273 replies to this topic

[devSin]

I think it's more likely that it's just swallowing up all available memory (forcing everything else to page out)? When you quit, now most everything that was in memory has to be read back in when it's accessed. From disk. Slowly.

A memory leak is simply successively allocating memory for the same task without freeing the previously-held memory for it, and it won't persist when you exit the process. Although it can eat up all available memory if severe enough (and left running long enough), I think StarCraft II just legitimately uses that much RAM.

Try turning graphics settings (start with shaders) down and see if it improves memory usage is all I can think (or upgrade to as much RAM as you can).

[Mister Mumbles]

devSin, on 02 August 2010 - 11:15 AM, said:

Try turning graphics settings (start with shaders) down and see if it improves memory usage is all I can think (or upgrade to as much RAM as you can).

Great advice. I'm already running everything on low. Anyway, I don't know why I haven't thought of it being a memory issue before. It actually make sense. Meh. At this point I'm thinking I may just put SC2 in my things to play bin for my next computer update, which may not happen for another year or so.

Expanding the RAM on my Macbook doesn't make too much sense for just one game... also taking into account its still piddly graphics chip. I probably would have gotten a better Mac at the time if my budget had allowed it, but I did need a quick replacement when my Powerbook bit the dust back then. At least I was lucky enough to have snagged one of the first unibody MBs since that happened two weeks after their release.

[devSin]

Yeah, there are at least two expansions, so unless you don't plan on ever picking up the second and third chapters of the story, it probably doesn't matter to wait a year or two. Blizzard will also work to improve the game in the meantime, and Apple will fix OpenGL bugs and improve things, and nVidia might deign to improve their drivers, so things can also get better in 10.6 point updates, and 10.7 unless (until?) Apple just decides to cancel work on Mac OS X. But you're probably still going to be a bit constrained with only 2GB and the 9400M (you might try under Windows if you have a copy).

Personally, I'm not going to upgrade at least until Diablo III is out, assuming I'm still alive (fair assumption, but not certain), not bankrupt (probably wishful thinking), and haven't just switched completely to Windows + iPad (the least likely of the three, as I still have too much self-respect to voluntarily use Windows). I figure a Mac Pro released after D3 will play it and StarCraft II and expansions just fine, and the world will probably change such that it can be the last computer I ever purchase.

[dxlr8r]

Very disappointed. Beta worked nice on my Mac Pro 2008 with Nvidia GeForce 8800GT running 10.6.4 BUT with 10.6.3 graphic drivers... It is playable for like 5 minutes then it becomes to buggy to play. Some images:

http://homepage.mac....men/sc2/sc1.png
http://homepage.mac....men/sc2/sc2.png
http://homepage.mac....men/sc2/sc3.png

And that's just some of it. Some of the bugs fills the entire screen but they flicker to fast to get a screenshot off.

Been playing to the third campaign and I am already bored. Maybe it's because of the bugs. In the countdown vs Zerg mission the bugs are to big to play any further.

Edit: I have also tried the "Windowed Fullscreen" mode, heard that that could help. No effect here, the bug amount was the same.

Maybe Zerg got their hands on the Retail... In Zerg being bugs

[Mister Mumbles]

You know, maybe it's a good thing I've put SC2 on hold. It gave me the incentive to go back to WC3. Yes, I'm finally going to try and finish that damn game. I've never completed its campaign nor even touched the expansion, even though I've owned the game for how many years now? A bit sad, yes. Also, playing WoW right now I was interested in exploring more of the backstory I've missed, a lot of which comes specifically from that game. So that should be quite fun. Maybe I'll finally get a hang of the hero units, and I could also give multi a try for the first time.

[dojoboy]

Well, I lost my first MP game in the rookie league.  As the Terrans, I expanded too quickly and did not have enough defenses at my main base.  My opponent (Protoss) warped in units and took me down.  I've got 49 more!  May not ever be any good.  The campaign missions where I'm against the clock or racing another race for some goal cloud my thinking.  I much more enjoy the ones where I have opportunities to build.

[Janichsan]

Pegasus, on 03 August 2010 - 09:38 AM, said:

You know, maybe it's a good thing I've put SC2 on hold. It gave me the incentive to go back to WC3. Yes, I'm finally going to try and finish that damn game. I've never completed its campaign nor even touched the expansion, even though I've owned the game for how many years now? A bit sad, yes.

I never got into WC3. I liked WC, WC2 and SC, but WC3 never managed to catch my interest. I got bored somewhen at the beginning of the second campaign. Then I cheated my way through the game because I wanted to see the little StarCraft sequence you get to see after finishing the game on "hard". I never actually touched the expansion. This whole hero unit thing pretty much turned me off.

[badger2d]

Janichsan, on 04 August 2010 - 04:06 AM, said:

I never got into WC3. I liked WC, WC2 and SC, but WC3 never managed to catch my interest. I got bored somewhen at the beginning of the second campaign. Then I cheated my way through the game because I wanted to see the little StarCraft sequence you get to see after finishing the game on "hard". I never actually touched the expansion. This whole hero unit thing pretty much turned me off.

