Jump to content


Company of Heroes


  • Please log in to reply
19 replies to this topic

#1 Stecchino

Stecchino

    Heroic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 288 posts
  • Location:Norfolk, Virginia, USA

Posted 25 September 2006 - 06:23 AM

I can't download the demo until next week or so, just wondering if anyone's tried it yet.

Company of Heroes

I've got a 1.83 Core Duo iMac with the x1600 and can post my experience next week.

#2 Tomatocow

Tomatocow

    King of the Cows

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

Posted 25 September 2006 - 07:13 AM

I'm rather interested in purchasing this game.

#3 Lord Heavy

Lord Heavy

    Fan

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 36 posts
  • Location:London

Posted 25 September 2006 - 07:39 AM

I have played the demo, but only on my Macbook, so I've admittedly had to turn the graphics right down.

A lot is going to depend on what you want from the game: if you like RTS-style games (ie, build faster than the opposition) then fine: this is just one of those games with a WWII texture overlay. If you want a more approachable version of Battlefront's Combat Mission series or an update on the old Close Combat franchise I think you'll be disappointed.

It doesn't appear to have the approach of a Total War or Imperial Glory game, where the 'building' is extraneous to the fighting.

Machine specs aside, the amazing looking rich graphical environment that you're able to zoom right into is useless in a playing situation. The game moves too quickly to be able to take advantage of it, and I found myself pretty much always zoomed out to the max, constantly clicking the default view key to get the camera reorientated.

Maybe I'm being too purist (and anti- this kind of RTS ;) ), but I really didn't get the marketing pitch that suggests it's an RTS version of, for instance Call Of Duty 2. However, I know I'm just reacting badly to particular elements, like the rather too literal visual of capture points being marked with poles you have to hoist flags up on.

Every hill an Iwo Jima, every building the Reichstag... ;)

The realism claims are also a little over-stated. Sure, troops occupying a house looks pretty good, and building a sandbag wall I could cope with. But rifle fire appears to have little or no effect. Tanks take a crazy number of shots to destroy, whatever the game's nod to period projectiles and armour.

I un-installed the demo the minute my two Shermans started playing a combination of kiss chase and bumper cars with a couple of JagdPanzers.

And a 1.7gb demo?! Yikes.  :o

I'm sticking with the afore-mentioned games for the time-being...
Mac Pro Quad Xeon Intel 5100 2.66ghz|2gb RAM|nVidia 8800GT 512mb|4 x 250gb  SATAII
MacBook Intel Core 2 Duo 2ghz|4gb RAM|Intel GMA 950 64mb|80gb SATA

#4 Stecchino

Stecchino

    Heroic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 288 posts
  • Location:Norfolk, Virginia, USA

Posted 25 September 2006 - 08:08 AM

Wow, thanks for your input on the gameplay.  So you were actually able to play it on your a MacBook, even though settings were obviously turned down?  If that's the case, that gives me hope for my iMac Core Duo w/ 128 MB x1600.

#5 Lord Heavy

Lord Heavy

    Fan

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 36 posts
  • Location:London

Posted 25 September 2006 - 10:54 AM

View PostStecchino, on September 25th 2006, 03:08 PM, said:

Wow, thanks for your input on the gameplay.  So you were actually able to play it on your a MacBook, even though settings were obviously turned down?  If that's the case, that gives me hope for my iMac Core Duo w/ 128 MB x1600.


Yes, it was very playable with the graphics turned down, so the iMac should be significantly better. Good luck! :)
Mac Pro Quad Xeon Intel 5100 2.66ghz|2gb RAM|nVidia 8800GT 512mb|4 x 250gb  SATAII
MacBook Intel Core 2 Duo 2ghz|4gb RAM|Intel GMA 950 64mb|80gb SATA

#6 Stecchino

Stecchino

    Heroic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 288 posts
  • Location:Norfolk, Virginia, USA

Posted 26 September 2006 - 03:35 PM

A thorough review of Company of Heroes performance and video settings.

It's a gorgeous-looking game and you'll need top hardware (by today's standards) to run it at the highest settings.  Interestingly, it still looks pretty incredible at medium settings which is probably what my iMac will be working at when I download the demo.  Although I don't see myself buying any $50 game at this point in the pre-Christmas year, I'm looking forward to downloading the demo.

#7 yellow#5

yellow#5

    Legendary

  • IMG Pro Users
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 809 posts
  • Location:new jersey

Posted 01 October 2006 - 12:02 PM

Most settings on medium, resolution @ 1280x720, it runs at a consistent 30-45 FPS on my MBP, 2GHz, x1600 256.

I've not played any RTS games in a long time, so I'm basically doing terribly (the CPU smokes me on easy in skirmishes), but it is a whole lotta fun. So far I've had the most fun playing against my other unskilled friends.

