> Very true Todd. People need to play the game for longer than 30 min. to
> really feel the potential of the car models. It can be quite fun, I just
> wish the 911turbo was in it!!!
Speed is no problem on my P166 either. I agree that the tracks leave
something to be desired. I wish they had put some road tracks in, like
the coastal and alpine tracks from NFS. At least the circuits are long
and have traffic. But still, I hated the circuits in NFS, and I'm not
totally satisfied with the circuits in NFS2. Overall, I'm satisfied
with the game.
> > I'd have to agree with you. As much as I loved NFS, this is not even
> > close to being as good. On a Micron P200 with 32MB of RAM, Diamond
> > Stealth with 4MB and a 12X CD the frame rate sucks so badly that its
> > almost unplayable. After the money I spent on this computer I don't
> > feel like I should have to turn down any graphic settings. I don't know
> > if its EA's fault or Windows 95's (I hate Win95 for games), but I'm
> > taking this one back.
> i am really satisfied with nfs2's speed in win95. i am running on p166,
> matrox mill, 32mb ram ... and it has very good framerate with everything
> turned on! (that's with traffic .. etc) dunno what everybody is ***ing
> about!
> nfs2 is a good sequel ... it's just the tracks that suck! car feel &
> stats need some improvement. maybe EA should've consulted Road & Track
> (like NFS) to get better car dynamics, etc...
> --ray
Please, please do at least a Direct3D version. Please. A 3Dfx version
would be great, too.
And better tracks would be nice. Most of the ones in NFSII really do
suck.
> > > I'd have to agree with you. As much as I loved NFS, this is not even
> > > close to being as good. On a Micron P200 with 32MB of RAM, Diamond
> > > Stealth with 4MB and a 12X CD the frame rate sucks so badly that its
> > > almost unplayable. After the money I spent on this computer I don't
> > > feel like I should have to turn down any graphic settings. I don't know
> > > if its EA's fault or Windows 95's (I hate Win95 for games), but I'm
> > > taking this one back.
> > i am really satisfied with nfs2's speed in win95. i am running on p166,
> > matrox mill, 32mb ram ... and it has very good framerate with everything
> > turned on! (that's with traffic .. etc) dunno what everybody is ***ing
> > about!
> > nfs2 is a good sequel ... it's just the tracks that suck! car feel &
> > stats need some improvement. maybe EA should've consulted Road & Track
> > (like NFS) to get better car dynamics, etc...
> > --ray
> This is one game that cries out for hardware acceleration. Not so much
> for better frame rates, though faster is better (it is called Need for
> *SPEED*, after all), but to get rid of all that horrid pixelation.
> Please, please do at least a Direct3D version. Please. A 3Dfx version
> would be great, too.
> And better tracks would be nice. Most of the ones in NFSII really do
> suck.
Joe McGinn
===================================================
Author of Inside LotusScript, available August 1997
http://www.racesimcentral.net/
===================================================
> >NFS2 is Direct3d
> Really? That makes it's performance all the more horrendous, since I
> have a 3D card (albeit not the fastest one) on a P200, and even with
> graphics detail set low I couldn't drive with the***pit on.
> Joe McGinn
> ===================================================
> Author of Inside LotusScript, available August 1997
> http://www.racesimcentral.net/
> ===================================================
When I play the game all the graphics are cranked, but the view distance
is set to medium (where it was set when I installed the game). The only
time when I the games is unplayable is when Winblows 95 decides it wants
to access the hard drives for no reason. I just hit escape and wait for
them to stop, about three minutes later I can continue racing. I leave
the dash on and there is no decrease in performace when I have the dash
on or when I play outside the car.
You have a faster computer than I do and I have no trouble playing the
game. It sounds like there is something wrong with your setup or the
computer.
This is just me $0.02 worth
matt
--
> >NFS2 is Direct3d
> Really? That makes it's performance all the more horrendous, since I
> have a 3D card (albeit not the fastest one) on a P200, and even with
> graphics detail set low I couldn't drive with the***pit on.
> Joe McGinn
> ===================================================
> Author of Inside LotusScript, available August 1997
> http://www.racesimcentral.net/
> ===================================================
Read my lips. THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH MY COMPUTER OR SETUP. Every
other game - including DirectX3 titles like I76 - works fine (not to
mention the original NFS which is smooth as silk on this computer).
NFS2 is simply an extremely poorly performing piece of software.
I have a university degree in computer science and over ten years
experience developing PC applications, in assembly language, C, C++,
VB, and every other language and tool you can think of. I know what
I'm talking about.
Joe McGinn
===================================================
Author of Inside LotusScript, available August 1997
http://www.browsebooks.com/McGinn/
===================================================
> >You have a faster computer than I do and I have no trouble playing the
> >game. It sounds like there is something wrong with your setup or the
> >computer.
> >This is just me $0.02 worth
> God I wish I had a dime for every MORON who says "there's something
> wrong with your computer" to people who aren't happy with the frame
> rate of a game. I'd be richer than Bill Gates.
> Read my lips. THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH MY COMPUTER OR SETUP. Every
> other game - including DirectX3 titles like I76 - works fine (not to
> mention the original NFS which is smooth as silk on this computer).
> NFS2 is simply an extremely poorly performing piece of software.
> I have a university degree in computer science and over ten years
> experience developing PC applications, in assembly language, C, C++,
> VB, and every other language and tool you can think of. I know what
> I'm talking about.
> Joe McGinn
> ===================================================
> Author of Inside LotusScript, available August 1997
> http://www.browsebooks.com/McGinn/
> ===================================================
matt
--
Joe McGinn
===================================================
Author of Inside LotusScript, available August 1997
http://www.browsebooks.com/McGinn/
===================================================
> >I just cranked up the view distance from medium to far. The game ran
> >just as smooth as the original NFS.
> No, it didn't. NFSII is AT LEAST twice as slow as NFS 1 and SE.
> Joe McGinn
> ===================================================
> Author of Inside LotusScript, available August 1997
> http://www.browsebooks.com/McGinn/
> ===================================================
I refuse to buy a 3D card until they settle on one standard, like 3Dfx
or the other one.
--
> >Whatever you say, you know best. Like I said before I have the max
> >install done and thus the CD is almost useless. The hard drive is much
> >faster than the CD. But I am sure that you know more than me. Have you
> >installed the whole game to disk. Probably not. You probably think
> >that your CD-ROM will read as fast as your hard disk. I have found a
> >very good motherboard though and that could be the difference.
> I think the problem is that, you run the game without the Opponents,
> or maybe just with one of them.
> Once I turned off the opponents, and added the traffic instead, the
> game now runs almost like the original NFS, but not as
> fast .
> I just think EA, really made a stupid mistake, by addding all that
> extra stufff, Buildings, trees, and etc. It's all unnessary.
> I just want good physics, who cares about beautifull graphics.
matt
--
I think the problem is that, you run the game without the Opponents,
or maybe just with one of them.
Once I turned off the opponents, and added the traffic instead, the
game now runs almost like the original NFS, but not as
fast .
I just think EA, really made a stupid mistake, by addding all that
extra stufff, Buildings, trees, and etc. It's all unnessary.
I just want good physics, who cares about beautifull graphics.
