rec.autos.simulators

by **Jason L'Hirondell** » Thu, 11 Dec 1997 04:00:00

1st off I would like to say that your online presence is a refreshing
change and
is good to see, You guys are putting up with a lot af Flame (You deserve
it) and
is appreciated. Other companies should take note.
On the other hand I expect it, when I shell out 70.00 bucks Canadian
"Taxland"
for a unfinished and falsely advertised "SIM" like CPR "Cart Patched
Regularly"
I think I deserve Complete customer support. No?

This game has "SIM" written all over it, well it is not. Anyone who says
otherwise is
Really stupid. In its current state, it is an Arcade game.
If a few patches can Fix the undeniable AI, Bugs a plenty, Pitlane, FPS,
etc, etc, I will be in awe at TRI's programming Guru's. They got lots to
fix cause the AI is
the worst in this game. It is not even there I would say. All 12 of them.

Software companies have a great position where once you open the box and
break
the seal, you cannot take it back. I hope this will change some day.
I know Micro$oft gives a 30 day money back thing and that is good.

On to the show...

1. You claim with the Patch I will get 25-50% increase in Performance?
So currently I Get about 27FPS on average. This means if I get 25% min
Increase
like you say I should be getting about 37-38 FPS. I will eat my shorts
if I
Get that.

2. How about that yellow flag, How can you miss that in the first place.
Cart Races have Yellow flags. Come on, a CART Sim without yellow
flags....
Like Football without Touchdowns. there is no excuse for this I can
see.

3. What about the turbo setting thing, Any setting or setup above 5 and it
starts
Backfiring.

4. What about the ability to race with a Full Field of cars?
12 Cars in an Indy Race?!?! Is this a Framerate problem or a AI
problem or
Both? Go-Cart races have 12 Drivers, Not Cart Races.

5. Will you Guru's be able to fix the problem with not being able to see
down the track
more, as it is on 15 it sucks, Anything higher and the slideshow
begins.
Look at ICR2 3D or any game, We can see down the track, this is a good
thing.

6. Perhaps if you cannot get Glide working any faster then *Cough* D3D,
Perhaps
TRI should call on someone who can. Id software, Parallex, Activision
and almost
Every other game develpoer in the Free "Non Micro$soft" world.

Im not a programmer nor pretend to be, but the chances of D3D being on
Par
"in any case" with any other API are quite remote. Any developer would
in all sanity
tell us that. Alex St Johns built the thing and well....Case closed.
You have eyes but do not see...Come on, Give it up with D3D.
Your company will anyhow, I'll bet you on it : )

Thanks for putting up with me "GO-CART Guys"
I know Im a pain in the ass > ; )
Just tryin to keep you on your toes, nothing personal ever meant.

Jason L'Hirondelle

remove the x to reply

by **CART Te** » Thu, 11 Dec 1997 04:00:00

Here we go ...

Check the new AI in the patch
27fps + 25% = 34 not 38 - please get some ketchup with those shorts ; )
"Backfiring" is pop-off valve - you have the turbo too high. Check threrads
here
on ras for how this works on real CART cars.
Full field - just go to REALISM dialog to set the # of cars. Simple
solution.
Move clipping distance out to 21 to see more - it's slow? what system do you
have?
I understand that QUAKE runs almost identically under D3D as Glide - check
out
this article for * facts * rather than feelings ... we found the same on CPR
and Looking Glass said the same
for FU2 ... seems to be a pattern emerging here? ...

"... the game ran at almost the same framerate as the 3Dfx GL Quake (a frame
or two per second slower). But he predicts that if it had been written to
take advantage originally of Direct 3D it would have been even faster than
the standard GL Quake"

http://www.next-generation.com/news/072497c.chtml

Jason L'Hirondelle wrote in article

>1st off I would like to say that your online presence is a refreshing
>change and
>is good to see, You guys are putting up with a lot af Flame (You deserve
>it) and
>is appreciated. Other companies should take note.
>On the other hand I expect it, when I shell out 70.00 bucks Canadian
>"Taxland"
>for a unfinished and falsely advertised "SIM" like CPR "Cart Patched
>Regularly"
>I think I deserve Complete customer support. No?

>This game has "SIM" written all over it, well it is not. Anyone who says
>otherwise is
>Really stupid. In its current state, it is an Arcade game.
>If a few patches can Fix the undeniable AI, Bugs a plenty, Pitlane, FPS,
>etc, etc, I will be in awe at TRI's programming Guru's. They got lots to
>fix cause the AI is
>the worst in this game. It is not even there I would say. All 12 of them.

