rec.autos.simulators

by **Nic** » Fri, 15 Mar 2002 10:56:52

I assure you that the PS2 is far more than just capable of recreating
GPL. Considering the PS2 is smoother than the X-box in games created
for both platforms (EA Sports titles especially), when the X-box is P3
733 approx and the PS2 is 295 Mhz. And GPL ran fine on my P120, back
in the day...

Firstly, never believe Mhz ratings. Some instructions can take up to 8
times the length of others to be executed on a PC/X-box (so my
Computer Architecture unit of my CompSci degree tells me) while a PS2
is built from the ground up to be a smooth, fast, reliable ***
machine.

Consoles cannot just do arcade games, look at Moto GP2, F355 et al. It
is just that the average console gamer wants quick thrills of Burnout
or Crazy Taxi rather than proper sims.

I can honestly say that the PS2 could quite easily recreate GPL, and
have enough power left over to increase the graphical detail
considerably and still run at a bare minimum of 60fps. Don't believe
me? This is a fact from a recent presentation given by independent
programmers on ths PS2 vs X-box/PC argument. Obviously it was not
specific about GPL, but basically a PS2 is about as fast as a 1Ghz PC,
but a huge amount smoother (and it doesn't crash :-)

That was why I said I would like to see it. GT3 only allows 6 cars in
a race because the detail of the cars is so high that 20 or so could
make it stutter a little. And be a little pointless, given the quick
fix, 2/5/10 lap races in GT3. And the environments are so detailed as
well. Look at a shot from original GPL (no GPLEA addons or anything)
and compare them.

Sorry about the rant, but my career is going to be taken up with
programming PCs and/or consoles, and I know quite a bit about it
already, and I just hate it when people who know f**k all about it
give their worthless viewpoint. I am not talking about you guys, just
whoever it was that said consoles can only run arcade games. Could you
imagine a CPU which could tell just by looking at an instruction to
add two numbers together whether the program was arcade or simulation?
I don't think you could design one if you tried. It's like being give
the word 'the', and being able to tell what the book it came from was
about. Some people really have twisted views of technology :-)

Remember, the PS2 has a maximum resolution of 640x480 (anything bigger
looks really ugly on a TV), so its not as if it is struggling with the
workload.

Nick Govier

by **jbod** » Fri, 15 Mar 2002 14:20:34

Don't live in such a narrow little world, Chad:

http://www.sportplanet.com/hg/article.php?page=1&id=26

;-)

-- JB

> I have some console friends who always refer to GT3 as a "sim". They know
> I'm a sim racer and they like to think that I think it is, but I really
> don't. It has no in-car view, it has no damage modeling, and quite honestly,
> when you get the faster cars, the physics do not at all seem realistic.
> These are just some of the things I think are quite needed to be called a
> "sim".

> After playing Grand Prix Legends, Nascar 4, Viper Racing and the like, when
> I play GT3 with my friends I can't help but think "arcade".

> So my questions are...

> 1. Do you think GT3 is a "sim". If so, why? If not, then tell me why on
> earth would console racers refer to it as such?

> I should say, the only racer that I've ever thought of as a "sim" or
> "sim-like" was Ferrari F355 Challenge on the Dreamcast.

by **jason moy** » Fri, 15 Mar 2002 19:06:21

> And GPL ran fine on my P120, back
> in the day...

Interesting. My p-150 with SLI'd Voodoo 2's (ran Quake and Hexen 2 at
1024x768 like a warhorse) couldn't run GPL at more than 5-15fps with
no other cars on the track.

I don't remember anyone claiming that GPL couldn't be done on a
console. Really the question in my mind would be whether N2002 could
run on a PS2, not a sim that came out 4 years ago.

Jason

by **Gunnar Horrigm** » Sat, 16 Mar 2002 21:13:14

> > it is
> > a good idea to immediately change oil when you get a new car because that
> > boosts the horsepower.

> This alone should answer the "is it a sim" question.

I think that's a bug, actually. anyway; while I agree that GT3 isn't
a proper sim, labelling it as arcade is just unfair. take a look at
Crazy Taxi. THAT'S arcade.

