Maybe I'm being unreasonable here, but I have been finding the minimum system requirements for many recent games really pushing the envelope for wide use (and PURCHASE). I wouldn't blame them for cutting the G3 loose, but I would think supporting the Digital Audio Powermac and up would be a concern for them, perhaps? Like, there are a lot of Macs of this speed and onwards up there, and that Mac was released in early 2001. That's not that long ago... is it?? Basically, you're okay (for now) if you run a Quicksilver Powermac or any eMac or G4 iMac. But even so, how much life is left in these prolific models??
Although I won't account for the graphic card requirements (higher requirements on that should be fair game), check out some minimum system reqs (I take any G3 compatibility with these particular titles with a hefty grain of salt):
Tiger Woods 2003: G3/350 -- but the demo runs like hell on my G4/450.
Lord of The Rings: G4/800, 2GB drive (no bold text there... because I'm getting numbed by this high spec )
Jedi Academy: G3/500! That's very surprising, given how nice the game plays -- most of the time. On my G4/450, things jittery once in a while. And sometimes your character goes just nuts when in battle. Could be me, though. If you're a Star Wars fan, this game rocks!BUY IT! I did ( demo available )
Spy Hunter: G3/600 (Mac Addict found this spec optimistic).
Return To Castle Wolfenstein: a modest G3/500 -- and a Radeon card. I only list this one to say that I found the game-play and graphics to be really nice on my Sawtooth.
Nascar 2003: G4/733 -- but is dual processor savvy, and they say a dual dual G4/500 would be fine [img]smile.gif[/img] Same specs for Nascar 2002.
Bloodrayne: G4/733 (Mac Addict said this was a demanding game)
Halo: G4/800 (1GHz G4 and Radeon 9000 recommended)
Unreal Tournament 2003: G4/700 (except 12" PowerBook manufactured in 2003... Halo must like a L3 cache -- but it won't run on a Mac sold only LAST YEAR?!), 3GB hard disk space!! [img]tongue.gif[/img]
So... as far as the Mac gaming industry is concerned, if you don't have the last G4/733 Digital Audio or newer, fuhgeddaboudit [img]graemlins/ptptptptptpt.gif[/img]
(hey, that aint too shabby a list of Mac games! And that's only the heavy CPU hitters!)
__________________ 32GB iPad 1 WiFi. 2011 Mac Mini Server (used as a workstation) 2GHz quad-core i7/8GB/1TB, 24" BenQ LCD, 17" NEC LCD, Magic Trackpad. MacBook 2.4GHz Core2 Duo/2GB/200GB/DL-DVDRW. Apple TV 2, 32" flat panel TV, Logitech DiNovo Edge BT keyboard & trackpad. >5TB of FW drives, 16GB iPhone 4S. In memoriam: my Sawtooth "Frankenmac" with upgraded dual 1.3GHz G4/2GB/360GB striped RAID/DVDRW/ATI Radeon 9000 Pro
Do you guys realize that 21 of the 24 games you listed are/were either:
a) Out already for consoles WAAAAY before the MacOS version
b) Are due out in the next few months (Call of Duty, UT2003) for the majority of consoles...
There are features that make a lot of these games actually more preferable to playing on a console anyway - i.e. Rainbow Six 3's AWESOME XBLive/PSOnline component and Halo's GODLY lack of problems with the high horsepower requirements - buttery smooth FPS throughout...
...and that's not even going NEAR the hideous lack of quality RPG's on MacOS (exceptions: Diablo series and Dungeon Siege)
__________________
Even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in a while...
I think that it's been mentioned many times before, the best systems to play games on, between Macs and consoles, are on Macs.
As for the game requirements, they are getting a bit high up there. This may be one problem that game developers themselves are contributing to, they're bringing out games that can only be run by a large minority of an already small small segment of the overall computing market.
Use your mid-level G4's for work, use your sub-$300 consoles for games.
And watch the Mac gaming platform disappear. If only users of recent Macs should be using Macs for gaming, there would be far from enough users to support this shaky industry.
What the Mac gaming companies should bloody well do is get on the stick with multi-processor support! then you can get those older duallies -- and the wallet carrying owners of said duallies -- into the game. Leave Mac gaming to the high-end only, and it will die.
__________________ 32GB iPad 1 WiFi. 2011 Mac Mini Server (used as a workstation) 2GHz quad-core i7/8GB/1TB, 24" BenQ LCD, 17" NEC LCD, Magic Trackpad. MacBook 2.4GHz Core2 Duo/2GB/200GB/DL-DVDRW. Apple TV 2, 32" flat panel TV, Logitech DiNovo Edge BT keyboard & trackpad. >5TB of FW drives, 16GB iPhone 4S. In memoriam: my Sawtooth "Frankenmac" with upgraded dual 1.3GHz G4/2GB/360GB striped RAID/DVDRW/ATI Radeon 9000 Pro
G4s have been lagging in speed a bit, so not too surprising. Games are not necessarily the best thing to take advantage of L3 cache or Altivec; correct me if I'm wrong.
One of the things I like about owning a PowerBook, instead what I used to own - a self-made PC, is that I am no longer tempted to upgrade my video card every 8 months.
As an embedded software developer myself, I am somewhat biased, but I believe consoles will take over high-end gaming. Steve Jobs has said that the TV is where you go when you don't want to think (read: you want to escape reality), and the PC is where you go when you do want to think, create, learn, etc. He uses this argument to justify not building a Media PC, but I think it speaks to this gaming issue as well.
Future consoles will use many processors, perhaps many multi-core processors. Console makers worry only about one type of performance, they have almost no compatibility issues to work out, and they can have their own OS. They don't have to release new hardware every few months. Sony's spending millions (billions?) to develop new chips just for gaming. The times they are a changing.
Go to Game.Ars and read the 2/5/2003 edition where they talk about the "rise of the console".
One more thing. There is a chance for PCs (Macs included) to regain their hardcore gamer status. Someone must innovate to create a game that is different in some way, that does something consoles can't do very well. Something where the higher video resolution is really important, for example, or where you need huge quantities of hard disk space. Or something else I haven't thought of ...
By the way, I finished the Halo Campaign on Normal difficulty yesssssterday.
I see you mentioned how much hard drive space these games take up - but if you consider the average Mac user has a 60 GB or bigger hard drive, I don't think that should be a very big concern to us.
__________________ ACMT Mac mini (Mid 2011) 2.7 GHz i7, 8GB RAM, Crucial M4 256GB SSD + 500GB + 1TB FW800 OWC Mercury Elite Pro mini iPhone 4S • iPod nano 8GB • Sound System Audio Engine A2 • Display UltraSharp U2412M 24"
i would much prefer to play games on my mac but it would be too damn expensive to keep up with system requirements.
i did as troutmagnet said, and kept my macs for work and bought an xbox. the only thing that sucks about consoles is the controllers. somebody should market a mouse keyboard combo that can be programmed and used with consoles.
i'm playing on a new 27" flat screen tv so that doesn't bother me so much - i thought i would miss the monitor.
I have Tiger Woods 2003 and play it on both my eMac G4 700Mhz and my Al Powerbook 1 Ghz.
My son has the 2004 version for PS2 and even he prefers it on the Mac. He says the Mac graphics are awesome compared to the PS2.
For the record, I emailed Aspyr to enquire when the 2004 version for the Mac would be released. Their reply was that they are not even sure they will make one for the Mac. Darn!
NOTICE: If you see links to ads in the above post, blame the ad-linking software used by the owners of this website. I do not endorse these ad links. Don't click on them.
)
( 
)
Linear Mode
