Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Enthusiast Zone > Gaming > Unreal Tournament is Carbonized!

Unreal Tournament is Carbonized!
Thread Tools
Leonard
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 29, 2001, 10:53 AM
 
Yes, yes, Unreal Tournament is carbonized. Unfortunately, it sounds like the carbonized version is still in beta and has a few known problems. See http://www.imgmagazine.com/news/stor...ArticleID=3895

Of course I'm sure Mark will have the known problems, eventually worked out.
Mac Pro Dual 3.0 Dual-Core
MacBook Pro
     
juanvaldes
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Seattle, WA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 29, 2001, 05:40 PM
 
yes it is out. I got it immediately. Run pretty good on my system DP 450 448 RAM rage pro 16meg

Launches is 3 bounces then 30 sec...

I am getting 30-50fps, under 9 I get 50-70fps, but then I am only using one CPU under 9.

Can't wait for Preview 2 (well, final release of course ) when there is OS X optimizations and my second CPU will help me kick a$$!

[ 10-09-2001: Message edited by: juanvaldes ]
The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions, that I wish it always to be kept alive.
- Thomas Jefferson, 1787
     
Macfreak7
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Macfreak7
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 30, 2001, 05:26 AM
 
exciting, really...
our PeeCee counterparts are about to see UT2 soon, and we are so happy that UT has been carbonized.. wow

who the hell said mac gamers dont take sh*t?
     
juanvaldes
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Seattle, WA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 30, 2001, 06:33 AM
 
Originally posted by Macfreak7:
<STRONG>exciting, really...
our PeeCee counterparts are about to see UT2 soon, and we are so happy that UT has been carbonized.. wow

who the hell said mac gamers dont take sh*t?</STRONG>
oh we do.

AOE2 next month, only two years after the PeeCee counterpart!

But mainly I am glad to see one of my favorite games being ported over to X, I use X only now, and I have completely stopped playing this game because it just wouldn't run in classic.
The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions, that I wish it always to be kept alive.
- Thomas Jefferson, 1787
     
yukon
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Amboy Navada, Canadia.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 30, 2001, 03:37 PM
 
howzit work in 10.1?

any real differences in speed/bugs?

does it have OpenAL in os9 (doubt it).
[img]broken link[/img]
This insanity brought to you by:
The French CBC, driving antenna users mad since 1937.
     
juanvaldes
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Seattle, WA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 30, 2001, 04:52 PM
 
Originally posted by yukon:
<STRONG>howzit work in 10.1?

any real differences in speed/bugs?

does it have OpenAL in os9 (doubt it).</STRONG>
many many bugs. My review on performance was under X.1
The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions, that I wish it always to be kept alive.
- Thomas Jefferson, 1787
     
alphamatrix
Senior User
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Mount Vernon, WA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 30, 2001, 07:26 PM
 
I'm getting a:
Class Actor Member Owner problem: Script=48 C++=52:

On the start up screen

Oh Well
I'll just have to wait for the next revision.
     
SpeedRacer
Senior User
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Istanbul
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 1, 2001, 07:56 AM
 
Originally posted by alphamatrix:
<STRONG>I'm getting a:
Class Actor Member Owner problem: Script=48 C++=52:

On the start up screen
</STRONG>
Same exact error here. After getting so pumped to see this game go X, definite bummer.

Also, my mouse disappears with the splash screen such that i cannot switch the video from Software to OpenGL.

Cube/500/384/Radeon here.

Anyone find a way around these issues?

Speed[/LIST]
     
<SteveS>
Guest
Status:
Reply With Quote
Oct 1, 2001, 03:44 PM
 
Originally posted by Macfreak7:
<STRONG>exciting, really...
our PeeCee counterparts are about to see UT2 soon, and we are so happy that UT has been carbonized.. wow

who the hell said mac gamers dont take sh*t?</STRONG>
What does UT2 coming soon to the PC have to do with UT being carbonized on the Mac? Sorry, but I fail to see the correlation. UT has been available for the Mac for a long time, about a month after the PC version.

I don't know about you, but I'm very excited about Westlake bringing UT to OS X. Considering they are not getting paid to do it, is even more reason to be excited that they have taken it upon themselves to bring this title forward.

