rec.autos.simulators

Was GPL a commercial disaster?

Jan Verschuere

Was GPL a commercial disaster?

by Jan Verschuere » Sun, 15 Aug 1999 04:00:00

Whoa there big guy... you're losing 90% of the population here. This ain't
the VegeServer ya old git!!<g>

Can't post shit like that in here... it's too good for 'm. ;-))

Jan.
------


>He counted up he number of GPL posts here over a 6-month period, divided
>them by pi, took away the few posts that complained about the sim, then
>multiplied that number by the entire population of New Zealand (because
it's
>as good a number as any), and Hey Presto!......as the number was a positive
>and not a negative, proof that it was not a commercial disaster!!  :o)

><snip>

Dave Henri

Was GPL a commercial disaster?

by Dave Henri » Sun, 15 Aug 1999 04:00:00


> Plus I tend to agree with Alison Hines' assessment that word-of-mouth would have sold a ton of copies and cut way down on returns had the default setups been easier.  With the advent of FF support and her Ferrari setups, perhaps a remarketing campaign for GPL is in order?

> Jerry Morelock

  I know!  They could package GPL with ICR2 but they call ICR2 something
else, like CART2000.  Yeah that would sell a ton of em..oh, and make
the price 14.95 US$
dave henrie
Mike Fishe

Was GPL a commercial disaster?

by Mike Fishe » Sun, 15 Aug 1999 04:00:00


If that was intended as humour rather than bigotry, it failed.

John Bodi

Was GPL a commercial disaster?

by John Bodi » Sun, 15 Aug 1999 04:00:00


>they didnt get back the money they had hoped to make on gpl
>probably due to very very bad advertising stratagies.

I have trouble with the concept of "bad advertising strategies" with regard
to GPL -- the wonderful 2-page spreads that I saw in most of the computer
magazines were impressive.  These ads even made their way into mainstream
automotive publications as well (though I could be wrong here).  Plus, I
think I also saw some ads on television, too -- I believe I recall seeing
GPL ads on Speedvision that used live-action footage to portray the same ad
on TV that they used in the 2-page magazine ads ("In 1968, they changed the
rules to make the cars safer.  Welcome to 1967.").  I could be wrong about
the ads making their way into mainstream automotive magazines (I swear I
remember seeing it in Car & Driver, though), and the TV ads may also be a
figment of my automotively-deranged imagination, but I don't recall seeing
more advertising push for any other sim, ever.  Seems to me like the
advertising push for GPL was at least equal to any other racing/driving sim.

Despite that, though, I've heard from reliable sources at MGI/Sierra that
Viper Racing has out-sold GPL.  And I don't think Viper Racing got even HALF
the advertising support that GPL did.  I don't recall seeing ANY magazine
ads for Viper Racing, yet GPL had those wonderful 2-page spreads (FWIW, I'd
love to have a GPL poster with a reproduction of those ads -- it would look
great over my computer desk!).

All in all, I think it was more an accessibility issue, rather than a lack
of advertising support/hype, that has kept GPL from becoming an all-time
bestseller.  Without the ability to adjust the difficulty level, it's just
too hard for the average Joe or Jane to get any kind of satisfaction from
the competition in GPL.  Executing a good 4-wheel drift though a turn is
surely a thrill, but a lot of people just can't find even that enjoyable if
they don't feel like they have the ability to be competitive with the AI,
and GPL fell down in that area.  With the addition of Allison's setups and
the AI Tweak utility, GPL is much more accessible for the non-***
driving sim fan, but it should have had these things right out of the box,
not as add-ons only available on the Web.

Sierra/Papyrus desperately needs to re-release GPL with the better setups,
the AI Tweak utility, and the V1.1 patch all in place on the installation
CD -- they need to call it "Grand Prix Legends Gold" or even "Grand Prix
Legends 2" (we'd know the difference, and the "2" would give the general
public reason to take a 2nd look -- plus, it would be no worse than
re-releasing ICR2 as CART Racing . . .).  Plaster stickers all over the
package indicating that this version features "FULL FORCE FEEDBACK SUPPORT"
(a catch-phrase that's sure to guarantee more sales), and then come up with
some additional hook to make it more accessible to beginners -- something
like a gentle, high-banked oval track that novices could use to get used to
the GPL physics model (the Louden track is okay, but I think something like
the Dover track would be better).  Advertise on the box that GPL "Now
includes exclusive test skidpad track!", and GPL would be on the way to
higher sales and greater popularity.

Then again, who asked me?  Perhaps somebody should, come to think of it.
You listening, Papy?

-- John Bodin
   Publisher, The IRL Insider Magazine
   http://www.racesimcentral.net/


> How do you know?



> > No.  It may have not been the best selling software, but it wasn't a
> > "disaster".



> > > In terms of low sales?  Does anybody know?

