rec.autos.simulators

by **Toni Lassi** » Tue, 07 Sep 1999 04:00:00

GP3 60% complete and they are still planning to just bunch 3D-support
on top? The game engine is based on GP2 code because Crammond "Hates
to waste good code"? Hasbro stated that the game WILL be released on
schedule?

Be afraid, be very afraid...

by **John Bodi** » Tue, 07 Sep 1999 04:00:00

>GP3 60% complete and they are still planning to just bunch 3D-support
>on top? The game engine is based on GP2 code because Crammond "Hates
>to waste good code"? Hasbro stated that the game WILL be released on
>schedule?

>Be afraid, be very afraid...

I already am. Can you say "canned spins?" I was afraid that you could . .
.

by **Remco Moe** » Tue, 07 Sep 1999 04:00:00

>GP3 60% complete and they are still planning to just bunch 3D-support
>on top? The game engine is based on GP2 code because Crammond "Hates
>to waste good code"? Hasbro stated that the game WILL be released on
>schedule?

>Be afraid, be very afraid...

Actually I am pleased to hear this....looks like they started with the
physics, not with the graphics engine. We all know that the graphic
cards are evolving very fast ATM, so it does make sense to do that
part of the game as last, so you can optimize to the latest graphic
card specs...

Remco

by **Jan Verschuere** » Tue, 07 Sep 1999 04:00:00

I am of the firm opinion Geoff can't pull it off. Too little too late is all
we'll hear come spring.

Jan.
----

by **Revvi** » Tue, 07 Sep 1999 04:00:00

Go look at the screenshots above...the graphics look absolutley stunning and
Geoff has always been the man to deliver realistic sims

Revvin

by **Toni Lassil** » Tue, 07 Sep 1999 04:00:00

> Actually I am pleased to hear this....looks like they started with the
> physics, not with the graphics engine. We all know that the graphic
> cards are evolving very fast ATM, so it does make sense to do that
> part of the game as last, so you can optimize to the latest graphic
> card specs...

The problem is, you can't just take an old graphics engine and add
support for whatever graphics card you like. Implementing a complex
3D-interface requires that you design the engine to support 3D-cards from
day one. This is one thing GPL did right.

--
Toni Lassila

by **Toni Lassil** » Tue, 07 Sep 1999 04:00:00

> Go look at the screenshots above...the graphics look absolutley stunning and
> Geoff has always been the man to deliver realistic sims

Doesn't mean that it will run properly on any machine, support 3D cards or
have the slowmo-feature and cars-on-rails-features removed. GP2 was a nice
sim, but it doesn't mean one can just overlook all it's shortcomings. And
frankly, by the things I've heard, he didn't bother to fix much.

--
Toni Lassila

by **blackrob9..** » Tue, 07 Sep 1999 04:00:00

I was VERY dissapointed on seeing GP3 at ECTS. I took some screenshot
but it's not worth posting them.

It really does look like our Geoff has spend the lasy 2 years locked in
a room and nobody told him about 3D hardware :(

It looks like GP2 with a bit of a facelift.
It looked like it was running on a playstation - chunky textures, no
filtering, textures jumping around.

I bet he still used fixed-point code :((

very very sad.

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.

by **Aubre** » Tue, 07 Sep 1999 04:00:00

Oh man, the game hasn't even come out yet, and people are already whining
that its too hard for them! Who the hell started this "canned spins"
propoganda bullshit anyway?

>I already am. Can you say "canned spins?" I was afraid that you could . .
>.

by **John Bodi** » Tue, 07 Sep 1999 04:00:00

Does GP2 feature canned spins? Have they stated that GP3 will be based on
the GP2 engine? You figure out the rest.

-- JB

>Oh man, the game hasn't even come out yet, and people are already whining
>that its too hard for them! Who the hell started this "canned spins"
>propoganda bullshit anyway?

>>I already am. Can you say "canned spins?" I was afraid that you could .
.
>>.

by **Jon Van Ginneke** » Wed, 08 Sep 1999 04:00:00

> > Actually I am pleased to hear this....looks like they started with the
> > physics, not with the graphics engine. We all know that the graphic
> > cards are evolving very fast ATM, so it does make sense to do that
> > part of the game as last, so you can optimize to the latest graphic
> > card specs...

> The problem is, you can't just take an old graphics engine and add
> support for whatever graphics card you like. Implementing a complex
> 3D-interface requires that you design the engine to support 3D-cards from
> day one. This is one thing GPL did right.

BS.
GPL started with Rendition/Software and 3Dfx was included later on...GPL was
started before Glide was even available.
NR3 basically started with ICR1 (no 3d cards) but supports D3D, 3Dfx, and
software. How'd they manage that impossible task?
How did Papy make NR3 in just a couple months from NR99 when NR99 didn't
support D3D?

________________________________________________
Jon Van Ginneken

"Serious sport has nothing to do with fair play. It is bound up
with hatred, jealousy, boastfulness, disregard of all rules, and
***ic pleasure in witnessing ***: in other words it is
war minus the shooting."

--George
Orwell

by **Remco Moed** » Wed, 08 Sep 1999 04:00:00

>> Actually I am pleased to hear this....looks like they started with the
>> physics, not with the graphics engine. We all know that the graphic
>> cards are evolving very fast ATM, so it does make sense to do that
>> part of the game as last, so you can optimize to the latest graphic
>> card specs...

>The problem is, you can't just take an old graphics engine and add
>support for whatever graphics card you like. Implementing a complex
>3D-interface requires that you design the engine to support 3D-cards from
>day one. This is one thing GPL did right.

Hmmm, ok. And where do you get the information that the current build
of GP3 uses an old graphics engine?

Remco

by **Toni Lassil** » Wed, 08 Sep 1999 04:00:00

> GPL started with Rendition/Software and 3Dfx was included later on...GPL was
> started before Glide was even available.

[...]

Neither example works in the case of GP3. Transporting software-code to
hardware-code isn't that easy if you haven't planned for it. And if the
code is based on GP2, Crammons certainly hasn't designed it for 3D cards.

And if N3 is based on ICR1, I'm not buying it!-)

--
Toni Lassila

by **Toni Lassil** » Wed, 08 Sep 1999 04:00:00

> Hmmm, ok. And where do you get the information that the current build
> of GP3 uses an old graphics engine?

1. They are even CONSIDERING implementing a software-mode
2. The game is 60% complete and still without 3D-acceleration
3. Crammond has stated that he doesn't like to start all over if he has
good code he can use

Just an educated guess, really...

--
Toni Lassila

by **mark jeangerar** » Wed, 08 Sep 1999 04:00:00

OK, my memory is very bad. I have a habit of trying to get a "feel" for the
big picture in my life experiences, to the exclusion of detail. Thus, my
memory is very bad. So hopefully someone will clarify what I think I
remember reading when I say, "Didn't Crammond base GP2 on his World Circuit
code?"

Seemed to work out then.

--
Mark Jeangerard
www.soundchaserweb.com
New Mexico USA

rec.autos.simulators

GP3 turning out to be a dog?

GP3 turning out to be a dog?

GP3 turning out to be a dog?

GP3 turning out to be a dog?

GP3 turning out to be a dog?

GP3 turning out to be a dog?

GP3 turning out to be a dog?

GP3 turning out to be a dog?

GP3 turning out to be a dog?

GP3 turning out to be a dog?

GP3 turning out to be a dog?

GP3 turning out to be a dog?

GP3 turning out to be a dog?

GP3 turning out to be a dog?

GP3 turning out to be a dog?

GP3 turning out to be a dog?