Now, on a COMPLETELY different topic... When is the official release date for the PC version of UT2? I wasn't under the impression that it would be ready anytime soon. Also, considering the success of UT along with other games based on it's engine (for the Mac), it's probably a safe assumption that we'll see this title for the Mac as well. However, I wouldn't be surprised if the release wasn't simultaneous though. UT went under several major modifications on the PC side after it's initial release. It was no trivial task keeping the Mac version up to date. I don't believe Westlake was contractually bound to keep the Mac version up to date, but they did it anyway. My guess is that they don't want to get caught up in that cycle again and will wait until the UT2 engine matures a bit. That's just speculation on my part, but that may be an unpleasant side effect to porting code that was nowhere near complete in the first place.

Steve
     
graphixmaker
Forum Regular
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: San Diego, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 1, 2001, 09:00 PM
 
It ran great on my machine (G4 450 640mb OS X 10.1)

I don't mind not having the music, I just turn on itunes and get to playing. I had no obvious problems with it and it only crashed once. But I was also running Hotline Server and client, Fire, iTunes and a Htlone Bot in classic. So it easily could have been any of those that brought it down.
     
3.1416
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Feb 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 1, 2001, 10:26 PM
 
Originally posted by SpeedRacer:
<STRONG>Anyone find a way around these issues?[/LIST]</STRONG>
I had the same problem and ended up manually editing the UnrealTournament.ini file. In the [Engine.Engine] section change the GameRenderDevice line to "GameRenderDevice=OpenGLDrv.OpenGLRenderDevice ". Then in the [OpenGLDrv.OpenGLRenderDevice] section I had to add these two lines:

MinLogTextureSize=0

MaxLogTextureSize=10

After that, UT uses OpenGL and is fully playable on my G4/400 except for the sound.

[ 10-01-2001: Message edited by: 3.1416 ]
     
SpeedRacer
Senior User
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Istanbul
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 2, 2001, 09:42 PM
 
Edit

[ 10-02-2001: Message edited by: SpeedRacer ]
     
yukon
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Amboy Navada, Canadia.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 2, 2001, 10:13 PM
 
westlake put up a troubleshooting page at
"http://www.westlakeinteractive.com/utxnotes.html"

might help
[img]broken link[/img]
This insanity brought to you by:
The French CBC, driving antenna users mad since 1937.
     
niconono
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jun 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 3, 2001, 07:19 AM
 
Have the same "Class actor..." problem.
All I can say is that I installed UT under Classic for the occasion...
Now I guess I have to wait...grrrr..
     
Mskr
Forum Regular
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Savoy, IL USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 3, 2001, 10:48 AM
 
Originally posted by &lt;SteveS&gt;:
<STRONG>
Now, on a COMPLETELY different topic... When is the official release date for the PC version of UT2? I wasn't under the impression that it would be ready anytime soon. Also, considering the success of UT along with other games based on it's engine (for the Mac), it's probably a safe assumption that we'll see this title for the Mac as well. However, I wouldn't be surprised if the release wasn't simultaneous though. UT went under several major modifications on the PC side after it's initial release. It was no trivial task keeping the Mac version up to date. I don't believe Westlake was contractually bound to keep the Mac version up to date, but they did it anyway. My guess is that they don't want to get caught up in that cycle again and will wait until the UT2 engine matures a bit. That's just speculation on my part, but that may be an unpleasant side effect to porting code that was nowhere near complete in the first place.

Steve</STRONG>
It's actually "Unreal II", not "Unreal Tournament 2". Here's
the official site; there's no release date as yet as far as I can tell. Notice, though, in the FAQ they make a point of saying that U2 is only being developed for the PC at this point. I would guess this means "Windows PCs", as opposed to PS2, Xbox, GameCube, and (of course) Macs.
Software Architect, CodeTek Studios, Inc.

12" AlBook 867 (Combo drive) 640 MB/40 GB (work development machine) -- TiBook 400MHz/384MB/10GB (home machine)
CodeTek VirtualDesktop Pro: Power multitasking! -- DockExtender: Powerful, efficient launcher for Apps, Docs and everything else!
     
mrfrost
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Cybertron
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 3, 2001, 01:20 PM
 
On my G4/400 it runs like ****
Could this be because of my ATI rage 128 pro?
I have 576 MB ram

It is really unplayable
     
juanvaldes
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Seattle, WA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 3, 2001, 02:22 PM
 
Originally posted by Mr_Frost:
<STRONG>On my G4/400 it runs like ****
Could this be because of my ATI rage 128 pro?
I have 576 MB ram

It is really unplayable</STRONG>
It's your G4. I have the same GPU (rage 128 pro w/16m) unless they changed the amount of ram on the card. Aside from that, you have more ram but half the cpu's. Dp450. So that is probably to blame.

