PDA

View Full Version : Call of Duty


laytonhayes
May 10, 2004, 04:49 PM
Has anyone played Call of Duty on the mac yet? I have been looking for a mac demo, but without any luck. I have been waiting forever for this to come to mac after playing the PC version. Does it look as good on the mac as on the pc? Thanks....

applekid
May 10, 2004, 06:33 PM
The game just started shipping today, and I doubt there will be a demo. Like any other port, this will be similar to its PC counterpart.

xJus10x
May 10, 2004, 07:44 PM
that's cool it shipped today! i knew it was shipping in May but i didnt know when.

bitfactory
May 10, 2004, 08:56 PM
so how is it (from folks who have played the PC version)????

i've been looking forward to something new.

abhishekit
May 10, 2004, 09:31 PM
i hv played it, but on a windows comp..i hv also completed commandos 3 :) , infact commandos is the only reason i ever touched my roommate's comp..IMO commandos is THE BEST strategy game ever made..also, i liked commandos 2, call of duty, the best of three

cheers

Awimoway
May 22, 2004, 01:41 AM
I don't know if anyone is still following this thread, but I just got it tonight and it plays great. Wonderful game, nice port.

AkiraK
May 22, 2004, 12:43 PM
Call Of Duty is pretty solid. The single player is extremely immersive, given the presence of some smart AI squadmates, and the multiplayer is far better than MOH: AA in nearly every way. Definitely a step up in the WWII FPS genre (though the holy grail is still Battlefield 1942, coming to Mac soon).

MacsRgr8
May 28, 2004, 03:33 PM
I don't know if anyone is still following this thread, but I just got it tonight and it plays great. Wonderful game, nice port.

I agree!

Excellent game. Does need a really fast Mac, if you want high detail...

DavidCL23
May 31, 2004, 12:48 PM
I agree!

Excellent game. Does need a really fast Mac, if you want high detail...

Very true, BUT WHERE'S THE CHEAT CODES!!!!

yellow
May 31, 2004, 01:21 PM
Very true, BUT WHERE'S THE CHEAT CODES!!!! Hold down shift when starting up the game. Type in:

+set thereisacow 1337 +set sv_cheats 1 +set monkeytoy 0

Then click ok and the game starts as normal. If it doesn't work the first time, quit the game and try it again. It'll work the second time. Then in the game, open the console (using ~) and type in the cheat you want. Some of the better cheats are:
god
give health

I'd avoid the "give amm/give all" cheats as they consistantly crashed the game (it had troubles loading grenade code).

yellow
May 31, 2004, 01:22 PM
(though the holy grail is still Battlefield 1942, coming to Mac soon). I think I actually prefer CoD to BF1942. Can't fly to save my life. But driving tanks rocks!

Muskie
May 31, 2004, 08:21 PM
I think I actually prefer CoD to BF1942. Can't fly to save my life. But driving tanks rocks!

I prefer CoD as well. I've been a MoH:AA fan for quite some time now, so I never saw why BF1942 was such a big hit. The only plus I really saw was the vehicles, and that wasn't even so great, at least to me. But CoD beats them both. Like AkiraK said, the AI on your team was great. The only thing I didn't like about the enemy AI, was that they were so obviously scripted. They would only show up after you moved to a certain area, or planted an explosive or whatever, it was kind of lame.

Mord
Jun 1, 2004, 11:18 AM
well i was given it just now and it runs at 10-15fps on my dual cube with all setings at low 640x480 still i can manage :(

back to halo

neonart
Jun 1, 2004, 11:30 AM
well i was given it just now and it runs at 10-15fps on my dual cube with all setings at low 640x480 still i can manage :(

back to halo

It makes no sense how Halo can run better than CoD on your cube. Halo is one of the most resource intensive games on Mac AND PC. I can run the CoD demo at much higher settings than I can run Halo without losing playability.

In any case, this is a GREAT GAME!

BTW, a Call of Duty demo is available at this site. (http://www.macupdate.com/info.php/id/15071)

oingoboingo
Jun 1, 2004, 09:41 PM
OK, I'm going to be a little controversial and say that after playing the retail version of Call of Duty for a couple of days now, it's nothing special. If you've ever played any of the Medal of Honor series before, then you've seen pretty much everything that Call of Duty has to offer. While the teamwork angle in the single player game is much improved (the majority of the missions involve working with a squad of soldiers...there are only a few where you are by yourself), CoD is still at its heart a script-driven, highly linear WWII shoot 'em up. You *know* as soon as you pick up that health pack, set that explosive charge, or walk through that door, that a script is going to be triggered and the bad guys are going to start firing.

The single player maps are highly linear...there's really no chance of getting lost, much less any type of exploration or innovative ways to outflank an enemy or reach an objective. Once you try and get off the main path, the game blocks your path with an invisible wall. There's also the annoying (for me at least) 'rail shooter' scenes, where you're on the back of a truck or a jeep or something, blasting away at Germans as they pop up from behind bushes in a very arcade-like target range simulation. Next please.

Once again, there are intro scenes stolen directly from various movies and television shows. How much impact or surprise can there be when you're trying to cross the Volga to re-take Stalingrad, when you've seen exactly this scene in 'Enemy at the Gates' years before? Even the lines that the Soviet commissars and commanders are speaking are taken directly from the movie. There's no surprises. I know what happens next...except getting to bonk Rachel Weiss at about halfway through :)

While all this sounds very negative, CoD isn't *really* a bad game. It just doesn't go anywhere that Medal of Honor didn't go years ago. There are improvements in team AI, some extra graphical polish, and a few little things like weapon accuracy dropping when you're running or standing. But it still just feels like an MOH expansion pack or a mod. Don't expect anything you didn't see years ago, and don't expect more than a day or two of entertainment from the (disjointed) single player campaign.

I haven't played multiplayer yet, so all these comments apply to the single player. The multiplayer might be a whole different world.

yellow
Jun 1, 2004, 10:04 PM
I can see all your points. I too noted that many of the missions were ripped from various movies/mini-series. I appreciate the different aspects of soldering (being American, British, & Russian), some of the longer (or tougher) missions, somewhat realistic weaponry, good plot, & great graphics. IMO, it's what MoH aspires to, and that's not a bad thing.

But speaking of being controversial (and off topic), I think Halo really didn't live up to all the hype I'd heard. Didn't I play this game when it was called Half-life?

Awimoway
Jun 2, 2004, 02:48 AM


All very fair points except that you're in the wrong room, sort of. I don't mean you can post here, I just mean that most of us in this thread are WWII FPS fans. Your criticisms are true of the genre in general, not just Call of Duty. I think the point most of us are making is that if you don't mind a scripted, linear, shoot-em-up—and in fact happen to like them—then this one is pretty damn good.

Another criticism that isn't actually news to anyone who plays a lot of these is the thing about Stalingrad looking like a ripoff of the opening scenes of Enemy at the Gates. Medal of Honor: Allied Assault had some scenes that were absurdly similar to Saving Private Ryan and Medal of Honor: Spearhead was a thorough ripoff of Band of Brothers--and the parts that they left out were in Call of Duty. C'est la vie. WWII-themed shooters are still my favorite kind of game. They're popular enough that I don't doubt that we'll see less linear, more imaginative iterations soon enough.

However, having now finished Call of Duty (single player), I must say that I'm not as completely impressed as I was originally. I can't quite put my finger on it, but somehow the Medal of Honor games and even Return to Castle Wolfenstein all seemed, well, prettier. There was something about all the Call of Duty levels that seemed kind of plain and ugly. Maybe it's just that every level was on the front, so there was a lot of devastation, but I got tired of looking at rubble so much. And there was no weather. Those other games also had more (and better-scripted) stealth missions than Call of Duty. Don't get me wrong, I like Call of Duty a lot, and some of its design is definitely prettier—landscaping and plants are much more lifelike, for example—but I think I take back any claims to Call of Duty being superior. It's par. It's just been so long since there was a new WWII game for Macs that I think maybe I got overexcited.

oingoboingo
Jun 2, 2004, 03:57 AM
All very fair points except that you're in the wrong room, sort of. I don't mean you can post here, I just mean that most of us in this thread are WWII FPS fans. Your criticisms are true of the genre in general, not just Call of Duty. I think the point most of us are making is that if you don't mind a scripted, linear, shoot-em-up—and in fact happen to like them—then this one is pretty damn good.


Sure, I understand. I'm not saying that CoD is a bad game, just that there isn't really anything new in it for anyone who's played the Medal of Honor series. I bought MOH:Allied Assault, Spearhead and Breakthrough when I owned a PC, and played them until the CD-ROMs just about wore out. I'm definitely a WWII FPS fan. I was just hoping that in the years after the release of MOH:AA that something more innovative could have been developed.

Converted2Truth
Jun 2, 2004, 11:16 AM
I haven't played much of WWII fsp's, but this game runs choppy when i max out the video settings. I just spend 3k on this dual 1.8G5 (ATI 9600) and it kinda sucks that this doesn't scream. The system requirements don't even hint at the idea of needing more power than this. Does anyone know if i need a video card driver update or something? anyone else having this problem?

yellow
Jun 2, 2004, 11:27 AM
The game runs very smoothly with maxed out settings on a dual 1.33GHz G4, 1GB RAM, with an nVidia GeForce4 Ti (128MB VRAM). Part of your problem is your 64MB VRAM graphics card. Another might be lack of RAM, if you don't have much RAM then the game will surely start to swap, which means everything slows down.

Mord
Jun 2, 2004, 11:29 AM
what resolution are you runing? are you using a lcd or a crt? if a crt what refresh rate?

dose anyone know if you are ment to allocate ram with the hunkmegs command and whether the game takes advantage of dual prosessors?

yellow
Jun 2, 2004, 11:36 AM
whether the game takes advantage of dual prosessors? Doubtful. There are very few games that actually do. Which is mind boggling to me with the amount of DP Macs out there. Though I suppose DP is still relatively on the rare (statistically) side in the WinTelThon world, which all these games are originally developed for/ported from.

Mord
Jun 2, 2004, 11:38 AM
i think there is a command like "smp 1" to turn it on in quake 3 based games but i am not sure

Converted2Truth
Jun 2, 2004, 11:43 AM
what resolution are you runing? are you using a lcd or a crt? if a crt what refresh rate?

dose anyone know if you are ment to allocate ram with the hunkmegs command and whether the game takes advantage of dual prosessors?

Apple 17'' Studio running COD @ 1280xWhatever (because 1600xWhatever isn't supported by the 17"). And i've got enough ram.. must just be lackin on the vram, if g4's are smoke'n me with retail 9800. If i upgrade, should i wait and see if ATI comes out with X800 mac edition? or should i just get the 9800 se now?

neonart
Jun 2, 2004, 04:10 PM
Apple 17'' Studio running COD @ 1280xWhatever (because 1600xWhatever isn't supported by the 17"). And i've got enough ram.. must just be lackin on the vram, if g4's are smoke'n me with retail 9800. If i upgrade, should i wait and see if ATI comes out with X800 mac edition? or should i just get the 9800 se now?

Wait to see what happens so you get the best card for your $. Seriously, this game runs darn well on my Dual 1.25. I'm not a PC gamer and my expectations for FPS may be slightly lower, but I wont play something if it's skipping and choking. I'm thinking it's either driver and permissions problems, or just not enough VRAM (or RAM).
On my 12" Powerbook 1Ghz I had to turn down settings a good bit to make it play well, but it does Ok at 1024x678. Therefore I don't think the resolution is the big hog, but the graphics settings. Keep your res and step down little by little the graphics settings.

shortyjj
Jun 2, 2004, 09:04 PM
I just tried the demo on my new 12" PB and I'm very pleasantly surprised - very smooth. Gives me new faith in my machine as a gaming rig.

How can I check the fps again?

stevebabcock
Jun 3, 2004, 10:31 AM
All of a sudden the multiplayer won't work on my powerbook. :(


and by all of a sudden, I mean just this morning. arrgghhh!!

Muskie
Jun 3, 2004, 10:45 AM
All of a sudden the multiplayer won't work on my powerbook. :(

What do you mean by it "won't work"? Does it say the cd key is in use, does it not start up, does it not find servers, what doesn't work about it?

TeeJay
Jun 4, 2004, 10:16 AM
I just tried the demo on my new 12" PB and I'm very pleasantly surprised - very smooth. Gives me new faith in my machine as a gaming rig.

How can I check the fps again?


type cg_drawFPS 1 into the console and cg_drawFPS 0 to turn it off :)

neonart
Jun 5, 2004, 12:07 PM
type cg_drawFPS 1 into the console and cg_drawFPS 0 to turn it off :)

I can't get the console to come up! Any thoughts?

crowdaddy
Jun 6, 2004, 06:50 PM
I am a battlefield 1942 fan for life. It is a kind of game that will never leave you bored as there are many mods, maps and variations out there. You can find something to quench your specific thirst: Desert Combat for modern warfare, Eve of Destruction for Vietnam, Galactic Battlegrounds for the Star Wars fan in you, etc. etc. The game seems so more dynamic than CoD. I have CoD and one thing i love about it is that it seems as if you are playing through a movie, which is really cool, it really absorbs you. Unofficially, there is no single player for battlefield, the real fun is online. And boy is that fun. The planes, jeeps, tanks, boats, etc. etc. provide ample methods for destruction and borderless gameplay. You don't feel constricted to the ground and that has an awesome feeling.

psycho bob
Jun 6, 2004, 09:29 PM
I can't get the console to come up! Any thoughts?

console has to be turned on in the options panel on the main menu. then use the ~ key.

osprey76
Jun 7, 2004, 10:28 AM
i think there is a command like "smp 1" to turn it on in quake 3 based games but i am not sure

That command is correct, but the game is not SMP enabled. The original Quake3 engine that a lot of the WWII games are built on (RtCW, MOH, CoD) is multithreaded. In other words, it does use both processors. However, the games are based on the Q3 engine. So, the stuff they add with the characters, scripting, etc. is not SMP enabled. You can change the setting, but the game will still only use one processor. The upside of having two processors is one can completely focus on the game and the other can take care of system overhead.

neonart
Jun 7, 2004, 08:59 PM
console has to be turned on in the options panel on the main menu. then use the ~ key.

On my demo I could not do that. Instead I held Shift and the console came up before the game. I typed the cg_drawFPS 1 and was pleasantly surprised by this great game!
With all settings maxed out pretty much (I dont think FSAA is on though) it averaged 30-50FPS*, with hardly any drop into the 20's! I cant get over how great it looks too:

(*G4 DP1.25, 2GB RAM, R9800)

yellow
Jun 7, 2004, 10:12 PM
The demo is burnville? That's an awesome mission/level.

h'biki
Jun 8, 2004, 04:14 AM
Call Of Duty is pretty solid. The single player is extremely immersive, given the presence of some smart AI squadmates, and the multiplayer is far better than MOH: AA in nearly every way. Definitely a step up in the WWII FPS genre (though the holy grail is still Battlefield 1942, coming to Mac soon).

I've played the demo and I enjoyed it. Perhaps more than MoA -- which was good, but inconsistent. I'm trying to decide whether to buy it or not thou. Judging from the comments on this thread, I'm not so sure.

Personally, I'd love to see a WW2 Tactical Shooter, like Ghost Recon. Which, despite its short comings, is still my fave war game.

The ability to be in control of a squad, with good team AI, on an open ended map would be excellent. Add to that the more realistic combat (you just don't want to be shot) and movement (prone is damn slow) and it creates a nice tense game. Operation Overlord seems like a perfect theatre for such a game too, because it mostly small strike teams trying to recapture strategic objectives.

What appealed to me initially about CoD was that it had taken some of its ideas from tactical shooterrs (prone + aiming reticule) but after playing the game, its still very arcade.

Ah well. I'mm sure a WW2 tactical shooter will come.

oingoboingo
Jun 8, 2004, 04:50 AM
What appealed to me initially about CoD was that it had taken some of its ideas from tactical shooterrs (prone + aiming reticule) but after playing the game, its still very arcade.

Ah well. I'mm sure a WW2 tactical shooter will come.

That's what I was trying to say earlier in this thread. CoD isn't a bad game...it's just yet another arcade-style WWII scripted FPS game. Don't expect anything different to the various MoH expansion packs and console ports. As you say, a WWII-themed Ghost Recon style game would be fantastic, and would actually be something new (well, for WWII shooters anyway).

Ghost Recon kind of reminds me of an older game on the PC, Operation Flashpoint. That was a game that had my heart racing...being shot once was usually fatal, and often by the time you heard the bullets suddenly start whizzing by, it was too late. You had to correct for distance and gravity when aiming a long-range shot. Enemy AI was excellent. You had to use cover or die. And it had a nice team-based flavour, as as you worked your way through the game you could command a squad.

h'biki
Jun 8, 2004, 04:54 AM
That's what I was trying to say earlier in this thread. CoD isn't a bad game...it's just yet another arcade-style WWII scripted FPS game. Don't expect anything different to the various MoH expansion packs and console ports. As you say, a WWII-themed Ghost Recon style game would be fantastic, and would actually be something new (well, for WWII shooters anyway).

