Macs to get Spore, Call of Duty 4

By Robert Purchese Published 16 January, 2008

This could be the year, Lifestylers.

Handsome Apple computer Mac will be given some big games to play this year. Good grief.

Among them will be scintillating shooter Call of Duty 4 and hurry up and release it Spore.

Aspyr Media will be responsible for the former, and has already chalked-up a meaty 61 Mac conversions to its name, including Guitar Hero III, Quake Wars and Civilization IV.

Doing Spore honours is TransGaming Technologies, which will work day and night to launch its version alongside the PC offering this year.

It has done other work for EA previously, manipulating Command & Conquer 3 and Battlefield 2142 for Macs.

Rather exciting for those of you with fancy white stylish monitor computers then, even if you are one of those who bought it and then installed Windows because it was more complicated than you had hoped, Kristan.

Those new laptops are nice, though. You might also like to know about the Macworld show taking place this week in San Francisco. But we know nothing about it.

How many of you use Macs, Eurogamers? Oh, we have removed it as a platform.

Picture of Robert.

About Robert Purchese

Bertie is Eurogamer's Senior Staff Writer. When he's not hunting down news stories he's often found playing with his kids or gabbling about fantasy games and strange online worlds.

Read more articles from Robert by visiting the Robert Purchese archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (44) Latest comment 4 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • Zomoniac #1 4 years ago

    And I'm sure they'll only cost a thousand pounds each, and be out five years later than the PC version. Why can't everyone take a leaf out of SI's book and release a dual-format disc. £20 FM08 for Mac at the same time as PC, no excuses anymore.

  • ElasticTangent #2 4 years ago

    I love Mac's but don't do any gaming on them anymore. PC's are banned from my house.

  • MightyMouse #3 4 years ago

    Lots of people play wow on macs, but yeah myth was dual-format back in the day and I never did understand why games moved away from that.

  • asphaltcowboy #4 4 years ago

    "YES! finally i can play call of duty in starbucks whilst being a total cunt!"

    lol! :D

  • Batfink #5 4 years ago

    I play Civ on my mac, but all other games on the 360 and wii.

  • Raya #6 4 years ago

    Kristan must be a knob then ;-) And Mac's aren't white any more ;-) [link url=http://www.apple.com /macbookair/
    ]http://www.apple.com /macbookair/
    [/link]

    C&C plays sweet on a mac - emulation works fine and dandy

  • Les #7 4 years ago

    Last game I played on a Mac was Marathon 2 (I don't count playing Windows games via Bootcamp, though I detest Windows so much, that I rarely ever do that though it was one of the more important factors when deciding to upgrade) but I'm very interested in Spore. Good news in my book.

  • [maven] #8 4 years ago

    The same semi-emulation approach only works craptastically for Eve... :(

  • Coughthulu #9 4 years ago

    "The same semi-emulation approach only works craptastically for Eve... :("

    This is the reason I used Bootcamp to install XP on my Mac, if only they'd given us a decent conversion...

  • Corbb #10 4 years ago

    That means the games will have an OpenGL port made...
    So I'm more interested will they be ported on Linux as well.

  • redgiemental #11 4 years ago

    This is the best news in the world for me. Since I switched to Mac last year the only thing I was regretting was that I'd have to setup bootcamp to play Spore. Now I can just pick up the Mac version and be on my way. I'm very happy with my Mac and find vastly superior to Windows just so everyone knows where i stand on this issue :p.

  • Scrumhalf #12 4 years ago

    I love my MacBook Pro - but the only game I play on it is Peggle Deluxe.

  • bengray66 #13 4 years ago

    I use my mac for dreamweaver, but i always have FM08 in a window in the background.

  • superdelphinus #14 4 years ago

    the best thing to do is get a cheaper, more powerful pc and then install something like linux mint on it. All the bells and whistles (and more) of mac os but cheaper and faster

  • superdelphinus #15 4 years ago

    that mac air looks nice but seems a bit pointless - what's the point in reducing only one of the dimensions? and non-user replaceable battery on a laptop is a joke. Remember when apple used to be all about making things more usable and better? It's all about style over function now

  • Batfink #16 4 years ago

    These will not be ports, so no OpenGL versions for linux. This will be, as it was before, repackaged Wine for the windows version.

