Star Wars: Empire at War is Intel-Only

[aidanpendragon]

Was quite looking forward to this, especially as the (PC) system requirements generally looked not too steep. Imagine my surprise when I check & see Aspyr says it's Intel-only; G4 and G5 need not apply.

Now, maybe my last-gen eMac would have been just on the cusp of being able to run a Mac port; guess I can understand that, even if I'm not too happy about it (you need a top-end rig for Civilization??). But Aspyr also just cut out everyone running a high-end iMac G5, a PowerMac Quad, etc., i.e. anyone who bought a Mac before January 2006. Oops.

Strikes me as sheer laziness on their part. Macworld (http://www.macworld.com/news/2007/02/01/empire/index.php) has part of Aspyr's "explanation," which is just an excuse: "The complexity of bringing a totally new game engine to OS X meant there was plenty of work just getting the game up and running on the Mac, and adding the extra work of supporting PowerPC as well would have pushed the game release off several months."

Boo frickin' hoo. Sorry you think PowerPPC is "extra work" and not what much of your market still is. Why not release a Universal version in the next few months, if you're so concerned about the ship date?

But on the plus side/insult to injury, "because we were focusing solely on the Intel version of the game, we did take care to ensure it would run on all Intel Macs, including those with the Intel integrated graphics chips." So, GMA 950? Si. My Radeon 9600? Nein.

Maybe this would be less of an issue but for all the good hype Aspyr gets as being so Mac-friendly, a developer who really cares instead of churning out quick'n'dirty ports, etc. In reality, they just flipped a lot of people the bird.

I would say I won't buy any more Aspyr titles, but they've already made that decision for me. All I can say is that when I do get the inevitable Intel Mac, I'll cheerily pass over Aspyr games and run them in Windows under Boot Camp, instead.

...a few threads down is one praising Blizzard for its dogged support of past & current apps as Universal, Mac and Windows equally, etc. They're the real heroes.

[combatcolin]

Give them a good moan.

And write a letter, much better than an e-mail.

But, you know sign of the times and all that.

[TDM21]

I got Aspyr's Mac newsletter last night where they talked a little about the development of Empires at War and why the decision was made to be Intel only. That is what Macworld is referencing. While I don't like the idea of Intel only I can understand why. Look how long it took to get some games over to Mac because the engine hand to be ported. After that some games were only Mac to Mac network play (Command & Conquer Generals for example).

Here is the complete article:

Our work on Empire at War is finishing up, in preparation for the game shipping in February.? This is the first Mac game we have developed that is Intel-only, and the decision to not support PowerPC Macs was a difficult one.? The complexity of bringing a totally new game engine to OS X meant there was plenty of work just getting the game up and running on the Mac, and adding the extra work of supporting PowerPC as well would have pushed the game release off several months.? The other wrinkle to Empire at War is that it is likely a PowerPC version would not be able to play multiplayer against Intel Macs, due to slight differences in floating point calculations between the two types of CPUs.? Having a Universal Mac version of the game that didn't allow multiplayer between all Macs would be confusing at best.? Because we were focusing solely on the Intel version of the game, we did take care to ensure it would run on all Intel Macs, including those with the Intel integrated graphics chips, like the MacBook.?

[whooleytoo]

Must be a substantial risk, the Mac gaming market is (sadly) very small, and to cut out all PowerPC Macs just makes it smaller again. Factor in that a lot of Intel users would do their gaming in Boot Camp and it leaves a very, very small target market.

[Lord Blackadder]

I'm not surprised...even though I'm being left out now I think it's probably the right move.

A lot of people are switching to the Mac, and Apple (I'm sure) wishes to drop PowerPC support as soon as possible - the only PPC users they really care about are the Pro users who have tens of thousands of dollars invested in G5 towers running professional application suites. People on the consumer end will see PPC support drop more quickly.

It's important that the Mac gaming industry "keep up with the Joneses" by releasing as many ports as possible and as quickyl as possible. Going Intel-only massively simplifies this.

Plus, lets face it - G4s (even the most highly modified towers and last-gen PowerBooks) are marginal gaming platforms at best when it comes to 3D gaming. The G5 machines with weaker video cards (especially the iMacs) are also in this category. Within a couple years only the towers with upgraded video cards will be much use for 3D games, and the lack of newer video card options will hamper their performance. In addition, there is no indication that Third-party CPU upgrades for the G5 will ever be available - IBM may not be interested in selling small lots of CPUs to the likes of PowerLogix and OWC, making the G5's lifespan much shorter than the evergreen G4 towers.

