Jump to content


soldier of fortune 2


  • Please log in to reply
64 replies to this topic

#21 Quicksilver

Quicksilver

    Verbal Windbag

  • IMG Writers
  • 4227 posts
  • Location:Chicago Illinois
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 11 April 2005 - 10:34 AM

Allright, but for some of us, we value fun and gameplay over sheer gore.
Former Senior Hardware Editor
InsideMacGames.com

#22 txa1265

txa1265

    Notorious

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 236 posts
  • Location:Corning, NY USA

Posted 11 April 2005 - 12:06 PM

QuicksilverG5, on April 11th 2005, 08:06 AM, said:

Um, someone obviously needs to buy a few more games.  SOF2 was a very good game, but there are at least a dozen that I can mention off the top of my head that match it or beat it in terms of quality.  I'd say that SOF2 singleplayer beats the multiplayer anyday.   :P

View Post


Taste is a funny thing ... I like SoFII more than I objectively know I should.  I got it for PC on day of release due to how much I like Raven (and despite how mediocre the first one was), and have played it probably 15 - 20 times since.

The story is hackneyed, the dialog cliched, the levels look like they were designed on an etch-a-sketch ... yet I love it ;)  The feel is intense, the weapons are tremendous, and the hit detection makes the immersion actually work.

I just finished another run a week or so ago, and it was a blast!

This may be heresy to some, but if I had to choose between HL2 and SoFII ... I would take SoFII without hesitation.  It isn't my favorite game, or even my favorite shooter, but it is a load of fun.

Mike
Dopelar effect (n.)  The tendency of stupid ideas to seem smarter when they come at you rapidly.

Check out my blog.

#23 sillek

sillek

    Heroic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 473 posts
  • Location:A

Posted 11 April 2005 - 06:52 PM

The iMac Man, on April 10th 2005, 12:08 PM, said:

Ran fine on my 800mhz iMac.

View Post


This guy has ran everything "fine" on that thing !
Too bad everything runs at <10FPS on the same machine for me ):

#24 Quicksilver

Quicksilver

    Verbal Windbag

  • IMG Writers
  • 4227 posts
  • Location:Chicago Illinois
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 11 April 2005 - 07:11 PM

It's all subjective--never listen to someone that says a game runs "fine" or "fast" on his system unless he gives you numbers with the corresponding settings.  I've seen some people call 40 fps crap and others silky smooth.
Former Senior Hardware Editor
InsideMacGames.com

#25 Tomatocow

Tomatocow

    King of the Cows

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2377 posts
  • Location:A store near you.

Posted 11 April 2005 - 09:59 PM

I love the sound the bot makes when you blast his head off with a shotgun. :lol:

#26 The iMac Man

The iMac Man

    Macologist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2422 posts
  • Location:IL (USA)

Posted 11 April 2005 - 11:20 PM

sillek, on April 11th 2005, 07:52 PM, said:

This guy has ran everything "fine" on that thing !
Too bad everything runs at <10FPS on the same machine for me ):

View Post



I am very Mac-smart, and know how to keep my machine running the fastest it possibly can.

"Subjective" is not the issue here.  The game runs fine on my iMac.
-iMac

(The PC to Mac CoD Mod Converter)
Heat of Battle
Revolt
SWAT
Others

Get Mac Game Mods: Macologist.org

#27 sillek

sillek

    Heroic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 473 posts
  • Location:A

Posted 12 April 2005 - 12:11 PM

The iMac Man, on April 11th 2005, 09:20 PM, said:

I am very Mac-smart, and know how to keep my machine running the fastest it possibly can.

"Subjective" is not the issue here.  The game runs fine on my iMac.

View Post


Well do you have any examples of what I might do to make games perform better ?  Games that require a tad more than half of my specs are running like crap.  Does this means everyone has to be "Very Mac-smart" to get three year old games to run decently ?


Quote

It's all subjective--never listen to someone that says a game runs "fine" or "fast" on his system unless he gives you numbers with the corresponding settings. I've seen some people call 40 fps crap and others silky smooth.

