Re: NACAR HEAT DEMO: 1st Impression.

The resolution options on the Graphics menu will vary depending on what your video card is capable of handling. "Mike Grandy" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:o20l5.10405$[email hidden]... >And the graphics.... wow. >(p3-700/Hercules 64mb GTS, so I'm running at 1024x768 with 0 hiccups, all >options maxed..) Thats pretty good. I only see 640X480 and 800X600. Did I get the wrong demo. Anyways, frame rate is great at 800X600. I'm getting 55 frames per second. Graphics should be much better at a higher resolution. Michael K. Grandy Sr Proud Member of Precision Racing Professional Internet Race Team Powered by ECCI "ECCI - A proud sponsor of the 1998 NROS finals" The CDS4000 was designed for stock car racing... and it delivers NOTICE TO BULK E-MAILERS: Pursuant to US Code, Title 47, Chapter 5, Subchapter II, p.227, any and all nonsolicited commercial E-mail sent to [email hidden] is subject to a download and archival fee in the amount of Five-Hundred Dollars U.S. E-Mailing denotes acceptance of these terms. Member of Nass 2000 Pro Online Series Member of OSCAR Freedom Cup Series Member of the National Invitational Series The NIS is sponsored by Thomas Enterprises <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:QN%k5.1108$[email hidden]... ymenard <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (9 lines)

> "Joe McGinn" <[email hidden]> wrote >> - User interface, gameplay, and accesibility options that should shame >> Papyrus > Bollocks. The Nascar line of software by Papyrus has an incredibly easy > GUi, and has a great number of gameplay and accesibility options. I suggest > you recheck it instead of staying such false statement (whatever NH's > options).

He's not kidding. The setup menu's in the NHeat demo are exceptionally easy. And the graphics.... wow. (p3-700/Hercules 64mb GTS, so I'm running at 1024x768 with 0 hiccups, all options maxed..) Personally, I like the smoke effects. They're better than Nascar<N> any way you look at them. And finally, there's a godamned steering wheel in the cockpit. Praise ye gods. The crowd looks like that. A crowd. Not a set of flat bleachers with randomly painted spots on them. As for the physics thus far: Nascar <N> looks like a toy. Put it in expert mode, and have some fun. I expect that the solidness will still make GPL fan such as myself feel a little wary, but the sensation of racing a car on train rails that papy's nascar series has instilled in me/us isn't here. The car does'nt drive a strait line. You can't take your hands off the wheel for extended periods of time (In expert mode). Try throwing the machine in 3rd at >100mph without the gas down, and the tail comes out from under you (slightly, at least). Nice option for a clutch control/automatic clutch. Tons of steering options/controller adjustments. Tuning options... Front/Rear sway, Brake bias, Spoiler, Grille Tape, Wheel lock, and an option to test these after modification. Options for RS Shifters, and (woop!) 4 speed shifters. Here's where I hug my ACT-LABS hardware... Supersampling/smoothing available for controllers. External/arcade views are nothing short of gorgeous. Especially the car models. The lettering on the tires in motion looks damn near real (at my resolution and options, anyways...) Oh. And finally.... An animated pitcrew. Heh. Back later. Earnheardt's mine. ;) -J.C.H.

You have to have a card with more than 16 meg of memory on it to get anything higher than 800 x 600 is what Ed means I think. Robert "Jan Loebzien" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On 11 Aug 2000 23:42:34 GMT, "Ed Martin" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >The resolution options on the Graphics menu will vary depending on whatyour video card is capable of handling.

Quoted text (16 lines)

> > What's the reasoning behind this? How do you know that one doesn't > prefer a higher resolution and is willing to trade some FPS in return? > > Especially since the config file is editable anyway, why do you deny > the user the comfort of setting it as he wishes *within" the game? > > For those who are patronized by the game, open the options.cfg in the > \config folder and change the value for the 'video_mode' entry. > 2 - 640x480 > 3 - 800x600 > 4 - 1024x768 > 5 - 1280x1024 > > > Jan

On Fri, 11 Aug 2000 14:16:56 -0700, "Regular Racer" <[email hidden]> wrote: > Well, all I can say is "Hmmmm........" I can say "It rocks": - Improved physics, force feedback, and sense of speed from the already-great Viper Racing. - User interface, gameplay, and accesibility options that should shame Papyrus and Microprose. No question about it, this will be the game for the non-hardcore crowd, with "Beat the Heat" and other fun game modes (what a concept, making a Nascar game fun! ;-). But it also seems to have physics and options galour for the hardcore simmer. With Nascar 4 coming down the pipe too, this is a great year for Nascar racing fans.

Well, all I can say is "Hmmmm........"

"Joe McGinn" <[email hidden]> wrote > - User interface, gameplay, and accesibility options that should shame > Papyrus Bollocks. The Nascar line of software by Papyrus has an incredibly easy GUi, and has a great number of gameplay and accesibility options. I suggest you recheck it instead of staying such false statement (whatever NH's options). -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- May the Downforce be with you... -- http://www.WeRace.net -- People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realise how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world.

blah, blah, blah......... -- Todd S. "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:mW_k5.142506$[email hidden]... > "Joe McGinn" <[email hidden]> wrote > > - User interface, gameplay, and accesibility options that should shame > > Papyrus > > > Bollocks. The Nascar line of software by Papyrus has an incredibly easy > GUi, and has a great number of gameplay and accesibility options. I suggest > you recheck it instead of staying such false statement (whatever NH's > options). > > > > -- > -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> > -- May the Downforce be with you... > -- http://www.WeRace.net > -- People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realise > how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world. > > >

> With Nascar 4 coming down the pipe too, this is a great year for > Nascar racing fans. not this year... Nascar 4 has been pushed back to January 2001 according to High Gear.... http://www.simracingnews.com/games/releases/index.shtml NASCAR Racing 4 Papyrus 01/16/01 -- Sjon

"Andre Warringa" <[email hidden]> wrote > Is it based on the Viper engine? Developed by the same team who > developed Viper Racing? Yes it's the same game engine, and yes MGI is the developer of both title. Nascar Heat also has a much bigger development group with even more ex-Papyrus employees. -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- May the Downforce be with you... -- http://www.WeRace.net -- People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realise how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world.

