• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

StarCraft 2 Beta |OT| (Beta Now Reopen, GL HF)

C

celebi23

Member
So, awhile back, I used the System Check app on my dad's iMac (has better specs than my MacBook Pro)

Current_SystemCheck_Results.png


I just installed 2GB more RAM & ran the System Check app on my MacBook Pro (used CrossOver Games for the Windows version)

SystemCheck_Mac_2_fixed_2.png


SystemCheck_PC_2_Fixed.png


Should I replace the specs, already on the Beta Opt-In page, with my MacBook Pro's Windows or Mac specs?
Will having Windows, show up in the specs, really affect when I get into the Beta?
Should my MacBook Pro be able to play the Beta?
 
G

Gribbix

Member
celebi23 said:
Should my MacBook Pro be able to play the Beta?
Click to expand...
I'm running the beta on a similarly spec'd 3+ year old MBP (2.33 GHz Core 2 Duo, 2GB RAM, Radeon X1600 with 256MB VRAM). The game defaulted to the lowest settings so I stayed with that. I'm averaging around 40+ FPS at 1440x900. It's certainly doesn't look as good as all the screens you're seeing, but I'm happy with the performance.
 
C

celebi23

Member
vultureparade said:
I don't know if this has been posted, but here are a bunch of Starcraft 2 beta HD videos on youtube

http://www.youtube.com/user/hdstarcraft?blend=1&ob=4



Blizzard said that they aren't doing a mac beta at this time, so opting in with windows is probably the safer bet.
Click to expand...


Gribbix said:
I'm running the beta on a similarly spec'd 3+ year old MBP (2.33 GHz Core 2 Duo, 2GB RAM, Radeon X1600 with 256MB VRAM). The game defaulted to the lowest settings so I stayed with that. I'm averaging around 40+ FPS at 1440x900. It's certainly doesn't look as good as all the screens you're seeing, but I'm happy with the performance.
Click to expand...

Thanks guys :D Just submitted the Windows specs. Hopefully that won't drop me to the bottom of the list :lol
 
I

Ice Monkey

Member
Jesus Christ, 2 full pages go by before I can say something of interesting importance involving the resolution changes from 1680x1050 to 1024x768 and why that doesnt matter.

Blizzard said something about being challenged with the resolution allowed on a computer for tournaments and stuff, to even out the playing field. They settled on 1024x768 being the default res, as you can see when you play sc2 beta windowed, it goes to 1024x768 and when you resize it it just stretches the image.

If you notice the screenshots between 1680x1050 and 1024x768 they look like they cover the same exact amount of ground, so we could be talking about some type of intelligent stretching going on here that wouldn't have affected performance much if at all.
 
B

brucewaynegretzky

Member
Two questions:

1.) How many units can be selected at a time? Shots I've seen show way more than the old 12.

2.) Do units still walk in a straight line when you send a bunch of units somewhere or can you get them to walk in formations of some sort?
 
G

Gribbix

Member
brucewaynegretzky said:
Two questions:

1.) How many units can be selected at a time? Shots I've seen show way more than the old 12.
Click to expand...
As far as I can tell, there's no limit to how many units can be simultaneously selected.

2.) Do units still walk in a straight line when you send a bunch of units somewhere or can you get them to walk in formations of some sort?
Click to expand...
I'm not sure what you mean by formations. It's been about a year since I've last played SC1, but for the most part, the units do a better job of not getting into each other's way.
 
S

Sloegr

Member
FromTheFuture said:
Otherwise, they've added sequenced commands (not sure if the right term for this) which was present in WC3 but not SC1. Essentially, by holding shift, you can give a series of commands, and the units will follow them out in succession.
Click to expand...

Sequenced commands exist in SC1. I know you can give a bunch of move commands using the shift key, and the unit will carry them out in order.
 
B

brucewaynegretzky

Member
I think my first question got people confused. What I meant was do they walk in a single file line when you move them. For example if you have your units in a small circle in C&C they walk in that circle to the point you sent them. In SC1 they would form a single file line. Do they do the single file thing again or do they stay in the formation they are in when you give the command?
 
