GT4 WRS Week 55 : "Deep Blue"
- Thread starter Tedehur
- 190 comments
- 7,576 views
Tedehur
Staff Emeritus
- 4,322
- France
- Z spec
Sorry for the car choice. Due to my current lack of time, I didn't check in Famine's list when the car was available and assumed it appears pretty frequently in the used car lot. I was wrong, my bad.
Yet, I fear that changing anything to the rules (like allowing similar cars) will only make the rules fuzzy (I mean, fuzzier than they are now) and perhaps even introduce a killer car that would waste the whole race.
So I'd rather stick with the current rules, even if it divides by 2 the number of submissions.
Sorry for those who won't race the WRS this week due to my mistake, and see you next week (that will give you time for a last minute improvement in the BC qualifiers)
BTW, if any of you has wishes for the coming weeks, the suggestion thread is waiting for you
Yet, I fear that changing anything to the rules (like allowing similar cars) will only make the rules fuzzy (I mean, fuzzier than they are now) and perhaps even introduce a killer car that would waste the whole race.
So I'd rather stick with the current rules, even if it divides by 2 the number of submissions.
Sorry for those who won't race the WRS this week due to my mistake, and see you next week (that will give you time for a last minute improvement in the BC qualifiers)
BTW, if any of you has wishes for the coming weeks, the suggestion thread is waiting for you
- 3,105
- GTP_MisterWeary
Well it did take a while for me to get to the 22b but it was worth it 👍 The car is awesome, it drives so nice and the power to weight makes it a really fun drive. I've always liked the 22b since I saw one at the national WRX meeting a couple of years back, the flared guards look so cool!
Anyway, my first clean race (barely
):
Lap #1
T1: 0'30.964
T2: 1'02.028
T3: 1'30.996
Lap #2
T1: 0'24.590
T2: 0'55.971
T3: 1'2x.xx0
Lap #3
T1: 0'24.562
T2: 0'54.920
T3: 1'23.840
Board Updated
Anyway, my first clean race (barely
):Lap #1
T1: 0'30.964
T2: 1'02.028
T3: 1'30.996
Lap #2
T1: 0'24.590
T2: 0'55.971
T3: 1'2x.xx0
Lap #3
T1: 0'24.562
T2: 0'54.920
T3: 1'23.840
Board Updated
- 703
well i am gunna have to do wait for it to get into the used car garage again, o see... otherwise i wont be able to race this week also... 
another 20 weeks to go, cant wait to finally get the car...
another 20 weeks to go, cant wait to finally get the car...
- 900
- Devon
AWESOME splits holl01! I finally got the correct car after having to sell 297 fcnukig wheels!! Also turns out i had the correct car already but the stupid garage menu chose to display Subaru impreza coupe... and misses out the premium sport part of the name untill you click on the car!! Anyway after all that i decided i didnt like the car anyway and have no clean splits yet. anger over now.
Laurence5905
Premium
- 322
MisterWeary
I agree with you completely! It's really an awesome car, especially once you get it set-up right... Wheelspin is virtually non-existant, even with no aids turned on. And the handling is pretty darn good as well -- once you get rid of that 4WD understeer with the proper setup.
Despite the difficulties this week in obtaining the car, I think this is an excellent combo.
Anyone who needs it, I'm happy to e-mail you my save-game so you can get the car without having to advance your days anymore... Just PM me with your e-mail address... I'm running NTSC format, just so you know...
- 1,424
- Kent, UK.
- DG_1275GT
I don't want to instigate a torrent of PM's threatening me 
but I already had the car in my garage, I started a game ages ago with the intention of buying/winning one of each car so hopefully this weeks troubles shouldn't affect me if the situation arises again. I still don't have a Max drive yet (still can't find out if it'll work on my 🤬 Win 98 computer, if anybody else is still using Win 98 [there must be someone else out there] with a max drive please let me know?) If it does happen again I'd be more than happy to supply a (PAL) game save for anyone who wants one, (720 odd different cars, 2500+ days, about half gold and half silver licences and currently on 98.1% complete. Yes I do have a life, I've just not slept since playstations were invented!)
