lithium06
Apr 1 2008, 07:42 PM
Espionage724
Apr 1 2008, 10:39 PM
Awesome...still won't matter to me because of my awesome Intel 950GMA card.....Why does intel have to make such insanely great video cards that can play any game well?
Chrystopher
Apr 4 2008, 03:49 PM
Coool!
pentarch_paladin
Apr 11 2008, 03:35 AM
That is amazing. I don't have to buy a PS3 to get this game!
Antoontje
Apr 13 2008, 10:08 AM
Thats really cool!
I want it!
scottishduck
Apr 15 2008, 09:16 PM
QUOTE
via Aspyr
Truly horrible coders. Expect a legion of bugs.
Headrush69
Apr 15 2008, 11:40 PM
QUOTE(scottishduck @ Apr 15 2008, 05:16 PM)

Truly horrible coders. Expect a legion of bugs.
Considering it is Cider based, it's not really much of any of their coding.
itshelloween
Apr 16 2008, 08:05 AM
COD4 is not going to use cider.
cyclonefr
Apr 16 2008, 12:25 PM
It won't but they are still horrible coders. Even CoD 2 is still running like {censored} on high end Mac when there is lots of smoke.
thespottedelf
Apr 16 2008, 12:45 PM
really... cod 2 runes fine (everything all the way up) on my mac... its a 2ghz c2d 1 gig of ram and ati 1600xt 128mb... and thats hardly a high end mac...
r u running 1.3?
on topic: i can't wait for this... is it cracked all ready? I don't think the cod series is worth paying for lol... not my favirote but i like the single player... and i play on the cracked servers once in a while
cyclonefr
Apr 16 2008, 01:54 PM
I'm not running 1.3 but i'm speaking about the SMOKE. Whenever there is everything but smoke on the screen, it runs at 10fps everything maxed. I'm not sure 1.3 changes that, does it ?
QUOTE(cyclonefr @ Apr 16 2008, 12:25 PM)

It won't but they are still horrible coders. Even CoD 2 is still running like {censored} on high end Mac when there is lots of smoke.
Quake4 runs amazingly well on OSX.
cyclonefr
Apr 19 2008, 03:08 PM
Why ? Because it's an OpenGL game right from the beginning and made for Linux which is pretty close to OSX (thanks to the Doom 3 engine).
But COD is a D3D game, not even out for Linux, so expect it to run like {censored} compared to its windows counterpart.
ThinkMark
Apr 19 2008, 06:50 PM
QUOTE(Espionage724 @ Apr 1 2008, 11:39 PM)

Awesome...still won't matter to me because of my awesome Intel 950GMA card.....Why does intel have to make such insanely great video cards that can play any game well?
At first, i didn't see the bit in bold, then i did sadly, LOL...
COD4 Is awesome, though PC's still get assassins creed....
Think Mark
QUOTE(cyclonefr @ Apr 19 2008, 03:08 PM)

Why ? Because it's an OpenGL game right from the beginning and made for Linux which is pretty close to OSX (thanks to the Doom 3 engine).
But COD is a D3D game, not even out for Linux, so expect it to run like {censored} compared to its windows counterpart.
Doom 3 is not 'made' for Linux. Its made for Windows/Linux/OSX in mind equally. Now stop being a baby and wait until the game is actually out before bashing it.
cyclonefr
Apr 19 2008, 09:44 PM
You obviously didn't understand what I was saying : of course it was made for WINDOWS in mind too, that's why I only said LINUX, because it was obvious.
I'm not sure it was made with OSX in mind considering how long they took to put out the Mac version of Quake 4 / Doom 3 / Prey after the linux/windows version.
Yeah sure I'm a baby : i'm bashing it because EVERY D3D to OpenGL port Aspyr have made has BAD performances compared to its windows counterpart. Just like Guitar Hero 3, CoD 2, Neverwinter Nights 2 to name a few.
So yeah i'm expecting CoD 4 to be a bad port. If it isn't, I guess Aspyr would have finally heard OUR complains. Yes, you read right, it seems i'm NOT the only one blaming Aspyr there. Oh and why do you think Asypr stop porting Tomb Raider games for Mac and now Feral is ?
the first ever public demonstration of Doom 3 was showed at Macworld. Generally what happens with id games is id produces all the code but doesn't actually release the game, they let the publisher do it (in this case Aspyr)
lithium06
Aug 23 2008, 08:26 AM
aww now the Aspyr site says Q3 2008. closer i guess. i'd try it out.
the_eternal_dark
Aug 26 2008, 05:32 AM
QUOTE(cyclonefr @ Apr 19 2008, 03:08 PM)

