rec.autos.simulators

This is a good point. My life is not GPL (or ICR2 or N2 or GP2 or
CPR), and certainly the card I have has been a joy up until this point
when there was a new piece of software I wanted. (Papy doesn't put
stuff out often).

Now for the *** theory, just for everyone's amu***t. Racing
simmers are a peculiar breed of gamer. They tend to be a little older
and have a little more cash than the average 15 year old Unreal or Q2
player. Many have the means to consider a single sim to be a reason to
buy a certain kind of hardware. In a way, this gives the software guys
a liberty to hold on to certain hardware constraints that other game
designers are not allowed by the market to do. That is, for CPR to
sell well (and not just build ill will for MS, which is already seen
as the devil), it can't ask the average Joes and Janes to buy a
special or obscure card to run their software on- they must design the
software such that it is available to everybody with an average
machine. Pisses the simmers off, but hey- simmers are a definite
minority int he grand scheme.

The future is not writing for specific video card APIs, any more than
the future of programming isn't an eventual return to assembly
language. Eventually you have compilers that are smarter than any
assembly language guru, and likewise, eventually you have graphics
standards that cant talk to 20 different types of hardware and
operating systems better than any but the most narrow-focused
programmers could talk to any one card through some OS they know
intimately.

The thing that bugs me about Papyrus' release here is not that they
released a rendition and a 3dfx version, but that they did this
without the "generic" graphics API version. People here blame it on
"lack of time" or "lack of performance"- but I think both are bull.
First off, if you want to see a lack of performance, pick the "none"
category for graphics cards, and *look at the non-accelerated
version*. That's no performance. And that is what the minimum specs on
the box are selling- and I daresay that the average joe or Jane seeing
the glossy box, reading the minimum requirements, and splurging will
get this home and never, ever see anything other than this (at 9FPS,
and blocky). A D3D version would work orders of magnitude better. I
mean, it isn't just speed the prprietary card gives- Papy's graphics
just plain look incomplete without the graphics card doing it's
tricks. They wrote this for a card- too bad the min. req. didn't say
that.  (simmers all knew this, but that is because they spend a lot of
time around here. The average consumer doesn't).

Secondly, too much time to build in the universal API version... ?
Logically, that should be the one you start with! Later, in the
optimization stage, you make some hot-rodded version. But granted that
Papy was working on this years ago, when D3D was not so hot and nobody
but wizards really considered OpenGL on a PC, I guess we can let them
off the hook a bit on that one. But regardless- what is this "native
support for rendition"- why rendition? I know there is a Papy history
of being in bed with rendition... and that helps put this whole thing
in perspective. The whole "proprietary card only" thing is fishy.

I've wondered why exactly there has been so much fuss and emotion over
my and other complaints that Papy provided no standardized support for
this sim- until I realized that people that bought proprietary gear to
run this sim or some other game have a vested stake that the industry
stick with keeping the proprietary standards they paid for as a
priority. They are glad there is still special support for "just
them", and many seem to hope that standardized support doesn't come,
it seems.

SO basically, you have the software company in bed with the hardware
guys, and the users that paid for the hardware and the software
devoted passionately to the two because of their own investment.

Pretty nice situation for Papy, I'd say.

Far cry from Id, who consistently used its clout in the industry to
*put standards in place.* OpenGL was not what many people considered a
wise direction 3 or 4 years ago... but Id, understanding the
shortsightedness of proprietary hardware APIs, and forever aware of
Microsoft trying to push a mediocre standard in place of an already
better existant one, pushed OpenGL. Now OpenGL it is a standard that
must be obeyed by all video card manufacturers- why? Because so many
millions of people play Q2. They knew they could force people to buy
hardware- they sort of did once already (Doom was itself apparently a
major motivation for hundreds of thousands of people to buy PCs
instead of Macs).

Hard to think of the guys at Id as saints! But in the end, they did
more than force OpenGL down the industry's throats- they helped
pressure Microsoft to develop a much better 3D API than they propably
ever would have with no competition and the ability to force their
standard on the world.

OK- end of amusing *** theory.

I keep getting the feeling that we're arguing when we don't have to be.

You do know that a Voodoo1 or Voodoo2 card DOES NOT replace your existing
graphics card, don't you?  It works with your existing card - it comes with
a "pass-through" cable that goes from your existing card to the Voodoo card,
then you plug your monitor into the Voodoo.  As long as you have an open PCI
slot, you can just pop the Voodoo card in, install the pass-through, and any
game that supports 3dfx will work with it, and anything that doesn't will be
ignored and use your existing card.

So, you can keep your Riva128 for D3D, and have the Voodoo card for Glide -
best of both worlds.

If you need any more info, just reply to this message.

Rick

... do absolutely nothing about the situation.

vsynch enabled == about 57 in 800x600 with the voodoo 2.

if this were the case, i'd use it more games.  even Shogo is faster and
smoother using a Voodoo 2 card.... and this game seems to be based on D3D.

SLI is getting cheaper every day... definitely an option ...

debateable.  a voodoo 2 can be had for $145 now.

right.  and again, screenshots matter about as much to me as the cardboard
packaging material in the games i buy.  pretty graphics are usless if they
don't move in a playable/smooth fashion during the game.

if i want screenshot, i'll buy a five dollar *** magazine.