>Software companies have a great position where once you open the box and
>break
>the seal, you cannot take it back. I hope this will change some day.
>I know Micro$oft gives a 30 day money back thing and that is good.

>On to the show...

>1. You claim with the Patch I will get 25-50% increase in Performance?
> So currently I Get about 27FPS on average. This means if I get 25% min
>Increase
> like you say I should be getting about 37-38 FPS. I will eat my shorts
>if I
> Get that.

>2. How about that yellow flag, How can you miss that in the first place.
> Cart Races have Yellow flags. Come on, a CART Sim without yellow
>flags....
> Like Football without Touchdowns. there is no excuse for this I can
>see.

>3. What about the turbo setting thing, Any setting or setup above 5 and it
>starts
> Backfiring.

>4. What about the ability to race with a Full Field of cars?
> 12 Cars in an Indy Race?!?! Is this a Framerate problem or a AI
>problem or
> Both? Go-Cart races have 12 Drivers, Not Cart Races.

>5. Will you Guru's be able to fix the problem with not being able to see
>down the track
> more, as it is on 15 it sucks, Anything higher and the slideshow
>begins.
> Look at ICR2 3D or any game, We can see down the track, this is a good
>thing.

>6. Perhaps if you cannot get Glide working any faster then *Cough* D3D,
>Perhaps
> TRI should call on someone who can. Id software, Parallex, Activision
>and almost
> Every other game develpoer in the Free "Non Micro$soft" world.

> Im not a programmer nor pretend to be, but the chances of D3D being on
>Par
> "in any case" with any other API are quite remote. Any developer would
>in all sanity
> tell us that. Alex St Johns built the thing and well....Case closed.
> You have eyes but do not see...Come on, Give it up with D3D.
> Your company will anyhow, I'll bet you on it : )

> Thanks for putting up with me "GO-CART Guys"
> I know Im a pain in the ass > ; )
> Just tryin to keep you on your toes, nothing personal ever meant.

> Jason L'Hirondelle

> remove the x to reply

>.

by Jo » Thu, 11 Dec 1997 04:00:00

Quake is OpenGL, not D3D nor Glide.

FU2 is not exactly known as a blazing performer - quite the contrary
in fact. And not meaning to be overly skeptical or anything, but any
company like Looking Glass that doesn't have a Glide version available
isn't going to admit it would be better, even if it is. That would be
marketing suicide for the game.

Joe

by **Ed Jankovsk** » Thu, 11 Dec 1997 04:00:00

: Here we go ...

: I understand that QUAKE runs almost identically under D3D as Glide - check
: out
: this article for * facts * rather than feelings ... we found the same on CPR
: and Looking Glass said the same
: for FU2 ... seems to be a pattern emerging here? ...

: "... the game ran at almost the same framerate as the 3Dfx GL Quake (a frame
: or two per second slower). But he predicts that if it had been written to
: take advantage originally of Direct 3D it would have been even faster than
: the standard GL Quake"

: http://www.next-generation.com/news/072497c.chtml

I fully support the CART team, however I can't go along with this one. If
you are going to use next-generation online as *facts* I am worried. For
starters, that report that D3D Quake was nearly identical to GL Quake came
*from* Microsoft, during a time where some game companies were pressuring
MS to adopt GL support. What would you expect Microsoft to say when they
want to support their baby? "Yeah GL smokes D3D". Game players have seen
many times where a d3d port vs. a 3dfx native port have significant
improvements.

by **Brian Heilan** » Thu, 11 Dec 1997 04:00:00

You tell it like it is Jason, my hat is off to you!

I think I have just become a bigger Formula 1 fan. I was able to download
the UK demo of UBI softs F1 simulation.
What an amazing piece of programming compared to Cart Frustration Racing.
Oh and Yes, UBI soft has decided to make a 3dfx and a d3d version of the
simulation and both are included in the demo.
I first tried the 3dfx version, and was blessed with a smooth handling car,
graphics that represented sight distances to the horizon, very good frame
rates, overall I was impressed.
I then tried the d3d version, and was expecting the flicker of cart, bad
frame rates etc. But to my surprise, it looked almost as good as the 3dfx
version, there were a few things much worse, mirrors were not functioning,
and the environment looked more like a cartoon (Like Cart Frustration
Racing) transitions from horizon to sky were not smooth like in the 3dfx
version.

Based on what I see in the demo of F1, WAIT TO BUY A REAL SIMULATION UBI
Soft F1 WILL BE HERE SOON!!
I only wish it was being distributed in the United States right now! If it
were, I would already own a copy, and I would have forgotten about Cart
Frustration Racing already.