Cài đặt Steam
Đăng nhập
|
Ngôn ngữ
简体中文 (Hán giản thể)
繁體中文 (Hán phồn thể)
日本語 (Nhật)
한국어 (Hàn Quốc)
ไทย (Thái)
Български (Bungari)
Čeština (CH Séc)
Dansk (Đan Mạch)
Deutsch (Đức)
English (Anh)
Español - España (Tây Ban Nha - TBN)
Español - Latinoamérica (Tây Ban Nha cho Mỹ Latin)
Ελληνικά (Hy Lạp)
Français (Pháp)
Italiano (Ý)
Bahasa Indonesia (tiếng Indonesia)
Magyar (Hungary)
Nederlands (Hà Lan)
Norsk (Na Uy)
Polski (Ba Lan)
Português (Tiếng Bồ Đào Nha - BĐN)
Português - Brasil (Bồ Đào Nha - Brazil)
Română (Rumani)
Русский (Nga)
Suomi (Phần Lan)
Svenska (Thụy Điển)
Türkçe (Thổ Nhĩ Kỳ)
Українська (Ukraine)
Báo cáo lỗi dịch thuật
This isn't 2005; you can't get by on "wuss" hardware. Sorry, but them's the facts, Jack.
The games list specific hardware requirements- they are NOT mere suggestions. On today's systems you need over a hundred gigabytes non-allocated space for temporary installation space and permanent swap space (VRAM).
It would be different if you were running legacy games.
Plus, your complaint is ironic. People concerned with COST do not BUY Macintosh. Macs are performance systems- often selected for professional purposes- hands-down over Windows systems (for people with money to burn; INTELLIGENT non-gamer people choose LINUX systems). If you buy a Mac system so impoverished in the hardware department as YOUR system obviously is, you should have put your money down on a WINDOWS system (if your focus is gaming; Linux platforms haven't garnered sufficient developer focus).
Further explanation of irony: If you can afford a Mac system, you can afford a MUCH better Windows system with less problems.