rec.autos.simulators

Craig contradicted himself a few times. The review was proofread (a couple
of spelling/grammar errors, and the fact that he had an entire paragraph in
there which was devoted to Red Baron 2 <---- I'm referring to the
"music/turned it off" part here). Craig (an "experienced sim racer") gives a
BIASES opinion of GPL, in my opinion: even though he says acknowledges the
fact that GPL is a sim, he reviews it with the mindset that it is not
exactly his cup-of-tea because it doesn't match up to his "arcade" desires.

What I found extremely offensive, was that he makes ASSUMPTIONS for the
reader. Of course, he is entitled to his opinion, but when you publish a
review, you have certain responsibilities that you owe the reader and the
product. If it's crap.. tell them that you thought it was ***- tell them
that you advise them to consider if they really want a "sim" or a "game" and
then make the decision. (Remember that Craig DIDN'T know there was the "Four
Wheel Drift" setup book included, btw). The two statements below are
especially misleading and equally as damaging, as they give a very clear
(misinformed) opinion:

    "I can still picture most people returning Grand Prix Legends
    a few days after they buy it."

    "Simulation fanatics will probably love this game -- I just don't
    think that anyone else with a lower level of enthusiasm will get
    much out of it."

I chatted with many people that don't fit into the "sim racer" profile, but
they saw the game, tried it, and fell in love with it. Sure, it was
difficult, but that is what they love about it. Craig mentions
    "Gamers need some sort of encouragement that they are doing
    better; they don't need to be thrown into a complex driving model
    that is going to take weeks to get competent at."

That's exactly what even the "gamer-converts" liked about GPL. The reward of
putting in the effort is to be able to (at first) complete a lap without a
spin!, and then to know that your lap times are improving. When you do that
"perfect" lap and your heart is beating so hard you're almost going to have
a coronary, your chair is drenched in sweat, and you've got white-knuckles
from gripping the wheel so hard, THEN you have your reward. I hadn't even
won a race until the other day, but every few days, I would make a new
"best" lap, and even if I finished 10th, I was happy and e***d about what
I'd just done.

I just read his review again, and like I said the first time, Craig does
make some good observations. But for all the reasons above and the other
ones posted here in the group, the review gives an INACCURATE look at GPL
(He didn't even mention GPL's great multiplayer component.. not even a word
of it.) I suggested to Craig that he edit it to fix it up (his bias,
mistakes, ommissions, and factual errors, etc), but he says he stands by
it...

Looking at the Avault's "Review Criteria":
    TWO-AND-A-HALF stars is "Needs Help"..
    3-stars is "Average"..
    3 1/2 is "Decent"..
    4 is "Pretty Good"..
    4 1/2 is "Most Impressive".. and
    5 is "Incredible".

Does Craig not say himself "Simulation fanatics will probably love this
game", "...If you answered yes to those two questions, then Grand Prix
Legends might be the game for you.", and "One thing that can't be denied is
that this is a driving simulation like no other you have played before.".

Based on that, and the following:
    "Don't pay too much attention to the scenery because your task is to
guide this ill-tempered beast around the circuit without ending up in a
horrible accident." (Then don't complain about the "flat" people and trees,
etc)
    "The game has a veritable cornucopia of options with which it may be
tailored."
    "Papyrus has done a bang-up job on getting the physics of these cars to
be very accurate"
    "Other nice features include a very detailed and dynamic 'garage'.."
    "Grand Prix Legends is extremely easy to get up and running"

... you get the picture... GREAT product... (5 stars on the way??)... But
wait!!
Here's what he didn't like:
    - "scrunched up" view (it's called letterbox)
    - want decent setups provided (they are pretty decent, Craig!)
    - wants an easier learning curve so it is "fun to learn how to drive the
car" - that's why Papyrus included the "trainer", "advanced trainer",
braking help, throttle help, steering help, and shift-R.
(Btw, Craig DIDN'T have the Four Wheel Drift setup guide with his "review"
copy. Sorry to hear that, but as there IS one included with the game, I
suggested to him that he EDIT the review to reflect that (..he's not
planning on it).

Based on these minor grumbles.. how the heck does the gave only deserve
TWO-AND-A-HALF stars? ("needs help"). At WORST, he should have given it 4
stars ("pretty good") based on the info in his review (even from a "arcade"
perspective), and perhaps even 4 1/2 stars ("Most Impressive" ) - minus his
minor grumbles. And if he reviewed GPL with the word "sim" in his mind, bump
those up by at least another 1/2 star.

