Unreal Tournament 2003 Demo Released

[MacRumors]

InsideMacGames reports (http://www.insidemacgames.com/news/story.php?ID=7607) the demo for the Mac version of Unreal Tournament 2003 is now available.

The demo requires a 700MHz processor, 32MB video card Radeon/Geforce 2MX or higher, 256MB RAM, and Mac OS X 10.2.6.

Demo is available via MacGameFiles.com (http://www.macgamefiles.com/)

[hugemullens]

GIDDY UP!!

[Freg3000]

ARGHHHHHH!!!! Downloading as slow as molasses......it'll be done after dinner....but I want it NOW!!! :)

Edit: The demo features 4 maps (2 DM, 1 CTF, 1 bombing run) and most of the weapons in the full version of the game.

[crassusad44]

Everyone thought they were waiting for 10.2.5, but they were waiting for 10.2.6...

Why do I even post this? I have to go ahead and download. Must... get... frag...

[ratspg]

i'm yet to get home to try this, has anyone had any success on something below a 700mhz processor? I excel in all other requirements, but I'm running a 667 g4 powerbook, 768 ram, and 32mb radeon 7500. Anyone with a slower computer this yet?

[P-Worm]

In my opinion, Unreal tournatment was the most addictive multiplayer game EVER. I'm so excited about this! That game would actually make me unplug my clean setup on my computer and move it all to a friends house for just a one night fragfest. Amazing.

P-Worm

[g30ffr3y]

it keeps telling me the file isnt on the server... what gives...

[P-Worm]

Yeah, ot won'e let me through either. The server must be really backed up. Is anyone else getting through?

P-Worm

[Codemonkey]

Originally posted by g30ffr3y
it keeps telling me the file isnt on the server... what gives...

Which one are you trying to d/l from? Usually that's sort of a default message when too many people are logged into and FTP server.

At any rate... all my macs are under 500 Mhz, except for my G3... :-P So I'm SOL til the 970 comes out... :p

[danbalsh]

Anyone got any mirrors for this? as both of the ones on MacGameFiles are being hammered. :(

[g30ffr3y]

im getting the brick wall from both sites...

[Vlade]

Well im 33 MHZ above the requirment, so it looks like i better start saving for a 970!

[g30ffr3y]

ive got plenty of power in both my macs, but this file is not being nice...

[TwitchOSX]

I have a dual 800 g4 with 768mb ram and GeForce 3 card. Do you think that will work ok?

[zigi]

Unfortunately, it is linked to ausmac.net which is completely full.:eek:

[Chef Ramen]

dammit...none of my computers meet the requirements:(


maybe the PM970s will be free to those who need them :D

[zigi]

If the performance benchmarks are anything to be believed, this and Doom III will rock on any 970. However, Apple will need to push to get the high-end GPU's on the mac at the ~time as the PC. You never know, the increase in high profile games and increase in gamers on the Mac platform will probably make ATI and nVidia take more notice of OS X as an respectable future gaming platform. Maybe this will spur their production on. Here's hoping. :cool:

[g30ffr3y]

im getting a crawling download from the macgamefiles link... please dont error out... please...

[poonjabber]

Does somebody have a bittorrent link? It's the only good way to cope with these slashdottings...

If somebody has the file, please run bittorrent: http://unc.dl.sourceforge.net/sourceforge/bittorrent/BitTorrent_OSX_3.1.dmg

and post the link for the file...

[howard]

oh dammit...my ibook won't run it...i have a 16meg card not 32...i should try anyway...see if it can at 3 frames per hour

[Sauron1440]

Holy *****!!!!
I just downloaded it from IMG pro ($20 a year - worth it, believe me) and on my machine, it works great with the default options set - I'll fiddle with them later. I have to finish some homework, then I'll play some more - but holy crap, is that a fun demo. Finally a FPS game that runs well on my comp, and with my Rev 7.1 sound card - (no news on surround yet - haven't checked.)
In any case - here's my machine specs for all those interested:

G4/933 Tower (single)
GeForce4 MX 64MB
768MB RAM
running at 800x600 so far - I'll try 1024 and report back

THE WAIT IS WORTH IT PEOPLE - or just pay $20 for IMG pro... :D :D :D

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by howard
oh dammit...my ibook won't run it...i have a 16meg card not 32...i should try anyway...see if it can at 3 frames per hour

Could be worse. It could be 3 hourse/frame.:p

[P-Worm]

Originally posted by Sauron1440
Holy *****!!!!
I just downloaded it from IMG pro ($20 a year - worth it, believe me) and on my machine, it works great with the default options set - I'll fiddle with them later. I have to finish some homework, then I'll play some more - but holy crap, is that a fun demo. Finally a FPS game that runs well on my comp, and with my Rev 7.1 sound card - (no news on surround yet - haven't checked.)
In any case - here's my machine specs for all those interested:

G4/933 Tower (single)
GeForce4 MX 64MB
768MB RAM
running at 800x600 so far - I'll try 1024 and report back

THE WAIT IS WORTH IT PEOPLE - or just pay $20 for IMG pro... :D :D :D

Could you put it on sourceforge for the rest of us?

P-Worm

[Gelfin]

Uh, yeah, that's nice and all. I guess I'd like to have UT2K3, as it's a sorta fun game.

Unfortunately I'm buying nothing from MacSoft until they stop jerking people around and playing the "cone of silence" game with regard to Neverwinter Nights, so I guess it doesn't really make a lot of difference what they release for the moment.

If anybody ever writes a textbook about how to do community relations surrounding a game release, NWN for Mac will stand as the premier example of what NOT to do.

[fussball]

Well- I got the d/l.. but my iBook 700 w/ a 16mb card... doesn't work well at all :-( guess its time to upgrade the desktop at home so i can play

[MacBandit]

Damn it all to HELL!!!!!
For some reason my download just completed at 40MBs. Well as you can guess that is far from complete and stuffit couldn't open it. So now I have to reconnect.

Arggghhhh!!!!

[daedelgt]

Works great on my 17"! Perty grass... :Homer drolling noise:

[MrMacMan]

Originally posted by MacBandit
Damn it all to HELL!!!!!
For some reason my download just completed at 40MBs. Well as you can guess that is far from complete and stuffit couldn't open it. So now I have to reconnect.

Arggghhhh!!!!


I have BitTorrent, how should I proceed, I'm getting it from someone right now?

I have it... now how to host?

[Sauron1440]

Uuuh - Sourceforge?

If I put that on my project site, the bandwidth would skyrocket so high (no offense, guys) my project would get kicked without any warning whatsoever. Besides - I don't think there's that much room on the account. I'd host it myself, but I only have ADSL. Is there somewhere else I could upload it? someone with a T1? or someone on a lax school network?

[macdong]

oh great.
at long last, it finally came out.
and i am stuck at work without access to my computer at home...

[shawnjackson]

Originally posted by zigi
If the performance benchmarks are anything to be believed, this and Doom III will rock on any 970. However, Apple will need to push to get the high-end GPU's on the mac at the ~time as the PC. You never know, the increase in high profile games and increase in gamers on the Mac platform will probably make ATI and nVidia take more notice of OS X as an respectable future gaming platform. Maybe this will spur their production on. Here's hoping. :cool:

um... you must be delerious if you think we will see Doom III even six months after the pc release. Work has just begun (last month i think) on porting the engine to mac.

[Mr Jobs]

lol, u lot keep on downloading. i on the other hand have a side PC just for games, and when it comes to Unreal Tournament 2003...well been there, done that.

god i love to brag

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by shawnjackson
um... you must be delerious if you think we will see Doom III even six months after the pc release. Work has just begun (last month i think) on porting the engine to mac.

I'm not sure that is completely correct. When John Carmack first started developing the new engine he was doing it with Mac OSX. The first time the world ever got a preview of Doom III it was previewed on a Mac. That was a couple years ago.

[zigi]

Originally posted by shawnjackson
um... you must be delerious if you think we will see Doom III even six months after the pc release. Work has just begun (last month i think) on porting the engine to mac.

I didn't mean to suggest that I believe we'll see it released along side the PC version.

Anyway, JC's engines are all written in C (some ASM, but getting less), and I know that the engine has been designed to be as cross-platform as possible from the start, so it will not be a re-write like many of the Direct3D games that have been ported to OS X and OGL. JC has pledged support for ID games on OS X, at an expo or something a year or two ago.

[MrMacMan]

If someone needs the torrent link post to tell me how to do it, I have godly cable upload speeds, around 700 usually... good enought for 10 users.

[MacBandit]

So I have been playing it for a while and it's a blast. What sort of frame rates are people getting. On my Dual/GHz/DDR PowerMac with the OEM G4MX 32MB I am getting a whopping 20FPS max at 800x600 at 32bit with all details turned on. With everything off and at 640x480 at 16bit I get 60-80FPS until I get in a fire fight and it drops to 20FPS. It is amazingly still playable at the low FPS and I was kickin ass but I want my ATI9700.

[poonjabber]

alright, since I got the download, I set up bittorrent for yall..
go to http://spurio.us/ut2003-macosx-demo-2206.dmg.bz2.torrent

if you have bittorrent installed correctly, just click that link. Otherwise, copy and paste into bittorrennt...

let me know if it doesn't work... I think I set it up right.

[Les Kern]

Talk about karma... My 1.42DP with 2GB ram was delivered TODAY! Let's rock. (why is it so darn heavy anyway? Gotta be twice my 867)

[mangoman]

Originally posted by Sauron1440
Holy *****!!!!
I just downloaded it from IMG pro ($20 a year - worth it, believe me) and on my machine, it works great with the default options set - I'll fiddle with them later. I have to finish some homework, then I'll play some more - but holy crap, is that a fun demo. Finally a FPS game that runs well on my comp, and with my Rev 7.1 sound card - (no news on surround yet - haven't checked.)
In any case - here's my machine specs for all those interested:

G4/933 Tower (single)
GeForce4 MX 64MB
768MB RAM
running at 800x600 so far - I'll try 1024 and report back

THE WAIT IS WORTH IT PEOPLE - or just pay $20 for IMG pro... :D :D :D

Now THAT's what I wanna hear. I've got the same specs, plus my RAM is maxed out, so... basically, I'm stoked. Turned on. Moist with pleasure... shall I continue? :D

[Hawthorne]

Will Rainbow Six : Raven-shield come to the Mac, and soon?

Please oh please oh please oh please. ;)

[MrJamie]

How do you check your FPS? Lemme know and I'll tell you what I get on my Dual 1GHz w/ 512MB DDR RAM and a GeForce 4 Ti 128mb

[BaghdadBob]

Originally posted by MacBandit
I'm not sure that is completely correct. When John Carmack first started developing the new engine he was doing it with Mac OSX. The first time the world ever got a preview of Doom III it was previewed on a Mac. That was a couple years ago.

Thank you again Bandit. Does it ever frustrate you how many incorrect assumptions there are about the Mac? Next someone's gonna tell us "yeah, but I bet you wish you had wireless networking!

"Or a GUI OS! Suckaz! Windows ROOLZ!"

[MrMacMan]

Originally posted by BaghdadBob
Thank you again Bandit. Does it ever frustrate you how many incorrect assumptions there are about the Mac? Next someone's gonna tell us "yeah, but I bet you wish you had wireless networking!

"Or a GUI OS! Suckaz! Windows ROOLZ!"

gotta add 'MY computer Roxors because it has more GHZ'

[janey]

for those people who are finding it very difficult to download from the mirrors on macgamefiles.com:
in safari option click all the download sites on macgamefiles and just wait...
or ask around for a link to an unauthorized mirror-which will be much faster.

[mangoman]

I'm getting a copy from a buddy who shot it to me via iChat. Not bad. Just about done (it's taken about 30 minutes).

Coolio!

Time to say goodbye to my lovely wife. I'll miss her... (snif) ... Goodbye job... Goodbye friends...

HELLO KILL!!!

