17 réponses à ce sujet

[LyonVanguard]

I just finished installing this game and played for a few minutes. What I have experienced in this short span of time has to be by far the worst feeling I have ever felt playing a game.

I bought this game through steam a few months ago to play on my bootcamp partition so I have experience with the pc version. It was frankly one of the best gaming experiences I have had in the pc.

Not only does this game look 10x worse than the pc version in full settings but it also performs twice as slow.

How can something that looks worse than the pc version run with less fps with the same hardware?

Did anyone test this crap?

How could Bioware release this?
This is not up to Bioware's standards of quality.

Not only that, but how can they charge $50+ for something that was obviously done for the heck of it?

Now I am out $60+. I wish I could get my money back honestly.
I should sue for false advertisement, this is not the same product.

Modifié par LyonVanguard, 13 janvier 2010 - 05:25 .

[LyonVanguard]

Double post.

Modifié par LyonVanguard, 13 janvier 2010 - 05:25 .

[LyonVanguard]

Delete this, posted in wrong section.

[txa1265]

I disagree - I was pleasantly surprised that I was able to run with nice visuals without any issues.

[Dogmatic Atheist]

Yeah, I get pretty good performance too. I have a Mac Pro with a Radeon HD 4870 w/ 512MB VRAM and can max out all settings without issue.

[MOTpoetryION]

true OP i feel it wasn't beta tested very much , been saying it from day one . But remember EA is involved with them now . That right there says it all. Sorry guys but it looks as though EA has tainted yet another game company

[Marvin_Arnold]

It's difficult to say anything without knowing what hardware the OP is running it on. On a MBP (late 2008), I can run it in high graphics, high textures, full antialiasing and framebuffers at 1440x900 (or with Cinema Display at 1600x1000) with comfortable framerate.

[BomimoDK]

MOTpoetryION wrote...

true OP i feel it wasn't beta tested very much , been saying it from day one . But remember EA is involved with them now . That right there says it all. Sorry guys but it looks as though EA has tainted yet another game company

i would like you to notice that it ws not bioware who did the port.
EA is trying HARD to corrupt these guys and from what i see, they're trying just as hard not to be corrupted. so far it's a battle where EA has the upper hand but Bioware has a reputation and i'm betting it's a reputation they're more than desperate to keep.
just wait it out... i know not many play games like this, but when i buy an RPG, especially Bioware RPG's i'm very prepared for the product to be at it's full potential about a year after release. i'm not worried... i'll still be playing this in 10 years, i'm still playing BG1 and 2.

[el Charlot]

BomimoDK wrote...

MOTpoetryION wrote...

true OP i feel it wasn't beta tested very much , been saying it from day one . But remember EA is involved with them now . That right there says it all. Sorry guys but it looks as though EA has tainted yet another game company

i would like you to notice that it ws not bioware who did the port.
EA is trying HARD to corrupt these guys and from what i see, they're trying just as hard not to be corrupted. so far it's a battle where EA has the upper hand but Bioware has a reputation and i'm betting it's a reputation they're more than desperate to keep.
just wait it out... i know not many play games like this, but when i buy an RPG, especially Bioware RPG's i'm very prepared for the product to be at it's full potential about a year after release. i'm not worried... i'll still be playing this in 10 years, i'm still playing BG1 and 2.

Please note that we're on the Bioware forum, and that the link they provide for support is EA one ... so EA is responsible for the support, and Bioware direct to them, not to their own support or anything ... so reputation, corruption, its not the point, Bioware give a link to a support that is a shame ... thats all.

And I'm currently disapointed, after a good feeling, by gametree support (the Cider guys that made the port)., I have a non working game and they will do nothing about it.

Modifié par el Charlot, 22 janvier 2010 - 12:41 .

[jkiller2]

I have to second the crappiness of the mac conversion. On my girlfriend's MBP with a core duo 2.0 Ghz processor and an ATI X1600 the game is almost unplayable at all the minimal settings. The only time the game runs smoothly is with the 'above the head' view. Now granted this is at the lowest end of the system requirements, but if this is what the game was going to be like gametree should have upped the system specs for potential buyers.

Additionally, releasing the game with no DLC or patch support is only begging people to get pissed at you.

My two cents.

Modifié par jkiller2, 22 janvier 2010 - 04:02 .

[dualie11]

The game runs acceptably well on my two year old iMac with ATI X2600 graphics and 4GB of RAM. In fact I played it entirely and enjoyed it immensely. It did lag in the anvil battle and I had to go top down, and there were a few crashes here and there, but generally it was very enjoyable. I even installed some mods without a problem.

I have no doubt performance is better in Windows, but meh. I'd rather take the hit and stay in OS X thanks. I'm not gonna whine too loudly, and I will buy Mac games when they are available because that's how developers get the message that it's worth it to them. I'm personally grateful to play it on the Mac.

[LyonVanguard]

dualie11 wrote...

The game runs acceptably well on my two year old iMac with ATI X2600 graphics and 4GB of RAM. In fact I played it entirely and enjoyed it immensely. It did lag in the anvil battle and I had to go top down, and there were a few crashes here and there, but generally it was very enjoyable. I even installed some mods without a problem.
I have no doubt performance is better in Windows, but meh. I'd rather take the hit and stay in OS X thanks. I'm not gonna whine too loudly, and I will buy Mac games when they are available because that's how developers get the message that it's worth it to them. I'm personally grateful to play it on the Mac.

