Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

schuey100 · May 25, 2004, 03:14 PM

Ok, I have a gripe! Well sort of

as I said I'm new to gaming (and also hijacking the topic here a little) but when I'm playing C&C I have to quit the game to access, say, my email!! Is there any way of not having to quit the game everytime you want to do something for 30 seconds on your Mac? It's very annoying and seems a bit silly to me?!?

Lateralus · May 25, 2004, 03:31 PM

You can hide some games using the 'Command + H' keys. And some games respond to Expose. Others, you have to quit to get to Finder.

schuey100 · May 25, 2004, 03:33 PM

Originally posted by PowerMacMan:
You can hide some games using the 'Command + H' keys. And some games respond to Expose. Others, you have to quit to get to Finder.

Thought so

C&C doesn't respond to hide or Expose

i5works · May 25, 2004, 05:08 PM

Originally posted by schuey100:
Ok, I have a gripe! Well sort of as I said I'm new to gaming (and also hijacking the topic here a little) but when I'm playing C&C I have to quit the game to access, say, my email!! Is there any way of not having to quit the game everytime you want to do something for 30 seconds on your Mac? It's very annoying and seems a bit silly to me?!?

You can play the game in a window instead of fullscreen. It's discused in the Read Me document.

schuey100 · May 25, 2004, 07:12 PM

Originally posted by i5works:
You can play the game in a window instead of fullscreen. It's discused in the Read Me document.

You are a diamond!!!

Brilliant. I really should have read the read me. Bad boy

altimac · May 28, 2004, 03:49 PM

i have a 400, upgraded to 1.3Ghz G4 640 MB ram and a Geforce 2MX and a AluBook 15" 1Ghz.
For me the game is *extremly* slow, every thing move slow-motion, in lowest settings...
i was addicted to this game 1 year ago on a friend's PC (1.4Ghz athlon, Geforce 3) and i'm really suprised to discover so bad performance on faster macs !
any one has a clue ?

thanks

i5works · May 28, 2004, 04:13 PM

Originally posted by altimac:
...and a Geforce 2MX...

Dump the MX class hardware. A 4Ti or modern ATI video card would work much better.

Luca Rescigno · May 28, 2004, 04:50 PM

My GeForce 3 in my 1.33 GHz G4 does a pretty good job as long as I use the lowest settings. In skirmish mode, that is. Campaigns are all in slow motion for me.

My brother's 1.4 GHz G4 with a GeForce 4 Titanium runs it really well, but still not that great compared with a PC he recently built for someone... he tried the game on that machine, a P4 2.8 w/ Radeon 9600 Pro, and it was amazingly good. All maximum settings, and it runs perfectly.

You really just need a very powerful graphics card. The processor isn't that important. I tried it with that GeForce 4 Titanium in a dual 450 MHz G4, and it was nice and fast. Not quite as great as with the 1.4 GHz processor, but it was close enough that you could tell that the graphics card is much more important than the processor.

altimac · May 30, 2004, 08:04 PM

i upgraded to 10.3.4, what a change !
the game is finally more than playable even in 1024*768 on both my mac (the PB 1Ghz is faster probably due to a better video card)

no slow motion at all

so if you really want to play this game, install 10.3.4 is almost a compulsory !

Leonard · May 31, 2004, 04:52 PM

Originally posted by altimac:
i have a 400, upgraded to 1.3Ghz G4 640 MB ram and a Geforce 2MX and a AluBook 15" 1Ghz.
For me the game is *extremly* slow, every thing move slow-motion, in lowest settings...
i was addicted to this game 1 year ago on a friend's PC (1.4Ghz athlon, Geforce 3) and i'm really suprised to discover so bad performance on faster macs !
any one has a clue ?

thanks

Get a better graphics card. You have a low-end video card.

As someone else said a Geforce 4Ti or a modern ATI Radeon card would help. Of course the question is what type of AGP slot do you have in that upgraded G4... a 2x or a 4x. If you have a 2x AGP slot, that may not help either.

DBvader · 03:32 AM

I wasn't happy with the way the game was running at 1024x768, but I thought that it was a very fun game. I decided to mess with the antialiasing in ATI's preference pane and run the game at 800x600. It worked and ran a bit faster, but I tried the game with the AA and anisotropic filtering at 1152x864 and the game was stunning (with a much better framerate). I must have forced a more efficient pipeline with my Radeon 9600. I got a similar framerate boost by upping the resolution in UT2K3 a while back.

