# Warcraft 3 and MacBook Pro



## DeadPrez (May 4, 2006)

Hi, I recently purchased a Macbook Pro (2.0ghz, 2gig ram, 7200 rpm hd) and just finished playing a handful of sluggish 3v3 Warcraft III (Frozen Throne) games.  I'm new to Mac so bear with me.  My previous desktop is Windows XP on an AMD 2700+ w/ 1 gig ram and ATI 9800 Pro.  In other words, shouldn't the MacBook Pro kick ass all over something nearly two years older?  

My video settings are cloned from the PC.  1280x1024x16, model detail high, animation low, texture quality high, particles high, lights medium, shadows off, occlussion on, spell detail high.  I'm not saying these settings can't be tweaked downward but I would have thought the MacBook Pro would have *easily* handled Warcraft III due to the next generation of video card and (duo core) CPU.   Not to mention everyone swearing WoW and other games work at full settings.  

Hopefully I am just a confused new Mac user that who hasn't tweaked a driver just right or something.  Please help.  I don't want to have to boot Windows just to get decent performance!

edit:  Is it possible/probably War3 won't run at full speed if it isn't compiled as a universal binary?  I just checked via the Activity Monitor and it says Frozen Throne is a PowerPC (as opposed to Intel) binary.


----------



## nixgeek (May 4, 2006)

That's exactly the problem you're having.  If your version of WarCraft 3 was for PowerPC, it's running through Rosetta, the PowerPC emulation layer.  You might want to check Blizzard's website to see if they have a universal binary for the application that you can install.  That would SIGNIFICANTLY improve performance.


----------



## Damrod (May 4, 2006)

As far as I know there is no UB version of War3 though, only for WoW


----------



## DeadPrez (May 4, 2006)

This is seriously disappointing because I dropped like 3 grande on a Mac I was under the impression would run Warcraft III natively.  Should have known there was a catch.


----------



## nixgeek (May 4, 2006)

Umm.....this has been in the news for about a year now (even mainstream news).  Apple announced they were switching to Intel processors last year during WWDC.  Also consider that you're playing an old game on a newer computer (despite the processor difference).  Think of it as playing an old DOS/Windows 95 game on a Windows XP computer.  Good luck with that one.

There's nothing wrong with the computer....it's running the app as advertised by Apple....through emulation in Rosetta.  Be glad that the application is running at all since the Intel Core CPUs and PowerPC CPUs are totally different.  The problem is that you didn't research before making the purchase....that's hardly Apple's fault.  If you're not pleased with it, return it and by a PowerPC Mac and you'll be back to playing WarCraft 3 happily.

BTW, the only PowerPC Macs you're going to find now are either used or the high-end Power Mac G5 Macs.  I wouldn't bother spending the money on an iBook G4.  Of course, at this point I don't know what to recommend to someone who's spent 3 Gs on a MacBook Pro for WarCraft 3 only. 

Sorry, but I had to say something about it.  It's just a matter of common sense when you're spending that amount of money.

OK, I'm done....


----------



## DeadPrez (May 4, 2006)

Oh, I see you are trolling me.  I didn't spend the money solely on the MacBook Pro for War3, but yeah War3 being native to Mac was misleading. I didn't realize I had to look for universal binaries because the Mac store people and the website never told me that.  And you are coming across as a zealot asshole and your analogy doesn't actually fly.  

PS:  if you search major mac related websites there is a lot of misinformation about performance of Warcraft III on MacBooks.  Much saying it runs perfectly at full video settings.


----------



## nixgeek (May 5, 2006)

DeadPrez said:
			
		

> Oh, I see you are trolling me.  I didn't spend the money solely on the MacBook Pro for War3, but yeah War3 being native to Mac was misleading. I didn't realize I had to look for universal binaries because the Mac store people and the website never told me that.  And you are coming across as a zealot asshole and your analogy doesn't actually fly.
> 
> PS:  if you search major mac related websites there is a lot of misinformation about performance of Warcraft III on MacBooks.  Much saying it runs perfectly at full video settings.



I'm not being a zealot (and there's no need for profanity either).  Heck I would even tell you to buy a Windows computer if you wanted it mainly for WC3 (since that's your main concern)!  It just doesn't make sense to spend that amount of money and then complain about a game not working properly on it.

