64 replies to this topic

[Wumpus]

Full details released today!

http://blog.gameagen...etails-released

http://blog.gameagen...-duty-black-ops

I'm doing the review for this, which I'm nearly done. I've finished the campaign and I've been playing lots of Multiplayer and Zombies. This is SO fun. Knock CoD all you want, this is quality entertainment. I'm hoping we'll get a substantial enough community around to keep the multiplayer going. I have some plans for it as well, like maybe some live streaming or playdates (as they are called) and maybe getting a VoiP server up so we can talk while playing.

Not going into full performance notes now (that will  be in the review on launch) but it runs great on my mid 2010 iMac for reference.

You can pre-order it now or signup at the new game agent site for a chance to win a free copy.

Who is into this?

P.S. Don't need "I hate CoD" comments in this thread, thanks.

[Djevlen]

"So we have a release date: 27th of September

Some details:
Will be on Steam, but no steamplay
1 DLC is included - "First strike content pack", One more will be available for purchase - "Rezurrection Content Pack"($14.99) and  there will be 2 additional DLCs later sold as a bundle.
Many macs will struggle with the requirements i think, but its a pretty good looking game imo.
Mac-to-mac MP only!, but if you buy it on the MAS you´ll still be able to play with your friends who bought it here, on steam etc.
There will be a mac app store only version being released a little later that will support game center, same situation as with Empire: Total War

Just thought I´d throw out some details I find interesting, for more info check: http://blog.gameagen...tails-released/


Price: $49.99"
Copied my reply in the news thread, just some quick details for people who are too lazy to click on your links:p

What an amazing couple of weeks for mac gaming, Empire: TW, GW2 beta client, this and feral is porting Arkham City.

[Wumpus]

Forgot to add you should join the FB group for Black Ops to better organize matches! https://www.facebook...ups/BlackOpsMac

[UmarOMC1]

*cough*MacGameStore*cough*

[Janichsan]

So, the game is pricey (albeit as much as the Windows version on Steam), is limited (only Mac-to-Mac multiplayer, no private matches, no way to run your own server, no Theater Mode) and has system requirements that exclude virtually any Mac sold before 2010 and even many still sold?

Yeah, sounds like an instant smash hit.

[Thain Esh Kelch]

I'm quite sure it will sell nicely anyway, since it has been exposed so much to the brainless masses.

I'll wait for it to hit 5-10$ though, as I usually do, due to a big bag back log of games.

[2112]

I'm all for Aspyr and the other Mac publishers doing well, but this release has quite a few obvious problems.
I played this game little less than a year ago using Boot Camp on the very same Mac Mini that's specifically excluded from the system reqs. It played great and I loved the game.
Then you have Mac-only MP, plus the $49.99 price tag and the whole project starts looking rather weak.

I really hope they do OK with it.

[Wumpus]

Janichsan, on 21 September 2012 - 01:43 AM, said:

So, the game is pricey (albeit as much as the Windows version on Steam), is limited (only Mac-to-Mac multiplayer, no private matches, no way to run your own server, no Theater Mode) and has system requirements that exclude virtually any Mac sold before 2010 and even many still sold?

Yeah, sounds like an instant smash hit.

Right, no I "I hate CoD" just a bunch of negative sarcasm. Thanks!

See my post below for comments on price. A newly released AAA costing $50 isn't considered pricey.

I'm defending the game, but it doesn't mean I recognize its shortcomings. I don't think anyone is going to cry over not running their own server (who even does that on Mac? for a game like this) but the no private matches is a blow for sure. It would make having any kind of competition match, or wanting to practice/screw around with friends difficult as anyone can wander in and you can't stop them. Theater mode would definitely be cool. Though you can remedy that in part by just recording as you play. Of course playing with the PC masses would be better, though even if implemented, I doubt it would benefit us for very long. MW3 has been out awhile, and with BO2 on the horizon its likely most people will drop it. MW2 MP has died out significantly as a result of MW3 and such, so its just a matter of time before the majority of players move on.

