F12000 - General Reaction to this game

I have been quite surprised by the generally good reaction to this game on r.a.s My own experiences with F12K were totally disappointing. To say that the frame rate stank on a PIII550 GeForce DDR and 256MB RAM is the understatement of the gaming year. Maybe I'm unlucky, but I feel my system is fine as the wonderful SBK2000 runs at full detail with great game speed - and this bike sim is in another class in terms of depth of graphic detail. The return of F12K to EB within the permitted 10 days was as inevitable as a Johnny Herbert race retirement. The chart success of this game is undeniable. However, I feel this has more to do with the current absence of a really top flight F1 sim and also the ability of the FIA licence to shift boxes in the same way as FIFA does. Things promise to get a bit more crowded in the next few weeks however. The new Eidos game should hopefully boast a much better frame rate at the very least. The real deal will undoubtedly be GP3. However, how can we rely on release dates that keep moving backwards? It will, I am sure be worth the wait - but just how much longer will the wait be? In the meantime, disappointing titles will continue to take the sales that should belong to Microprose.

I have been quite surprised by the generally good reaction to this game on r.a.s My own experiences with F12K were totally disappointing. To say that the frame rate stank on a PIII550 GeForce DDR and 256MB RAM is the understatement of the gaming year. Maybe I'm unlucky, but I feel my system is fine as the wonderful SBK2000 runs at full detail with great game speed - and this bike sim is in another class in terms of depth of graphic detail. The return of F12K to EB within the permitted 10 days was as inevitable as a Johnny Herbert race retirement. The chart success of this game is undeniable. However, I feel this has more to do with the current absence of a really top flight F1 sim and also the ability of the FIA licence to shift boxes in the same way as FIFA does. Things promise to get a bit more crowded in the next few weeks however. The new Eidos game should hopefully boast a much better frame rate at the very least. The real deal will undoubtedly be GP3. However, how can we rely on release dates that keep moving backwards? It will, I am sure be worth the wait - but just how much longer will the wait be? In the meantime, disappointing titles will continue to take the sales that should belong to Microprose.

> >--"A . . . witch?" > >--"A witch! BURN HIM! BURRRNNNN HIM!!" > > > > A witch? How do you *know* he's a witch...? :-) > 'e looks like one! -- s i m a g e r y @ h o t m a i l . c o m

Remco Moedt <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > >If GPL gets 9.5/10, GP2 7.5/10, MGPR2 5/10 (feeling generous), how would > >you rate F1 2000? > > As a racing simulation, it will get 3/10 from me, as a driving > simulation 8.5/10. David/Greg/Iain will disagree of course.... Hehe. I will certainly give starts 3/10 :-) I will also give the requirements listed on the box a 2/10. No way in hell is a P2-450 the recommended machine. Recommended machines generally run games at the max resolution with a good framerate. I do give it 8.5 out of 10 all around though. I am basing this on my personal comparisons to it's current companion sims. Namely F1RS/MGPRS2 and GP2. IMHO F1 2000 is head and shoulders above these 2 other games. Hotlapping is awesome even with the full field of cars on the track for some reason. 21-24 fps no problem. In the actual race with the same number of opponents on the track it is a solid 18 with a range of 13-19fps. I find this strange since the actual number of cars on the track is the same. Also in races, you will remain at the 13-19 fps even when AI cars drop out. For me starting races is the only issue. I am now getting 13fps on the line so I can tolerate it. At least I could last night :-) -- Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes. cisko [AT] ix [DOT] netcom [DOT] com

Jan Verschueren <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:jOlL4.116891$[email hidden]... > Beats me... quite some slow down for sure, but I usually manage... Only > slightly worse than GPL with a full grid. So you have the same crappy framerate as everyone else. You are just lucky enough to deal with it. -- Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes. cisko [AT] ix [DOT] netcom [DOT] com > Jan. > =--- > > Tel <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > On Tue, 18 Apr 2000 23:16:43 GMT, "Jan Verschueren" > > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > > >As for F12K... I think it runs just fine on my slightly more modest setup > > >(PIII-450, V2 SLI, 128Mb RAM) @ 800x600 with some stuff turned down. It's > > >one of those games where control doesn't really suffer by the occasional > (or > > >regular, in this particular case ;-)) framehit. Getting more and more > > >dissapointed with the FF implementation tho'. On the whole not bad as a > > >diversion though. > > > > You mean you can have a decent start with 22 cars? What's your secret? > > > > > > > >

Leon <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Your right - the FF implementation is pretty hopeless. If you have a logitech wheel, try setting the FF spring centering tension to 50%. It will not give loading/unloading sensations in the turns but it does improve things quite a bit. IMHO. -- Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes. cisko [AT] ix [DOT] netcom [DOT] com > * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network * > The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free! >

Stevie B = ) <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:8dkc68$79a$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (9 lines)

> <good points well made snipped> > > > By the time GC gets his act together, > we'll probably be looking > > forward to the 2001 season, and GP3 > will be allowing us to drive an Arrows > > with Damon Hill in 98! > > Damon Hill drove for Jordan in '98

The real point is that GP3 is the '98 season. Wow. -- Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes. cisko [AT] ix [DOT] netcom [DOT] com

I may have missed the discussions on this, but what about the sim's race modelling? How do cars handle? How much fun is it ? How hard and "realistic" does it get? If GPL gets 9.5/10, GP2 7.5/10, MGPR2 5/10 (feeling generous), how would you rate F1 2000? "Chris Wright" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:8dim0d$q4q$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> I have been quite surprised by the generally good reaction to this game on > r.a.s > > My own experiences with F12K were totally disappointing. To say that the > frame rate stank on a PIII550 GeForce DDR and 256MB RAM is the > understatement of the gaming year. Maybe I'm unlucky, but I feel my system > is fine as the wonderful SBK2000 runs at full detail with great game

speed - > and this bike sim is in another class in terms of depth of graphic detail. > The return of F12K to EB within the permitted 10 days was as inevitable asa > Johnny Herbert race retirement. > > The chart success of this game is undeniable. However, I feel this hasmore > to do with the current absence of a really top flight F1 sim and also the > ability of the FIA licence to shift boxes in the same way as FIFA does. > > Things promise to get a bit more crowded in the next few weeks however.The > new Eidos game should hopefully boast a much better frame rate at the very > least. > > The real deal will undoubtedly be GP3. However, how can we rely on release > dates that keep moving backwards? It will, I am sure be worth the wait -but

