rec.autos.simulators

Once upon a time I had millions of credits. Oodles of them. Then
through a spectacularly poor string of car purchases in the game, I
ended up with a Tommy Kaira ZZII and 200,000 credits... oh dear.

Now the ZZII is a mighty fine car. Supercar, some might say. It's not
an LM car though, so the chances of competing for the big money Pro
tournaments like the "All Stars" was a bit unrealistic... I needed an
angle to win some money in a hurry :)

After a search on the internet for the various prizes on offer for
different races, I decided to take my trusty little ZZII to the
Endurance event at "Special Stage Route 11". I figured the
aerodynamics of the big Toyota, Mazda and Nissan Lemans cars would be
nullified by a twisty track. I also figured that a computer driven car
wouldn't be able to hang onto it's tyres as well me - or go as fast on
hard tyres.

So the stage was set - off into a 50 lapper around Special Stage Route
11. I was the only "road" car in the race, albiet heavily modified and
tuned for the track.

The first few laps saw a ragged battle between myself and the pack,
t-boning each other into corners and generally causing havoc. After
that I broke clear in 3rd place and tried to stay with the Toyota and
Mazda LeMans cars out front. By driving smoothly (suddenly into tyre
preservation mode), I found I could match lap times or go slightly
quicker - so settled down to see what tyres they were all on...

As we went past about 7 laps, it became obvious I was on to something
rather good - I caught the two leaders and flew past them. The Toyota
was actually going backwards at a rate of knots (no doubt on blistered
***), and the Mazda was pulling out every trick in the book to stay
with me - which of course killed his tyres in the process.

So they are both in at lap 8 and 9, and I'm still going. Lap 11 I pit,
and emerge 3 seconds in the lead. They of course catch me on their now
warm ***, but then I succeed in pulling gently away once more.

And so the pattern continued for the rest of the race. I lasted 10 to
11 laps on each set of tyres - the opposition (going about a second a
lap slower) lasted 8 to 9 laps on each set of tyres. Take that up to
50 laps, and I went over the line a lap ahead of the Toyota (which had
needed an extra pit-stop).

Where's all this leading?

I guess I'm saying that in the right conditions, Gran Turismo is a
damn fine game - and the battles within it's races can be as good as
any other racing game under the right circustances...

Anyway - suppose I better get on with some work!

Jonathan

But there's no AI for the computer cars.  They follow a set path around the
track and pit on a set schedule.  If they're scheduled to pit every 8 laps,
they pit every 8 laps.  Even if they're 100 feet from the finish line.  The
tire wear is dependent upon the amount of downforce you run, but the
downforce is static.  It does not vary with speed.   Have you noticed that
if you remove all downforce that your wheels spin like mad from a standing
start?  Add all the downforce you want and then your wheels don't spin.  No
air movement so why would the downforce increase?

This game gives a fine illusion of a sim, but it's anything but a sim.

Chris.

Hear hear. I grow so weary of the energy people expend in arguing sim Versus non-sim; PC Versus Console, etc. You are exactly correct: these are GAMES, plain and simple. Even the best of them, PC or console (and there ARE some experiences that are better had on a console) are electronic representations of the sport of racing, and none of them come close to being a real sim.

For "real" sims, try these out:

Commercial Racing Simulator in Minnesota http://www.racesimcentral.net/

or even these home made ones:

http://www.racesimcentral.net/

http://www.racesimcentral.net/~dunkleyj/motion.htm

Anybody, including me, who plays racing or flight games on a PC or console, even with a racing seat as I have: http://www.racesimcentral.net/, and the fact that it might not have the most accurate physics model, or a damage model, or the fact that the AI is more like Artificial Ignorance instead of Artificial Intelligence does nothing to detract from the fact that is a very good GAME, just like the other more "realistic" racing games. After, how many of us have actually raced a Formula One car, or a NASCAR vehicle, or even a street car on closed road courses, ala SCCA (I have done the latter for several years, BTW).

Dennis

Here we go with the argument of whether something is a sim or not.  It is a simulation of racing, and not too bad for sitting in one's living room with a button controller in their hand.  If any of these games were true simulations of racing, we'd all have hydraulically controlled, fully-outfitted***pits with full-display windshields, and be required to fasten all the restraining belts before firing up the engine.  And the engine noise not only would probably shatter the windows in our homes, but also wake the neighbors.  8-)  We're all driving color pixels around limited-space screens for entertainment.  As with the varied display screens and audio systems we each use, the amount of enjoyment isn't necessarily rated the same by each individual.
--
Chris H.

Dennis, it's funny you mention the Nascar Racing sim as a "real" sim.  I
raced at the West Nyack location and, although I enjoyed it, I felt more
comfortable at home with my sharper 21" monitor, more comfortable MOMO
wheel, and the superior graphics/physics of N2002.  I would like the
hydraulic car but my wife would leave me. ;0)

I went there thinking that the Nascar Racing center would be the Holy Grail
of racing, but I actually had the Holy Grail right at home. ;0)  Right now
F1 2001 with the ALMS add-on is my Holy Grail.

--
Joe Marques

Chris.

Hear hear. I grow so weary of the energy people expend in arguing sim Versus
non-sim; PC Versus Console, etc. You are exactly correct: these are GAMES,
plain and simple. Even the best of them, PC or console (and there ARE some
experiences that are better had on a console) are electronic representations
of the sport of racing, and none of them come close to being a real sim.

