Valve demanded $1,000,000 advance to port HL2

[kkat69]

A million is nothing in the big scheme of things.

Valve had every right to ask for it. They have to build a team to go Mac native. That million would probably get 5 people for a year. Its not like there's unlimited potential on the Mac and why should Valve assume all the risk. I'm sure it would take millions more just to get the thing tested, produced and supported. Its not like they held a gun to his head or were really screwing him.

Game makers have been wanting to make games for Apple, its just that Apple doesn't have any love for the gaming market and will always choose more lucrative projects to spend their time and money on. They looked at gaming and a gaming console back when they were deciding what to do next. The gaming industry didn't make sense to them in terms of payback, thats why they built the iPhone.

How many reports have you heard, where the game companies asked to have an API updated or changed only to go into the voids never to be seen again?

You bet the have the right to ask. They also have the right to Steve Jobs foot in their Arse!!

If Valve wants to do it they do it. Valve assumes the risk because in business that's what you do. You assume the risk and hope your product sells.

If Valve is unsure of their product in the Mac world then don't make it end of story. You don't go around twisting stories and telling half truths about why HL2 won't come to Mac. Nor do you strut around with the attitude that "ne ner ne ner ne ner, if you want it for mac gimmi gimmi gimmi and I'll give it to yah"

That's childish BS no matter how you slice it. If anything I DARE Valve to port HL2 or Team Fortress to Mac if anything to prove to Apple that there is a viable community and that they should start putting higher end hardware in their general consumer products and then they'll see their profits soar with the influx of new Apple owners just dying to get their hands on the systems they've wanted and now the game they wanted.

But alas, I dont' think Valve is up to the challenge. I don't think they'll take the dare. Just tuck your tails and admit that all your compentent programmers have left and your only left with inept people who can only put patches out.

However if you feel like sticking it the man, I dare you to port any of your products to Mac! I DARE YOU!











(doubt if it'll work but it's worth a shot eh?)

 

[contoursvt]

Ummmm ya. Nobody is going to dare a company into sinking a lot of time and $$ into a project that isnt going to bring them back a decent profit. You may wish it all you want but its not happening.

You can thank Steve for not pushing OSX hard enough or making machines better for mainstream users. If there was a larger install base, then Valve would probably do it.


Hey I have an idea. Why dont you spend $1000 to make a mold for those widgets that we want...but the problem is that 'we' is 10 people and oh ya we dont want to spend more than $30 a widget. Hey you never know if you try if you'll make the extra $700 or not. I dare you to make them!

See it should be for Apple to take that risk. Valve doesnt need to prove anything. Apple needs to prove that their installed userbase is big enough for support a gaming market. Apple gives $$, something gets developed, products sell and Valve has the assurance now that indeed, there is a market.

You bet the have the right to ask. They also have the right to Steve Jobs foot in their Arse!!

If Valve wants to do it they do it. Valve assumes the risk because in business that's what you do. You assume the risk and hope your product sells.

If Valve is unsure of their product in the Mac world then don't make it end of story. You don't go around twisting stories and telling half truths about why HL2 won't come to Mac. Nor do you strut around with the attitude that "ne ner ne ner ne ner, if you want it for mac gimmi gimmi gimmi and I'll give it to yah"

That's childish BS no matter how you slice it. If anything I DARE Valve to port HL2 or Team Fortress to Mac if anything to prove to Apple that there is a viable community and that they should start putting higher end hardware in their general consumer products and then they'll see their profits soar with the influx of new Apple owners just dying to get their hands on the systems they've wanted and now the game they wanted.

But alas, I dont' think Valve is up to the challenge. I don't think they'll take the dare. Just tuck your tails and admit that all your compentent programmers have left and your only left with inept people who can only put patches out.

However if you feel like sticking it the man, I dare you to port any of your products to Mac! I DARE YOU!











(doubt if it'll work but it's worth a shot eh?)

 

[Krevnik]

Hey I have an idea. Why dont you spend $1000 to make a mold for those widgets that we want...but the problem is that 'we' is 10 people and oh ya we dont want to spend more than $30 a widget. Hey you never know if you try if you'll make the extra $700 or not. I dare you to make them!

