How Do Mac Users Feel About This?

Calm_Fury

We discussed this in other threads. I'm not surprised at all. I had 0 expectations that would support ARM Mac natively.

ESO has its own engine. Translating it would be a huge chore and would definitely create a bunch of ARM Mac specific bugs. They can barely keep up with the bugs in the main platforms.

It is not like they can open XCode and just recompile for ARM like lots of other Mac apps can.

The best hope now is that Apple and Microsoft find a way to enable Windows on Bootcamp to run x86 programs, and I wouldn't hold my breath for that either.

I'm due to swap my mac. I'll probably buy a cheap PC to run ESO.

Blacknight841

This is a simple business transaction. If zenimax, even for one second, thought they could make more money on an ARM ESO, they would not hesitate to do it. They invested money into porting the game to Stadia, rather than fixing even a few bugs in the game. When a company excludes future support of a game like ESO, by definition, they don't see a need for supporting it in the future. Sure they may support the current x86 intel systems out there, but they won't invest to make the game future proof. Even if as they say it needs to be rewritten, unfortunately with all the problems in the game, that may be the best thing for it. Basically Zenimax is gambling on the game dying before they would reach a state in which there will be no Macs that can run the game.

No profit = no further investment. This is evident by the increasing number of bugs, and the diminished content. Rather than providing more content, they have resorted to Spreading out the content with each update over the 3 month period between updates. Based on how man different remakes and platforms Skyrim was available on, If zenimax saw a large enough opportunity to profit from bringing the game to the switch, a phone, or even a calculator ... they would find a way to do it. They just do no see that in Mac players.

When an app developer stops supporting old versions of their product, they are assuming that there is no longer any need for it because most of the users have upgraded to a newer device, or newer software version. This is the same thing except in reverse... Zenimax is chasing not to support future generations of Mac, because they assume that not enough people will upgrade, and there won't be any new players from it.

However when a developer comes out saying they will stop supporting something ... that is a good indication of the end. This announcement makes it clear that even future consideration is off the table. This isn't a question of "could this happen in the future?"... this is a simple "No, it won't happen. So don't hold your breath." So, get the shovel ready. Long live ESO!

Danikat

I realise it's probably a sensible business decision but it does make me very curious about the thought process that went into this. For a start I'd love to know how many people regularly play ESO on a Mac compared to the total population since that's likely a major consideration. I know we'll never get that info but I'd like to know.

As much as it sucks for Mac players I do hope it's because there's so few of them it's not worth the time and effort, because any other implication (like concerns about the upcoming Microsoft purchase, or the inability to update the game that extensively at all) are even more concerning.

IntenseRenegader wrote: »

Im not sure what everyone is talking about. I can play eso great on a mac

They're talking about this announcement: https://www.elderscrollsonline.com/en-us/news/post/59187

The short version is that the game runs on current macs and will continue to do so but will not be compatible with new ones. So you can keep playing on your current mac but if you ever buy a new one it won't run ESO.

LanteanPegasus wrote: »

Malkiv wrote: »

https://www.elderscrollsonline.com/en-us/news/post/59187]Well, all users, really.

How it makes me feel? Totally indifferent with regards to my expectations towards ESO.

I never liked the marketing idea of Apple. Making people buy expensive things with the main purpose of showing off how special and cool and ahead of their times they are is bad enough. Making them buy the same thing over and over again despite the old one still being totally fine and working as intended (I-Phone) is just the kind of crappy consumerism I can't stand.

To me Apple is the equivalent of a sports car in the electronic world. I get the impression that 90 out of 100 people only buy it for their image.

I'm sure the other 10% have very valid reasons to use Apple devices, because those are ideal for specific needs in their jobs or hobbies. But those are victims now of the company's need to be even more of a "special snowflake", probably to cater to the feelings of the 90%.

