PC game on iMac running parallels...

Discussion in 'Mac and PC Games' started by acortes, May 6, 2011.

  1. acortes macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    May 6, 2011
    #1
    Good morning,

    I hope this is the right forum to ask this question:

    I am planning on buying the new 27" iMac with Parallels installed in it. The question is Would I be able to play Battlefield 3 (with no problems) on my iMac? :confused:

    Thanks for your replies
     
  2. Mackilroy macrumors 68040

    Mackilroy

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2006
    #2
    Not with Parallels. If you want performance you'll have to install Windows via Boot Camp.
     
  3. doh123 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2009
    #3
    For playing games on Mac OS X you have a few options.

    For best performance and ease of use, you have Bootcamp, which is a tool that lets you install Windows 7 and dual boot your machine. This lets you turn the machine on in either Windows like a normal PC, or in Mac OSX, but you have to do a full restart, you cannot run both at once.

    For the next best performance, but with the most compatibility issues and often more difficult to get working, you have tools based off Wine. Wine is software thats made to allow Windows software to directly run on different OSes... it does NOT require Windows at all like the other 2 methods do. Normal WIne is not for the normal user as you have to compile code yourself and run everything command line. Instead its better for most users to use different software packages designed for the mac that use Wine.

    Wineskin is a package that lets someone attempt to port a Windows program (mainly used for games) over into a Mac OS X app. Crossover Games is a (not free) tool that aids in running Windows games directly on OSX... it is much more user friendly than trying to port it to a full app like Wineskin, but there is much less customization available and you are less likely to get a program to work, if your technically inclined. If you don't feel like digging in deep into getting something ported, its easier for most users. As a full disclaimer, I love Wineskin because its my baby... I started the project and do almost all of the work on it, but making a Windows app into a Mac app and running it like normal on Mac OS X is my preferred choice.

    Then lastly you have Virtual machines like Parallels and VMWare. While compatibility issues are often less than something Wine based, since its a total virtual machine running a real copy of Windows, it usually takes a bigger hit in performance than Wine... even though they actually use some Wine code for handling Graphics in Parallels, there is just much more work on the computer running a whole virtual computer and a full OS. If its a very old low performance game, and you do not feel like trying to get it to run under Wine, or minor compatibility issues prevent it from running with any current version of Wine, then this is a good way to go, since you can run it on top of OSX and you do not lose all access to OSX like you do with a Bootcamp install.

    All that said, Battlefield 3 is untested, and we do not know if it will work with anything Wine based right away, or if it will take some improvements to Wine.... we also cannot know if it will run in a virtual machine correctly, but if it does it will most likely be extremely slow and no playable. Your option to be able to play decently right away would be a Bootcamp install since then your mac really is turned into a normal PC.
     
  4. superericla macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    #4
    In my experience I've gotten better frame rates in Parallels than I did using a wineskin. When I used the program in wine it didn't recognize that I had a multicore processor which is likely one of the main reasons for this.
     
  5. PowerGamerX macrumors 6502a

    PowerGamerX

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2009
    #5
    Funnily enough I get a lot of games to work by using Wineskin then running the actual app through Crossover. For whatever reason that gets a lot of games that I can't get working on one or the other to work. World of Tanks comes to mind. Though mouse look still doesn't work.
     
  6. acortes thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    May 6, 2011
    #6
    Thanks for all your replies, especially Doh123, for your detailed answer. I guess is going to be bootcamp (as I am not on the techie side) or just dust off my "old" pc used exclusively for games...

    Thanks again to all
     
  7. doh123 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2009
    #7
    Wine is so picky... it can bd tough getting games to work. But What I made sure in Wineskin is that its a self contained app. i got sick of finally getting a game to work, then Crossover gets and update and breaks it... When you get it ported and working with Wineskin, its its own app and it keeps working! Wineskin has come a log way since it started, there still some problems, but with 2.x and WS7 engines, its running pretty much just as good as Crossover in most things, and I even have Crossover Wine version built engines available :) Codeweaver's still has a large team (relative to just me by myself), so they can focus more on specific titles to support where I barely keep up with it by myself... I in no way care to compete with them, as they help make Wine much better. I just basically started making the tool for me, and Portingteam.com, but it just kinda took off and I thought I'd share it with anyone who wanted it :)
     
  8. I AM THE MAN macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2011
    #8
    To me, I just don't like Wine because when I first tried it out (which was about a year ago) it lagged and barely supported some of the vital applications, etc.
     
