rec.autos.simulators

Another good CPR review

John

Another good CPR review

by John » Mon, 19 Jan 1998 04:00:00

I haven't seen anyone mention this review but The Pits gave CPR their
highest rating a V8.
You can read the review at http://www.racesimcentral.net/

Donald R. Chapm

Another good CPR review

by Donald R. Chapm » Mon, 19 Jan 1998 04:00:00


>I haven't seen anyone mention this review but The Pits gave CPR their
>highest rating a V8.
>You can read the review at http://www.theuspits.com/other.html

I am confused by the following quote from the review:

"A few other niggling points...the full screen option (shown here),
which even  though it has exceptional graphics, is almost useless for
driving, as at the speeds you are doing, it doesn't draw far enough
ahead to be really useful. The non-full screen mode is great, though,
and can be used quite readily."

The reviewer talks about the need for a good 3D card to run the game,
and he has a Stealth II S220, but I thought that if you run the game
in non-full screen mode that it is not in 3D acceleration mode. What
am I missing here?

Also, I am surprised that The Pits, being the excellent and long
running sim racing resource that it is, would fail to mention the lack
of full course yellows and tire temps in their review. Those omissions
definitely take away from the "sim' aspect of the game for some of us.

Don Chapman

Greg Cisk

Another good CPR review

by Greg Cisk » Mon, 19 Jan 1998 04:00:00


Probably someone who knows what they are talking about. He
recommended the Stealth II S220 instead of 3dfx. HAHA. Oh boy.

--
Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes.

Sean Ormon

Another good CPR review

by Sean Ormon » Mon, 19 Jan 1998 04:00:00


> Probably someone who knows what they are talking about. He
> recommended the Stealth II S220 instead of 3dfx. HAHA. Oh boy.

Granted, you can take my 3dfx card when you pry it from my cold, dead PCI
slot (umm...or Voodoo II comes out), but what's the problem here?  CPR is a
D3D game, and 3dfx does NOT rule that roost!  My Velocity 128 beats it out
pretty consistently in graphics and speed; the difference is slight, but
noticeable.  If the S220 just sucks on general principles, forgive me; I'm
not that familiar with the card.  My point is that there are better
alternatives than the 3dfx for D3D.

Sean

Jeff Vince

Another good CPR review

by Jeff Vince » Mon, 19 Jan 1998 04:00:00



>I am confused by the following quote from the review:

>"A few other niggling points...the full screen option (shown here),
>which even  though it has exceptional graphics, is almost useless for
>driving, as at the speeds you are doing, it doesn't draw far enough
>ahead to be really useful. The non-full screen mode is great, though,
>and can be used quite readily."

>The reviewer talks about the need for a good 3D card to run the game,
>and he has a Stealth II S220, but I thought that if you run the game
>in non-full screen mode that it is not in 3D acceleration mode. What
>am I missing here?

   IIRC, the Stealth card has a D3D video driver bug (ie: "it's the
card manufacturer's fault") which doesn't handle CPR properly, leading
to "pop-up" problems.  When running in non-full screen (non-3D), this
problem disappears, thus the reviewer's (erroneous) conclusion.  (BTW,
that was why MS sent Randy Magruder a 3Dfx card to do his review.)

   Oddly, only the programming experts at MS seem to know D3D well
enough to evoke this "driver" bug...  ;)

   Curious...


Before you send me UCE, I know what you're thinking...  Did he complain
to five or six postmasters last month?  Now, you must ask yourself one
question: "Do I feel lucky?"  Well, do you, punk?

Sean Ormon

Another good CPR review

by Sean Ormon » Mon, 19 Jan 1998 04:00:00

Hey, strange as it may sound there are actually people who like CPR!  I
just can't figure out why this game is so hated in the group...  It seems
like every time someone points out a good review it gets totally trashed,
then everyone has their fun insulting the reviewer, the magazine or web
site that had the AUDACITY to say something good about this sim, and
indirectly, everyone who is actually enjoying it!  If you start fresh and
w/o bias, I think the hot sims out now are very comparable in quality,
playability, realism, etc; they each have their strengths and
weaknesses.  Then, a few niggling complaints (some valid, some not) start
to tilt the group's opinions one way or the other...  Then, it snowballs,
and bashing a certain product becomes downright fashionable and fun!
It's the only way I can figure a game like F1RS has become the darling
(of sorts) of the newsgroup and CPR is the red-headed stepchild!

I see CPR as a complete blast for a number of reasons I won't reiterate
here.  I've been racing since World Circuit (F1GP) and have jumped back
and forth between all the latest sims, and I don't think there's a solo
racer out now that gives me such a feeling of being in the***pit!  If
you include multiplayer experiences, I'd say it's second only to the
NROS.  Now, I'm not saying my opinion is RIGHT, but when people say this
sim is a failure, that it's a complete waste of effort on behalf of TRI
and MS, when they start attacking reviewers and steering strangers away
from it in the stores, they're WRONG!

BTW, I'm in no way impugning the original poster...  This is just a
little preemptive strike (or rant) against those about to toast The Pits.

