(NB the smiley before flaming me about the release date of GP2.)
---Jim
--
Pat Dotson
IMPACT Motorsports
> > I really cannot understand why there are still people moaning and
> > whining about GP2 after all this time? GP2 has stood the test of time,
> Sure it's stood the test of time. In GP2 terms, it's only been out for
> about 2 months of simulated time. :-)
> (NB the smiley before flaming me about the release date of GP2.)
> ---Jim
Beers and cheers
(uncle) Goy, BIG fan of GP2
> > I really cannot understand why there are still people moaning and
> > whining about GP2 after all this time? GP2 has stood the test of time,
> > yes, it has faults, but all other sims also have faults, there is no
> > such thing as the *perfect* sim, even though we would all love one.
> > Yes, it has now been bettered (by F1RS), but it is still a great sim
> > by *any* standards.
> Yes, it's a great sim. People are just trying to make it clear
> that one aspect of this particular sim (time-warp, which is different
> from every other sim on the market), is something they don't
> want to see carried over to another sim, or implemented by
> another sim developer.
% > I really cannot understand why there are still people moaning and
% > whining about GP2 after all this time? GP2 has stood the test of time,
% Sure it's stood the test of time. In GP2 terms, it's only been out for
% about 2 months of simulated time. :-)
% (NB the smiley before flaming me about the release date of GP2.)
ROTFL. Thanks....
--
**************************** Michael E. Carver *************************
Upside out, or inside down...False alarm the only game in town.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<[ /./. [- < ]>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
% > >Regardless, GP2 is not capable of running
% > >with full detail at real-time on the fastest computers
% > >available today.
% > I doubt this statement very much - and I will keep you posted when I
% > upgrade. I think that moving up to a PII 233 or 266, or even a 300
% > shouldn't make it too difficult to find another 7 fps.
% First turn at Monaco from the back of the pack with full detail and
% smoke is still going to be a bad slide show. It's going to be a
% long time before a computer that will handle that loadis available,
% and by then GP2 will seem like GP1 does today. GP3 with 3D-acceleration
% will probably fix the problem to a great extent.
The other real bad thing about Monaco (other than the inflated CPU
Occupancy), is the wide range and quickly varying CPU Occupancy level.
It can range from 180 to 50 in just a few hundred feet. This is a real
accordion-roller-coaster ride that recks havoc even with hot lapping.
The above range is solo on the track and not other AI. I have also
noticed that the AI tend to go brain-dead when the occupancy level gets
high. This is extremely noticable on the starts when they just stop on
the track even though there is a clear path ahead and beside them.
I suspect they may also suffer oxygen deprivation (a.k.a. CPU
deprivation) to the brain when the CPU occupancy level spikes during
tight battles in the turns.
I think we are not "knocking" GP2 for its contribution to the auto sim
market, but as someone else pointed out, are just decrying this one
particular shortcoming in the coding of this product. While I still
have reservations about some of the physic modeling of the way the car
handles, they can be overlooked as an "artistic license" issue.
However, there is NO excuse for furthering this method of graphics
coding. Even if GP3 is 3d accelerated, this CPU occupancy has to go.
Unless Geoff sub-contracts the graphics coding to someone else, I am not
so sure we will see a departure from this approach. It was used in GP1
and was carried over into GP2 (along with other flaws). As we have
heard, Geoff is "building" on the core of GP2 for GP3, unless he chucks
certain parts of this core, we will see the same shortcomings in GP3,
and with the competition having raised the bar fairly high (when it
comes to graphics and multiplayer capabilities) this could very well
make GP3 a back marker.
% Lest I be percieved as a GP2 hater, let me say that I love the
% sim and still drive it occasionally. But the time warp thing has
% to go.
--
**************************** Michael E. Carver *************************
Upside out, or inside down...False alarm the only game in town.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<[ /./. [- < ]>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
> % > I really cannot understand why there are still people moaning an
> d
> % > whining about GP2 after all this time? GP2 has stood the test of
> time,
> % Sure it's stood the test of time. In GP2 terms, it's only been out
> for
> % about 2 months of simulated time. :-)
> % (NB the smiley before flaming me about the release date of GP2.)
*Peter* 8-)
> > I really cannot understand why there are still people moaning and
> > whining about GP2 after all this time? GP2 has stood the test of t
> ime,
> Sure it's stood the test of time. In GP2 terms, it's only been out f
> or
> about 2 months of simulated time. :-)
> (NB the smiley before flaming me about the release date of GP2.)
> ---Jim
*Peter* #:-)
Yep, I definitely AM!!!!