> > > James

Eldre

Was GPL a commercial disaster?

by Eldre » Sun, 15 Aug 1999 04:00:00



>> Unfortunately, that in itself is not enough to make it a best seller in a
>> country which loves Jerry Springer, the WWF and "Titanic."

>GPL was not a sales success because:

>Americans hate realism!!!

>Marc Mercer

And your basis for that generalized statement is...?

Eldred

__

Put your message in a modem, and throw it in the ***-sea...
remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

David Ript

Was GPL a commercial disaster?

by David Ript » Sun, 15 Aug 1999 04:00:00




>>they didnt get back the money they had hoped to make on gpl
>>probably due to very very bad advertising stratagies.

>I have trouble with the concept of "bad advertising strategies" with regard
>to GPL -- the wonderful 2-page spreads that I saw in most of the computer
>magazines were impressive.  These ads even made their way into mainstream
>automotive publications as well (though I could be wrong here).  Plus, I

I didn't see any GPL ads in mainstream magazines.

There have been ads for models of 1960s and 1970s F1 cars in C&D lately.
Maybe that's what you're thinking of.

I think Nascar 1 and 2 were pushed harder / better, at least in the US.

Yep.  Sometimes companies release too early and patch too late.  The Papy
guys could have added the ability to race the F2 and F3 cars and some
spiffy AI tweaking utilities pretty easily.

If they did that, it should be called Gold, not 2.  Truth in advertising
is a good thing.  GPL2 (if it ever happens) should model a different season.  
(Early 60s 1.5L formula would be best from the standpoint of controllability
and minimal work; early 1980s turbo cars would appeal more to younger
F1 fans, but would require a lot of work for aerodynamics and licensing.)

I don't see GPL Gold happening, because of the licensing hassles involved
with adding more tracks or drivers or cars, which is what you'd expect
from a Gold edition.  If they wanted to go to all that effort, they
could do an Indy Legends game, which would sell better, at least in the
US.

--

spamgard(tm): To email me, put "geek" in your Subject line.

John Bodi

Was GPL a commercial disaster?

by John Bodi » Sun, 15 Aug 1999 04:00:00

<LIBERAL SNIP>

Indy Legends?  Funny you should mention it -- you might want to check this
out:

http://irlinsider.adnetweb.com/sims/gtirl/

I'm not sure now if this is a GT Interactive effort, or if this is a Papy
and/or third-party effort to create a conversion for GPL, but I have heard
reference to an "Indy Racing Legends" sim.  Let's hope it happens!

-- John Bodin
    Publisher, The IRL Insider Magazine
    http://irlinsider.adnetweb.com/

>--

>spamgard(tm): To email me, put "geek" in your Subject line.

Marc Merce

Was GPL a commercial disaster?

by Marc Merce » Sun, 15 Aug 1999 04:00:00

My apologies to all americans :)

my newsreader decided it would be amusing to chop off the end of my post to
get me in trouble

there were a good 100 words more to my post..

had these words been included along with the initial 2 lines hopefully you'd
have been chuckling along with me (probably because of the rather cruel joke
included about my fellow brits :)

as you might have guessed the realism dig was linked to Jerry Springer the
WWF and Titanic :)  and nothing more sinister.

My apologies again (unless of course you believe that Jerry Springer the WWF
and Titanic are all real!  - in this case all I will say is get help!  :)

Marc

Bruce Kennewel

Was GPL a commercial disaster?

by Bruce Kennewel » Mon, 16 Aug 1999 04:00:00

I just couldn't figure out what the hell he was saying!!! :o)


> Don't bother Bruce... he's just fishing for flames.

> Sorry 'bout setting this guy off in another thread... it's him against the
> world now.

> Jan.
> ------

> >WH-A-A-A-T????


> ><snip>

Bruce Kennewel

Was GPL a commercial disaster?

by Bruce Kennewel » Mon, 16 Aug 1999 04:00:00

LOL!
Thanks for bringing me back to reality, Jan! :o)


> Whoa there big guy... you're losing 90% of the population here. This ain't
> the VegeServer ya old git!!<g>

> Can't post shit like that in here... it's too good for 'm. ;-))

> Jan.
> ------

> >He counted up he number of GPL posts here over a 6-month period, divided
> >them by pi, took away the few posts that complained about the sim, then
> >multiplied that number by the entire population of New Zealand (because
> it's
> >as good a number as any), and Hey Presto!......as the number was a
positive
> >and not a negative, proof that it was not a commercial disaster!!  :o)

> ><snip>

Jeff Vince

Was GPL a commercial disaster?

by Jeff Vince » Mon, 16 Aug 1999 04:00:00

On Fri, 13 Aug 1999 22:20:21 +0200, "Schumacher"


>They didn't make the money they excepted cause they didn't think Sports Car
>GT was going to be so awesome, and whoever makes GPL made the same mistake
>McLaren did with Ferrari, to under value their competition's potential.

