UT2k3 sux on iBook G4...wtf???

stevegongrui · November 12, 2003 12:28PM

Hey Guys,

I was all excited about UT2k3. The installation took 3 hours. Then I finally got to launch it.

This is the sittiest I've ever seen. I was on lowest setting for all and at 640x480 and it still like...really sucked. I think something's wrong.

Note that I installed the new patch that is supposed to speed it up a great deal.

System: iBook G4 800, 256 ram.

Could it be because of the ram? One friend tells me that's the problem yet another friend tells me it wouldn't use that much ram and even if I had maxed it out, the difference would not be that big.

Help guys, I feel like I got ripped off from Apple

lkeller · November 12, 2003 1:02PM

Your iBook G4 is nowhere near what would be considered a graphics powerhouse. UT2K3 is a graphical powerhouse of a game. I downloaded the demo and had somewhat decent results in 640x480 with the pertinant opitons turned off. My system is a lowly 800mhz iBook G4 but I have the RAM maxed out. Or maxed out to the point that doesn't require me to remove an item soldered to the mainboard.

kecksy · November 12, 2003 4:33PM

Quote:

Originally posted by stevegongrui

Hey Guys,

I was all excited about UT2k3. The installation took 3 hours. Then I finally got to launch it.

This is the sittiest I've ever seen. I was on lowest setting for all and at 640x480 and it still like...really sucked. I think something's wrong.

Note that I installed the new patch that is supposed to speed it up a great deal.

System: iBook G4 800, 256 ram.

Could it be because of the ram? One friend tells me that's the problem yet another friend tells me it wouldn't use that much ram and even if I had maxed it out, the difference would not be that big.

Help guys, I feel like I got ripped off from Apple

Yeah, I'd say it's RAM. Do your self a favor and by a cheap 512MB stick from a 3rd party. OS X loves to hoard RAM for itself, so I'm sure UT2003 isn't getting enough if you have only 256MB.

nickgb · November 12, 2003 5:10PM

My standards for a decent FPS experience may be lower than yours, but I just tried the UT2k3 demo on my 800mhz G4 (640 ram) and results were better than I expected. Interestingly, the resolution I ran the game at seemed to make little difference to the performance - I've heard faking the lower resolution on the LCD uses CPU power, so that sort of makes sense. What mattered seemed to be the level itself - Antalus, the big outdoor map, was pretty jumpy, though playable. Even at 1024x780 with 32-bit color, the indoor map included - whatever that factory one is, don't remember the name - felt pretty smooth. I turned down details on the models because you don't really have time to look at them anyway, and that helped even more. Sorry I don't have any FPS numbers.. just going on subjective experience.

Given that the new patch increases performance on single processor machines and has some new optimizations for ATI cards, I feel pretty confident about buying the game - just going to wait till the next big Amazon sale. The real test for my new baby will be Halo, of course - I'm hoping (dreaming?) that the lowest-end rendering path (of the four available) will give playable results.

So... yeah. Maybe upgrade your RAM.

gargoyle · November 12, 2003 5:37PM

Damn you people... get a clue!!!

Laptops are not games machines

Before I switched back to an Apple, my PC had become basically a games console. It was specced as follows:-

P4 2.6

Abit Mobo with a 112Mhz FSB

512 Megs RAM

128 Megs Video Ram

nVidia Ti4600

And it was beginning to show its age, with the FPS dropping each time a new game came out... Games these days are VERY nice looking, this requires A LOT of gfx ram. They are also very large complicated beasties, which requires a lot of system ram, and a powerfull cpu.

My GFX card has 4 TIMES the RAM of that in the iBook, and would prolly only run UT2k3 on normal settings at high speed. Best settings for the game would prolly give my PC system trouble.

You iBook is only just a bit better than the minimum system requirements so set all the settings to the minimum, and then only expect slightly better than mimium performance.

Incase you hadent noticed, it gets my backup when some plant-pot like you comes on saying things like "Apple Ripped Me" cos I can't make instant quantum theory calculations on my 5 year old Bondi iMac 266!!!

</rant>

rok · November 12, 2003 6:29PM

hey, ut2k3 runs great on my dual g4, 32-bit, 800-600. not a frame lost. haven't tried it at other resolutions, etc., but i'm pretty darned happy (after having been relegated to an imac dv 400 and pismo 500 for the past three years).

stevegongrui · November 12, 2003 6:36PM

For clarifications, I have a new machine, and if I have the latest hardware, I expect to be able to run the latest software because if it couldn't, it shouldn't be sold as a current machine.

amorph · November 12, 2003 6:48PM

Quote:

Originally posted by stevegongrui

For clarifications, I have a new machine, and if I have the latest hardware, I expect to be able to run the latest software because if it couldn't, it shouldn't be sold as a current machine.

