CART Trial Version Comments

> I must say I am disappointed quite a little bit by this. I have >been anticipating this demo for a while. While the car physics and >sounds may be good, the graphics leave a lot to be desired in late >1997. First of all, the other cars look terrible to me. There's no >comparison to the look of the cars in this and the ones in ICR2, N2, >UbiF1, and even the sorry Psygnosis F1. I can't really comment on the graphics issues you raised as I haven't installed a 3D accelerator in my system yet. But, I have previously posted some critical comments regarding the physics model in CART vs. GP2. I now think that there needs to be a new level beyond the Professional level as it stands right now in CART. It should require a great deal of tweaking of setup and practice to find the ideal line and speed in order to approach the real life lap record at a course like Laguna. The professional level should be just that: a level of realism that demands precise driving in order to be competitive. While the physics are perhaps a good first attempt, I still believe the cars have way too much grip. I couldn't possibly have been throwing the car around in GP2 (or in real life for that matter) as I can in CART. There should be no way that a person with one or two days experience should be able to get the kind of lap times that are being achieved. Also, as I said in a previous post, when you do put a wheel off on grass or gravel, there should be a more significant decrease in speed and control. With CART, missing a turn is no big deal as you don't loose a realistic amount of speed or control. These are all a function of the physics model and are the basis of my criticism.

Make sure you have "hardware acceleration" checked in the graphics setup. Otherwise it defaults to your normal video card. I also was a little disappointed by this game after trying it. I personally like Psygnosis Formula 1 much better.... the graphics are a little more sharp in Formula 1... I would like CART much better if the steering wasn't so bad. Maybe its just me, but the CART cars steer the same as the Monster Truck Madness trucks do... (meaning the steering is not very responsive and I feel like I'm driving a truck), Indy type cars are supposed to have very responsive steering, with the ability to dart in and out of traffic quickly, something this game does not have.

Quoted text (32 lines)

> I must say I am disappointed quite a little bit by this. I have >been anticipating this demo for a while. While the car physics and >sounds may be good, the graphics leave a lot to be desired in late >1997. First of all, the other cars look terrible to me. There's no >comparison to the look of the cars in this and the ones in ICR2, N2, >UbiF1, and even the sorry Psygnosis F1. > Like another post mentioned, the graphics of ICR2 Rend look much, >much better. I fiddled with this thing at every setting I could think >of, and it just looks bland. And even worse, I'm getting choppy >performance with a 200 Mhz MMX Overdrive\32 RAM\512K L2\Intergraph >Intense V1000 Rend\Diamond Monster. Yes, I have all the latest drivers, >hardware accleration is enabled, etc. The frame rate speeds up when I >turn some of the graphics down, but it is still CHOPPY. The frame is OK >but I get a lot of the Win95 'hiccups'. I find this hard to believe. >The Ubisoft F1 demo has much, much more detail than this and SCREAMS on >this computer. > I want to like this sim, I really do. I am not so convinced that the >sounds are all that much better than ICR2, and perhaps the physics of >the car are better, but the graphics engine really could have been a lot >better. This is supposed to utilize MMX? I get 70-89 frames per second >with POD! Microsoft, take a look at some of these other graphics >engines: Moto Racer, NFS2SE, POD, ICR2, N2, UBIF1. These all play at >30+ frames per second on my computer. I can't you what my frame rate >was; I deleted the demo before I saw the FAQ. Perhaps I'll try it >again. But I do know that it was disturbing compared to the >above-mentioned titles. > One final thing. I have no way of knowing which 3D card it was >using. Before this, all Direct 3D games have used my 3Dfx card, but >this one looks like it might have been using the inferior Rendition >card. Is there any way to tell, or switch, which card is used for >Direct 3D here? I might give it a second chance if someone can shed >some light here.