As for those sites, please provide the links to backup your statement.  It's possible that they might have been talking about the *PowerBook G4* and not the MacBook Pro.

In the meantime, check these links out.  Had you really checked (and not gone by someone's word), you would have been better informed.

http://www.apple.com/games/hardware
(Take special note of the box that talks about Intel Core CPU Macs.  And this is right off of Apple's page.)

The other place to check would be the website of Blizzard themself to see if the game has a universal binary, which they don't.  But as you can see, they have the page with the system requirements on it.

http://www.blizzard.com/war3

Don't take your hostility out on me because I was honest.  Take out your hostility at Blizzard for not making a universal binary available.  Send them an e-mail, write them a letter.  Let them know that you want a universal binary for your desired application.  If no one says anything about it, they won't do anything about it.


----------



## nixgeek (May 5, 2006)

By the way, it looks as though you're not the only one wanting a Universal Binary for this game.  A Google search for "'warcraft III' 'universal binary'" came up with some people asking about UBs for WC3.

Here's another link to a list of universal binary games.

http://guides.macrumors.com/Universal_Binary_Games


----------



## Mikuro (May 5, 2006)

This may seem obvious to us longtime Mac users who follow news, but it's certainly not obvious to anyone else, like DeadPrez.

We Mac users don't like to admit it, but this switch certainly causes PR problems, as DeadPrez's experience shows. Furthermore, most Mac sites do GUSH about the performance of Rosetta, because they, like us, have entirely different expectations than any "normal person" would. They see that it runs great _for a non-native program_ or _compared to G4 systems_, and they say it runs great based on that. But any switcher will be judging it against comparable hardware running Windows. It's only natural.

Many (most?) Mac sites assume their readers know a good bit about the Mac, so they really AREN'T good sources of information about this kind of thing for new, uninformed users.

To DeadPrez, all I can say is, now you know. In the future, you'll know what to look for, so you won't get burned. In the meantime, all you can do is pester Blizzard for an update and make do with sub-optimal performance. The good news is that universal binaries are rolling out of company doors every day, and they scream.


You never actually said how WC3 ran, just that it was worse than your PC. Out of curiosity, what is your opinion on its objective performance? Unplayable, decent, good, ___?


----------



## nixgeek (May 5, 2006)

That's understandable, Mikuro.  However, as with anything that costs a LOT of money, it's always good to do research.  $3000 is a lot of cash to be spending without doing the research.  I know I'm going off topic here (as I usually tend to do ), but bear with me.

If someone is going to buy a car, doesn't that person want to make sure they are making an _investment_ in that car?  Considering how gas prices are rising here in the US (not assuming DeadPrez lives in the US), wouldn't it be prudent to make sure you can get the best mileage out of your vehicle?  Maybe it's just me (as I still see many people buying these HUGE SUVs).  Even still, you want to make sure that said vehicle doesn't have any maintenance issues that would be considerably expensive.  All that stuff needs to be researched before making a decision on something that's very expensive.  The same goes for buying a home (even moreso if you ask me).

Getting back to computers, my soon-to-be brother-in-law decided to buy himself a laptop.  He had the resources that he could have referred to, but didn't use them.  He ended up buying himself a Dell Inspiron 710m with a Pentium-M CPU for about 1700 bucks......last year's technology.  Had he contacted me about it (since we just bought a Dell laptop), I would have recommended something with an Intel Core Duo that would have costed him less (not everyone needs a Mac, but everyone should get a good deal on a good computer).  He decided to make that decision himself without doingthe research.  That's bad decision making if you ask me.

DeadPrez, I've seen you on here before _(EDIT: Just checked the profile and it states that it was created yesterday...my mistake...could be another user with a similar name?  Guess I should have done my research! )_.  If this MacBook was a recent purchase, you could have asked us for our opinion.  Heck, you could have even posted to any site asking about your issue and you would have gotten an answer.  From personal experience, I tend not to trust anything that salespeople tell me since they're just trying to make commission, be it Apple or Best Buy or whatever.  Youe best bet is to get your information from people that don't have a specific bias to a company or anything.  You'll find that some people might even recommend a PC if that's what would have solved your problems.