So, sad as it is, if you buy an Apple you buy into that Apple philosophy, and I don't expect companies like ZOS to go out of their way (read: spending a lot of time and money) to cater to people that do so.
I actually think it shows care for their users that they put up the warning/put out the facts this early, and this clearly.

And at the end of the day - didn't Microsoft just buy Bethesda/ESO? I might have to rethink the customer service praise, maybe competition is the driving motif here, or maybe both, but I'll stand to all the other things I said. Still indifferent.

I think there's a 3rd group too: people who don't know (or care) much about tech but do recognise brand names. The kind of people who use iPhone as a generic term for all smart phones, and then when they want a new one they go into the store and ask for an iPhone, so of course they get sold an iPhone and may never know or consider that there's other options.

I think it's less common with computers, but I definitely know some people who refer to all laptops as macbooks because one of their kids or someone else they know has one which is actually a macbook.

(They do it with consoles too. One of the first things I had to learn when working in a video game store was that customers who come in asking about "a Nintendo" or games for one did not necessarily mean a Wii or DS (the current consoles at the time) it could be literally any machine used to play games, including in some cases a PC or Mac.)

karekiz

BlueRaven wrote: »

karekiz wrote: »

relentless_turnip wrote: »

I understand their position here... But don't understand why they would refer to ESO in this way. The tone makes it sound like they don't believe it to be worth the effort. Diminishing performance only enforces these thoughts...
They probably didn't intend it to sound like this, but either way it's pretty worrying.

Would you port a 6 year old MMO onto a platform with a tiny percentage of players? I dunno. I think it sounds like a waste of money, especially when that percentage of players already have the capability to log in <***Currently***>.


It actually reminds me of the old Mac EQ server when they swapped TO intel lol.

Blizzard does not seem to have a problem. And macs don’t run off of a unique server.

1. I wouldn't compare ESO to World of Warcraft in terms of population. Especially after classic launch which according to reports put it back towards numbers similar to WOTLK <IIRC>. Also Blizzard has a history of supporting Apple.

2. The EQ thing isn't me saying ESO = EQ servers just a similar situation where they supported an Apple *Client* then it completely changed and it wasn't worth it to bother to continue to rewrite it to support again.

BalticBlues

What the letter from ZOS’s Studio Director Matt Firor basically says is:

We think there would not be enough ESO PLAYERS on ARM-based Macs
to justify an ARM-based development team at ZOS.
So we are fading out our Mac support.

Considering that ZOS now belongs to Microsoft,
and Microsoft already develops MS OFFICE for ARM,
this probably speaks volumes about how successful ESO is on Mac...

wolfie1.0.

BalticBlues wrote: »

What the letter from ZOS’s Studio Director Matt Firor basically says is:

We think there would not be enough ESO PLAYERS on ARM-based Macs
to justify an ARM-based development team at ZOS.
So we are fading out our Mac support.

Considering that ZOS now belongs to Microsoft,
and Microsoft already develops MS OFFICE for ARM,
this probably speaks volumes about how successful ESO is on Mac...

To be fair here the actual purchase of ZOS by Microsoft wont occur until June 2021. They may act like they are the same now but really they arnt. And that one portion of MS developed for ARM isn't the same as another. Office and a game like ESO are very different. It would be like asking the guy that fixes lawnmowers for a living to work on you car, he may get the job done but it may not work the same after.

Lysette

relentless_turnip wrote: »

I totally get their stance on this and think it was quite ridiculous for apple to make this change and essentially put the pressure on game developers to cater for their users.

What does worry me is this: "It is a huge undertaking to port a product as old, large, and complex as ESO to a new CPU, with no certain outcome of success. Because of these factors, we will not be porting ESO to run on the new ARM-based Macs."

I understand their position here... But don't understand why they would refer to ESO in this way. The tone makes it sound like they don't believe it to be worth the effort. Diminishing performance only enforces these thoughts...
They probably didn't intend it to sound like this, but either way it's pretty worrying.

