treemonster Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 Mac support was just released this year, so it's hardly a fair statistic at all. Maybe it'd be a better statistic if we compared the number of Mac users today with the number of PC users at the same point in Steam's life cycle for PC games (read: the first year of release for Steam on PC). Even still, that statistic wouldn't be fair because Steam has advanced to a much bigger service than it was in the first year of its release. Basically, my point is this: this really is a useless statistic. It's impossible to fairly compare given that Steam was just released for the Mac and that Windows users have had years to build their userbase for Steam. It's an interesting statistic, but useless at the moment. Honestly, it's higher than I thought it would be. it really depends on teh adoption rate among mac users tbh. particularly those that have even a passing interest in gaming, and perhaps do not want to dual boot windows to do it. it seems every new game i join a fb fan page for there are a few people crying for a mac version of the game. it would be interesting to compare this to mac share of games with mac clients that aren't on steam like wow for example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Veteran Posted August 25, 2010 Veteran Share Posted August 25, 2010 I wonder how many are actually Macs and how many are just OS X? OSx86 can be made to report whatever Mac model you want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Warwagon MVC Posted August 25, 2010 MVC Share Posted August 25, 2010 People are missing my point: I'm not saying that Mac SHOULD have more than 5%, simply that it seems like a terrible waste of resources from Steam. I'm sure that porting and maintaining Steam for Mac OS takes more than 5% of their resources, especially given that the 5% is probably inflated already because of the free portal offer. Mac's have always been a terrible waste of resources when it came to game developers, this is nothing new. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darrian Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 I'm surprised the number is even that high. Most gamers use Windows. Most Mac OS users probably aren't even aware Steam exists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rudy Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 Mac's have always been a terrible waste of resources when it came to game developers, this is nothing new. Indie games have done fairly well on OSX/Linux while others have failed on Windows Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaltLife Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 It won't be anywhere even near an extra 5% revenue. There are not enough games available for Mac yet (and I'm doubtful that there will be any time soon), and I suspect that a lot of the people who buy games from Steam for Mac were already buying them and playing on Windows. Didn't mean 5% more revenue , but rather a potential increase (the supposedly 5% amount of mac users) that are going to make new purchases, but statistically you are correct. There is a high probability that these users have already purchased their games and were simply waiting on the ports. I however am not one of those individules, I am in-fact all new revenue for the company as I never purchase a single item while using a PC. I would also imagine that Steam took these stats into consideration before development. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darrian Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 I wonder how many are actually Macs and how many are just OS X? OSx86 can be made to report whatever Mac model you want. I'm not sure that's really relevant; OS X is OS X, regardless of the hardware it's running on. However, setting up a "Hackintosh" can be daunting for most people, so I'd imagine the number is quite low. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaltLife Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 I'm not sure that's really relevant; OS X is OS X, regardless of the hardware it's running on. However, setting up a "Hackintosh" can be daunting for most people, so I'd imagine the number is quite low. This, plus a quick look at the site says OSX 10.6.3/10.6.4 64bit didn't see anything pertaining to exact models I know on my old hackintosh steam wouldn't have worked simply because of the video drivers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malisk Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 Only? I think 5% is pretty good. I agree. :) Considering it's 1 out of 2 platforms it's available for, I'd say 5% is pretty terrible. What? What's the total OS X market share again? 10-15%? 5% would be very very good for Steam! It's as if nearly 50% of all Windows users would play games, and choose Steam! This means OS X users are very good Steam customers. As for OS X's low market share, well, Steam entered this OS X game being fully aware of that, and they have no problems with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaP Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 People are missing my point: I'm not saying that Mac SHOULD have more than 5%, simply that it seems like a terrible waste of resources from Steam. I'm sure that porting and maintaining Steam for Mac OS takes more than 5% of their resources, especially given that the 5% is probably inflated already because of the free portal offer. If you think it's a waste of resources for Valve then there's a couple of things you don't understand about business. It's actually a very good move by valve. It expand the market share of Steam. Better be first than last and this is what Valve is doing with Steam. Blizzard does support Mac. I would say it paid them so far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c3ntury Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 Not surprising considering their overall market share