Its something to be said all versions of the game can play together. Normally the MAS stuff has MP issues, but that's not a problem here.

Let me guess, you have one of the macs that can't run the game? Or you are just bitching, I can't tell. For one's, there's plenty of people who meet the requirements. Sure, there's plenty of people who don't, but what are you going to do, not release games with higher requirements? Give me a break. And I bet anything It would run on my early 2009 MBP which has a 512mb card. Sure, its not "supported" but that doesn't mean it won't play. Obviously if you go try playing this on a MBA or some other puny mac laptop its not going to happen. It would also probably run on most any iMac, and certainly 15" MBP's, which last I checked, were all popular sellers.

Of course the final word is actually testing on minimum or just below minimum spec machines to see if it runs. You want to bitch on how horrible its going to be. I'm going to say how good its going to be. You don't like the game? That's your problem. I'm going to to enjoy it along with everyone else who does.

Thain Esh Kelch, on 21 September 2012 - 03:04 AM, said:

I'll wait for it to hit 5-10$ though, as I usually do, due to a big bag log of games.

Since when has a high end mac title ever gone that low? I think you'll be waiting forever

2112, on 21 September 2012 - 08:11 AM, said:

Then you have Mac-only MP, plus the $49.99 price tag and the whole project starts looking rather weak.

One thing I believe you are missing is the fact that this comes with a normally $15 DLC pack for free. The current PC version is still $40, so in that light, this is a better value as you'd have to spend $55 to get it. And if you pre-order you save a total of $10. And having played the extra maps I assure you they are worth it and add a lot of fun variety. Sometimes I believe Aspyr has a game that's too high priced (Company of Heroes for example, without ANY multiplayer at all at $50 was steep) but this I feel is justified with the First Strike DLC inclusion.

[ltcommander.data]

Janichsan, on 21 September 2012 - 01:43 AM, said:

So, the game is pricey (albeit as much as the Windows version on Steam), is limited (only Mac-to-Mac multiplayer, no private matches, no way to run your own server, no Theater Mode) and has system requirements that exclude virtually any Mac sold before 2010 and even many still sold?

Yeah, sounds like an instant smash hit.

The 320M and HD3000 might be a bit slow even if they are popular, but the 330M GT and HD4000 not being supported is definitely going to annoy users.

At first I thought the prices Aspyr would be charging for the DLC were expensive until I saw that the prices for the Windows DLC on Steam are the same. Remembering this is Activision and their love of milking their franchises/customers, I guess I shouldn't be surprised.

[Janichsan]

Wumpus, on 21 September 2012 - 09:51 AM, said:

Right, no I "I hate CoD" just a bunch of negative sarcasm. Thanks!

Your welcome.

Quote

See my post below for comments on price. A newly released AAA costing $50 isn't considered pricey.

Well, yeah, the price is debatable. I mentioned myself that Activision for some reason still sells the Windows version of the game for that price on Steam, despite being almost two years old.

Quote

Let me guess, you have one of the macs that can't run the game? Or you are just bitching, I can't tell. For one's, there's plenty of people who meet the requirements. Sure, there's plenty of people who don't,...

I wanted to grant you your wish, but you basically forced me to: I hate CoD. I don't give a fraction of a sh*t whether my Mac could run it or not. However, this game probably has the highest system requirements I've ever seen for a Mac game, significantly higher than the Windows version. If the Steam hardware survey is to be believed, the vast majority of Macs cannot run it. Defend the game all you want, but Aspyr is bound to get flak for that alone.

[Thain Esh Kelch]

Wumpus, on 21 September 2012 - 09:51 AM, said:

Since when has a high end mac title ever gone that low? I think you'll be waiting forever

Steam sales.

But at least Star Craft 2 is coming closer and closer to 10$ now...

[Wumpus]

Janichsan, on 21 September 2012 - 11:15 AM, said:

Well, yeah, the price is debatable. I mentioned myself that Activision for some reason still sells the Windows version of the game for that price on Steam, despite being almost two years old.