  • bengray66 #17 4 years ago

    mac os but cheaper and faster

    I agree it will be much cheaper, but faster? The new Intel Macs are like lightning! I use a lot of Photoshop / Dreamweaver and i would say its a good 25/30% quicker than a higher spec PC. Thats from a design point of view though, Macs are far superior for that, but gaming? Other than a passive game like FM which i play, I would have no intention of playing something like COD4 on a mac. It seems a bit silly to me. PC's have far better hardware for games than macs do.

  • susurrus #18 4 years ago

    Rotten Apples.. Biggest Con ive ever seen. And people buy into it. Humans are shallow in the end, and it all comes down to style....
    It comes down to spending an insane amount of cash on an already out of date system, oh dnt worry though it looks great and oh are you a designer? Well mac is the way to go, photoshop works so much better then on a pc, no really it really does..

    Look, Macs look shit hot, you pay 700quid -> 1000 extra for that style. Go figure. Go and spend the equal cash on a pc equivalent and i promise you you will either get something Nearly as portable... ok Mac Air looks thin.. but Viao wank all over macs in style anyway.. and one thing you will get is far more powerful components probably built in the same factory as the mac parts.

    Rant over.


  • susurrus #19 4 years ago

    Sarcasm aside,

    Designing on MACS is no different, and im osrry no faster then PC... PHOTOSHOP WORKS THE SAME ON EACH! Unless you trying to run cs3 on a pentium 2 and on the mac its a macbook pro.. come on! Stop with the MAcs dominate design Bullshit... Hook Line and Sinker i say

  • tobsen #20 4 years ago

    I don't get it - why should I play a presumably underperforming COD 4 port under OS X in a tiny Mac online community, when I can simply install Windows on my Mac anyway and play the real thing?

  • FWB #21 4 years ago

    Sweet. Spore is one of the ones that I'm most excited about.

    My iMac was actually around the same cost, if not cheaper, than a PC when I bought, for two reasons. Apple gear is cheaper in Japan and Microsoft's decision to separate the languages for their OSs meant that an English version of XP where I was living would cost an arm and a leg. The latter is THE reason I have a Mac. Now that I have one, not going back.

  • susurrus #22 4 years ago

    Oh and about the games.... its a good thing, ive had to put up with Mac users moaning over the past years while i play games on an highly upgradable, cheaper, 'lesser' PC, create all my artwork, designs, videos, and make music on software that isnt LOGIC and watch them suffer with Apples customer support, paying to get thier repetativly faulty system sent and repaired. Paying the insane amount on money on just everything mac when im sitting there doing exactly the same things.

    So it comes down to if you have the cash, why not?

    Do i hate macs? no i just dont understand what all the fuss is about.. and until i buy one i dont think i ever will.

    In my line of work (CGI) macs are laughable, Mainly becuase of a lack of support for nice gfx cards and very powerful processors. And really they keep breaking!!!

    There are macs in the studio and no one uses them for the 'design' work... they are a waste of space and they will be thrown out.

    We use HP workstation and Xeon processors... and they are great for 'Design'.

  • kapowaz #23 4 years ago

    Trust the subject of Macs to get a few disgruntled rants out of the populace. All encouraged by EG! For shame.

    More games on the Mac is, believe it or not, a good thing. Not just for Mac users, but for PC gamers too. Why? Well, currently a lot of cross-platform development is focusing on consoles and taking the focus away from the PC. It's hard to deny that the PC game market is shrinking back to its primaeval state of hardcore games for hardcore gamers, but a lot of that is down to the fact that Joe Public isn't really all that interested in all the hassle that goes along with running a gaming PC. "Continual expensive upgrades? Worrying about keeping Windows secure and stable? No thanks, I'll get an Xbox 360 instead." - it's easy to see this damaging PC gaming in the longrun.

