GP3 - What are we shouting about...

It uses the same engine, therefore it's almost 100% certain it will be. -- DB --

I've studied the screen shots, and especially the one of the back of the Arrows going down the monaco start straight...it looks no better than GP2. The***pit is nice enough - the rotating LCD display is a clever idea, something that I don't think has been done before. However, it's going to REALLY get on your nurves if you're trying to look at numbers that are at 90 degrees to your eye line - people will laugh at me tiliting my head going round the corners.... I appreciate that this is only a 60% completed thing, but GPL looks more organic, GP500 looks more real and TOCA 2 looks more vivid. I am expecting much from this game. I am sure Crammond will deliver (D'ya know that GP1 was written here in Tetbury, Glos.) But there's A LOT of work to do.

Seeing the official screenshots for the first time, it seems almost obvious to me that this is indeed the old GP2 graphics engine. The graphics look better simply because they are using more polygons and higher res graphics. However, I think they would be completely crazy to release the game without 3d hardware support, so I'm going to guess that they will add this later. (Although nothing in the features list about that either! HRMMM...) Maybe they'll have the sense to put some hands on that creepy steering wheel too. You are right, though, looking at the features list, it's certainly nothing to shout about. It won't be ahead of it's time like F1GP and GP2 were. -A >I've studied the screen shots, and especially the one of the back of the >Arrows going down the monaco start straight...it looks no better than GP2. >The***pit is nice enough - the rotating LCD display is a clever idea, >something that I don't think has been done before. However, it's going to >REALLY get on your nurves if you're trying to look at numbers that are at 90

Quoted text (9 lines)

>degrees to your eye line - people will laugh at me tiliting my head going >round the corners.... >I appreciate that this is only a 60% completed thing, but GPL looks more >organic, GP500 looks more real and TOCA 2 looks more vivid. >I am expecting much from this game. I am sure Crammond will deliver (D'ya >know that GP1 was written here in Tetbury, Glos.) But there's A LOT of work >to do.

On Tue, 7 Sep 1999 21:20:09 +0100, It is done the same way in OF1R. -- * rrevved at mindspring dot com * unit.26 s.p.u.t.u.m. * http://www.cabal.net

> However, it's going to > REALLY get on your nurves if you're trying to look at numbers that are at 90 > degrees to your eye line - people will laugh at me tiliting my head going > round the corners.... It's how it's done for real - it's a "simulation". Tom -- -- "Wasted your life in black and white, Kevin Carter"

Well, I'm sorry I didn't commit the features to memory like you did. Now would you like to expand on why you think the graphics look better, or are you just some bullshitter who likes to make personal remarks? I didn't see anything that couldn't have been done with GP2's graphics engine. >Try reading the feature list again. Hardware rendering is mentioned. I >guess this sums up your observational ability! Grpahics only look better >because of more Polys and higher res?, Jesus that says it all

Errrr... we know it's the same engine, so it's erm, almost certain it will be. Which bit did you have problem with? Sorry, I can't explain it with pictures for you, do you understand? -- DB --

Try reading the feature list again. Hardware rendering is mentioned. I guess this sums up your observational ability! Grpahics only look better because of more Polys and higher res?, Jesus that says it all

GP2 was NOT ahead of iots time, only ahead of the available hardware by years... GP2 was a ripp off, only the screenshots were great. The new GP3 page has NOTHING to offer: - screenshots are just awfull (GP2 quality) - all the other promises are just 'the usual shit'. .. OF COURSE it will have 3D support. Of course it will have the real tracks, real cars.. It just doesn't say anywhere if it will be playable.. I suggest everyone just copies the game IF its good, so we finally get a PLAYABLE game for all the money we spend on hardware to get GP2 going (in vain). I upgraded like mad only to find out the game looked totally outdated by the time it was fully playable in SVGA. Or if you are a total morron, just join the hype created for GP3. Its all just meant to make you spend your dollars.

