WE NEED TO PROTEST
The Civ developing team, no make that EVERY devleoping team is ignoring us.
We are being pushed aside for Windows. We are a large, devoted gaming comunity and we demand respect. We need to let them know how we feel. We need to speak up and form a petition.
If anyone agrees with me, we must speak up

Yup

Hey guys, how do I break this to him? I have been a righteous Mac gamer since 1988 when I got my Mac II but I have to tell you we are not a large, devoted gaming community. We are a really, really small, devoted gaming community. Want proof? Just look at the relative number of posts in the Mac forum vs. the others on the main forum page (hint, most of those other posts don't come from Mac users). I, for one, am very happy that I can get almost all of the games I want on my Mac. Things have rarely been better for the last decade or so. Thanks to a few dedicated individuals like Brad Oliver, Mac gaming is undergoing a renaissance. With the Baldur's Gate family of games, Civ III and EV Nova here and MoO III and Europa Universalis II on the horizon, my Mac gaming needs will be well served for the next couple of years. I feel better about the current situation than I have in a long time. Want to really help out Mac gaming? Order an occasional game from the Apple Store. That lets Apple know that we're out here and gets them talking to game developers - my copy of Stronghold should be here early next week.

[dance]

Yes, we are small. But still, we deserve respect non the less. If our machines are good enough for the Pentagon and the White House, they are good enough for gaming. We need to speak up, not just buy buying things. If anything, we should buy more.

Sure Mokra, we do need to speak up (and out, not down). Listen to The Old Cannoneer: we live in a numbers world and the bean counters rule.

Personally, I'm looking to reward Blizzard for releasing Warcraft3 as a Mac/Pc hybrid; Aspyr for SW: GalBattlegrounds; and, eventually, Infogrames for Civ3:PtW. See our threads elsewhere for how to go about expressing displeasure direct to the publishers. The keyword is <community>.

If anyone is to blame for this, it's the initial transition from the Apple II/Apple III world to the Macintosh.

I can't confirm it, but I had heard a rumor that when the Mac was first introduced, a comment was made along the lines of "We had a game machine, it was the Apple II"

The Mac in its early days didn't provide enough expansion, wasn't in color.... Later Macs were too expensive, and to be blunt, were coming from only one source.. they still are.

What really knocks the cheese off of my cracker though is seeing stuff that started out on the Apple II, and now you can't even think of getting on the Mac.

I remember Akalabeth, Lord British's basic prelude to Ultima..... Then Ultima I, II, and III, then IV. I played these on my Bell and Howel Apple II+, my IIe, and my IIc I also got my introduction to Sid Meir on my Apple II in the form of Pirates! Anyone else notice that the later versions of Ultima are PC only.... Notice how everything comes out for the PC first, then if you're lucky, gets ported to the Mac? I was so looking forward to Pirates! Gold... It finally came out, but I could never get it to work without crashing on my Mac IIci.... It crashed even more frequently on my 7200 and getting it to run on my G3 is simply out of the question.

To this day, I run Apple II emulators on all my macs, just so I can still play these games.

But it's not just gaming, it seems to be software in general that goes to the PC world first, then ported over to Macs later....often watered down with less features, or buggy as all get-out. AOL is the best example of this one. Because my family has been using Apples since 1978, and because the family's computer geek is a rabid apple user, they all buy Macs. I had to explain to my mother that the adds she's bombarded with on TV and radio don't apply to Mac users. She won't get the all new, all wonderful AOL 6.0 (and now AOL 7.0) because Mac users are treated like red headed stepchildren by software developers. The AOL transition from 3.0 to 4.0 took 18 months by my count after the PC rollover. It took almost 2 years for the transition from 4 to 5. The Mac has stayed on 5.0 while the PC users got all the latest and greatest upgrades. One would think that when OS X came out, that AOL would at least try to star tfresh and bring the new Mac interface up parallel to the PC version, but no.. they stuck with 5.0...and their earliest attempts were oh-so buggy.