Y

Yaweee

Member
What does the game do if you select a non-widescreen resolution when you have a widescreen monitor? I'm a bit concerned with framerate due to my shit GPU, and it seems to be tossup between games whether lowering the resolution results in the stretching or not.
 
I

Ice Monkey

Member
FromTheFuture said:
1. You can select an infinite amount of units. Up to 120 units are visible on the UI. What happens is when you select units, they are separated into 5 groups of 24. You can still control them all, but they are in different number groups on the UI.
Click to expand...

Incorrect, and to the other one who said this too. You're unlikely to ever encounter it but the limit is something like 200 or maybe more units. look at my video and i'm not sure if you can see it but when i'm moving the zerglings near the end i have them in 2 separate groups because there is some arbitrary limit, it's not infinite.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfl279o_Cko

Just making this official :)

I have another video ill upload later where I have 200 marines in one hotkey group and destroy a base, also testing the pathfinding among alternating groups of supply depots raising/lowering. It looks pretty cool.

This type of stuff is basically what i do with the beta now that I realized that everyone I play against is some SC pro or something, I can't win worth shit maybe like 1/5 games I win because the other player happens to be stupid for once.
 
Minsc

Minsc

Gold Member
Ice Monkey said:
Jesus Christ, 2 full pages go by before I can say something of interesting importance involving the resolution changes from 1680x1050 to 1024x768 and why that doesnt matter.

Blizzard said something about being challenged with the resolution allowed on a computer for tournaments and stuff, to even out the playing field. They settled on 1024x768 being the default res, as you can see when you play sc2 beta windowed, it goes to 1024x768 and when you resize it it just stretches the image.

If you notice the screenshots between 1680x1050 and 1024x768 they look like they cover the same exact amount of ground, so we could be talking about some type of intelligent stretching going on here that wouldn't have affected performance much if at all.
Click to expand...

Nope, that's fundamentally not how 3D rendering works. You get the same visible space regardless of resolution. It's aspect ratio that changes things. 1600x1200 is rendering 2.4x the amount of pixels as 1024x768 with the same information being shown, just in finer detail.

Only hacked 2D RTS games let you see more map space on higher resolutions.

Blizzard did mention something about supporting 16:10 resolutions, I'm not sure how they balanced them, but you are going to end up seeing different portions of the screen compared to a 4:3 resolution.
 
T

TheExodu5

Banned
Ice Monkey said:
Jesus Christ, 2 full pages go by before I can say something of interesting importance involving the resolution changes from 1680x1050 to 1024x768 and why that doesnt matter.

Blizzard said something about being challenged with the resolution allowed on a computer for tournaments and stuff, to even out the playing field. They settled on 1024x768 being the default res, as you can see when you play sc2 beta windowed, it goes to 1024x768 and when you resize it it just stretches the image.

If you notice the screenshots between 1680x1050 and 1024x768 they look like they cover the same exact amount of ground, so we could be talking about some type of intelligent stretching going on here that wouldn't have affected performance much if at all.
Click to expand...

No, they cover a different amount of ground. I posted the shots earlier.

native.png


1024.png


It's going to depend on the aspect ratio, as Minsc said. 16:10 does seem to provide more coverage than 4:3. The question is whether 16:10 or 16:9 provides the most screen space now.

As for the same performance, as I said earlier, it's because of the CPU limitation at these settings.

Three of the visual settings have CPU demands:

Terrain Detail (moderate impact)
Shaders (very heavy impact)
3D Portraits (low impact ~10% performance)

The rest of the visual settings appear to be entirely GPU based (except for physics I presume...but it's hard to test that out since physics cannot be evaluated in a still frame).
 
P

Pandaman

Everything is moe to me
theexodus is right, there's something seriously weird about the shaders. :\

on my laptop:
all settings on low = 110 fps
all settings on low + ultra texture detail = 90fps
all settings on ultra except shaders [on low] = 80fps
all settings on ultra = 20-40fps
all settings on low, shaders on ultra = 20-40fps
 
N

NameGenerated

Who paid you to grab Dr. Pavel?
Can anyone else not connect to Battle.net on SC1? It says it's "unable to properly identify my application version" and to uninstall/reinstall it. I just installed it like 2 hours ago.
 
A

aznpxdd

Member
Just tripled everyone's score again with Marines/Mauraders/Medivac. :D It seems most people don't defend against drops.

Anyone on GAF wanna play some 2v2?
 
A

autobzooty

Member
Crisco said:
Uh, not on PC monitors.....
Click to expand...

1080p was the most common thing I saw when I was shopping for a monitor for my computer. That's what I got.

spoon! said:
Are you intending on playing sc2 on a big comfy couch? :p
Click to expand...

Actually I just bought a new office chair today and my PC experience is comfier than ever now!
 
K

KnightM7

Banned
This was probably already asked but anyways. Is it safe to assume that we're definitely getting new units with each game in the trilogy?

ie.
SC2: Heart of the Swarm - 1 new unit for each race
SC2: Legacy of the Void - 1 new unit for each race, plus a new playable one!!
 
A

autobzooty

Member
KnightM7 said:
This was probably already asked but anyways. Is it safe to assume that we're definitely getting new units with each game in the trilogy?

ie.
SC2: Heart of the Swarm - 1 new unit for each race
SC2: Legacy of the Void - 1 new unit for each race, plus a new playable one!!
Click to expand...

I believe Blizzard said something about each release being comparable to a "Brood War" type expansion pack, but I don't think even they're sure of it yet. I'd be very surprised if new units weren't added.

plus a new playable one!!
Click to expand...

no. fastest way to ruin starcraft would be to add a new race.
 
E

evlcookie

but ever so delicious
Crisco said:
Uh, not on PC monitors.....
Click to expand...

It's starting to make it's way into the PC monitor world these days. A lot of monitors are 16:9 now instead of the "old" 16:10, i know it's crazy!
 
Z

Zzoram

Member
KnightM7 said:
This was probably already asked but anyways. Is it safe to assume that we're definitely getting new units with each game in the trilogy?

ie.
SC2: Heart of the Swarm - 1 new unit for each race
SC2: Legacy of the Void - 1 new unit for each race, plus a new playable one!!
Click to expand...

The most an expansion will add is 1-2 units/buildings per race. No new playable race, that's just stupid.
 
S

spoon!

Member
Speaking of units, is the lurker going to be in or out? I don't remember anyone saying it got cut out, but its definitely not in the beta build...
 
Z

Zzoram

Member
spoon! said:
Speaking of units, is the lurker going to be in or out? I don't remember anyone saying it got cut out, but its definitely not in the beta build...
Click to expand...

They're fixing it at the moment I believe. It's currently a useless unit, because it's in the same tier as ultralisks and they fill the same role.
 
S

spoon!

Member
Zzoram said:
They're fixing it at the moment I believe. It's currently a useless unit, because it's in the same tier as ultralisks and they fill the same role.
Click to expand...
Oh right. Hive tech lurkers :lol
 
T

TheExodu5

Banned
autobzooty said:
If 16:10 provides an advantage, I'm going to be very angry. 16:9 is much more common and should be the standard!!
Click to expand...

Although I have a 16:10 monitor I would prefer it if 16:9 was the baseline for SC2. 16:9 appears to be gaining popularity in the PC world and since 1080p is the standard in home entertainment I would like to be able to conform on the PC side as well. One common resolution makes it much easier to integrate all the devices on one screen.

Either way though, the difference in between 16:9 and 16:10 is very minimal. It's not going to be providing any meaningful advantage.
 
F

FoxSpirit

Junior Member
Runs around 45-50FPS on my 4850 and a E4400@2.9GHz, everything on Ultra. Dips down to 30 during heavy action.
And yeah, I could set textures to Ultra despite just having 512MB VRAM.
Anisotropic is a must, makes the ground looks much better, AA doesn't work through CCC so maybe later.

