> > 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-
Yeah, Yeah, Yeah.... we heard it all before snzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.....
GP2 is still the BEST racing sim on the market.....I am still gonna
blow $1000 bucks on a P200, Matrox mel....etc, etc, just to hike the
fps up.
And when P300+ are the norm., GP2 will still be valid.
Congratulations to Geoff Grammond, he is a ***y genius, (GOD). The
only thing I can't understand is how he got tucked up those wan***'s at
Microprose?
Jammer (UK)
......"Employ a ***ager, while the still know every thing!"