rec.autos.simulators

by **Denn** » Fri, 28 Jul 2000 04:00:00

Yep, you guessed it, GP3 again. It is true that it was
4 years ago when GP2 was released an I see many posts
rambling on about the 4 years it took to develop GP3.
How about GC taking a *big* vacation and actually started
developing GP3 1 or 2 years ago, that would seem ok,
wouldn't it. Besides, 2 years ago, nobody cared about
3D accel, because the cards were crap. And FF only got
into the picture around that time too.

Developing software (games) in such an unstable environment
can be disasterous if the design team makes the wrong
descisions (like the input module, or the render module, look
at Unreal), so sometimes whole portions have to be rewritten
to accomodate recent developments on input and 3D devices.

That's not to say GP3 wasn't late, it took it's time, but now it's
here I must say, I like it. Sure there are some problems and
the physics engine has (too) many shortcuts, but basically
it's an ok simulation. There's just so much you can model in
the physics departement with the current CPUs, maybe in
another 4 years time, we'll all be driving *real* simulations.
(I assume GPL also uses some shortcuts and/or simplyfications
in the physics module).

Dennis.

by **Simon Brow** » Fri, 28 Jul 2000 04:00:00

On shortcuts in the physics, there may well be some, or even lots in GPL, I
can't possibly judge since i've never tried to write a motor-sports
simulation, or driven a 1967 F1 car, but the important thing is that you
never notice them. The only time GPL does something weird that 'feels
wrong' is in the most extreme of crashes.
Although GP3 is an excellent game and one I will play a lot, the physics are
a dissapointment.

by **Michael E. Carve** » Fri, 28 Jul 2000 04:00:00

% Yep, you guessed it, GP3 again. It is true that it was
% 4 years ago when GP2 was released an I see many posts
% rambling on about the 4 years it took to develop GP3.
% How about GC taking a *big* vacation and actually started
% developing GP3 1 or 2 years ago, that would seem ok,
% wouldn't it. Besides, 2 years ago, nobody cared about
% 3D accel, because the cards were crap. And FF only got
% into the picture around that time too.

Because in an interview with Geoff, he said they took a few months
"vacation" after GP2 and started work on coding the next release.

% Developing software (games) in such an unstable environment
% can be disasterous if the design team makes the wrong
% descisions (like the input module, or the render module, look
% at Unreal), so sometimes whole portions have to be rewritten
% to accomodate recent developments on input and 3D devices.

Don't hardcode yourself into a corner. Apparently Geoff has hardcoded
his software and this makes if difficult to be flexiable and change
certain "modules" without having to s***everything and start all over
again.

--
**************************** Michael E. Carver *************************
Upside out, or inside down...False alarm the only game in town.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<[ /./. [- < ]>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

by **Tim McArthu** » Fri, 28 Jul 2000 04:00:00

As an example, GPL has no tire wear implemented at all. Tire heat is, but
not actual wear. Papy was able to get away with this due to the actual tires
lasting for numerous races (They were street tires) back in 1967. Can you
imagine if a modern sim had no tire wear in it?

by **MichaelJ** » Fri, 28 Jul 2000 04:00:00

You're pretty much right. Geoff is a family man and took a couple of
years off after GP2. After all, he made a ton of money and didn't have to
do much. He's not a 24/7 coder like Carmack, he has other interests.

I wouldn't be surprised if he had been talked into doing the 3D hardware
upgrade (GP3) by Microprose men with large chequebooks.

- Michael

by **Tony Whitle** » Fri, 28 Jul 2000 04:00:00

I don't think so! The racing tyres were not as sophisticated in those days
but they weren't borrowed from your average Ford. Tyre wear could be a
problem - I've seen pictures of completely bare tyres at Monza, IIRC they
weren't the first set they'd used in the race.

That said, it sounds like a fairly serious omission.

Tony Whitley

by **Stephen Ferguso** » Fri, 28 Jul 2000 04:00:00

I wouldn't say the 3D update is his. My impression is that he did a one-man
routine on most of the game engine using software rendering, then Hasbro
dumped a bunch of people on him less than a year ago to tidy up the artwork
and somehow add 3D support. The lack of huge performance difference between
software and hardware that people have mentioned would hint that the 3D
support was just a relatively last minute patch up to add compatibility to
modern hardware, and some nice filtering here and there.

Somehow, when I think of Crammond, I also think of Valve software and
Half-Life, only because both of them did some nice coding to make a lot of
"3D card only" effects also work in software. It is *almost* a non-issue
now with a fairly large saturation of 3D cards on the market, but Crammond
is not a complete idiot for remembering that there are a lot of households
still plugging away on PII-s with onboard video. These kind of people
aren't going to buy a 200 dollar card to play a game, but they are going to
happily put down 50 bucks for a fairly snazzy looking F1 game.

Stephen

by **Richard G Cleg** » Fri, 28 Jul 2000 04:00:00

:> As an example, GPL has no tire wear implemented at all. Tire heat is, but
:> not actual wear. Papy was able to get away with this due to the actual
: tires
:> lasting for numerous races (They were street tires) back in 1967.
: I don't think so! The racing tyres were not as sophisticated in those days
: but they weren't borrowed from your average Ford. Tyre wear could be a
: problem - I've seen pictures of completely bare tyres at Monza, IIRC they
: weren't the first set they'd used in the race.

Tyres in '67 were certainly not street tyres as you say - however,
they would last more than one race - generally several.

--
Richard G. Clegg Only the mind is waving
Networks and Non-Linear Dynamics Group
Dept. of Mathematics, Uni. of York
UPDATED WWW: http://manor.york.ac.uk/

by **Richard G Cleg** » Fri, 28 Jul 2000 04:00:00

: On shortcuts in the physics, there may well be some, or even lots in GPL, I
: can't possibly judge since i've never tried to write a motor-sports
: simulation, or driven a 1967 F1 car, but the important thing is that you
: never notice them. The only time GPL does something weird that 'feels
: wrong' is in the most extreme of crashes.

Nonsense - there's plenty of faults in the GPL simulation engine.
It's the best out there but there's lots of problems which could be
improved upon in a GPL2.

--
Richard G. Clegg Only the mind is waving
Networks and Non-Linear Dynamics Group
Dept. of Mathematics, Uni. of York
UPDATED WWW: http://manor.york.ac.uk/

by **Jo Hels** » Fri, 28 Jul 2000 04:00:00

On Thu, 27 Jul 2000 18:04:19 +0200, "Stephen Ferguson"

>> > Yep, you guessed it, GP3 again. It is true that it was
>> > 4 years ago when GP2 was released an I see many posts
>> > rambling on about the 4 years it took to develop GP3.
>> > How about GC taking a *big* vacation and actually started
>> > developing GP3 1 or 2 years ago, that would seem ok,
>> > wouldn't it. Besides, 2 years ago, nobody cared about
>> > 3D accel, because the cards were crap. And FF only got
>> > into the picture around that time too.

>> You're pretty much right. Geoff is a family man and took a couple of
>> years off after GP2. After all, he made a ton of money and didn't have to
>> do much. He's not a 24/7 coder like Carmack, he has other interests.

>> I wouldn't be surprised if he had been talked into doing the 3D hardware
>> upgrade (GP3) by Microprose men with large chequebooks.

>I wouldn't say the 3D update is his. My impression is that he did a one-man
>routine on most of the game engine using software rendering, then Hasbro
>dumped a bunch of people on him less than a year ago to tidy up the artwork
>and somehow add 3D support. The lack of huge performance difference between
>software and hardware that people have mentioned would hint that the 3D
>support was just a relatively last minute patch up to add compatibility to
>modern hardware, and some nice filtering here and there.

