rec.autos.simulators

What I've done is taken a screenshot, at Talladega, from three titles:
NASCAR Racing 2002 (full version), NASCAR Racing 2003 (demo) and NASCAR
Thunder 2003 (full version).

I've opted for a higher resolution jpg for my image conversions, for better
effect and whatnot. Each screenie is around the 180KB range.

Keep in mind that each screenshot was taken from the S/F line, facing the
wrong direction. The reason for doing this is that there would be more
points of reference.

Even better, the S/F line at Tally is a universal constant. :)

Enjoy.

-Will

<SNIP>

Perhaps I should include a link? :)

http://users.joplin.com/rmelton/index.html

-Will

W

Eldred
--
Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett
GPLRank:-1.950
MonsterRank: +305.145
N2002 Rank:+17.59

Never argue with an idiot.  He brings you down to his level, then beats you
with experience...
Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

Andrew.

Eldred
--
Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett
GPLRank:-1.950
MonsterRank: +305.145
N2002 Rank:+17.59

Never argue with an idiot.  He brings you down to his level, then beats you
with experience...
Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

Er yeah.  There were some obvious things:

The trioval in the Thunder2k3 screenshot doesn't have enough banking.
The trioval in the Thunder2k3 screenshot has an unrealistically tight
radius (which contributes to the end of pit road being curved which is
why you can't see it properly).

The graphical differences are meaningless, imho.  The obvious
differences in the way track is modelled are glaring tho.

For an even better example, take comparison shots of Sears Point and
Watkins Glen in N2003 and compare them to Thunder 2003.  It's like
looking at completely different tracks.

Jason

That's what I meant by pointing out the differences in pit road.  The
dimensions of the track are totally different between the two...

Eldred
--
Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett
GPLRank:-1.950
MonsterRank: +305.145
N2002 Rank:+17.59

Never argue with an idiot.  He brings you down to his level, then beats you
with experience...
Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

Yeah, I figured.  Tho I replied to you, my shock/horror that no one
noticed the huge difference sin the track (in an incredibly easy track
to model...er wait, N1 tallywhack n/m) was directed towards the rest
of the thread.

Really, all you need to do to see the accuracy of the Thunder 2003
tracks (as I've said in like 20 different threads) is drive a lap
around Watkins Glen.  It's pretty silly, really.  It's like ISI had
used all of their allotted elevation changes on F1 2002 (love
porposing around Priory like it has potholes) and didn't have any left
over for Thunder 2003 so they made the tracks flat.

Jason