Looking for West interview that they gave a while back...

im looking for an interview that was conducted in VROC a while back that had the gplers asking the wests about various wsc features, and the one im interested in is Bump modelling on the tracks. i seem to remember someone critisizing the method that wsc had proposed to use in comparison with gpls (i cant remember the specifics, its why im after the transcript), but i see mention of Bump modelling being used in NT2003 and its being advertised as a 'new' feature in NR2003, which begs the question 'why have games back to gp2 had fast and slow damper modelling if they havent had bumps?' do gpl and n4/n2002 model bumps or is the cockpit just being moved around randomly? pez

Ask Doug Ellison....he has everything they do and think recorded in archives. ;-) AD

"Alex 'pez' Porazinski" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:ap71uk$193$[email hidden]... > im looking for an interview that was conducted in VROC a while back thathad > the gplers asking the wests about various wsc features, and the one im > interested in is Bump modelling on the tracks. > > i seem to remember someone critisizing the method that wsc had proposed to > use in comparison with gpls (i cant remember the specifics, its why imafter

Quoted text (9 lines)

> the transcript), but i see mention of Bump modelling being used in NT2003 > and its being advertised as a 'new' feature in NR2003, which begs the > question 'why have games back to gp2 had fast and slow damper modelling if > they havent had bumps?' > > do gpl and n4/n2002 model bumps or is the cockpit just being moved around > randomly? > > pez

The short and highly inaccurate answer is: Papyrus tracks model the larger bumps and swells and the tracks like those from the ISI 3d modeled tracks have a much easier time displaying the smaller but sometimes more intense bumps. The trouble with the former is the tracks tend to feel overly smooth, the trouble with the latter is the tracks bumpiness is sometimes not a product of good modeling but a lack of proper polygon counts to correctly protray a track. dave henrie

On Thu, 24 Oct 2002 03:13:27 GMT, "Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote: > The trouble with the former is the tracks tend to feel overly smooth, the >trouble with the latter is the tracks bumpiness is sometimes not a product >of good modeling but a lack of proper polygon counts to correctly protray a >track. Dave, I realize you're not buying the game, but I thought this might be interesting, on the subject of bumps. Bristol in NT2k3 is undriveable because of the high-frequency bump modelling. During a testing session with 60+ FPS I can run in the 15's even with the car bouncing all over like I'm driving on large pebbles. When the FPS drops to 30 in-race it's seriously impossible to even compete. Halfway through one of the turns, in the low groove, is a bump so severe that if I'm not completely off of the gas when I hit it the car immediately gets airborne and lands right next to the wall. It's pretty funny, and basically means that if I try to get on the throttle when the AI does I can kiss the right side of the car goodbye. Jason