It just seems contradictory. Maybe owners of macs with similar specs as mine (Dual 867/Radeon 9600/1 GB RAM) can get a similar boost in performance. good luck.

xmacintosh · Jun 1, 2004, 08:35 AM

I have an eMAC 1GHz with 512MB RAM and ATI video 32MB.

C&C is extremly slow, all move slow-motion, in lowest settings... I disabled ALL things (CUSTOM), set the screen to 800x600... and it's still SLOW SLOW! I updated to last version, and it's still very slow.

What's wrong???

X 10.3.4

jamesa · Jun 6, 2004, 07:56 AM

Originally posted by xmacintosh:
I have an eMAC 1GHz with 512MB RAM and ATI video 32MB.

C&C is extremly slow, all move slow-motion, in lowest settings... I disabled ALL things (CUSTOM), set the screen to 800x600... and it's still SLOW SLOW! I updated to last version, and it's still very slow.

What's wrong???

X 10.3.4

I have the same problem. I wonder what the go is? Powerbook 12" 1.33ghz... slow as hell, even on the lowest setting...

-- james

Lancer409 · Jun 7, 2004, 01:20 AM

this game was a cpu and graphics card intensive program on the pc, i dont doubt that it runs like phlem on alot of macs. i think the recommended pc specs were 1.8-2ghz or above when it came out ..

i think this game is alot more fun than warcraft iii, although i believe warcraft iii has more of a quality fit n feel to it. the graphics for generals (imho) is nicer, than warcraft III, but the storyline in generals sucked, it was mainly a series of training missions to get u ready for multiplaying (the levels really just introduce units and how to use them.

warcraft iii's small groups, unit cap, upkeep, slow damage (takes forever to kill things so u can micromanage with heal spells n stuff) isnt my type of play .. i always like command and conquer games more, because i prefer f22's to centaurs .. hehe ... sure magic is neat, and i have wariii on my pbook12 right now, but i like cnc games more (on the whole) .. nothing more fun than swarming with loads of tanks and infantry, or setting up pathfinders in key positions to pick apart infantry while u use jets for quick unit destruction/air support.

if you guys who have luck running mac's generals think its fun, u aint seen nothing yet. wait til you guys get ur hands on zero hours. heads and shoulders above the original generals. not a expansion as much as it's more of a standalone game. 9 different generals (as well as the 3 original generals) brings it up to 12 different generals to choose from, each with their own unique units, upgrades, bonus's (energy-powerplant upgrades for certain sides) ... damn .. the intensity goes up several notches. i wonder if a game like ccg/zerohour could have been optimized like warcraft iii though .. hrm ... would be neat.

gbafan · Jun 7, 2004, 12:14 PM

I didn't experience any performance problems playing the demo on my 12" PB Rev. B. I did notice that the gameplay is very slow compared to Warcraft III, so maybe this is what people think is a performance problem.

CnC has always been a slower paced series, units just don't move as fast as they do in a Blizzard RTS.

Luca Rescigno · Jun 7, 2004, 05:27 PM

Ever played it on a fast PC? Believe me, it's a fast game. The way the game handles slower hardware is by just slowing down the entire game rather than skipping frames. So if you have slow hardware the game will seem very slow... if you have fast hardware, it'll be fast. And it really IS fast. Soldiers SHOULD run at a normal-looking pace. Next time you play, watch the speed at which they put one foot in front of the other. If it's not a natural running pace, then C&C is slowing down to accommodate your hardware.

Cipher13 · Jun 8, 2004, 01:21 AM

I find it hard to believe that C&C Generals runs so poorly on my system (unplayable), while World of Warcraft is entirely playable.

Come on...

Lateralus · Jun 8, 2004, 01:31 AM

I must be the only person for whom the game runs well.

schuey100 · Jun 8, 2004, 04:05 AM

Runs well for me!

gbafan · Jun 8, 2004, 12:54 PM

Like I said, I don't have a problem running the game. I've always thought CnC games where slower paced, including Red Alert on the PC back in the day.

* shrug *

JHromadka · Jun 9, 2004, 04:07 PM

Anyone having problems with the function keys when on a PowerBook? I can assign an area to F1, but trying F2 locks the game until I click somewhere on the screen, and the area isn't defined.