Jump to content


Quake Wars - Wait some more?


  • Please log in to reply
194 replies to this topic

#41 nagromme

nagromme

    Master Blaster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1954 posts

Posted 06 February 2008 - 01:58 AM

Agreed--a high-end GPU with other specs being low-end or midrange--and thus cheaper--would make a real gamer's Mac. Especially with an upgradable GPU for longevity. A separate display would be more traditional too.

But I'll use (if not strictly need) the power for other things--such as 3D work and F@H, and letting other things run WHILE gaming. So just this once I'm willing to pay for more than a gamer's machine.

#42 Smoke_Tetsu

Smoke_Tetsu

    Uberspewer

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

Posted 06 February 2008 - 05:00 AM

View PostiRolley, on February 6th 2008, 12:47 AM, said:

Only thing I see for Quad core, would be to have the game split in multiple threads, like running Physics on another thread. But the trend seems to be using a dedicated Card for that, not a CPU core.

O, rly? I don't see Ageia doing that well. In fact they are being bought out and the physics being moved to the GPU instead of a dedicated card. But how many games use Ageia vs Havok which is going to push the dedicate a core to physics model more since it was bought out by intel anyway? That's only part of the market and only on nvidia GPUs.

Other than Ageia Physx and other than on the PC I don't see much in the way of dedicated physics cards and they are even more of a waste of money than a gamer getting an octo core right now since so few games use them. Not to mention the performance hit you take in the token content that takes advantage by upping the amount of items in the game... all because of again, the GPU.

You forget that just because games are GPU limited today it wont stay that way forever. My point is right now there isn't much added benefit with Octo Core over a Quad core in the real world with games because of the GPU. A lot of games don't even make much use of multithreading at all especially on the Mac... and that probably hurts the perception of it here. But if you bootcamp it you'll be glad you have a Quad Core sooner rather than later I'd wager. Just because your Mac games hardly push dual core right now that doesn't represent the whole gaming market for the next few years.

Games are quickly making use of Quad Core especially in Windows... and sooner or later a non workstation grade 8 core system will come out and the GPU to back it up and by the time that happens games will truly take advantage of it. My post in no way says Dual Core is the best.. and it shouldn't be taken that way.

A Mac Pro may actually be more future proof provided you can upgrade the GPU. But that doesn't seem to be the case on the Mac side so far. Since games today are GPU limited I would say the iMac is actually one of the worst choices in todays real world. It's just unfortunate Apple doesn't have a consumer Quad Core with an 8800 class card (and an option to upgrade when new cards come out) out right now. And hell.. throw in SLI while you are at it since games are so GPU limited. That would be the best thing for gamers for the next few years until 8+ cores take off in a big way. At least in Bootcamp and at least for Crysis, Lost Planet, Alan Wake, Supreme Commander, and id software's Rage (which will probably take advantage in all OS') etc. and probably other games too since the gaming world is going multithreaded especially on the consoles.
--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


#43 somebody

somebody

    Fanatic

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 54 posts
  • Location:Brain, Head

Posted 06 February 2008 - 05:37 AM

Are you people actually still waiting for this game?!

I remember playing the demo and it was one of the most horrible games i've ever played. It was extremely buggy, ran like popsnizzle, and the gameplay simply sucked balls, really not worth waiting for!

BF2142 is waaay better :)
Srsly you guys.

You guys, srsly.

#44 AussieMacGamer

AussieMacGamer

    Owner, 2nd Largest Topic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3087 posts

Posted 06 February 2008 - 05:59 AM

View PostiRolley, on February 6th 2008, 06:47 PM, said:

Hopefully by then Apple will have released a more gamer oriented mac than then the Xeon Mac Pro.  :cool:

I have a Core Duo iMac and I don't ever remember seing (MenuMeters) my cpu reaching 100%. Not even in games. Let alone both cores. Smoke Testsu is right on : I'll add that even todays CPU exceed the requirements for most games.