--
Gunnar
#31 SUCKS#015 Tupperware MC#002 DoD#0x1B DoDRT#003 DoD:CT#4,8 Kibo: 2
myk, trygg og god.

by **Stephen F** » Sat, 16 Mar 2002 21:49:55

> > > it is
> > > a good idea to immediately change oil when you get a new car because
that
> > > boosts the horsepower.

> > This alone should answer the "is it a sim" question.

Factory uses dino-oil, the aftermarket sells Mobil 1? :-)

Stephen

by **Mark Foste** » Sat, 16 Mar 2002 22:08:16

> > > it is
> > > a good idea to immediately change oil when you get a new car because that
> > > boosts the horsepower.

> > This alone should answer the "is it a sim" question.

> I think that's a bug, actually. anyway; while I agree that GT3 isn't
> a proper sim, labelling it as arcade is just unfair. take a look at
> Crazy Taxi. THAT'S arcade.

Whilst I don't look upon GT3 as a sim in the purest sense of the word,
in no way can it really be described as an arcade racer.

You only need spend countless hours running around Complex String in the
RUF RGT Time Trial to realise that the only way to go quickly is to
treat it like a sim. If you try to drive GT3 like an arcade racer,
expecially at the higher levels, you will get nowhere.

All said it falls down badly in several areas as far a being a sim goes.
The most obvious is the lack of damage (but thats only down to licencing
the cars), the next worse, IMHO, is the fact that the FF Wheel feels
just plain awful. The AI is, errr... well... it isn't really, more like
real stupid than Artificial Intelligence.

Still, having finished 78% of the game I got bored with it about half
way through the Professional races and just play the fixed time trials
now. Damn! that Complex String is a harsh ***.

--
Mark Foster, University of Sussex Computing Service, Falmer, UK. BN1 9QJ

-------------------------------------------------
"There are no such useless words as...'I didn't have a chance.'"
[Driving, HMSO]

by **Olly Greenfiel** » Sun, 17 Mar 2002 00:52:48

The Complex String is a pretty awesomely tough course, with lots of turns
and braking. I pretty much hate the A.I. in GT3 also. Most of the time I
play this game in time trial mode, and race against my ghost, which is fun.
In this mode the handling of your car demands proper driving lines and
techniques if you expect to post good lap times, definitely not arcade style
driving here. However , I would tend to disagree with you as far as the
force feedback is concerned, I think it very much enhances the game, and is
pretty good if not great.

> > > > it is
> > > > a good idea to immediately change oil when you get a new car because
that
> > > > boosts the horsepower.

> > > This alone should answer the "is it a sim" question.

> > I think that's a bug, actually. anyway; while I agree that GT3 isn't
> > a proper sim, labelling it as arcade is just unfair. take a look at
> > Crazy Taxi. THAT'S arcade.

> Whilst I don't look upon GT3 as a sim in the purest sense of the word,
> in no way can it really be described as an arcade racer.

> You only need spend countless hours running around Complex String in the
> RUF RGT Time Trial to realise that the only way to go quickly is to
> treat it like a sim. If you try to drive GT3 like an arcade racer,
> expecially at the higher levels, you will get nowhere.

> All said it falls down badly in several areas as far a being a sim goes.
> The most obvious is the lack of damage (but thats only down to licencing
> the cars), the next worse, IMHO, is the fact that the FF Wheel feels
> just plain awful. The AI is, errr... well... it isn't really, more like
> real stupid than Artificial Intelligence.

> Still, having finished 78% of the game I got bored with it about half
> way through the Professional races and just play the fixed time trials
> now. Damn! that Complex String is a harsh ***.

> --
> Mark Foster, University of Sussex Computing Service, Falmer, UK. BN1 9QJ

> -------------------------------------------------
> "There are no such useless words as...'I didn't have a chance.'"
> [Driving, HMSO]

by **Mark Foste** » Sun, 17 Mar 2002 01:38:47

Oh, how very true... I would guess that it was originally made up just
for testing the car models etc but then someone had the idea of
releasing it as a track so they polished it up and stuck it in.

I'm not even sure it really deserves to be called AI :-(.

Exactly how I play it.

Absolutely right. Never has there been a better place to show that LESS
is definitely MORE. Just recently I thought I'd have a leisurely drive
around 'the string' just to see if I could make it without touching a
single kerb and because I was not pushing and overdriving the car, I
posted my second best time ever. (Note: I never made it without touching
the kerbs though :-)

Best run so far is 4.50.03x, just another 0.2 to go.