See it should be for Apple to take that risk. Valve doesnt need to prove anything. Apple needs to prove that their installed userbase is big enough for support a gaming market. Apple gives $$, something gets developed, products sell and Valve has the assurance now that indeed, there is a market.

If Valve is big enough, and popular enough, they don't need handouts from companies like Apple to get a big enough market on the Mac. As the previous poster said, it is the responsibility of the business to take the risk, or not.

In your example, the business shouldn't take the risk. That is fair. But what is asinine is saying that you should be paid to take an obviously bad risk that doesn't provide benefit. Usually when you ask for capital to do work, you are getting the capital from a publisher who wants ROI. If this situation is like your example, Apple would also realize they get no ROI on their million dollars, and is thus a bad risk and won't take it.

 

[contoursvt]

Exactly why it didnt happen. There are not enough users to make that port profitable. Apple knows it and so does Valve. Valve was probably trying to be nice by even entertaining the idea and giving apple the opportunity to have a big developer make a new game for their platform(likely at no profit for them). If anything, apple should have said here is the $1,000,000. At least the news of a big development like that might cause some potential switchers to actually switch because they hear some new games might be coming their way.

...If this situation is like your example, Apple would also realize they get no ROI on their million dollars, and is thus a bad risk and won't take it.

 

[Krevnik]

Exactly why it didnt happen. There are not enough users to make that port profitable. Apple knows it and so does Valve. Valve was probably trying to be nice by even entertaining the idea and giving apple the opportunity to have a big developer make a new game for their platform(likely at no profit for them). If anything, apple should have said here is the $1,000,000. At least the news of a big development like that might cause some potential switchers to actually switch because they hear some new games might be coming their way.

Yet we see evidence to the contrary that such a port /would/ be profitable. Otherwise Aspyr, MacSoft, and others wouldn't be in the business of doing it.

 

[Mac Kiwi]

I really think it has to do with Apple not liking the graphics card specs they will have to release for the newer games.


We all know Apple over price the cards,maybe it just hurts their bottom line to much to meet the requirements needed to keep up with modern games.The decision to throw caution to the wind could cost them millions.

 

[Krevnik]

I really think it has to do with Apple not liking the graphics card specs they will have to release for the newer games.

We all know Apple over price the cards,maybe it just hurts their bottom line to much to meet the requirements needed to keep up with modern games.The decision to throw caution to the wind could cost them millions.

I would love to see more retail/BTO cards for the Mac Pro, and MXM in the iMac. Odds of it happening aren't looking good at this point though... especially with the costs ATi and Apple incur bringing a Mac-friendly version of a graphics card to market that ATi wants Apple to bear (part of the pricing mechanism involved).

 

[northerngit]

The question is, if Valve are so money hungry, why are they looking at a Linux port...

Valve Looking to Port Games to Linux

I suspect the 1 million may have been to make Apple put up or shut up. If we believe Valve's version of events, as a developer it must be frustrating to always run around in circles. Maybe Valve were looking at ensuring Apple actually followed through on the investment, rather than get all excited and forget about out it the next day.

Who knows, but right now the gaming platform to have is an XP rig or an Xbox360 - maybe the PS3 after GT4 and a few other big budget Xmas titles are released, but as all the reviews say, nothing on the PS3 has shined so far. But that's all subjective.

I switched 18 months ago. For a while I was MS free... then I gave up and bought a 360 and an XP gaming rig for non-console games. Which is really annoying. I even stopped playing WoW on my MacBook Pro and switched back to Windows. Apple needs to get it together or stop pretending they care about gamers so we all know where we stand!

It's still a Microsoft world for gamers

 

[booksacool1]

I have to admit, i'm a bit disappointed with apple on this one.
1 million isn't much to put HL2 (and thus pave the way for CSS, DOD: S, Ep1, Ep2, Portal...) on the mac. Its just that valve wants to make sure they don't waste too much money on it, if the small user base ends up making it unviable.
Its also stated in that article that valve made just 70m in 2005 (revenue), so they probably can't/don't want to afford an expensive risk.

