GP2 - Slow Down is a Fatal Flaw

: I would love to hear from others on this... : GP2 deals with processor overload by slowing the world time down rather than : dropping frames. That's why things seem like they are in slow motion on first : turns of races, time really is moving slower. Every other sim I can think of, : from ICR2/NASCAR to flying sims to mech warrior sims will drop frames rather : than slow down time. [snip] I agree. I don't totally hate it, but I does add a kinda arcadish touch to the sim. However, I don't like how Papyrus has handled their sims when it comes to the first corner either. Instead of the simulated world time slowing down, the AI's brains go into slow motion. I'm running along and all of a sudden the cars ahead of me are going half-speed. It's not a gradually "braking" affect. It also seems that the AI have memory gaps. I guess the cpu is overtaxed and can't keep the AI's memory cups full. Dropping frames can be hazardous too. As the frame rate drops any driving correction is multiplied by the frame drop rate. I guess until we all get multi-cpu machines with full blown 3D video cards, we will have to live with the limitations. -- **************************** Michael E. Carver ************************* Upside out, or inside down...False alarm the only game in town. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<[ /./. [- < ]>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

I would love to hear from others on this... GP2 deals with processor overload by slowing the world time down rather than dropping frames. That's why things seem like they are in slow motion on first turns of races, time really is moving slower. Every other sim I can think of, from ICR2/NASCAR to flying sims to mech warrior sims will drop frames rather than slow down time. To me, if you cannot rely on the world time being constant, you cannot rely on what you see to pick up time/distance cues. Having the world time change as you approach a hairpin corner is as much a problem as having the distances changing in real time. Imagine trying to drive into a corner while the track was changing shape! But if time/distance cues are how we drive a sim, having the world time change is just the same thing. This says to me that GP2 is is a Twilight Zone sim and not a racing sim if time can slow down and speed up. And that happens very easily with GP2, no matter what the graphics are set to, whenever there are several cars close. Is this a problem for others as well as me? I would love to know. Bill aka BillyJoe on Hawaii -------------------------------------------------------------- Centrimedia web development http://www.centrimedia.com/ --------------------------------------------------------------

Quoted text (27 lines)

> I would love to hear from others on this... > GP2 deals with processor overload by slowing the world time down rather than > dropping frames. That's why things seem like they are in slow motion on first > turns of races, time really is moving slower. Every other sim I can think of, > from ICR2/NASCAR to flying sims to mech warrior sims will drop frames rather > than slow down time. > To me, if you cannot rely on the world time being constant, you cannot rely on > what you see to pick up time/distance cues. Having the world time change as you > approach a hairpin corner is as much a problem as having the distances changing > in real time. Imagine trying to drive into a corner while the track was > changing shape! But if time/distance cues are how we drive a sim, having the > world time change is just the same thing. > This says to me that GP2 is is a Twilight Zone sim and not a racing sim if time > can slow down and speed up. And that happens very easily with GP2, no matter > what the graphics are set to, whenever there are several cars close. > Is this a problem for others as well as me? I would love to know. > Bill aka BillyJoe on Hawaii > -------------------------------------------------------------- > Centrimedia web development > http://www.centrimedia.com/ > --------------------------------------------------------------

Hi Bill, Did it ever occur to you that it's possible that the game just uses a different approach to the matter ? It doesn't use REAL time for determination of the lap times or the distances or whatever. If it did lap times might be manualy altered by slowing clocks down or people would come up with other tricks. In GP2 all is done by looking at the cars' characteristics while you're driving. Speed, accelaration, distance etc, determine the time, not visa versa. That's why you can score the same time with processor overload, and not be twice as slow when your processor is 200% busy. Automatically reducing frame rate doesn't seem to be a good thing to me, since frame rates could drop down to a level that's non playable. Imagine doing a start with five frames a second! I then would prefer the game to temporarely slow down. The only anoying thing about slowing down is that things don't go as fast as in the real world, but it's actually quite easily made better. Make sure that your processor is about 80% busy at normal driving(use the 'O' key on your keyborad !), by reducing the frame rate 2/3 fps lower than estimated or removing some detail. If you'd do race now you'd notice that most of the times things go as fast as the real thing and just occasionaly go a bit slower. You'll probably won't even notice. So, it's not a matter of slowing time down or speeding time up. Time will go as fast as ever, fast if you're having fun and slow when you're bored. If you consider GP2 a Twilight Zone sim, you'd better watch out for those X-files !!!!(They'll do terrible things to your harddisk) See Ya, Eddy

Quoted text (20 lines)

