Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

Frumpy · Apr 2, 2004, 10:41 AM

Riiiiiiight. So this seems like one of the greatest games out for the PC market right now, but when i look at the system specs, they say the minimum is a 1GHz, and the recommended is 2GHz. So i'm thinking that we'll NEVER see this on the Mac side. Am i wrong?

-Q- · Apr 2, 2004, 10:45 AM

I guess it depends on when the game would be released. I'd imagine by the time it would be ready, the 3 Ghz PowerMacs would be out and more machines in the mac lineup would feature G5 chips. Anything is possible.

So what's so great about this game?

Caesar2099 · Apr 2, 2004, 11:17 AM

What's so great about this game? Allow me to tell you... (if I sound like an advertisement it's because I'm a sell out)

Too lazy to list all of the reasons but here's a few, amazing graphics, best physics engine period, and intuitive and thoughtful AI. This game isn't exactly new and unique but it gets everything right. It succeeds in all aspects of the first person shooter.

Forte · Apr 2, 2004, 11:34 AM

They started releasing patches for it right after it was shipped, though. That's before it even hit store shelves!

That doesn't inspire a lot of confidence in me about the game's quality... (I'd be quite happy if my feelings on that are wrong, though)

busket68 · Apr 2, 2004, 12:02 PM

I've heard about it. What sounds REALLY great is that it's shipping WITH a map editor, that's intuitive and easy to use. You can basically build your own maps, and while you're building it, HIT a button, and BAM, you're playing the game. This allows you to fine tune your own maps really easily.

- Rob

Frumpy · Apr 2, 2004, 12:44 PM

Hey Mr. Sellout (it's ok, i'm a fan of the sell outs too), that little plug sounded an awful lot like what i heard about it on Xplay. Hmmm...

Vash · Apr 2, 2004, 02:25 PM

I hope it makes it to Mac OS X sometime...
I played it at a LAN on my friends PC for almost 2 hours, awesome game. Just amazing graphics and physics, massive beautiful levels. Oh, and he showed me the editor. It really is extremely simple, it looks like the WC3 editor, except you can go down into it instead of just seeing Birds Eye View the whole time. Terrain editing just like WC3 (Raise certain size areas by certain amounts or lower them or make trees etc...)

Caesar2099 · Apr 2, 2004, 05:13 PM

Originally posted by Frumpy:
Hey Mr. Sellout (it's ok, i'm a fan of the sell outs too), that little plug sounded an awful lot like what i heard about it on Xplay. Hmmm...

Hehe, that's why I'm a sell-out, I stole it from X-Play. Hmm I guess that makes me a thief then... Whatever I just watch Xplay for one reason... (I'll give you a clue, they're nicknamed "the Twins")

iOliverC · Apr 4, 2004, 04:43 PM

I've got this game on my PC, and I have to say, it is a little repetitive, but the engine + graphics are top notch. For example, you can handglide, be in boats, cars etc. All very realistic. You can even snipe birds

.

Adam Betts · Apr 4, 2004, 05:07 PM

Originally posted by iOliverC:
I've got this game on my PC, and I have to say, it is a little repetitive, but the engine + graphics are top notch. For example, you can handglide, be in boats, cars etc. All very realistic. You can even snipe birds .

How repetitive is it comparing to Halo? If Far Cry levels is anything like The Library, I'll avoid it

iOliverC · Apr 4, 2004, 05:46 PM

I guess its just all the jungle you get (which is where most of the levels are based), but the Jungle is very nicely done. Feels like games are finally moving to that next-gen stage. Where physics are life-like.

RayK · Apr 5, 2004, 10:43 AM

I am resisting buying this for the PC in hopes that there will sometime be a Mac port... hopefully sometime after I get a reversion A G5...

wuzup101 · Apr 5, 2004, 06:46 PM

I'm sure it would work nicely on a powerful g5 system with a respectable graphics card. That is if they make it (and I hope they do). I played the demo for pc and it did have some bugs in it, and since I just bought UT2004 I haven't purchased the full Far Cry version yet. I can tell you that it does bring even the fastest PC systems to their knees. When they say 1ghz min they mean 1ghz processor w/ a fast video card will get you next to no resolution and no effects. On my AthlonXP w/ 512k l2, 1gig pc3200, Radeon 9800Pro @(420/360) I still can't turn up everything and I'm running the demo at 1280x1024. Oh well... just means more time to study and dream about that powerbook/ibook i want/need...

itai195 · Apr 7, 2004, 06:18 PM

If it does come to the Mac, the specs will be astronomical. Admittedly I don't have the greatest PC, but I tried running it on a laptop with a 1.4 GHz Pentium M, 64MB ATi Radeon 9000 (I think it's a 9000... might be newer), and 512MB of memory and it was barely playable. I have a 1.8 GHz G5 with a better graphics card and more memory so it should perform better, but there always seems to be a performance hit when games are ported to the Mac. Anyway, they did just announce console versions...

Holigen · Apr 7, 2004, 07:34 PM

Originally posted by someone:
They started releasing patches for it right after it was shipped, though. That's before it even hit store shelves! That doesn't inspire a lot of confidence in me about the game's quality... (I'd be quite happy if my feelings on that are wrong, though)

That tells me that the dev team is committed to making the game as good as possible.

Forte · Apr 7, 2004, 08:09 PM

Originally posted by Holigen:
That tells me that the dev team is committed to making the game as good as possible.

I see it a bit differently, myself (maybe I'm a little cynical, since there are so many lazy developers out there these days) - I feel that if they absolutely have to patch it before it's even on store shelves, they probably haven't done an up-to-standard job on the coding to begin with. After all, if they were commited to a quality product, it would be as bug-free as possible upon release, and not require patching, right?

itai195 · Apr 7, 2004, 09:06 PM

Shoddy quality usually isn't the fault of developers -- it's either the fault of a shoddy QA process or producers and project managers who are more concerned with getting the product out the door than with quality. It's hard to imagine that a game that looks as good as Far Cry was developed by subpar programmers.

Forte · Apr 7, 2004, 10:56 PM

Originally posted by itai195:
Shoddy quality usually isn't the fault of developers -- it's either the fault of a shoddy QA process or producers and project managers who are more concerned with getting the product out the door than with quality. It's hard to imagine that a game that looks as good as Far Cry was developed by subpar programmers.

Well, Big Rigs Over The Road Racing *looked* good, but I don't really wanna go further off-topic than I already did... ^^;; (Sorry)

lenox · Apr 16, 2004, 12:09 PM

Originally posted by Forte:
....After all, if they were commited to a quality product, it would be as bug-free as possible upon release, and not require patching, right?

Would you rather they don't release patches at all, and leave the game broken on many hardware setups? I really wouldn't look down on them for being comitted to their product, and still actively working out any kinks that may arise in the incredibly complicated/segmented pc games market.

Frumpy · Apr 16, 2004, 12:18 PM

Amen, Lenox.....Amen.