Jump to content


OS X, G5 and Gaming.....questions from a PC gamer! ;-)


  • Please log in to reply
78 replies to this topic

#61 bobbob

bobbob

    Uberspewer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3367 posts

Posted 29 March 2004 - 07:20 PM

Quote

I loved OS 9's UI, but despised its decrepit core.
As I said, I love its UI, too. I wasn't talking about loving its kernel/APIs/stability/etc.

Quote

no process, not even the OS, can actually use more than the 4GB limit

I'm pretty sure the options are to either remap the address space when you want a different working set, or spawn more processes and use shared memory to communicate. I haven't used PAE in windows, so I'm not sure which is easier. Oh, and it's ~68 GB, and I just said 60 because it's rounded to the nearest 20 GB. Bite me ;)

Quote

not enough for the hardcore gamer who wants to play through two or three new releases each week.

I don't think it's the number of games that do us in, it's the variety and security. Games like Silent Storm, FFVII and XI, Metal Gear Solid 1 and 2, etc. get disproportionately ignored in favour of others. Even when a sequel to a Mac hit comes out for PC, whethor or not it gets ported is totally up in the air.

To highlight a recent example, until last week you'd have been insulted if you'd posted a question here regarding BF1942. Even though we now know it's eventually going to come out, whether the Secret Weapons expansion will come out is still unknown. Battlefield Vietnam is already out on the PC, and it's even more of a mystery.

#62 G-News

G-News

    Legendary

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 657 posts
  • Location:Bern, Switzerland

Posted 30 March 2004 - 01:15 AM

BF Vietnam is so buggy on the PC at the moment, that they can take their time and fix the bugs, before porting it to the Mac first. I wouldn't blame em.

#63 twinky

twinky

    Fanatic

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 50 posts
  • Location:Ontario, Canada

Posted 02 April 2004 - 08:12 PM

2^36 is 68,719,476,736 bytes, which is 64 GB, not 60 or 68. :-P

Quote

I don't think it's the number of games that do us in, it's the variety and security. Games like Silent Storm, FFVII and XI, Metal Gear Solid 1 and 2, etc. get disproportionately ignored in favour of others. Even when a sequel to a Mac hit comes out for PC, whethor or not it gets ported is totally up in the air. 

To highlight a recent example, until last week you'd have been insulted if you'd posted a question here regarding BF1942. Even though we now know it's eventually going to come out, whether the Secret Weapons expansion will come out is still unknown. Battlefield Vietnam is already out on the PC, and it's even more of a mystery.

That's true. I suppose it depends on how specific your tastes are. But I think how much gaming you want to do is also an important factor.

#64 bobbob

bobbob

    Uberspewer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3367 posts

Posted 04 April 2004 - 12:10 AM

Quote

2^36 is 68,719,476,736 bytes, which is 64 GB, not 60 or 68.

That's not SI :P 2^36 is 64 GiB, and 68 GB. Just ask hard drive manufacturors.

#65 G-News

G-News

    Legendary

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 657 posts
  • Location:Bern, Switzerland

Posted 04 April 2004 - 01:43 AM

we're talking about RAM though, not harddrives.
You rarely, if ever, use the 1000MB Gigabyte size with RAM, which still follows a very clear exponential line based on 2.

#66 bobbob

bobbob

    Uberspewer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3367 posts

Posted 04 April 2004 - 12:34 PM

Quote

we're talking about RAM though, not harddrives.

SI's the same, though. No need to corrupt the system.

#67 twinky

twinky

    Fanatic

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 50 posts
  • Location:Ontario, Canada

Posted 04 April 2004 - 03:48 PM

Quote

Quote

we're talking about RAM though, not harddrives.

SI's the same, though. No need to corrupt the system.

Computers are base 2. Sticking with base 2, especially when you're talking about the amount of memory a system can address, makes more sense than switching to base 10 arbitrarily. :-P

...and now that this thread has been thoroughly derailed... :-D

#68 bobbob

bobbob

    Uberspewer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3367 posts

Posted 04 April 2004 - 04:16 PM

Quote

switching to base 10 arbitrarily

SI prefixes are standardized to powers of ten. Use MiB, GiB, or whatever, if you want powers of two.

#69 G-News

G-News

    Legendary

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 657 posts
  • Location:Bern, Switzerland

Posted 04 April 2004 - 04:21 PM

You know, america hasn't even managed to move to the metric system yet, so why should we emphasise on standards, when clearly everyone who's talking about a Gigabyte means 1024MB UNLESS he's a harddrive manufacturer, who would also use a system that calls 700MB a GB, just to have seemingly bigger harddrives.
Harddrivespace is also mapped in base 2, so their "trick" is quite questionable anyway.