For "real" sims, try these out:

Commercial Racing Simulator in Minnesota
http://www.racesimcentral.net/

or even these home made ones:

http://www.racesimcentral.net/

http://www.racesimcentral.net/~dunkleyj/motion.htm

Anybody, including me, who plays racing or flight games on a PC or console,
even with a racing seat as I have: http://www.racesimcentral.net/
playing a game. GT3 is a BLAST to play, and the fact that it might not have
the most accurate physics model, or a damage model, or the fact that the AI
is more like Artificial Ignorance instead of Artificial Intelligence does
nothing to detract from the fact that is a very good GAME, just like the
other more "realistic" racing games. After, how many of us have actually
raced a Formula One car, or a NASCAR vehicle, or even a street car on closed
road courses, ala SCCA (I have done the latter for several years, BTW).

Dennis

Here we go with the argument of whether something is a sim or not.  It is a
simulation of racing, and not too bad for sitting in one's living room with
a button controller in their hand.  If any of these games were true
simulations of racing, we'd all have hydraulically controlled,
fully-outfitted***pits with full-display windshields, and be required to
fasten all the restraining belts before firing up the engine.  And the
engine noise not only would probably shatter the windows in our homes, but
also wake the neighbors.  8-)  We're all driving color pixels around
limited-space screens for entertainment.  As with the varied display screens
and audio systems we each use, the amount of enjoyment isn't necessarily
rated the same by each individual.
--
Chris H.

Regardless.......i had great worrys about buying a PS2 and Grand Turismo and i was shocked as its a great game, very fast ( later cars ) and much fun. Plus its never ever crashed or blue screend once............ lets hope my x-box is going tobe that good.

Chris.

The point of my post was to call into question some of the points the
original poster made.  He wrote of using a good car on twisty tracks, using
the computers choice of cars and pit stop strategy to have an enjoyable
race.  I feel that GT3 fails in two of these areas.  I find the driving
model to be excellent, but the AI and pitstop strategy of the computer to be
lacking.

GT3 is a fantastic driving game, but a very poor racing game.  A racing game
must have AI to be any good and GT3 fails in this regard.  I love playing
this game.  Nowhere in my post did I raise the comparison between consoles
and pc's.  I own three
 consoles (PS2, Dreamcast  and XBox) and play games on those three machines
far more than my PC.  My point was not one of sim vs. non sim, but a good
racing game vs a bad racing game.  Again, GT3 is an excellent driving game.
Not a game  where you can necessarily sit back and enjoy an excellent race,
because the computer didn't put up an excellent race.  It simply went around
the track on a preprogrammed path and a preprogrammed pitstop strategy.  It
doesn't adapt a race around your car.  It would race the same race whether
you're on the track or not.

What I said was basically that NONE of what we're calling "sims" are actually sims because each has flaws in one or more areas.  It is the entertainment of the game which makes it enjoyable for the user, not how sim-like it might be.

Just because someone posts about their enjoyment of the game, isn't a reason to decry that flaws within that game.  We could all just sit around all day picking apart various games, because there really isn't a true racing car simulation on the market that any of us want-to-be racers could afford.

I believe I enjoyed GT2 more than GT3.  Why?  Because of tire wear.  And that's possibly because I don't "tune" well.  Without many, many trials and errors, I can wear out a set of tires at Seattle Circuit within three laps in GT3.  That makes the game difficult for me, and possibly less enjoying, but also more educational than GT2 because I'm determined to figure it out.

But I don't sit back and criticize the game because someone has posted their enjoyment of it.  That would be like criticizing sex.  A blonde?  HA!  You don't know what sex is until you've been with a brunette/redhead/black-haired . . . with blue/green/brown eyes.   You don't get the true picture of what sex can really be like until your partner is over/under 5-4, weighs over/under 120 pounds.  8-)

It is the individual's perception of being entertained with the game, not whether you or I think it has flaws.
--
Chris H.

I know what I wrote and I stand by it.  I don't consider GT3 a sim because
it doesn't do a very good job of simulating racing which is what the
original poster was getting at.  Passing, pitstop strategy, "battles within
it's races" as described by the poster.  It doesn't have any of that really.
The area of the game that was praised were it's worse qualities.  If the
poster had said "this is an excellent game in that it does a great job of
modeling different cars and the physics that go along with them" then I
would have said he's 100% correct.  It is a great game in that respect.

I'm sorry, I guess I thought this was a usenet forum intended for open
discussion on topics.  Next time I won't post unless I whole heartedly agree
with the original poster.  In fact, I don't think anyone should post
anything because there's no reason to start a discussion if there's nothing
to discuss.

Im no expert at all btw. I even enjoy GT2's physics :D If it wasnt for the
bad tire-behaviour, i would
think its really really great. If you use the "real tires" that can be
bought for a couple of cars, it feels quite nice.
Still not like a real car, but its so good anyway, cause the limited ram of
the PSX (2MB) and a 33MHz cpu without
a FPU-unit.

GT3 does a good job too, with 300MHz cpu, altough a really powerfull FPU,
and 32MB of ram :)

In addition to a legion of other senseless replies, a poster wrote...

What a truly ***group of people you are in this newsgroup.

Main Entry: simulator
Pronunciation: 'sim-y&-"lA-t&r
Function: noun
Date: 1835
: one that simulates; especially : a device that enables the operator
to reproduce or represent under test conditions phenomena likely to
occur in actual performance

Grand Prix Legends, Nascar 2002, F1 2001, Rally Trophy, and the DTR
series are all designed to reproduce the phenomena of their respective
focii in as much detail as possible within the limitations of PC
hardware.  They would, as such, be classified as simulations.  They
all have flaws, but it clear that their focus is more on the
reproduction of real-life phenomena than on compromise in the name of
playability.

GT3 is not a sim, nor does it pretend to be one.  I've never seen
anyone other than a handful of PSX zealouts call it a simulation.  It
was a racing game designed for gamers, not simulation enthusiasts.
The developer's goal was clearly to create a game that is fun to play
and bears some resemblance to reality, which is an honorable goal, but
I wouldn't call it a simulation per the stated dictionary definition.

Jason