IMO, it just goes to show apple isn't serious about gaming. HL2 and the Counterstrike series would really make OSX seem much more game-friendly.

 

[garethlewis2]

Woo hoo. Someone mentioned Ass Speer.

Yeah, there rolling money aren' they. No, they live in a shed at the end of Steve Jobs Garden.

Valve make a ton of money with Steam and console ports of the games. For the Mac, they don't have to just convert all of HL2 renderers to use OpenGL, they also have to implement the entire Steam content system to run on OS X, then make sure it is completely seamless so a player on a Mac could play MP with a Windows player and a 360/PS3 player.

 

[Silencio]

Screw Valve. You don't see Carmack demanding big payments from Apple to get Id to develop for the Mac. I don't think any undue arm-twisting was needed to bring over UT3, either.

Apple is always going to be at a disadvantage when it comes to gaming due to Microsoft's dominant position with DirectX. Unless some more compelling reason comes up for developers to code straight to OpenGL instead, the effort to code DirectX for Windows and then go back and do OpenGL for Mac OS X and Linux is going to dissuade most developers.

If Apple is going to bribe developers to write for Mac OS X, they should not start with game developers, but with Autodesk. A Mac OS X native version of AutoCAD would convince a lot of architectural and engineering offices to splash out on Mac Pros. But if one developer gets an advance out of Apple, then all of them will want one, and that sets a terrible and expensive precedent, and Steve Jobs rightly won't go there.

 

[Krevnik]

Woo hoo. Someone mentioned Ass Speer.

Yeah, there rolling money aren' they. No, they live in a shed at the end of Steve Jobs Garden.

Valve make a ton of money with Steam and console ports of the games. For the Mac, they don't have to just convert all of HL2 renderers to use OpenGL, they also have to implement the entire Steam content system to run on OS X, then make sure it is completely seamless so a player on a Mac could play MP with a Windows player and a 360/PS3 player.

There is a huge difference between something like MacSoft (and Aspyr before they decided to become a publisher) and Valve. Valve is already profitable and a port does not make or break the company. MacSoft and Aspyr made their money solely by porting games.

Networking code is also the least of the worries during a port these days. Grunt-work, maybe, but usually not difficult with the largest concern being byte-order (not so much these days if you make Intel-only Mac games, for example).

Sure, Aspyr didn't take home bank off their ports, but it did well enough for them to continue to grow and hire new developers. And that was when all they had was their ports which they paid licensing/etc on just to do. Valve isn't exactly in a position where they have to pay out both ways to do a port since they own the game already.

 

[CRAZYBUBBA]

The Apple user base is not big enough IMO. Out of all the mac users in the world, how many have current machines with strong enough video capabilities to play? We can eliminate all the G4 and older machines so we're looking at G5 and newer.
.

Don't discount the G4. I play cused to play civ4 and call of duty 2, among other universal games comfortably when I had 1 gb of ram on my pb.

Even before that I used to buy the macsoft and aspyr ports, my faves being max payne and no one lives foreve.r

 

[contoursvt]

No offence but the G4, as nice a cpu as it is, probably wont even be able to push 10 frames per second in a modern current game with any reasonable amount of detail. You can test this out by downloading the demo of unreal tournament 3 and trying it

Don't discount the G4. I play cused to play civ4 and call of duty 2, among other universal games comfortably when I had 1 gb of ram on my pb.

Even before that I used to buy the macsoft and aspyr ports, my faves being max payne and no one lives foreve.r

 

[madmax_2069]

No offence but the G4, as nice a cpu as it is, probably wont even be able to push 10 frames per second in a modern current game with any reasonable amount of detail. You can test this out by downloading the demo of unreal tournament 3 and trying it

but that is on a G4 with a stock video card, most of these games are limited to the video cards capability's. ever look at http://www.themacelite.com ???

if you haven't then you would not know that you can flash a PC 6800 ultra, 6800 GT, and even the 7800 GS to Mac. and all are capable enough to push most of the Mac games way way above 10FPS on a upgraded G4 system. just ask in the forums there and you ill see.

when most of the people there can run doom 3, and prey on a G4 using one of the above video cards then i don't see why HL2 would be any different.

you obvious don't realize that there is more Mac gamers out there then what you think.

oh and BTW i can play UT 2K4, Halo, Postal II, RTCW, SOF II, Urban terror, and a few more on my DA 533 with a Geforce 2 MX at a very comfortable rate. but yes most are set to low and medium, some are set to the max settings, but this is on a slow 533mhz G4 with a slow GF2MX card. a cpu upgrade and a much faster video card (6800 GT and above) will result in the ability to max out settings and still be smooth.