  9. turbobass macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 25, 2010
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #9
    If you want to play Battlefield 3 you should either get a PC

    OR

    Get a PS3 / Xbox and your iMac -- which is what I recommend.

    Honestly, I understand the reasons for PC gaming (and myself started on the PC) but I think you're going to get a sub-par experience on the Mac. I would LOVE to be proven wrong as I am eyeing a souped-up i7 (the top of the line one) and would love it to play games but honestly I think you're better off with a console if you are playing casually and not a super gaming nerd.
     
  10. TallManNY macrumors 68040

    TallManNY

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2007
    #10
    Interesting discussion about Wine. I'm considering some PC gaming once I upgrade my Mac. I console game right now. But lets face it, the Xbox hardware is getting pretty long in the tooth. My next iMac is going to blow it away hardware-wise. Since I haven't heard a peep about next generation console rumors, we might still be three years away from Xbox 720 (I'm spinning my wheels). I don't see how the programers can keep making the console games compelling against game play on $2,000 machines with up-to-date hardware.
    Sure Bootcamp might be the best solution, but Windows 7 is $200. I have no need for any Win-dohs (no offense doh) program that isn't also available in OS format, so I would just be buying it for gaming. That's a big expense just for the benefit of playing a PC game versus the Mac games.
     
  11. turbobass macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 25, 2010
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #11
    Ridiculous and wrong. Developers are just as of recently starting to take full advantage of the firepower in the last gen of consoles. Have you SEEN Gears of War 3 or Bulletstorm (both Epic, I know)? You can't honestly say "long in the tooth" so dismissively -- I played both last night and they looked great. It takes years for developers to unlock the full potential of hardware because frankly it's quite difficult to do and also the more DETAIL the higher the COST.

    Haha. Right. You're forgetting that its an interaction between hardware and software. These console games are fully optimized. How about you post a pic of any contemporary console (or PC) game (Gears, MK9, Black Ops, Crysis 2) ported to your iMac when you get it so we can see how "blown away" the competition is?

    The general consensus is 2014 ( http://kotaku.com/#!5794000/microso...or-new-consoles-leaving-nintendo-in-the-clear ). Scuttlebutt says that Nintendo is announcing a more "harcore" offering this year.

    Scratching my head here again. You say "compelling" like XB360 and PS3 have Gameboy graphics. Again, have you SEEN these games? They look better and better with each new release (generally).

    Uh huh. You seem like you're ALL about the bleeding edge in gaming. Have fun trying to keep your iMacs 3D card to the newest and top of the line.
     
  12. PowerGamerX macrumors 6502a

    PowerGamerX

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2009
    #12
    The Xbox is long in the tooth. Most games run at 720p, just because they are just maxing out the hardware now doesn't mean that the hardware itself isn't long in the tooth. It is. Hell, when it was first presented it was running on custom G5 towers. PC's surpassed the power of the current gen consoles a while ago.
     
  13. turbobass macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 25, 2010
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #13
    Have you heard of the PS3? That has more hardware power than the XB360 (I guess you guys would light your torches at this point and cry "long in the tooth!"). Some games look better on PS3. Some games look worse (ports). So, within the console world the X360 is already not the fastest. But the thought that your iMac (or PC for that matter) is going to create a whole new contemporary experience and leave your old outmoded console in the dust is totally ignoring the software side of the development cycle.
     
  14. PowerGamerX macrumors 6502a

    PowerGamerX

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2009
    #14
    Considering the PS3 is the only current gen console I own, I know a bit more about it's performance.

    I don't think anybody is claiming that PC's give a new amazing graphical experience but fact is the PC version will almost always look better than the console version on capable hardware.
     
  15. Mackilroy macrumors 68040

    Mackilroy

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2006
    #15
    The PS3 doesn't have more hardware power than the Xbox – not on the GPU side. CPU, perhaps, but even then it's largely a wash.

    I'll go with a PC over either, and I own all three.
     

Share This Page