rec.autos.simulators

by **Arthur Axelra** » Mon, 03 May 1999 04:00:00

Buy yourself a 3dfx card then get SCGT.

Art
Stealth Racing
http://www.***sys.com/stealthracing.html

by **faston bulbou** » Tue, 04 May 1999 04:00:00

I have the exact same setup and I can't get the D3D to work. If I select
hardware D3D, the colours in the game are all screwed up and reversed. I
have to select software mode. I have tried getting new drivers from STB,
but still no worky....

by **pqt2** » Wed, 05 May 1999 04:00:00

Damn, against my better judgement (and before I read this post) I purchased
the sim today. If I have time I'll try to load it tomorrow-if I don't have
your problem I'll advise.
Thanks to all for the input. Paul

by **pqt2** » Thu, 06 May 1999 04:00:00

Got about 2 hours with this jewel now(probably 50 on the demo), no problems with
it at all, not even taking an unacceptable hit with 15 cars on my outdated
system. That's the good news. What a piece of crap, the only redeeming factor
this game has is that it has real world tracks. It should be renamed Need for
Speed-SCGT. I'm of the opinion that even the graphics are much better in NFS3.
It's also on par with Test Drive 4 except it has pitstops.
Yes, I can see how this can be a fun GAME because of the close competition
with the other cars but I can't believe that so many good remarks has been made
about this game from simmers on this NG. I'm not an ultra- *** simmer but
give me a break, this thing is an ARCADE GAME at best. Other than more up to
date graphics it is not even close to GP2, ICR2, or NASCAR2 and Viper Racing and
GPL make it look like kids play.
If you are still waiting for it's release in England "Don't Waste Your Money"
waite and see what TransAm will be like. Just my opinion but this thing is a
waste of $40. I was warned and my experience with the demo told me not to buy it
so I can only blame my self, no one else. Cheers, Paul

> Damn, against my better judgement (and before I read this post) I purchased
> the sim today. If I have time I'll try to load it tomorrow-if I don't have
> your problem I'll advise.
> Thanks to all for the input. Paul

by **lamd** » Thu, 06 May 1999 04:00:00

My advice to the guy with a Dell...get a Celeron 400 or 466, flash your Bios
with Intel's P13 and you're set.
A Celeron is a cheap upgrade for your computer and will make it go the extra
mile.

> It's a good sim and you have a nice system but like most newer sims you
> need some more horsepower under your hood to really enjoy them. Save the
> $40 for more puter power.
> JM

> > Advice please, before I go out and waste $40. How will SCGT run on my
> > Dell 266 with 4MB STB128 AGP. It seems OK with the DEMO but there are
> > only four cars. GPL sucks on my old system and I'm concerned that SCGT
> > will also be a cpu hog. Thanks,Paul

by **Kai Fulle** » Thu, 06 May 1999 04:00:00

I hope you've progressed past the GTQ cars before you've made these
comments, 2 hours would be pretty quick to do so, and have also downloaded
the realism editor.

>Got about 2 hours with this jewel now(probably 50 on the demo), no problems
with
>it at all, not even taking an unacceptable hit with 15 cars on my outdated
>system. That's the good news. What a piece of crap, the only redeeming
factor
>this game has is that it has real world tracks. It should be renamed Need
for
>Speed-SCGT. I'm of the opinion that even the graphics are much better in
NFS3.
>It's also on par with Test Drive 4 except it has pitstops.
> Yes, I can see how this can be a fun GAME because of the close
competition
>with the other cars but I can't believe that so many good remarks has been
made
>about this game from simmers on this NG. I'm not an ultra- *** simmer
but
>give me a break, this thing is an ARCADE GAME at best. Other than more up
to
>date graphics it is not even close to GP2, ICR2, or NASCAR2 and Viper
Racing and
>GPL make it look like kids play.
> If you are still waiting for it's release in England "Don't Waste Your
Money"
>waite and see what TransAm will be like. Just my opinion but this thing is
a
>waste of $40. I was warned and my experience with the demo told me not to
buy it
>so I can only blame my self, no one else. Cheers, Paul

