F1GP II is out!!

Well, it's almost. I played on it at the Autosport show and it looked pretty finished. Shame they didn't have all pentiums to play it on. The sound is excellent and the graphics will be great on a better pc. I only had a chance to run at Silverstone. The really anoying thing was that they have included changing tarmac where the track has changed! Really off putting. It's also alot harder to get back on the track when you come off. Rumble strips are more fun too! Steve

Hey Steven, are you work for Ken Tyrell? If yes, say Hi to Mr. Tyrell, Salo and sospiri! Kevin Ma

If he does, then the person responsible for net access at the team can't spell "Tyrrell" :-) Steve.

Please, can you tell us more about detail, gameplay, computer AI, what computer the game was running, how many fps it got, anything that comes to mind when you compare GP2 with the original? I'm eagerly waiting for the game to be released (who's not, DUH), so all new information on the game is welcome. -- Imar de Vries | 'Those crazy Ferrari fans sure make a lot of noise... LFRS - Patrim #61 | (dramatic pause)... more than the Peugeot that I drive.' HOF Grey Council | - Hakkinen, Formula One driver

>I too played it at the show and I can say now that it is C*R*A*P. >The start at Imola (full detail+texture) was unbeleivably jerky, I would >estimate around 15fps if that many. The processor occupancy was 145-150% >(from the 'o' key) and all this was a 120MHz Pentium. Someone else said that the demo was running in SVGA (can you confirm this?). If this is the case, then I'm not too bothered because I usually play games in VGA mode anyway (it'll be a couple of years before we have the hardware to run games in SVGA properly). Oh dear, I have a friend with a DX266 who's desperate to get this game :-( Pinacle (U.K. trade software distributor) have 23rd February 1996 as the release date. My computer shop owning friend checked for me today. Steve.

writes:

Quoted text (15 lines)

>>Well, it's almost. I played on it at the Autosport show and it looked >>pretty finished. Shame they didn't have all pentiums to play it on. >>The sound is excellent and the graphics will be great on a better pc. >>I only had a chance to run at Silverstone. The really anoying thing >>was that they have included changing tarmac where the track has >>changed! Really off putting. It's also alot harder to get back on >>the track when you come off. Rumble strips are more fun too! >>Steve >Please, can you tell us more about detail, gameplay, computer AI, >what computer the game was running, how many fps it got, anything >that comes to mind when you compare GP2 with the original? >I'm eagerly waiting for the game to be released (who's not, DUH), >so all new information on the game is welcome.

I too played it at the show and I can say now that it is C*R*A*P. The start at Imola (full detail+texture) was unbeleivably jerky, I would estimate around 15fps if that many. The processor occupancy was 145-150% (from the 'o' key) and all this was a 120MHz Pentium. The funniest thing was that the girl on that stand claimed it would run on a 486DX266 :-) hahhahaha. But serously folks, it really does look the dogs, but it would seem that there aint no way it is ever gonna be fast enough on anything less than VERY high end hardware. oh... BTW the girl on the stand claimed a release date of MARCH. (but she didn't say which year :-) Mark -- Mark Foster, University of Sussex Computing Service, Falmer, UK. BN1 9QJ ------------------------------------------------- "There are no such useless words as...'I didn't have a chance.'" [Driving, HMSO]

-> Well, it's almost. I played on it at the Autosport show and it looked pretty -> finished. Shame they didn't have all pentiums to play it on. The sound is -> excellent and the graphics will be great on a better pc. I only had a chance -> to run at Silverstone. The really anoying thing was that they have included -> changing tarmac where the track has changed! Really off putting. It's also -> alot harder to get back on the track when you come off. Rumble strips are -> more fun too! -> -> Steve Pulled this from the net, FYI

If you are talking about having played it at Autoaport International (incorporating That Racing Car Show) then the girl on the stand told me that the machines were Pentium 120's. Kinda makes you see it in a different light eh ? I am not out to slag it off but it really is too ***y slow... I know... I've played it. This is not rumour, not speculation, not spouting opinions. It is fact, like it or not. Mark -- Mark Foster, University of Sussex Computing Service, Falmer, UK. BN1 9QJ ------------------------------------------------- "There are no such useless words as...'I didn't have a chance.'" [Driving, HMSO]

>the machines were Pentium 120's. Kinda makes you see it in a different light >eh ? I find it hard to believe. Whilst the game *was* really impressive, I just can't imagine a P120 having so much trouble doing that. There just wasn't enough going on. In fact when I had the detail off the processor was at ~140%. If this is true, then Microprose has done a really bad job of updating this and it's going to flop. I would liken it to playing IC2 on a 486-50, ie unlikley to keep you interested! I wouldn't want to patronise the people on the stand, but when I think of some of the people we've had doing stand duty.......

>Please, can you tell us more about detail, gameplay, computer AI, >what computer the game was running, how many fps it got, anything >that comes to mind when you compare GP2 with the original? >I'm eagerly waiting for the game to be released (who's not, DUH), >so all new information on the game is welcome. Well, I didn't play it for very long, just had a quick go. Too many little ankle biters around! I was racing as Damon Hill and one of the camera views, which looks back at the driver, looked just like that moment at Silverston when Hill and Schu colided, really odd. I don't know what machine I was using, but I wouldn't have said it was a pentuim. I reckon it'll be ok on a 66Mhz 486, without the detail. The car in general seemed a lot more realistic, not quite so nimble under braking! I just thought the sound was the best bit, really crackling on the down changes! I have to admit though, I was more interested in the real thing next door! (and the pvc clad girls with Jeremy Clarkson!) I'm considering buying a pentium to play it on, it really does look worth it. Steve.

