>Just because a game did not have a squat does not mean, >it's a failure.
Most games developers don't use Visual Basic. They use either Java, C, or C++ to make their games.
> Also, a Dedicated arcade system tends to be much more efficient and utilized than
> any PC based game systems.
> The PC horribly inefficient operation systems coupled with slow bus speeds,
> translation problems, and much more... make the PC the least optimal system to made
> efficient software for.
That depends on what type of PC system it used as a hardware. Not all of them are have flaws.
> "The engine, transmission control, suspension, and tire physics were modeled in
> conjunction with Doug Milliken[3] who was listed as a test driver in the game
> credits. In the 1950s his father William Milliken of Milliken Research led a team at
> Cornell Aeronautical Laboratory in Buffalo NY USA (later Calspan) that converted
> aircraft equations of motion to equations of motion for the automobile, and became
> one of the world's leading experts in car modeling[4]."
We know who this person is. He worked with other arcade companies besides Atari. He was a leading expert in car modeling for only for that time. But things have changed now. That was back in the 80s.
> So, while a PC may have been capable of similar results to the much older race
> drivin... You dont see such complexity, control, and realism the Thunder games. They
> are technically Inferior.
>
> (Mathematics & Physics do not become 'Obsolete' over time)
This I can agree but Mathematics and Physics do become more complex as technology advances as newer hardware is developed.
> - Ohh yes, I was asked to play it while waiting for a movie to start, and
> reluctantly popped in some change. As expected, it sucked to the point that I didnt
> even want to finish playing it, less than 1/4 way thru it. I swear, I almost fell
> asleep when playing that game. Thats how pathetically non-involving it is.
>
That's just you. It's you that don't like the game.
> While Outrun does not have Physics, it at least has fast intense challenge, looks
You are going off topic here. We're not talking about 2D driving games. We're talking 3D driving Games. You should never compare a 2D Driving game to 3D driving games since they are different categories even if they genres are the same. Unless your were comparing Sega's Outrun 2, which is a 3D driving.
> - We were comparing a useless Pile of Crap that is the Thunder games... to games
> that actually have depth. Which sadly means, you cant even follow and argument.
>
No! No! No! You did not understand my point here. You're argument proves invalid. We're not talking about thunder games here. You earlier said that Daytona USA had better Physics simulation than today's arcade driving games of the later generations. So I chose the newer 3D driving game made by Sega as an example. As I said before, Daytona USA was a good game for that time. But it does not feel like a driving game since it has some flaws. Sega's newer 3D drving game Initial D Arcade Stage is simply one of the best 3D driving games they ever released. Damages to your vehicle affects your performance such as speed and velocity. The Driving simulation feels like you are in a race course in real life. In Daytona USA, even when you crash, performance is somewhat affected, but you can eventaully speed up again but does not shows signs of damage to engine or other things. I know what I'm talking about. I have a very close contact who holds a Ph.D in Physics and Electrical Engineering. He even knows all about Physics and computers and modeling simulation. He used to work with the game developers in both consoles and arcade industry. He knows exactly the type of physics simulation used on Hard Drivin' and Daytona USA. You cannot make any physics argument or convince me in anyway unless you can prove to me you are a certified physics expert holding a Ph.D in Physics and you're a certified Electrical Engineer. If you used to manage an arcade game room business, that does not make you a Physics Expert.
> - Graphics only go so far. Mario does not have super high tech graphics... but the
> 2d Marios are some of the most popular and beloved games ever made in history.
>
> The games got cheaper in quality, easier, boring and lifeless.
Sort of but not entirely true. Poorly made games by arcade companies is not the whole thing to blame. As I said before, Arcades are declining because PC Games and Game Consoles are taking over the gaming market due to not only the graphics but the it's design and innovations that made the technology better for the PCs and Consoles. And the economy is not doing so well so the arcade industry is negatively affected by the economy.
> - Arcades are more popular in Japan merely because of population density. Meaning,
I agree but not only because the population density but also the culture is more diverse in Japan than it is here in the US.
> Also, arcades are a place where tons of gambling with Pachinko machines is done..
> and so that supports the places very well.
>
> Even in Japan, the arcades are not doing as good like they used to do... and are
I agree but many are still trying to good last time but not as well like that have before.
|
Index 
Flat 
Re: DU Update: Offroad Thunder
Reply