Were my own work and home life schedule not so full, and I'm sure what I'm saying goes for just about any other user that has at least some experience in programming, I'd try to lend a hand in orting some things over to the Mac world.. but Alas, there's only 24 hours in a day, bills need to be paid, the kids need braces, etc.

BTW, Brad, I know we've all said this time and time again, but Thanks.. from the bottom of our collective hearts, thanks to you and all other programmers like you.

i remain furious over the way Mac gamers are treated. i have pretty much given up on even purchasing games for my mac. i hardly ever touch my PC, which i bought off e-Bay a while back simply to play games on, but have decided, that i will purchase PC games only. i detest using the PC, but lets face it, the Mac simply does not get the games, and when they do, they remain buggy, fixes and editors arrive late, or not at all. Then, we are left gushing over the few developers who port games to the Mac for fear they will cease doing so in the future. Hats off to Brad, i suppose, however, MacSoft promised an editor months ago. We were told that classic support was tossed out because it would hold up the editor and result in it not coming out until April, if then. So, where is this elusive editor that was supposed to be out by April 2002? It is not enough that these games simply make it to the Mac. Software companies need to be able to invest in ensuring that the Mac ports are every single bit as viable as the PC counterparts. The Mac games NEVER are however, and every single kid i know, knows this. So, regardless of how superior we believe the Mac is, and regardless of how sleek the OS is, i doubt Apple will ever manage to rise above the niche machine they have become. Once Steve Jobs leaves, i fully expect Apple to fold and go the way of Amiga. i strongly feel that this is strongly due to poor gaming. Kids are the grown-up consumers of tomorrow. Why pay twice as much for a machine that looks great, runs great, has a great OS and all that, but whose software is second rate. Regardless of what crap or how long we have to wait for updates, etc., we as a community accept it and gush with thanks that the software was merely released. In all deference to Brad and his hard work, i am angry as hell at MacSoft that i paid for a game that has been, from day one, only a lousy second rate copy of the PC version. Of course, Macsoft can say that not many people have purchased the game, they have only been paid so much to port it, etc., etc. Well, kudos to them. However, i am not about to praise them for their fantastic porting, or thank them for it. Porting companies need to take some responsiblity for the situation they have assisted in creating by providing such second rate, slow, porting. i've been playing the game on my PC, with all the bells and whistles for some time, and so has every other kid in my neighborhood. i am a firm believer that if you are going to do a job, and if you are going to agree on whatever sum in payment for that job, you are ethicly bound to provide the best effort you possibly can to it. This has not been done, or Brad would not be the only person working on the game. We would not be sitting here looking at our PC brethren speeding by us with such a cooler version. Games suck on the Mac and i blame companies such as MacSoft for this. i will never purchase from them again. And, i'm sure this will only reinforce poor quality work from them as more people decide the same. i am simply amazed that companies don't get the message. Do it right or don't do it at all.

Luke (Gottesfreunde), beware the Dark Side. :)

Originally posted by Gottesfreunde
In all deference to Brad and his hard work, i am angry as hell at MacSoft that i paid for a game that has been, from day one, only a lousy second rate copy of the PC version.

How so? Are you referring strictly to the editor? Because I certainly don't feel that comment is justified for the game itself, even with the so-called "beta" 1.21f build. I don't want to be the one to break it to you, but as far as I can tell, the Mac version of Civ3 is as "bug free" as the PC version. Take a look on the PC forums for Civ3 bug reports if you don't believe me.

I also believe you are focusing your anger at the wrong people. If you want to blame someone for poor Mac support, point your finger at the original developer. Companies like Blizzard embrace the Mac from the highest levels, and it shows - they commit to simultaneous releases, have Mac developers in-house doing the work, and pursue only those features that they know will work cross-platform.

By the time games hit porting houses, most of the damage is already done. We have no magic bullet for DirectPlay network games, we typically can't get the source in time to make a simultaneous release (or anything near simultaneous), and we have no say in making the editors Mac-friendly from the start. *****ing at MacSoft, Aspyr or MacPlay won't change that one bit.