[Stelliform]

98MB completed!!!! :) I have played the PC demo tons, but I am certain the Mac version will play better... :D

[Xero]

this will be nice just to see what my powerbook can handle[15" 1ghz, 1gbRAM], or more like weather i can start a small brush fire from the display's hinges! but... fortunatly ive got mr big-loud-black-pc-box to my right with ut2k3 already loaded. :rolleyes:

im skeptical about ut2k3's performance on my powerbook though, if warcraft 3 is any indicator, which started to slow up when the action got thick... though i was running in native resolution...:D

[Freg3000]

I think it has been asked, but how do you determine the FPS? I've been playing at 1280 X 1024 with a ATI Radeon 9000 Pro and it runs great (at least I think so-but what do I know, maybe it's 15 FPS :rolleyes: )

[Stelliform]

Originally posted by Stelliform
98MB completed!!!! :) I have played the PC demo tons, but I am certain the Mac version will play better... :D

Yep, the Mac version is better.. :)

It plays Well on my TiBook 1 Ghz 1 Gig of Ram... 64 MB ATi

I will test frame rates and then edit my post..

FYI the command is "stat fps"

On the Bomberrun map I got 60 fps in the small rooms, and I got 30 fps in the wide open rooms. When I had 6 bots in view (in one room) I had high 30's. Very playable!

[bwawn]

Originally posted by poonjabber
Does somebody have a bittorrent link? It's the only good way to cope with these slashdottings...

I've been meaning to say this for a while...

When something is not posted on Slashdot.org and the web site goes down from too many hits, it is NOT a "slashdotting." The term "slashdotting" is for sites that are taken down from hits specifically from slashdot.org.

Sorry, I just see this very frequently on this site. I had to clear it up. I'm not trying to sound rude; I apologize if it comes off that way.

[yzedf]

Originally posted by MrJamie
How do you check your FPS? Lemme know and I'll tell you what I get on my Dual 1GHz w/ 512MB DDR RAM and a GeForce 4 Ti 128mb
open the console by typing "~"
then type "Stat fps"

http://www.ut2k3.net/consolecommands.php

[Stelliform]

Originally posted by bwawn
I've been meaning to say this for a while...

When something is not posted on Slashdot.org and the web site goes down from too many hits, it is NOT a "slashdotting." The term "slashdotting" is for sites that are taken down from hits specifically from slashdot.org.

Sorry, I just see this very frequently on this site. I had to clear it up. I'm not trying to sound rude; I apologize if it comes off that way.

They what do you call it then? It isn't DOSing...

Just wondering.

Back to playing!!! (That is why the thread is slow. ;))

[poonjabber]

I'm not going to be pedantic about the "definition" of a slang phrase like "slashdotting". Suffice it to say that as long as people who read what you write can understand what you mean, that's called "communicating".

I was also being a little facetious what with the pluralizationing and all... :)

[Mudbug]

I don't think I've blinked in about an hour or so, so maybe I should take a minute off. My wife is giving me dirty looks anyway... It is, after all, her powerbook that I'm turning into a portable oven.

That brings up a good question - any way to harness the heat from the display hinges into a useful way - say cook brownies while you play? That would be great.

Oops, I mean that would roxors.

[frozenstar]

Originally posted by bwawn
When something is not posted on Slashdot.org and the web site goes down from too many hits, it is NOT a "slashdotting." The term "slashdotting" is for sites that are taken down from hits specifically from slashdot.org.

Sorry, I just see this very frequently on this site. I had to clear it up. I'm not trying to sound rude; I apologize if it comes off that way.

Sorry, but that is just not true. The term "Slashdot Effect" obviously got its name from slashdot.org, but it applies to any situation in which a website suffers a sudden surge in traffic due to being linked or referred to by another very high-traffic website or news source.

Sorry, I just had to clear this up. I hope it doesn't sound rude. ;)

[mangoduck]

now now, kiddies. play nice.

i'm interested in some screenshots, because there's no way in hell my G3 400 w/rage128 8MB is going to run it. those required specs sound crazy, but then times are changing.

[mangoman]

Originally posted by mangoduck
now now, kiddies. play nice.

i'm interested in some screenshots, because there's no way in hell my G3 400 w/rage128 8MB is going to run it. those required specs sound crazy, but then times are changing.

Are you my long lost brother? :confused:

- mangoman

[BaghdadBob]

I'm almost tempted to download it to find out just how slow my iMac will run it...

[Mudbug]

On the TiPB 667/512/32vid - 28 fps w/ 3 guys in front of me, 60 fps with no traffic.
quite playable (and fun...) :)
here's the cool one...

G3 300MT (yeah, it's beige...) 192/ATI Mach64 w/ 6 megs of video ram (yeah, I know you're jealous...)






wait for it...





5 fps - no traffic.
? fps - traffic - couldn't play long enough to find out. I'm assuming it would fark it pretty good.

[sparkleytone]

i've got some pretty crappy download speed from BitTorrent right now, but I am keeping it going. Another thing to try for those that can't seem to get a place is to login thru command line or something like Transmit to the FTP site that is linked...then manually navigate to the directory and request the file. this got me onto a semirespectable 10k/sec download.

[OSXpert]

Dual 500G4, 1024, 16ATI Lets just say that the 16MB graphics card well....umm...makes it not run so hot you might say.

I wanted to play solitaire anyway....

[ChoMomma]

PowerBook Ti800 Radeon 7500 32MB/512MB ram

UT2k3 DEMO :D

Average of 27 - 36FPS during game play with 5 bots :D

Hot Damn! Good action!

[Stelliform]

Originally posted by mangoduck
now now, kiddies. play nice.

i'm interested in some screenshots, because there's no way in hell my G3 400 w/rage128 8MB is going to run it. those required specs sound crazy, but then times are changing.

Anybody want to volenteer how to take screen shots? I know some good spots that look cool....

[sparkleytone]

i didnt find it in the console commands but try these.

/screenshot or just screenshot

/snapshot or just snapshot

if either of those work and you are getting the console in the screenshot, try to bind the command to a keystroke and then do it.

edit: i am now downloading it at 240k/sec (my max) due to the wonders of the command line GNUwget (http://wget.sunsite.dk)

[TwitchOSX]

Dual 800 G4/768mb ram/GeForce 3 card. About 27fps average and around 36 high. Very fun. Is unreal 2k3 on gameranger yet?

[robbybogers]

i keep getting this message when i try to install the .dmg file

"ut2003-macosx-demo-2206.1.dmg" failed to mount due to error 32. (broken pipe)

any idea what it means?

[LimeiBook86]

NNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!! 5 megs before the file is completed and it times out! I was using Safari and I'm on a cable modem, I am so MAD!!!! WHY!!! WHY!!! What gives!? Dammit I am so mad!!!!! I can't recover the file and now I have to wait another hour to see if teh freagin thing will download ARG! DAMN YOU SERVER!!!!! DAMN YOU!!!!!

[markomarko]

Originally posted by Mudbug
On the TiPB 667/512/32vid - 28 fps w/ 3 guys in front of me, 60 fps with no traffic.
quite playable (and fun...) :)



At work right now. Can't wait to compare this with my 12" powerbook. Mine has 32mb too, but its a GeForce 4 of some sort. HOPEFULLY, the game is cpu-bound and the 200mhz will help keep me neck-in-neck with your machine.

[Stelliform]

Oops, sorry guys... I will have to ppost screenshots tomorrow... My wife pulled the old "OK, I'm Tired." In the voice that translates into, Come to bed now, and stop keeping me up... :)

[phc]

Originally posted by Mudbug
On the TiPB 667/512/32vid - 28 fps w/ 3 guys in front of me, 60 fps with no traffic.
quite playable (and fun...) :)


I'm glad it runs decently on a 667 MHz TiBook DVI... that's what I have :D

From my experience if you run something on the PC side with the specified requirements it usually runs quite poorly.

I've only played 1 processor intensive game on my TiBook since I got it 9 months ago (Quake) and Quake ran pretty nicely. People are always amazed when they see how nicely Quake runs on a computer that "only" has a 667 MHz processor. Megahertz myth? Nah...

[iSmell]

I've got a 700MHz emac that's just about dead on the minimum requirements but with an extra 256 RAM (512 total). I'm getting about 9 fps standard settings. Not very playable. My logitech trackball isn't very good for gaming either. I don't usually play games like this on my computer, but it's pretty cool. I've got too much work to do right now (6 page paper due yesterday), but maybe tomorrow I'll lower the detail settings to make it a little more playable and dig out my pro mouse. It is nice to have the extra buttons and scroll wheel though. I wish I'd gotten a mouse instead of a trackball. I used to love the trackpad on my powerbook, but this really isn't the same thing.

Anybody want a logitech trackball? Cheap!









eBayfecta

[GeeYouEye]

runs fine on an iBook 800... minus the fact that playing with a trackpad is dang near impossible

[digitalgiant]

STRONG..30.4k a second. Tight<sarcasm> Cant wait to give this old 667 non-DVI PB a workout:D
Apple just approved me for 2300 bucks,,hmmm,,
maybe its time for a new iMac?,hmmmm

[MacBandit]

I originally posted my FPS and it's weird how some people with less hardware are posting better frames then what I got. I just don't buy it. I even had all graphics turned down to a minimum. Come on people there's no reason to pad your numbers give us the real dope.

I agree that it feels very playable but it isn't fluid. That's why I checked the FPS in the first place and was astonished to see them below 30FPS so frequently and still be playable.

Is anyone playing on a server or serving themselves?

[BaghdadBob]

I can't play it on my machine (too...weak!) and it's taking everyone away from the forums, which have been my source of entertainment lately. :(

I guess I could get back to FoghornDeadhorn on B.net, he's this [ ] close to lvl 30, and has been for four weeks. I'm so neglectful.

You guys suck...(pout, pout, pout)

:D

[markomarko]

Originally posted by MacBandit
I originally posted my FPS and it's weird how some people with less hardware are posting better frames then what I got. I just don't buy it. I even had all graphics turned down to a minimum. Come on people there's no reason to pad your numbers give us the real dope.

I agree that it feels very playable but it isn't fluid. That's why I checked the FPS in the first place and was astonished to see them below 30FPS so frequently and still be playable.

Is anyone playing on a server or serving themselves?

Hmmm, you running 10.2.6? I'm sure you are. I can't wait to get home and try it. As my little pb has a Geforce card, maybe we 'll end up blaming it on that.

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by markomarko
Hmmm, you running 10.2.6? I'm sure you are. I can't wait to get home and try it. As my little pb has a Geforce card, maybe we 'll end up blaming it on that.

Yup, clean install of 10.2.6 and all updates.

I have a MDD PowerMac, Dual 1GHz, 1Gig of Ram, 80 Gig hard drive less then half full, G4MX 32MB (sorry little thing but it cut the price of the computer by $100 I did that looking forward to the ATI9700 that HAS NEVER APPEARED!!). Sorry I got upset.

[rockman2023]

Thank God for good friends with cable modem. There was no way in hell i was gonna DL this 130MB on my 56k. I'm gettin the game tomo/later on CD.

Hopefully my Quicksilver 733/384MB/GeForceMX2 32MB will run this bad boy. And this came out just in time; right at the end of my semester.

I dont think it's fair that there's such a high requirement. Many other people out there dont have a good enough system and dont have the $$ to shell out for superb upgrades (RAM, Video card).....at least I dont right now (If anyone is looking for a Graphic Designer in Long island, please hire me http://forums.macrumors.com/images/smilies/biggrin.gif).

Gotta get back to that Director project; it's due in 15 hours (3PM latest). No sleep for me... http://forums.macrumors.com/images/smilies/redface.gif

[iSmell]

Originally posted by iSmell
I've got too much work to do right now (6 page paper due yesterday), but maybe tomorrow I'll lower the detail settings to make it a little more playable and dig out my pro mouse.

Umm.. ok so I lied. I went back and played more with all the graphics settings set to "down right crappy" and I got a good 30 fps average even when the ***** was going down. I'm not nearly as bad at this game as I thought. And the trackball wasn't so bad either, but I still think I'd rather have a mouse.

Are there any 'hardcore' or even 'serious' gamers out there that use trackballs?

Ok, now to write that paper...
(for real)







((maybe))

[BaghdadBob]

Originally posted by iSmell
Are there any 'hardcore' or even 'serious' gamers out there that use trackballs?
Haaaaiiieeellll no, you trackball monkey.

