Messages

Btw... this is fun..
You cannot view this attachment.
You cannot view this attachment.

That is a cool combo for a CCC track. Because it uses tunnels as checkpoint.
Really cool that you share these findings. They seem trivial, but I hadn't thought of them yet   

Try running my anniversary edition (new original) it doesn't need a crack and it is more memory friendly than the original.

'92 through '94 is also the time when I built my own early tracks. Miss that time!

To many holes in my memory to be Sure. I know i bought my own computer (because I was unsatisfied with the quality of the one provided by my partners) shortly before going to Colombia on holiday. That was december 1996.
I know that around that time (before or after) my parents deforced and we moved out.
The new house had a gigantic desk for my computer. But I have no idea what the arrangements for that were in the old house..m.. so I think I started using stunts in 1997, probably not before.

Doesn't it just switch between the 10 or 20 cycles per second?
That is what the timertestflag does as well iirc.
Like this piece of assembly code suggests.

I think cas means that it doesn't feel right to pay someone else to do the work while you sit and wait. This is a project that we are very attached to and letting someone else finish it may damage the attachment. Things achieved through hardship and perseverance have more personal value.

And about the physics. It may not be possible to fully reverse the code. But we need enough to fully understand the workings and exactly what causes/makes the bug/features to copy that.

As for the look and feel. A bigger resolution would improve playability and hopefully also bring a new generation of players.
A legacy mode would be obviously part of the package.

It looks cool. And I would also like to play it if possible.
In general, not specifically related to your project.
Looking at the video I realised again how unrealistic stunts physics are, and at the same time is that exactly why remakes don't feel the same. (I have to admit by that that TrackMania actually gets quite close)..
Stunts cars have no suspension, they don't learn, wobble or bounce. I am not sure if a "off the shelf" physics engine can do that. But since it is stated as bad choice for racing games, maybe the unreal engine is "bad enough" in this case to provide a stunts feeling..

If you want that,    we (definitely me) are happy to assist.

Can you configure the stunts directory as floppy drive? Dosbox (and i assume boxer) isolate the disk after starting. So new files are not seen by the game. But if loaded as floppy drive it acts as removable medium and you can take and drop files on the fly. (It is very useful for replay checking)

You get the message when files are missing.
I have a list of files somewhere...
EDIT: found them. These are all the original files except the game itself. If you have a clean copy they should all be there.

Code Select Expand

AD15.DRV
 ADENG1.VCE
 ADSKIDMS.VCE
 ALPINE.PVS
 BERNIES.HIG
 BERNIES.TRK
 CARANSX.RES
 CARAUDI.RES
 CARCOUN.RES
 CARFGTO.RES
 CARJAGU.RES
 CARLANC.RES
 CARLM02.RES
 CARP962.RES
 CARPC04.RES
 CARPMIN.RES
 CARVETT.RES
 CHERRIS.HIG
 CHERRIS.TRK
 CITY.PVS
 COUNTRY.PVS
 CRED.RES
 DEFAULT.HIG
 DEFAULT.RPL
 DEFAULT.TRK
 DESERT.PVS
 FONTDEF.FNT
 FONTLED.FNT
 FONTN.FNT
 GAME.PRE
 GAME1.P3S
 GAME2.P3S
 GEENG.SFX
 HELENS.HIG
 HELENS.TRK
 JOES.HIG
 JOES.TRK
 MAIN.RES
 MISC.RES
 MT15.DRV
 MT32.PLB
 MTENG1.VCE
 MTSKIDMS.VCE
 OPP1.PRE
 OPP1LOSE.PVS
 OPP1WIN.PVS
 OPP2.PRE
 OPP2LOSE.PVS
 OPP2WIN.PVS
 OPP3.PRE
 OPP3LOSE.PVS
 OPP3WIN.PVS
 OPP4.PRE
 OPP4LOSE.PVS
 OPP4WIN.PVS
 OPP5.PRE
 OPP5LOSE.PVS
 OPP5WIN.PVS
 OPP6.PRE
 OPP6LOSE.PVS
 OPP6WIN.PVS
 PC15.DRV
 PCENG1.VCE
 PCSKIDMS.VCE
 README.INF
 SDCRED.PES
 SDCSEL.PVS
 SDGAME.PVS
 SDGAME2.PVS
 SDMAIN.PVS
 SDMSEL.PVS
 SDOSEL.PVS
 SDTEDIT.PES
 SDTITL.PVS
 SKIDOVER.KMS
 SKIDS.HIG
 SKIDS.TRK
 SKIDSLCT.KMS
 SKIDTITL.KMS
 SKIDVICT.KMS
 STANSX.P3S
 STAUDI.P3S
 STCOUN.P3S
 STDAANSX.PVS
 STDAAUDI.PVS
 STDACOUN.PVS
 STDAFGTO.PVS
 STDAJAGU.PVS
 STDALANC.PVS
 STDALM02.PVS
 STDAP962.PVS
 STDAPC04.PVS
 STDAPMIN.PVS
 STDAVETT.PVS
 STDBANSX.PVS
 STDBAUDI.PVS
 STDBCOUN.PVS
 STDBFGTO.PVS
 STDBJAGU.PVS
 STDBLANC.PVS
 STDBLM02.PVS
 STDBP962.PVS
 STDBPC04.PVS
 STDBPMIN.PVS
 STDBVETT.PVS
 STFGTO.P3S
 STJAGU.P3S
 STLANC.P3S
 STLM02.P3S
 STP962.P3S
 STPC04.P3S
 STPMIN.P3S
 STVETT.P3S
 TD15.DRV
 TDENG1.VCE
 TDSKIDMS.VCE
 TEDIT.PRE
 TITLE.P3S
 TROPICAL.PVS

Flight sims and racing sims are very different. I dare to say that a flight sim is easier.

But to give a bit of perspective in what made stunts I'll summarise some bits and pieces from elsewhere on the forum.
It started with another project by other people. They designed a driving simulator that they wanted to sell as instructional setup. It had a real cabin and controls and was very expensive.
It worked, but they couldn't sell it. Until they were asked to make a game of it. It went into the arcades as "hard driving".
It was a hit. Well worth the heavy investments. But it was bound to the arcades.
When home computers evolved and became "strong enough" to run something similar several companies tried to make one for home computers.
Stunt driver is one, it's ok. Didn't last.
DSI started a game with the title "skid marks" and in an early promotion it has a track that is very similar to hard driving with even the barn in the right place.
Before the release they added more track elements and changed the name to STUNTS.
But the inspiration that was taken from hard driving is unmistakable.

Hard driving was ported to pc later. But in my opinion is STUNTS still the best racing game of that time.

I don't think the physics model is very simplified because of the hardware limitations, I think it's because people who play driving games don't want realistic physics. I mean look at the driving games made after 1995 and until now. How many of them have decent physics models?

First, stunts is a 1990 game. Physics engines didn't exist yet.
Secondly,

I think it's because people who play driving games don't want realistic physics.

realistic or not, that is a matter of taste. It's still a physics model.
And stunts feels more realistic than many games that came behind.
Thirdly, I'm sure there are games with better physics now that could function on a 286, but that knowledge wasn't there in 1990.

Stunts has a physics model, it is just very simplified because of the hardware limitations at the time. But it's a clever setup and is many ways ahead of it's time.
It may not meet your standards, but the game has a physics and collision engine. It has pathfinding for the automated opponents. A very powerful track editor for it's time that can make millions (not a joke) of different tracks.
It supports car engine parameters almost straight from the car manual for gear ratios among other things.

Try not to down talk stunts so much. We are passionate about it and your ignorance could be taken badly by some.
I apologise for misremembering the of the shelf physics engine you used.

I have a strange working mind. So I often miss things other find important. Even after reading back i don't see it. So I'm sorry about that. One track mind I guess.

I'll check out the link to China later. .
As for graphics, we sort off have that covered with CAS his graphics engine. It can already generate gameplay videos from replay dump files.
The difficult part is doing 'the same trick' in live gameplay. You used bullet physics if I'm not mistaken. I think we want to try and build something like that with the stunts game core physics model. Not an easy feat. But not impossible either.
You could for instance plug it into your game as an optional feature.
You have a lot of knowledge about game making on the level we are. I personally consider that an asset if you are willing to help with this. Share your expertise, and maybe we can help you with getting your games to the next level as well.

And looping back to your email from 2014.
Stunts is not freeware. It is abandoned. The right are (just as prince of Persia) owned by Ubisoft. Ubisoft owns TrackMania now. So as long as we don't threaten that game we are quite safe.

Of course we noticed your games. And several of us played them. I will to when I have the time (have not played anything for months now since I just bought a new house and it takes a lot of my free time).

The point with stunts is that we like the physics and collision engine, its a strange mix of arcade and simulation driving in pseudo physics. We wanted to port it all to C to be able to just upgrade the graphic engine. That is a Mammoth task and we are with a small group.
Our current goal is to try and isolate the engine core and place it in a new shell.
To keep the essence but upgrade everything around it. And reverse compatible with the original if possible.

What makes you think that we want anything else than STUNTS?
I mean, we are aware of your work for a very long time.
See the first mention of your site and work
But there is a reason why we still play STUNTS. And will continue to, unless the same gameplay is featured in a newer game.
Since that hasn't been the case. We stick with what we have.
We like your work. And appreciate it. We will support and help you wherever we can. But don't expect us to leave STUNTS behind in favour of your work.

I give up.
Nevermind.