Intel platforms are the future for the Mac, and the Mac gaming industry (in my opinion) is in a tough spot - they are now competing directly with the much, much larger Windows gaming world. Mac user who want to game can install Windows and play the newest games as soon as they are launched - no looong waits for bad ports anymore (ahem, Halo!). They need to get lots of games ported fast and make them run fast on the entire Mac line when possible, and they can't afford to spread themselves thin by working on porting games to a legacy architecture as well.

[MichalM.Mac]

hi (sorry about my english:)
I have two PPC - last iBook (1.42), and heavily upgraded G4 digital audio (1.8, ATI 9800)... i play games a lot and i love sci-fi games. I was really hoping, that they port SW:EaW. One Day a saw on net new, that says this game will be available for Mac OS X and it will run on PPCs. Hooooraaay, but as i can see Aspyr is group of "fast losers" (they do fast uplayable ports of games like Civ4) Now I'm really really Sad, that SW:EaW will NOT be for PPC. I don't plan any Intel Mac in 2 years so this is bad thing for me. DAMN YOU Aspyr !!!!!!

[Mackilroy]

This isn't the first Intel-only game – that honor (or not, depending on your perspective) belongs to Heroes of Might and Magic V.

Still, even though I already have EAW for the PC, I'll probably pick it up for the Mac.

[MichalM.Mac]

That's not SAME. First HoMaM 5 is developing Freeverse = amateurs, they never work on game like this Second - they use special new technology - Cider, which emeluta DirectX API..... EaW Intel Only is about LAZY Apyr :( :( :(

(sorry about my english)
MichalM.Mac

[bluebomberman]

Another reason why I've all but given up on gaming in my Mac. My iMac G5 Rev. A still rocks and I can't justify getting a new Mac just to play the occasional (and sometimes second-rate) port.

Oh well. Back to my Wii...

[Mackilroy]

MichalM.Mac: in terms of context, it's identical. In terms of background, which is what you're whining about, no, it's not the same. But it's still Intel-only.

[ReanimationLP]

Nothin' like shafthing the PPC guys.

Most people will probably end up skipping the Mac version for the PC version, as this game will probably run better under Windows XP in Boot Camp then it would under OSX due to Direct X.

[Ringo]

I'm pretty sure Aspys had already mentinonned that they would quickly turn to Intel-only they mentionned a 6 month to 1 year window, I may be wrong but sure I read that some days after Apple announced the migration. Guess you'll have to live with it. But it's actuallly weird that Aspyr would cut out a portion of an already small market.


(!!! just saw that you added an Apple "smiley" :apple: :apple: Thanks mods! )

[bousozoku]

Mark Adams of Aspyr has been whining for the longest time how it would be nearly impossible to bring games to both Intel and PowerPC-based Macs. I suspect his boss at Westlake would have been giving a different story.

Aspyr spent so much time making poor choices that it's no wonder their game ports need more resources than they should.

I find it difficult to believe that IEEE-754 floating point is different on two processors. Even on a 68040 or 68881, it's still a standard format. If they didn't want to use AltiVec to help, the G5 has decent floating point support and they could have left the G4 behind, since they'd already done that anyway.

Good developers work out the problems. Aspyr whine.

[TDM21]

Wow, I didn't think there would be this much of a negative attitude towards Apsyr. Still, Apple hasn't sold a PPC system for almost 6 months (not counting the refurb store). I think it time to start looking at where Mac are going; and that doesn't look pretty with the name change. The gaming market lives on the latest and greatest hardware and in the Mac world that is Intel.

If you want to call Aspyr lazy then go ahead, but the original announcement of SW:EaW was made back at the start of November. With the game shipping in February, three months of development time is very reasonable. In contrast, PPC and UB development has always been a long and time consuming process. Civilization IV was first announced for Mac back in October 2005. The game did not ship until July 2006: 10 months later. Obviously the game wasn't ready to ship, but Aspyr had to get it out the door. After that, it took another 6 months to make the game compatible with GameSpy and PC players. Want another example? Command and Conquer: Generals took 7 months to ship from when it was first announced. Doom3: 8 months. All of these game have one thing in common: the engine they run on had to be moved over to Mac.

