That's great. Thank you very much for looking after us Mac users. :D

Cool. I was a bit confused because the game page didn't have anything new/updated on it :)

Nice job, but is it normal that the cursor in the game view is twice as slow as in menus? This is really awful, I'll have to check out the Windows version for comparison...

EDIT: Nope, the Windows version is fine.
EDIT 2: Updating the wrapper, changing the Wine version to 1.6 and turning on the native Mac driver (under graphics options in Wineskin) seems to fix everything. It is important to update the wrapper to get the option for the Mac driver, and just using 1.6 without the Mac driver produces even worse results, so the Mac driver is a must. I'll contact support to let them know.

Even though I went to my game library and clicked on Fallout, "My Account" in the menu bar seems to be "stuck" with a red 1. Just FYI.

EDIT: Nevermind... issue resolved.

I did NOT know the Mac versions used emulators like Boxer or WINE, I knew DOSBox was portable across PCs and MACs for the DOS stuff but I thought the later games were all either released on Macs originally and you had that version or nothing!

It depends on the game. Newer games made in the last 5+ years are probably native Mac games (assuming there was an original Mac release).

In the case of Fallout 1 & 2 (and other older Mac releases), those titles were originally made for PowerPC Macs and will not run on modern Intel-based Macs. As a result, emulation is a necessity.

EDIT: Naturally, any game that never had a Mac release would need emulation through Wine/DOSBox. And for some games, even if there was an Intel Mac release, Mac ports are somewhat notorious for not getting all the expansion packs. In those cases, again, emulation might be necessary to deliver the "Complete" experience for the Mac version.

Does that mean the Mac version of Fallout 1 no longer has the original CD contents as per my discussion here?

Stupid question, but does that mean I have to re-install Fallout with the new files ?

Same here: I just couldn't figure what the heck changed. So, basically... nothing (for Win32 users).

Oh, bugger, I should have read this before deleting the earlier image - the DOS version might be nice to have at times. If you want to use the new one, yes.

I was already running the Windows version through Wine. So this does exactly nada for me. Wineskin is easy enough that everyone who owns a Mac could have already done so, to be honest. I'm disappointed that GOG.com won't be offering the DOS version for download anymore. It was slow, yes, but a touch more stable. They should offer it as a bonus. The good news is, for those that didn't try the Windows version, that you now have a more mod-compatible version. I'd use the hi-res, and was liking the armor mod... until I realized that it cuts the dialogue of your party members out for some reason. Also, making the characters look like random generics with a switch of armor is kinda annoying.

What Wine version and setup is GOG.com using?

Any chance the older Boxer/DOS version can be re-added as a bonus?

Wineskin says 1.1.44 and there is no Winetricks.log, so they either deleted it or didn't use and Winetricks. They did use an override for ddraw (native, builtin) in Winecfg though, probably because of the ddriw fixed used to get Fallout to work on modern systems. Maybe they did something else in the registry as well, but i don't know. I'm actually surprised they used such an acient Wine version, but with Wine newer is not always better.

You are right that using Wineskin is simple, but often times games will require certain tweaks and a lot of trial & error, so I'm always glad if someone else does the work for me. And quite frankly, I really have better things to do than mess with Wine stettings, so I'll take a premade wrapper anytime.

I don't in any way want to sound ungrateful, as I'm always pleased when a game on GOG is made available for Mac, or updated and improved.

However, in this case I just can't see why a Wine version of Fallout is an improvement on the previous Boxer-based release. In general, Boxer-based versions are actually preferable because the Boxer interface is so polished and excellent, whereas Wine is fairly rough-and-ready. OK, if the Wine version really does run appreciably better on old Macs, or bring other advantages such as higher screen resolutions, then those are reasons to have it.

But my Mac dates from 2008, so it's hardly a very recent model, and I can see no difference in performance between the new Wine version and the old Boxer version. The differences I *do* notice, however, are:

1. The new Wine version insists on running full-screen by default, and there's no straightforward way of toggling between full-screen and windowed play.

2. Like all Wine games, it's slightly flakey in terms of returning to the desktop when you've finished, and it may also require a bit of user-level tweaking (as noted in earlier comments).

3. The previous Boxer-based version has a *much* nicer user interface and – of particular importance – supports the full-screen toggle control of OS X Lion and later, so you can easily move between full-screen and windowed play at any time. This feature alone makes it by far the better version of the two (and is something I personally consider quite important).

In other words, the new Wine release is, for me, a significant backwards step. Luckily I've kept the download of the previous Boxer version, so I can continue to use that, but that doesn't help people who haven't. I'd strongly suggest that GOG should keep the Boxer-based copy available and allow people to choose which version is best for them. For most users I'd suggest that the best version is the one that's just been deleted, unfortunately.

My other comment on this topic is: why waste time degrading a Mac release that's already been done very satisfactorily, when there are loads more games that need the Mac treatment?

For example, the entire Heroes of Might and Magic series – the best games ever written! – have STILL not been given Mac versions. These games are why I joined GOG in the first place. Heroes I and II could easily be given stand-alone Boxer-based Mac releases. Heroes III and later need Wine-based Mac versions. I do wish GOG would get on with these, rather than doing things like making Mac Fallout worse than it was before.

(Yes, I can create my own Mac Heroes installations, and have done so. But that doesn't alter my basic point that there's really no reason why GOG has not yet dealt with these unutterably superb games. They ought to have been priorities, not games to be left languishing unconverted.)

Again, sorry to be negative, because basically I love what GOG is doing.