rec.autos.simulators

Nascar 2 3DFx patch. How hard can it be??

Michael E. Carve

Nascar 2 3DFx patch. How hard can it be??

by Michael E. Carve » Sun, 25 Jan 1998 04:00:00



% >
% >Development of support for a given product begins when the company
% >concerned (Rendition, 3dFX) is able to persuade software companies
% >(Papyrus) to support their product. This is done by technical
% >demonstration, supply of developer kits and boards, technical
% >expertise and support, etc etc. It is not based upon the release date
% >of the board.

% And the people at 3DFX did all of the above, but, Sierra just kept
% saying no. I don't know their motive, but I do know a lot of people
% are pissed at them for it.
%                
%                  [This Space Left Intentionally Blank]
                    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
It sounds as if the above is also referring to an area between your
ears. ;-)  At the time that Papyrus made the decision to support
Rendition, Sierra's decision to champion Renditon had nothing to do with
their decision.  Papyrus was impressed with the capabilities of the chip
set and it's instructions.  They had the support of Rendition and 3DFX
had yet to successfully champion their cause.  Future Papyrus products
will support 3DFX directly and they should be shortly providing the N2
port.  I understand your frustration, but at least keep the facts
straight.  If you are truly pissed, I would suggest you do not support
Papyrus and therefore forgo using their 3DFX patch for N2.  That should
really show them!  Those stupid idiots at Papyrus, sheesh when will they
ever get it right?

To bad I didn't archive the original Papyrus press releases concerning
their reasons for going with Rendition.  The whole approach and their
reasoning made sense (at the time).  But, it probably wouldn't matter,
as many are bound and determined to re-write history to their own
liking.

--
**************************** Michael E. Carver *************************
     Upside out, or inside down...False alarm the only game in town.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<[ /./.  [-  < ]>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Nosfera

Nascar 2 3DFx patch. How hard can it be??

by Nosfera » Sun, 25 Jan 1998 04:00:00



plonk!
--
Nos

                 [This Space Left Intentionally Blank]

Don Burnett

Nascar 2 3DFx patch. How hard can it be??

by Don Burnett » Sun, 25 Jan 1998 04:00:00

They were one of the first to support truly advanced 3d hardware -
Rendition!
<g>
--
Don Burnette
I-65 Racing
Dburn on Ten


Jo

Nascar 2 3DFx patch. How hard can it be??

by Jo » Sun, 25 Jan 1998 04:00:00


So tell us again, why is this company that was so bright about 3d
hardware basically the last company on the PLANET to support truly
advanced 3d hardware like 3dfx?

Joe

Nosfera

Nascar 2 3DFx patch. How hard can it be??

by Nosfera » Sun, 25 Jan 1998 04:00:00


>So tell us again, why is this company that was so bright about 3d
>hardware basically the last company on the PLANET to support truly
>advanced 3d hardware like 3dfx?

>Joe

Didn't you know? Papy are considered gods in this group and any
disparaging comments are met with a barrage of ridicule.
--
Nos

                 [This Space Left Intentionally Blank]

Ronald Stoe

Nascar 2 3DFx patch. How hard can it be??

by Ronald Stoe » Sun, 25 Jan 1998 04:00:00




> >SNIP

> >I can't speak for the person that you replied to but for myself I'm more
> >upset about a supposed Papyrus employee posting on the news group that the
> >date for the 3DFX patch would be posted on Dec 22nd. I just think so many
> >software companies blow it by giving out dates! Why don't they just keep it
> >a big secret until it is ready??? Are they trying to get sales early by
> >hoping people will buy the game with 3DFX support? I really don't know the
> >reason but software companies should just announce it when it is ready for
> >release. I'm sure there are some benefits for making an early announcement
> >but I have seen so many software companies get reamed for missing a deadline
> >they talked about.

> >Cheers!
> >The John in the U.S.A.

> It wasn't a Papyrus employee. It was someone who posted a private
> email from a Papyrus employee.