With the Intel switch here to stay, it was only a matter of time before Aspyr to release an Intel only game. I'm sure MacSoft is going to soon follow. Glenda Adams even said in an interview with IMG that Aspyr planned on shipping the first Intel only games by early 2007. PPC gaming is starting to look bleak. By this time next year I doubt you will see any big name games being announced as Universal Binary.

[MichalM.Mac]

I'll rather wait to May and have PPC version of this game :( :( :(

[fblack]

We all knew this was coming down the pipe. Some of us have seen this before. I remember the transition to PPC, we were told that there would be plenty of software for our old machines for a looong time. It didn't take more than about 1-2yrs before software really dried up for my poor ol 68040 processor, sniff :( .

I guess what's surprising is how quick PPC might get abandoned. We might see a stampede by the middle of the year and a serious drop off for ppc software offerings. Its unfortunate, but expected.

[Dunepilot]

Another reason why I've all but given up on gaming in my Mac. My iMac G5 Rev. A still rocks and I can't justify getting a new Mac just to play the occasional (and sometimes second-rate) port.

Oh well. Back to my Wii...

Seconded. The poor Mac ports being made by companies like Aspyr are the reason why I bought a Gamecube, and now, a Wii. To drop PPC support this early where there are lots of very capable G5 machines out there is pretty ridiculous. Oh well, kiss goodbye to your (small) Mac market.

[Cloudgazer]

There is no good reason for Aspyr to drop PPC support just yet.
Most macs out there are still PPC.

Yes, I know they're looking to the future.
But in 2 years time, No one is gonna want to play this game anyway.

This was my last hope for mac gaming.

*sigh*
Guess i may as well just get a PC for my gaming needs.
I have tried to be supportive of mac game developers... but no more.

$#%@ them!
:mad:

[combatcolin]

I think in this case an on-line petition might actually work for once.

[MichalM.Mac]

I think in this case an on-line petition might actually work for once.


Hey Yeah !!! Let's try online petiton, for example in Half-Life 2 petition case there was problem with Havoc licensing, but in THIS case only problem is Aspyr opinion. If lot of people sign, maybe they reconsider this case and make this for PPC :) i know that i am little naive, but PPC users should try this and hope !!! :)

[iancapable]

This isn't the first Intel-only game – that honor (or not, depending on your perspective) belongs to Heroes of Might and Magic V.

Still, even though I already have EAW for the PC, I'll probably pick it up for the Mac.

That's because they used cider to port it. When I was a Linux user I used cedega a lot for windows gaming, people said it was slower, but I didn't see any problem with the games supported, depends on how complicated it was to support.

I think a lot more games will be ported with this or at least made a bit more cross platform now that the mac is getting much more popular!

[bousozoku]

I think in this case an on-line petition might actually work for once.

Every dealt with their technical support? Ugggh.

Aspyr and Mark Adams don't care what the outside world has to say. They're convinced that getting things out the door cheaply is the best way to do it.

They're not in search of excellence; they're apparently only in search of the weekend.

[aidanpendragon]

Still, Apple hasn't sold a PPC system for almost 6 months (not counting the refurb store).

6 months isn't much of a window in which to declare all previous (PPC) hardware obsolescent/unsupported.

Glenda Adams even said in an interview with IMG that Aspyr planned on shipping the first Intel only games by early 2007. PPC gaming is starting to look bleak. By this time next year I doubt you will see any big name games being announced as Universal Binary.

Same thing. By this time next year, maybe I can understand, particularly as system requirements ramp up. Or on high-end FPS's now. But a relatively modest game like Empire at War, that lots of PPCs reasonably could have run (I mean, if they can get it running on Intel integrated graphics, come on)?

If you want to call Aspyr lazy then go ahead, but the original announcement of SW:EaW was made back at the start of November. With the game shipping in February, three months of development time is very reasonable.

I can see Aspyr's thinking: if we don't get an Intel Mac port out as quickly as possible, people will just play it on Boot Camp. But that logic doesn't fly:

- 3 months is still "too long" for that particular market segment: people inclined to play it under Windows will either A. buy it when it comes out & not wait, or B. if they do wait for 3 months, buy the price-dropped PC version rather than the "always-$50-never-reduced" Aspyr version.

