[anapplemacphreak]

SIM CITY 4
Mike
"Windows copied us back in 1984 with the Macintosh and they are still doing it today...its a great feeling."
-Steve Jobs C.E.O. of Apple Computers

[iloveitaly]

JKII, awesome game runs great on older computers....
now i game that I want, C & C .when i get my 1.4GHZ CPU upgrade for my sawtooth that is what i am getting.......

[Argent]

In reply to:

---

The trouble is my Mac, an 800Mhz April 2002 TiPB, is at the exact low end of the system requirements... Does anyone happen to know how this game would play on a setup like mine?

---

It isn't an exact comparison, but a friend of mine plays Halo on a 12" 867MHz G4 PowerBook. Detail is low, but it runs very smoothly.

In reply to:

---

I sort of view Halo as Marathon's successor

---

In terms of the storyline and overall "feel," I agree, Halo is very much Marathon's successor. Fantastic game.

[Peter Cohen]

In terms of whether Halo will run on particular configurations, just hold tight. MacSoft will post a demo version soon and you'll be able to see for yourself.

[Duke_Thomas]

Hmmm. Soon, you say? Argent and stroudx had me all excited about going out and buying Halo -- but you're right, I suppose I should wait. Thanks Peter, and also Ar and St.
Sorry guys, you'll just have to wait a few weeks for me to come to kick your ass. /forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif

[Peter Cohen]

Better safe than sorry. An alternative would be to buy it from a retailer that offers a money-back guarantee. But given that the demo is on the way and you have questions about how well your hardware will hold up, I suspect waiting for the demo is probably the most prudent (if frustrating) course of action.

[Harvestr]

Halo and Shadowbane
Warcraft 3 if you don't mind playing a game for 3 months and never winning. Great looking game but frustrating as hell. Tower Defense is the only fun I ever had in it. Befor eyou label me as a noob or say I suck, just know that I know many people that have quit the game too and for the same reason.

[Argent]

In reply to:

---

Sorry guys, you'll just have to wait a few weeks for me to come to kick your ass.

---

Yeah, yeah. Bring it. /forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif

[newoldg3]

Hit eBay and find Myth I and II (or II and the conversion for the 1 levels.) STILL two of my all-time favourite games.
Think I need a faster Mac, though... Can't play WCIII on my beige 300 Mhz G3...

[griffman]

X-Plane, Tony Hawk (any of them), Tiger Woods 2003, Kelly Slater Pro Surfer, Medal of Honor and MoA: Allied Assault, Halo, Quake3, Nascar Racing ... all were/are fun.
-rob.

[wap]

Quake 3
Halo
Ghost Recon
UT 2003

(Bubble Trouble) its still a blast

[wap]

Oh yeh my son plays the Sims

[MacDancer]

Warcraft III all the way. As for the guy who said that it's hard to win, yes, definitely. At least as far as on-line goes. I'm about level 10 on random team (2v2 or 3v3, never tried 4v4), level 8 on free-for-all (which is actually comparative to level 14 or so, because there's at least four people in every game, and only one of them wins), and I've never really tried to do too much with solo, because I have bad micromanagement, which is more important in solo than the other types, and because there are wayyyyyyyy too many high-level people with low-level accounts for the first ten to thirteen levels. The highest solo level in the USA servers is about 35-40, but I haven't checked for a while, the highest in free-for-all is level 19, and the highest in random team is somewhere in the thirties... I think... As for the custom games, the package is worth getting just for them. I'm restricted to games such as Hero Arena (gladiators basically. Sometimes with teams, sometimes without), murder games (basically Clue, only in real time and slightly different in other ways), and games such as Preschool Wars (I won't even try to explain...) which generally don't have very many units in them. As for the off-line play, it's fairly good, the campaigns are pretty good, though the story-line is somewhat forced in both versions of Warcraft III. That's not really a problem though, I've seen worse story-lines milked harder in book form, where it's the main feature. I cut the guys at Blizzard a little slack, since they sorta have to have an ending for each campaign, which means that they've just completed the fifth ending last year. The game-play isn't too hard in the first campaign, I beat all but one of the missions, and I only cheated on that one because the DSL had just come back on, and it was a stay-alive-for-X-amount-of-time mission, where I knew that I had 37 minutes to go. The second campaign is a bit harder, and apparently gets very hard in the last five missions or so, but I couldn't tell you for sure, because my DSL has stayed on very satisfactorily since I got the expansion set. All in all, a very good game, the best RTS in my opinion, even if it won't get very much attention due to World of Warcraft, Blizzard's foray in to the MMORPG area. I strongly reccomend it.

[Dan Frakes]

In terms of the types of games being discussed in this thread (first-person shooters), I would have to say that my favorite single-player is still Deus Ex, even though it's been years since I played it, and before that, Marathon. I have yet to see another single-person FPS "get" the genre (including the balance of gameplay and story line) as well as these.
In terms of multiplayer, my favorite is still the Unreal Tournament series. Halo is very good, but apart from the vehicles, the gameplay is (in my opinion) better in UT, not to mention that I like UT's network/game browser much better (Halo's online browser is an exercise in frustration /forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif). I'm anxious to see if UT2k4 does the vehicles right...