I've got a G5/Dual 2.0. 2GB of RAM, fast drives, so on and so forth. This game is making it feel like an old machine, which it is. Anyway, I'm wondering what difference a new video card might make. I have a 9800 Pro 128MB at the moment, and am looking at either the 6800 Ultra or the x800. I've got 23" and 17" Apple displays.

Does anyone have any practical experience with this sort of upgrade? I'd rather hear from folks that have the setup I'm looking at buying, rather than to hear that it "should be" faster. I can guess that myself. :D

I've got a G5/Dual 2.0. 2GB of RAM, fast drives, so on and so forth. This game is making it feel like an old machine, which it is. Anyway, I'm wondering what difference a new video card might make. I have a 9800 Pro 128MB at the moment, and am looking at either the 6800 Ultra or the x800. I've got 23" and 17" Apple displays.

Does anyone have any practical experience with this sort of upgrade? I'd rather hear from folks that have the setup I'm looking at buying, rather than to hear that it "should be" faster. I can guess that myself. :DHave you downloaded and installed the beta patch? You shouldn't be running into problems with that setup.

Yup, this isn't my first rodeo. :)

It's just a laggy game. I'd like to see it perform as it should.

It is laggy even after the patch. But I'm not sure how much of that is video. One test... try a big map with lots of stuff... and try it at lowest settings... low resolution. Then try the same exact map on higher settings. If the graphics are slowing the game down for you, then a better video card will help.

But without FPS ... it's hard to tell how much difference the video card is making. It would be nice if a review of the game compared speeds... barefeats or something.

My wallet has been itching for a new video card, too, but I want to know if it will help. I'm holding out for another patch to see if they clear up some of the issues.

I'll give that a try. I don't seem to be CPU-limited, as I don't notice much if any performance difference while running other programs in the background. The whole thing is a bit disappointing. I don't blame Brad or Aspyr for design of the game (they work with what was given to them), but for the bugs? You bet. Brad was talking about how an Aspyr beta is the equivalent of others' GM, which now seems like quite the hyperbole, if not some sort of sick joke. When I used to be involved in software development, we would have never let something such as this out the door. Then again, we actually had to support what we sold, so a buggy release drove our support costs up dramatically. Aspyr doesn't seem to have this problem, as they don't do support in the more traditional sense. I'd have thought C3C would have made them more patient, but perhaps it showed them what they could get away with. Disappointing.

I suppose I'll wait for another patch, too, but as it is the game play experience really isn't that great. The game is playable, but isn't exactly enjoyable. I feel as though a good portion of my game playing time is being wasted.

Yeah... I find myself playing in a window, so I can do other things while the computer "thinks."

Fast combat and other little fixes speed the game up tremendously, especially toward the end. Shutting most of the eye candy off so that turns don't take so excrutiatingly long helps. But there is still that jerky scrolling and zooming that makes it tough to play.

My home rig is a dual 2.5 GHz G5 with 2GBs of RAM. It originally had a 9600XT video card with 128 MBs of RAM. The video performance was slow with jerky scrolling at 1600 x 1200. Lowering the resolution really didn't help that much. It might not have been that bad, but I have a Macbook Pro which really runs the game much better.

I bought an X800 with 256 MBs of RAM and that fixed it. It is still not as snappy as the Macbook Pro, but it is just a speed difference, it no longer feels annoying. I think the X800 is a good match for the cpu now. I checked out a couple of games that I already have and could see a big difference in the FPS games that I have. I would recommend getting one.

Yeah... I find myself playing in a window, so I can do other things while the computer "thinks."

Fast combat and other little fixes speed the game up tremendously, especially toward the end. Shutting most of the eye candy off so that turns don't take so excrutiatingly long helps. But there is still that jerky scrolling and zooming that makes it tough to play.

I agree WRT the zooming and scrolling.

I have a Mighty Mouse, and its trackball is so sensitive that I'll find myself getting a close-up look at a land square with horses in it in one instant and, the next instant, find myself with a global view! If Aspyr can find a way to "desensitize" it a wee bit, I'd be a happy camper!

