PDA

View Full Version : Mac Doom III by IMG


applekid
Jan 3, 2005, 03:30 PM
Before reading the article, remember this is a preview of the beta version:

http://www.insidemacgames.com/previews/view.php?ID=179

I wish they posted some screenshots from the Mac version (because the ones on their site seem to be the PC version).

Converted2Truth
Jan 3, 2005, 03:56 PM
The guy who 'previewd' doom3 sucks. It's not written right at all. And he's reviewing the game, not previewing it.

What's up with IMG posting PC pics of games anyway?

Doom3 isn't for everyone. A previewer should mention that, but not judge it according to their personal taste. This guy is lame.

enclave
Jan 3, 2005, 04:18 PM
The guy who 'previewd' doom3 sucks. It's not written right at all. And he's reviewing the game, not previewing it.

What's up with IMG posting PC pics of games anyway?

Doom3 isn't for everyone. A previewer should mention that, but not judge it according to their personal taste. This guy is lame.

Horrar for another sub par mac port!

Oh well, at least I still have my pc for gaming

Converted2Truth
Jan 3, 2005, 04:29 PM
Horrar for another sub par mac port!

Oh well, at least I still have my pc for gaming
We should support mac gaming, or it will never get better. Let's face it, apple needs to see the large VOID in mac performance when it comes to games. Once 50% of apple users are pissed cause they can't run doom3 (or any other intensive game) on there new computer, Jobs will open a new can, focusing on graphics performance. They should have an entire division dedicated to this. Instead, they're practically relying on the opensource code stuff.

While i game on a PC (for games that never make it to the Mac OS), I buy lots of titles for the mac. My next purchase will be Men of Valor. Games are fun on the Mac, and buying them supports the Mac gamers and those that port PC games.

Maybe i'm stupid, oh well...

Dont Hurt Me
Jan 3, 2005, 04:44 PM
Its hard to support Mac gaming when Apple is pushing Fx5200 garbage and wont support videocards and has only 1 machine even capable of holding one. :rolleyes: I gave up on Mac gaming this year but i still buy a few arcade titles for the wife. Doom3 was sweet on my machine with everything on...... :D but Halflife2 was even sweeter :eek:

Lord Blackadder
Jan 3, 2005, 06:49 PM
I don't understand the fuss; the writer pretty much summed up what PC reviews have said (great engine, boring game, high sys reqs), only adding that the pre-beta-ish version he sampled wasn't an accurate example of what performance to expect.

Still, having a Dual 2.5 currently choke on it makes me hope Aspyr is working overtime on the optimization. Don't go Halo on us here! :eek:

applekid
Jan 3, 2005, 06:53 PM
Heh. The title should say "Mac Doom III Preview by IMG." If a mod could change the title, that'd be appreciated. :o

Converted2Truth
Jan 3, 2005, 08:02 PM
Still, having a Dual 2.5 currently choke on it makes me hope Aspyr is working overtime on the optimization. Don't go Halo on us here! :eek:
Aspyr is only in charge of publishing DoomIII. They're not involved in porting it or anything from what i understand.

Lord Blackadder
Jan 3, 2005, 08:55 PM
Aspyr is only in charge of publishing DoomIII. They're not involved in porting it or anything from what i understand.

Good point, I stand corrected. But my worries remain...

enclave
Jan 3, 2005, 11:09 PM
Good point, I stand corrected. But my worries remain...

Considering that Carmack programmed the engine to be cross platform I would have little hope in assuming the game will be "optimised" for release, a dual 2+ gig machine choking on Doom3 is NOT a good sign of whats to come.

I wish Apple would take games more seriously, it's the only thing keeping the pc industry rolling. Who needs a 3ghz machine to do a spreadsheet? That's right no one, the games are what is pushing the platform forward...

Sigh... Damnit Apple if only you put half as much effort into the games side of things as you did the pro apps....

mcarvin
Jan 3, 2005, 11:18 PM
Horrar for another sub par mac port!

Oh well, at least I still have my pc for gaming

We'll see for sure in a couple of months. Tuncer was looking at a late alpha/first beta version.

the games are what is pushing the platform forward...

Let the games stay on PC, seriously. I use my Mac for work and some fun stuff, and my consoles are for gaming. Besides, what platform/manufacturer are you prouder of: one that can help create and produce Lord of the Rings (yet be easy enough for your mom/dad/significant other to do likewise) or the one that plays HL2 the best?

ravenvii
Jan 3, 2005, 11:43 PM
Let the games stay on PC, seriously. I use my Mac for work and some fun stuff, and my consoles are for gaming. Besides, what platform/manufacturer are you prouder of: one that can help create and produce Lord of the Rings (yet be easy enough for your mom/dad/significant other to do likewise) or the one that plays HL2 the best?

How about BOTH?! :eek:

:D Yeah, yeah, I know; in my dreams.

benpatient
Jan 4, 2005, 12:16 PM
one that can help create and produce Lord of the Rings

um...I think you missed something...at the end of production for The Two Towers, there were over 1200 Linux boxes running on Intel hardware, and tons of SGI machines running at WETA.

THAT is how lord of the rings was created. Maya and Renderman and a custom-built program called Massive did most of the work. Macs weren't involved in the thousands of special effects shots. I guess people probably used macs for their email or something...but come on. They didn't make LotR on Macs. They made it on PCs, Linux and SGI machines.

Timelessblur
Jan 4, 2005, 12:36 PM
I would not call it another subpar mac port. The game is going to show the glaring weakness in Apple computer, the iMac which are going to bariely be able to run it. THe emacs yeah right now happen.

Have you look at the system spec for the PC side. they are rocomending some pretty high end stuff and then the people who did reviews on it stated anything below the 9600 pro really should not try to run this game because it will be pretty poor.

Edot
Jan 4, 2005, 02:18 PM
um...I think you missed something...at the end of production for The Two Towers, there were over 1200 Linux boxes running on Intel hardware, and tons of SGI machines running at WETA.

THAT is how lord of the rings was created. Maya and Renderman and a custom-built program called Massive did most of the work. Macs weren't involved in the thousands of special effects shots. I guess people probably used macs for their email or something...but come on. They didn't make LotR on Macs. They made it on PCs, Linux and SGI machines.

Actually I recall them using macs at Skywalker for some of the Graphics and Sound work. Also, they used an iPod to cart around dailies. Watch the Appendicies on the Extended Edition sets and you will be suprised that they did use macs. Also I know for a fact they used Shake, but I don't know on what hardware.

Mav451
Jan 4, 2005, 02:35 PM
You guys do realize he's reviewing with a ATi 9800XT?

Even on the PC side, going from the Athlon XP 2500+, to the 3200+ to the Athlon 64 FX-53 << powerhouse, the frames don't change significantly. This is a GPU-LIMITED game guys.

From the weakest to the strongest processor, the optimal resolution stayed at 1024 x 768 (this is what I would call "average" performance). I thought most of you guys knew that ATi is weak at OGL...

B/c it is GPU-limited, moving to a stronger GPU--especially in OGL would take care of this. Going to the lowest 6800 model, the Non-Ultra (12-pipe), it can already hit 1280x1024 on the 3200+.

Moving to an FX-53, the lowest 6800NU can hit 1600x1200 with optimal framerates (avg of 50's). So guys, don't be worried he didn't do so hot with the 2.5G5 >> it was the GPU at fault, not the CPU.

mcarvin
Jan 4, 2005, 02:38 PM
How about BOTH?! :eek:

:D Yeah, yeah, I know; in my dreams.

I hear ya though.

mcarvin
Jan 4, 2005, 02:44 PM
Actually I recall them using macs at Skywalker for some of the Graphics and Sound work. Also, they used an iPod to cart around dailies. Watch the Appendicies on the Extended Edition sets and you will be suprised that they did use macs. Also I know for a fact they used Shake, but I don't know on what hardware.

I think Shake was on the Linux boxes at the time, but also after Apple bought Shake. However, I could have swore I saw some marketing material that had either Gollum or a massive orc army in Shake for OS X.

applekid
Jan 4, 2005, 04:22 PM
From the weakest to the strongest processor, the optimal resolution stayed at 1024 x 768 (this is what I would call "average" performance). I thought most of you guys knew that ATi is weak at OGL...

That really doesn't apply on the Mac. ATI develops their own drivers and utilities, so the support is already greater. They have the manpower to focus on Mac drivers. And since Apple has to write the nVidia drivers, they probably aren't going to put too much manpower in writing those. So, ATI on the Mac is a savior! :cool:

benpatient
Jan 4, 2005, 04:37 PM
However, I could have swore I saw some marketing material that had either Gollum or a massive orc army in Shake for OS X.

yeah, well, apple ran ads back in the day showing G4s with a video of some pixar movie (toy story, maybe?) and pretended (but didn't say explicitly) that they had used the G4s to create the movie's renders...when they had used SG or some such. Just marketing...

in fact, Pixar, essentially a sister-company to Apple, now, uses PC-based machines running Linux almost exclusively for all 3d rendering applications...nothing in the offices is anything but a Mac, but when you get to where the real work happens, there isn't a G5 in sight. It's just the current reality of rendering. Pixar would be stupid to use Macs for rendering...it would be a waste of money and time...

crachoar
Jan 4, 2005, 07:44 PM
Leave games to the PC?

You've got to be kidding me right?

Games (in fact) do push the hardware companies to design more powerful equipment.

That's a fact.

If you don't care - great. But the majority of us 'mac gamers' do.

And if I had to pick between 'Half-Life 2' or 'something mom and dad can use', I'm going with 'HL2'...

Apple has to meet the needs of the gamers if they ever expect to seriously compete with the 'Windows' side of computing...

And furthermore, why should I support shoddy mac ports?

Did the game porting companies learn their lesson after Halo?

Saying 'keep buying the crappy, unoptimized ports - that also happen to me months, if not years late, because if you do, things will get better!' is foolish.

Things will not get better until the companies start taking mac gaming seriously. And to do so, Apple needs to step in and do something...

Buying 'Bungie' would've been that one move. If 'Halo' were a mac exclusive, we'd be in gaming heaven right now. Companies would've taken note of the popularity of the game. Mac sales would've gone through the roof...

But nope. Apple didn't seem to care about their game developers - and ironically - still don't. :(

applekid
Jan 4, 2005, 08:22 PM
Leave games to the PC?

You've got to be kidding me right?

Games (in fact) do push the hardware companies to design more powerful equipment.

That's a fact.

If you don't care - great. But the majority of us 'mac gamers' do.

And if I had to pick between 'Half-Life 2' or 'something mom and dad can use', I'm going with 'HL2'...

Apple has to meet the needs of the gamers if they ever expect to seriously compete with the 'Windows' side of computing...

And furthermore, why should I support shoddy mac ports?

Did the game porting companies learn their lesson after Halo?

Saying 'keep buying the crappy, unoptimized ports - that also happen to me months, if not years late, because if you do, things will get better!' is foolish.

Things will not get better until the companies start taking mac gaming seriously. And to do so, Apple needs to step in and do something...

Buying 'Bungie' would've been that one move. If 'Halo' were a mac exclusive, we'd be in gaming heaven right now. Companies would've taken note of the popularity of the game. Mac sales would've gone through the roof...

But nope. Apple didn't seem to care about their game developers - and ironically - still don't. :(

Pick up programming, port a commercial game, then come back and talk to us.

Gaming is not going to be Apple's highest priority for a long time. Just look at how many people hang around these forums compared to the rest of MacRumors forums. It's a minority. This budget Mac will prove my point once it comes out. Watch out for a population jump, without the help of gamers.

Apple has done everything in their power already. Game development on the Mac has come a long way. In the "dark ages" of the Macs (before Steve Jobs' return), we were lucky if we got one triple-A title a year. OpenGL is one major development and API Apple has pushed. Go to ADC's website. There is loads and loads of development tools, tutorials, guides, and resources for game development. They have a section dedicated to game development! So those of you that keep on complaining Apple needs to do more, you are just ignorant. What game developers and/or porters need to do now is "seal the deal," IMO. Get bigger budgets, take some bigger chances with bigger games. The only shoddy thing Apple needs to work on is getting those graphics card drivers tip-top shape. IBM needs to keep pushing the G5s. And people need to start switching over to the Mac in higher numbers.

There's more you "Mac gamers" need to do than just moan, groan, and complain. You haven't proven anything to game companies by pirating copies of Halo. You haven't helped anyone by stopping the purchases of games for your Mac. You haven't helped anyone when you tell people to just don't even try gaming on the Mac.

topicolo
Jan 4, 2005, 08:39 PM
Buying 'Bungie' would've been that one move. If 'Halo' were a mac exclusive, we'd be in gaming heaven right now. Companies would've taken note of the popularity of the game. Mac sales would've gone through the roof...

But nope. Apple didn't seem to care about their game developers - and ironically - still don't. :(

If Halo was mac exclusive, the game would never have been this popular.

You actually need to consider that there have been over 13.6million xboxes sold versus about 12 million macs sold since 2000 (and not all capable of even running halo) and not everybody buying a mac will buy games for it, unlike the xbox, which is designed mainly for gaming.

Also, a noticeable percentage of the people who eventually play halo on the mac would pirate the game and not contribute any money to bungie's coffers at all. Those numbers would not help companies notice the mac's gaming popularity.

The sad truth is that the mac IS mainly a productive platform that supports some games, and it would take a LOT of work and a long time before any huge changes are seen. Back in the early days, Jobs didn't like the mac being referred to as a "cute little toy" so he actively discouraged game development on the mac and this is why games aren't as popular as they are.

It doesn't look like anything is going to change anytime soon

mcarvin
Jan 4, 2005, 09:05 PM
If Halo was mac exclusive, the game would never have been this popular.

You actually need to consider that there have been over 13.6million xboxes sold versus about 12 million macs sold since 2000 (and not all capable of even running halo) and not everybody buying a mac will buy games for it, unlike the xbox, which is designed mainly for gaming.

Also, a noticeable percentage of the people who eventually play halo on the mac would pirate the game and not contribute any money to bungie's coffers at all. Those numbers would not help companies notice the mac's gaming popularity.

The sad truth is that the mac IS mainly a productive platform that supports some games, and it would take a LOT of work and a long time before any huge changes are seen. Back in the early days, Jobs didn't like the mac being referred to as a "cute little toy" so he actively discouraged game development on the mac and this is why games aren't as popular as they are.

It doesn't look like anything is going to chance anytime soon

I have a serious question to ask here - not trolling or flaming or anything like that. Games generally matter for a very short while. The exceptions - Halo, UT, Quake, Doom, Duke Nukem, The Sims, most of Blizzard's stuff - that actually have real staying power are on Mac in some way. We get some A-list games, and a bunch of B-list (NOLF, Black and White, etc), and some really great stuff from indies like Ambrosia and Panagea. So if we have the "games that matter", then what's all the agitation over?

Besides, ESPN NFL 2k5 and the new Ratchet and Clank rock hard. And they're not on PCs - only consoles.

enclave
Jan 4, 2005, 10:01 PM
Leave games to the PC?

You've got to be kidding me right?

Games (in fact) do push the hardware companies to design more powerful equipment.

That's a fact.

If you don't care - great. But the majority of us 'mac gamers' do.

And if I had to pick between 'Half-Life 2' or 'something mom and dad can use', I'm going with 'HL2'...

Apple has to meet the needs of the gamers if they ever expect to seriously compete with the 'Windows' side of computing...

And furthermore, why should I support shoddy mac ports?

Did the game porting companies learn their lesson after Halo?

Saying 'keep buying the crappy, unoptimized ports - that also happen to me months, if not years late, because if you do, things will get better!' is foolish.

Things will not get better until the companies start taking mac gaming seriously. And to do so, Apple needs to step in and do something...

Buying 'Bungie' would've been that one move. If 'Halo' were a mac exclusive, we'd be in gaming heaven right now. Companies would've taken note of the popularity of the game. Mac sales would've gone through the roof...

