Sign the Petition!

AlanH said:
That explains the non-release of C3C. But I said PtW, not C3C. It was released way before C3C, and version 1.21 was playable relatively bug-free. It was available in late 2001, so could have been ported to Mac OS, even without the multi-play.

In SP, PTW was playable upon release. But, when you consider the patch history of Civ3, MacSoft didn't want to go down that road again, IMHO (pure conjecture). As it is, we barely got 1.29, thanks in large part to cracker's efforts through dialogue with Brad Oliver. With the scene set for PTW being another patch-party, I feel MacSoft chose not to, plus as I mentioned, PTW didn't sell as well as expected.
 
AlanH said:
The critical section re. multiplayer is at the end of post #10. I need to work out the precise translation of that sentence, unless you have it:

That says, that the multiplayer part will be a part of the programm from the very beginning on, the design of the whole software will following the multiplayer idea. It will not be something additional like an AdOn or a PlugIn again.

I understand ColdFevers statement in that way, that DirectX will not be used in programming Civ IV, but I guess I should secure that and ask him especially about this point.
 
They may just be saying that the *game* design accommodates multiplayer better. They can use DirectPlay, or any other communications method, to implement multi-player, whether they create it as an add-on or integrate it. It's just a communications protocol and an associated set of programming commands.

I hope they were not saying the multi-player programming structure itself is non-modular. If they integrate DirectPlay commands into the heart of the code it would be more difficult to create a Mac version that doesn't use DirectPlay, as they can't just leave one chunk of code out, they'd have to patch out individual DirectPlay commands in the Mac version. It could then mean they have to build a Mac DirectPlay implementation in order to port C4 at all.
 
Well, new infos, and not the good one:

ColdFever said:
Allerdings, und die absolut neueste Version ist Pflicht, ohne die läuft gar nichts. DirectX ist bei Civ4 überall drin, ob es die Grafik einschließlich der neuen Pixelshadertechnik oder der Netzwerkcode ist.

Und der Hardware und dem Betriebssystem fordert Civ4 eine Menge ab. Insofern würde ich allen Civ4-Interessenten raten, sich für den Herbst mit Folgendem zu versorgen:
WinXP/2000 (für Win 98 dürfte es eng werden)
512 MB (besser noch 1024, 256 dürften eng werden)
Grafikkarte mit 64 MB RAM (32 MB dürften eng werden)

Das sind natürlich keine offiziellen Angaben, aber die genannten Daten sind auch für fast alle anderen hochmodernen Programme inzwischen sinnvoll, und das megakomplexe Civ4 dürfte davon keine Ausnahme machen.

it says, that Direct X in the latest version is an "must have" for playing Civ 4
it will run on Win XP with 512 MB RAM and 64 MB Video RAM minimum.

These are not official datas, but they will fit.
 
I don't think DirectX is a problem. It's the graphics display system to handle sprite movement and scene textures and such, and was used for CivIII, and the Mac version was produced OK. DirectPlay is the multiplayer communications technology.
 
AlanH said:
I don't think DirectX is a problem. It's the graphics display system to handle sprite movement and scene textures and such, and was used for CivIII, and the Mac version was produced OK. DirectPlay is the multiplayer communications technology.


Is DirectPlay not an part of DirectX package. I don't know.

Well, we will see... but reading about the fact that a Directwhatever technique is in use does not raise my mood, you know.
 
Yes, reading M$ site info, it does appear that DirectPlay is a component of the DirectX suite. I guess ease of porting, or otherwise, depends on how dependent the software is on each aspect of DirectX, but we can only speculate.
 
hmmm

I am not an IT specialist, just a businessman....

But I will have Civ 4 on my Mac :D

So I have searched the internet for a while using keywords like "macintosh +Direct X" ...

Well, I found two homepages, one is http://www.libsdl.org/index.php which sounds quite interessting (I guess)
and I found that: http://www.coderus.com/ and I guess that should be the end of all sorrows. Because they present MacDX which is - so I have understand the message - the Macintosh version of Direct X.

Or not ?
 
The Coderus MacDX product certainly looks promising. I have no idea whether it covers all the API calls used in CivIII or IV, but it certainly seems to have the main components, including DirectPlay. I wonder how much they want for it :hmm:
 
Hate to burst your bubble guys, but MacDX won't get Mac-PC network play going. DirectX is made up of lots of parts; DirectDraw, Direct3D, DirectPlay, etc... All of the Mac porting houses have coding libraries similar to MacDX to help in porting windows games to the Mac. MAC DX and similar software helps mitigate the porting of the graphics and sound of a game over to the Mac, but the networking component known as DirectPlay is a nut that just can't be cracked.

I looked down this road when PtW came out and it was reported that it used DirectPlay for multiplayer. I posted to every forum and message board I could. The answer I got from people in the industry (maybe even including Brad) was always the same:

If Firaxis uses TCP/IP or some similar open networking standard, we're good. If it's DirectPlay, we're screwed.

I think Brad even metioned in an InsideMacGames.com interview once that he and Westlake Interactive (who he worked for at the time and was doing the port of Civ3) were flat out asking Firaxis to use TCP/IP in PtW to keep Mac-vs.-PC a possibility. You see where that got us... :(

Jack_of_All_Trades
 
What does the DirectPlay component of MacDX do then? I downloaded the demo of that piece specifically, and it appeared to contain the sort of API calls you'd expect. I couldn't make it join a client to a server, but I assumed that was just my lack of knowledge of the protocol.
 
I dug up the following 2 quotes from Brad Oliver and Glenda Adams on the issue (God bless Google):

From- http://apolyton.net/misc/interviews/ac_bradoliver2.shtml

"DanQ: In terms of multiplayer capabilities, will it be compatible to allow Mac SMACer's to go head-to-head with their Windows-based counterparts?

