rec.autos.simulators

F1GP 2, aren't we asking for the impossible ??

John Wallac

F1GP 2, aren't we asking for the impossible ??

by John Wallac » Thu, 13 Jun 1996 04:00:00



:) Fame at last....!!

On the P-Pro question, I honestly don't know. I've had a couple of P-
Pros, but I haven't done testing, overclocking or performance
comparisons to anything like the extent I've done on 386, 486 and
Pentium systems.

What I can say is, a P-Pro is certainly not the only option for GP2.
With the limited market pick-up of the P-Pro, Intel have just launched
the P-200, which is something they had no intention of doing a few
months ago. With Intel guaranteeing 200Mhz performance from their chips,
you can bet there's more to come from the Pentium range. With S-DRAM
allowing motherboard speeds up to 75Mhz or more, expect a triple clocked
P-225 running on a 75mhz motherboard - now THAT would seriously shift
GP2, especially if the PCI components operated at 37.5Mhz.

Moving aside from Intel's plans, we saw on the 486 how Cyrix, AMD, STM
and others developed the 486 market long after Intel had moved to the
Pentium. Even if Intel do desert the Pentium and the Pro proves to be a
poor option for GP2, expect the other manufacturers to extend their
"Pentium" range to fill the gap.

As long as there's a gap in the market for this, the huge number of
games fans needing CPUs to run 16/32-bit code as fast as possible will
ensure someone supplies the hardware (and cheaply too in order to
undercut the Pro).

No worries!

Cheers,
John

                      _________________________________
          __    _____|                                 |_____    __
_________|  |__|    :|          John Wallace           |     |__|  |_________

  \     :|  |::|    :|       Team WW Racing TSW        |     |::|  |      /
    >   :|  |::|    :|_________________________________|     |::|  |    <
  /     :|__|::|____:/         Sim Racing News         \.____|::|__|      \
/_______:/  \::/ http://www.racesimcentral.net/\::/  \._______\

Richard Bus

F1GP 2, aren't we asking for the impossible ??

by Richard Bus » Thu, 13 Jun 1996 04:00:00

BTW, does anyone know how much hard disk space this game is going to take up? I need
to know in order to take stock of my drive space in preparation for this game.
Thanks,   RB
Remember that racecar is racecar spelled backward.
Busch Motorsports

John Wallac

F1GP 2, aren't we asking for the impossible ??

by John Wallac » Fri, 14 Jun 1996 04:00:00



Your choice.

The full install takes up 60Mb (!!), but you can make a minimum install
of 10-ish Mb and run the majority from CD. For the sake of speed, I've
got a couple of hundred Mb cleared in anticipation.... :)

Cheers!
John

                      _________________________________
          __    _____|                                 |_____    __
_________|  |__|    :|          John Wallace           |     |__|  |_________

  \     :|  |::|    :|       Team WW Racing TSW        |     |::|  |      /
    >   :|  |::|    :|_________________________________|     |::|  |    <
  /     :|__|::|____:/         Sim Racing News         \.____|::|__|      \
/_______:/  \::/ http://sneezy.dcn.ed.ac.uk/simnews/index.htm\::/  \._______\

Randy Magrud

F1GP 2, aren't we asking for the impossible ??

by Randy Magrud » Sat, 15 Jun 1996 04:00:00


>But, that being said, I can't help but see some strange irony in the
>fact that you need a $4,000 machine to run this game in good
>conditions (i.e., svga and most details on, to get an adequate fps
>rate), while, this fall, you can spend $500 on a Sony Playstation, Mad
>Katz steering wheel pedal combo, and Psygnosis' F1 game... which
>albeit is more of an arcade game than a sim, but with a supposed
>30fps, amazing graphics (IMHO better graphics than GP II).

$500?  No way.  The costs are:

Playstation                           $200  ($199 actual)
Mad Katz Wheel & Pedals:    $70
Psygnosis' F1 Game:             $60
                                         ----------
                                            $330

You also can buy Electronic Arts' Andretti Racing 97, Need for Speed
and other racing games.

Randy

Eduardo Jorge Magalh?es de Figueired

F1GP 2, aren't we asking for the impossible ??

by Eduardo Jorge Magalh?es de Figueired » Mon, 17 Jun 1996 04:00:00

Hello!
I would like for someone to send me (if possible), all the car setings
for all the tracks in Nascar Racing.
I do not know anything about that stuff.
I would really like your help!
Thank you.

ARobe855

F1GP 2, aren't we asking for the impossible ??

by ARobe855 » Mon, 17 Jun 1996 04:00:00

Hiya m8

Check out the pits web site.  The address is on my web page(address at
bottom in sig).  But when u click on the link you will have to delete the
index.html bit to accsess site.

Cya
The answers are there.  You just have to know where to look...
Check out my web page for all your links to F1GP,Indycar,ICR2,Nascar and
X-Files.
Do it know : http://members.aol.com/ARobe85580/home.html

Chuck Stuar

F1GP 2, aren't we asking for the impossible ??

by Chuck Stuar » Mon, 17 Jun 1996 04:00:00


Select Garage from the menu, then Options, then Load, then choose your poison.

