rec.autos.simulators

by **Magnulu** » Wed, 12 Jan 2005 14:57:51

Here's some features I'd like to see in a rally game:

- very realistic/complex physics (and the option to add driving aids, such
as traction control, etc.- a slider/numerical option similar to Gran Turismo
would be great for this).
- random stage generation (similar to V-Rally)
- ability to make custom stages (similar to V-Rally)
- stages could be customized for length, road width, conditions, and overall
difficulty (competition's speed), anywhere from 3-4 minutes to 25-30 minutes
- career mode that would use random stages and custom stage lengths based on
user choice
- large selection of cars, including vintage cars. If the devs can't get a
license for the real cars- make the up!
- NO cars are locked, except perhaps for a progression in the career mode.
- online and arcade style rallycross racing
- traditional pace notes (not like Colin McRae Rally).

by **ymenar** » Wed, 12 Jan 2005 17:05:29

> - very realistic/complex physics (and the option to add driving aids,
> such
> as traction control, etc.- a slider/numerical option similar to Gran
> Turismo
> would be great for this).

Why do you want on one side complexity, but on the other options to take off
that complexity? Doesn't make sense.

Impossible nowadays considering the complexity of track geography.

--
-- Fran?ois Mnard <ymenard>
-- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez
Corporation - helping America into the New World...

by **Plowboy** » Thu, 13 Jan 2005 01:33:50

Yeah I agree with you YM, it is Oxy Moronic...
All natural artificial flavor hahahaa

it is like saying Super Size my Quarter pounder meal, oh and the diet coke.

ymenard enlightened us with:

>> - very realistic/complex physics (and the option to add driving
>> aids, such
>> as traction control, etc.- a slider/numerical option similar to Gran
>> Turismo
>> would be great for this).

> Why do you want on one side complexity, but on the other options to
> take off that complexity? Doesn't make sense.

>> - random stage generation (similar to V-Rally)
>> - ability to make custom stages (similar to V-Rally)

> Impossible nowadays considering the complexity of track geography.

by **ymenar** » Thu, 13 Jan 2005 03:19:14

> Maybe he wants it to be a commercial success?

A commercial success for a racing simulation won't ever happen anymore on
the PC. There was Nascar Racing 1, and that's all. All others are success
within the own field of simracing, not of all PC *** itself. Even less
console ***! :)

--
-- Fran?ois Mnard <ymenard>
-- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez
Corporation - helping America into the New World...

by **Eric Tet** » Thu, 13 Jan 2005 03:36:34

> it is like saying Super Size my Quarter pounder meal,
> oh and the diet coke

I do that. I'm not on a diet, but I don't see the point in drinking a
caloric beverage (i.e. syrup) when the non-caloric version taste just
as good. That like saying, "Don't make my Quarter Pounder Meal any
larger or taste any different, just quadruple the calories, please. I
just like empty calories. Thanks."

by **Mike Beaucham** » Thu, 13 Jan 2005 05:39:18

Adding a non-diet coke to a Quarter Pounder Meal doesn't quadruple the
calories. Infact, it doesn't even double them.. and that's with the KING
size Coke.

Mike
http://mikebeauchamp.com

by **David Butter** » Thu, 13 Jan 2005 09:17:25

<snip>

Admittedly also a long time ago, but doesn't GP2 count as a commercial
success?

--
Please remove ".invalid" to reply by email.

Support the world's oldest motorsport venue!
http://www.shelsley-walsh.co.uk/future.html

by **Eric Tet** » Thu, 13 Jan 2005 13:51:05

> Adding a non-diet coke to a Quarter Pounder Meal doesn't quadruple
the
> calories.

I didn't say it did. It was an analogy to the Coke.

To me, Diet Coke taste as good as regular Coke. So why would I ever
choose the one that has 80 grams of sugar? Just because I'm not on a
diet?

I don't care if I'm ordering a triple fudge sunday, if I order a Coke
with it it'll be a Diet Coke. Not because I'm trying to lose weight,
but because there's no point in consuming empty calories I can't even
taste.

by **Mike Beaucham** » Fri, 14 Jan 2005 02:14:15

Coo'

>> Adding a non-diet coke to a Quarter Pounder Meal doesn't quadruple
> the
>> calories.

> I didn't say it did. It was an analogy to the Coke.

> To me, Diet Coke taste as good as regular Coke. So why would I ever
> choose the one that has 80 grams of sugar? Just because I'm not on a
> diet?

> I don't care if I'm ordering a triple fudge sunday, if I order a Coke
> with it it'll be a Diet Coke. Not because I'm trying to lose weight,
> but because there's no point in consuming empty calories I can't even
> taste.

by **Plowboy** » Fri, 14 Jan 2005 02:45:36

OK, since you wanted to nit pick the analogy, did you get the original
point? Somebody wanted the most comprehensive simulator out there, with
complex this and that, then in the same frikkin breath, wants to "drive" it
with a joypad or keyboard, it is Oxy Moronic..

Got it, get er done

Eric Tetz enlightened us with:

>> Adding a non-diet coke to a Quarter Pounder Meal doesn't quadruple
>> the calories.

> I didn't say it did. It was an analogy to the Coke.

> To me, Diet Coke taste as good as regular Coke. So why would I ever
> choose the one that has 80 grams of sugar? Just because I'm not on a
> diet?

> I don't care if I'm ordering a triple fudge sunday, if I order a Coke
> with it it'll be a Diet Coke. Not because I'm trying to lose weight,
> but because there's no point in consuming empty calories I can't even
> taste.

by **Magnulu** » Fri, 14 Jan 2005 03:26:59

I have a logitech Momo wheel, that's my preffered control method. It has
also lasted about 2 1/2 years, which is really impressive as far a plastic
controllers go. I did have to glue a shifter, but it has held up quite
well.

Every PC racing game should be driveable with the keyboard or a joypad.
Maybe it won't be the greatest *** experience, but it should be doable.
On the consoles I tend to use a gamepad for racing games, because the PS2
wheel is overpriced and I just never felt a big need- the PS2 could use a
really good racing wheel. Then again, the PS2's graphics are all jaggy
looking and give me a headache for racing games.

With a bit of care, an analogue gamepad or joystick works well enough.
I played GPL with an analogue gamepad for several months with good success
(I even did manual shifting), and my laptimes did not immediately improve
when I went to the wheel. I use a gamepad on my PC to play MotoGP2.

My point was that my ultimate rally game would also have to be able to
break even and appeal to alot of people, otherwise nobody will give it any
support.

by **Plowboy** » Sat, 15 Jan 2005 01:41:42

Mag,

See my point is, I write programs once in a while, you know like database
programs... now you see the enlightenment phase is polar opposite for
consumers, compared to boss's expectations surely, but you fit in the
Dilberts Boss catagory, who wants the program to have the depth to map the
human genome, but use it for your cellphone's phone book.

Secondly If YOU arent going to spend money (or time) for a wheel that you
will enjoy for hundreds of hours, on hundred's of games, why do you have the
expectation that any game developed to "fit" people who have invested the
time and money for a "simulator" to fit you set-top box users?

It is Oxy Moronic, to pay 3000 dollars per gallon, for the best automotive
paint perl charmelon (changes color) you can buy to brush it on over the
dents and rust... Similarly it is oxy-moronic to expect Mario-cart to
fulfil my needs as a Sim Racer. Thus also equating to painting the $600,000
Ford Mustang Concept car, with Krylon spray cans.

Magnulus enlightened us with:

>> OK, since you wanted to nit pick the analogy, did you get the
>> original point? Somebody wanted the most comprehensive simulator
>> out there, with complex this and that, then in the same frikkin
>> breath, wants to "drive" it with a joypad or keyboard, it is Oxy
>> Moronic..

> I have a logitech Momo wheel, that's my preffered control method.
> It has also lasted about 2 1/2 years, which is really impressive as
> far a plastic controllers go. I did have to glue a shifter, but it
> has held up quite well.

> Every PC racing game should be driveable with the keyboard or a
> joypad. Maybe it won't be the greatest *** experience, but it
> should be doable. On the consoles I tend to use a gamepad for racing
> games, because the PS2 wheel is overpriced and I just never felt a
> big need- the PS2 could use a really good racing wheel. Then again,
> the PS2's graphics are all jaggy looking and give me a headache for
> racing games.

> With a bit of care, an analogue gamepad or joystick works well
> enough. I played GPL with an analogue gamepad for several months with
> good success (I even did manual shifting), and my laptimes did not
> immediately improve when I went to the wheel. I use a gamepad on my
> PC to play MotoGP2.

> My point was that my ultimate rally game would also have to be able
> to break even and appeal to alot of people, otherwise nobody will
> give it any support.

by **Magnulu** » Sat, 15 Jan 2005 17:12:24

Because I want the game to be popular too, at least enough that other
developers won't shy away from similar topics. I don't mind niche games,
but an endless stream of niche games is what killed the flight simulation
category, or at least whittled it down alot. It really doesn't hurt a game
to design a good interface that will work with alot of different
controllers.

Can't we have a happy middle, like Need for Speed: Porsche? Something
that could, theoretically, please alot of people in between? There will
always be people who protest that the damage model in Porsche was not good
enough (too forgiving), or that there were no super-speed powerups, but my
guess is MOST people were happy with the mix of a complex physics model (for
the time, as it had a true 4-point model), a gamer friendly career mode, and
fairly good multiplayer.

by **Plowboy** » Sat, 15 Jan 2005 23:23:29

Oh... You will have to excuse me, the whole time I thought you were
serious. Now that we're wishing for things, I have lots of things I wish
were true, but I wont bore you or the newsgroup with them, just know most of
it involves lots of money.

Magnulus enlightened us with:

>> Secondly If YOU arent going to spend money (or time) for a wheel
>> that you will enjoy for hundreds of hours, on hundred's of games,
>> why do you have the expectation that any game developed to "fit"
>> people who have invested the time and money for a "simulator" to fit
>> you set-top box users?

> Because I want the game to be popular too, at least enough that other
> developers won't shy away from similar topics. I don't mind niche
> games, but an endless stream of niche games is what killed the flight
> simulation category, or at least whittled it down alot. It really
> doesn't hurt a game to design a good interface that will work with
> alot of different controllers.

>> It is Oxy Moronic, to pay 3000 dollars per gallon, for the best
>> automotive paint perl charmelon (changes color) you can buy to brush
>> it on over the dents and rust... Similarly it is oxy-moronic to
>> expect Mario-cart to fulfil my needs as a Sim Racer. Thus also
>> equating to painting the $600,000 Ford Mustang Concept car, with
>> Krylon spray cans.

> Can't we have a happy middle, like Need for Speed: Porsche?
> Something that could, theoretically, please alot of people in
> between? There will always be people who protest that the damage
> model in Porsche was not good enough (too forgiving), or that there
> were no super-speed powerups, but my guess is MOST people were happy
> with the mix of a complex physics model (for the time, as it had a
> true 4-point model), a gamer friendly career mode, and fairly good
> multiplayer.

by **Magnulu** » Sun, 16 Jan 2005 02:45:17

I can play GPL with a gamepad. And I can do it quite well.