rec.autos.simulators

by **Nosfera** » Wed, 11 Mar 1998 04:00:00

Yes, I have seen the dif between glquake and quake. I do have a 3DFX
card, after all. Have you seen the difference between Interstate 76
D3D and Glide? There is no visual difference, except the glide version
has a problem with corrupted graphics. Have you seen the difference
between Imagic's iF22 in D3D and software mode? The only difference is
the ground is slightly blurry, no acceleration or any other graphical
effects are added. So all I'm saying is; if Nascar2 just runs faster
on my 3DFX card than software mode then I'm a happy camper. The nice
3DFX graphical effects, if any, are just icing on the cake.
--
Nos
send all flames to:

http://www.racesimcentral.net/~nosfer/index.html
ICQ:#8844008

by **Nosfera** » Wed, 11 Mar 1998 04:00:00

Well, I can soon change that. Come to precious me little ***. :-)

--
Nos
send all flames to:

http://www.racesimcentral.net/~nosfer/index.html
ICQ:#8844008

by **Brad Isl** » Wed, 11 Mar 1998 04:00:00

>>Lots of people are eagerly anticipating the 3DFX patch. I also get
>>the impression that neither of you have seen the dramatic improvement
>>in visual quality that a decent 3DFX conversion gives you. Am I
>>wrong? Have you seen the difference between Quake and GLQuake? The
>>improvement is no less than astounding. Quake, for me, was ugly and
>>uninteresting. GLQuake was, "Wow, this is great stuff." The question
>>now is, "Will the 3DFX patch for N2 be done right?" Let's hope.

>Yes, I have seen the dif between glquake and quake. I do have a 3DFX
>card, after all. Have you seen the difference between Interstate 76
>D3D and Glide? There is no visual difference, except the glide version
>has a problem with corrupted graphics. Have you seen the difference
>between Imagic's iF22 in D3D and software mode? The only difference is
>the ground is slightly blurry, no acceleration or any other graphical
>effects are added. So all I'm saying is; if Nascar2 just runs faster
>on my 3DFX card than software mode then I'm a happy camper. The nice
>3DFX graphical effects, if any, are just icing on the cake.

Exactly. Hence my hope that the the 3DFX patch for N2 be done right.
Interestingly enough, the frame rate on the two computers here is
just fine - P166 MMX and PII 233.

by **Brad Isl** » Wed, 11 Mar 1998 04:00:00

Agreed. Lots of companies are doing freebie 3DFX patches. It's great
PR for them and really bad PR for the ones that release new
full-priced games with 3DFX support being the only added feature aka
MWII and NFSII.

by **John Walla** » Wed, 11 Mar 1998 04:00:00

On Sat, 07 Mar 1998 13:45:28 -0800, "Marc J. Nelson"

>Attention perhaps, but he doesn't seem to be fooling around. Not sure
>how he was able to create the screen shots though, as the "normal" '\'
>key produces the same effect as the Rendition version. However, this
>doesn't mean he didn't use a 3rd-party program.

Hypersnap will do the trick.

Cheers!
John

by **Marc J. Nelso** » Wed, 11 Mar 1998 04:00:00

Hi John!

> Hypersnap will do the trick.

That's what I thought, but couldn't recall the name of the program. =)

Cheers!

Marc

--
Marc J. Nelson
Sim Racing News - http://www.simnews.com

by **Stev** » Sat, 14 Mar 1998 04:00:00

Me too please!!! Looks like the site was talken down....

Steve

>I can't even access the site to see the pics. If someone has dl them,
>could you please e-mail them to me.

>Thanks,
>Tom Wardell

>http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/2171/index.html

>>http://www.shadows.com/nasfan/01.jpg
>>http://www.shadows.com/nasfan/02.jpg
>>http://www.shadows.com/nasfan/03.jpg
>>http://www.shadows.com/nasfan/04.jpg

>>It will be out soon... runs awesome on my p200 with a regular old
>>Orchid Righteous 3d and 64 megs SDram.

rec.autos.simulators

n2 3dfx screenshots here

n2 3dfx screenshots here

n2 3dfx screenshots here

n2 3dfx screenshots here

n2 3dfx screenshots here

n2 3dfx screenshots here

n2 3dfx screenshots here

n2 3dfx screenshots here