>> Damn, against my better judgement (and before I read this post) I
purchased
>> the sim today. If I have time I'll try to load it tomorrow-if I don't
have
>> your problem I'll advise.
>> Thanks to all for the input. Paul

by **pqt2** » Thu, 06 May 1999 04:00:00

The answer is Yes and Yes. All this does if make the AI more competitive, it
does not make the game a SIM. My point is that IMO SCGT is an Arcade Racer with
real world tracks with so-so graphics and making winning more difficult does not
change anything. Just one example to back up my position-Why would you spent
credits to upgrade your brakes when there is no need to brake, just let up at
the right place, drift through the turn and accelerate out and still beat the
competition. If you don't have to use your brakes in a pc race program it's
ARCADE! I'm sorry but that spoils it for me, then again it is a fun game. Paul

> I hope you've progressed past the GTQ cars before you've made these
> comments, 2 hours would be pretty quick to do so, and have also downloaded
> the realism editor.

by **pqt2** » Thu, 06 May 1999 04:00:00

Another 2 hours with this game. I am really trying to keep an open mind(even if
some of my comments may have been critical) about SCGT but I'm still not totally
convinced it really it is up to my expectations of what a sim should be when
compared to VR and GPL. Oh well I'll keep trying-having fun anyway- I guess that
the main thing anyway. Paul

> HUH?
> With the adv. options editor, you WILL have to brake. This assumes of
> course that you selected sim mode in the editor.

> --
> // rrevved posts from mindspring dot com

by **Kai Fulle** » Thu, 06 May 1999 04:00:00

this thread has gotten to thinking about something Jeff Gordon said in the
XS Racing adverti***t... It was something along the lines that the racing
sims do a good job of simulating car physics, but do very little to simulate
the true racing experience, the sheer sense of speed and door to to
exhilaration (and acceleration)

So GPL may have the greatest physics of all time, but I would almost be
willing to say that Wipeout XL for the PSX (without the weapons) may
actually simulate the experience. This is a fairly unexplored analogy, but
lets face it, 200 mph at dega is a lot more exciting in real life than in
Nascar2. Now I'm not going to say that current PC's can match that, but some
do a better job of it than others (and this goes a lot farther than simply
the sense of speed. Just some thoughts that I'm sure some of the more
experienced people in the GPL community (Hey I've been on r.a.s. for half a
decade now (that's pretty amazing) but I don't claim to know a whole lot
about GPL, driving with a joystick and a non 3dfx or rendition card.

One thought about all these road racing games that have been coming out, no
matter your preference among them (being GPL, SCGT, F1RS2 ect.) how e***d
are we about going back to the ovals of nascar3? I Know I am, but I still
feel that it may be boring compared to the twists of Monaco... ok so that
deserves it's own thread probably, but I thought I'd put that out there too.

Ordering my Logitech wheel real soon, and looking to get back into racing!
:)

>Are you sure you got the Advanced Options editor and set it to "Pure
>Simulation" mode befor starting up the game? And, are you sure you have
driven
>anything but a GTQ car? AND, I know you didn't take the hairpin turn at
Sardian
>Park (or the two 90 degree turns) without using your brakes, so in that
regard
>I have no choice but to accuse you of being a plant for a competitive
racing
>game developer! Seriously, though, you're remarks sound a lot like someone
who
>a)hasn't spent enough time with the game, and b)doesn't have the advanced
>options editor. (which, BTW, lets you choose from 4 different physics
models, 4
>different drive trains, and 4 levels of grass slickness - there actually
isn't
>a part about it that makes AI more competitive, except that the physics are
>harder to drive, so it's easier to spin out. I have to assume by your
remarks
>that this is not the editor you have. I'd urge you to give it some more
time -
>I really believe it has a lot to offer "under the hood" - and I,
personally,
>appreciate that they tried to make it more of a game. Dry sims are fun to
>monkey around with for awhile, but to me sim physics in a game setting is
the
>ultimate combo.

by **GypsyMet** » Fri, 07 May 1999 04:00:00

Are you sure you got the Advanced Options editor and set it to "Pure
Simulation" mode befor starting up the game? And, are you sure you have driven
anything but a GTQ car? AND, I know you didn't take the hairpin turn at Sardian
Park (or the two 90 degree turns) without using your brakes, so in that regard
I have no choice but to accuse you of being a plant for a competitive racing
game developer! Seriously, though, you're remarks sound a lot like someone who
a)hasn't spent enough time with the game, and b)doesn't have the advanced
options editor. (which, BTW, lets you choose from 4 different physics models, 4
different drive trains, and 4 levels of grass slickness - there actually isn't
a part about it that makes AI more competitive, except that the physics are
harder to drive, so it's easier to spin out. I have to assume by your remarks
that this is not the editor you have. I'd urge you to give it some more time -
I really believe it has a lot to offer "under the hood" - and I, personally,
appreciate that they tried to make it more of a game. Dry sims are fun to
monkey around with for awhile, but to me sim physics in a game setting is the
ultimate combo.

by **Mark C Dod** » Fri, 07 May 1999 04:00:00

Use the "Advanced Options" ultility thats around (sorry, can't remember the URL I got
it from) that changes the physics to a more realistic level. Until I used this util I
though the same as you but now the game is far more challenging, especially in the
rain.

