Diablo® III

Dear friend,

I really think that you dont know what you are talking about. Maybe the card is old, but this games demands are too few for that card. It cant even run it on 800x600 while it can perfectly run wow that has more demands on 1280x1024. So, your post is incongruous. It is true though, that people cannot complain and post the same things over and over again, as blizzard has made a refund possible. Hope that everything will get fixed soon and that everyone will be able to enjoy the game.

I'm sorry, your basing this all on the fact an 8 year old MMO can run fine on the card that is pretty damn good for 8 years ago. WoW has had 8 years of optimizations built into it. Diablo 3 has had 2 weeks of live testing on a variety of cards. If you were part of the (late) beta then you would know we had WORSE frame-rate. Blizzard had said at the time that the game was not optimized properly because they were trying to make sure they were shipping a game that works properly.

As for how slow the card is, please check any of the latest Feral games (Bioshock 2, Deus Ex: HR) and please tell me what the support is on them. I can tell you right now they don't support the 9400M because it is a _SLOW_ card. The card was very versatile and kept going for many years longer than it should have. Apple happened to ship a low of LOW end macs with the 9400M in them. Please note that, LOW END, mac shipped with LOW END graphics cards. The 9600M GT isn't that much better, I average between 15-25fps throughout the entire game. I don't really see the point in arguing over which game requires more demand on your computer as neither of us worked on the game and can safely vouch as to which requires more to run.

05/27/2012 02:19 PMPosted by JapeCity

Wouldn't you assume this is a legitimate issue if thousands of people are saying the same thing? It seems like common sense to me.

In no way am I saying it is not a legitimate issue. I am trying to clarify for the apparent masses that do not understand the actual performance of their hardware. We are all in the same boat here, however some people seem content with rocking the boat with their eyes closed in the hopes it will remove all the water we have inside the boat when in-fact it is just making the situation worse.

I don't know about your "boat" but mine (9600M GT - the most reported problematic GPU) is moody when working with Diablo 3 - works pretty well at times and quite bad at other. The weird thing is this is not necessarily related to the stage/place (even thought there are obviously some detail-intence stages). FPS would be great sometimes, even for hours! Other times they would plummet after a single zombie dies. That's does not scream "old-hardware" to me.

Then there is the occasional kernel panic - sometimes 1-2 hours into the game, sometimes 5 minutes into the game. People claim it could be heat related - the game is heavy -> GPU struggles as it is old -> get's hot because of all the heavy computations -> temperature reaches threshold -> computer freezes as to avoid damage to the hardware. Yes? No. In fact my computer crashes sometimes even 2 minutes into the game on a cold machine. Meaning that Diablo crashes my (our) machine. This does not happen with other software/games. Do not try to shift responsibility away from the software and blame a perfectly capable GPU (referring to the 9600M GT 512MB) with no logical argument. Is the game heavier than WoW? Probably, due to new visual effects and mechanics and such and stuff... Can you switch off those effects? Yesss - there are a ton of options that can lower the requirements of the game to be able to run on a 1994 Casio Calculator Watch. Here, the game runs on 1280x1024 with high texture, no shadows, and high physics with stable 30FPS that drops to a mildly annoying 20FPS every time you deal with a pack of enemies. That's totally acceptable for me (until the patch is issued), even though I know that a Windows machine with the same hardware would do a bit better. However, there are these moments (more-often-than-not) when the game just goes crazy - FPS drops and/or a kernel panic occurs and as I pointed out, they are most probably non-hardware related.

That is interesting as I have been running the game without issues and have had it open pretty much constantly since launch. As I also run it on the 9600M GT (512MB). I should note that the 9600M GT has twice the amount of VRAM that the 9400M does, and runs significantly faster than the 9400M.

Here are my D3Prefs.txt if you want to give them a try: http://cl.samdmarshall.com/GwIF

Bump when is this getting implemented?

@ DirkGently, No sir you are wrong about the 2 weeks of testing. As a beta tester we reported the 9400m and most other macs as being slow the last few months of beta. Initially it was fine then they changed something that made it really slow. They were aware then and said "final release" coding would be better and run stable, However here we are pushed aside and basically lied to that it would be better then what we reported in beta 3 months ago.

*sob*

Anything we can do now to at least play? For iMacs with regular nvidia 9400. I don't care about Graphics just so i'm able to play.

Also I'm playing on 10.6.8, should i upgrade to 10.7.4?

Dear friend,

I really think that you dont know what you are talking about. Maybe the card is old, but this games demands are too few for that card. It cant even run it on 800x600 while it can perfectly run wow that has more demands on 1280x1024. So, your post is incongruous. It is true though, that people cannot complain and post the same things over and over again, as blizzard has made a refund possible. Hope that everything will get fixed soon and that everyone will be able to enjoy the game.

I'm sorry, your basing this all on the fact an 8 year old MMO can run fine on the card that is pretty damn good for 8 years ago. WoW has had 8 years of optimizations built into it. Diablo 3 has had 2 weeks of live testing on a variety of cards. If you were part of the (late) beta then you would know we had WORSE frame-rate. Blizzard had said at the time that the game was not optimized properly because they were trying to make sure they were shipping a game that works properly.

As for how slow the card is, please check any of the latest Feral games (Bioshock 2, Deus Ex: HR) and please tell me what the support is on them. I can tell you right now they don't support the 9400M because it is a _SLOW_ card. The card was very versatile and kept going for many years longer than it should have. Apple happened to ship a low of LOW end macs with the 9400M in them. Please note that, LOW END, mac shipped with LOW END graphics cards. The 9600M GT isn't that much better, I average between 15-25fps throughout the entire game. I don't really see the point in arguing over which game requires more demand on your computer as neither of us worked on the game and can safely vouch as to which requires more to run.

05/27/2012 02:19 PMPosted by JapeCity

Wouldn't you assume this is a legitimate issue if thousands of people are saying the same thing? It seems like common sense to me.

In no way am I saying it is not a legitimate issue. I am trying to clarify for the apparent masses that do not understand the actual performance of their hardware. We are all in the same boat here, however some people seem content with rocking the boat with their eyes closed in the hopes it will remove all the water we have inside the boat when in-fact it is just making the situation worse.

A true statement indeed. It's just that it's rather surprising to me that this video card is behind the times. Here I thought I had a decent vessel to run this game on. This just goes to show that I'm lacking in knowledge when it comes to this subject matter :/

Just a rough estimate on an ETA would be better than continuing to say "ASAP" Are we looking at days? Weeks? Months?

05/27/2012 08:37 PMPosted by Rìx

Initially it was fine then they changed something that made it really slow. They were aware then and said "final release" coding would be better and run stable, However here we are pushed aside and basically lied to that it would be better then what we reported in beta 3 months ago.

If this is true, that's pretty gross.

I'm having the same issue as everyone else with my 9400m. Luckily for me I've just been playing on a Guest Pass and haven't spent the $60 yet. If this issue can be resolved I will be happy to buy the game, but as it stands it is not worth the investment.

I was able to play at 1280x800 resolution with all low/off settings for graphics for pretty much all of Act 1. The Skeleton King battle was way too intense and was unplayable. I knocked the resolution down to 800x600 (with all low/off settings still) and was at least able to play, but looking at 800x600 fullscreen is so blurry it makes me want to gouge my eyes out. 800x600 windowed is at least crisp, but rather small on my 13" screen.

I want to give you money, Blizzard. Fix this issue, please!

Let me preface by stating that I am a fan of Blizzard. There are not many other (are there any other?) developers that simultaneously release games for Mac and PC on the same day. If we complain too much, perhaps Blizzard will stop developing for Mac altogether in the future so be careful what you ask for.

I happen to be an attorney and while I have not opened up the books on this topic in while, what follows is why I think Blizzard needs to “belly up to the bar” and level with us Mac users. (Note, what follows is based on Article 2 of the Uniform Commercial Code and would apply in those states that adopted the UCC; it would not apply outside the U.S. nor in states not adopting the relevant provisions of the UCC. These are also my general conclusions and this is not legal advise for anyone in particular.) Blizzard stated what video cards are supported. By doing so, Blizzard is making a representation that D3 will work on machines that meet the minimum specs. In fact, it turns out that D3 is not presently playable on machines with the 9400 and certain other cards despite the fact that Blizzard confirmed machines with these cards would be able to play D3. If and to the extent the game is not playable, then Blizzard has breached its representations and warranties relative to D3 entitling purchasers to a variety of legal remedies. These remedies include, among other things (a) repair (meaning Blizzard fixes the issue) or (b) a refund of the purchase price. Blizzard is required to provide such a remedy in a reasonable time.

It is this latter requirement where I respectfully suggest that Blizzard needs to level with us Mac users impacted by the graphic card issue. At some point, if the patch is not issued in a “reasonable” time, then refunds should be made available. (Perhaps Blizzard is already offering refunds to those who ask. I, for the moment, would prefer to wait in hope the patch comes soon.) While “blue” has indicated that the patch is being worked on etc., we Mac users don’t know if we are looking at days, weeks, months or years. If I bought a new car and it did not work as promised, the dealer/manufacturer would fix it in a day or two at most. If the dealer or manufacturer said “sorry, we hope your car will work soon and please be patient” that dealer/manufacturer would go out of business pretty soon or the relevant governmental agencies (Federal Trade Commission, Consumer Product Safety Commission, etc.) might intercede. In all cases, the dealer/manufacturer would estimate the fix date and would not say “as soon as we can figure it out and we hope that is soon.”

It seems odd to me that Blizzard knew the release date for D3 months in advance of the actual release date but cannot (or will not) give us some better sense of when the Mac patch will be forthcoming. I know that there are many variables here but Blizzard must know something more precise than “soon”.

So, my request/challenge to Blizzard is to level with us Mac users about the patch and when it is likely to be released. By doing so, the impacted Mac users can make an informed decision about waiting or applying for a refund. Again, I plan on waiting this out for the time being but I cannot help but feel like I (we) are being strung along to some extent. I for one believe that openness and transparency on this issue is best.

With Mac taking up 22.5% of all new portable computers sold (which blows all other brand name sellers out of the water) and a large increase and continued growth to its os users (I believe it's at somewhere around 15% which has been about a 4% increase from last year alone) and lets not forget the market chokehold they have on tablets where they own 63% (I'm posting from my iPad) I think it would be silly for them to ignore such a market and stop supporting it they are a corporation that want to make as much profit as possible and want to make headlines. They knew about fps the lag issues for months now and just now came forward to address it because if they would have had separate releases, blizzard would lose a lot of customers if they would have done that and would not have broken sales records.

Everything else in your post I totally agree with and I'm glad you put it out there, so that a lot of users can have some idea of what they can do about this issue.

05/27/2012 08:37 PMPosted by Rìx

@ DirkGently, No sir you are wrong about the 2 weeks of testing. As a beta tester we reported the 9400m and most other macs as being slow the last few months of beta. Initially it was fine then they changed something that made it really slow. They were aware then and said "final release" coding would be better and run stable, However here we are pushed aside and basically lied to that it would be better then what we reported in beta 3 months ago.

Partly true. I can attest to much better performance now than I had over the past few months of the beta. The 9400M hasn't ever been a decent card, so you might not call 5 frames much of an improvement, however the 5-10 frames of improvement I saw on the 9600M GT were enough to make this playable and I am going through Inferno right now as a result of that playability. Other more powerful cards are now working much better than they were during the beta. Treating everything with the lowest common denominator is not a very fair way of evaluating the situation, I'd say.

I am disappointed that Blizz didn't know about the severity of this problem sooner. (I think maybe it's because the levels where the problem is most severe all occur after the Skeleton King, so weren't tested in the large-scale beta.) But given that, I realise the devs can't wave a magic wand and make the problem go away - they have to figure out what's causing the problem, and they have to make sure the fix actually works and doesn't do something even worse (eg cause D3 to crash). They can't give an ETA because they don't know yet what is required - bug-fixing is an inherently unpredictable process. So I think you have to accept 'as soon as we can' for the moment. That hopefully means within days or weeks, but in any case complaining won't make it faster. Give them a couple of weeks at least before accusing them of not making an effort to fix it.

running the game on my late 2009 macbook pro is having the slowness issue as well. its killin me!

05/27/2012 01:02 PMPosted by DirkGently

I am finding it hard to believe that anyone in this thread complaining actually understands how slow the 9400M is and why performance isn't very good with it. It isn't about who is more important or whatever the hell most of you are talking about. It is a matter of drivers being old and the card being slow.

I understand fully. I'm running the 9400M and some zones are unbearable. It takes me somewhere around 15 minutes to run the oasis (just entrance to exit with almost no fights). Fighting Azual on Nightmare was awful (my frame rate was somewhere around 7). This isn't about windows being more important than mac though, which is what a lot of people are making it out to be. Macs are still fairly new to gaming so issues are going to arise, Blizzard has been working with a windows platform for decades and only started working with mac in the past few years. I expect some issues to arise, I just wish this had been fully tested prior to launch. Still a good game though, just wanna be able to continue my progress through hell and hopefully into inferno

05/28/2012 12:44 AMPosted by HarmlessBuny

I am finding it hard to believe that anyone in this thread complaining actually understands how slow the 9400M is and why performance isn't very good with it. It isn't about who is more important or whatever the hell most of you are talking about. It is a matter of drivers being old and the card being slow.

I understand fully. I'm running the 9400M and some zones are unbearable. It takes me somewhere around 15 minutes to run the oasis (just entrance to exit with almost no fights). Fighting Azual on Nightmare was awful (my frame rate was somewhere around 7). This isn't about windows being more important than mac though, which is what a lot of people are making it out to be. Macs are still fairly new to gaming so issues are going to arise, Blizzard has been working with a windows platform for decades and only started working with mac in the past few years. I expect some issues to arise, I just wish this had been fully tested prior to launch. Still a good game though, just wanna be able to continue my progress through hell and hopefully into inferno

Sorry, what?