I must say I am disappointed quite a little bit by this. I have been anticipating this demo for a while. While the car physics and sounds may be good, the graphics leave a lot to be desired in late 1997. First of all, the other cars look terrible to me. There's no comparison to the look of the cars in this and the ones in ICR2, N2, UbiF1, and even the sorry Psygnosis F1. Like another post mentioned, the graphics of ICR2 Rend look much, much better. I fiddled with this thing at every setting I could think of, and it just looks bland. And even worse, I'm getting choppy performance with a 200 Mhz MMX Overdrive\32 RAM\512K L2\Intergraph Intense V1000 Rend\Diamond Monster. Yes, I have all the latest drivers, hardware accleration is enabled, etc. The frame rate speeds up when I turn some of the graphics down, but it is still CHOPPY. The frame is OK but I get a lot of the Win95 'hiccups'. I find this hard to believe. The Ubisoft F1 demo has much, much more detail than this and SCREAMS on this computer. I want to like this sim, I really do. I am not so convinced that the sounds are all that much better than ICR2, and perhaps the physics of the car are better, but the graphics engine really could have been a lot better. This is supposed to utilize MMX? I get 70-89 frames per second with POD! Microsoft, take a look at some of these other graphics engines: Moto Racer, NFS2SE, POD, ICR2, N2, UBIF1. These all play at 30+ frames per second on my computer. I can't you what my frame rate was; I deleted the demo before I saw the FAQ. Perhaps I'll try it again. But I do know that it was disturbing compared to the above-mentioned titles. One final thing. I have no way of knowing which 3D card it was using. Before this, all Direct 3D games have used my 3Dfx card, but this one looks like it might have been using the inferior Rendition card. Is there any way to tell, or switch, which card is used for Direct 3D here? I might give it a second chance if someone can shed some light here.

complete opposite here, I can't even drive straight >Make sure you have "hardware acceleration" checked in the graphics setup. >Otherwise it defaults to your normal video card. >I also was a little disappointed by this game after trying it. I personally >like Psygnosis Formula 1 much better.... the graphics are a little more >sharp in Formula 1... I would like CART much better if the steering wasn't >so bad. Maybe its just me, but the CART cars steer the same as the Monster >Truck Madness trucks do... (meaning the steering is not very responsive and >I feel like I'm driving a truck), Indy type cars are supposed to have very >responsive steering, with the ability to dart in and out of traffic quickly,

Quoted text (36 lines)

>something this game does not have. >> I must say I am disappointed quite a little bit by this. I have >>been anticipating this demo for a while. While the car physics and >>sounds may be good, the graphics leave a lot to be desired in late >>1997. First of all, the other cars look terrible to me. There's no >>comparison to the look of the cars in this and the ones in ICR2, N2, >>UbiF1, and even the sorry Psygnosis F1. >> Like another post mentioned, the graphics of ICR2 Rend look much, >>much better. I fiddled with this thing at every setting I could think >>of, and it just looks bland. And even worse, I'm getting choppy >>performance with a 200 Mhz MMX Overdrive\32 RAM\512K L2\Intergraph >>Intense V1000 Rend\Diamond Monster. Yes, I have all the latest drivers, >>hardware accleration is enabled, etc. The frame rate speeds up when I >>turn some of the graphics down, but it is still CHOPPY. The frame is OK >>but I get a lot of the Win95 'hiccups'. I find this hard to believe. >>The Ubisoft F1 demo has much, much more detail than this and SCREAMS on >>this computer. >> I want to like this sim, I really do. I am not so convinced that the >>sounds are all that much better than ICR2, and perhaps the physics of >>the car are better, but the graphics engine really could have been a lot >>better. This is supposed to utilize MMX? I get 70-89 frames per second >>with POD! Microsoft, take a look at some of these other graphics >>engines: Moto Racer, NFS2SE, POD, ICR2, N2, UBIF1. These all play at >>30+ frames per second on my computer. I can't you what my frame rate >>was; I deleted the demo before I saw the FAQ. Perhaps I'll try it >>again. But I do know that it was disturbing compared to the >>above-mentioned titles. >> One final thing. I have no way of knowing which 3D card it was >>using. Before this, all Direct 3D games have used my 3Dfx card, but >>this one looks like it might have been using the inferior Rendition >>card. Is there any way to tell, or switch, which card is used for >>Direct 3D here? I might give it a second chance if someone can shed >>some light here.

Are you sure you have traction control off. Boy when I removed this help, i lost it quite a few times. Although, I must saw that even if I goosed it coming out of the yurns, the car would stick like glue.......With ICR2, you had to be more gentle with the throttle. :( Crimson Crimson's Sim World www.total.net/~fmoriss

Quoted text (8 lines)

>> Although the car will become unstable, it is possible to go through >> turn five without lifting. >Oops, make that turn six. Of course you cannot go through five without >lifting. >Turn five requires a slow down. I usually downshift to fourth gear. >..and as someone else mentioned, it is far too easy to get good lap times.

