I dont know all the senative details. but Crysis2 PS3 runs using the OpenGL gfx language right? Does this mean that a Crysis2 Macintosh version would be possible?

Could be a nice release to nock COD4 off the Mac App store *WINK* .. Macs are pretty powerful these days.. 330m as well as some nice ATI cards in the imacs and of course higher end stuff in the Mac pros. Even the stock standard 9400m integrated gfx card in the very low end Macs is much higher performance than the PC equivalents..

Could be a nice treat later on in Crysis2's life. Best wishes for the release! and thanks for the MP demo!

I dont know all the senative details. but Crysis2 PS3 runs using the OpenGL gfx language right? Does this mean that a Crysis2 Macintosh version would be possible?

Could be a nice release to nock COD4 off the Mac App store *WINK* .. Macs are pretty powerful these days.. 330m as well as some nice ATI cards in the imacs and of course higher end stuff in the Mac pros. Even the stock standard 9400m integrated gfx card in the very low end Macs is much higher performance than the PC equivalents..

Could be a nice treat later on in Crysis2's life. Best wishes for the release! and thanks for the MP demo!

Crysis 2 uses DirectX, not OpenGL except for the PS3 version.

What are you talking about? The 330m and 9400m are on the extreme low-end for graphics.

no just no

I dont know all the senative details. but Crysis2 PS3 runs using the OpenGL gfx language right? Does this mean that a Crysis2 Macintosh version would be possible?

Could be a nice release to nock COD4 off the Mac App store *WINK* .. Macs are pretty powerful these days.. 330m as well as some nice ATI cards in the imacs and of course higher end stuff in the Mac pros. Even the stock standard 9400m integrated gfx card in the very low end Macs is much higher performance than the PC equivalents..

Could be a nice treat later on in Crysis2's life. Best wishes for the release! and thanks for the MP demo!

For the same price, you can buy a PC much more powerful than a Mac.
So I don't think "very low end Macs is much higher performance than the PC equivalents" is a correct statement.

Lowest end macs cost more than my PC, and my PC is about 20 times more powerful in the gpu department.

However, it is possible to run crysis 2 on mac, but you wouldn't get most of the pretties due to the bloated OS not handling games well (refer to all steam games). Nor does mac have directX.

Ppl, keep it on topic. You're just no help to anyone.

If the PS3 version uses OpenGL (I really don't know), a Macintosh version might be possible.

Likely the Mac platform is too small a market to warrant the development costs. Can't Macs emulate a Windows PC fairly well and thus run the game that way?

Wait for Mac app store revenue numbers to come out. Apple users are way more comfortable spending money on pure digital software.

Also the 330m is not the extreme low end. its more midrange for a mobile GPU. the extreme desktop GPUs your comparing it to are not required to run Crysis ... and i'm sure they will be even less relevant a compatibility comparison for Crysis2.

the 9400m you could say is lower end... of at least nvidia gpu development but not of development at large.. considering that 2/5 new computers are macs (and most of the 3/5 PCs are for Commercial not recreational use) and that even if many of them are the low end macbook type going for a 9400m is way nicer than some horrible intel intergrated gfx that is in far to many Windows PCs.. (of the total sold). And a 9400m can run Crysis1 even with shaders not off.

In regards to OSX gaming performance i have the same effective performance in OSX than i had in many windows games especially the Valve ones .. (i'm running a 9series mobile GPU and i figure thats where most of Valves and Apples .kext work when't into (they did a huge update of the gaming performance late last year). Many of thous Hardware comparisons you saw when Steam launched on OSX where not even running on Native OSX hardware. Comparing a PC to a PC Hackintosh (Non Apple Hardware) is not a fair comparison as Apple optimise on the Bios level personalised to each REAL product they sell.

Regardless I think maybe once some Figures of Macintosh Sales come in in some months from the App store maybe Crytek could look into it for its viability? or maybe they have already made up their mind.

Mac is not designed for gaming, it is designed for work.

Very fue PC are designed for gaming first and foremost. The potential of some thing does not outweigh the reality.
Its quite possible a larger portion of newly sold Macs are gaming compatible Than the Portion of newly sold PCs.

I think its some thing Crytek may want to investigate. Systems are just systems software is where the power is.

Mac v Pc; who will win this epic struggle?

I agree with what he said on Mac users being more open to buying software. Heck its true.

Also the 330m is not the extreme low end. its more midrange for a mobile GPU. the extreme desktop GPUs your comparing it to are not required to run Crysis ... and i'm sure they will be even less relevant a compatibility comparison for Crysis2.
Midrange for a mobile GPU means it's low end for an actual desktop GPU.

considering that 2/5 new computers are macs (and most of the 3/5 PCs are for Commercial not recreational use) and that even if many of them are the low end macbook type going for a 9400m is way nicer than some horrible intel intergrated gfx that is in far to many Windows PCs.. (of the total sold).
What? First you make up a statistic with nothing to support it, and then you accuse Windows machines of containing a horrible integrated graphics card? Hell, practically the whole macbook range has integrated chips...

