Return to Castle Wolfenstein - OS X Client Available

Discussion in 'MacRumors News Discussion (archive)' started by MacRumors, Sep 18, 2001.

  1. macrumors bot


    Apr 12, 2001
    As reported by, the OS X client for Return to Castle Wolfenstein is now available. For all the info, see Graeme Devine's .plan file, quoted below:
    <font face="courier"]Name: Graeme Devine
    Description: Designer / Project Manager
    Mac stuff.
    The OS X build is looking good. On my G4 dual 800 with a GeForce 3 card I get 90fps in game, while on my P3 dual 800 with a GeForce 3 I get 30fps on the same settings.
    I've been running it on my machine without problem, in game and out. However, I'm using a developer build of 10.1 (5G48), and I've not tested across anything else. I'll continue to do that tomorrow before putting out a general public release.
    Meanwhile, if you want to play the BLEEDING edge client, you can grab it from my iTools public folder (graemedevine). You'll need to have downloaded and installed a full PC build because this is just the app, so this limits the # of you that can play it to experts and desperate types.. I've been updating the build here for people to test on since I only have a few OS X machines here to play with.
    Please ONLY send bug reports on this build to me ( and try to include a clear step by step way to replicate the error you have. Please also include the OS X build you have running and what kind of video card you have installed.</font>
    Wow, his dual G4 really leaves that dual P3 in the dust. Can't wait to give this a shot.
  2. #4
    How do I install it

    OK, I downloaded the file from this guys idisk, now how do I get it to work?? He said sometime about having a PC version or something?? Does he mean the linux or windows version?? I would really love to play but I can't install it.
  3. #5

    Why is there a "password is pong"? I can just sign up, right??? Who created PIPong (Password Is Pong)? Not an administrator, I'm assuming.
  4. Guest

    You have to..

    You have to download the Windows Version, install it on a PC, and then send the folder to your Mac, put the OS X version in that folder, run it, and voila it launches., and it does NOT work on 10.0.4 for me.. it will launch OK and everything, but when I go to join a server it hangs the computer. but im sure it will work in 10.1...
  5. #7

    hehe, i had to check, too, and it is pong
  6. Guest

    Good lord

    Good lord some of you are STUPID!

    If you can't read the darn text stop posting confirmation how idiotic you are re: "It don't werk cuz i dun got da whole game filez an i got only da app thingy."

    Geeze, and who said anything about posting Apple Beta software updates?

    He is talking about the GAME HE IS WORKING ON. He tried it on OS X 10.1 which Apple has all but told every detail of so far on its web site and at Expos for months now.

    Damn why oh why did I read the comments on this article. I feel like I am in the movie "Dude, Where's My Car?" or something.
  7. macrumors 68020


    May 9, 2001
    Excuse me

    How come something can be better at 90fps if 30fps is way too fast for the human eye? 15 fps still continuos.
  8. Guest


    Whoever changed the password for "password is pong" is ****ing *******. Go somewhere else and be a dick.
  9. macrumors newbie

    Sep 18, 2001
    San Jose, CA
    RE: Excuse Me

    30fps is full motion video, anything above 60fps can't be seen by the naked eye.
  10. macrumors regular

    Jul 9, 2001
    Re: RE: Excuse Me

    Are you sure about that? I know that if my monitor is set at a measly refresh rate of 60Hz, I can totally see the refresh. But if I kick up to 85Hz, the image is much more solid.

    I'm assuming since the hertz refers to cycles per second, that 60fps is the equivalent of 60Hz.

    On top of that, (and I'm purely speaking out of my ass now) I would guess that there are interference patterns that result from running at an fps rate that is different from the monitors Hz refresh rate. Otherwise, a particular frame might occur in between full images shown by the monitor, resulting in an instance which isn't seen at all.

    If anybody's got some real knowledge of this, I'd be curious to know...
  11. Guest

    Sep 18, 2001
    The reason better fps is desirable is quite simple. While it's true that the naked eye can't differentiate over 30-32fps, you want a high fps so that in scenes of explosive action and high detail the frame rate won't drop below 30.

    For instance, a scene in a game while you're alone in a brick tunnel may give you 90fps. Who cares?

    Well, when you turn the corner and 8 players attack you and each other with rocket launchers, flame throwers, etc, it will put a tremendous strain on the system. But if you have the power to run 90fps in 'idle' mode, hopefully it will never fall below 30fps during high graphics activity. The system (card) has to draw all this stuff, you know, and it drastically reduces fps.

    Make sense?

  12. Guest


    Although TV and movies have a framerate around 30 fps, that is only ok because of a "blurring" effect between frames.

    Fluorescent lights that have a refresh rate of less than 60-ish appear to flicker. This shows how you can see more than your TV throws at you and why high refresh rates on monitors are important.

    The trained eye can actually discriminate between frame rates up to around 80+ fps, consciously. I have heard rumors (and I believe them) that you can detect more sub-consciously. You detect this in the form of fatigue. Supposedly, reading text at 70 fps or less leads to fatigue while above that may not as quickly. I am not sure if this is true since low refresh rates are also characteristic of high resolution and very small text.

    That is what I know about that.

    Also, great results with the FPS vs the P3. Not all that surprising that we beat them but by such a degree is nice to see.
  13. Guest


    Movies are 24 fps. This is why some movies look god awful on straight lines with DVD if you don't have progressive scan. Moire patterns are created because of the odd sequencing of fields to turn 24 fps into 30 fps.

    TV is 60 fields per second which ends up being 30 frames (NTSC). PAL is 50 fields or 25 frame per second. However PAL has slightly higher resolution than NTSC.

    Anyone when spending enough time training their eyes can see framerates well in excess of 90 fps. It takes time but it can be done.

    While 30 fps is enough visual content to convey motion to the brain it isn't enough to give it the full sensation of movement. You either need a much higher framerate, roughly double... or you need motion blur.

    Higher refresh rates are great for your eyes and low ones will fatigue them quickly. Don't believe me? Get a good monitor and set your desktop to 1280x1024 at 60hz. Use the computer for 3 hours straight. Now do the same thing tmrw with a refresh rate set at 110 (or even 90). Its like the difference between reading text off the tv (60hz) and paper (110hz).
  14. macrumors newbie

    Sep 18, 2001

    I have a Geforce2 GTS 32mb and a 800mhz athlon and get 35fps in 1600x1200x32bit. How can a GF3 only get 30 at any setting?

  15. macrumors member

    Sep 3, 2001
    Re: 30fps?

    Okay you loosers, listen up.
    The human eye can only handle about roughly 60 fps, mkay. And if the TV would only show 30 fps, the whole image would appear to flicker when the frame change. That is why most TV double and tripple the refresh rate. This means that if a TV is 60Hz it first draws every second line of pixels and then draws the other half, this removes all flickering. The TV uses no blurr effects, though most TV-games do this to keep up the frame rate, since most TV-games got goofy processors. The tv is old, and **** by todays standards compared with todays high resolution computer screens. The tv uses a resolution of; 640*480 NTSC, 720*576 PAL. Also the TV-screen most offenly can display this whole area and cuts out the edges. TV-game developers uses a 50 pixel safe border around the screen, because this is how much the tv cuts out!!!
    I know this since I've developed TV-games myself. Playstation2 is nice and all but since the TV can only display this rotten resolutions, one will never experience as nice graphics on a tely as on a computer, unless of course they begin using other standards than PAL or NTSC.
    And higher frame rates are always good, gives you less processor hick-ups.
  16. Guest

    Sep 18, 2001
    Shouldn't you know how to spell LOSER before you call everyone that?

    I do need to get looser, though.....

  17. Guest

  18. macrumors member

    Sep 3, 2001
    Eh, no wait I meant to tell everyone to get looser, honestly :)

  19. macrumors member

    Sep 3, 2001
  20. macrumors newbie

    Sep 20, 2001
    "Dude Where's My Wolfie"

    I don't care what anybody says, "Dude, Where's My Car?" was an excellent movie.