Only because I luuuuvvvvv GP2 so much? I have most of the other
*quality* sims available, and like all of them in different ways,
(F1RS, RAC Rally, Indy car racing II, Nascar Racing, Moto Racer, etc,
etc), as well as a few driving programs which are not strictly sims?
(TOCA Touring Cars, Destruction Derby, Screamer2, GTA).
Despite this, I still keep coming back to GP2, as the actual driving
model just seems so right? (I actually think F1RS is *the* best sim
available at the moment overall), but GP2 gives me the most enjoyment,
even after all this time.
So I'm sorry if I keep defending GP2, I do realise it has faults, and
acknowledge that GP3 must address these issues, and hopefully it will.
But just leave GP2 alone alright!!!! OR ELSE!!!!
8?)
*Peter* 8-)
You tell'em Peter. GP2 is the best racing sim ever. I got a fifty dollar bill
sitting on my monitor for GP3.
Jerry
> > > I really cannot understand why there are still people moaning and
> > > whining about GP2 after all this time? GP2 has stood the test of t
> > ime,
> > Sure it's stood the test of time. In GP2 terms, it's only been out f
> > or
> > about 2 months of simulated time. :-)
> > (NB the smiley before flaming me about the release date of GP2.)
> > ---Jim
> Ooh that hurt!!!! 8?)
Geez, if something better than F1RS comes along next month, I will loose
interest in it in a minute.
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!
> By that token your computer becomes a low level form of "simulator"
> when you run the software on it. The software itself is a
> "simulation", but running it makes the host PC become a "simulator".
software on our PCs what are we doing then? Simulating? <g>
The idea is that "little" PCs are part of modern F1 cars. From this
point of view it is possible to do partially exactly the same as in
a real car: run a piece of software.
;-)
Markus
> > Geeze, he's defensive our Pete aint he?
> Yep, I definitely AM!!!!
> Only because I luuuuvvvvv GP2 so much? I have most of the other
> *quality* sims available, and like all of them in different ways,
> (F1RS, RAC Rally, Indy car racing II, Nascar Racing, Moto Racer, etc,
> etc), as well as a few driving programs which are not strictly sims?
> (TOCA Touring Cars, Destruction Derby, Screamer2, GTA).
> Despite this, I still keep coming back to GP2, as the actual driving
> model just seems so right? (I actually think F1RS is *the* best sim
> available at the moment overall), but GP2 gives me the most enjoyment,
> even after all this time.
> So I'm sorry if I keep defending GP2, I do realise it has faults, and
> acknowledge that GP3 must address these issues, and hopefully it will.
> But just leave GP2 alone alright!!!! OR ELSE!!!!
> 8?)
> *Peter* 8-)
: of a joke in comparison when I first tried it last June. ICR2 is very
: easy to brake with and accelerate out of corners with in comparison to
: GP2. However, after browsing the web, all the GP2 comps I saw allowed
: helps and this to me was a complete joke. As you know, the helps in ICR2
: slow you down - a very big thing in favour of ICR2. Also, despite the
: lesser physics of ICR2, being able to race in SVGA with over 30 cars and
: a constant 30 fps is brilliant! I was once a RTS fan, turn based
The one thing that I prefer about GP2 is that I can get away with
a little wheel banging. One light touch of another car in ICR2
sends the two of us spinning down the road. I have often seen the
real things bang wheels and get away with it. Apart from that,
though, the decision is easy. If I am at home, and can plug in an
analog controler of some sort, then ICR2 it is. The graphics may
not be as pretty on full detail as GP2, but when I turn the
graphics down to a playable level in both sims, I have beautiful
cars racing on a featureless track in GP2 at 20fps, or pretty nice
cars on a nice looking track at 27fps in ICR2 (this is on a P133
notebook). I've got controllable slides with ICR2 instead of canned
spins, I can race
in the middle of 8 other cars without things slowing down, and the
cool "wide angle" mirrors in ICR2 take care of the fixed head position.
If I am on the road and have just a keyboard to play with, then
GP2 it is with steering help on. I pick and choose the courses
that let me keep the frame rate up (Germany and Monza are dull
anyway, so no loss if I don't race there) and I can have pretty
intense, enjoyable races away from home. ICR2 isn't playable
with the kb.
Overall, I keep coming back to the Papyrus product.
Stephen
I wasn't *defending* an architecture that has possible slow-mo as disadvantage.
I'm just saying that if Crammond is able to exploit the speed of 3D cards fairly
easy so that even mediocre machines can get 25fps, he might not bother about
totally reworking the concept from scratch.
JoH
Please remove *anti-spam* from the email when replying.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
When everything else failed, we can still become im-
mortal by making an enormous blunder....
John Kenneth Galbraith
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
