rec.autos.simulators

Joakim

Yep. To me, Rally Trophy seems to be just another nice try. But then again,
I'm still waiting for a *real* rally simulation. Haven't seen it yet :(

And RT has the best physics engine for a rally sim

Thanks,
Alex

It's possible to exploit the inevitable fact that you're not driving a real
car, and therefore not having to suffer the mechanical and fysical
consequences of your control actions, in any sim. I.e. any sim can be turned
into "an arcade romp" by treating it as one.

I don't know. I guess probably because it's good, fun and doesn't suffer
from hardware incompatibilities.

"old" cars?

This so called "GPL mentality" doesn't exist. I'm sure those who posted
favourably about the demo, like myself, genuinely like it. That I and others
also still enjoy GPL doesn't enter the equation. As simracers and RAS
regulars *we* comment on all new releases we're fortunate enough to be able
to play. "The GPL brigade" doesn't always unanymously praise or lament a
certain title unless the game in question is exceptional in either
direction.

There is however no denying the era and style of the cars are similar, as
well as the way it communicates to the player. It's therefore no surprise
that those who like GPL will get on with and like RT fairly easily. I like
to interpret this as being in the game's favour rather than against it.

They're hardly ditches... more like deep, gentle sloping ruts. Besides,
you're supposed to hang a front wheel over them, not purposely drive through
them.

Cars are too forgiving and too strong for my liking too. However, the car's
response within the RT universe is consistent and predictable, allowing me
to use what I perceive as realistic techniques to go fast and that's what
matters.

If we can indeed not turn those off, that would be annoying. Then again,
lots of other demos don't allow full customization of the interface either,
so that's nothing anyone reviewing the demo should hold against it.

He's much more positive when you don't hit stuff along the way. <g>

While not entirely realistic, the co-driver is almost never the owner of the
car and as a rule never comments on performance in the stage, I found his
comments quite amusing.

You're the first to use that particular expression in any RT thread I've
read.

Jan.
=---
"Pay attention when I'm talking to you boy!" -Foghorn Leghorn.

I am going to install both tonight and try them out,  I am pretty sure that
RM isnt that hot either tho, and its stages are a little unrealistic IMO
compared to RC2k

Ash

| RC2K? Am I the only one that thinks some people here are on crack? RC2K
has
| good parameters of how the car reacts to different inputs, but doesnt
really
| feel like it has much of a physics model. It just pivots and drifts.
Pretty
| lame IMO. RM has much better physics...
|
|
| And RT has the best physics engine for a rally sim
|
| Thanks,
| Alex


| > I have always thought that RC2000 had a better feel than the acclaimed
| Rally
| > Masters
| >
| > Ash
| >

| > | On Wed, 31 Oct 2001 04:09:56 GMT, "David G Fisher"

| > |
| > | >I said before that I love this demo and the physics seem excellent,
but
| > to
| > | >be honest, I don't see how the physics are that much better than
| RC2000.
| > | >Feels very similiar to me in many ways.
| > | >
| > | >Also, some are saying the center of gravity is too low and the car is
| too
| > | >hard to roll in the RT demo. RC2000 was supposedly too easy. I don't
| > think
| > | >everyone will EVER agree on what "feels" right in this sim or any
| other.
| > |
| > | after months of people (including yourself) mentioning RC2000 in a
| > | good (but not brilliant) light, i picked up a budget release and
| > | installed it.  My memories of the demo on my previous celeron 400
| > | machine weren't favourable.
| > |
| > | running on my duron 800, it is vastly improved.  the long stages that
| > | felt so tedious before are now much more challenging and realistic and
| > | the narrow roads are a joy.  it *is* difficult, but I think it
| > | certainly is the best rally title i've played.  I am hoping that rally
| > | trophy is good although I haven't seen the demo yet.
| > |
| > | as for your points about the center of gravity, etc.  Isn't that more
| > | a comment on the mini than on the game? :)
| > |
| > |
| > | Regards all,
| > | istoff
| > |
| > | "Its easy to get lost in thought
| > | if you don't go there often"    - Me, 1993
| >
| >
|
|

Could that argument not also be turned around?