Brad

I am partly with Brad on this one.

The performance and stability of the mac version of all the games I've played recently has been outstanding, hats off to Brad and his peers.

On the other hand, I can't fully place the blame on the original developers. I place _most_ of it directly on your bosses, Brad. They have failed to make supporting us a priority. The external appearence, at least, is that things like the editor (promised in the box) and patches clearly do not matter to them. The fact that they have not paid you to do all the fine work that you have done for us (Thank you) reflects that they would much rather pump new products out instead of supporting the ones we have already paid for. What they fail to realize, however, is that this is leaving a very bitter taste in the mouth of the mac users, and many of us are seriously debating whether or not we should just buy the PC version of the game next time. I understand that new products are going to pay your salary, but not if we don't buy them.

Finally, it is wrong to say that mac software is second-rate. There is less software available for the mac, but what is out there is generally of far superior quality than is available on the PC. As a dual user, I can say that with confidence. One reason for this is the sheer number of lame programmers on the PC. Any fool who can pick up a copy of Visual Basic suddenly thinks he is a wiz-bang hacker and produces software that sucks on an unparalleled level. You find fewer people on the mac, and generally they are of a higher calliber. I will always believe that mac software is superior if for no other reason than that.

-Joe

Originally posted by jlazzaro
On the other hand, I can't fully place the blame on the original developers. I place _most_ of it directly on your bosses, Brad.

That's not entirely fair either. In MacSoft's defense, they are paying me for the editor (but not the patches), although there's never been a firm timeline for the editor. The 1.21f patch ate up all the free time I had committed for the editor. I'm praying to god every day that I can finish the editor before the next PC Civ3 patch. Then I won't care what happens to it on the PC side in the future. ;)

Brad

Originally posted by Brad Oliver


That's not entirely fair either. In MacSoft's defense, they are paying me for the editor (but not the patches), although there's never been a firm timeline for the editor. The 1.21f patch ate up all the free time I had committed for the editor. I'm praying to god every day that I can finish the editor before the next PC Civ3 patch. Then I won't care what happens to it on the PC side in the future. ;)

Brad

You mean if you don't finish the editor in time, then we'll get another patch? That doesn't sound so bad from our point of view. :D

Naah, just kidding, Brad. Hope you make it!

Just reread your post - are you done with your work on the 1.21f patch? Sure reads like it.

So, this means that once the editor is released, then that is it, regardless of updates on the PC side there will be no more for the mac?

Originally posted by Gottesfreunde
So, this means that once the editor is released, then that is it, regardless of updates on the PC side there will be no more for the mac?

If the PC patch comes out before the mac editor is complete, Brad may have to hold of the release of the editor to incorporate the new changes (new PC patch). I believe?

Great to see the passion in this thread. I have been away playing Star Wars: Galactic Battlegrounds--thanx Brad for a fine job on that one, I just love it. Also, I'm playing Warcraft III and that is terrific, too.

I miss Civ3 a bit, but can't enjoy it until the Editor and final bits and pieces get done. That's where Brad is right: with SW:GB and WC3, I have two complete games which were worth every penny (cent?) that I paid. With Civ3, there's this long drawn out drip-feed of goodies which will cost twice the price. Now, if someone will just convert 'Rise of Nations' to the Mac, I'll drop Firaxis until they can provide proper service.

Originally posted by Gottesfreunde
So, this means that once the editor is released, then that is it, regardless of updates on the PC side there will be no more for the mac?

Always in motion is the future. Hard to see, it is.

Brad

Y'see, Yoda did come back to life and has chosen the highest form of existence: porting the few decent games from the PC which are worthy of being Mac games…

Originally posted by jlazzaro

Finally, it is wrong to say that mac software is second-rate. There is less software available for the mac, but what is out there is generally of far superior quality than is available on the PC. As a dual user, I can say that with confidence. One reason for this is the sheer number of lame programmers on the PC. Any fool who can pick up a copy of Visual Basic suddenly thinks he is a wiz-bang hacker and produces software that sucks on an unparalleled level. You find fewer people on the mac, and generally they are of a higher calliber. I will always believe that mac software is superior if for no other reason than that.