- The people most likely to buy a Mac port (of any game) are those who don't have any other option: PPC users. We're also the ones most likely to wait 6-8 months for a port and pay a premium when we finally get one. And we're still, in early 2007, well in the majority of the installed base. Why Aspyr thus doesn't do a Universal version later (i.e., release in another 3 months) is beyond me.

I think in this case an on-line petition might actually work for once.

I'll gladly sign if someone does one.

[aidanpendragon]

Every dealt with their technical support? Ugggh.

I think I have a comic string of emails from trying to explain the bugs introduced by their Civ 3 "update" patch.

[Lord Blackadder]

Ok, you've changed my mind a bit.

I'm looking at moving to a Mac Pro in a year or so, and I plan on breaking the bank with it. My G4 tower is still chugging along nicely, but I've pushed it pretty much to the end up its upgrade potential - any more major upgrades would require me to remove something I've already upgraded.

So I'm looking ahead and not really concerned about PPC, as long as it's well supported throughout 2007.

But there is a huge installed base of G5 users that I sort of ignored (maybe it's jealousy, since I was never able to afford those G5 towers I drooled over).

If I had a G5 now I'd probably be 3 years away from a replacement, and that's a long time to have no new games...I mean, how many times can I beat Diablo II before I realize it's getting old? ;)

Anyway, I have to admit to myself that, given the option of running Windows and playing all the games I want to play, or waiting 1/4 year to get two to four ports from Aspyr - well, sorry, but Windows sounds awfully good at that point. I already have a copy of XP for my junker PC....

...so what does Aspyr have to offer me? I'm not a die-hard Mac user that refuses to use anything without an Apple logo - even though Macs have been my primary (sometimes only) home computer for 11 years. I'll go where the games are. Heck, I already did that with my PC, which was used partly for a few games I couldn't play on the Mac.

There's only one problem with this scenario - if most of us go to Windows for gaming, then OS X will die as a gaming platform (other than Burning Monkey Solitaire :rolleyes: ). I'm not happy about that. Instead of a couple of 6 month-old games per year, we'll get none.

[bousozoku]

I think I have a comic string of emails from trying to explain the bugs introduced by their Civ 3 "update" patch.

I can imagine.

I sent them a screenshot that was generated through one of the games they published and the senior person (John?) responded with something like "What kind of file is this?" :D

Every communication has been like that.

[aidanpendragon]

I can imagine.

I sent them a screenshot that was generated through one of the games they published and the senior person (John?) responded with something like "What kind of file is this?" :D

Every communication has been like that.

I'd installed a Civ 3 patch that promised Command-H window hiding, fixes to music stuttering, and compatability with 3rd-party mods; but it also introduced graphic stuttering, made the app's Finder icons disappear, and greatly lengthened load times. Reported all of this to Asypr and they said:

"This patch has two purposes the first was to make the game Universal for the new Intel Macs, the second was to resolve a problem some people where having with a missing data file. If you have not received this missing data file error you will not need this patch."

Which completely ignores their own list of changes. I eventually got a better answer, but even then it was "well, that known issue [that they didn't list] only affects iMacs and eMacs," or "some Macs take longer to load, but it's a bit hit or miss," or "disabling widgets my [sic] help."

Then take Blizzard: latest DivX codec causes WC3 to crash? After a bit of back & forth to ID the problem, they send me a custom version of the codec that they developed with DivX to work with WC3. Now that's support.

...not to turn this thread into a we-hate-Aspyr rant; guess my (& others') frustration with them has been building, and this latest poke in the eye is just too much.

[bousozoku]

I'd installed a Civ 3 patch that promised Command-H window hiding, fixes to music stuttering, and compatability with 3rd-party mods; but it also introduced graphic stuttering, made the app's Finder icons disappear, and greatly lengthened load times. Reported all of this to Asypr and they said:

"This patch has two purposes the first was to make the game Universal for the new Intel Macs, the second was to resolve a problem some people where having with a missing data file. If you have not received this missing data file error you will not need this patch."

Which completely ignores their own list of changes. I eventually got a better answer, but even then it was "well, that known issue [that they didn't list] only affects iMacs and eMacs," or "some Macs take longer to load, but it's a bit hit or miss," or "disabling widgets my [sic] help."

Then take Blizzard: latest DivX codec causes WC3 to crash? After a bit of back & forth to ID the problem, they send me a custom version of the codec that they developed with DivX to work with WC3. Now that's support.

...not to turn this thread into a we-hate-Aspyr rant; guess my (& others') frustration with them has been building, and this latest poke in the eye is just too much.

Well, there are plenty of companies that care about their customers. Aspyr are just not one of those companies. I don't even think that they allow registration of their products. Perhaps, they should change the company name to Haphazard. Aspyr sounds too much like aspire, which has a good connotation.

MacSoft was bad with UT2004 support. If not for being able to talk with Ryan Gordon of Epic Games, I wouldn't have gotten it working. Even after working out the problem, I don't think that MacSoft has updated their technical support. Then again, it's now part of the Peter Tamte dynasty and connected loosely to Microsoft, though none of those Microsoft Studios games have migrated for a very long time, right?

For all the people with Macs now, not too many seem to be playing games and since I only have PowerPC machines, there isn't anything for me to buy now.

[aidanpendragon]

Perhaps, they should change the company name to Haphazard. Aspyr sounds too much like aspire, which has a good connotation.

For the longest time I didn't get the joke and thought their name was "Ass-purr." Maybe it should be.

Macworld has a hilarious/depressing comments thread running on this topic, in which the magazine's editors come down hard on anyone questioning the Asypr line & generally look like a bunch of jerks in doing so. Lots of "Intel is teh bombZ!!!1!" types of posts, too. It makes me appreciate the overall quality of the posters here at Macrumors.

Their discussion does get better at the end; and Asypr's (Glen or?) Glenda Adams eventually weighs in. Choice comments include:

"One point that probably isn't obvious I should make- the decision was not simply to do EAW for Intel vs Universal. It was as much to do EAW Intel only or not for the Mac at all."

This is asserted but not really explained, other than to say "the economics work out that way." I don't particularly like where that line of thinking goes.

She also adds, "while there is a large user base of existing powerPC owners, we have long seen that the majority of our game sales come to people have recently bought/upgraded their computers. ...Given new purchases have to be Intel...the potential sales is much higher on the Intel side of the curve than the PowerPC side."

I'm not sure how they know the first point. I got a ton of Aspyr games when I bought my (hardly bleeding-edge) eMac in mid-2005 - games released over the prior 5 years that I couldn't play on my G3. Do I fit in their curve?

The second point may be abstractly true, but seems to be sacrificing many short-term sales in the face of an uncertain longer-term. A Universal version, even if a later patch, would capture both.

"Finally, Aspyr didn't make this decision to alienate or annoy PowerPC users."

No, that's just a happy side effect for them.

In fairness, "we're continuing to do Universal games in 2007, and didn't announce we were unilaterally killing PowerPC support for all future games." But the handwriting is on the wall...

[Dont Hurt Me]

People shouldnt be so upset at Aspyr, they should be upset at Apple and how it markets its OS which has given it such a tiny percentage of the market which has given developers no reason to support the platform. Blame Apple and its silly way of selling its superior OS. Thats what this boils down to. You dont port something if there arent any customers for it. Plus how many PPC machines really have a decent video card to play this? the old ppc macs have stale video cards or chips. This is an example of tiny marketshare and what it does for you.

[bousozoku]

For the longest time I didn't get the joke and thought their name was "Ass-purr." Maybe it should be.

Macworld has a hilarious/depressing comments thread running on this topic, in which the magazine's editors come down hard on anyone questioning the Asypr line & generally look like a bunch of jerks in doing so. Lots of "Intel is teh bombZ!!!1!" types of posts, too. It makes me appreciate the overall quality of the posters here at Macrumors.

Their discussion does get better at the end; and Asypr's (Glen or?) Glenda Adams eventually weighs in. Choice comments include:

"One point that probably isn't obvious I should make- the decision was not simply to do EAW for Intel vs Universal. It was as much to do EAW Intel only or not for the Mac at all."

This is asserted but not really explained, other than to say "the economics work out that way." I don't particularly like where that line of thinking goes.

She also adds, "while there is a large user base of existing powerPC owners, we have long seen that the majority of our game sales come to people have recently bought/upgraded their computers. ...Given new purchases have to be Intel...the potential sales is much higher on the Intel side of the curve than the PowerPC side."

I'm not sure how they know the first point. I got a ton of Aspyr games when I bought my (hardly bleeding-edge) eMac in mid-2005 - games released over the prior 5 years that I couldn't play on my G3. Do I fit in their curve?