#8 teamturbo_2000

teamturbo_2000

    Notorious

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 237 posts
  • Location:Kansas

Posted 01 October 2006 - 12:28 PM

I played the demo with my 24" Core 2 iMac with max resolution & topped off graphics and it worked like a charm.  I was getting 80 ish FPS.  Personally, the I think the Mac Book Pro is weak in the game spectrum.  The X1600 graphics card sucks.  I don't understand why Apple settles for less with the graphics card.  That's in every computer except the Mac Pro.  I'm running the Nvida 7600GT and I still think Apple could of done better.

Oh well.
My Setup
iMac 24" Intel Core 2 Duo (2.16)
2 Gigs Ram
7600 GT 256MB Graphics Card
Blue Toothed Keyboard & Mighty Mouse

#9 Stecchino

Stecchino

    Heroic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 288 posts
  • Location:Norfolk, Virginia, USA

Posted 01 October 2006 - 03:55 PM

View Postyellow#5, on October 1st 2006, 01:02 PM, said:

Most settings on medium, resolution @ 1280x720, it runs at a consistent 30-45 FPS on my MBP, 2GHz, x1600 256.

View Postteamturbo_2000, on October 1st 2006, 01:28 PM, said:

I played the demo with my 24" Core 2 iMac with max resolution & topped off graphics and it worked like a charm.  I was getting 80 ish FPS.


Thanks for the info!

#10 yellow#5

yellow#5

    Legendary

  • IMG Pro Users
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 809 posts
  • Location:new jersey

Posted 01 October 2006 - 07:33 PM

View Postteamturbo_2000, on October 1st 2006, 02:28 PM, said:

I played the demo with my 24" Core 2 iMac with max resolution & topped off graphics and it worked like a charm.  I was getting 80 ish FPS.  Personally, the I think the Mac Book Pro is weak in the game spectrum.  The X1600 graphics card sucks.  I don't understand why Apple settles for less with the graphics card.  That's in every computer except the Mac Pro.  I'm running the Nvida 7600GT and I still think Apple could of done better.

Oh well.

There are substantially better video card options for a laptop?

#11 acegraphics

acegraphics

    Newbie

  • Members
  • 3 posts

Posted 06 November 2006 - 12:11 PM

View Postteamturbo_2000, on October 1st 2006, 12:28 PM, said:

I played the demo with my 24" Core 2 iMac with max resolution & topped off graphics and it worked like a charm.  I was getting 80 ish FPS.  Personally, the I think the Mac Book Pro is weak in the game spectrum.  The X1600 graphics card sucks.  I don't understand why Apple settles for less with the graphics card.  That's in every computer except the Mac Pro.  I'm running the Nvida 7600GT and I still think Apple could of done better.

Oh well.


I guess the fact that I can play Dark Messiah at medium settings 1024 x 768 at about 25-35 fps means nothing.

Considering the imac core duo with the x1600 card can seemingly run every current game (except 1 or 2 very top end ones) pretty damn smooth i wouldn't say it sucks by no means.

#12 bobbob

bobbob

    Uberspewer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3367 posts

Posted 06 November 2006 - 02:27 PM

View Postyellow#5, on October 1st 2006, 07:33 PM, said:

There are substantially better video card options for a laptop?

Go 7600 GT? Still cool and quiet, much better than a mobility X1600. Go 7800s are a step further, too. Go 7950s are the best available, but only a non-laptop desktop replacement such as the 17" MacBook is expected to have one or two of those.

#13 Gmoney12534

Gmoney12534

    Newbie

  • Members
  • 1 posts

Posted 29 May 2008 - 10:30 AM

[quote name='Lord Heavy' date='September 25th 2006, 06:39 AM' post='284002']
I have played the demo, but only on my Macbook, so I've admittedly had to turn the graphics right down.

A lot is going to depend on what you want from the game: if you like RTS-style games (ie, build faster than the opposition) then fine: this is just one of those games with a WWII texture overlay. If you want a more approachable version of Battlefront's Combat Mission series or an update on the old Close Combat franchise I think you'll be disappointed.

It doesn't appear to have the approach of a Total War or Imperial Glory game, where the 'building' is extraneous to the fighting.

Machine specs aside, the amazing looking rich graphical environment that you're able to zoom right into is useless in a playing situation. The game moves too quickly to be able to take advantage of it, and I found myself pretty much always zoomed out to the max, constantly clicking the default view key to get the camera reorientated.

Maybe I'm being too purist (and anti- this kind of RTS ;) ), but I really didn't get the marketing pitch that suggests it's an RTS version of, for instance Call Of Duty 2. However, I know I'm just reacting badly to particular elements, like the rather too literal visual of capture points being marked with poles you have to hoist flags up on.

