Jump to content


Epic Confirms Gears of War, UT 3 For Mac


  • Please log in to reply
157 replies to this topic

#41 Smoke_Tetsu

Smoke_Tetsu

    Uberspewer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3318 posts
  • Steam Name:Tetsu Jutsu
  • Steam ID:smoke_tetsu
  • Location:Cyberspace

Posted 16 July 2007 - 10:17 PM

Well that means its fully native but it doesn't necessarily mean it's universal. However they said the work they did with multiprocessor on the 360 has helped them optimize the engine on PC. So it may also also be that their work on that might also help them make it universal but don't quote me on that.
--Tetsuo

Alex Delarg, A Clockwork Orange said:

It's funny how the colors of the real world only seem really real when you viddy them on the screen.

the Battle Cat said:

Slower and faster? I'm sorry to hear such good news?

Late 2012 27 inch iMac, Core i7 Quad 3.4GHz, 16GB RAM, Nvidia GeForce GTX 680MX 2GB, 3TB HDD - Mavericks

Late 2009 27 inch iMac, Core i5 2.6GHz, 12GB RAM, ATI Radeon 4850HD 512MB, 1TB HDD - Mavericks

Mac Mini, PowerPC G4 1.4Ghz, 1GB RAM, Radeon 9200 32MB, 256GB HDD - Leopard

Dell Inspiron 1200 Notebook: 1.2GHz Celeron, 1.2GB RAM, Intel GMA915, 75GB HDD - Ubuntu

Generic Black Tower PC, Dual Core 64-bit 2.4GHz, 4GB RAM, GeForce 9600 GT 512MB - Windows 7


#42 Eric5h5

Eric5h5

    Minion Tormentor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7160 posts

Posted 16 July 2007 - 11:21 PM

View PostMaestro, on July 17th 2007, 12:07 AM, said:

Look at the numbers, there are only so many of PPC computers. Intel computers are currently being sold, and will be sold indefinitely (unless some more crap hits the fan). You can only make so much cash doing a PPC port, while on the Intel you can continue to make cash for years.

That's besides the point.  The hardest part is making the OS X port in the first place.  The other issue is endian problems.  In this case, there shouldn't be many of those, because the game/engine already runs on PPC (i.e., XBox360).  Intel Macs don't run a completely different operating system or something, you know.  Some people get confused and think PPC -> Intel is like OS9 -> OS X, when in fact it's a lot more like 68K -> PPC (with the main exception that both 68K and PPC are big-endian).

Quote

Do you have any technical expertise (other than your post count)?
Yes, as a matter of fact, I do.  Do you?

Quote

You aren't thinking about the future, how many Intel Macs will be sold compared to PPC Macs?

Who cares about that?  If they can get an OS X PPC port running with relatively little effort, why would they turn down the opportunity to make more money by selling more copies?  It's a simple business question of ROI, not about what "the future" is.

--Eric

#43 ijedi42

ijedi42

    Notorious

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 193 posts
  • Location:Vancouver

Posted 17 July 2007 - 12:19 AM

and with this announcement any future wedding plans i had in the next few years have faded into the evening mists! :lol:

#44 Smoke_Tetsu

Smoke_Tetsu

    Uberspewer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3318 posts
  • Steam Name:Tetsu Jutsu
  • Steam ID:smoke_tetsu
  • Location:Cyberspace

Posted 17 July 2007 - 01:23 AM

The people here have had a hands on preview with the game and talk about things we should expect when it comes out.

"Mouse and keyboard controls--which, during my demo session, were being used by none of the other eight journalists sitting near me--feel appropriate to the game despite its third person perspective. In addition to the expected ease of aiming, I found myself better able to control my character while executing the "roadie run""

This is pretty much what I thought. I don't have a problem with playing third person shooters with keyboard and mouse. It's not that much harder than playing a first person shooter with keyboard and mouse.
--Tetsuo

Alex Delarg, A Clockwork Orange said:

It's funny how the colors of the real world only seem really real when you viddy them on the screen.

the Battle Cat said:

Slower and faster? I'm sorry to hear such good news?

