rec.autos.simulators

by **Jay** » Sun, 06 Dec 1998 04:00:00

Just got the January edition of PC Gamer (one of the most comprehensive, and
unbiased PC mag's on the market, IMO unlike the Ziff Davis rags that give
biased reviews of products that advertise in their rag...)

On page176 they review Grand Prix Legends, and on a scale from 0-100 it only
scored a 70.... Basically they trashed Sierra/Papyrus as saying the game is
virtually undriveable! They go on to say that it's a game only for serious
sim racers, and if your just looking for a fun game you can jump into and
race without hours and hours and hours of practice/training this one is
definitely not for you!

Here is a few lines from the review....

->For reasons known only to Papyrus, its most recent games have also been
lacking essential 3d hardware support,and at times you get the impression
that it would bother them to even have their products called "games". The
this is the company's first title with hardware support out of the box says
volumes for its priorities, and the fact that Papyrus continues to make
games that are maddeningly inaccessible for the average gamer says even
more. <-

and....

->Being regarded as the greatest developer of racing sims seems to have gone
to Papyrus' collective head. They may indeed create the most amazing physics
models seen in any sim (ground or air). What they forgot to do was make a
game that most people would want to, or even be able to, play! <-

Ouch!!!!!

The article goes on to point out the highs and lows of the game....

Highs: Superb physics model. Strong driver AI.

Lows: No true difficulty settings. Coupled with the over-modeled physics,
this means a steep, steep learning curve.

Overall score: 70

BTW, They gave F1RS a score of a 90 or 92, I can't remember which, and ToCA
got an 88, NFSIII also got a score of 88.

by **Schlom** » Sun, 06 Dec 1998 04:00:00

I really disagree with this evaluation. Yes its hard to drive but the cars in
1967 WERE very hard to drive. I really cant draw any direct comparisons but i
have driven cars witout areo(friend has minisprint without wings) and driving
it on pavement is hard enough. Dirt is almost impossible with out practice.
Judging from this i think GPL is very accurate.

IMO the absense of difficulty settings is rayther a nuesence. Yes it easy to
change them if u know something about programming or someone tells u how to do
it but a slider bar (like the one for detail bias, linear/non-linear etc) would
be much easier. I do not however agree with what the call "over modeled"
physics. IMO they are very true to form.

I would give GPL at least a 90 if not a 97-100

But then again this is my opinion. Be interresting to see what some other
reviews say.

by **dafn..** » Sun, 06 Dec 1998 04:00:00

Get a 100 in my book. I spent mucho dinero to be able to
enjoy this sim at the highest level. It takes a long time to be able
to drive at a competetive level but what other sim gives such
satisfaction of a feeling of accomplishment when your done ?

by **Graeme Nas** » Sun, 06 Dec 1998 04:00:00

Is this the UK PC Gamer? Because they had an extensive GPL review in
November. It was honest and unbiased with GPL getting a rather nice 93%
at the end of it all!

Cheers!

--
Graeme Nash
Nash Racing Organisation(!) Lotus - Green/Green

You know what to do with "don't_spam_me"...
http://www.karisma1.demon.co.uk/
ICQ# 11257824

"Useless quote"

by **Daxe Rexfor** » Sun, 06 Dec 1998 04:00:00

>>On page176 they review Grand Prix Legends, and on a scale from 0-100 it
only
>>scored a 70.... Basically they trashed Sierra/Papyrus as saying the game
is
>>virtually undriveable! They go on to say that it's a game only for serious
>>sim racers, and if your just looking for a fun game you can jump into and
>>race without hours and hours and hours of practice/training this one is
>>definitely not for you!

>I really disagree with this evaluation. Yes its hard to drive but the cars
in
>1967 WERE very hard to drive. ...<snip>.......
>Judging from this i think GPL is very accurate.

They didn't say it wasn't accurate, they said it was virtually undriveable.
What's the *major* difference between "virtually undriveable" and "very hard
to drive"?

Furthermore, why is saying that it's a game only for serious sim racers
considered negative? That's exactly what it is. In fact, it's not a GAME
at all. I am not suprised that pc GAMEr doesn't like it! If they said it
was a great game and really fun to drive, pretty soon a whole hoard of NFS3
drivers who bought the sim on PC GAMER's recommendation would be in here
***ing about how hard it is and that it is impossible to drive! (And
asking for patches to run cop cars and Diablos at Nurburgring) Instead of
the fun and useful and productive exchanges about GPL that take place in
here, you would have brilliant threads and dopey flame wars that start
with:

LameRZ,
gRAnd pRiX LeggENdz f*cKiN SUCKS Suckahh!!! If U kant driVe 300 miles peR
Hour like NEEd foR SpeEd 3 thEN you do'NT no WhAtTs KEWL. NfS3 is DA BoMb!!
itt's PhAT! iT RULEZ!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You should be happy they gave it a crappy score.

daxe (always ready with a stupid, unpopular opinion)

---== http://www.racesimcentral.net/ - Largest Usenet Server In The World! ==---

by **Richard J. Koche** » Sun, 06 Dec 1998 04:00:00

I have never really liked PC Gamer and now I don't think that I will ever even
read their pages again. If they want to trash such an excellent and
revolutionary sim as GPL is because the reviewer is a woos and has no skills
outside of point and shoot game like Quake, then let 'em. I say that the whole
sim community should***'em and cancel any subscriptions and not buy any
future issues of their stupid magazine. There is no need to reason to dock 30
points off their rating simply because it is too hard.

Just my two cents,
Ryan Kocher

> Just got the January edition of PC Gamer (one of the most comprehensive, and
> unbiased PC mag's on the market, IMO unlike the Ziff Davis rags that give
> biased reviews of products that advertise in their rag...)

> On page176 they review Grand Prix Legends, and on a scale from 0-100 it only
> scored a 70.... Basically they trashed Sierra/Papyrus as saying the game is
> virtually undriveable! They go on to say that it's a game only for serious
> sim racers, and if your just looking for a fun game you can jump into and
> race without hours and hours and hours of practice/training this one is
> definitely not for you!

> Here is a few lines from the review....

> ->For reasons known only to Papyrus, its most recent games have also been
> lacking essential 3d hardware support,and at times you get the impression
> that it would bother them to even have their products called "games". The
> this is the company's first title with hardware support out of the box says
> volumes for its priorities, and the fact that Papyrus continues to make
> games that are maddeningly inaccessible for the average gamer says even
> more. <-

> and....

> ->Being regarded as the greatest developer of racing sims seems to have gone
> to Papyrus' collective head. They may indeed create the most amazing physics
> models seen in any sim (ground or air). What they forgot to do was make a
> game that most people would want to, or even be able to, play! <-

> Ouch!!!!!

> The article goes on to point out the highs and lows of the game....

> Highs: Superb physics model. Strong driver AI.

> Lows: No true difficulty settings. Coupled with the over-modeled physics,
> this means a steep, steep learning curve.

> Overall score: 70

> BTW, They gave F1RS a score of a 90 or 92, I can't remember which, and ToCA
> got an 88, NFSIII also got a score of 88.

by **ymenar** » Sun, 06 Dec 1998 04:00:00

Jay J wrote

How can over-modeled physics be bad ??

I don't understand the logic.

- Fran?ois Mnard <ymenard> Good race at the Brickyard!
- Official Mentally retarded guy of r.a.s.
- Excuse me for my English (I'm French speaking)
- Sponsored by http://www.awpss.com/ on the NROS
- "People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realise
how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."--

by **Robert Youn** » Mon, 07 Dec 1998 04:00:00

Well, if PC "Gamer" (whatever a "Gamer" is) want to reduce every piece of
software to the level of their standards let them stew in their own
mediocrity. Most people are tired of one-dimensional "games" that hold your
attention for five minutes and are as challenging as reading the first three
letters of the alphabet (big letters mind). Good quality software is a
welcome rarity and GPL stands out a mile. The review won't have done any
harm, since saying "this is only for serious sim racers" will of course
attract a lot of people. I am no particular fan of Sierra but I think
quality software should be encouraged. Most software reviewers (but of
course not all) are callow nerds who write in order to appeal to nine year
olds with an attention span of a few seconds.

Robert

>Just got the January edition of PC Gamer (one of the most comprehensive,
and
>unbiased PC mag's on the market, IMO unlike the Ziff Davis rags that give
>biased reviews of products that advertise in their rag...)

>On page176 they review Grand Prix Legends, and on a scale from 0-100 it
only
>scored a 70.... Basically they trashed Sierra/Papyrus as saying the game is
>virtually undriveable! They go on to say that it's a game only for serious
>sim racers, and if your just looking for a fun game you can jump into and
>race without hours and hours and hours of practice/training this one is
>definitely not for you!

>Here is a few lines from the review....

>->For reasons known only to Papyrus, its most recent games have also been
>lacking essential 3d hardware support,and at times you get the impression
>that it would bother them to even have their products called "games". The
>this is the company's first title with hardware support out of the box says
>volumes for its priorities, and the fact that Papyrus continues to make
>games that are maddeningly inaccessible for the average gamer says even
>more. <-

>and....

>->Being regarded as the greatest developer of racing sims seems to have
gone
>to Papyrus' collective head. They may indeed create the most amazing
physics
>models seen in any sim (ground or air). What they forgot to do was make a
>game that most people would want to, or even be able to, play! <-

>Ouch!!!!!

>The article goes on to point out the highs and lows of the game....

>Highs: Superb physics model. Strong driver AI.

>Lows: No true difficulty settings. Coupled with the over-modeled physics,
>this means a steep, steep learning curve.

>Overall score: 70

>BTW, They gave F1RS a score of a 90 or 92, I can't remember which, and ToCA
>got an 88, NFSIII also got a score of 88.

by **Mark** » Mon, 07 Dec 1998 04:00:00

Jay, when it comes to auto sims these rags cater to the arcade
crowd. We can only thank our lucky stars that Papy has not caved
to this probable money-making approach. On flight sims the mags
often seem a bit more tolerant (often due to more hard core and
professional input), but I guess Joe Reviewer is not gonna admit
that skills the family Geo Metro should not translate directly to
a 400HP 1300lb pocket rocket <g>.

Don't let it get you down... we don't need the NFS folks online
in GPL anyhow ;-)

Rgds,
Mark R.

by **DJacob** » Mon, 07 Dec 1998 04:00:00

GPL is for the hard core. It will keep the Rif-Raf out. If I am ever able to
drive it competively I will feel like I accomplished something. The review was
accurate. If they rate it too high and people buy on their word most will be
disappointed. It is just to hard for the average Joe and requires too much
hardware to run. We might like it , but it is not for everyone.
Don

by **Grit** » Mon, 07 Dec 1998 04:00:00

Well, I for one ain't gonna be buying any more copies
of PC Gamer. Anyone who reviews a game like Grand Prix
Legends and can't see that it's quite simply the greatest race
sime to date is obviously incompetent (or being "influenced"
by other software companies).
I'll no longer let PC Gamer influence my purchases in
ANY way (no that they did in the first place :)

It's not that I'm a big GPL fan and have feel some irrational
loyalty to a game I really enjoy. It's simply that a friggin' BLIND
man could see that GPL is the superior race sim to date.

S.C."Gritz" Petty
Spectre Racing
http://members.xoom.com/Gritz/Spectre/spectreracing.htm

>Just got the January edition of PC Gamer (one of the most comprehensive,
and
>unbiased PC mag's on the market, IMO unlike the Ziff Davis rags that give
>biased reviews of products that advertise in their rag...)

>On page176 they review Grand Prix Legends, and on a scale from 0-100 it
only
>scored a 70.... Basically they trashed Sierra/Papyrus as saying the game is
>virtually undriveable! They go on to say that it's a game only for serious
>sim racers, and if your just looking for a fun game you can jump into and
>race without hours and hours and hours of practice/training this one is
>definitely not for you!

>Here is a few lines from the review....

>->For reasons known only to Papyrus, its most recent games have also been
>lacking essential 3d hardware support,and at times you get the impression
>that it would bother them to even have their products called "games". The
>this is the company's first title with hardware support out of the box says
>volumes for its priorities, and the fact that Papyrus continues to make
>games that are maddeningly inaccessible for the average gamer says even
>more. <-

>and....

>->Being regarded as the greatest developer of racing sims seems to have
gone
>to Papyrus' collective head. They may indeed create the most amazing
physics
>models seen in any sim (ground or air). What they forgot to do was make a
>game that most people would want to, or even be able to, play! <-

>Ouch!!!!!

>The article goes on to point out the highs and lows of the game....

>Highs: Superb physics model. Strong driver AI.

>Lows: No true difficulty settings. Coupled with the over-modeled physics,
>this means a steep, steep learning curve.

>Overall score: 70

>BTW, They gave F1RS a score of a 90 or 92, I can't remember which, and ToCA
>got an 88, NFSIII also got a score of 88.

by **Rick Worre** » Mon, 07 Dec 1998 04:00:00

I think Mark has hit the nail on the head here. The average Joe
doesn't fly his Geo plane to work every day, so it doesn't seem that
ridiculous that he can't jump into a flight sim and fly like a pro.
He does, however, drive his Geo Metro car to work every day, so
driving a racecar should be pretty easy--faster, but basically the
same skillset.

I work my ass off on GPL, and I still suck--and I love it more each
time I play it. Now, THAT'S an endor***t!

>Jay, when it comes to auto sims these rags cater to the arcade
>crowd. We can only thank our lucky stars that Papy has not caved
>to this probable money-making approach. On flight sims the mags
>often seem a bit more tolerant (often due to more hard core and
>professional input), but I guess Joe Reviewer is not gonna admit
>that skills the family Geo Metro should not translate directly to
>a 400HP 1300lb pocket rocket <g>.

>Don't let it get you down... we don't need the NFS folks online
>in GPL anyhow ;-)

>Rgds,
>Mark R.

>>Just got the January edition of PC Gamer (one of the most comprehensive, and
>>unbiased PC mag's on the market, IMO unlike the Ziff Davis rags that give
>>biased reviews of products that advertise in their rag...)

>>On page176 they review Grand Prix Legends, and on a scale from 0-100 it only
>>scored a 70.... Basically they trashed Sierra/Papyrus as saying the game is
>>virtually undriveable! They go on to say that it's a game only for serious
>>sim racers, and if your just looking for a fun game you can jump into and
>>race without hours and hours and hours of practice/training this one is
>>definitely not for you!

>>Here is a few lines from the review....

>>->For reasons known only to Papyrus, its most recent games have also been
>>lacking essential 3d hardware support,and at times you get the impression
>>that it would bother them to even have their products called "games". The
>>this is the company's first title with hardware support out of the box says
>>volumes for its priorities, and the fact that Papyrus continues to make
>>games that are maddeningly inaccessible for the average gamer says even
>>more. <-

>>and....

>>->Being regarded as the greatest developer of racing sims seems to have gone
>>to Papyrus' collective head. They may indeed create the most amazing physics
>>models seen in any sim (ground or air). What they forgot to do was make a
>>game that most people would want to, or even be able to, play! <-

>>Ouch!!!!!

>>The article goes on to point out the highs and lows of the game....

>>Highs: Superb physics model. Strong driver AI.

>>Lows: No true difficulty settings. Coupled with the over-modeled physics,
>>this means a steep, steep learning curve.

>>Overall score: 70

>>BTW, They gave F1RS a score of a 90 or 92, I can't remember which, and ToCA
>>got an 88, NFSIII also got a score of 88.

--
Rick Worrell
Sports *** Network
http://www.racesimcentral.net/***.com

by **Grimfarro** » Mon, 07 Dec 1998 04:00:00

> Just got the January edition of PC Gamer (one of the most comprehensive, and
> unbiased PC mag's on the market, IMO unlike the Ziff Davis rags that give
> biased reviews of products that advertise in their rag...)

Exactly how a magazine that was infamous for giving Outpost, Lords
of Magic and Ascendancy over 80% can be considered "unbiased" is
really beyond me. At least CGW waits until they play the whole game
before reviewing it. Also, PC Gamer has in the past "reviewed"
games which never even became released (like one Warhammer
strategy/action game which was scrapped at the last minute,
but was "Reviewed" by PC Gamer anyway). Sorry, but the
magazine is pretty much crap. And this "review" of
GPL is further evidence of its deterioration.

Grimfarrow

by **Ian Wrigh** » Mon, 07 Dec 1998 04:00:00

The UK Version of PC Gamer isn't perfect, but as a demonstration of their
coolness they gave Geoff Crammond's F1GP1 and GP2 (95%) number >7< in their July
1998 top 100 games of all time, beating all other racing games!
if you want to read the UK PC Gamer review of GPL email me and I'll send it
cos it's not bad at all.

> Is this the UK PC Gamer? Because they had an extensive GPL review in
> November. It was honest and unbiased with GPL getting a rather nice 93%
> at the end of it all!

by **NanaKo** » Mon, 07 Dec 1998 04:00:00

LoL...Well, I wholeheartedly agree with "Gritz's" comments - In my own humble
opinion, GPL is the BEST racing sim I've played - PERIOD!

Um, I've included a listing of what pc race sims I've played:
-ICR1/2
-MS CART Precision Racing
-NASCAR 1/2
-Ubisoft F1 Racing

rec.autos.simulators

PC Gamer Review of GPL, Rather unkind scores!

PC Gamer Review of GPL, Rather unkind scores!

PC Gamer Review of GPL, Rather unkind scores!

PC Gamer Review of GPL, Rather unkind scores!

PC Gamer Review of GPL, Rather unkind scores!

PC Gamer Review of GPL, Rather unkind scores!

PC Gamer Review of GPL, Rather unkind scores!

PC Gamer Review of GPL, Rather unkind scores!

PC Gamer Review of GPL, Rather unkind scores!

PC Gamer Review of GPL, Rather unkind scores!

PC Gamer Review of GPL, Rather unkind scores!

PC Gamer Review of GPL, Rather unkind scores!

PC Gamer Review of GPL, Rather unkind scores!

PC Gamer Review of GPL, Rather unkind scores!

PC Gamer Review of GPL, Rather unkind scores!

PC Gamer Review of GPL, Rather unkind scores!