Nascar 2 3DFx patch. How hard can it be??

Correct me if I'm wrong, but, are not most games that support 3Dfx, also Rendition games? If that answer is yes, then why is it that making a 3Dfx game out of a rendition game is such a big deal? Nearly every game I own that supports the Voodoo chipset also supports the Rendition. Why is it then, that after announcing the announcment date, the announcment has not yet been made about when they will announce the proposed release of the enhancement. :) Did I run on? Hello Sierraaaaa. I shitcanned my Rendition card cause the original N2 was unplayable in it's as shipped state. Waited till I was bored out of playing before the patch came out, then still couldn't get reliable performance from the Rendition version of N2. When do I get my moneys worth? Perhaps Never? I'd guess that the voodoo patch will cause more trouble than it's worth. Just my $0.02 ---------------------------------------------------------- If You think health care is expensive now, wait till it's free! RR #3 Box 96 Williamsport, Pa. 17701 (717) 745-7697

On Tue, 20 Jan 1998 02:57:39 -0500, "Phil Bower" >Correct me if I'm wrong, but, are not most games that support 3Dfx, also >Rendition games? No, not at all. Direct 3D games will take advantage of many "3D" chipsets(3DFX, Rendition, nvidia, PowerVR, etc.), but the performance is usually not that great. Other games use a direct port for individual chipsets(3DFX Glide API, for example Need for Speed IISE). Still others(well not many -Quake/Quake2/Hexen2) may use OpenGL. However, only 3DFX , nvidia, and the newest Rendition chipsets currently support it well. So, Nascar 2 was programmed directly for Rendition, probably because its chipset and API was availlable before 3DFX, and Sierra was going to be selling a Rendition graphics card. Now, because of the huge market share that 3DFX has amassed over the last year, and its superior performance, Papyrus is producing a 3DFX patch. The answer was no, but the 3DFX patch is a big deal because HOPEFULLY it will have much better performance, and will be accessible to more gamers who have 3DFX cards as opposed to Rendition. That may be, but its probably through the inferior Direct 3D, as opposed to a direct Rendition port. The 3DFX glide versions of NHL98, Longbow 2, Need for Speed IISE, Ubisoft's F1 Racing, POD, G-Police, Extreme ***, NBA Live 98, Carmageddon, Jet Fighter III, etc. are far superior in performance to their Direct 3D or Rendition counterparts. And some of these games definitely do not support Rendition. Also, the OpenGL versions of Quake, Quake 2, and Hexen 2 are, in my opinion, better than the Rendition versions overall. I have both a 3DFX card and a Rendition card, so I have made the comparisions. Let's hope not. Don Chapman

Maybe 3DFX want to implement N2 with anti aliasing, which the N2 rendition wasn't implement with!!!! Bye Coco

Quoted text (28 lines)

> Correct me if I'm wrong, but, are not most games that support 3Dfx, also > Rendition games? > If that answer is yes, then why is it that making a 3Dfx game out of a > rendition game is such a big deal? > Nearly every game I own that supports the Voodoo chipset also supports the > Rendition. Why is it then, that after announcing the announcment date, the > announcment has not yet been made about when they will announce the proposed > release of the enhancement. :) > Did I run on? > Hello Sierraaaaa. I shitcanned my Rendition card cause the original N2 was > unplayable in it's as shipped state. Waited till I was bored out of playing > before the patch came out, then still couldn't get reliable performance from > the Rendition version of N2. When do I get my moneys worth? Perhaps Never? > I'd guess that the voodoo patch will cause more trouble than it's worth. > Just my $0.02 > ---------------------------------------------------------- > If You think health care is expensive now, wait till it's free! > RR #3 Box 96 > Williamsport, Pa. 17701 > (717) 745-7697

It is exactly this attitude that makes it not worthwhile for companies' representatives to come on to r.a.s. to have intelligent and useful discussions. They said there will be a FREE 3dfx patch in early '98. A 3dfx patch that they certainly did not have to bother with is a good thing. Early '98 has not passed yet. Get it? Thank you Papyrus/Sierra for the patch and for continuing to support a product that is more than a few weeks old (most company's limit). Yes it is a good will gesture on your part that will encourage people to buy more of your products but it is also a bonus that we are getting that was not advertised or expected based on what it said on the outside of the box. Marc.

Quoted text (9 lines)

>Correct me if I'm wrong, but, are not most games that support 3Dfx, also >Rendition games? >If that answer is yes, then why is it that making a 3Dfx game out of a >rendition game is such a big deal? >Nearly every game I own that supports the Voodoo chipset also supports the >Rendition. Why is it then, that after announcing the announcment date, the >announcment has not yet been made about when they will announce the

proposed >release of the enhancement. :) >Did I run on? >Hello Sierraaaaa. I shitcanned my Rendition card cause the original N2 was >unplayable in it's as shipped state. Waited till I was bored out of playing >before the patch came out, then still couldn't get reliable performance from >the Rendition version of N2. When do I get my moneys worth? Perhaps Never?

Quoted text (10 lines)

>I'd guess that the voodoo patch will cause more trouble than it's worth. >Just my $0.02 >---------------------------------------------------------- >If You think health care is expensive now, wait till it's free! >RR #3 Box 96 >Williamsport, Pa. 17701 >(717) 745-7697

Must be you, because I dont know too many people who had problems with Rendition mode that wasnt easily solved. Sounds like a hardware problem on your end. As far as getting "your moneys worth"... did it every say on the box or advertised that you would get a 3DFX patch ??? Id say the 3DFX patch is a BONUS. It wasnt a flaw in the game. It wasnt a hardware conflict. For Christs sake... ITS NOT CPR !!!! So Id say you got your moneys worth and just be patient until the 3DFX patch comes out. Early 1998 could be interpreted first quarter 1998. First quarter does not end until March 31, 1998. Scott

Quoted text (28 lines)

> Correct me if I'm wrong, but, are not most games that support 3Dfx, also > Rendition games? > If that answer is yes, then why is it that making a 3Dfx game out of a > rendition game is such a big deal? > Nearly every game I own that supports the Voodoo chipset also supports the > Rendition. Why is it then, that after announcing the announcment date, the > announcment has not yet been made about when they will announce the proposed > release of the enhancement. :) > Did I run on? > Hello Sierraaaaa. I shitcanned my Rendition card cause the original N2 was > unplayable in it's as shipped state. Waited till I was bored out of playing > before the patch came out, then still couldn't get reliable performance from > the Rendition version of N2. When do I get my moneys worth? Perhaps Never? > I'd guess that the voodoo patch will cause more trouble than it's worth. > Just my $0.02 > ---------------------------------------------------------- > If You think health care is expensive now, wait till it's free! > RR #3 Box 96 > Williamsport, Pa. 17701 > (717) 745-7697

> Maybe 3DFX want to implement N2 with anti aliasing, which the N2 rendition > wasn't implement with!!!! 3dfx Voodoo (1) can't do anti-aliasing in real time. It wasn't optimised for this function. Rendition CAN. Kevin

> Correct me if I'm wrong, but, are not most games that support 3Dfx, also > Rendition games? No. Each has considerable native content which the other doesn't. A consequence of the early 3d marketplace + the fact that early Direct3d was so difficult to program. Sierra/Papy came out early on the Rendition bandwagon, and learned how to program it 2 1/2 years ago. Now they have to learn to program 3dfx while pathcing N2. Because of unexpected delays. No. It will be cool. They are taking extra time to ensure its cool. Kevin

>It is exactly this attitude that makes it not worthwhile for companies' >representatives to come on to r.a.s. to have intelligent and useful >discussions. Nonsense. It is NOT providing information that pisses people off. The more Papyrus withdraws from public participation, the more they*** people off who want to know what's going on. All they have to do is provide SOME reasonable level opf information instead of the wall of silence we've been getting recently. They seem to be turning into another EA. Actually, what they said was that they would provide and "exact date" for the patch release on Dec. 22 of last year. They failed to provide this basic information that they promised, so naturally people are going to be impatient. Joe

> Sierra/Papy came out early on the Rendition bandwagon, and learned how > to program it 2 1/2 years ago. Now they have to learn to program 3dfx > while pathcing N2. Actually, Papyrus got started on the Rendition coding about 1-1/2 years ago when Mike Newhall was still there. As far as the 3Dfx stuff is concerned, I don't think they're doing it in-house, but don't know for sure (I'll find out though!). Cheers! Marc -- Marc J. Nelson Sim Racing Online / Sim Racing News / The Sim Project http://members.aol.com/simracing <remove '*' before replying>

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > Sierra/Papy came out early on the Rendition bandwagon, and learned how > > to program it 2 1/2 years ago. Now they have to learn to program 3dfx > > while pathcing N2. > Actually, Papyrus got started on the Rendition coding about 1-1/2 years > ago when Mike Newhall was still there. As far as the 3Dfx stuff is > concerned, I don't think they're doing it in-house, but don't know for > sure (I'll find out though!).

I *know* Papyrus was working on Rendition code while they were still in the old Somerville, MA offices. Since they moved from there in November 1995, I can assert that they were working on Rendition coding since before then. EOD. (You are correct in stating that Mike Newhall was still there at the time.) ---Jim

Quoted text (8 lines)

> >They said there will be a FREE 3dfx patch in early '98. A 3dfx patch that > >they certainly did not have to bother with is a good thing. Early '98 has > >not passed yet. Get it? > Actually, what they said was that they would provide and "exact date" > for the patch release on Dec. 22 of last year. They failed to provide > this basic information that they promised, so naturally people are > going to be impatient.

Did they promise an "exact date" (your quotes, not mine) as you claim? Can you support that claim? ---Jim

I don't have a problem with publishers/developers keeping quiet. I would rather that they said absolutely *nothing* than pop up a "projected release date" which isn't met. Expectations are raised when the soothsayers, crystal ball-gazers and marketing gurus state dates that are not met. This then places pressure on the publisher/developer. Far better to say nothing at all until they are starting to ship it out to the distributors. -- Bruce (at work) "Laziness is nothing more than the habit of resting before you get tired." (Jules Renard)

>Did they promise an "exact date" (your quotes, not mine) as you claim? >Can you support that claim? Yes I can (bet ya didn't expect that on Usenet, didja? ;-). Here you go: David -- Thanks a lot for your message. I can see that 3dfx and Papyrus haven't been sending out clear messages about the port. It's coming soon!! On Monday, December 22, I will make an announcement as to the exact date the NASCAR Racing 2/3dfx port is due. Erica PR Manager Papyrus Joe

Quoted text (11 lines)

>> >They said there will be a FREE 3dfx patch in early '98. A 3dfx patch that >> >they certainly did not have to bother with is a good thing. Early '98 has >> >not passed yet. Get it? >> Actually, what they said was that they would provide and "exact date" >> for the patch release on Dec. 22 of last year. They failed to provide >> this basic information that they promised, so naturally people are >> going to be impatient. >Did they promise an "exact date" (your quotes, not mine) as you claim? >Can you support that claim?

For my money, the Dec. 22 Papyrus announcement told us three things that we didn't know already: 1. That it would indeed be released (pretty dumb if they did the work on the patch and it wasn't released, but not beyond the realm of possibility [see "CPR/Glide"]), 2. That the patch would be released in "early '98". Not as specific as we might have liked, but its something to go on (would you prefer a specific date pulled out of the air which has no chance of being met?), and 3. That the patch would be compatible with and supported on NROS/TEN, a very big deal for many people (and not an automatic). Maybe Joe didn't get what he wanted out of the announcement, but it wasn't for a lack of information. ;) Before you send me UCE, I know what you're thinking... Did he complain to five or six postmasters last month? Now, you must ask yourself one question: "Do I feel lucky?" Well, do you, punk?

