rec.autos.simulators

Re: Craig Miller's Grand Prix Legends Review

2 1/2 stars?? This is a travesty of justice!! I found Craig Miller's review
of Sierra's Grand Prix Legends (GPL) to be an extremely unfair review of the
product. It was evident that the reviewer wrote his review with the "arcade"
game idea in his head, when he should have been reviewing GPL for what it
is - a racing simulation. There are many factual errors, ommisions, and
comments made which portray GPL to be of a different calibre of game than
the one I own! Please read the following examples and comments as I prove my
point:-

- "The graphics are good as far as these types of games go, but
they give no sense of awe or wonder. "

Excuse me? Grand Prix Legends' graphics are great (granted, the off-track
objects are "flat".. but it doesn't matter, as they are only eye-candy, and
look good from a distance). All tracks and cars are modelled with a
painstaking eye for realism and detail. What's more, they look beautful! How
the reviewer's above statement can be made completely baffles me. Was he
reviewing the same game?

- "The musical score is spartan at best. I don't really think that it
matters much in this type of game, however. I can say that the music
does nothing to set the mood of the game nor does it give me any
sense of enjoyment just for music's sake. I quickly turned it off."

Hmmm.. did Craig even review the game, or did he just read a few other
reviews,etc and make up the rest. There is NO music of any kind in the game
(and therefore definitely no option to turn in OFF!)

- "I can still picture most people returning Grand Prix Legends a
few days after they buy it."

That's a really great comment for a reviewer to make. It would be redundant
anyhow, as people who read Craig's review most likely WON'T buy the product
in the first place (2 1/2 stars.. unfavourable comments, etc)- so unless
they are a Racing Sim ***, most people will read the review and pass it
by. A reviewer should not pass judgement for OTHERS, but merely give an
unbiased PERSONAL opinion of the product. The above statement just killed
GPL for anyone that was even entertaining the idea of perhaps buying GPL.
However, at the bottom of the second page, he writes: "Simulation fanatics
will probably love this game -- I just don't think that anyone else with a
lower level of enthusiasm will get much out of it." This again renders the
"returning it to the store" statement redundant. This sentence was all that
was needed, but again he is making assumptions for the reader. A better
sentence would have been "... love this game -- those with a lower level of
enthusiasm may not get as much enjoyment of it".

Craig complains of a lack of setup help for the cars. Well, there was an
ENTIRE BOOK provided with GPL for setups alone, and some say it is the best
one ever written for a computer racing game. And he complains that the cars
are impossible to drive. Well, this IS A SIMULATION... NOT an arcade game,
and should thus be reviewed as one. Can you really expect to hop into a 1967
Grand Prix car, and not spin on your first lap out?? I guarantee you that
you would spin MANY times, and it would take some time to 1) learn the car's
handling, and 2) learn the tracks, 3) learn racing techniques, and 4) be
comfortable with other racers on the track. In this respect, GPL does a
fantastic job of SIMULATING the experience. Sure, it IS frustrating, but I
would invite Craig to participate in an online race or visit a Fast-laps
page to see how well people are able to drive these cars.

Once you get used to the cars, they can really be pushed to the limit. Craig
does acknowledge this in the "Intelligence & Difficulty" section, however,
the "Review Criteria" states that this section is "more a measure for
advanced, *** gamers who like a significant challenge." GPL is
challenging, but that's what's good about it. This is NOT an arcade game
(much as it appears Craig wants it to be), and so it's purpose is not for
you to be able to win your first Grand Prix a week after you buy the
product. Another major point that should be noted is that the Artificial
Intelligence model is VERY advanced. The computer drivers' times adapt as
you get faster and more experienced. This way, there is always a constant
challenge. Therefore, the 2 1/2 stars awarded in this area are most
inappropriate. I would agree that part-points could be lost for being a
little too challenging for most people, but again, the point of GPL is to
provide a simulation of the Grand Prix experience, and it does just this so
this rating should be much higher.

Craig complains about framerate problems on his system. He should have tried
lowering the resolution setting. I can almost guarantee you that at 800 x ..
resolution (or even (969 x..), he would have easily achieved the maximum
possible resolution of 36fps. I personally use 640 x .. res for most of my
races as this gives me 36fps on my system (lower spec than the reviewer's),
and GPL still looks great. One reason the higher resolutions are offered is
so that in a year's time when the latest chips and graphics cards come out,
GPL will be able to take advantage of them. Obviously, 1024 x .. resolution
IS a strain on today's systems, so just reduce the resolution, and problem
solved! (Remember Microprose's GP2? .. A year after it was released, the
enjoyment level increased as people were able to run it with better
framerates, etc.)

