rec.autos.simulators

F12000- You gotta be *&*&*(^ kidding me!

Jeff Salzman

F12000- You gotta be *&*&*(^ kidding me!

by Jeff Salzman » Wed, 29 Mar 2000 04:00:00

OK,

I got my Acts Force RS back from repair- thanks again to that company,
their products ROCK.

Anyway, I instantly (no lie!) ran a low 1:08 at Watkins Glen on GPL (I
was there yesterday...) anyway, I tried F12000 at Monza- a track I can
turn a decent lap time on- and was surprised.

Surprised at the odd fact that the brakes seem to slide on each corner
that I lost it on (on an earlier lap). Reminds me of Bobby Unser's
retarded commentary on ABC, but nevermind. Like the *** I laid down
made the track slicker or something. And it made those chuckanes
harder to drive through. Anyway...

Here's my question- I've got a P3 500, 128MB RAM, and a Canopus Pure
3D II (Voodoo 2 card). What the )&(*&(*& is up with the shit-ass frame
rates when running a race? Excuse it any way you want, but cripes
almighty, this is some kind of a sick joke. GPL's certainly more
realistic, physics-wise, and all F12000 has to offer is some weak-ass
D3D graphics...say what you want, Ubisoft's MGPRS2 still looks better.
And maybe I'm prejudiced since I don't use a TNT card, but come on.
The frame rate is WORSE than GPL running in software mode, USING the
V2 card.

Just like the usual BS with the NHL series, they get one or two things
better each year, and the rest gets worse. What will F1 2001 look
like?? Bring on GP3....this POS is going back back back...

Jeff

Pat Dotso

F12000- You gotta be *&*&*(^ kidding me!

by Pat Dotso » Wed, 29 Mar 2000 04:00:00


> I got my Acts Force RS back from repair- thanks again to that company,
> their products ROCK.

They are great!

So, your entire problem was frame rate?  Lowering the
detail a bit, and reducing the number of AI drivers
will fix it (sort of like GPL when it came out, eh?).

F1 2000 has a lot to offer if we and ISI can sort
a few things out.

FYI, part of the problem with it is the restrictions
placed on licensing by the FIA.  ISI just didn't
have any flexibility in a lot of areas.  Another
thing is the short development cycle of this sim.

I think ISI will be able to make some improvements.

--
Pat Dotson
IMPACT Motorsports
http://www.impactmotorsports.com/pd.html

Ric

F12000- You gotta be *&*&*(^ kidding me!

by Ric » Wed, 29 Mar 2000 04:00:00

On Tue, 28 Mar 2000 15:45:26 -0600, Pat Dotson



>> I got my Acts Force RS back from repair- thanks again to that company,
>> their products ROCK.

>They are great!

>> rates when running a race? Excuse it any way you want, but cripes
>> almighty, this is some kind of a sick joke. GPL's certainly more
>> realistic, physics-wise, and all F12000 has to offer is some weak-ass
>> D3D graphics...

i agree, i think this game is a really big disappointment overall.

roll on gp3.

Rich
http://come.to/rs-shifter

Jeff Salzman

F12000- You gotta be *&*&*(^ kidding me!

by Jeff Salzman » Wed, 29 Mar 2000 04:00:00

On Tue, 28 Mar 2000 15:45:26 -0600, Pat Dotson


>So, your entire problem was frame rate?  Lowering the
>detail a bit, and reducing the number of AI drivers
>will fix it (sort of like GPL when it came out, eh?).

>F1 2000 has a lot to offer if we and ISI can sort
>a few things out.

>FYI, part of the problem with it is the restrictions
>placed on licensing by the FIA.  ISI just didn't
>have any flexibility in a lot of areas.  Another
>thing is the short development cycle of this sim.

>I think ISI will be able to make some improvements.

No, that's not an excuse. A P3 500 is hardly obselete by any stretch.
Why should a system, less than 6 months behind state-of-the-art, be
unplayable??? And again, this is WITH an accellerator card.

 GPL was not that far behind the curve. The code is sloppy. Compare
UBI's MGPRS2 to this and explain the reason.

Shane Lowr

F12000- You gotta be *&*&*(^ kidding me!

by Shane Lowr » Thu, 30 Mar 2000 04:00:00

MGPRS2 while a lot of fun is about 2 years old now ... and should run well.
The polygon count of F1 2000 is considerably greater than the UBI game. The
ai looks to be better as well. I had better clarify that before i get
crusified(sic) The ai drives with the same physics model that you do, it
uses setups that same as you do. All that means a fps hit. Gpl is the same
way. Up the ai down the frame rate.

The same complaints that came out with gpl are coming out with this title.
ppl who think their computers arent all that old have to run resolutions/
make sacrifices to get a good frame rate.

The thing is, IMHO, this is a great title and their are already ppl working
their butts off to make it better. If you want to argue that it shouldnt
have shipped this way fine. Most games have problems when they ship. I'm
certainly not saying it's right. just the way it is.

If you dont like the game fine. I'm enjoying the hell out of it

--
regards

Shane Lowry

Chuck Kandle

F12000- You gotta be *&*&*(^ kidding me!

by Chuck Kandle » Thu, 30 Mar 2000 04:00:00


> No, that's not an excuse. A P3 500 is hardly obselete by any stretch.
> Why should a system, less than 6 months behind state-of-the-art, be
> unplayable??? And again, this is WITH an accellerator card.

>  GPL was not that far behind the curve. The code is sloppy. Compare
> UBI's MGPRS2 to this and explain the reason.

RS2 is two years old, has Glide support, and the physics model isn't as
in-depth as F12K's appears to be.  Needed more than 3 reasons?<g>  With
tweaking, you can certainly get it running just fine on your system.

--
Chuck Kandler  #70
K&S Racing
http://www.fortunecity.com/silverstone/thepits/195

Competitor in the TopGear MGPRS2 league at:
http://topgear.dhs.org/  Come on & join the fun!

They'll call you names
And spit in your face,
But legends never die.   --Gene Simmons


1. &&&&&& Largest tires for a 1997 Wrangler ???? &&&&&&&&&

2. &#1057;&#1082;&#1072;&#1095;&#1072;&#1090;&#1100;

3. &#1079;&#1085;&#1072;&#1082;&#1086;&#1084;&#1089;&#1090;&#1074;&#1072; &#1089;&#1077;

4. &#1087;&#1086;&#1101;&#1090;&#1072; &#1064;&#1072;&#1085;&#1076;&#1086;&#1088;&#1072;

5. &#1044;&#1091;&#1088;&#1088;&#1077;&#1089; &#1076;&#1086; &#1042;&#1083;&#1105;&

6. &#1087;&#1091;&#1089;&#1090;&#1099;&#1085;&#1103; &#1087;&#1086;&#1089;&#1083;&#1077;

7. AMP AMP AMP AMP AMP AMP

8. &#1055;&#1088;&#1080;&#1074;&#1077;&#1090;

9. &#29233;&#19968;&#20010;&#20154;&#22909;&#30171;!!

rec.autos.simulators is a usenet newsgroup formed in December, 1993. As this group was always unmoderated there may be some spam or off topic articles included. Some links do point back to racesimcentral.net as we could not validate the original address. Please report any pages that you believe warrant deletion from this archive (include the link in your email). RaceSimCentral.net is in no way responsible and does not endorse any of the content herein.