    And yet here with the Mac there's a stablemate. Macs and PCs are far more like brother and sister than PCs and consoles; they're both played with a screen inches instead of feet away (you can use more, smaller text) primarily using a keyboard and mouse. In this day and age of wireless, motion-sensing joypads and wiimotes, the ways which gamers interact with their games have changed dramatically, and yet the Mac and PC still both have these old-fashioned devices available to them.

    Then there's the lessons to be drawn from the Mac 'experience' (if you will). Obviously some individuals allow themselves to get all riled about how it's simply a pretty case on the outside, but clearly the user experience plays a massive part too. The refined, occasionally simplistic, but no-nonsense approach that Mac OS X takes has been picked up on by hundreds of independent software developers who make eye-catching, easy-to-use software for the Mac. It's easy to look at the PC and see a less fertile environment for inspiration (why else in this day and age would a modern game use un-antialiased Arial as a font for menu items and mission text?). If PC game developers immerse themselves in the 'other' side, they may pick up a few ideas which benefit PC games too.

  • kapowaz #24 4 years ago

    @susurrus: Presumably the new Mac Pro (dual quad-core Xeon, graphics upgradeable to a Quadro FX 5600) is still 'laughable' for your needs? [link url=http://www.ap ple.com/macpro/technology/
    ]http://www.ap ple.com/macpro/technology/
    [/link]

  • space_ace #25 4 years ago

    played it already on 360... i wonder how many other ppl use mac for work and 360 for games... ms and apl together, hehe... i still curse the 360 for noise and crashes though

  • Les #26 4 years ago

    "the best thing to do is get a cheaper, more powerful pc and then install something like linux mint on it. All the bells and whistles (and more) of mac os but cheaper and faster"

    "Look, Macs look shit hot, you pay 700quid -> 1000 extra for that style. Go figure. Go and spend the equal cash on a pc equivalent and i promise you you will either get something Nearly as portable... ok Mac Air looks thin.. but Viao wank all over macs in style anyway.. and one thing you will get is far more powerful components probably built in the same factory as the mac parts."

    I won't deny a big part of the appeal of the Mac is its looks. People like to be surrounded by beautiful things (as well as people) I honestly can't understand that other PC manufactureres still don't get that.

    But the biggest selling point of the Mac is that it just works. Sure, you can get a better specced PC for the same amount of money (or the same specs for less) but that's not the point. OS X is light years ahead of Windows when it comes to code efficiency. OS X is smooth even on a medium specced 3-4 year old machine. Vista won't even run properly on a high specced brand new machine. Furthermore, you can only keep a Windows PC running smoothly if you're interested in computers. Most people are not and they're right, they shouldn't need to be. A PC is a tool and should just work. With Windows, if you don't know your firewalls, registry protectors, addware scanners, virusscanners and spyware removers (along with all the cryptic messages they show you regularly), your PC won't last three months.

  • susurrus #27 4 years ago

    Kapowaz, yes true, that is a nice mac :p But id still get the pc counterpart..

  • FWB #28 4 years ago

    I remember the first time I tried to install a new application on my Mac. I found difficult because I just didn't realise how easy it was. I've been with PCs since... well a long time, and and such was programmed to use a computer a certain way; a far more complex way as I now see.

  • Durandle #29 4 years ago

    This doesn't always mean OpenGL ports will be made. TransGaming for example specialise in software/drivers/wrappers that allow DirectX and Windows code to compile/run under other platforms with minimal changes to the code base.

  • Waldo #30 4 years ago

    I was going to say something here, but I'll just let this video sum up my feelings instead:

    http://youtube .com/watch?v=FxPXFptzQRY

  • Kropotkin #31 4 years ago

    I have never used a Mac nor do I have any intention to do so. Why? Because I play games on PC, a lot. This means getting a Mac would be a massive retrograde step gaming wise. I'm also very familiar with the PC platform and can take care of my Vista based PC fine thank you very much. Granted I did build it myself from pre-defined components which means I know what's in it and how to manage it. Yes I am aware of need to constantly update drivers and maintain a good virus scanner along with knowing where it is in my network but I would have though the same applies to the Mac or am I wrong there?