>And the graphics.... wow. >(p3-700/Hercules 64mb GTS, so I'm running at 1024x768 with 0 hiccups, all >options maxed..) Thats pretty good. I only see 640X480 and 800X600. Did I get the wrong demo. Anyways, frame rate is great at 800X600. I'm getting 55 frames per second. Graphics should be much better at a higher resolution. Michael K. Grandy Sr Proud Member of Precision Racing Professional Internet Race Team Powered by ECCI "ECCI - A proud sponsor of the 1998 NROS finals" The CDS4000 was designed for stock car racing... and it delivers NOTICE TO BULK E-MAILERS: Pursuant to US Code, Title 47, Chapter 5, Subchapter II, p.227, any and all nonsolicited commercial E-mail sent to [email hidden] is subject to a download and archival fee in the amount of Five-Hundred Dollars U.S. E-Mailing denotes acceptance of these terms. Member of Nass 2000 Pro Online Series Member of OSCAR Freedom Cup Series Member of the National Invitational Series The NIS is sponsored by Thomas Enterprises <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:QN%k5.1108$[email hidden]... ymenard <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (9 lines)

> "Joe McGinn" <[email hidden]> wrote >> - User interface, gameplay, and accesibility options that should shame >> Papyrus > Bollocks. The Nascar line of software by Papyrus has an incredibly easy > GUi, and has a great number of gameplay and accesibility options. I suggest > you recheck it instead of staying such false statement (whatever NH's > options).

He's not kidding. The setup menu's in the NHeat demo are exceptionally easy. And the graphics.... wow. (p3-700/Hercules 64mb GTS, so I'm running at 1024x768 with 0 hiccups, all options maxed..) Personally, I like the smoke effects. They're better than Nascar<N> any way you look at them. And finally, there's a godamned steering wheel in the cockpit. Praise ye gods. The crowd looks like that. A crowd. Not a set of flat bleachers with randomly painted spots on them. As for the physics thus far: Nascar <N> looks like a toy. Put it in expert mode, and have some fun. I expect that the solidness will still make GPL fan such as myself feel a little wary, but the sensation of racing a car on train rails that papy's nascar series has instilled in me/us isn't here. The car does'nt drive a strait line. You can't take your hands off the wheel for extended periods of time (In expert mode). Try throwing the machine in 3rd at >100mph without the gas down, and the tail comes out from under you (slightly, at least). Nice option for a clutch control/automatic clutch. Tons of steering options/controller adjustments. Tuning options... Front/Rear sway, Brake bias, Spoiler, Grille Tape, Wheel lock, and an option to test these after modification. Options for RS Shifters, and (woop!) 4 speed shifters. Here's where I hug my ACT-LABS hardware... Supersampling/smoothing available for controllers. External/arcade views are nothing short of gorgeous. Especially the car models. The lettering on the tires in motion looks damn near real (at my resolution and options, anyways...) Oh. And finally.... An animated pitcrew. Heh. Back later. Earnheardt's mine. ;) -J.C.H.

<[email hidden]> and I wrote > > Bollocks. The Nascar line of software by Papyrus has an incredibly easy > > GUi, and has a great number of gameplay and accesibility options. Isuggest > > you recheck it instead of staying such false statement (whatever NH's > > options). > > > He's not kidding. > The setup menu's in the NHeat demo are exceptionally easy. Yeah so? I'm not contesting that. I'm saying that it's false to say that Papyrus can't do a correct GUI, or that they don't have gameplay features. Take a peek at the Nascar acceleration pack. Or just look at this below : Main menu -----> Several race type options |____> Game options They are both found in the two titles, with the same elements (graphics/sound/gameplay, etc..). -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- May the Downforce be with you... -- http://www.WeRace.net -- People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realise how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world.

I like it a lot, once I got daytona to run in 'race' mode I really got to see what it's capable of, this AI is amazing, they get down on the grass or apron to avoid crashes, they go 3 wide when it's called for... they don't STOP and turn sideways in the middle of the track... As for the physics, I think it's very realistic, damage is turned off, which will change the energy dispersion a lot, but so far every time I've lifted off at Daytona it's been because I was going 185 backwards hood to hood with a car flipping me over :-) -- Tim, [email hidden]|[email hidden] http://legends.sports-gaming.com/forums.shtml FREE forums for your league... http://legends.sports-gaming.com Sim racing website loosely based on gpl... Cox Cable News <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:N7el5.9310$[email hidden]... > Your download handicap aside, what do you think of the Sim? > > -Larry > > "Tim Wheatley" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:8n3hi2$1lq$[email hidden]... > > My first impression was "sh*t!" > > > > Cos I had to download the demo again, one of the files had a CRC error. > ;-) > > > > I think it's great, shame the bozo's aren't selling it this side of the > > pond. > > > > -- > > Tim, > > [email hidden]|[email hidden] > > http://legends.sports-gaming.com/forums.shtml FREE forums for your > league... > > http://legends.sports-gaming.com Sim racing website loosely based on > gpl... > > Regular Racer <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:O0_k5.378$[email hidden]... > > > Well, all I can say is "Hmmmm........" > > > > > > > > > > > >

On 12 Aug 2000 15:22:48 GMT, "Ed Martin" <[email hidden]> wrote: >You missed my point, Jan. Ahh I think I got your point, I just don't agree with it. :-) Anyway, the "extended readme", as suggested in another post here would sure be nice. And no worries about the customer support since the average customer won't read it at all. :) JanL

