2009 Macbook? Which one? White polycarbonate? Unibody? My 2007 MBP runs the game on high settings. I'd guess atleast medium settings would work. Probably not ultra, but there is a chance.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Starcraft II Beta Has Begun!
- Thread starter BradenG
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
2009 Macbook? Which one? White polycarbonate? Unibody? My 2007 MBP runs the game on high settings. I'd guess atleast medium settings would work. Probably not ultra, but there is a chance.
CylonGlitch
macrumors 68030
I sold three WoW Beta Keys on ebay for $300 each (a week before the end of the beta). Then when WoW came out, I happened to work across the street from a big computer store and was buying WoW 10 copies at a time and selling the keys on eBay for $100 each. Totally paid for my WoW account for several years.
Sceneshifter
macrumors 6502
bloody hell, the suspense is killing me, will this run or not on the macbook white 😱
There is a video of a guy running it on the X3100 card so that's good news (I mean, at least it doesn't get auto-rejected)! I would think Blizzard wants it to run on the macbook, as it represents a large base of mac users, no (totally just guessing, please don't get scientific about it)?
Is there anyone who is able to run the beta (for watching replays) on his macbook and wants to report some info about how it runs?
Like a user posted above, it runs WoW just fine, so shouldn't be a big deal then to run sc2?
There is a video of a guy running it on the X3100 card so that's good news (I mean, at least it doesn't get auto-rejected)! I would think Blizzard wants it to run on the macbook, as it represents a large base of mac users, no (totally just guessing, please don't get scientific about it)?
Is there anyone who is able to run the beta (for watching replays) on his macbook and wants to report some info about how it runs?
Like a user posted above, it runs WoW just fine, so shouldn't be a big deal then to run sc2?
It will run. The minimum specs are a Radeon 9800, which is like a 5 year old card. My 5 year old PB has a radeon 9700!
It may well turn out to not run very well on any macs other than Mac Pro's or iMacs with fairly good video cards. But I may be wrong, it depends how much multi-threading is going on in the release.
From what I can see on Video card rankings the Geforce 9600M GT in my 2009 17" MBP is actually rated less than a Radeon 9800 😱, and rated less than my Geforce 7600 GT AGP card in my old P4 2.4ghz box. (Which feels much slower to use than my MBP)
I won't be happy if my £1700 MBP can't run a game that has been in development far longer than it has been on the market, but if it does turn out not to run well I can stick £300 worth of bits and chips in a box and play.
This is the only game I've been looking forward too in a long time, I still play brood war every now and then, what a classic 😎
From what I can see on Video card rankings the Geforce 9600M GT in my 2009 17" MBP is actually rated less than a Radeon 9800 😱, and rated less than my Geforce 7600 GT AGP card in my old P4 2.4ghz box. (Which feels much slower to use than my MBP)
I won't be happy if my £1700 MBP can't run a game that has been in development far longer than it has been on the market, but if it does turn out not to run well I can stick £300 worth of bits and chips in a box and play.
This is the only game I've been looking forward too in a long time, I still play brood war every now and then, what a classic 😎
I'm with you. This might be the game that finally gets me to build that hackintosh I've been thinking about for a while.
As for the beta goes, I've reconsidered. If I get a key, I'm selling that ****. A few hundred bucks is worth way more than playing a buggy game a little bit early.
I read on the beta forums that someone had run Starcraft 2 via bootcamp at high, but not ultra.
The 9600 in the MBP can run Red Alert 3 at semi-ultra perfectly, so draw your conclusions from that.
The 9600 in the MBP can run Red Alert 3 at semi-ultra perfectly, so draw your conclusions from that.
As I said in a previous post, Macs within 3 years from now should run the game fine. Even on low settings the game doesn't look terrible and my friend's Intel 945 Core 2 Duo 2 GHz can run it on low.
My 8600 GT 256 MB runs the game fine in all circumstances on HIGH (not ultra - ultra is a little laggy) and runs great. This is also running it on an external 24" display @ 1600x1200
Edit: Also, the game is not multi-threaded. It only uses 1 core. Your biggest requirement is your graphics card and RAM I think. Depending on the card, your mileage may vary.