-Joe

Yes, i should have been more specific... Mac Games generally suck. i am a dual user as well and i am daily astounded at the sheer convoluted nature of most PC programs. On the Mac, due to fewer developers, and a smaller user base, software has to be good to survive on the platform. However, i also believe that games are the strongest driving force behind the home computer industry, although the www arguably is equally as strong, but then again, the www does not push the computer to its limits the way a game does. i am confronted with this quite often as i argue the advantages of the purchase of a Mac over a PC. However, the one thing i am constantly hit with is the game issue. And if kids don't want a Mac because they can't play games on them, or the games are second rate, then what makes us think they will want them as adults--esp when the issue of cost and lagging mhz speeds are drawn in (i know all about the MHZ myth, and what apple is selling is a myth)? We are creatures of habit, and sadly, the PC is the habit of kids who like games. i am angered when companies who port Mac games end up porting the game in truncated fashion because it only drives home the point... pay equal or more for the same product, but get substandard software.

And, i am referring to the editor. It is essential to the game. The fact that we don't have it yet is simply unacceptable. It is unacceptable that we do not have the promise of updates to keep us on par with the PC version of the game. It is unacceptable that Brad is the only person working on this game at MacSoft and unacceptable that Firaxis does not think more of its Mac fan base as it does the PC base. But, if this game is any indication, i don't think the situation will get any better. Indeed, it seems to be a case in point. Use the Mac for everything else, but not games.

Gottesfreunde, I can't argue with most of what you say--it's correct. However, two points need to be clarified: 1) Brad Oliver does not work for Firaxis--he appears (I am not sure whether he is an employee or a contractor) to do contract work for Westlake Interactive who port games to the Mac on behalf of publishers. Like most sought-after 'artists', he has a schedule which seems to be filled for some time. He's porting Star Wars: Jedi Knight at the moment, and God knows what else after that. The Civ3 Editor is at Alpha stage of development, but the process is confused because Firaxis have produced two patches which are not officially available on the Mac (we do have a Beta of 1.21f, which most of us are using). The ideal would be an Editor released with patch 1.29f, but that requires a contract between Westlake and the publisher--more on that later-- and a slot in Brad's schedule. We look like getting an Editor and an officiial 1.21f and that's it. 2) The developer of Civ3 is Firaxis and they sell the game to Infogrames who publish the PC version. Macsoft, a subsidiary of Inforgrames, publishes the Mac version and there are separate contracts, profit centres, marketing teams. I think the decision maker at Macsoft is Nate Birkholtz, who has posted in one of the other forums.

That's how I understand it at present.

i really don't care who owns what, who does what, blah blah. i only want Mac games to be 100% equal to their PC counterparts, period. As a Mac user when i go out and lay down my cash for a product that is also a PC product, i should be able to expect every bit as much as the PC side is getting. If we are not, this should be CLEARLY advertised on the box--then let's see how many are sold?! It only seems plain to me that the better the product the better the sales. If every time a game comes out it is like this, then how does that convince people they should buy it?--oh, i am just supposed to be gushing and thankful that the company made the port to begin with, and give them money just for doing that to prove how thankful i am?!!! B.S. Crap like this hurts the platform, hurts the consumer, and simply can not be good for business.