I agree about the graphics. Compared to EA Superbikes, GPL and even TOCA 2 they are a
bit ordinary.

> Got about 2 hours with this jewel now(probably 50 on the demo), no problems with
> it at all, not even taking an unacceptable hit with 15 cars on my outdated
> system. That's the good news. What a piece of crap, the only redeeming factor
> this game has is that it has real world tracks. It should be renamed Need for
> Speed-SCGT. I'm of the opinion that even the graphics are much better in NFS3.
> It's also on par with Test Drive 4 except it has pitstops.
> Yes, I can see how this can be a fun GAME because of the close competition
> with the other cars but I can't believe that so many good remarks has been made
> about this game from simmers on this NG. I'm not an ultra- *** simmer but
> give me a break, this thing is an ARCADE GAME at best. Other than more up to
> date graphics it is not even close to GP2, ICR2, or NASCAR2 and Viper Racing and
> GPL make it look like kids play.
> If you are still waiting for it's release in England "Don't Waste Your Money"
> waite and see what TransAm will be like. Just my opinion but this thing is a
> waste of $40. I was warned and my experience with the demo told me not to buy it
> so I can only blame my self, no one else. Cheers, Paul

> > Damn, against my better judgement (and before I read this post) I purchased
> > the sim today. If I have time I'll try to load it tomorrow-if I don't have
> > your problem I'll advise.
> > Thanks to all for the input. Paul

by **Mark C Dod** » Fri, 07 May 1999 04:00:00

I agree totally. After playing with the editor I believe the games physics are
quite good. For instance there is a definite pendulum feel of the Porsche compared
to the BMW's etc. Before I applied the editor the cars handled like the TOCA 2
slotcars and all felt the same. I can now do quite good power drifts around corners
and the rain physics are some of the best I have seen.

It's not as realistic as you can get but hard enough to make you concentrate hard
for 30 minutes to win a race!

> Are you sure you got the Advanced Options editor and set it to "Pure
> Simulation" mode befor starting up the game? And, are you sure you have driven
> anything but a GTQ car? AND, I know you didn't take the hairpin turn at Sardian
> Park (or the two 90 degree turns) without using your brakes, so in that regard
> I have no choice but to accuse you of being a plant for a competitive racing
> game developer! Seriously, though, you're remarks sound a lot like someone who
> a)hasn't spent enough time with the game, and b)doesn't have the advanced
> options editor. (which, BTW, lets you choose from 4 different physics models, 4
> different drive trains, and 4 levels of grass slickness - there actually isn't
> a part about it that makes AI more competitive, except that the physics are
> harder to drive, so it's easier to spin out. I have to assume by your remarks
> that this is not the editor you have. I'd urge you to give it some more time -
> I really believe it has a lot to offer "under the hood" - and I, personally,
> appreciate that they tried to make it more of a game. Dry sims are fun to
> monkey around with for awhile, but to me sim physics in a game setting is the
> ultimate combo.

by **pqt2** » Fri, 07 May 1999 04:00:00

That very well could be true. Us older guys like to take it slow and easy sometimes
just to make sure we are ariund at the end and get the job done:-) Paul

> If you don't have to use the brakes, then you aren't going fast
> enough.

by **Chris Schlette** » Sat, 08 May 1999 04:00:00

Once you get to GT1, yeah. Otherwise I watched TV while racing. :)

by **Mark C Dod** » Sun, 09 May 1999 04:00:00

Fuuny. I was watching a Cart replay whilst racing earlier......

> > It's not as realistic as you can get but hard enough to make you
> concentrate hard
> > for 30 minutes to win a race!

> Once you get to GT1, yeah. Otherwise I watched TV while racing. :)

rec.autos.simulators

SCGT/System

SCGT/System

SCGT/System

SCGT/System

SCGT/System

SCGT/System

SCGT/System

SCGT/System

SCGT/System

SCGT/System

SCGT/System

SCGT/System

SCGT/System

SCGT/System

SCGT/System

SCGT/System