Sean

Randy Magrud

Another good CPR review

by Randy Magrud » Mon, 19 Jan 1998 04:00:00



>> Probably someone who knows what they are talking about. He
>> recommended the Stealth II S220 instead of 3dfx. HAHA. Oh boy.

>Granted, you can take my 3dfx card when you pry it from my cold, dead PCI
>slot (umm...or Voodoo II comes out), but what's the problem here?  CPR is a
>D3D game, and 3dfx does NOT rule that roost!  My Velocity 128 beats it out
>pretty consistently in graphics and speed; the difference is slight, but
>noticeable.  If the S220 just sucks on general principles, forgive me; I'm
>not that familiar with the card.  My point is that there are better
>alternatives than the 3dfx for D3D.

Greg is a pretty diehard 3DFX evangelist.  You either own one or
you're a blooming idiot, apparently.  (I wonder if Greg knows that in
one quarter alone nVidia Riva boards jumped to 21% marketshare-still
less than the little over the slight majority of 3DFX boards out
there, but in a single quarter for the million mark to be reached is a
pretty high level of market penetration.  And yes, in D3D mode, the
Riva 128 beats the 3DFX, and the Stealth II does as well in many
instances.  The main argument for 3DFX is that you can run Glide *and*
D3D games and get great performance.  No argument there.  But its
certainly not the only board out there, nor is it always the fastest.
But of course all of this will be lost on Greg 3DFX Cisco, because
he's ill-equipped to tolerate others who differ with him on their
choice of hardware and software.

Randy
Randy Magruder
Contributing Reviewer
Digital Sportspage
http://www.digitalsports.com

John Walla

Another good CPR review

by John Walla » Mon, 19 Jan 1998 04:00:00



>Greg is a pretty diehard 3DFX evangelist.  You either own one or
>you're a blooming idiot, apparently.  (I wonder if Greg knows that in
>one quarter alone nVidia Riva boards jumped to 21% marketshare-still
>less than the little over the slight majority of 3DFX boards out
>there, but in a single quarter for the million mark to be reached is a
>pretty high level of market penetration.

Says little for the _quality_ of the Riva and a hell of a lot for the
_marketing_ of the board. The vast majority of those sales were
bundled sales, with vendors building the card into pre-built systems
instead of a regular 2D card. In the UK at least that trend has been
reversed, and the majority of games machines are being sold with a
bundled 3dFX, as that's what the market is demanding.

No comment on the respective merits, demerits, just the facts ma'am :)

Cheers!
John

Greg Cisk

Another good CPR review

by Greg Cisk » Mon, 19 Jan 1998 04:00:00

Any questions on this randy? And it is 'Greg 3DFX Cisko' not Cisco.
If you are going to try and ramrod me at least spell my freaking name
right :-)

--
Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes.


>I have to put my two cents worth in here.  I own a Gateway 266 that came
>with a velocity 128, and I have yet to get a piece of software that I own
>other then Monster Truck Madness to use d3d acceleration without the game
>crashing, so I can't say that the card works better than 3dfx.  I bought a
>Monster 3d a month ago and My computer absolutely blazes with the two cards
>working together.





>> >> Probably someone who knows what they are talking about. He
>> >> recommended the Stealth II S220 instead of 3dfx. HAHA. Oh boy.

>> >Granted, you can take my 3dfx card when you pry it from my cold, dead
>PCI
>> >slot (umm...or Voodoo II comes out), but what's the problem here?  CPR
>is a
>> >D3D game, and 3dfx does NOT rule that roost!  My Velocity 128 beats it
>out
>> >pretty consistently in graphics and speed; the difference is slight, but
>> >noticeable.  If the S220 just sucks on general principles, forgive me;
>I'm
>> >not that familiar with the card.  My point is that there are better
>> >alternatives than the 3dfx for D3D.

>> Greg is a pretty diehard 3DFX evangelist.  You either own one or
>> you're a blooming idiot, apparently.  (I wonder if Greg knows that in
>> one quarter alone nVidia Riva boards jumped to 21% marketshare-still
>> less than the little over the slight majority of 3DFX boards out
>> there, but in a single quarter for the million mark to be reached is a
>> pretty high level of market penetration.  And yes, in D3D mode, the
>> Riva 128 beats the 3DFX, and the Stealth II does as well in many
>> instances.  The main argument for 3DFX is that you can run Glide *and*
>> D3D games and get great performance.  No argument there.  But its
>> certainly not the only board out there, nor is it always the fastest.
>> But of course all of this will be lost on Greg 3DFX Cisco, because
>> he's ill-equipped to tolerate others who differ with him on their
>> choice of hardware and software.

>> Randy
>> Randy Magruder
>> Contributing Reviewer
>> Digital Sportspage
>> http://www.digitalsports.com

Greg Cisk

Another good CPR review

by Greg Cisk » Mon, 19 Jan 1998 04:00:00


>Greg is a pretty diehard 3DFX evangelist.  You either own one or
>you're a blooming idiot, apparently.  (I wonder if Greg knows that in
>one quarter alone nVidia Riva boards jumped to 21% marketshare-still
>less than the little over the slight majority of 3DFX boards out

I wonder if greg cares about Riva? When Voodoo2 comes out you
can forget about it.