xD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Neo Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 Considering it's 1 out of 2 platforms it's available for, I'd say 5% is pretty terrible. How so? Apple is only one company. I'd say for a single company that's pretty good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Southern Patriot Posted August 25, 2010 Share Posted August 25, 2010 I wonder how many are actually Macs and how many are just OS X? OSx86 can be made to report whatever Mac model you want. Interesting point, but from a game developer's point of view, it's irrelevant. That would be the same as wondering how many Windows Steam users are running it on Macs under Boot Camp. Mac's have always been a terrible waste of resources when it came to game developers, this is nothing new. Actually, back in the early 90's, lots of games were made on the Mac first, then ported to Windows, so saying that Macs were ALWAYS a waste of resources just shows how short of a memory you have. Back then, people bought Amigas and Macs for games, and Windows PCs for work. Funny how times change, huh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LiquidSolstice Posted August 27, 2010 Share Posted August 27, 2010 Unless Steam is going bankrupt supporting OS X, this makes perfect sense, since, I don't know, Steam only JUST recently came out for Mac. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LingeringSoul Posted August 27, 2010 Share Posted August 27, 2010 I'm surprised the number is even that high. Most gamers use Windows. Most Mac OS users probably aren't even aware Steam exists. That's basically how it is for me. I have a Macbook Pro and a desktop PC, and the PC is what I use for the vast majority of my gaming. My Mac is primarily used for school/work. I have Starcraft 2 installed on it, but apart from that I like to install as few games on it as possible so that I'm not tempted to play them when I should be working. As for the 5% figure, it's higher than I thought it would be, since like Ayepecks said, Steam support just came out for the Mac. I imagine it will grow over time as more games come out with Steam support (and perhaps more importantly, different types of games). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rudy Posted August 27, 2010 Share Posted August 27, 2010 Actually, back in the early 90's, lots of games were made on the Mac first, then ported to Windows, so saying that Macs were ALWAYS a waste of resources just shows how short of a memory you have. Back then, people bought Amigas and Macs for games, and Windows PCs for work. Funny how times change, huh? Even MS Excel was made for Mac first :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hendrick Posted August 27, 2010 Share Posted August 27, 2010 ...MacOS 10.6.3 64-bit accounted for 4.3 percent of total Steam use, with MacOS 10.5.8 64-bit adding the extra 0.77 percent... Were these figures taken before 10.6.4? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Southern Patriot Posted August 27, 2010 Share Posted August 27, 2010 Even MS Excel was made for Mac first :p Not just Excel. The whole Office suite was released for Mac before Windows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elliott Posted August 27, 2010 Share Posted August 27, 2010 At least 25 million Steam users and 5% are on Macs. That's 1.25 million users. I think Valve and its partners can justify porting for that. :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryoken Posted August 27, 2010 Share Posted August 27, 2010 The biggest flaw in the argument that 5% is a waste of resources is the assumption that everyone is equal. If those 5% of mac users account for 10% of sales, or more likely, 10% of Valve sales, then it's a major success for Valve. As long as they turn a profit, even in the slightest, they win. And with them being their first, already having done the hardwork for them of porting the Source engine, and the Steam client, all they need to do is sit back and wait for them to move from the red to the black on the project. Also lets not forget that Mac users tend to have a disposable income greater than the average PC user, even if they don't have the die-hard gamers as the PC side, they can benefit from casual gamers who might be willing to part with more cash for a game, than the average pc counterpart. Or again as above, at least enough to make it profitable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manish Posted August 27, 2010 Share Posted August 27, 2010 I agree. :) What? What's the total OS X market share again? 10-15%? 5% would be very very good for Steam! It's as if nearly 50% of all Windows users would play games, and choose Steam! What? Honestly, did I just misread what you've said or have you got no concept of maths? Just to make sure though, 5% of Steam users on a Mac does not equal 50% of all people with a Mac just because their market share is ~10%. How so? Apple is only one company. I'd say for a single company that's pretty good. Isn't Microsoft one company too? :s If those 5% of mac users account for 10% of sales, or more likely, 10% of Valve sales, then it's a major success for Valve. As long as they turn a profit, even in the slightest, they win. I know that you were using an example, but I think it's unlikely that 5% of Steam users will account for 10% of sales. I agree with the part I've highlighted in bold though; obviously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryoken Posted August 27, 2010 Share Posted August 27, 2010 I know that you were using an example, but I think it's unlikely that 5% of Steam users will account for 10% of sales. I agree with the part I've highlighted in bold though; obviously. Actually, I'd be amazed if 5% of Steam users Didn't account for more than 10% of Sales.. I buy a few games a year, I know a few who buy a few a month.. I could easily see 10% of Steam sales coming from 5% of the userbase.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts