5 years with no gaming - what did i miss

Discussion in 'Mac and PC Games' started by bmxpepe, Mar 6, 2011.

  1. bmxpepe macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2011
    #1
    Hey guys,

    im going to get the new 13" MBP. Im really curious about what games can be played on this machine.

    You have to know, that i havent been gaming for about 5 years now.

    In the good old days i loved games like Alien vs. Predator, Unreal 1, NFS Part ?(with the police-chases).

    I dont like games where you have to play really long to have fun (like WoW or SC).

    So what would be your suggestion?? Which game should i give a try? :)

    Saludos,

    Phil
     
  2. Dagless macrumors Core

    Dagless

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2005
    Location:
    Fighting to stay in the EU
    #2
    Valve **** out 3 really good multiplayer games - Team Fortress 2, Left 4 Dead and Left 4 Dead 2. Very addictive and long-lasting games. TF2 is 4 years old now and the servers have never been as full! (they keep updating it with new weapons, game modes, achievements etc)

    Some popular indie games too. Braid, Audiosurf, Minecraft.
    Some high quality racing games in the form of Burnout Paradise, GRID, DIRT.

    They made a new Alien V Predator but it wasn't very good. They have updated the original though to support modern systems! It's rather cheap (I bought it when it was £1 on Steam). Oh and Duke Nukem Forever is out very soon, for real too!

    That's all I can think of on the spot!
     
  3. alywa macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 6, 2004
    #3
    Dig Dug is pretty fun... Requires at least 16k of ram, though.
     
  4. shstiger2009 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2011
    #4
    Hahahaha.

    +1 on Team Fortress 2.
     
  5. thejadedmonkey macrumors 604

    thejadedmonkey

    Joined:
    May 28, 2005
    Location:
    Pa
  6. bokdol macrumors 6502a

    bokdol

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    VA
    #6
    starcraft 2 of course. but anything from blizzard. also assassins creed 2 fun to play. and all the steam/valve games.

    +1 for tourchlight. especially if you liked diablo
     
  7. deadwulfe macrumors 6502a

    deadwulfe

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2010
    #7
  8. edddeduck macrumors 68020

    edddeduck

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2004
    #8
    New MBP 13" currently is not as powerful (for gaming) as the previous two revisions of the MBP 13" as the graphics card does not support some fairly major features that mean some more modern games like Borderlands which we made will not play or will play with large glitches.

    Now the software drivers will improve but this card is not a gaming card and unlike the NV integrated cards that it replaces the drivers are missing a few features. You should be able to play some older games but even on the PC the Intel HD 3000 will not cut the mustard for any of the newer PC titles.

    If you are really wanting to play some games for the next few years I would look at the 15" (if you can afford it) as it contains a dedicated card as well as the Intel one which will make all the difference for gaming. At the very least do some research before you buy don't want you to be disappointed with the 13" MBP due to the gfx card it has installed.

    Edwin
     
  9. BornAgainMac macrumors 603

    BornAgainMac

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2004
    Location:
    Florida Resident
    #9
    I tend to play older games from 4 years old or older except for Left 4 Dead which I played a lot in the last 12 months. I recently tried the Batman: Arkham Asylum and I feel like I have been in a freakin cave all these years. I thought it was going to be an average game. I still like the older games but it really is a treat to play a modern game.
     
  10. doh123 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2009
    #10
    the HD3000 is better than people give it credit for... tis also faster in i7s than in i5s. I had a Macbook Pro 13" with a 320m, and I have a 17"Macbook pro now that I've played some games using just the HD3000, and the HD3000 runs pretty close to the same speed as the 320m, i cannot tell a difference. This is only in OSX though, as I do not use Windows, or even have it installed. The i5 HD3000 will be a bit slower, but still runs decently. There are no features its really missing for gaming like previous generations Intel Graphics.
     
  11. ActionableMango macrumors 604

    ActionableMango

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2010
    #11
    Borderlands was pretty good, especially if you like co-op.
     
  12. edddeduck macrumors 68020

    edddeduck

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2004
    #12
    I am just saying that if it was me buying a new MacBookPro (as Mac gamer & developer) for the next few years and only wanted to buy one machine, I would buy one with a dedicated card. The Intel 3000 HD is underpowered (for gaming) and missing some important OpenGL calls that is already effecting it's ability to play high end games.

    It will be great for everything else but if you want to play new AAA games I would recommend you review your options before putting down hard cash. This includes Bootcamp gaming, the Intel 3000 series card is a bit faster on Windows but it still struggles compared to dedicated graphics hardware.

    For casual gaming the card should be fine for a good while just the newer graphic intensive games might have problems. Good luck with choosing a new laptop,

    Edwin
     
  13. Winni macrumors 68030

    Winni

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2008
    Location:
    Germany.
    #13


    A 13" MacBook certainly is not the machine that I would recommend for playing games, and Mac OS X certainly is not the operating system of choice when you want to play games either.

    Anyway, leaving out all strategy and adventure games that you don't like because of the playing length, those are nice little games for a MacBook (and OS X):

    Midnight Mansion 1 & 2
    Braid (also on Xbox)

    As you can see, it's a rather short list.


    Buy an Xbox 360 and then you can play those things that you've missed over the last five years:

    Bioshock 1 & 2
    Dead Space 1 & 2
    Gears of War 1, 2 and soon 3
    Modern Warfare 1 & 2
    The Darkness
    Red Dead Redemption: Undead Nightmare
    Half-Life 2 Orange Box
    Portal 1 & soon 2
    Left 4 Dead 1 & 2
    And a whole bunch of other titles in that league.

    Some of those games have also been ported to OS X, but usually those conversions suck performance-wise - on ANY Mac. You should stick with the original Xbox 360 versions.
     
  14. edddeduck macrumors 68020

    edddeduck

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2004
    #14
    I know the Mac version of BioShock 1 out performs the 360 on modern Mac's with higher resolutions, effects and textures, cannot comment on the others as I did not work on them but for BioShock 1 know the Mac version is better :)

    The HD 3000 can play games like BioShock 1 most likely very well however it will struggle on newer games that will be released over the coming year or so.

    Edwin
     
  15. deadwulfe macrumors 6502a

    deadwulfe

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2010
    #15
    I don't own an xbox 360, nor have I played one. However, I disagree with your comment on the performance of the ported games sucking on any Mac. The games that I have played on Windows and Mac which have been ported are Bioshock 1, Left 4 Dead 1 & 2, The Orange Box, and Portal 1. These were all natively done and, on my 15" 2010 MBP, I do not experience a difference in fps on either operating system.

    My thoughts on why performance appears to be the same are:
    1) That the drivers and/or games themselves have been updated to better perform on the Mac side than originally released
    2) I am playing on my native resolution of 1440x900 and not your native resolution of too big for gaming on the graphics card resolution of 2560x1440 (that's higher than high-def high definition gaming!)
    3) I actually have first-hand experience with these games and am not simply creating my opinion based on internet board based knowledge of people who need to vent their frustration

    Regardless of the reason, I do not believe the performance of these games on your iMac are a satisfactory sample to determine that these games suck on any and every Mac. That is all.
     
  16. edddeduck macrumors 68020

    edddeduck

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2004
    #16
    Running out of VRAM by running a resolution that is too high is the biggest problem people run into, often you will get a low fps even with everything turned down if you play with native resolutions. If you drop the res even a little the same machine will be able to play with Max settings.

    The 27" iMac is the best example of this, especially the 512MB older model. So I would always recommend when hunting for the best speed/quality drop your resolution first you might be amazed at when you can turn on when you drop the resolution just a little.