Only thing I see for Quad core, would be to have the game split in multiple threads, like running Physics on another thread. But the trend seems to be using a dedicated Card for that, not a CPU core.

I still beleive a good iMac with an upgradable GPU would be ideal.

Processors are always maxed out on my macbook Pro, when i play 3d Games.

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


#45 iRolley

iRolley

    Legendary

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 752 posts
  • Location:Antibes - France

Posted 06 February 2008 - 06:44 AM

View PostAussieMacGamer, on February 6th 2008, 05:59 AM, said:

Processors are always maxed out on my macbook Pro, when i play 3d Games.

Wow... that's different than what I am experiencing.

Here's my CPU usage during the timedemo and after.

Posted Image

UPDATE :

I ran the timedemo demo1 at 800x600 Med Quality WITH Shadows. (windowed mode)
on
iMac Core Duo 2Ghz, 1.5gig RAM, X1600 256mg

#46 Janichsan

Janichsan

    Jugger Bugger

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

Posted 06 February 2008 - 06:50 AM

View PostiRolley, on February 6th 2008, 01:44 PM, said:

Wow... that's quite different than what I am experiencing.

Here's my CPU usage during the timedemo and after.
Possibly depends on the settings. Haven't you said sometwhere that you are playing Doom 3/Quake 4 usually without the shadows? Those are pretty CPU prone.

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


#47 iRolley

iRolley

    Legendary

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 752 posts
  • Location:Antibes - France

Posted 06 February 2008 - 07:03 AM

View PostJanichsan, on February 6th 2008, 06:50 AM, said:

Possibly depends on the settings. Haven't you said sometwhere that you are playing Doom 3/Quake 4 usually without the shadows? Those are pretty CPU prone.

(I usually run Doom3 with shadows, Quake4 without, Prey with shadows... I am not a constant dude  :happy: )

I did another run at 640 x 480. The cpu usage was indeed higher then, averaging at about 80-85% I'd say, with a result of 66fps in the time demo.

The conclusion here is that when we get the CPU to become the bottleneck, we have already reached a fairly high ftp count. But that's Doom3, a pretty old game, for sure, but on a not too recent computer as well (first gen intel iMac).

My point still is : put either a very high end GPU or upgradable GPU in the current iMacs, and I'll be a happy gamer for years.

#48 nagromme

nagromme

    Master Blaster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1954 posts

Posted 06 February 2008 - 08:51 AM

Thanks for the review, somebody :) Doesn't persuade me ;)

#49 QuantaCat

QuantaCat

    Master Blaster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1995 posts
  • Location:Vienna, Austria

Posted 06 February 2008 - 12:47 PM

View Postsomebody, on February 6th 2008, 12:37 PM, said:

Are you people actually still waiting for this game?!

I remember playing the demo and it was one of the most horrible games i've ever played. It was extremely buggy, ran like popsnizzle, and the gameplay simply sucked balls, really not worth waiting for!

BF2142 is waaay better :)

Funny, the game wasn't buggy for me at all, and there was a wave of people complaining that the game was "horrible" and that "BF2142 was way better". And there were enough saying just the opposite.
So yes. BF2142 is way better. So is Quake Wars. So is UT3. So is my face. OMG LETS COMPARE PENIS SIZE.
So basically, that was a very useless post, and mine on top of that.

So to make it a useful one: my MBP generally starts up the fan as soon as I get into 3d, even if its not *that* heavy. AvP1 Gold, for example, heated my fan up too. And it even had some rare lag moments, where I had many dead aliens lying around, and I used the plasma pistol. or however its called. (which, if I remember correctly, has always lagged. even on PC, back when it was still fresh and *rad*)

As for ETQW: it never lagged on me. Ever. And I have played through every campaign multiple times, with all degrees of player activity.