Why were these contracts not developed at the beginning? Why was a little bit of foresight not used? Who cares. The bottom line is that me, as a consumer, and everyone else who bought this game has been royally shafted. i don't care who is to blame, be it a "system" or a company, or a person. i simply, as a consumer, want what i paid for. As a Mac user i want crap like this to end because in the long run it hurts the platform more and drives home the point that Macs are marginalized machines--which they ARE. It only makes sense to me that by ensuring customer satisfaction with a product results in greater trust in the company and further purchases from them. So, with fiasco's such as this, how can this possibly help a company make money? So every time i read things like not enough people bought the game to make it what it should be, or make the company care about the Mac platform, or ensure future games, i can't help but observe it as some weird vicious downward cycle. Why should anyone buy this game with it's release as it is? Really, come on now! And if MacSoft doesn't make money from it, then why should they port the next Civ game? But why should they make money from it when it sucks compared to the PC game? Whose problem this is is not for me, as a consumer to fret over. For me, as a consumer, it should only be my concern if i fail to get what i paid for. In this case, we have not gotten what we paid for. If Firaxis, Infogames, Westlake or whomever, is going to continue to patch the game, then they should also ensure that the Mac obtains those patches to remain on par with the PC version. MacSoft, as the company whose name is on the packaging should speedily renegotiate or what ever they have to do to ensure their customers get a fair shake. Anything else does more harm to the Mac platform than Microsoft ever did in ripping it off in the first place.

Originally posted by Gottesfreunde
i am just supposed to be gushing and thankful that the company made the port to begin with, and give them money just for doing that to prove how thankful i am?!!! B.S. Crap like this hurts the platform, hurts the consumer, and simply can not be good for business.

While this is probably the last thing you want to hear, the reality is that the Mac is a very small market compared to the PC, and as such it's much harder and more expensive to pour resources into things like this, especially if the original PC app continues to be modified past the release date. The bottom line is that as a Mac user, odds are better than average that in these cases, you're not going to maintain feature parity with the PC version, unless the PC team has committed resources specifically for the Mac build (which literally never happens). If that upsets you to the point of severe emotional distress, then the gods-honest-best thing you can do is buy a PC, or wait for the Mac market to grow much larger than what it currently is.

Brad

Sad but true. :cry:

How 'bout a status update on what we ARE getting?

Originally posted by Brad Oliver


..... the Mac is a very small market compared to the PC, and as such it's much harder and more expensive to pour resources into things like this, ....

Brad

Off topic somewhat, I'm curious as to what kind of profit the mac companies earn. I'm not looking for anything to point at, just curious. If the market for mac-gaming is that small, these folks must be Democrats! :lol:

Originally posted by gfeier
How 'bout a status update on what we ARE getting?

That's going to have to come from MacSoft.

Brad

Originally posted by Brad Oliver


While this is probably the last thing you want to hear, the reality is that the Mac is a very small market compared to the PC, and as such it's much harder and more expensive to pour resources into things like this, especially if the original PC app continues to be modified past the release date. The bottom line is that as a Mac user, odds are better than average that in these cases, you're not going to maintain feature parity with the PC version, unless the PC team has committed resources specifically for the Mac build (which literally never happens). If that upsets you to the point of severe emotional distress, then the gods-honest-best thing you can do is buy a PC, or wait for the Mac market to grow much larger than what it currently is.

Brad

Brad this is the crux of my argument and of my question. While i have indeed chosen to purchase a cheap PC to play games on due to the knowledge of what you have written above, and although on one level this makes sense to me, overall it does not. It seems like a "catch 22". It would seem to me that if Mac games were on parity with their PC counterparts, and had the same support, that more of the games would be sold. If more games were available for the Mac that were on parity with the PC counterparts, it would seem that more Macs would also be sold as the impression that games on Macs are crap would be slowly eroded away.

i have read, and think that i understand where you are coming from in your arguments concerning the frequent updates, the squashing of your free time, etc for the builds. Perhaps i have not been clear enough, through my criticisms, to relate how admirable this is of you to do. i certainly appreciate your efforts, more so when they are given freely. If patches are on the way for a game that is to be ported, why are these updates not included or renegotiated in the contract? From what you are writing, it would appear that MacSoft is a small company indeed if you have to do work by yourself without additional resources allocated.

i just fail to see how it helps game companies, such as MacSoft, in the long run if more people choose to do as i do. If your argument--which appears to be very closely in line with the crux of my own--is true, then this situation *is* a downward spiral. i love my Mac, and i wish more people would use them, especially as i experience all the limitations and convoluted nature of my WinTel PC. Perhaps getting the game is better than not getting it at all, however, but i don't see, especially in the troubled economy that we have now, why people would choose to continue to purchase games that can not be on par with their PC counterparts--especially a game such as this one in which this issue is so very important to those of us who want to get as much out of it as possible. The endearing quality of THIS game is the gamers ability to modify it, make their own scenarios, etc.