You said that I was a zealot, and I'm far from that (if you look at my sig you'll see that I'm no zealot).  But I am honest and I prefer impartial advice from the people I seek it from, and I give impartial advice to those that seek it.  It would do me no harm if you were to return that MacBook Pro and purchase a Windows PC in its place....so long as that solves your problem.  But that's not Apple's fault.  They have prominently stated the issues that might be encountered.  Had they not done that, I would be on your side.  The one to blame here is Blizzard for not providing the necessary software for people that are upgrading to newer computers.  If you ask me, they are the ones that are showing favoritism to a particular platform.


----------



## DeadPrez (May 5, 2006)

I appreciate your intense concern over my well-being.  But I fear you are only making things worse since you are reading what you want to read and not realizing I am not blaming apple, I am blaming misinformation.

ps:  I had to edit that wiki of Universal Binary Games to make it accurate (and then someone re-edited it so a partial misrepresentation remains).


----------



## DeadPrez (May 5, 2006)

Mikuro, thanks for replying in a much less abrasive manner.

My tests, from the highest settings to the lowest settings, show crippled performance at any resolution and video setting.  Which is to say, unplayable both competitively and casually (though a casual player on a small map might not instantly realize the extent of the degradation).  I can only believe Rosetta is the bottleneck because video settings seem irrelevant to performance.


----------



## nixgeek (May 5, 2006)

DeadPrez said:
			
		

> I appreciate your intense concern over my well-being.  But I fear you are only making things worse since you are reading what you want to read and not realizing I am not blaming apple, I am blaming misinformation.
> 
> ps:  I had to edit that wiki of Universal Binary Games to make it accurate (and then someone re-edited it so a partial misrepresentation remains).




My apologies then to you.


----------



## ex2bot (May 7, 2006)

Not wanting to get too critical here, but IMHO I don't think it's a good idea to harshly criticize someone because he got bit by a complex compatibility bug. 

To us it's simple, Intel Macs don't run PPC software natively. Rosetta is miraculous in that it actually works for non-game software at a reasonable speed. It's even more miraculous that some games apparently work pretty well. Unfortunately, Warcraft III isn't one.

A lot of people don't even understand what what effect a different microprocessor has on a machine much less understanding the intricacies of Rosetta.

DeadPrez, I hope you have better luck with the rest of your software. Every time I see one of those MacBook Pros, I drool. I think that will be my next Mac. But not for awhile.

Doug


----------



## nixgeek (May 8, 2006)

Again, my issue was about not having done the research before spending that amount of money and then having it sound like it was Apple's fault (and again, I'm no zealot but credit must be given where it's due), but this is all water under the bridge now.  I have apologized and it's done, at least for me....it was a simple misunderstanding.


----------



## Damrod (May 8, 2006)

Honestly folks, don't you think it's about time to let this argument die?


----------



## nixgeek (May 8, 2006)

I couldn't agree more.   DeadPrez already stated that it was very slow under Rosetta, and yes Rosetta is most likely the bottleneck in the scenario.  Think if the performance as being akin to running the Windows version under Virtual PC.  Under Rosetta it's probably not as bad as that (since you're also emulating a PC and a WIndows environment, as opposed to just the PPC architecture), but I'm sure it's close enough.


----------



## ex2bot (May 11, 2006)

Rosetta uses a much more efficient emulation than Virtual PC, as I understand it. VPC translates Intel instructions one-by-one into PPC. Rosetta caches the translations. More speed later. I'm sure the article I read is out there, but I don't remember where. It's been awhile.

Rosetta is absolutely amazing and unprecedented. People have been reporting performance roughly equivalent to a 1 GHz PPC on dual 2 GHz Core Duo machines. On my DP 1.8 G5, VPC feels like a 200 or 300 MHz snail.

Doug


----------



## nixgeek (May 12, 2006)

While I'm sure you're correct, I was just giving a general comparison of why it might feel slower.  I'm sure it's not as bad as Virtual PC, but it's obviously not going to feel fast if you're expecting native performace especially on a game.

I can't believe this thread is still alive....might we be beating a dead horse here??  (or maybe a DeadPrez since I haven't seen him answer on this thread for some time now... )


----------



## ex2bot (May 13, 2006)

Yeah, where did everybody go? It's kind of creepy in here. 

Well, I'm outta here. L8R, nixgeek! Don't forget to lock up.

Doug

P.S. Is that a tumbleweed?? I didn't know that was possible.


----------



## nixgeek (May 14, 2006)

dktrickey said:
			
		

> Yeah, where did everybody go? It's kind of creepy in here.
> 
> Well, I'm outta here. L8R, nixgeek! Don't forget to lock up.
> 
> ...



