rec.autos.simulators

by **Norbert Mauge** » Tue, 22 Apr 1997 04:00:00

I've played GP2 for 10 months on a P100 and now I wanna have something that
REALLY FLIES... so :

Is there a machine that can run GP2 in SVGA FULL details (except sky) +
texture in mirror at 25 FPS with a CPU occupancy LESS than 90 (during a
race, not during practice)

I plan to buy an AMD K6 200. what kind of performance (in full detail) can
I expect in fps ??? (I have a millenium)

When I try to play in SVGA Full details in monaco, during the first lap I
have a CPU occupancy of about 300-450%.... (on my P100)... I need some
other benchmark to make my opinion about a new CPU.

Thanks...

by **Clinton D. Mae** » Tue, 22 Apr 1997 04:00:00

Don't that just suck.....

I have a P150 32megEDO Abit IT5H motherboard
with a STB Lightspeed 128bit 2.25meg video card.

When I overclock to 166 I can get almost all graphics
in the mirrors on.

The rest of the graphics...well...only half maybe.

23.2fps

by **Mark J Ric** » Wed, 23 Apr 1997 04:00:00

Norbert,

At present GP2 has not equivelent processor to run with full detail AND
full frame rate. A iP200, mmx-200, 686-200 or AMD-200 whould give you full
detail with 16/17fps (which most people are very happy with) or you could
drop some detail levels, such as the sky and one or two mirror options and
have a higher frame rate. One must always strike a balance between the
two. The choice is always with the user.

Best Regards,
Mark Rich/MicroProse-Europe

by **Steffen Schlei** » Wed, 23 Apr 1997 04:00:00

I have a 200 Mhz Pentium, 512 KB PB-Cache (asus T2P4), 60 ns EDO RAM
and a Mystique. But I Play GP2 only with textures on the fences and
low detail (at 25,6fps) because I hate to get over 100% CPU occupancy
during race start!

A friend of mine has a 225 Pentium MMX (overclocked).
But this isn't enough too.

IMHO there is no CPU which handle that game.

There are two solutions:

1. Microprose improves the graphic engine (ICR 2 runs better (not
perfect))

2. Microprose support 3D graphics accelerators like the Vodoo from
3dfx

But without Microprose we couldn't get full frame rate and full
graphics this year.

Steffen Schleier

by **David Gar** » Thu, 24 Apr 1997 04:00:00

> Norbert,

> At present GP2 has not equivelent processor to run with full detail AND
> full frame rate. A iP200, mmx-200, 686-200 or AMD-200 whould give you full
> detail with 16/17fps (which most people are very happy with) or you could
> drop some detail levels, such as the sky and one or two mirror options and
> have a higher frame rate. One must always strike a balance between the
> two. The choice is always with the user.

> Best Regards,
> Mark Rich/MicroProse-Europe

Hi Mark,

I must say your about as late in commenting to this newsgroup as GP2 was
in
hitting the shelves. Now finally since you've made Microprose's presence
known
to the only "REAL" news group that discusses Geoff Crammond's
"so-called"
masterpiece, then you might want to answer some "REAL" questions!

1st: Why would you dare advertise "modem capabilty" when it is obvious
that
it wasn't useful in the least? Even with "direct link" it is impossible
and
most unacceptable to actually work successfully. Did you not know this
at the time? Its
hard to believe this important feature could go unoticed! Doesnt
Microprose
have "beta" testers like everyone else?!

2nd: Why would you release a sim made from an engine that wouldnt even
run with half
the details on with the fastest hardware still to this date? What you
have stated
above about 16/17 fps on a p200mmx is based on what? What track, what
location on the track?
How many cars in front? I only would guess, since playing GP2 on a
p200mmx, you mean
the longest run at "Japan" with absolutely ZERO cars in front of you.
Where do you get
a statistic of "most" people. 16/17 fps is lousy compared to what most
of these "die-hard"
racing sim fanatics are used to in past sims on slower pents. Isnt it
obvious to you guys that this
would "limit" your market or profit? I guess not, taken in consideration
of the little
"required hardware = 100MHz 486DX/4" tag on the side of the box.