I decided to search for mods (procrastinating on an essay) after posting the message and I discovered War of Infamy, a WW2 mod for GR. I'm downloading it now, to see what its like.

You can get a mac version from:

http://dynamic.gamespy.com/~damnr6/macmods/grtotalconversion.shtml#


Ghost Recon kind of reminds me of an older game on the PC, Operation Flashpoint. That was a game that had my heart racing...being shot once was usually fatal, and often by the time you heard the bullets suddenly start whizzing by, it was too late. You had to correct for distance and gravity when aiming a long-range shot. Enemy AI was excellent. You had to use cover or die. And it had a nice team-based flavour, as as you worked your way through the game you could command a squad.

Wow. Sounds neat. i heard of it as a more sophisticated version of Counterstrike, which never blew me away... at least not compared to the tactical shooteryness of the R6 series. (I actually LIKED the plannign stage. I always prided myself on planning a mssion so well, that I didn't actually have to control the characters. It was like Robosport but FP! Hmm. Now *thats* an old game)

Klopsi69
Jun 8, 2004, 07:19 AM
On the pc (before i switched a few months ago...) I did a lot of FPS war games.

Battlefield 1942 was a really fun intro to onine gaming for a lot of people, but i soon graduated to Operation Flashpoint, which blows the crap out of any game out there in terms of atmosphere, AI, weapons, and realism.

It is a genuinely long lasting game.

Can't believe there isn't a mac port. I had to stop playing it on pc, because it was taking too much of my time.

TeeJay
Jun 10, 2004, 12:44 PM
...of course there's always Red Orchestra for UT2004 (http://redorchestramod.gameservers.net/) if you're looking for WWII mods and The Third Reich (http://www.thethirdreich.com/) currently for UT99 and soon to be for UT2004. I play both of them and they both kick ass. :D

OutThere
Jun 10, 2004, 12:55 PM
Hmm, there must be something wrong with the people who say that it runs really badly on their really good computers, because it runs very well on my iBook G4 with 32 megs of vram and 256 megs of ram with the graphics at mid to high range. With the graphics all the way up it is apparent that I don't have enough vram because it starts to leave out some textures, but with the graphics at say 60-65% of capacity it runs very well, except on the beaches of stalingrad, where even with the graphics all the way down it ran very poorly. Check your settings and try again guys, because there's gotta be something wrong there.

osprey76
Jun 10, 2004, 02:26 PM
It was like Robosport but FP! Hmm. Now *thats* an old game)

Nice! Now that would be one worth bringing to OS 10. Ah, the days of blowing up my friends on Robosport!

benpatient
Jun 10, 2004, 03:18 PM
i'm just anxious to play day of defeat:source.

the ONLY problem with DOD in my opinion is that the graphics are old...their normandy beachfront mission can occupy me for hours at a time...

MacsRgr8
Jun 10, 2004, 03:47 PM
I have 'em all:

MOH:
Allied Assault
SpearHead
Breakthrough

Call of Duty

I LOVE 'EM ALL!

If you like these WWII first person shooters, you want them all.

The more levels I can play the better.
If there's gonna be COD II, I'll buy it too! These games are so good.

Waiting for 1942 ;)

Windowlicker
Jun 18, 2004, 04:44 PM
It makes no sense how Halo can run better than CoD on your cube. Halo is one of the most resource intensive games on Mac AND PC. I can run the CoD demo at much higher settings than I can run Halo without losing playability.

In any case, this is a GREAT GAME!

BTW, a Call of Duty demo is available at this site. (http://www.macupdate.com/info.php/id/15071)

i'm a huge mohaa fan myself. i'm waiting to get my 2x1.8 g5 next week (oh please god!! it was supposed to ship today!) so that I can play the lovely game at the highest settings. i've got spearhead under work now and will get Breakthrough. after that I might want trying CoD..

MemphisSoulStew
Jun 19, 2004, 02:17 PM
i'm a huge mohaa fan myself. i'm waiting to get my 2x1.8 g5 next week (oh please god!! it was supposed to ship today!) so that I can play the lovely game at the highest settings. i've got spearhead under work now and will get Breakthrough. after that I might want trying CoD..

Breakthrough is very tough. Unlike MoHAA and Spearhead killing an enemy doesn't automatically cause them to drop their weapon for you to pick up. I ran out of ammo near the end of one mission and had to kill a couple of Germans by hitting them with my rifle butt. Luckily there was a MG I could pick up in the same room so I was able to complete the mission, as immediately after that scene you're faced with at least a dozen more Germans, none of whom drop their weapons when you kill them. Trying to get past that lot with no ammo would be impossible.

When you get it be very careful with your ammo!

CoD made a refreshing change. The enemies in all the MoH games have certain moves and certain stances that you see over and over again. They react in certain ways when shot, and fall over and die in certain ways. The enemies in CoD also react in certain ways, but at least they are different moves that you won't have seen before.

CoD is IMO at least as good as the original MoHAA, and better than Spearhead or Breakthrough. Get it, you'll like it ;)

jacg
Jun 21, 2004, 01:36 PM
All of a sudden the multiplayer won't work on my powerbook. :(


and by all of a sudden, I mean just this morning. arrgghhh!!

Same here - ok one minute (except I'd left airport off, so quit CoD to turn airport on) then it wouldn't start up. Trashed prefs and restarted - no effect. Worked in a different user though.

Solution anyone?

neonart
Jun 26, 2004, 10:42 PM
i'm a huge mohaa fan myself. i'm waiting to get my 2x1.8 g5 next week (oh please god!! it was supposed to ship today!) so that I can play the lovely game at the highest settings. i've got spearhead under work now and will get Breakthrough. after that I might want trying CoD..

Did you get your G5?

I got a DP2.0 and it's amazing! This game (CoD) also is a really great port. With everything on the highest settings except bilinear filtering, at 1600x1200 I see 60-100FPS. FPS never drops into the 30's, infact you rarely see any drops into the 40's!
This is a very fun, intense game!

Next I'd love to see Splinter Cell finally get released!

iLikeMyiMac
Jul 28, 2004, 01:10 PM
On my demo I could not do that. Instead I held Shift and the console came up before the game. I typed the cg_drawFPS 1 and was pleasantly surprised by this great game!
With all settings maxed out pretty much (I dont think FSAA is on though) it averaged 30-50FPS*, with hardly any drop into the 20's! I cant get over how great it looks too:

(*G4 DP1.25, 2GB RAM, R9800)
Could you tell me how to turn FSAA off? I've heard that it is much more playable with it off but I figure out how to turn off.

12ibookg4
Jul 28, 2004, 04:49 PM
Could you tell me how to turn FSAA off? I've heard that it is much more playable with it off but I figure out how to turn off.
i would also like to know how to turn fsaa off. call of duty runs pretty slowly on my ibook and i want to speed it up. it gets really slow when there is a lot of action and i already have all the other settings down to the min.

Muskie
Jul 28, 2004, 04:59 PM
i would also like to know how to turn fsaa off. call of duty runs pretty slowly on my ibook and i want to speed it up. it gets really slow when there is a lot of action and i already have all the other settings down to the min.

Here's a good way to get stuff to play well. http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=79688 works pretty nice, I've even gotten some games to look a lot better without any slowdown graphics-wise. Good luck

pgc6000
Jul 28, 2004, 08:21 PM
CoD was an awsome game. And pretty challenging at times. The weird thing was when I FIRST played it it was on an 800 MHz iMac G4 (It's askes for 867 MHz) and it ran perfectly until the Russian campaign. It got sorta slow and glitchy. I had not touched the settings ethier. I re-installed it on my iBook and it ran much better though. Atleast when I was on the Russian campaign. :D
But yeah CoD was very good. Better than MOH: AA

mojohanna
Jul 28, 2004, 09:39 PM
I haven't played much of WWII fsp's, but this game runs choppy when i max out the video settings. I just spend 3k on this dual 1.8G5 (ATI 9600) and it kinda sucks that this doesn't scream. The system requirements don't even hint at the idea of needing more power than this. Does anyone know if i need a video card driver update or something? anyone else having this problem?

I have the same machie with only 768 of ram and the GeForce fx 5200 card. I have had no problems with mine. I have all of the details turned on, but I don't think I have it maxed out. I am not much of a gamer, but things are pretty smooth.