🚀 go-pugleaf

That's why you buy a good PC.

In article <4ejksa$14...@news.doit.wisc.edu>, rale...@students.wisc.edu
(ralewan) wrote:

>That's why you buy a good PC.

That's the whole point, the game has bad graphics because it is ported
from a PC version!  Get the heck out of the Mac groups if that is what you
think!  I've seen the PC version of TieFighter and the graphics suck!  So
go be happy with your VGA and get out of here.

Actually after playing it more, I think that the graphics are better, but
I still like the X-Wing graphics better cause they look sharper and the
background is black not blue.  After giving it 20 megs and turning off all
unnecessary extensions, it flies much smoother.

what did you mean Evan  about the 'space' being blue cause I was flying in
the simulator?  It is blue all the time.

Does anyone know of any games that offer QD3D support.  I think that
Descent does, but how can you tell if it is working or not?

In article <nhouck.7...@ucla.edu>, nho...@ucla.edu (Noel) wrote:

> I just bought WCIII for the Mac and I must say that I am not impressed
buy the 
> graphics.  First it only has 256 color graphics which makes the video scenes 
> look much worse then they would with 16 bit.  Why is the background when 
> flying a blue shade and not black, it makes everyhting look muddy.  I
think it 
> looks ugly, X-Wing is much crisper and nicer to look at (at least on the Mac 
> in hi res) and is 100 times more fluid.  I can't imagine that the texture 
> mapping makes WCIII that much slower vs X-Wing, cause there is usually only 1 
> fighter on the screen at a time anyway.  Besides, where is the support for 
> QuickDraw 3D, I didn't buy a Mac for nothing?  Even in High Res mode, which 
> should be 1:1 pixel mapping, the stars/nebulea and such are not in high res, 
> and to top it off the game is jerky on an 80Mhz PPC.  On an 030 I can 
> understand that, but a PPC?  All the other flight sims I have are smooth as 
> glass!  The sound is not very good either, but this one area that X-Wing 
> doesn't have an edge up on WCIII.  I just got the game and only played it for 
> about 15 minutes at it's highest graphics settings, but I would expect more 
> from a 4 CD game.  It looks like they didn't put much effort into porting it 
> to the Mac as far as improving the graphics and sound, the port of X-Wing has 
> much improved graphics over the PC version, I would expect the same
here.  The 
> only saving grace is that the animation is smooth (although low res and in 
> crappy 256 color) in the video scenes and the Costuming/Makeup is good.
> 
> BTW, I have the demo for X-Wing that I uploaded to AMUG/incoming and 
> a.b.mac.games.  If anyone wants me to repost it, let me know, but all the 
> parts did get there ok, at least on my server.
> 
> later-
> Noel
> nho...@ucla.edu
> http://www.seas.ucla.edu/~noel

That's odd...it runs very smoothy on my 7100/66 with only 8 megs of RAM. 
What version are you using, and what extensions do you have on?  I have
both X-Wing and WC III, and I find WC III to be far superior in all
respects, especially the cutscenes.  One last thing:the blue screen means
that you are flying a flight simulator-the background is black in the real
missions.  

      Evan.

----------------------------------------
>>>>>ems...@uncc.campus.mci.net<<<<<
"If you want some
get some
bad enough
take some"
-Snoop Doggy Dogg, "Gz and Hustlas"
-----------------------------------------

In article <emsauda-2801...@s07-pm02.uncc.campus.mci.net>,
ems...@uncc.campus.mci.net (Evan Sauda) wrote:
 
> That's odd...it runs very smoothy on my 7100/66 with only 8 megs of RAM. 
> What version are you using, and what extensions do you have on?  I have
> both X-Wing and WC III, and I find WC III to be far superior in all
> respects, especially the cutscenes.  One last thing:the blue screen means
> that you are flying a flight simulator-the background is black in the real
> missions.  

   I have to agree, I've been playing WCIII quite a lot nowadays.  The
testure-mapping is very well done, and as long as you don't have a capital
ship filling the entire screen, it is very smooth.  Personally I find it
much more enjoyable than X-Wing.
 
>       Evan.