    I'm not going to hurl abuse at the Mac or indeed people who use them but right now I don't regard them as a viable alternative to a gaming PC. Myabe some day that will change, who knows...

  • monkie_king #32 4 years ago

    Wow, people who don't get Macs really don't get Macs.

    edit: not aimed at you, kropotkin, just unfortunate timing on the submit button. And I wouldn't argue that any type of Mac is a replacement for a gaming rig.
    Edited by 1 at 16/01/08 @ 13:35

  • Scrumhalf #33 4 years ago

    @Kropotkin: I think that is a common and valid point of view, and one I certainly had.

    I moved to use a Mac laptop just over 5 years ago to do development work as it is much closer to Linux that I deploy to. I then bought an XBox 360 in addition to my home-built gaming PC, I hardly touch my PC now at all. I occasionally use it to stream videos to my XBox but even then using a big external hard drive and my Mac is simpler.

    There is just no reason to have a PC - somebody else mentioned that it is so much simpler to use a Mac in comparison. I too didn't get the install as it was just too simple. There is no way I am ever going back to a PC now!

    Having said that Spore is interesting me for the Mac as I can play that on the train :)
    Edited by 1 at 16/01/08 @ 13:48

  • Turambar #34 4 years ago

    Will Apple be offering decent graphics cards to go with these games?

  • septimus #35 4 years ago

    Wow, TransGaming will get their PC emulator to play spore. Great. Will only need an 8 Core Mac Pro to play it.

    Mac user, but not drinking the Kool-Aid so realise how shit mac gaming is.
    Edited by 1 at 16/01/08 @ 15:12

  • BradlayLaw #36 4 years ago

    I've got UT2004 and WoW running in OSX. In bootcamp I've got that vast treasure cheat called steam installed. Best of both worlds really.

  • audiorage #37 4 years ago

    Macs are the way to go. Using them is so much simpler. Many mac haters use a mac once and say: "This is not what I'm used to so its crap!". You have to give them a chance! Give them a few days, and maybe get someone to show you the tricks to using them and you will soon realize how much of a superior OS it is, it just works! :)

  • AOFanboi #38 4 years ago

    I have an older MacBook Pro (with ATI X1800) and Overlord runs not fast on Vista 64-bit there (yes I know I should have bought 32-bit instead); but WoW runs very well in Mac OS X. I guess it comes down to better drivers and less demanding engine in those cases.

    Mac games are more expensive than the same games on Windows because of the lower volumes and less titles available. Pure supply and demand. Though agmes written in Java, Flash and other cross-platform technologies run well on it.

    With "endless" games like Civ IV, WoW, The Sims 2 and Spore - how many do you really need anyway? :)
    Edited by 1 at 16/01/08 @ 19:49

  • Pablo2k5 #39 4 years ago

    Scrumhalf said... "I then bought an XBox 360 in addition to my home-built gaming PC, I hardly touch my PC now at all."

    You just destroyed your argument right there.

    The 360 is a sack of shit.

    Personally, I don't think the 360 is a substitute for a 'decent' gaming PC but then again it depends on what games you are playing and how old you are.

  • tmatharu #40 4 years ago

    A Mac is the most simpliest bit of kit ever....and it not a big can of worms waiting to explode like Windows.....so i am glad thats there's software coming out for the Mac, which in effect is not just a pretty face, but a decent bit of hardware too....which is complemented by the wonderful OSX...... :D

    Hurrah!

  • smelly #41 4 years ago

    Who buys a mac to play games???

  • IronCladChicken #42 4 years ago

    You people do realise that Macs and (IBM) PC's are both the EXCAT SAME PIECE OF KIT - Its only the OS that differs between them - & since its easy-peasy to get OSX running on an off the shelf PC - You're essentially paying extra for the designer case.