Every hill an Iwo Jima, every building the Reichstag... ;)

The realism claims are also a little over-stated. Sure, troops occupying a house looks pretty good, and building a sandbag wall I could cope with. But rifle fire appears to have little or no effect. Tanks take a crazy number of shots to destroy, whatever the game's nod to period projectiles and armour.

I un-installed the demo the minute my two Shermans started playing a combination of kiss chase and bumper cars with a couple of JagdPanzers.

And a 1.7gb demo?! Yikes.  :o

I'm sticking with the afore-mentioned games for the time-being...
[Yeah some things in this game are really unrealistic but if youre looking for realism you should get Soldiers: Heroes of World War 2 thats probably the most realistic world war 2 game i ever played but its a hard game so idk you might get frustrated. But yeah i can play this on high on my macbook pro with a respectable framerate]

#14 Quicksilver

Quicksilver

    Verbal Windbag

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

Posted 29 May 2008 - 04:03 PM

I can play the game with almost everything maxed out at 1440x900.
Former Senior Hardware Editor
InsideMacGames.com

#15 bobbob

bobbob

    Uberspewer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3367 posts

Posted 29 May 2008 - 06:34 PM

If anyone still has problems playing it, Dawn of War is the older game using the same engine and it's quite fun, too.

#16 The Liberator

The Liberator

    Liberate Tutemet Ex Infernis

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3707 posts
  • Steam Name:Meriones
  • Location:Melbourne, Australia

Posted 30 May 2008 - 08:04 PM

View Postteamturbo_2000, on October 2nd 2006, 04:28 AM, said:

I played the demo with my 24" Core 2 iMac with max resolution & topped off graphics and it worked like a charm.  I was getting 80 ish FPS.  Personally, the I think the Mac Book Pro is weak in the game spectrum.  The X1600 graphics card sucks.  I don't understand why Apple settles for less with the graphics card.  That's in every computer except the Mac Pro.  I'm running the Nvida 7600GT and I still think Apple could of done better.

Oh well.
That is because it is a laptop, not a desktop. Unless you want a 4 kg clunky, bulky brick, you will have to stick to the slightly worse GPU's in the smaller (mid range) laptops. Only really Alien Ware sells laptops with top range GPU's in the, but as I said, they are really heavy, really bulky, and clunky. It will feel like yo are carrying bricks in your bag, not a few thousand dollar computer. I know that Apple's choice of GPU isn't always the best, but there are only two options...

By the way, the current Mac Book Pro is absolutely fine, just like Quicksilver said. ;)

Liberator.

iMac: 2.8GHz i7 | 16GB RAM | 10.10.5 | ATI Radeon HD 4850M | 512MB VRAM

Custom: 3.4 GHz i5 | 16GB RAM | Win 7 SP 1 | nVidia GeForce GTX 660 OCII | 2GB VRAM


We hang in D.C. with them CIA killers

Baraka Flacka Flames - Head of the State


#17 Quicksilver

Quicksilver

    Verbal Windbag

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

Posted 30 May 2008 - 09:28 PM

Apple could easily add a 8700M GT to the MacBook Pro with no reconfiguration necessary, and the performance boost is fairly significant.  The 8800M GT can also fit, but it's probably a bit too hot.

The moral of the story is that there are always multiple options.
Former Senior Hardware Editor
InsideMacGames.com

#18 The Liberator

The Liberator

    Liberate Tutemet Ex Infernis

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3707 posts
  • Steam Name:Meriones
  • Location:Melbourne, Australia

Posted 30 May 2008 - 11:26 PM

Oh well, sorry about that, I didn't know. I take all of that back teamturbo. :)

Liberator.

iMac: 2.8GHz i7 | 16GB RAM | 10.10.5 | ATI Radeon HD 4850M | 512MB VRAM

Custom: 3.4 GHz i5 | 16GB RAM | Win 7 SP 1 | nVidia GeForce GTX 660 OCII | 2GB VRAM


We hang in D.C. with them CIA killers

Baraka Flacka Flames - Head of the State


#19 frog

frog

    Newbie

  • Members
  • 2 posts

Posted 23 August 2008 - 06:06 PM

got a question-
I tried to load cofh on my macbook pro. I use fusion and xp. Got an error that said I didn't have enough of shader model. Says I need 1.1 and I have none. What do I do?

#20 Tesseract

Tesseract

    Unmanageable Megaweight

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

Posted 24 August 2008 - 03:15 AM

View Postfrog, on August 24th 2008, 10:06 AM, said:

got a question-
I tried to load cofh on my macbook pro. I use fusion and xp. Got an error that said I didn't have enough of shader model. Says I need 1.1 and I have none. What do I do?
It seems that Fusion doesn't provide the needed graphics features, so I guess you're left with Boot Camp.