Hi, what's your problem? I think the screenshots are really nice for the software mode, better, then GPL in Software mode. Image the graphic with a Voodoo3 or Riva2. The graphic of Gp2 is still good for a game that is so old. I play Gp2 more then every other new racing game (ok, maybe without GPL). What should they write on there webpage? Gp2 was and is a very good Racing Game. With a better graphic, network support and a driving-model like GPL it would be near perfect. We should wait for a "offical demo", then we will see, how the game will really look like. Greetings, Tobias

What are you all talking about, those screen shots are great for a software rendered sim. Just take a look at GPL software accelerated and you'll see the difference. Ofcourse GP3 will be support 3D hardware and it will look great. And knowing the quality Geoff puts into his sims we just know this is going to be great. GP2 still is the most solid 'sim' around. The problem with MGPRS2 that is has a couple flaws, but those flaws are just about the most important parts of a sim. GP3 will be great, so let's stop whining.

: I've studied the screen shots, and especially the one of the back of the : Arrows going down the monaco start straight...it looks no better than GP2. The poly model has some extra features, like barge boards (?). It looks a lot better than the angular Ubisoft models. Let's hope he gets the 3D hardware side up to speed (so the speak). : I appreciate that this is only a 60% completed thing, but GPL looks more : organic, GP500 looks more real and TOCA 2 looks more vivid. Organic... good choice of words. I have always found Papyrus pallettes much more realistic than other games. Although ICR2 had chunky textures, the colours always looked better than GP2 to my eyes. GPL seems spot on to me. The Ubisoft products are just a little to weird for me. Stephen

I think what he's saying is generally in games that use polygons rather than voxels the usual method for "improving graphics" is increasing the number of polys in a scene and bumping up the resolution. However I will agree that the screenshot of the Arrows on the website does look like GP2. M

(someone else wrote): :>The***pit is nice enough - the rotating LCD display is a clever idea, :>something that I don't think has been done before. : It is done the same way in OF1R. But without as much info, and not as readable. Stephen

Hey, you should try Lego racers. Great graphics and it sure is different! I must admit, the GP3 feature page doesn't state that its MORON proof. Therein lies your problem

Well, if you think like this: - don't buy GP3 - sell your GP2 - try to find another GOOD racing simulation which runs on your poor hardware and stop discussing about GP2/GP3 if you won't ever play this! bye, mani -- Manfred Mitreiter [link lost in import]

On Tue, 7 Sep 1999 21:20:09 +0100, "Douglas Ellison" >I've studied the screen shots, and especially the one of the back of the >Arrows going down the monaco start straight...it looks no better than GP2. I really don't know what you mean... It DOES look much better. The realism of the wheels is great, for example. Car shape is much more detailed as well. I think that's what's going to happen: we'll turn our heads! Happens to me even in GP2 from time to time. It might feel natural after an adaptation period. It was clearly mentioned that the thing is running in software rendering mode as for now. Therefore, let's wait until the 3D accelerated version is shown. You might take a look at software-GPL for an impression of the difference it makes... All in all I think we shouldn't take the current "impressions" too serious. There's a lot of work left, probably lots of Gp2-stuff "borrowed" to start testing, people who have driven it have only spent 15mins or so in probably not the most comfortable circumstances.... That's the drawback of early demos: it's not the final game yet! Let's all calm down and wait a few months before judging. JoH ======================================== Jo Helsen EDP Operations BF Belgium ========================================

I just don't understand you guys... How long ago did you see GP2?? Just think away all the fancy hardware 3D effects from the current games and see what's left. THEN compare. JoH ======================================== Jo Helsen EDP Operations BF Belgium ========================================

Just tell me this: Do YOU in any way find this GP3 page interesting? If YES, please explain why. Don't bother...