Late 2012 27 inch iMac, Core i7 Quad 3.4GHz, 16GB RAM, Nvidia GeForce GTX 680MX 2GB, 3TB HDD - Mavericks

Late 2009 27 inch iMac, Core i5 2.6GHz, 12GB RAM, ATI Radeon 4850HD 512MB, 1TB HDD - Mavericks

Mac Mini, PowerPC G4 1.4Ghz, 1GB RAM, Radeon 9200 32MB, 256GB HDD - Leopard

Dell Inspiron 1200 Notebook: 1.2GHz Celeron, 1.2GB RAM, Intel GMA915, 75GB HDD - Ubuntu

Generic Black Tower PC, Dual Core 64-bit 2.4GHz, 4GB RAM, GeForce 9600 GT 512MB - Windows 7


#45 Riko

Riko

    Legendary

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 738 posts
  • Location:Wang-Bang-Rotterdam

Posted 17 July 2007 - 01:50 AM

Nice!!! Was thinking about buying it for my sickbox, no need to do now!
Yieha!

#46 Janichsan

Janichsan

    Jugger Bugger

  • Forum Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8075 posts
  • Steam Name:Janichsan
  • Location:over there

Posted 17 July 2007 - 02:32 AM

View PostSmoke_Tetsu, on July 17th 2007, 09:23 AM, said:

This is pretty much what I thought. I don't have a problem with playing third person shooters with keyboard and mouse. It's not that much harder than playing a first person shooter with keyboard and mouse.
I'm wondering why everyone is so sceptical about this. A keyboard and mouse controlled TPS is nothing new: think of Oni, for instance.

"We do what we must, because we can."
"Gaming on a Mac is like women on the internet." — "Highly common and totally awesome?"


#47 Smoke_Tetsu

Smoke_Tetsu

    Uberspewer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3318 posts
  • Steam Name:Tetsu Jutsu
  • Steam ID:smoke_tetsu
  • Location:Cyberspace

Posted 17 July 2007 - 02:45 AM

View PostJanichsan, on July 17th 2007, 02:32 AM, said:

I'm wondering why everyone is so sceptical about this. A keyboard and mouse controlled TPS is nothing new: think of Oni, for instance.

Exactly, I'm not skeptical at all myself. I was just playing some Max Payne as a matter of fact. I'm just sort of adressing those people who are skeptical and for some reason think gamepads are better for third person shooters.
--Tetsuo

Alex Delarg, A Clockwork Orange said:

It's funny how the colors of the real world only seem really real when you viddy them on the screen.

the Battle Cat said:

Slower and faster? I'm sorry to hear such good news?

Late 2012 27 inch iMac, Core i7 Quad 3.4GHz, 16GB RAM, Nvidia GeForce GTX 680MX 2GB, 3TB HDD - Mavericks

Late 2009 27 inch iMac, Core i5 2.6GHz, 12GB RAM, ATI Radeon 4850HD 512MB, 1TB HDD - Mavericks

Mac Mini, PowerPC G4 1.4Ghz, 1GB RAM, Radeon 9200 32MB, 256GB HDD - Leopard

Dell Inspiron 1200 Notebook: 1.2GHz Celeron, 1.2GB RAM, Intel GMA915, 75GB HDD - Ubuntu

Generic Black Tower PC, Dual Core 64-bit 2.4GHz, 4GB RAM, GeForce 9600 GT 512MB - Windows 7


#48 dokter_mac

dokter_mac

    Fanatic

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 97 posts

Posted 17 July 2007 - 03:23 AM

View PostSmoke_Tetsu, on July 17th 2007, 12:32 AM, said:

They have been indicating otherwise. Like I said they have been talking about the optimizations they have been making with the UE3 and they acknowledge that most people are running DX9 level hardware and they are making the games to run well on that. Even in interviews I have seen for GoW I have seen them say that you would be able to run it on "popsnizzley" hardware of course not at full detail. So it doesn't sound like they are just targeting the highest of the high end. Of course to get the best experience as possible that's what you'd want.

Well, I can tell you (as I'm testing EU3 for Mac, not Unreal Engine 3 but Europa Universalis 3) that the PPC G5 (for the moment, because it's still beta) is running this game better then the Intel Macs. It depends, since EU3 uses a lot of GPU code instead of CPU, which GPU card you have. My PM G5 (dual 2.7Ghz) with a ATI X800XT runs EU3 so well that the developers are chocked :-) It is written for very high end PC's and it's not optimised for medium PC's.

