Dragon 428

Last updated: 23-01-2006 --Workshop--For Sale--

Last updated: 20-01-2006 --News--Workshop--

Last updated: 13-01-2006 --Workshop--

Uh? Importing some models in 3D max, move them around and then hitting the F9 button to render them is already called "looking up to art work of this standard"? Sorry m8 but you must be joking. The praise goes to the ones that have build all the actual models and done the skinpainting. Without them there wouldn't even be this whole rush of renders from everybody The above comment is aimed at the "render boys" in general. It's nothing personal to you Chops Dragon

Ok I have had some more thoughts about the GFX performance and I do think it might have something to do with the chipset for the motherboard. I came across this piece of info: LINK Does any of you PC guru's have any experience with this utility? cheers Dragon

Hi Alan, I understand completely what you are saying and do understand youre very keen on getting the car in the game. Sparky has done a good job on the model but I think it's a bit of history around Sparky (which you didn't knew about) that holds people back. There are a couple of things that need to be looked into before the car can actualy get into the game. We try to make all the cars in the game equal to each other (handling and speed wise) otherwise everybody would pick a certain car because it is quicker. One of the major things in this is the wheelbase. By making the wheelbase in the model the same as other F2 models from the game this problem gets solved. Downside might be that the model that has been made thus far needs to be altered to suit the "game wheelbase". And altering the model will take up a lot of time, where you might be better of building a brand new model (3D Max model that is, lol). But if the wheelbase on youre model suits the game's wheelbase then there isn't a problem. Also looking at the car I am not sure about the poly count of the car. There is a maximum that 3D Max can export to get the car into the game. Looking at all the poly's that are visable I have the idea that this might cause a problem. Once again it doesn't have to be but it looks like it. Last but not least. Sparky knew about his mapping problems and should have told you so. It's like me saying that I can build you a car but after completing the chassis and rollcage I have to stop as I can't do the rest. As for me, yes I could finnish the model but I don't feel up for it. I have to be in the mood for modeling things and at the moment I am not in that mood. Plus (and please don't get me wrong here) I prefer building a model entirely by myself instead of finnishing/starting a model of someone else. cheers, Dragon

Thanks for the reply's guys, it's been very helpfull but sadly didn't solve the problems. I did run the drivercleaner tool wich seemed to clean up some stuff from my old Nvidia card. Nascar Heat still gives the polygon rate a bottleneck (+-900) and I have ran out of ideas. I am almost starting to think that the brand new card has a failure in it (but then it wouldn't even work?). Anyone have an idea what the polygon rate in Nascar Heat means in combination with the graphix card? Dragon

Last updated: 31-12-2005 --News--Workshop--

Before anyone starts saying that the tracks aren't as in real life, here is a little explaination why they aren't 100% spot on. When AndyG and JayW made the break through in Heat with the track building (they was the 1st in the world to get a new track in Heat so think before you say something) everything was very new to them and us. AndyG knocked up a lot of tracks in a short space of time. He did this as it was the off season and he wanted to get everything ready for the new season when we would start using the new Nascar Heat game. The idea was more tracks and variaty in tracks. He made most of the tracks without even having been there or having any pictures of the track at all. He build them from what other people told him how it would look like. Thats why some tracks might resemble a real life track more then others. I think it doesn't matter if Cowdy, Buxton or whatever tracks are not 100% to the real life. The more important thing is that they are completely different tracks to race on (on-line) and this only adds to the enjoyement of racing. We must be happy with what we have and appriciate that there were folk that have made these tracks. Without the tracks, there wouldn't be a UK Dirt Heat based mod and we might still be racing the DTRSC game. If you think the tracks in Heat don't look good, then I can only say that you have never raced in the time when there was DTRSC. But to us that didn't matter as it was racing at different tracks, that was the big thrill. It's easy to say something isn't right about the modeling of things, but those that model only know what an amount of work goes into the modeling. I would like to wish that altering a model is a simple job to do, but sadly this isn't the case. So next time someone comes up with a question to alter a model in Heat, have another read through this post please as it isn't a click on the button. cheers Dragon

Hi Scrapman, I can't find the AGP settings in my BIOS. I have set the AGP performance to 256Mb now. I am not sure weather I can trust the numbers in Heat as my PC is performing good at the moment. Could it be that the polygon rate number exceeds the limit for Nascar Heat and therefor it puts just a number down. I have no trouble runnig Heat. I just want to know if my GFX card is performing to it's maximum but I am not sure about the numbers in Heat being any good/resebling the true performance of the card Dragon

