The Mac Version Sucks

#1 Edited by Cube (4366 posts) -

Anyone else try it on the Mac? The game is so slow compared to the PC version. What's with that? Same with Portal. Does this have to do with the Mac architecture? Or is it just Valve? 
 
I had to make my sensitivity 17.0 when on PC I have it at 7.9. Your thoughts? 
 
Edit: By slow I mean response time, not lag.

#2 Posted by teh_pwnzorer (1482 posts) -
@Cube: What the hell are you talking about?  Slow as in low fps?  If you're talking about mouse sensitivity, then give your head a shake.  Who cares.  Just adjust it.
#3 Posted by Cube (4366 posts) -
@teh_pwnzorer: Give my head a shake? The fuck dude. I am talking about how it is generally slower paced than the PC version.   
 
Gotta love the GB community. Betcha must be proud, kid.
#4 Edited by Zidd (1857 posts) -

Mac OS X and Windows use different methods of mouse acceleration. Which makes for the slow aiming. 
 
edit: The OS X version of Counter-strike: Source isn't even out yet.

#5 Posted by Cube (4366 posts) -
@Zidd: This is what I thought. I was just curious if that was really the case or if it was the game itself.
#6 Edited by Ineedaname (4319 posts) -

I agree with the dude above, if it's only mouse sensitivity adjust it and "forgedaboutit" 
 
I am curios to know what settings you have it on and what FPS you are getting though.
 
Edit: he was no longer above. 
And how can they change the pace of the game? =/

#7 Posted by RobotHamster (4177 posts) -

How did you play it, is it a beta or something?  I didn't see it in the store.

#8 Posted by Cube (4366 posts) -
@Ineedaname said:
" I agree with the dude above, if it's only mouse sensitivity adjust it and "forgedaboutit"   I am curios to know what settings you have it on and what FPS you are getting though. "
25 FPS (LOL) and Medium settings.
#9 Posted by Zidd (1857 posts) -

The OS X versions of source engine games run a bit worse than the Windows versions due to out of date drivers. If Apple released newer, better drivers for Nvidia and ATI cards than it would be less of an issue.

#10 Posted by Cube (4366 posts) -
@RobotHamster said:
" How did you play it, is it a beta or something?  I didn't see it in the store. "
It's the CSS Beta that was released for PC a few weeks back. Not sure, it said I could install it so I did, and it worked. 
#11 Posted by triple07 (1198 posts) -

Which Mac are you playing it on? That could be a part of it.

#12 Posted by Dipstick (546 posts) -
@Cube said:
" @RobotHamster said:
" How did you play it, is it a beta or something?  I didn't see it in the store. "
It's the CSS Beta that was released for PC a few weeks back. Not sure, it said I could install it so I did, and it worked.  "
You played the beta on both PC and OSX? 
 
I've been playing it on PC for about 2-3 weeks now and they're is a difference between the beta and source (the movement feels different)  
It might now be a OSX,it might just be the beta.
#13 Edited by Cube (4366 posts) -
@triple07 said:

" Which Mac are you playing it on? That could be a part of it. "

iMac from 2009. I can understand Macs were never made for games in the first place, but it just seems weird it struggles so heavily with a game from 2004. 
 
2 GB Ram, 2.66 Ghz Core 2 Duo, NVIDIA GeForce 9400 
 
@Dipstick: Yeah, played it on PC too. Definitely different on Mac.
#14 Edited by HitmanAgent47 (8576 posts) -

Your videocard needs to be better. I get 200 frames per second average on my pc. Besides, macs aren't gaming machines at all compared to pc. I could go on about it however you probally know.

#15 Posted by Dipstick (546 posts) -
@Cube said:
" @triple07 said:

" Which Mac are you playing it on? That could be a part of it. "

iMac from 2009. I can understand Macs were never made for games in the first place, but it just seems weird it struggles so heavily with a game from 2004. 
 
2 GB Ram, 2.66 Ghz Core 2 Duo, NVIDIA GeForce 9400 
 
@Dipstick: Yeah, played it on PC too. Definitely different on Mac. "
The beta runs on the new episode 2 engine (I.E. The new source engine)  
 
Performance between the old CS:S and the beta is going to be different. 
#16 Posted by Cube (4366 posts) -
@HitmanAgent47: I also get high FPS on my PC. I get high FPS on a 8800 GTS
#17 Posted by Dipstick (546 posts) -
@HitmanAgent47 said:
"

Your videocard needs to be better. I get 200 frames per second average on my pc.

"
"  I get 200 frames per second average on my pc."  
 
Was that really needed? I mean cool,your video card is better but there was literally no need for you to post that.
#18 Posted by HitmanAgent47 (8576 posts) -
@Cube: Remember just because it's a 9000 series gpu doesn't mean it's fast as a 8800gts. A high end last gen card will easily out perform a low end newer gen series card. Besides it's a mac, not sure how efficient it is for gaming which I don't think it's all that good for it.
#19 Posted by Jazz (2322 posts) -

Isn't all the steam stuff being emulated through Cider or Wine? 
Thats probably why its going slowly, its hardly optimised for Macs to begin with. I'm pretty sure its not native. 
Either way, I can run Borderlands at 40fps on my 2007 MBP using Wine, so it could be shoddy programming too.