'Course, when I play UT on my PS2 I use the left joystick goes Forward/Backward/Look Left/Look Right and right joystick Look Up/Look Down/Strafe Left, Strafe Right. Then I laugh at people who struggle with it going "it really is the best configuration, once you MASTER IT LIKE I'M MASTERING YOU!!!! BUWHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!"

[rubikcube]

It's more beautiful than anything i could have ever imagined...

Runs almost too well on my dual gig 2002 with a geforce 4 ti.

Anyone know how to turn on anti aliasing?

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by rubikcube
It's more beautiful than anything i could have ever imagined...

Runs almost too well on my dual gig 2002 with a geforce 4 ti.

Anyone know how to turn on anti aliasing?

How FPS are you getting?

I killed F@H and now I can get 30FPS minimum at 1024x768 at 32bit with nearly everything on.

[Gymnut]

Bout friggin time this got released. Game is badass on my Dual 1Ghz MDD, 2GB Ram, 2x120GB HD, Nvidia Geforce4Ti, Superdrive/Combo drive.

[digitalgiant]

I just ran it on my 667 16meg PB,,,,weeee. All by myself,, I got 10 FPS,,, playing with one other guy online,,,,5 FPS. In case you were wondering,, all setting were at there lowest every option turned off. looks like its should run good on the iMac I am getting,,,cant wait.

[iSmell]

Originally posted by BaghdadBob
Haaaaiiieeellll no, you trackball monkey.

'Course, when I play UT on my PS2 I use the left joystick goes Forward/Backward/Look Left/Look Right and right joystick Look Up/Look Down/Strafe Left, Strafe Right. Then I laugh at people who struggle with it going "it really is the best configuration, once you MASTER IT LIKE I'M MASTERING YOU!!!! BUWHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!"

That's how I play Bond on GameCube, but I thought hardcore gamers always felt more comfortable with a mouse and keyboard?

This paper sucks. I think I'll play one more round of UT2k3 to wake myself up :-)






sleepy monkey

[superscientific]

Yeah on the 1024x768 with everything turned on my AluBook 17" is getting about 30....sometimes lower and when moving it stays at 30+....
on pause it hovers around 42...(menu)
when standing still during play it gets about 21 fps

danny

runs awesome on the 17" PB

[wsteineker]

Yo Bandit, here are some numbers from my box (DP GHz Quicksliver, 1.5 GB RAM, Radeon 9000). I'm bottoming out at around 30 fps with everyone on screen and heavy action. My high end (clear screen except for terrain) is around 53 fps. My average is in the high 30s. All of this is at 1024x768 with everything turned all the way up. Does that give you a better frame of reference?

As for impressions, I NEED anti-aliasing. I also need a Radeon 9700, but who's counting? ;)

Any word on the Radeon 9700 for Mac? Has ATI announced a ship date yet for the standalone card?

What about folks with DP GHz systems and GeForce4 Ti cards? You guys have any numbers?

[markomarko]

I'm getting 14fps avg with everything set to normal but physics which is at high.

All decals, foliage, etc. are turned off.

Mind you, only 256mb of ram might have something to do with it...

whoever ran this on their ibook, could you give me more details?

[dstorey]

Originally posted by MacBandit
How FPS are you getting?

I killed F@H and now I can get 30FPS minimum at 1024x768 at 32bit with nearly everything on.

So this is what's responsible for f@h dropping to 25k this week....b"@s^$ds the lot of you ;)

[paulie]

Yet another game I get stuck not being able to pull down the console in.

I've got a 17" 1GHz iMac, with a Japanese keyboard.. I can press ~ just fine (see, there it is), but apparently it sends it along in Unicode..

This means that any FPS game I have that uses ~ to bring down the console, I can't do ANYTHING with.. I've even (in Quake 3 and RTCW) tried remapping the console command key.. nothing happens..

I also can't type a backslash at all (making all coding efforts as slow as molasses).

Does anyone know a fix/workaround so that I can pull down the console with my Japanese keyboard? I'm not keen on dropping $70 on a new keyboard just for 2 characters.

[mangoduck]

Are you my long lost brother?

ehm... [looks at posts]

i don't know, but i was here first! heh. that would be the first time i've seen the word "mango" in another screen name.

regarding screenshots, in addition to typing some variation of "/screenshot" mentioned earlier, try pushing the "f" keys at the top. i know that works in quake 3 and i think regular unreal tournament as well. it should give an indication that one was taken, if it works.

[BaghdadBob]

Originally posted by iSmell
That's how I play Bond on GameCube, but I thought hardcore gamers always felt more comfortable with a mouse and keyboard?

This paper sucks. I think I'll play one more round of UT2k3 to wake myself up :-)
You know, although I started shooters on computers I migrated to consoles because it was the only way for my poor ass to keep up with the hardware...ohhhh, so many games of Goldeneye...so I still don't feel quite right with a mouse in my right hand, it should be a numeric pad if not a controller.....

But if you need something to wake you up, try playing Doom II and warping straight to "Dead Simple" (level 8 I think) on Hurt Me Plenty difficulty. That'll wake you up in the morning :eek:

Every good shooter should be able to beat that level from scratch...call it a test of manhood, a rites of passage if you will....... :D

[Flickta]

I'm playing Marathon again...
I'm playing Marathon again...

...What?
...What year?
...2003?
Oh...
No, this can't be real!
It's Unreal!.. ...2003

Is it in real 3d? :eek:

[mangoman]

First game just played. WOOF. I'm used to fluid play, and this ain't perfectly fluid...

But it's FUN!

WOOoooohhhoooOOOOO~!

[C14ru5]

paulie: I've often encountered a similar problem with {Norwegian, UK English, German, Swedish} keyboards that have 102 keys instead of the 101 keys that a run-of-the-mill US keyboard has. According to Key Caps, the tilde should be located at the top left just beneath the escape key, but in the game it's simply not there. However, after furiously pressing all 102 keys on the keyboard i found out that when using a US or Dvorak keyboard layout, the tilde key is placed next to the left shift key.

Another measure you can take (other than trying to press all the keys on your keyboard) is changing your keyboard layout as explained in this technote:

http://developer.apple.com/technotes/tn2002/tn2056.html

BTW, if the only reason you wanted to use the tilde key was to be able to activate the FPS statistics, you can do that just by pressing TAB and writing "stat fps" or any other command you would like to execute.

[Akira]

Hmm, something tells me that UT2003 won't run that good on my G4/350MHz Sawtooth... ;)

nah, I'll just go and play Metroid Prime, Resident Evil Zero or some other great game on my GameCube :p
Or I'll confiscate my dad's G4/800Mhz :D

[hvfsl]

There are people wanting to get a new iMac soon to play this game on, I just have to say don't. To play UT2003 at a desent speed you will need a fast PM G4 or maybe a PPC970 if it comes out. Don't forget Doom3 is just around the corner and will require a 1.8Ghz PC to run will, so it will require about the same on the Mac.

[TyleRomeo]

what res are you guys playing at? I play at 1600x1200 with max graphics and im getting close to 30fps, I dont know why you need anything more than that, to me 30 fps is smooth. I just need to get a gamepad so I can actually play this game

Tyler

[agreenster]

I really dont care for UT, but Im nuts about tactical ops. (the mod which later became a stand-alone) Anyway, does anyone know if infogrames is releasing Ops for UT2003?

[Akira]

Originally posted by TyleRomeo
what res are you guys playing at? I play at 1600x1200 with max graphics and im getting close to 30fps, I dont know why you need anything more than that, to me 30 fps is smooth. I just need to get a gamepad so I can actually play this game

Tyler

Gamepad??
Did you just say gamepad, as in controller, which comes with a gameconsole??

You're the first person I've ever heard saying they want a gamepad to play a First-Person-Shooter.

[Codemonkey]

Originally posted by Akira
Gamepad??
Did you just say gamepad, as in controller, which comes with a gameconsole??

You're the first person I've ever heard saying they want a gamepad to play a First-Person-Shooter.

LOL no kidding. No one point this thread out on a PeeCee gamers forum - they'll have a whole lot to laugh about!

1) We're talking about a game that on comparitively priced PeeCee hardware would be getting 100fps with 16 players in view.

2) We're saying that we can (or prefer) to play with trackballs and game pads!

Now THAT's funny. We all look like a bunch of noobs...

[Mudbug]

Originally posted by Codemonkey
LOL no kidding. No one point this thread out on a PeeCee gamers forum - they'll have a whole lot to laugh about!

1) We're talking about a game that on comparitively priced PeeCee hardware would be getting 100fps with 16 players in view.

2) We're saying that we can (or prefer) to play with trackballs and game pads!

Now THAT's funny. We all look like a bunch of noobs...

for some reason, I don't mind knowing I use my computer to make $$, instead of waste time (although, it's good for that, too.) I just choose to use it productively. I don't really care that I can get 100 fps in Photoshop...;)

[Codemonkey]

Originally posted by Mudbug
for some reason, I don't mind knowing I use my computer to make $$, instead of waste time (although, it's good for that, too.) I just choose to use it productively. I don't really care that I can get 100 fps in Photoshop...;)

Good for you.

What thread is this again?

[Raiwong]

I'm getting 14fps avg with everything set to normal but physics which is at high.

All decals, foliage, etc. are turned off.

Mind you, only 256mb of ram might have something to do with it...

whoever ran this on their ibook, could you give me more details?

I ran it on my 800mhz ibook with 384mb RAM with 32mb radeon 7500, it shocked me I can't believe it runs at decent speed.

I switched everything on and world detail to highest and I still managed on 20-25fps when playing if lucky I can get 29fps on standby at 1024X800.

I'm relieved I though it would lag like crap, I wonder how it runs on a 12 inch PB

For those people questioning the differen in results:

- restarting your computer will make it faster if u didn't shut it down for long

- RAM matters

- Laptops on battery power will clock down the proccesor to conserve battery make sure you check power saving

- IBM G3 in ibooks are faster in non-altivec comparisons to G4 of the same mhz

on a fresh restart my ibook with power plugged in my ibook can get 27-29 average fps

[arvidvdb]

Am I the only one around here who doesn't give a #@$# about first person-shoot-em-up games, but still is very addicted to Ambrosia's magnificent Bubble Trouble?

(wonder how much fps that would run on a 970):D

[TrenchMouth]

alright so here is my story;

i dl'd it last night and got about 25k/s so it finished around 3am. so i played for about 30min before going to bed with all the default settings. then today i checked it out again and decided to throw all the settings as high as they allow in the demo (i think in the retail that there will be some changes) and ran it and it was pretty abismal.

i have a 800mhz iMac 17in w/384megs. the fact that this is a relatively new computer, although i do like the new 1ghz imacs, and it runs as slow as it does on the high end section is a little off putting. compairatively, a friend of mine has a winblows compatible computer that he bought around the same time for less money that rocks this game hard, getting twice the frame rate i am getting (wich is averaging around 16 fps jacked up) at the same levels of detail. also there is something going on with the mouse sensitivity that i am not sure i like, but i bet that is easily fixed i just need to mess with those settings as well.

my point is: that the mac has a long way to go in the real game department. i still love my mac more than any wintel machine, and i wouldnt trade it for any of them, but there is some serious work to be done in this area if Apple wants to attract the HUGE market of people that just sit around and play games. i can live with it as is, i am not a huge gamer, but it would be nice to throw up a lan game with some friends and frag the crap out of each other at better than 10fps on a relatively new computer. kinda heart breaking.

970....please hurry.

on a side note, my other computer is a 500mhz ibook, and i am not even goign to try, i like that machine and i wouldnt do somthing like that to it.

[Codemonkey]

Originally posted by TrenchMouth
alright so here is my story;

[SNIP]

970....please hurry.



AMEN! Good post, and my sentiments exactly. Here are some stats of a windows box that gets 400fps with no action (100 fps w/16 players on screen) in Q3 (feel free to even half those numbers if you feel the UT03 engine is that much more taxing...)

AMD 2100+ XP
A7V333 Motherboard
GeForce4 Ti4600
512mb DDR (333Mhz)

Cost 6 months ago: $2100 CDN (cost of a new PM: ~$2500 CDN). I'm betting all that hardware can be had for under $1500 now.