This game has appeared on the Mac since its inception. If i recall, the first version was created on a Mac. It has not been until this version that the Mac community has truly been left out in the cold. For a game as big as this one to be in such straits, i am left feeling that the situation is not going to be improving much for future games. This, to me, does not bode well for the platform that supports the porting industry in the first place.

To say that one should just switch to another game, however, is akin to saying if you don't like god in the pledge of allegiance, you should move to another country. The point is Civ III and its measure, not an open sourced imitation of it. However, as i will check out those other alternatives mentioned previously in the thread, the appeal of Civ III is unquestionable, esp. as it appears the game is improving through the ability to actually create maps with starting locations, the upcoming expansion pack, etc.

A catch 22 indeed.

Well said, Gottesfreunde. If I might amplify one point, it seems to me that, while buying a Wintel machine for gaming is an easy - and admittedly effective - solution in the SHORT term, it is counterproductive in the LONG term for precisely the reasons you have articulated.

The only real long-term solution is parity (at least) between Mac and Windows software availability and quality. True, complete parity won't happen anytime soon, but situations like the current status of Civ3 really do seem to be setbacks in terms of that goal.

Gottesfreunde (God's Friend?) For someone who doesn't care, you sure write a lot. We're commenting on ONE game here--an extremely complex and expandable game with enormous user input..

Go and check out InsideMacGames or Macgamer.com and see what is happening in the wider world of Mac games.

Originally posted by Gottesfreunde
If patches are on the way for a game that is to be ported, why are these updates not included or renegotiated in the contract?

There's really no way to know what the future holds for any game when a contract is signed, so we have to take things as they come. Not surprisingly, sometimes we'll hit a rough spot, and it takes time for everyone involved to figure out where to go next. Let's all just wait and see what happens.

The endearing quality of THIS game is the gamers ability to modify it, make their own scenarios, etc.

I'd like to point out that this "endearing quality" of which you speak was radically different (and quite limited) when the game was released on the PC side (and when everything was planned for the Mac version). I should also point out again that the editor phoenomenon is not limited to Civ3: tons of Mac games do not include the editor because it's usually prohibitively expensive to do: Quake 3 and the Unreal games jump immediately to mind. They're certainly no less important to those games than the Civ3 editor is to Civ3.

If i recall, the first version was created on a Mac. It has not been until this version that the Mac community has truly been left out in the cold.

I should point out that the Civ series did not start out on the Mac, it was a DOS app. Furthermore, MacSoft hasn't made any announcement about 1.29f, so let's try and keep things in perspective until then. And I should also point out that both Civ2 and SMAC multiplayer were Mac-only, so depending on what you consider "essential" to the game, Mac users took a hit back then too.

Brad

Originally posted by Brad Oliver

tons of Mac games do not include the editor because it's usually prohibitively expensive to do: Quake 3 and the Unreal games jump immediately to mind. They're certainly no less important to those games than the Civ3 editor is to Civ3.


This is what i am talking about, and it boggles my mind. i suppose we are just so thankful the games are coming to the Mac that we take what we can get. i wish i knew programming myself so that i could jump in the fray and make things radically different.


I should point out that the Civ series did not start out on the Mac, it was a DOS app. Furthermore, MacSoft hasn't made any announcement about 1.29f, so let's try and keep things in perspective until then. And I should also point out that both Civ2 and SMAC multiplayer were Mac-only, so depending on what you consider "essential" to the game, Mac users took a hit back then too.