Quoted text (9 lines)

> just how much longer will the wait be? > > In the meantime, disappointing titles will continue to take the sales that > should belong to Microprose. > > > > >

On Tue, 18 Apr 2000 23:16:43 GMT, "Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote: >As for F12K... I think it runs just fine on my slightly more modest setup >(PIII-450, V2 SLI, 128Mb RAM) @ 800x600 with some stuff turned down. It's >one of those games where control doesn't really suffer by the occasional (or >regular, in this particular case ;-)) framehit. Getting more and more >dissapointed with the FF implementation tho'. On the whole not bad as a >diversion though. You mean you can have a decent start with 22 cars? What's your secret?

Chris Wright wrote... > <snip> > The real deal will undoubtedly be GP3. However, how can we rely on release > dates that keep moving backwards? It will, I am sure be worth the wait -but > just how much longer will the wait be? Just out of curiousity (don't want to re-open the debate)... what exactly makes you think GP3 will be the definitive F1 sim? As for F12K... I think it runs just fine on my slightly more modest setup (PIII-450, V2 SLI, 128Mb RAM) @ 800x600 with some stuff turned down. It's one of those games where control doesn't really suffer by the occasional (or regular, in this particular case ;-)) framehit. Getting more and more dissapointed with the FF implementation tho'. On the whole not bad as a diversion though. Jan. =---

Your right - the FF implementation is pretty hopeless. * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network * The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!

Although this has been debated to death in this NG, I'm coming to the conclusion that the poor frame rate has something to do with TNT2 and GeForce DDR. The Voodoo owners (2 and 3) seem to be very happy. I am getting 20-25fps @ 1024x768 with 22 cars and most options at high on my Athlon 750. Again, I don't want to start the debate again, but I will say that the main complaint that people have is about frame rate - hardly a sensible way of assessing the quality of the sim itself! If we think back, GP2 and GPL both suffered from a barrage of complaints on the same subject when they were released - in fact with full detail on I believe that GP2 can still struggle on a lot of systems! As far as comparisons with Johnny H's game is concerned, well best ignored really! 'The real deal will be GP3' - well why do we all say this? Sure, Crammond is a master and I've followed his software since 'Revs' on the old BBC micro in the early eighties (how many of you remember that?) but I've seen some not too favourable reports on GP3. So, we'll just have to wait and wait and wait, and that is part of the problem. By the time GC gets his act together, we'll probably be looking forward to the 2001 season, and GP3 will be allowing us to drive an Arrows with Damon Hill in 98! F12K is here now and is a real blast if you can get it to run smoothly. Iain Chris Wright <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:8dim0d$q4q$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> I have been quite surprised by the generally good reaction to this game on > r.a.s > > My own experiences with F12K were totally disappointing. To say that the > frame rate stank on a PIII550 GeForce DDR and 256MB RAM is the > understatement of the gaming year. Maybe I'm unlucky, but I feel my system > is fine as the wonderful SBK2000 runs at full detail with great game

speed - > and this bike sim is in another class in terms of depth of graphic detail. > The return of F12K to EB within the permitted 10 days was as inevitable asa > Johnny Herbert race retirement. > > The chart success of this game is undeniable. However, I feel this hasmore > to do with the current absence of a really top flight F1 sim and also the > ability of the FIA licence to shift boxes in the same way as FIFA does. > > Things promise to get a bit more crowded in the next few weeks however.The > new Eidos game should hopefully boast a much better frame rate at the very > least. > > The real deal will undoubtedly be GP3. However, how can we rely on release > dates that keep moving backwards? It will, I am sure be worth the wait -but

Quoted text (8 lines)

> just how much longer will the wait be? > > In the meantime, disappointing titles will continue to take the sales that > should belong to Microprose. > > > >

<good points well made snipped> we'll probably be looking will be allowing us to drive an Arrows Damon Hill drove for Jordan in '98

--"A . . . witch?" --"A witch! BURN HIM! BURRRNNNN HIM!!" ;) --DK

'e looks like one! --

On Wed, 19 Apr 2000 08:42:46 +0100, "Iain Mackenzie" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Although this has been debated to death in this NG, I'm coming to the >conclusion that the poor frame rate has something to do with TNT2 and >GeForce DDR. The Voodoo owners (2 and 3) seem to be very happy. I am >getting 20-25fps @ 1024x768 with 22 cars and most options at high on my >Athlon 750. So that is "reasonable", yes. But an Athlon 750 is not what you call a medium system!!! How many around here have that sitting on their desk? What do people with a 500Mhz system get in this case? JoH

<good points well made snipped> > By the time GC gets his act together,we'll probably be looking > forward to the 2001 season, and GP3will be allowing us to drive an Arrows > with Damon Hill in 98! Damon Hill drove for Jordan in '98

I'm talking about the 'real' feel of the road, oversteer/understeer etc. Yes, the trivial effects like shaking over curbs are good, but that's not why I bought a FF wheel. Try Rally Championship 2000 - now that actually feels like a car. * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network * The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!