Guys, IMHO, I think you'll find that spending more time in the garage might improve your overall assessment of the sim. Brett

Quoted text (49 lines)

> [snip] > >I can't really comment on the graphics issues you raised as I haven't > >installed a 3D accelerator in my system yet. But, I have previously posted > >some critical comments regarding the physics model in CART vs. GP2. I now > >think that there needs to be a new level beyond the Professional level as it > >stands right now in CART. It should require a great deal of tweaking of > >setup and practice to find the ideal line and speed in order to approach the > >real life lap record at a course like Laguna. The professional level should > >be just that: a level of realism that demands precise driving in order to be > >competitive. > >While the physics are perhaps a good first attempt, I still believe the cars > >have way too much grip. I couldn't possibly have been throwing the car > >around in GP2 (or in real life for that matter) as I can in CART. There > >should be no way that a person with one or two days experience should be > >able to get the kind of lap times that are being achieved. > >Also, as I said in a previous post, when you do put a wheel off on grass or > >gravel, there should be a more significant decrease in speed and control. > >With CART, missing a turn is no big deal as you don't loose a realistic > >amount of speed or control. These are all a function of the physics model > >and are the basis of my criticism. > Frank, > I must agree with all of this. I'm not too worried about graphics, as > long as they're good. I am really concerned about racing realism. I am > only using the trial version but I don't think this is an issue. I > have all aids off and difficulty set to professional. The grip issue > is an absolute joke. I can stress how important this is to a real > simulation. Coming out of the corkscrew, I can slam the throttle in > any gear without a hint of a spin. I can almost drive as fast on the > gravel as I can on the track. > This is a real missed opportunity - they clearly have the technology > to get this right. I understand someone officially related to the > games is posting FAQs to the group. I hope this issue is picked up as, > until it is addressed, this cannot possibly be considered an accurate > simulator. In all other respects (except pits and flags), I think it's > an excellent start. Dare one ask for a 'patch' in the near future? > Regards > -- > Neil Charlton > http://www.charlt.demon.co.uk/ > --

The issue of grip is coming up a lot. This Sim was developed with the full cooperation and testing input of many CART drivers (Blundell, Rahal, several others ...) - the physics model is based on their tuning input. I am sure some of you have raced open wheel cars, but for the rest of you we do want to stress that you should not be measuring what is "realistic" by simply referring to other Sims you may play. Who is to say that other feel is the "correct" one? Yes CART feels different - this is natural. Does it have "unrealistic grip"? The professional CART drivers don't think so. Needless to say you "cannot please all the people all the time" but at least keep an open mind. We are reading and responding to all the postings and email - we are committed to making the CPR series the very best based on listening to your input and suggestions. Keep em coming ... -- Posted using Reference.COM http://www.reference.com Browse, Search and Post Usenet and Mailing list Archive and Catalog. InReference, Inc. accepts no responsibility for the content of this posting.

>Yes , yes and yes. Are you seriously saying that flooring the throttle >in first in the middle of a hairpin with an 800bhp car *shouldn't* >make you spin out? Hmm, in professional mode I've found after flooring the throttle results in me doing doughnuts. I'm not sure if the wheel was straight or not all the times i attempted this...

Quoted text (27 lines)

>>The issue of grip is coming up a lot. >>This Sim was developed with the full cooperation and testing >>input of many CART drivers (Blundell, Rahal, several others ...) >>- the physics model is based on their tuning input. >>Does it have "unrealistic grip"? >>The professional CART drivers don't think so. >Hey Dean, good to see you participating in the forum. While it is nice >that Blundell and others approve of the physics, and the physics do >seem very good overall, the grip may be set too high, and here's why: >Folks, myself included, are doing 249 mph laps at Michigan, 203 mph >laps at Miami, 1:05.xx second laps at Detroit, 192 mph laps at >Milwaukee, 1:34.xx laps at Elkhart Lake, 0:54.xx second laps at >Toronto, and so on. If I am not mistaken all of these laps are >*significantly* better than the real track records. >I am confident that even with my modest skills, I can break the real >track record at *every* track by a significant margin (barring of >course some unusual difference between a track in CPR and the real >thing). Something *must* to be responsible for the super performances >in CPR and grip is the most likely suspect. If not grip, then what is >it? >In my opinion, if you fix this problem, the physics will be right on.

