NFS2 PC --Just got it. Mildly disappointed.

Greetings. I *ABSOLUTELY LOVED* NFS1. It is a GREAT game and I've probably spent a hundred hours "behind the wheel", so when I spotted Need For Speed 2 (PC Version) this weekend at Sam's Club Discount Warehouse, I e***dly shelled out the $42.95. I've now spent several hours playing the game. Following is my opinion: Nice intro video of a Cala and a Jaguar XJ220 racing thru the UK countryside. The video leads to an attractive shell. Plenty of eye candy but it requires a few extra clicks and keypresses to navigate compared to NFS1. So far, so good. After a few clicks, I've selected a track, the Proving Grounds, chosen a car (the venerable F50) and cranked up the graphics detail. I click "RACE". Now what? In a word -- "disappointment!" The framerate is terrible, probably not more than 12 frames/sec. on my Micron P133 with 64MB RAM, Diamond Stealth 64 Video 2001 4MB PCI video. NFS2 is clearly, substantially slower than NFS1. So much for Direct X (Microsoft's Windoze game development library designed to replace DOS) -- I can't run a full size window with high-level graphics and maintain a reasonable frame rate. So I hit Escape, go to Options and change to medium-detail graphics and turn off the horizon to get the same framerates as NFS1 on my 486-120 with full screen/detail/horizon, etc!!! Now the game looks lousy, but at least it's playable. So I jump back into the game. The camera pans around the Ford GT90 I've selected and moves into the***pit. Cool. But wait! Since I've chosen a medium-size window (in order to get a decent framerate), I no longer get a ***pit view! Sheesh. I run a few laps around the boring oval known as the Proving Grounds and decide to move on to a more interesting track. Back to the shell. I cycled thru the various tracks and cars, playing each for approx. half an hour and I must say that I am underwhelmed with the tracks. The background music is at first interesting, but after a few moments annoying, and the level of detail on most of the tracks is concentrated in just one or two areas -- usually a cluster of buildings in a city separated by long stretches of very ugly tunnels or tree-lined highway. One additional point about the tracks -- they're all ovals, all a little boring. If you (like me) enjoyed the long top-speed straightaway race along NFS1's "Coastal" or "City" tracks, you're really going to miss them in NFS2. I've not had a chance to play multiplayer, I've not yet attempted to customize the vehicles (change brake bias, downforce, etc.), and perhaps it's just a matter of time before I get used to running in a reduced graphics mode, but so far I'm disappointed. It's not that its a bad game, its just not much better than NFS1, and some of the things I liked about NFS1 (e.g. the long, segmented tracks, the fast framerate) are lost. Perhaps the best parts of the game lie in the multiplayer, and if that's the case I hope to be surprised. PROS: Attractive interface. Music is great. Improved camera angles (you can see backwards on the track...). Networked gameplay! Multimedia showcase is slick! The angular effects of the physics engine has been refined. Nice "Map" window showing relative position. CONS: *SLOW* framerate. "Arcade" feel, even in advanced simulation mode. Cars are still indestructible. Tracks are circular and they're too short (no segmented tracks). The tracks need more variety and more quantity. BOTTOM LINE: For all of its improvements, I was mildly disappointed by this release. Electronic Arts has traded a prettier game shell and easier programming via DirectX for an in-game framerate that sucks. If you have a 200mhz Pentium, you'll probably love NFS2. With anything less you'll likely admit that "I told you so!" Cheers,

Excellent review--it echoes my thoughts precisely.

I agree with you on every detail! The game is allot of glam and no substance! And what is this ***about putting out DirectX games with no D3D(I76 is coming out with a 3D3 patch) support!! No wonder the frame rates are horrible! Oh and BTW if your low on memory (16megs) forget this game your HD will be spinning forever causing your machine to produce 1 fps at the most!!! I love win95 games:-(!!! DOS Lives!!!!

>via DirectX for an in-game framerate that sucks. If you have a 200mhz >Pentium, you'll probably love NFS2. With anything less you'll likely admit >that "I told you so!" Actually even on a P200 the frame-rate sucks - you can run full screen, but not at full detai and ONLY with the***pit off. Joe McGinn =================================================== Author of Inside LotusScript, available August 1997 http://www.browsebooks.com/McGinn/ ===================================================

Joe, not sure why it won't run on your 200. Runs great on mine, with everything turned to up to the max. I don't know why but my system doesn't seem to run into all the problems that others get with performance for NFS2 and others. Pete

Quoted text (12 lines)

> >via DirectX for an in-game framerate that sucks. If you have a 200mhz > >Pentium, you'll probably love NFS2. With anything less you'll likely admit > >that "I told you so!" > Actually even on a P200 the frame-rate sucks - you can run full > screen, but not at full detai and ONLY with the***pit off. > Joe McGinn > =================================================== > Author of Inside LotusScript, available August 1997 > http://www.browsebooks.com/McGinn/ > ===================================================

>Joe, not sure why it won't run on your 200. Runs great on >mine, with everything turned to up to the max. I don't know why >but my system doesn't seem to run into all the problems that >others get with performance for NFS2 and others. Well for the record there's nothing wrong with my system. It rnus other games perfectly, and very fast. Maybe we have different ideas of what an acceptable frame rate is. Joe McGinn =================================================== Author of Inside LotusScript, available August 1997 http://www.browsebooks.com/McGinn/ ===================================================

I have no idea what some of these developers are thinking when they leave out D3D support in their Win95 games! It just doesn't seem logical to me! Hell games like MTM are slow even with D3D!!!

>I have no idea what some of these developers are thinking when they leave >out D3D support in their Win95 games! It just doesn't seem logical to me! >Hell games like MTM are slow even with D3D!!! Here's the story I heard (form game developers): Microsoft's Direct3D API sucks eggs. Almost all 3D games work by drawing triangles. Apparently (and typically) Microsoft chose a competely different design for the D3D APIs. It does work and it is 3D, but basically the game has to be designed from the ground-up for the Microsoft API. The problem? No problem if everyone had 3d cards - the problem is that if you design for the Microsoft API, game performance will TOTALLY SUCK if you don't have a 3D card at all. In other words, as a game developer you basically have to toss off your biggest market (i.e., people without 3d cards yet) to support the D3D API. I'm told by game programmers that this is why D3D has been so slow catching on, and why so few games support it (and why for those promising to support it, implementation is turning out to take a hell of a lot longer than planned). Microsoft is planning on fixing this, by providing a proper triangle-based API in Direct3D 5.0, which will hopefully be available in few months (and, if we're lucky, Microsoft won't***up that API too). To make a long story short, basically Microsoft has failed utterly to prvide the 3D APIs that they promised in Windows95. About two years after Win95's released (i.e., sometime this year) they hope to fix the deficiency and provide what they promised 2 years ago. If they fix it right (which is a big IF I'll grant you) solid in-the-box D3D support should be a normal feature in games by next Christmas. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news (please don't shoot the messenger! <g>). Joe McGinn =================================================== Author of Inside LotusScript, available August 1997 http://www.browsebooks.com/McGinn/ ===================================================

Joe, I'm very picky when it comes to frame rate. In GP2 all I have to do to get 25+ frames is turn clouds off. Unless MB plays a big part in difference. I have an ASUS rev. 3.1 over clocked to 75mhz to give me 225mhz. I run an STB 128 Lightspeed video. I compared a Dell 200 non MMX to mine and there was a huge difference. I don't recall if you said you had MMX or not. Many have looked at my system believe me frame rate is not a problem. Whose system are you using and what mother board. By the way I also cranked my DMA speeds up to 100 meg/sec through the bios. Pete

Quoted text (9 lines)

> Well for the record there's nothing wrong with my system. It rnus > other games perfectly, and very fast. Maybe we have different ideas of > what an acceptable frame rate is. > Joe McGinn > =================================================== > Author of Inside LotusScript, available August 1997 > http://www.browsebooks.com/McGinn/ > ===================================================

>Joe, I'm very picky when it comes to frame rate. In GP2 all >I have to do to get 25+ frames is turn clouds off. Unless MB plays >a big part in difference. I have an ASUS rev. 3.1 over clocked to >75mhz to give me 225mhz. I run an STB 128 Lightspeed video. I compared >a Dell 200 non MMX to mine and there was a huge difference. I don't >recall if you said you had MMX or not. No, no MMX (which is probably about 0.001% of the PC market right now). IBM P200 Aptiva, Intel motherboard. Joe McGinn =================================================== Author of Inside LotusScript, available August 1997 http://www.browsebooks.com/McGinn/ ===================================================

Is it possible that they optimised it for MMX even though I don't see it mentioned on the box! Perhaps with my overclocking and MMX its enough to push it over the top performance wise on my system. Pete

Quoted text (13 lines)

> No, no MMX (which is probably about 0.001% of the PC market right > now). > >believe me frame rate is not a problem. Whose system are you using > >and what mother board. > IBM P200 Aptiva, Intel motherboard. > Joe McGinn > =================================================== > Author of Inside LotusScript, available August 1997 > http://www.browsebooks.com/McGinn/ > ===================================================

Bart, by the sounds of Joe's problems the 200 MMX may make a big difference. Although it doesnt say enhanced for MMX it may in fact be. I would go with the 200MMX I don't think you will regret it. Pete

Quoted text (18 lines)

> Have you had the opportunity to see NFS2 on like speed systems, one > with MMX and another without. The reason I say this is I am thinking > about upgrading my CPU. I currently have an Intel P5 133 and the game > plays pretty well, it will freeze for half a second a couple time a > race and then continue.. I have seen huge discounts were just > announced for the pentium classis on monday by Intel. If the MMX > doesn't make a big difference I will save my dime and get one of the > discounted chips probably a 200 or get a 150 and overclock it to 200 > (or try anyway, tom's hardware page would make me think this is > possible, it would be the bargain way to do it) My MB shouldnt' be a > problem it is a Tyan VX with the cache upgrade, the latest BM drivers, > new WD HD, and MGA Millinium 4mg video card. > Bottom line after all that rambling. Do you think this game takes > advantage of the MMX instruction in the new CPU's ? Do you think a > P200 would be much slower running NFS2 than a P200MMX ? > Bartman

Thanks for the update

: BOTTOM LINE: : For all of its improvements, I was mildly disappointed by this release. : Electronic Arts has traded a prettier game shell and easier programming : via DirectX for an in-game framerate that sucks. If you have a 200mhz : Pentium, you'll probably love NFS2. With anything less you'll likely admit : that "I told you so!" Hio, just thought I'd pop in here and say a few words about the speed issue. Having never played NFS1 I'm not terribly qualified to speak, but that's never stopped me before ;) I was actually suprised at the preformance of the game, I allways race out of the car, far back as possible. I have all the grapics options set to full, optimal 16bit sound, and no music. It seems to me to fly... Is there anyway to get an actual FPS frome the game itself? Now a word about my system: Asus P55T2P4 MB, at 83 MHz bus <-- Big factor? Intel p166 MMX <-- Possible MMX support that's not mentioned? ATI 3D Pr Turbo w/4MB <-- OK, I know this isn't the reason for the good perfomance... AWE32 <-- so what... WD AC22100 HDD <-- but seeing as the drive is never touched... so what again 4X piece of ***Mitsumi CD-ROM <-- but then again it's all on the HDD, so again, so what... Win95 OSR2B with DirectX 3.0a Draw whatever conclusions you like from this. Only possible reasons I see for my great performance are the OCed MB, and MMX acceleration (but I doubt it, otherwise it'd be hyped). Of course, maybe I'm just blind... Oh, BTW, I play with the full grid, in an F1, of course ;) -- \ _ / o o \_(0)_/ \ / +---=====(]( + )[)=====---+ \__ /0\ __/ My opinions are my own, and are right. O O \__\___/__/ O O / (_) \

: Is it possible that they optimised it for MMX even : though I don't see it mentioned on the box! Perhaps with : my overclocking and MMX its enough to push it over the : top performance wise on my system. I think this is a strong possibility indeed. -- \ _ / o o \_(0)_/ \ / +---=====(]( + )[)=====---+ \__ /0\ __/ My opinions are my own, and are right. O O \__\___/__/ O O / (_) \

Quoted text (39 lines)

> Nope.. > I have a p200-MMX and am having the same problems as everyone else. > Hope this helps. > Jason > >Bart, by the sounds of Joe's problems the 200 MMX may > >make a big difference. Although it doesnt say enhanced for MMX > >it may in fact be. I would go with the 200MMX I don't think you > >will regret it. > >Pete > >> Have you had the opportunity to see NFS2 on like speed systems, one > >> with MMX and another without. The reason I say this is I am thinking > >> about upgrading my CPU. I currently have an Intel P5 133 and the game > >> plays pretty well, it will freeze for half a second a couple time a > >> race and then continue.. I have seen huge discounts were just > >> announced for the pentium classis on monday by Intel. If the MMX > >> doesn't make a big difference I will save my dime and get one of the > >> discounted chips probably a 200 or get a 150 and overclock it to 200 > >> (or try anyway, tom's hardware page would make me think this is > >> possible, it would be the bargain way to do it) My MB shouldnt' be a > >> problem it is a Tyan VX with the cache upgrade, the latest BM drivers, > >> new WD HD, and MGA Millinium 4mg video card. > >> Bottom line after all that rambling. Do you think this game takes > >> advantage of the MMX instruction in the new CPU's ? Do you think a > >> P200 would be much slower running NFS2 than a P200MMX ? > >> Bartman

I'm running it on a 200MHZ non-MMX Pentium and it runs fine (even though it doesn't compare to NFS1). A problem I was having was that I keep my desktop set on 800x600 and if you don't change it to 640x480 BEFORE starting the game the framerate will be really bad.

Nope.. I have a p200-MMX and am having the same problems as everyone else. Hope this helps. Jason

Quoted text (25 lines)

>Bart, by the sounds of Joe's problems the 200 MMX may >make a big difference. Although it doesnt say enhanced for MMX >it may in fact be. I would go with the 200MMX I don't think you >will regret it. >Pete >> Have you had the opportunity to see NFS2 on like speed systems, one >> with MMX and another without. The reason I say this is I am thinking >> about upgrading my CPU. I currently have an Intel P5 133 and the game >> plays pretty well, it will freeze for half a second a couple time a >> race and then continue.. I have seen huge discounts were just >> announced for the pentium classis on monday by Intel. If the MMX >> doesn't make a big difference I will save my dime and get one of the >> discounted chips probably a 200 or get a 150 and overclock it to 200 >> (or try anyway, tom's hardware page would make me think this is >> possible, it would be the bargain way to do it) My MB shouldnt' be a >> problem it is a Tyan VX with the cache upgrade, the latest BM drivers, >> new WD HD, and MGA Millinium 4mg video card. >> Bottom line after all that rambling. Do you think this game takes >> advantage of the MMX instruction in the new CPU's ? Do you think a >> P200 would be much slower running NFS2 than a P200MMX ? >> Bartman