 

[contoursvt]

Doom3 is over 3 years old now and Prey is based on the same engine. HL2 is ancient too. When I said current games, I didnt just imply the new Half-life that came out but included other games too. Try UT 3 demo that just got released. The 6800 Ultra is by no means a very fast card anymore. My secondary box is a dual 3.0Ghz Xeon PC with a 7800GS which is a faster card than the 6800 Ultra (not by a huge margin but it is) and I could feel the weight of UT3 compared to things like Doom3, Prey, Farcry..etc. If the CPU speed gets reduced at this point, then my framerates will only go down. I can reduce the detail and resolution but my point was that with the eye candy turned up, the framerates will be very low on a G4 with current demanding games.

but that is on a G4 with a stock video card, most of these games are limited to the video cards capability's. ever look at http://www.themacelite.com ???

if you haven't then you would not know that you can flash a PC 6800 ultra, 6800 GT, and even the 7800 GS to Mac. and all are capable enough to push most of the Mac games way way above 10FPS on a upgraded G4 system. just ask in the forums there and you ill see.

when most of the people there can run doom 3, and prey on a G4 using one of the above video cards then i don't see why HL2 would be any different.

you obvious don't realize that there is more Mac gamers out there then what you think.

oh and BTW i can play UT 2K4, Halo, Postal II, RTCW, SOF II, Urban terror, and a few more on my DA 533 with a Geforce 2 MX at a very comfortable rate. but yes most are set to low and medium, some are set to the max settings, but this is on a slow 533mhz G4 with a slow GF2MX card. a cpu upgrade and a much faster video card (6800 GT and above) will result in the ability to max out settings and still be smooth.

 

[dogtanian]

I really think it has to do with Apple not liking the graphics card specs they will have to release for the newer games.


We all know Apple over price the cards,maybe it just hurts their bottom line to much to meet the requirements needed to keep up with modern games.The decision to throw caution to the wind could cost them millions.

I agree. Apple must know their graphics offerings are pretty poor for any real gamer...

 

[wuzelwazel]

id/Bungie?

I think Apple needs to invest/support some good mac gaming ventures early on and get something more than Blizzard and Aspyr behind them.

Don't forget id and (fingers crossed) the return of Bungie?

I agree that Apple hasn't taken a particularly pro-active stance on gaming, they're focused on building market share through more broad streams (music/video/media). However, I also wouldn't say that the state of Mac gaming is particularly dreary. Apple does give support to every Mac developer, although it is generally more indirect than a $1,000,000 check.

 

[pilotError]

Big Bill probably paid them $2M just to embarrass big Steve! LOL

You seem to be significantly overestimating the amount of effort a port normally takes. If it was really that bad, no games would ever be ported. For example, Ryan Gordon is doing the Mac and Linux versions of UT3 on his own. Blizzard's entire Mac team (which does Mac versions of all their games) is about 5 people last I heard. It doesn't take "millions" to port and market a Mac version; there just isn't that much money in the Mac gaming market.

A million isn't anything in the software world. I seriously doubt I'm over estimating anything. Unless the guy owns the company and works for beer nuts, its costing them. You still have QA to do, I doubt he's doing that. Some marketing, people who scan the interwebs and manage the feedback, etc.. Even with minimal staff, you would be hard pressed to get to half that number if you wanted to get something out the door in a year.

Seriously, how much do you think those 5 guys at Blizzard cost per year? I'm sure they aren't making minimum wage... Maybe when they first started and lived in their Mom's house they could get away with it...