> I would love to hear from others on this... > GP2 deals with processor overload by slowing the world time down rather than > dropping frames. That's why things seem like they are in slow motion on first > turns of races, time really is moving slower. Every other sim I can think of, > from ICR2/NASCAR to flying sims to mech warrior sims will drop frames rather > than slow down time. > To me, if you cannot rely on the world time being constant, you cannot rely on > what you see to pick up time/distance cues. Having the world time change as you > approach a hairpin corner is as much a problem as having the distances changing > in real time. Imagine trying to drive into a corner while the track was > changing shape! But if time/distance cues are how we drive a sim, having the > world time change is just the same thing. > This says to me that GP2 is is a Twilight Zone sim and not a racing sim if time > can slow down and speed up. And that happens very easily with GP2, no matter > what the graphics are set to, whenever there are several cars close. > Bill

Yeah!...I agree One thing we cannot do in GP2 is cut out the background while still having the foreground to what aver level we need.That would have helped the frame rate... But are you sure this slowing down happens during racing?..I thought it only happened during replays...if it does,then just as in many other ways,this is not a sim...it's an Arcade game!,and falsely advertised. Frame rate is the question..with better detail control,neither frame skipping or slow down would be necessary,coz we could tunethe graphics. Of course,they want us all to buy new P200's...I've got a P120..that should be good enough in most circumstances,but it's not. Only poor sales would cause them to look more seriously at these matters,but as a collective buying group,Sim Racers will buy it anyway. I did! mmff! rgs John.

...and when will that day be coming? ;) I want to mark it in my wish list calendar of PC upgrades/purchases! (currently Xmas '96) :) Kyle

I even believe some guy called Einstein said that time goes SLOWER when you yourself move FASTER. Is the conclusion that it doesn't really matter how fast you drive? ?!x%?! (confused people please consult your psychiatrist) =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= The most civilized civilizations are as close to barba- rism as polished iron is to rust. Rivarol =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Quoted text (9 lines)

> I would love to hear from others on this... > GP2 deals with processor overload by slowing the world time down rather than > dropping frames. That's why things seem like they are in slow motion on first > turns of races, time really is moving slower. >SNIP>>>> Is this a problem for others as well as me? I would love to know. > Bill aka BillyJoe on Hawaii >Bill,

I must say that I agree with you 100%. I might also add that this problem can really cause major depth perception problems, especially if there is an accident elsewhere on the track as I am approaching a turn. My braking seems to suffer as the timing is all wrong when the slow down occurs! I'm running on a P166 and have set the frame rate to 15 fps down from the estimated 21.3 fps. This really helps to cut down on the "slow downs", but never in the first turn. Sal V.

Well you have some good points. But I think that this is an interesting approach to the issue of framerate vs graphics. Those that dont care too much about absolute authenticity can play it with all the graphic options on and see a real pretty sim while the action goes on slow enough that they can react to it. Those that that kind of thing bothers can just adjust the desired framerate down 2-3 frames below the estimated and lower the graphic options down and enjoy the sim at speed. I know the sim absolutely ROCKS on my 166 but then again I dont have textures on BANKS, VERGES, SKY but who needs them Im driving a F1 car not sightseeing. Pierre PAPA DOC Legrand

Quoted text (11 lines)

> > I would love to hear from others on this... > > GP2 deals with processor overload by slowing the world time down rather than > > dropping frames. That's why things seem like they are in slow motion on first > > turns of races, time really is moving slower. Every other sim I can think of, > > from ICR2/NASCAR to flying sims to mech warrior sims will drop frames rather > > than slow down time. > Yeah!...I agree > One thing we cannot do in GP2 is cut out the background while still > having the foreground to what aver level we need.That would have helped > the frame rate...

Then turn off the trackside details - you can even press Alt-D while driving to toggle them. (Although this doesn't work quite so well when you use Alt as one of your gear shift keys... well done GC) I usually run the game so that it's around 70% processor occupancy on average so that you need a lot of stuff on-screen before it goes over 100% The frame rate can drop considerably when there are a lot of cars creating a lot of smoke - turning smoke off makes a big difference. It has very good detail control. The main control that's missing is to make it flat-shade the polygons on cars to reduce the slow-down when a lot of cars are on screen. If you're prepared to drop to low (VGA) res, then it handles texture mapping everything without any problems... but personally I prefer to run in SVGA with no textures than drive in legoland... -- Whatever it was I just said was probably just personal opinion rather than the official view of my employer.

Quoted text (14 lines)

>I would love to hear from others on this... >GP2 deals with processor overload by slowing the world time down rather than >dropping frames. That's why things seem like they are in slow motion on first >turns of races, time really is moving slower. Every other sim I can think of, >from ICR2/NASCAR to flying sims to mech warrior sims will drop frames rather >than slow down time. >To me, if you cannot rely on the world time being constant, you cannot rely on >what you see to pick up time/distance cues. Having the world time change as you >approach a hairpin corner is as much a problem as having the distances changing >in real time. Imagine trying to drive into a corner while the track was >changing shape! But if time/distance cues are how we drive a sim, having the >world time change is just the same thing.

