rec.autos.simulators

by **Kieran Larki** » Mon, 24 Jul 2000 04:00:00

Everyone keeps on saying GP3 physics are CRAP. well the arrows drivers said
they were spot on? so how many people in this news group have drive an f1
car at those type of speeds? none? maybe one or two? what are there views on
the physics. I haven't driven gp3 yet, but just coz the physics aren't what
you expect doesn't mean there not true.

--
Kieran
www.pcracing.co.uk for GP3 and WSC

by **Bern** » Mon, 24 Jul 2000 04:00:00

Where did they say it was spot on? I only heard pedro was able to lap
consistantly fast straight away. They then said this shows how dam good the
physics are.... fact is my grandma can lap pretty dam easily aswell. Gp2
still reigns as king of modern f1 sims.

by **bog** » Mon, 24 Jul 2000 04:00:00

>Everyone keeps on saying GP3 physics are CRAP. well the arrows
drivers said
>they were spot on? so how many people in this news group have
drive an f1
>car at those type of speeds? none? maybe one or two? what are
there views on
>the physics. I haven't driven gp3 yet, but just coz the physics
aren't what
>you expect doesn't mean there not true.

>--
>Kieran
>www.pcracing.co.uk for GP3 and WSC

-----------------------------------------------------------

Got questions? Get answers over the phone at Keen.com.
Up to 100 minutes free!
http://www.keen.com

by **bog** » Mon, 24 Jul 2000 04:00:00

I wouldn't read too much into the opinions of " people who ought
to know " I know it sounds bizarre but to be an expert on
analogies eg. photography , hi-fi music reproduction , autos
simulators etc you actually need as much experience with the
analogy as the real thing , otherwise you are too easily
impressed. This is research FACT I'm afraid. For example -
modern computer generated effects in movies , they are
embarrassingly unrealistic at the moment and will look
hopelessly dated in a few years - show a computer generated
explosion to a special effects expert and they will be able to
criticise , show the same effect to an explosives expert with no
special effects knowledge and they will be " that's amazing ,
exactly like the real thing !"
Similarly musicians were amazed by CD sound when it came out -
"it's perfect !" , of course the hi-fi manufacturers knew it
was anything but perfect , whether or not they'd played a guitar
in their lives.
Same with GP car drivers.

-----------------------------------------------------------

Got questions? Get answers over the phone at Keen.com.
Up to 100 minutes free!
http://www.keen.com

by **Dann** » Mon, 24 Jul 2000 04:00:00

Id like to know when the arrows drivers got their hands on the game.
Definatly after the model was designed and its not as if geoff was going to
redesign the game afer they said it doesnt feel right;
You dont even know what they even said.
And if you had any experience with cars you would know the GP3 cars feel
dead.
You dont need to have driven an F1 car to know how a car in general handles
the gp3 cars have no weight or inertia feel to them.
I take the fastest corners with the totally wrong line and i just fly
through on rails.If a real F1 car is like this my grandma would win the WC .

The physics are not even comparable to GPL.
I know these cars have wings but they should still share characterictis.
Bottom line is the physics engine is dated and cant similate a real cars
characterisitcs.

He shouldnt have even bothered making the game with a model like this its to
easy to drive and no fun after gpl

by **Kieran Larki** » Mon, 24 Jul 2000 04:00:00

If they could lap quickly doesn't it suggest that the physics were quite
accurate?

--
Kieran
www.pcracing.co.uk for GP3 and WSC

> Where did they say it was spot on? I only heard pedro was able to lap
> consistantly fast straight away. They then said this shows how dam good
the
> physics are.... fact is my grandma can lap pretty dam easily aswell. Gp2
> still reigns as king of modern f1 sims.

> > Everyone keeps on saying GP3 physics are CRAP. well the arrows drivers
> said
> > they were spot on? so how many people in this news group have drive an
f1
> > car at those type of speeds? none? maybe one or two? what are there
views
> on
> > the physics. I haven't driven gp3 yet, but just coz the physics aren't
> what
> > you expect doesn't mean there not true.

> > --
> > Kieran
> > www.pcracing.co.uk for GP3 and WSC

by **Kieran Larki** » Mon, 24 Jul 2000 04:00:00

I would like to know that if anyone could say if they got in a real 1967 F1
car they would be able to match there times on the tracks. my guess would be
no. However this doesn't make the physics unrealistic.

--
Kieran
www.pcracing.co.uk for GP3 and WSC

> Id like to know when the arrows drivers got their hands on the game.
> Definatly after the model was designed and its not as if geoff was going
to
> redesign the game afer they said it doesnt feel right;
> You dont even know what they even said.
> And if you had any experience with cars you would know the GP3 cars feel
> dead.
> You dont need to have driven an F1 car to know how a car in general
handles
> the gp3 cars have no weight or inertia feel to them.
> I take the fastest corners with the totally wrong line and i just fly
> through on rails.If a real F1 car is like this my grandma would win the WC
.

> The physics are not even comparable to GPL.
> I know these cars have wings but they should still share characterictis.
> Bottom line is the physics engine is dated and cant similate a real cars
> characterisitcs.