-- 
        ***|                         |  
          )_)    |                   |   John Fisher
        )____)  )_)                  | jfi...@bdt.com
      )______)  _|_                  |
    ______|____|___\___              | All opinions are my own, etc.
____\\ _    -   _   /________________|
^^   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^     ^^^     ^^  |                                                 

Huh? wrote:

> >That's why you buy a good PC.
> 
> That's the whole point, the game has bad graphics because it is ported
> from a PC version!  Get the heck out of the Mac groups if that is what you
> think!  I've seen the PC version of TieFighter and the graphics suck!  So
> go be happy with your VGA and get out of here.

Easy there.  I won't jump into the Mac vs. PC debate, but don't flame
because you assume he doesn't belong in a Mac newsgroup.  If you check
the header, you'll see that this was cross-posted to 
alt.games.wing-commander, with most of the readers there being PC users.

People can be real passionate about there computers, sheesh!  (I should
know, I used to own an Amiga <g>)

--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
+        Dave Prothero         ||    International Technology Group     +
+       dpr...@peak.org        || Streamlining Business With Technology +
+ http://www.peak.org/~dproth/ ||     http://www.proaxis.com/~itg/      +
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

In article <jfisher-2901...@powermac.dial-up.bdt.com>,
John Fisher <jfi...@bdt.com> wrote:
>In article <emsauda-2801...@s07-pm02.uncc.campus.mci.net>,
>ems...@uncc.campus.mci.net (Evan Sauda) wrote:
> 
>> That's odd...it runs very smoothy on my 7100/66 with only 8 megs of RAM. 
>> What version are you using, and what extensions do you have on?  I have
>> both X-Wing and WC III, and I find WC III to be far superior in all
>> respects, especially the cutscenes.  One last thing:the blue screen means
>> that you are flying a flight simulator-the background is black in the real
>> missions.  
>
>   I have to agree, I've been playing WCIII quite a lot nowadays.  The
>testure-mapping is very well done, and as long as you don't have a capital
>ship filling the entire screen, it is very smooth.  Personally I find it
>much more enjoyable than X-Wing.

Gee, this is almost becoming a religious question, like the joystick
thing :).  But I'll third the nice graphics vote for WCIII.  Turning on
"some textures" on my machine gets me a perfectly smooth game, even when
cap ships are filling my viewport.

But, I'll have to give X-Wing it's creds.  It has a few things that
WCIII lacks.  The first thing I can think of is extensive space battles.
In WCIII, the most support you ever have is around three to four ships.
In X-Wing, there are entire other squadrons flying along with you, all
with different objectives.  It's a trip just to fly out and watch the
fights unfold, especially when A-Wings and TIE Interceptors are
involved.

And I personally feel that X-Wing has a stronger visual presence than
WCIII.  Not that it's graphics are better (they aren't), but all the
ships are distinctively different.  A corvette, a Star Destroyer, a
frigate, a freighter.  None of them look remotely the same.  I really
can't say the same of WCIII's Kilrathi capital ships.  Or the ConFed
ships either, for that matter.  Probably just a personal thing....

Quanah S. Harjo,
Torn between his Arrow and his A-Wing.
hqu...@osuunx.ucc.okstate.edu

Are you playing the mac version of wing 3? Is it different from 
the pc version?

Of course, WCIII is sometimes slow near very big cap ships (like starbase).
but if there are only small fighters, I can have 20 frames per sec. I find
the game really fun. You may have to play it a little bit longer. It can
take some time to handle correctly your fighter. But once you learned some
combat tactics, you will like the game a lot!