To me it basically means "now, give me a break, really? As if we wouldn't have nothing else to do than pleasing Apple. The game is complex and code is massive and given it's age, we have a hard time to iron out stuff, which is there since years, and don't even bother to ask us to update to a new processor, we cannot even make it run properly on the old one".

Basically it is a reasonable decision by Matt - they have enough problems to get the game in shape on X86, putting a port to a totally new hardware on top of it, would be just asking for disaster to strike.

And Mac users should address Apple with their complain about it - it is not Matt's or ZOS's fault here, when Apple decides to no longer support X86.

Starlight_Whisper

Honestly, I read same article and seems like they don't think they be successful. Like mac will have too limited of software to use. Mac won't last long this way

Lysette

Starlight_Whisper wrote: »

Honestly, I read same article and seems like they don't think they be successful. Like mac will have too limited of software to use. Mac won't last long this way

I guess this is what Matt meant when he said it is questionable if the effort to cater to it will yield a good return. Being careful here is certainly a smart move for now. And it doesn't have to be his final decision about the matter anyway.

I guess I should mention, that it is quite fair from Matt to give this information at all - he wouldn't have to. This is customer friendly and helps players to make reasonable decisions - especially because he gave as well alternatives.

zaria

Starlight_Whisper wrote: »

Honestly, I read same article and seems like they don't think they be successful. Like mac will have too limited of software to use. Mac won't last long this way

I say it will be an lack on game on it anyway, current mac is easy as its basically an linux pc.
With the new system it will be much harder unless your game is based on an engine who support lots of platforms like unity.

In short you don't buy the new apple cpu if one of your primary goal with the computer is gaming.
The question is more if Apple will drop the intel cpu.

As other say its an problem for gaming and some other uses, not something who is Apple main focus, I feel they want to move the laptop closer to phones and tablets.
It probably works out for them, did not work for Microsoft but they used it to get into mobile.
For apple their main focus is mobile.

BalticBlues

Starlight_Whisper wrote: »

Honestly, I read same article and seems like they don't think they be successful. Like mac will have too limited of software to use. Mac won't last long this way

I would not bet on this. ARM technology won the mobile sector for good reasons
and now is coming to servers & desktop computers also for good reasons.

And while Microsoft does not believe in their own products,
so Microsoft does NOT offer MS OFFICE for their own ARM Surface Pro X computers,

Microsoft believes in Apple's products,
so Microsoft will offer MS OFFICE for Apple ARM MacBooks

Raideen

Starlock wrote: »

Raideen wrote: »

Mac users should not feel anything about it, they know what they are getting into when it comes to gaming. Mac has never been a solid gaming platform.

Eh, that's something of myth, to be honest. Current Macs can run almost anything that Windows can run if you set your hardware to boot up in or emulate Windows. I'm just too lazy to do that - or rather, I don't feel like paying for the license - so I stick to console for most games.

As BlueRaven points out, it's not that it's impossible to do a conversion. And considering this game has gambling revenue to draw from, they've frankly got no darned excuse as far as financing it goes. They just don't care enough to bother.

Dollar for dollar there has never been a mac made that will perform as good as a PC when it comes to games. In fact, even in the creative realm PC works better than mac. The primary reason apple has the stereotype of being a "creative/design machine" is because Apple was the first to stress the importance of typography in the 80's. Windows followed shortly after. Apple is good for graphic design, but not better than PC. In fact the Adobe suite works better on PC and has more features within most of the apps. Eizo Monitors WAY outperform apples offerings, so even with something as basic as a monitor PC will out perform Mac. Designers (if I am to stereotype them) often prefer Apple because of the branding and lifestyle associated with it. Its cool, hip, trendy and that is all well and good, but when it comes time to actually perform...

I worked for a design firm in Hollywood (Burbank specifically) who used mac pros for the "lightweight" work and for "street cred" when tours were given for clients (because most folks buy into the myth of apple being a designers machine). Anything that involved 3D rendering or heavy crunching was done by PC's. It was not about cost, it was about getting work done in a more timely/faster manner. Our rendering farm was all PC.