As an example MW2 was $60 for ages, years after release even. They can get away with it because of its enormous popularity. Annoying, but there you have it. Its $20 now, but I bet MW3 won't drop in price anytime soon. (excepting big steam sales.)

Janichsan, on 21 September 2012 - 11:15 AM, said:

I wanted to grant you your wish, but you basically forced me to: I hate CoD.

This is an entirely different discussion. Your perception is an opinion, not a fact. What shooter does it right? must every game innovate and advance the genre? Sure CoD games stick to their guns and only tweaks the formula. Sure, the series has issues, but its undeniably fun and the many thousands of gamers who agree with me and play the games aren't wrong. It doesn't make the game wrong. They are gamers making choices about what they want to play and enjoy. Just like you choose to hate it.

I hate mobile games. I hate casual games. I hate sports games, LEGO games and I detest console games. It doesn't make any of them wrong, it just means I don't like them. And I don't attack people for liking them or playing them. And I certainly don't go into threads where people like the game(s) and make sure they know how much I hate it and how wrong the game is as a result. Its such a waste of time and 100% unnecessary except to gratify yourself in some way. Its not constructive, its just blatant criticism for its own sake. This is very different than discussing what a games shortcomings are, how it could improve, or what we actually like about it in the first place but would like to see change. Even then, at the end of the day, all of that is an opinion. There's never a 100% consensus on these things. Its not about popular opinion, or minority opinion. Its about what *I* like and want to play. If you can't respect it, then go away.

The whole mentality of "you like this game/platform therefore you are WRONG or the game is WRONG" is in itself incredibly immature and akin to discrimination. Being a gamer is all about choices in regards to what we buy/play/consume. And what we want to play as individuals, is always 100% right because its our choice, and our fun.

Janichsan, on 21 September 2012 - 11:15 AM, said:

I don't give a fraction of a sh*t whether my Mac could run it or not. However, this game probably has the highest system requirements I've ever seen for a Mac game, significantly higher than the Windows version. If the Steam hardware survey is to be believed, the vast majority of Macs cannot run it. Defend the game all you want, but Aspyr is bound to get flak for that alone.

Highest system requirements you've ever seen? Okay. There's a thing called "when newer games are released, the system requirements go up." Oh noes, a new (to Mac) game requires a newer computer. What novelty is this?

And sure, you need double the RAM and Vram of the windows version, but that's no surprise either. Windows games have always been easier to run on lower, or on-par hardware and get better performance. Anyone trying to seriously game on 256mb card or integrated chip (with 384mb or whatever) is doing it wrong. You can play tons of stuff on a 256mb card, but Black Ops is by no means a casual title, an indie title, or a low-end shooter. Its a high end shooter. High end shooters always have high requirements. Deal with it.

Lets break down the steam survey. "Vast majority of macs"? Please. Approximately 87% have enough RAM. Something like 79-80% have the CPU to run it. And about 44% have the GPU to run it. The most cutting is obviously the GPU.

But not everyone uses steam. The Steam survey is based on the people who A. use Steam in the first place and B. Even accept the survey. The survey is optional, and thus not entirely accurate. And definitely not a definitive report on mac users gaming. A lot of people don't use steam and use the MAS. The MAS version does not require steam to play. I'm betting the number of people who could play it is easily in the 50% range or higher. If you want to bitch about accessibility in high end gaming, then you're in the wrong place. Its always been a little polarizing in terms of "who can run this and who can't." And game releases are what often drives gamers to get new macs. I know it does for me.

Of course Aspyr will catch flak - from people who want to play it but can't. Or people like you who feel a curious need to demonize them about it. You have no interest in the game in the first place, so there's no loss on their part. If you want to play AAA shooters on a low end laptop (or mac mini or what have you) you have the wrong system. Get something better. Its not Aspyr's problem, its your problem. Enough people have the mac's to run it to make it a viable audience.

You don't give a popsnizzle about the game, and you hate it. That's great. Take your hate mongering and spew it elsewhere. This thread doesn't need it. I enjoy the game. Other people enjoy it. Let us have our fun.

