Discussion in 'Civ3 - Macintosh' started by Kainnine, Nov 6, 2003.
Anyone know if/when/who conquest is coming to Mac?
If = Maybe
When = ?? (But probably at least 6 months down the road)
Who = ?? (and is tied to the "If" question )
Well, AFAIK it all depends on PC sellings (or Westlakes projections thereof).
But I'm not entirely sure if that's the most recent info.
MacSoft's projections, not Westlake. Westlake doesn't sell Mac games.
Oops... my fault. ^^''
Didn't we hear this exact same discussion back when PTW came out? As in waiting for projections on the sales before anyone would okay a release?
Isn't Conquests based on the PTW engine?
My brother just bought Conquests for his PC - damn him - and he says that it came with PTW on the CD!
Actually it doesn't really. PTW's features are included in conquest, but you cannot install PTW from the conquest cd.
All I know for myself is... that I can only just hope that it comes out for mac. If it does you know I'm getting it. Maybe if we get a petition or something together. Oh well. We can only hope!
From what I've seen we can be glad that the Windows users are the beta testers, and we can hope that if and when it does come to the Mac they'll have sorted out the worst problems.
Petitions are useless. Hard commercial realities are what drive companies to develop products. If they think they'll sell another 5% by adding a Mac version to the product list, and if 5% of their Windows sales adds up to a good return on investment in developing it, then they'll do it. So just hope they sell a shed load of Windows product.
I too am waiting Patiently for Conquests to come out on Mac.
Why should we suffer for making intelligent choices such as not buying a PC.
Im no programmer but i fail to see why its so difficult to release the game to us.
Porting a game to Mac is actually quite hard. If the game is developed with cross-platform support in mind from the beginning, like eg Blizzard and id (usually) does, it is much easier, but Civ was not developed that way.
In this particular case, however, the actual game has already been ported and Conquests is just a patch on top of it. The hardest part to port might be the network play (which came in PTW, but is included in Conquests), particularly if it should be compatible with the Windows version, but I still think that its should be doable.
In any case, QA testing for any release takes time = costs money.
Mac-to-Mac networking would be OK, as it could use the Apple-supported game networking protocols. But PC-to-Mac compatibility could only be achieved by porting the DirectPlay protocol, which is M$-proprietary technology. That would probably incur license or legal fees capable of bankrupting a game publisher.
Alas, what Alan says is all too true.
This is probably my biggest complaint against Firaxis. Instead of using a more open technology, they chose to use M$-proprietary stuff. IIRC, they were asked about this in a chat, and basically said they had no interest in using any other protocol.
Which basically means a port of the MP side is nearly impossible, at least for PC-Mac interconnectivity.
Not sure what the problem is with multiplayer not being compatible with the PC version. How many of us finished the epic game in one sitting? Real-time mode or other multi-play features aren't really Civ. Play WC3 for that kind of fix.
More realistic multiplayer mode is play by email. I don't see Westlake having any trouble making that compatible with the PC version.
fasces, I'm not sure you understand the obstacle. Microsoft is an empire that would fight tooth and nail any effort to reverse engineer DirectPlay, which is used for PTW/C3C's MP component. There is no application that would allow Mac to PC MP. Therefore, MP can only be between Macs when DirectPlay is used on the PC side for MP.
i would't really care if the game came as Multi-player or not. Frankly, playing CIV as multi-player would be about as much fun as a root canal. i could not stand to wait for the other player to finish their moves, heck, i can barely stand waiting for the moves to be finished by the computer. i find CIV III to be almost unbearably slow as it is, and i have a G4 1Ghz dual processor. i had a chance to see the game on an equally equipped PC and was astounded at how quickly the game moved along.
Ultimately, i am still disillusioned with the whole "civ" franchise. i invested in a game that was, from the start, disappointing in its capabilities (i was especially bothered by the limited political interactions--i still wish the game had some of the cool options politically such as can be found in SMAC such as being able to move your forces inside the cities of your allies to help them protect their terroties as well as intervene to stop conflicts between factions).
But, to make matters worse, despite the best efforts of Mr. Oliver, patches for the game have been a little too long in the coming, and the editor is still a sorry excuse at appeasement as it doesn't even work with the current version of the game (which even though i am using the 1.29 beta, is soon to offically, be at that version). Then, these additions come out that my money is on them NEVER appearing on the Mac.
I was talking about "play by email" compatibility on that paragraph. Unless email is part of Directplay and only Microsoft can use email protocol.
Oh, good point. I would think its possible.
Oh, it would be legal all right. It would be reverse-engineering, which is OK in the eyes of the law. Stuff like MacDX is essentially a reverse-engineered DirectX, and they haven't been sued.
I don't know how hard it would be, that depends on how large a part of DirectPlay would have to be reverse-engineered, but not trivial in any case.
Separate names with a comma.