy push to support gaming on Macs (even though I just don't like Macs). My concern though is that Macs are essentially closed in comparison to PCs, which makes them the DRM-friendly console equivalent, so what does that mean for consumers? Uniformity? A push for "games as a service"? Complete Apple authority?

[MysterD]

Open GL 4.0 announced.

[scottws]

I think a lot of devs didn't see Mac support as a priority since nowadays you can install Windows on a Mac. Apple flaunts "Windows runs better on a Mac than on a PC!"

I'm kinda glad there's finally some noteworthy push to support gaming on Macs (even though I just don't like Macs). My concern though is that Macs are essentially closed in comparison to PCs, which makes them the DRM-friendly console equivalent, so what does that mean for consumers? Uniformity? A push for "games as a service"? Complete Apple authority?

They are lying.  There is no way Windows runs better on a Mac.  Mac hardware is all made in China crap.  I would estimate that about 25% of the Macs we buy have to get serviced within 6 months.  Secondly, Macs are usually behind on technology a bit.  For instance, it wasn't that long ago that you finally could get 7,200 rpm drives in a MacBook and they haven't even officially announced a computer with an Intel Core ix chip in it yet.

[gpw11]

Yeah, I remember reading about that on Digg.  Except that it latently wasn't true. It came from a benchmark someone ran comparing a Macbook Pro to other high-end laptops running Vista.  The MBP ran Vista marginally better.  The thing that everyone except the most extreme Apple Zealots pointed out was that this isn't an accurate comparison since the MBP was receiving an advantage due to more RAM and DDR3, whereas the other high-end laptops were all running DD2 motherboards.  Basically, it was a story about how a more expensive laptop running better hardware was faster than other expensive laptops.  It then got blown out of proportion by extreme Apple zealots and sales staff.  Technology fans, whether Windows or OSX users quickly shot it down.

There is no advantage to running Windows on a Mac.  If you benchmark identical hardware you'll get the exact same result, and all of the hardware is pretty much cross platform these days...it's just some of it (RAM!) costs an arm and a leg more if you buy it through Apple. Like Scott said, however, the PC hardware market moves much faster and has less of a markup, so dollar for dollar, you could probably build a much better PC than you could buy a mac.

I am, however, curious as to how OSX runs on PCs these days.  I'm tempted to install it on a partition on my laptop....

[scottws]

I am, however, curious as to how OSX runs on PCs these days.  I'm tempted to install it on a partition on my laptop....

Good luck.  It doesn't even run that well on Macs!

[Xessive]

Oh yeah, it is a load of crap but that won't stop Apple from taking advantage and tending the notion.

[idolminds]

FYI, the Mac client comes out today. It might already be out, actually. But thats not really why this is getting a bump:

Valve has also confirmed that it will make Steam available to Linux users in the coming months.

Now thats interesting.

[MysterD]

Valve is offering up their graphics code on the Mac for those willing to join them and partner-up with Steamworks.