My Diablo 1 disc has mac and windows. as does my Warcraft 2 disc and I have Warcraft 1 sitting on a drive somewhere. Blizzard has been working on the mac platform for a long time.

They also need to make this problem known, especially to the media. I've read 3 reviews for this game this week alone on Mac review sites where they have blatantly not played the game and are just going from the Blizz press release which states that it runs beautifully on a Mac and that people should run out and buy it. In the comments sections below, there are slews of people saying, 'sounds great, I'm gonna buy it!', etc.

05/28/2012 03:26 AMPosted by Deacon

They also need to make this problem known, especially to the media. I've read 3 reviews for this game this week alone on Mac review sites where they have blatantly not played the game and are just going from the Blizz press release which states that it runs beautifully on a Mac and that people should run out and buy it.

bill! stop the presses!

headline...

"this just in! sometimes computer games run bad on some computers! A nation is shocked"

I want to follow up on my Sunday post regarding purchaser’s right to have Blizzard repair D3 or refund the purchase price in a “reasonable time.” My comments were really applicable if you bought D3 directly from Blizzard. Under the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) your remedies are typically against your “seller.” So, if you purchased from Blizzard, you look for recourse against Blizzard. If you purchased from Amazon, Gamestop, Best Buy etc., then you look to those companies (at least for refund; they obviously cannot repair D3 unless the disk is physically broken etc.) So, it is important that anyone who bought D3 from a third party such as Best Buy know that vendor’s return policy. If the vendor has a 14 day return or money back policy, then if you bought D3 on the release date your time to return D3 is rapidly closing and you, most likely, will have to wait and hope for a patch that fixes the issue (or, perhaps depending on the vendor, a store credit).

Not knowing when the patch will be released really puts us at a disadvantage because if we wait longer than the vendor’s period for return and refund, we potentially lose our right to get our money back. This again highlights the importance of Blizzard giving us some guidance as to when the patch will be released so we can intelligently decide whether we want to get a refund before that right is lost.

So, if you are thinking you might want to return D3 for a refund, it is critical for you to find out your seller’s return policy and make sure you decide what you want to do before the return period expires. If that day is approaching and Blizzard has not given any guidance as to when the patch will be released, it is probably a good idea to return D3 for a refund and then repurchase it later if and when the patch is released. If you wait past your vendor’s period for a refund, you are committed to wait for the patch however long that might be.

Given Blizzard’s historical track record and support for the Mac, I for one intend to wait it out (although the expiration date for my return period is not imminent). Getting some more specific guidance from Blizzard as to the expected release date for a patch, however, would certainly make it easier to make an informed decision here.

I want to follow up on my Sunday post regarding purchaser’s right to have Blizzard repair D3 or refund the purchase price in a “reasonable time.” My comments were really applicable if you bought D3 directly from Blizzard. Under the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) your remedies are typically against your “seller.” So, if you purchased from Blizzard, you look for recourse against Blizzard. If you purchased from Amazon, Gamestop, Best Buy etc., then you look to those companies (at least for refund; they obviously cannot repair D3 unless the disk is physically broken etc.) So, it is important that anyone who bought D3 from a third party such as Best Buy know that vendor’s return policy. If the vendor has a 14 day return or money back policy, then if you bought D3 on the release date your time to return D3 is rapidly closing and you, most likely, will have to wait and hope for a patch that fixes the issue (or, perhaps depending on the vendor, a store credit).

Not knowing when the patch will be released really puts us at a disadvantage because if we wait longer than the vendor’s period for return and refund, we potentially lose our right to get our money back. This again highlights the importance of Blizzard giving us some guidance as to when the patch will be released so we can intelligently decide whether we want to get a refund before that right is lost.

So, if you are thinking you might want to return D3 for a refund, it is critical for you to find out your seller’s return policy and make sure you decide what you want to do before the return period expires. If that day is approaching and Blizzard has not given any guidance as to when the patch will be released, it is probably a good idea to return D3 for a refund and then repurchase it later if and when the patch is released. If you wait past your vendor’s period for a refund, you are committed to wait for the patch however long that might be.

Given Blizzard’s historical track record and support for the Mac, I for one intend to wait it out (although the expiration date for my return period is not imminent). Getting some more specific guidance from Blizzard as to the expected release date for a patch, however, would certainly make it easier to make an informed decision here.

Maybe thats the reason that they dont give us a specific date, or an ETA. Maybe they want us to lose the chance of refund legally, so they dont have to give us our money back ;)