First of all, I'd like to thank Dean for being here and fielding all of these questions and inquiries. I know you'll get a lot of abuse and exaggerated comments along the way, but I'm equally sure you'll get some valuable feeback as well. I, as well as many others here feel CART has promise and could even live up to its hype as a state of the art sim if it is fine tuned. As I've posted previously, my greatest focus is with the physics followed by the AI. Dean, you stated: I don't know if you intend this statement as the end all of discussion regarding the accuracy of the physics model. If you do, I think your missing an opportunity and a portion of the market segment. Frankly, I don't think you should realy solely on professional drivers as sole arbiters of reality because they don't have much experience behind the wheel of a sim and don't know just how much is possible. There is no question that the aim of a true sim is to be as true to the actual event as possible. But feedback that they give you can and I would suspect was watered down by virtue of the fact that their experience of driving involves so many other physical sensations and interactions with their cars that we in the sim racing world will never experience. When you put these guys behind the wheel of a sim you and ask them to evaluate the level of grip in the car, you've taken away the whole feel they get from a car from the seat of their pants. Thats how they tell how a car is about to break loose in a curve. Behind the wheel of a sim (perhaps the only sim they'll ever spend any appreciable time with) they are a bit like fish out of water. I'm not saying their input should be ignored. Far from it! But don't use their lack of finding a problem with the grip as an excuse for not accepting that there may in fact be a problem with the grip and it is something that needs to be fixed. Its funny, but at every mention of a potential problem with the physics model, your feedback I've seen has been something akin to "your now treading on sacred ground" and theres a definate relucance to admit there may be a problem that requires tweaking. If you and the Terminal Reality folks are serious about wanting and using feedback from the racing sim enthusiasts, you all should also have an open mind. Even when it relates to aspects of the game you seem to feel are sacred cows. If you feel I'm biased and not being open minded about my observations. OK. I disagree and feel I'm giving your product a fair and honest evaluation. But I'm not the only one saying this. The post I've quoted above is from Getzen and he makes an important point regarding the same issue and he, as you well know, was and is a beta tester for CART. There have been others as well who have agreed with this. Its not a *** theory. Were independent people voicing a similar concern. Please don't discount us and our observations and say: Addressing the physics model and the grip will be an excellent way to ensure a longer life span for the product as more people will be able to go farther and farther with the game if (as in real life racing) the additional time spent practising results in greater and greater skill and reduced lap times and perhaps in time being able to set a lap record. When a sim racer can set a lap record after one weekend of practise, it doesn't bode well for the long term interest in the game.

Quoted text (8 lines)

> I must agree with all of this. I'm not too worried about graphics, as > long as they're good. I am really concerned about racing realism. I am > only using the trial version but I don't think this is an issue. I > have all aids off and difficulty set to professional. The grip issue > is an absolute joke. I can stress how important this is to a real > simulation. Coming out of the corkscrew, I can slam the throttle in > any gear without a hint of a spin. I can almost drive as fast on the > gravel as I can on the track.

Have you tried racing with Traction Control OFF? I can spin at will with it off...it can be a challenge to get out of the slower track sections without spinning the wheels. You can smoke the tires through all six gears basically going nowhere... -- Neil Yeatman Ajax, Ontario, CANADA

> When a sim racer can set > a lap record after one weekend of practise, it doesn't bode well for the > long term interest in the game. I would think it would be very difficult if not impossible to compare real life lap time and a simulation for several reasons. 1. Track is bound to not represent the actual track. 2. Cars are bound to not represent the actual cars. 3. Real drivers (no matter what they say) have some "fear". (may not be very relevant though) 4. Depending on how simplified the physics model is, who knows? 5. A bejillion other variables . . . A nice test for lateral g force should be a simple skidpad test since lateral accelleration is equal to rotational rate squared times radius. ie a=w^2r where w in radians/sec, a in ft/sec^2 and r in ft. Or something like that anyway, I'm not arguing the formula, I'm saying it should be trivial to simulate a skidpad and determine if the car is following this simple physics model. Do simulated g-force at different size skid pads roughly correspond to actual g-forces? Depending of the type of physics/experiment you are doing, you may be lucky to find your experimental values withing 25% of theoretical. Something as complicated as a car going around a track spending lots of time in non-linear traction and all sorts of other variables I think squabling over a couple of seconds is really pointless.