I wish I could, but DeadPrez took the key with him to "the Other Side." 

Maybe a nice bureau would be heavy enough to prevent re-entry.....OK, that didn't sound good......bye...


----------



## DeadPrez (May 14, 2006)

But since there is no "solution" to speak of, short of Blizzard reallocating resources out of the kindness of their heart, I'm not exactly thrilled about the shortcomings/innovativeness (half empty, half full) of Rosetta.  

There are rumors swirling that Blizzard may actually be making universal binaries of many of their older games but I have nothing official to link about that.  Really depends on whether Blizzard think WoW is their only priority (and in terms of $$ its hard to argue).

BTW, my MacBook Pro is in for repair because the hard drive already crashed.  So back on the old Windows desktop for a week.  I wonder what new twist is waiting for me in two weeks?


----------



## nixgeek (May 14, 2006)

From the looks of it on the Net, it looks as though it's time for a recall on the MacBook Pro.  I was looking into getting a MacBook or MacBook Pro sometime in September, but I'm thinking I might go ahead and wait until next year once all of the kinks are worked out.

Incidentally, I haven't heard about any problems with the Intel iMacs.  Weird.


----------



## Damrod (May 15, 2006)

If I remember correct, the last Powerbooks weren't that free of problems either, right? Maybe it's a general problem of Apple on the mobile computing front that's not just present here since the Intel machines arrived. 

Maybe it's just noticed more because of more coverage in the media


----------



## jhawk28 (May 16, 2006)

The good news is that Blizzard seems to be focused on upgrading their software. They keep releasing patches for StarCraft and WarCraft. They upgraded StarCraft to OSX from OS9, so hopefully, they will release a UB version.

Joshua


----------



## Damrod (May 17, 2006)

The question is when they do though


----------



## delsoljb32 (May 17, 2006)

yeah, they do take their sweet time doing things, thats for sure! As far as I can tell, they've backed off the production of Starcraft:Ghost for consoles (not in their Under Development section on the website, and I didnt find it for sale anywhere... hmmm.... is it finished and coming out soon?).


----------



## Damrod (May 18, 2006)

Regarding Ghost: No, it won't be coming out soon or is finished AFAIK. It's on hold, and there is no development done on it. All forces are drawn to WoW: The Burning Crusade I guess.

I don't remember how long it took for Starcraft to be patched for OS X. Anyone remember how long it was?


----------



## ex2bot (May 19, 2006)

Damrod: Regarding Apple notebook reliability, Apple is consistently rated as having the most reliable desktops and notebooks!

What does that say about notebooks in general? Hmmmm

Doug

P.S. ANOTHER tumbleweed!


----------



## HoZ (May 22, 2006)

My friend had a problem with his Mac Book Pro, It kept crashing when he was using lots of processing speed, Like movie editing and such.

I think it is a cooling isshue, Don't take my word for it though


----------



## Ishcabittle (May 22, 2006)

Damrod said:
			
		

> Honestly folks, don't you think it's about time to let this argument die?



Hardly!

One thing you might consider trying is snapping up a copy of Warcraft3 for Windows and running that in XP via Boot Camp.  In my experience XP on an intelMac rips it up in the gaming front, I've been systematically testing everything I can get my grubby little hands on.

If W3 is super super important to have, I bet you it's cheap enough to purchase considering its age.


----------



## hexorcist (May 28, 2006)

Hi,

I consider buying a MacBook Pro, and intend to install WinXP along with OS X (dual-boot) and maybe even Linux. WarCraft III (I have the windows version) is the only game I play, so I was wondering if anyone had tried to run it on the MacBook, with a windows xp install. Does it run smoothly? Has anyone tried other games on a WinXP install on the MacBook?

A problem with headphones in winxp is also described. Anyone experienced this?

Big thanks!


----------



## Mandog (Jun 5, 2006)

Well, slightly off-topic, but I have WC3 working at full res and full settings on my Intel iMac 20 2gb machine.  My MBP 17 OTOH gets a kernel exception every time I run it (even patched to 1.20d).  Ugh.

Boot Camp runs it at full res and full settings beautifully BTW.

Awaiting a fix or some hints on my MBP and a universal binary.

Take care folks,

Manny


----------