3rd and most important of all: Why would Microprose NOT release a patch
for
this "so-called" masterpiece?!! This is most disturbing given the fact
that
the customers that bought this product deserve something beside a "beta"
copy
of GP2. Shareware is usually free, not 40 bucks! The game is "definetly"
NOT
finished in 99% of the posts I've read in here from people that have
spent
countless hours playing with GP2 AND other racing SIMS. Almost every
game that
has been developed and released was sooner or later followed by a patch
or "fix". Is
Microprose any different?! Should we, as customers, except this "beta"
as is?!
I think not!

The REAL problem is not only these listed above, but also Microprose's
blatant
reluctancy to "show" any type of customer support OR even presence in
this ng. One may
assume you thought after a few months, the heat would'nt be as present
and therefore
you wouldn't have to answer any "REAL" questions.

With all due respect, please Mr.Rich, please answer the "REAL"
importance here if you
stand behind your company!

-DG-

by **Jo Hels** » Thu, 24 Apr 1997 04:00:00

I NEVER understood why people wanted to have all graphics and textures in the
mirros. Where the hell do you need them for? I only have the cars plotted in my
mirrors, and much more detail on the track itself.

JOH
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
When everything else failed, we can still become im-
mortal by making an enormous blunder....

John Kenneth Galbraith
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

by **Phillip Cunningha** » Thu, 24 Apr 1997 04:00:00

***Warning: Sarcastic post follows***

Sorry to correct you Mark but I have the GP2 box in front of me as I type
and it says 486/66 [minimum] and DX4 [recommended].

Why do you need such horsepower when the box clearly infers that any old
pentium should make it fly??

Phil.

> Norbert,

> At present GP2 has not equivelent processor to run with full detail AND
> full frame rate. A iP200, mmx-200, 686-200 or AMD-200 whould give you
full
> detail with 16/17fps (which most people are very happy with) or you could
> drop some detail levels, such as the sky and one or two mirror options
and
> have a higher frame rate. One must always strike a balance between the
> two. The choice is always with the user.

> Best Regards,
> Mark Rich/MicroProse-Europe

> > I've played GP2 for 10 months on a P100 and now I wanna have something
> that
> > REALLY FLIES... so :

> > Is there a machine that can run GP2 in SVGA FULL details (except sky) +
> > texture in mirror at 25 FPS with a CPU occupancy LESS than 90 (during a
> > race, not during practice)

> > I plan to buy an AMD K6 200. what kind of performance (in full detail)
> can
> > I expect in fps ??? (I have a millenium)

> > When I try to play in SVGA Full details in monaco, during the first lap
I
> > have a CPU occupancy of about 300-450%.... (on my P100)... I need some
> > other benchmark to make my opinion about a new CPU.

> > Thanks...

by **Marc Collin** » Thu, 24 Apr 1997 04:00:00

...but I think we all know Mr. Rich and Microprose won't have the stomach
to answer them.

(post c.c.'d to Mr. Rich)

> > Norbert,

> > At present GP2 has not equivelent processor to run with full detail AND
> > full frame rate. A iP200, mmx-200, 686-200 or AMD-200 whould give you
full
> > detail with 16/17fps (which most people are very happy with) or you
could
> > drop some detail levels, such as the sky and one or two mirror options
and
> > have a higher frame rate. One must always strike a balance between the
> > two. The choice is always with the user.

> > Best Regards,
> > Mark Rich/MicroProse-Europe

> Hi Mark,

> I must say your about as late in commenting to this newsgroup as GP2 was
> in
> hitting the shelves. Now finally since you've made Microprose's presence
> known
> to the only "REAL" news group that discusses Geoff Crammond's
> "so-called"
> masterpiece, then you might want to answer some "REAL" questions!

> 1st: Why would you dare advertise "modem capabilty" when it is obvious
> that
> it wasn't useful in the least? Even with "direct link" it is impossible
> and
> most unacceptable to actually work successfully. Did you not know this
> at the time? Its
> hard to believe this important feature could go unoticed! Doesnt
> Microprose
> have "beta" testers like everyone else?!

> 2nd: Why would you release a sim made from an engine that wouldnt even
> run with half
> the details on with the fastest hardware still to this date? What you
> have stated
> above about 16/17 fps on a p200mmx is based on what? What track, what
> location on the track?
> How many cars in front? I only would guess, since playing GP2 on a
> p200mmx, you mean
> the longest run at "Japan" with absolutely ZERO cars in front of you.
> Where do you get
> a statistic of "most" people. 16/17 fps is lousy compared to what most
> of these "die-hard"
> racing sim fanatics are used to in past sims on slower pents. Isnt it
> obvious to you guys that this
> would "limit" your market or profit? I guess not, taken in consideration
> of the little
> "required hardware = 100MHz 486DX/4" tag on the side of the box.

> 3rd and most important of all: Why would Microprose NOT release a patch
> for
> this "so-called" masterpiece?!! This is most disturbing given the fact
> that
> the customers that bought this product deserve something beside a "beta"
> copy
> of GP2. Shareware is usually free, not 40 bucks! The game is "definetly"
> NOT
> finished in 99% of the posts I've read in here from people that have
> spent
> countless hours playing with GP2 AND other racing SIMS. Almost every
> game that
> has been developed and released was sooner or later followed by a patch
> or "fix". Is
> Microprose any different?! Should we, as customers, except this "beta"
> as is?!
> I think not!

> The REAL problem is not only these listed above, but also Microprose's
> blatant
> reluctancy to "show" any type of customer support OR even presence in
> this ng. One may
> assume you thought after a few months, the heat would'nt be as present
> and therefore
> you wouldn't have to answer any "REAL" questions.

> With all due respect, please Mr.Rich, please answer the "REAL"
> importance here if you
> stand behind your company!

> -DG-

by **Frode Dufe** » Thu, 24 Apr 1997 04:00:00

> Norbert,

> At present GP2 has not equivelent processor to run with full detail AND
> full frame rate. A iP200, mmx-200, 686-200 or AMD-200 whould give you full
> detail with 16/17fps (which most people are very happy with) or you could
> drop some detail levels, such as the sky and one or two mirror options and
> have a higher frame rate. One must always strike a balance between the
> two. The choice is always with the user.

> Best Regards,
> Mark Rich/MicroProse-Europe

I just remember all the glamours words, network play and Weather changes
during race.
And i had the AVI movie from the game, you could hear all the sounds.
But the real game nothing.
I got a Ppro 200Mhz with a hercules dynamite 128/video, 32 MB ram, an i
still cant run it on full detail.
I play it in SVGA with all the plots in the mirror off and no sky, then
i get 25fpm, but still i have to but it on 17fpm, du save my self from
the slow motion, when i meet the back markers..
And when i come into a spin and there is smoke.... then Zooooooooom it
is flying up in the 300% area!!!
What kind og a computer was this game designed for?????
I even read at Crammonds home page (when it was there that is) that the
game was going to go realy smooth
on a P90 with all the details on in SVGA.
What happend to this product???? did you guys give it up, and shiped it
so you could earn in the loss on the project???
And that "state of the art" 3D enginge that Crammond used, well it is
realy nice looking with all the sun effect in the paint an stuff, but a
state of the art 3D engine sould run very good on a normal consumer
computer that peopel use. (p120 to p166)
Are you at MP going to do a litle remodling on the game to get it to run
faster, and give us the promisses you made before the game was shiped?
A patch for the most common 3D cards would have been realy nice.
BTW, what is crammond up to now?? did he quit MP, or what???
And if he did quit, did all the info on the game go with him?

Frode Dufey

by **Michael E. Carve** » Thu, 24 Apr 1997 04:00:00

<snip>
: IMHO there is no CPU which handle that game.

: There are two solutions:

: 1. Microprose improves the graphic engine (ICR 2 runs better (not
: perfect))
:
: 2. Microprose support 3D graphics accelerators like the Vodoo from
: 3dfx

In other words are you really saying, "there is no solution"? <g>

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

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

by **Michael E. Carve** » Thu, 24 Apr 1997 04:00:00

: Norbert,

: At present GP2 has not equivelent processor to run with full detail AND
: full frame rate. A iP200, mmx-200, 686-200 or AMD-200 whould give you full
: detail with 16/17fps (which most people are very happy with) or you could
: drop some detail levels, such as the sky and one or two mirror options and
: have a higher frame rate. One must always strike a balance between the
: two. The choice is always with the user.

I knew it!!!! I am not MOST people!!! 16/17fps for a race sim is a
JOKE! I guess it's just me, but anything less than 20fps just won't cut
it. Next to the physics of a sim, the fps is the most important factor
(actually it is almost neck 'n neck). I can't tell you how much my own
driving improved (not to mention my enjoyment of the thrills of speed),
when I upgraded my video card to the Intergraph Rendition card for ICR2
& NASCAR2. In ICR2, getting a clean 30fps made all the difference in
the world.

No wonder MicroProse doesn't think there is anything wrong with GP2.
There's something wrong with me! Hell, the patch for "me" will be out a
week after MicroProse patches GP2. <g>

(Just confirms my belief that MicroProse is out of the loop.)

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

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

by **Norman McBrid** » Thu, 24 Apr 1997 04:00:00

I can run GP2 at full detail with 25 fps with no trouble.

I have an AMD K6-200, Abit It5H motherboard, 32 megs RAM, Matrox
Mystique video.

GP2 suggested fram rat is 22 or 23, but I crank it up to 25 and it works
great.

> : Norbert,

> : At present GP2 has not equivelent processor to run with full detail AND
> : full frame rate. A iP200, mmx-200, 686-200 or AMD-200 whould give you full
> : detail with 16/17fps (which most people are very happy with) or you could
> : drop some detail levels, such as the sky and one or two mirror options and
> : have a higher frame rate. One must always strike a balance between the
> : two. The choice is always with the user.

> I knew it!!!! I am not MOST people!!! 16/17fps for a race sim is a
> JOKE! I guess it's just me, but anything less than 20fps just won't cut
> it. Next to the physics of a sim, the fps is the most important factor
> (actually it is almost neck 'n neck). I can't tell you how much my own
> driving improved (not to mention my enjoyment of the thrills of speed),
> when I upgraded my video card to the Intergraph Rendition card for ICR2
> & NASCAR2. In ICR2, getting a clean 30fps made all the difference in
> the world.

> No wonder MicroProse doesn't think there is anything wrong with GP2.
> There's something wrong with me! Hell, the patch for "me" will be out a
> week after MicroProse patches GP2. <g>

> (Just confirms my belief that MicroProse is out of the loop.)

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

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

by **Frode Dufe** » Thu, 24 Apr 1997 04:00:00

> I can run GP2 at full detail with 25 fps with no trouble.

> I have an AMD K6-200, Abit It5H motherboard, 32 megs RAM, Matrox
> Mystique video.

> GP2 suggested fram rat is 22 or 23, but I crank it up to 25 and it works
> great.

But how is it in Monaco????
And how much does you CPU need to work?

Frode Dufey

by **Phil and Kim Abe** » Thu, 24 Apr 1997 04:00:00

I had the same dream the other night, except I was getting 40 fps. ID
software had recruited Crammond and the Papyrus guys to help build "THE"
sim, and I was just about to enter some type of deathmatch at Daytona when
I woke up all moist and gooey ! :-)

Phil

"Don't look back - they may be gaining on you !!"
**************************************************
http://www.magna.com.au/~mohair/

by **Mr Bil** » Fri, 25 Apr 1997 04:00:00

Looks like he ran off again David...who would have thought.
Mr Rich.... We are wating......

Mr Bill

> > Norbert,

> > At present GP2 has not equivelent processor to run with full detail AND
> > full frame rate. A iP200, mmx-200, 686-200 or AMD-200 whould give you
full
> > detail with 16/17fps (which most people are very happy with) or you
could
> > drop some detail levels, such as the sky and one or two mirror options
and
> > have a higher frame rate. One must always strike a balance between the
> > two. The choice is always with the user.

> > Best Regards,
> > Mark Rich/MicroProse-Europe

> Hi Mark,

> I must say your about as late in commenting to this newsgroup as GP2 was
> in
> hitting the shelves. Now finally since you've made Microprose's presence
> known
> to the only "REAL" news group that discusses Geoff Crammond's
> "so-called"
> masterpiece, then you might want to answer some "REAL" questions!

> 1st: Why would you dare advertise "modem capabilty" when it is obvious
> that
> it wasn't useful in the least? Even with "direct link" it is impossible
> and
> most unacceptable to actually work successfully. Did you not know this
> at the time? Its
> hard to believe this important feature could go unoticed! Doesnt
> Microprose
> have "beta" testers like everyone else?!

> 2nd: Why would you release a sim made from an engine that wouldnt even
> run with half
> the details on with the fastest hardware still to this date? What you
> have stated
> above about 16/17 fps on a p200mmx is based on what? What track, what
> location on the track?
> How many cars in front? I only would guess, since playing GP2 on a
> p200mmx, you mean
> the longest run at "Japan" with absolutely ZERO cars in front of you.
> Where do you get
> a statistic of "most" people. 16/17 fps is lousy compared to what most
> of these "die-hard"
> racing sim fanatics are used to in past sims on slower pents. Isnt it
> obvious to you guys that this
> would "limit" your market or profit? I guess not, taken in consideration
> of the little
> "required hardware = 100MHz 486DX/4" tag on the side of the box.

> 3rd and most important of all: Why would Microprose NOT release a patch
> for
> this "so-called" masterpiece?!! This is most disturbing given the fact
> that
> the customers that bought this product deserve something beside a "beta"
> copy
> of GP2. Shareware is usually free, not 40 bucks! The game is "definetly"
> NOT
> finished in 99% of the posts I've read in here from people that have
> spent
> countless hours playing with GP2 AND other racing SIMS. Almost every
> game that
> has been developed and released was sooner or later followed by a patch
> or "fix". Is
> Microprose any different?! Should we, as customers, except this "beta"
> as is?!
> I think not!

> The REAL problem is not only these listed above, but also Microprose's
> blatant
> reluctancy to "show" any type of customer support OR even presence in
> this ng. One may
> assume you thought after a few months, the heat would'nt be as present
> and therefore
> you wouldn't have to answer any "REAL" questions.

> With all due respect, please Mr.Rich, please answer the "REAL"
> importance here if you
> stand behind your company!

> -DG-

rec.autos.simulators

Who is running GP2 in SVGA full details at 25 fps ???

Who is running GP2 in SVGA full details at 25 fps ???

Who is running GP2 in SVGA full details at 25 fps ???

Who is running GP2 in SVGA full details at 25 fps ???

Who is running GP2 in SVGA full details at 25 fps ???

Who is running GP2 in SVGA full details at 25 fps ???

Who is running GP2 in SVGA full details at 25 fps ???

Who is running GP2 in SVGA full details at 25 fps ???

Who is running GP2 in SVGA full details at 25 fps ???

Who is running GP2 in SVGA full details at 25 fps ???

Who is running GP2 in SVGA full details at 25 fps ???

Who is running GP2 in SVGA full details at 25 fps ???

Who is running GP2 in SVGA full details at 25 fps ???

Who is running GP2 in SVGA full details at 25 fps ???

Who is running GP2 in SVGA full details at 25 fps ???

Who is running GP2 in SVGA full details at 25 fps ???