You can either slow the "sim world" down, or reduce the frame rate. Reducing the frame rate would mean that the game becomes jirky and difficult to control. slowing the "sim world" down, while less than pleasent, does mean that you keep full control of your car, and as the processor is more likely to overload when a lot is going on, the slowing the game world down, to me is the better way of doing things. Slowing down the time doesent change the shape of the track, and your time/distance cues still work (i.e you still brake at the same point), you just need to concentrate a bit more thats all. Think of like this:- reducing frame rate:- you might miss your braking point because you skipp right passed it in betweenn frames (you can be travling at arround 200mph). slowing the game down:- no frames skipped, so you won't miss your braking point. However, the game should ONLY slow down when *A LOT* is happining, the game should not slow down when you brake normally for a bend. please note that the recomended frames per second (fps) is a bit on the generous side. Set up your graphic options, and the set the fps to the reconended fps - (minus) 2 or 3fps for a smooth ride. It sounds strange, but it does work - try it. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- If you believe in the light, its because of obscurity If you believe in happiness, its because of unhappiness If you believe in God, its because of the Devil Father X - Exorcist, church of Notre Dame, Paris ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------

Actually, I don't really mind the time slow down that occurs when the processor occupancy goes over 100%. If the CPU can't handle it, then there's nothing you can do... by adjusting your frame rate you can decide if you prefer to slow down real-time or have a lower frame rate. But what I don't like is the fact that the game doesn't make full use of the CPU when the processor occupancy goes below 100%. Think of all those wasted clock cycles... The way it is now, you can adjust your worst-case but at the expense of your best-case! However, I think I understand why it has been coded that way. If you think about it, the sim-time difference between each frame is always constant (1/FPS second), no matter how long it takes to create and display the frame in real-time. I'm sure this probably simplified a lot the coding... i.e. 20 FPS -> 1 frame = 0.05 s 1) reset real-time timer 2) increase sim-time by 0.05 s 3) calculate frame 4) display frame 5) if real-time timer < 0.05 s then wait until timer reaches 0.05 s goto 1 else goto 1 endif Patrick

: >Think of like this:- : >reducing frame rate:- you might miss your braking point because you skipp right passed it in : >betweenn frames (you can be travling at arround 200mph). : >slowing the game down:- no frames skipped, so you won't miss your braking point. : Ah, but you might (as I have done) misjudge your actual speed and not : brake enough. When it seems like you're moving 30 mph slower, there's : that much less braking that you think you'll need. Good fast racing is a rhythm thing. One gets the rhythm down and one does well. I develope a feel for when/how long/how hard/ to brake, when to shift, when/how fast/how hard/ to accelerate. S-L-O-O-O-O-W-W-W-W-W'ing down the race world creates havoc on my rhythm. I brake too early, brake too hard, over accelerate and generally blow it. Steering isn't too bad though. I'm sorry, but it just doesn't cut the mustard, however it certainly does cut-the-cheese :-) -- **************************** Michael E. Carver ************************* Upside out, or inside down...False alarm the only game in town. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<[ /./. [- < ]>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

>Think of like this:- >reducing frame rate:- you might miss your braking point because you skipp right passed it in >betweenn frames (you can be travling at arround 200mph). >slowing the game down:- no frames skipped, so you won't miss your braking point. Ah, but you might (as I have done) misjudge your actual speed and not brake enough. When it seems like you're moving 30 mph slower, there's that much less braking that you think you'll need. -- http://members.cruzio.com/~keeper/toons.html - Contemporary WB cartoons info http://www.armory.com/~keeper/midi.html - My own MIDI music and arrangements

Quoted text (10 lines)

>>Think of like this:- >>reducing frame rate:- you might miss your braking point because you skipp >>right passed it in >>betweenn frames (you can be travling at arround 200mph). >>slowing the game down:- no frames skipped, so you won't miss your braking >>point. >Ah, but you might (as I have done) misjudge your actual speed and not >brake enough. When it seems like you're moving 30 mph slower, there's >that much less braking that you think you'll need.

YES! The two most important characterstics for a race driver to have are _great timing_ and _quick reflexes_. The unrealistic timing in GP2 makes it very difficult to react properly to other cars or time braking and acceleration points. The braking example that you give is great but acceleration out of corners is also affected. It's very easy to apply too much throttle and spin. The argument against slowing the frame rate (slowing time instead) because you might miss your braking point ignores the ability of a driver to see the braking point from a distance and _time_ his application of the brakes. You don't have to see the marker at the instant you hit the brakes. The timing of the brake point stays the same every lap. I love playing GP2 on my dx4/100 while hot lapping but racing isn't much fun with the constant warping of time. The feeling of immersion and realism in the sim is ruined every time it happens. -- Pat Dotson