rec.autos.simulators

>> IMHO, around the end of this year 3d card will hopefully chip standard on
>> most of the PC. In the eventuality that Voodoo-based card do some sort of
>> monopol like Creative (SB) some years ago, I may speculate that there
isn't
>> going to be a non-accelerated version anymore. Many things can happend.
>> OpenGL, D3D, etc... can make some big steps, nobody knows.

>   Lets face it! If you want to play games you NEED a 3D card! Soon,
>there will be a D3D (or something similar) that is truely good and that
>properly standardises the 3D card world. Imagine if when you purchased a
>2D card in the past that it only worked with games/software designed for
>it! Until this "proper" D3D standard appears the gamers of the world
>will be justifyably put off by the current state of things. I have a
>Riva card in my system that was a complete waist of money. If MS or the
>3D card manufacturers don't do something soon then people will just go
>and get themselves a Playstation, etc and who could blame them. The
>current state of affairs is simply a joke!

>    It seems that all the card manufacturers have a standard for their
>own cards that is optimum. There will never be an overall solution like
>D3D that allows all cards to operate as well as with their own
>drivers/API so when does all the rebellion come to an end. I think we
>might need legislation to step in and say "Ok, this is the standard API
>and that is that". Then all card and game makers MUST program and design
>around this new API. Without legislation, this nonsense could go on
>forever!

> It probably has to do with the performance of today's computers.
> Somewhere I read that GPL is updating its physics model at approximately
> 200Hz. This is probably not enough if you want to correctly simulate
> modern race cars with high down force, stiffer suspension, stiffer
> tires, much better brakes, lighter wheels and so on. The time constants
> in a modern race car are much smaller compared to old race cars.

> A simple analogy would be if you wanted to do a numerical simulation of
> a mass suspended in a spring. You would have to update the simulation
> faster than the frequency of the system to capture its correct motion.
> If you now increase the stiffness of the spring (as have happened in
> modern race cars) the frequency of the system will increase. Therefore,
> you have to update the simulation more often to capture the correct
> motion of the system.

> Due to this you probably end up at updating the physics model at 500Hz
> or more for a modern race car. This would require a faster computer and
> that is probably why they will wait to use this physics model until the
> average computer is fast enough for simulating a modern race car.

> This could be one of the reasons for simulating older race cars.

> This theory is based on my own (spare time) effort developing a race car
> simulation game using multibody dynamics and fixed step ode-integrators.

> interesting:) but i suspect you are putting too much into the idea
> that Nascar3 is papyrus's Great Goal and that all else is just
> a "test". David Kaemmer's goal has always been to simulate motor-
> racing as perfectly as possible, and each game that Papyrus produces
> reflects their improving physics modelling. GPL is simply the next
> step up for them. I expect that by the time Nascar3 is complete
> the physics model they bring over from GPL will have been improved
> in many subtle ways again. And then by the time ICR3/Cart2 arrives
> (just exactly when is difficult to tell as yet, my crystal ball
> is all cloudy) the physics model will probably be improved some more
> still. and they'll keep improving it after that.
> As to why they chose to make a sim based on the '67 F1 season, well,
> i figure they wanted to do something different than the same old
> Nascar and Cart that they've done for the last 4-5 games. And you
> have to admit these '67 cars are awesomely fun to drive:)
> At least they didn't go too far back in time. a fully simulated
> Chariot racing game would be a bit too weird.

> IMHO, around the end of this year 3d card will hopefully chip standard on
> most of the PC. In the eventuality that Voodoo-based card do some sort of
> monopol like Creative (SB) some years ago, I may speculate that there isn't
> going to be a non-accelerated version anymore. Many things can happend.
> OpenGL, D3D, etc... can make some big steps, nobody knows.

>    It seems that all the card manufacturers have a standard for their
>own cards that is optimum. There will never be an overall solution like
>D3D that allows all cards to operate as well as with their own
>drivers/API so when does all the rebellion come to an end. I think we
>might need legislation to step in and say "Ok, this is the standard API
>and that is that". Then all card and game makers MUST program and design
>around this new API. Without legislation, this nonsense could go on
>forever!

>     It seems that all the card manufacturers have a standard for their
> own cards that is optimum. There will never be an overall solution like
> D3D that allows all cards to operate as well as with their own
> drivers/API so when does all the rebellion come to an end. I think we
> might need legislation to step in and say "Ok, this is the standard API
> and that is that". Then all card and game makers MUST program and design
> around this new API. Without legislation, this nonsense could go on
> forever!

> >     It seems that all the card manufacturers have a standard for their
> > own cards that is optimum. There will never be an overall solution like
> > D3D that allows all cards to operate as well as with their own
> > drivers/API so when does all the rebellion come to an end. I think we
> > might need legislation to step in and say "Ok, this is the standard API
> > and that is that". Then all card and game makers MUST program and design
> > around this new API. Without legislation, this nonsense could go on
> > forever!

> Trust me, the last thing you want is the government poking its nose
> into this. NEVER ask for government regulations unless it is truly the
> last resort and no other solution is possible... "Hi! I'm from the
> government and I'm here to help you..." :-)

> ---Jim

>   Well, this is of course what I mean ie last resort. Has anyone heard
>about a truely good solution? I have heard about Direct X 6 being an
>Open GL based API. Anyone prepared to expand on this? All I have heard
>personally is that MS has basically conceded the inferiority of Direct X
>5 and was looking at Open GL.