Why ? Because it's an OpenGL game right from the beginning and made for Linux which is pretty close to OSX (thanks to the Doom 3 engine).
But COD is a D3D game, not even out for Linux, so expect it to run like {censored} compared to its windows counterpart.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rGo0_lAk9oYRuns decently enough via Wine within Ubuntu.
romey-rome
Sep 9 2008, 02:58 AM
Aspyr's site now says Sept 15th.
lithium06
Sep 23 2008, 05:02 AM
amazon says sept 30
theumang
Sep 23 2008, 12:37 PM
netkas
Sep 25 2008, 10:12 PM
yeah
http://www.gameagent.com/store/aspyr/en_US...106317500#thumband, since it's aspyr, not a cider, it must be faster
aspyr uses own way to translate d3d calls into opengl calls, with recompilation of original app and etc, which is faster than cider's way
cyclonefr
Sep 26 2008, 01:45 PM
but still is unfortunantely a PORT so performances won't be as good as on windows.
Gameagent has a shitty DRM btw.
booger_sniffer5000
Oct 4 2008, 03:02 AM
I wonder if COD5 will be ported to OS X when it comes out.
stellarola
Oct 4 2008, 10:07 PM
According to the macrumors.com forums, the game runs as well as the Windows counterpart.
Not sure the system but one user got these frame rates..
CoD4 Windows - 35-60fps
CoD4 Mac - 30-60fps
Not too shabby, I'd say.
-Stell
Lardinio
Oct 5 2008, 05:02 PM
Got my copy yesterday morning!
Runs just as well in OSX as it does in Windows, I have two nearly identical systems, both with x1950 gt graphics cards and I get 35 - 40 fps at 1440x900 with everything uphigh apart from AA and AF.
Although the sound isn't quite as 'surround' as the pc version, apart from that it is great to finally have it ported!
cyclonefr
Oct 6 2008, 02:59 PM
except FSAA, everything else is fine. I mean when you enable fsaa 4x, it divides your fps by 4, and by 2 with fsaa 2X.
Except shitty fsaa optimization, everything else is perfect. A good port overall.
GERGÖ
Oct 8 2008, 10:39 PM
Yeah! I'm happy, now I can play one of my favourite games.
vbetts
Oct 8 2008, 11:00 PM
QUOTE(cyclonefr @ Apr 19 2008, 03:08 PM)

Why ? Because it's an OpenGL game right from the beginning and made for Linux which is pretty close to OSX (thanks to the Doom 3 engine).
But COD is a D3D game, not even out for Linux, so expect it to run like {censored} compared to its windows counterpart.
Call of Duty 2 uses the quake 3 engine, which is IDtech 3 and Doom 3 is IDtech 4. Quake 3 engine is based on opengl. But it's not that they're horrible coders, it's like you said, DX. It's not easy to port one platform to another like this.
cyclonefr
Oct 9 2008, 10:36 AM
Dunno where you saw that CoD2 uses Quake 3 engine but you are smoking dude. It's a home made engine. Only CoD 1 uses Quake 3 engine.
And again i was right on some point : while the port isn't that bad, it's still slower. Not even talking about FSAA...
ecluley
Oct 9 2008, 10:39 AM
I read that this needs leopard to run. I find that kinda annoying, some people don't want to upgrade to leopard, I have a mate who wants to get CoD4 but only has Tiger - he does a lot of home recording and is loathed to upgrade in case anything doesn't work anymore. Can it be installed using pacifist on tiger? Why do all new games need leopard?
Software Updater
Oct 9 2008, 11:59 AM
Its like it was with Vista...
Same kind of tactics anyways.
thenameisgabe
Oct 10 2008, 10:04 PM
I just got it, running it on a hackingtosh. Runs much better on xp/vista than on leopard.
Leopard : 25-55fps on multiplayer.
XP/Vista: 60-90fps
It also doesn't look as good on OSX. Can't say I'm not disappointed.
Hardware:
ASUS P5B-VM
4gb ddr2 800 ram
8800GT 512mb
2.4ghz C2Duo
If anyone has any tweaks that make this game run better, please let me know.
cyclonefr
Oct 10 2008, 10:28 PM
make sure you disable FSAA, else it's unplayable...
thenameisgabe
Oct 11 2008, 12:44 AM
was already disabled. FPS drops to like 10-15 when in heavy action.
How is it running on other builds? or actual macs?
cyclonefr
Oct 11 2008, 02:36 PM
for me it doesn't drop under 30fps, even when heavy actions fully maxed except smoke edge (useless, you wont notice it) & fsaa. But i'm running it in 1280x1024, so maybe that's why
thenameisgabe
Oct 11 2008, 04:43 PM
What's your build look like?
I'm running at 1680x1050. Using iDeneb's 10.5.5 release.
Never did have much luck with osx86 and gaming, although spore runs fine.
cyclonefr
Oct 11 2008, 06:55 PM
look at my signature. The 8800 GT build I mean.
thenameisgabe
Oct 11 2008, 11:07 PM
That's odd, we essentially have the same system except for the processor. I didn't think the game was that cpu intensive, I'm going to try overclocking to see if it makes a difference.
stellarola
Oct 12 2008, 05:27 AM
QUOTE(thenameisgabe @ Oct 12 2008, 12:07 AM)