So what does Craig score for his review?? I'll be generous and give him 1
1/2 stars, but even that is an injustice - 2 1/2 stars is "needs help"!!

doktorB
http://www.racesimcentral.net/~drbryan/gpl

I spent days driving the Lotus around Monza before turning a sub-1:30
lap.  That is *one car* on *one track* out of the many.  Lately, my
daily tour includes sight-seeing the German mountainside at the "ring".
I swear I thought I saw some cows grazing in those pastures. <g> I can
see it taking months to get the "ring" down with a competitive lap
time.  But hey, I literally have the rest of my life to do it.

The point is, GPL is not for the "casual gamer" who has an hour or so to
play on the computer each day. Having said so, 2 1/2 stars is a praise.

Rick

=========================================================

"..I see no reason for people to disrupt their lives over
this.....YET..."

    - US Gov't Y2K Czar John Koskinin on ABC NEWS Nightline (10/20/98)

I missed this bit in his article when I read it - has it been changed? It's a
bit of a giveaway I must say. Rather destroys his case.
Paul

This takes me back to the so called "review" of GP2 in UK PCGamer...
The game was reviewed and surprise surprise, 95% and blah blah
"amazing" "difinitive" etc..etc.. The review of course was supposed to
be out a few weeks before the game, yet the game was held back another
few months..

In that review, there were some absurd comments such as "on a P90 the

fast SVGA card..." It is my feeling that Microprose must have dictated
most of this, telling the reviewer that it would be like that on
release.

My point? If you're missing it: I think GPL has nothing to worry
about. It is a fine product that has been given one poor review. GP2
on the other hand was a poor product in terms of CPU load (at least
IMO) but was reviewed with just a little hyperbole. As a sim-racer, I
have bought both and GP2 is the one that almost found the window.

It's a *** website and has been given a gamers review. I don't
really see the problem. I think this links back nicely to the very
well thought out post, posted here awhile back entitled "will GPL
sell?" The person made some great points about the "average Joe". I
think the state of this newsgroup of late shows that our "Joe Av" is
getting some good points from somewhere.

This is how I would split the general Pc owning public and GPL's
Market:

Sim-fanatics (say 98% of these, the people that make up your
"community",  of which have a strong online presence here or other
forums, + the 2% who are not actively into the Internet but know
others that are or have many friends of the same *** inclination)

- These people are going to rush (out) to d/load the demo and buy the
thing full price the minute it's shipped, of anything with Papyrus
slapped on it.

Racing Fans (like racing games/sims of any type equally or may lean to
a certain variety)

- Likely to buy GPL based on previous Papy games, views on on-line
forums and maybe web/magazine reviews.

Gamers (may like the racing genre best, but split their PC time
between various games from action/RPG genres. May enjoy playing racing
purely for spills and thrills)

- Might buy GPL due to screen shots on box and in web reviews and
magazines.

So using this as I hope a fairly good guide, (it may be utter tit) I'd
like to know exactly where Papy is going to be losing out BY THIS ONE
REVIEW. It sure doesn't affect me in the way it does you... So what
exactly are you worried about?? My only concern is that we may lose
some potential sim racers, who are going to forego buying GPL because
of one review... Urm, are we better off without them?? I feel that in
all honesty 1500 is a steep number.. Maybe 1450 of these decide to
seek another opinion??

Still, I do think that you are in principle correct, and that the
review isn't "fair" not helped by the twoddle about Menu Music. Let's
hope the review gets amended, but BOYCOTTING WITH CAPS ON, C'mon...

Thanks,

-:http://www.racesimcentral.net/

Craig Miller wrote the following in his review of GPL at the Avault.
    "Graphics: (2 1/2 stars) The graphics are good as far as these types
          of games go, but they give no sense of awe or wonder
          .. In addition, many of the objects on the track look cheesy.
          If I see one more "flat" person or tree I am going to scream!"
Now consider this:

North Americans: Look on the cover of the GPL box. To the right of the flap
(in yellow type):
    "The graphics in Grand Prix Legends are simply
    some of the best ever in a racing simulation."
                                            - Adrenaline Vault
Hmm... wonder who wrote that? Definitely wasn't Craig Miller, was it?

That one gave me a good laugh. Wish I'd noticed that when I emailed them at
the Avault.
Hahahahahaha!

Glad to see that they are going to be "re-evaluating" the product now that
it has come to their attention that they were missing the Setup manual.

There you go... make your voice known, and things CAN get changed. Lets wait
and see what the "revised" review says. Can't wait!

doktorB
http://webhome.idirect.com/~drbryan/gpl
-- Exclusive offer: PDPI L4 Digital Gamecard
   ONLY $80.95 US with Passwords on my site
   Get rid of Jitters & poor framerates today! --

As I've said before, he should have the article PROOF-READ before submitting
it (get someone else to read it too..), and whoever is in charge of the
Avault reviews should also read all material submitted to them for
publication so that things like this don't get put up on their pages.

I'll accept his excuse.. but I have to laugh as I ask the question:

HOW did the text mistakenly make it's way INTO HIS GPL review?

What was he doing? Cutting & Pasting?.. Who knows?

doktorB
http://webhome.idirect.com/~drbryan/gpl
-- Exclusive offer: PDPI L4 Digital Gamecard
   ONLY $80.95 US with Passwords on my site
   Get rid of Jitters & poor framerates today! --

- Consistency : GPL is of equivalent quality, in Avault terms, to
PowerF1 and Daytona USA? Really?

- Principle : It's easy to let it pass, but IMO *** sites and
*** magazines are utter trash these days, poorly thought out
reviews, desperately trying to be trendy and to pander to the whims of
the advertisers....whose products they are reviewing. If someone gets
it wrong for whatever reason it could be argued that is their right,
but it is also our right to let them know we disagree and will not
give them our custom in future.

Cheers!
John

To a gamer? Quite possibly. Nice graphics and great crashes.

GPL is the most realistic peice of software physics produced to date.
It is placed on a shelf labeled "games", in a computer game box. It is
reviewed by a ***** web site as a *game*, by a bloke who expects to
keep the right pedal down 90% of the time, waggle the wheel here and
there and come in 1st, 1st, 1st.

GPL doesn't do this, 2.5 stars. Big deal!!!

I think Papy took a big decision, or maybe risk, in producing such a
pure, raw, sim without any real kind of arcade variation. Of course I
would have been heavily disappointed if they had, but N2 had one and
most of us ignored it and never even tried it!

Papy has the trouble of being in a genre where traditionally, motor
vehicles simulations have gone from being next to impossible to where
GPL is, in a very short period of time. Apart from Papy, the genre has
largely been built to be regarded as the worst example of companies
rushing out crappy driving models as long as they are surrounded in
the most luscious textures, colours etc.. possible.

Therefore, there is *no way* GPL can sit on the shelf with the words
"most realistic driving model ever" and be truly believed by these
same people who supposedly won't buy GPL just because of Avault.

I think Papy are laughing with joy as there is no real reason why GPL
should be accepted by any kind of _***_ press..

Thanks,

-:http://www.racesimcentral.net/

To me it is a complete travesty for a reviewing house to take off a review
and rewrite it just because a lot of people don't agree with it.

I know; it's happened to me.

Alanb

I have read every thread in r.a.s regarding the Avault Grand Prix Legends
review, and the majority of them are "balanced, considered, and
even-handed." Even the harsher ones point more directly at Avault and not
the original reviewer.

But that is his job! At least according to the Avault bios
section(http://www.racesimcentral.net/): Playing Games,
Reviewing and Previewing them.

Analogy: If the users that my department supports at work are unhappy
because I have not provided what they consider quality work, I expect to
hear about it. Some will be professional with their feedback,whereas others
may be crass, such is life. We are the "customers" in this case and have
just as much right to complain to Avault or vent in this newsgroup. I have
no want for Craig Miller to change his review. I would rather see Avault
provide a more comprehensive review that includes ratings of the AI,
multiplayer, graphics at multiple resolutions, etc. Virtually every GPL
review section knocked the game for being too hard, this does not provide
for a fair review.

Basically, I would like to see some consistency in Avault's reviews of
similar products. That is Avault's responsibility as a *** site, or
should be if they wish to keep me coming to their site as a customer. There
should not be such discrepancy between GPL(2 1/2
stars)(http://www.racesimcentral.net/) and CART Precision Racing(4
1/2 stars)(http://www.racesimcentral.net/) on the same site, even
if it is different reviewers. The CPR review mentions high hardware
requirement, sluggish frame rate and pop-up but gets 5 stars for graphics,
whereas the GPL review mentions these same issues but gets 2 1/2 stars. The
GPL review mentions slick easy-to-use interface but gets 3 stars for the
Interface section, whereas CPR gets a perfect 5 stars. GPL seems to be
knocked in this case for no Force Feedback support. Is that really part of
interface? If so, the original unpatched CPR also had a huge problem with
steering wheel configurations and null zone sensitivity, but no mention of
it or detraction on points here. Then there is this quote from the Gameplay
section:

"The perfectly modeled physics are truly something to experience. You can
almost feel the response of your car as it races over bumps, skids around
corners, and jostles into walls or other cars."