My 8600 GT 256 MB runs the game fine in all circumstances on HIGH (not ultra - ultra is a little laggy) and runs great. This is also running it on an external 24" display @ 1600x1200
Edit: Also, the game is not multi-threaded. It only uses 1 core. Your biggest requirement is your graphics card and RAM I think. Depending on the card, your mileage may vary.
Wow, thanks, that worked! 🙂
Ok just reporting that I am also running it on a 2007 MPB with bootcamp on but on lower resolution and 2GB of RAM. The recommended settings put almost everything on medium and it runs smooth until there are big battles then the frame rate drops down a bit. I haven't tried changing the settings yet to high, will try later.
I helped beta test the mac version of WoW, so hopefully I'll get a beta key eventually. What's the easiest way to re-submit sys specs and do you think that'll have an effect?
I've got my MacBook pro with a GeForce 8600M, but I want to try it also on my new MacPro Quadcore. It's too bad multicore doesn't help.
I've got my MacBook pro with a GeForce 8600M, but I want to try it also on my new MacPro Quadcore. It's too bad multicore doesn't help.
Just wanted to chime in with my results.
I have a 2008 iMac 2.66 Core 2 Duo w/ 256MB 2600 HD (Mobility, XT, whatever you wanna call it... that's a whole 'nother debate).
I am running at 1680x1050 and typically have well over 60fps and only in very large battles does that drop down into the 40s-50s. I haven't seen it drop into the 30s with these settings.
I have my game set at mostly medium and high, with the exception of shaders, which are low. I don't know why, but the shaders kill my performance. The game definitely looks better with them, but it takes a good 30% or so off my performance even at Medium setting.
Also, it should be noted that I'm not running my GPU at stock speeds. I've overclocked it roughly 20%, where it runs stably.
Anyhow, the game is certainly very playable on this machine, even without the overclocking. I am picky about performance and don't like to see my FPS drop below 40 in an RTS. If you aren't so concerned, you could definitely crank up the details and only see slowdown during large battles.
I have a 2008 iMac 2.66 Core 2 Duo w/ 256MB 2600 HD (Mobility, XT, whatever you wanna call it... that's a whole 'nother debate).
I am running at 1680x1050 and typically have well over 60fps and only in very large battles does that drop down into the 40s-50s. I haven't seen it drop into the 30s with these settings.
I have my game set at mostly medium and high, with the exception of shaders, which are low. I don't know why, but the shaders kill my performance. The game definitely looks better with them, but it takes a good 30% or so off my performance even at Medium setting.
Also, it should be noted that I'm not running my GPU at stock speeds. I've overclocked it roughly 20%, where it runs stably.
Anyhow, the game is certainly very playable on this machine, even without the overclocking. I am picky about performance and don't like to see my FPS drop below 40 in an RTS. If you aren't so concerned, you could definitely crank up the details and only see slowdown during large battles.
My two cents...
After playing the Beta and participating in the Starcraft 2 Beta forums, I can shed light on a few things here.
In terms of playability, literally almost any modern computer within the last 5-6 years that doesn't run on Intel Graphics can play it. For those that do, only the horrible old 64 MB integrated memory graphical cards would probably stutter. Otherwise, the X3100 should definitely be fine. Of course, you may need to play on completely low settings if you're using the lowest of the lowest specs, but it's PLAYABLE. Starcraft 2 comp. engineers definitely came through in making the game quite resource friendly.
In terms of Beta signups, Blizzard is inviting in Waves based on choices that they make up. Mac players will definitely eventually get invited as well. When? I don't know, but Blizzard will definitely end up choosing mac players before the Beta ends. Don't worry about your specifications too much, Blizzard is choosing almost indiscriminately, higher specs does not guarantee selection.
Finally, in terms of the game, it's definitely amazingly polished. Any ordinary developer would probably have launched years ago, but Blizzard is probably focused on making it perfect. The social system needs working though, it's still clumsy compared to something like steam, so count on Beta being around for a while.
After playing the Beta and participating in the Starcraft 2 Beta forums, I can shed light on a few things here.
In terms of playability, literally almost any modern computer within the last 5-6 years that doesn't run on Intel Graphics can play it. For those that do, only the horrible old 64 MB integrated memory graphical cards would probably stutter. Otherwise, the X3100 should definitely be fine. Of course, you may need to play on completely low settings if you're using the lowest of the lowest specs, but it's PLAYABLE. Starcraft 2 comp. engineers definitely came through in making the game quite resource friendly.
In terms of Beta signups, Blizzard is inviting in Waves based on choices that they make up. Mac players will definitely eventually get invited as well. When? I don't know, but Blizzard will definitely end up choosing mac players before the Beta ends. Don't worry about your specifications too much, Blizzard is choosing almost indiscriminately, higher specs does not guarantee selection.
Finally, in terms of the game, it's definitely amazingly polished. Any ordinary developer would probably have launched years ago, but Blizzard is probably focused on making it perfect. The social system needs working though, it's still clumsy compared to something like steam, so count on Beta being around for a while.
Ja Di ksw
macrumors 65816
That......sucks.
Can you say anything about the game itself? I see the zerg always getting slaughtered, are they underpowered or do people just not know how to play with them yet?
CJM
macrumors 68000
Yeah, judging from the top-tier replays I've been watching, all three races seem to hold their own quite well.
Roaches and hydras feel like a good combination, with mutas for some crazy harassment.
Zerg plays vastly differently to the other races, so naturally they take some getting used to. Queens must be used effectively in order to maximise larva output to keep troop numbers high.
Oh and in other news: I GOT A KEY TODAY YESSSSS, WHY THE HELL AM I AT WORK!? I CANT STOP FEELING EXCITED! ^^
hum,
many people here speak of all the technique details of the game, but what about the game itself, is it good ?
I've never played starcraft, but i'm a huge fan of warcraft 3, and I am not sure wether im gona like starcraft 2 or not.
For two main reasons, one is that there are no heroes, so the game play is very different on that side, and second, it seems to be a very fast gameplay, with lidle room for Micromanagment if you are not epileptic/PGM.
So for the people who actualy played it, do you think that starcraft 2 still can be enjoyable for people who like wc3 even if both game are not identical on the way they are played
many people here speak of all the technique details of the game, but what about the game itself, is it good ?
I've never played starcraft, but i'm a huge fan of warcraft 3, and I am not sure wether im gona like starcraft 2 or not.
For two main reasons, one is that there are no heroes, so the game play is very different on that side, and second, it seems to be a very fast gameplay, with lidle room for Micromanagment if you are not epileptic/PGM.
So for the people who actualy played it, do you think that starcraft 2 still can be enjoyable for people who like wc3 even if both game are not identical on the way they are played
CJM
macrumors 68000
Of course the game itself is good. It sure is difficult and feels faster than the original, but it's still loads of fun. Each race is radically different from the other, each unit filling different roles.
After the slower 'novice' matches, it chucks you in at a higher pace, but between the frantic action, there's still plenty of room for micromanagement, especially at the earlier game.
It is a different game to WC3, but then it's not WC3.
Other than that, it looks amazing and sounds amazing.
thank you for the reply 🙂
I guess I'll see when it comes out, after all it is still a blizzard game wich for me at least means a very good quality and effort put in the making. Until now I've never been decieved by blizzard, but I had some doubts because this one would be in competition with my nummber one RTS game,
I guess I'll see when it comes out, after all it is still a blizzard game wich for me at least means a very good quality and effort put in the making. Until now I've never been decieved by blizzard, but I had some doubts because this one would be in competition with my nummber one RTS game,
Ja Di ksw
macrumors 65816
3
1) I can't get majority of the playback on that teamliquid site to work, what program do you use to watch them?
2) Does anyone know of a good site for viewing information about the units in SC2? Most of the sites are either outdated and/or set up horribly, which is a shame considering the beta is out and people have access to all the units now.
3) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=joNPrnY4K_4
Holy hell. This changes the game from SC2 into SC2 + almost anything. I can't wait to play a 3rd person shooter in the SC2 universe! Been waiting for that about as long as SC2 itself 🙂. This looks AWESOME.
1) I can't get majority of the playback on that teamliquid site to work, what program do you use to watch them?
2) Does anyone know of a good site for viewing information about the units in SC2? Most of the sites are either outdated and/or set up horribly, which is a shame considering the beta is out and people have access to all the units now.
3) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=joNPrnY4K_4
Holy hell. This changes the game from SC2 into SC2 + almost anything. I can't wait to play a 3rd person shooter in the SC2 universe! Been waiting for that about as long as SC2 itself 🙂. This looks AWESOME.