AGP texturing allows the graphics card to use texture from system RAM in addition to video RAM... thus a 16 MB AGP TnT gives us about 32 MB, enough for lots of textures plus the big 1024x768 frame buffers. Pre-V5 voodoos can't do this, so a 16 MB V3 is like a 8MB AGP card when it comes to RAM. It's not a question of performance, but of space. I know a lot of V3 owners are unhappy with us, but I think it's just that until a higher-spec game came out, it wasn't as obvious to most how hamstrung the V3 is with respect to other cards of the same generation (e.g. TnT 1) vis a vis texture memory and hi-res texture support. I bet a TnT 2 M64 could be had for dirt cheap these days, though... -Dave P. MGI "Jan Loebzien" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (14 lines)

> On Sat, 12 Aug 2000 16:49:45 +0200, Jan Loebzien <[email hidden]> > wrote: > > >"AGP texturing" has nothing to do with the maximum possible > >resolutions, it's only a performance issue! > > I might stand corrected, reading that NH uses larger textures than the > 256x256 the pre-V5 Voodoos can handle. > > Still that doesn't explain why the original poster was not allowed to > run his TNT (which *does* support AGP texturing) at the higher res. > > > JanL

LOL -- Tim, [email hidden]|[email hidden] http://legends.sports-gaming.com/forums.shtml FREE forums for your league... http://legends.sports-gaming.com Sim racing website loosely based on gpl... Jan Loebzien <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Sat, 12 Aug 2000 08:14:00 GMT, "RoadRunner NewsServer" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >However, I assure you they aren't 'Out To Get You'. > > You mean "they" are really out there? Just not to get me? > > ;-) > > > JanL

On Sat, 12 Aug 2000 08:14:00 GMT, "RoadRunner NewsServer" <[email hidden]> wrote: >However, I assure you they aren't 'Out To Get You'. You mean "they" are really out there? Just not to get me? ;-) JanL

On Sat, 12 Aug 2000 00:43:49 -0400, "Robert Platts" <[email hidden]> wrote: >What I mean is for the game to be played in resolutions higher than 800 x >600 you need a card with more than 16 meg of memory. Seems I was unable to make my point clear. You *can* run the game in higher resolutions on a 16MB card, as evidenced if you change the value in the config file manually! Of course it will be slower, since higher resolutions need more fill rate, but you can! The issue is just why the game designers think they know better what people want. JanL

On Sat, 12 Aug 2000 07:24:01 GMT, d0le <[email hidden]> wrote: >Memory IS the issue when the card (Voodoo's) don't support AGP >texturing. "AGP texturing" has nothing to do with the maximum possible resolutions, it's only a performance issue! Who are the developers to tell me that my card is too slow without even letting me try it out? JanL

Well, it's because not everyone who buys this game is as savvy as the people here. You guys can all hack through pretty much anything (as evidenced once again with all the stuff popping up for the Heat demo within 18 hours of release). But beyond the ability to "hack", you guys also understand why things work & how/why to adjust them when they don't. I'm not trying to "dis" the general consumer, but this game is targeted at a broad audience - much broader than Papyrus' games. "Jan Loebzien" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (15 lines)

> On Sat, 12 Aug 2000 00:43:49 -0400, "Robert Platts" <[email hidden]> > wrote: > > >What I mean is for the game to be played in resolutions higher than 800 x > >600 you need a card with more than 16 meg of memory. > > Seems I was unable to make my point clear. > You *can* run the game in higher resolutions on a 16MB card, > as evidenced if you change the value in the config file manually! > Of course it will be slower, since higher resolutions need more > fill rate, but you can! > The issue is just why the game designers think they know better > what people want. > > JanL

On 12 Aug 2000 14:59:17 GMT, "Ed Martin" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Well, it's because not everyone who buys this game is as savvy as the people >here. Hmm, but in the end you require the people to be "as savy" if they want to get the best out of the game (at least what *they* think is best).If the option is in the config file, why hide it inside the game? Let the user choose 1280 and let him see himself that his card doesn't cut it. Or he even might prefer the higher res over higher fps ... JanL

On Sat, 12 Aug 2000 16:49:45 +0200, Jan Loebzien <[email hidden]> wrote: >"AGP texturing" has nothing to do with the maximum possible >resolutions, it's only a performance issue! I might stand corrected, reading that NH uses larger textures than the 256x256 the pre-V5 Voodoos can handle. Still that doesn't explain why the original poster was not allowed to run his TNT (which *does* support AGP texturing) at the higher res. JanL

You missed my point, Jan. People like you (I mean the general "you") that want to tweak & tune will figure out the way to do it. You already did, right? Plus, you understand the consequences. The average customer for this game probably doesn't, so we're not going to flood them with options which will just result is customer support calls asking why they are getting poor performance. We put options in the game that we felt were appropriate for the general/average user. We left a bunch of other stuff "open" in things like options.cfg for people like you that want to fool around with it. That seems like a good plan to me. "Jan Loebzien" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On 12 Aug 2000 14:59:17 GMT, "Ed Martin" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >Well, it's because not everyone who buys this game is as savvy as thepeople

Quoted text (11 lines)

> >here. > > Hmm, but in the end you require the people to be "as savy" if > they want to get the best out of the game (at least what *they* > think is best).If the option is in the config file, why hide it inside > the game? Let the user choose 1280 and let him see himself > that his card doesn't cut it. > Or he even might prefer the higher res over higher fps ... > > > JanL

My first impression was "sh*t!" Cos I had to download the demo again, one of the files had a CRC error. ;-) I think it's great, shame the bozo's aren't selling it this side of the pond. -- Tim, [email hidden]|[email hidden] http://legends.sports-gaming.com/forums.shtml FREE forums for your league... http://legends.sports-gaming.com Sim racing website loosely based on gpl... Regular Racer <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:O0_k5.378$[email hidden]... > Well, all I can say is "Hmmmm........" > >