Think this is about GPL? Nope, CPR, but even though anyone can safely say
the exact same things about GPL,  CPR gets 5 stars for Gameplay, whereas GPL
gets 2 1/2. According to the GPL review this is completely because the game
is too hard.

Sound FX is next with the following quote:

"powerful sounds perfectly emulate the roar of engines, the whoosh of
passing cars, and the screeching of tires, and help create a sense that the
player is at the wheel of a mighty vehicle. "

Again, this quote is about CPR, but I don't think that it is opinion that
GPL provides at least that same experience, if not more. However, CPR gets 4
1/2 stars for Sound FX, while GPL gets 2 1/2 stars and the following quote:

"the sounds as you are driving don't do much to add to the realism of the
game. You can hear cars coming up from behind you but only in a muffled way,
though this may be appropriate because of the noise of your car and the fact
that you are wearing a helmet. Other than that almost no sound cues exist
except for the occasional squeal of tires as you spin out for the Nth time.
"

Huh? The sounds don't do much to add to the realism of the game? Which
sounds do not add to the realism? What sounds are missing? What sounds are
not realistic? Please explain! Once again, it appears by the "tire squeal"
comment that the reviewer is knocking GPL for just being too hard, and doing
so in the Sound FX section. Is this fair? CPR had canned shifting sounds,
listen to the shifting in GPL. There is no comparison.

Then comes the Intelligence and Difficulty section, which is really the only
section that should get knocked for the fact that GPL is hard. GPL gets 2
1/2 stars with no mention of the trainer and driving aid options, and
absolutely no mention of the incredible AI. The CPR review says some
debatable positive comments about that games AI, especially since this
review was of the AI flawed, unpatched product, but then mentions the
following:

"Once I nailed down the controls and physics of driving, I was rarely out of
contention for the lead, even when starting in last place. During long
stretches of straight track, the player can easily blow past other drivers.
The most ingenious AI in games can't beat a faster car. According to the
racing results screen, it was not uncommon for my car to have had an average
speed of 20 mph or better over cars placing second and third place. While
this blunderous oversight makes success much easier than one would expect in
a real race, it diminishes the satisfaction of victory. It would have been
more gratifying to slowly succeed by adopting more methodical approach, but
the game literally allows you to blast into first place right from the
starting line. "

Essentially explaining that the game is way too easy, which it was, but yet
CPR gets a 4 star rating for this section, while GPL gets 2 1/2 stars for
being too hard, with no mention of the AI performance!!! This makes no
sense. I guess if a game is too easy, give it a great rating, whereas if a
game is too hard, slam it. Which one gives the more satisfying challenge and
longer lasting appeal?

And the most amazing thing to me, is the fact that the US GPL Box(pointed
out earlier by doktorB) contains the following quote from the Avault GPL
preview back in Feb. 1998(http://www.racesimcentral.net/):
"The graphics in Grand Prix Legends are simply some of the best ever seen in
a racing simulation."

But Avault's GPL review gives the graphics 2 1/2 stars. How inconsistent is
that? Again, I know this is different people with different opinions, but
Avault as a site should be consistent, or at least explain their
inconsistencies.

If you have read any of the posts that contain Craig Miller's responses
regarding this issue, he is very condescending to those that disagree with
him. Your own letter from him seems to point that out:
Quote:

"What is it with you people on the newsgroups that makes you think that just
because I have a different opinion than you that I am: 1; an evil bastard,
2; an immature arcade freak, or 3; I deserve to be tortured until I confess
my malicious intent?"

If you really read through all the r.a.s posts, they contain much more
valid, mature, justified arguments than malicious ones. I weed out the ones
that have personal attacks and I hope Craig can do the same. I would just
like to hear Craig's or Avault's answers to the legitimate complaints.
Besides, to quote one of my childhood heroes:

"You knew the job was dangerous when you took it Craig" :)

Don Chapman