If Unreal 3 is a very high demanding game (CPU and GPU), Cider is not the solution here. It will run always slower then on a PC. The higher the specs for a game, the less ineresting it is for a publisher to use Cider. It's simple, Cider (as good as it is) slows down a game!
Epic will demand that this game will run good on a Mac. Just like there previous versions from there engines.
A Mac port is the best solution.

A few publishers are using Cider now, like VP for X3. But so far the feedback is not that good. The game slows down and on a new Intel Mac with a great CPU and dito GPU, this is shameful for a publisher. Cider has a lot of potential, but only for a certain number of games.

With Leopard in the pipeline, the G5 (a 64 bit processor) will become interesting.
And unlike EA games, EPIC and ID are aiming at a much larger number of systems. They are not afraid for a good port and they are seeing the advantages, like for instance future licenses from there engines. Just look at Carmack showing of the new engine at WWDC. He is also giving very good comments for OS X as a developing platform! Look what he wrote in only a few weeks and how good it renders on Mac OS X (which is universal, for PPC and Intel).

#49 AussieMacGamer

AussieMacGamer

    Owner, 2nd Largest Topic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3087 posts

Posted 17 July 2007 - 07:09 AM

:cool: :cool: :cool: :cool: :cool:    

OAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.

i think i am just going to sleep smiling!
to me, this means a lot for mac gaming

IMG Resident Crackpot
"What you need is a dog or a girlfriend, or both, or one in the same!" -Gary Simmons Aka. The Battle Cat
15" Macbook Pro C2D 2.16Ghz ATI X1600 3Gb Ram w/Samsung 840 SSD R.I.P

2015 Mbp 13", 256gb SSD

Windows popsnizzlebox with a 5400rpm HD and a GTX 1060

Now Playing: Player Unknown's Battlegrounds/CS:GO/Rising Storm 2/The Witcher 3 Blood and Wine/Shenmue 1


#50 the Battle Cat

the Battle Cat

    Carnage Served Raw

  • Admin
  • 17376 posts
  • Location:Citadel City, Lh'owon
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 17 July 2007 - 07:54 AM

This is great news.  I feel like the Israelites did coming out of the wilderness into the land of milk and honey.  IE: My feet hurt, I really need a shower, and I can see what I want most scattered across the landscape in front of me.  It's a good day to be the Battle Cat.  

View PostMaestro, on July 16th 2007, 09:07 PM, said:

You are talking out your behind there Eric5h5...
Common misconception, all he really needs is a breath mint.

View Postijedi42, on July 16th 2007, 11:19 PM, said:

and with this announcement any future wedding plans i had in the next few years have faded into the evening mists! :lol:
Wives are a dime a dozen but a really good game that captures the imagination is a thing of priceless value.
Gary Simmons
the Battle Cat

#51 Eric5h5

Eric5h5

    Minion Tormentor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7160 posts

Posted 17 July 2007 - 08:19 AM

View Postthe Battle Cat, on July 17th 2007, 09:54 AM, said:

Wives are a dime a dozen but a really good game that captures the imagination is a thing of priceless value.

It is a sad thing when you are reduced to quoting yourself....

--Eric

#52 Nicholas

Nicholas

    Notorious

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 194 posts
  • Location:Chichester, England

Posted 17 July 2007 - 11:14 AM

Sounds like its worth dribbling over a keyboard for...
My web site & Blog - Good for what ails you...

#53 Smoke_Tetsu

Smoke_Tetsu

    Uberspewer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3318 posts
  • Steam Name:Tetsu Jutsu
  • Steam ID:smoke_tetsu
  • Location:Cyberspace

Posted 17 July 2007 - 12:49 PM

View Postdokter_mac, on July 17th 2007, 03:23 AM, said:

Well, I can tell you (as I'm testing EU3 for Mac, not Unreal Engine 3 but Europa Universalis 3) that the PPC G5 (for the moment, because it's still beta) is running this game better then the Intel Macs. It depends, since EU3 uses a lot of GPU code instead of CPU, which GPU card you have. My PM G5 (dual 2.7Ghz) with a ATI X800XT runs EU3 so well that the developers are chocked :-) It is written for very high end PC's and it's not optimised for medium PC's.
Those two upcoming UE3 games sound to be written for high end and also they are being optimized for medium PC's at least. Since you have a dual processor system you'd get some benefit from the optimizations they have made for multiprocessor if they make it universal.