#70 Whaleman

Whaleman

    High Priest of Bork

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

Posted 04 April 2004 - 04:36 PM

Quote

Quote

switching to base 10 arbitrarily

SI prefixes are standardized to powers of ten. Use MiB, GiB, or whatever, if you want powers of two.

But byte and bit isn't SI units, so they can do pretty much what they want with them and the prefixes.

You seem to want to go against the whole computer industry here, since it actually is for a fact so that 1kilobyte = 1024 byte and so on. But since 1000 and 1024 is rather close, I guess they chose the SI prefixes since people know the relative size difference of those prefixes. using kilo to represent anything byt 10^3 isn't illegal. A lot of companies should be in trouble for the abuse of words like micro, mega, tera, giga and suchlike.
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***

#71 twinky

twinky

    Fanatic

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 50 posts
  • Location:Ontario, Canada

Posted 04 April 2004 - 05:35 PM

Quote

Quote

switching to base 10 arbitrarily

SI prefixes are standardized to powers of ten. Use MiB, GiB, or whatever, if you want powers of two.

Why, when the accepted convention is powers of two?

#72 Nixide

Nixide

    Fanatic

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 60 posts
  • Location:SoCal

Posted 07 April 2004 - 05:38 AM

This is my PowerMac G5 specs:

• Dual 1.8GHz PowerPC G5
• 1GB DDR400 SDRAM (PC3200) - 2x512
• 250GB Serial ATA - 7200rpm
• ATI Radeon 9800 Pro
• Apple Cinema Display (20" flat panel)
• Bluetooth Module
• 56k V.92 internal modem
• Combo (CD-RW/DVD-ROM)
• Apple Mac OS 10.3.3
• MacMice The Mouse

I play Halo and Medal of Honor, and it works grate on high settings. If you are a gamer or a graphics editor you have to buy the MacMice The Mouse this is “the best mouse ever” go to http://www.macmice.com/themouse.html to get more info and to buy it.  :wink:

#73 DaveyJJ

DaveyJJ

    All hail Bastet

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3895 posts
  • Steam Name:DaveyJJ
  • Location:Inside Bastet's secret temple preparing for the catpocalypse.

Posted 12 April 2004 - 10:59 AM

Quote

Personally, I find there are more good games out for Mac than I have time to play.

Totally in agreement here with bookman. And except for the very few "oh my gawd I wish that was available on a Mac PC game titles" (not too mention Rome Total War again  :wink: ) I've got more choice of games than time.

And the nice thing is that even if it's not a simultaneous release, the Mac versions seem better build and without the associated hassles of their PC counterparts (required drivers updates, dll screwups etc), IMHO.

But there are plenty of A-level FPS titles for the Mac and more coming every day. And a dual G5 of any speed will be more than enough to handle the games; it's always the stock video cards which seem to be to be the one lone hang-up on a Mac (when am I going to see 128Mb vid cards in my Mac laptops?).

My $0.02.

Davey JJ <--pining for Rome Total War Mac Edition and also surrounded at work with two 12" laptops in a sea of PC boxes

#74 Greg Grant

Greg Grant

    Uberspewer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2526 posts

Posted 12 April 2004 - 07:44 PM

Quote

The Mouse this is “the best mouse ever” go to http://www.macmice.com/themouse.html to get more info and to buy it.  :wink:

These days I'm aggitated with 3-button mice, I need 5 dammit! I'm personally attached the original MS Intellimouse Explorer r2 (it has the faster 1500 per sec much like newer stupider Intellimice Explorers).

Slightly offtopic: I haven't used a single button mouse 1997, isn't it about time Apple just make 3 button mice (two + scroll) now? Most people are quite conditioned to multiple mouse buttons and accustomed to scroll wheels.
the IMG audio guy...

#75 placebo

placebo

    Legendary

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 929 posts
  • Location:Massachusetts

Posted 22 April 2004 - 11:15 AM

Quote

Doom 3 is confirmed for Mac and PC, and will probably be a hybrid disc release. 
As I recall, Mac users will buy the PC disk, and download a Mac OS X installer, which will use the PC disk to install the textures, maps, etc., while the installer will also provide a Mac OS executable that you will launch.

#76 Poxicator

Poxicator

    Newbie

  • Members
  • 9 posts
  • Location:Romford UK

Posted 18 May 2004 - 07:41 AM

mmmm getting back to the topic I thought Id add a belated post expressing my views.