But nope. Apple didn't seem to care about their game developers - and ironically - still don't. :(

it's a sad fact people. Good news hoever for Doom fans

there is a beta of Jdoom, an EXCELLENT port of the Doom source code. It's still in it's infancy on the mac but there will be a proper release very soon

www.doomsdayhq.com

Check it out!

frozenstar
Jan 5, 2005, 08:49 AM
in fact, Pixar, essentially a sister-company to Apple, now, uses PC-based machines running Linux almost exclusively for all 3d rendering applications...nothing in the offices is anything but a Mac, but when you get to where the real work happens, there isn't a G5 in sight. It's just the current reality of rendering. Pixar would be stupid to use Macs for rendering...it would be a waste of money and time...

Yeah, well, you're wrong.

Pixar bought those Intel/Linux boxes before the Xserve G5 was released.
The Xserve G5 in a cluster configuration is an excellent rendering solution. In most cases, it's cheaper, cooler, and quieter than competing offerings from the x86 world.

benpatient
Jan 5, 2005, 12:17 PM
odd...they are still buying x86 systems (as of mid 2004) for their render farms. They switched over their production workstations to xserves in 2003, but those machines still need the linux boxes to do all the "down and dirty" rendering. They're all hidden in a back room, but the meat and potatoes of Pixar is a bunch of linux-running x86 processors.

Mantat
Jan 5, 2005, 01:02 PM
I dont know how many times I will have to post this but Pixar linux boxes were supposed to be replaced by G5 last year but the program was delayed because of availlability issues. Its a known fact that even Steve Jobs prefer to use the best tool for the job. For exemple, until the arrival of the XServe, all the server job was done on SUN machine, and in the case of Pixar, they used linux boxes for rendering.

Now that renderman has been ported on OSX I am prety sure they will do their best to optimize the code for G5 and make the switch for two reasons:
- Jobs has a big ego and doesnt like pc
- cost, XServe maintenance cost are a fraction of pc 1U.

They make extensive use of Mac in the production of LotR but it wasnt dominant since they arent a Mac shop, they are a Apple shop and used Shake a lot to compose all the fx.

Massive is just a simulation software, it doesnt output any image, only animation data. Its like Mayhem (google it).

Finaly, to the idiot who said that a game 'worth being pirated' should return to the pc world. I paid for every game I use and I am proud of supporting mac gaming. There are alot of small / simple game on the mac for people who are interested in the shareware world and not in 3D shooter.

Mord
Jan 5, 2005, 01:20 PM
there is nothing with the the same cost/performance/maintenance raitos as xserves powerpc is the new high performence super computing chip, 4/10 of the top ten supercomputers use the powerpc (2x ppc440's 2x ppc 970's) which means the powerpc outnumber all the x86 clusters.

socamx
Jan 5, 2005, 01:29 PM
I came into this thread thinking "oh boy now I can get some more information about a possible game to buy! yippy skippy!"

After reading through the posts I am knee deep in hell about 2 completely unrelated things.

1. What pixar actually uses for their movie rendering.
2. A pissing match about PC vs Mac and gaming.

You people need to seriously grow up and maybe the reason this particular mac gaming forum is so slow is because you guys treat gaming on a mac as a burden instead of a good thing. DEAL WITH IT. Be glad macs can play games in the first place. Be glad that we get some good damn games, IE Unreal Tournament, Quake, Halo, etc. (Probably others but you people piss me off to much to bother to name them). "BUT OMG WE AREN'T GETTING HALF LIFE 2 AND SO AND SO GAME!?!!?@!@!" So the ****** what? Just deal with it and if you really want to play it, just get a pc and stop bashing macs.

You guys treat the entire Mac platform as if it completely sucks. When something good happens its like "oh yay, hoo-rah".

But god willing something bad happens, you guys completely tear it to shreds untill you are beating the lifeless pulp and act like its armageddon.
Halo for example, I played that entire game through, BOUGHT IT LEGALLY, and never had 1 damn problem. I didn't see any signs of a half-assed port. Sure maybe the FPS stuttered in extreme cases, but that is why you buy better hardware...DUH. Expecting games to run on every single Mac, when only ONE machine is clearly designed for it (more or less), THE G5, is just RETARDED. If I didn't want to play the newest and greatest games, I would never have gotten a G5 with a Radeon 9800 Pro, I would have gotten an eMac or something. But no, I wanted to game on a platform all of you hate, so I got the computer DESIGNED for it....so stop with the bull that "Doom 3 won't run on a G4"...WELL GUESS WHAT, the G4 processor is old news, time to look to the furture.... the G5 TOWER. By the way, Apple puts the Nvidia 5200 Ultra in because, guess what, most people that buy the G5 aren't looking to gaming, they need a video editing workhorse, or photoshop machine. The graphics card barely does anything for photoshop.