My view:
30+, never going below 30 - golden
30+, going below 30 only in large fights - good
20-30, never going below 20 - Not good, but perfectly acceptable
10-20, what I play games in.. very annoying, but more acceptable if it's an RPG such as NWN
1-10FPS unplayable.  Sometimes playable if it's an RPG but it's still extremely frustrating.

#28 dj phat 2000

dj phat 2000

    Heroic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 256 posts

Posted 12 April 2005 - 01:27 PM

QuicksilverG5, on April 11th 2005, 09:34 AM, said:

Allright, but for some of us, we value fun and gameplay over sheer gore.

View Post


which is why for me Star Trek Elite Force 1 is still my personal favorite FPS, multi player game EVER!!!!!

No blood, no gore, no to many things that is typical of pretty much any other FPS MP game I've played.  Its FAST, its free styling.  I'd say its a mix of skateboarding, gymnastics, with weapons FPS.  You can do something new all the time when playing practically.  Got to love that Quake III engine for that physics.  :D  

To bad EF2 is nothing like it. :(

#29 dj phat 2000

dj phat 2000

    Heroic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 256 posts

Posted 12 April 2005 - 01:35 PM

sillek, on April 12th 2005, 11:11 AM, said:

Well do you have any examples of what I might do to make games perform better ?  Games that require a tad more than half of my specs are running like crap.  Does this means everyone has to be "Very Mac-smart" to get three year old games to run decently ?
My view:
30+, never going below 30 - golden
30+, going below 30 only in large fights - good
20-30, never going below 20 - Not good, but perfectly acceptable
10-20, what I play games in.. very annoying, but more acceptable if it's an RPG such as NWN
1-10FPS unplayable.  Sometimes playable if it's an RPG but it's still extremely frustrating.

View Post


Nah man.  You really need to get at Least 60FPS to maybe match your LCD or Monitor Refresh rate.  Then the game is Golden.  As the feel of the game is just right.  Any more is great but, at least your monitors refresh rates is golden.

#30 Gloops

Gloops

    Heroic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 435 posts
  • Location:Herts, UK

Posted 12 April 2005 - 01:50 PM

Hamhock, on April 11th 2005, 04:28 PM, said:

The single player version of SOF2 ran terribly on my machine (933 G4, w/ATI 9600), but the multiplayer runs great. I think that has to do with the AI of the single player, but I don't really know.

View Post


Single player runs fine on my 800 MHz G4 after the 1.03 patch - before that, crap. The patch helps a LOT. Just played through single player again with the weapon mod from SoF 2 files. Loads more fun.
What, Me worry?

#31 Whaleman

Whaleman

    High Priest of Bork

  • IMG Pro Users
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5632 posts
  • Steam ID:holybork
  • Location:The Land of Bork
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 12 April 2005 - 02:09 PM

dj phat 2000, on April 12th 2005, 08:35 PM, said:

Nah man.  You really need to get at Least 60FPS to maybe match your LCD or Monitor Refresh rate.  Then the game is Golden.  As the feel of the game is just right.  Any more is great but, at least your monitors refresh rates is golden.

View Post


Any more and you get tearing... hence Vsync.
You shouldn't ask yourself such worthless questions. Aim higher. Try this: why am I here? Why do I exist, and what is my purpose in this universe?

(Answers: 'Cause you are. 'Cause you do. 'Cause I got a shotgun, and you ain't got one.)

***END MESSAGE***

#32 sillek

sillek

    Heroic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 473 posts
  • Location:A

Posted 14 April 2005 - 10:52 PM

Well, Myth II is six years old and I get 20-30 FPS.
Diablo II is four [?] years old and I was getting incredibly low FPS in that [1-10 in multiplayer..usually with a large amount of skip]
Unreal Tournament is ..how old ?  People say it's '99 so I would guess five years old.  I get about 14-30FPS in that.  Oh, and TacOps still doesn't work in multiplayer.  No help from Macologist on their forums ):



In order to get 60FPS, I'd have to go back to games that were designed for OS 8.

