Doom3 for Mac still a long way off...

Discussion in 'Games' started by oingoboingo, Aug 14, 2004.

  1. oingoboingo macrumors 6502a

    oingoboingo

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2003
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    #1
    There's currently a story at AMDZone (linked from Slashdot...AMDZone is currently slashdotted) on a Q&A session at Quakecon. Looks like the Mac port of Doom 3 might still be a long way off completion. From the article:

    "A Mac gamer asked about the port to OS X. Apparently there is no current time for the release of a port. The game runs, but there is a lot of optimization, and currently they feel the Mac platform can not yet offer the same experience as the PC. Activision will not publish the Mac version of Doom 3. There is no publisher set currently."
     
  2. PlatinumBlade macrumors member

    PlatinumBlade

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2004
    Location:
    Lansing, MI
    #2
    Doom 3 for Mac still a long way off...

    That's not too surprising. Doom 3 on the PC isn't really a good experience unless you have at least a 3.0 GHz processor, hopefully the newer 800MHz FSB, 1GB of memory, and an ATI X800 or nVidia 6800 card. I played the game last weekend with a bunch of friends and all of us who did not have the 6800 card were getting trounced by the guy who did. It even chugged on his PC a few times and he has a 3.2 GHz system.

    I hope that Id will have decided to take advantage of multiple processor systems like they did with Quake 3. I think those that do have dual processors will really appreciate that. I hope the end result we see won't be a "port" but original code straight from Id so that we know it will be done well that way if it isn't great then there won't be anyone to blame but Id and not a Mac developer like Aspyr, etc.
     
  3. Ninja_Turtle macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2004
    Location:
    Fullerton, California
    #3
    party

    haha i love that guys name...lol it RULES!!! haha well anyways, yeah, you know whats really weird? that the first doom3 demo was on a mac...so wtf???? thats whats really weird...it was first shown on a mac, but now well have to wait? WTF!!! thats the only thing i have to say...oh, and yeah, i love that guys name!
     
  4. Declan macrumors member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2003
    #4
    Id are just saying it will be done when its done, at least its on its way, and in the mean time most will have played it.
     
  5. LoadRunner macrumors member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2003
    Location:
    Manhaton Beach California
    #5
    Why not look at the sight again. You'll see they updated it with quotes from the mac quake3world forum. From people who went to quake con. NEner :p
     
  6. Archaeopteryx macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2003
    #6
    I dunno.. I played doom 3 at a friends house the other day.. He has a 1.5 ghz pc and a un notable video card.. he was running it at medium detail level and it didnt run bad at all.. a slight skip here and there but definatley enough to run well... :-/
     
  7. benpatient macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2003
    #7
    PlatinumBlade, you keep saying this, but it's simply not true.

    Doom 3 runs quite a lot better than I expected it to on my 1.8 ghz Athlon 2500+ with a 128mb 9600 Pro and 1gb of RAM.

    In fact it runs very well. I've taken to playing it at medium 1280 or high 1024. The difference between high and medium detail settings is considerable, so I usually go with 1024 and have the details on High.

    I am a pretty demanding gamer. I expect things to be pretty smooth, especially by the apparent Mac Gamer standards. No offense guys, but people who think 30fps on UT2003 is a good timedemo score aren't very demanding at all...

    But no question about it...Doom 3 runs admirably on "moderate" PC hardware.
     
  8. vraxtus macrumors 65816

    vraxtus

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2004
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    #8


    I'm half with you and half with PlatinumBlade. I've many friends that have the game, and have tried it myself on a few occasions. The system I tried it on was a 2 ghz Athlon with a GFTi4400, 1 GB RAM. It ran *decently* on 800x600 @ med detail... from between 20 - 40 average, and in the teens when I got into a firefight.

    I've also heard from a friend that he averages 40 FPS on his Barton with a 9700 Pro @ 1024, hi detail. However this is where I'm with PlatinumBlade.

    I'm not sure if benpatient has played the MP but evidently at my friend's settings, MP is virtually unplayable. Evidently the resources demanded by the game are much higher on MP and slow his computer to an FPS in the teens... to reconcile it he runs at 800x600.

    Now, this is not good for us at all. The basic specs of my friend's Barton are generally better than most Macs, and furthermore Athlon's DO tend to run games better than PPC CPUs. My sense is that until they can tweak it to run better on a PPC CPU, it will be a long ways away before D3 sees a Mac release.
     
  9. benpatient macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2003
    #9
    i haven't touched the MP.

    wasn't very impressed with the idea of a 4 player cap and extremely limited environments/gameplay options.

    Anyone who buys D3 for the multiplayer was asking for disappointment anyway.

    It's possible that my performance would drop aggressively running multiplayer. But I could care less, because it can't possibly be that much fun anyway. Why would you play what amounts to DeathMatch 1.0 when you have great things like DoD and CS and the Myriad of MP options found in the UT series? I can't imagine wasting my time with that...
     
  10. vraxtus macrumors 65816

    vraxtus

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2004
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    #10
    Well, my and PlatinumBlade's (probably) point is that in DM when you are LANing it with other people, the guy with a better GPU is going to have a clear advantage because the game doesn't run nearly as well on MP than SP.
     
  11. benpatient macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2003
    #11
    platinum's post was saying that the game wasn't playable on even a pretty good PC...that's not at all true, apparently except for multiplayer.

    Like 5 people are going to play doom 3 for the multiplayer. Apparently iD knew this and so they didnt bother making it run well.

    I have to wonder if the MP setups that you and PB have experienced had a dedicated server running, or if one of the machines was being forced to play that role. If the 6800 equipped machine can so thoroughly trounce the 9800/9600 machines, even when their resolutions and details are turned down, then it seems to me that iD made some pretty terrible netcode for this game...that would be odd considering how well the Q3 engine's netcode was done. I guess Q4 will be the multiplayer engine, and D3 was just to show off the unified lighting?

    either way, nobody will be judging D3 by its multiplayer. If they expected it to be good, they were in denial from the start.

    HL2 is the one that needs to deliver on the MP, and all indications are gooooooooood.
     
  12. vraxtus macrumors 65816

    vraxtus

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2004
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    #12

    You do know that D3 can be modded to 16 right? And that 32 player servers already exist?
     
  13. PlatinumBlade macrumors member

    PlatinumBlade

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2004
    Location:
    Lansing, MI
    #13
    Doom 3 Performance

    Sorry I wasn't clearer but vraxtus is correct about what I was saying. The majority of the play I've had with Doom 3 has been MP and it was that which I was basing my statement on. However, perhaps tomorrow, if my 6800 for my PC arrives, I'll have a better idea of how it behaves.

    In SP mode I run it at 1024X768 HIGH detail and it runs alright but not great. I know what great is having seen it running in Ultra mode on a system with a 6800 GT OC'ed to Ultra speeds. Some of the key things that also helped his system were 2GB of 400MHz RAM, and the game being played from a SATA RAID. The increased performance in hard disk access helped noticeably.
     
  14. ThomasJefferson macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2002
    Location:
    Virginia
    #14
    For those of you who have Mac portables and a PC for games.

    Try letting the spiders in Doom III jump at you and then time it, so you can shoot them in the air. Very intense.
     
  15. Converted2Truth macrumors 6502a

    Converted2Truth

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2004
    Location:
    Hell@HighAltitude
    #15
    What bothers me most about the whole doom3 experience is that everyone else i know who has (it/played it), has downloaded it for free. To me, this is really irritating. Everyone knew it was going to be better looking than everything else; everyone knew it was going to be scarier than anything else; everyone knew what the game was going to focus on: Single player FSP thriller....

    I just don't know how people can justify stealing 4 years of programming, art, and sound. These people claim they are honest, trustworthy, etc... One guy i know told me it's like testdriving a car. Well, since when have dealerships let you take a new car coast to coast? They don't. It's around the block, or on the highway for an hour or two.

    Oh well, guess it explains why software jobs in the US are declining readily. Too many asholes pirating software instead of paying for it... causing outsourcing, job cuts,... anyway, i'll shut up now.
     
  16. oingoboingo thread starter macrumors 6502a

    oingoboingo

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2003
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    #16
    Hmmm...everyone I know who has played it has paid for it. Maybe my friends balance out yours :) Much quicker to go down to the store and buy it than wait for 3 CD-ROMs to download over BitTorrent or something like that. As Jobs says...the best way to prevent piracy is to make it easier to do the right thing.

    Now if everyone I know (myself included) wasn't so disappointed with the game itself...boooooooring <snore>. Dark room...zombie...SHOOT IT! Dark room....zombie...SHOOT IT! Dark room...zombie....SHOOT IT! :D
     
  17. Nermal Moderator

    Nermal

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2002
    Location:
    New Zealand
    #17
    If I'm reading this correctly, the Linux version is a few weeks away, and the Mac version is coming before that :D
     
  18. vraxtus macrumors 65816

    vraxtus

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2004
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    #18

    See my thread before you post old news. Thx!
     
  19. Nermal Moderator

    Nermal

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2002
    Location:
    New Zealand
    #19
    'Old news' is a bit of an oxymoron, don't you think? :rolleyes:

    In all seriousness, I was busy this morning and didn't get a chance to see what other threads there were - I just saw that this thread was the most recently updated, so I posted in here.
     
  20. vraxtus macrumors 65816

    vraxtus

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2004
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    #20
    No worries, just wanted to see what people were feeling all in one thread. Glad to see that kind of news though.
     

Share This Page