   OK, we all know you're full of it, but let's prove it...

   Please explain, oh marketing maven, how a game released in May '99
(without a lot of advance fanfare) would adversely impact the sales of
a game released 9/30/98 -- a full *seven months* before it.

   "Ummm, GPL doesn't sound that good, I'll keep playing Need For
Speed for another seven months until something better comes along..."

   LOL.

"But in a way, fear is a big part of racing, because if there was
nothing to be frightened of, and no limit, any fool could get into
a motor car and racing would not exist as a sport." -- Jim Clark

Jeff Vince

Was GPL a commercial disaster?

by Jeff Vince » Mon, 16 Aug 1999 04:00:00




>>I have trouble with the concept of "bad advertising strategies" with regard
>>to GPL -- the wonderful 2-page spreads that I saw in most of the computer
>>magazines were impressive.  These ads even made their way into mainstream
>>automotive publications as well (though I could be wrong here).  Plus, I

>I didn't see any GPL ads in mainstream magazines.

   I regularly read "On Track" and "Autoweek".  It seems that the ad
appeared in "On Track" and a review appeared in "Autoweek".

"But in a way, fear is a big part of racing, because if there was
nothing to be frightened of, and no limit, any fool could get into
a motor car and racing would not exist as a sport." -- Jim Clark

John Bodi

Was GPL a commercial disaster?

by John Bodi » Mon, 16 Aug 1999 04:00:00


>My apologies to all americans :)

>my newsreader decided it would be amusing to chop off the end of my post to
>get me in trouble

>there were a good 100 words more to my post..

>had these words been included along with the initial 2 lines hopefully
you'd
>have been chuckling along with me (probably because of the rather cruel
joke
>included about my fellow brits :)

>as you might have guessed the realism dig was linked to Jerry Springer the
>WWF and Titanic :)  and nothing more sinister.

>My apologies again (unless of course you believe that Jerry Springer the
WWF
>and Titanic are all real!  - in this case all I will say is get help!  :)

Well, I'm not a huge fan of the WWF, but I did cry the first time I saw
"Titanic" (Leonardo didn't die soon enough, and the nudity was too brief).
Springer, on the other hand, is my favorite pick-me-up (it's great to know
that I'm not THAT screwed up!) . . .

;-)

-- JB

- Show quoted text -

John Bodi

Was GPL a commercial disaster?

by John Bodi » Mon, 16 Aug 1999 04:00:00





>>>I have trouble with the concept of "bad advertising strategies" with
regard
>>>to GPL -- the wonderful 2-page spreads that I saw in most of the computer
>>>magazines were impressive.  These ads even made their way into mainstream
>>>automotive publications as well (though I could be wrong here).  Plus, I

>>I didn't see any GPL ads in mainstream magazines.

>   I regularly read "On Track" and "Autoweek".  It seems that the ad
>appeared in "On Track" and a review appeared in "Autoweek".

Thanks -- I didn't think I was going crazy!  I know Car & Driver features
the ads for GPL-era models all the time, but I think the GPL ad also ran in
C&D back in late '98.  I could be wrong, but if it appeared in On Track,
there's a good chance I'm right -- or else I'm confusing the On Track ad
with C&D . . . moot point, actually, but the On Track tie-in does prove that
Sierra DID do a bit of marketing with GPL.

-- JB

- Show quoted text -

John Bodi

Was GPL a commercial disaster?

by John Bodi » Mon, 16 Aug 1999 04:00:00


>On Fri, 13 Aug 1999 22:20:21 +0200, "Schumacher"

>>They didn't make the money they excepted cause they didn't think Sports
Car
>>GT was going to be so awesome, and whoever makes GPL made the same mistake
>>McLaren did with Ferrari, to under value their competition's potential.

>   OK, we all know you're full of it, but let's prove it...

>   Please explain, oh marketing maven, how a game released in May '99
>(without a lot of advance fanfare) would adversely impact the sales of
>a game released 9/30/98 -- a full *seven months* before it.

>   "Ummm, GPL doesn't sound that good, I'll keep playing Need For
>Speed for another seven months until something better comes along..."

Sorry, Jeff, but that theory doesn't hold water.  Why would anybody tear
themselves away from something as wonderful as NFS for something as
hopelessly difficult as SCGT?

;-)

-- JB

- Show quoted text -


rec.autos.simulators is a usenet newsgroup formed in December, 1993. As this group was always unmoderated there may be some spam or off topic articles included. Some links do point back to racesimcentral.net as we could not validate the original address. Please report any pages that you believe warrant deletion from this archive (include the link in your email). RaceSimCentral.net is in no way responsible and does not endorse any of the content herein.