-jch

Doing a "generic" graphics API version is not trivial, looking at the
game Unreal.  It's been out for 5 months now and all they have to
show for the "generic" API version is a gl beta version for rendition,
which needs to be hacked to work on the riva cards.  Even then, some
people  still can't get it to work or have graphic anomalies.  Or the
D3d beta version that works on the G200, and again needs to be hacked to
work on other cards, with the same inconsistent results.

And these gl and D3d version are being worked on by outside firms for
Epic.  If Epic had waited for their gl or D3d version to ship with the
final product, their game would have been delayed another half year or
more.  Imagine if Epic had chose to do those ports in house, the game
would have probably been delayed another year.  

Fraid not. Shogo is at it's best on a TNT with all the DX6 treats.

Z.

i'll say once again, i have an STB v4400 paired with a Creative Voodoo 2
12mb card.

Shogo fails miserably on the TNT card after level 4 unless you disable
certain options.

not to mention it chokes with high detail settings when debris starts flying
everywhere.

The Creative card plows through it as if nothing were happening.

i have nothing against personal opinions, except when people adamanatly
believe their's is the only "correct" opinion.  

then again, you could be sitting at my house right now evaluating my system
while i'm at work.

doubtful.

-jch

On the other hand i could have been working with Shogo for a long time at
work, and have spent many hour using it at work. Actually at home i'm on my
4th time through, and i've had absolutely no problems with my Diamond TNT.

If it's *** on your system, well sorry, but that only happens at 1600x1200
on mine.

Z.

% Because you didn't follow the rule? You bought hardware knowing that
% it didn't support a piece of software you were likely to want. I would
% guess that you bought the card long before you saw the GPL box, so
% your hardware buying decision wasn't based upon that - from my memory
% GPL's hardware support has been common knowledge for many, many
% months.

While people following this and a few other NG's know what hardware is
really needed to run GPL, the "minimum" requirements stated by Sierra
are total bullshit, and the poor bloke buying the program off the shelf
after reading the box has a "right" to feel "used and abused".  Sierra's
minimum requirements are blantantly deceiving.  Misleading the public
like this will only cause ill feelings toward the company and their
current/future products.

I will defend Papyrus' decision to only support the video chipsets they
did, but I cannot defend them or Sierra for blantantly misleading the
general purchasing public.

--
**************************** Michael E. Carver *************************
     Upside out, or inside down...False alarm the only game in town.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<[ /./.  [-  < ]>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

i see.  so you're the only one that seems to have no problem with Shogo while
_every other TNT owner on this planet_ has run into this bug, found by

"Here's a bug people have found. In the Dock 17 mission on the TNT (maybe the
128), the level shows up all blue. There will be a fix for this in the first
Shogo patch"
[snip]

going through the game 4 times, surely you would notice that at least once of
the levels is _completely_ blue when using the TNT, having no textures at
all.  it's blatantly obvious.  hell, i almost went blind the first time i saw
it.  seeing it 4 times, as you _must_ have, would probably cause recurring
nightmares.

other than this, i've had no problems with my card, wither.  i don't recall
saying there was an actual problem.

i said the performance was close to Voodoo 2, but not better.
get your facts straight.

-jch

A bug which is actually confined to the Release, not all versions of shogo.
(which you're also aware of, i'm sure.)

Z.

On Thu, 22 Oct 1998 16:36:08 GMT, "Michael E. Carver"

I agree (that wasn't what my post was about though).

I've yet to see a box so I don't know what was said, but it certainly
sounds like some people are hacked off.

Cheers!
John

As Jeremy Paxman would say "Answer the question!".

Anyway, are you suggesting that the pre-release(?) version you have
is/was fine and the programmers decided to slip in a totally blue
level for TNT owners just before release?

Cheers!
John

I never knew that.  Actually, shouldn't the salespeople at CompUSA been able
to tell the guy that?  Don't THEY know???
________

Eldred Pickett
e-mail address altered to deter spammers - remove the '*' to reply

Put your message in a modem - and throw it into the ***-sea...

Let's see.. Epic releases Unreal..  it sells for millions. Epic releases the
engine.. it sells for multimillions.  If you received a few million dollars
in less than 5 months.. you think you'd care about some patch for us TNT
owners?

Sadly... I'd be out there driving my ferrari and living it up and taking a
break from programming all together.  I'll let some kid work on the patch..
I'm too big for that trivial stuff now.. look at me.. I'm in a ferrari.

(whatya know.. now I sound like that silly kid in CGW who plays too much
Quake)

I also read that the bug is caused from TNT processing the fog layer too
fast... and therefore it comes out a *** blue color.  Apparently it looks
for the closest match to display and 'passes up' the transparency effect.

I have that bug with my TNT problem.  I look at it this way... at least it
can be patched.  I've played a few voodoo games and that damn tearing in
textures can't be fixed because of the hardware.

I am using a voodoo 1 card..  but then.. hey.. I'm using a TNT 1 card too.
;-)