    If that’s your thing, that’s cool - but don’t pretend there is any difference (superior or inferior) between the two systems.

    & don’t forget OSX itself is just a flashy GUI built on top of FreeBSD - an OS written for IBM PC's.

  • AOFanboi #43 4 years ago

    @IronCladChicken

    Troll, you fail.

    1) IBM no longer make PCs so it doesn't make sense to talk about IBM PCs. An "IBM PC" was an 8086-based machine with one or two double-density floppy drives, up to 1 MB of RAM and a CGA graphics adapter. Later specs like PC-99 were developed by a consortium of manufacturers.

    2) I prefer having hardware with the nice maglock power cord, motion detector that instantly parks the disks thus avoiding HD crashes if my MBP falls, 802.11n wireless and a very good screen than the run-of-the-mill PC hardware thank you. Since you probably have never actually used a Mac and just seen one on the outside I guess you can only talk about "designer case" - which of course the PC world is full of, witness AlienWare, Asus Ferrari and Dell XPS.

    3) The "flashy GUI" is Aqua, OS X is a Mach-based microkernel OS that has a BSD 4.4 (not FreeBSD) component and a shedload of other stuff, mostly from the NeXT company Jobs founded when he was booted years ago.

  • IronCladChicken #44 4 years ago

    1) IBM no longer make PCs so it doesn't make sense to talk about IBM PCs. An "IBM PC" was an 8086-based machine with one or two double-density floppy drives, up to 1 MB of RAM and a CGA graphics adapter. Later specs like PC-99 were developed by a consortium of manufacturers.

    Dude - IBM PC refers to the component structure of the machine - Since the term PC (Personal Computer) is generic to all (desktop, laptop, etc.) computer systems, IBM PC is used to specify the models of machines that are based on/developed from IBM's original designs.

    This can be seen on pretty much any IBM PC software sold until around the mid nineties where software was tagged as being for IBM PC & compatibles (often they also mentioned Tandy PC's the first popular clones)

    IBM were making their own PC's up until very recently - since 8086 chips were out of date by the mid-eighties - and IBM started making their boxes around, what? 1982? I doubt they would have kept using 8086 processor until they sold off their PC arm a few years back?

    2) I prefer having hardware with the nice maglock power cord, motion detector that instantly parks the disks thus avoiding HD crashes if my MBP falls, 802.11n wireless and a very good screen than the run-of-the-mill PC hardware thank you. Since you probably have never actually used a Mac and just seen one on the outside I guess you can only talk about "designer case" - which of course the PC world is full of, witness AlienWare, Asus Ferrari and Dell XPS.

    Actually, I've developed software for Macs in the past (currently working on SUN boxes) - I can tell you ALL these features are available for the IBM PC - The internal hardware is the same off the shelf hardware used for IBM PC systems - no one denies this, when Apple switched from Motorola to Intel they even used it as one of the reasons for the change over.

    3) The "flashy GUI" is Aqua, OS X is a Mach-based microkernel OS that has a BSD 4.4 (not FreeBSD) component and a shed load of other stuff, mostly from the NeXT company Jobs founded when he was booted years ago.

    If you look at a legacy chart you can clearly see (as well as it being generally known) that OSX is built on top of FreeBSD - It's a good choice of OS (my personal favorite being a big fan of Berkley Unix - The name FreeBSD ran under prior to being released as an open source OS) but doesnt stop my previous assertation from being correct.

    [link url=http://en.w ikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Darwin
    ]http://en.w ikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Darwin
    [/link]

    Also I have a Next workstation sitting in my shed at home - They were great systems and definitely ahead of their time (desktop Unix OS, 17" screen, 1024x768 res in the early nineties - when IBM PC games were still touting a 640x480 hi-res experince)

    & also trolling? - Only a zealot would consider my previous post trolling.

    I’ve no interested in knocking systems, as a professional I believe in using the relevant system for the job at hand (be it a OSX, Linux or Windows box) since it’s important in my role to fit the resolution to the requirements. At the end of the day thats all that matters.