rec.autos.simulators

by **Iain Mackenzi** » Wed, 18 Mar 1998 04:00:00

Well has anyone tried it yet?

by **Ken** » Wed, 18 Mar 1998 04:00:00

I am not impressed with the graphics quality at all. It is better than
nothing-in that it gets rid of the pixellization and speeds up gameplay.
It is nowhere near the quality of the Rendition version. I will post
screenshots later of both the Rendition version on a Thriller 3d and the
3dfx version from tne CL Voodoo 2. The good news is that this is only a
beta. Maybe they are just teasing us for Nascar 3.
Ken
The Game Pad
http://gamepad.org/

> Well has anyone tried it yet?

by **Richard A, Ishid** » Wed, 18 Mar 1998 04:00:00

>I am not impressed with the graphics quality at all....

I actually prefer the DOS/Win 95 version over the 3Dfx version so far. The
replays in the 3Dfx version are too slow. I'm running a 200 mhz Pentium with
R3D and 64 mbs SDRAM. The sky is nice in the 3Dfx version. The only N2 track
I've tried so far is Sears Point. I prefer the ICR2 converted tracks like
Long Beach and Laguna Seca and the graphics seem better in the DOS/Win 95
version, IMO. My regular video card is a Matrox Millenium with 4 mbs WRAM. I
really like to watch the replays so having a patch that runs the replays
slower is not an improvement. I'll go back and try a few traditional N2
tracks to see if there is a noticable improvement. For the moment, I prefer
the DOS/Win 95 version. Thanks to 3Dfx for the patch. ;-)

Later,
Buddha

rec.autos.simulators

Opinions on NASCAR Patch?

Opinions on NASCAR Patch?

Opinions on NASCAR Patch?

Opinions on NASCAR Patch?