I have a G4 1gig DP with 1gig RAM
Recently I became so dissillussioned with the Mac gaming world that I bought my first ever PC. Ive been using Macs since 1981 and before that dedicated computers, so this was a big step for me. However the cost didnt make it that big a deal as I had a friend put it together for me. So why did I bag myself a PC?

Comms: There are no comms for OSX as far as I'm aware. RogerWilco supports OS9 but hasnt been upgraded since 2000! Of course the PC version has been upgraded but to enable compatability all platforms require the old version which is hard to find. TeamSpeak is available for PC and has promised to cater for Macs once the PC version is finished. That promise was made over a year ago and still no work has started despite Apple providing the TS team with free Macs. Ventrillo too has promised support but there's no sign of it yet.
As a clan leader I need comms.

Games: Games arrive for PC much quicker than for Mac, a prime example is BF which has only just arrived for Mac just as all the PC players move to VietNam!
They are also much cheaper, supported better, more add-ons and community supplied apps etc etc. Mac games rarely drop their prices like the PC equivalents. Most games too will never see a Mac. RtCW ET is a prime example.

Hardware: Well the price difference is shamefull but IMHO the Mac is better and doesnt rely on the speed of its wheels (Ghz) to impress. But when it comes to replacing your mobo or graphix you may well ask yourself should I just trade-in.

The argument stands aloft for games on PC above the Mac however the Mac's strengths have never been in the games market but things are definitely improving. Where the Mac benefits is in the graphics world and to be perfectly frank you will not find a PC that can match a Mac for quality of colour. The PC unfortunately is restricted by sRGB and therefore does not have the gamut of a Mac. Microsoft has chosen to make this matter worse by developing its own colour system recently and therefore going against the international standards. Infact it makes me laugh that MS email apps cannot even display a CMYK image on a PC but can on a Mac!
This graphic argument also seeps into the gaming world and I have often found that a game displayed on a Mac with 64bit card is better than 128 or even 256 on a PC. Strange but that's been my experience.
The Mac obviously has loads of benefits and on OSX is a much better, user friendly and securer platform. Unfortunately the games market is not the podium for the Mac community to take a convincing stance on. :-/

#77 wfolta2

wfolta2

    Fan

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 13 posts

Posted 24 May 2004 - 10:51 PM

Yes, you can build faster PCs for games. The PC hardware world is driven 100% by games, so it should work that way.  (The Mac world is driven by audio, video, and print, so progresses differently.)

In terms of your gaming experience, it depends on the game and unfortunately you can't tell what the future holds.

Some of my favorite games have had a good Mac experiences, for example: Warcraft III (RTS), Neverwinter Nights (RPG) and Unreal Tournament 2004 (FPS). They network Mac-PC and the mods run cross-platform, so you're not left out. Updates are released within a few days/weeks of the PC version, so you're not left out there, either.

Of the three, only Warcraft provides Mac level-building tools. NWN provides nothing, though UT2004 lets you compile your own "mutators". (Some of us are developing open-source editor tools for NWN, though, and it's getting very close to fully usable!)

In the case of NWN, follow-on official expansion packs were not released in Mac versions, but you could buy the PC version and install the datafiles and they worked. Bad examples of favorite games would include Majesty, which was much later for the Mac and the expansion pack never came out for Mac. The original Splinter Cell is just about to make it to the Mac, but the second edition just came out for PC.

And Mac games will use OpenGL, while PC games will be written for DirectX and ported to OpenGL, so even if the hardware were up to snuff, they'd probably never be as fast.

#78 Space_Pirate_Killer

Space_Pirate_Killer

    above n00b

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2270 posts
  • Location:Under a Crust.

Posted 11 June 2004 - 01:45 AM

Yes
The official Inside Mac Games forum Space Pirate Killer.

#79 kardinal

kardinal

    Heroic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 343 posts
  • Location:London, UK (originally Helsinki, Finland)

Posted 11 June 2004 - 04:40 AM

Quote

Quote

switching to base 10 arbitrarily

SI prefixes are standardized to powers of ten. Use MiB, GiB, or whatever, if you want powers of two.
1GB is 1024MB with computers. Even if HD manufacturers claim a HD is 68GB, it's size is 64GB when using it.

Just because HD manufacturers say something to claim their HDs are larger than they actually are doesn't mean the whole computing world has to follow. Just as one Byte is 8 bits, one KiloByte = 1024 Bytes, and so on and so forth.