Oh yeah, and you can watch beta replays even if you didn't get picked yet without cracking the game... oh Blizzard :lol
 
S

Snapshot King

Member
MrMister said:
Seriously I don't want another SFIV on my hands where I get so mad at the online community whooping my ass where I quit multi forever. :lol
Click to expand...

Suck it up and practice your protoss links and zerg jump cancels.
 
I

infinityBCRT

Member
TheExodu5 said:
Although I have a 16:10 monitor I would prefer it if 16:9 was the baseline for SC2. 16:9 appears to be gaining popularity in the PC world and since 1080p is the standard in home entertainment I would like to be able to conform on the PC side as well. One common resolution makes it much easier to integrate all the devices on one screen.

Either way though, the difference in between 16:9 and 16:10 is very minimal. It's not going to be providing any meaningful advantage.
Click to expand...
There are 16:9 PC displays? I was always under the impression that 16:10 was the norm.
 
K

KaYotiX

Banned
Played a few games today and damn I'm still getting slapped around by alot of these SC pros lol. I'm decent but when I watch the replays they are way ahead of me in skill.

Love the game though and the only way to get better is too keep playing I guess. Hopefully more ppl are let in soon so it levels the playing field a bit. Only had 1 game that wasn't me wining ASAP or me losing ASAP :lol
 
S

spwolf

Member
infinityBCRT said:
There are 16:9 PC displays? I was always under the impression that 16:10 was the norm.
Click to expand...

they are the norm, still... most new ones are 16:9, but it will take quite a while for them to take over the install base.

so there is no wrong answer there really.
 
I

Ice Monkey

Member
I guess when I see those screenshots I don't notice much if any difference in the playing field as much as yall do.

By the way whoever asked about the movement pathing earlier, check out my video I posted to see how smoothly even 400 lings walk in a straight line.
 
A

aznpxdd

Member
Zzoram said:
They're fixing it at the moment I believe. It's currently a useless unit, because it's in the same tier as ultralisks and they fill the same role.
Click to expand...

They don't serve the same role, but still, Hive lurks is just way too late.
 
I

infinityBCRT

Member
Olivero said:
Anyone up for up for some SC1? Channel GAF USEast.
Click to expand...
Me, Mila and Panda just played a game. I built up my army slowly expecting to get raped but it never happened. After I was confident with my forces I started trotting around the map and just saw a bunch of decimated bases. Mila and Panda beat the crap out of each other and I had the easy win :D
 
I

infinityBCRT

Member
NameGenerated said:
Can anyone else not connect to Battle.net on SC1? It says it's "unable to properly identify my application version" and to uninstall/reinstall it. I just installed it like 2 hours ago.
Click to expand...
right click on starcraft.exe and put "run as administrator"... it doesn't even work when i enable run as admin by default in compatibility settings, only when i right click and run as admin/
 
B

Blizzard

Banned
Ice Monkey said:
I guess when I see those screenshots I don't notice much if any difference in the playing field as much as yall do.

By the way whoever asked about the movement pathing earlier, check out my video I posted to see how smoothly even 400 lings walk in a straight line.
Click to expand...
I thought the same thing! I was scrolling up and down and couldn't really tell a difference in the field shown. I thought I was going crazy. :lol
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Destiny 2 PC Beta Thread - Codes are redeemable, preload starts Friday 25th, 10AM PDT
44 45 46 47 48
2K
266K
Waaghals replied
Media Create Sales: Week 2, 2019 (Jan 07 - Jan 13)[
Sales-Age
5
1K
ZSaberLink replied
Hearthstone |OT10| Ultimate Infuriation
42 43 44 45 46
2K
231K
SirKicksalot replied
My Little Pony: The Movie (2017) |OT| Big Screen, Small Horse
2 3 4 5
247
46K
Fat4all replied
My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic Season 7 |OT| Is this still a fad?
25 26 27 28 29
1K
348K
draetenth replied
Top Bottom