But I get the same frame rates that I do under 9 (little less) but UT still doesn't have any SO X code to make it take advantage of OS X.
The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions, that I wish it always to be kept alive.
- Thomas Jefferson, 1787
     
<Tim>
Guest
Status:
Reply With Quote
Oct 8, 2001, 04:51 PM
 
Originally posted by Mr_Frost:
<STRONG>On my G4/400 it runs like ****
Could this be because of my ATI rage 128 pro?
I have 576 MB ram

It is really unplayable</STRONG>
I have a G4/400 with 960 MB's RAM. It's very playable, though a bit slower than in 9. I'm not sure what your problem is, but it runs great for me!

Tim
     
GK
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Boston
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 8, 2001, 05:27 PM
 
UTX runs pretty slow on ly TitaniumG4, I switch to 9.2.1 only for
playing UT. I hope the next updates will be significantly faster than this beta.
     
NeilOB
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: England
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 8, 2001, 07:44 PM
 
Still waiting for that new final version of UT so that i can get my fps back up to 40 on my iBook 466. But thanks for the crappy preview Westlake. (no offense)
     
Geobunny
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 8, 2001, 08:15 PM
 
Originally posted by graphixmaker:
<STRONG>It ran great on my machine (G4 450 640mb OS X 10.1)

I don't mind not having the music, I just turn on itunes and get to playing.</STRONG>
That's not something I was ever able to say when running in OS 9 - that makes me very happy.

One small question though, is it not really odd playing without sound effects etc.? I used to do it at night 'cos I didn't want to wake people up and was too lazy to crawl behind my computer to plug my headphones in - playing in silence just got on my nerves eventually and got rid of my laziness!
ClamXav - the free virus scanner for Mac OS X | Geobunny learns to fly
     
<Rented Mule>
Guest
Status:
Reply With Quote
Oct 8, 2001, 08:58 PM
 
JuanValdes, you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

1. UT X does not take advantage of multiprocessor Macs. A Dual-500/533/800 will not make the game run faster than the single processor version of these computers (if applicable).

2. UT X obviously has been optimized for OS X in some areas since it loads extremely fast. The only optimization left is getting the frame rate up to OS 9 standards...and I believe that has nothing to do with OS X. The only thing that disturbs me is the absence of InputSprocket in OS X.

3. OS X 10.1 manages memory in a slightly different way 10.0.4 did. UT X crashes and slow downs in many cases are related to this and Adams has to fix it.

While I'm glad Westlake is porting lots of new games and some older games to OS X, I can see they also haven't a clue how OS X works. I thought I'd go into a seizure when I heard Aspyr announce that the Omni Group was to scrap their cocoa ports of many games Westlake was struggling to port over.

AFAIK, Omni Group had all their games cocoaized (if there is such a word) way, WAY before Westlake even started carbonizing these same games. Omni ports were optimized for SMP G4s but were held back because of the in-game video format (the name of this format escapes me) was incompatible with the Mach-o (cocoa) framework. This was indirectly Omni Group's problem but more directly the company that created this video format's problem.
     
JL!
Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 8, 2001, 11:44 PM
 
Maybe I'm dumb, but under OS 9.2.1 when I'm playing Unreal Tournament I get an error while the game is trying to open saying that it can't find OpenAL. What the heck is that?

I've just been going back to the 9.2.1 ONLY app because the Carbonized version is missing some stuff I want in OS X, and under OS 9.2.1 it gives me a different error (an assertion failure in some .cpp file, which is funny because it shows you how alpha this release is)

JL!
If senility were a race, I would win.
     
kingturd
Forum Regular
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Turdville
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 9, 2001, 02:25 AM
 
Originally posted by &lt;Rented Mule&gt;:
<STRONG>JuanValdes, you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.
2. UT X obviously has been optimized for OS X in some areas since it loads extremely fast. The only optimization left is getting the frame rate up to OS 9 standards...and I believe that has nothing to do with OS X. The only thing that disturbs me is the absence of InputSprocket in OS X.
</STRONG>
I think maybe you also have no idea what you are talking about. If you would read the Read Me file that came with UT X (or even then webpage), you would see that there have been 0 optimizations for OS X. The reason it does load faster is because classic does use the SMP in X to some extent... combine that with better memory management and you'll get a program that loads faster under classic as opposed to 9.