Sorry, but its not worth it if they make crappy ports. I bet that you have not played the Windows version.
Bioware shouldn't have put their logo in the mac version.

[Marvin_Arnold]

LYonVanguard, it would be very interesting if you had screenshots from both the WIN and Mac versions that showed how the Mac version looks "10 times worse"...

Interesting, because using the Wine free wrapper with the WIN version (which would be an alternative to the Cider port), you can only play it with NVidia cards. ATI cards won't work at all. It seems that with the Cider port, the issues are similar.

I have absolutely no problem running it on my one year old MBP with NVida card (external monitor w. 1600x1000) with full antialiasing, Framebuffer effects, high graphic quality and high texture settings. Framerate goes down in very intense settings (like denerim market place), but is smooth otherwise. You may check my screenshots (which are reduced size, of course) for the quality. Nothing that deserves the word "crappy" for sure.

What hardware are you trying to run it on anyway? Did you turn on framebuffer effects? These considerably enhance the visual quality.

Modifié par Marvin_Arnold, 28 janvier 2010 - 12:03 .

[LyonVanguard]

Marvin_Arnold wrote...

LYonVanguard, it would be very interesting if you had screenshots from both the WIN and Mac versions that showed how the Mac version looks "10 times worse"...

Interesting, because using the Wine free wrapper with the WIN version (which would be an alternative to the Cider port), you can only play it with NVidia cards. ATI cards won't work at all. It seems that with the Cider port, the issues are similar.

I have absolutely no problem running it on my one year old MBP with NVida card (external monitor w. 1600x1000) with full antialiasing, Framebuffer effects, high graphic quality and high texture settings. Framerate goes down in very intense settings (like denerim market place), but is smooth otherwise. You may check my screenshots (which are reduced size, of course) for the quality. Nothing that deserves the word "crappy" for sure.

What hardware are you trying to run it on anyway? Did you turn on framebuffer effects? These considerably enhance the visual quality.

I am running an nvidia 9600m gt.
I will take the screenshots for you. Give me a few hours.

[dualie11]

LyonVanguard wrote...
I bet that you have not played the Windows version.

Why would/should I?  The Mac version runs pretty well for me, in fact I'm on my second time through, so why would I even care how it runs in Windows?  It's not a platform performance contest for me.  I don't need to be able to brag about how much faster it runs on my platform.  I only care that it is stable, looks good, performs well, has good support, and has timely updates/expansions.  So far, all those things hold true, except for the timely updates.

I don't understand why someone would buy the Windows version, then come on a Mac forum complaining about the performance on Macs.  This seems pointless and irrelevant.

By the way, this iMac has an ATI2600 in it, and it looks very, very good.

Modifié par dualie11, 02 février 2010 - 12:57 .

[LyonVanguard]

dualie11 wrote...

LyonVanguard wrote...
I bet that you have not played the Windows version.

Why would/should I?  The Mac version runs pretty well for me, in fact I'm on my second time through, so why would I even care how it runs in Windows?  It's not a platform performance contest for me.  I don't need to be able to brag about how much faster it runs on my platform.  I only care that it is stable, looks good, performs well, has good support, and has timely updates/expansions.  So far, all those things hold true, except for the timely updates.

I don't understand why someone would buy the Windows version, then come on a Mac forum complaining about the performance on Macs.  This seems pointless and irrelevant.

By the way, this iMac has an ATI2600 in it, and it looks very, very good.

You completly miss the point.
The fact of the mater is, you are getting a lesser version for the same price. You say it looks and runs fine but since you haven't played the game using the windows version you have no idea how smoother and better the game looks.

It doesn't mater why I bought the mac version, all that maters is that it runs worse than the windows version and Bioware should fix it.

[RDustinC]

I am running the Mac version, and I don't think it looks any worse than what my brothers looks on his PC. It does however run worse. The framerate isn't great at all, and I just doubled my memory from 2gb to 4gb and saw maybe 1-2 FPS increase at most. Clearly the Mac version needs tweaks and optimizing! I should have seen a little more than that I would think.

[dualie11]

LyonVanguard wrote...

dualie11 wrote...

LyonVanguard wrote...
I bet that you have not played the Windows version.

Why would/should I?  The Mac version runs pretty well for me, in fact I'm on my second time through, so why would I even care how it runs in Windows?  It's not a platform performance contest for me.  I don't need to be able to brag about how much faster it runs on my platform.  I only care that it is stable, looks good, performs well, has good support, and has timely updates/expansions.  So far, all those things hold true, except for the timely updates.

I don't understand why someone would buy the Windows version, then come on a Mac forum complaining about the performance on Macs.  This seems pointless and irrelevant.

By the way, this iMac has an ATI2600 in it, and it looks very, very good.

You completly miss the point.
The fact of the mater is, you are getting a lesser version for the same price. You say it looks and runs fine but since you haven't played the game using the windows version you have no idea how smoother and better the game looks.

It doesn't mater why I bought the mac version, all that maters is that it runs worse than the windows version and Bioware should fix it.

I'm not missing any point.  I simply DON'T CARE how it runs in Windows.  I'm only interested in how it runs on my Mac, in OS X.  That's all.  If you like the Windows version better than go play that one, but spare us the whining about how much better it is on your platform of choice.  If the game runs poorly on your Mac – without the Windows comparison – then that is a valid complaint.  Complaining that it doesn't run like it does in Windows is not.

On my Mac the game runs just fine.  It's fully playable/enjoyable.  It could use some bug fixes, but what software can't?