Don't agree. With my Ferrari FF, the effects feel great! The effects when rolling over the kerbs in chicanes really adds to the experience. Iain Leon <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Your right - the FF implementation is pretty hopeless. > > * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network* > The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free! >

I had a Athlon 500 when the sim first came out, and to be honest I don't see that much difference with the upgrade to 750! Iain Jo Helsen <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (15 lines)

> On Wed, 19 Apr 2000 08:42:46 +0100, "Iain Mackenzie" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >Although this has been debated to death in this NG, I'm coming to the > >conclusion that the poor frame rate has something to do with TNT2 and > >GeForce DDR. The Voodoo owners (2 and 3) seem to be very happy. I am > >getting 20-25fps @ 1024x768 with 22 cars and most options at high on my > >Athlon 750. > > So that is "reasonable", yes. But an Athlon 750 is not what you call a > medium system!!! How many around here have that sitting on their desk? > > What do people with a 500Mhz system get in this case? > > JoH

> Damon Hill drove for Jordan in '98 > >Good God! how time flies. You're right of course, it was 1997 for Arrows. Iain

Beats me... quite some slow down for sure, but I usually manage... Only slightly worse than GPL with a full grid. Jan. =--- Tel <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Tue, 18 Apr 2000 23:16:43 GMT, "Jan Verschueren" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >As for F12K... I think it runs just fine on my slightly more modest setup > >(PIII-450, V2 SLI, 128Mb RAM) @ 800x600 with some stuff turned down. It's > >one of those games where control doesn't really suffer by the occasional(or

Quoted text (8 lines)

> >regular, in this particular case ;-)) framehit. Getting more and more > >dissapointed with the FF implementation tho'. On the whole not bad as a > >diversion though. > > You mean you can have a decent start with 22 cars? What's your secret? > > >

"Zen" <[email hidden]> wrote: >I may have missed the discussions on this, but what about the sim's race >modelling? The AI is "out-of-the-box" plain bad. It seems that the code is quite well (they respond to setup changes), but it's not finished. >How do cars handle? Best handling of modern F1 cars yet. >How much fun is it ? It's hotlappers paradise. >How hard and "realistic" does it get? You need to be a rocketscience specialist to set your computer up, kinda hard IMO <g>. Some parts of the physics are toned down a bit, but I'm not sure if that's a bad thing. (Driving away full throttle from standstill is too easy, again IMO). >If GPL gets 9.5/10, GP2 7.5/10, MGPR2 5/10 (feeling generous), how would >you rate F1 2000? As a racing simulation, it will get 3/10 from me, as a driving simulation 8.5/10. David/Greg/Iain will disagree of course.... Remco

Yes, I know what you mean. It's not as good GPL, but it still adds a lot to the experience, esp when added spring is applied. Iain Leon <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> I'm talking about the 'real' feel of the road, > oversteer/understeer etc. Yes, the trivial effects like shaking > over curbs are good, but that's not why I bought a FF wheel. > > Try Rally Championship 2000 - now that actually feels like a car. > > * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network

* > The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free! >

I've got a PIII running @ 581 with GeForce DDR (overclocked to 130/320) and frame rate is not impressive. It's playable with mirror on but all mirror extra details off, smoke/dust do medium, all car details medium, 12 visible cars, and everything else at max. Most of the time with this is 25-30 fps but is still slow on the grid. The FF is pant on my excellent Ferrari FF wheel especially compared to Rally Champ 2000, GPL and Viper racing. Curbs are good but there's no "feel" when it slides or should be weighting up. Perhaps they'll improve it all with a patch. However knowing EA they'll just bring out for F1 2001 and we'll have to fork out again. The cars do seem rather accident prone but I must say I've had some really triffic racing out of it so far. We'll just have to Wait for GP3 Some Call Me Tim

> As a racing simulation, it will get 3/10 from me, as a driving > simulation 8.5/10. David/Greg/Iain will disagree of course.... > Remco >Not entirely! The aspect of F12K that needs sorting out is definitely the AI. It is nothing like as bad as some people would suggest, but nevertheless needs some work. I would give it 6/10 for racing and 9/10 for driving. Iain

My opinion: GPL: 8/10 GP2: 7/10 MGPRS2: 8/10 F1 2000: 8,5/10 (but a tons of bug have to be fixed soon otherwise i give it a 6,5/10) Zen <[email hidden]> a �crit dans le message : [email hidden]... > I may have missed the discussions on this, but what about the sim's race > modelling? How do cars handle? How much fun is it ? How hard and"realistic"

Quoted text (8 lines)

> does it get? > > If GPL gets 9.5/10, GP2 7.5/10, MGPR2 5/10 (feeling generous), how would > you rate F1 2000? > > "Chris Wright" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:8dim0d$q4q$[email hidden]... > > I have been quite surprised by the generally good reaction to this game

on > > r.a.s > > > > My own experiences with F12K were totally disappointing. To say that the > > frame rate stank on a PIII550 GeForce DDR and 256MB RAM is the > > understatement of the gaming year. Maybe I'm unlucky, but I feel mysystem > > is fine as the wonderful SBK2000 runs at full detail with great game > speed - > > and this bike sim is in another class in terms of depth of graphicdetail. > > The return of F12K to EB within the permitted 10 days was as inevitableas > a > > Johnny Herbert race retirement. > > > > The chart success of this game is undeniable. However, I feel this has > more > > to do with the current absence of a really top flight F1 sim and alsothe > > ability of the FIA licence to shift boxes in the same way as FIFA does. > > > > Things promise to get a bit more crowded in the next few weeks however. > The > > new Eidos game should hopefully boast a much better frame rate at thevery > > least. > > > > The real deal will undoubtedly be GP3. However, how can we rely onrelease > > dates that keep moving backwards? It will, I am sure be worth the wait - > but > > just how much longer will the wait be? > > > > In the meantime, disappointing titles will continue to take the salesthat

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > should belong to Microprose. > > > > > > > > > > > >

