--
Cheers,
John Browne
CART Team
> ell, I recieved CART Precision Racing by Terminal Reality yesterday.
> Here's a review of the game <note: totally my opinion>
> 1. Graphics -
> The graphics are good. Are they better then Nascar 2? No. But they
> are decent. I run a Monster 3D and Rendition. The game runs very
> smooth
> on my P200. I can't equate this to lower end machines, But I'd guess
> it
> will work decent with some graphics turned off.
On my P200,Monster 3D I have >25 fps allways with everything on!
CART <20 fps
I never got smacked from behind by the Nascar2 AI, but in CART...
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!
On Thu, 6 Nov 1997 10:17:03 -0800, "John Browne"
>Actually our track data comes from extremely fine measuring using GPS
>equipment with sub 6cm accuracy (we're talking under 4 inches). We measured
>both sides of the tracks and the racing line for both absolute lat-long and
>altitude. This was carried out in conjunction with Pi Research.
The perspective of CPR seems more "wide angle", with small details
(and the width of the road) rapidly shrinking in the distance. Other
sims (ie: ICR2) tend to be more "telephoto", with distant objects
appearing larger. As I wrote in another post:
< Another thing that I've noticed, comparing ICR2-3D with the CPR
<demo, is the differing perspective of the***pit views. In CPR the
<road in the distance comes closer to a true "vanishing point", while
<its much wider (in the distance) in ICR2. If you look at the sides
<of the road as they converge in the distance, in CPR the convergence
<is *much* sharper. I think this perspective may be contributing to
<the control problems I'm having and enhancing the speed effect for
<all.
BTW, while I prefer ICR2's view of the road, CPR's front tires look
better (ICR2 looks a bit knock-kneed in comparison :).
And since we're back to the GPS mantra again, another question in
that post that has not been responded to:
< Also, comparing Laguna's, which is more accurate: ICR2's dips on
<the backstraight (between T6 & T7) where the cars disappear from view
<or CPR's view where you can see directly from T6 to T7?
Finally, thanks to you CPR guys for coming to listen to us whining.
Better now than later, I guess... ;)
Before you send me UCE, I know what you're thinking... Did he complain
to five or six postmasters last month? Now, you must ask yourself one
question: "Do I feel lucky?" Well, do you, punk?
>>I raced most of the tracks last night, and was
>>disappointed in the width of some. Homestead looked like a two lane
>>highway.
>>Actually our track data comes from extremely fine measuring using GPS
I wish you guys had done the same once you get OFF the track :). There are
inaccuracies the minute you get off the race surface, such as Turn 11 at
Laguna Seca. There should be curbing and flat space to the inside of the
turn, instead of the Papyrus-style wall. (I can say this because just this
summer I did the Intro to Racing at Skip Barber there, and my first impression
of Turn 11 was "cool! No wall!")
Randy
Randy Magruder
Staff Writer
Digital Sportspage
http://www.digitalsports.com/
> On Thu, 6 Nov 1997 10:17:03 -0800, "John Browne"
[snip]
> BTW, while I prefer ICR2's view of the road, CPR's front tires look
> better (ICR2 looks a bit knock-kneed in comparison :).
As always, this is one of the minor negative points with CART...
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!