						Snoopy


: In article <nhouck.7...@ucla.edu>, nho...@ucla.edu (Noel) wrote:

: > I just bought WCIII for the Mac and I must say that I am not impressed
: buy the 
: > graphics.  First it only has 256 color graphics which makes the video scenes 
: > look much worse then they would with 16 bit.  Why is the background when 
: > flying a blue shade and not black, it makes everyhting look muddy.  I
: think it 
: > looks ugly, X-Wing is much crisper and nicer to look at (at least on the Mac 
: > in hi res) and is 100 times more fluid.  I can't imagine that the texture 
: > mapping makes WCIII that much slower vs X-Wing, cause there is usually only 1 
: > fighter on the screen at a time anyway.  Besides, where is the support for 
: > QuickDraw 3D, I didn't buy a Mac for nothing?  Even in High Res mode, which 
: > should be 1:1 pixel mapping, the stars/nebulea and such are not in high res, 
: > and to top it off the game is jerky on an 80Mhz PPC.  On an 030 I can 
: > understand that, but a PPC?  All the other flight sims I have are smooth as 
: > glass!  The sound is not very good either, but this one area that X-Wing 
: > doesn't have an edge up on WCIII.  I just got the game and only played it for 
: > about 15 minutes at it's highest graphics settings, but I would expect more 
: > from a 4 CD game.  It looks like they didn't put much effort into porting it 
: > to the Mac as far as improving the graphics and sound, the port of X-Wing has 
: > much improved graphics over the PC version, I would expect the same
: here.  The 
: > only saving grace is that the animation is smooth (although low res and in 
: > crappy 256 color) in the video scenes and the Costuming/Makeup is good.
: > 
: > BTW, I have the demo for X-Wing that I uploaded to AMUG/incoming and 
: > a.b.mac.games.  If anyone wants me to repost it, let me know, but all the 
: > parts did get there ok, at least on my server.
: > 
: > later-
: > Noel
: > nho...@ucla.edu
: > http://www.seas.ucla.edu/~noel

: That's odd...it runs very smoothy on my 7100/66 with only 8 megs of RAM. 
: What version are you using, and what extensions do you have on?  I have
: both X-Wing and WC III, and I find WC III to be far superior in all
: respects, especially the cutscenes.  One last thing:the blue screen means
: that you are flying a flight simulator-the background is black in the real
: missions.  

:       Evan.

: ----------------------------------------
: >>>>>ems...@uncc.campus.mci.net<<<<<
: "If you want some
: get some
: bad enough
: take some"
: -Snoop Doggy Dogg, "Gz and Hustlas"
: -----------------------------------------

Are you the guy complaining about wing commander 3 graphics? 
Are you insane! Wing commanders graphics are 100x better than 
than ancient game xwing! Also something that bothers me is mac 
gamers saying how much better graphics there systems have in 
mac ported games. Rubbish! The original xwing game was in 1993 
and they made it for the mac in 1995! And at the same time a 
new svga version cd rom xwing came out. The same with tie 
fighter! So don't compare new refurbished mac games to 1993 
tecnology!

In article <nhouck-2901...@s109_18.resnet.ucla.edu>,
nho...@ucla.edu (Huh?) wrote:

> In article <4ejksa$14...@news.doit.wisc.edu>, rale...@students.wisc.edu
> (ralewan) wrote:
> 
> >That's why you buy a good PC.
> 
> That's the whole point, the game has bad graphics because it is ported
> from a PC version!  Get the heck out of the Mac groups if that is what you
> think!  I've seen the PC version of TieFighter and the graphics suck!  So
> go be happy with your VGA and get out of here.
> 
> Actually after playing it more, I think that the graphics are better, but
> I still like the X-Wing graphics better cause they look sharper and the
> background is black not blue.  After giving it 20 megs and turning off all
> unnecessary extensions, it flies much smoother.
> 
> what did you mean Evan  about the 'space' being blue cause I was flying in
> the simulator?  It is blue all the time.
> 
> Does anyone know of any games that offer QD3D support.  I think that
> Descent does, but how can you tell if it is working or not?

Actually, Descent only uses QD3D if it detects a hardware accelerator.   
QD3D on it's own is much slower than anything that software engineers can
come up with.  The cool thing about QD3D is that it is so general and can
be used for so many different things, but for specific stuff in a game,
programmers can write their own code that is faster.  However, with QD3D
accelerators going down in price, expect to see more games supporting them
in the future.

You can adjust the color of the background in the installation program for 
the video card (stop complaining and fix it).
 
================================================= 
David MacInnis      david_m...@mindlink.bc.ca
                Canadien (eh?) 
"Do or do not, there is no try......"    (Yoda)
=================================================