PS: by the way, nagromme, I never really got an answer to "does AVPG PC connect to AVPG MAC". Do you know?
QC.


avatar courtesy of James Grimlee.

#50 Smoke_Tetsu

Smoke_Tetsu

    Uberspewer

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

Posted 06 February 2008 - 04:40 PM

View PostiRolley, on February 6th 2008, 06:03 AM, said:

My point still is : put either a very high end GPU or upgradable GPU in the current iMacs, and I'll be a happy gamer for years.

You can't measure tomorrows games performance with yesterdays.
--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


#51 nagromme

nagromme

    Master Blaster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1954 posts

Posted 06 February 2008 - 05:54 PM

If AVPG won't play in Leopard I may not be able to test vs. PC :( But I seem to recall that I did play against PC players "back in the day." I'm afraid I can't 100% confirm--it's been a while!

#52 QuantaCat

QuantaCat

    Master Blaster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1995 posts
  • Location:Vienna, Austria

Posted 07 February 2008 - 01:59 AM

It wont play in leopard?






uh oh..
I didnt take into account that some of them have leopard in my lan party.. SCREWED!
QC.


avatar courtesy of James Grimlee.

#53 nagromme

nagromme

    Master Blaster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1954 posts

Posted 07 February 2008 - 12:06 PM

I don't know--someone mentioned that above. I hope it's not correct!

Free fallback plans:
http://www.worldofpadman.com
http://www.macgamefi....php?item=18598 (Wolfenstein: ET BitTorrent)
http://tremulous.net Mac: http://www.apple.com.../tremulous.html
(The latter two having some learning curve, but that might be OK, with everyone learning together.)

#54 QuantaCat

QuantaCat

    Master Blaster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1995 posts
  • Location:Vienna, Austria

Posted 07 February 2008 - 03:41 PM

Cool, I didn't find Tremulous for mac. Thanks for that. And I just noticed Glenda is checking the thread. I'm so happy that Aspyr is actually informing the people/giving a crap. Seriously.


I just hope that the mac version of ETQW comes out after I get a replacement for my mouse.
QC.


avatar courtesy of James Grimlee.

#55 nagromme

nagromme

    Master Blaster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1954 posts

Posted 07 February 2008 - 05:59 PM

Welcome. I suspect Aspyr does care, and that what information they are able to release--and when--is not random :)

#56 G-News

G-News

    Legendary

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

Posted 08 February 2008 - 07:22 AM

Update from their ETQW site:

Quote

Mac Release Date: March 2008

I'm positive that I'll have enough cash collected from the main station floor to buy that title when it ships in July.
Now officially the forum idiot

#57 nagromme

nagromme

    Master Blaster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1954 posts

Posted 08 February 2008 - 11:45 AM

Good catch.

#58 G-News

G-News

    Legendary

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

Posted 01 March 2008 - 02:53 AM

From today's Aspyr newsletter:


Quote

ENEMY TERRITORY QUAKE WARS™
QuakeWars is in approvals, and if all goes well will be off to duplication soon. Performance has increased with help from Apple's OpenGL team and our own staff of Mac graphics programmers, and we're excited to get this one out to players. The latest Leopard Graphics Update released by Apple can give nice performance boosts to many Mac games including Quake Wars, so if you haven't updated already, check your Software Update or go to Apple's support site to download it. More

Looks like we were mostly right after all. The 10.5.2 & Leopard Graphics Update were the crucial elements that Aspyr were waiting for, it seems.
Whether the performance boost is indeed that significant, I don't know.
Now officially the forum idiot

#59 nagromme

nagromme

    Master Blaster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1954 posts

Posted 01 March 2008 - 06:55 AM

Awesome!

#60 QuantaCat

QuantaCat

    Master Blaster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1995 posts
  • Location:Vienna, Austria

Posted 18 March 2008 - 12:32 AM

Funny, I only just today got this newsletter..
QC.


avatar courtesy of James Grimlee.