It was hand-rolled, but we're talking performance here, not warranties or cool UI's...

Because we're Mac users, I find that we "put up" or "tolerate" the Mac with games, and that's ok, because it gets us through.

Incidentally, I'd still never buy a PeeCee just for gaming, it doesn't make any sense when any of the new consoles are faster than almost any consumer computer for sub-$300.

[mangoman]

Originally posted by arvidvdb
Am I the only one around here who doesn't give a #@$# about first person-shoot-em-up games, but still is very addicted to Ambrosia's magnificent Bubble Trouble?

(wonder how much fps that would run on a 970):D

I'm also addicted to Bubble Trouble, and yes, you are the only freak in here who doesn't give a #@$# about first person shoot-em-up games.

If you're UT2K3 character looked like the fish, would that sway you?

[Jimong5]

My Dual 867 1 Gig RAM Radeon 9000, gets 25-60 FPS with everything set to max and running at 1280x1024. I'm in love with the gameplay, much better then UT IMO.

My friend got it on his 667 Ti 32 7500, And He reports getting 25-45 at 800x600, not bad I think. Gonna have my friend with his 600 iMac give it a spin next. see how that turn out, the Ti Owner says even at low FPS, the game is still playable, compared to UT which was bad at low FPS.

[arvidvdb]

Originally posted by mangoman
I'm also addicted to Bubble Trouble, and yes, you are the only freak in here who doesn't give a #@$# about first person shoot-em-up games.

If you're UT2K3 character looked like the fish, would that sway you?

Haha, you're on to me.. that WOULD sway me
My aversion to first-person-shooters is just a counter-measure to my addiction wich I would, nou doubt, develop in the first minute after launching such a game...
:D

cheers

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by hvfsl
There are people wanting to get a new iMac soon to play this game on, I just have to say don't. To play UT2003 at a desent speed you will need a fast PM G4 or maybe a PPC970 if it comes out. Don't forget Doom3 is just around the corner and will require a 1.8Ghz PC to run will, so it will require about the same on the Mac.

The funny thing is that I actually expect decent performance from Doom. I have some reasons for this though. First off QuakeIII performs better on a mac then UT while having better graphics. Quite often QuakeIII would get around 60FPS on my old B/WG3 400 with a PCI Radeon card while UT would only get 25FPS. This is just due to better optimizations hands down and better coding. Also with a dual processor machine there is no battle between QuakeIII and UT as QuakeIII not only has the better programming but is also dual processor aware. I expect the same benefits that QuakeIII shows in DoomIII as they are both products of ID and not only that DoomIII for that Mac was actually demo'd on the Mac nearly 2 years ago so it's had a lot of developement time.

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by wsteineker
Yo Bandit, here are some numbers from my box (DP GHz Quicksliver, 1.5 GB RAM, Radeon 9000). I'm bottoming out at around 30 fps with everyone on screen and heavy action. My high end (clear screen except for terrain) is around 53 fps. My average is in the high 30s. All of this is at 1024x768 with everything turned all the way up. Does that give you a better frame of reference?

As for impressions, I NEED anti-aliasing. I also need a Radeon 9700, but who's counting? ;)

Any word on the Radeon 9700 for Mac? Has ATI announced a ship date yet for the standalone card?

What about folks with DP GHz systems and GeForce4 Ti cards? You guys have any numbers?

That sounds about right. That's the same FPS I am getting with my G4MX with shadows off and engine detail at good instead of max. It's still not fluid but it's very playable. I played on some servers last night there are some really fun maps out there. Also the download time on the maps was a matter of seconds instead of minutes.


I ask again what sort of FPS are people getting with the Ti4600?

[rubikcube]

at 1280x1024, I am getting around 30-40 frames a second depending on what i am looking at. This is with max everything.

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by rubikcube
at 1280x1024, I am getting around 30-40 frames a second depending on what i am looking at. This is with max everything.

This doesn't help anyone unless you give us details about your hardware.

[Codemonkey]

Originally posted by MacBandit
The funny thing is that I actually expect decent performance from Doom. [SNIP]

Yup, Doom 3 should actually yield fairly good performance, and this is probably primarily because UT03 uses strictly lightmap lighting, whereas Quake III uses vertex.

However, keep in mind that the D3 engine should be significantly more advanced than the UT03 engine, so it might actually even out in the end...

Anyway. Just some thoughts.

John Carmack is a genius, and it reflects in the magic he's able to pull off in his games.

[zigi]

Originally posted by MacBandit
The funny thing is that I actually expect decent performance from Doom. I have some reasons for this though. First off QuakeIII performs better on a mac then UT while having better graphics. Quite often QuakeIII would get around 60FPS on my old B/WG3 400 with a PCI Radeon card while UT would only get 25FPS. This is just due to better optimizations hands down and better coding. Also with a dual processor machine there is no battle between QuakeIII and UT as QuakeIII not only has the better programming but is also dual processor aware. I expect the same benefits that QuakeIII shows in DoomIII as they are both products of ID and not only that DoomIII for that Mac was actually demo'd on the Mac nearly 2 years ago so it's had a lot of developement time.

I know that Graeme Divine coded some parts of the Quake III engine to utilize the AltiVec, which give an added boost. The same will be present in any future id game as the Mac market is growing and with a processor like the 970 (duel or single), and a 900MHz bus I wouldn't be surprised to see some of the Mac games performing extremely well against their PC counterparts. Provided we have that latest GPU's!;)

[network23]

Okay, something must be seriously wrong with my setup. it had better be that I'm still running 10.2.4 on my Mac...

867MHz DP MDD
over 700MB RAM
ATI Radeon
10.2.4

I didn't know how to turn on FPS, so these are estimates...

Default settings - maybe 2 fps
600x480, everything min or off - 15fps standing 5-10 in action.

I'll run the Combo updater tonight.

[MacBandit]

Okay monkeys here's some tips.


Screenshot

To take a screen shot just look in your setup menu and look at the controls. Near the bottom it says 'F9' to take a screen shot. You could remap it to any key though. The screen shot will appear in the application suppport ~/library/Application Support/Unreal Tournament 2003 Demo/System/.


Widescreen Support

Okay go to the application support/system folder that I pointed out just above. Open the UT2003.ini file using TextEdit. Now do a find for SDLDrv.SDLClient. Just below it you will see three options.
[SDLDrv.SDLClient]
WindowedViewportX=640
WindowedViewportY=480
FullscreenViewportX=1024
FullscreenViewportY=768
MenuViewportX=1024
MenuViewportY=768

Either change all three or just the one you want to to the appropriate screen size for your display.

I hope this helps.

[MacBandit]

This taken at 1024x768 at 32bit with everything on with a G4MX. These were taken while playing on a map from a gaming server last night. Yes, the flags blow in the wind.

[MacBandit]

#2

[Gymnut]

Dual 1Ghz MDD, 2GB Ram, Nvidia Geforce4Ti 4600

Averaging 60fps with all the settings jacked up, nuff said. :D

Dl'd the demo at approx. 8pm P.S.T. in 5min. Ahh the glory of living in paradise and being 3-5 hours behind!

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by Gymnut
Dual 1Ghz MDD, 2GB Ram, Nvidia Geforce4Ti 4600

Averaging 60fps, nuff said. :D

At what resolution and settings? The tests I have seen with the same machine and card are closer to 30FPS with everything turned on and running at 1280x1024. The same for the ATI9700. www.xlr8yourmac.com finally posted the results of the ATI9700 with UT2k3 it's on the main page today.

[Dr. Distortion]

Originally posted by sparkleytone
i've got some pretty crappy download speed from BitTorrent right now, but I am keeping it going. Another thing to try for those that can't seem to get a place is to login thru command line or something like Transmit to the FTP site that is linked...then manually navigate to the directory and request the file. this got me onto a semirespectable 10k/sec download.

Hmm, it downloaded at about 600-700k/sec this afternoon... damn good speeds for a BitTorrent download!

-Dr. D.

[oliverlubin]

unplayable on G4 400 @ 800x600 w/ATI Radeo 8500 ... probably why they say 700mhz processor. :)

[rojazz]

Originally posted by agreenster
I really dont care for UT, but Im nuts about tactical ops. (the mod which later became a stand-alone) Anyway, does anyone know if infogrames is releasing Ops for UT2003? no idea

i don't know why i wrote this, but i was one of the founding members of the to team so i feel like i needed an ego boost because i haven't talked about tactical ops in a good 9 months

[ollywilson2003]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Raiwong
[B]I ran it on my 800mhz ibook with 384mb RAM with 32mb radeon 7500, it shocked me I can't believe it runs at decent speed.

I switched everything on and world detail to highest and I still managed on 20-25fps when playing if lucky I can get 29fps on standby at 1024X800.

I'm relieved I though it would lag like crap, I wonder how it runs on a 12 inch PB

For those people questioning the differen in results:

- restarting your computer will make it faster if u didn't shut it down for long

- RAM matters

- Laptops on battery power will clock down the proccesor to conserve battery make sure you check power saving

- IBM G3 in ibooks are faster in non-altivec comparisons to G4 of the same mhz/QUOTE


How on earth did you get those sort of frames when my 800mhz 17" iMac qith 512 Ram and Geforce 4MX gets 15fps?????

[mangoman]

How on earth did you get those sort of frames when my 800mhz 17" iMac qith 512 Ram and Geforce 4MX gets 15fps????? [/B]

That's the WEED talkin'! :D

[Grimace]

This plays incredibly on my 17" PB. Even better screen size when hooked up to an LCD projector!!

[gandalf55]

FLIES on my dual 1Ghz g4. 1.5 GB RAM.

[totally_fly]

Well, I fit the minimum requirements fairly well. I played with my 733 g4 and my Radeon 9000 Pro. I'm pretty sure the 733 is the bottleneck, but the game was playable at the default setting, and the graphics were still pretty nice. When I upped the resolution, everything went well when I was alone, but when gunfire was everywhere and people were jumping all over the place, it dropped pretty badly. (It also dropped with the lower res. but what can ya do? Sorry but I have no exact fps numbers)

Looks like a well written game (optimized), especially compared to the old UT. Should run extremely well on high end PowerMacs.

Edit: oh and I have 1.25 gigs of ram

[Xero]

well im not sure what some of you peoples idea of "playable" is, but after playing this on my 1ghz,1gb ram 15" PB... it felt pretty sluggish at 800x600 with default details. im probably just way to picky, because if i feel even a little bit of mouse lag or chopiness, it bothers me.

[areyouwishing]

Originally posted by Xero
well im not sure what some of you peoples idea of "playable" is, but after playing this on my 1ghz,1gb ram 15" PB... it felt pretty sluggish at 800x600 with default details. im probably just way to picky, because if i feel even a little bit of mouse lag or chopiness, it bothers me.

What video card are you running? The 64mb, or the 32mb? This will make a HUGE difference.

edit...
I am another that is curious about the 12" PB scores...if anyone has any info, that would be great.

[Flowbee]

Anybody running it on an upgraded cube?

[Zenith]

It runs with decent speed on my QS 733 with OEM GeForce 2 MX. I can't get the exact fps because I can't bring down the console (norwegian keyboard), but I think it averages on about 15 fps. I'm sure the 733 is the bottleneck here... It doesn't matter which resolution or complex graphics I run. Is UT2k3 aware of multiprocessors? It seems like it's running great on all duals, even dual 450's. The 733 lacks L3 cache, so maybe that got something to do with it.

[pimentoLoaf]

The demo is a minor thing. If the actual program is otherwise identical to the PC one, you're gonna be amazed.

The PC version also includes Maya 4 PLE with a special plug-in that allows the UT2003 editor to use stuff without worrying about Maya watermarks. Haven't tried that yet.

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by gandalf55
FLIES on my dual 1Ghz g4. 1.5 GB RAM.

One liner posts like this are innapropriate.

Please make a difference by posting your actual fram rates and what graphics card you have along with the machine info. This way people can reference there machine against yours.

Check frame rates by bringing down the console with the '~' key and then type 'stat fps'.

