Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

otis123

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
May 4, 2006
555
0
do you think blizzard will make it intel only? it seems like it would be easier to do, but would they leave us out in the cold for not having a x86 processor?
 

rbarris

macrumors 6502
Oct 28, 2003
358
0
Irvine CA
do you think blizzard will make it intel only? it seems like it would be easier to do, but would they leave us out in the cold for not having a x86 processor?

Regarding PowerPC, it's a pretty safe bet that SC2 will not be able to run on a G3 or G4, so that leaves the G5 type systems.

The game is graphically intensive enough that it will likely require the benefits of multi-threaded OpenGL, which isn't available on G5 until Leopard ships, and will not benefit single-processor G5 machines. So, single processor G5 iMacs and towers are probably no-go.

So, this leaves us with tower (dual core) G5 PowerMacs running Leopard, as probably the lowest PowerPC system we could support with SC2.

Note that SC2 is not shipping this month or anything like that, as was pointed out in interviews online, we have a lot of content yet to complete, and we have not yet made any permanent choices about which hardware will be supported. No release date has been announced.

We'll be watching the hardware surveys on WoW over the coming months to see what the breakdown of Mac hardware is and what the trends are. Obviously Intel is growing very rapidly this year among that user base.
 

shu82

macrumors 6502a
Jan 10, 2007
697
4
Rocket City, AL
Come on, I refuse to believe that my year old 1.67 G4 PB won't run it. I am not saying at full effects, but it will run. It will work!!!!!!

fingers to ears.....lalalalalalalalalalala
 

rbarris

macrumors 6502
Oct 28, 2003
358
0
Irvine CA
Come on, I refuse to believe that my year old 1.67 G4 PB won't run it. I am not saying at full effects, but it will run. It will work!!!!!!

As I recall that was one of the models with the 0.5MB L2 single core CPU and 167MHz memory bus?
 

whooleytoo

macrumors 604
Aug 2, 2002
6,607
716
Cork, Ireland.
So, this leaves us with tower (dual core) G5 PowerMacs running Leopard, as probably the lowest PowerPC system we could support with SC2.

Don't forget the dual CPU, single core G5s which were out before the dual-core G5s.</complete pedant mode>

Which is what I have, though I'll probably be starcrafting on a MBP.. or a light-powered MacTablet Supreme depending on when SCII actually ships!
 

Barham

macrumors regular
Feb 5, 2004
164
33
Don't forget the dual CPU, single core G5s which were out before the dual-core G5s.</complete pedant mode>

Which is what I have, though I'll probably be starcrafting on a MBP.. or a light-powered MacTablet Supreme depending on when SCII actually ships!

LOL

and /vote for light-powered MacTablet as the spokesmachine for SCII when it ships

But seriously, imagine an rts with full touchscreen support.


Also, I'm glad to hear from 'rbarris' (the horse's mouth as it were) that my MacBook Pro will be able to run SCII. I was a bit worried for a sec.

Now, how well will it actually run? That is the question.
 

Sdashiki

macrumors 68040
Aug 11, 2005
3,529
11
Behind the lens
So is this a re-vamped super version of the WC3 engine or something from scratch?

Id like to say its just an improved WC3 but I see nothing to prove that.

If that is the case, wouldnt the hardware requirements be on par with WC3s?

5 years can make a lot of difference in computing power, but do you really think we will need the latest and greatest just to get it to run?
 

Catfish_Man

macrumors 68030
Sep 13, 2001
2,579
2
Portland, OR
So is this a re-vamped super version of the WC3 engine or something from scratch?

Id like to say its just an improved WC3 but I see nothing to prove that.

If that is the case, wouldnt the hardware requirements be on par with WC3s?

5 years can make a lot of difference in computing power, but do you really think we will need the latest and greatest just to get it to run?

There's certainly a lot going on there (physics using the havok engine for example) that isn't happening in WC3.
 

~Shard~

macrumors P6
Jun 4, 2003
18,377
48
1123.6536.5321
I'll be buying a new MBP once they're updated in the next month, as well as a new iMac once they receive their overhaul and once Leopard is released this fall, so I should have nothing to worry about. I might go for the upgraded video card option though just in case... ;) :cool:
 

rbarris

macrumors 6502
Oct 28, 2003
358
0
Irvine CA
So is this a re-vamped super version of the WC3 engine or something from scratch?

Id like to say its just an improved WC3 but I see nothing to prove that.

If that is the case, wouldnt the hardware requirements be on par with WC3s?

5 years can make a lot of difference in computing power, but do you really think we will need the latest and greatest just to get it to run?

System requirements have not yet been announced, but this engine is much more hardware intensive than Warcraft III or WoW - for example the minimum Pixel-Shader 2.0 requirement.
 

thejadedmonkey

macrumors G3
May 28, 2005
9,188
3,356
Pennsylvania
If the Intel Mini, not yet determined if integrated graphics can be supported.

I knew it was worth it to spend the extra $1000 for no good reason:D

Actually, I think you'd have a LOT of people upset if their Macbook can't run it.. especially the people who just bought a new one after the update last week.
 

shu82

macrumors 6502a
Jan 10, 2007
697
4
Rocket City, AL
yea, I was talking about the CD mini in my sig. I have a gig of ram. If you rule out the GMA 950 then no macbook will run it as well.
 

AoWolf

macrumors 6502a
Nov 17, 2003
958
2
Daytona Beach
As our blizzard friend pointed out this game is not coming out right away. Worry about system requirements when it goes to beta.
 

Chone

macrumors 65816
Aug 11, 2006
1,222
0
I knew it was worth it to spend the extra $1000 for no good reason:D

Actually, I think you'd have a LOT of people upset if their Macbook can't run it.. especially the people who just bought a new one after the update last week.

Angry at Apple for putting such a crappy graphics chip in the MacBook in the first place that is... even a X1300 mobility chip would be far better than that GMA 950.
 

Rocksaurus

macrumors 6502a
Sep 14, 2003
652
0
California
I don't see how it could run on a MacBook... Even with multithreaded GL i don't see how he can say that the last rev Powerbook, which has a mobility 9700 would perform worse due to the graphically intense nature of the game than a GMA950. If it's graphically intense, the 9700 should have an easier time with it and make up for the slower single processor to at least be able to RUN it... No?

EDIT
PS- rbarris - I've heard rumors floating around that SC2 has been in development for FIVE years. I'm not sure I believe this... How long has it been in development..?
 

asphalt-proof

macrumors 6502a
Aug 15, 2003
584
0
Magrathea
I thought the game was coming out 4 quarter in '09. If that is the case, then we have over 2 years beforeseeing this game. Meaning that last iteration of the G5 will be over 3 years old. I would be surprised if Blizzard spent a lot of time and money making sure a 3 year old proc was supported.
 

Earendil

macrumors 68000
Oct 27, 2003
1,567
25
Washington
Ugg.... I still consider my laptop a halfway decent gaming rig. No full blown graphics on the latest FPS games, but with 2 gigs of ram, and a 64mb video card, I would hope that I don't get eliminated from the runnings, even if the low end, just because I've got a G4 not an intel.

I mean, one can upgrade RAM easily enough, even he graphics card in most cases, but not the proc from a G4/G5 to an Intel...
 

bobber205

macrumors 68020
Nov 15, 2005
2,182
1
Oregon
Hey Blizzard guy.

You do know there's tons of fans that would pay 100 dollars right here and now to get the game now (in beta form of course), don't you? ;)
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.