Quote

If Unreal 3 is a very high demanding game (CPU and GPU), Cider is not the solution here. It will run always slower then on a PC.
You should be glad because they aren't using Cider on either UT3 or GoW.

BTW, If they really are optimizing it to run on a wide variety of systems like they said I don't see why a G5 can't run it especially if you have a decent GPU or upgrade it. That and it's still faster than some of the PC's that it can probably run on.
--Tetsuo

Alex Delarg, A Clockwork Orange said:

It's funny how the colors of the real world only seem really real when you viddy them on the screen.

the Battle Cat said:

Slower and faster? I'm sorry to hear such good news?

Late 2012 27 inch iMac, Core i7 Quad 3.4GHz, 16GB RAM, Nvidia GeForce GTX 680MX 2GB, 3TB HDD - Mavericks

Late 2009 27 inch iMac, Core i5 2.6GHz, 12GB RAM, ATI Radeon 4850HD 512MB, 1TB HDD - Mavericks

Mac Mini, PowerPC G4 1.4Ghz, 1GB RAM, Radeon 9200 32MB, 256GB HDD - Leopard

Dell Inspiron 1200 Notebook: 1.2GHz Celeron, 1.2GB RAM, Intel GMA915, 75GB HDD - Ubuntu

Generic Black Tower PC, Dual Core 64-bit 2.4GHz, 4GB RAM, GeForce 9600 GT 512MB - Windows 7


#54 nagromme

nagromme

    Master Blaster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1954 posts

Posted 17 July 2007 - 01:00 PM

I have final word on whether it will be profitable to sell UE3 games for G5 Macs:

* It is definitely POSSIBLE that they would sell enough copies to G5 owners to pay for the additional work. Not certain, only possible.

* It is definitely POSSIBLE that they would NOT sell enough copies to pay for the actual work.

* Whichever is true, it is definitely possible that Epic will guess WRONG and either pass on a Universal version that could have been profitable, or make one and not see much return.

Dispute resolved :)

#55 Smoke_Tetsu

Smoke_Tetsu

    Uberspewer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3318 posts
  • Steam Name:Tetsu Jutsu
  • Steam ID:smoke_tetsu
  • Location:Cyberspace

Posted 17 July 2007 - 01:08 PM

One could hope that the work they did for the 360s processor would help reduce the work just like how their work with it helped with multiprocessor. I'm kind of thinking if the latter is possible then so is the former but I could be wrong.
--Tetsuo

Alex Delarg, A Clockwork Orange said:

It's funny how the colors of the real world only seem really real when you viddy them on the screen.

the Battle Cat said:

Slower and faster? I'm sorry to hear such good news?

Late 2012 27 inch iMac, Core i7 Quad 3.4GHz, 16GB RAM, Nvidia GeForce GTX 680MX 2GB, 3TB HDD - Mavericks

Late 2009 27 inch iMac, Core i5 2.6GHz, 12GB RAM, ATI Radeon 4850HD 512MB, 1TB HDD - Mavericks

Mac Mini, PowerPC G4 1.4Ghz, 1GB RAM, Radeon 9200 32MB, 256GB HDD - Leopard

Dell Inspiron 1200 Notebook: 1.2GHz Celeron, 1.2GB RAM, Intel GMA915, 75GB HDD - Ubuntu

Generic Black Tower PC, Dual Core 64-bit 2.4GHz, 4GB RAM, GeForce 9600 GT 512MB - Windows 7


#56 nagromme

nagromme

    Master Blaster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1954 posts

Posted 17 July 2007 - 01:36 PM

Anything could help. Except the factors that hurt :)

But we can't know how MUCH the factors help or hurt, in dollars vs. time. We can only speculate. So I don't think either prediction is crazy: Universal or Intel-only.