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by Xero
well im not sure what some of you peoples idea of "playable" is, but after playing this on my 1ghz,1gb ram 15" PB... it felt pretty sluggish at 800x600 with default details. im probably just way to picky, because if i feel even a little bit of mouse lag or chopiness, it bothers me.

I agree. I find it playable but it isn't particularly good. Some people don't notice the jumping or lag though because it happens so fast. I just know that games like QuakeIIIArena are fluid on my Dual/GHz/DDR with a gig of ram and the G4MX were as this game is far from fluid but still playable. Asking someone how the game plays on there machine is the same as asking them how some bit rate of such and such song sounded. It's all open to interpretation by each person and some people are picky and other people have no standards.

All in all I would say that the engine behind UT2003 hasn't been optimized much just like the original UT. The frame rates are pretty much locked in by the game engine rather then the hardware it's playing on. With UT you could have the fastest Mac on the planet and the slowest one side by side and the difference in frame rates would usually be no more then %50. This is the complete opposite with QuakeIII which was a very well coded game in which Macs could compete with PCs for frame rates. With QuakeIII my machine can get near 200FPS with low resolutions. Even with high resolutions it holds around 30FPS. Now compare that to any UT game. With a high end machine and the best graphics card one can get the best FPS you get with low resolution are only 30% faster then the best FPS you get with maximum resolution.

[trose]

It runs pretty nice on my MDD 867, Radeon 9000, 1gig RAM. About 25-30 fps on average. Is definately faster than the AMD XP1700 w/ Radeon 7000 I use at work.

I doubt I will purchase it though. As a standalone game UT is better, but after the mods come out I am sure the Doom 3 engine is going to rock.

My Mac beats the crap out of PC's with twice the Mhz in Quake 3, because it was actualy coded with Macs in mind, not just as an afterthought. I expect Doom 3 will have similar enhancements.

[totally_fly]

Playable to me means that you can actually run around without the game feeling sluggish. It also means you can fight with others and actually aim at the person, not skip all over the place. Frame rate wise, thats probably around 20-30. But, obviously, whats ideal is probably something around 70-150 fps.
I have an old machine, so I dont expect much. I just wish my 733 wern't as much of a bottleneck to my Radeon 9000 Pro.

[dflett]

Looks like my PC still has a use then...

12" Powerbook 640MB - too slow to play effectively - 15-20 fps with everything on minumum @ 800x600 on 10.2.6. Just too slow compared to my PC.

And that is only on these 'simple' demo levels - the full game has some amazingly complex open levels with rotating planets in the sky and all manner of ****** going on at once that even my fast PC slows down to 10fps even though it gets 60fps in these demo levels. It really is the only reason to buy a PC :-) So the performance on the demo levels does not bode well for the full game.

Guess we have to wait for the 970! But at least its here - nearly.

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by dflett
Looks like my PC still has a use then...

12" Powerbook 640MB - too slow to play effectively - 15-20 fps with everything on minumum @ 800x600 on 10.2.6. Just too slow compared to my PC.

And that is only on these 'simple' demo levels - the full game has some amazingly complex open levels with rotating planets in the sky and all manner of ****** going on at once that even my fast PC slows down to 10fps even though it gets 60fps in these demo levels. It really is the only reason to buy a PC :-) So the performance on the demo levels does not bode well for the full game.

Guess we have to wait for the 970! But at least its here - nearly.

I've been playing some of those other levels you mentioned by going to gaming servers with alternative maps on them. They really are cool but they play the same as the demo maps on my machine.

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by totally_fly
Playable to me means that you can actually run around without the game feeling sluggish. It also means you can fight with others and actually aim at the person, not skip all over the place. Frame rate wise, thats probably around 20-30. But, obviously, whats ideal is probably something around 70-150 fps.
I have an old machine, so I dont expect much. I just wish my 733 wern't as much of a bottleneck to my Radeon 9000 Pro.

I agree about the playability but I'm surprized that you can't get it playable on your machine with a few tweaks. Are you sure you don't have any back ground tasks running? Also how much ram do you have? You're machine should do fairly well. Though I must say my Dual/GHz/DDR with G4MX doesn't play it fluidly. Think of it as a chanllenge. I played on some game servers last night and even though it wasn't fluid it was still playable and I wasn't any where near last place.

[markomarko]

Originally posted by dflett
Looks like my PC still has a use then...

12" Powerbook 640MB - too slow to play effectively - 15-20 fps with everything on minumum @ 800x600 on 10.2.6.

Yeah, I had the same experience with my 12" powerbook. Pretty dissappointed. Funny thing is that you're frame rates are pretty close to mine, but i'm only running 256MB to your 640MB.

Meanwhile, some dood with an ibook 800 is posting 20-30fps times. WTF? Could it be the Radeon under the hood? Or is it the 512k on chip cache? (why oh why is this notebook so cache crippled?)

I blame it primarily on the GeForce 440 go or whatever the F. it's called. The one thing I've noticed in these posts is pretty consistent link between poorer framerates and NVidia cards.

[Raiwong]

Two guys to be exact, i'll post a screen cap after class ok? However judging from your RAM and superior graphics card it doesn't make sense

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by markomarko
Yeah, I had the same experience with my 12" powerbook. Pretty dissappointed. Funny thing is that you're frame rates are pretty close to mine, but i'm only running 256MB to your 640MB.

Meanwhile, some dood with an ibook 800 is posting 20-30fps times. WTF? Could it be the Radeon under the hood? Or is it the 512k on chip cache? (why oh why is this notebook so cache crippled?)

I blame it primarily on the GeForce 440 go or whatever the F. it's called. The one thing I've noticed in these posts is pretty consistent link between poorer framerates and NVidia cards.

Well for one the G3 in the iBook actually outperforms a G4 at the same MHz at CPU intensive tasks which UT was and I assume UT2003 is also because of the poor frame rates. Also I thin you're correct that the GeForce 440 is not on the same level as the ATI in the iBook.

It is incorrect though to blame all poor frame rates on NVidia cards as one of the fastest cards available for the Mac is the NVidia Ge4Ti. It's just that of all the graphics cards that Apple has used they have for the most part used slower NVidia cards as compared to the ATI cards they have used.

[markomarko]

Originally posted by MacBandit
Well for one the G3 in the iBook actually outperforms a G4 at the same MHz at CPU intensive tasks which UT was and I assume UT2003 is also because of the poor frame rates. Also I thin you're correct that the GeForce 440 is not on the same level as the ATI in the iBook.

It is incorrect though to blame all poor frame rates on NVidia cards as one of the fastest cards available for the Mac is the NVidia Ge4Ti. It's just that of all the graphics cards that Apple has used they have for the most part used slower NVidia cards as compared to the ATI cards they have used.

Well, I'm not blaming it all on the Nvidia cards, but browse through every page of this discussion, and you'll see a correlation. Note that I did not say cause.

I take issue with this idea that the G3 800 is better at cpu-intensive stuff than the G4 867. The benchmarks at barefeats, macspeedzone, et al, do not show this. It shows the two (ibook and 12" pbook) as neck in neck on many tasks, with ibook slightly ahead on some, and 12" pbook on others. It is "comparable" on non-altivec cpu, single-task stuff.

After looking at many benchmarks and reader reports (here and at img and xlr8) I think it's fair to narrow the reasons for the 12"'s underperformance to: a) cache size and b) graphics card.

*I can't remember who it was, but someone with a Radeon 7500 tibook 667mhz was pulling really good frame rates for a system that's supposed to be under spec. That's a G4 that's slower than the ibook, with a boost in terms of having L3, and exactly the same graphics card as the ibook. Now, I wouldn't this say that this represents a g3 outperforming a g4, would you?

BTW, I encourage everyone to read up on how to run the UT benchmark, over at www.xlr8yourmac.com and contribute your results to their database.

[Raiwong]

From my past experience graphics cards are what make up fps rates anyways.

I tried to snapshot, but got a bunch of lines instead, seems like you'll have to believe me unless you can find another method, other then grab

[miserlou]

Here r some screenshots

Dual 1.25 GHz, 2GB RAM, Gf4t1, 1280*1024, 32 bit, high/highest ...

http://homepage.mac.com/miserlou/PhotoAlbum7.html

[Raiwong]

may I ask how u obtained the screen shots? I tried apple + shift + 3 and it got a bunch of scrappy lines and everytime I pressed it it would lower my fps by about 5.

[holmesf]

If you've got a 667MHz Powerbook G4 with 16MB Radeon then forget it. You'll be tempted to download this, but don't bother wasting your time. Don't say I didn't warn you.

And trust me, you'll still download it :p

[miserlou]

Press <F9> for screenshots

Press Tab for console and enter <stat fps> for displaying the framerate

:D

[Raiwong]

where will the screenshots go?

[miserlou]

~/users/you/Library/Application Support/Unreal Tournament 2003 Demo/System

have fun ;)

[jg3]

As expected, it runs like crap on my G4 400 AGP (Rage 128), even with all the details and stuff turned off/down, and at 640x480. But man, is it pretty. Having just taken a graphics class, I now have some idea of how hard and [GC]PU intensive a lot of the things they do are, and in light of that I have to say, bravo. It's too bad the original UT OS X port isn't better; I was (foolishly) hoping UT 2003 would allow me to play a popular FPS acceptably. Ah well, just more reason to get a new computer. :)

[miserlou]

Originally posted by jg3
As expected, it runs like crap on my G4 400 AGP (Rage 128), even with all the details and stuff turned off/down, and at 640x480. But man, is it pretty. Having just taken a graphics class, I now have some idea of how hard and [GC]PU intensive a lot of the things they do are, and in light of that I have to say, bravo. It's too bad the original UT OS X port isn't better; I was (foolishly) hoping UT 2003 would allow me to play a popular FPS acceptably. Ah well, just more reason to get a new computer. :)

have a look on my benchmarks ... wait til rev B of the 970 :D

[Raiwong]

If a 800mhz ibook can surprise people, a 900mhz ibook will kick, more reason to buy an ibook now :P i'm still ever jeolous of the metallic casing of a 12" PB

[mangoman]

I"ve got SnapzProX... figure that OUGHTA work for screen shots. I'll try to take some tonight or this weekend...

FRAGadelically yours,

mangoman

[Raiwong]

Here it is, when I play it drops to around 19-20 fps I was firing my gun in this one, but it didn't get it for some reason. Oh this is a 800mhz ibook 382MB ram, without restarting after 2 days of use.

[Raiwong]

sorry I had to compress it to low to acommodate the 102kb limit here, it looks way more better then that..

[mangoman]

On that map, my mouse is whacked (a two button, scroll wheel Logitech -- the blue and gray one). I think it's cause I don't have the drivers installed at work. Haven't tried the home box yet...

[amnesiac1984]

Guess what, all those struggling to download, macbidouille.com has the file


www.macbidouille.com/downloads/samefilenameasallmirrors


really fast for me, and that was soon after the announcement

[howard]

Originally posted by Raiwong
If a 800mhz ibook can surprise people, a 900mhz ibook will kick, more reason to buy an ibook now :P i'm still ever jeolous of the metallic casing of a 12" PB

my 700mhz won't run it...that extra 16megs toward the video card sure does help...

[edesignuk]

OMG! It runs sweet @ 1280x1024x16-bit on my DP1Gz Quicksilver w/ 64Mb GeForce4MX...I'm amazed! I didn't think the GF4MX would handle it so well, after all it is just the basic card. I know the minumum specs only say 32mb is required, but I'm still shocked!

[edesignuk]

Here's a screen cap playin at 1280x1024x16...(had to compress A LOT to be able to attach to post :()

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by mangoman
I"ve got SnapzProX... figure that OUGHTA work for screen shots. I'll try to take some tonight or this weekend...

FRAGadelically yours,

mangoman

Hey Mango just use 'F9' like everyone else. I explain screenshots and how to implement wide screen support half way down page 5.

By the way has anyone done the wide screen thing?

[BaghdadBob]

Well, I had to try it.

Turned all the settings down. All of them. 640 x 480, lowest everything.

On my 400 MHz G3 iMac with 512 MB RAM, I got a whopping 2 FPS (6 peak).