>Somehow, when I think of Crammond, I also think of Valve software and
>Half-Life, only because both of them did some nice coding to make a lot of
>"3D card only" effects also work in software. It is *almost* a non-issue
>now with a fairly large saturation of 3D cards on the market, but Crammond
>is not a complete idiot for remembering that there are a lot of households
>still plugging away on PII-s with onboard video. These kind of people
>aren't going to buy a 200 dollar card to play a game, but they are going to
>happily put down 50 bucks for a fairly snazzy looking F1 game.

I could have written this (the post, not GP3 software engine :-) )

JoH

by **Tony Whitle** » Fri, 28 Jul 2000 04:00:00

Generally yes, but not always. I'll dig out the picture of the Ferrari (I
think) with canvas showing! But not tomorrow :-)

Tony Whitley

by **Simon Brow** » Fri, 28 Jul 2000 04:00:00

Did I say otherwise? I said there may be lots of shortcuts in the GPL
physics, but that I couldn't tell because i've never driven a 1967 F1 car.
Sounds like a pretty reasonable comment to me. :)

> : On shortcuts in the physics, there may well be some, or even lots in
GPL, I
> : can't possibly judge since i've never tried to write a motor-sports
> : simulation, or driven a 1967 F1 car, but the important thing is that you
> : never notice them. The only time GPL does something weird that 'feels
> : wrong' is in the most extreme of crashes.

> Nonsense - there's plenty of faults in the GPL simulation engine.
> It's the best out there but there's lots of problems which could be
> improved upon in a GPL2.

> --
> Richard G. Clegg Only the mind is waving
> Networks and Non-Linear Dynamics Group
> Dept. of Mathematics, Uni. of York
> UPDATED WWW: http://manor.york.ac.uk/

by **Ed Solhei** » Fri, 28 Jul 2000 04:00:00

> You're pretty much right. Geoff is a family man and took a couple of
> years off after GP2. After all, he made a ton of money and didn't have to
> do much. He's not a 24/7 coder like Carmack, he has other interests.

I seem to recall reading in an interview (on the official GP-site ?) that
Goeff actually took 3-4 months vacation after GP2 and then started to work
on GP3.

Imho, he should probably had taken a much, much longer vacation tho...(and I
cant blame you for thinking that he did) by the looks of his so called
"masterpiece".

--
All the best,
Ed Solheim
The GPLEA

by **Zonoska** » Fri, 28 Jul 2000 04:00:00

> > You're pretty much right. Geoff is a family man and took a couple of
> > years off after GP2. After all, he made a ton of money and didn't have
to
> > do much. He's not a 24/7 coder like Carmack, he has other interests.

> I seem to recall reading in an interview (on the official GP-site ?) that
> Goeff actually took 3-4 months vacation after GP2 and then started to work
> on GP3.

> Imho, he should probably had taken a much, much longer vacation tho...(and
I
> cant blame you for thinking that he did) by the looks of his so called
> "masterpiece".

But then, we wouldn't have GP3 right now, don't you think?

Dennis.

by **G.Aitke** » Fri, 28 Jul 2000 04:00:00

> > > You're pretty much right. Geoff is a family man and took a couple of
> > > years off after GP2. After all, he made a ton of money and didn't have
> to
> > > do much. He's not a 24/7 coder like Carmack, he has other interests.

> > I seem to recall reading in an interview (on the official GP-site ?) that
> > Goeff actually took 3-4 months vacation after GP2 and then started to work
> > on GP3.

> > Imho, he should probably had taken a much, much longer vacation tho...(and
> I
> > cant blame you for thinking that he did) by the looks of his so called
> > "masterpiece".

> But then, we wouldn't have GP3 right now, don't you think?

> Dennis.

I think what we have here is GP2.1 for Winxx. To put it another way...If
GPL is the jewel in the crown, then GP3 is the turd in the drinking
water...IMHO. Flame away, I wont be here, I'll be in the refund que at
EB.

If you own it and you like it and you are reading this, that's fine,
it's just MHO.
Would'nt the world be a boring place if.....ect.