Craig states "The fact that the screen is scrunched up is very annoying".
It's not "scrunched up". It was designed this way.. you may recognise it
from the movie theatre - it's called "letterbox" format. (The movie "Grand
Prix" was an inspiration, I believe), The top and bottom areas of the
screen, if filled with graphics, would be sky! Everything would be enlarged,
and take up more processor requirements, and is not really needed anyhow.
Papyrus essentially did the same thing in Nascar2, only the "black areas"
were filled at the top of the screen with the inside roof of the car, and
the bottom, with a large black dashboard. Nobody seemed to complain then! As
there is no roof is a GP car, it would have been unbalanced in my opinion to
have just a large dashboard at the bottom in GPL.

One final point, and this is a MAJOR one. Grand Prix Legends was designed
with the "multi-player" experience in mind. There is NO MENTION of GPL's
multiplayer capabilities whatsoever. Today's computer *** market has
found that the Online-*** experience is a major selling point in the
consumer's mind. Grand Prix Legends offers phenomenal online racing - some
say the racing experience is better than that of NROS. As many as 19 people
can log into a "host" server (so 20 players max), and have a good session of
online racing. (That is the maximum possible, best results with a
cable-modem host are around 12-15 players). Some GPL owners use GPL almost
exclusively for online play. (I still haven't run a full-length race on my
own!). This was a MAJOR oversight to "forget" to mention this aspect of GPL.

Whilst Craig Miller does admittedly make some very good observations and
comments, overall his review of GPL is unacceptable. Avault's credibility is
in jeopardy if reviews like this are continued to be published. I think my
main problem with the review is that is was reviewed with the "arcade" game
mindset, when the reviewer acknowledges that it is a sim. Therefore, it
should be reviewed as a sim, and should not whine about "arcade" features
that are not presented. A reviewer should have the decency to give the
product more than what appears to be a quick test before writing an article,
and should definitely read (quickly browse at the least!) through the
accompanying manuals - not just a few select pages, as it appears that Craig
did. (There was a book called "Four Wheel Drift" included in the box that
has a track-by-track guide, and discussion on how to setup the cars for the
various tracks.)

It is my opinion that Avault should either
1) Have the reviewer re-write the review to correct the inaccuracies,
omissions, and "arcade" bias that it so evidently includes in the current
draft WITH an apology to Papyrus and to Avault's visitors,
2) Replace the review with one written by an experienced Sim-racer who knows
how to write a proper review
3) Using #2, give a "sim-racer's opinion" comparison review (along with
suggestion #1), or
4) Remove the review from the site (no article would be better than one
which gives a false impression of a product)

Sincerely,
Dan Bryan

The Adrenaline Vault(Avault) lost all credibilty with me last year when they
reviewed CART Precision Racing. They gave it 4 1/2 out of 5 stars! I guess
that means it is a far superior game to GPL! Two full stars worth! I'm not
trying to start another CPR debate, but this comparison is just more proof
of Avault's inability to give un-biased, consistent reviews. I know all
reviewers are different, and everyone's entitled to their own opinions, but
there has got to be a better way of reviewing games. I like at least the
idea of having a general gamers review, and then a genre fans review. How do
all those flight sims get such good reviews with their encyclopedia manuals
and steep hardware requirements and learning curve? What about those
real-time strategy games? I don't like them myself so I would probably not
be a good reviewer for the hard corps, but I hope I could at least tell if a
game is of good quality or not. Two and 1/2 stars is like failing, below
average, to be avoided; and GPL is just NOT such a game. It seems unfair.
Anyway here are some of the gems from the Avault CPR review:

"A highly refined masterpiece that sets a new standard for realism in racing
simulations. "

"With the exception of the unbalanced car speeds and slightly demanding
hardware requirements, this is a five star title."

"The perfectly modeled physics are truly something to experience. "

".....the opposition in Precision Racing does perform with a high degree of
proficiency and aptitude. "

And the real kicker:

"Rookie Microsoft makes an illustrious entrance into a competitive genre
with Precision Racing, and is already poised to climb the pedestal and grasp
the trophy from the firm grip of veteran leader Papyrus. "

Too bad Avault did not use some of the above quotes for GPL, it is so much
more deserving of them!

Don Chapman
d...@mindspring.com

read more »

Imagine getting a copy of GPL with only the regular manual.  <shudder>

We may have been reading a different review...The one I read stated that"There
is no music in the game so I didn't rate this section."  Ah, the speed
of e-mail!  ;)

Cheers!

Marc

--
Marc J. Nelson
Sim Racing Online - http://www.simracing.com/

* Switch confused.net with concentric.net to reply...Confused-yet? *

i've never really put much weight with reviews, as i'm a hands on-then
make decision person.

however, the review of Grand Prix Legends by your Chris Miller is
absolutely one of the most laughable things i've read up to this point in
the eight years i've been on the net.

tell this 35-year-old-console-jockey to get a clue, maybe a steering setup
instead of a joystick for the game (Fav being NASCAR 2... yeah...
whatever..), and maybe some actual experience with the game.  F.Y.I. the
game _doesn't even have_ music.

Chris Miller is a joke.  and you've lost a patron as long as this dork is
on your staff.  tell wonderboy that Need For Speed 'N' is more his speed
of ***.  something arcadish, and completely devoid of intelligence
requirements.

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

-jch

Hi,
    The only reviews I read are the ones posted here on r.a.s.  At least
I know there is a much higher chance it was written by a racing sim
fanatics here like me with the same general mind set, unlike all of those
other "gamers"! :)

Later,
John

I've send an Email too. We'll MAKE them correct this!

// Johan

Same here. I didn't know if it was quoted wrong or if AVault changed
the review.

I trust opinions in the respective *** groups more than web page
reviews, be it flight sims, driving sims or action games.
You have to sift through the SUX and RULEZ type trash to get to it,
but there's enough there that you'll get a better balance of opinion.

I don't think his reaction to GPL was surprising at all. I can't
imagine anyone not REALLY into racing sims investing the time to get
good at it. In his summation, that is basically the point he conveyed
to me.
I'd further add that anyone without an interest in cars and the
physics modelled will quite possibly hate GPL.
Remember it happening with SODA?

I have friends that will sit and watch the GPL suspension cam and be
amazed at what they see, but I also have a couple of friends that
would dismiss it with "THIS BLOWS!" after 2 laps on the easiest track.
I don't even force it on them, I just fire up Quake2 for a little
deathmatch. That's just the way opinion is.

I bought GPL and think it's awesome, but I know already that I'll
never be good at it. I just don't have the time, and I actually prefer
racing sims to more arcade style stuff.
MotoRacer, MXMadness and the original Need For Speed basically cover
my arcade releases, and I have everything Papyrus has been involved
with from the original EA Indy 500.

I divide my computer time between racing sims, flight sims and action
games, and as much as I hate to admit it here, GPL has put aside for
Shogo:MAD.  Its fun (for me), and I think it's getting lost here that
fun is what it's all about.

Given the storm of releases that will be coming out for the holiday
season, I'll be honest and say I don't even know when I'll get back
into GPL.

I'm really looking forward to NASCAR using the GPL engine (with the
lingering fear that it's gonna be a hardware hog beyond anything
that's come before), since the cars are more accessible by nature.
Already knowing the tracks will make the transition smoother, too.

Sorry to ramble, but Mark (as always) presents some good points.

--

        http://www.racesimcentral.net/~fusion1
         http://www.racesimcentral.net/~fusion1
    (dirt bikes, rat bikes, rental car abuse...)

Cheers!
John

Most of the guys here probably hotlapped the 2 track demos for over a
month before the full release came out.
I bet this made the transition into the full game much easier.
You've already learned the handling, it was more a matter of learning
the new tracks. I think that knocked a bigger hunk out of the learning
curve than for people playing it "cold".

Tim

Z.

This is what it used to say:
"The musical score is spartan at best. I don't really think that it
matters much in this type of game, however. I can say that the music
does nothing to set the mood of the game nor does it give me any
sense of enjoyment just for music's sake. I quickly turned it off."

And this is what is says now:
There is no music in the game so I didn't rate this section. Heck, the game
is supposed to be set in the sixties -- they missed their chance to get some
really good music in the game to provide a mood. It obviously would have
been inappropriate while racing, however.

... I think this tops it all ...

Hena

l8er
ronny

--
Toys'R'Us '99: "So, would you like a hand gun with that action figure,
kiddo?"

          |\      _,,,---,,_        I want to die like my Grandfather,
   ZZZzz /,`.-'`'    -.  ;-;;,_              in his sleep.
        |,4-  ) )-,_. ,\ (  `'-'     Not like the people in his car,
       '---''(_/--'  `-'\_)            screaming their heads off!