Here we go again. I shouldn't criticise anything the almighty software developers have done cause that might step on some toes. They send out a game that even with it's patch is in desperate need of problems being fixed and I, after having it for a year, shouldn't be bitter that I still don't use it because I get infuriated when something beyond my control, fails. I'll tell you what. I'll give an anology that I made for someone else, earlier. It goes like this... You go to your local Car dealer and order a brand new car. Wait a few weeks and when it comes in, you go to the dealer and pick it up. The salesperson hands you the plastic bag with the keys just after you hand him a cashiers check for the car. You're the proud owner of a new car. You open the bag, grab the key and get in. Turn on the engine and immideately, the engine blows up, catches the car on fire and burns it to a crisp. Hmmm, this car doesn't work, you surmise. You walk back into the dealership and hand the guy the keys and say, yep, that cars a peice of shit. The guy hands the key back to you and says, yep, it sure is, but I just sell em. You ordered it and I got it for you. After you open the baggie with the key, we have a shrinkwrap policy, just like software dealers, it's your car. But it didn't work!!!! Sucks to be you. That model is known to do that. They are working on a carb kit you can install that shoud help that most times. Would you like to get it when it comes out? Screw you, I'm writing a letter to the editor, calling 60 minutes, the better buisiness bureau..... You can't do that. It'll hurt the Mfgrs' feelings. These people work real *** cars like that, there working on the problems with that carb right now as we speak, I'm sure of it. F&*#$ that!!! I work for my money too!!! What am I supposed to do about a car in the meantime? Well, we sell this model over here too, it doesn't catch on fire any more like that one does. Would you like to buy one of those. And also, since you're a previous Model X owner, you get a $10.00 rebate when you buy a model Y. In addition, since you bought that barbeque model outside, you were automatically entered into our Free Carb Kit sweepstakes. Hey, what the hell, it's only another $25,000.00, sell me a model Y. Oh, and I almost forgot to tell you, before you leave, stop in at the parts department, they allready have FREE carb kits for the Y models IN STOCK. You'll really want to get one of them before you drive it. Our service department will install it for you for a marginal fee. Give us a few days to work the bugs out and I'm sure you'll be thrilled with the Y model. We'll even let you borrow our tow hitch for the X model outside so you can take it home with you too! remind you of GP2 and N2, CPR, ... Perhaps you might think about the people who may be 13,14,15 years old and REALLY WORK for the money they earn to be able to get these programs and find out that 4 weeks worth of grass mowing/yard work just went down the shitcan cause a software vendor screwed em. Maybe YOU, should ask yourself when was the last time you bought a program that actually worked. Can you remember?? I can, it was 1987, I bought Unix. -------- Get the picture. Sorry Marc, I really don't give a shit whos toes I stomp on. I paid my dues for that game and I want it to work. I'm not going to stop posting until it does. From Microsoft on down, software vendors have trained us to simply accept the fact that when we buy a car from them, it'll catch on fire the first day we have it. Were an entire society of "Fire Extinguisher Carriers"! Put out the fire for the moment, get back in, reboot the car and see if we can get up the mountain this time before something else explodes.

Quoted text (10 lines)

>It is exactly this attitude that makes it not worthwhile for companies' >representatives to come on to r.a.s. to have intelligent and useful >discussions. >They said there will be a FREE 3dfx patch in early '98. A 3dfx patch that >they certainly did not have to bother with is a good thing. Early '98 has >not passed yet. Get it? >Thank you Papyrus/Sierra for the patch and for continuing to support a >product that is more than a few weeks old (most company's limit). Yes it

is >a good will gesture on your part that will encourage people to buy more of >your products but it is also a bonus that we are getting that was not >advertised or expected based on what it said on the outside of the box. >Marc.

Quoted text (10 lines)

> Correct me if I'm wrong, but, are not most games that support 3Dfx, also > Rendition games? > If that answer is yes, then why is it that making a 3Dfx game out of a > rendition game is such a big deal? > Nearly every game I own that supports the Voodoo chipset also supports the > Rendition. Why is it then, that after announcing the announcment date, the > announcment has not yet been made about when they will announce the proposed > release of the enhancement. :)

No, this is not entirely correct. Both 3Dfx and Rendition (as well as other chipsets, like Riva) will run Direct3D. However, 3Dfx and Rendition each also support their own native API's. For 3Dfx it's called Glide, with Rendition there is Speedy3D and Redline. These native API's only run on their respective hardware. Thus, a Glide port of a game will only work on a 3Dfx card, and a Speedy3D or Redline will only work with a Rendition card. The current 3D accelerated version of Nascar2 is for Rendition only and only works with a Rendition card, although a Glide port has been made (still not released though). When/if it is finally released, you will need a 3Dfx card to use it obviously. It sounds like most of the games you own are Direct3D accelerated, since you say they will run on both Rendition and 3Dfx boards (or, they might each have specific native versions of the same game).

Thanks for clearing the air Jim, sorry for the misinformation! =P Cheers! Marc

Quoted text (7 lines)

> I *know* Papyrus was working on Rendition code while they were still > in the old Somerville, MA offices. Since they moved from there in > November 1995, I can assert that they were working on Rendition coding > since before then. EOD. (You are correct in stating that Mike Newhall > was still there at the time.) > ---Jim

-- (please remove '*' when replying) Sim Racing News - http://www.simnews.com The Sim Project - http://www.simproject.com * No animals were harmed in the making of this e-mail *

What doesn't work about Nascar2? I was not aware that the game had fatal flaws...just a few niggly bugs like everything else. I have heard nothing that compares to your car blowing up analogy and my copy certainly works well. As for the 3dfx patch, as I said, start complaining in April if we don't have it yet. Marc. <snipped>

-nice long story deleted- Ok, I can see some of your points, but when N2 was released there was no mention of a 3dfx patch. Papyrus wnet to a lot of effort to make the game work with rendition (which it does admirably). It even works with the new rendition chipset that didn't exist when the game came out. Papyrus don't owe anyone a 3dfx patch. If they make one I'll applaud them and if I ever meet one of their programmers I'll buy them a drink - only have to mow lawns for two weeks for that:-). But I don't DEMAND them to make it for free. Why stop at 3dfx - lets have an AGP version, a Nvidia version, a Permedia or whatever version! Shoot. lets wait for a couple of years and demand an S3 Rage 8 version. If they make one they're doing us a favour and we should be grateful. Now go buzz Microprose for a wet weather, multiplayer version of gp2 like it says on the back of the box. brian - remove 'bye' from address to reply

From what I understand, 3DFX did the port. It's done. Sierra insisted they give it final approval. 3DFX had to hand it all over to them for release. They're holding it to be released with some sort of upgrade/patch/add-on or something of that nature. I could be wrong, but this is how I understand it from various company rep posts and press releases. HH

Quoted text (17 lines)

> >Did they promise an "exact date" (your quotes, not mine) as you claim? > >Can you support that claim? > Yes I can (bet ya didn't expect that on Usenet, didja? ;-). Here you > go: > David -- > Thanks a lot for your message. I can see that 3dfx and Papyrus haven't > been sending out clear messages about the port. > It's coming soon!! On Monday, December 22, I will make an announcement > as to the exact date the NASCAR Racing 2/3dfx port is due. > Erica > PR Manager > Papyrus

Doh! I figured it was so unlikely that I didn't bother with a DejaNews search before spouting off. Consider myself corrected... ---Jim PS: Now, the little bit of lawyer in me wants to argue that they did make an announcement "as to" the release date (stating that the exact date would be in early 1998), rather than an announcement "of" the exact date... But that would be a bit too lame, even for r.a.s./UseNet... :-) <-- NB the smiley before flaming...

Papyrus deserves NO credit for the 3DFX patch. The patch was actually done by the guys over at 3DFX due to consumer demand. Of course Papy/Sierra is going to take all the credit for themselves. That could be the only reason for the delay. -- Nos [This Space Left Intentionally Blank]

Papyrus had no obligation in letting 3DFX make a patch either. They could have stuck to their guns with Rendtion since Sierra/Papyrus are very much into Rendition. I think its great that they are even spending a minute of their time and resources to please those who want a 3dfx version. Scott

Quoted text (14 lines)

> >If they make one they're doing us a favour and we should be grateful. Now go > >buzz Microprose for a wet weather, multiplayer version of gp2 like it says on > >the back of the box. > >brian > Papyrus deserves NO credit for the 3DFX patch. The patch was actually > done by the guys over at 3DFX due to consumer demand. Of course > Papy/Sierra is going to take all the credit for themselves. That could > be the only reason for the delay. > -- > Nos > [This Space Left Intentionally Blank]

Come on ... Papyrus will release a 3DFX patch for N2 because it is in their economic best interest to do so. N3 is still months away yet it will support 3DFX. Meanwhile, Rendition is history despite some last gasps -- (and I own one). It only makes good business sense that Papyrus encourage 3DFX conversion in the present for their benefit in the future when N3 is released. Troy Fortmann **************************************************** ... Spirited debate is the process by which something approaching the truth is revealed. ****************************************************

At this point does it matter? I have bought every Papy product up to SODA and have watched the quality od sim and support slide. Nascar should have been patched last year FOR THE SAKE OF PAPY'S FUTURE not ours. I could not care about N2 at this point. I was underwhelmed at its release and 3dfx graphics are not likely to change that. The issue is when will Papy return to making groundbreaking sims ala the original (and brilliant) NASCAR and Indycar and even ICR2 to a limited extent. Lately mediocrity and rehashes are all that seem to be forthcoming. I really hope GPL lives up to its advanced billing. If so all will be forgotten. If not then, sadly, I think we are nearing the end of an era.

Quoted text (13 lines)

>> >They said there will be a FREE 3dfx patch in early '98. A 3dfx patch that >> >they certainly did not have to bother with is a good thing. Early '98 has >> >not passed yet. Get it? >> Actually, what they said was that they would provide and "exact date" >> for the patch release on Dec. 22 of last year. They failed to provide >> this basic information that they promised, so naturally people are >> going to be impatient. >Did they promise an "exact date" (your quotes, not mine) as you claim? >Can you support that claim? >---Jim

Maybe the delay is because Papyrus are testing it to the max to make sure that the patch has been done properly. No points for guessing who would get it in the neck if the patch is not right. Yea thats right .....Papyrus I can just see the post in RAS now Hold your horses. After all it will be for free. -- NOTE: Remove the "remove" from E-mail address to reply. Nigel of Lakewood Motorsports (Memeber of the Nascar Offline Racing Series) Nascar Coruba & Coke Chevy Hamilton New Zealand

Jimminy Cricket! I wonder why? And I think it sucks that they didn't support 3DFX in the first place, even though it's superior technology to Rendition. -- Nos [This Space Left Intentionally Blank]

Ack Man! They've had the patch in their hands for quite some time now. Should have finished testing long ago. Anyway, they are under the wing of Sierra now and since when has Sierra cared about releasing buggy software? Come to think of it, every game that Papy has done has needed multiple patching. Free, thx to 3DFX and not Papy. -- Nos [This Space Left Intentionally Blank]

Quoted text (9 lines)

>> I think its great that they are even spending a minute of their time and >> resources to please those who want a 3dfx version. >Come on ... Papyrus will release a 3DFX patch for N2 because it is in >their economic best interest to do so. N3 is still months away yet it >will support 3DFX. Meanwhile, Rendition is history despite some last >gasps -- (and I own one). It only makes good business sense that Papyrus >encourage 3DFX conversion in the present for their benefit in the future >when N3 is released.

Yes, and this is the same reason everyone else makes 3dfx games. Papyrus made N2 a long time ago, when rendition was the most popular card. I think this is the reason they went heavily rendition, and the same reason sierra put it in their 3d card: because it was the most popular. BTW I own a rendition and a 3dfx. But why would 3dfx make an N2 patch? to help sell their cards of course. Face it, nobody's in the charity business for long... I think a 3dfx patch may help rejuvenate N2 sales but I think a high percentage of the sim racing market have it already. IT's commercially 50-50. In reply to Nosferatu (good film BTW) I don't think anyone could produce a 3dfx patch for N2 without a lot of help from Papyrus. Brian . -- remove 'bye' from address to reply

Good point. with common sense like that you could only come from NZ. Brian -- remove 'bye' from address to reply

says... >Ack Man! They've had the patch in their hands for quite some time now. >Should have finished testing long ago. Anyway, they are under the wing >of Sierra now and since when has Sierra cared about releasing buggy >software? Come to think of it, every game that Papy has done has >needed multiple patching. Free, thx to 3DFX and not Papy. Do you have evidence of this? Brian -- remove 'bye' from address to reply

Yea, I have a poster from the remake version. It's a sight to behold. Regarding Papy helping 3DFX. Apparently they wouldn't do a 3DFX patch, but they said 3DFX is welcome to try. I guess they get kudos for atleast releasing the code. -- Nos [This Space Left Intentionally Blank]

Evidence of what exactly? That Papy has had the patch for quite some time? Yes, this is old news on the 3DFX news server. -- Nos [This Space Left Intentionally Blank]

% >Papyrus had no obligation in letting 3DFX make a patch either. They % >could have stuck to their guns with Rendtion since Sierra/Papyrus are % >very much into Rendition. % Jimminy Cricket! I wonder why? It has nothing to do with Sierra putting their weight behind the Verite chip based cards. % >I think its great that they are even spending a minute of their time and % >resources to please those who want a 3dfx version. % > % And I think it sucks that they didn't support 3DFX in the first place, % even though it's superior technology to Rendition. When Papyrus started coding and investigating 3D accelerated video cards Rendition was the only card available at the time that Papyrus felt capable of providing the acceleration they were looking for. Voodoo wasn't available. Therefore they put their eggs in the Verite basket. This was for ICR2, but I assume ICR2 was basically ported to Rendition to learn the ropes for NASCAR2. By the time N2 was released Papyrus was already working on their next set of projects (along with NROS). I highly suspect pulling resources to port N2 to 3DFX had extremely low priority over their other projects. -- **************************** Michael E. Carver ************************* Upside out, or inside down...False alarm the only game in town. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<[ /./. [- < ]>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Whatever the cause, Papyrus has gone from being on the forefront of 3d acceleration technology (i.e., when they originally supported Rendition cards) to being practically the last software company on Earth to support more advanced 3d technology such as the 3dfx. It's no wonder people are getting impatient. Joe