There is a reason Solidworks does not offer their software for Mac. I don't even think Artioscad is available for Mac. Those are two of, if not the most popular CAD softwares on the planet (Artios being more corrugated specific for packaging).

Apples strength lies in its security and there is merit in that and a reason to use those machines for those applications, but when it comes to gaming, or creative work (performance related work) Apple just does not measure up and has not for a very long time.

I don't say any of this to disparage apple as a product, but in the realm of performance, Apple is going to lose the vast majority of the time.

fred4

Please be aware that these new ARM-based Macs cannot run software created for Intel-based computers.

Stating this flat out strikes me as neither correct nor incorrect in this particular case.

X86 emulation comes with a significant performance impact—in general, emulation is okay for software like office productivity apps, but not for gaming.

I guess we'll have to wait for more reviews, but it seems that Apple have done a very good job on Rosetta 2 with synthetic x86 benchmarks reaching anywhere from 60% to 95% of native performance. That is NOT the crippling performance impact you would expect from emulation. I run ESO on a Core 2 Quad from 2008. I would expect one of these Macs to beat that, despite emulation.

What I therefore read this as is (A) Matt Firor put the statement out without ZOS assessing the new Mac's capabilities and (B) he is covering his behind for now. I guess there could be (C), which is ZOS using this as an excuse to withdraw Mac support or an off-chance of (D) in that he's actually right. However the early indications are that Apple has done a far better job at emulation than anyone expected. It would be unfortunate if ZOS withdrew official support only for ESO to fail with some small glitch that they could fix.

Emma_Overload

I blame Apple for this, not ZOS. There is zero benefit to Mac users from this change, no matter what Apple says.

BalticBlues

Emma_Overload wrote: »

I blame Apple for this, not ZOS. There is zero benefit to Mac users from this change, no matter what Apple says.

Caution. This depends where you are coming from - and where you want to go from here...
https://www.tomsguide.com/opinion/arm-macbook-reason-to-upgrade.

fred4

Emma_Overload wrote: »

I blame Apple for this, not ZOS. There is zero benefit to Mac users from this change, no matter what Apple says.

I am a lifelong Windows user and develop software for that platform. I just bought a Ryzen laptop. I don't use Apple products and have no vested interest, but I have to give them kudos.

You and Matt Firor are both flat out wrong. Please watch the gaming section in the following review. Shadow of the Tomb Raider and Total War Three Kingdoms are both running twice as fast on the M1 Macbook Pro versus the Intel one, despite Rosetta 2 emulation. As a programmer I know exactly where Matt is coming from. I might have said the exact same thing in his position, however - again with the caveat that later reviews may show warts in Apple's products - those comments appear to have been wrong. So laughably wrong, in fact, that I imagine he'll have to retract them. If ZOS are going to desupport Macs, it won't be for performance reasons and they had better come clean.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tTxZZ48FG4s

KappaKid83

Eedat wrote: »

A lot of things are going to lose Mac support and it's really Mac's decision. Mac loves to force exclusivity. Expect to lose support for practically all games except maybe new triple A titles for a long time and a lot permanently if you buy an Arm Mac

This is the only take that really matters. It is strictly a Mac decision to go this way and a money grab, like all of their other products(extra for charging connector/charger/cord etc.). Programming a game in one set of parameters is hard enough but having to completely re-write the same game for a one off Chipset seems asinine at best.

idk

Eedat wrote: »

A lot of things are going to lose Mac support and it's really Mac's decision. Mac loves to force exclusivity. Expect to lose support for practically all games except maybe new triple A titles for a long time and a lot permanently if you buy an Arm Mac

I agree with this. Apple is literally making Macs into a fifth platform. If their market share on the gaming side is significantly smaller than the three biggest I doubt many companies will port their games to play on Mac. It is a very costly and time-consuming process as Zos shut down adding new meaningful content to ESO for a year to get the game ready for consoles.

fred4

The main question I would have, if I was contemplating an M1-based Mac, is how long Rosetta 2 will be supported.

Celephantsylvius_Bornasfinmo

Really you can't go wrong with one of these (if you want to stay loyal to mac)

It's a great old machine, won't let you down (one of the best from Apple in my opinion)

https://www.backmarket.fr/mac-pro-juin-2012-xeon-333-ghz-hdd-1-to-12-go-pas-cher/353403.html?shopping=gmc&gclid=Cj0KCQiAqdP9BRDVARIsAGSZ8AnEcEDOvg6yhdRC1M2kmqhY2Fh5j3mJKWEEECelFM-XN2IN69Ib1BIaAkEvEALw_wcB

Rasoma

fred4 wrote: »

The main question I would have, if I was contemplating an M1-based Mac, is how long Rosetta 2 will be supported.

Based upon the PowerPC to Intel timeline Apple dropped support for it in the OS seven years later with the release of Mac OS X Lion so I'd say around five years minimum. They are aware that despite wanting people to all upgrade as soon as the new machines are available people and institutions have budgets so they need to factor in the normal amount of time a machine would be used for and add a bit on just to be safe.

etchedpixels

fred4 wrote: »

Please watch the gaming section in the following review. Shadow of the Tomb Raider and Total War Three Kingdoms are both running twice as fast on the M1 Macbook Pro versus the Intel one, despite Rosetta 2 emulation.

In which case there is no need to worry about ARM support in ESO anyway because Rosetta will be good enough.

If Rosetta is good enough Zenimax don't have to worry, and given Apple unlike many other vendors actually seem to respect product lifetime rules even with software support that ought to keep it going for enough years to work out if they need to change plan.

danno8

BalticBlues wrote: »

Starlight_Whisper wrote: »

Honestly, I read same article and seems like they don't think they be successful. Like mac will have too limited of software to use. Mac won't last long this way

I would not bet on this. ARM technology won the mobile sector for good reasons
and now is coming to servers & desktop computers also for good reasons.

Those reasons being primarily power draw. On phones and laptops that's very important. For servers most definitely as power demands are an expense.

On desktop PC, not so much really. PC gamers hardly care about power demands of their systems as long as it translates into more FPS. Even PC non-gamers hardly care if their systems draw 500w or 300w while they are compressing files or encoding. The extra $1 or $2 on their monthly bill doesn't matter.

Apple wants full control of its hardware from the bottom up, and with Intel being so unreliable for them over the last few years they decided to take control. They will have quick ARM processors that are very power efficient and powerful at doing what most Apple users use their Macbooks for.

Unfortunately that will likely not mean gaming.

edit: To be clear, what I mean is that gaming isn't really a consideration over at Apple when they make these decisions, whether the M1 turns out to be faster for gaming or not.

katorga

Realistically, Apple is about 8% of the total PC market. M1 Mac's will be a tiny sliver of that. It makes complete sense to not develop for Mac.

So we use Mac's at work, and I think if Apple goes 100% ARM it will kill them off except for execs who just do email, attend video meetings and consume content. The underlying x86 compatibility and access to various solutions to run windows-only applications at essentially native speed is what made them feasible for general use. Something as simple as not having an ARM native VPN client would sink it.

SeaGtGruff

BalticBlues wrote: »

And while Microsoft does not believe in their own products,
so Microsoft does NOT offer MS OFFICE for their own ARM Surface Pro X computers,

Microsoft believes in Apple's products,
so Microsoft will offer MS OFFICE for Apple ARM MacBooks

I know nothing about the situation regarding MS Office and the Surface Pro X, so when I saw your opinion I went searching-- and found the following thread:

https://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/surface/forum/surfprox-surfupdate/office-on-surface-pro-x/3f5f1817-6805-48f8-b59d-a0d8fc19dca1?auth=1

There's a lot of back-and-forth there, but it seems to me that things get a bit clearer by the end of page 3:

https://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/surface/forum/surfprox-surfupdate/office-on-surface-pro-x/3f5f1817-6805-48f8-b59d-a0d8fc19dca1?auth=1&page=3

Anyway, my takeaway from it is that it's not because "Microsoft does not believe in their own products" as you claim, but that it's a whole lot more complicated than that, and that MS is most likely working on solutions.

montiferus

As a mac user it is disappointing to hear the news but I don't fault ZOS as I am sure the market is far too small for them to put any money into it.

For now i will continue to play on my intel based mac. When the time comes to upgrade my laptop I will either buy a PC or quit ESO. Leaning toward the latter since the game is frankly a hot mess these last couple of years.

I am curious does anyone know the numbers on the mac population for ESO? I know a handful of guildies who also play on mac but my guess is it represents less than 3% of the player base.

BlueRaven

Raideen wrote: »

Starlock wrote: »

Raideen wrote: »

Mac users should not feel anything about it, they know what they are getting into when it comes to gaming. Mac has never been a solid gaming platform.

Eh, that's something of myth, to be honest. Current Macs can run almost anything that Windows can run if you set your hardware to boot up in or emulate Windows. I'm just too lazy to do that - or rather, I don't feel like paying for the license - so I stick to console for most games.

As BlueRaven points out, it's not that it's impossible to do a conversion. And considering this game has gambling revenue to draw from, they've frankly got no darned excuse as far as financing it goes. They just don't care enough to bother.

Dollar for dollar there has never been a mac made that will perform as good as a PC when it comes to games. In fact, even in the creative realm PC works better than mac. The primary reason apple has the stereotype of being a "creative/design machine" is because Apple was the first to stress the importance of typography in the 80's. Windows followed shortly after. Apple is good for graphic design, but not better than PC. In fact the Adobe suite works better on PC and has more features within most of the apps. Eizo Monitors WAY outperform apples offerings, so even with something as basic as a monitor PC will out perform Mac. Designers (if I am to stereotype them) often prefer Apple because of the branding and lifestyle associated with it. Its cool, hip, trendy and that is all well and good, but when it comes time to actually perform...

I worked for a design firm in Hollywood (Burbank specifically) who used mac pros for the "lightweight" work and for "street cred" when tours were given for clients (because most folks buy into the myth of apple being a designers machine). Anything that involved 3D rendering or heavy crunching was done by PC's. It was not about cost, it was about getting work done in a more timely/faster manner. Our rendering farm was all PC.

There is a reason Solidworks does not offer their software for Mac. I don't even think Artioscad is available for Mac. Those are two of, if not the most popular CAD softwares on the planet (Artios being more corrugated specific for packaging).

Apples strength lies in its security and there is merit in that and a reason to use those machines for those applications, but when it comes to gaming, or creative work (performance related work) Apple just does not measure up and has not for a very long time.

I don't say any of this to disparage apple as a product, but in the realm of performance, Apple is going to lose the vast majority of the time.

At my job we charge extra if the files were prepared on a pc because of all the extra time we have to put into correcting them. Yeah, you can do “creative” things on a pc, but they are generally highly problematic compared to similar files done on a Mac.

SeaGtGruff

I don't know the ratio of people who play ESO on a Mac versus a Windows PC, but I play on both-- but most often Windows.

Dunning_Kruger

Eh stadia isn’t a bad option for them. If they are playing on Mac they are used to sub par gaming experiences.

I mean that with minimal troll too; we all know macs aren’t for PC gaming and have the worst game support in the market in general.

kojou

Even if the adoption rate of ARM based Macs is really high, there is no way ZOS would invest the amount of resources required to support ESO to work on it natively. It would be too large of an effort for a game this old.

I am interested to see how the ARM based Macs do in general, one of my biggest problems with my Mac that I use for work is its performance is thermally bound.