rec.autos.simulators

--

Kevin "Q" Quattro
VFX Animator
Foundation Imaging

My thoughts on the issue of 3D support are simple- this is not a sim for the
masses. It's aimed at the *** sim fan, and the vast majority of those
already own a 3Dfx or Rendition card, and those who don't will buy one in
order to experience this great sim.

--
Scott Moore
Hoosier MotorSports
http://www.racesimcentral.net/
Sports *** Network
http://www.racesimcentral.net/***.com

Nope. No need to, IMHO. "not a big deal", for us serious hard-core
SimRacers. But for casual racers... that's a different question.  Remember
to buy Hardware in function of the Hardware you want to support it.  GPL was
announced since years that it wouldn't be in D3D.

FF isn't supported also presently. I don't see the need, since all those FF
wheels on the market are nothing more than "bumps and grunt" feedback.
Nothing realistic _for the moment_.  And is it worth the working hours of
XYZ programmers to do a patch for it if the number of FF drivers is not that
high...  Those FF drivers can still drive GPL without a problem.

Still, it's a must-have to anybody that has even little interest in racing.

- Fran?ois Mnard <ymenard> Good race at the Brickyard!
- Official Mentally retarded guy of r.a.s.
- Excuse me for my English (I'm French speaking)
- Sponsored by http://www.awpss.com/ on the NROS
- "People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realise
how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."--

It's not even a "high-tech" issue. it's a issue of two (now) old API's that
can't compete against OpenGl or D3D in terms of userbase, and that is the
mistake Papy has made, and they're going to end up paying for it in sales. boo
hoo.

I'm not in as so much sorry for Papy, as i am amazed at the arguments that
papy fans will come up with to jusitfy a idea which has turned one of the best
sale potential titles of the year into a mid range seller.

Is it any wonder Cendant want to bail out of their software interests?

Z.

Wanna Bet? I've spoken with several people who have purchased Thriller 3Ds
or Voodoo- based cards for this particular product.

Most people who are not "hard core sim fans", even if GPL supported their
hardware, would try it for a day or two and return it-the learning curve is
just too steep for the casual gamer. I don't think the lack of wider
hardware support is going to hurt in the intended market.

It's never a mistake to forego compatability for quality- do you want
Papyrus to become another Microprose, who are so concerned about running on
all the latest hardware that they never ship a product?

--
Scott Moore
Hoosier MotorSports
http://www.racesimcentral.net/
Sports *** Network
http://www.racesimcentral.net/***.com

Peruse this N.G. for all the people who've bought CPU's, motherboards, Thomas
$uper Wheels, and the lot, just so they can use them for GPL, or some other
game.  How significant their numbers are relative to the whole market, I can't
say.  I can say, however,  that I bought a Voodoo II card for the software; not
for one product, but for access to a number of them.  I'd rather not have had
to, but it was worth it.  And regardless of whether it's game-oriented or not,
at some point, EVERY computer user will have to buy hardware to keep pace with
the software.  There are countless perfectly functional 386's out there, but
who's using one?  My guess is that N3, or whatever they decide to call it, will
likely support D3D, and FF as well.  It just makes for a larger target-market.

Steve B.

This is what cracks me up.  The idea that the "learning curve" is too
steep.  GPL is NOTHING compared to some of Janes Simulations and with
braking and throttle help it isn't that tough.  

I don't think he is concerned about running on the LATEST hardware.
OpenGL and D3D are not THAT new.  Bottom line it is a mistake by
Papy/Sierra not to have Direct3d or OpenGL support.  BTW - Another
mistake that hasn't been fully realized YET is why they didn't have
massive multiplayer support at like MPlayer, WON, IGZ or TEN built into
the game.  The game OBVIOUSLY plays well multiplayer now, WHY are we
having to make things like VROC ourselves?  Makes me wonder if N2000
will actually have massively multiplayer built into it?

Bill / Amish on TEN

--
Scott Moore
Hoosier MotorSports
http://www.racesimcentral.net/
Sports *** Network
http://www.racesimcentral.net/***.com

--

Kevin "Q" Quattro
VFX Animator
Foundation Imaging

--
Scott Moore
Hoosier MotorSports
http://www.racesimcentral.net/
Sports *** Network
http://www.racesimcentral.net/***.com

If this were the case do you think Papyrus would have released ICR2 as
Rendition, followed it up with N2, then SODA and capped it all with
GPL? Would Sierra have allowed that if people were "simply not buying
the product"?