SOFTWARE mode???? Is there anybody out there still playing games without a 3D card? Software mode totally irrelevant. good for a game that is so old. When I bought GP2, I just had to IMAGINE how it would run on a Pentium 500. I bought it too, because I really loved GP1, and because I liked the screenshots and the reviews (PREviews). But as I said: even with the up to date hardware I had, it just wasn't fun to play. Especially when cars go over curbes, even on a P2-500 the game will slow down. So does this mean that Microprose have produced a quality product? No! Just think about buying a beautiful sportscar with all options.. just to find out it only goes 40 mph.. would be near perfect. True, like I said: GP2 graphics engine is very poor programming. The driving-model was ok at the time (it was the best for a long time). Well, thats true. I agree :) I just want to warn you guys: don't join the hype, TRY before you buy!

*** off ***. I always had up to date hardware. Maybe you are too young to know about GP2. Why can't you just agree Microprose and Geoff riped us all off?

: *** off ***. Hey, hey, HEY! If you can't play nicely, go home. : I always had up to date hardware. : Maybe you are too young to know about GP2. I don't imagine there are many three-year olds posting on USENET. : Why can't you just agree Microprose and Geoff riped us all off? Because a lot of us don't feel ripped off. If you feel that way, fine. Have a personal boycott of Microprose. I am sure it will make you feel all warm and fuzzy, and maybe it will put a tiny financial dent in their pockets. But stop ranting and raving and trying to turn everyone to your side of the issue. GP2 has a huge following because it was a quality product. I don't feel at all ripped off (and it still amuses me when everyone equates losing 50 bucks on a bad game with the end of the world - I'm a student with a marginal income and I still don't lose any sleep about the duds I have bought and will buy). Let me explain it one more time. Some people liked GP2. Some didn't. Can you live with the difference? I can. Stephen

An excellent, tolerant, considered response - you must be proud. Cheers! John

EEEEkeeekkk...... I wish I'd never said anything now.... All I think is that we should wait. People we're saying "Ooo it looks amazing" when clearly (software mode or not) it didn't look much better than GP2. The background looks nice, but not good enough. The Arrows shot look average compared to a GPL shot. The poly's of the car would be the same in 3d / soft mode. Anyway - it's FAR FAR FAR too early to commit to any serious comment about what the game may or may not be. My opinion is that the only thing wrong with GP3 is that the web site is crap, and shouldn't have been made, it's wasted a lot of time and disapointed a lot of people Doug Now, I'm off to race round Castle Combe in GP2...in a Formula Ford...with the colours of the racing team I work for. THAT'S why gp2 was soo good, or is so good. Because I can race what I want where I want. Let's hope GP3 is adaptable like that. Doug, AGAIN

Quoted text (13 lines)

>On Tue, 7 Sep 1999 21:20:09 +0100, "Douglas Ellison" >>I've studied the screen shots, and especially the one of the back of the >>Arrows going down the monaco start straight...it looks no better than GP2. >I really don't know what you mean... It DOES look much better. The >realism of the wheels is great, for example. Car shape is much more >detailed as well. >>The***pit is nice enough - the rotating LCD display is a clever idea, >>something that I don't think has been done before. However, it's going to >>REALLY get on your nurves if you're trying to look at numbers that are at

90

Quoted text (30 lines)

>>degrees to your eye line - people will laugh at me tiliting my head going >>round the corners.... >I think that's what's going to happen: we'll turn our heads! Happens >to me even in GP2 from time to time. It might feel natural after an >adaptation period. >>I appreciate that this is only a 60% completed thing, but GPL looks more >>organic, GP500 looks more real and TOCA 2 looks more vivid. >It was clearly mentioned that the thing is running in software >rendering mode as for now. Therefore, let's wait until the 3D >accelerated version is shown. You might take a look at software-GPL >for an impression of the difference it makes... >All in all I think we shouldn't take the current "impressions" too >serious. There's a lot of work left, probably lots of Gp2-stuff >"borrowed" to start testing, people who have driven it have only spent >15mins or so in probably not the most comfortable circumstances.... >That's the drawback of early demos: it's not the final game yet! >Let's all calm down and wait a few months before judging. >JoH >======================================== >Jo Helsen EDP Operations BF Belgium >========================================

>GP2 was NOT ahead of iots time, only ahead of the available hardware by >years... >GP2 was a ripp off, only the screenshots were great. This is where you are wrong, while I'm not exactly on the GP3 hype bandwagon, GP2 *when released* had very revolutionary and realistic physics compared to any previous sims. While ICR2 and other sims still allowed the applying full brake pedal without much effects or loss of control of locking brakes etc., GP2 was the first to realistically model locking brakes as well as curbs with bouncing etc.. Prior to GPL, GP2 was the most realistic physics model IMHO. While GP3 may or may not turn out to be a DUD (I'll wait until it ships before I get e***d about it) at least give GP2 credit for what it did right. Seeyas on the track. --John (Joao) Silva

Strange: this has to be the same Karl Zosel who even created decent add-ons for GP2 (cockpits come to mind). Some of them might be still available on grandprix2.com. Quite a change of mind. Lobotomized? Reaperle

If so many people are allowed to be totally possitive about GP2 on this channel, why is it NOT allowed to have a different opinion? Isn't it good to have DIFFERENT opinions on a channel??

> If so many people are allowed to be totally possitive about GP2 on this > channel, why is it NOT allowed to have a different opinion? > Isn't it good to have DIFFERENT opinions on a channel?? If you have a different opinion and can back it up in fact, few people will have a problem with that. But unsubstantiated claims backed with rudeness & obscenities........we don't need it. -- Chuck Kandler #70 K&S Racing http://www.fortunecity.com/silverstone/thepits/195 The box said "Windows 95 or better", so I installed LINUX!

Well said Chuck ! > > If so many people are allowed to be totally possitive about GP2 on this > > channel, why is it NOT allowed to have a different opinion? > > Isn't it good to have DIFFERENT opinions on a channel?? > If you have a different opinion and can back it up in fact, few people will > have a problem with that. But unsubstantiated claims backed with rudeness

Quoted text (7 lines)

> & obscenities........we don't need it. > -- > Chuck Kandler #70 > K&S Racing > http://www.fortunecity.com/silverstone/thepits/195 > The box said "Windows 95 or better", so I installed LINUX!

Now YOU'RE ***ed off - by my killfile... *PLONK* Yes, you HAD... But seems actually you don't. An you're talking/writing like a 12 year old ***ager, after his first beer. Are you drunken, or on ***??? Why should I?? -- Manfred Mitreiter [link lost in import]

Almost right - prior to SODA, GP2 was the most realistic physics model. IMHO of course! Cheers, Richard

Very well said Chuck.

This is r.a.s. - are you sure...? :-) Cheers! John

LOL!! No, John, I guess I can't back that one up with *facts*! Great comeback!

Quoted text (7 lines)

> >If you have a different opinion and can back it up in fact, few people will > >have a problem with that. > This is r.a.s. - are you sure...? :-) > Cheers! > John

-- Chuck Kandler #70 K&S Racing http://www.fortunecity.com/silverstone/thepits/195 The box said "Windows 95 or better", so I installed LINUX!

Ah yes you are probably correct from what I remember hearing about SODA at the time, I never did give SODA a good try, I tried to run the demo but it was too slow in software mode on my system at the time, and it didn't support my 3DFX card either. I was waiting for the promised 3DFX patch to purchase it but the patch stayed vapourware and was never released :-( Sounds like I missed a good sim, (and also like they missed many sales by not producing the 3DFX patch). Maybe if I see it in a bargain bin my current system can run software mode well and I may give it another try. Seeyas on the track. --John (Joao) Silva

Quoted text (7 lines)

>>Prior to GPL, GP2 was the most realistic physics model IMHO. >Almost right - prior to SODA, GP2 was the most realistic physics model. >IMHO of course! >Cheers, >Richard

Hurry out to the store and search the bargain bin John! I got SODA Off-Road for like 10 bucks two years ago or so and I feel like I got a great deal...the physics feel very realistic IMHO and it's very fun to race on. Dan Belcher Team Racing Unlimited

I'll definitely keep an eye out for it :-) Seeyas on the track. --John (Joao) Silva >Hurry out to the store and search the bargain bin John! I got SODA Off-Road >for like 10 bucks two years ago or so and I feel like I got a great deal...the >physics feel very realistic IMHO and it's very fun to race on. >Dan Belcher >Team Racing Unlimited

writes Oh no it won't...it will be really slippy and cold :-) mart -- Mart Hugh Rogers

>Hi Karl, >More like overestimating the power of the PC's at the time. AND recognising it >by allowing configuration of the detail level. You could easily remove most of >the details and end up with a smooth IR2-clone. One that moved moved up and down >as well, BTW... Wasn't the svga mode for gp2 a last minute add on anyway? I heard that only when MP found out ICR2 had svga they decided to do a quick and dirty hack. This would also explain the tremendous performance difference between vga/svga modes. Anyone better informed care to comment? uwe -- Uwe Schuerkamp http://www.schuerkamp.de/ Herford, Germany (52.0N/8h30mE) Ever wondered what's wrong with the world? http://bnetwork.com/ PGP Fingerprint: 2E 13 20 22 9A 3F 63 7F 67 6F E9 B1 A8 36 A4 61

Yes & Yes. Unfortunately, they really missed the ball on this one. A state of the art physics model and a graphics engine 2 years out of date :( Definitely worth it - just don't expect much from the graphics! <g> Cheers, Richard

>>THAT'S why gp2 was soo good, or is so good. Because I can race what I want >>where I want. Let's hope GP3 is adaptable like that. >It uses the same engine, therefore it's almost 100% certain it will be. >-- DB -- Great inside information! Care to mention your sources? JoH Please remove *anti-spam* from the email when replying. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= When everything else failed, we can still become im- mortal by making an enormous blunder.... John Kenneth Galbraith =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Geoff Crammond has said that it is basically the same game engine as GP2, and of course F1GP. Doesn't mean the game won't be quite different to it's predecessors (as F1GP was to GP2). I'm thankful it's using the same engine, as for me, GP2 has a perfect feel, unlike most other 'sims' I've tried recently. -- DB --

>>Great inside information! Care to mention your sources? >Errrr... we know it's the same engine, so it's erm, almost certain it >will be. Which bit did you have problem with? The bit where you are so absolutely totally beyond any doubt sure that it is "the same engine". What does it mean anyway, "the same engine"?? From what I've heard, the cars in GP3 can tumble 360. From what I've heard, the nose dives under breaking, and probably raises under acceleration. There seems to be lateral movement as well. From what I've seen, the cars are much more detailed (even in software mode!), with what seem to be real 3D wheels (unlike GP2). From what I've seen, the steeringwheel moves on-screen. From what I've seen, there are huge background pictures (cfr shot Monaco mountains). From what I've seen, the wheels are visible from the***pit and rotate according to the speed. From what I've read, there will be realistic weather effects. From what I've read, there will be network play. But this is all achieved via "the same engine" as GP2. Of course it is! How could I fail to see the obvious conclusion? Me thinks that "familiar looking" graphics in the software-rendering stage are not enough to call this "the same engine". Me thinks the same help options and the same telemetry-options and the same setup-options do not in any way mean that this is "the same engine". It means that all these design elements were, and are, adequate and don't need any changes just to change things. An engine based on the GP2 engine, is not "the same engine". And it's not necessarilly a bad thing either. After all, both GP2 and GP3 simulate F1-cars with a body, suspension, chassis, engine and four wheels, don't they? Not that I don't hope there will be similarities, so a simple conversion of GP2 tools and editors is possible. JoH Please remove *anti-spam* from the email when replying. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= When everything else failed, we can still become im- mortal by making an enormous blunder.... John Kenneth Galbraith =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

: Wasn't the svga mode for gp2 a last minute add on anyway? I heard that : only when MP found out ICR2 had svga they decided to do a quick and : dirty hack. This would also explain the tremendous performance difference : between vga/svga modes. Sounds plausible. All the screengrabs in the manual are VGA, and all the prerelease screenshots were also in VGA. Stephen