Xref: utzoo comp.sys.mac.programmer:20347 comp.sys.mac.games:2356 Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cs.utexas.edu!ut-emx!ccwf.cc.utexas.edu From: rdd@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Robert Dorsett) Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.programmer,comp.sys.mac.games Subject: Re: Mac II Disappointment/Request for Game Recs Message-ID: <42136@ut-emx.uucp> Date: 4 Jan 91 19:50:14 GMT References: <1991Jan4.164554.5097@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> Sender: news@ut-emx.uucp Reply-To: rdd@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Robert Dorsett) Followup-To: comp.sys.mac.programmer Distribution: usa Organization: The University of Texas at Austin Lines: 74 In article <1991Jan4.164554.5097@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> mil@mendel.acc.Virginia.EDU (Maria I. Lasaga) writes: >I visited my brother over the holidays, excited to see the Mac IIsi in >action. I was very disappointed by the performance of a lot of the software. >Basically, the games opened up within a small 9" window anyway, rather than >on the full screen. >Any comments on this issue would be appreciated. This isn't a question of >"Which is better, the Macintosh or the IBM?" It is, "If we have been >claiming that the Macintosh is such a great graphics machine, why do >the graphics of so much of our available software not compare with those of >IBM software?" Is it that the IBM has had more time to develop good software? >I really would like to know, as I consider whether I still want to purchase >a Macintosh II myself. Macintosh game sales are about 10% of IBM sales. Macintosh *color* sales are less than 10% of that; only a small fraction of THAT remainder are usually truly concerned that a given program doesn't run in color (although most would, of course, love it if it does). The market is small, and what does exist is somewhat ambivalent, hard to get a handle on. It is not cost-effective to write for the color machines: salaried programmer time is expensive, and the material costs can be excessive. The vast majority of game purchases are done by people running on Plusses or SE's; I do no not expect the LC or IIsi to change the equation very much. With this in mind, it makes a LOT of sense to write for 9" screens, get the software running well in monochrome, and concentrate on keeping it stable on more advanced machines. THEN, if the opportunity arises, the software can be colorized. >Lastly, I would greatly appreciate it if any Mac II owners could >recommend any software that works spectacularly on the Mac II's. (I brought >along a copy of Solarian, A copy, I hope, that you purchased. The rampant piracy of the good games is another factor that discourages any attempts to develop color software. One cannot sell $300 games; therefore, one doesn't have the same cushion against piracy that the business software publishers have. A $50 game, retail, will net the *publisher* less than $25. That $25 has to go to pay for advertising, the box, disk, administrative and programmer salaries, and profit for the company. And note that the mail-order houses get THEIR wares at $15-$20/unit. Suppose you're a "free-lancer." 15% royalties, net. Suppose we sell 5,000 copies over two years: at $25/unit (let's be generous), that's $18,750. $9K a year. Not too far over the poverty line. If one can multiply this by a factor of ten, by writing for the PC, guess what your free-lancer's going to do? ('course, it's not that simple, since the PC market's a lot more glutted, but no matter how you cut it, you'd make more money). One thing he's NOT going to do is spend several hundred man-hours colorizing his software (unless it's REALLY easy). A GOOD Mac program (e.g., Dark Castle) might sell 20,000 copies in its life- time. Compare this to the million or so Flight Simulators out there. Most Mac programs peak out at fewer than 5,000 to 7,000 copies. Now, if Apple would do the smart thing, and produce usable color systems for < $1500, everything would change. I find it absolutely intolerable that, with VGA PC clones selling for less than a thousand bucks, retail, Apple's bottom-of-the-line color system costs over $3000--and IT doesn't even come with a floating-point chip or the necessary VRAM, for crying out loud! Apple has consistently discouraged game production, tending to favor business/personal-productivity software developers. And you wonder why there aren't fancy games on the Mac? In summary, it's economics, not the technical capabilities of the machines, that affect whether you will see a Mac game run in color. --- Robert Dorsett Internet: rdd@rascal.ics.utexas.edu UUCP: ...cs.utexas.edu!rascal.ics.utexas.edu!rdd