In article <wrdL4.1463$[email hidden]>, "Iain Mackenzie" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Although this has been debated to death in this NG, I'm coming to the >conclusion that the poor frame rate has something to do with TNT2 and >GeForce DDR. Possible. But my 300a/450 V3-3000 seems to exibit poor framerate. Yes, it can be 40+ at times (one/two cars visible, mirrors off), but it is about 5-10 fps at the start with a reasonable attempt at setting details to maintain speed. I have to start with the nose view, no mirrors, etc. Sure, a 450 is not SOTA, and perhaps there is some P3 SSE tweaking. >Again, I don't want to start the debate again, Too late! :-) Seriously, you can't expect to state your opinion and not get replies in kind. >but I will say that the main >complaint that people have is about frame rate - hardly a sensible way of >assessing the quality of the sim itself! It's a major facet, though not the only. I'd say a sim has to be good at: driving physics, AI, graphics/framerate compromise, and yes, playability. The AI here is really bad. I posted about how cars catch up to a slower car, then when trying to pass, start weaving as if the code is fighting between passing and staying on the race line. End result is a lot of wipeouts. >If we think back, GP2 and GPL both >suffered from a barrage of complaints on the same subject when they were >released - in fact with full detail on I believe that GP2 can still struggle >on a lot of systems! I think the GPL really holds as I know I had to limit myself to ~9-car fields. Compare to F12000 comments here such as "F1 sim with less than a 22-car field, hah!". Similar, eh? I don't think the GP2 comparison is as relevant. GP2 was clearly a game designed to "grow" as systems did. And came out before 3d accelerators. Basically, there are a lot of games that look as nice as F12000, but run much smoother. If it had an order of magnitude improvement in graphics, the jerky framerate would be more understandable. >'The real deal will be GP3' - well why do we all say this? Sure, Crammond >is a master and I've followed his software since 'Revs' on the old BBC micro >in the early eighties (how many of you remember that?) but I've seen some >not too favourable reports on GP3. While I tend to disregard the reports, I do not think GP2 was as god-like as some here. So, I'm not holding my breath. >F12K is here now and is a real blast if you can get it to run smoothly. I agree. It's good enough to spend $30 and enjoy now. We'll see if, or by how much, GP3 is better ... whenever it does get released.

"Greg Cisko" <no.spam.email.for.me> wrote > The real point is that GP3 is the '98 season. Wow. Don't you like historical sims? ;-) Seriously, as much as this pissed me off at first, I don't care much. I personally like the tracks that year more than in 1999 or 2000, and I feel the cars will give us a better challenge on track. And with the open architecture of Geoff's game engine, Im sure it will be open to many enhancements very soon after it's release. -- -- 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.

"Erwan Gourvenec" <[email hidden]> wrote > My opinion: > GPL: 8/10 > GP2: 7/10 > MGPRS2: 8/10 > F1 2000: 8,5/10 (but a tons of bug have to be fixed soon > otherwise i give it a 6,5/10) Yes it's only your opinion... Having MGPRS2 and GPL rated the same is pure heresy. -- -- 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.

Too get any kind of playable framerate on my V3000 running on a 464 mhz celeron, I have to turn detail down considerably. I love the sim, but really wish they would have included better support, ie glide, open gl. -- Don Burnette Dburn in N3 and Legends "Iain Mackenzie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:wrdL4.1463$[email hidden]... > Although this has been debated to death in this NG, I'm coming to the > conclusion that the poor frame rate has something to do with TNT2 and > GeForce DDR. The Voodoo owners (2 and 3) seem to be very happy. I am > getting 20-25fps @ 1024x768 with 22 cars and most options at high on my > Athlon 750. snip

Hmm, I'm running the same setup except at 464 mhz, I get high teens at the start from the back of a full field. I set most of my details to medium with mirrors on and run at 1024x768. Smooths out to mid 20's after first turn at Monza, with high in the upper 30's as the field spreads out. -- Don Burnette Dburn in N3 and Legends <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:8dleq0$6d5o$[email hidden]... > Possible. But my 300a/450 V3-3000 seems to exibit poor framerate. Yes, it > can be 40+ at times (one/two cars visible, mirrors off), but it is about 5-10 > fps at the start with a reasonable attempt at setting details to maintain > speed. I have to start with the nose view, no mirrors, etc. Sure, a 450 is > not SOTA, and perhaps there is some P3 SSE tweaking.

In article <prrL4.109594$[email hidden]>, "Don Burnette" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Hmm, I'm running the same setup except at 464 mhz, I get high teens at the >start from the back of a full field. >I set most of my details to medium with mirrors on and run at 1024x768. >Smooths out to mid 20's after first turn at Monza, with high in the upper >30's as the field spreads out. How many cars visible? I've tried a few levels. Here's the skinny on what happens as I changed options. All the above from watching replays of a Brazil race starting from grid position 6 using FRAPS... all set lowerst possible, 640x480 (except 4 cars visible) : 48 fps waiting, 38 when starting to move. changed to 800x600: still 48 fps changed distances set to "max": 33 fps added high cockpit: 31 fps mirrors on: 24 fps bilinear filtering: 25 fps (withing error, no change) race groove: 24 fps (grandstands: reduces 3-6 fps, not used below) 6 vehicles visible: 25 fps 12 vehicles: 20 fps (back to 4 vehicles): texture detail max: 25 fps text=min, all vehicle details to max: 23 text + max details: 19-21 fps but VERY JERKY when moving! = accidents a plenty Generally, if there are a lot of high polygon textured vehicles visible, framerate seems to get bad in a hurry. Once I'm racing and one, two, three cars are visible, framerate can be quite high (>30).

<[email hidden]> wrote in message news:8do38t$7pvi$[email hidden]... > In article <8do2m8$f8v$[email hidden]>, "Greg Cisko"<no.spam.email.for.me> wrote:

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > >Dave Masten can confirm my high tolerance to low framerates. > >If I really like the game I deal with it. Over all the start is a small > >slice of time. For 99% of the race everything is cool. > > Confirmed :-) > > How far back does that go? Strike Commander? Falcon 3? What was that

horrid > WWII pacific theater Origin flight sim? Pacific Strike. I really liked that game, even though I gave it a bad review :-) > FWIW, I find 10 fps too slow to control a race start in F12K. I probablyneed Thank goodness I am getting13fps then :-) Actually it is still questionable at 13... But the game is fun so I am happy. -- Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes. cisko [AT] ix [DOT] netcom [DOT] com > closer to 20. And I like it over 25 or so. In GPL, I like to keep it above > 25, but tolerate 20 at the start. But I remember F15-III days when 10 FPS was > good enough for me to play the game (but I still whined about it!). >

AstonMartinDB007 <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > I had F1 2000 and also returned to EB,I guess I will wait till GP3 comesout. Swell. And exactly why did we need to know about that? -- Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes. cisko [AT] ix [DOT] netcom [DOT] com

Ronald Stoehr <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (9 lines)

> Greg Cisko wrote: > > > snip > > > > For me starting races is the only issue. I am now getting 13fps > > on the line so I can tolerate it. At least I could last night :-) > > Being able to tolerate 13 fps you must have really low blood pressure, > or something...