Showcase games like UT2003 are a special case, because they tend to push the available hardware envelope when they're first released. People buy machines just to play them.

What you're essentially saying is that every machine should be spec'd the same way; but the iBook is an inexpensive workhorse, not something you'd take to a LAN party to play the latest and greatest. It will run all the latest software - it runs the game, doesn't it? - but if you actually expect it to fly running UT2003, or Maya, or Mathematica, then frankly you went in with unrealistic expectations. People on the PC side spend two and three times what you spent to get a gaming rig. (For a real hoot, find a PC notebook that costs as much as your iBook and try running UT2003 on that.)

By your logic, Apple should offer nothing but the dual G5, because there exists recently released software that only runs well on the hottest machine available.

luca · November 12, 2003 6:55PM

Steve, I hate to break it to you, but you have a machine with:

1) The lowest of the low-end graphics among Macs

2) The slowest processor available in a Mac

3) Very little RAM

4) Low speed mobile components designed to generate less heat by not being as fast

5) The Mac OS, which is historically really bad at handling games.

My eMac isn't even a gaming machine. Yeah, it can play games, but a "gaming machine" really only includes G5s with at least a Radeon 9600 and 512 MB of RAM if you're looking at Macs. Among PCs, "gaming machines" have similarly impressive stats. Sure, you can play games reasonably well on lower end machines, but they're not game machines.

Buy more RAM and get back to us before you just start blaming Apple for ripping you off. If you want games build a $500 PC (it'll run current games well), a $2000 PC (it'll run future games well also) or buy a $150 game console.

zapchud · November 12, 2003 7:05PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Gargoyle

Damn you people... get a clue!!!

Laptops are not games machines

I strongly disagree with that statement.

They are maybe not the best for the purpose, but you ought to be able to run older games (UT2k3 is now more than a year old, not for mac, but it's still old) acceptably. The hardware that's in the iBook should be more than enough to push a game like UT2k3. If it doesn't run well, it's likely to be the fault of those who ported it (Westlake), for not optimizing it enough. That's very common.

But they shall have credit for doing the job of porting in the first place :-)

placebo · November 12, 2003 7:25PM

Would yoou like to use my "Finder-free UT2k3" app? (That's what I did with my day off yesterday) It kills the Finder, letting more memory be available to the game. I've seen 25-FPS boosts on my G5.

And it has a cute little icon.

Send me a Private message if you want it.

mcq · November 12, 2003 9:02PM

Didn't really read through the thread, but make sure you have the latest patches installed.

http://www.macsoftgames.com/products...3-Support.html

trumptman · November 12, 2003 11:17PM

I have a pretty decent PC. DDR-RAM, Radeon 9000, and a Duron 1300 processor. (Part of a motherboard/cpu combo sale)

Unreal Tournament 2003 just barely ran acceptable. Likewise I had a dual 1 ghz G4 with geforce4mx card. Unreal Tournament 2003 would still barely run tolerably.

Dude the gamers that dig on these games are spending $500 just for their graphics card. You bought your whole machine, a laptop to boot, for $1100 tops.

Buy all the nice year old games wandering on the Mac right now. It should play them fine. If you need the latest greatest, buy a console and sit in front of the TV. Then use your laptop via airport downstairs.

Nick

gargoyle · November 13, 2003 5:49AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Zapchud

I strongly disagree with that statement.

They are maybe not the best for the purpose, but you ought to be able to run older games (UT2k3 is now more than a year old, not for mac, but it's still old) acceptably. The hardware that's in the iBook should be more than enough to push a game like UT2k3. If it doesn't run well, it's likely to be the fault of those who ported it (Westlake), for not optimizing it enough. That's very common.

Quote:

For clarifications, I have a new machine, and if I have the latest hardware, I expect to be able to run the latest software because if it couldn't, it shouldn't be sold as a current machine.

Its not a case of how old or new the hardware is, or how old or new the game is. Its a case of numbers. As already mentioned, powerbooks and laptops use reduced performance chips in order to generate less heat.

Combine that with the fact that no matter how old a game is, you are still gonna need a shitload of RAM (dedicated video, or otherwise) to store the textures in while they are being mapped to the players and maps. Most powerbooks do not have a shitload of RAM.

If you really wanna play games on your powerbook, stick to something a bit less power hungry, and or FPS hungry. Tiger woods golf for example!

placebo · November 14, 2003 3:13PM

Here's the app.

Finder-free UT2k3

Click2unzip

Enjoy!

placebo · November 14, 2003 3:20PM

Quote:

Originally posted by nickgb

My standards for a decent FPS experience may be lower than yours, but I just tried the UT2k3 demo on my 800mhz G4 (640 ram) and results were better than I expected. Interestingly, the resolution I ran the game at seemed to make little difference to the performance - I've heard faking the lower resolution on the LCD uses CPU power, so that sort of makes sense. What mattered seemed to be the level itself - Antalus, the big outdoor map, was pretty jumpy, though playable. Even at 1024x780 with 32-bit color, the indoor map included - whatever that factory one is, don't remember the name - felt pretty smooth. I turned down details on the models because you don't really have time to look at them anyway, and that helped even more. Sorry I don't have any FPS numbers.. just going on subjective experience.

Is the factory level you are talking about called Asbestos? Asbestos is a relatively low-polygon level, that might be why.

nickgb · November 14, 2003 3:53PM

Yeah, that's the one. I played some CTF - both Citadel and Orbital2, today. I've knocked the color depth down to 16-bit - I don't really notice the difference after a minute or two (unlike those games that, in 16-bit, make everything hazy and grainy, UT seems pretty rich regardless). I've got bot detail and physics detail low, world detail normal and texture detail low. Detail textures off. Detail textures are real pretty, but it's only on the lower and lowest settings that the textures actually look boring. I tried running around with detail textures on and the detail setting at normal - not too much frameskip until I got in a fight. Yeah, it was gorgeous. But generally I don't have time to stop and admire the rivets on the floor. Also, the screen size of the iBook makes the tinier details so small anyway...

What I'd really like is

1) A better sense of the improvement I might see from the full version of 2k3, assuming I patched it.

2) Whether the vehicles, large maps, etc in 2k4 will be such a system hog that I shouldn't even think about it.

nickgb · November 14, 2003 4:11PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Placebo

Here's the app.

Finder-free UT2k3

Click2unzip

Enjoy!

Hey, thanks for posting this - couple small questions:

there's a folder called __MACOSX - should we use the application in that folder, or the one with the icon?

are there any problems using it with the demo?

noticed that it doesn't reload the finder on quitting UT2k3 - any risks involved with this, other than just rebooting finder from the dock?

newbie questions, but better to know than not...

res · November 15, 2003 3:00AM

On the PC side, my gaming rig, an Athlon XP 2100+ 512MB Ram and a 64 MB Radeon video card ran Unreal tournament very well, but it choked on UT2k3. I tried playing it for a little while, but it was just too frustrating for me to play.

Games like UT2k3 are put out with future hardware in mind, sometimes, when they are first released, no hardware can run the game with a constant high frame rate at full settings. Eventually the hardware catches up.

You just can't expect a current laptop to run UT2k3 well, at least not on the Apple side of things -- The Alienware Area-51M will get the job done.

ghost_user_name · November 15, 2003 3:14AM

Quote:

Originally posted by stevegongrui

For clarifications, I have a new machine, and if I have the latest hardware, I expect to be able to run the latest software because if it couldn't, it shouldn't be sold as a current machine.

Although everyone else has done a thorough good job of saying this, I feel compelled to say it myself too:

You're only fooling yourself.

I'll summarize.

1. You're using a notebook. Notebooks are not gaming machines.

2. You're using the lowest-end, slowest notebook available from Apple.

3. You're using an Apple notebook. Games are notorious for being "bad ports" that perform terribly and have little or no optimizations on Apple hardware.

4. You've only 256 MB of RAM. That's bare minimum for getting anything done in OS X.

5. You're using the most demanding game available. It chokes even the fastest PC desktops.

Case closed.

ghost_user_name · November 15, 2003 3:16AM

Quote:

Originally posted by nickgb

there's a folder called __MACOSX - should we use the application in that folder, or the one with the icon?

Looks like someone isn't using 10.3 yet.

That's the resource fork data of the app. The app may not run or may not run properly without it. You'll have to find a way of merging that with the data fork.

UT2k3 sux on iBook G4...wtf???

Comments