Perhaps I have been spoiled by using my Sidewinder FF USB in GPL but I
have tried every which way I can to get the Logitech FF to feel right in
GT3 and it just doesn't. It's not that there are force effects missing
or anything, it's that there are force effects where there shouldn't be
and the strength of the feedback is inconsistent.

Using the same wheel in WRC on PS2 is fine. The wheel works and feels
much more like it should, a little light perhaps, but the forces are in
the right places.

The danger is that I could probably get used to using the FF wheel in
GT3 and learn to drive around its deficiencies but then I'd probably
*** up my feeling of GPL.

It was a nice idea that, for me at least, never worked as well as I had
hoped it would. Maybe in GT4?

Mark

--
Mark Foster, University of Sussex Computing Service, Falmer, UK. BN1 9QJ

-------------------------------------------------
"There are no such useless words as...'I didn't have a chance.'"
[Driving, HMSO]

by **Tony Borro** » Tue, 19 Mar 2002 04:34:38

I guess what I've found most interesting about this thread is that most
people on this group say something like:

"GT3 a sim?!?! NO! No way! GT3 is most definitely NOT A SIM! ... but you
know what I REALLY like when I'm playing it is ... "

So it seems that a lot of people don't think it's a sim, but DO have a hell
of a good time playing it.

TB

> Organization: University of Sussex Computing Service
> Newsgroups: rec.autos.simulators
> Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 16:38:47 +0000
> Subject: Re: Is Gran-Turismo 3 on PS2 a "sim" ???

>> The Complex String is a pretty awesomely tough course, with lots of turns
>> and braking.

> Oh, how very true... I would guess that it was originally made up just
> for testing the car models etc but then someone had the idea of
> releasing it as a track so they polished it up and stuck it in.

>> I pretty much hate the A.I. in GT3 also.

> I'm not even sure it really deserves to be called AI :-(.

>> Most of the time I play this game in time trial mode, and race against
>> my ghost, which is fun.

> Exactly how I play it.

>> In this mode the handling of your car demands proper driving lines and
>> techniques if you expect to post good lap times, definitely not arcade style
>> driving here.

> Absolutely right. Never has there been a better place to show that LESS
> is definitely MORE. Just recently I thought I'd have a leisurely drive
> around 'the string' just to see if I could make it without touching a
> single kerb and because I was not pushing and overdriving the car, I
> posted my second best time ever. (Note: I never made it without touching
> the kerbs though :-)

> Best run so far is 4.50.03x, just another 0.2 to go.

>> However , I would tend to disagree with you as far as the
>> force feedback is concerned, I think it very much enhances the game,
>> and is pretty good if not great.

> Perhaps I have been spoiled by using my Sidewinder FF USB in GPL but I
> have tried every which way I can to get the Logitech FF to feel right in
> GT3 and it just doesn't. It's not that there are force effects missing
> or anything, it's that there are force effects where there shouldn't be
> and the strength of the feedback is inconsistent.

> Using the same wheel in WRC on PS2 is fine. The wheel works and feels
> much more like it should, a little light perhaps, but the forces are in
> the right places.

> The danger is that I could probably get used to using the FF wheel in
> GT3 and learn to drive around its deficiencies but then I'd probably
> *** up my feeling of GPL.

> It was a nice idea that, for me at least, never worked as well as I had
> hoped it would. Maybe in GT4?

> Mark

> --
> Mark Foster, University of Sussex Computing Service, Falmer, UK. BN1 9QJ

> -------------------------------------------------
> "There are no such useless words as...'I didn't have a chance.'"
> [Driving, HMSO]

by **(Rich8** » Wed, 20 Mar 2002 15:24:15

Complex String totally rocks, I'd love to have that track in GPL!!

On Fri, 15 Mar 2002 13:08:16 +0000, Mark Foster

>> > > it is
>> > > a good idea to immediately change oil when you get a new car because that
>> > > boosts the horsepower.

>> > This alone should answer the "is it a sim" question.

>> I think that's a bug, actually. anyway; while I agree that GT3 isn't
>> a proper sim, labelling it as arcade is just unfair. take a look at
>> Crazy Taxi. THAT'S arcade.