Regarding the scroll, it's harder than hell. I play in windows mode, and it won't scroll at all when I move to the map edge with my arrow. Perhaps I'm missing something elemental, but the only "easy" way to scroll is by selecting a position on the mini-map, which then shows up on the main map. Another way I found to scroll, albeit jerky and annoying, is to pull back from the main map until it's half-way between the city and global view (if that makes any sense), then kind of "sweep" your mouse in the direction you want to go on the main map. It works ... sometimes! Anyway, I hope Aspyr can find a way to improve this as well.

Other than for that, and the game's complexities (and there are a lot of them, especially in WorldBuilder mode) and intermittent sound/music issues, Civ IV looks like it could be a real gem, a true successor to the glory that, IMO, was Civ II.

Gatekeeper

I agree WRT the zooming and scrolling.

I have a Mighty Mouse, and its trackball is so sensitive that I'll find myself getting a close-up look at a land square with horses in it in one instant and, the next instant, find myself with a global view! If Aspyr can find a way to "desensitize" it a wee bit, I'd be a happy camper!
Have you tried de-sensitizing it yourself? Chances are that it would reflect the sensitivity you set using the System Preferences/Keyboard and Mouse pane's tracking speed.

Regarding the scroll, it's harder than hell. I play in windows mode, and it won't scroll at all when I move to the map edge with my arrow.
There is an option in the .ini file to allow scrolling in windowed mode. Set that to 1 and it will scroll when you are near the boundary of the window. But I found it too annoying as the precision required to get the right place on the edge of the window - but not outside the window - was too much for normal use. It was also a pain as it never seemed to scroll when I wanted it to and did when I didn't (for example, selecting a unit near the edge of the screen).

I just use the arrow keys to scroll my view - its easier and doesn't overload the mouse with too many functions.

So the new video card made a big difference? I can't belive your laptop is snappier than a dual 2.5 desktop?! Wow.

Brad was talking about how an Aspyr beta is the equivalent of others' GM, which now seems like quite the hyperbole, if not some sort of sick joke.

I believe you've misinterpreted my past statements. The phase we call "beta" on our status page is the phase where we've declared a game GM and it is off to the PC publisher for final approvals. This has nothing to do with the quality of the end result.

My apologies for misunderstanding that.

Now get back to work and get PBEM fixed! :D

Have you tried de-sensitizing it yourself? Chances are that it would reflect the sensitivity you set using the System Preferences/Keyboard and Mouse pane's tracking speed.

Hmm. They're still on factory settings ... and, from what I can see, there's no way to alter the trackball sensitivity. I'll dig deeper, though. After all, I'm no old pro at OS X yet. Gimme another year, OK? :D

Gatekeeper

So the new video card made a big difference? I can't belive your laptop is snappier than a dual 2.5 desktop?! Wow.

I'm in the middle of putting together some numbers on how fast a particular turn takes to run on my various systems. I had a lot done and then the patch came out, so that slowed me down some. Both because I should redo some tests and I had to check out the patch with extensive real world use. :D

The G5 cranks through the AI turns fine, but with the old video card scrolling was slow. I got the new video card before the patch came out and it does make a big difference.

I'm sorely tempted... don't know how to explain it to the wife though :)

I don't blame Brad or Aspyr for design of the game (they work with what was given to them), but for the bugs? You bet.

Same here. They cannot have tested with a single G5 system during production. The problems would have been to obvious.

Also the so called "OS X bugs" could have been addressed with Apple's assistance during the 6 months of production I am sure. I came to that conclusion by witnessing the speed Apple deleted my critical (but factual) comments from their discussion forums just today. This release is important for them as well.

I think it is reasonable to expect a system released around the same time with a game (the PC version anyway) to perform bearable.

Same here. They cannot have tested with a single G5 system during production. The problems would have been to obvious.

Actually, we did development on G5s. I do have a reasonable explanation for how we missed this, which I'm going to launch into now in the hopes of saving my good name. ;)

As it turns out, the CPU usage bug in Civ4 manifests itself when Civ4 monitors directories that don't exist.

Now during development, John and I were using the raw source to the FX shaders in addition to the binary FX shaders (which you see as the Shaders/FXO directory) since we had to do lots of translation of the shader source. So John and I both had one extra directory that isn't in the final PC data - a Shaders/FX directory. As it happens, Civ4 monitors this directory along with a few others. So we could never reproduce the runaway CPU usage bug. It's worth noting as well that neither our QA department nor our external beta testers ever mentioned that the CPU usage was well over 100%, or that would have been a red flag to us.

Of the three programmers on Civ4, two of us were remote. The third guy was in Austin, and he was dedicated to the sound code. So when we got reports of performance issues with Civ4, we couldn't see firsthand what was going on, and had to rely on trying to reproduce the issues locally on our Macs. We did fix a number of performance issues which were reported back to us as having made a difference, but it's a little shocking to look back on this bug now and realize the extent of the problem. Essentially, everyone in the world but the two guys who needed to see the bug were affected. ;)

Also the so called "OS X bugs" could have been addressed with Apple's assistance during the 6 months of production I am sure.

We didn't get builds of 10.4.7 that broke Civ4 until after Civ4 went GM. We shipped Civ4 off to the duplicators before 10.4.7 was final.

This wasn't a smooth release by any stretch, and I might in fact call it our worst launch ever. So if it feels good to continue ranting about our ineptitude, I won't try and stop you. :)

So if it feels good to continue ranting about our ineptitude, I won't try and stop you. :)

I must admit there is a catharthic quality to it that does feel good. (:mad: => :) )

That said, while mistakes happen, what really matters is how people respond to them. It's good to see you and Aspyr being so responsive. Please consider any future rants from me as calls to excelence.

Well, I splurged and bought a Radeon 800xt w/ 256mb Ram (I use to have a geforce 5200 that came with my g5)... Surprisingly, the scrolling, and animations are still choppy, even on the lowest settings on a standard map! It's very playable, but I'm shocked that this video card, which I think is one of the best you can get for the mac, still isn't able to handle the game.

Wow... at least you curbed my desire to splurge on a new card for a few minutes.

What G5 do you have? How couldn't it make a difference?!

Don't get me wrong it makes a difference, it's really just the scrolling that's really choppy... unless I'm zoomed all the way in. The leader animations are also choppy, but that's not a huge deal to me.

I have a duo 1.8ghz g5 with 1gb of ram and now with a radeon 800xt 256mb

I was expecting more from this card...

It's surprising because there isn't much difference in performance between the resolutions, and settings... weird! But just to be clear, it's alot more enjoyable than the geforce 5200, but probably not worth my first paycheck from my summer internship.

Well, I splurged and bought a Radeon 800xt w/ 256mb Ram (I use to have a geforce 5200 that came with my g5)... Surprisingly, the scrolling, and animations are still choppy, even on the lowest settings on a standard map!

Make sure you are using the beta patch we put out last week.

I was going to say that... but it seemed too obvious.

This wasn't a smooth release by any stretch, and I might in fact call it our worst launch ever. So if it feels good to continue ranting about our ineptitude, I won't try and stop you. :)

I am sure you have had your share of feedback during this summer, but then again, we are paying customers (and therefore always right by the definition ;) ). The ranting comes from the dissapointment. It is not like I didn't want this release to be a success by an standards.

Anyway, I am looking things to turn better in the future (in form of patches).

Well I certainly feel a lot calmer with the latest note from Brad.

I'll continue to remain patient and hopefully the kinks will be worked out faster then it took Firaxis to fix the major kinks in Civ IV for the Windows platform.

By the responses I am seeing I am sure that Aspyr's #1 priority is to fix Civ IV before continuing with any new project.

Yvo

I downloaded 'call of duty 2' demo after noticing how choppy the scrolling was for civ4, turns out the radeon 800xt I just bought handles that game a lot better than civ4. I still can't believe that there wasn't that big of a difference between the geforce 5200 and the Radeon 800xt. Just to be clear I downloaded the patch when it came out.

Make sure you are using the beta patch we put out last week.

Well brad, he had downloaded the patch. And btw, that card CAN run Civ4 very, very well on the PC. Explain that one.

Hello fellow brothers in arms.

My q. regarding the rather poor gforce performance in my dual g5:

How about dual monitor usage, could that slow down the gforce aswell ?


q2: I`m also feeling a lack of multithreading support ( not unlike some other macapps. btw), I hope thats not 10.3 related.