No, of course not. People _will_ buy hardware to support the software,
and if you don't understand that then you fail to grasp the market GPL
is selling into. The arguments you make are valid if GPL were to be
looking at the more mainstream market, but without various learning
modes and arcade features I think D3D or OpenGL support wouldn't help
anyway. Papy understand their market well, and GPL addresses that
market. To branch out or reach beyond that would require an
investigation into the items you mention.

No, IMO it's not, but I'm equally sure it has nothing to do with API
support in one product from one subsidiary of one company that they
own. If you ever look at the FT you'll understand their reasons all
too well.

Cheers!
John

thanks for restoring my faith in the intelligence of the group and the impact
of sales.

If people think GPL was written to sell to hardcroe sim only fans, they're out
of their tiny little minds.

Z.

I may be an idiot(or "absolutely stupid" as you point out), but I have
bought hardware to support software all my life. In fact, it is usually what
dictates my upgrading. I have been into console and computer *** since
the late 1970's. I wanted to play Donkey Kong so I upgraded from Atari 2600
to ColecoVision. I wanted to play MS Flight Simulator so I upgraded(if you
want to call it that) from an Apple II to an IBM 8088 PC. I wanted to play
Super Mario so I upgraded from NES to SNES. I wanted to play DOOM so I
upgraded from 386 to 486. I wanted to play Indycar better so I purchased a
steering wheel. I wanted to play Tekken so I upgraded from Genesis to
Playstation. I wanted to play Nascar so I upgraded from 486 to Pentium. I
wanted to play Grand Prix 2, so I upgraded to a Pentium 166. I wanted to
play Rendition Indycar 2 and Nascar 2 so I upgraded to Rendition Verite
based card. I wanted to play 3D Quake and Tomb Raider so I added a 3DFX
Voodoo card.  I wanted to play Quake 2 and Unreal better, so I upgraded to a
Pentium II. I wanted to play as many games as possible(Glide, D3D, openGL)
at upwards of 1024x768 resolutions, so I upgraded to 2 Pure 3D II's in SLI
mode.

If the software is good, people will buy the necessary hardware. I sometimes
wish that was not the case, but that is how the industry works, it has
always been that way and always will be. Don't buy *** hardware just
because the specs are good, that may amount to nothing. The S3 Virge, Sega
Saturn, Atari Jaguar, and NEC PowerVR may have had decent specs but the
software was never there so why bother. If a really good game comes out that
supports nVidia TNT only, or provides really superior performance to the
setup I already have, then I will probably purchase that card as well.

Rendition and 3DFX API's may be old(if 2 years is considered old), but they
still can provide superior performance and faster development time than the
improved Direct X 6. The 3D world is constantly changing, and given how long
games are in development, companies have to make decisions based on what is
available at that time and guess on the future. P.S. What 3DFX & Rendition
beaters are you referring to? I do not think that there is anything that
will currently beat my 2 Pure 3D II SLI setup. Are you referring to the TNT?
It may be a little faster on some benchmarks, but overall the 3DFX Voodoo 2
wins out in *** performance and support, and that is what matters to me.

I really do not believe that Papyrus will lose sales because of only 3DFX
and Rendition support. Besides, Grand Prix legends is not going to be a
Quake 2, Tomb Raider, or Myst in terms of sales. It is in no way "one of the
best sale potential titles of the year". It was not intended to be. Papyrus
knows there sales. Indcyar II (now out for 3 years and extremely cheap) was
available out of the box to a huge number of users because it had good SVGA
performance and ran very well even on low-end pentiums. It was and still is
a great game, but its sales have been no where near Papyrus own Nascar and
Nascar 2, let alone a best seller title. Grand Prix Legends is for a very
niche group and Papyrus tried to support that group and as many others as
possible. As far as 3D accelerators go, 3DFX has by far the largest install
base, and the majority of people into Papyrus sims probably have some kind
of Rendition board as well. This whole things sounds like alot of sour
grapes.

Well, anyway my "absolutely stupid" self is going to go back to playing some
stupid sim called Grand Prix Legends. I guess your superior wisdom is what
is keeping you from enjoying it. As you state below:
boo hoo

Don Chapman

Owners of the Savage S3, Riva TNT, Riva 128's Intel i740's are all beign
denided access to GPL- and GPL alone, in reality.

It's not as if Sierra are pushing the limit's with exciting new stuff either-
just things that have been aroudn a long long time- and thats the problem.

I could unsderstand if it was exciting bold and new, but it's old and tired
API's- (it's not even glide 3.0, is it?) are being used.
And i for one would welcome the news that they are going to wake up, and
realise this, and work on an opengl or D3D Raterizer.

Z.