OFFICIAL BF1942 & BHD Reviews

[BTs_Mysterio]

Agreed Nomad.

[Saberian 3000]

Hmm, well the reviews of this are kinda odd cause we at Apple were lucky enough to be the first to beta test the BF 1942 in 20 player LAN games and it ran pretty damn well from what I was looking at.  Considering that I used a 15" 1 ghz Imac for one test, an 800 mhz Emac for the 2nd and a dual 2 gig G5 for the third.  We had gotten ahold of copies of the game with the Asypr reps hosting the games for us and we had no problems playing the game.  Granted on some of the slower machines we had to turn down the graphics settings but it is very odd that Nomad was experiencing that many issues with the game when we actually ran it on machines that were way slower then what he had, single processors, and still we had no issues.  Well, at that time there were still a lot of graphical glitches and on the 2nd release of the beta test before the testers actually got to try it there was a gun glitch.  Other then that the game ran prety damn good from what I have seen of it.  So I am under the assumption that there was something not set correctly on your computer there bro, cause I have had no issues with the game other then the graphical issues that we have already SS'ed and recorded at that time.  And I can also say that I had 12 tech agents and 6 other assorted Apple employees with me testing them out as well with little to no issues, including some bringing their own Powerbooks with 32mb graphics cards.  Talk about low end, but let's face it, the Imac and Emac I was using were also using the 32mb cards as well.  Again, little to no issues as long as the graphical settings were on low.  Personally I dont always speak up in this case when it comes to computer games but I think BF 1942 is a great job when it comes to the porting of the game and have seen much worse when it comes to games that other companies have put out.  Sure, there will be other glitches that will need to be fixed, but I always thought that they came out with the game a little too soon.  Anyway, that is that.  

:MoD:Saberian

[KoS.Rebel]

Noms, i see your point, and hell i would feel cheated if i bought the new version of AA cause it runs like crap also.  But what you have to see is that those system requirements are what it takes to run the game, not play perfectly. Im running on a dual 867 which exceeds the requirements but it still runs like crap. Noms, to fix that MP screen, im pretty sure all u have to do is bump ur resolution to 800x600. Keep everything on low and turn off everything that shouldnt be on just bump ur res up a bit and that should fix the screen. Your res shouldnt really upset ur FPS i think but try bumping it and tell me what happens.

[BTs_Mysterio]

Rebel, there is truth that some ports have been done better than others. They Quake 3 engine (originally) was a better port than Unreal's (2003) engine. That's a ok example but I'm just trying to let you know that some times ports have lazy errors in them. ie:

Unreal 2003 Released - FPS between 60-90 on G5
Unreal 2003 Fixed via huge update- 200+ FPS on G5

That's the same computer. The person who ported the game went back and looked over how he did it, saw mistakes and fixed them. (Open AL was the problem in that case, along with a few other sloppy errors). Getting my point yet.

[KoS.Rebel]

Myst, the quake engine in itself is awesome. CoD runs on Quake engine and so does SoF2. That is why they get high FpS. Games like RvS dont, same with BHD and BF9142.

[BTs_Mysterio]

<shakes head at rebel for talking to me like I don't know this>

The fact is that these games can't compare on a midrange machine to a PC version on a midrange. You could argue that they aren't similar in power , but they are. There are games that are optimized well in porting. Most aren't. Be it for speed or money, they need to work on such skills.

[crypt]

UT owns on high end machines, Quake owns on all machines, period.

[BTs_Mysterio]

For anyone with High End machines Unreal is much much better than Quake. Unreal is probably going to stay on top due to the beautiful integration of vehicles that Quake 4 seems to have no sign of. All that Quake 4 has running for it is Doom 3.

[KoS.Rebel]

Im not a fan of vehicles.... so ill take Quake engine any day. Vechiles to me ruin the game....IE bf1942....had to make the maps bigger to support vehicles and it didnt make it any better in my mind. Didnt play the new UT but the only successful game that has used vehicles is Halo. Other then that...leave CoD with no vehicles and pwn.

[BTs_Mysterio]

Try Ut2k4. That's the best vehicle support in any game. There are weapons to take them down and it's even with their own advantages. Try it.