Quoted text (15 lines)

> says... > >Ack Man! They've had the patch in their hands for quite some time now. > >Should have finished testing long ago. Anyway, they are under the wing > >of Sierra now and since when has Sierra cared about releasing buggy > >software? Come to think of it, every game that Papy has done has > >needed multiple patching. Free, thx to 3DFX and not Papy. > Do you have evidence of this? > Brian

Nascar 1 IndyCar I IndyCar II (took about a year to fix) Nascar 2 And for good measure, there's Red Baron 2, the latest disaster. Pro Pilot is pretty beat up too. I shudder to think what's ahead when Half-life is shipped.

says... I agree with the Voodoo versus Rendition time frame. Clearly, Sierra bet on the Rendition camp -- but they lost. Yes, they sold a ton of software which is the objective, but it is time to move over to the 3DFx side of town. In terms of priority, the 3DFx patch should be relatively high on the Papyrus list. GPL & N3 are on a distant horizon but will be supporting 3DFx. NROS is whatever it is going to be for the near term. (Note: I think Papyrus is keeping a low profile on that deal until it sorts out.) Things that keep the Papyrus name in the headlines in a positive way are always high priority. Releasing a 3DFx patch for N2 would breath new life into an old product while grabbing some headlines and experience dealing with 3DFx issues. If Papyrus went as far as re-releasing a new boxed version of N2 with the 3DFx patch, they could probably pick up some additional people who have been on the fence due to "video card discrimination." (After Thought: I think they missed an opportunity to package the 3DFx patch with the BGN Expansion Pack and charge an extra $20 bucks for the combo.) Troy

I believe Voodoo came out very shortly after Rendition. The Voodoo was out before ICR2 and N2 were ported. Lame excuse sorry. -- Nos [This Space Left Intentionally Blank]

"Superior technology" is not always the winner as you should know well. An average product will generally sell better than a good one if packaged and marketed well, especially if it arrives on the market earlier. I guess that three years ago you knew that 3dFX was going to be top dog? Thought not... Cheers! John

I'm sure if Papy hadn't released any 3dFX support you would be complaining, if they released it a few weeks ago with bugs you would be complaining, if it worked on-line but crashed NROS you would be complaining. Please note that this is not a "patch" as you describe, it is a free upgrade - "upgrade" in the sense of "product enhancement". You bought N2 in the knowledge that it did not have, and never would have, 3dFX support. You were happy. Now you're getting 3dFX support, a free upgrade to a product which was already fine. A bonus. And this is considered a problem or an issue worthy of getting upset about? Cheers! John

Agreed. I would certainly have bought BGN if it had included the 3dfx patch. Joe

Quoted text (9 lines)

>Releasing a 3DFx patch for N2 would breath new life into an old product >while grabbing some headlines and experience dealing with 3DFx issues. If >Papyrus went as far as re-releasing a new boxed version of N2 with the >3DFx patch, they could probably pick up some additional people who have >been on the fence due to "video card discrimination." (After Thought: I >think they missed an opportunity to package the 3DFx patch with the BGN >Expansion Pack and charge an extra $20 bucks for the combo.) >Troy

I agree fully. I havn't bought the expansion pack, but if the 3DFX patch was bundled with it I certainly woud have. -- Nos [This Space Left Intentionally Blank]

Even lamer justification. Development of support for a given product begins when the company concerned (Rendition, 3dFX) is able to persuade software companies (Papyrus) to support their product. This is done by technical demonstration, supply of developer kits and boards, technical expertise and support, etc etc. It is not based upon the release date of the board. Cheers! John

Quoted text (9 lines)

>Development of support for a given product begins when the company >concerned (Rendition, 3dFX) is able to persuade software companies >(Papyrus) to support their product. This is done by technical >demonstration, supply of developer kits and boards, technical >expertise and support, etc etc. It is not based upon the release date >of the board. >Cheers! >John

And the people at 3DFX did all of the above, but, Sierra just kept saying no. I don't know their motive, but I do know a lot of people are pissed at them for it. -- Nos [This Space Left Intentionally Blank]

Quoted text (7 lines)

>"Superior technology" is not always the winner as you should know >well. An average product will generally sell better than a good one if >packaged and marketed well, especially if it arrives on the market >earlier. >I guess that three years ago you knew that 3dFX was going to be top >dog?

If you hung out in the video card group then you would have seen that Voodoo was hot on the radar scope atleast two years ago. Long before they did a Rendition patch. It's been said that Rendition paid Sierra/Papy to do the patches for ICRII and N2. So much for the marketing savvy. 3DFX still came out on top. -- Nos [This Space Left Intentionally Blank]

Just a note and certainly not a complaint but some of us...umm who could that be...were silly enough to buy the bundle of Nascar2 and the expansion pak based on Sierra's announcement of support for Voodoo. Yes Yes I realize how premature that might have been....but occasionally I misunderstand developers statements. Point being...? Well at least one person out here has bought Nascar2 and the expansion pak based on Voodoo support...<VBG>. Cant wait for them to release it...but I have to tell you that it sure seems like they are sandbagging us. Also after reading John Carmacks interview in Boot Magazine Im wondering what kind of deal Rendition had Sierra in...cause it sure seems that Sierra is extremely against Voodoo ports. You remember Carmack saying part of his agreement with Rendition was to NOT do any OTHER direct ports of Quake. Only Rendition....Maybe Sierra has the same sort of deal and maybe it was for alot longer...??? Pierre PAPA DOC Legrand Pierre PAPA DOC Legrand Infamous Pink Flamingo Pilot...

>I'm sure if Papy hadn't released any 3dFX support you would be >complaining, if they released it a few weeks ago with bugs you would >be complaining, if it worked on-line but crashed NROS you would be >complaining. No I wouldn't. I would love them for it. A few companies, Rowan and MSI are two I can remember off the top of my head, have released patches in beta form so that we the consumer can test it and notify them of any problems. Heck, Rowan is up to patch V (starting with a) and while a few have complained along the way the majority of people are really glad that a company would release a patch sooner than make us wait. I bought N2 because I liked N1, but, I didn't actually buy it until it was rumoured on the 3DFX news server that a patch was most likely a sure thing in the future. I'm not upset, believe me, just making some noise. It's only thanks to people like that who made noise over on the the 3DFX news server that there is even going to be a N2 FREE upgrade. You won't get anything if you don't ask. -- Nos [This Space Left Intentionally Blank]

Surely they said no because they were selling their own Rendition board (or planning to). John -- John Hartridge | FUJIFILM Electonic Imaging Ltd, ext 3282 | Three Cherry Trees Lane,

Quoted text (9 lines)

>Please note that this is not a "patch" as you describe, it is a free >upgrade - "upgrade" in the sense of "product enhancement". You bought >N2 in the knowledge that it did not have, and never would have, 3dFX >support. You were happy. Now you're getting 3dFX support, a free >upgrade to a product which was already fine. A bonus. And this is >considered a problem or an issue worthy of getting upset about? >Cheers! >John

And one last point. Here's a list of all the 3D chipsets Tombraider supports. Tombraider was not a native 3DFX game, but had to be patched for all cards. Rendition Verite 3dFX Matrox Mystique Power VR Voodoo Rush Beta S3 Virge Now, that's what I call customer service. Happy customers = more $$$. -- Nos [This Space Left Intentionally Blank]

My company was involved in the production of 3dFX - I think you can rest assured that I knew of it's potential quite some time ago. That said, _potential_ means nothing, and the best product in the world can still be resoundingly beaten by an inferior one. Making a decision purely based upon technical ability as you appear to do is not a sensible thing to do. Cheers! John

Oh yeah, I do recall that "Tomb Raider Online" game that might risk being messed up by firing out patches willy nilly. At least compare like with like - if you mess up NROS by forgetting any small detail then you will be in big trouble. Patches require testing for programs like this, and testing _before_ release on private servers so that they do not cause problems upon release. Cheers! John

Quoted text (14 lines)

>I'm sure if Papy hadn't released any 3dFX support you would be >complaining, if they released it a few weeks ago with bugs you would >be complaining, if it worked on-line but crashed NROS you would be >complaining. >Please note that this is not a "patch" as you describe, it is a free >upgrade - "upgrade" in the sense of "product enhancement". You bought >N2 in the knowledge that it did not have, and never would have, 3dFX >support. You were happy. Now you're getting 3dFX support, a free >upgrade to a product which was already fine. A bonus. And this is >considered a problem or an issue worthy of getting upset about? >Cheers! >John

Is the patch, or upgrade as you call it out already, and if so, where can I find it? Please forgive my ignorance, I've been off-line for a while. Thanks. Rich

SNIP I can't speak for the person that you replied to but for myself I'm more upset about a supposed Papyrus employee posting on the news group that the date for the 3DFX patch would be posted on Dec 22nd. I just think so many software companies blow it by giving out dates! Why don't they just keep it a big secret until it is ready??? Are they trying to get sales early by hoping people will buy the game with 3DFX support? I really don't know the reason but software companies should just announce it when it is ready for release. I'm sure there are some benefits for making an early announcement but I have seen so many software companies get reamed for missing a deadline they talked about. Cheers! The John in the U.S.A.

> If you hung out in the video card group then you would have seen > that Voodoo was hot on the radar scope atleast two years ago. Long > before they did a Rendition patch. It takes more convincing than reading flames in UseNet to go with a new and as yet market-unproven 3D standard. (Either that, or cash on the barrelhead to minimize your risk...) Rendition did not (to my knowledge) pay for N2. They did pony up for ICR2, since they wanted to bundle it as a flagship product. ---Jim

An average product will generally sell better than a good one if packaged and marketed well, especially if it arrives on the market earlier. John Look at Apple computer and the IBM (cloned) PC. There is no doubt that Apple had a much better operating system, but bad executive decisions (read...no clones allowed) have all but doomed them. -- JerryD(upstateNY)

Quoted text (7 lines)

>My company was involved in the production of 3dFX - I think you can >rest assured that I knew of it's potential quite some time ago. >That said, _potential_ means nothing, and the best product in the >world can still be resoundingly beaten by an inferior one. Making a >decision purely based upon technical ability as you appear to do is >not a sensible thing to do.

If that's true then why is it I feel my Monster 3D purchase is one of the most sensible things I've ever done? You seem intent on trying find a flaw in my logic, but when it comes down to it I'm a computer savvy consumer so eat my shorts. -- Nos [This Space Left Intentionally Blank]

Quite simply Papy made a mistake. We bought the correct 3D card based on the amount of support and the power of the Card and Papy didnt choose the correct video card to support. No crime in making a mistake....just wish they would fix it. Though truth is Im having so much fun with Longbow2, Quake2, F1 Racing sim and several non 3d sims that maybe support for N2 is moot at least from my point of view. I guess I will just eat the 50 dollars I spent on N2 (I purchased it based on the company saying it was coming out with a patch)....and consider it a lesson learned....dont buy a sim on Promised Support.... PAPA DOC Pierre PAPA DOC Legrand Infamous Pink Flamingo Pilot...

> Making a >decision purely based upon technical ability as you appear to do is >not a sensible thing to do. >Cheers! >John What stupid logic is that? I based my decision on technical ability and support. I pity the***poor logic of people who buy cards like the Riva. -- Nos [This Space Left Intentionally Blank]

Quoted text (10 lines)

>Oh yeah, I do recall that "Tomb Raider Online" game that might risk >being messed up by firing out patches willy nilly. >At least compare like with like - if you mess up NROS by forgetting >any small detail then you will be in big trouble. Patches require >testing for programs like this, and testing _before_ release on >private servers so that they do not cause problems upon release. >Cheers! >John

You fail to see my point. The point is that EIDOS support many cards and not just one. As I said before. Happy customers = more profits. Get it now? -- Nos [This Space Left Intentionally Blank]

Quoted text (15 lines)

>SNIP >I can't speak for the person that you replied to but for myself I'm more >upset about a supposed Papyrus employee posting on the news group that the >date for the 3DFX patch would be posted on Dec 22nd. I just think so many >software companies blow it by giving out dates! Why don't they just keep it >a big secret until it is ready??? Are they trying to get sales early by >hoping people will buy the game with 3DFX support? I really don't know the >reason but software companies should just announce it when it is ready for >release. I'm sure there are some benefits for making an early announcement >but I have seen so many software companies get reamed for missing a deadline >they talked about. >Cheers! >The John in the U.S.A.

It wasn't a Papyrus employee. It was someone who posted a private email from a Papyrus employee. -- Steven Travers

% > % >Development of support for a given product begins when the company % >concerned (Rendition, 3dFX) is able to persuade software companies % >(Papyrus) to support their product. This is done by technical % >demonstration, supply of developer kits and boards, technical % >expertise and support, etc etc. It is not based upon the release date % >of the board. % And the people at 3DFX did all of the above, but, Sierra just kept % saying no. I don't know their motive, but I do know a lot of people % are pissed at them for it. % % [This Space Left Intentionally Blank] ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ It sounds as if the above is also referring to an area between your ears. ;-) At the time that Papyrus made the decision to support Rendition, Sierra's decision to champion Renditon had nothing to do with their decision. Papyrus was impressed with the capabilities of the chip set and it's instructions. They had the support of Rendition and 3DFX had yet to successfully champion their cause. Future Papyrus products will support 3DFX directly and they should be shortly providing the N2 port. I understand your frustration, but at least keep the facts straight. If you are truly pissed, I would suggest you do not support Papyrus and therefore forgo using their 3DFX patch for N2. That should really show them! Those stupid idiots at Papyrus, sheesh when will they ever get it right? To bad I didn't archive the original Papyrus press releases concerning their reasons for going with Rendition. The whole approach and their reasoning made sense (at the time). But, it probably wouldn't matter, as many are bound and determined to re-write history to their own liking. -- **************************** Michael E. Carver ************************* Upside out, or inside down...False alarm the only game in town. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<[ /./. [- < ]>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

plonk! -- Nos [This Space Left Intentionally Blank]

They were one of the first to support truly advanced 3d hardware - Rendition! <g> -- Don Burnette I-65 Racing Dburn on Ten

So tell us again, why is this company that was so bright about 3d hardware basically the last company on the PLANET to support truly advanced 3d hardware like 3dfx? Joe

>So tell us again, why is this company that was so bright about 3d >hardware basically the last company on the PLANET to support truly >advanced 3d hardware like 3dfx? >Joe Didn't you know? Papy are considered gods in this group and any disparaging comments are met with a barrage of ridicule. -- Nos [This Space Left Intentionally Blank]

Quoted text (18 lines)

> >SNIP > >I can't speak for the person that you replied to but for myself I'm more > >upset about a supposed Papyrus employee posting on the news group that the > >date for the 3DFX patch would be posted on Dec 22nd. I just think so many > >software companies blow it by giving out dates! Why don't they just keep it > >a big secret until it is ready??? Are they trying to get sales early by > >hoping people will buy the game with 3DFX support? I really don't know the > >reason but software companies should just announce it when it is ready for > >release. I'm sure there are some benefits for making an early announcement > >but I have seen so many software companies get reamed for missing a deadline > >they talked about. > >Cheers! > >The John in the U.S.A. > It wasn't a Papyrus employee. It was someone who posted a private > email from a Papyrus employee.

...and didn't he only say, the release date of the patch would be "announced" on Dec 22nd? l8er ronny -- |\ _,,,---,,_ I want to die like my Grandfather, ZZZzz /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ in his sleep. |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' Not like the people in his car, '---''(_/--' `-'\_) screaming their heads off!

You don't know this to be correct, and I know for a fact that it is wrong. If you know something then by all means shout it out, but trying to turn uninformed speculation into fact only diminishes the weight of your words. Cheers! John

Okay, so you would be happy and all of the users of NROS would be pissed off when it brought the system down. Anyway, why should we, the public, have to test unfinished work and do the Q.A. job? What, did they make the patch all by themselves then? No, it's thanks also to 3dFX and Papyrus, but you appear unwilling to acknowledge the work they are doing for you. Cheers! John

Quoted text (10 lines)

>> Making a >>decision purely based upon technical ability as you appear to do is >>not a sensible thing to do. >>Cheers! >>John >What stupid logic is that? I based my decision on technical ability >and support. I pity the***poor logic of people who buy cards like >the Riva.

What kind of stupid answer is that? I said you shouldn't base a buying decision on technical ability, you respond that you based your decision on technical ability.....and support. So not only technical ability. Helloooooo, McFlyyyyyyy. Perhaps reading before responding might be an idea? :-) Cheers! John

On that logic I bet you're real happy with that Betamax video that's sitting in the corner of your room. Technology alone is not enough, and that would also have been the case for the Monster 3D or any other 3dFX card. Thankfully they were released early, had the pricing strategy correct and were advertised and bundled very well. "Eat my shorts"? The Bart Simpson school of debating turns out another Grand Master. Cheers! John

I always did, it's just not much of a point as related to the discussion. If you have a product like Tomb Raider you can pretty much mess around with what you like. If you***up PowerVR support then you***off a few customer, patch it again and re-release. Not too much damage. With a system like NROS you may***up the whole system if the PowerVR patch has a problem. More patches = more work = more testing = more chance of problems = yet more patching and testing. What you ask is Utopia, what is delivered is commercial reality. There's a difference. Cheers! John

>Helloooooo, McFlyyyyyyy. Perhaps reading before responding might be an >idea? :-) >Cheers! >John Hey John......know what this means? Plonk! -- Nos http://www.cris.com/~nosfer/index.html

You missed the "er" from the end of your .sig... Cheers! John

Is that because I'm capable of making a point without having to blow raspberries and call names when I run out of arguments? Q.E.D..... Tip of the day ; Don't look in the mirror Killfiled. John

Quoted text (8 lines)

> >Helloooooo, McFlyyyyyyy. Perhaps reading before responding might be an > >idea? :-) > >Cheers! > >John > Hey John......know what this means? > Plonk!

With any luck, it means that you'll no longer feel compelled to spout the same viewpoint over and over whenever John posts. Once you've eventually kill-filed all of us, perhaps the S/N will improve... To save you valuable time: here's a section for you to copy/paste: Hey Jim......know what this means? Plonk! ---Jim

Atleast I don't walk around in a zombie like state spouting off "Papyrus are gods, Papyrus are gods...ad nauseum to infinity. Plonk! -- Nos http://www.cris.com/~nosfer/index.html

No, you walk around in a zombie like state spouting off "Papyrus are not gods, Papyrus are not gods...ad nauseum to infinity. Different message, equally tedious. Actually even more so given the fact that it is a consistently negative outlook. You still need that "er" on your .sig. Cheers! John PS - Forgot to killfile you at work, sorry about that. It's now done.

>Didn't you know? Papy are considered gods in this group and any >disparaging comments are met with a barrage of ridicule. >-- >Nos > [This Space Left Intentionally Blank] Didn't you know? 3dfx guys are considered gods for some simracers wannabe and any true comments and facts are met with a barrage of ridicule from pro-3dfx people. <Ducks away from flame bombs...> Heck if you are not happy with Papyrus product don't buy them. Here is the list of products they did. Show me one bad product: * Fran?ois Mnard * With great respect, * May the downforce be with you, * Good race at the Brickyard, (-o-) * <ymenard> on NROS, sponsored by * http://www.awpss.com/ * SimRacing director, AWPSS * Official Mentally retarded guy of r.a.s. * Excuse me for my English (I'm French speaking) * Excuse me for my provocative posts and reply's <g> begin 666 ymenard.vcf M0D5'24XZ5D-!4D0-"DXZ3>EN87)D.T9R86[G;VES.TXN#0I&3CIY;65N87)D M3#M#14Q,.U9/24-%.DXO00T*5$5,.TA/344[1D%8.DXO00T*0412.TA/344Z M.SLQ,30V.2!/=FED92U#;&5R;6]N=#M-;VYT<F5A;"U.;W)D.U%U96)E8SM( M3E1!0DQ%.C$Q-#8Y($]V:61E+4-L97)M;VYT/3!$/3!!36]N=')E86PM3F]R M+F%W<'-S+F-O;2\-"E523#IH='1P.B\O=W=W+F%W<'-S+F-O;2\-"D5-04E, M.U!2148[24Y415).150Z>6UE;F%R9$!A=W!S<RYC;VT-"D5.1#I60T%21 T* ` end

<snipped a non-real *** Simracer remark> No no ! He also says "3dfx is god, 3dfx is god". Actually did someone really changed his mind after one of the longest no-life r.a.s. thread ?? No really ? * Fran?ois Mnard * With great respect, * May the downforce be with you, * Good race at the Brickyard, (-o-) * <ymenard> on NROS, sponsored by * [link lost in import] * SimRacing director, AWPSS * Official Mentally retarded guy of r.a.s. * Excuse me for my English (I'm French speaking) * Excuse me for my provocative posts and reply's <g> begin 666 ymenard.vcf M0D5'24XZ5D-!4D0-"DXZ3>EN87)D.T9R86[G;VES.TXN#0I&3CIY;65N87)D M3#M#14Q,.U9/24-%.DXO00T*5$5,.TA/344[1D%8.DXO00T*0412.TA/344Z M.SLQ,30V.2!/=FED92U#;&5R;6]N=#M-;VYT<F5A;"U.;W)D.U%U96)E8SM( M3E1!0DQ%.C$Q-#8Y($]V:61E+4-L97)M;VYT/3!$/3!!36]N=')E86PM3F]R M+F%W<'-S+F-O;2\-"E523#IH='1P.B\O=W=W+F%W<'-S+F-O;2\-"D5-04E, M.U!2148[24Y415).150Z>6UE;F%R9$!A=W!S<RYC;VT-"D5.1#I60T%21 T* ` end

>Didn't you know? 3dfx guys are considered gods for some simracers wannabe >and any true comments and facts are met with a barrage of ridicule from >pro-3dfx people. <Ducks away from flame bombs...> Good idea, since your reputation here is worse than his. -- Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes.

>>Atleast I don't walk around in a zombie like state spouting off >>"Papyrus are gods, Papyrus are gods...ad nauseum to infinity. >No, you walk around in a zombie like state spouting off "Papyrus are >not gods, Papyrus are not gods...ad nauseum to infinity. Different He does? I haven't seen it. And I monitor this NG regulary. In fact NOS rarely posts here. So I am sure you have proof. -- Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes.

I love ICR2 and N2. I'm just getting frustrated waiting for the ever elusive 3DFX patch. This one was a bit of a ripp off because all it gave you was one track and the paintkit. It was kind of expesive for what it was. Havn't tried it , but I've seen some negative comments. Can't comment on vapourware. Listing unreleased sims is not valid. That's because they are flawed sims when they are released. Every one of them. -- Nos http://www.cris.com/~nosfer/index.html

><snipped a non-real *** Simracer remark> That's right I'm a *** flight simmer who likes to do some racing now and again. A flight sim has a lot more work load than a racing sim. Why don't you come on over and hang with the big boys some time, or are you too much of a pansy and can't handle having a sidewinder up your tailpipe. :-) Stick your Rendition where the sun don't shine. -- Nos http://www.cris.com/~nosfer/index.html

On Tue, 27 Jan 1998 18:20:33 -0600, "Greg Cisko" >He does? I haven't seen it. And I monitor this NG regulary. In fact >NOS rarely posts here. So I am sure you have proof. I made a post saying Papy is withholding the 3DFX patch from us and they don't deserve any credit for it because 3DFX did the patch and only because a whole wack of us over on the 3DFX news server were pestering them for it. Sierra/Papy had no intention of doing a 3DFX patch. So that set off the *** Papy brown nosers (who all have Rendition cards anyway) in this group.;-) Now that Papy has the patch I'm sure they are doing some tweaks here and there so I will concede they might deserve some credit. But, I can't say that for sure until I actually see N2 running in 3DFX on my machine. -- Nos http://www.cris.com/~nosfer/index.html

All I know is I bought the sim expecting a 3dfx Patch...would be nice if someone from PAPY would come and explain themselves. Geez this group is no where near as useful as the flight sim group. Not sure why but one reason is the lack of developers...what happened everyone get soft and leave, get their little feelings hurt...and took their toys home...??? PAPA DOC

Quoted text (7 lines)

>But, I can't say that for sure until I >actually see N2 running in 3DFX on my machine. >-- >Nos >http://www.cris.com/~nosfer/index.html

Pierre PAPA DOC Legrand Infamous Pink Flamingo Pilot...