[Janichsan]

Wumpus, on 21 September 2012 - 01:44 PM, said:

This is an entirely different discussion.

Yes, it is. This is why I didn't address this point here.

Quote

Highest system requirements you've ever seen? Okay. There's a thing called "when newer games are released, the system requirements go up." Oh noes, a new (to Mac) game requires a newer computer. What novelty is this?

You seem to forget in your enthusiasm that there have been ports of games with higher requirements on the Windows side than CoD:BlOps where the Mac version had lower requirements... (e.g. Mafia II, RAGE, The Darkness II)

But okay, have fun. This is really not my problem.

[Djevlen]

I bet you can play CoD: BO on macs that don´t comply with all of the RECOMMENDED requirements, then again not everyone needs to have everything on High/Ultra/max at native resolution.  Also I bet Aspyr came up with those recommended requirements so that if your mac comply with them all, it´ll run the game flawlessly.

People said the same when Crysis was released some years ago, that you needed to have such a powerful computer in order to run the game but you didn´t. Of course you needed it if you wanted to run the game with everything on max, but even on low the game looked better any other game out there. And you didn´t need a high-end computer to run the game on low or even medium.

It seems strange to me that people blame Aspyr for porting a AAA shooter thats probably going to be the best looking Mac game so far. Eventually all "new" games will have higher requirements than the most demanding games out there today. We should be thanking them instead, I know i can´t wait for the 27th of september.

[Wumpus]

Janichsan, on 21 September 2012 - 02:38 PM, said:

Yes, it is. This is why I didn't address this point here.

Right, you'll just link to your snide one liner that makes you seem like some deep game critic instead. You didn't address the point there either. (I wasn't going to go and reply to it in another thread from July.) If you're going to talk popsnizzle, then back it up. Discussion is healthy, seemingly random hate isn't.

Janichsan, on 21 September 2012 - 02:38 PM, said:

You seem to forget in your enthusiasm that there have been ports of games with higher requirements on the Windows side than CoD:BlOps where the Mac version had lower requirements... (e.g. Mafia II, RAGE, The Darkness II)

Every game is different port wise. I don't do it and I'm not privy to its knowledge, but from experience and some familiarity with Aspyr and Feral (whose games you are quoting above) that's the case. Rage actually ran better for me on Mac than Windows and it was awesome. And that was Aspyr. So yay Aspyr? I never tried Mafia 2 in windows, but I did do The Darkness 2 demo in windows for a preview then did the review on Mac. Performance was great in either case.

What I said wasn't a blanket statement, its a generality.

Janichsan, on 21 September 2012 - 02:38 PM, said:

This is really not my problem.

Finally, you get it! Goodbye.

Djevlen, on 21 September 2012 - 03:47 PM, said:

I bet you can play CoD: BO on macs that don´t comply with all of the RECOMMENDED requirements, then again not everyone needs to have everything on High/Ultra/max at native resolution.  Also I bet Aspyr came up with those recommended requirements so that if your mac comply with them all, it´ll run the game flawlessly.

People said the same when Crysis was released some years ago, that you needed to have such a powerful computer in order to run the game but you didn´t. Of course you needed it if you wanted to run the game with everything on max, but even on low the game looked better any other game out there. And you didn´t need a high-end computer to run the game on low or even medium.

It seems strange to me that people blame Aspyr for porting a AAA shooter thats probably going to be the best looking Mac game so far. Eventually all "new" games will have higher requirements than the most demanding games out there today. We should be thanking them instead, I know i can´t wait for the 27th of september.

Agree with this, and that's usually the case. Just for fun I'm going try it out on my laptop that's below spec and see what happens. I know I've run games like that before you just have to lower everything.

Its definitely one of the best looking games out on Mac so far. RAGE looks better in some case (but not all.)

[Eric5h5]

Enough, Wumpus.  Janichsan is allowed to post an opinion, and nobody gets to dictate terms for posting in a public forum topic (aside from the standard forum rules, of course).  If you're not interested in dissenting opinions, the best thing you could have done was just ignore Janichsan's post.

--Eric

[Wumpus]

Eric5h5, on 21 September 2012 - 06:00 PM, said:

Enough, Wumpus.  Janichsan is allowed to post an opinion, and nobody gets to dictate terms for posting in a public forum topic (aside from the standard forum rules, of course).  If you're not interested in dissenting opinions, the best thing you could have done was just ignore Janichsan's post.

--Eric

*edit* If you don't want to read all about the conflict, see the bottom section of my post for MBA testing if you are concerned about your under-spec hardware.

Of course he's allowed. I never said or thought he wasn't. He has every right to post here. I don't mind dissenting opinions as I've said, discussion is healthy. I merely asked (nicely) to avoid simple "I hate CoD" posts which contribute nothing to an actual discussion. (Which he made a point to link to.)  He's made valid and interesting points otherwise and I've been going back and forth with him. Strongly, yes. Would I rather he not post what I view as something that doesn't add anything to the topic? Sure. Do I think he can't, or said he can't? No.

I know I said "goodbye" because he isn't actually responding to a lot of the points I made. And I said "let us have our fun" because he's just hating on it. Lastly I know I said "Take your hate mongering and spew it elsewhere." which is certainly harsh. I didn't mean everything he said, just the "I hate this" parts. All the points about the high system requirements and the games shortcomings in terms of features are valid, and worth talking about. Talking about WHY you hate the game is valid too, but he never did that. Be passionate in your love or hate, just be clear and thorough. Being vague is the worst thing possible because its pointless.

He doesn't even have the game or want to play the game. He's making all this out to be huge problems, how its going to fail and how Aspyr is horrible. When he doesn't even care in the first place or have experience or evidence of the game. (Whereas I do.) So come on, its a little absurd. That's why I said "take your hate mongering and spew it elsewhere."

I'm sorry if I offended someone about it. I feel passionate about this game..and the genre. If someone is going to make strong claims like "this game defines everything wrong with shooters" and "this game won't run on the *vast* majority of macs" and "this game is going to fail" then I'm going to make strong replies. If you can't handle it or back up what you say, don't start something in the first place. I'm not out to get anyone, or attack anyone. I don't go out of my way to explain how much I hate games anyone likes, I'm just defending what I like. Anything seemingly personally directed is me asking him to explain more or back up what he's said, which is an extension of the conversation/discussion.

More than anything I feel as gamers, and even more specifically Mac gamers, we should share our love and passions of/for games, not our hatred. We should be happy more games come to the Mac, even if its not one we want to play ourselves, because other Mac gamers will. This encourages developers and the community. And we should respect each others choices and interests.

I try and respect everyone's choices, including about games and systems I personally have no interest in, dislike, or don't believe in. Because its their choice, and if they have fun with it, more power to them I say. Its really disrespectful in my eyes to walk into a thread like this, and make claims like that. (Game is wrong, game will fail, its all horrible and problematic.) The only thing it fosters is negativity, and is in no way helpful, useful or contributing to the thread/topic. If you're going to do it, do it all the way. Ignoring points or parts of the posts is just silly.

In the interests of the "this game has too high requirements" discussion, I just tested Black Ops on my MacBook Air. It ran very smoothly on the auto-detect settings, which was 1024x768 resolution and medium settings. The machine itself is "unsupported" in the processor, video card department and OS version. It wants 10.7.4.

MBA Specs: 13" Mid 2011. 1.7 GHz Core i5. 4GB RAM. Intel HD 3000 (384mb) Lion 10.7.3.

I played through the first mission smoothly..I may even try turning up a few things.

So there you go, game runs just fine on low end, "unsupported" hardware. Can stop complaining about excessive system requirements.

