Maybe the Mac is a good test platform for OpenGL, then they are going to springboard off this, and jump into PS3 development.
Also, I'd buy a dozen copies of TF2 for the iPhone, so I could play with the people I work with. ;) Allan -----Original Message----- From: hlcoders-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com [mailto:hlcoders-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Kyle Jansen Sent: Saturday, March 13, 2010 11:42 PM To: hlcoders@list.valvesoftware.com Subject: Re: [hlcoders] Steam 2010 mod support and Source for the Mac Two things: First, I completely agree with Adam's analysis. From what I see, Valve makes most of it's money from Steam, not games. I wouldn't be surprised if some of their games actually failed to make a profit, given how long their dev times are. Further, the Mac has nothing to compete with Steam, while the PC has several dozen competitors. What I'm hoping is that this Mac port signals a Linux port as well. The systems are sufficiently similar that it wouldn't be difficult, and Linux has absolutely no competition. Even Mac!Steam has to deal with retail. Second, I don't think moving into general movie sales would work for Valve. They don't really have first-hand experience making and selling movies, so they won't be able to be as developer- (or the film equivalent) and consumer-friendly as they are with games. Besides the fact that they would be up against some fierce competition, and don't have nearly the brand recognition many of the movie-digital-distribution players have. Steam is for gamers. Gamers know about it. Most gamers like it, or at least consider it the least evil DRM available. What could work, then, is selling game-related media. Put the Source modding tutorial DVDs on. Put game soundtracks on. Heck, I'd buy Advent Children if it was on Steam. Of course, watch all my predictions turn out wrong. I'm guessing a Team Fortress feature film, and a port of Steam to the iPhone, just to make my predictions look stupid. > Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2010 13:36:33 -0600 > From: Nathan Voge <hl2fr...@msn.com> > Subject: Re: [hlcoders] Steam 2010 mod support and Source for the Mac > To: hlcoders <hlcoders@list.valvesoftware.com> > Message-ID: <col116-w380923eee8badc081a07588...@phx.gbl> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > > Don't forget that Steam not only works for digital distribution of games. > Sure that is mostly what they have now, but I'm guessing that somewhere at > Valve they are thinking about digital distribution of other things. Movies > (There was/is that one Zombie Movie. BTW the site www.2chums.com is now for > sale), songs, professional software... > > > Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 22:51:58 +0000 > > From: harry101jeff...@googlemail.com > > To: hlcoders@list.valvesoftware.com > > Subject: Re: [hlcoders] Steam 2010 mod support and Source for the > > Mac > > > > It also re-asserts Steams position as the best digital distribution > > system available. Stopping other new platforms such as impulse that > > support mac from taking control is a wise move. > > > > On 11 March 2010 19:08, Kerry Dorsey <kdor...@dorseyinc.com> wrote: > > > Adam, you're absolutely right...as I see it. This is much less about > > > platform game support than it is about platform distribution support. But > > > the latter is useless without the former. You accurately described the > > > Mac dev food-chain so I won't be redundant, but the other key aspect of > > > current ports to the Mac involves the code itself...native versus > > > virtualization. The latest Sims 3 port for Mac is emulated. It's PC code > > > thrown on top of a resource hungry virt environment (that's an over > > > simplification, so don't get too upset) that runs horribly on all but the > > > latest and strongest machines. So while some see "support for the Mac" > > > means that it will run on all Macs, that ain't so. In fact, I'm venturing > > > a guess that EA's support costs for the average Mac release is INSANE, > > > all because of performance issues. If said code were native, most of the > > > problems probably wouldn't exist. So I see Valve's decision to port, > > > natively, their OB engine product to the Mac to be an effort to a.) throw > > > more sand in Activision's distribution eyes, (go Steam!!) , develop a > > > previously untapped market segment (Mac), and head off support nightmares > > > with a little preventative research and development. > > > > > > It shows how Valve's business model and management have matured in a very > > > short time. Good job! > > > > > > -Kerry > > > > > > > > > On 3/11/10 10:43 AM, "Adam Buckland" <adamjbuckl...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > My $0.02: > > > > > > I think a lot of people are missing the point here. Valve only > > > ported the games because they had to. The real motive here is Steam. > > > > > > Selling Mac software is very different to selling PC software. For > > > PC games, it makes perfect sense to put a boxed copy on a shelf > > > where people can go to a shop and buy it. > > > For the Mac, however, their users are much more spread out, and > > > therefore putting a boxed copy on a shelf isn't such a good idea. > > > Most Mac software houses realised this a long time ago and sell > > > their software via digital distribution instead. Most don't even > > > make boxed copies. Mac games however have never quite got there > > > and still sell mainly boxed copies. > > > > > > The current state of Mac ports of games (with a few exceptions) is > > > that a developer will develop a game for Windows, release it, and > > > then pass their code to a third-party developer (Aspyr is an > > > example), who will then port the game to OS X and sell it. The > > > problem here is that it can take a team such as the one at Aspyr a > > > year to port a game to OS X, by which time the game's hype is > > > almost non-existant, and because the porter, the original > > > developer, and the publisher all need to make a profit, the game > > > is sold at full-price, while the prices of the other platforms is > > > significantly reduced, making the OS X port very unattractive. > > > > > > While it make take a third-party porting company a year to port > > > the game to another platform, the original developer could port > > > the game much faster and for a much lower cost, especially if the > > > Mac is a release platform. Problem is, they don't bother because > > > they don't want to have to deal with trying desperately to > > > distribute it digitally themselves. > > > > > > Valve have spotted an opportunity here. What they're doing is > > > they're bringing a digital distribution platform that is mature > > > and one that many developers already have experience using to the > > > Mac. By doing this, they will (hopefully) entice many other > > > developers to move their games to the Mac themselves because a > > > distribution method that still gives them a higher-than-normal > > > (compared to boxed copies) profit margin is available. > > > > > > So, why have Valve moved their games to OS X and not just Steam? > > > Well, there's a number of reasons > > > 1) They need something to launch Steam on the Mac with!! > > > 2) If they didn't, other developers would have no reason to have > > > any confidence in Steam for Mac. > > > 3) Valve now have some valuable knowledge and experience in > > > porting to OS X that they can use to help other developers in > > > porting their games to OS X. This is useful because while Valve > > > are giving away techniques that they've spent considerable money > > > trying to develop, more Mac games on Steam = more profit! > > > > > > So, to sum up, the people who are looking at existing market > > > figures shouldn't be. Valve aren't trying to move in on the existing > > > market. > > > They're trying to create one. > > > _______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders _______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlcoders
