rec.autos.simulators

Marc.

I do have to admit though that GPL would be ALOT more fun if it had
difficulty switches for AI and physics. It is almost impossible to
successfully complete one lap during race conditions in a GPL car. I just
don't have the time anymore to spend hours and hours practicing. Sometimes I
just like to hop in and race! It really should have come with more options
for difficulty

Mike

PC Lamer is not unbiased at all.  In fact although I agree that most
magazines show some level of "adjustment" on occasion,PC Lamer has
constantly shown their inability to be trusted.

FACT: In 1996 the AVERAGE rating given to games by PC Lamer was in the
mid 80% range.  They seemed to love almost everything.

FACT: In 1997 after severe criticism from the public and other media, PC
Lamer decided they needed to lower this average.  However, they did this
not by giving more accurate ratings to the Big Publishers games, but by
including several patsy reviews in each issue.  These "added in" reviews
were almost always of games that were OVER 6 MONTHS OLD (and usually were
almost impossible to find by then in any store).  They pan a few titles
that came out six-nine months ago by some small publisher, and then go on
to review Big Publisher games that came out less than a month ago.

FACT: PC Lamer claims to only review "Finished Games" and yet is the only
magazine with the fine distinction of having printed REVIEWS (not pre-
views, but full fledged reviews) of TWO games that were never even
published.  They also have had reviews of games in print on the newsstand
the same week that a game in released.  This is particularly amazing
considering the two month delay in print media.  

They rated ACENDANCY at 93% (wouldn't have anything to do with the
reviewing publishing the strategy guide...no)

They gave Chessmaster 5000 a 90% in spite of the fact that the game was
so bug ridden as to make its entire database unusable.

I haven't read that magazine since last year when their cover proclaimed
"BIGEST ISSUE EVER!!!  444 PACKED PAGES"  Well t was try, there were 444
pages, of course 63% of those pages were FULL PAGE ADS, that left a
whopping 164 pages for everything else (including any ads that weren't
full page).  By the time you got done with table of contents, the "whats
on the CD" section, you ended up with a magazine that was many things,
like impossible to enjoy.

Oh god that magazine sucks.

Check out:

http://www.pathcom.com/~kenl/

<snip of yet another PC Lamer reviewers ineptitude>

--
*** Support open DVD ***

No phone line connection
No charge for additional viewings
No records of what you watch
Cheaper to rent
Cheaper to own

DIVX: Watching you watch movies

DIVX: You watch it, it watches you

DIVX: Its hard to beleive it, but Bill Gates has nothing to do with it!

Mike

--
Ken

Go #43 and #44

"If I went 'round claiming I was Emperor because some
 moistened bink lobbed a scimitar at me, they'd put me away" - anonymous
peasant

volksy (at) geocities (dot) com
volksy (at) yahoo (dot) com

that's Barbour, not Barber, folks . . .

MS CART. Now theres one I'm glad I didnt buy, if its even remotely close to the
demo. I spent who knows how long downloading it, and deleted it after about two
laps. Didnt feel it was worth the HD space.

What they said was right on the money.  The average gamer will
not like this title.  I can think of few people I know personally, if
any, to whom I would give it to for Christmas.

If you randomly picked100
of PC Gamer's readers and let them play the game for a couple
of hours, then had them rate it, I bet it would get some really high ratings
and some really, really low ratings from frustrated / bored
users who never "got it".  I think 70% is a fair estimate of the
average rating those randomly selected users would give.
That is the true test of such a rating.  They are trying to predict
how well their average reader would enjoy the sim.

rob.

Grimfarrow

--
Anssi Lehtinen

Jon.

: ->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. <-

While I agrew with their point about not making the game accessible to a
wider audience, they are hopelessly wrong with this point.  CART pre-dated
hardware acceleration, and when Rendition cards hit the scene (before
Voodoo even existed) Papyrus produced some very efficient code to support
it and released it as a free patch.  Nascar 2 was Rendition ready out of
the box (again, before 3D cards had wide-spread acceptance, and before
most software companies were writing direct 3D and glide titles - I think
Psygnosis's F1 was the first 3dfx game).  Their next title (GPL) is
rendition and 3dfx ready, with patches coming for other cards.  Exactly
what was this reviewer expecting?  Support for a card which didn't yet
exist?  What was this guy smoking?

Stephen

It does take a bit of time to learn what these cars demand (lift while
shifting, get the car settled before turning in, easy on the
accelerator, etc.).  And of course, you have to learn the track you're
on to know what to do when, but that's true of all racing sims/games on
road courses.

Also, anybody who is is having a hard time controlling the car should
download Alison's excellent Coventry setups.  The car handles
beautifully on all the tracks I've tried (well, a bit too much
understeer at Monaco for my tastes, but that's another story). I think
you'll be pleasantly surprised.

Of course, it takes a HUGE amount of time to get as good as the top GPL
racers, but that's true of any sport/hobby/activity worth pursuing.

Dave Ewing

Dave Ewing

But they should "subdivide" those readers into specific likes and
dislikes before trying to review it as if it's targeted market is
something as broad as "any person who likes cars".

I dare say I couldn't write a review of "Barbie's Fashion
Designer CD", as I have no taste, yet 100% of it's "target"
audience (pre-*** girls, I suppose) would probably give it rave
reviews.

A sim - or any game -(hell all products for that matter) should
be only "rated" as it stands against any directly-competing
product on the marketplace, past or present, and not on it's
"mass appeal". If it is the best thing out there for it's
targeted market, it'll have near 100% "mass appeal", but only for
it's target.

 GPL raised the bar significantly higher as the new target for
all other "racing sim" programmers out there to try and hit.

Rating a simulation for it's mass appeal to the general ***
public is akin to saying a shit-barge SUV like an Explorer is
somehow "better" than a  Porsche 911 because "it has a bigger
trunk and it rides smoother" and validating the comparison by
saying "well, they both have 4 tires and an engine". Not even a
fair comparison.

 Auto magazines (and there's damned few of them that I like) do
better than so-called "***" mags. in at least trying to only
compare apples only with other apples.

 In reviewing anything which calls itself a "simulation", there
should be only one criteria: Is this closer to "real" than any
other "simulation" on the market? Yes or no. "Hard to drive"
isn't a criteria for being "good", it's merely a by-product of
trying to be "real".

 True, but still the "difficulty" shouldn't enter into the actual
scoring of the product, since it's trying to emulate something
that obviously isn't easy in real life. "Difficulty" should be
the side-bar article, and they should always balance that with
the fact that despite the difficulty, it pays off *immensely* in
the satisfaction you get when you know you just cut that
damn-near perfect lap. :)

 Regards,

Doc Wynne
Technical Support & Network Services
Support Engineering/dickson.net
http://www.racesimcentral.net/
--
Never a late apex, never a dull moment.