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chuck Stuart - Mesquite TX USA  
VBTrace 96 is a runtime Procedure Trace, XRef,
Debug, Profiler and much more. Shareware $49.
http://www.apexsc.com/vb/ftp/coop/cstuart
ftp.apexsc.com/pub/cgvb/coop/cstuart
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ken Nicols

F1GP 2, aren't we asking for the impossible ??

by Ken Nicols » Wed, 19 Jun 1996 04:00:00

:> BTW, you may already know this or not, but an early version of the
:> game was reviewed by two British PC *** magazines. It scored a
:> massive 95% in both, and that was before car flipping and the like
:> were added. It's gonna be AWESOME I tell ya......
:
:>    /Spencer Stapleton/

:>  /London, Great Britain/
:
:
:
:Thats true and one of these mags was PCGamer (uk).  This is generally one of the most respected mags for
:gamers who know what they're talking about, and they aren't afraid to give a game a low score.  On a related
:point then, PCGamer say they have been recieving updated copies of GP2 every 3 weeks or so, and they say it
:has been getting better and better.  The funny thing is that they are saying that the game runs like sh*t off
:a shovel (i.e. damn fast) on their machines.  And they consider the office P133 a machine close to SkyNet

The infamous "review" of F1GP2 in February said "Any old 486/66 will
quite happily power the low detail mode". MPS's own web page now
claims DX4/100 minimum. Either Geoff Crammond has made the game
slower, or PC Gamer were talking bollocks.

This review was written when everyone in the know knew the engine was
unoptimised. MPS just fed a line to PC Gamer and they quite happily
reprinted it.

:powers :))  This would seem to concur with the fact that Crammond has programmed the basic game in machine
:code (or assembly or something - sorry it's been a hard day, hehe).  I reckon that all this talk like "Oh man
:my 64 meg P200 wont be able to run it fast enough" will disappear fast once the shrinkwrap version appears.  
:And I'm prepared to wait as long as it takes for Crammond to do the great job he always has done in the past.

MPS will be glad that some people are prepared. There seems to be
another two month delay now, so F1 on the Playstation is looking more
and more appealing.

I think a lot of the new features added are been driven by marketing -
will we see another delay for in-race commentary when one salesman
gets an idea after playing with Bizzare's F1?

:Peace...
:
:--

:(Steve)
:"Will you put me inside your TV tonight,
: 'Cos you're treatin' me like a rerun."
:       - Beck, Puttin' It Down.

Ken

Tim Barn

F1GP 2, aren't we asking for the impossible ??

by Tim Barn » Thu, 20 Jun 1996 04:00:00

: The infamous "review" of F1GP2 in February said "Any old 486/66 will
: quite happily power the low detail mode". MPS's own web page now
: claims DX4/100 minimum. Either Geoff Crammond has made the game
: slower, or PC Gamer were talking bollocks.

: This review was written when everyone in the know knew the engine was
: unoptimised. MPS just fed a line to PC Gamer and they quite happily
: reprinted it.

Er, no, they had a copy of the games, I saw the CD, didn't get my hands
on it though unfortch. That said, I guess they played it on a P90 or
suchlike. Anyway, looks like it'll definitely be here in a couple of
weeks so we'll soon see.
cheers,
--
Tim Barnes                              |   Dept. of Mathematics,

http://holly.maths.bris.ac.uk/~BarnesT  |   Bristol, U.K.
Tel: +44 (0)117 928 7780                |   BS8 1TW

Jeff

F1GP 2, aren't we asking for the impossible ??

by Jeff » Thu, 20 Jun 1996 04:00:00



> : The infamous "review" of F1GP2 in February said "Any old 486/66 will
> : quite happily power the low detail mode". MPS's own web page now
> : claims DX4/100 minimum. Either Geoff Crammond has made the game
> : slower, or PC Gamer were talking bollocks.

> : This review was written when everyone in the know knew the engine was
> : unoptimised. MPS just fed a line to PC Gamer and they quite happily
> : reprinted it.

> Er, no, they had a copy of the games, I saw the CD, didn't get my hands
> on it though unfortch. That said, I guess they played it on a P90 or
> suchlike. Anyway, looks like it'll definitely be here in a couple of
> weeks so we'll soon see.
> cheers,
> --
> Tim Barnes                              |   Dept. of Mathematics,

> http://holly.maths.bris.ac.uk/~BarnesT  |   Bristol, U.K.
> Tel: +44 (0)117 928 7780                |   BS8 1TW
>Frankly with all Microcraps posturing the DEMO best be good, or I'll stick with ICR2. Jeff

Jame

F1GP 2, aren't we asking for the impossible ??

by Jame » Tue, 25 Jun 1996 04:00:00



>van Brero) wrote.......,
>>>You can read in this newsgroup that many people who own fast pentium (120+)
>>>computers are disappointed when they hear F1GP2 will only do some 12 frames
>>>per second in SVGA with a P150. But they are also awed by the huge amount of
>>>graphical detail the game has to offer. Well wake up ! You just can't demand a
>>>game that has all those graphical features and run smoothly on a p75 in SVGA.
>>>Just be glad that all those fancy graphical options can be disabled.

I think these frame rates aren't true anyway, admittedly we had great
problems with NASCAR and fps with half decent graphical detail.  But
ICR2 has cured this and we're getting decent fps and detail
combined.... so I'm sure Geoff can do this if not better in SVGA.  SRN
claimed better frame rates than this anyway didn't they?

GP1 was programmed in Assembly, Geoff is one of the few guys to do
this as most of them program a C engine and work around this... so
surely GP2 must be programmed in Assembly too.

Just shows how shit the PC is at graphics if we're hoping for these
levels of fps. the Playstation with it's graphics accelerators are
getting 30fps flat out, the marketting BS reckons they've got '95,000'
textured, light sourced polys wanging around at a race.   We'll have
to wait for the grahics accelerators to get these levels of fps+.
Wish they'd set an industry standard chipset, 'cos some of us are
going to lose out buying these cards and finding out noones going to
suppot it.  My choice at the moment is the Creative Labs 3DBlaster
thingy, but the one that Papyrus are using sounds good too.... only
thing to do is wait and see who wins.

28/29th is what I hear.
Could be early though.... fat chance :/

PC Zone and PC/CD Gamer?  I read the PCZone one and it was definitely
reviewing a mid-stage beta - with official Microprose pics.   Just
think, we were all on the brink of thinking the game was definitely
coming out then... and at Xmas (with Geoffs comments on the WWW) and
at......... and at.........

Have you noticed the Xmas message is still there, is this some of
Microprose time paradox, perhaps tey still think it's Xmas.

James Long

Brian Fo

F1GP 2, aren't we asking for the impossible ??

by Brian Fo » Tue, 25 Jun 1996 04:00:00

I have a large collection of settings at my Nascar Setups page at
http://www.4w.com/pages/fox/nassetup.htm.
As many as 30 for places like Michigan, about 15 on average.

--

Brian Fox                               Nass '96 BGN 'A' Driver

http://www.4w.com/pages/fox AND/OR
http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/1238
Fox Motorsports
 _______________________/\/\_____
 \_ /////// __            __'_--/           "Sly as a Fox"
   \-------/ / /\______/ /                Speed doesn't always  
            /_/       /_/                     win the race!
\\\\\\    // ||\\   // ||
\\\\\\\\\||_//\\\\\||_//_________________________________________________
__

James Patric

F1GP 2, aren't we asking for the impossible ??

by James Patric » Tue, 25 Jun 1996 04:00:00


>       Me too, the only tracks I any good at is bristal and martinsville.

>     ---------------------------------------------------------------


> Newsgroups: rec.autos.simulators
> Subject: Nascar settings for all the tracks
> Date: Sun, 16 Jun 1996 18:30:30 -0700
> Organization: (Utilizador da IP)
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


> Hello!
> I would like for someone to send me (if possible), all the car setings
> for all the tracks in Nascar Racing.
> I do not know anything about that stuff.
> I would really like your help!
> Thank you.

All of the setups you need are avaiable at " THE PITS" sorry I lost the URL , maybe
someone else will post it again
Manoel K/vell

F1GP 2, aren't we asking for the impossible ??

by Manoel K/vell » Fri, 28 Jun 1996 04:00:00


> Have you noticed the Xmas message is still there, is this some of
> Microprose time paradox, perhaps tey still think it's Xmas.

> James Long


Nope it's for Xmas 1996 and maybe 1997
Anon

F1GP 2, aren't we asking for the impossible ??

by Anon » Sat, 29 Jun 1996 04:00:00


> >All of the setups you need are avaiable at " THE PITS" sorry I lost
> the URL , maybe
> >someone else will post it again

> The URL is HTTP://sparky.arc.net/users/jkohl/thepits/

> My question is are there any descriptions of these setups.  Without
> some data about how they handle or what they are good for I might as
> well tweek my onw setups.  I find that each setup requires a different
> line and approach to the track.

> i.e I got a great setup for Watkins Glen the guy who gave it to me was
> drivin laps at 120 121.. I saw him do it.  Blowing me away at 112. He
> gave me the setup.  I got up to 116 but it was real loose and hard to
> control. It wasn't until I talked to him a week later and learned to
> spin it through the turns like a dirt tracker that I could get up to
> his speeds.

> With some text on the setups it would help to know what they are all
> about how they handle and What lines to take.

> Just a thought.
> Tim

I dont remember if you were the original poster or not, but the request was for settings
for all of the Nascar tracks. This can be found at the pits as well as numerous others.
What it appears you are now asking for here is for someone to drive your car too. The
lines to take how they handle etc. How the Heck can somebody tell you how your car is
going to handle while your driving, as for lines to take etc. c-mon

rec.autos.simulators is a usenet newsgroup formed in December, 1993. As this group was always unmoderated there may be some spam or off topic articles included. Some links do point back to racesimcentral.net as we could not validate the original address. Please report any pages that you believe warrant deletion from this archive (include the link in your email). RaceSimCentral.net is in no way responsible and does not endorse any of the content herein.