>...what happened everyone get >soft and leave, get their little feelings hurt...and took their toys >home...??? To make a long story short ... yes. Joe

I fogot to add this to my posts.....Member of 3Dfx Brotherhood http://analog.acsinc.net/ceremuga -- Nos http://www.cris.com/~nosfer/index.html

On Tue, 27 Jan 1998 18:20:33 -0600, "Greg Cisko" >He does? I haven't seen it. And I monitor this NG regulary. In fact >NOS rarely posts here. So I am sure you have proof. I'm glad you are sure, that way I won't need to waste my time on it. Cheers! John

>All I know is I bought the sim expecting a 3dfx Patch...would be nice >if someone from PAPY would come and explain themselves. If 3dfx was a determining factor in the purchase, then why didn't you wait until after the patch was released? I feel the urge to quote from one of your own posts here: See any parallels? No that's a *real* helpful post. If I were a developer I would just *have* to rush in and start contributing. I think you've answered your own question. Cheers, Richard

Quoted text (22 lines)

> >All I know is I bought the sim expecting a 3dfx Patch...would be nice > >if someone from PAPY would come and explain themselves. > If 3dfx was a determining factor in the purchase, then why didn't you > wait until after the patch was released? > I feel the urge to quote from one of your own posts here: > >Yea your right it SUCKS...dont buy it.....at least YOU dont buy > >it.....that way we wont have to hear you crying. > See any parallels? > >Geez this > >group is no where near as useful as the flight sim group. Not sure why > >but one reason is the lack of developers...what happened everyone get > >soft and leave, get their little feelings hurt...and took their toys > >home...??? > No that's a *real* helpful post. If I were a developer I would just > *have* to rush in and start contributing. I think you've answered your > own question.

Well, I just had a little collision with "Flamingo" in csipgf. After <suggesting> to post a joke only once, he started calling me names. Now he's posting "helpful" posts in ras as well. Down goes the neighbourhood... l8er ronny -- |\ _,,,---,,_ I want to die like my Grandfather, ZZZzz /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ in his sleep. |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' Not like the people in his car, '---''(_/--' `-'\_) screaming their heads off!

>Not sure why >but one reason is the lack of developers...what happened everyone get >soft and leave, get their little feelings hurt...and took their toys >home...??? You just answered your own question. Everytime a company representative comes in here, people jump on him and attack him. Please remove spamless when replying thru e-mail.

A response to a somewhat antagonistic response....umm. Absolutely correct I made a mistake....next time I wont go along with a companies attempts to encourage me to buy their software. Next time I will be more cynical. You think that was crying...nah that wasnt crying. You havent really seen creative crying until I get started.....trust me Im really really good at it. The differences between Nascar1 and Nascar2 arent significant enough for me to have gone out and purchased N2....until they announced voodoo support. Umm I guess we are just going about it in different ways. Your trying to woo them into participation....Im kicking their ass for not particiapating. The fact that we both want them participating is our common ground. My feelings on the matter is however simply I state the matter it still is very much to their advantage to participate. If this board is even somewhat similar to the flight sims board then some of the most influential people in the hobby are here.....seems like I would want to participate...if I had a chance. Now if they come here and their skins are thin and they dont know how to manage their presence then yes it can be painful....though I havent really figured out how this gets to be more than just a minor annoyance to anyone participating...something about "stick and stones will break my bones but names will never hurt". Unless someone has figured out a way to have a virtual stick with which to beat someone. If this is the case will someone sell it to me....there are a couple of people that need a good wacking around the flight-sims board. All a developer needs to do to participate is be careful of promising too much, stating dates of completion, and badmouthing the competition...following those rules and ignoring the personal attacks will raise the level of this board to a point that it might start to be useful to both sides. PAPA DOC Pierre PAPA DOC Legrand Infamous Pink Flamingo Pilot...

>>Yea your right it SUCKS...dont buy it.....at least YOU dont buy >>it.....that way we wont have to hear you crying. >See any parallels? Did he say it sucks? On the 3DFX server we were getting updates from 3DFX on the state of the patch for N2. Once it was handed over to Papy they put a***order on 3DFX and have said squiddly squat about it's progress since. Except that crumb of a thing about sometime next year. On the flight-sim group the better developers participate in the news group and keep us informed with designers notes etc. I see none of that in this group. And that does suck. What a dweeblet. -- Nos http://www.cris.com/~nosfer/index.html

On Wed, 28 Jan 1998 15:26:51 +0100, Ronald Stoehr

Quoted text (7 lines)

>Well, I just had a little collision with "Flamingo" in csipgf. After ><suggesting> to post a joke only once, he started calling me names. >Now he's posting "helpful" posts in ras as well. Down goes the >neighbourhood... >l8er >ronny

Don't distort the facts. He was just having some fun and you go in there and stomp on his virtual head. As I said once before to you (don't know if you read it yet), if you don't like what someone posts then don't read it. Duh........how simple can it be. -- Nos http://www.cris.com/~nosfer/index.html

That doesn't say much for this news group than does it. I've only just started coming here and some of the people here are quite snobbish. No problem though. I just killfiled them. It's rare indeed for me to killfile anyone in the flight-sim group. I have. But, very rarely. Some of you need to lighten up a bit. -- Nos http://www.cris.com/~nosfer/index.html

>I'm glad you are sure, that way I won't need to waste my time on it. >Cheers! >John See what I mean. Plonk! -- Nos http://www.cris.com/~nosfer/index.html

Say what...this isnt a tough group...hell with only around 50 to 100 messages its hardly used. If a developer cant stand this then hire someone that can because being here could be valuable...could be. It will have to be built up...but consider the Flight-sims group with upwards of 700posts a day.....and developers all over it....thats a useful group. Thats a group that you avoid at your own peril if your a developer. Developers with the correct attitude are getting feedback on that board that enables them to build brilliant stuff....Andy Hollis is perhaps THE prime example of how to handle posts. Does he get FLAMED...oooh yea...does he cry and take his toys and go home...nah..just add a name to the killfile...or respond. Ive seen Andy respond to some extremely heated posters...in a calm rational manner that disarmed the poster...thats how you deal with bastards like me.<VBG> Now of course with no devlopers this is basically just a clubhouse for the users. Fun to post....fun to read..but not much use outside of that....if the developers though made the commitment they could start finding out what their buyers thought of their programs. Then this group might grow into something more useful than a clubhouse for Race Driver wanna be's...like me. hehehe. Pierre PAPA DOC Legrand Infamous Pink Flamingo Pilot...

Aw hell Ron you still sore...I promise I will work you in on the next joke on the flight sim group that way you can feel like part of the group....really I promise... Group..... little Ronnie felt left out....awww.. PAPA DOC Pierre PAPA DOC Legrand Infamous Pink Flamingo Pilot...

>You just answered your own question. Everytime a company >representative comes in here, people jump on him and attack >him. Nonsense. Maybe one out of a hundred people do that, and it's no different on the flight sim board. The only difference is that the flight sim developers seem professional enough to handle it. It's actually VERY easy to maintain a professional presense on newsgroups: 1) Don't slam the competition. 2) Ignore personal/rabid flames. DON'T defend yourself against them, just ignore them. It's as simple as that. I agree that this group is much less useful than the flight-sim groups because of the developers failure to participate here. The silence regarding future auto sims/updates here is deafening. Joe

>It's as simple as that. I agree that this group is much less useful >than the flight-sim groups because of the developers failure to Ya. The only thing we get here is guys who think they used to drive race cars, and have surveys of the tracks or something. For example what I would really like is someone from UBIsoft come here and talk about those inaccuracies. Or have papy say something about the 3dfx N2 update (if there really is one). There have been developers here, but as you described, they could not ignore the idiots and just keep on with *THEIR* bussiness. Which I found strange. This NG can be great for tech support among other things. -- Header intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes.

Why or how were you expecting a 3dfx patch? I am curious about this since I bought the game when it was released, monitored this NG since it's creation and never heard that there would be a 3dfx patch... Until recently. One other thing is that I happen to know that Nascar2 flys on a P5-166 in 640x480 at max detail. IMHO a 3dfx patch (while nice) is nowhere near needed. The graphics are awesome in 2D, IMHO. It's not like the game is completely unplayable (Jetfighter3) without 3D. You might get a little better graphics but that should be about it. This about sums it up I'm affraid. One guy who used to work for Papy (Jim Sokoloff) was by far the best presence from a developer here. But he got a new job. So it is a crappy deal, but that is all we got :-) -- Header intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes.

I hate to break in here again, but :-) The difference in framerate from Nascar1 to Nascar2 is astounding. Is this not the case? And for that reason alone it would be worth making the purchase. My impression of Nascar 1 is that even on a P5-166 it is still a pig. IMHO :-) -- Header intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes.

I made a post saying Papy is withholding the 3DFX patch from us and........................... Nosferatu Maybe Papy is withholding it, just to***you off. <g> (Bet I can beat you at N2, right now) <g> "Stick your Rendition where the sun don't shine." Anyone who likes N2 and buys a 3Dfx Voodoo board, probably already has one, there. -- JerryD(upstateNY)

Interesting comment and one that I suspect is untrue or at the very least misleading in terms of todays mass market entertainment products. I would say it was untrue also in terms of the physics involved, but that's not a conversation that will have any relevance to computer simulations of real world physics for perhaps hundreds of years. -- Suck The Goat

When I bought the sim (about 2 minutes after it was released here!) I did so on the basis that it was Rendition- ready. Actually bought the Rendition card prior to getting the game. But Papyrus never made any mention of 3Dfx back then......none whatsoever. The first I saw of 3Dfx was in this group. So why would anyone buy the game just for 3Dfx until a 3Dfx patch has been released? DOH!! -- Bruce (at work) "Laziness is nothing more than the habit of resting before you get tired." (Jules Renard)

Oh Im sorry I asked to be as clever as you but unfortunetely it didnt happen....damn. Yes sorry I heard that PAPY was going to release a Voodoo Patch for Nascar2 and I foolishly went out and finally bought the sim. This of course was a mistake considering that Sierra now runs Papy and Sierra doesnt seem to be able to buy a clue in regards to 3d Cards. Witness Red Baron2...Notice Im not calling anyone names or screaming for support...Im just making long posts wondering where in the heck the developers are in this foresaken newsgroup... Nother words I know I made a mistake actually believing that a Voodoo patch was gonna be forthcoming from PAPY/Sierra...since apparently they only support the Rendition. No problem...lesson learned...I should have stuck with Nascar1 which to my untutored eyes appears extremly similar to Nascar 2. PAPA DOC Pierre PAPA DOC Legrand Infamous Pink Flamingo Pilot...

Quoted text (15 lines)

> On Wed, 28 Jan 1998 15:26:51 +0100, Ronald Stoehr > >Well, I just had a little collision with "Flamingo" in csipgf. After > ><suggesting> to post a joke only once, he started calling me names. > >Now he's posting "helpful" posts in ras as well. Down goes the > >neighbourhood... > >l8er > >ronny > Don't distort the facts. He was just having some fun and you go in > there and stomp on his virtual head. As I said once before to you > (don't know if you read it yet), if you don't like what someone posts > then don't read it. Duh........how simple can it be.

I stomped on his virtual head??? Now, that's funny. You know, I always read his posts first on csipgf, because I value his knowledge about flight sims. I was really surprised to see him react the way he did to a flame-less, smiley-supported suggestion. Oh, well... l8er ronny -- |\ _,,,---,,_ I want to die like my Grandfather, ZZZzz /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ in his sleep. |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' Not like the people in his car, '---''(_/--' `-'\_) screaming their heads off!

> Aw hell Ron you still sore...I promise I will work you in on the next > joke on the flight sim group that way you can feel like part of the > group....really I promise... No hard feelings, if you tell us the joke only once. Oh well, if it's good, twice! Maybe some other guy didn't get it the first time. Of course, Letterman has a lot of success with repeating jokes. I still don't get it! If I would have flamed your ass, called you names, you could be pissed. But a little suggestion... l8er ronny -- |\ _,,,---,,_ I want to die like my Grandfather, ZZZzz /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ in his sleep. |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' Not like the people in his car, '---''(_/--' `-'\_) screaming their heads off!

>patch... Until recently. One other thing is that I happen to know that >Nascar2 flys on a P5-166 in 640x480 at max detail. That obviouly depends on your 3d hardware or some other detail. I have to cut off MOST details to make it "fly" on my P200 in 640x480. I expect a hude performance increase from the 3dfx patch. Joe

Hi Pierre, I don't think it will greatly decrease the revenue of any sim producer if he does _not_ participate in this forum. Also, there's a lot of gibberish, and sadly little serious information here for the sim developers. Nobody here holds the holy grail of knowledge, and the sim developers and their beta testers aren't entirely dumb themselves. So what should they come here for? Nagging kiddies? Overly self-assured braggarts? I think there's very little reason for them to show up here. If they do it, it is very very nice of them, but if they back out again because they get fed up, I think most of us can understand... Achim

(snip) I should have stuck with Nascar1 which to my untutored eyes appears extremly similar to Nascar 2. (unsnip) The '2' version in Rendition is a far more enjoyable experience, p/doc. -- Bruce. (At home)

>>patch... Until recently. One other thing is that I happen to know that >>Nascar2 flys on a P5-166 in 640x480 at max detail. >That obviouly depends on your 3d hardware or some other detail. I have >to cut off MOST details to make it "fly" on my P200 in 640x480. I >expect a hude performance increase from the 3dfx patch. This is with no 3D hardware. Just a Diamond Stealth 3D 3000 (Virge) card. Max detail, draw 12 cars ahead, 4 behind, no problems. -- Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes.