Don't criticize other poster's comments when you don't know any more than they do.
     
juanvaldes
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Seattle, WA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 9, 2001, 02:27 AM
 
Originally posted by &lt;Rented Mule&gt;:
<STRONG>JuanValdes, you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

1. UT X does not take advantage of multiprocessor Macs. A Dual-500/533/800 will not make the game run faster than the single processor version of these computers (if applicable).

2. UT X obviously has been optimized for OS X in some areas since it loads extremely fast. The only optimization left is getting the frame rate up to OS 9 standards...and I believe that has nothing to do with OS X. The only thing that disturbs me is the absence of InputSprocket in OS X.

3. OS X 10.1 manages memory in a slightly different way 10.0.4 did. UT X crashes and slow downs in many cases are related to this and Adams has to fix it.
</STRONG>

What the hell are you talking about?
I never said it used my DP. I was just stating what system I had. Also, I said that it runs SLOWER then in 9, but not by much.

If you had read the FAQ it stated that this is just a port, with no OS X specific code yet. I haven't noticed much if any speedup in load times.

So far so good for me
The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions, that I wish it always to be kept alive.
- Thomas Jefferson, 1787
     
clebin
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Cardiff, Wales
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 9, 2001, 06:08 AM
 
I'm just glad to see it - it was by no means certain that they would port it to X, and it's a freebie after all. I'm sure the programmer really appreciated the "thanks for the crappy preview". I'm convinced some people own Macs just to inconvenience themselves so they can whine and whinge about it.

Has anyone investigated if it's possible to upgrade the VRAM in a Titanium? It would make so much difference to UT to have 16 or 32mb in what isn't a bad 3D card.

The AL in OpenAL is Audio Layer. I wasn't aware that UT used it, or even that there was a Mac port..

Chris
     
pelorus
Forum Regular
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Northern Ireland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 9, 2001, 07:47 AM
 
Originally posted by &lt;Rented Mule&gt;:
<STRONG>1. UT X does not take advantage of multiprocessor Macs.

2. UT X obviously has been optimized for OS X in some areas since it loads extremely fast.</STRONG>
Ooookkkayyyyyy...

UTX does not "take advantage" of multiprocessing but it will receive some benefits in that jobs will be shunted onto the idle processor leaving more room for the good dtuff. Also it should eventually run at least at the same rate as in OS9 but with fewer "slowdowns" or "hiccups" due to network threads having to finish.

UTX probably hasn't been optimised at all - the speedup is more likely to be due to multitasking. Under OS9s inefficient multitasking an intensive thread has to complete before another can begin. In OSX this ain't so and threads can co-exist. a lot of "complex" things can go on at the same time in OSX.

I play Q3 and RtCW in OSX fine - without having to quit my web browser or mail client. I couldn't do that in OS9.
     
<Rented Mule>
Guest
Status:
Reply With Quote
Oct 9, 2001, 07:51 AM
 
Originally posted by kingturd:
<STRONG>

I think maybe you also have no idea what you are talking about. If you would read the Read Me file that came with UT X (or even then webpage), you would see that there have been 0 optimizations for OS X. The reason it does load faster is because classic does use the SMP in X to some extent... combine that with better memory management and you'll get a program that loads faster under classic as opposed to 9.

Don't criticize other poster's comments when you don't know any more than they do.</STRONG>
You must be retarded, kingturd because UT X has nothing to do with the Classic environment...it's a carbon application, it runs native. It would seem you know even less than I do, and therefore going by your logic you shouldn't criticize my post.

Originally posted by juanvaldes:
<STRONG>
What the hell are you talking about?
I never said it used my DP. I was just stating what system I had. Also, I said that it runs SLOWER then in 9, but not by much.</STRONG>
Maybe I misunderstood what you meant about UT X being optimized for dual-processor Macs when you said:

Can't wait for Preview 2 (well, final release of course ) when there is OS X optimizations and my second CPU will help me kick a$$!
...and...

Aside from that, you have more ram but half the cpu's. Dp450. So that is probably to blame.
Could you explain what you meant?
     
<Rented Mule>
Guest
Status:
Reply With Quote
Oct 9, 2001, 07:57 AM
 
Originally posted by pelorus:
<STRONG>

Ooookkkayyyyyy...

UTX does not "take advantage" of multiprocessing but it will receive some benefits in that jobs will be shunted onto the idle processor leaving more room for the good dtuff. Also it should eventually run at least at the same rate as in OS9 but with fewer "slowdowns" or "hiccups" due to network threads having to finish.