I myself is a GPL'er and I love it. But I still think some people go
overboard in there praise, and are blind to its weaknesses. And I feel there
is some of the same going on with Rally Trophy. The reason for that I can
only guess. But I think it has something to do with hte fact that the
producers/creators have been very active in here, and I think that teh
historic part plays in a great deal too. Don't get me wrong, I don't think
it is a bad game/demo, I just think it gets a little too much credit in
here, from a comunity that more often that not criticies the smallest detail
in anything that is not GPL related. And I think there are a lot of little
things to criticise in the RT demo. it is only a demo, and so it can improve
a hole lot. It?s just the inconsistensy I think there is, and would like to
point out.

maybe so, but I can still lose the car and go straight through it with very
little effect to the car. Not what I would expect from a realism
perspective.

Well, I just think it also matters that you are punished for going over the
limit too much.

I tend too agree, but if they try and market this toowards the ***
simlovers, maybe they should have made that possible. They help give the
overall impression of a mostly arcade game.

He's more positive maybe, but he's still not very helpfull. I need distances
too.

Me too at first. But they very quickly became anoying. That ofcourse is just
a question of personal preference and driving ability :-)

Well I think it has been mentioned quite alot. Mayve not those exact word,
but GPL on gravel have, and I think the genral expectation was something to
that effect before the demo. The Demo did not deliver that IMO, but that
somehow have failed to disapoint most of you. I just wonder why?

Let me state for the record. I am not out to critisise RT or judge it by the
demo, I was just commeting on the lack of criticism that almost all new
games get in here, since I was somewhat disapointed by the lack of realism.

Joakim

I have no idea.  :-)

David G Fisher

Not entirely. There's no amount of nurturing by the player that can turn
something like Stunt GP into a sim. There's also no getting around the
arcade build-up of having to "earn" cars and tracks in some games. I.e. it's
possible for the player to pull a game, which threads the line between sim
and arcade for the sake of perceived playability, over to the sim side of
things by concious effort, but it can only go so far.

Ah... the magic words: "some people".

Yes, it helps when a developer communicates and, more importantly, "levels"
with *us*. It's much easier to come to terms and "forgive" a design decision
when it's presented up front and defended with reasonable argument. Unlike a
certain contender in the Nascar sim field I might add... if I was bitter,
which I am.<g>

The historic/nostalgia part does play a major role I think. Anyone who's
interested in motor *sport* (as opposed to those into brand name cult
through the vehicle of motor racing) is going to be dissapointed by most of
the comtemporary/big bucks offerings. - With the notable exception of Moto
GP... is there any limit to this guy Rossi? - Even I, who was too young to
be able to appreciate this era when it actually happened, find it somehow
"purer" / more worthy.

There's nothing detail about a title/demo failing to deliver even the
remotest sense of "being there" for the majority of posters. It's not like
people here don't try to get into things... *we* are the worst bunch of
tweakers and fiddlers to ever disgrace the face of the earth. If it's not
there it's not there, sadly.

What inconsistency? A game either succeeds in immersing the player or it
doesn't. Everything else is secondary. Those for whom the game pushes the
right buttons will comment favourably, those for whom it doesn't, won't.
There is fairly little gray area here... the game may have all the
licencing, flashy graphics, great framerate or whatever in the world: if it
doesn't succeed in grabbing the player he/she won't like it (and, usually,
be verbal about it).

Agreed, but on the other hand Bugbear and Ilari never claimed the opposite.
From what I've read they aimed to produce a game which both the general
gamer and the simracing enthousiast could enjoy and, IMO and from what I've
seen so far, they've succeeded admirably.

You have a point there. Personally, though I'm not even looking at these
items. I'm not even really listening to the co-driver. I'm *driving* at the
limit of my ability... there's no time for distractions.

Pace notes are a sore point in most rally sims. The obvious solution of
incorporating "recce's" and allowing people to compile their own notes has
obviously not sunk in (and would be out of place in the general context of
RT, IMO).