>I think there's very little reason for them to show up here. Sounds like a very old-fashioned attitude. In the long term, they WILL make more money if they interact more with their users, as opposed to going off an developing products in isolation. Look at all the crappy arcade racers (NFS2, TD4, Andretti) that came out last year. All of those developers could have delivered vastly superior products just be taking the trouble to find out what people really want, which they can do here. Joe

>This is with no 3D hardware. Sorry, I meant 2d (typo). P200, ATI Mach 64. Nascar2 CRAWLS on this system at max detail. Joe

On Wed, 28 Jan 98 19:15:41 GMT, "Piers C. Structures"

Quoted text (7 lines)

>> A flight sim has a lot more work load than a racing sim. >Interesting comment and one that I suspect is untrue or at the very >least misleading in terms of todays mass market entertainment products. >I would say it was untrue also in terms of the physics involved, but >that's not a conversation that will have any relevance to computer >simulations of real world physics for perhaps hundreds of years.

If you look at something like GPL, it is basically computing the physics of a flight sim - up, down, left, right, aero interactions, alterations in aero surfaces and airflow etc etc. All this and tire interactions, slip angles, wheelspinm brake locking - and a trackful of other cars doing the same thing. Seems like flight sims have it easy :-) Cheers! John

On Wed, 28 Jan 1998 16:32:04 -0600, "Greg Cisko" >I hate to break in here again, but :-) The difference in framerate >from Nascar1 to Nascar2 is astounding. Is this not the case? Isn't it amazing what you can do when the effective screen size to be rendered is shrunk....? Cheers! John

I have to admit it *seems* that way - the mechanics of tyre / road interaction are very poorly understood compared to the relatively straightforward physics of a modern jet fighter, but I wouldn't want to get into a flame war over it ;-) I wonder if any of the flight sims accurately model a stalled aircraft? The maths involved with that seems simply horrendous. If any software house has managed to do that by the physics then I take my hat off to them! Cheers, Richard

Quoted text (8 lines)

>On Wed, 28 Jan 1998 16:32:04 -0600, "Greg Cisko" >>I hate to break in here again, but :-) The difference in framerate >>from Nascar1 to Nascar2 is astounding. Is this not the case? >Isn't it amazing what you can do when the effective screen size to be >rendered is shrunk....?

Is that all they did? Jeezz. I thought they optomized it or something :-) Anyway, I just know it runs just fin on my P5-200MMX and do not really think a 3dfx patch would really add much in the way of framerate. -- Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes.

You problem is your video card then. If you reboot into DOS the thing will fly on a P5-166. At least it does in Illinois :-) -- Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes. >>This is with no 3D hardware. >Sorry, I meant 2d (typo). P200, ATI Mach 64. Nascar2 CRAWLS on this >system at max detail. >Joe

"Workload" can be from many things. The one thing that racing sims have easier than flightsims is terrain rendering. Once the track is loaded into memory you are set. In flightsims you constantly have to go back to the CD for another piece or satellite terrain data. Plus there are potentially many more AI objects to keep track of (sometimes several dozen). Plus digitized radio messages all over the place. Then throw in a Dynamic warring campaign? Forget about it :-) The basic comparison of a flightmodel Vs driving model can be somewhat equal. But that is about it. -- Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes. >> A flight sim has a lot more work load than a racing sim. >Interesting comment and one that I suspect is untrue or at the very >least misleading in terms of todays mass market entertainment products. >I would say it was untrue also in terms of the physics involved, but >that's not a conversation that will have any relevance to computer >simulations of real world physics for perhaps hundreds of years. >-- >Suck The Goat

On Wed, 28 Jan 98 19:15:41 GMT, "Piers C. Structures" >Interesting comment and one that I suspect is untrue or at the very >least misleading in terms of todays mass market entertainment products. >I would say it was untrue also in terms of the physics involved, but >that's not a conversation that will have any relevance to computer >simulations of real world physics for perhaps hundreds of years. What a crock of nothingness. Why don't you go give SU-27 Flanker a spin and then come back when you know what the hell you're talking about. Until then your input is worthless. -- Nos http://www.cris.com/~nosfer/index.html

On Wed, 28 Jan 98 19:15:41 GMT, "Piers C. Structures" >Interesting comment and one that I suspect is untrue or at the very >least misleading in terms of todays mass market entertainment products. >I would say it was untrue also in terms of the physics involved, but >that's not a conversation that will have any relevance to computer >simulations of real world physics for perhaps hundreds of years. I meant on the user and not the computer. Duh! -- Nos http://www.cris.com/~nosfer/index.html

Quoted text (8 lines)

> On Wed, 28 Jan 1998 16:32:04 -0600, "Greg Cisko" > >I hate to break in here again, but :-) The difference in framerate > >from Nascar1 to Nascar2 is astounding. Is this not the case? > Isn't it amazing what you can do when the effective screen size to be > rendered is shrunk....?

It's far more amazing what you can do when you can afford to optimize the texture mapper for a Pentium at the expense of 486-performance rather than the other way around... (Because Pentiums are way more common *** machines than 486s, which was decidedly not true when N1 came out...) The arcade (F10) driving views are still tons faster in N2 on anything higher than a 486 and the screen sizes are the same there... ---Jim

Quoted text (9 lines)

>I have to admit it *seems* that way - the mechanics of tyre / road >interaction are very poorly understood compared to the relatively >straightforward physics of a modern jet fighter, but I wouldn't want to >get into a flame war over it ;-) >I wonder if any of the flight sims accurately model a stalled aircraft? >The maths involved with that seems simply horrendous. If any software >house has managed to do that by the physics then I take my hat off to >them!

You misunderstood me too. I meant workload on the user. A fligh-sim requires a lot more brain input than a racing sim. -- Nos http://www.cris.com/~nosfer/index.html

On Thu, 29 Jan 1998 17:32:05 -0600, "Greg Cisko" >The basic comparison of a flightmodel Vs driving model can >be somewhat equal. But that is about it. I was talking about user input Greg. I'm not comparing the workload on the computer. But, I agree a flight sim with sattelite data has a heavier workload on a computer than a racing sim by far. -- Nos http://www.cris.com/~nosfer/index.html

Quoted text (10 lines)

>On Wed, 28 Jan 1998 16:27:13 -0600, "Greg Cisko" >>Why or how were you expecting a 3dfx patch? I am curious about >>this since I bought the game when it was released, monitored this >>NG since it's creation and never heard that there would be a 3dfx >>patch... Until recently. >Because Brian Bruning from 3DFX told us on the 3DFX news server that >they were doing a 3DFX upgrade themselves quite a long time ago. Papy

IMHO you should not have based any buying decision on that. It sounds all rather iffy. I thought maybe you guys heard something from papy (who seem kind of entrenched with Rendition). We (current owners of N2) will be very lucky if we *EVER* see such a patch. Next time check here for the real poop :-) -- Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes. >wouldn't do one, but they said 3DFX could do it if they want. So they >did. Then when 3DFX handed over the code Papyrus went and told 3DFX >they would appreciate it if they let Papyrus handle an further >developer/customer output on the status of the patch.Talk about great >support and developer/customer relations. There's no one that does it >better than 3DFX. And Papy/Sierra is one of the worst, IMO. Although >Sierra/Dynamix has been providing some interaction lately after the >release of Red Baron 2. So they are improving. Can't say the same for >Sierra/Papyrus though. >-- >Nos >http://www.cris.com/~nosfer/index.html

>On what Processor? I draw 14 ahead and 5 behind.I turn off the objects >detail so I get a good frame rate on my P200/83mhz bus, Diamond >Stealth 2000. With 3DFX I won't have to turn off object detail. See? I >think you do see performance different than me. I see iF22 runing like >a dog and you see it running like a champ. I think you have a WHAT!!!! Have you read anything I said about iF22 in the flightsim NG? I would not even try to load that smoldering piece of dung on my machine. If papadoc could not get it going right, that was all the info I really needed (if you remember). P5-200MMX on a 66mhz bus. I have no clue why N2 is apparently running better on my machine. I have all the graphic details set to ON and have the # of cars ahead set to 12 and 4 to the rear. I do know the framerate is very fast. Why it isn't on yours I don't have a clue. What is you SVGA bench score? Mine is 67. You do reboot into DOS right? No shutdown to MS-Dos mode, but an actual reboot? In fact sense of speed and racing gameplay is about the same as F1RS. -- Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes.

Quoted text (12 lines)

>>I have to admit it *seems* that way - the mechanics of tyre / road >>interaction are very poorly understood compared to the relatively >>straightforward physics of a modern jet fighter, but I wouldn't want to >>get into a flame war over it ;-) >>I wonder if any of the flight sims accurately model a stalled aircraft? >>The maths involved with that seems simply horrendous. If any software >>house has managed to do that by the physics then I take my hat off to >>them! >You misunderstood me too. I meant workload on the user. A fligh-sim >requires a lot more brain input than a racing sim.

Eh..... I wouldn't bet on that. True, a civilian flight sim has more controls and instruments to handle, but 95% of the time, things aren't happening that fast--and the other 5%, you're usually not doing much with radios and such (I don't tend to be fiddling with such things after the middle marker). A closer comparison would be a good combat simulator, where things DO tend to be happening rather quickly. But look at what, in my experience, is the most useful play mode of a combat sim--the padlock view in Falcon 3.0. Even with all the patches, it doesn't have much instrumentation... I'd say that going three- wide into the corner at Martinsville (a recipe for disaster) requires just as much brain input as dogfighting F3's MiG-19 from Hell... RM [link lost in import: /~rmanning/vulpineracing.html]

>You problem is your video card then. If you reboot into DOS >the thing will fly on a P5-166. At least it does in Illinois :-) No, I run it only in native DOS. It IS a good graphics engine, faster than any other unaccelerated game I've played. But it's just no where near as fast as 3dfx accelerated games. Joe

On Thu, 29 Jan 1998 20:32:44 -0600, "Greg Cisko" >Oh in that case is should be so obvious that the flightsims require *MUCH* >more user input (weapons/radar) that it is not even worth further comment >on my part. Sorry for butting in :-) No problem The *** racers won't admit to it anyway. Ignorance is bliss. -- Nos http://www.cris.com/~nosfer/index.html

On Thu, 29 Jan 1998 20:30:20 -0600, "Greg Cisko" >Actually I have 20-15 eyesight or something like that. It is supposedly >better than 20/20 (no glasses to contacts). And I'm affraid to say N2 >flew on my P5-166. If has not gotten worse since i went to a >P5-200MMX. What can I say? I know what I am looking at. And I >know a crappy framerate when I see it. I don't for N2. You're right, it doesn't have a crappy frame rate. But, turning the textures off on objects makes it scream. -- Nos http://www.cris.com/~nosfer/index.html

On Thu, 29 Jan 1998 20:48:30 -0600, "Greg Cisko" >WHAT!!!! Have you read anything I said about iF22 in the flightsim NG? >I would not even try to load that smoldering piece of dung on my machine. >If papadoc could not get it going right, that was all the info I really >needed >(if you remember). Oops! I thought it was you who recently emailed me and said iF22 runs smoothly with no pauses on your machine. It couldn't have been you because he was running on a 75mhz bus and your using 66mhz. You must have thought, "what the hell is he talking about?" Sorry my mistake. It doesn't run poorly on my machine, I just like it faster than you. I run in dos and my svga bench is 74. Hey, my P200 classic is faster than your P200 mmx. :-) -- Nos http://www.cris.com/~nosfer/index.html

Ah but the point Im making isnt that not participating will DECREASE the revenue...but by building up this group into something more than a boys club...(not derogatory) they will MAKE money by being more in touch with the user base...they will make money by developing rapport with the guys who make a difference...and forging connections between what up to now are faceless developers/programmers and team members and a part of the buying public. Of course this is just a small cross section but its still a cross section and indeed a bigger crosssection than they are likey to see coming thru their offices. Of course before that happens they have to increase traffic here a bunch....by... 1. Providing links from their Web sites to this group. 2. Always having someone from the company responding in a kind firm way to all posts....unless borderline crazy. 3. Posting information regarding upcoming patchs...here first.... 4. Encouraging Beta Testers to post their HONEST opinions... This will take an large commitment of patience given the average post here but after awhile it might make this into a place of value. Indeed it seems worth a try.... Pierre PAPA DOC Legrand Pierre PAPA DOC Legrand Infamous Pink Flamingo Pilot...

