rec.autos.simulators

> >[The 3dfx Mantra]

> Sorry. I just thought this needed repeating :- )

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

> >>So does D3D.

> >A foolish statement, but on-par with your religious anti-3dfx
> >evangelizing. As we all know, the only board that supports ALL of the
> >commonly used *** APIs (D3D, Glide, and OpenGL) is Voodoo.

> Really?  Does it support RRedline and Speedy3D?  NO?  Ooops, there
> goes SODA, NASCAR 2, and IndyCar II for starters.  Also, OpenGL is
> being supported by the Riva chipset as well as the Rendition chipset.
> The drivers were later in coming, but they are usually there, if not
> in final status, in pre-release beta status.

> The only foolish statement here was the one you just made.

> And as far as your allegation that I'm engaging in "religious
> anti-3DFX evangelizing",  I just have to laugh.  Nothing like trying
> to apply the reverse of your own motivations to other people.  I'm not
> anti-3DFX at all.  I have no beef with anyone who wants to get one.
> Its a great board and its advantages are well known.  What *is* funny
> is how anyone who even raises the possibility of another board being a
> good purchase is ridiculed and mocked by people like you.  I'm not
> against 3DFX, but I'm also not against nVidia, Rendition, NEC, Matrox
> or anyone else who produces  a great board.  Its people like YOU that
> have a problem with anyone else even considering anything other than
> 3DFX, and its people like YOU who are doing the religious evangelizing
> "(THERE IS ONLY ONE GOD.  ITS NAME IS 3DFX.  BOW DOWN AND WORSHIP
> BEFORE THE 3DFX GODS.  IF YOU DO NOT YOU WILL BE RIDICULED AS THE
> CLUELESS HEATHEN THAT YOU ARE.  EITHER ENDORSE 3DFX OR ENDURE OUR
> WRATH.  WE REFUSE TO EVEN CONSIDER THE POSSIBILITY THAT THERE IS
> ANYTHING OTHER THAN 3DFX.  TO SAY OTHERWISE IS HERESY.  BEGONE, YE
> DOGS OF RIVA AND RENDITION AND POWERVR.  WE CAST YOU INTO THE FIERY
> LAKE OF IGNORANCE AND CLUELESSNESS TO BURN FOR ALL ETERNITY.   SHOW
> YOUR FACE IN THE NEWSGROUPS NO MORE!).    The preceding is satirical
> of course, but we're only a few notches away from hearing it from
> people like you, given the scorn you've heaped on anyone who provides
> anything less than religious single-minded loyalty to your favorite
> brand.

> So next time you have the urge to accuse me of religiously
> evangelizing anti-3DFX, look in the mirror first and ask yourself if
> the problem is simply that you are doing the exact opposite.

> Randy

> Randy Magruder
> Contributing Reviewer
> Digital Sportspage
> http://www.racesimcentral.net/

> >Says little for the _quality_ of the Riva and a hell of a lot for the
> >_marketing_ of the board.

> There's no denying nVidia did it right by getting major OEM's to sell
> their board.  Think about it.  No matter how good or bad the board is
> that you're introducing, if its not 3DFX , you're in trouble from day
> one, so you have to do something to get noticed and ensure a great
> deal of support, and among software developers, its marketshare that
> ensures support.  For example:  Janes Combat Simulations, which
> previously had been evangelizing themselves as 3DFX only because there
> was no way they could do D3D without a big sacrifice in quality, has
> now put a D3D patch on their web site which is OPTIMIZED FOR RIVA
> CHIPSETS.  Says something about the power of marketshare.

> Besides, I've been following the whole argument of image quality, and
> frankly, those arguments are old and worthless at this point.  The
> early problems observed with image quality on Riva boards were either
> due to drivers or early versions of D3D games which didn't exploit its
> capabilities.  You can find a lot of 3DFX fans hooting that Riva
> doesn't support transparency (wrong), fog tables (wrong), or that you
> couldn't deactivate its auto-mip-map generation (wrong).

> >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.

> Well, it just demonstrates that what flies in the UK doesn't always
> fly here.  At any rate, its not so important how or why these cards
> get into the machines, simply that they do, they are great cards, and
> the software industry has taken notice.

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

> How good is F1RS without 3dfx? F1RS has D3D and 3dfx support that
> should prove your point. Anyone who reads about F1RS in this NG knows
> that the D3D version is not up to the performance of the 3dfx version. Could
> that have a little to do with your review of F1RS? You did give the
> impression
> that it would not be a review equal to the current popular opinion in this
> NG. I
> expect no less frankly.

>>Do you ordinarily extrapolate the entire 3DFX user base from the
>>loyalists who are patrolling the 3DFX newsgroups?  

>What would cause you to make such a bizarre assumption.

>>I raised quite a few.  Good ones actually.  For starters, Joe omitted
>>anything from his paraphrasing of Andy Hollis' comments which might
>>cast doubt on what he wanted to read into it.

>Oh, please, give this catty, smugly superior kind of bullshit a rest,
>why don't you.