I´ve had far larger and more extensive games rendered within seconds on a single 2 ghz win pc. with only half a gig of ram ( my mac_: standard 1 gig g5 2x2ghz on 10.3.9)

Finally one odd sidenote on the soundissue:

It seems there is no problem in triggering multiple samples of the same file (e.g. 5 marketplaces) (the reported multisample prob. ? ) / but some overlapping issues from the different "levels of sound (atmo-planet ,atmo midview, atmo closeup (especially the fade between mid and closeup)

However I`m a happy customer having played 6 full matches so far ,even on larger maps, at very low gfx settings.

PS: Would there be an "about" date for the first full patchversion ?

and please let us maccies know about the Warlords portation, I`m certain there is an eager betatester in each and everyone of us maccivvers
:)

Cheers oLO(rd)

Hmm. They're still on factory settings ... and, from what I can see, there's no way to alter the trackball sensitivity. I'll dig deeper, though. After all, I'm no old pro at OS X yet. Gimme another year, OK? :D

Gatekeeper

Here is something that can adjust the trackball sensitivity.

http://plentycom.jp/en/steermouse/index.html

*whistles* Thanks for the link, Welnic. I'll have to find the time to read deeper into it ... and soon, too!

Gatekeeper

Well, I splurged and bought a Radeon 800xt w/ 256mb Ram (I use to have a geforce 5200 that came with my g5)... Surprisingly, the scrolling, and animations are still choppy, even on the lowest settings on a standard map! It's very playable, but I'm shocked that this video card, which I think is one of the best you can get for the mac, still isn't able to handle the game.

Try turning the graphics up to High for most settings. I know it sounds silly, but it will probably help you. Don't bother with anti-aliasing or anything, but just turn the textures up to High.

crazy eddie: I just played a game with my new x800 (just installed it tonight) and performance is amazing. I'm playing at 1024x768 at all the highest settings with AA set to 4, and it does very nicely. I scrolled out to the global view on a huge map and rotated the earth. I was very impressed with how smooth it is. There are some small little sticking points, but it's a great improvement over my 9600.

Well brad, he had downloaded the patch. And btw, that card CAN run Civ4 very, very well on the PC. Explain that one.

That's easy - the 5200 on the PC can't run Civ4 "very, very well". ;)

That's easy - the 5200 on the PC can't run Civ4 "very, very well". ;)

I think he has a radeon 800xt..?

Of the three programmers on Civ4, two of us were remote. The third guy was in Austin, and he was dedicated to the sound code. So when we got reports of performance issues with Civ4, we couldn't see firsthand what was going on, and had to rely on trying to reproduce the issues locally on our Macs. We did fix a number of performance issues which were reported back to us as having made a difference, but it's a little shocking to look back on this bug now and realize the extent of the problem. Essentially, everyone in the world but the two guys who needed to see the bug were affected. ;)


I myself am a frequent Brad cheerleader, but I will have to say the above disturbs me a teeny weeny bit. This isn't a Brad problem, or even a programmer problem, it's a resource problem. When trying to code complex applications, you have to be able to test on multiple environments and bring your resources together so everyone can see what everyone else is doing. I understand you are remote, but my request is that this kind of situation needs to be addressed for the future. I hope everyone there Brad understands how to better address different configurations and come up with a solution. Some of us have a really bad habit of recording things like this for the future and counting the number of times it happens. :D

We didn't get builds of 10.4.7 that broke Civ4 until after Civ4 went GM. We shipped Civ4 off to the duplicators before 10.4.7 was final.

This wasn't a smooth release by any stretch, and I might in fact call it our worst launch ever. So if it feels good to continue ranting about our ineptitude, I won't try and stop you. :)

I can understand the timing with 10.4.7. From a developer's point of view, is apple expensive to work with as a developer? Apple, MS and most major developers have a network where they release beta versions of builds. I understand you might be a smaller shop but ideally most everyone should have some sort of ability to get access to betas so things can be tested ahead of time.

I'm a bit anal about insisting shops have this, but I can understand how this might be a problem in recent years. My company is a Microsoft shop and we stopped participating in the "microsoft certification" programs and obtaining beta builds because being officially part of the program cost too much money. Apple might be the same way.

This isn't a Brad problem, or even a programmer problem, it's a resource problem.

Indeed. Welcome to the world of mac games. If there were 10x as many mac users, or we all paid $400 for the game, those resource issues would be solved.