Thanks for the reply's guys. What I did was install the latest drivers from ATI and that seemed to do the trick (partly). I now have a following problem with the entire PC being a tad slow (which is down to the graphix I think). Especially with shutting down. When checking in Heat how the gfx card performce I have a bottleneck at the Polygon rate (just around 900). I am not sure why the gfx card isn't performing the way it needs to be. I am guessing that the AGP settings for the card are on "auto" (read something about it on some forum). But as it's a 4x and 8x compatible card I think I need to tell the PC that it needs to pick the 4x AGP. It's changable somewhere but just can't find it (in the Bios?) Could it also be that the Bios settings need updating? I had already changed the AGP performance in the Bios from 64Mb to 256Mb but that didn't make a difference. Any advice? Thanks for the tips thus far

John, I am not even getting into Heat. It's the PC that doesn't seem to fire up properly. Lol, youre right about the selling part. What I'll do is the following: - uninstall all the new drivers for the new gfx card - take new card out - put new card in - start PC for a check - install drivers for old card - start PC for a check - uninstall old drivers ( in the hope that ALL the drivers are now being removed) - take out old card - put new card in - start PC without installing new drivers for a check - install new drivers in the hope that it works - worst case, install drivers from omega site I don't know if the above is the right way to do it but i't's just a "feeling" that I have

Installed a ATI Radeon 9600 256Mb AGP card in my PC yesterday. Only to have the exact same problem as Michael. After loading screen, the screen goes blank (into sleeping mode) and the PC doesn't do anything anymore. Only a reset can fire the PC up again. When bying the card i specificly asked if it was needed to uninstall the old drivers from the old gfx card. This wasn't needed and a simple install of the new card would cuase no problems. Having done so I did get problems. Now I have tried what is written in this thread to solve the problem but all failed. After reading some techy forums and stuff I think there are still some drivers from my old gfx card on my PC but I don't have a clue where to find them. I did an uninstall of the old drivers/software but this hasn't cured the problem. Now I am not a computer genious but do want to sove the problem. Whjats the best advice to do? Bring it to a PC shop so they can solve it or is there still a chance of solving it myself? cheers, Dragon

Tried it an worked a treat Jarry but......... When in the background options again I can now select a different background (browing it) but I can't select it. The menu doesn't add it to the list of standard XP backgrounds. It looks like my excisting background is "locked" into the standard background and I can only change the background my giving the new background the same file name as the current one (hope this makes sence) Dragon

Thx jarry, I'll give it a go tonight

Last updated: 18-12-2005 --Workshop--

Having encountered and got rid of the virus that struck my PC on friday it seems that I am not able to change my background of my desktop anymore. I can go in the optione menu for the screen without problems but as soon as I get into the background options, nothing can be clicked on and the buttons seem to be locked. The options from all the other stuff like resolution etc. work fine. Any idea how to solve it? Dragon

Last updated: 12-12-2005 --Workshop--

Main question is: "what are we trying to achieve with non Jolt paying members being locked out of certain parts of the forum"? And secondly, does it solve the problem? Personally I don't see what the current problem is as I haven't seen the effects to the forum of the non payed posters. If it is like Pedz says to bring down the amount of posts by non paying members then I don’t think the proposed idea is answer. If the non payers still want to ask a F1, F2, SSC or whatever subject, they will post it in the "public" thread and not in the F1 thread. The amount of posts stays the same, it's just located at a different place on the forum. The only positive thing about this is that the payed members sections will be "cleaner" post wise. If you want to bring down the bandwith/posts from non members, then the only solution is to make the entire forum for payed Jolt members only (like Grasser says). That way you are sure that the posts on the forum are from members only. Downside is that this will not attract any new members. You can't stop people that run a free league to get info from our UK Dirt league. There is a Dutch free league that is set up somewhere last year. The best thing they can do is have a look on our forum and see how things are organized. They still have a lot to learn but why go and invent the wheel again? Funny part of this is that they even have some sort of UK Dirt awards. The categories are an exact copy/translation of what is summed up in our UK Dirt awards (once again I cant fault them for that and they are not doing something illegal). Which brings us back to the questions I asked at the start of this post. Just my 2 eurocents worth. Dragon

Last updated: 04-12-2005 --Workshop--

Does DTRSC run on XP as well? Havent tried it yet but maybe one knows? I tried to install Colin Mc Rae Rally 1.0 on the PC again the other week but had no joy with it. Seems that XP and the newer grpahics cards don't like the game I got it to work only on a resolution from 320x240 pixels and after a stage the gane crashed out. I have looked at a couple of forums and stuff for answeres but no joy. I also had some help from JohnMid but we couldn't get any further either. Someone has some more ideas how to solve it? Dragon

Last updated: 26-11-2005 --Workshop--

Last updated: 21-11-2005 --News--Workshop--

I didn't see this thread but I'd like to echo what AndyG said. Thanks guys. Dragon

Happy birthday and have a nice day Bozz