Gears of War on 2.4 iMac, VM Fusion

Discussion in 'Windows, Linux & Others on the Mac' started by cowboyswc, Mar 2, 2008.

  1. cowboyswc Guest

    #1
    :confused:
    After talking with several of the Mac guys at our local Palo Alto and Burligame CA stores I was told to buy VM Fusion and install Windows XP Pro. I purchased the XP pro this morning and brought it up to current with all the updates. I purchased and installed VM Fusion so I could seamlessly work on Windows on my iMac interface without booting off and on. Really cool program. Then I purchase Gears of War for Windows.

    After trying everyhting the game right before launching comes up with:

    wargame-G4Live.exe error message.


    Any thoughts..

    Extremely bummed.

    Brian
     
  2. nutman macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 19, 2006
    #2
    vmware only supports dx8, but will do some of the dx9 stuff. basically, you need to use bootcamp and run windows as windows so that you get all of dx9 which will allow you to play gears of war. it will work well. i played the game on a mbp 2.16 c2d merom with all the settings on high and and a lower resolution [don't know it off the top of my head]. have fun.
     
  3. cowboyswc thread starter Guest

    #3
    Thanks for the reply.
    So you would recommend to uninstalling the VM Fusion and then install the boot camp partition?
    I think the VM Fusion also partitions the drive but does not support x9, OK I think I am getting it... I wish VM Fusion would upgrade that on their end...:rolleyes:
     
  4. flopticalcube macrumors G4

    flopticalcube

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Location:
    In the velcro closure of America's Hat
    #4
    Even better, VMware can use your bootcamp partition so you only need one installation of Windows.
     
  5. cowboyswc thread starter Guest

    #5
    My wife uninstalled boot camp just recently. Can I go ahead and recreate a boot camp partition and still use it in conjunction with VM that is currently installed.?

    Thanks so much guys, I am so minor-ly frustrated..
     
  6. sixth macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2006
    #6
    The easiest way to fix your problem I would say is in this order:

    1. Delete VMware created image, just launch Vmware and delete the windows installation.

    2. Launch boot camp, create the partition on the machine, install windows and install the windows drivers. Reboot as needed.

    3. Once Windows is installed completely with all drivers, Launch back into OS X and launch Vmware, select the Boot Camp partition, and boot it, install the vmware drivers etc.

    4. You now have Vmware in OS X and boot camp to game. I have it this way and have been using it for almost a year now.

    5. Done.
     
  7. wgilles macrumors 6502

    wgilles

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2008
    #7
    My personal experience with VMWare, Parallels, etc. is that they don't work too well with games, its better to run them in boot camp.
     
  8. cowboyswc thread starter Guest

    #8
    surgery

    My imac will go under the knife tonight and tomorrow. I will do exactly as you mentioned. Thanks so much for the advice. Appreciate the help.:) Will report results soon.
     
  9. kamm macrumors regular

    kamm

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2008
    #9
    Parallels can use your BootCamp installation since 2006 if I remember correctly... ;)
     
  10. Neil321 macrumors 68040

    Neil321

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2007
    Location:
    Britain, Avatar Created By Bartelby
    #10
    Maybe so but fusion rocks
     
  11. kamm macrumors regular

    kamm

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2008
    #11
    Possible but why?:) Just tried both and Parallels is faster I think...
     
  12. Neil321 macrumors 68040

    Neil321

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2007
    Location:
    Britain, Avatar Created By Bartelby
    #12
    Try reading this, the speed issues are covered in last pages

    http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=423372

    Its not just about speed ( stability & support ) parallel's maybe slightly faster but this is
    a false true
     
  13. kamm macrumors regular

    kamm

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2008
    #13
    Sorry but it's mostly filled with a fight between others and you where you keep repeating the same "better stability and support" without ever citing a SINGLE issue. On the contrary I'm saying I've tried shortly both and found them to be equally stable but Parallels runs things a tad faster.

    No offense but what is "false true" here? :p:cool:
     
  14. Neil321 macrumors 68040

    Neil321

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2007
    Location:
    Britain, Avatar Created By Bartelby
    #14
    this is the false true ( why parallel's maybe faster than fusion )

    I actually don't like that article. ( It's not based on the actual differences between the speed of Windows applications themselves under Parallels Desktop vs. VMware Fusion. Instead, it's based on "productivity" differences where Windows applications are launched from OS X or vice versa (like opening Mac Excel from a Windows Outlook attachment, or opening Windows Excel from a Mac Entourage attachment). In this case, Parallels has a nifty feature that allows associating Windows applications with OS X files and vice-versa, VMware does not, and in the test they count the time in VMware to save the attachment, manually launch whatever version of Excel, manually find the file, and then open it to the actual application results.

    For that reason, I think it's actually more a marketing tool to sell that Parallels feature (which is nifty) then a real comparison of the two. It'd be like a benchmark that relied on VMware's dual core support (where Parallels only supports one) and then built a suite of tests that relied on that dual core support to beat Parallels... it'd not really be a good comparison, but it'd be a great marketing tool. Or worse, a set of 64-bit Vista tests... oops! Parallels can't run that! And it wouldn't really be a test, would it?

    These forums are for mostly posting issues, i dont have & never have had any issues with fusion so in my opinion and many others its stable & reliable

    If i dont have any issues i cant post them

    Did you notice the amount of people in the thread i linked that have tried parallel's
    but then ditched it for fusion
     
  15. kamm macrumors regular

    kamm

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2008
    #15
    I don't get it: what has someone's personal opinion about some article has to do with MY OWN experiences? :confused:

    Similarly I don't see how the quantity of each side's fans becomes a decisive factor... :confused:
     
  16. cowboyswc thread starter Guest

    #16
    Interesting..

    You guys bring up awesome points. I asked myself many of these questions just 72 hours ago when I held them both sofware packages in my hand. After calling most of the Apple stores in the Bay Area, Fusion was recomended more times to me so I took back my un-opened Parallells. I also read that same article and it helped me make my choice. I went with the fusion due to everything I read about the dual core featur advantage.:cool:.
     
  17. Neil321 macrumors 68040

    Neil321

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2007
    Location:
    Britain, Avatar Created By Bartelby
    #17
    Kamm your own opinion counts,no one is saying the quantity
    of fans is the decisive factor

    That is why its been said so many times its up to the individual
    to make their choice.That is why they have trials

    You choose parallel's i choose fusion and we both have opinions
    thats not gonna change
     
  18. kamm macrumors regular

    kamm

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2008
    #18
    Exactly. Now I have to choose for another MBP and since it will run a lot more, 3D-heavy apps I'll re-test both again. :cool: Different machines, different purposes, different solutions...
     

Share This Page