> He shouldnt have even bothered making the game with a model like this its
to
> easy to drive and no fun after gpl

> > Everyone keeps on saying GP3 physics are CRAP. well the arrows drivers
> said
> > they were spot on? so how many people in this news group have drive an
f1
> > car at those type of speeds? none? maybe one or two? what are there
views
> on
> > the physics. I haven't driven gp3 yet, but just coz the physics aren't
> what
> > you expect doesn't mean there not true.

> > --
> > Kieran
> > www.pcracing.co.uk for GP3 and WSC

by **bog** » Mon, 24 Jul 2000 04:00:00

>If they could lap quickly doesn't it suggest that the physics
were quite
>accurate?

Er , no.

-----------------------------------------------------------

Got questions? Get answers over the phone at Keen.com.
Up to 100 minutes free!
http://www.keen.com

by **Michael E. Carve** » Mon, 24 Jul 2000 04:00:00

% Everyone keeps on saying GP3 physics are CRAP. well the arrows drivers said
% they were spot on? so how many people in this news group have drive an f1
% car at those type of speeds? none? maybe one or two? what are there views on
% the physics. I haven't driven gp3 yet, but just coz the physics aren't what
% you expect doesn't mean there not true.

They can say that because they don't know that one can program better
physics in a computer sim (in other words they haven't played any sim
with better physics). Also the Arrows team can't be that great.. how
many races have they won? ;-)

[It's a joke son, I said it's a joke!]

--
**************************** Michael E. Carver *************************
Upside out, or inside down...False alarm the only game in town.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<[ /./. [- < ]>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

by **Jan Verschuere** » Mon, 24 Jul 2000 04:00:00

Of course not... which is why the "real F1 guys" should have said "it's a
reasonable approximation, nothing that will prepare you for the real thing
though", not "it's spot on".

Let's take this hypothetical situation... I show up at the Arrows pit at a
test and show them I can lap safely and consistently in GP3 with all aids
off. Will they trust me to drive their F1 car? -Of course not, so take that
"spot on" comment with not just a pinch, but a truck load of salt.

Jan.
=---

by **Mats Lofkvis** » Mon, 24 Jul 2000 04:00:00

>> If they could lap quickly doesn't it suggest that the physics
>> were quite accurate?

> Er , no.

If a real F1 driver quickly went to laptimes that a good
simracer had trouble reaching, I would say it suggests the
game is very accurate. I.e. if real world knowledge applies,
the game is a good simulation.

If on the other hand "quickly" only means what you and me
also could achive with some practice, it doesn't really
say much at all. It _could_ still be a decent simulation
e.g. if the real world driver is limited to much by the
lack of feedback inherent in a PC simulation of a car,
but it could also be junk.

(Compare flight simulators: an airforce pilot recently told
me that he doesn't care for PC simulations mainly because
the lack of seat-of-the-pants feedback makes the simulation
a totally different beast where he has no use of his real
world knowledge.)

_
Mats Lofkvist

by **Pierre Legra** » Mon, 24 Jul 2000 04:00:00

I dont know whether they are ***or not but I do know that its
possible for a reasonably smart person who takes the time, to critique
the realism of almost anything plausibly. There are some very good
critics of Flight simulations who have never flown a military jet and
yet they usually are spot on with their observations. Common sense and
a curious mind are pretty much unstoppable.

In regards to the Arrow's team saying how great it is....thats purely
a function of not knowing whats possible. And the other thing is
someone from the company brings the sim into the Arrow's
garage..perhaps the developer himself...he gets a driver to sit down
and try it. Do you honestly think that driver is gonna turn to him and
start laughing saying how shitty it is....??? Nope the driver will be
polite and say how wonderful it is....its not nice to be rude.

PAPA DOC

by **Greg Cisk** » Mon, 24 Jul 2000 04:00:00

Well all I can say is the Arrows team are total back markers in real
F1 so what the hell do you expect :-)

--

by **stras** » Mon, 24 Jul 2000 04:00:00

So I guess you didn't watch or even here about the recent
Austrian grand prix? Granted, the Arrow's car blew up a bit
over halfway through the race, but 3rd place sure isn't what
I would consider a backmarker position.

* Sent from AltaVista http://www.altavista.com Where you can also find related Web Pages, Images, Audios, Videos, News, and Shopping. Smart is Beautiful

by **Jo Helse** » Mon, 24 Jul 2000 04:00:00

<snip>

(GC)

Maybe he didn't make the game for YOU, Danny. Maybe for the 2.999.000 other
people (1000 GPL freaks excluded :-) ) who meant to buy it and are going to be
thrilled by the weather, the AI etc...

Just say that you don't like it and that you keep driving GPL. That's more than
enough.

JoH

------- The best way to accelerate a Mac is 9.81 m/s2 --------
--------------------------------------------------------------

rec.autos.simulators

Gp3 physics

Gp3 physics

Gp3 physics

Gp3 physics

Gp3 physics

Gp3 physics

Gp3 physics

Gp3 physics

Gp3 physics

Gp3 physics

Gp3 physics

Gp3 physics

Gp3 physics

Gp3 physics

Gp3 physics

Gp3 physics