Just grow the hell up, all of you.

Yes its clear Mac gaming is a small community, always has, probably always will be. So what, support it so that it will atleast be there in the future. It HAS improved over time due to people that take time out of their hands to port games for macs, so support them.

Take your Mac vs PC gaming pissing matches else where, no one cares.

Oh and saying pirating is game is good has got to be one of the most retarded things I have ever heard... </rant>
______________________________________________________________

Well for the people that actually care what this topic is about, a Doom 3 preview. (Just incase you didn't realize what the topic was...)

I am actually quit intereseted in this. Very curious to how it is going to run on other machines when it finally hits shelves, but so far it looks like they are doing a good job of porting it.

I'll definitely be buying Doom 3 when it comes out...because I support Mac gaming.

oingoboingo
Jan 5, 2005, 03:21 PM
I came into this thread thinking "oh boy now I can get some more information about a possible game to buy! yippy skippy!"

After reading through the posts I am knee deep in hell about 2 completely unrelated things.

1. What pixar actually uses for their movie rendering.
2. A pissing match about PC vs Mac and gaming.

To quote the classic Slashdot line:

"You're new here, aren't you?"

socamx
Jan 5, 2005, 07:15 PM
Not new here... I just avoid this place because of stuff like this...

Mord
Jan 6, 2005, 01:16 PM
what i most want to know is weather the game will run on a g4, not run well but just be able to play it, as my cube will be heavyly upgraded by the time i get doom 3 and i just want to rub in the fact that it runs to everyone i know

my cube will have a dual 1.5GHz+ cpu and a radeon 9700 clocked at 9800 pro speeds with peltier cooling (i know all abotu condensation provention ect and the cooling requirements for peltier cooling, i'm going to try it wil air cooled TEC's first then i'll try watercooled TEC's if ti proves unstable, as you may have guessed i'm a cube geek and my dual 450MHz cube is getting a little slow with it's radeon 7500 and 1GB ram.

benpatient
Jan 6, 2005, 05:16 PM
wow, man. You managed to sound more "pissy" and childish than the rest of the thread posters combined! Congrats.

Mav451
Jan 6, 2005, 05:25 PM
what i most want to know is weather the game will run on a g4, not run well but just be able to play it, as my cube will be heavyly upgraded by the time i get doom 3 and i just want to rub in the fact that it runs to everyone i know

my cube will have a dual 1.5GHz+ cpu and a radeon 9700 clocked at 9800 pro speeds with peltier cooling (i know all abotu condensation provention ect and the cooling requirements for peltier cooling, i'm going to try it wil air cooled TEC's first then i'll try watercooled TEC's if ti proves unstable, as you may have guessed i'm a cube geek and my dual 450MHz cube is getting a little slow with it's radeon 7500 and 1GB ram.

If your cube is using G4's (what it sounds like), and you have a 9700/9800Pro, I believe your "optimum" resolution, at high quality will be 1024 x 768. Yeah, you may be able to scale up to 1280 or even 1600, but you would definitely have to back off of high quality to medium or low (especially at 1600).

Eric5h5
Jan 6, 2005, 06:27 PM
I'll definitely be buying Doom 3 when it comes out...because I support Mac gaming.

Well, me too, but there's no point yelling at people because you sink down to their level. Yes, the whining is annoying, but you just have to filter it out. ("So what's left," some wiseguy just said.)

Anyway, Doom III...shouldn't it be called NewDoom, or maybe NextGenerationDoom, or maybe Doom 2.0 (as opposed to Doom II)? Or something. It's really not Doom III, is it? Because then it would be a sequel to Doom II. Which it isn't.

OK, pedant time is over now. Good thing the X800 for Mac is out, eh? Too bad ATI doesn't actually seem to be SELLING it yet....

--Eric