Still not sure if I have a clean lap yet, (got a replay to double check) but my fastest lap so far was a 1'25. something. Again not breaking any land speed records this week but I'm certain I can knock off a couple more seconds at least.
Thanks again Holl01 for the set-up advice, (posted on the first page of this thread I think).
Happy racing folks.
but I already had the car in my garage, I started a game ages ago with the intention of buying/winning one of each car so hopefully this weeks troubles shouldn't affect me if the situation arises again. I still don't have a Max drive yet (still can't find out if it'll work on my 🤬 Win 98 computer, if anybody else is still using Win 98 [there must be someone else out there] with a max drive please let me know?) If it does happen again I'd be more than happy to supply a (PAL) game save for anyone who wants one, (720 odd different cars, 2500+ days, about half gold and half silver licences and currently on 98.1% complete. Yes I do have a life, I've just not slept since playstations were invented!)Still not sure if I have a clean lap yet, (got a replay to double check) but my fastest lap so far was a 1'25. something. Again not breaking any land speed records this week but I'm certain I can knock off a couple more seconds at least.
Thanks again Holl01 for the set-up advice, (posted on the first page of this thread I think).
Happy racing folks.
- 4,728
- ferrari_chris
I can't gaurantee it 100%, but I'm confident it will work on Win98. When you buy it, it comes with two discs - one for the PS2 and one for the PC that has the drivers for the USB stick. I think the drivers are only needed for Win98 as later editions have the drivers built in (or can get them off the net).SuperT
I'm confident it'll be a go for ya, but no gaurantees. 👍
- 2,276
- AngelCreator
- AngelCreator
Well it's not that I don't have the car, but I just don't want to race this week.
And thats what I like about the WRS, you don't have to race ever week.
And thats what I like about the WRS, you don't have to race ever week
.
- 530
- United States
SuperT
I have an ancient Dell XPS 400R with Windows 2000 in my closet that still runs, should be similar to 98 (used to have 98, installed 2000 [lag fest with a Pentium 2 lol] now my Dell Axim PDA is all around better than it). I'll try to install my max drive on it; If I'm successful, I'll PM the details to you (and not a threatening one, I found the car immediatly when I turned on GT4 [don't kill me!]).
If Laurence has trouble, I'm also offering to email my gamesave (has the 22B with holl's settings, and a drifting setup on C) to any NTSC.
Just a warning: most of my cars are set up to drift in some way or another, so don't be alarmed if you suddenly spin into a corner with a RX-7.....
- 3,105
- GTP_MisterWeary
This is one of the most fun races you've provided us with yet Cyril, I L O V E this car, it is such a blast, not sure where to pick up time but I'm sure I'll find another second or two 👍
Lap #1
T1: 0'30.739
T2: 1'00.772
T3: 1'29.333
Lap #2
T1: 0'24.391
T2: 0'54.457
T3: 1'2x.xx9
Lap #3
T1: 0'24.406
T2: 0'54.585
T3: 1'23.059
Board Updated
Lap #1
T1: 0'30.739
T2: 1'00.772
T3: 1'29.333
Lap #2
T1: 0'24.391
T2: 0'54.457
T3: 1'2x.xx9
Lap #3
T1: 0'24.406
T2: 0'54.585
T3: 1'23.059
Board Updated
- 908
- NW England
- Red_Leader
Yeah, it's a nice car indeed. Just a shame that it isn't easier to get hold of as i'm sure it's for this reason not many people are running this week. I was lucky and was only a few days away from it turning up at the dealer. Maybe in future it might be a good idea to give a bit of warning if a particulary rare car is required. This would allow people the time to find and buy it.MisterWeary
Laurence5905
Premium
- 322
CoolGeekz
The problem with that is, Win'98 does NOT have built-in USB 2.0 support, and Win 2000 does. So even if the MaxDrive works in Win 2000, it's no guarantee that it'll work in Win'98.
