UDK for MacOS X

[Dmikis]

Is there any information about UDK for Mac? Will it be released?

[tomluoc]

May be there will be no release bcoz i see the .Net framework is required to setup UDK here. I like your thought by the way!

[Dmikis]

I think it isn't a big problem for porting: EpicGames announced Mac version of UT3 in 2007 (information from Wikipedia and maclife.com), but now I can't find any info about this so you seem to be right. But does exist any official info?

[Shambler]

As said, there are a number of things relying on .NET, so that makes it unlikely.
However, I think it's just the editor which relies on .NET so much, so Mac/Linux versions of the base engine/runtime might still be possible.

[Jazz]

As far as I know Unreal Editor is mostly based on wxWidgets, there is a Linux/Mac version of toolkit available. I don't know, where .NET is used in UDK, but there is also mono project for Mac/Linux with poor .NET compatibility

Still, all this story around Mac/Linux version of UT3 is frightening and I'm afraid we are not getting UDK before UT3

[MadGrenadier]

Yea, I'm still waiting on that linux port of UT3 :/

Not holding my breath anymore though

[badkangaroo]

Actually, http://www.mono-project.com/Main_Page Mono is an opensource .Net development framework for linux osX and windows. It's a bit behind where epic needs it to be, but I dont think that .net is the main reason for not porting the engine.

[robin1232]

no, actually, the main reason why is because the pc version runs on DirectX (9.0c) and mac can only handle OpenGL, macsoft is porting, but they're also still working on an age of empires III expansion (like anyone is going to buy that...).

anyway, I think that its gonna be released as soon as UT3 and Gears of War come for mac, but thats probably gonna take a long, long time.

[Jazz]

no, actually, the main reason why is because the pc version runs on DirectX (9.0c) and mac can only handle OpenGL

PlayStation 3 version runs on OpenGL

Seems like you are not following Icculus with his news about Linux/Mac port.

Ryan "Icculus" C. Gordon already posted two screenshots with Unreal Tournament running on Linux and Mac, using mojoshader (translator for directx shader language, afaik UE3' render pipeline is fully based on shaders)

[robin1232]

PlayStation 3 version runs on OpenGL

Seems like you are not following Icculus with his news about Linux/Mac port.

Ryan "Icculus" C. Gordon already posted two screenshots with Unreal Tournament running on Linux and Mac, using mojoshader (translator for directx shader language, afaik UE3' render pipeline is fully based on shaders)

where can I find it then?
cant find anything at all on http://icculus.org/

[Dmikis]

There is a link to his mercurial repository: you can download mojo only form it (as i understand).

[Phenicks]

where can I find it then?
cant find anything at all on http://icculus.org/

http://icculus.org/cgi-bin/finger/fi...&time=06-38-30

I think Jazz meant to follow him on Twitter.

[Henrik]

Icculus took over 2 years to do many of his ports.. It's been exactly 2 with UT3 now, so you never know.

[Megam4n]

Well, I'm a mac user and would LOVE to have UDK run natively on my comp. I could use XP, or figure it out in Wine... but it would be nice to have it on OS X.

We have to wait ~2 years?

[Jazz]

We have to wait ~2 years?

Well, 2 years passed and Unreal Tournament 3 is not published yet, so no one knows

As for wine, Unreal Editor never worked good through it. I've tried to install UDK, but failed even on winetricks installation of framework.

[majorcrabs]

I would also like to express my interest in a max or linux udk, running it in parallels is almost impossible to use light mass haha

[Idsz]

Why do you want to run it in OSX? Don't really know if you have an Intel mac but if so, just use bootcamp. If you have a mac that could run UDK smoothly then you probably won't have any problems with running it on windows on your mac.

[thelaw]

Personally I prefer to develop on windows but would still like to the have the option to publish to OSX.

[Jazz]

Why do you want to run it in OSX? Don't really know if you have an Intel mac but if so, just use bootcamp.

Maybe because not everyone wants to keep windows installation for a single program?

[robin1232]

Why do you want to run it in OSX? Don't really know if you have an Intel mac but if so, just use bootcamp. If you have a mac that could run UDK smoothly then you probably won't have any problems with running it on windows on your mac.

because windows is the most unstable kernel there is, seriously, it crashes all the time.
twenty minutes after installing my xp bootcamp it crashed and required a reinstall.
now it runs pretty good, but it still crashes alot more than OS-X.

[tidu]

Why do you want to run it in OSX? Don't really know if you have an Intel mac but if so, just use bootcamp. If you have a mac that could run UDK smoothly then you probably won't have any problems with running it on windows on your mac.

Sorry to dig up an old thread here. I agree with your statement, it's easy enough to map/mod in boot camp, I did it with UT3. But I think OP might be onto something. Macs are gaining some marketshare, and it's possible "mac gaming," whatever it may be, could gain some traction. And I think if it were to start anywhere, it would be small, cheap (or free), fun homebrew games.

Autodesk recently ported Maya to Mac, and Photoshop's available, so there aren't many limitations to an artist working with a Mac UDK. I'll easily settle for boot camp, but I don't think a Mac UDK is so far fetched.

[zoltanjr]

Macs have become pretty much the norm for designers in the last 3 years, can't really figure out why i think its just because they look stylish and you know designers.

If i only used maya and photoshop it would probably prefer a mac, if it didn't cost 5x more then a build yourself PC, but until they get 3ds and the games running natively dual booting just gets annoying. I personally would prefer to run ubuntu by itself permenantly but since most games and lots of other software don't like it too much yet its just as bad as a mac. Hopefully in a couple of years it'l run everything windows 100% and then windows can go in the bin

[robin1232]

Sorry to dig up an old thread here. I agree with your statement, it's easy enough to map/mod in boot camp, I did it with UT3. But I think OP might be onto something. Macs are gaining some marketshare, and it's possible "mac gaming," whatever it may be, could gain some traction. And I think if it were to start anywhere, it would be small, cheap (or free), fun homebrew games.

Autodesk recently ported Maya to Mac, and Photoshop's available, so there aren't many limitations to an artist working with a Mac UDK. I'll easily settle for boot camp, but I don't think a Mac UDK is so far fetched.

actually, photoshop is more than available, it works better on mac than on windows.

as for the UDK, macsoft is working on an UT3 for mac port and Epic also announced Gears for mac.

so I think it might be coming along with the UT3 port.

[eAlex79]

Actually UDK uses WPF. I guess for parts of the editor. And WPF is not ported to any other OS..

And the Adobe Suite on Mac OS uses Carbon.. even CS 4. That's why they have Photoshop 64 on Windows x64 but not on Mac OS X 10.6. I love Mac OS and use it for anything I see it fit, but f.e. OpenGL is just slow on Mac OS. Got worse again with 10.6.

And as of today Mac's can run Windows nativly.. I doubt theyll spend time and money to port over UDK, just because the benefits/costs list is uneven.

Best bet is to dual boot your Mac with Win 7 and Mac OS. One for fun (and funwork) and one for (serious?) work.

[robin1232]

Actually UDK uses WPF. I guess for parts of the editor. And WPF is not ported to any other OS..

And the Adobe Suite on Mac OS uses Carbon.. even CS 4. That's why they have Photoshop 64 on Windows x64 but not on Mac OS X 10.6. I love Mac OS and use it for anything I see it fit, but f.e. OpenGL is just slow on Mac OS. Got worse again with 10.6.

And as of today Mac's can run Windows nativly.. I doubt theyll spend time and money to port over UDK, just because the benefits/costs list is uneven.

Best bet is to dual boot your Mac with Win 7 and Mac OS. One for fun (and funwork) and one for (serious?) work.

sigh...
http://www.insidemacgames.com/news/s...rticleID=15395

[domox]

I know this is old news but... http://www.pcworld.com/article/18528..._engine_3.html So, aside from having to port tools, any work on at least being able to bake for the mac/iphone platform? I am intimate with the iPhone SDK and this is proof to me that it is not too much of a stretch to pull off. I have tremendous faith in Epic and am simply a frustrated dev who is going through UDK withdrawals.

Thanks

[TheOneandOnly]

Best bet is to dual boot your Mac with Win 7 and Mac OS. One for fun (and funwork) and one for (serious?) work.

But having a partitioned harddrive is a complete pain in the arse when you've already got all your other Mac-based design applications on the opposite part to the UDK. Personally I can just about get away with running the UDK in Windows under Parallels, but it would be much more efficient if I didn't have to.

I don't understand why Epic hasn't at least mentioned some sort of consideration of a Mac version of the UDK. After all, it can be used for more than just games, and Macs seem to be getting ever widening use in the entertainment industries. Having a dedicated Mac version would speed up quite a few people's production times, and maybe speed up the cash flow into Epic's pockets as a result.

[crapageddon]

I boot camp it. Currently running XP and have Maya on my PC side. I would love to get a Mac port of UDK to utilize my processors and full ram. Right now I cap out on the PC side at 4GB when I could have 8GB on my Mac side. Dual Quad cores are being underwhelmed as well. If Mac doesn't get on the wagon soon I may end up going back to PC exclusively. I bought a Mac because of the flexibility of having both OS's and while OSX kicks the crap out of windows - OSX can't run UDK. Not yet anyway.

I'm thinking of upgrading to vista on my BootCamp to utilize the 64 bitness. Any suggestions? I'm not going to 7 because I need Leopard to do that and Leopard I've heard nothing but horror stories about (for 3D users anyway).

[eAlex79]

Leopard? 10.5 has really good OpenGL support for the cards it supports, 10.6 is okay but worse then 10.6, but it's useable and I sure Apple is going to change that soon, and 10.4 is just plain bad at OpenGL.

Go for Snow Leopard and Windows 7.

[robin1232]

Leopard? 10.5 has really good OpenGL support for the cards it supports, 10.6 is okay but worse then 10.6, but it's useable and I sure Apple is going to change that soon, and 10.4 is just plain bad at OpenGL.

Go for Snow Leopard and Windows 7.

10.6 has native support for OpenCL.
and ofcourse DirectX is faster than OpenGL, but I hate the way that it has to reinstall every time you install a game...

seriously though, OpenCL can compute things on the GPU which can be really fast.
Linux supports it too, but I hope microsoft doesn't steal it (like with HTML 5, at least google contributed with a good example of how to use it).

[fungos]

10.6 has native support for OpenCL.
and ofcourse DirectX is faster than OpenGL, but I hate the way that it has to reinstall every time you install a game...

seriously though, OpenCL can compute things on the GPU which can be really fast.
Linux supports it too, but I hope microsoft doesn't steal it (like with HTML 5, at least google contributed with a good example of how to use it).

Well, just saying that "DirectX is faster than OpenGL" shows biased view at best, ignorance at worse.

You should complete that sentence with "on Windows platforms".
There is a nice and growing engine called Unigine (http://unigine.com) that has a nice benchmark feature, and amazingly, it run under Windows, MacOSX and Linux. Try it, and benchmark it under Windows and Linux(with NVidia driver) or MacOSX.

Here my OpenGL+Linux benchmark was a little better than Windows+DirectX! YES, TRY IT YOURSELF! But, Windows+OpenGL really sux as hell! This is not OpenGL fault I can say...

Anyway, there is not a reason (other than - I don't give a f*!#) that we haven't udk3 on MacOSX (if they already have an udk3 iPhone preview!) and Linux (if they already have an udk3 Palm webOS preview!).

UDK3 on iPhone: http://www.beyondunreal.com/view_story.php?id=13058
UDK3 on Palm webOS: http://www.techrockstar.com/2010/03/...s-gets-unreal/

ps1.: I really want to play Mortal Online in a stable and decent platform like MacOSX or Linux.
ps2.: I have various friends that have Mac and want to play it too, and other unreal games but are stuck at WoW because it just runs under MacOSX.

[StingReay]

As said, there are a number of things relying on .NET, so that makes it unlikely.
However, I think it's just the editor which relies on .NET so much, so Mac/Linux versions of the base engine/runtime might still be possible.

It's not hard to optimise an app for Mono. Look at Unity for Mac, it uses Mono instead of .NET.

[VeliV]

Ignorance is a bliss when it comes to Mac vs. PC. I've been using both for some time now and I usually bootcamp to windows in order to play the latest games. Other than that, it's all OSX.

Why? Since I've never had important software crash in OS X On windows it tends to crash quite often, especially if you dont do clean install once in a while for the whole computer. Also, on OSX there are far fewer background processes going on, which means that I have the performance on the program that I am actually working with.

When it comes to graphics, there is no "DirectX only" features. For example, check MGS3 Snake Eater on PS2 console. It has all the shiny effects that MS used to sell Vista (DX10) to consumers. But still it has nothing to do with DirectX.

Same applies for Unreal. The shaders makes up most of what we see on the screen and the difference between the HLSL (DirectX) and GLSL (OpenGL) are quite minimal and can be easily converted to each other. After all, the hardware does the computing, not the language.

Same applies for .NET . The mono project is more than enough to handle most of .NET features.

The real question here is not which OS is better, since it comes down to users own preference, but more about if it's viable for Epic to make a Mac port of UDK. ATM, the answer is no, but even that might change in the future (whit more titles being released on the Mac as well).

It is not a matter of technological issues. It's a matter of money.

[Johnny Thunder]

Steam runs on a mac now so that may tip the balance of the computer gaming world, ideally for the better seeing as Mac and Linux share a lot in common.

[eAlex79]

What do MacOS X and Linux share alot then?

UDK uses WPF, WPF is not part of Mono, and it probably will not be.

[eXeC]

Ignorance is a bliss when it comes to Mac vs. PC. I've been using both for some time now and I usually bootcamp to windows in order to play the latest games. Other than that, it's all OSX.

Why? Since I've never had important software crash in OS X On windows it tends to crash quite often, especially if you dont do clean install once in a while for the whole computer. Also, on OSX there are far fewer background processes going on, which means that I have the performance on the program that I am actually working with.

When it comes to graphics, there is no "DirectX only" features. For example, check MGS3 Snake Eater on PS2 console. It has all the shiny effects that MS used to sell Vista (DX10) to consumers. But still it has nothing to do with DirectX.

Same applies for Unreal. The shaders makes up most of what we see on the screen and the difference between the HLSL (DirectX) and GLSL (OpenGL) are quite minimal and can be easily converted to each other. After all, the hardware does the computing, not the language.

Same applies for .NET . The mono project is more than enough to handle most of .NET features.

The real question here is not which OS is better, since it comes down to users own preference, but more about if it's viable for Epic to make a Mac port of UDK. ATM, the answer is no, but even that might change in the future (whit more titles being released on the Mac as well).

It is not a matter of technological issues. It's a matter of money.

Not to mention the amazing technology called tesselation that Microsoft claim is amazing and worth upgrading to Dx11 for. >_> OpenGL has been able to do tesselation since 2007. OpenGL just doesn't have a huge FUD campaign in their favour.

[Makaze]

Not entirely true. OpenGL implements a different version of tessellation that will not take advantage of the new tessellation hardware in upcoming cards. So DX11 really will have an advantage over OpenGL at release. Of course by the time those cards are widespread enough to matter I'm sure there will be an OpenGL extension out to support them. But it's simply not true that OpenGL has had DX11 tessellation since 2007.

[jpeg123]

i really do hate to open the thread but killing floor (if i'm not mistaken) is available for mac through steam. the game is built off of the unreal engine. so it is possible to port some of the games over to the mac. so the support is there but not for editor (from killing floor steam page) "Includes Windows-only SDK for the creation of new levels and mods". i think that the sdk for any unreal games are being worked on and should be available soon


http://store.steampowered.com/app/1250/ killing floor page

[JA53N]

Mass Effect and Bioshock are also on Mac, so the unreal engine must be capable of cooking the games to run on a Mac, just not running the editor on one, which is fair enough.

[UnrealmrK]

I am currently running UDK on a mac using boot camp.