Dave Masten can confirm my high tolerance to low framerates. If I really like the game I deal with it. Over all the start is a small slice of time. For 99% of the race everything is cool. -- Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes. cisko [AT] ix [DOT] netcom [DOT] com > > -- > l8er > ronny > > Your mouse has moved. Windows must be restarted for the change > to take effect. Reboot now? > |\ _,,,---,,_ I want to die like my Grandfather, > ZZZzz /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ in his sleep. > |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' Not like the people in his car, > '---''(_/--' `-'\_) screaming their heads off!

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] (Joe62) writes:

Quoted text (13 lines)

>>From all the posts I've read in the last few weeks, frame rates seem lower >>with TNT and GeForce owners than Voodoo. > >The point is they are unacceptably low (for many people) on ALL cards, >even running on powerhouse systems like yours, and even on Voodoo >cards. Everytime I see someone saying the framerate is good on their >Voodoo they are like "Oh it's great, I tweaked the hell out of it and >got it up to 25 fps." 25 fps is not great, it's a poorly optimized >graphics engine. > >Joe McGinn >_____________________ >Radical Entertainment

The problem is, frame rate smoothness(and eye-candy) is subjective. What might be totally unacceptable for you or me might be great for someone else... The actual numbers, we can agree on. The *interpretation* of those numbers is another thing. Eldred -- Tiger Stadium R.I.P. 1912-1999 Own Grand Prix Legends? Goto http://gpl.gamestats.com/vroc Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

In article <[email hidden]>, Dave Henrie <[email hidden]> writes:

Quoted text (18 lines)

>Did he turn you into a NEWT???\ >dave :) Henrie > >BriGuy wrote: >> >> > >--"A . . . witch?" >> > >--"A witch! BURN HIM! BURRRNNNN HIM!!" >> > > >> > >> > A witch? How do you *know* he's a witch...? :-) >> > >> >> 'e looks like one! >> >> -- >> >> s i m a g e r y @ h o t m a i l . c o m >

Burn 'im anyway...! -- Tiger Stadium R.I.P. 1912-1999 Own Grand Prix Legends? Goto http://gpl.gamestats.com/vroc Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

In article <[email hidden]>, BriGuy <[email hidden]> writes:

Quoted text (9 lines)

>> >--"A . . . witch?" >> >--"A witch! BURN HIM! BURRRNNNN HIM!!" >> > >> >> A witch? How do you *know* he's a witch...? :-) >> > >'e looks like one! >

Did you dress him up like this...? -- Tiger Stadium R.I.P. 1912-1999 Own Grand Prix Legends? Goto http://gpl.gamestats.com/vroc Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

Joe62 <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (8 lines)

> [email hidden] wrote: > > >Whereas in ICR or ICR2, I found > >it much smoother looking (and driving) at 20 fps, and even playable at > >less than 15 fps (this is going back some years). > > I still disagree. I remember having to run ICR2 and N2 in 320x200, as > it was the only way to get a really solid frame-rate.

Maybe you are a little too "freaked" about insisting on glassy smooth framerates before a racing sim is even worthy of your consideration? Yep... I think you are way too intolerant to what you conceive to be crappy framerates. 300x200 in Nascar 2... Haha. I did a F12K race yesterday starting from the rear. On the grid, the fps was 13. The start went fine and the rest of the race was around 18-19fps. I had a whole lot of fun, and finished in second and the framerate and my racing experience was perfectly acceptable at those numbers. Of course I could have been focusing on what the numbers were and had a miserable time. But regardless of the numbers, the race was very smooth. If I didn't have numbers I would not have realized that the fps was below 20-25fps. -- Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes. Please reply to: cisko[AT] ix [dot] netcom [dot] com

I had F1 2000 and also returned to EB,I guess I will wait till GP3 comes out.

In article <8dlj0v$bpb$[email hidden]>, "David Karr" <[email hidden]> writes:

Quoted text (13 lines)

>--"A . . . witch?" >--"A witch! BURN HIM! BURRRNNNN HIM!!" > >;) > >--DK > >"ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >news:4arL4.39939$[email hidden]... > >> >> Having MGPRS2 and GPL rated the same is pure heresy. >

A witch? How do you *know* he's a witch...? :-) Eldred -- Tiger Stadium R.I.P. 1912-1999 Own Grand Prix Legends? Goto http://gpl.gamestats.com/vroc Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

--"A . . . witch?" --"A witch! BURN HIM! BURRRNNNN HIM!!" ;) --DK "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:4arL4.39939$[email hidden]... > > Having MGPRS2 and GPL rated the same is pure heresy.

I'm running 6 cars visible. -- Don Burnette Dburn in N3 and Legends <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:8dlh65$6l9o$[email hidden]... > In article <prrL4.109594$[email hidden]>, "Don Burnette" <[email hidden]> wrote: > >Hmm, I'm running the same setup except at 464 mhz, I get high teens at the > >start from the back of a full field. > >I set most of my details to medium with mirrors on and run at 1024x768. > >Smooths out to mid 20's after first turn at Monza, with high in the upper > >30's as the field spreads out. > > How many cars visible? I've tried a few levels. Here's the skinny on what > happens as I changed options. All the above from watching replays of a Brazil > race starting from grid position 6 using FRAPS... snip

"Iain Mackenzie" <[email hidden]> wrote: >The Voodoo owners (2 and 3) seem to be very happy. I am >getting 20-25fps @ 1024x768 with 22 cars and most options at high on my >Athlon 750. It's not the graphics card, it's the frame rate. 25 fps is BAREKY acceptable to me, though still slow enough to be annoying. I remember how I striggled with GPL on my old P200 because I couldn't get the frame-rate above 25. Then when I upgraded my CPU and got up to 36 it felt smooth for the first time. >Again, I don't want to start the debate again, but I will say that the main >complaint that people have is about frame rate - hardly a sensible way of >assessing the quality of the sim itself! I disagree. A good frame rate is an essential characteristic of any racing game, but ESPECIALLY for a sim! It really doesn't matter what other qualities the game has, a slow frame rate kills it for many people. Joe McGinn _____________________ Radical Entertainment

Did he turn you into a NEWT???\ dave :) Henrie BriGuy wrote:

Quoted text (13 lines)

> > > >--"A . . . witch?" > > >--"A witch! BURN HIM! BURRRNNNN HIM!!" > > > > > > > A witch? How do you *know* he's a witch...? :-) > > > > 'e looks like one! > > -- > > s i m a g e r y @ h o t m a i l . c o m

From all the posts I've read in the last few weeks, frame rates seem lower with TNT and GeForce owners than Voodoo. An observation only in an attempt to understand why some people have the frame rate problem and some don't. Iain Joe62 <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (13 lines)

> "Iain Mackenzie" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >The Voodoo owners (2 and 3) seem to be very happy. I am > >getting 20-25fps @ 1024x768 with 22 cars and most options at high on my > >Athlon 750. > > It's not the graphics card, it's the frame rate. 25 fps is BAREKY > acceptable to me, though still slow enough to be annoying. I remember > how I striggled with GPL on my old P200 because I couldn't get the > frame-rate above 25. Then when I upgraded my CPU and got up to 36 it > felt smooth for the first time. > > >Again, I don't want to start the debate again, but I will say that the

main

Quoted text (11 lines)

> >complaint that people have is about frame rate - hardly a sensible way of > >assessing the quality of the sim itself! > > I disagree. A good frame rate is an essential characteristic of any > racing game, but ESPECIALLY for a sim! It really doesn't matter what > other qualities the game has, a slow frame rate kills it for many > people. > > Joe McGinn > _____________________ > Radical Entertainment

That is the funniest and best post I've seen for ages on this NG! Ha, ha, ha! Iain David Karr <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:8dlj0v$bpb$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (15 lines)

> --"A . . . witch?" > --"A witch! BURN HIM! BURRRNNNN HIM!!" > > ;) > > --DK > > "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:4arL4.39939$[email hidden]... > > > > > Having MGPRS2 and GPL rated the same is pure heresy. > > >

On Wed, 19 Apr 2000 23:18:25 GMT, "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (10 lines)

>"Greg Cisko" <no.spam.email.for.me> wrote >> The real point is that GP3 is the '98 season. Wow. > >Don't you like historical sims? ;-) > >Seriously, as much as this pissed me off at first, I don't care much. I >personally like the tracks that year more than in 1999 or 2000, and I feel >the cars will give us a better challenge on track. And with the open >architecture of Geoff's game engine, Im sure it will be open to many >enhancements very soon after it's release.

"Open architecture"? I would rather say: "With all the incredibly motivated freaks out there" <G> JoH

On Wed, 19 Apr 2000 16:06:29 +0100, "Iain Mackenzie" <[email hidden]> wrote: >I had a Athlon 500 when the sim first came out, and to be honest I don't see >that much difference with the upgrade to 750! >Iain So, is this GOOD news or even more hopeless? ;-) JoH

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] (Joe62) wrote: >It's not the graphics card, it's the frame rate. 25 fps is BAREKY >acceptable to me, though still slow enough to be annoying. I remember >how I striggled with GPL on my old P200 because I couldn't get the >frame-rate above 25. Then when I upgraded my CPU and got up to 36 it >felt smooth for the first time. This is perhaps particular to that title (GPL that is). I found it hard to believe that the 25 fps displayed in GPL was indeed 25, or that the 36 is 36. Notice how it doesn't seem smooth at less than 36? And I don't mean just car control. Just look at the scenery. Whereas in ICR or ICR2, I found it much smoother looking (and driving) at 20 fps, and even playable at less than 15 fps (this is going back some years). Part may be due to changing tolerance level, part may be the higher physics demands of GPL require more input. But I posit that part is a, umm, questionable fps counter. Perhaps the graphics, or the engine, aren't updating everything at that shown rate.

That is the funniest and best post I've seen for ages on this NG! Ha, ha, ha! Iain

Quoted text (12 lines)

> --"A . . . witch?" > --"A witch! BURN HIM! BURRRNNNN HIM!!" > ;) > --DK > > Having MGPRS2 and GPL rated the same is pure heresy.

I beg to disagree. I think the slow frame rates are due to graphics card incompatibility. I have a TNT2 (Guillemot Xentor MaxiGamer - 32 MB RAM) and two 12Meg Voodoo2 cards is SLI. In software mode, or with the "primary video card", I see the slow frame rates that are causing the complaints. With the "secondary card" (the Voodoo2s in SLI), it is quite smooth at 1024x768 with 12 cars, details on high for many things, but most of the miscellaneous off. I have a Falcon-Northwest PIII 550 with 128 Meg Ram. As an aside, I enjoy the many difficulty choice settings so that this old slow driver can reach the "Podium" at Silverstone, anticipating this weekend's race. Joe62 wrote: > It's not the graphics card, it's the frame rate. 25 fps is BARELY > acceptable to me, though still slow enough to be annoying. I

EldredP wrote:

Quoted text (20 lines)

> > In article <8dlj0v$bpb$[email hidden]>, "David Karr" > <[email hidden]> writes: > > >--"A . . . witch?" > >--"A witch! BURN HIM! BURRRNNNN HIM!!" > > > >;) > > > >--DK > > > >"ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > >news:4arL4.39939$[email hidden]... > > > >> > >> Having MGPRS2 and GPL rated the same is pure heresy. > > > > A witch? How do you *know* he's a witch...? :-) >

Easy! Hold him under water. If he continues to breathe, he's a witch. If not...... -- Chuck Kandler #70 K&S Racing http://www.fortunecity.com/silverstone/thepits/195 Competitor in the TopGear MGPRS2 league at: http://topgear.dhs.org/ Come on & join the fun! They'll call you names And spit in your face, But legends never die. --Gene Simmons