As a note, I know what my computer is capable of... I know I'm supposed to have a faster computer to make this playable, but it just should be better than this at the graphical quality I was seeing. I don't feel this is a really well optimized engine. Do you suppose they concentrated on optimizing it for the 970? Riiiiiight...

That's OK. Our revenge is coming with D3.... :D

Not that I'll be able to run that until I get a faster computer either :(

[wsteineker]

Alrighty, I modified the .ini file for widescreen support (1280x1050) and it works like a charm! I downstepped the world map detail from Highest to plain ole' High to compensate, and I'm still getting frame rates in the mid to high 30s. Nice. Thanks for the tip, Bandit.

You guys want to see some widescreen screenshots?

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by BaghdadBob
Well, I had to try it.

Turned all the settings down. All of them. 640 x 480, lowest everything.

On my 400 MHz G3 iMac with 512 MB RAM, I got a whopping 2 FPS (6 peak).

As a note, I know what my computer is capable of... I know I'm supposed to have a faster computer to make this playable, but it just should be better than this at the graphical quality I was seeing. I don't feel this is a really well optimized engine. Do you suppose they concentrated on optimizing it for the 970? Riiiiiight...

That's OK. Our revenge is coming with D3.... :D

Not that I'll be able to run that until I get a faster computer either :(

UT was notorious for being one of the worst optimized programs/games for the Mac ever. It looks to me they did there best to continue the line of award winning software with UT2K3. ;)

I think UT2K3 actually runs worse on a graphics to graphics comparison on equal hardware.

[wsteineker]

Originally posted by MacBandit
UT was notorious for being one of the worst optimized programs/games for the Mac ever. It looks to me they did there best to continue the line of award winning software with UT2K3. ;)

I think UT2K3 actually runs worse on a graphics to graphics comparison on equal hardware.

You're right here. The whole thing just feels really bloated. I mean Christ, I'm running hardware that's less than a year old! I really should be getting better frame rates than this. :(

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by wsteineker
Alrighty, I modified the .ini file for widescreen support (1280x1050) and it works like a charm! I downstepped the world map detail from Highest to plain ole' High to compensate, and I'm still getting frame rates in the mid to high 30s. Nice. Thanks for the tip, Bandit.

You guys want to see some widescreen screenshots?

Yeah they would be cool. Did you know you can increase your field of view? So that with the wide screen you aren't just stetching the image to the sides but actually seeing more. It's in the options somewhere I don't remember where but I know I remember coming across it.

[wsteineker]

Originally posted by MacBandit
Yeah they would be cool. Did you know you can increase your field of view? So that with the wide screen you aren't just stetching the image to the sides but actually seeing more. It's in the options somewhere I don't remember where but I know I remember coming across it.

WHAT?!?!? I'll look for that, but post it here if you run back across it. I'll hold off on the screen shots until then. Thanks! :)

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by wsteineker
You're right here. The whole thing just feels really bloated. I mean Christ, I'm running hardware that's less than a year old! I really should be getting better frame rates than this. :(

Also if you turn the graphics all the way down they look like crap but you don't see a realistic speed increase. I mean Marathon had better graphics then UT2K3 at it's lowest settings.

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by wsteineker
WHAT?!?!? I'll look for that, but post it here if you run back across it. I'll hold off on the screen shots until then. Thanks! :)

Okay it wasn't quite what I was expecting but this is good to know anyway. In the options menu there's the tab for you're character. Once there on the right side of the scree there are three options the bottom one is the FOV (field of view). You can adjust this from 80-100. I played with it and I don't know why anyone would use anything but 100 though the game comes set at 90 I believe. If you set it at 80 it's like a bad case of glaucoma, it kills your peripheral so you can't see anything around you.

[wsteineker]

Originally posted by MacBandit
Also if you turn the graphics all the way down they look like crap but you don't see a realistic speed increase. I mean Marathon had better graphics then UT2K3 at it's lowest settings.

I noticed that when I was attempting (in vain) to get the average fps up into the mod to high 40s. I was *marginally* successful, but the whole thing didn't really speed up at all. It just got uglier.

I think you may have hit on the real problem here, Bandit. Marathon = Bungie game. Bungie = good. Bungie = lots of Mac native code. UT2k3 = bloated poorly ported code.

[wsteineker]

Originally posted by MacBandit
Okay it wasn't quite what I was expecting but this is good to know anyway. In the options menu there's the tab for you're character. Once there on the right side of the scree there are three options the bottom one is the FOV (field of view). You can adjust this from 80-100. I played with it and I don't know why anyone would use anything but 100 though the game comes set at 90 I believe. If you set it at 80 it's like a bad case of glaucoma, it kills your peripheral so you can't see anything around you.

Ha, ok. I'll dig on that for a little while. Off to get a beer and play more video games!!!!

P.S.- This is the reason I failed out of college back in '98. ******** Quake II. ;)

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by wsteineker
Ha, ok. I'll dig on that for a little while. Off to get a beer and play more video games!!!!

P.S.- This is the reason I failed out of college back in '98. ******** Quake II. ;)

You failed out of college what? your freshman year?

[wsteineker]

Originally posted by MacBandit
You failed out of college what? your freshman year?

Ha. Sophomore year, actually. I graduated when I was 17. And it wasn't so much "failing out" as it was an understanding that the Dean and I came to that maybe it wasn't the best place for me at the time. At least that's what I like to tell myself... :)

[poonjabber]

I just ran the flyby-asbestos benchmark, and here's my results:

UT2003 Build UT2003_Build_[2003-02-16_18.56]
MacOS 10.2.6
PowerPC G4/Vger/Altivec @ 1000 MHz
ATI Radeon 9000 OpenGL Engine

dm-asbestos?game=engine.gameinfo exec=../Benchmark/Stuff/flybyexec.txt -benchmark -seconds=71 -nosound

30.759985 / 70.013062 / 245.700806 fps rand[1447920047]
Score = 63.929745

so 30fps min, 70 agv, 245 max...

that's so misleading though. Whenever I play the game I can get maybe 29 fps TOPS.

I have a Powerbook G4 with 64MB VRAM and 1024 MB system RAM.

[BaghdadBob]

Originally posted by wsteineker
Ha. Sophomore year, actually. I graduated when I was 17. And it wasn't so much "failing out" as it was an understanding that the Dean and I came to that maybe it wasn't the best place for me at the time. At least that's what I like to tell myself... :)
That's funny, that's almost exactly what my high school counselor told me my junior year. She was actually advising me to test out. And I didn't even get into much trouble...not that I disagreed or anything :D

Anyway. Amidst all the frustration with this game, since I'm not even in the ballpark to play it I'm gonna say that I was pretty good at UT on the PS2. Beat it all on the lowest difficulty, and then, right after I conquered the DM levels on the highest difficulty I did something that messed up the memory block.

I was so pissed. After that I only ever played it on multi-player....except most people got tired of playing me.

On topic, the performance on that game wasn't great either, considering what the PS2 can do, it was kinda...mmm...bloated?

I'm not real impressed by MacSoft here. God I miss Bungie. Would someone buy them back, please??

When D3 comes out, someone with the 2nd rev DP 970 and three flatscreens needs to report on my dream of setting that up at 200+ degrees and having the monitors arranged panoramically....ooooh....

Speaking of bloated, I just compared the size of my Photoshop 3.0 folder and PS 6.0. Now that was funny.

[wsteineker]

Originally posted by BaghdadBob
I'm not real impressed by MacSoft here. God I miss Bungie. Would someone buy them back, please??
No *****, man. If there's a god, I hope he tells someone to give Bungie back to us. ;)

[Jaykay]

Originally posted by wsteineker
No *****, man. If there's a god, I hope he tells someone to give Bungie back to us. ;)

The problem is, he'll have to buy it from the devil's back yard..

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by wsteineker
No *****, man. If there's a god, I hope he tells someone to give Bungie back to us. ;)

Well we have the next best thing. Peter Tamte founded MacSoft in 1993 then quit to head up Bungie's publishing arm. He quit Bungie when Microsoft bought them in 2000 and launched Destineer Studios, which recently bought MacSoft. I think we'll see good things coming out of MacSoft in the next few years.

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by wsteineker
Ha. Sophomore year, actually. I graduated when I was 17. And it wasn't so much "failing out" as it was an understanding that the Dean and I came to that maybe it wasn't the best place for me at the time. At least that's what I like to tell myself... :)

I think some people need a break from College. I actually went to college part time for 4 years or so and and have been away from it for about 4 years now. I more then anything want to finish my degree now. I think sometimes that's what it takes. I had a professor and a high school teacher that both believed t hat kids shouldn't be forced into college and instead should be there because they want to. I know what they mean now.

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by poonjabber
I just ran the flyby-asbestos benchmark, and here's my results:

UT2003 Build UT2003_Build_[2003-02-16_18.56]
MacOS 10.2.6
PowerPC G4/Vger/Altivec @ 1000 MHz
ATI Radeon 9000 OpenGL Engine

dm-asbestos?game=engine.gameinfo exec=../Benchmark/Stuff/flybyexec.txt -benchmark -seconds=71 -nosound

30.759985 / 70.013062 / 245.700806 fps rand[1447920047]
Score = 63.929745

so 30fps min, 70 agv, 245 max...

that's so misleading though. Whenever I play the game I can get maybe 29 fps TOPS.

I have a Powerbook G4 with 64MB VRAM and 1024 MB system RAM.

Use the BotMatch-ASBESTOS Demo it will give you a much more realistic performance rating.

[mangoman]

I just preorderd from InsideMacGames.com. Even bought a IMG Pro thingie, too. Goodbye real world, I'm goin' in...

[rockman2023]

On my 733 Quicksilver/384MB RAM/GeForce2MX 32MB VRAM/OSX 10.2.6, with most of the settings set to their lowest: 640x480, everything low/off, 16-bit color, etc., I'm gettin around 15-25 fps avg.

Playing online on 56k isnt as bad as i thought it'd be. I do have to sign on to AOL to get online, so that runs in the background.

i dont mind the game looking like an N64 game, as long as it plays smooth. Hopefully, the game will be optimized to run faster on machines that barely make the requirement.

Maybe i'll get a $600 1.2GHz G4 chip from SonnetTech (http://www.sonnettech.com) . I wonder if more RAM, a faster processor, or a better video card will do the trick.

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by rockman2023
On my 733 Quicksilver/384MB RAM/GeForce2MX 32MB VRAM/OSX 10.2.6, with most of the settings set to their lowest: 640x480, everything low/off, 16-bit color, etc., I'm gettin around 15-25 fps avg.

Playing online on 56k isnt as bad as i thought it'd be. I do have to sign on to AOL to get online, so that runs in the background.

i dont mind the game looking like an N64 game, as long as it plays smooth. Hopefully, the game will be optimized to run faster on machines that barely make the requirement.

Maybe i'll get a $600 1.2GHz G4 chip from SonnetTech (http://www.sonnettech.com) . I wonder if more RAM, a faster processor, or a better video card will do the trick.

You wold be better off with a faster graphics card then a CPU. At least with this game. Also the game is a bloated pile of crap when it comes to coding so you might go ahead and see how it does with some of the graphics turned on. It might suprise you and only drop your FPS 1-2 frames.

[miserlou]

smp "1" ??? :confused:

:D

[BaghdadBob]

Originally posted by MacBandit
You wold be better off with a faster graphics card then a CPU. At least with this game. Also the game is a bloated pile of crap when it comes to coding so you might go ahead and see how it does with some of the graphics turned on. It might suprise you and only drop your FPS 1-2 frames.

So, would that drop me to 0-1 FPS? :D

Also, what's with the above screenshot? Are you running in some kind of console window? I don't get it.

I started a new thread: are you gonna buy this game as is? (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=26603)

[Jimong5]

Option Return sends it into window mode.

[miserlou]

Hey BBob,

you have to press <option><return> to change to window mode ... and <command><tab> to switch to finder

[BaghdadBob]

:D

Last time I asked a stupid question I had five people answer it in two minutes...

Thanks guys ;)

[8thDegreeSavage]

I love all the whiners talking about "Bloated code" like they coded it themselves....please.

[wsteineker]

Originally posted by 8thDegreeSavage
I love all the whiners talking about "Bloated code" like they coded it themselves....please.
And I love all the whiners pretending like it's not bloated. :rolleyes:

[BaghdadBob]

And all those taxpayer whining about their taxes like they're the ones writing the budgets, and all the Burger King diners whining about their burgers like they microwaved them themselves, and all those people at WalMart on the first friday after welfare checks as if they're the managers who might anticipate the predicatbly dreadfully-long lines and put some more cashiers out there...

As if we would know. :rolleyes:

[MacBandit]

I found a way to boost my peak FPS by about 8 frames. In the UT2003.ini file find this bPreloadAllSkins=false. Change it to true. I don't know if it will help game play but it did improve my benchmark tests. I tested it a total of 7 times with and without and it conclusively improved framerates. I messed with the CacheSize also and it didn't make a difference.

[rockman2023]

Originally posted by MacBandit
I found a way to boost my peak FPS by about 8 frames. In the UT2003.ini file find this bPreloadAllSkins=false. Change it to true. I don't know if it will help game play but it did improve my benchmark tests. I tested it a total of 7 times with and without and it conclusively improved framerates. I messed with the CacheSize also and it didn't make a difference.

I think I see a difference. Not necessarily an increase in frame rate, but it seems a bit smoother.

[Dont Hurt Me]

hey mac bandit what system are you running, on my powermac 800 with geforce3 and 1 gig of mem it is looking fine, i was thinking a new cpu but now ill wait, also this is probably pulling more then halo will so i feel good about my system. im sure doomIII will destroy that but in the mean time im gaming. Also for all those gamers out there that are loooking at new systems, get a powermac.

[Gymnut]

Is UT2k3 shipping already? On apple's website it's noted that UT2k3 is new to the store and Macsoft's site has UT2k3 listed in its "store". :confused:

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by Dont Hurt Me
hey mac bandit what system are you running, on my powermac 800 with geforce3 and 1 gig of mem it is looking fine, i was thinking a new cpu but now ill wait, also this is probably pulling more then halo will so i feel good about my system. im sure doomIII will destroy that but in the mean time im gaming. Also for all those gamers out there that are loooking at new systems, get a powermac.

I've listed it a few times but it's deep in the bowels of this thread now.

MDD Powermac
2x1GHz
1GB DDR2700
80GB
G4MX 32MB

On the bot benchmark I'm getting around 73FPS peak with a 30FPS average. That's at 1024x768 32bit with nearly everything on.

Also I'm folding on both processors in the background. It shouldn't make a difference but it seems to make a very small one.

For anyone who was wondering UT2003 is SMP aware. Not to the point you would want but it will run the game on one processor and run the sound decoding on the second one. Here's a little faq from the developer.

http://icculus.org/cgi-bin/finger/finger.pl?user=icculus

[SumDumGuy]

I seem to be averaging around 70 fps and maxing around 80-85 with no action on screen.

This on my Dual 1GHz MDD with 2GB RAM, GeForce 4 Ti at 1280x1024x32 with all settings at normal.

During a firefight or with bots on screen it drops to an average of 35-40 fps.

I followed MacBandits advice and modified the .INI file and saw a slight (5fps or so) improvement.

Very playable! Very addictive!

[edit] Also killed F@H on both processors..seems to help

[dermeister]

I haven't tried it yet but I have:

Double Processor 450 G4
32MB DDR Radeon
1.152 GB of ram

Think itl be fast for me? What fps range? anybody have a similar system? Is it dp optimized?

[wsteineker]

Originally posted by dermeister
I haven't tried it yet but I have:

Double Processor 450 G4
32MB DDR Radeon
1.152 GB of ram

Think itl be fast for me? What fps range? anybody have a similar system? Is it dp optimized?
It's nice to see enthusiasm like this, but I wouldn't get my hopes up if I were you. Seriously, this game just might choke your system, man. Good luck, though.

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by dermeister
I haven't tried it yet but I have:

Double Processor 450 G4
32MB DDR Radeon
1.152 GB of ram

Think itl be fast for me? What fps range? anybody have a similar system? Is it dp optimized?

It helps to read the thread before asking questions that have already been answered a dozen times over.

To get you started read my post at the bottom of Page 8. It should give you an idea of the hardware demands. Also I included a link that will answer you question about DP optimizing (AKA SMP or Symmetrical Processing).

[mangoman]

Well kids, I bit on the GeForce Ti 128 card. Props to MacBandito for the Other World Computing tip. Shopped with them before, and their prices are swell. (Although I'm wondering how in the heck they can drop over 100 clams off the price from what Apple's charging...anyone?)

So, yeah, now I'm cool again, for at least this week.

Frag Away,

mangoman

[Sol]

Originally posted by MacBandit
In the UT2003.ini file find this bPreloadAllSkins=false. Change it to true.

Where can I find this file? I Showed package contents, went into the System folder and the closest match I found was UT2003.int

Please point me to the right location.

Also, does anyone know how to force the game to play on the second monitor in full screen?

[TheMightyG]

Originally posted by Sol
Where can I find this file? I Showed package contents, went into the System folder and the closest match I found was UT2003.int

Please point me to the right location.

Also, does anyone know how to force the game to play on the second monitor in full screen?

The INI file is found in your Users/Home/Library/Application Support/Unreal Tournament 2003/System folder.

Sorry, but can't help you on the 2nd monitor thing.

[AppleMatt]

Had a whack on a 12" PowerBook with everything on max, not as bad as I thought it would be.

Remember this is a first beta, hopefully later demos and the retail (plus updates) will improve the situation greatly. They know that if Mac users aren't happy, we won't buy!

Hopefully they will add altivec support aswell.

AppleMatt

[Dont Hurt Me]

after playing this today iam not sure if i like it better then the original, sure its new and improved but is it really? the older game had a better look and feel in my opinion. just a thought i had to share. i would love to see the original with all new levels.i think i enjoyed the weapons in the original too. All that armor looks like crap if you ask me and i use to enjoy chasing and fragging those babes. also the grunting kind of sucks in 2003. ill buy the game but i think the original looked better,sounded better, enjoy your fragging.wish there was a pure version of UT in OSX.

[buddha]

Hrm,
Ti 667 rev B with 640 ram.

average of low 21-24, max of about 45.

Nothing else running.

Certainly a bit sluggish, hard to get right on targeting.

I don't play games much though, so my requirements of performance are probably fairly lower than most gamers. Still a fun break from studying though.

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by buddha
Hrm,
Ti 667 rev B with 640 ram.

average of low 21-24, max of about 45.

Nothing else running.

Certainly a bit sluggish, hard to get right on targeting.

I don't play games much though, so my requirements of performance are probably fairly lower than most gamers. Still a fun break from studying though.

What sort of setting did you have it set to? Also did you modify the UT2003.ini file like I have suggested?

[Sol]

Originally posted by MacBandit
In the UT2003.ini file find this bPreloadAllSkins=false. Change it to true.

Thank you for the tip. My dual 800 can now render around 40 fps in the in-door level.

[AppleMatt]

Anyone know if increasing the cache size under [Engine.GameEngine] will improve performance?

Currently set to:
CacheSizeMegs=32

AppleMatt

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by AppleMatt
Anyone know if increasing the cache size under [Engine.GameEngine] will improve performance?

Currently set to:
CacheSizeMegs=32

AppleMatt

I tried that. I tried 64, 128, 256, 512. The only one that seemed like it made any difference was 64 but that was only 1 frame/sec and is well within the toleranc of error if you ask me.

[mdavis]

I love this game so much. I literally spent 1 1/2 years playing UT every day. I have a 28.8k connection sense I live outside of town and SATELLITE SUCKS (don't even try it) So the evening it came out I headed down to our Starbucks to use their WiFi but found all the free servers sucked. So, I spent the $30 or whatever it was on an IMG membership (looks cool anyways) and used member mirror #2 and got a steady 170K/sec. After I got the file it was awesome... :) I'm running it on a DP 1Ghz PowerMac G4 with a GeForce 4 Ti and 1Gig of RAM and I get and average framerate of about 40 on that forest map.. (All settings max) That's not too good. I overclocked a few weeks ago to 1.2Ghz but the machine would crash every once in a while and it was running at about 54ºC which is pretty hot. I hear the new Verax fans not only dramatically reduce MDD noise but keep that machine cooler than stock. I think I will buy the kit in a few weeks (I only need a sight cooling boost) and overclock again. Overclocking made a noticeable difference in Urban Terror. I should note that the framerate bottleneck is occurring at the CPU, not the VidCard. In any game, I can put my resolution at 640x480 and get X fps and then set it to 1600x1200 and get the exact frame framerates. Apparently, the Radeon 9700 has some new thing where it takes a huge load off the CPU with supported games (UT2K3 was a specific example) So when the 9700 goes retail that would really help performance I bet. For those of you whoa re thinking, "what and idiot, why doesn't he just turn down his graphics settings and deal with it??" In case you missed it, the bottleneck isn't occurring at the VidCard, but at the CPU. And BTW, I have tried turning everything down just to re-test my theory :) Well I hope this is interesting to everyone and helps at least someone ;)

[edesignuk]

Oh man...I've just been playing it @ 1280x768x16 (modded the ini file ;)) on my 43" plasma! It looked so sweet!

[TheMightyG]

I think I hate you!:D :D :D
Note to self: start working on wife re: necessity of plasma TV

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by edesignuk
Oh man...I've just been playing it @ 1280x768x16 (modded the ini file ;)) on my 43" plasma! It looked so sweet!

How's the pixels refresh rate with the plasma? Do fast moving things streak like they do with an LCD?

[edesignuk]

Originally posted by MacBandit
How's the pixels refresh rate with the plasma? Do fast moving things streak like they do with an LCD?
It looks spot on, smooth an silky :D

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by mdavis
.............I should note that the framerate bottleneck is occurring at the CPU, not the VidCard. In any game, I can put my resolution at 640x480 and get X fps and then set it to 1600x1200 and get the exact frame framerates. Apparently, the Radeon 9700 has some new thing where it takes a huge load off the CPU with supported games (UT2K3 was a specific example) So when the 9700 goes retail that would really help performance I bet. For those of you whoa re thinking, "what and idiot, why doesn't he just turn down his graphics settings and deal with it??" In case you missed it, the bottleneck isn't occurring at the VidCard, but at the CPU. And BTW, I have tried turning everything down just to re-test my theory :) Well I hope this is interesting to everyone and helps at least someone ;)

UT and UT2k3 both seem to be very bloated so that they do take a lot of CPU. I could see how an TI4600 could out pace a Dual/GHz/DDR PowerMac though that isn't the complete case with this game. It doesn't seem to matter the system there is little to know frame rate increase/decrease from max all setting to minimum on all settings it's a software problem not so much a hardware problem. As I have noted the graphics at minimum on all settings are worse then those of Marathon or the original Doom yet those settings don't yield a performance increase. Hopefully they will improve the code before they release a final version.

Have you tried modifying the UTT2003.ini file? Find this bPreloadAllSkins=false. I orginally dicovered this and it seems to help.

[MacBandit]

Okay I have a new modification for the UT2003.ini file to give you another average 3-4FPS increase. This is courtesy of XLR8yourmac.com by the way though I have tested it myself repeatedly and confirmed the benefit.

Change the following line.

Channels=32

Change 32 to 8. I don't recommend going any lower as with even 4 players 8 channels will be used.


For anyone who didn't catch my previous tip here it is again. Also in the UT2003.ini file change the following line accordingly.

bPreloadAllSkins=false

change fales to true.

[mangoman]

Is June 11th the day the final hits the streets? Keep thinking that I saw that date somewhere... Scanned the threads, but couldn't find anything. Anyone got the scoop?

thanks.

[Sol]

Originally posted by MacBandit
Change the following line.

Channels=32

Change 32 to 8. I don't recommend going any lower as with even 4 players 8 channels will be used.

Any idea what Channels refers to? Does it have to do with audio or is it something completely different?

Keep the great tips coming. Hopefully you will also tell us how to choose the second monitor for the game.

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by Sol
Any idea what Channels refers to? Does it have to do with audio or is it something completely different?

Keep the great tips coming. Hopefully you will also tell us how to choose the second monitor for the game.

It's audio channels.