#20 Posted by HitmanAgent47 (8576 posts) -
@Dipstick: It's the third time today I had a brainless comment because my post are too thought provoking and intellegent for ppl instead of being too literal. I'm trying to show a contrast, my videocard isn't powerful however if he's not getting good frames, there is something wrong with his hardware and I elaborated on the videocard. It doesn't take alot of power to run.
#21 Posted by Zidd (1857 posts) -
@Dipstick: Don't feed the troll. 
 
The source engine has had tons of optimizations over the years to run on Windows. The OS X version is new give it some time and performance will improve.
#22 Edited by Fbomb (1168 posts) -
@Dipstick said:

" @HitmanAgent47 said:

"

Your videocard needs to be better. I get 200 frames per second average on my pc.

"
"  I get 200 frames per second average on my pc."   Was that really needed? I mean cool,your video card is better but there was literally no need for you to post that. "
Glad someone said this, because I was thinking it... Frames Per Second bragging of a PC game in a topic about the game running slowly on a Mac. no idea.
#23 Posted by Zidd (1857 posts) -
@Jazz: All of the Source Engine games run natively under OS X. They would run much much worse if they were Ciderized.
#24 Posted by Jazz (2322 posts) -
@Zidd:  
Well, I suppose its just growing pains then. 
Good to know though...hopefully it will eventually encourage others to work on mac versions of their games. 
I love steam, but have zero interest in valve games.
#25 Posted by HitmanAgent47 (8576 posts) -
@Fbomb said:
"@Dipstick said:

" @HitmanAgent47 said:

"

Your videocard needs to be better. I get 200 frames per second average on my pc.

"
"  I get 200 frames per second average on my pc."   Was that really needed? I mean cool,your video card is better but there was literally no need for you to post that. "
Glad someone said this, because I was thinking it... Frames Per Second bragging of a PC game in a topic about the game running slowly on a Mac. no idea. "

It's too bad most of you are too unintellegent to realise that this game was out during half life 2, which is like 8 years ago or more, everyone should get higher framerates, so should the mac. Instead they think i'm bragging, it shows how much ppl loves to reply without thinking about it to get their post count up. I even made a thread to talk about this phenomenon.
#26 Posted by Zidd (1857 posts) -

I'd rather developers do OS X versions properly like Valve instead of putting out some Ciderized crap that runs poorly and never see any kind of support after that. Just look at Dragon Age: Origins for OS X. People who bought that got screwed big time. The game runs like crap, and has not gotten a single patch or DLC since its release.

#27 Posted by Zidd (1857 posts) -
@HitmanAgent47 said: 
It's too bad most of you are too unintellegent to realise that this game was out during half life 2, which is like 8 years ago or more, everyone should get higher framerates, so should the mac.
Actually the beta update for CS:S included an engine update to a later version of Source. Which would make the game more demanding. I'm hoping that the OS X versions of Source games over time will get to the point where they can perform as good or better than the Windows versions on similar hardware.
#28 Posted by triple07 (1198 posts) -
@Cube said:
" @triple07 said:

" Which Mac are you playing it on? That could be a part of it. "

iMac from 2009. I can understand Macs were never made for games in the first place, but it just seems weird it struggles so heavily with a game from 2004. 
 
2 GB Ram, 2.66 Ghz Core 2 Duo, NVIDIA GeForce 9400 
Weird I wouldn't imagine having slowdown on a new Mac.
#29 Posted by handlas (2757 posts) -

TF2 runs completely great on my Mac Pro laptop.  Better than my aging PC.
 
I read CS:S doesn't come out till next week on Mac tho...how are you playing it?  Nor is it downloadable from my games list.

Online
#30 Edited by Partisan189 (78 posts) -
@HitmanAgent47 said:

" @Dipstick: It's the third time today I had a brainless comment because my post are too thought provoking and intellegent for ppl instead of being too literal. I'm trying to show a contrast, my videocard isn't powerful however if he's not getting good frames, there is something wrong with his hardware and I elaborated on the videocard. It doesn't take alot of power to run. "

This has to be sarcasm, hate to burst your bubble be there was nothing intelligent or insightful in your posts. The problem has less to do with his video card and more to do with software. Valve's emulation on the Mac is probably less then ideal right now and not to mention someone said earlier in the thread Mac is not giving a whole lot of support for Nvidia and ATI video drivers which can lead to a huge performance hit. A 9400 will play CSS perfectly fine on medium settings on a PC and high settings depending on resolution. I was playing CSS when it was released on my POS computer made in 2004 with an integrated video card and it was playable.
#31 Posted by HitmanAgent47 (8576 posts) -
@Partisan189: My reply will have to be from a few screenshots. Ppl thought I was bragging when I said over 100 frames, i'm claiming it takes absolutely no power, it's your underpowered macs that's the problem, not optimization. If you can't even get over 30 frames per second, then maybe it's not the osx completely, it's using really lousy components. I don't even have a good rig anymore, yet it doesn't break a sweat running it maxxed out. Screenshots are at 1080p, no smoke and mirrors with the rez.
 
   
   
   
   
  
#32 Posted by RobotHamster (4177 posts) -

I think it plays pretty good so far.

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.