>Whilst I don't look upon GT3 as a sim in the purest sense of the word,
>in no way can it really be described as an arcade racer.

>You only need spend countless hours running around Complex String in the
>RUF RGT Time Trial to realise that the only way to go quickly is to
>treat it like a sim. If you try to drive GT3 like an arcade racer,
>expecially at the higher levels, you will get nowhere.

>All said it falls down badly in several areas as far a being a sim goes.
>The most obvious is the lack of damage (but thats only down to licencing
>the cars), the next worse, IMHO, is the fact that the FF Wheel feels
>just plain awful. The AI is, errr... well... it isn't really, more like
>real stupid than Artificial Intelligence.

>Still, having finished 78% of the game I got bored with it about half
>way through the Professional races and just play the fixed time trials
>now. Damn! that Complex String is a harsh ***.

>--
>Mark Foster, University of Sussex Computing Service, Falmer, UK. BN1 9QJ

> -------------------------------------------------
>"There are no such useless words as...'I didn't have a chance.'"
> [Driving, HMSO]

by **Olly Greenfiel** » Thu, 21 Mar 2002 01:34:12

That would be an excellent conversion. We already have the Grand Valley
conversion, maybe this should be next , HINT, HINT.

> Complex String totally rocks, I'd love to have that track in GPL!!

> On Fri, 15 Mar 2002 13:08:16 +0000, Mark Foster

> >> > > it is
> >> > > a good idea to immediately change oil when you get a new car
because that
> >> > > boosts the horsepower.

> >> > This alone should answer the "is it a sim" question.

> >> I think that's a bug, actually. anyway; while I agree that GT3 isn't
> >> a proper sim, labelling it as arcade is just unfair. take a look at
> >> Crazy Taxi. THAT'S arcade.

> >Whilst I don't look upon GT3 as a sim in the purest sense of the word,
> >in no way can it really be described as an arcade racer.

> >You only need spend countless hours running around Complex String in the
> >RUF RGT Time Trial to realise that the only way to go quickly is to
> >treat it like a sim. If you try to drive GT3 like an arcade racer,
> >expecially at the higher levels, you will get nowhere.

> >All said it falls down badly in several areas as far a being a sim goes.
> >The most obvious is the lack of damage (but thats only down to licencing
> >the cars), the next worse, IMHO, is the fact that the FF Wheel feels
> >just plain awful. The AI is, errr... well... it isn't really, more like
> >real stupid than Artificial Intelligence.

> >Still, having finished 78% of the game I got bored with it about half
> >way through the Professional races and just play the fixed time trials
> >now. Damn! that Complex String is a harsh ***.

> >--
> >Mark Foster, University of Sussex Computing Service, Falmer, UK. BN1 9QJ

> > -------------------------------------------------
> >"There are no such useless words as...'I didn't have a chance.'"
> > [Driving, HMSO]

by **Chris H** » Thu, 21 Mar 2002 06:58:15

Ah, man! Complex String, no way. We should have Rome, with the 1967 Sophia Loren reaching into the water at the fountain. 8-)
--
Chris H.

> That would be an excellent conversion. We already have the Grand Valley
> conversion, maybe this should be next , HINT, HINT.

by **Rob Adam** » Thu, 21 Mar 2002 07:08:24

Sophia, sure that would be good. But if we're gonna use the way-back-babe
machine, I'd prefer Raquel Welch (yum). Happened upon an old Mork and Mindy
episode the other day featuring her, and remembered why I lusted after her
when I was a ***ager :)

Ah, man! Complex String, no way. We should have Rome, with the 1967 Sophia
Loren reaching into the water at the fountain. 8-)
--
Chris H.

by **Chris H** » Thu, 21 Mar 2002 10:02:36

ROFLOL! Mindy was sort of cute herself. No one ever believes me when I say I spotted Sophia by the fountain in GT2. Since they say they didn't see her, I say it just proves she's got good taste in men. 8-)
--
Chris H.

> Sophia, sure that would be good. But if we're gonna use the way-back-babe
> machine, I'd prefer Raquel Welch (yum). Happened upon an old Mork and Mindy
> episode the other day featuring her, and remembered why I lusted after her
> when I was a ***ager :)