800x600 is decent but with a 19" monitor it looks very "blocky". The game
it. It's just that the AI cars are killing the framerate regardless of the
resolution.
Sal V.
Sal V.
--
-- Fran?ois Mnard <ymenard>
-- May the Downforce be with you...
-- http://www.WeRace.net
-- People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realise
how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world.
Nonesense, the problem isn't with F12K at all, but with ISI's engine, going
all the way back to SCGT which has the same problems. ISI's engine is a pig,
it has always been a pig. It remains to be a pig. The only way any ISI
product will EVER be any good is if they start from scratch.
Better yet, scratch ISI and make the SBK developers responsible for all
racing sims under the EA label.
The whole idea that two developers working under the same corporate umbrella
can't cooperate is also nonsense, and if this is the way it really is at EA
then EA itself has some major internal problems.
Kevin F. Gavitt
> > Well I've just done a major computer upgrade and F1-2000 still won't run
> > well in a decent resolution(1024x768). My new machine is a Athlon-800
with
> a
> > ELSA GeForce-2 GTS and while all other sims/games went through the roof,
> > F1-2000 still is a DOG! Also tried the GeForce-2 in a PIII650E with even
> > slower results.
> > This tells me that it's just the program itself not being optimized to
> take
> > advantage of today's hardware. Oh well, maybe next time.
> > Sal V.
I agree the SCGT engine is a sluggo. But just because EA has deals
with the
different programmers, no way they can easily work together. Lets take
Sierra
Papyrus for example. Papyrus is based in Boston. Most of Sierra's
other
holdings are located in California, Portland Oregon, and the Seattle
area.
Dynamix in Portland has some outstanding 3d and online programmers...any
chance
what they already had done could be used with a Papyrus program? ONLY
if
every shred of Papy code was completely thrown away. Each programmer
does
things differently, and code for one is entirely different than for
other companies.
Look how long it took to convert a completed Toca2 track to SCGT even
though
both were created with the same software tools. Now Papy's tracks are
100%
different from the Toca/scgt stuff. Even if Sierra/Havas owned
Codemasters,
there would be no way to use the Codemasters track format without a
complete
rewrite of the Papy code. How much money do you have in your budget.
same goes for ISI and the SBK developers. I'm sure the SBK guys are
busy
working on another version of their product. How much CASH will EA
give'm
to go work with ISI. And ISI only had 9 months to get F12k out the
door.
Heck it takes some programmers that long just to get their offices in
order.
I got the feeling from forums at gtinsider, that the ISI guys really
hadn't
finished working on SCGT. They had several 'planned' improvements that
never
got done because of EA's decision to use them for the F1 product. My
'guess' is
that EA bought and distributed SCGT just so they could get somebody
working on
an F1 program quickly.
I'm waiting for F12001 to decide on the merits of the EA F1 line.
dave henrie
> I think you missed the point. With Sal's (and yours) machinery one would
> _think_ that ANY sim could be run with max. details. And please don't give
> me that ***about F1 2000 being released for future HW. Besides, 25 fps
is
> not that much. To me, it's unacceptably slow.
> Hena
> >Try tweaking the graphics options a bit more. Runs at about 25fps on my
> >before many times, it seems that Geforce and TNT cards suffer more than
> >Voodoo on F12K for reasons yet unknown.
> >Iain
> >> Well I've just done a major computer upgrade and F1-2000 still won't
run
> >> well in a decent resolution(1024x768). My new machine is a Athlon-800
> with
> >a
> >> ELSA GeForce-2 GTS and while all other sims/games went through the
roof,
> >> F1-2000 still is a DOG! Also tried the GeForce-2 in a PIII650E with
even
> >> slower results.
> >> This tells me that it's just the program itself not being optimized to
> >take
> >> advantage of today's hardware. Oh well, maybe next time.
> >> Sal V.
At about 30 fps the human eye "usually" is unable to notice the flicker
between frames. However the human eye is capable of detecting the
benefits of more than 30 fps....
http://www.penstarsys.com/editor/30v60/30v60p1.htm
http://www.firingsquad.com/features/faceoff/6-fps/default.asp
http://www.ping.be/powervr/fps_discus.htm
http://www.robinsonresearch.com/MOVIES/part_IB.htm
from http://www.student.hk-r.se/~pt93mm/thesis/domain_paper.html
The qualifier 'Real-time' narrows the domain further. By this term we do
not mean to imply that the system will have to deal with hard deadlines
that are critical to the functionality of the application. Instead, the
term is used to point out that we are talking about animation. This
simply means that the frames must be produced at a speed that tricks the
human eye to perceive flicker-free, or at least almost flicker-free
motion. In practice, 'flicker-free' means 20 - 30 frames per second,
"almost flicker-free" might be around 10 frames per second. Occasional
frame rate drops to less than 10 frames per second might or might not be
acceptable, depending on the application.
--
**************************** Michael E. Carver *************************
Upside out, or inside down...False alarm the only game in town.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<[ /./. [- < ]>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
It's not a fact and I can prove it, but lost the link to the url that
does prove it. :-(
--
Nos
INCOMING!!!
Hena
> I think Michael covered this in his post. But if you can't tell the
> difference between 25fps and let's say 35fps you should see your eye
doctor.
> Hena
BOMBS AWAY! Please search deja.com about this subject.
I thought you could do better Iain. Well I ain't surprised from somebody
who praise F1 2k ;)
--
-- Fran?ois Mnard <ymenard>
-- May the Downforce be with you...
-- http://www.WeRace.net
-- People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realise
how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world.
> I didn't say I couldn't tell the difference between 25 and 35 fps - did I?
...but who cares really, the important thing is that the human eye can
see frame rates well above 30 :-)
Beers and cheers
(uncle) Goy
"Team Mirage" http://www.teammirage.com/
"The Pits" http://www.theuspits.com/
* Spam is for losers who can't get business any other way *
"Spamkiller" http://www.spamkiller.com