Quoted text (11 lines)

> Make sure you have "hardware acceleration" checked in the graphics setup. > Otherwise it defaults to your normal video card. > I also was a little disappointed by this game after trying it. I personally > like Psygnosis Formula 1 much better.... the graphics are a little more > sharp in Formula 1... I would like CART much better if the steering wasn't > so bad. Maybe its just me, but the CART cars steer the same as the Monster > Truck Madness trucks do... (meaning the steering is not very responsive and > I feel like I'm driving a truck), Indy type cars are supposed to have very > responsive steering, with the ability to dart in and out of traffic quickly, > something this game does not have.

Now, this is ludicrous! Comparing the BAD arcade game by Psygnosis to CART! If there ever was a game with bad control input it has to be Formula 1... 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!

Quoted text (15 lines)

> > One final thing. I have no way of knowing which 3D card it was > > using. Before this, all Direct 3D games have used my 3Dfx card, but > > this one looks like it might have been using the inferior Rendition > > card. Is there any way to tell, or switch, which card is used for > > Direct 3D here? I might give it a second chance if someone can shed > > some light here. > Have to say I agree. I have been wondering the same thing. Which card > is this game using 3dfx or rendition. Also, for some reason when I > start a race the game defaults to VGA graphics in full screen mode. I > have to press F4 to get acclerated graphics i.e. 3dfx or rendition what > ever the heck its using. > Anybody know how to tell which card is being utilized? > thanks > Karter

Agree, same problem,I can't believe having a P166 , 32M ,ati all in wonder, monster 3d and having the best graphics choice turned on ,the game can give me only 10 fps.that's ridiculous.Turning most of the graphics of ,I can manage to get only about 14fps. Yes,I have acc hardware on , full screen, mono sound(which is also a ridiculous advice to get better fps),etc. Where's the secret path.If there isn't one ,and what i'm getting is the top,maybe this game is being released by Intel and not by Microsoft. PS:In my system,I run games like POD,NFS2,motorace,F1ubisoft,with much more detailed graphics than Laguna and they run FANTASTICALLY(30+fps).Am I missing something,or 10fps is what i can get?

That sounds a little like "evading the question" to me :) The comments of the CART drivers were undoubtedly instrumental in turning this into something which feels like a CART car. Remember though that it isn't a CART car, it's a simulation of one, and we have thousands of hours more experience at driving sims than any CART driver. I've yet to see any high-performance car with that amount of grip when accelerating out of low-speed corners, and especially not any car with 800+hp. That is one aspect that the CART drive apparently passed as "realistic", so how can the everything else be considered sacrosanct based upon that same input? That;s _REALLY_ good to know, and I have to say CPR is an excellent starting point. As a multiplayer racer it's loads of fun, easy to drive and is pretty much a must-buy IMO. To be considered as the best simulation it still has a long way to go however, but seeing the way FlightSim has developed I have high hopes for future releases. Best Regards, John (Sim Racing News)

I use Professional mode also, and I have the same problem in the DEMO : the traction when coming out of slow/middle corners. You can play with settings to make it spin or not to spin, but with 800+hp, I think, with any kind of setting, rear end should get loose, when nailing the throttle. Except for that 'small' problem, and very slow AI, the game is absolutely fantastic. -- Gregory Alferov, "Greg" ~~_____~~ http://home.inreach.com/tifosi/ [__]=[_(-)_]=[__]

I agree 100%. Nailed it. But you could have saved yourself 30 minutes by reading the FAQ's.>> No, I'm not going to lose my temper, but I'm darn sure going to feel like it. I posted several messages here explaining EXACTLY what was going on. I *do* know where those keys are, because I used them before you even posted the first FAQ is. The fact of the matter is that while talking to another CPR user over the phone, we did some experimentation. REGARDLESS of how I set the Ctrl-F, Ctrl-H settings (all the way up to 31 frame-rate-be-damned), the Firestone bridge did NOT begin to be drawn until I was about a 3rd of the way down the straight, and didn't finish until I was almost underneath it. That is WITH MAXIMUM DRAW AHEAD. On a P166 w/ a Rendition v1000 board, my buddy was seeing it draw as he turned towards it coming out of turn 3, even when he set draw ahead LOWER than the value I was using. What I'm trying to ask (and this will be the nth time since this message from you is the first response I've seen to my query), is whether or not the game looks at a CPU model/speed and then decides what the draw-ahead RANGE will be. I.e. 15 will be this and 31 will be that for this machine, but it will be something else for another machine? I have sent both newsgroup and private e-mails to you guys asking about this, so imagine why I'm a little annoyed to find that I've been blasted like a peasant because you mistakenly assume that I haven't explored every option presented to me. Randy Randy Magruder Staff Writer Digital Sportspage [link lost in import]