Exactly... I found myself doing stuff on purpose to sample the entire
spectrum of his sarcasm. Too bad he responded to driving the stage like a
granny by stating "finish". <g>

Not the impression I got, sorry.

Wait a minute... you agree there are shortcomings in GPL, so why would we
"want" GPL on gravel? -The aim must be to experience "the next level" in
simracing, IMO.

I see what you're getting at. However, I think it's easier to accept a game
where unrealistic events still produce a reasonable result as opposed to one
where a reasonable input triggers an unrealistically bad result.

Jan.
=---
"Pay attention when I'm talking to you boy!" -Foghorn Leghorn.

I agree, that when I here the reasoning behind a descision, it is easiert
ounderstand and maybe forgive. I have not been following that part very
closely, but I had the impression that it would be more relasitic, than I
preceived from the demo.

That if it is a modern day game and we have heard nothing from the
developers, every little detail that is not up to par, will be critisised in
a way that makes you think hte gaem is unplayable. I am 99% sure, that has
this been a modern day Rally Sim, and made by EA, people would have been
jumping on eachother to say hao bad the physics are.That it is wrong  going
through a ditch at 90mph in a mini and take no damage and contionue as you
had been on the road all a long. That when you drive up a hill and role,
sometime you don?t end up the right way, and if you ram front in to a big
rock at 120mph you probably don't drive away from that with just a bent hood
and cracked windscreen. Further more I think every little detail, such as
both the windscreen and side window alway crack together would be pounded
out for everyone to hear a long with a warning not to buy this game straight
away and wait for the word on the release.

Well thats my theory anyway. :-)

obviously, since the regulars in here praises it. But as I say, I think it
somehow have more to do with the facts that it is historic and the
developers have been writing in here, than the quality of realism, that this
bunch seems to value more than others might. I could be wrong ofcourse.
Maybe I was just a little disapointed. I will not be rushing out and buying
this one. I'll wait for a verdict on the final release. It's just that now
I'm not sure I trust the opinion of this bunch as we disagree on the demo so
much. (one some points any way)

Well by the amount of sticj GP3 got from its "sky messages" one would expect
RT to receive some to. But maybe not on the grounds of the demo, but I think
a lot of people will be disapointed if the cannot turn them off in the
release. But offcourse, I shouldn't make my descison from the demo. But
again, I wa a littel suprised not to see it mentioned at all as a concern.

because GPL is gennerally concidered the most realistic physics wise? GPL is
not perfect by any means, but it is the best we have at the moment. I think
that is not just my opinion. And do we realy need another arcade rally game?
ok so it's historic cars, but will the none simmer care about that?

I agree, but if it is a question of appealing to different groups, I still
think it?s often not a good idea to sit between two chairs, because no one
will be entirely happy. The best way would be to let the player decide the
level of relism him self, so the arcade gamer who doesn?t want to use the
brakes and be able to cut throug the ditch and not damgage the car too much
driving into rocks can do that, and the simmer who wants to feel the
steering go away when he cuts a tire just runing on the road, and flip the
car if hecatches the ditch wrong, can get that too.

Joakim

Also, when a developer pokes their head in here (usually temporarily since
it's inevitably bitten off), people here feel like their vast knowledge is
being tapped, and they give that sim some slack. If it turns out their
advice hasn't been taken, then it's attack time.

--
David G Fisher

To me, it feels like it rather uses the 'if...then' approach, in which case
a car will also do more or less what it's supposed to do under specific
circumstances, it just doesn't do it as realistically as a system
calculating the state of the system using accurate formulae. I.e., it'll do
something, but its more of a prefabricated routine, and approximation, than
a mathematically and physically accurate reaction to outer influence.

It's still good fun, though :-)

Achim

Isn't Crammond's GP series also built on such physics model you are
describing here ?

Have anyone played RT extensively and then loaded GPL right afterwards
? One word, flat :)

--
Olav K. Malmin
remove .spam when replying

Yes it is. Sorry for the late reply.

Achim