The Frozen Throne campaigns are wonderful, they really started thinking outside the box in that one and making single player missions much more varied from each other and from the old standard of "just go kill all the enemy bases".  I'm hoping, from the sound of it, SC2 single player when I get to play it will feel like the Frozen Throne campaign and more.

[Janichsan]

badger2d, on 04 August 2010 - 08:35 AM, said:

The Frozen Throne campaigns are wonderful, they really started thinking outside the box in that one and making single player missions much more varied from each other and from the old standard of "just go kill all the enemy bases".  I'm hoping, from the sound of it, SC2 single player when I get to play it will feel like the Frozen Throne campaign and more.

Hm... maybe I should check out TFT someday. The main game wasn't too encouraging, though.

[Tetsuya]

badger2d, on 04 August 2010 - 08:35 AM, said:

The Frozen Throne campaigns are wonderful, they really started thinking outside the box in that one and making single player missions much more varied from each other and from the old standard of "just go kill all the enemy bases".  I'm hoping, from the sound of it, SC2 single player when I get to play it will feel like the Frozen Throne campaign and more.

the SC2 campaign is quite varied.  There's a mission where 80% of the map (where all the minerals are) floods with lava every few minutes, so you have to lift-off your buildings, etc, on time, all while staving off zerg attacks..

and another where you have to live through a night-time zombie-horror vibe.

[Thain Esh Kelch]

Janichsan, on 04 August 2010 - 08:49 AM, said:

Hm... maybe I should check out TFT someday. The main game wasn't too encouraging, though.

TFT had a great campaign. But I also liked the regular campaign though...

[Mister Mumbles]

WC3 is definitely showing its age though. Those portrait facial animations are truly hideous. More often than not it looks like they forgot to put in their dentures they're smacking their gums so much.

Just like Janichsan I was never too fond of the introduction of heroes as the all-powerful units that they are. I forgot how the game had these semi-quests. It seems a bit weird in a strategy game, yet I can remember reading about the game's development way back when WC3 was supposed to be more of an RPG than RTS before they nixed most of the RPG stuff and ended up using that for WoW.

[clocknova]

I don't know if it's poor programming on Blizzard's part, or due to Apple's awful graphics drivers, but I've noticed that if I dial down my screen resolution, then dial it back up to my native 1680x1050, the game speeds up dramatically, only to slow down again after I complete a mission.  I have to repeat this process between every mission.  This is on my 2008 Macbook Pro with the NVIDIA 8600M 512.

[devSin]

Apple doesn't write graphics drivers.

Do you get the same result if you switch from fullscreen to windowed mode and back again after the missions?

[clocknova]

devSin, on 05 August 2010 - 10:08 PM, said:

Apple doesn't write graphics drivers.

Do you get the same result if you switch from fullscreen to windowed mode and back again after the missions?

Maybe not, but I can only get them from Apple when Apple wants me to have them, so they're de facto Apple's.

I don't know.  I'll give it a shot later.

[Eric5h5]

devSin, on 05 August 2010 - 10:08 PM, said:

Apple doesn't write graphics drivers.

It seems they do, at least for nVidia cards, from what I've read.

--Eric

[Thain Esh Kelch]

As far as I can recall, Apple do in fact write all drivers themselves, although they do get help from nVidia/AMD.

[clocknova]

Thain Esh Kelch, on 06 August 2010 - 02:01 AM, said:

As far as I can recall, Apple do in fact write all drivers themselves, although they do get help from nVidia/AMD.

Then they need to stop.   Or get more help.

[devSin]

From what you've read from whom?

As far as I'm aware, Apple is provided drivers by AMD and nVidia (they are forced to use Apple's implementation of OpenGL of course). If Apple had to reverse engineer the hardware (or the Windows drivers) to figure out how to write their own drivers (the GPU company is NOT giving away their secret sauce), for every single card they've ever shipped no less, I'm sure you can imagine how terrible their drivers would actually be (the drivers we get now would look like Best Software Ever Written in comparison). You can understand how people might think it (Apple is the customer of AMD and nVidia, not the end user; it's the responsibility of Apple to provide consumer-facing support), but it doesn't really seem believable, does it?

[Sneaky Snake]

Well can't say my experience of SC2 has been enjoyable as of yet.

Went in to town to buy the game. Sat down expecting a great night of Strategy gaming, which I haven't had in years (since AoE II). Ran through the tutorials quick to make sure nothing serious has changed in RTS games as of late. Was on the last tutorial, nearly done. Game locks up. Alright, whatever, happens to everyone. Try to open it again and I just get a error, and the option to send Blizzard an error code. So now I'm sitting with a completely unusable copy of SC2 and wondering what happened.

This is on my Gaming PC, so I'll install the Mac Pro and see how it goes, but the Mac Pro is the family computer, and as such availability is slim.