Did someone mention Flanker...????? Someone mention stalls...spins...weather...winds..crosswinds...BVR..System Failures ..SAMS...nah its not hard...hehehehe.....its EASY. Its ok Greg Im not getting ready to go on a Rant..really Im not...<VBG> PAPA DOC Pink Flamingo Pilot.....<VBG>

Quoted text (14 lines)

>>Interesting comment and one that I suspect is untrue or at the very >>least misleading in terms of todays mass market entertainment products. >>I would say it was untrue also in terms of the physics involved, but >>that's not a conversation that will have any relevance to computer >>simulations of real world physics for perhaps hundreds of years. >What a crock of nothingness. Why don't you go give SU-27 Flanker a >spin and then come back when you know what the hell you're talking >about. Until then your input is worthless. >-- >Nos >http://www.cris.com/~nosfer/index.html

Pierre PAPA DOC Legrand Infamous Pink Flamingo Pilot...

On Thu, 29 Jan 1998 09:09:21 +0100, Ronald Stoehr > if you don't like what someone posts >> then don't read it. Duh........how simple can it be. But if I can't read it, how am I going to know if I.... Never mind. Cheers! John

Hehe thats pretty dang funny;-) Like calling someone on the phone getting the wrong number and saying....well why did you answer then 8-0 I like your sense of humor John! Cya, Mike

>You're right, it doesn't have a crappy frame rate. But, turning the >textures off on objects makes it scream. I wouldn't know as my textures (and clouds) are all ON. -- Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes.

Be my guest. I'm not the idiot I once was. I'm a different idiot now :-) Besides, we're F1 racing buddies now! -- Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes.

On Thu, 29 Jan 1998 17:26:26 -0600, "Greg Cisko" >Is that all they did? Jeezz. I thought they optomized it or something :-) >Anyway, I just know it runs just fin on my P5-200MMX and do not >really think a 3dfx patch would really add much in the way of framerate. Agreed. However sometimes perception is more important than reality, and if the market perceives that the product will be better with the addition of 3dFX support then it can be beneficial to implement it. It will in any case be good practical experience for future titles I guess. Cheers! John

Agreed that N2 was a step forward in framerate, but I'm sure the decision to reduce the amount of track visible through the windshield had rather more to do with improving framerate than aesthetic accuracy. Cheers! John

>It's far more amazing what you can do when you can afford to optimize >the texture mapper for a Pentium at the expense of 486-performance >rather than the other way around... (Because Pentiums are way more >common *** machines than 486s, which was decidedly not true when N1 >came out...) Ah ha! This is the reason I remember N2 was much faster than N1. It was optomized for the pentium! Thanks Jim. -- Header intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes.

Quoted text (9 lines)

>On Thu, 29 Jan 1998 20:32:44 -0600, "Greg Cisko" >>Oh in that case is should be so obvious that the flightsims require *MUCH* >>more user input (weapons/radar) that it is not even worth further comment >>on my part. Sorry for butting in :-) >No problem The *** racers won't admit to it anyway. Ignorance is >bliss.

Ignorance is certainly bliss when it comes to true track renderings it would seem. In fact I think I have proved that much :-) -- Header intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes. >-- >Nos >[link lost in import: /~nosfer/index.html]

>It doesn't run poorly on my machine, I just like it faster than you. I >run in dos and my svga bench is 74. Hey, my P200 classic is faster >than your P200 mmx. :-) Since you are running your P5-200 on a 83mhz bus it better be. Try turning your system bus down to 66mhz, what is your SVGA bench then? -- Header intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes.

On Fri, 30 Jan 1998 13:36:39 -0600, "Greg Cisko" >Since you are running your P5-200 on a 83mhz bus it better be. Try >turning your system bus down to 66mhz, what is your SVGA bench >then? Well, running on an 83mhz bus negates the advantage of mmx's supposedly 10% speed increase then. My bench svga at 66mhz is 68. Still 1 point faster than your 200mmx. What gives? What vid card do you have? I also have a 512k L2 coast cache module so that does give me a slight increase in speed. My mb is an Asus P55T2P4 and I'm using a Diamond Stealth 2000 vid card (2mb). -- Nos http://www.cris.com/~nosfer/index.html

>Well, running on an 83mhz bus negates the advantage of mmx's >supposedly 10% speed increase then. My bench svga at 66mhz is 68. >Still 1 point faster than your 200mmx. What gives? What vid card do >you have? I also have a 512k L2 coast cache module so that does give >me a slight increase in speed. My mb is an Asus P55T2P4 and I'm using >a Diamond Stealth 2000 vid card (2mb). The only thing I can think of is that you are in Canada :-) I have a HOT-541 mb which may not be that great. My vid card is a Diamond Stealth 3D 3000 (4MB). My mb has 256k L2 cache with an extra 256k module like yours, so I have 512k L2 cache. I guess I have no clue why your PC benchmarks faster. It has to be the mb. -- Header intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes.

Quoted text (10 lines)

> On Wed, 28 Jan 98 19:15:41 GMT, "Piers C. Structures" > >Interesting comment and one that I suspect is untrue or at the very > >least misleading in terms of todays mass market entertainment products. > >I would say it was untrue also in terms of the physics involved, but > >that's not a conversation that will have any relevance to computer > >simulations of real world physics for perhaps hundreds of years. > I meant on the user and not the computer. Duh!

Well ok, I can relate to that but, I would still say it was potentially misleading. Workload in a flight sim certainly revolves around a more disparate set of control and inputs than a driving sim, or at least the parts that happen in real time. But, and this is a big but (like what those american women have (hey, it's because there so hip)), how do you define workload in this sense? Is it just a matter of the actual number of different controls and systems? Does it relate to how the mind copes with situations outside of the trained responses envelope? Or is it perhaps a measure of the ammount of concentration (the occupancy of the mind if you like) that the user has to exert to fulfill the goal. Now if it's just a matter of the number of buttons you have to press then a flight sim obviously comes out on top compared to a racing simulator. Then again, your average word processor has many more functions and buttons than a flightsim. Responses outside of the trained envelope. What I mean here is that some responses are automatic, they require no thought apart from 'do this'. When I fly simulated aircraft, many of my responses are automatic. I don't really have to think about throttling back as I reach level flight I just do it. In a military simulator, let's take longbow, a high workload environment might be where i have to assess tactical information and configure the avionics with targeting information. The interaction with the aircraft systems should be part of my trained responses, the workload aspect is all to do with the environmental situation, assesment of risk and actioning of (or perhaps off) immediate threats. The same aspects are present in a driving sim, the actual driving responses should be pretty much automatic, it's things like overtaking and track position over pit stops, changing weather that will occupy the untrained 'thinking' part of the driver. Although there aren't so many buttons to press, all the information assessed by the driver has to be translated into action on the road. It would be interesting to get some actual metrics on the differences, rather than speculate, but I don't think there would be major differences in magnitude, rather there would be different patterns of loading. Different levels of concentration (brain occupancy)? Perhaps this would be the easiest metric to obtain, we could simply measure the heat output of the brain while engaged on the different entertainments. Here again we can expose one of the misleading aspects of your comment. Rather like processors have only an ability to excecute a fixed number of instructions in a fixed ammount of time, the same brain albeit engaging in different tasks has only a limited capacity to give, or perhaps that's better put as it has a maximum potential which cannot be exceeded. Both types of simulation might show peak activity near the limit of the individual's ability to give. Again, the main differences are in the pattern of brain behaviour over the course of the session. You may well find that a combat flight simulation has long periods of low activity interspersed with short peaks of high activity. With a driving simulator you may well find that the mean level of activity is quite high - providing the driver is driving to the limit then they are doing so pretty constantly, and the peaks are therefore less pronounced. Given then a one hour session, single mission (ie race to win or kill & stay alive) the energy expended by the race driver over the course of the session will undoubtedly be much greater, proving that they infact have a higher average workload. Ahem. We now return you to your scheduled flame fest. -- Suck The Goat

On (say) my P200 there are x instruction cycles available in any given time period. As you say, a flightsim has to use some of these to model/render large chuncks of terrain, perhaps going back to disc for areas when the player view scrolls off the loaded area. In (say) F22 the ground is textured with pixels, each of which approximates 10m^2, this gives the developers a suitable 'workload', i.e. the game engine can cope with terrain at that level of aggregation without getting bogged down. In something like F1RS the ground textures are much smaller with each pixel representing a few cm^2; you can see that both flight sims and driving sims set their workload for processing these details around the available processing power and their need to render/resolve the calculation in real time, given a lower limit for the target machine. The apparent differences are obvious in the two types of simulation, but the workload for the processor (the only meaningfull definition of workload) is much the same. -- Suck The Goat

Quoted text (10 lines)

> On Wed, 28 Jan 98 19:15:41 GMT, "Piers C. Structures" > >Interesting comment and one that I suspect is untrue or at the very > >least misleading in terms of todays mass market entertainment products. > >I would say it was untrue also in terms of the physics involved, but > >that's not a conversation that will have any relevance to computer > >simulations of real world physics for perhaps hundreds of years. > What a crock of nothingness.

Why thankyou, it's always a pleasure to be put down by someone of your obvious calibre. I have flown SU-27 but am at a loss as to what your point actually is. Perhaps if your frame was robust enough to support both your large ego and a double figure IQ you would be able to explain it to me. -- Suck The Goat

On Thu, 29 Jan 1998 09:09:21 +0100, Ronald Stoehr

Quoted text (8 lines)

>You know, I always read his posts first on csipgf, because I value >his knowledge about flight sims. I was really surprised to see him >react the way he did to a flame-less, smiley-supported suggestion. >Oh, well... >l8er >ronny

You were rude. And what's it to you anyway? -- Nos http://www.cris.com/~nosfer/index.html

>...thats how you deal with bastards >like me.<VBG> And me.....hehe. -- Nos http://www.cris.com/~nosfer/index.html

On Wed, 28 Jan 1998 16:27:13 -0600, "Greg Cisko" >Why or how were you expecting a 3dfx patch? I am curious about >this since I bought the game when it was released, monitored this >NG since it's creation and never heard that there would be a 3dfx >patch... Until recently. Because Brian Bruning from 3DFX told us on the 3DFX news server that they were doing a 3DFX upgrade themselves quite a long time ago. Papy wouldn't do one, but they said 3DFX could do it if they want. So they did. Then when 3DFX handed over the code Papyrus went and told 3DFX they would appreciate it if they let Papyrus handle an further developer/customer output on the status of the patch.Talk about great support and developer/customer relations. There's no one that does it better than 3DFX. And Papy/Sierra is one of the worst, IMO. Although Sierra/Dynamix has been providing some interaction lately after the release of Red Baron 2. So they are improving. Can't say the same for Sierra/Papyrus though. -- Nos http://www.cris.com/~nosfer/index.html

On Thu, 29 Jan 1998 23:56:33 +1100, Bruce Kennewell >The '2' version in Rendition is a far more enjoyable experience, p/doc. But, he doesn't have Rendition. He was assuming he would eventually be running it 3DFX accelerated. He eventually will be, it's just a matter of when. -- Nos http://www.cris.com/~nosfer/index.html

On Thu, 29 Jan 1998 08:23:14 -0600, "Greg Cisko" >This is with no 3D hardware. Just a Diamond Stealth 3D 3000 >(Virge) card. Max detail, draw 12 cars ahead, 4 behind, no >problems. On what Processor? I draw 14 ahead and 5 behind.I turn off the objects detail so I get a good frame rate on my P200/83mhz bus, Diamond Stealth 2000. With 3DFX I won't have to turn off object detail. See? I think you do see performance different than me. I see iF22 runing like a dog and you see it running like a champ. I think you have a P200/75mhz bus. Right? Almost identical machines and our perceptions of frame rate are different. Interesting. :-) -- Nos http://www.cris.com/~nosfer/index.html

On Thu, 29 Jan 1998 17:23:41 -0600, "Greg Cisko" >You problem is your video card then. If you reboot into DOS >the thing will fly on a P5-166. At least it does in Illinois :-) Aha....a P166! There is no way N2 is smooth on your machine at max detail. Ever thought of going to see the eye doctor? :-) -- Nos http://www.cris.com/~nosfer/index.html

On Wed, 28 Jan 1998 17:31:28 -0500, "Jerryd(upstateNY)" >I made a post saying Papy is withholding the 3DFX patch from us and........................... >Nosferatu >Maybe Papy is withholding it, just to***you off. <g> Yep, and they are doing a good job of it. :-) You'll never know. Why should I replace my perfectly good 2D card for one game (ICR2)? There *will* be a 3DFX patch for N2. :-) -- Nos http://www.cris.com/~nosfer/index.html