The second point may be abstractly true, but seems to be sacrificing many short-term sales in the face of an uncertain longer-term. A Universal version, even if a later patch, would capture both.

"Finally, Aspyr didn't make this decision to alienate or annoy PowerPC users."

No, that's just a happy side effect for them.

In fairness, "we're continuing to do Universal games in 2007, and didn't announce we were unilaterally killing PowerPC support for all future games." But the handwriting is on the wall...

Really, how would Aspyr know who are buying their games? They don't ask and I don't think they care. I suppose people in the company buy the majority of the games but knowing where they're located, most of the people there probably own Dell machines.

I would bet that the only games that are/continue to be Universal are those in The Sims line.

It's Glenda or Mark, but never Glen.

MacRumors has the best of the forums concerning Apple. I'd tried MacCentral (now MacWorld News) and MacNN and MacAddict. There wasn't much of an active community except on MacNN but we do keep things cleaner here but flaming posters have been everywhere.

[aidanpendragon]

Plus how many PPC machines really have a decent video card to play this?

Well, my fairly moderate eMac with Radeon 9600/64MB meets their specs. Any G5 Mac should. I won't bring up the "if it works on Intel GMA950" again.

It's Glenda or Mark, but never Glen.

Sorry, meant as an Ed Wood joke. Every time I see her name, I think of that. It's not a common name.

[gregorsamsa]

I have a PPC Mac & I'm a games player...but I think this move by Aspyr kind of makes sense in the long-term. If Mac-native gaming is to survive (& that's a very big if), Mac games need to be released much quicker. If avoiding PPC conversions achieves this, so be it.

I guess all those of us left without the Intel (& Boot Camp) option will just have to upgrade as soon as we can. I for one hope to be doing so in the Spring. - Hell, most of us saw this coming as soon as Jobs announced the switch to Intel.

[bousozoku]

...
Sorry, meant as an Ed Wood joke. Every time I see her name, I think of that. It's not a common name.

My mistake. I didn't recognise it.

[MacsRgr8]

I do understand one point of view in defence of Aspyr.... at least it won't take so bloody long before releasing it.
Take a look at the long-awaited release of Colin McRae 2005 by Feral. I am seriously glad they are porting it, and I will definitely buy it... but look at the title: Colin McRae 2005.

I have played this game on my (gaming-)PC before it died about a year ago. Even then it wasn't the newest rally-sim game for Windows. Here we are more than 2 years on after the PC release (october 2004), am still I am waiting and waiting and waiting... :(
If Feral were te release this game as Intel only, were they able to release it sooner?
I am inclined to say: probably....

But, for my own sake, I am so glad it will be PPC too.... I want to play it on my Quad G5 with 7800. :cool:

[bousozoku]

I do understand one point of view in defence of Aspyr.... at least it won't take so bloody long before releasing it.
Take a look at the long-awaited release of Colin McRae 2005 by Feral. I am seriously glad they are porting it, and I will definitely buy it... but look at the title: Colin McRae 2005.

I have played this game on my (gaming-)PC before it died about a year ago. Even then it wasn't the newest rally-sim game for Windows. Here we are more than 2 years on after the PC release (october 2004), am still I am waiting and waiting and waiting... :(
If Feral were te release this game as Intel only, were they able to release it sooner?
I am inclined to say: probably....

But, for my own sake, I am so glad it will be PPC too.... I want to play it on my Quad G5 with 7800. :cool:

If they could release it for Intel or PowerPC only, they might save a little time, but not that much.

Feral constantly seems to release old games. It may be about their ability to finance the process. It's been rare that I've seen their games available, so even if I'm interested, it's tough to buy them. At this point, they may end up as the developer of choice for Mac games.

[TDM21]

As this year continues and more games are released, I think there will be a strong trend.

Game engines that have never ran on Mac before will be Intel only releases (ST:EaR for example), but engines that are already running on Mac will probably see UB releases: games based on Doom3/Quake4 and the Civilization series. Prey is an example of this. Since Quake4 was already released for the Mac as a UB, it didn't take the huge amount of time to develop like it did for Doom3, which is what a majority of the game is based on.

I think its obvious, but that is just my opinion.

[MichalM.Mac]

But i still hope, that some games with new engine will be universal