However, you can call CodeJunkies at 727-431-0650 and ask them if their Action Replay MaxDrive EVO (that's the one that comes with the Memory Stick you'll need) will work with Windows 98. They don't have that info on their website, but I'm sure one of their tech-support folks will know for sure.
And, finally, when you buy the MaxDrive, make sure you buy it from somewhere that you can take it back to, and get your money back, just in case it doesn't work with your computer.
Oh, and CoolGeekz -- on that old P2 of yours, upgrade the RAM to 256MB (or more) and install Win XP. I have an old Dell P2-400MHz laptop with 256MB of RAM, and I'm running Win XP on there. Very little lag -- it's actually quite a useful little thing to carry around, and perfect for browsing the web (got a wireless internet card on there, so I can pretty much go anywhere there's WiFi and still have 'net access.) It's not as fast as my desktop PC (AMD Athlon XP 3200+), but it definitely is not too slow to use.
- 2,756
- Carlisle,Cumbria,England!
- Ballstothewall1
Actually, I don't believe that the max-drive stick is USB 2.0 anyway, probably the best it is, is 1.1.
So it 'should' work!
Plus all USB 2.0 devices are, by design, backwards compatable.
You may need drivers, you may not.
The moral of the post is........
'Suck it and see!'
Edit:
Hey Laurence,
How the hell did you get XP to run with no lag on 256Mb?
Xp 'needs' 256 just to accomodate it's inordinately large arse!
Well impressed!
Neil
So it 'should' work!
Plus all USB 2.0 devices are, by design, backwards compatable.
You may need drivers, you may not.
The moral of the post is........
'Suck it and see!'
Edit:
Hey Laurence,
How the hell did you get XP to run with no lag on 256Mb?
Xp 'needs' 256 just to accomodate it's inordinately large arse!
Well impressed!
Neil
- 237
- Suede53 / GTP_Suede53
Ballstothewall
Not to butt in, but I thought I'd share my $.02. Bone stock XP needs more like 128MB, so 256MB will run XP fine (actually, pretty well). If you trim some of the fat off XP, you can get it run on around 64MB. I did this to a really old laptop and works great. It's just not as "pretty".
Laurence5905
Premium
- 322
Ballstothewall
It all depends on how you set up the virtual memory. If you let Windows determine automatically the size of the VM, then it'll be pretty slow. But if you set your own swap-file size, then it's not too bad at all... You have to set the minimum and maximum size to be equal. I have mine set to 768MB, max and min. So the swap-file is created, and it never changes size, and thus it never gets fragmented. You do this immediately after installing WinXP, and the swap file is therefore very near the beginning part of the hard-drive, and is accessed much faster than it would otherwise be.
Boot-up time is very slow -- it's swaping Win XP's huge "arse" into the virtual memory, and that might take 3 or 4 full minutes to complete. But once it's booted up, it runs fantastically well. But I never completely shut it off, I simply put it into "hibernate" mode, so I rarely have to go through a complete boot-up. It's quite useable that way. Maybe 30 seconds from the time I turn it on to the time it's finished coming out of hibernate mode, and it's ready to go.
Laurence5905
Premium
- 322
Ballstothewall
You wouldn't be the first to think that... There's been a large group of folks who think there's a giant conspiracy out there between the hardware and software manufacturers... But really, it's not...
The hardware manufacturers are each individually trying to outdo each other (Intel vs. AMD, nVidia vs. ATI, etc.) and come up with the next "big thing." The software writers simply take advantage of new features in the newest (and thus most expensive) hardware.
Yes, they COULD write tighter code, but the cost/benefit ratio drops significantly the more time you spend on any given project. 18-months ago, the average computer was half as fast as it is today. 18-months from now, they'll be twice as fast. If you spend 2 years "tightening up" your code, you're WAY behind! Competition demands that you get your latest project out the door in 6 months, and start on the next one. This inevitably leads to "code bloat" which isn't helped by the fact that the next generation of software usually uses a lot of pieces from the previous generation.
But that's all the result of competition -- if you're not concerned about having the "latest and greatest" you can take advantage of the fact that any hardware and software that's been out for more than 6 months has had 75% of its inital price slashed off, because somebody else has come out with something else that's newer and better... So stay 6 to 12 months "behind," and you can have a pretty awesome computer that's not going to cost you thousands. I've been in the computer industry for about 17 years now, and that's what I do... And it doesn't just apply to computers -- cell phones, HDTV's, MP3-players, and just about every other consumer-electronics device will show the same trends. Buy something that's been out for 6 months or so, rather than something that was just released last week, and you'll have fewer bugs to deal with, and more money in your wallet at the end of the day.
- 2,756
- Carlisle,Cumbria,England!
- Ballstothewall1
I totally agree with the main thrust of what you are saying there Laurence, and never buy the latest thing out.
However, the software writer's excuse of reduced return from tighter code is exactly that, an excuse!
Take game software as a prime example;
Games like Doom & Quake, they took years to write, optimise ,tweek , de-bug. And when they came out, they worked! I mean they worked on everyone's PC, and they were the best games they could be, they didn't need patched or updated. Admitedly there wasn't quite the same 'web' then as now, but the point is valid.
Now, a game takes less than a year to write, they release it, then get thousands of complaints, then patch it, then patch it again, and again, and again!
The recommended requirements are through the roof because no-body can be arsed to write decent fast code, they just think " If I want it to do this, then I'll use 'this' piece of code that does something similar, and add a bit to make it do what I want" instead of actually writing a routine to do the job right from the word go, and being more efficient in the proccess.
And they get away with it because the hardware manufacturer's are having a war of their own, and giving them the raw horsepower to take up the slack.
The loser's in this situation are people like us, that actually play the games and end up forking out our hard-earned cash over and over again just so we can keep up!
Basically it stinks, for us! Is great for them! And the likes of Bill Gates et'al get richer than they deserve.
And don't even get me started on windows Vista!
Neil
However, the software writer's excuse of reduced return from tighter code is exactly that, an excuse!
Take game software as a prime example;
Games like Doom & Quake, they took years to write, optimise ,tweek , de-bug. And when they came out, they worked! I mean they worked on everyone's PC, and they were the best games they could be, they didn't need patched or updated. Admitedly there wasn't quite the same 'web' then as now, but the point is valid.
Now, a game takes less than a year to write, they release it, then get thousands of complaints, then patch it, then patch it again, and again, and again!
The recommended requirements are through the roof because no-body can be arsed to write decent fast code, they just think " If I want it to do this, then I'll use 'this' piece of code that does something similar, and add a bit to make it do what I want" instead of actually writing a routine to do the job right from the word go, and being more efficient in the proccess.
And they get away with it because the hardware manufacturer's are having a war of their own, and giving them the raw horsepower to take up the slack.
The loser's in this situation are people like us, that actually play the games and end up forking out our hard-earned cash over and over again just so we can keep up!
Basically it stinks, for us! Is great for them! And the likes of Bill Gates et'al get richer than they deserve.
And don't even get me started on windows Vista!
Neil
- 1,424
- Kent, UK.
- DG_1275GT
Whoops! I hope I'm not gonna end up with mods/admin on my back now guys, looks like I should've started a new thread for this query.
Thanks for all your advice guys. Red ticks ticked (where allowed). 👍
The max drive has now been ordered so I guess I'll be sucking and seeing, (matching my driving skills).
Right, As I seem to have diverted it ever so slightly I think I'd better try and drag this thread back into shape, (trying to save my own butt here).
Another hour of practice earlier chopped another second and a bit off of my fastest lap time so I'm now into the 1'24's but I'm sure I can shave a fair bit more off, the weekends here so I'll be able to put in a bit more effort.
I'm getting an early night tonite
so I'll post the splits in the morning.
looks like I should've started a new thread for this query.Thanks for all your advice guys.
Red ticks ticked (where allowed). 👍The max drive has now been ordered so I guess I'll be sucking and seeing, (matching my driving skills).
Right, As I seem to have diverted it ever so slightly I think I'd better try and drag this thread back into shape, (trying to save my own butt here).
Another hour of practice earlier chopped another second and a bit off of my fastest lap time so I'm now into the 1'24's but I'm sure I can shave a fair bit more off, the weekends here so I'll be able to put in a bit more effort.
I'm getting an early night tonite
so I'll post the splits in the morning.
- 3,105
- GTP_MisterWeary
Looks like I'm losing like 0.5 from T1 - T2....will have to rethink my strategy through there. Nice splits Clemi 👍
Board Updated
Board Updated
It would be easier to get the times down if it weren't for those hooning AI cars!!Casio
Stop bumping me in the rear please!!
Oh well, nonetheless I have some marginally better splits that I will post whenever I feel like it (tomorrow).
Also, nice discussion on technology trends!
I never buy things as an early adopter. It's the safe way of satisfaction. 👍
- 530
- United States
Laurence5905
It was already upgraded from 98 (which ran very well) to 2000, now it takes 15 minutes to boot and even longer to shut down (and lags almost all the time).I can't upgrade anything on it without replacing everything (motherboard is really out of date, so is the processor, the powersupply is 150 watts, 8GB of HD space would barely hold XP, case is poorly ventilated [one small fan at the back] and video/sound cards are unidentifiable and probably couldn't run XP [9 years old...)
Specs:
[note: 9 years old]
Intel Pentium 2 400Mhz (funny...my 3 year old Dell Axim PDA is 300Mhz, and you can buy 600Mhz top of the line Dell PDAs, not that it matters)
256 MB RAM (high as it will go, motherboard will have to go if I upgrade)
8GB Hard Drive (lol I have programs bigger than this [i.e: AutoDesk Inventor 10/AutoCAD/VIZ Render])
??? Video Card (so old, can't identify it....I was 8 when it came out)
150 Watt Power Supply
17in CRT Monitor that weighs over 30 lbs (actually almost broke the shelf I put it on in my closet)
I do have a Sony Vaio laptop with a Pentium 3, 384 MB RAM, and Windows 2000 that works very well, I use it to check the WRS leaderboard and post times while I'm playing GT4. Nothing special really, but it can run older games and Microsoft Office quite well.
- 3,105
- GTP_MisterWeary
Casio
I'd love to make some smartass remark about you waking a sleeping giant but let's be honest.....I suck
P.S. I'm also forced to change my avatar, the program I use for image editing is having a spack on my new PC
oh well!P.P.S Even if it is temporary, you've awoken the giant
Lap #1:
0'30.656
1'00.392
1'28.518
Lap #2:
0'24.284
0'54.144
1'22.219
Lap #3:
0'24.201
0'54.128
1'2x.xx4
Board Updated
balls: Doom was released at 1.0 and had official updates 1.1, 1.2, 1.4, 1.6, 1.666, 1.7, 1.8 and 1.9. (1.3 and 1.5 were internal versions that never made it to release). Quake started at 1.0 and ended up at 1.09, IIRC, I don't remember how many interim versions there were, but it was quite a lot. And of course there was a rather large patch called QuakeWorld which added the _real_ network code that they didn't quite manage to finish in time for the initial release .
.
- 530
- United States
Only had time for 1 run (1:34 am...) but it was my best yet (except for the first lap, lacking about .3 ish
30.763 (had a bit of a skirmish with 4th place, so slower than I hoped [seen 30.663])
1'00.410 (best of 1'00.003, ug I want a 59)
1'28.642 (messed up the hairpin as usual, lost .2 ish there)
23.986
53.123 (yay for drifting...)
1'21.301
23.927
53.087 (going to get 52.xxx! grr)
1'2x.xxx
30.763 (had a bit of a skirmish with 4th place, so slower than I hoped [seen 30.663])
1'00.410 (best of 1'00.003, ug I want a 59)
1'28.642 (messed up the hairpin as usual, lost .2 ish there)
23.986
53.123 (yay for drifting...)
1'21.301
23.927
53.087 (going to get 52.xxx! grr)
1'2x.xxx