Here's your entire posting:- If you think information on your visibility settings was somehow contained in this posting I need to get a bigger monitor - I'm obviously missing some lines of text somewhere. We included these keys SPECIFICALLY to allow the user to set the visibility (pop-up) to a level of their own choosing. And the same settings, on any machine, result in the same amount of visibility. Hope that answers your question. -- Posted using Reference.COM http://www.reference.com Browse, Search and Post Usenet and Mailing list Archive and Catalog. InReference, Inc. accepts no responsibility for the content of this posting.

Yah, And when set I it to 31 distance My Framerate goes from 22 FPS to about 10. Great!!! Can it get any worse? I got a Abit IT5H with a 233mmx and 64 megs ram. Overclocked to 83x3= 250 3D Blaster and a Monster3D. GP2 runs better!!!!!! Love that D3D...NOT. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------- http://www.reference.com

Quoted text (7 lines)

> Neil, thanks for the reply. As I stated, I'm in professional mode with > *all* help turned off. Here's a test. Approach the corkscrew and throw > it intoi the left hand part. Throw the wheel over for the right and > floor the throttle. It will *not* spin. Every open-wheeler I've ever > raced (nothing like 800bhp) would spin out. Do you not get these > symptoms? Could be I'm still doing something wrong (wouldn't be the > first time).

Hi Neil....I tried this as you asked, and it *does* spin...if I go wide open from either neutral and shift into first, or if I have full brakes on in 1st gear and take my foot off the brake. At this spot in the corkscrew you describe it puts me BOOM into the wall. I can do the same on any part of the track (that I've tried). Maybe you're not getting on the throttle fast enough? I don't know what kind of controller you're using...I have a TSW. Maybe if you're using a joystick the effect is slightly different. By the way, while watching SpeedVision the other day they had Sports Cars running at Laguna. The commentators were saying that while the Corkscrew is a low-speed turn, it's not difficult...the turn that follows is one of the (if not THE) hardest on the track. -- Neil Yeatman Ajax, Ontario, CANADA

>Control F moves out the clipping distance >Control H moves it in >Somebody tell me how I make this ANY CLEARER! Put a 'Draw Ahead' slider on the Graphics options dialog where it belongs..... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This space intentionally left blank

> Here it is ... write it down ... > Control F moves out the clipping distance > Control H moves it in The steering in the game seemed quite twitchy until I started playing with - and + controls. By hitting the - control I managed to get rid of most of the oversteer. But by reading the read me file I have managed to make the game run accecptably. Karter

I have to second what Neil Yeatman wrote. The lefthand entry into the Laguna corkscrew is tricky because of elevation changes and speed. The second half is an increasing radius turn, so you can actually get the power on quite early, although it's downhill. Remember that even though CART cars have enormous power/weight ratios, they also have tremendous download available via wing angles and Gurney flaps, which can help the rear tires stay hooked up on acceleration. Turn 9 (the lefthand sweeper that follows the corkscrew) is a tough turn. Because it is a fast turn, you are getting a lot of aerodynamic download to help with grip. However, the turn will bite you unless you do it just right. I'm usually in 5th gear there; I like to just breath the throttle, turn in late, and nail the throttle again to keep the rear planted. Aim for a late apex or you may run off the track at driver's right coming out of the turn. Cheers, John (CART Team)

Quoted text (27 lines)

>> Neil, thanks for the reply. As I stated, I'm in professional mode with >> *all* help turned off. Here's a test. Approach the corkscrew and throw >> it intoi the left hand part. Throw the wheel over for the right and >> floor the throttle. It will *not* spin. Every open-wheeler I've ever >> raced (nothing like 800bhp) would spin out. Do you not get these >> symptoms? Could be I'm still doing something wrong (wouldn't be the >> first time). >Hi Neil....I tried this as you asked, and it *does* spin...if I go wide >open from either neutral and shift into first, or if I have full brakes >on in 1st gear and take my foot off the brake. At this spot in the >corkscrew you describe it puts me BOOM into the wall. >I can do the same on any part of the track (that I've tried). Maybe >you're not getting on the throttle fast enough? I don't know what kind >of controller you're using...I have a TSW. Maybe if you're using a >joystick the effect is slightly different. >By the way, while watching SpeedVision the other day they had Sports >Cars running at Laguna. The commentators were saying that while the >Corkscrew is a low-speed turn, it's not difficult...the turn that >follows is one of the (if not THE) hardest on the track. >-- >Neil Yeatman >Ajax, Ontario, CANADA