On Fri, 30 Jan 1998 14:56:56 -0600, "Greg Cisko" >The only thing I can think of is that you are in Canada :-) I have a HOT-541 >mb which may not be that great. My vid card is a Diamond Stealth 3D >3000 (4MB). My mb has 256k L2 cache with an extra 256k module >like yours, so I have 512k L2 cache. I guess I have no clue why your PC >benchmarks faster. It has to be the mb. Mine faster than yours....nyaaah...nyaaah. ;-) Could be in Canada we have a purer power supply so that could be why. ;-) -- Nos http://www.cris.com/~nosfer/index.html

On Fri, 30 Jan 98 10:40:55 GMT, "Piers C. Structures" >Why thankyou, it's always a pleasure to be put down by someone of your >obvious calibre. >I have flown SU-27 but am at a loss as to what your point actually is. >Perhaps if your frame was robust enough to support both your large ego >and a double figure IQ you would be able to explain it to me. I wan't talking about workload on the computer I was talking about workload on the user. But, I'm sure you'll come up with some gibberish to disprove that too. :-) -- Nos http://www.cris.com/~nosfer/index.html

On Fri, 30 Jan 98 10:47:23 GMT, "Piers C. Structures" >Ahem. >We now return you to your scheduled flame fest. Hehe...how did I *know* you would come up with a thesis on the subject? All your post proves to me is that you can argue any point to make it appear valid, but non of it is based on factual evidence. I'm not going to argue with you though. You win. Today your ego gets to be massaged. Happy? -- Nos http://www.cris.com/~nosfer/index.html

Quoted text (10 lines)

>On Fri, 30 Jan 98 10:47:23 GMT, "Piers C. Structures" >>Ahem. >>We now return you to your scheduled flame fest. >Hehe...how did I *know* you would come up with a thesis on the >subject? All your post proves to me is that you can argue any point to >make it appear valid, but non of it is based on factual evidence. I'm

I'm sorry, it appears you have him confused with the US prez. :-) -- Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes. >not going to argue with you though. You win. Today your ego gets to be >massaged. Happy? >-- >Nos >http://www.cris.com/~nosfer/index.html

I wan't talking about workload on the computer I was talking about workload on the user. Nosferatu Talking about "workload on the user", I am trying to learn something, here, about N2, and you seem to be the biggest "workload" here. Take time from your ranting and look at the name of this board. Why don't you take your 3dfx board and your flight simm, and go to a flight simm board and spout your baloney ? -- JerryD(upstateNY)

On Sat, 31 Jan 1998 10:35:02 -0500, "Jerryd(upstateNY)" >I wan't talking about workload on the computer I was talking about workload on the user. >Nosferatu >Talking about "workload on the user", I am trying to learn something, here, about N2, and you seem to be the biggest "workload" here. >Take time from your ranting and look at the name of this board. >Why don't you take your 3dfx board and your flight simm, and go to a flight simm board and spout your baloney ? Ever heard of a kill file? Learn to use it. I do post on the flight-sim board regularly. And I have made posts here discussing race sims. Best advice I can give to you is; mind your own business. -- Nos http://www.cris.com/~nosfer/index.html

I don't want to get off the beaten path with the direction of this message, but, I just wanted to tell you all that I'm proud to have started the longest thread I have EVER SEEN in a newsgroup. The nice part is that almost none of it has anthing to do with the original post. Happy typing everyone. ---------------------------------------------------------- If it weren't for Lawyers, we wouldn't need em. And, did you know that, in the United States, they're Un-Constitutional!. George, Adam, John and the rest of the gang saw something comming! RR #3 Box 96 Williamsport, Pa. 17701 (717) 745-7697

Go to chi.general and look at the "Non-smoking Bars" thread... got you beat easily.. Of course I didn't start it but..

Quoted text (15 lines)

> I don't want to get off the beaten path with the direction of this message, > but, I just wanted to tell you all that I'm proud to have started the > longest thread I have EVER SEEN in a newsgroup. The nice part is that > almost none of it has anthing to do with the original post. > Happy typing everyone. > ---------------------------------------------------------- > If it weren't for Lawyers, we wouldn't need em. And, did > you know that, in the United States, they're Un-Constitutional!. > George, Adam, John and the rest of the gang saw something comming! > RR #3 Box 96 > Williamsport, Pa. 17701 > (717) 745-7697

-- Dave Otterness

>Talking about "workload on the user", I am trying to learn something, = >here, about N2, and you seem to be the biggest "workload" here. >Take time from your ranting and look at the name of this board. >Why don't you take your 3dfx board and your flight simm, and go to a = >flight simm board and spout your baloney ? If someone is comparing flight sims and racing sims in some way, the conversation is approriate on either board. Joe

>Hehe...how did I *know* you would come up with a thesis on the >subject? All your post proves to me is that you can argue any point to >make it appear valid, but non of it is based on factual evidence. No, he made some good points. Flight sims have more operation of of complex systems in response to the environment. Driving sims have more of a millisecond-to-millisecond direct interaction with your physical environment. These both involve very different kinds of thinking and input to the game, so it's really obvious which one is "more". Joe

Quoted text (7 lines)

>No, he made some good points. Flight sims have more operation of of >complex systems in response to the environment. Driving sims have more >of a millisecond-to-millisecond direct interaction with your physical >environment. These both involve very different kinds of thinking and >input to the game, so it's really obvious which one is "more". >Joe

Flight-sims have both Joe. Constant monitoring of altitude and speed is very important. Not to mention energy management in a dogfight, radar management, awacs observation etc. Anyway, I only brought up flight-sims because some guy was saying I'm not a hard-core race simmer. I'm not a light user of racers either and I was just saying I'm a *** flight simmer which I feel has a heavier workload on the user than a racing sim. Anyway, let the discussion die a peaceful death. -- Nos http://www.cris.com/~nosfer/index.html

On Sat, 31 Jan 1998 22:25:09 -0500, "Phil Bower" >I don't want to get off the beaten path with the direction of this message, >but, I just wanted to tell you all that I'm proud to have started the >longest thread I have EVER SEEN in a newsgroup. The nice part is that >almost none of it has anthing to do with the original post. >Happy typing everyone. He...you should see the one in the flight-sim group and cross posted to many other groups. It's over 400 posts long. Big doggy doo about Boot mag slagging the Riva card. -- Nos http://www.cris.com/~nosfer/index.html

Interesting....let me add some thoughts here. If you have long periods of rest in a flight sim its because your not paying attention....and you are just about to get smoked...at least combat sims. Su-27 Flanker in particular and Longbow2 as well...if you are flying along with your head up your ass you will be restarting shortly. Su-27 does not tolerate inattention.....and Longbow2 though slightly more foregiving is quite deadly to the unwary....especially at the hardest settings. But this really is not a fruitful area to compare games.....workload. Now when going fast on motorcycles and cars the mind is focused so well indeed that I almost didnt realise how hard I was working. It just flowed....(this is real life tm)....whereas in Combat flight sims your not only flying the plane for all your worth but your sensing your enviroment for all your worth...your monitoring your signature for all your worth....and keeping tabs on other flights..and if you get in a fight the workload goes even higher as you point out. The part you missed was all the stuff prior and all of that goes into flying Combat Sims at the highest levels. Racing sims and Aerobatic Flying sims would be the best comparison as both involve doing one thing exclusive of any other thing. This is not to belittle either of these items...indeed I love to fly Su-27 solo in Aerobatics...its almost my favorite thing to do these days as H2H has lost some of the oooh gotta do that sort of feeling. Ive done it been there got the T-shirt, mug, and got the Pink Plane....<VBG> I love doing it because of being able to get lost in the concentration of flowing into the next manuevers....this is much the same feeling I get when in F1 Racing sim.... At the highest levels in Combat sims...your flying your ass off...and then all of a sudden someone changes all the rules and your readjusting everything....and then its ooooh nooo here comes a missile....then its damn damn damn...gotta hit the target.....where is my ***ing wingman....hey mofo get your ass in the fight.......shit he's firing...damn damn damn....fun fun fun..but very different. Now which has more workload....Combat Flight sims.... Does this matter....not a whit because its not a valid comparison.....they both require different degree's of concentration....both require full time paying attention. PAPA DOC

>I don't want to get off the beaten path with the direction of this message, >but, I just wanted to tell you all that I'm proud to have started the >longest thread I have EVER SEEN in a newsgroup. Guess you haven't been following the "corruption at boot magazine" silliness. Joe

Did you guys consider the Chipset on the motherboards. Keep in mind that there is very seldom more than 1% difference in motherboards with the same chipset, but could be monumental differences with differering chipsets/io controllers. ---------------------------------------------------------- If it weren't for Lawyers, we wouldn't need em. And, did you know that, in the United States, they're Un-Constitutional!. George, Adam, John and the rest of the gang saw something comming! RR #3 Box 96 Williamsport, Pa. 17701 (717) 745-7697

Quoted text (8 lines)

>>Well, running on an 83mhz bus negates the advantage of mmx's >>supposedly 10% speed increase then. My bench svga at 66mhz is 68. >>Still 1 point faster than your 200mmx. What gives? What vid card do >>you have? I also have a 512k L2 coast cache module so that does give >>me a slight increase in speed. My mb is an Asus P55T2P4 and I'm using >>a Diamond Stealth 2000 vid card (2mb). >The only thing I can think of is that you are in Canada :-) I have a

HOT-541

Quoted text (7 lines)

>mb which may not be that great. My vid card is a Diamond Stealth 3D >3000 (4MB). My mb has 256k L2 cache with an extra 256k module >like yours, so I have 512k L2 cache. I guess I have no clue why your PC >benchmarks faster. It has to be the mb. >-- >Header intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes.

>Hi Pierre, >I don't think it will greatly decrease the revenue of any sim producer if he >does _not_ participate in this forum. This may be entirely true. Perhaps their revenue will not be *directly affected* by participation here. However, gibberish or no, there is a terrific wealth of information here for any interested developer. I would also say that there is more in the way of market direction to be seen here than anywhere else. Perhaps even more than the store shelves. Good advertising is a pretty good marketing tool. Take a look at the number of people who kept their copy of MS CPR till they could no longer return it just because someone from ms said they would fix it. I would say that that message on THIS forum generated a good deal of revenue for ms right there. Oh, afew hundred bucks is no big deal to Bill, but he makes his money a hundred bucks at a time. Also, there's a lot of gibberish, and No, I think there's more information than most people give credit for. It's just a question of wanting to interpret it as a personal insult or a customer whos money they have allready taken, genuinely wanting to see improvements in the product they bought. No, noone here has any divine grace. However, most of the people here DO have more money to spend, and if a developer wants more of it, they had better listen to the masses. OK. One person is a little miffed about something, no big deal. Everyone on the newsgroup is pissed, that's a different story. As for the knowledge thing, there is not that much knowledge needed to contribute very real opinions about a peice of software and new ways to enhance it. As an example, I wrote several peices of software for a company some time ago, that were used in a bunch of different areas of the plant. It was a company with a lot of labor intense jobs that were occupied by perhaps as many as a hundred, less fortunate or educated people. I'd say that maybe 25% could not read or write. This place gave a 50c/Hr bonus each week just for being on time for work each day. In any case, I set up a time clock system which used bar coded credit card's i'll call, them for each employee. I made all sorts of changes to the system after talking to some mentaly retarded employees. (The company hired workers from a local "School of Hope"). In fact, I even made changes to some of the production software that they never came in contact with because of limitations of the people. As for the timeclock, some of the people were not mentaly able to understand instructions of running a card thru a slot. For them, I made cards that could be oriented any of 8 ways and still be read. Frustrating? Sometimes. But the bottom line is that the amount of information to be found on this group is directly proportional to the developers desire to find information. Sorry to disagree again. You can say anything you like about me and I'll probably never care enough raise an eyebrow. If the entire group says they agree, I'll probably look for reasons they might see to agree. At no point will I stop participating just because someone said something negative about me. My feelings won't be hurt. I would guess that is why Jim S. Has posted in this thread so often. Admitedly, his posts have mostly been directed to pointing out historical facts or clearing up issues. In the long run, most of those posts will probably end up as $ to Sierra. ---------------------------------------------------------- If it weren't for Lawyers, we wouldn't need em. And, did you know that, in the United States, they're Un-Constitutional!. George, Adam, John and the rest of the gang saw something comming! RR #3 Box 96 Williamsport, Pa. 17701 (717) 745-7697

>>I don't want to get off the beaten path with the direction of this message, >>but, I just wanted to tell you all that I'm proud to have started the >>longest thread I have EVER SEEN in a newsgroup. >Guess you haven't been following the "corruption at boot magazine" >silliness. Have you seen the consoles vs PC wars? Or the Derek Smart posts? Or Why N64 is better than Playstation? Granted this is a long thread, but it's still a baby compared to those others... Ben -={ To get my real email address, remove the NOSPAM }=- SPAMMERS!!! Read this!!! No spam for me! Unwanted, unsolicited commmercial email WILL be dealt with.. And, why the hell do you even bother sending the shit if you don't include your own return address?