That's odd, we essentially have the same system except for the processor. I didn't think the game was that cpu intensive, I'm going to try overclocking to see if it makes a difference.
Actually, after testing it, I too saw some really shitty fps. It's night and day with the Windows version and this one.
Also I cranked my CPU speed up a bit and did notice a boost in fps in OSX. It appears to be more CPU intensive in OSX than Windows.
-Stell
thenameisgabe
Oct 15 2008, 12:59 AM
Well, OC'ed to 2.7ghz up from 2.4 and saw an increase of about 20-25fps. Now i'm running above 40 most of the time.
Hoping its a bug and they can release a patch for it, though its unlikely.
Oh well, been looking for an excuse to upgrade anyways. Any suggestions for a decent build that runs vanilla?
Thanks,
Gabe
cyclonefr
Oct 15 2008, 05:41 PM
I guess that's why the game is fast for me. It's a shame it's so CPU intensive, i guess because the CPU does most of the Direct3D to OpenGL work...
Lardinio
Oct 16 2008, 09:34 AM
Overclocking my E4300 from 1.8Ghz to 3.2Ghz really helps! My X1950GT has been overclocked to XTX speeds, but that doesn't seem to make too much difference, about 4fps from base to overclocked. The cpu puts about another 15fps on, running at 1440x900 with 2xAA and everything on. It runs pretty close to my other system which has identical hardware but runs XP and used to have the same 1950gt. I have recently upgraded the graphics card to a Nvidia 9600 GSO (my first Nvidia card since the GeForce 3 in my G4 Cube) I wish this card would work in OSX as it absolutely murders the 1950gt and only cost me £55 for the XXX overclocked version which is as quick as 8800GT but has a nice black PCB (which of course makes all the difference!)
One thing I have noticed though is the HDR makes the models look like they have been laminated when compaired to the XP version, but I'm sure they will tweak it with additional releases.
Majki
Oct 17 2008, 01:16 PM
On my HacMac spectification in signature... this works like poor
dnjmarlboro
Oct 18 2008, 11:48 AM
QUOTE(Majki @ Oct 17 2008, 01:16 PM)

On my HacMac spectification in signature... this works like poor
Which signature?
COD4 Mac plays very very well on 1920x1200 (C2D 3 Ghz / 8800GT)
tastannin
Oct 21 2008, 05:46 AM
CoD4 SP crashes on launch (2-3 bounces then disappears) on my Hackintosh. Reinstalled. Installed 1.7 patch. BUT CoD4 MP works just great. WEIRD.
Hackintosh specs are 2.5 ghz C2Q, 4GB RAM, Asus P5K Deluxe/WiFi, Sapphire ATI 3870 512MB, etc. Leopard 10.5.5.
Any ideas, anyone?
TIA!!
thenameisgabe
Oct 21 2008, 10:39 AM
could be the video card, aren't ATI cards not fully supported?
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please
click here.