: >the machines were Pentium 120's. Kinda makes you see it in a : >different light eh ? Are you sure they were all P120s? The guy I asked said that they were P90s! Maybe they just weren't quite sure! Ceri.

>I too played it at the show and I can say now that it is C*R*A*P. >The start at Imola (full detail+texture) was unbeleivably jerky, I would >estimate around 15fps if that many. The processor occupancy was 145-150% >(from the 'o' key) and all this was a 120MHz Pentium. >The funniest thing was that the girl on that stand claimed it would run on a >486DX266 :-) hahhahaha. Have you ever realized that this demo could be a debugging version. And as we all know, these are very slow. Wait untill the good compiled version arrives at your store.

That's waht we ar doing for half a year now

>>>Wait untill the good compiled version arrives at your store. >>That's waht we ar doing for half a year now >Well, I am waiting since late 1994. It was supposed to be release in >aug. 1995, nov. 1995, dec. 1995.... :( Michel it was early 1994 when the first info about gp2 arrived. (You know) ... Racing is in my *** ...

: >Wait untill the good compiled version arrives at your store. : Why does everyone assume that the poor performance of the : GP2 demos seen so far is down to poorly compiled code : (i.e. including debugging tools etc.)? It surely isn't : that difficult for Geoff Crammond to compile his code : to, say 95% efficiency by just including a few command : line codes for the compiler????? Can anyone enlighten me? Theres demos now? playable? or are you talking about that infamous .mov file? if its playable, can i have the address? -- Erdem Santino Onder, Mechanical Engineering I, Carleton University "I say what i mean, and i do what i say"; Vincent Hanna; HEAT 1996 Candidate for Engsoc Board of Governors in 96/97!

Why does everyone assume that the poor performance of the GP2 demos seen so far is down to poorly compiled code (i.e. including debugging tools etc.)? It surely isn't that difficult for Geoff Crammond to compile his code to, say 95% efficiency by just including a few command line codes for the compiler????? Can anyone enlighten me? Fraser

>>Wait untill the good compiled version arrives at your store. >That's waht we ar doing for half a year now Well, I am waiting since late 1994. It was supposed to be release in aug. 1995, nov. 1995, dec. 1995.... :(

Only at a couple of Shows/Exhibitions - nothing has been released to the masses. Steve.

GP2 demos seen so far is down to poorly compiled code<< I would say it's more likely that there is just inefficient code that has been thrown together for the demo, rather than simple compiler Debug code (although that is possible). Steve.

Quoted text (8 lines)

>: Why does everyone assume that the poor performance of the >: GP2 demos seen so far is down to poorly compiled code >: (i.e. including debugging tools etc.)? It surely isn't >: that difficult for Geoff Crammond to compile his code >: to, say 95% efficiency by just including a few command >: line codes for the compiler????? Can anyone enlighten me? >Theres demos now? playable? or are you talking about that infamous .mov >file? if its playable, can i have the address?

Something bothered me about the first message and I'll ask that question after answering the latest bit. The demo he's talkiing about is the demonsstration copies of the VGA game that MPS are taking to shows with them. II've played it and aside from any screen rate problems etc it's looking very good. To Fraser: I take it you're not a programmer. The compiler will optimise the code for you but to make it EFFICIENT you have to do your job well. All the compiler does is convert your code into a machine readable language so all the onus on making the code efficient (ie not as resource hungry) is on the programmer (mind you there are applications that can do some of the work forr you.) Personally I'm not too bothered as I'll have my lovely new P100 by the time it's released... (if anyone's buying a new PC, PC Science in the UK are offering P100's for the same price as the P90). Max

Quoted text (28 lines)

|> NNTP-Posting-Host: zen.ecs.soton.ac.uk |> |> |> >: Why does everyone assume that the poor performance of the |> >: GP2 demos seen so far is down to poorly compiled code |> >: (i.e. including debugging tools etc.)? It surely isn't |> >: that difficult for Geoff Crammond to compile his code |> >: to, say 95% efficiency by just including a few command |> >: line codes for the compiler????? Can anyone enlighten me? |> |> >Theres demos now? playable? or are you talking about that infamous .mov |> >file? if its playable, can i have the address? |> |> Something bothered me about the first message and I'll ask that question |> after answering the latest bit. |> The demo he's talkiing about is the demonsstration copies of the VGA game |> that MPS are taking to shows with them. II've played it and aside from |> any screen rate problems etc it's looking very good. |> |> To Fraser: |> I take it you're not a programmer. The compiler will optimise the code |> for you but to make it EFFICIENT you have to do your job well. All the |> compiler does is convert your code into a machine readable language so |> all the onus on making the code efficient (ie not as resource hungry) is |> on the programmer (mind you there are applications that can do some of |> the work forr you.)

Generally agreed. Although some good compilers have code optimization built-in, such as register optimization and branch prediction just to name a few, the big job relies on the programmer himself. If the programmer can't write efficient code, the compiler can't do much to improve speed. For speed critical code, it is best to write it entirely in assembly where maximum optimization can be done. This is also true for multiple processor programs where different processors have different characteristics and the programmer must write different routines for each of the target processors to achieve the best possible performance. In this aspect, I have faith on Geoff. -- Isaac Wong (613) 763-6127 | Protel Compiler Group http://chat.carleton.ca/~iwong | Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada