Tendo City

In the words of Christopher Walken, "Wowie-wow-wow!!"






*faints*

Holy smokes! Tunnel track going THROUGH normal track! So far it's clever usage of old stunts, but I'm sure new ones shall present themselves. Now Sega/Nintendo, just make SURE you give us a level creator and all's well!

Would that be cool or what? The smart thing would be to include a track editor, but I doubt they will.

They already did it once in the last F-Zero game. To not include it in the new one would mean this game is lesser than the last one! That's not right at all! There's no reason not to, for it makes good judgement, and not only that, it makes good sense, to HAVE a track editor.

That was a 64DD expansion, not a part of F-Zero X. But since they already have the technology why wouldn't they incorporate something similar in the Gamecube version? I suppose memory is an issue, though. Those memory cards are tiny.

But they are plenty large enough to hold TS2 level data right? The X track builder basically used the same "part" makeup to construct tracks, so it would basically be 4 data parts on a grid. The first 3 would be location, the last would be the part identifier. Anything beyond that would be calculated by the game's engine, and thus would not need to be stored in the memory card. In other words, it's just a question of how big the grid is. So, there should be plenty of space if they just think a bit when they make the save files for it.

I suppose so... but they must have needed all of that DD space for something.

Or not.

Haha, remember Do-Shin the giant, who's name I don't know how to spell? They managed to compress all the data stored there to something a 59 block card could store pretty well. The tracks on those 64MB disks didn't take up that much room as opposed to other games anyway, so even by those standards the tracks weren't space hogs. Of course, I don't even know how many "blocks" were on those disks or any other first hand details, so my info is limited to nerds who imported it telling me this stuff.

I saw those... there are a few more. The graphics sure are great... I want this game NOW, not this summer! :)

As for a track editor, I really doubt it will be in it... the tracks look too complex... but they could surprise us and have one. They should at least have the random track generator, but if its not there I won't be all that surprised, given the high quality of the graphics and how complex the tracks look...

I doubt Sega/Nintendo would take the time to include this feature, but it surely would be a welcomed feature for all us hardcore fans out there. Sega has learned a lot from FZero X and its own racing games, namely that sense of speed has very little to do with actual speed in virtual meters over seconds and more to do with the speed of objects AROUND the vehicle relative to the vehicle, keeping in mind their distance from the vehicle. It's basically an advanced paralax scrolling.

Graphics mean nothing when it comes to storing data, unless you actually are CREATING the graphics yourself, as in drawing the textures and modeling the models. Trust me, it means NOTHING that the tracks have bumps or the backgrounds look like a jungle. When it comes to save files, there is NO reason to store that data. All it needs to store is that the jungle background is being used. That can be done very simply, by assigning "jungle" to a single byte of data, that byte being "J" in this example. Where' the jungle? On the disk! The program itself knows what the J means, and does all the building itself. This is how all save files work. Only the most wasteful of save data will actually store all the sprites and models being used. In fact, ANY save file that just dumps all that info is purely wasteful and bad programming. So, it doesn't matter how complex it is, a random track builder wouldnt' even be processing what each track piece looks like, just where on the grid it connects (ie, what side) and then just put them all together. Again, the amount of data save files use is not NEARLY the amount of data the game puts together after reading the save file's data.

I know. But if the tracks are very complex (not in graphics. In exectution and design.) and are designed as a unit and not as tiles, that won't matter... having a track creator requires tile-based tracks, at least for the track creator style ones. F-Zero X had that... the ones in the main game were complex in places, sure, but did the track creator give you those options? I don't know... obviously I've never used it, so I can't say.

How about a game that DID have a track creator in the US? Yes, Excitebike 64. That had a easy to use track creator... simple, and it couldn't do half the stuff the real tracks did (even just in arenas), but it could make some good tracks. Maybe it could have something like that... a lot less complex that the ingame ones, but SOMETHING so that we get (hopefully!) both a track creator and a random track function... :)

Dark Jaguar is correct. Not much memory is required for a custom track. It could even be compressed further than the 4 pieces of information. For instance, rather than having to know where in 3-Dimensional space a part is, you could just have a 2-piece information system -- knowing which pre-defined part is used, and knowing which part it connects to. The Gamecube hardware and the F-Zero software will do all the work in putting that together. That is, if the track editor is well-programmed.

God I hope there's going to be a track editor.

You and me both geoboy... There's really no excuse.

Anyway, ABF does have a good point. The tracks could all be designed point by point. However, on the other hand they could have done something like programming their own track editor and using that to make the tracks. Things like that save time and money, so they may have gone that way. It's similar to how Blizzard made a world editor for WC3 and used that instead of having to design all the worlds in a more primitive language. Blizzard just took some capabilities out of the WC3 editor and gave it to the people with WC3, which I really like. If my video card actually supported the mode the world editor wants to use :D, then I would be using a very powerful yet easy to use program for making WC3 levels. How much memory does a WC3 level take up? Well, I checked, and even the ones with millions of triggers (the sheep game) took up around 80 or so kilobytes. Of course, the triggers aren't that big a deal. The map isn't storing all the words used in the trigger data, just hte numbers and some bits of info used to link one thing to another thing. The "things" themselves are placed by the computer and the main game's programming. Now then, wouldn't you say that the WC3 levels are quite complex? It has to keep track of land placement to a very small degree, yet it's all stored in a very small file size. Maps really are quite small. Now then, that's all just without any kind of compression on Blizzard's part or worry of space consumption, and it still allows for plenty of maps on a 512 kilobyte (59 block) memory card. Well, okay about 5 :D, but you see my point. Now, a race track for F-Zero should store even less data. There will be multiple track links using the above suggestion of "what part it links to", and everything being reletive to the starting line block's placement, but that's all easy data to store. The actually computations of putting them together is done by the game's engine. All that's needed in the save file is "curve full-pipe piece linked to flat piece number 3 by top", which isn't stored like that, but more like this.

C (curved tunnel track piece)
3 (indicates track piece number)
8 (this number indicates style of connection)

You see? VERY small footprint. Of course, the fact that this will connect by making a hole in that kind of track isn't needed to be placed in the file. That's done by the game's code after reading what connects to what and by what method.

F-Zero GC looks amazing and the graphics and enviroments look awesome!! A track editor would be a great edition to this game, though I don't know wether they will go through the trouble to implement one [EGM seems to think they will].

Those pics look great. Almost competing with Quantum Redshit, and well ahead of Wipeout Fusion.

Let's hope it has that old sense of speed.

And we need 1) Track Editor
2) Online play

Imagine plaiying a game where EVERY other car on the track was a real life person? Sah-weeet.

Online racing games are tricky... I've played some (Pod and Need for Speed High Stakes on the PC), and find that, even under good lag conditions, there is a LOT of warping cars (because of lag, cars 'freeze' then 'warp' to where they should be... making play hard...) ... it can work, but, like fighting games, its tough to get working in an acceptable fashion...

Anyway, Nintendo hates online multiplay so we won't be seeing anything like that anytime soon. I know we've all said that a million times, but it doesn't make it any less frusterating...

True, but apparently the recent Beta tests for Auto Modellista went rather well for online play. I couldn't imagine playing a racing game on 56k, though. Particularly with 16+ other people on the server. :)

BAH! *continues waiting for Burnout Online - crosses fingers*

Yeah, having to recieve a steady stream of data for 29 other cars, each one travelling CONSTANTLY at a VERY high speed relative to the level, as opposed to the low speed travel in an FPS or many other games (this includes fighters, I don't see how those could lag that much, especially since I played Killer Instinct on an XBand, a frickin' XBAND, and though there was lag in half the bouts, many times the speeds were fine for battling) would certainly pose a bigger lag threat. However, I do think it can be done. I've played one racing game on XBox Live. It had very little lag at all. In fact, the only real lag problems in this game (which was a bad game anyway I should warn, and only a demo, but that doesn't reduce the needed bandwidth) were very rare indeed, occasionally hiccuping during pileups of many motorcycles.

Oh, and although Quantum Redshift does look nice in the demo that came with Mech Assault, I'd have to say that what I've seen of F-Zero X in motion looks better. Online play? I've pretty much given up on that. I too would love it, but the chances of Nintendo doing that are so low that well, you'd have to do something funny and amusing to an analogy to really convey it's lowitude, you know, like what Penny Arcade does. However, map making is a must. A must I say! There's one thing they could do though. They could add system link support. In fact, Nintendo should be doing this more often. They HAVE a broadband adapter. They just need to do what MS does. MS has people link up to 4 systems to a hub/router via ethernet. There is, obviously, NO lag with a system link of this sort (or pretty much any sort). There's no reason at all that they can't do this. ABF once stated a potential problem, but XBox games use this SAME type of ethernet system link ALL THE TIME, so there's no problem at all. They just need to design the feature to use the broadband adapter. What's the harm? They don't need to pay server costs or anything this way, and in fact, just like with XBox system link games, soon GameSpy would simply create a tunnel application for use with the GCN, faking a "GCN here" signal from a computer, thus we could get indirect online play.

Wow, that is amazing. I'm just a sucker for forests and nature stuff, and I never thought I see that in an F-Zero game.

It takes a while for the intricacies of Quantum Redshift's graphics to sink in. I particularly love the water, and the vehicles are far ahead of those in FZero.

Although that forest is particularly beautiful. Very difficult to pick a clear graphical trojan horse (I don't know what that means!).

Anyways, QR sucked balls, so I'm sure this will be the better game. :)

And yes, I too played Killer Instinct, although through a Rom/Emulator/Cable modem, and it ran perfectly. The thing that would cause trouble would be cross country/continant play.

The reason fighting games would be hard to do online is not because of the lag they would cause, but because of the knee-jerk reactions required. Although, that really shouldn't be TOO much of a problem, unless you're playing cross-continent.

Nature's awesome, but you didn't see any nature in the old F-Zero games? You didn't see outer space, or the sky? Just messin' with ya. However, one thing I've always loved is technology that harmonizes with nature. Like, trees with computers embeded in their bark, monitering moisture to trigger rainfall or something cool like that. Those tracks running through a forest seem just like that, except of course for the noise of the race totally assaulting the forest's ears, and um, the loads of roadkill for anything that's higher than however high those cars float :D.

I thought F-Zero X had good graphics... very low-tech, but very fast, lots of cars, and a unique style that was good. So good graphics. :)

This game of course has both the fast, lots of cars part AND truly great graphics. Very nice... All I want is MORE THAN FOUR VEHICLES IN MULTIPLAYER! It was REALLY lame that F-Zero X allowed only 4 vehicles in multiplay, and made that part of the game a LOT worse... like not worth playing much in multiplay because single is so much cooler worse...

Only 4 wasn't too big a deal with my friends and I, as we were basically there just to face off against each other. However, I get what you mean. Having 26 computer players does add to the frantic fun indeed. From what I understand, the 4 player limit was due to N64's limitations. Showing 4 camera angles takes a bit more processing power than just showing one. So basically, to keep the game flowing as fast they sacrificed CPU players. However, I do think they should have put the option in and let US decide if it was worth the frame rate sacrifice.

I played PD, which allows for 8 bot players in addition to the 4 human players, and was shocked when people actually COMPLAINED about the addition. They said "with that many players, it really slows down". Sheesh, they gave you the OPTION. Would you have rather not even had the option? Playing with limited bots themselves would be the SAME thing as if the game itself prevented that number, so what is their problem? Giving options and letting the player decide if it's playable that way or not is something I'm always for.

F-Zero X was only remotely fun in multiplayer with opponents at your difficulty level. Anything else and its lame due to lack of computers... its the same way in Wave Race (n64 or ngc), Hydro Thunder, and any other game with just you and a couple comps.

Wipeout 64 is my example of well done 2 player mode. It has the full 16 vehicle field (and the full graphics) in 2 player... 3 or 4 player got rid of sidetrack graphics and limited it to 4 cars total, but 2 player was great. Excitebike had a full 6-car multiplayer mode too.. so did Rush 2049 (2 player only... there is no 3 or 4 player standard racing in the game, only stunt and battle...). But single player in those games just had 6 also... Star Wars Ep.1 Racer had up to 6 cars (inc. comps) in multi but 12 in single. Decent, but not as good as Wipeout...

N64 does better in some games (Extreme-G 3 with its 2 player mode with full field of cars) but Wave Race is stuck with you and the opponent... and Burnout only has 4 in single player so the fact it has 4 in multi isnt as bad.


Um, my point? The more comps in multi, the better the multi race mode... and way too many games skimp on that part of the game and leave you with a lame humans-only (or just one or two comps) mode. :(

Well Mario Kart 64 did it right eh? They allow two players in a full computer player match. However, 3 or 4 players and you hit the limit. Due to system limitations, the extra players are killed to allow for extra human perspectives. This time that shouldn't be the case.

On N64, asking for 2 players and a full computer field was something that many games had, so when others didn't I was dissapointed. F-Zero was the best example of that because it was the best game lacking that feature...

However, on N64 I didn't expect many comps in 3 or 4 player because virtually no games had them... I was just hoping that the next generation of games would have them. So far I have not seen that it will happen with any consistency... for every Extreme-G 3 (4 players and comps) there is a Wave Race Blue Storm with no comps AT ALL in its whole multiplay mode... :(

Download the new trailer. Its a 3 minuite long, 20 meg trailer.

http://mediaviewer.ign.com/ignMediaPage....2C+Screens

...

Absolutely amazing... absolutely, completely amazing...

*watches again... and then another time after that...*

I'm all out of underwear because of it!

I downloaded that trailer last night... and I think I've watched it at least 8 times now...

F-Zero is now right at the top of my want list...it was near there before, but this trailer blows away those other ones before it... its hard to say in words how amazing this game looks...

And straight from IGN Insider, courtesy of Nintendorks... (read the thread! Its got the full Insider article of hands-on play with the arcade system, and a bunch more pictures... starts about halfway down. :) )

http://www.plinkomedia.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2033





And some gameplay screens...







Also, more info here...
http://www.planetgamecube.com/news.cfm?a...em&id=3987
http://www.planetgamecube.com/specials.c...ile&id=424

I don't think there's anything I can say... the game looks like it'll be making a run for best racing game ever...

Oh, and here's a link to the phenominal gameplay video again.
http://mediaviewer.ign.com/ignMediaPage....2C+Screens

Awesome. Too bad I'll probably never get to play the arcade version.

I like the ideas for the track editor data storage, but there's just a tiny problem. The less data stored means the more calculations the CPU has to do, and thus making for rather long loading times.

As far as online goes, I would go with PH and say there's no way Nintendo would support that. EXCEPT... I seem to recall reading somewhere about SEGA doing some sort of online... but I'm not sure. If true, though, what better way would there be to use it? One of us could create a track at home, upload it, and then Tendites across the world could go to their local arcades and we'd all race! That's one of the pluses of consoles... they're all the same! So as long as the game is programmed pretty well, lag could be a non-issue.

Hey, I can dream, can't I?

are those newest 3 screens from the arcade version? because those are some really schnazzy graphics, and i'll wet myself if they're GC...but i won't be as xcited if they're from the arcade version, as PGC said that the arcade version's graphics would be better than the home version.

They said that? I haven't noticed any differences between the GC and arcade graphics.

Whitefleck, you missed the point. My idea isn't new at all, it's what most saved files do! Load times? Rendering the whole thing is done anyway, there's no worry! Just loading the track data files that are already built does the same thing, because they are stored in very simplistic ways too. These "load times" would just be drawing the whole track, which is then stored in RAM so it doesn't need to be repeatedly built during the race.

However as I said, my point is that that's how ALL save files work. The construction happens VERY quickly you know.

The GC and AC graphics will be identical. The only difference is that in the arcade it will run on a high-resolution screen while at home it'll be running on low-res TVs... I guess you could call that a graphical advantage for the arcade, but not in poly count or detail.

Oh... and the screens are cool, but that trailer blows them away...

Also. It is too bad there isn't online play, but since the game is from Nintendo I never expected it... sure, Sega does do some online games, but not Nintendo and its Nintendo's franchise. I don't expect any online play... or a map editor for that matter. While it is possible there will be an editor, I wouldn't put that chance very high... the game looks so complex that making tracks for it would be hard... unless they dumbed it down, which is possible. I do hope for one... but don't expect one.

They can just give us a crippled version of the track editor software they most likely made and used.

Oh, and the res thing can be equalled if all of us had lazy's TV of high resolutionosity.

I hope for a crippled editor... like the one in Excitebike 64... because a full one would be far too complex and probably not possible to do...

Oh, and yes, if we all had TV's like that (bigscreen HDTV's) we'd get that too... but almost no one does and very few people will for years to come...

Nintendo is only supervising the development of this game; AM2 is handling the real development. So unless Nintendo really hates online play, I don't see why Sega-who is very experienced in this field-couldn't implement some sort of online play.

But you're right, there probably won't be any sort of online play.

On a related note, according to the latest EGM's rumor section (which is somewhat reliable) all of the Mario sports games (Mario Golf, Mario Tennis, and even Mario Kart) with sport the prefix "World Smash", referencing their online playability. Let's cross out fingers.

Well, when I said crippled I didn't mean removing ALL capability (sheesh, if you can't figure it all out, don't USE all of it, don't make the rest of us suffer), I just meant removing it from whatever other editing software it's likely a part of and removing any abilities that could really cause some problems, like being allowed to change the physics of the F-Zero world or something.

Now DJ, DJ, I never meant to come off as if I were revering you for your idea. I really just meant to say I like the idea, but I see a problem with it. And I still do. It wouldn't be as simple as stitching them together, because that would create poorly connected strips of track. It needs to get all the transforming down and everything, which would probably take more time to load than a regular, preconstructed track. Anyone who has Timesplitters 2 can testify to that.

So it'd take a while to load... oh well. Why is that such a big issue?

As for online play, it will not happen... one of the developers says in one of those PGC articles that I linked to that the game will only have some online high-score comparing mode, not online racing... and I doubt very much that that will change before launch... its too bad, but I never even began to expect the game to have it.

I figured the shaping woudn't take too long, but after making and loading a level in TS2, I see your point. I also don't care about your point :D. Why on Earth should that feature be sacrificed just because of load times? You CAN just NOT USE IT ya know :D.

I don't THINK I mentioned scrapping a feature when I talked about it.

How about instead of saying "problem" in my first post, pretend I said "issue." I never meant it to mean "gosh, that's a good idea but it shouldn't be used, bah humbug." Sorry.

Oh okay. Sorry I make such an assumption anyway. There's lots of little tricks they could do to speed up the track construction process though.

Here are some more sexy F-Zero screens courtesy of IGN:









Wow! June can't come soon enough!

Edit: I tried to post the screens from n-philes but it wouldn't let me.

I ... must ... have ... this ... game...

Seconded.

*ejaculates*

Here are a few more gorgeous screens: