On Thu, 19 Nov 1998 19:23:52 -0500, "David G Fisher"
>Tell me EXACTLY (%) how much better the GPL physics model is than the one in
>MGP. Back up your answer with detailed facts and figures. Absolute proof
>would be great. 1%? 20%? 80%?
200%. F1RS2 was < one year in the making from F1RS whereas GPL was
three years in the making from the NASCAR/ICR2 engine. That gives an
extra two years development, which if you consider both physics gurus
as being equal is 200%. :-) (You can then throw the fact that Papy
has Dave Kaemmer into the mix and say it should be more than that).
:-)
The Renault engineers don't need to calculate physics - in their world
things just happen correctly within the laws of physics, you don't
need to interpret them and make it so.
How do you put facts and figures on an experience?
Myself.
I'd go along with that.
You can certainly discuss what remains, and since that is all we have
it would be equally silly to dismiss it. A sim has to recreate an
experience dominating all fives senses using only two, so what it
packs into those two senses is pretty important.
As written I agree with the above to an extent, but if you replace
"argue" with "debate" or "discuss" then it's worthwhile. Ubisoft and
Papyrus we know read the group regularly, MGI, MPS, MS, Psygnosis
probably also. Any shortcomings which are outlined here can be taken
on board if deemed appropriate, not only that but any good points of
other sims can be taken and implemented or further developed if they
are favourably accepted. I'd love to see this kind of forum of people
talking about my business - you get instant and detailed feedback on
how your competitors' products are hitting the market, great! You
can't BUY that kind of information usually.
On top of that, all the talk of racecar drivers is, IMO, over-rated.
You've raced bikes, I've raced cars, we've all driven cars - it's
abundantly clear that a sim cannot hope to recreate fully the
experience simply because it is so mind-blowingly physical. I've had
my racecar go end over end, land upside down and catch fire -
_nothing_ in a sim can come close to that. As far as I've seen most
race drivers who try, comment upon or develop sims get caught up on
the ways that sims fail, the lack of depth perception, the lack of
feel, the lack of spatial awareness or whatever. That's all very well
but we know that and can't do much about it. What we need is, as you
described, the means to recreate the _experience_ on the screen - the
physics may or may not play a larger or smaller role, it depends more
upon how all the ingredients mix together rather than what they are.
IMO that's why someone like Doug Arnao is really important, who knows
in intimate detail how a race-car feels and should react under
differing loads and conditions, but also knows and loves sims. Having
the ability to relate the two is something few sim-racers have, but
also race-drivers do not. Holding race-drivers up as the Holy Grail of
opinion is as flawed as saying a sim-racer is. All the same, the
target market of these companies is sim-racers, so far better sim fans
think it rocks than Michael Schumacher does.
Mmmm, but there is a difference between being good at Outrun and being
good at GPL. The skills and knowledge are similar but different.
Vagaries of the 3D engines and the way each company codes for it. F1RS
has no frame-rate counter and so whether the frame-rate changes is
subjective. In any case I think F1RS overall will have a higher
frame-rate than GPL on any given system and so any reduction will be
less noticable.
Cheers!
John
