[redJag]

hey they're taking signups for the beta test of the expansion. AND THERES A MAC OS X BETA! ok, sorry if you all knew about this.

[Rabid Duck]

Actually, it's that last part that concerns me. Blizzard's beta signup page says "On the Macintosh, you must be running Mac OS X 10.1.3 or later." In OS 9.2.2 the game runs choppy enough during large battles-- in Jaguar it's much, much worse. I sincerely hope Blizzard isn't cutting OS 9 support completely from the WC3 expansion.

[xyber233]

Well maybe it will run well if they only have to worry about an X version.

[Dex13]

Originally posted by xyber233:
Well maybe it will run well if they only have to worry about an X version.

I agree

[redJag]

I really really doubt that the expansion is going to be cocoa. They will almost certainly support OS 9. This, to me, is only an indication of their concern of Warcraft III in OS X.

[Rickster]

A project doesn't have to be Cocoa to be OS X only. Many "Carbon-based" APIs aren't available in CarbonLib under OS 9, and OS 9 doesn't support the newest features of OpenGL either. But most importantly, cutting off OS 9 support in a Carbon project means you don't have to test your code in in and optimize it for two radically different operating systems.

As for speculation on whether Blizzard might take that step... *shrug*.

[Akarso]

Originally posted by Rabid Duck:
Actually, it's that last part that concerns me. Blizzard's beta signup page says "On the Macintosh, you must be running Mac OS X 10.1.3 or later." In OS 9.2.2 the game runs choppy enough during large battles-- in Jaguar it's much, much worse. I sincerely hope Blizzard isn't cutting OS 9 support completely from the WC3 expansion.

WC3 works great on my MDD. it's running 10.2.4, dual 867, ati radeon 8500. maybe you're experiencing slow down because of your hardware setup?

[xyber233]

Most people have performance problems in X, even those with the new 1ghz iMacs. Hopefully performance will get better seeing as thats the only reason I have to boot into 9.

[Gul Banana]

When using Dad's dual GHz machine + Geforce 4, we certainly do not have performance problems in Warcraft III. With all settings at maximum, the game is completely smooth no matter what you throw at it.

The game may be a cpu-taxing one (RAM also makes a very big difference) but does not have inherent problems. It's just slow on slower/older hardware. On my G4/400 tower it's barely playable, and on my iBook 800 it's perfect in single-player but slower in multiplayer. All machines are running OS X.

I guess my point, assuming I have one, is that for more modern machines playing it in X is not a problem.

[xyber233]

Yeah, but when I boot into 9, everything is fine. It is smooth and looks great. But when I boot into X, it is barely playable in single player. I'm just hoping they can get X performance closer to 9 performance.

[::maroma::]

Originally posted by Gul Banana:
When using Dad's dual GHz machine + Geforce 4, we certainly do not have performance problems in Warcraft III. With all settings at maximum, the game is completely smooth no matter what you throw at it.

The game may be a cpu-taxing one (RAM also makes a very big difference) but does not have inherent problems. It's just slow on slower/older hardware. On my G4/400 tower it's barely playable, and on my iBook 800 it's perfect in single-player but slower in multiplayer. All machines are running OS X.

I guess my point, assuming I have one, is that for more modern machines playing it in X is not a problem.

I tend to believe this to be true. Blizzard made a heavy game. It doesn't really follow the light feel of Starcraft or Warcraft II. The fact that it's 3D instead of 2D, is I think the biggest issue. I know that I assumed it would run fine on my aging G4/500 before it was released, since Starcraft runs like a damn champ. But the harsh reality of progress set in when I tried to play it in X.

I'm in the process of saving for a new Mac. Hopefully I'll get one before this game becomes obsolete, and WC4 brings my new machine to it's knees.

[xyber233]

I have a 700mHz LCD iMac w/ 640 mb RAM. It runs great in 9 so it isn't really a hardware problem. It runs like crap in X compared to it. Sure WC3 is a demanding game but its hard to believe how much of a perfomance hit running in X is.

[redJag]

Originally posted by Rickster:
A project doesn't have to be Cocoa to be OS X only.

No, but if it were in cocoa it would be OS X only. This is why I went on to say "They will almost certainly support OS 9". Personally, I would love it if it was OS X only as long as it ran at least as well as it does in OS 9 currently. But Blizzard has always supported older computers and therefore I guarantee that the exp. pack will run in 9.

[rbarris]

To un-muddy the waters about this, some tidbits about Warcraft III Expansion and the Mac beta:

a. system / OS reqs for final product are not expected to change from the base product. OS9 support is not in danger of being dropped for final release.

b. Expansion beta is for OSX only, the main reason being we are on a very short timetable to get it ready, and the double testing that would be required to allow an OS9 beta was an issue. That's really all there is to it, there isn't a change to Cocoa or anything drastic like that. Warcraft III Expansion on the Mac is a Carbon CFM/PEF app just as Warcraft III was before it.

c. there are a number of new optimizations being done, some are finished, some are in testing, some are planned to go in between beta and final release. The majority of these will go into War3 non-Expansion patches as well. Some of them help G4 processors, some help OSX systems, and some of them are good for everybody.