[|MP|Nomad]

Noms, i see your point, and hell i would feel cheated if i bought the new version of AA cause it runs like crap also.  But what you have to see is that those system requirements are what it takes to run the game, not play perfectly. Im running on a dual 867 which exceeds the requirements but it still runs like crap. Noms, to fix that MP screen, im pretty sure all u have to do is bump ur resolution to 800x600. Keep everything on low and turn off everything that shouldnt be on just bump ur res up a bit and that should fix the screen. Your res shouldnt really upset ur FPS i think but try bumping it and tell me what happens.

Rebs, go back and read my first post.  I already used all the different Rez settings, ALL of them, and no change.

[BTs_Mysterio]

Nomad, don't be so shocked. BHD isn't that good yet is so over done. You should trade it in for a equal game. i.e. CoD, UT2k4, MoH:BT, and so on. OR buy Max Payne 2 for console! HURRAH FOR PAYNE.

[|MP|Nomad]

MoD Saberian, thanks for replying.  I think there was a misunderstanding on your part or perhaps I didn't explain myself well, my issue is not BF 1942, that game runs fine, definelty playable and can have fun, infact, now that I installed the Desert Combat mod, its even more fun and I find that it runs better and the graphics look much better and the sounds are more accurate to the weps being utilized; so the issue is not BF1942.

My problems are directed strictly to Black Hawk Down. However, although your suggestion was directed towards BF'42  (I think), I thought the same exact thing, that is has to be one of my settings on my end that I am either not selecting or need to deselect, I just don't know.  Can you help?

Also, if you or anyone else, want to see the SS's I took about the MP screen in BHD not being legible, send me an email to mpnomad@rogers.com with the subject heading, BHD Screen Shots, I will forward them to you.  Thanks guys.

[|MP|Nomad]

Nomad, don't be so shocked. BHD isn't that good yet is so over done. You should trade it in for a equal game. i.e. CoD, UT2k4, MoH:BT, and so on. OR buy Max Payne 2 for console! HURRAH FOR PAYNE.

Hey Myst, I know what you mean, but still doesn't change the way I feel about this game (BHD) and how its not working for me and I don't know why  .  I mean, if its ignorance on my part b/c its something I'm doing or not doing, I would be the first person to apologize for my comments towards Aspyr, but again, as I said before, I have nothing but respect for Aspyr and the opportunities they give to us Mac gamers.

Also, I already have CoD (as the thread indicates  ) and I don't really like MOH:BT and never really liked UT after MOH came out for Mac.

[BTs_Mysterio]

Come on you know you wanna try UT2k4. At least try the Demo. Onslaught owns.

[|MP|Nomad]

Come on you know you wanna try UT2k4. At least try the Demo. Onslaught owns.

OK, I admit, I did like UT when it first came out for mac .   I liked it b/c there werent many FPS games out for mac then.  But I can't remember when this was or what version UT it was either.  

Anyway, can you give me the link, to DL the demo?  I may try it.  Also, I heard its like 4-6 gigs in size? how many cds/dvds does it come with in the box? (i know, do the math, too tired/lazy tonight)

[BTs_Mysterio]

It's 200MB.  You can DL it anywhere.

[|MP|Nomad]

Oopps I just replied to this thread with a post meant for another thread, sorry  

[-V-]

I just got a copy of BHD, it runs very fine on my dual G4@1.42ghz with a Radeon 9700pro and 1.5GB ram.
I use 1024x768 rez and all settings on normal 4 MP.
Singleplayer runs fine with all settings on high too.

[Cobra]

Myst, the quake engine in itself is awesome. CoD runs on Quake engine and so does SoF2. That is why they get high FpS. Games like RvS dont, same with BHD and BF9142.

The QuakeIII engine is also over half a decade old, and from a technological standpoint is trumped soundly by Epic's Unreal Engine 2 (found in UT2003/2004 and derivatives like RvS).  It's not exactly surprising that it runs faster.  Not to say QIII-based games aren't pretty or making excellent use of what's available ? some of them are both ? but I wouldn't stack the QuakeIII engine higher than UE2 just because it achieves higher framerates...

But as far as the games go, CoD is teh 1337|\|355.

Oh, and if you haven't seen the video showing off Unreal Engine 3, go download it.  NOW.