rec.autos.simulators

> sorry, clicked that send button too fast.
> anyway, the "only" new features of GP3 are:

> * completely dynamic weather system

> > Got my Wireplay newsletter today, and noticed it had an article about
GP3.
> > Here's what it says:

> > =======================
> > Warning: GP3 rant alert
> > =======================

> > So Grand Prix 3 finally hit the shelves last week, to rave reviews and
> some not
> > so rave comments from the racing game fraternity.

> > Personally I think it's wicked. All the playability of the previous
game,
> with
> > hardware accelerated graphics and some of the best rain effects I've
ever
> seen.

> > I find the complaints amusing. 'The interface and features are exactly
the
> > same, with just a graphical overhaul' they say. But if you had developed
a
> game
> > that had been so popular for the last five years despite the fact it
> doesn't
> > make use of any of today's *** technology, why would you want to make
> > wholesale changes? That overused phrase 'If it ain't broke don't fix it'
> comes
> > to mind.

> > All the racing purists say it's unrealistic. Funny how all these people
> whose
> > closest experience to racing a Formula One car is using the High Street
as
> a
> > drag strip for their Ford Escort on a Saturday night are suddenly world
> experts
> > on how a Formula One car should behave.

> > I've seen many references to how GP3 compares, or rather doesn't compare
> to
> > Grand Prix Legends for realism. They may well be right, but the realism
is
> > GPL's undoing. Games are supposed to be fun. They are made for mass
market
> > appeal, or at least they should be if the developers want to get back
the
> > investment they've made in the games development.

> > We want to load a game up without reading a technical manual, click on a
> couple
> > of buttons and be mixing it at the front of the grid within a few hours,
> > something that GP2 and 3 excel at. Then you can start reading the
manual,
> tweak
> > the car and take the game to the next difficulty level.

> > GPL is a great game if you can be bothered to sit and concentrate for
> several
> > hours, just to get the car out of the pits without spinning. But how
many
> of us
> > wants to do that? Playability is what it's all about - the reason why
GP2
> sold
> > bucket-loads more copies than GPL and has been a top rated game for the
> last
> > five years. Something I'm sure GP3 is sure to emulate.

> > =======================

> > --
> > David. (GPLRank handicap: -5.12)
> > "After all, a mere thousand yards - such a harmless little knoll,
really."
> > (Raymond Mays on Shelsley Walsh)

> >    Blow it Out Your A-S  F12000 is way better than gp3 in all around
> simming

> > > Got my Wireplay newsletter today, and noticed it had an article about
> GP3.
> > > Here's what it says:

> > > =======================
> > > Warning: GP3 rant alert
> > > =======================

> > > So Grand Prix 3 finally hit the shelves last week, to rave reviews and
> > some not
> > > so rave comments from the racing game fraternity.

> > > Personally I think it's wicked. All the playability of the previous
> game,
> > with
> > > hardware accelerated graphics and some of the best rain effects I've
> ever
> > seen.

> > > I find the complaints amusing. 'The interface and features are exactly
> the
> > > same, with just a graphical overhaul' they say. But if you had
developed
> a
> > game
> > > that had been so popular for the last five years despite the fact it
> > doesn't
> > > make use of any of today's *** technology, why would you want to
make
> > > wholesale changes? That overused phrase 'If it ain't broke don't fix
it'
> > comes
> > > to mind.

> > > All the racing purists say it's unrealistic. Funny how all these
people
> > whose
> > > closest experience to racing a Formula One car is using the High
Street
> as
> > a
> > > drag strip for their Ford Escort on a Saturday night are suddenly
world
> > experts
> > > on how a Formula One car should behave.

> > > I've seen many references to how GP3 compares, or rather doesn't
compare
> > to
> > > Grand Prix Legends for realism. They may well be right, but the
realism
> is
> > > GPL's undoing. Games are supposed to be fun. They are made for mass
> market
> > > appeal, or at least they should be if the developers want to get back
> the
> > > investment they've made in the games development.

> > > We want to load a game up without reading a technical manual, click on
a
> > couple
> > > of buttons and be mixing it at the front of the grid within a few
hours,
> > > something that GP2 and 3 excel at. Then you can start reading the
> manual,
> > tweak
> > > the car and take the game to the next difficulty level.

> > > GPL is a great game if you can be bothered to sit and concentrate for
> > several
> > > hours, just to get the car out of the pits without spinning. But how
> many
> > of us
> > > wants to do that? Playability is what it's all about - the reason why
> GP2
> > sold
> > > bucket-loads more copies than GPL and has been a top rated game for
the
> > last
> > > five years. Something I'm sure GP3 is sure to emulate.

> > > =======================

> > > --
> > > David. (GPLRank handicap: -5.12)
> > > "After all, a mere thousand yards - such a harmless little knoll,
> really."
> > > (Raymond Mays on Shelsley Walsh)

> > Got my Wireplay newsletter today, and noticed it had an article about
GP3.
> > Here's what it says:

> > =======================
> > Warning: GP3 rant alert
> > =======================

> > So Grand Prix 3 finally hit the shelves last week, to rave reviews and
> some not
> > so rave comments from the racing game fraternity.

> > Personally I think it's wicked. All the playability of the previous
game,
> with
> > hardware accelerated graphics and some of the best rain effects I've
ever
> seen.

> > I find the complaints amusing. 'The interface and features are exactly
the
> > same, with just a graphical overhaul' they say. But if you had developed
a
> game
> > that had been so popular for the last five years despite the fact it
> doesn't
> > make use of any of today's *** technology, why would you want to make
> > wholesale changes? That overused phrase 'If it ain't broke don't fix it'
> comes
> > to mind.

> > All the racing purists say it's unrealistic. Funny how all these people
> whose
> > closest experience to racing a Formula One car is using the High Street
as
> a
> > drag strip for their Ford Escort on a Saturday night are suddenly world
> experts
> > on how a Formula One car should behave.

> > I've seen many references to how GP3 compares, or rather doesn't compare
> to
> > Grand Prix Legends for realism. They may well be right, but the realism
is
> > GPL's undoing. Games are supposed to be fun. They are made for mass
market
> > appeal, or at least they should be if the developers want to get back
the
> > investment they've made in the games development.

> > We want to load a game up without reading a technical manual, click on a
> couple
> > of buttons and be mixing it at the front of the grid within a few hours,
> > something that GP2 and 3 excel at. Then you can start reading the
manual,
> tweak
> > the car and take the game to the next difficulty level.

> > GPL is a great game if you can be bothered to sit and concentrate for
> several
> > hours, just to get the car out of the pits without spinning. But how
many
> of us
> > wants to do that? Playability is what it's all about - the reason why
GP2
> sold
> > bucket-loads more copies than GPL and has been a top rated game for the
> last
> > five years. Something I'm sure GP3 is sure to emulate.

> > =======================

> > --
> > David. (GPLRank handicap: -5.12)
> > "After all, a mere thousand yards - such a harmless little knoll,
really."
> > (Raymond Mays on Shelsley Walsh)