Rob rbarris "at" blizzard.com

[xyber233]

Thanx for clearing that up .

[::maroma::]

Yes, thanks for giving us the scoop. It's good to know what's going on as far as development over there. Glad to see that improvements are being made on Blizzards part. Now we just need to get Apple to update the damn drivers to get them up to par with 9.

[juanvaldes]

Originally posted by ::maroma:::
I tend to believe this to be true. Blizzard made a heavy game. It doesn't really follow the light feel of Starcraft or Warcraft II. The fact that it's 3D instead of 2D, is I think the biggest issue. I know that I assumed it would run fine on my aging G4/500 before it was released, since Starcraft runs like a damn champ. But the harsh reality of progress set in when I tried to play it in X.

I'm in the process of saving for a new Mac. Hopefully I'll get one before this game becomes obsolete, and WC4 brings my new machine to it's knees.

StarCraft came out in the age of P1's, I know that it would run great on a P1-133, if you turned up the game speed a little bit to compensate.

WC3 on the other hand came out in the age of 2Ghz P4's with highend dedicated GPU's.

I have a dual 1Ghz w/GF4Ti, needless to say I have no complaints.

[calamar1]

it wouldn't surprise me to find that some of the performance bottlenecks are from the graphics cards. honestly, i have no complaints, and run it maxed out on a quicksilver 867 and a Ti 867. The tower actually has been known to get a bit chunky in a big multiplayer battle, and the Ti never does. Is it possible that GeForce 2MX and 4MX support in OS X is partially responsible, given that so many seem to report these issues on iMacs and towers?

[xyber233]

Originally posted by calamar1:
it wouldn't surprise me to find that some of the performance bottlenecks are from the graphics cards. honestly, i have no complaints, and run it maxed out on a quicksilver 867 and a Ti 867. The tower actually has been known to get a bit chunky in a big multiplayer battle, and the Ti never does. Is it possible that GeForce 2MX and 4MX support in OS X is partially responsible, given that so many seem to report these issues on iMacs and towers?

I also thought that part of the problem was nvidia cards. Most people with ATi cards don't seem to complain that much.

[::maroma::]

Originally posted by xyber233:
I also thought that part of the problem was nvidia cards. Most people with ATi cards don't seem to complain that much.

That wouldn't surprise me at all. I have a GeForce3 (flashed) in my G4/500, and it's pretty unbearable in X. I am in the process of doing an upgrade package to my machine. 1Ghz upgrade card, new vid card (ATi) and new hard drive. I'm hoping this, and an update or 2 from Blizzard or Apple will allow me to play WC3 in X at least as well as I play it now in 9.

I just don't want to reboot anymore!

[Rabid Duck]

Originally posted by Akarso:
WC3 works great on my MDD. it's running 10.2.4, dual 867, ati radeon 8500. maybe you're experiencing slow down because of your hardware setup?

I'm running a G4/733 (Digital Audio) with 1GB ram and an ATI radeon 8500. I doubt it's the hardware that's at fault, as I've played on a 1.1 ghz celeron with a GeForce 2MX, and the game ran significantly smoother than mine does in OS 9.2.2 or 10.2.4 (though 9 is noticeably better than X).

My main problem is with large battles, in which the mouse cursor update rate slows to a crawl, making it impossible to micromanage. It makes it extremely difficult to beat decent players on battle.net when I can barely get a spell off because it takes 3 seconds to select a target. I've actually resorted to using my roommate's PC when playing medium-to-high level people on b.net because it is impossible to win battles when playing on my computer. There's absolutely no reason why the game should run so much worse using motorola processors than AMD/Intel processors.

I suspect Apple's OpenGL implementation is less than optimal right now, and far more advanced in OS 9 than in X. I wish they could have kept RAVE support in X until they got it all together... Anyway, that's just a theory. On to rant mode: I wish people would stop posting how smooth WC3 runs on their B&W G3 in OS X with all options maxxed, etc, etc, because they obviously have no other reference to compare it to. </rant>

I just don't want to have a handicap because I'm using a 2-year-old G4 rather than a 2-year-old Athlon. Throwing a bunch of mixed units into a battle and hoping for the best is an OK strategy for single-player, but a pretty crappy one when playing decent human players. I'm not a framerate junkie-- I don't particularly care if the 3D models render quickly during battles or not. It's the mouse speed I'm most concerned about. If I could make selections and give orders in real-time, that would be great. Perhaps there's a way for blizzard to handle cursor refresh rate differently than the 3D graphics' refresh rate?

Hoping, but not hopeful....

--RD

[xyber233]

Heh, that gets kind of annoying when the enemy starts using starfall and your allies are shouting "Stormbolt!!!" and I am trying but the mouse gets lost in the battle . By the time I click on the Potm, shes already dead. Anyways, I hope I get picked for the beta. Can't wait to try the blood mage.