How well does UT 2003....?

Discussion in 'Games' started by maracz, May 14, 2003.

  1. maracz macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2003
    #1
    How well does UT 2003 run on minimal specs? As in G3 800 MHZ 32 MB VRAM and 256 MB RAM? Would it be enoguh to play it well or will there be noticeable lagging as in msot games when you paly on minimal requirnments?
     
  2. insidedanshead macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2002
    #2
    No very...

    I have a digital audio 733Mhz G4 with a Radeon 9000. It's playable but not enjoyable.. I have most the settings at a minimum and run at 1024x768 (i refuse to go any lower). Thats what you have to expect with new games though. New games demand new hardware. I HAD a geforce 2mx and upgraded to the Radeon 9000 and it made NO difference, an obvious indication that it is my Processor and not my graphics card that is limiting.
     
  3. AmbitiousLemon Moderator emeritus

    AmbitiousLemon

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2001
    Location:
    down in Fraggle Rock
    #3
    i think most people who complain about UT2k3 don't know what they are talking about.

    I have a 800 G4 with a 32mb GForce2Mx (nearly the lowest requirements) and it runs well at default settings. or even slightly higher than default.

    i just make sure i quit all other apps before playing the game and free of some ram as well. if i forget to turn something off (like folding@home) then the game is still playable but not as smooth (kinda annoying) I think this is what happens to most peope who complain. they leave some big app running or have no free ram.

    you should also realize this is a free beta demo. the windows beta was also known for having higher requirements than the final. id say if this is how well the beta is running then we can expect great performance form the real thing.
     
  4. heal macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2003
    #4
    hi all
    I know Im not a low end user but i thought you'd be interested in the performance on my first gen dual 1 gig G4 with an nvidia geforce titanium 128.

    I have all of the settings at maximum and run at 1280 x 1024 and it is perfectly smoothly - so if it is this good now, can it get any better?

    My only wish is that the monitors support would extend to widescreen displays!

    m
     
  5. 8thDegreeSavage macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2002
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    #5

    Check www.insidemacgames.com forum for the hack for enabling widescreen..they have it there in one of the UT2003 threads.
     
  6. mikeyredk macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2003
    #6
    powermac 867 1.5 gig ram
    ati 9000 adc
    ran it on 1600X1200 max everything ran very good some low spots but avg 28 fps
     
  7. MacBandit macrumors 604

    MacBandit

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2002
    Location:
    Springfield, OR (Home of the Simpsons)
    #7
    I've also posted how to do this a bunch of times in the original UT2K3 and UT2003 threads. All you have to do is find the UT2003.ini file and open it in textedit. You will then want to do a find for 'SDLDrv.SDLClient'. Just under that there are a few lines that look like this.

    Modify X's so that it equals the screen width you want to have and the Y's so that it equals the height you want to have.

    It's definitely worth checking out the original UT2003 threads as they contain a lot of helpful hints that I and others posted including modifications to the .ini file to greatly improve overall performance without a quality loss.
     
  8. AmbitiousLemon Moderator emeritus

    AmbitiousLemon

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2001
    Location:
    down in Fraggle Rock
    #8
    i dont have a wide screen so im just asking out of curiosity, but does this provide a larger viewable area or does it just stretch things out?
     
  9. MacBandit macrumors 604

    MacBandit

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2002
    Location:
    Springfield, OR (Home of the Simpsons)
    #9
    I don't know as I don't have a wide screen either but I would guess that it just stretches things out.

    To ensure you are viewing all that is viewable go to your player prefs and make sure that the 'Default FOV' (Field of view) is set to 100.
     
  10. CubeHacker macrumors 65816

    CubeHacker

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2003
    #10
    Actually, the full version of UT2k3 ran much worse than the demo, for 2 main reasons. One, the full version shipped with higher resolution textures, and two, the levels in the full version are MUCH larger and more detailed than the ones included in the demo.

    Hopefully, some optimization will be done to improve the speed some, but I wouldn't expect miracles.
     
  11. MacBandit macrumors 604

    MacBandit

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2002
    Location:
    Springfield, OR (Home of the Simpsons)
    #11
    I think what was being referred to was early betas of the demo for the PC ran like crud as compared to the late versions.
     
  12. CubeHacker macrumors 65816

    CubeHacker

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2003
    #12
    There were no early betas of the demo released for the PC. There was one demo released a few weeks before the game went gold, and it ran very well.

    There WAS an illegal UT2k3 alpha that was leaked, which did run horrible. However that was at least a year old and is very different from the official demo that was released by Epic.
     
  13. iJon macrumors 604

    iJon

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    #13
    lets hope this game lasts because epic just announced unreal 2004 tournet. time will tell.

    iJon
     
  14. MacBandit macrumors 604

    MacBandit

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2002
    Location:
    Springfield, OR (Home of the Simpsons)
    #14
    Well whatever I'm just quoting what a few PC people have told me and what was posted on the net. They all agreed that the Demo greatly improved over time in speed and reliability. Well I know there have been at least 3 updates to the PC Demo maybe some of them came out after the release of the full version I don't know I don't have a PC.
     
  15. Nermal Moderator

    Nermal

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2002
    Location:
    New Zealand
    #15
    Just getting back on topic, I've got a G3 800, 32 VRAM, and 256 RAM, and after tweaking the settings a bit the game is fully playable. It's not perfect, especially when there's a lot on the screen, but it's playable.
     
  16. DreaminDirector macrumors 6502a

    DreaminDirector

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2002
    Location:
    Ladera Ranch, CA
    #16
    When the demo of UT2K3 came out, I tried it on my powerbook (800 mgz, 512 Ram) and it ran like crap, which I then realized that I had not upgraded to 10.2.6. After that, on the minimum settings, it worked good. Nothing like my desktop, but it still worked good.
     
  17. ZenPirate macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    May 21, 2003
    #17
    it's playable on my 800 iBook (640mb ram) , but gets quite laggy in the wide open spaces.
     

Share This Page