UTX probably hasn't been optimised at all - the speedup is more likely to be due to multitasking. Under OS9s inefficient multitasking an intensive thread has to complete before another can begin. In OSX this ain't so and threads can co-exist. a lot of "complex" things can go on at the same time in OSX.

I play Q3 and RtCW in OSX fine - without having to quit my web browser or mail client. I couldn't do that in OS9.</STRONG>
Of course it's going to get the benefits of OS X's SMP capabilities. But to claim UT X is optimized for Dual-Processor Macs is false. Quake 3 is optimized for dualies...Giants will be optimized for dualies. ST Elite Forces will be optimized for dualies...UT X isn't. And that's what I was trying to convey until you come and twist my words.

I know OS X can play DVDs, MP3s, download a file, all while I play UT X or Quake 3. I've done it before.
     
<Rented Mule>
Guest
Status:
Reply With Quote
Oct 9, 2001, 08:06 AM
 
BTW, UT X does use OpenAL...you can check it out in the .ini file.

For people that are experiencing random crashes and unexpected quits other than the ones listed on the official Westlake page, I found a .ini file on xlr8yourmac.com that somewhat fixes the problem.
     
<unregistered>
Guest
Status:
Reply With Quote
Oct 9, 2001, 03:01 PM
 
To the poster who mentioned the openAl problem - I also got this when returning to 9. Luckily I backup up the .ini files, as the read me suggested. Just replace the OS X .ini files with the two backup files (sorry, I forget which off the top of my head - again, it's in the read me.) And it should work great. Good luck.
     
juanvaldes
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Seattle, WA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 9, 2001, 03:46 PM
 
Originally posted by &lt;Rented Mule&gt;:
<STRONG>quote:
quote:

Originally posted by juanvaldes:

What the hell are you talking about?
I never said it used my DP. I was just stating what system I had. Also, I said that it runs SLOWER then in 9, but not by much.


Maybe I misunderstood what you meant about UT X being optimized for dual-processor Macs when you said:

quote:

Can't wait for Preview 2 (well, final release of course ) when there is OS X optimizations and my second CPU will help me kick a$$!


...and...
</STRONG>
Just that. When it is done with OS X optimizations. It will be alot like the change form Q3 in 9 to Q3 in X. A vast improvement.


Aside from that, you have more ram but half the cpu's. Dp450. So that is probably to blame.


Could you explain what you meant?
[/QB]
I believe the poster was blaming his Rage 128 for slow performance in OS 9. (I don't have the thread in front of me so this is memory.) I was stating that since there is no altivec code in UT and no use of DP's that he should have similar performance to me.
The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions, that I wish it always to be kept alive.
- Thomas Jefferson, 1787
     
NeilOB
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: England
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 9, 2001, 08:40 PM
 
Well, although it is nice to be able to play UT on 10.1, the gameplay is horrible. I'm still waiting for the next update!!!
     
NeilOB
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: England
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 9, 2001, 10:41 PM
 
Well, as much as i would like to be really excited about this release, i would have to say it blows, and i can't wait for the next one.
     
Frumpy
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Penfield, NY
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 9, 2001, 10:55 PM
 
I wish the people at Westlake would give us a version that actually worked instead of just teasing us!!!
Specs:12" PowerBook-1.33GHz, 768 PC2700, Airport Express, Panther (10.3.9), iSight, 15GB 3G iPod
     
SkiBikeSki
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Florida
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 11, 2001, 12:04 PM
 
I wish it worked for me. I have a QS 867 and GeForce3 and I want to see how good it is in OSX, but I get a error that simply says that UT X unexpectedly quit. That's it. I tried a clean install of UT GOTY and UTX and no better luck. I guess I have to wait for another release.
-- SBS --
     
Frumpy
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Penfield, NY
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 11, 2001, 08:32 PM
 
Well, if you really want this new version to work, and install, do this...
If it quits on you in OS X (the installer), do it in OS 9, NOT CLASSIC. Then go back into OS X, and it'll work. It'll suck, but it'll work.
Specs:12" PowerBook-1.33GHz, 768 PC2700, Airport Express, Panther (10.3.9), iSight, 15GB 3G iPod
     
SkiBikeSki
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Florida
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 12, 2001, 01:42 AM
 
The installer worked fine, it is UT X than quits everytime. I renders like a few frames, then quits. It does the same in 9 or X. It is so odd.
-- SBS --
     
   
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:03 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,