[Smoke_Tetsu]

In RAGE's case it's kind of like.. yay for the OpenGL drivers for ATI in OS  X being less crappy than the notoriously bad OpenGL drivers from ATI that are in Windows. They give even stuff like Eduke32 and professional rendering apps problems there that aren't present in OS X. People think the OpenGL drivers are bad in OS X? Well in ATI's case they are even worse in Windows.. yet people don't notice as much because most games in Windows nowadays are Direct3D and in OS X everything is OpenGL including those same Direct3D games wrapped.

BTW, one last thing.. not supporting and not running something well or at all are two different things. Aspyr is not supporting those cards is more like it. Which is kind of unfortunate but there it is.

Oh, one other thing.. I kind of think the lower requirements in The Darkness II where a little misleading. There was some performance problems with that game on my Mac the last time I played it. Same thing with Mafia II although things with it have gotten better after a few driver updates due to OS Revisions since then. Anyway I think it's a little silly to compare the performance and requirements to those without actual testing. Requirements are more like guidelines.. not rules.

[Janichsan]

Wumpus, on 21 September 2012 - 06:35 PM, said:

Of course he's allowed. I never said or thought he wasn't.

Okay, allow me a few more sentences in this thread.

Quote

Talking about WHY you hate the game is valid too, but he never did that.

You didn't want that discussion here, so I avoided that discussion here. If you want an explanation, here you go.

Quote

He's making all this out to be huge problems, how its going to fail and how Aspyr is horrible. When he doesn't even care in the first place or have experience or evidence of the game. (Whereas I do.) So come on, its a little absurd. That's why I said "take your hate mongering and spew it elsewhere."

What you don't seem to understand is that the points I mentioned are exactly the problems that will put off those gamers the most, that actually care the most about the CoD series. Not being able to play online with the significant Windows player base in a game that relies that much on the appeal of its multiplayer part? I don't have to be a fan of the series to see this will be big problem for many people.

[Wumpus]

Janichsan, on 22 September 2012 - 09:10 AM, said:

You didn't want that discussion here, so I avoided that discussion here. If you want an explanation, here you go.

Thank you for detailing that, I will certainly read it.

Janichsan, on 22 September 2012 - 09:10 AM, said:

What you don't seem to understand is that the points I mentioned are exactly the problems that will put off those gamers the most, that actually care the most about the CoD series. Not being able to play online with the significant Windows player base in a game that relies that much on the appeal of its multiplayer part? I don't have to be a fan of the series to see this will be big problem for many people.

That's certainly valid. I don't feel I'm missing it, just as a fan of the series, both older and current, and a fan of the Multiplayer, its not putting me off. I expect a few hundred people to be playing this, which of course sounds like nothing, but in our little mac community, its a fair chunk. For longevities sake or "right out the gate" sure, it won't be as populated. There were 20 or so QA people alone testing the game and that was pre-release. Even if there is only 50-100 playing at any given time, that's more than enough to hop into. If you look on Steam stats there's about 4-5K people playing Black Ops at any given time. (versus the 30,000 of MW3.)  I expect that number to drop a lot more once Black Ops 2 hits. So my point earlier was, its a bummer, but I still don't think mac-to-pc MP would benefit us that long except a few extra hundred players. Which may be a lot, but we'll have our own.

People do/will care about those points. I just don't see it stopping them from getting the game. I would hope it doesn't at any rate. Maybe its because I'm used to both large and small communities, even with cross-platform multiplayer. Something like Heroes of Newerth for example always has tons of players. Conversely Nuclear Dawn has about one full server at any given time *in the world.* But that one server is enough for me to go and play on. Its still 20-30 players to have fun with. So yeah, I'd buy this even if I didn't get a review copy. Its that good.

Its kind of a sad truth, but Mac ports almost always get some features shafted. Not just from Aspyr, even Feral or VP. Its kind of our reality. Hopefully that changes for the better as time goes on. I accept it because I have to, and I am happy with what I get. But it doesn't mean I realize it could be better, or wish for better. Of course I'd be happier with a fully featured Black Ops game, but this is still a nearly-complete release and that's worth a lot to me. I hope it is to the community as well. I think gamers will get their monies worth, even with Mac only Multiplayer.