"Iain Mackenzie" <[email hidden]> wrote: >From all the posts I've read in the last few weeks, frame rates seem lower >with TNT and GeForce owners than Voodoo. The point is they are unacceptably low (for many people) on ALL cards, even running on powerhouse systems like yours, and even on Voodoo cards. Everytime I see someone saying the framerate is good on their Voodoo they are like "Oh it's great, I tweaked the hell out of it and got it up to 25 fps." 25 fps is not great, it's a poorly optimized graphics engine. Joe McGinn _____________________ Radical Entertainment

[email hidden] wrote: >Whereas in ICR or ICR2, I found >it much smoother looking (and driving) at 20 fps, and even playable at >less than 15 fps (this is going back some years). I still disagree. I remember having to run ICR2 and N2 in 320x200, as it was the only way to get a really solid frame-rate. Joe McGinn _____________________ Radical Entertainment

On Thu, 20 Apr 2000 15:26:41 GMT Jo Helsen <[email hidden]> wrote: % If she didn't sink, she was a witch and she was burned. If she sunk, % too bad.... :-) Anyway: her possessions were then sold or % something. Or a duck <G> -- **************************** Michael E. Carver ************************* Upside out, or inside down...False alarm the only game in town. [email hidden] http://www.teleport.com/~mcarver =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<[ /./. [- < ]>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Joe62 wrote:

Quoted text (10 lines)

> > [email hidden] wrote: > > >Whereas in ICR or ICR2, I found > >it much smoother looking (and driving) at 20 fps, and even playable at > >less than 15 fps (this is going back some years). > > I still disagree. I remember having to run ICR2 and N2 in 320x200, as > it was the only way to get a really solid frame-rate. >

If you felt a compulsion to go 320x200 in N2 & ICR2 for frame rate's sake, all I can say is you're way too hung up on the numbers. Turn off the bloomin' FPS display, loosen the underwear, and actually *enjoy* yourself for once! You may find that once you peel your face from the #'s, you can actually enjoy a lot of these titles. Without going blind at 320x200 too! -- Chuck Kandler #70 K&S Racing http://www.fortunecity.com/silverstone/thepits/195 Competitor in the TopGear MGPRS2 league at: http://topgear.dhs.org/ Come on & join the fun! They'll call you names And spit in your face, But legends never die. --Gene Simmons

On Thu, 20 Apr 2000 13:31:57 GMT, Chuck Kandler <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (9 lines)

>> >> Having MGPRS2 and GPL rated the same is pure heresy. >> > >> >> A witch? How do you *know* he's a witch...? :-) >> > > >Easy! Hold him under water. If he continues to breathe, he's a witch. >If not......

That's not how it was done. Witches were supposed to be supernaturally light. Hence the use of "witch-ballances" (is that the word in English??) In theory, they were supposed to float on water, even with something heavy attached. So what they did was attaching a heavy stone to the witch and throwing her into a lake or something. If she didn't sink, she was a witch and she was burned. If she sunk, too bad.... :-) Anyway: her possessions were then sold or something. Those middle-age people were really smart <g> JoH

I had this situation with ICR2 before I finally upgraded to a P200mmx with a Rendition card. I would qualify at Michigan. at or near the pole. Blast away with a smooth driving experience. After a bunch of laps I would catch up to the backmarkers and then the trouble began. Smooth laps became suddenly waaay over-compensated as I tried to match my previous inputs with the now slightly jerky screen. 9 times out of 10 I would loose it or hit a car and end up far behind, and unable to match the earlier pace I set. Half brain\Half frame rate. When I caught up to the backmarkers my framerate would dive and I couldn't control the dang thing like before. All that went away after the R card was installed. dave henrie Chuck Kandler wrote:

Quoted text (31 lines)

> > Joe62 wrote: > > > > [email hidden] wrote: > > > > >Whereas in ICR or ICR2, I found > > >it much smoother looking (and driving) at 20 fps, and even playable at > > >less than 15 fps (this is going back some years). > > > > I still disagree. I remember having to run ICR2 and N2 in 320x200, as > > it was the only way to get a really solid frame-rate. > > > > If you felt a compulsion to go 320x200 in N2 & ICR2 for frame rate's > sake, all I can say is you're way too hung up on the numbers. Turn off > the bloomin' FPS display, loosen the underwear, and actually *enjoy* > yourself for once! You may find that once you peel your face from the > #'s, you can actually enjoy a lot of these titles. Without going blind > at 320x200 too! > > -- > Chuck Kandler #70 > K&S Racing > http://www.fortunecity.com/silverstone/thepits/195 > > Competitor in the TopGear MGPRS2 league at: > http://topgear.dhs.org/ Come on & join the fun! > > They'll call you names > And spit in your face, > But legends never die. --Gene Simmons

Dave Henrie wrote:

Quoted text (14 lines)

> > I had this situation with ICR2 before I finally upgraded to a P200mmx > with a Rendition card. > I would qualify at Michigan. at or near the pole. Blast away with a > smooth driving experience. After a bunch of laps I would catch up to > the backmarkers and then the trouble began. Smooth laps became suddenly > waaay over-compensated as I tried to match my previous inputs with the > now slightly jerky screen. 9 times out of 10 I would loose it or hit a > car and end up far behind, and unable to match the earlier pace I set. > Half brain\Half frame rate. When I caught up to the backmarkers my > framerate would dive and I couldn't control the dang thing like before. > All that went away after the R card was installed. > dave henrie >

Hmmmmm.... interesting. Gotta admit I never saw anything like that kind of situation with my old P133. But out of stupidity, and not RTFM, I tried ICR2 initially and by default it was at 320x200. I tried a few times driving out at Cleveland. Man will *that* give you a headache! I ended up uninstalling it for about 6 months until I discovered the -h switch to enable the hi-res video. A couple months after that, I got a Sierra Screamin 3D & was really a happy camper with it from then on! -- Chuck Kandler #70 K&S Racing http://www.fortunecity.com/silverstone/thepits/195 Competitor in the TopGear MGPRS2 league at: http://topgear.dhs.org/ Come on & join the fun! They'll call you names And spit in your face, But legends never die. --Gene Simmons