Quoted text (22 lines)

> If you think information on your visibility settings was somehow > contained in this posting I need to get a bigger monitor - I'm > obviously missing some lines of text somewhere. > We included these keys SPECIFICALLY to allow the user to > set the visibility (pop-up) to a level of their own choosing. > And the same settings, on any machine, result in the > same amount of visibility. > Hope that answers your question. > -- > Posted using Reference.COM http://WWW.Reference.COM > Browse, Search and Post Usenet and Mailing list Archive and Catalog. > InReference, Inc. accepts no responsibility for the content of this posting.

I have the same problem with the CPR Demo, and it has nothing to do with the visibility setting, it is an issue with the Diamond Stealth II. I initially ran the demo on an Intense 3D 100, and even at the minimum visibility setting of 15, I easily see far enough down the track to set up for corners, see brake markers. I got about 18fps on my P166 with***pit view, all graphics at a minimum. I then installed the Stealth II, and got 28-30fps, same graphic settings. However, most of the trackside objects and the track are now drawn much closer to my car than before. Sometimes I do not see a footbridge until I am almost under it. The visibility setting has no effect on this. Sometimes parts of the fences or walls are not drawn at all, even as I go by them. It makes it practically impossible to drive, as you have to brake before you see the corners. It is stated in the demo readme file that the Stealth II is one of the video cards that has "issues" with it, and this must be the issue. I do hope someone address it, be it Microsoft, Rendition , or Diamond. Given the Stealth II's D3D speed, I hope it is fixed to make the sim playable. As for the steering feel, I did not like it at first. There did not seem to be enough control at low speed, and too much at high speed. It felt like the dead zone was too big, and was leading to over-control when the wheel was turned far enough to do anything. Looking at the front wheel in "suspension view", I saw that there was very little dead zone. I cranked the lock to lock up to max, the sensitivity reduction with speed to max, and a small amount of non-linear steering in. The steering is more quick and precise on fast straights than I was used to. The car seemed easy to upset on a fast straight. I increased the spring settings, and this reduced the body roll, which seemed to make the car more stable at high speed. Still could use more lock to lock. Joystick calibration problems - even though I get a good cal in Windows, it looks like the gas/brake center is not being read right. When the car is not moving, it looks like there is a small amount of gas applied. If I cal the pedals with a little gas applied when centering, it is better. Also, there is the intermittant sound of the tires screeching and the engine revving when stopped. I notice when I cal the pedals, that the position crosshair is oscillating. This may be the cause. I'm using a CH Gamecard III, don't have any problems in any other sims. May try using manual Gamecard settings to see if Windows can read it better. -- "Feel Lucky, Scubaboy?" - Discovery Channel, Shark Week, 1995

On Tue, 4 Nov 1997 13:07:33 -0800, "John Browne" >early, although it's downhill. Remember that even though CART cars have >enormous power/weight ratios, they also have tremendous download available >via wing angles and Gurney flaps, which can help the rear tires stay hooked >up on acceleration. Yep, and this aerodynamic downforce helps to increase grip with increasing speed. Given the low speed through the first section of the corkscrew, it doesn't explain the velcro like properties of the track at the exit. I haven't found this turn too tricky at all. Seems to be pretty much flat in fifth (unless I miss the turn-in in which case it's tough to stay on the track). Cheers! John

>I look forward to the final version, which has been pushed back to "week of >Nov 25th" :( No need for the "frown" - I'd rather have them take a little extra time to work out some of the stuff people have been complaining about here rather than release it and patch the heck out of it later... (and, on the subject, I think the CART team has done a great job of reading and repsonding to complaints/concerns of the people here, even though a lot of the complaining being done is less than civil (for lack of a better word)...) So - to MS and TR, I say, "Do it right!" even if it takes an extra week or two... (and also "Thanks for listening..."). - Mike. ==================================================== Mike Holthouse - Indianapolis, IN I'm sick of spam!! To e-mail me, remove the "x"... ====================================================