    Edwin
     
  17. Dagless macrumors Core

    Dagless

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2005
    Location:
    Fighting to stay in the EU
    #17
    ^
    Yup! If I lower the res on TF2 from my 20" native display to 1280*800 (similar to that of consoles) I can play almost everything on max. At native res? I'm on low-medium. Of course anything that massively bumps up the VRAM like HDR and AA is going to sting as well.
    Nonsense. I had a 2008 Macbook that ran L4D1+2 at native resolution, settings on medium-max for a nice 50-60fps. Under Windows, of course. I can only imagine how much better the 2011 Macbooks would handle such games.


    Well, I can't say much for Mac performance but if the OP installs Windows XP or 7 then it would walk over any console. In general PC versions are better; more configuration options, better graphics, more control options, lower price point etc.

    OP... I'd recommend installing Bootcamp and letting the flood of good games crash down :D.
     
  18. chrono1081 macrumors 604

    chrono1081

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Location:
    Isla Nublar
    #18
    Lets see:

    Portal (very clever game)
    Bioshock (I generally don't like FPS but this one is good).
    Torchlight
    Braid (omg hard)
    Plants vs Zombies (very addicting)

    I'm sure there are more but I'm too busy making games and rarely get time to play them :(
     
  19. Irishman macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2006
    #19
    In survival horror and FPSs, yea, go to Steam for Mac (yes, you heard that right), and you've many choices there. Half-Life 1 & 2 (Finally!), Bioshock - not on Steam though (you'll catch yourself holding your breath...breathe, breathe), Portal, Team Fortress 2, Left 4 Dead 1 & 2. There are newer version of UTT out, but none with quite the thrill of UT '99.

    Then come back in 6 months and we'll start over. :)
     
  20. AlexMaximus macrumors 6502

    AlexMaximus

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Location:
    A400M Base
    #20
    Get addicted to Tiberium...






    If you missed that one, you should absolutely go for "Tiberium Wars" and the Add on "Kane's Wrath". Not the newest though, but absolutely worth mentioning! I loved that title, its the age old C&C series with much scifie stuff and a great story.

    One more thing just in case you missed that one... See if you can get the original Deus Ex somewhere. (yes .. the very first one... forget the second part) Even as a port or on Dosbox. This game sticks out as a marvel of the last decade. Despite the older graphic engine, I have not met a game with a more interesting and deeper story.

    Ohh... and keep in mind - The game was issued way before 911.... :D
     
  21. LaDirection macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2006
    #21
    I agree with the people who mentioned Valve titles, great ports, excellent gameplay.
     
  22. edddeduck macrumors 68020

    edddeduck

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2004
    #22
    The new MBP has an integrated card from Intel which is overall not quite as good (at the moment) for games as the older card manufactured by Nvidia in the previous model. If you want to keep gaming for the life of the MacBookPro spending the extra money on a 15" which contains a real graphics card will make a huge difference. Also the Mac drivers for the Intel cards on the whole have not been as optimised as the ones you get with NV or ATI cards as Intel cards have not been on the Mac for as long as NV or ATI/AMD. This does mean that the Intel card might improve in performance with OS Updates.

    Best rule of thumb on Mac models is if it has an integrated card (Apple label it "Shared RAM") it can play most games but gaming is not one of it's strengths and it will never perform as well as a similar machine with a similar dedicated card. The question you need to ask is how important is gaming is and if the improved performance is worth the price.

    Edwin
     
  23. YanniDepp macrumors 6502

    YanniDepp

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    #23
    Here's a little something for the original poster:

    [​IMG]

    Seriously though. Here's some games you really have to play:

    - Left4Dead 2 (and the original Left 4 Dead)
    - Portal
    - Bioshock
    - Half Life 2 and its follow-up episodes (if you haven't played Half Life 2 yet, play this first. It came out in 2004 but it still looks great, is very engrossing and has a great pace).

    The best part? All of these games run on Mac OS X, so you won't need Windows. The Left4Dead games, Portal and Half Life 2 are available on Steam, and Bioshock is available on the App Store. Word of advice, if you have Windows, buy Bioshock for Windows. The Mac port came out a lot later, and is more expensive.
     

Share This Page