...and didn't he only say, the release date of the patch would be
"announced" on Dec 22nd?

l8er
ronny

--
          |\      _,,,---,,_        I want to die like my Grandfather,
   ZZZzz /,`.-'`'    -.  ;-;;,_              in his sleep.
        |,4-  ) )-,_. ,\ (  `'-'     Not like the people in his car,
       '---''(_/--'  `-'\_)            screaming their heads off!

John Walla

Nascar 2 3DFx patch. How hard can it be??

by John Walla » Mon, 26 Jan 1998 04:00:00



You don't know this to be correct, and I know for a fact that it is
wrong. If you know something then by all means shout it out, but
trying to turn uninformed speculation into fact only diminishes the
weight of your words.

Cheers!
John

John Walla

Nascar 2 3DFx patch. How hard can it be??

by John Walla » Mon, 26 Jan 1998 04:00:00



Okay, so you would be happy and all of the users of NROS would be
pissed off when it brought the system down. Anyway, why should we, the
public, have to test unfinished work and do the Q.A. job?

What, did they make the patch all by themselves then? No, it's thanks
also to 3dFX and Papyrus, but you appear unwilling to acknowledge the
work they are doing for you.

Cheers!
John

John Walla

Nascar 2 3DFx patch. How hard can it be??

by John Walla » Mon, 26 Jan 1998 04:00:00





>> Making a
>>decision purely based upon technical ability as you appear to do is
>>not a sensible thing to do.

>>Cheers!
>>John

>What stupid logic is that? I based my decision on technical ability
>and support. I pity the***poor logic of people who buy cards like
>the Riva.

What kind of stupid answer is that? I said you shouldn't base a buying
decision on technical ability, you respond that you based your
decision on technical ability.....and support. So not only technical
ability.

Helloooooo, McFlyyyyyyy. Perhaps reading before responding might be an
idea? :-)

Cheers!
John

John Walla

Nascar 2 3DFx patch. How hard can it be??

by John Walla » Mon, 26 Jan 1998 04:00:00



On that logic I bet you're real happy with that Betamax video that's
sitting in the corner of your room.

Technology alone is not enough, and that would also have been the case
for the Monster 3D or any other 3dFX card. Thankfully they were
released early, had the pricing strategy correct and were advertised
and bundled very well.

"Eat my shorts"? The Bart Simpson school of debating turns out another
Grand Master.

Cheers!
John

John Walla

Nascar 2 3DFx patch. How hard can it be??

by John Walla » Mon, 26 Jan 1998 04:00:00



I always did, it's just not much of a point as related to the
discussion.

If you have a product like Tomb Raider you can pretty much mess around
with what you like. If you***up PowerVR support then you***off
a few customer, patch it again and re-release. Not too much damage.

With a system like NROS you may***up the whole system if the
PowerVR patch has a problem. More patches = more work = more testing =
more chance of problems = yet more patching and testing.

What you ask is Utopia, what is delivered is commercial reality.
There's a difference.

Cheers!
John

Nosfera

Nascar 2 3DFx patch. How hard can it be??

by Nosfera » Mon, 26 Jan 1998 04:00:00



>Helloooooo, McFlyyyyyyy. Perhaps reading before responding might be an
>idea? :-)

>Cheers!
>John

Hey John......know what this means?
Plonk!

--
Nos


http://www.cris.com/~nosfer/index.html                

John Walla

Nascar 2 3DFx patch. How hard can it be??

by John Walla » Mon, 26 Jan 1998 04:00:00



You missed the "er" from the end of your .sig...

Cheers!
John

John Walla

Nascar 2 3DFx patch. How hard can it be??

by John Walla » Mon, 26 Jan 1998 04:00:00



Is that because I'm capable of making a point without having to blow
raspberries and call names when I run out of arguments?

Q.E.D.....

Tip of the day ; Don't look in the mirror

Killfiled.

John


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.