I'm not trying to complain here, but rather understand what he means.  By his wording, you have to be a "mac smart person" to play a game.  Oh, and delete this if it's too off-topic.  Sorry about that.

#33 a2daj

a2daj

    Uberspewer

  • IMG Pro Users
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3400 posts
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 15 April 2005 - 09:26 AM

sillek, on April 14th 2005, 08:52 PM, said:

Diablo II is four [?] years old and I was getting incredibly low FPS in that [1-10 in multiplayer..usually with a large amount of skip]

View Post



Use software rendering.  OpenGL rendering performance isn't too stellar.
Dual 2.5 GHz G5-RADEON X800 -4 GB RAM-Revo 7.1
MBP 2.0GHz -Mobility RADEON X1600-2 GB RAM

#34 sillek

sillek

    Heroic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 473 posts
  • Location:A

Posted 15 April 2005 - 09:30 AM

OpenGL gave me 0-1 FPS and enormous skip.  I was always using software.  It was usually OK if I was standing still in town.  It got worse when I was fighting, but was alright as long as it wasn't a crazy place.  [Worldstone would lag].  But once ANYbody else in the game came anywhere near me, I'd just freeze and start lagging horribly.  Of course there would always be a pack of Sorc's in the game spamming Meteors non-stop on the position where Baal's minions spawn for the whole duration.  Now that is what pain is.

#35 Tesseract

Tesseract

    Unmanageable Megaweight

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3512 posts
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 15 April 2005 - 09:46 AM

I have personally witnessed Diablo II (Carbon) running at full speed (30 FPS IIRC, since the animations are composed of a fixed number of prerendered frames) in OS X on a Flower Power iMac. That's a 500 MHz G3 and a Rage 128.

Your hardware is more than the game needs. The problem could be network latency.

#36 codey

codey

    Fanatic

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 114 posts

Posted 18 April 2005 - 01:20 AM

c15zyx, on April 11th 2005, 04:32 AM, said:

Nope, the mouse input cvars are standard from Q3. I've checked the cvar lists (for possible graphics tweaks, etc) in all the Q3-based (and derivative) engine games I've played, and none support mouse-acceleration.

View Post

The cvar:

cl_mouseAccel

set to 1 definitely supports mouse acceleration in Quake 3, don't know if it works in SoF as I don't have the game.

cheers

#37 sillek

sillek

    Heroic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 473 posts
  • Location:A

Posted 18 April 2005 - 11:41 AM

A question about SoF2.. how do I display the FPS ?  Yes, I know the IMG FAQ II says /cg_drawFPS 1 .  I open the console, type it, then press the tilde key again.  Except, instead of closing the console, it types a ` into the console.  I can't get it closed.  The only thing I can do is type 'quit' in the console to quit the program.

Anyway, the game seems to play reasonable at 1024*768 with everything set to bare minimum.  I'm only about halfway through the first mission, though.  Hopefully I'll get a chance to play further.

#38 Quicksilver

Quicksilver

    Verbal Windbag

  • IMG Writers
  • 4227 posts
  • Location:Chicago Illinois
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 18 April 2005 - 03:59 PM

After you type the FPS command, hit enter, and then hit Shift + the "~" key.  That's how you get rid of the console.

Btw, the performance in the first level is horrible compared to the rest of the game.
Former Senior Hardware Editor
InsideMacGames.com

#39 sillek

sillek

    Heroic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 473 posts
  • Location:A

Posted 18 April 2005 - 06:19 PM

Thank you

#40 yves

yves

    Notorious

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 234 posts
  • Location:Netherlands

Posted 18 November 2005 - 11:34 PM

im lookin for the command to make shooting in sof pixel precise.
ive used it before but lost it with reinstall and now i cant find it anymore
on the pc side it is turned on by default but for some reason the mac version isnt
can anybody help me or correct me with better info
yves