Jo Helsen wrote:

Quoted text (27 lines)

> > On Thu, 20 Apr 2000 13:31:57 GMT, Chuck Kandler <[email hidden]> > wrote: > > >> >> Having MGPRS2 and GPL rated the same is pure heresy. > >> > > >> > >> A witch? How do you *know* he's a witch...? :-) > >> > > > > > >Easy! Hold him under water. If he continues to breathe, he's a witch. > >If not...... > > That's not how it was done. Witches were supposed to be supernaturally > light. Hence the use of "witch-ballances" (is that the word in > English??) In theory, they were supposed to float on water, even with > something heavy attached. So what they did was attaching a heavy stone > to the witch and throwing her into a lake or something. > > If she didn't sink, she was a witch and she was burned. If she sunk, > too bad.... :-) Anyway: her possessions were then sold or > something. > > Those middle-age people were really smart <g> > > JoH

Hehehe..... I knew it went *something* like that! Old age is killin the memory. <g> -- Chuck Kandler #70 K&S Racing http://www.fortunecity.com/silverstone/thepits/195 Competitor in the TopGear MGPRS2 league at: http://topgear.dhs.org/ Come on & join the fun! They'll call you names And spit in your face, But legends never die. --Gene Simmons

Read the whole thread and maybe you'll appreciate the point better. Iain Jo Helsen <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Wed, 19 Apr 2000 16:06:29 +0100, "Iain Mackenzie" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >I had a Athlon 500 when the sim first came out, and to be honest I don'tsee

Quoted text (7 lines)

> >that much difference with the upgrade to 750! > >Iain > > So, is this GOOD news or even more hopeless? ;-) > > JoH >

See William Yowell's later post on this. You are not correct in what you say. There is no doubt in my mind that Voodoo owners are less unhappy with frame rate than others. Iain Joe62 <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > "Iain Mackenzie" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >From all the posts I've read in the last few weeks, frame rates seemlower

Quoted text (12 lines)

> >with TNT and GeForce owners than Voodoo. > > The point is they are unacceptably low (for many people) on ALL cards, > even running on powerhouse systems like yours, and even on Voodoo > cards. Everytime I see someone saying the framerate is good on their > Voodoo they are like "Oh it's great, I tweaked the hell out of it and > got it up to 25 fps." 25 fps is not great, it's a poorly optimized > graphics engine. > > Joe McGinn > _____________________ > Radical Entertainment

In article <8do2m8$f8v$[email hidden]>, "Greg Cisko" <no.spam.email.for.me> wrote: >Dave Masten can confirm my high tolerance to low framerates. >If I really like the game I deal with it. Over all the start is a small >slice of time. For 99% of the race everything is cool. Confirmed :-) How far back does that go? Strike Commander? Falcon 3? What was that horrid WWII pacific theater Origin flight sim? FWIW, I find 10 fps too slow to control a race start in F12K. I probably need closer to 20. And I like it over 25 or so. In GPL, I like to keep it above 25, but tolerate 20 at the start. But I remember F15-III days when 10 FPS was good enough for me to play the game (but I still whined about it!).

Chuck Kandler <[email hidden]> wrote: >If you felt a compulsion to go 320x200 in N2 & ICR2 for frame rate's >sake, all I can say is you're way too hung up on the numbers. It's about smoothness and controllability, not numbers. Joe McGinn _____________________ Radical Entertainment

F15 III was my first Multiplayer on a PC. Not the new version but the old old one. We tweeked our dos configs for hours to get the needed ammount of memory in the first 640k. We'd spend a great deal of time chatting as the autopilots kept us under the Panamanian radar...then danced through the triangular mountains til we reached our target. I got separated from my wingman once, he was jumped my a small mig that could out turn him. He kept yelling for help so I pulled off my target, lit the burners and 'raced'(on topic!) to save his butt. I cleared the last ridge, saw a jet all lined up and ready to shoot the front jet so I locked and shot without getting an ID. Damn shame, my wingie had just reversed the Mig and was ready to save himself....tsk tsk..friendly fire. dave henrie [email hidden] wrote:

Quoted text (16 lines)

> > In article <8do2m8$f8v$[email hidden]>, "Greg Cisko" <no.spam.email.for.me> wrote: > > >Dave Masten can confirm my high tolerance to low framerates. > >If I really like the game I deal with it. Over all the start is a small > >slice of time. For 99% of the race everything is cool. > > Confirmed :-) > > How far back does that go? Strike Commander? Falcon 3? What was that horrid > WWII pacific theater Origin flight sim? > > FWIW, I find 10 fps too slow to control a race start in F12K. I probably need > closer to 20. And I like it over 25 or so. In GPL, I like to keep it above > 25, but tolerate 20 at the start. But I remember F15-III days when 10 FPS was > good enough for me to play the game (but I still whined about it!).

Joe62 wrote:

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > Chuck Kandler <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >If you felt a compulsion to go 320x200 in N2 & ICR2 for frame rate's > >sake, all I can say is you're way too hung up on the numbers. > > It's about smoothness and controllability, not numbers. >

Well, at first blush I thought this a totally ridiculous comment. My dog-slow P133 back then never had an inkling of a problem with ICR2. However, after the post by Mr Henrie, I realize there may have been issues on other's machines that just weren't showing themselves on mine. I retract my statement, although still suspect that without a framerate counter going, many people would otherwise enjoy this title. Race starts excepted. It just doesn't seem to be as framerate dependent for car control as GPL is, for example. Under 15 in GPL would be almost undriveable in any consistent manner. -- Chuck Kandler #70 K&S Racing http://www.fortunecity.com/silverstone/thepits/195 Competitor in the TopGear MGPRS2 league at: http://topgear.dhs.org/ Come on & join the fun! They'll call you names And spit in your face, But legends never die. --Gene Simmons