On 11 Aug 2000 23:42:34 GMT, "Ed Martin" <[email hidden]> wrote: >The resolution options on the Graphics menu will vary depending on what your video card is capable of handling. What's the reasoning behind this? How do you know that one doesn't prefer a higher resolution and is willing to trade some FPS in return? Especially since the config file is editable anyway, why do you deny the user the comfort of setting it as he wishes *within" the game? For those who are patronized by the game, open the options.cfg in the \config folder and change the value for the 'video_mode' entry. 2 - 640x480 3 - 800x600 4 - 1024x768 5 - 1280x1024 Jan

I'm amazed how you turned the original 3 line post into 494 lines, with only two replies ... ;-)

On Fri, 11 Aug 2000 21:18:12 -0400, "Robert Platts" <[email hidden]> wrote: >You have to have a card with more than 16 meg of memory on it to get >anything higher than 800 x 600 is what Ed means I think. That's not true. A TNT with 16MB can do 1600x1200 in 32bit, memory is not the issue here. The game is measuring the performance though. and if it thinks your system is to slow, it won't offer you the higher resolutions. That's what I mean by 'patronizing', the game is telling you what it thinks is best for you (cool) and forces you to stick with that (bad!). I noticed that by playing around with the FSAA settings on my V5. At 4x the fillrate is down to 180MPix/s, causing the game to deny me the 1280 resolution which I could previously pick with no FSAA enabled. Jan

Jan I'm not speaking in regular terms. What I mean is for the game to be played in resolutions higher than 800 x 600 you need a card with more than 16 meg of memory. Robert "Jan Loebzien" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (20 lines)

> On Fri, 11 Aug 2000 21:18:12 -0400, "Robert Platts" <[email hidden]> > wrote: > > >You have to have a card with more than 16 meg of memory on it to get > >anything higher than 800 x 600 is what Ed means I think. > > That's not true. A TNT with 16MB can do 1600x1200 in 32bit, memory > is not the issue here. The game is measuring the performance though. > and if it thinks your system is to slow, it won't offer you the higher > resolutions. That's what I mean by 'patronizing', the game is telling > you what it thinks is best for you (cool) and forces you to stick with > that (bad!). > > I noticed that by playing around with the FSAA settings on my V5. > At 4x the fillrate is down to 180MPix/s, causing the game to deny > me the 1280 resolution which I could previously pick with no FSAA > enabled. > > > Jan

In article <[email hidden]>, Jan Loebzien <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (12 lines)

> On Fri, 11 Aug 2000 21:18:12 -0400, "Robert Platts" <[email hidden]> > wrote: > > >You have to have a card with more than 16 meg of memory on it to get > >anything higher than 800 x 600 is what Ed means I think. > > That's not true. A TNT with 16MB can do 1600x1200 in 32bit, memory > is not the issue here. The game is measuring the performance though. > and if it thinks your system is to slow, it won't offer you the higher > resolutions. That's what I mean by 'patronizing', the game is telling > you what it thinks is best for you (cool) and forces you to stick with > that (bad!).

Hmmm . . . I thought you meant, "If Crammond had done it this way it would be revolutionary, but these guys aren't Crammond." Have you tried software mode, by chance? ;-) -- JB Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

Right Ed, thanks. I use a VooDoo 3 3000 on my main computer, the other is a Rage. I'll try it on that. Michael K. Grandy Sr Proud Member of Precision Racing Professional Internet Race Team Powered by ECCI "ECCI - A proud sponsor of the 1998 NROS finals" The CDS4000 was designed for stock car racing... and it delivers NOTICE TO BULK E-MAILERS: Pursuant to US Code, Title 47, Chapter 5, Subchapter II, p.227, any and all nonsolicited commercial E-mail sent to [email hidden] is subject to a download and archival fee in the amount of Five-Hundred Dollars U.S. E-Mailing denotes acceptance of these terms. Member of Nass 2000 Pro Online Series Member of OSCAR Freedom Cup Series Member of the National Invitational Series The NIS is sponsored by Thomas Enterprises "Ed Martin" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:8n231a$[email hidden]... The resolution options on the Graphics menu will vary depending on what your video card is capable of handling. "Mike Grandy" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:o20l5.10405$[email hidden]... >And the graphics.... wow. >(p3-700/Hercules 64mb GTS, so I'm running at 1024x768 with 0 hiccups, all >options maxed..) Thats pretty good. I only see 640X480 and 800X600. Did I get the wrong demo. Anyways, frame rate is great at 800X600. I'm getting 55 frames per second. Graphics should be much better at a higher resolution. Michael K. Grandy Sr Proud Member of Precision Racing Professional Internet Race Team Powered by ECCI "ECCI - A proud sponsor of the 1998 NROS finals" The CDS4000 was designed for stock car racing... and it delivers NOTICE TO BULK E-MAILERS: Pursuant to US Code, Title 47, Chapter 5, Subchapter II, p.227, any and all nonsolicited commercial E-mail sent to [email hidden] is subject to a download and archival fee in the amount of Five-Hundred Dollars U.S. E-Mailing denotes acceptance of these terms. Member of Nass 2000 Pro Online Series Member of OSCAR Freedom Cup Series Member of the National Invitational Series The NIS is sponsored by Thomas Enterprises <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:QN%k5.1108$[email hidden]... ymenard <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (9 lines)

> "Joe McGinn" <[email hidden]> wrote >> - User interface, gameplay, and accesibility options that should shame >> Papyrus > Bollocks. The Nascar line of software by Papyrus has an incredibly easy > GUi, and has a great number of gameplay and accesibility options. I suggest > you recheck it instead of staying such false statement (whatever NH's > options).