    Oh -- and unless I'm mistaken and did see instructions on getting this to work (under 10.0.4) simply download the GameSpot version (which is stuffed, not .exe), then get the files from Graeme's folder and put them in the unstuffed file. Presto -- it's time to kill some Nazi scum.
  21. macrumors newbie

    Sep 21, 2001
    are you braindead?

    It is incredible to see, that nobody of you guys can differ between refresh rate and fps...ok, here's the real deal.

    refresh rate:
    is a number in Hertz (like 60Hz or 85Hz). this stands for the number of times, the display draws the image that is sent to the input of the display device.

    is frames (different images) that are generated by the computer per second when using 3d, every frame must be generated fully by the 3d engine. on 2d applications there is usually no fps, because you only change parts of an image, like the character.

    ok, now this:
    when you hit pause on a game, there is no movement, agree?
    No movement, no changes. No changes, no frames have to change. -> the frame rate is ZERO. but still, there is an image shown, with the REFRESH RATE that is set at your computer, e.g. 85Hz. so what you see is 0 fps at 85 Hz.

    if you watch a dvd, you will get let's say, 30fps for a NTSC movie. ok? but if you watch it on your computer with the screen set to 85Hz what will happen?

    this: the dvd image is sent to the graphic adapter with a rate of 30 fps the graphics adapter sends the actual image received until a new frame arrives, with a rate of 85 cycles per second. if the frame changes while the image is displayed, the image will change after the preceeding is finished drawing. so sometimes a frame lasts for two cycles and sometimes for three. (85Hz / 30 fps = 2.83)

    what about the frame rate?
    you play a 3d game at let's say 60fps and to compare also at 5fps.
    you move your character from the left to the right side. this takes 2 seconds. at 60fps, 120 images will be created that are shown in these two seconds. the character will move very smoothly .
    the same done with 5fps will generate 10 images!
    the movement is very jumpy, more like 5 different looking pictures shown per second.
    if you have set your screen to 85Hz, there is no difference of the image quality overall. your eyes do not hurt at 5fps. it may look like ****, but it's only a matter of painted frames per second, like in a disney movie. every movement ocurring at over 20-25fps looks smooth to our eye. everything below that starts to look jumpy. but 15fps is still acceptable.

    this is a fact.

    greetings, the wizard.
  22. macrumors member

    Sep 3, 2001
    Re: are you braindead?

    Absolutely nothing new here. I tried to explain this in my post, but obviously some did not understand. Refresh Rate and fps is two totally different thingies and got nothing to do with one another.

    And also you said that 15 fps is acceptable! Well that certainly is not true in my book. When I started playing 3D-games on macintosh I started out with a 512k-machine and a PLUS. I've been playing marathon on an fx (40Mhz), doom, wolfenstein and Duke Nukem and all that shiii. I actually thouht back then that 8 fps was acceptable. But now when I've gotten used too at least 25 fps in a game, I can not play on those old setups anymore, it just too jerky.

  23. macrumors 6502

    Sep 3, 2001
    800Mhz What!?

    Someone said their Athlon got better than the dual 800P3. Duhh, OK, i'l try to be nice. Mhz myth, cache structure, Ram type. Most Athlon systems beat P3 systems because of one of more of these. Windows has multi-tasking less advanced than OSX (ok a lot less) but still more than OS9. But besides for special Apps (Photoshop) a Dual-PC needs 2 tasks at once to fulfil both processors. Thus the test FPS of 30 is the same of a single 800-Mhz PC. And as for your GeForce2, keep in mind until OSX 10.1 there was no dedicated GF3 acceleration, so if the dual-800 was on a 10.0.4 build, the GF3 would've acted like a 64MB MX +20% or so, plus another 20% for 10.1's faster OpenGL.

    Now what I wanna know is will Apple be cool and spring FSAA out onto the OpenGL drivers finally. I want FSAA damn it! 3Dfx was soo cool for completly re-writing all the FSAA code for Glide so It'd actually run on a mac VooDoo5. Apple still hasn't added that (or truform, see to the OGL libraries. The sad thing is that DirectX 8, OpenGL, and APPLE graphics card support FSAA. A friend once said "Ever wounder why your Mac crashes so much? ATi can't program drivers." No kidding...

Share This Page