In regards to OSX gaming performance i have the same effective performance in OSX than i had in many windows games especially the Valve ones .. (i'm running a 9series mobile GPU and i figure thats where most of Valves and Apples .kext work when't into (they did a huge update of the gaming performance late last year). Many of thous Hardware comparisons you saw when Steam launched on OSX where not even running on Native OSX hardware. Comparing a PC to a PC Hackintosh (Non Apple Hardware) is not a fair comparison as Apple optimise on the Bios level personalised to each REAL product they sell.
No. Graphics performance on Mac is nowhere near performance on Windows. Mac still uses OpenGL 2.1, while the current OpenGL version is 4.0 and offers feature parity with DirectX 11. They did a performance update, yes, but it's still far below the performance achieved from a Windows installation. As for your bizarre accusation that the reviews all used hackintoshes, that's false: all reviews from a credible source would have used an actual macbook, otherwise there's no point testing. It would be like trying to estimate performance on Linux using VMWare: totally pointless. Regarding the claim of bios optimisations, that would be pretty impressive seeing as Macs don't have BIOS.

For Imac and Macbook Pro only !

The Nv 9400m Intergrated GFX chip is vastly ahead of intel integrated GFX .. Then of course the Imac Macbook Pro and Mac pro all use vastly more powerful discreet graphics that while are often not the very top are def in the higher midrange of offerings.

And even then its a argument of the lowest end.. There are some great GPUs and CPUs in mac today.. the same as any midrange windows PC that could be purchased in that same year.

also that 2/5 was incorrect its actually 1/5 new computer sales sorry.
http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2010/10/2010-10-20014back2mac.jpg
But still.. i bet you 3 out of the 4 Windows based PCs would come with very bad intel integrated GFX..

Still i think the Mac audience is growing and is keen to support developers i would love to see a Crytek game one day running native on OSX.

There no need to be offended. By other ways of doing things.

Mac v Pc; who will win this epic struggle?

Lol, PC did, a long time ago. That's why there have been court cases against microsoft to stop them advancing windows so much.

Mac are a niche market aimed at those who can't really use PC's all that well in a professional manner, and want simplified programs, and have too much money to burn. It's why amateurs do video editing on mac and pro's use windows.

Mac v Pc; who will win this epic struggle?
The Pc!

I would love to see it on a mac. I saw someone on youtube playing it on a mac (using bootcamp) and played it with all settings on mac, so it is possible.

If it comes to mac you already have 1 customer

If you bought a Mac for gaming... you already made a pretty big mistake

Why bother ...

Crytek wouldn't bother on making a MAC version

why?

-macs are more expensive and don't have the same video card variety of PC

then

-most macs have really low video card, and the ones that have good ones cost thousands

so

-gamers usually go for PC instead of mac

because

-the price, performance, and community

hence why

-The gaming mac community is mainly based on Casual games, and very very few Gamers

Plus Macs don't have DX11 and still use OpenGl 2.1

-So crytek would need to spend time and money on developing a port on mac

to sell to the very small amount of gamers that actually have a mac thats capable of playing crysis 2

-The small amount of players means that the multiplayer would die very soon

and the other choice is to allow mac players to play on PC servers with PC gamers

-but then crytek would have to rewrite the Netcodes and dedicated servers configs so 1% of players could play

all this work so just 5000-15,000 people at MAX to buy crysis 2 is not worth it, insteaf crytek should even try to port it for Wii, they would get more sales there than Mac



macs aren't made for serious games like crysis 2, they are made for casual games and working

all this "high performance video cards" said by mac is just a trick so you buy their $500 upgrades which cost $100 on PC

on Steam you can see that the average PC performs 3.5x times better graphics wise than macs

http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/

Expand OS version, look at the percentage of Mac users. Steam probably qualifies as a reasonable statistical sampling, given the number of people represented.

Now is that kind of market share worth extra development dollars? Not in my book.

Edit: Mind you, if anything, Mac gaming is most likely over-represented on Steam, due to Valve being one of the few producers besides Blizzard who wastes time on virtually non-existent market sectors at all.

Crysis 2 it is reason why you should not buy Mac in first place

Very fue PC are designed for gaming first and foremost. The potential of some thing does not outweigh the reality.
Its quite possible a larger portion of newly sold Macs are gaming compatible Than the Portion of newly sold PCs.

I think its some thing Crytek may want to investigate. Systems are just systems software is where the power is.

Uhhhh....You have to have a good discreet video card that is compatible with a MAC, and very few are if i recall correctly. So first you need to tell AMD and NVIDIA to start making more drivers/card to run on MAC. And no systems are not systems, Apple takes a lackluster product and puts a bit of polish/marketing spin on it and sells it for 1.5x-2x what a comparable PC would cost. Anyone with any sense/tech know how would just buy their systems off newegg and build their own. Apple is a niche item for people who like to blab about how much they spent on something without having the slightest clue of how it performs (my stupid step mother is an example she can tell me that a MAC is better than a PC cause some other ignorant Rich person told her but she had to pay a personal tutor to teach her how to open files and use the internet..what a Idiot)