Brad Oliver: Very sadly, no. The Windows port uses DirectPlay, which is a proprietary networking protocol designed by Microsoft and which only runs under Windows.

It would be a near-Herculean task to reverse-engineer DirectPlay to get it to run on the Mac, Linux, etc..., and to date Microsoft hasn't expressed any interest in helping port DirectPlay to another OS. I doubt very much that Microsoft would welcome someone reverse-engineering their code without their assistance, and no one really wants to face Microsoft's legal team to find out ;-)

The only way at this point for Mac users to play with Windows users would be if Firaxis were to add networking support that didn't rely on DirectPlay (or any other proprietary scheme) to the Windows version, or Microsoft were to step up to the plate and help get DirectPlay running on the Mac. DirectPlay is very convenient for Win32 programmers as it's a nice high-level networking API, so it's far too tempting for them to ignore. The downside is that it forces a game to only be compatible with Microsoft operating systems. I dream of a day when game developers use open networking protocols.

To that end, I know of at least one currently: OpenPlay, an open-source library which uses a high level API (similar to DirectPlay) and runs on both Win32 and the Mac. It has been field-tested in Bungie's "Myth" series of games. If game developers would use it or something just as open, then it would make our lives a lot easier and would stem the complaints from users who wish to play cross-platform network games. I really can't stress this point enough. If a game company wants to make a game run on more than one platform, use a non-proprietary networking API :-)"

And from- http://www.insidemacgames.com/features/view.php?ID=138&Page=2

"IMG: And there’s always the issue of networking. Let’s call it the biological equivalent of a mouth, where one computer has to talk to another. In the case of Macs and PCs, this can be even more difficult because they often speak different languages. Specifically, many PC games use Microsoft’s networking protocol DirectPlay.

Actually, DirectPlay can be thought of as a virus. Mac developers can make software that works with an existing version, but Microsoft frequently updates the code – mutates the virus, if you will – meaning Mac game developers would have to constantly change code in older games to keep them compatible with their Windows cousins.

Glenda: For networking, DirectPlay is a real thorn in the side of Mac gamers. Microsoft hasn't published the internal DirectPlay networking protocols, so the only way to make a Mac game compatible is to reverse engineer DirectPlay and build a compatible library on the Mac. This has been tried in the past, with varying degrees of success. The problem is even if you can get Microsoft to not sue you for reverse engineering DirectPlay, you still have to end up rewriting your Mac DirectPlay library every time Microsoft updates DirectX. So you get stuck in a never ending process of maintaining a network library where you never know what will change next. The scope of a Mac DirectPlay library is large enough I don't think it’s economically feasible to do unless you can use it for several games. But since every game might use a different version of DirectPlay, or different features of the networking, you may not be able to reuse the Mac DirectPlay code from one game in another.

With all the legal and technical (and financial!) hassles, nearly every publisher has opted to do Mac-to-Mac network play only for DirectPlay games."
 
AlanH said:
What does the DirectPlay component of MacDX do then? I downloaded the demo of that piece specifically, and it appeared to contain the sort of API calls you'd expect. I couldn't make it join a client to a server, but I assumed that was just my lack of knowledge of the protocol.

I think MacDX helps in steering DirectPlay calls in a games program into the appropriate protocol on the Mac (like OpenPlay or TCP/IP) when porting the code itself.

JoAT
 
This subject has been exhausted several times in this forum. Check out threads like this. The most sensible inputs I've seen have been along the lines of:

Who needs network play? It's not appropriate to Civ. If you visit the game servers you'll see what a tiny population of players are involved in it, and a specific Mac-Mac protocol would obviously attract even fewer users. So why can't we just have (PTW/C3C/Civ4) for MacOS without network play?

... well, that depends on the effort involved in creating a version of the code that can run without a DirectPlay interface.
 
AlanH said:
This subject has been exhausted several times in this forum...

Too true; this and a multitude of other forums for all sorts of games. I think publishers really need to start pushing their development houses into using open standards when it comes to networked games, not just for Mac gamers sakes, but also now that a lot of PC games are being ported to consoles. And who knows if games will start making their way to Linux boxes or some yet-unreleased operating systems of the future. Open standards give publishers options, and I don't know of any business that doesn't like to have options.

To bring this post a little more back on the original topic; I still think that Civ 4 coming to the Mac is pretty much a given, even if network play is built in from the beginning and is based on DirectPlay. Sure it will make for some extra work for the porting house to work the code (even then just working Mac-to-Mac only), but the Civ franchise sells too well on the Mac to ignore the audience.

Hopefully Aspyr gets the Mac publishing rights so Brad can get his mits on the game and can do the same quality job on Civ4 as he did on Civ3. :)

JoAT
 
AlanH said:
Who needs network play? It's not appropriate to Civ. If you visit the game servers you'll see what a tiny population of players are involved in it, and a specific Mac-Mac protocol would obviously attract even fewer users. So why can't we just have (PTW/C3C/Civ4) for MacOS without network play?

I agree wholeheartedly. You've got to figure that the companies involved realize this as well.
 
Hey Dojoboy, are you having trouble with transparency again?
 

Attachments

  • dojo.gif
    dojo.gif
    3.4 KB · Views: 157
AlanH said:
Hey Dojoboy, are you having trouble with transparency again?

Uh, not anymore. ;) I'm using the avatar on a few sites, and just didn't tinker with it. Thanks.
 
AlanH said:
What does the DirectPlay component of MacDX do then?

The same thing our DirectPlay component does at Aspyr - it's a thin layer on top of OpenPlay/NetSprocket. Totally different protocol under the hood.
 
Back
Top Bottom