#57 Frost

Frost

    Secretary of Offense

  • Forum Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6074 posts
  • Steam ID:CaptFrost
  • Location:Republic of Texas
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 17 July 2007 - 02:07 PM

I would put my money on Intel-only normally, but there IS the factor of both games already running on processors from the PowerPC family. I would say that makes Universal extremely doable compared to a full port, and therefore much more likely than it would be otherwise.
Kestrel (Falcon NW Tiki) – 4.0 GHz i7 4790K / 16GB RAM / 512GB Samsung 950 Pro M.2, 2x480GB Intel 730 (RAID0), 10TB STX BarraCuda Pro / GeForce GTX TITAN X 12GB
Iridium (MacBook Pro Mid-2012) – 2.7 GHz i7 3820QM / 16GB RAM / 2TB Samsung 850 Pro / GeForce GT 650M 1GB

Eric5h5:
When there's a multiplayer version, I'm going to be on Frost's team. Well, except he doesn't seem to actually need a team...I mean, what's the point? "Hey look, it's Frost and His Merry Gang of Useless Hangers-On!" Or something.

#58 teflon

teflon

    Bastard of the Popeye Analogy

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9589 posts
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 17 July 2007 - 02:31 PM

yes, but that PPC is highly optimised for, has a good GPU (something that iMacs lacked), and is a console, which immediately means that you can get every last bit of juice out of it.

as it stands theres a very small cut of a small cut of a small cut of the entire computer market which has a PowerMac G5 with a 9800, X800 or X1900 and intends to use it for gaming.
Polytetrafluoroethylene to my friends.

Macbook Pro - C2D 2.4Ghz / 4GB RAM / Samsung 830 256GB SSD / Geforce 8600M GT 256Mb / 15.4"
Cube - G4 1.7Ghz 7448 / 1.5GB RAM / Samsung Spinpoint 250GB / Geforce 6200 256Mb
Self-built PC - C2Q Q8300 2.5Ghz / 4GB RAM / Samsung 830 256GB SSD / Radeon 7850 OC 1GB / W7 x64
and a beautiful HP LP2475w 24" H-IPS monitor

#59 Smoke_Tetsu

Smoke_Tetsu

    Uberspewer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3318 posts
  • Steam Name:Tetsu Jutsu
  • Steam ID:smoke_tetsu
  • Location:Cyberspace

Posted 17 July 2007 - 03:02 PM

At this point its a bit too early to rule them out though. Interesting thing is they said those optimizations have helped them with the PC.

You probably aren't going to get a high end experience but it probably would run albeit at lower detail settings.
--Tetsuo

Alex Delarg, A Clockwork Orange said:

It's funny how the colors of the real world only seem really real when you viddy them on the screen.

the Battle Cat said:

Slower and faster? I'm sorry to hear such good news?

Late 2012 27 inch iMac, Core i7 Quad 3.4GHz, 16GB RAM, Nvidia GeForce GTX 680MX 2GB, 3TB HDD - Mavericks

Late 2009 27 inch iMac, Core i5 2.6GHz, 12GB RAM, ATI Radeon 4850HD 512MB, 1TB HDD - Mavericks

Mac Mini, PowerPC G4 1.4Ghz, 1GB RAM, Radeon 9200 32MB, 256GB HDD - Leopard

Dell Inspiron 1200 Notebook: 1.2GHz Celeron, 1.2GB RAM, Intel GMA915, 75GB HDD - Ubuntu

Generic Black Tower PC, Dual Core 64-bit 2.4GHz, 4GB RAM, GeForce 9600 GT 512MB - Windows 7


#60 BenRoethig

BenRoethig

    Heroic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 494 posts
  • Location:Dubuque, Iowa USA

Posted 17 July 2007 - 04:49 PM

View Postdokter_mac, on July 17th 2007, 04:23 AM, said:

If Unreal 3 is a very high demanding game (CPU and GPU), Cider is not the solution here. It will run always slower then on a PC. The higher the specs for a game, the less ineresting it is for a publisher to use Cider. It's simple, Cider (as good as it is) slows down a game!

On the flip side, Mac ports aren't usually tweaked for performance the way PC games are.  It's usually done in a way to get the game playing in an acceptable manner on most Macs that would be running the game.  The question with cider is not how fast it is compared to a a windows game, but how fast it is compared to a traditional Mac Port.