You may be right on that. i can't remember where i heard that it was created on a Mac, but i seem to recall a conversation ages ago in reference to it. But, since i can't find any supporting evidence, so be it.

i tend to get rather passionate about things i strongly believe, and i do apologize if i have offended, as that was not my intention. i am impatient to be able to relax in front of my Mac and play the games that appeal to me without having to settle on my clunky PC if i want to have fun on a computer. i am also quite passionate about the Mac as a superior platform, and i want it to succeed. However, i consistently find it becoming more difficult to support.

i can wait, and when i get tired of that, at least i can play the game on the PC.

Originally posted by Gottesfreunde
i am also quite passionate about the Mac as a superior platform, and i want it to succeed. However, i consistently find it becoming more difficult to support.

I feel the same way, which is why I got into Mac porting in the first place. However, let's take a rational look at it.

The "Mac gaming scene" isn't going to mature based on ports alone, and it likely never will. The real battle is fought by those titles that ship simultaneously for the Mac and PC, ship on the Mac first or ship only on the Mac. Big success stories in Mac gaming in the past include SimCity (Mac-first), Myst (Mac-first), the Marathon series (Mac-only, then Mac-first). Ports can only go so far to establish the legitimacy of Mac gaming - they say we're (frequently) just as good as the PC as a platform, but at the expense of an editor here or there, or a release date that's after the PC ship date, sometimes by quite a while. And honestly, there will never be manpower enough for every Mac port to ship day-and-date with the PC version with all the bells and whistles, by definition of the porting process. That's a hard reality, but it's true. We got close with Civ3 (it shipped fairly close to the PC and an editor is on the way), but the stream of patches to the game after the fact have complicated things.

As of the past several years, the number of high-profile Mac-first or Mac-only titles has pretty much dropped to zero, and the number of game developers who created those cutting-edge AAA titles on the Mac have all moved on, and no one has stepped up to fill their shoes. When you look to the Mac as a gaming machine, this is the indicator to watch, and it's pretty clear nowadays what it's indicating. The number of ported titles to the Mac is now huge compared to years past, while titles that push the Mac as a gaming platform to start with have dropped to near zero.

Brad

Most people buy macs because they are superior on the hardware and software side. The sacrifice made is on the price and the number of software packages. Most of the business, graphics, and non-gaming software is available for the mac and are far superior to their PC versions. Mac OSX is the best OS out in the market. I have had my powerbook for a year now, running OSX from the begining , and computer has not crached yet. And I never turn it off. Am I going to change to a PC because a few games are not available for the Mac. Hell no, if I want to really get into gaming, I'll buy playstation or a X box. That is where the future of gaming is going. Not on to the PCs or MACs. I think CIV 3 is great the way it is, and if they want to make the patch or the editor, that is fine. If not, I could care less. I have a much better computer than PC owners and it is a joy to use. And Macs are not so much more expansive than the PC. Compare prices among comparable systems. They cost about the same.

If anyone has any doubt about games for our platform, check out:-

http://www.macgamer.com/features/futurereleases/index.php

They are currently tracking 86 games. Back to Civ3--it is different from other games for me, because it allows me to play with 'what if?' ideas in history. The AI is good enough to keep challenging me, so I don't get the sense that I 'know' the game. However, I want an Editor--and I know I'll get one eventually--in order to explore my 'what ifs?' in different eras.

What I would like to know is if there is a compensatory algorithm (sorry about that) which shows a balance of price versus overall sales. If we are a smaller community (duh!), what would we have to pay in order to make certain developments viable? PC folks have an economy of scale; Mac folks may not have a critical mass to make developments worthwhile. The problem with mass marketing is that these decisions are taken out of the consumers' hands. And yes, I know that cost is not the only consideration in the present situation, because not all the resources may be available at any price.

My present guess is that we will get full parity with the PC Editor when a 'saleable' package, such as Civ3:PTW, is released.