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by Sol
Keep the great tips coming. Hopefully you will also tell us how to choose the second monitor for the game.

I've spent the last couple hours googling and searching Unreal Tournament web forums for information on this. So far I haven't found anything. At the moment it looks like you're stuck with your primary monitor.

Could you do something for me though. Could your run 'cpu monitor' on your second monitor while you play UT2003? I'm curious to know how much CPU time it's taking on your computer. I read in another forum of a guy with a Dual/1.42 with dual monitor. His results only showed a 60% load on each cpu. That shows that UT2003s speed issues are not CPU bound as many are saying.

Remember you will need to stop folding if you are before doing this or it will always show 100%. Also make sure to close any other program besides UT2003 and CPU Monitor.

[Dont Hurt Me]

negative,this shows only what is being used. This is why a dual 1.42 does not add up to a 2.8 g4 if there was one.

[MrMacMan]

Thank you MacBandit, I get a couple more frames!

God damn, I have no idea why my machine absoultly SUCKS, but this helped a little...

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by Dont Hurt Me
negative,this shows only what is being used. This is why a dual 1.42 does not add up to a 2.8 g4 if there was one.

Why do you say that? Don't you think it should be maxing out both cpus or at least one of them if it was the cpus holding the game back?

I think what it potentially shows is that the game wasn't well written for the Mac.

[mangoman]

OK. I'm more or less double-posting to MR, so shoot me or report me. I need a fix so I can get my UT2K3 fix.

Just installed a new GeForce Ti 4600 card in my 933. Restarted. Colors in my display are VERY blotchy/splotchy.

This blows. Here I am lookin' forward to a beer and some UT2K3 death with the new Ti card, and I've got serious crap.

Hmph. Grrrrrrrr. Anybody got a clue on this? Thanks,

MM

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by mangoman
OK. I'm more or less double-posting to MR, so shoot me or report me. I need a fix so I can get my UT2K3 fix.

Just installed a new GeForce Ti 4600 card in my 933. Restarted. Colors in my display are VERY blotchy/splotchy.

This blows. Here I am lookin' forward to a beer and some UT2K3 death with the new Ti card, and I've got serious crap.

Hmph. Grrrrrrrr. Anybody got a clue on this? Thanks,

MM

Have you tried changing resolutions and bit depths?

If that doesn't work try zapping the P-Ram on startup hold the apple-option-p-r keys and wait to hear the startup sound at least 3 times.

If that all fails try repairing the permissions and finally try a system restore install with a preference copy option. It could be you need a different display option that wasn't installed because it wasn't the present hardware at the time of the last installation.

[mangoman]

Thanks, MacBandit. Where do I put in a vote for you bein' DA MAN around here?

Arn?

[Groovsonic]

Here is a dumb question, but I figure someone would know...

I am not much of a gamer, but I downloaded UT2003 demo and have been playing it, and its a pantload of fun! Question is, If i brought my mac over to a geeky friends house for a LAN party, would i be able to link up and play? Also, are the people playing on the servers all mac people, or is the network multi-system compatible. I am probably not asking the right questions, but hopefully someone can help me.

Thanks.

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by Groovsonic
Here is a dumb question, but I figure someone would know...

I am not much of a gamer, but I downloaded UT2003 demo and have been playing it, and its a pantload of fun! Question is, If i brought my mac over to a geeky friends house for a LAN party, would i be able to link up and play? Also, are the people playing on the servers all mac people, or is the network multi-system compatible. I am probably not asking the right questions, but hopefully someone can help me.

Thanks.

Yes, you can connect to a friends PC on a lan but your friend needs to be running the PC demo version. The people online are PC/Linux/Mac but they are all on demo only servers.

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by mangoman
Thanks, MacBandit. Where do I put in a vote for you bein' DA MAN around here?

Arn?

I take it one of my suggestions worked. If you don't mind answering which one so I know for future reference.

Thanks, for the kind words I just feel I'm doing my part and putting back what I've gotten out. It just so happens I am out of work and have time now to answer more questions. It's not necessary to put in a good word for me but I certainly won't stop you.:D

[mangoman]

Tried all your suggestion except the reinstall (obviously). I also told Mr. Anderson that I'm hearing whispers about these cards not being well supported via the needed drivers. Not many details, though.

Boo Hoo Hooooo. All I wanna do is get some killin' time in UT2K3? Is that so bad? Is that so daaaaammn baaad?

:p

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by mangoman
Tried all your suggestion except the reinstall (obviously). I also told Mr. Anderson that I'm hearing whispers about these cards not being well supported via the needed drivers. Not many details, though.

Boo Hoo Hooooo. All I wanna do is get some killin' time in UT2K3? Is that so bad? Is that so daaaaammn baaad?

:p

So it's still not working?

If that's so I suspect that a reinstall is in order. Trust me it's completely painless. Unless of course you have a modem connection and then the update dowloads will take overnight. The archive reinstall with the copy preferences option will leave everything exactly like it was except with a new system installed. Nothing lost no pain.

[mangoman]

Hell no. Stupid, stupid me. I'm just NOW reading in the Apple forums how the drivers haven't been optimized to take advantage of this card's hardware. Beyond that, I'm still sittin' here with NO beer in hand, f'd up colors on my screen, and a wild hunch that I might just ship this beyatch right back to OtherWorldComputing in a day or so....

Shiznit.

[mangoman]

OK. OK. (Takes a deep breath). Are you saying that I can use my Jag' CDs and do a fresh sys' install without disturbing all my Applications? And yes, I DO have a fat pipeline for Software Update. Would you also leave this new Ti card in the slot while doing the reinstall?

OK. I'll start a new damn thread after this...

Thnx,

mm

[Sol]

Originally posted by MacBandit
I'm curious to know how much CPU time it's taking on your computer.

I had UT2003 running on 640 X 480 on window mode and the CPU Monitor showed both my 800 MHz processors being used at about the same level. On the Terminal I was running the top process and that showed CPU usage between 90% and 115%. With medium graphics settings I was getting an average of 25 to 30 fps on the out-doors level of the demo. By the way, the longer the demo was running the higher my fps seemed to get. Running the game full-screen with a higher resolution does not seem to make any noticeable difference in the frame-rate.

The test computer was a dual 800MHz, 1GB RAM, 7200 RPM hard drive and a 32 MB nVidia GeForce 2 TwinView outputting to two monitors. Booting up with a single monitor did not seem to make a difference in frame-rates either.

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by Sol
I had UT2003 running on 640 X 480 on window mode and the CPU Monitor showed both my 800 MHz processors being used at about the same level. On the Terminal I was running the top process and that showed CPU usage between 90% and 115%. With medium graphics settings I was getting an average of 25 to 30 fps on the out-doors level of the demo. By the way, the longer the demo was running the higher my fps seemed to get. Running the game full-screen with a higher resolution does not seem to make any noticeable difference in the frame-rate.

The test computer was a dual 800MHz, 1GB RAM, 7200 RPM hard drive and a 32 MB nVidia GeForce 2 TwinView outputting to two monitors. Booting up with a single monitor did not seem to make a difference in frame-rates either.

The only problem with that is it doesn't give us an idea of how evenly spread out the load was. That is where the CPU monitor comes in it gives you a graphical indication of the load on each cpu. Thanks for the detail though.

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by mangoman
OK. OK. (Takes a deep breath). Are you saying that I can use my Jag' CDs and do a fresh sys' install without disturbing all my Applications? And yes, I DO have a fat pipeline for Software Update. Would you also leave this new Ti card in the slot while doing the reinstall?

OK. I'll start a new damn thread after this...

Thnx,

mm

It will not affect your preferences or apps in any way. Also yes, leave the Ti card in the slot during installation the point is to see if the installer will install different software/drivers for the card.

Also email OWC right away and let them know your problem. They may very well either help you with the problem or take a card and test it in one of there very own systems. They have been very helpful in this way for me in the past.

[Sol]

Originally posted by MacBandit
The only problem with that is it doesn't give us an idea of how evenly spread out the load was.

Well the CPU Monitor seemed to indicate both processors were used at 75% each. I have read that Unreal Tournament 2003 is multi-processor aware and the second CPU is utilized for audio (as well as most of the other running applications while UT2003 is on).

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by Sol
Well the CPU Monitor seemed to indicate both processors were used at 75% each. I have read that Unreal Tournament 2003 is multi-processor aware and the second CPU is utilized for audio (as well as most of the other running applications while UT2003 is on).

Thanks. That's what I was looking for. So the point is UT2003 isn't saturating even one of the processors. That's very intersting to know. So the next question is why not?

[ExoticFish]

MacRumors community,

I've been tweaking my UT2003.ini file and trying to get more fps out of this bloated but fun as heck game and here are a few things I've done to get better performance:

[ALAudio.ALAudioSubsystem]
Channels=12
LowQualitySound=True

(about 5fps boost)

[OpenGLDrv.OpenGLRenderDevice]
MaxTextureUnits=3

changing from 4 to 3 and it gives me on average of 8-12 more fps but there's a little bit of image quality loss which is noticable sometimes but not enough to distract me from playing.

Use16bitTextures=True
Use16bit=True

in the game i set it to 16-bit color but in the ini file the Use16bit was set to True but the Use16bitTextures was set to False, setting it to True helps.

[Engine.LevelInfo]
bLowSoundDetail=True
bNeverPrecache=false (thanks MacBandit)
bCapFramerate=false


all in all after these tweaks i went from and average of 21 fps to 35 fps on a 1GHz TiBook 512mb 64mb Radeon 9000

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by ExoticFish
MacRumors community,

I've been tweaking my UT2003.ini file and trying to get more fps out of this bloated but fun as heck game and here are a few things I've done to get better performance:

[ALAudio.ALAudioSubsystem]
Channels=12
LowQualitySound=True

(about 5fps boost)

[OpenGLDrv.OpenGLRenderDevice]
MaxTextureUnits=3

changing from 4 to 3 and it gives me on average of 8-12 more fps but there's a little bit of image quality loss which is noticable sometimes but not enough to distract me from playing.

Use16bitTextures=True
Use16bit=True

in the game i set it to 16-bit color but in the ini file the Use16bit was set to True but the Use16bitTextures was set to False, setting it to True helps.

[Engine.LevelInfo]
bLowSoundDetail=True
bNeverPrecache=false (thanks MacBandit)
bCapFramerate=false


all in all after these tweaks i went from and average of 21 fps to 35 fps on a 1GHz TiBook 512mb 64mb Radeon 9000

Great stuff. This is good to know for anyone who is starvin trying to get it to be playable. You're going to lose some quality all around with these setting sound and video but they just may make the difference between unplayable and playable.

[ollywilson2003]

Originally posted by MacBandit
Yes, you can connect to a friends PC on a lan but your friend needs to be running the PC demo version. The people online are PC/Linux/Mac but they are all on demo only servers.


Actually Ive had lans with a PC running the full version, u just need to use a map that is in the Demo.

[j33pd0g]

I have never played games on my mac (snood is a utility) . However, I am interested in knowing what an exceptional FPS number would be for us mac users. I will try the demo tonight.

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by j33pd0g
I have never played games on my mac (snood is a utility) . However, I am interested in knowing what an exceptional FPS number would be for us mac users. I will try the demo tonight.

An exception Average FPS would be anything over 40FPS on a benchmark run. Actually in the game if you can achieve a constant 75-100FPS then your really doing good. Outdoor maps usually take a lot more then do indoor maps. On an outdoor map my Dual/GHz/DDR Powermac with G4MX and 1 gig of ram usually achives an average of about 30-45FPS over the game. On an indoor map it usually gets between 36-75FPS.

[MacBandit]

Originally posted by ollywilson2003
Actually Ive had lans with a PC running the full version, u just need to use a map that is in the Demo.

That's good to know because from what I was reading the latest PC UT2003 Demo would not play on full version servers and the Mac Demo is based on that latest PC Demo. What they must have meant to say is that you can not connect to any server that isn't currently running a map from the demo game.

[Mudbug]

Who's got the current MacRumors server up? It won't give a ping rate, and I can't log into it.

btw - 667 DVi TiBook, 32M VR, 512 MB, T3 - 33 fps on average