He's not kidding. The setup menu's in the NHeat demo are exceptionally easy. And the graphics.... wow. (p3-700/Hercules 64mb GTS, so I'm running at 1024x768 with 0 hiccups, all options maxed..) Personally, I like the smoke effects. They're better than Nascar<N> any way you look at them. And finally, there's a godamned steering wheel in the cockpit. Praise ye gods. The crowd looks like that. A crowd. Not a set of flat bleachers with randomly painted spots on them. As for the physics thus far: Nascar <N> looks like a toy. Put it in expert mode, and have some fun. I expect that the solidness will still make GPL fan such as myself feel a little wary, but the sensation of racing a car on train rails that papy's nascar series has instilled in me/us isn't here. The car does'nt drive a strait line. You can't take your hands off the wheel for extended periods of time (In expert mode). Try throwing the machine in 3rd at >100mph without the gas down, and the tail comes out from under you (slightly, at least). Nice option for a clutch control/automatic clutch. Tons of steering options/controller adjustments. Tuning options... Front/Rear sway, Brake bias, Spoiler, Grille Tape, Wheel lock, and an option to test these after modification. Options for RS Shifters, and (woop!) 4 speed shifters. Here's where I hug my ACT-LABS hardware... Supersampling/smoothing available for controllers. External/arcade views are nothing short of gorgeous. Especially the car models. The lettering on the tires in motion looks damn near real (at my resolution and options, anyways...) Oh. And finally.... An animated pitcrew. Heh. Back later. Earnheardt's mine. ;) -J.C.H.

On Fri, 11 Aug 2000 21:52:49 GMT, [email hidden] (Joe McGinn) wrote:

Quoted text (9 lines)

>On Fri, 11 Aug 2000 14:16:56 -0700, "Regular Racer" ><[email hidden]> wrote: > >> Well, all I can say is "Hmmmm........" > >I can say "It rocks": > >- Improved physics, force feedback, and sense of speed from the >already-great Viper Racing.

Is it based on the Viper engine? Developed by the same team who developed Viper Racing? Andre

Quoted text (10 lines)

>- User interface, gameplay, and accesibility options that should shame >Papyrus and Microprose. > >No question about it, this will be the game for the non-hardcore >crowd, with "Beat the Heat" and other fun game modes (what a concept, >making a Nascar game fun! ;-). But it also seems to have physics and >options galour for the hardcore simmer. > >With Nascar 4 coming down the pipe too, this is a great year for >Nascar racing fans.

ROFLMAO! Cramond is a stupid ass if he thought he could pull a fast one by GP fans. (He did if you listen to the idiots(weather is nice but it's an option, not a whole game)). Amazing how people will sit here and complain about something they can fix in a config file. <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:8n2lu5$qcj$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (27 lines)

> In article <[email hidden]>, > Jan Loebzien <[email hidden]> wrote: > > On Fri, 11 Aug 2000 21:18:12 -0400, "Robert Platts" <[email hidden]> > > wrote: > > > > >You have to have a card with more than 16 meg of memory on it to get > > >anything higher than 800 x 600 is what Ed means I think. > > > > That's not true. A TNT with 16MB can do 1600x1200 in 32bit, memory > > is not the issue here. The game is measuring the performance though. > > and if it thinks your system is to slow, it won't offer you the higher > > resolutions. That's what I mean by 'patronizing', the game is telling > > you what it thinks is best for you (cool) and forces you to stick with > > that (bad!). > > Hmmm . . . I thought you meant, "If Crammond had done it this way it > would be revolutionary, but these guys aren't Crammond." > > Have you tried software mode, by chance? > > ;-) > > -- JB > > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ > Before you buy.

you just opened a whole can of 'don't believe that site' worms thing. "Sjon Stigter" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:8n2239$i1o$[email hidden]... > > With Nascar 4 coming down the pipe too, this is a great year for > > Nascar racing fans. > > not this year... Nascar 4 has been pushed back to January 2001 accordingto

Quoted text (10 lines)

> High Gear.... > > http://www.simracingnews.com/games/releases/index.shtml > > NASCAR Racing 4 Papyrus 01/16/01 > > > -- Sjon > >

Memory IS the issue when the card (Voodoo's) don't support AGP texturing. On Sat, 12 Aug 2000 04:24:30 +0200, Jan Loebzien <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (20 lines)

>On Fri, 11 Aug 2000 21:18:12 -0400, "Robert Platts" <[email hidden]> >wrote: > >>You have to have a card with more than 16 meg of memory on it to get >>anything higher than 800 x 600 is what Ed means I think. > >That's not true. A TNT with 16MB can do 1600x1200 in 32bit, memory >is not the issue here. The game is measuring the performance though. >and if it thinks your system is to slow, it won't offer you the higher >resolutions. That's what I mean by 'patronizing', the game is telling >you what it thinks is best for you (cool) and forces you to stick with >that (bad!). > >I noticed that by playing around with the FSAA settings on my V5. >At 4x the fillrate is down to 180MPix/s, causing the game to deny >me the 1280 resolution which I could previously pick with no FSAA >enabled. > > >Jan

Jan, Thanks for the info on the config file. However, I assure you they aren't 'Out To Get You'. :) -Larry "Jan Loebzien" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On 11 Aug 2000 23:42:34 GMT, "Ed Martin" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >The resolution options on the Graphics menu will vary depending on whatyour video card is capable of handling.

Quoted text (16 lines)

> > What's the reasoning behind this? How do you know that one doesn't > prefer a higher resolution and is willing to trade some FPS in return? > > Especially since the config file is editable anyway, why do you deny > the user the comfort of setting it as he wishes *within" the game? > > For those who are patronized by the game, open the options.cfg in the > \config folder and change the value for the 'video_mode' entry. > 2 - 640x480 > 3 - 800x600 > 4 - 1024x768 > 5 - 1280x1024 > > > Jan

Yep! -Larry "Andre Warringa" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (30 lines)

> On Fri, 11 Aug 2000 21:52:49 GMT, [email hidden] (Joe > McGinn) wrote: > > >On Fri, 11 Aug 2000 14:16:56 -0700, "Regular Racer" > ><[email hidden]> wrote: > > > >> Well, all I can say is "Hmmmm........" > > > >I can say "It rocks": > > > >- Improved physics, force feedback, and sense of speed from the > >already-great Viper Racing. > > Is it based on the Viper engine? Developed by the same team who > developed Viper Racing? > > Andre > > > >- User interface, gameplay, and accesibility options that should shame > >Papyrus and Microprose. > > > >No question about it, this will be the game for the non-hardcore > >crowd, with "Beat the Heat" and other fun game modes (what a concept, > >making a Nascar game fun! ;-). But it also seems to have physics and > >options galour for the hardcore simmer. > > > >With Nascar 4 coming down the pipe too, this is a great year for > >Nascar racing fans. >

Ed, As far as I'm concerned, you did the right thing! I would ask that in the final version, there be an advanced 'read me' or something that documents what we can, and can not and should, and should not edit in there :) Or, an advanced FAQ on the web site for this. Thanks for what looks to be an awsome Sim. Yes, I said SIM. :) -Larry "Ed Martin" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:8n3q48$[email hidden]... > You missed my point, Jan. People like you (I mean the general "you") that > want to tweak & tune will figure out the way to do it. You already did, > right? Plus, you understand the consequences. The average customer for > this game probably doesn't, so we're not going to flood them with options > which will just result is customer support calls asking why they aregetting > poor performance. > > We put options in the game that we felt were appropriate for the > general/average user. We left a bunch of other stuff "open" in thingslike

Quoted text (22 lines)

> options.cfg for people like you that want to fool around with it. That > seems like a good plan to me. > > "Jan Loebzien" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > On 12 Aug 2000 14:59:17 GMT, "Ed Martin" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > > >Well, it's because not everyone who buys this game is as savvy as the > people > > >here. > > > > Hmm, but in the end you require the people to be "as savy" if > > they want to get the best out of the game (at least what *they* > > think is best).If the option is in the config file, why hide it inside > > the game? Let the user choose 1280 and let him see himself > > that his card doesn't cut it. > > Or he even might prefer the higher res over higher fps ... > > > > > > JanL > >

Your download handicap aside, what do you think of the Sim? -Larry "Tim Wheatley" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:8n3hi2$1lq$[email hidden]... > My first impression was "sh*t!" > > Cos I had to download the demo again, one of the files had a CRC error.;-)

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > I think it's great, shame the bozo's aren't selling it this side of the > pond. > > -- > Tim, > [email hidden]|[email hidden] > http://legends.sports-gaming.com/forums.shtml FREE forums for your

league... > http://legends.sports-gaming.com Sim racing website loosely based ongpl...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> Regular Racer <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:O0_k5.378$[email hidden]... > > Well, all I can say is "Hmmmm........" > > > > > >

"ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Bollocks. The Nascar line of software by Papyrus has an incredibly easy >GUi, and has a great number of gameplay and accesibility options. The GUI's alright, I agree. But the gameplay and accessibility options are unchanged since N2, and quite unimaginative. An "arcade mode" does not compare to actual arcade game features that NH has. Joe McGinn _____________________ Radical Entertainment

It is a good plan...keep doing things that way!!! Marc. "Ed Martin" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:8n3q48$[email hidden]... > You missed my point, Jan. People like you (I mean the general "you") that > want to tweak & tune will figure out the way to do it. You already did, > right? Plus, you understand the consequences. The average customer for > this game probably doesn't, so we're not going to flood them with options > which will just result is customer support calls asking why they aregetting > poor performance. > > We put options in the game that we felt were appropriate for the > general/average user. We left a bunch of other stuff "open" in thingslike

Quoted text (22 lines)

> options.cfg for people like you that want to fool around with it. That > seems like a good plan to me. > > "Jan Loebzien" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > On 12 Aug 2000 14:59:17 GMT, "Ed Martin" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > > >Well, it's because not everyone who buys this game is as savvy as the > people > > >here. > > > > Hmm, but in the end you require the people to be "as savy" if > > they want to get the best out of the game (at least what *they* > > think is best).If the option is in the config file, why hide it inside > > the game? Let the user choose 1280 and let him see himself > > that his card doesn't cut it. > > Or he even might prefer the higher res over higher fps ... > > > > > > JanL > >

On Sat, 12 Aug 2000 15:39:37 -0500, "Dave Pollatsek" <[email hidden]> thus spoke:

Quoted text (12 lines)

>AGP texturing allows the graphics card to use texture from system RAM in >addition to video RAM... thus a 16 MB AGP TnT gives us about 32 MB, enough >for lots of textures plus the big 1024x768 frame buffers. Pre-V5 voodoos >can't do this, so a 16 MB V3 is like a 8MB AGP card when it comes to RAM. >It's not a question of performance, but of space. I know a lot of V3 owners >are unhappy with us, but I think it's just that until a higher-spec game >came out, it wasn't as obvious to most how hamstrung the V3 is with respect >to other cards of the same generation (e.g. TnT 1) vis a vis texture memory >and hi-res texture support. I bet a TnT 2 M64 could be had for dirt cheap >these days, though... >-Dave P. > MGI

Well Dave, if I had a choice of running a game at 800x600 using only video ram or running at 1024x768 using agp texturing I would use 800x600. Surely you know that using agp texturing just makes for slower performnace compared to using pure video ram. I have a V5 so I don't have the mentioned problem problem, but I still don't have to be concerend about it using crappy agp texturing either or crappy Nvidia drivers. -- Nos

You can argue with just about anybody these days, thanks to the internet... but seriously, AGP texturing isn't as huge a speed hit as you might think--for one thing, because of mipmapping, the bandwidth requirements are pretty low except for textures that are viewed up close--e.g., you'll probably only see the 512x512 mipmap for at most one or two cars at a time. Plus, most cards have good caching characterstics which help their texture fetching speed for AGP. So, for our large, high-poly scenes with a lot of faraway objects, we haven't seen much of a noticeable difference in performance between AGP/VRAM texturing. In general, we've found that the manufacturers "max theoretical" benchmark claims of fill-rate/poly rate are pretty different from real world situations. However, if you absolutely must get a 64 MB video card, we'll gladly store all our textures there! ;) -Dave P. MGI "Jan Loebzien" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Sun, 13 Aug 2000 00:27:58 GMT, "Cox Cable News" <[email hidden]> > wrote: > > >I find it so funny when people argue with the actual engineer's thatwrite

Quoted text (13 lines)

> >the software :) > > What's funny about that? > I did take part in a beta test for a sim not too long ago, > and there we argued with "the actual engineer's that > write the software" about this sort of stuff all the time. > The developers appreciated it and I'm pretty certain it > made the game better in the end. > Plus I learned quite a bit, just like I expect from this > conversation with Ed. :-) > > > JanL

On Sat, 12 Aug 2000 15:39:37 -0500, "Dave Pollatsek" <[email hidden]> wrote: >AGP texturing allows the graphics card to use texture from system RAM in >addition to video RAM... thus a 16 MB AGP TnT gives us about 32 MB, enough >for lots of textures plus the big 1024x768 frame buffers. 32MB? Shouldn't that actually be as much as you set the AGP aperture size to, i.e. even more than 32MB, given enough system RAM? Awfully slow system RAM btw, as mentioned in other posts here. ;-)

Quoted text (7 lines)

>Pre-V5 voodoos >can't do this, so a 16 MB V3 is like a 8MB AGP card when it comes to RAM. >It's not a question of performance, but of space. I know a lot of V3 owners >are unhappy with us, but I think it's just that until a higher-spec game >came out, it wasn't as obvious to most how hamstrung the V3 is with respect >to other cards of the same generation (e.g. TnT 1) vis a vis texture memory >and hi-res texture support.

Well, the thing is that the TNT1 is lacking the fillrate to move large textures at high resolutions anyway, as evidenced by your game not offering higher resolutions to to original poster in this thread! :-) JanL

On Sun, 13 Aug 2000 00:27:58 GMT, "Cox Cable News" <[email hidden]> wrote: >I find it so funny when people argue with the actual engineer's that write >the software :) What's funny about that? I did take part in a beta test for a sim not too long ago, and there we argued with "the actual engineer's that write the software" about this sort of stuff all the time. The developers appreciated it and I'm pretty certain it made the game better in the end. Plus I learned quite a bit, just like I expect from this conversation with Ed. :-) JanL

Ok, I'll be the 25th to ask. How? Sorry, Ed :) -Larry "Tim Wheatley" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:8n4g0r$6kj$[email hidden]... > I like it a lot, once I got daytona to run in 'race' mode I really got to > see what it's capable of, this AI is amazing, they get down on the grassor > apron to avoid crashes, they go 3 wide when it's called for... they don't > STOP and turn sideways in the middle of the track... > > As for the physics, I think it's very realistic, damage is turned off,which > will change the energy dispersion a lot, but so far every time I've lifted > off at Daytona it's been because I was going 185 backwards hood to hoodwith > a car flipping me over :-) > > -- > Tim, > [email hidden]|[email hidden] > http://legends.sports-gaming.com/forums.shtml FREE forums for yourleague... > http://legends.sports-gaming.com Sim racing website loosely based ongpl...

Quoted text (11 lines)

> Cox Cable News <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:N7el5.9310$[email hidden]... > > Your download handicap aside, what do you think of the Sim? > > > > -Larry > > > > "Tim Wheatley" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:8n3hi2$1lq$[email hidden]... > > > My first impression was "sh*t!" > > > > > > Cos I had to download the demo again, one of the files had a CRC

error. > > ;-) > > > > > > I think it's great, shame the bozo's aren't selling it this side ofthe

Quoted text (20 lines)

> > > pond. > > > > > > -- > > > Tim, > > > [email hidden]|[email hidden] > > > http://legends.sports-gaming.com/forums.shtml FREE forums for your > > league... > > > http://legends.sports-gaming.com Sim racing website loosely based on > > gpl... > > > Regular Racer <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > news:O0_k5.378$[email hidden]... > > > > Well, all I can say is "Hmmmm........" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

I find it so funny when people argue with the actual engineer's that write the software :) Keep up the good work, Dave P.! -Larry <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Sat, 12 Aug 2000 15:39:37 -0500, "Dave Pollatsek" > <[email hidden]> thus spoke: > > >AGP texturing allows the graphics card to use texture from system RAM in > >addition to video RAM... thus a 16 MB AGP TnT gives us about 32 MB,enough > >for lots of textures plus the big 1024x768 frame buffers. Pre-V5 voodoos > >can't do this, so a 16 MB V3 is like a 8MB AGP card when it comes to RAM. > >It's not a question of performance, but of space. I know a lot of V3owners > >are unhappy with us, but I think it's just that until a higher-spec game > >came out, it wasn't as obvious to most how hamstrung the V3 is withrespect > >to other cards of the same generation (e.g. TnT 1) vis a vis texturememory > >and hi-res texture support. I bet a TnT 2 M64 could be had for dirtcheap

Quoted text (13 lines)

> >these days, though... > >-Dave P. > > MGI > > Well Dave, if I had a choice of running a game at 800x600 using only > video ram or running at 1024x768 using agp texturing I would use > 800x600. Surely you know that using agp texturing just makes for > slower performnace compared to using pure video ram. I have a V5 so I > don't have the mentioned problem problem, but I still don't have to be > concerend about it using crappy agp texturing either or crappy Nvidia > drivers. > -- > Nos

On Sun, 13 Aug 2000 00:27:58 GMT, "Cox Cable News" <[email hidden]> thus spoke: >I find it so funny when people argue with the actual engineer's that write >the software :) I'm not arguing with him. Just bringing up a technical point. AGP texturing may allow for larger textures, but it comes with a perfromance penalty. That's why 3DFX don't use it, not because they don't know how to do it. -- Nos

I do understand, and agree, with that. However, 3dfx shouldn't have cut their uses feet off by only including 16MB of RAM on the card. If they _really_ wanted to overcome the so-called 'problem' with AGP textures, then they would have FULLY worked around the problem. They just took away the ability to show the problem. -Larry <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Sun, 13 Aug 2000 00:27:58 GMT, "Cox Cable News" <[email hidden]> > thus spoke: > > >I find it so funny when people argue with the actual engineer's thatwrite

Quoted text (8 lines)

> >the software :) > > I'm not arguing with him. Just bringing up a technical point. AGP > texturing may allow for larger textures, but it comes with a > perfromance penalty. That's why 3DFX don't use it, not because they > don't know how to do it. > -- > Nos

On Sun, 13 Aug 2000 17:49:05 GMT, "Cox Cable News" <[email hidden]> thus spoke:

Quoted text (9 lines)

>I do understand, and agree, with that. > >However, 3dfx shouldn't have cut their uses feet off by only including 16MB >of RAM on the card. > >If they _really_ wanted to overcome the so-called 'problem' with AGP >textures, then they would have FULLY worked around the problem. > >They just took away the ability to show the problem.

It's never been an issue until NH. I complained vehemently that the V1 only had 4mb of mmemory, but I got over it and bought a V2, then a V3 and now a V5. That's the way things work. You buy the hardware to run the software. Look at Nvidia's Riva128, it could hardly run anything without graphic glitches etc. If you want to run NH on a Voodoo card above 800x600 then get a V5. Plus you get FSAA that works and is something that is very useful in NH. Using system ram for loading textutures is not something I want my video card to do. I'll just buy a card with more memory instead. -- Nos

That's reasonable, and there's not much to argue with. I just wish 3dfx would look a bit further than the current trend and towards the future when releasing new products... nVidia does a better job of this. 3dfx should have seen the need for 32MB sooner, and included it in one product line earlier. -Larry <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Sun, 13 Aug 2000 17:49:05 GMT, "Cox Cable News" <[email hidden]> > thus spoke: > > >I do understand, and agree, with that. > > > >However, 3dfx shouldn't have cut their uses feet off by only including16MB

Quoted text (18 lines)

> >of RAM on the card. > > > >If they _really_ wanted to overcome the so-called 'problem' with AGP > >textures, then they would have FULLY worked around the problem. > > > >They just took away the ability to show the problem. > > It's never been an issue until NH. I complained vehemently that the V1 > only had 4mb of mmemory, but I got over it and bought a V2, then a V3 > and now a V5. That's the way things work. You buy the hardware to run > the software. Look at Nvidia's Riva128, it could hardly run anything > without graphic glitches etc. If you want to run NH on a Voodoo card > above 800x600 then get a V5. Plus you get FSAA that works and is > something that is very useful in NH. Using system ram for loading > textutures is not something I want my video card to do. I'll just buy > a card with more memory instead. > -- > Nos

On Sun, 13 Aug 2000 19:06:31 GMT, "Cox Cable News" <[email hidden]> thus spoke:

Quoted text (7 lines)

>That's reasonable, and there's not much to argue with. > >I just wish 3dfx would look a bit further than the current trend and towards >the future when releasing new products... nVidia does a better job of this. > >3dfx should have seen the need for 32MB sooner, and included it in one >product line earlier.

I guess. But, then they would have had to charge more for it than they wanted. By this time next year I will probably have a new video card anyway. But, if you are looking for a long term investment then a Geforce2 is most definately a better bet. -- Nos

In <[email hidden]> [email hidden] writes: >I guess. But, then they would have had to charge more for it than they >wanted. By this time next year I will probably have a new video card >anyway. But, if you are looking for a long term investment then a >Geforce2 is most definately a better bet. At the rate they are going for getting decent drivers I wouldn't rush out and get one though. Oh wait, I did. Sent it back after the third set of "latest" drivers I installed still didn't work with half my games. -- Artificial Intelligence stands no chance against Natural Stupidity. GAT d- -p+(--) c++++ l++ u++ t- m--- W--- !v b+++ e* s-/+ n-(?) h++ f+g+ w+++ y*

On Sat, 12 Aug 2000 15:39:37 -0500, "Dave Pollatsek" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (12 lines)

>AGP texturing allows the graphics card to use texture from system RAM in >addition to video RAM... thus a 16 MB AGP TnT gives us about 32 MB, enough >for lots of textures plus the big 1024x768 frame buffers. Pre-V5 voodoos >can't do this, so a 16 MB V3 is like a 8MB AGP card when it comes to RAM. >It's not a question of performance, but of space. I know a lot of V3 owners >are unhappy with us, but I think it's just that until a higher-spec game >came out, it wasn't as obvious to most how hamstrung the V3 is with respect >to other cards of the same generation (e.g. TnT 1) vis a vis texture memory >and hi-res texture support. I bet a TnT 2 M64 could be had for dirt cheap >these days, though... >-Dave P. > MGI

Yup, you're right Dave...........Just picked mine up for $89.00 US dollars..........And I love it! Todd

Quoted text (18 lines)

> >"Jan Loebzien" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >news:[email hidden]... >> On Sat, 12 Aug 2000 16:49:45 +0200, Jan Loebzien <[email hidden]> >> wrote: >> >> >"AGP texturing" has nothing to do with the maximum possible >> >resolutions, it's only a performance issue! >> >> I might stand corrected, reading that NH uses larger textures than the >> 256x256 the pre-V5 Voodoos can handle. >> >> Still that doesn't explain why the original poster was not allowed to >> run his TNT (which *does* support AGP texturing) at the higher res. >> >> >> JanL >