OK good phew... One thing you should understand is that I am a
flightsim person in addition to racing sims. 3dfx is the only choice
for flightsims too :-) Try running Longbow2 on a RIVA :-)

Oh I'm equipped to tolerate it. I just choose not to for a while. 3dfx
is the obvious choice and I am constantly amazed at the clueless
who cannot get it. Either they don't know what it means or they refuse
to understand it. It really is as simple as that. Sorry if it offends you.
Believe it or not that really is not my intent.
--
Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes.

George Buhr I

Another good CPR review

by George Buhr I » Tue, 20 Jan 1998 04:00:00

I have to put my two cents worth in here.  I own a Gateway 266 that came
with a velocity 128, and I have yet to get a piece of software that I own
other then Monster Truck Madness to use d3d acceleration without the game
crashing, so I can't say that the card works better than 3dfx.  I bought a
Monster 3d a month ago and My computer absolutely blazes with the two cards
working together.





> >> Probably someone who knows what they are talking about. He
> >> recommended the Stealth II S220 instead of 3dfx. HAHA. Oh boy.

> >Granted, you can take my 3dfx card when you pry it from my cold, dead
PCI
> >slot (umm...or Voodoo II comes out), but what's the problem here?  CPR
is a
> >D3D game, and 3dfx does NOT rule that roost!  My Velocity 128 beats it
out
> >pretty consistently in graphics and speed; the difference is slight, but
> >noticeable.  If the S220 just sucks on general principles, forgive me;
I'm
> >not that familiar with the card.  My point is that there are better
> >alternatives than the 3dfx for D3D.

> Greg is a pretty diehard 3DFX evangelist.  You either own one or
> you're a blooming idiot, apparently.  (I wonder if Greg knows that in
> one quarter alone nVidia Riva boards jumped to 21% marketshare-still
> less than the little over the slight majority of 3DFX boards out
> there, but in a single quarter for the million mark to be reached is a
> pretty high level of market penetration.  And yes, in D3D mode, the
> Riva 128 beats the 3DFX, and the Stealth II does as well in many
> instances.  The main argument for 3DFX is that you can run Glide *and*
> D3D games and get great performance.  No argument there.  But its
> certainly not the only board out there, nor is it always the fastest.
> But of course all of this will be lost on Greg 3DFX Cisco, because
> he's ill-equipped to tolerate others who differ with him on their
> choice of hardware and software.

> Randy
> Randy Magruder
> Contributing Reviewer
> Digital Sportspage
> http://www.digitalsports.com

Victor Cha

Another good CPR review

by Victor Cha » Tue, 20 Jan 1998 04:00:00

I agree with you.  I love CPR for its graphics.  I played Sony PlayStation's
F1RS as well as the PC demo.  But CPR has a more sense of graphical realism
(cockpit view and beautiful textures)   As we all know, CPR has problems
with framerate during a 12 cars race, "underskilled" AI, and.....that's the
only complain that I have about CPR.

Sean Ormon

Another good CPR review

by Sean Ormon » Tue, 20 Jan 1998 04:00:00


> Oh I'm equipped to tolerate it. I just choose not to for a while. 3dfx
> is the obvious choice and I am constantly amazed at the clueless
> who cannot get it.

Some might draw the conclusion that YOU are the clueless one: you admit to
being deliberately intolerant and feel comfortable suggesting that one should
use a SLOWER card (not to mention the washed-out colors) for a D3D game?

You've done an excellent job confirming Randy's accusations...

Sean

Ronald Stoeh

Another good CPR review

by Ronald Stoeh » Tue, 20 Jan 1998 04:00:00



> > Oh I'm equipped to tolerate it. I just choose not to for a while. 3dfx
> > is the obvious choice and I am constantly amazed at the clueless
> > who cannot get it.

> Some might draw the conclusion that YOU are the clueless one: you admit to
> being deliberately intolerant and feel comfortable suggesting that one should
> use a SLOWER card (not to mention the washed-out colors) for a D3D game?

> You've done an excellent job confirming Randy's accusations...

Who cares about a few frames per second slower? Voodoo has three things:
support, support and support!

BTW, if a card that much older is that little slower, what does it say
about
the rest...?

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!

Greg Cisk

Another good CPR review

by Greg Cisk » Tue, 20 Jan 1998 04:00:00

Oh boy you are too funny. Yes I recommend the 3dfx card even for
Direct3D. Anyone who would recommend Direct3D over glide is
rather clueless too. I guess you don't know much about this stuff.
That is fine. Have you tried playing Longbow2 or Jetfighter3 with
a Riva card?

--
Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes.



>> Oh I'm equipped to tolerate it. I just choose not to for a while. 3dfx
>> is the obvious choice and I am constantly amazed at the clueless
>> who cannot get it.

>Some might draw the conclusion that YOU are the clueless one: you admit to
>being deliberately intolerant and feel comfortable suggesting that one
should
>use a SLOWER card (not to mention the washed-out colors) for a D3D game?

>You've done an excellent job confirming Randy's accusations...

>Sean


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.