rec.autos.simulators

Certainly would have added to GPL's shelf appeal and made it very
distinctive!

Maybe it's time for a repackaging?

Jack Rambo

www.RaceLive.com/GPaL

Hahaha <of course>

Remember 1967 was the Summer of Love, so it would had been appropriate   ;-)

--
-- Fran?ois Mnard <ymenard/Nas-Frank>
-- NROS Nascar sanctioned Guide http://www.nros.com/
-- SimRacing Online http://www.simracing.com/
-- Official mentally retarded guy of r.a.s.
-- May the Downforce be with you...

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realise
how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

Too true! :)

I am very disturbed to read that due to the poor world-wide sales of GPL,
the utterly fantastic work that made the GPL physics engine possible, may
not get to be used further. Now don't get me wrong, I don't give a
"rats-a*se" about NASCAR2000, (or whatever it will be called), what I am
worried about is that the release of the GPL 1.1 patch will be the end of
line for GPL development.

THIS MUST NOT BE ALLOWED TO HAPPEN. PERIOD

GPL is really a victim of it's own brilliance, in that the virtually
true-to-life physics of the sim make it as hard as hell to initially learn
and get into. This has obviously put a lot of people off parting with their
hard-earned cash, dented the sales, and ultimately making GPL accessible to
only 100's of racers, instead of the 1000's expected.

There have been a couple of mistakes along the way:-

1. Difficult Demo. I remember when I first put the GPL demo on my Pentium
200, and attempted to do some laps around the Glen. Boy was that tough,
firstly with a framerate in the mid ***s, and a "pedal-to-the-metal"
mentality, it must have taken 3 hours to do a single clean lap in the mid
1:20's. After a couple of days, and a few tweaks to my system, the frame
rate was reasonable and I was getting close to breaking the 1:10 barrier,
(after having read people in ras doing 1:06's). The point I'm tryin to make
here is that a Demo for any game should be very accessible when first tried,
not an exercise in determined analysis to find the right hardware and
software combinations, whilst having to learn how to drive again. Any may I
remind everyone that there was VERY LITTLE support from Papy/Sierra, and I
got all my assistance from Alison Hines Eagle Woman site, (without who's
work I don't think GPL would be even the success it is today), and from the
people on ras. The lesson to be learnt here is sacrifice some of the
"eye-candy" for pliability in a Demo, and make it accessible to everyone,
not just the hard-core Simracing fraternity.

2. Not including an arcade mode in the original GPL release. If this had
been implemented then the sales of GPL would have probably hit the expected
figures, and helped prolong the life expectancy of GPL. And it's not as if
it would have been difficult to achieve. For instance, I read that the AI
have a uniform type of set-up, a sort of sub-set of what is available to us
in the game. Also the AI have must have some form of scaleable programmed
driving aid, (part of the Global Hype), that keeps them on the track, and
allows for the making of mistakes. See where I'm leading here? With the
addition of an arcade mode, using the AI set-up, (generic by car for all
racers), with all the driving aids switched on, some use of the Hype
facility to ensure that the first-time racer stays on the track, and
scaleable AI strength, the "newbie" can fly around the circuit, bumping and
jostling for position, with only the barest skill level required. Maybe
chuck in a speedo, instant timing, spilts, and it comes together nicely for
the less demanding drivers out there, (you know who you are). This allows
the Newbie to get a feel for the game, and then progress onto the sim aspect
of GPL, in there trainer cars, and ultimately onto the F1 cars.

3. System Requirements. Please please please please please please please,
make the system requirements identified on the box relate to what is really
required. When the game was first identified, it was said to run on a low
end spec machine, with some of the detail turned down. When I tried it on my
Pentium 200, which was a higher spec than recommended, it ran like a dog,
which if you read through ras, was the same the world over. I wonder how
many people read on ras that what they really needed was a PII 450, 128 Meg
ram machine, and this put them of buying GPL? Okay so you don't need a
high-end machine to run GPL, but to get it to run acceptably well, you would
need more that the recommended minimum spec. When will the software
companies ever learn??

Okay, moanin and ***in about what went wrong won't help save the GPL
physics engine, so what will. Well in my opinion a future patch to introduce
an arcade mode to the game could be a good step, but I really feel it is too
late for GPL...!! Therefore maybe the use of the GPL physics engine in
NASCAR2000, with an arcade mode, an intermediate mode, and a sim mode will
make it more accessible to the masses. For those that just want to race, a
dumbed-down physics engine sub-set would suffice, whilst the intermediate
mode would introduce a larger amount of the physics engine, with the sim
mode being exactly that. Hey if Papy/Sierra did it that way, even I would
buy a copy...., (maybe??). The reason I am advocating the NASCAR
implementation is that if the physics engine is maintained and used for
other projects, then further development may take place on GPL, instead of
the 1.1 patch being the last. (I was so looking forward to driving the 1976
Ferrari 312..!!). Also the release of a SDK for the engine and a track
editor would allow some of the talent in ras to continue the great work
started by Papy, instead of letting it go to waste.

If anyone has an email address for whoever is in charge at Papy/Sierra,
please start a petition, and flood their mail box with requests.

These are my humble opinions, and I respectfully ask that someone with the
foresight and power to not only save, but to continue developing the
greatest racing sim ever, does the right thing.

Don't give into the Luddites, future Papy/Sierra products should advance the
development of realistic car physics, not reduce it.

SteveG

.

<lotsa good points snipped>

I agree on all points, however you missed one IMO very important
additional problem... The simulated genre and era.
As far as I can see Papyrus always had over all these years, umm... a
slightly different clientele than say, Microprose with Geoff Crammond
in example. The overwhelming majority of Papyrus customers know
Nascar, Indycar/CART etc. pretty well, but only few of them (and I
certainly don't mean anyone frequenting this newsgroup here!) have a
serious interest in Formula1, much less historic Formula1. They may
have heard of Michael Schumacher or Jacques Villeneuve but Clark/Rindt
or Hulme?
In my opinion marketing for this game was very poor, specially I did
not see any efforts whatsoever to explain the racing series and
tradition and spirit behind it, they only emphasized on the great
physics etc. and completely forgot to hype the 'legends' part of the
game. Consequently, as a result they only attracted *** simmers
with it.

--Tel

Jeff

They should have put in a video of "Grand Prix" in the box with GPL! :)  
Or maybe a little historic book/video to explain late 1960's F1 racing.

Later,
John

Now I happen to fit the very narrow niche who both loves classic grand
prix racing and also challenging sims.  I really don't think that GPL
is a failure -- just read this newsgroup and you'll see that this sim
is the primary subject of conversation even over games with much
broader appeal such as NASCAR-based or Indycar-based games.

It's been mentioned that perhaps this complex engine should be an
option in a future NASCAR game with another option for a
sit-down-and-drive version.  Fine.  I can live with that and it would
be the best of both worlds for Sierra.  Please, Papy/Sierra, do not
let sales figures be your only criteria for success -- GP games just
don't sell that well and games based on the GP of 30 years ago are
even tougher to market, but your product -- the simulation of racing
from that era -- is an unparalleled success.  Just read the notes on
here and for every whiner, there will be a hundred who praise the
game.  Including the GPL, or GPL-inspired physics engine as an option
in N3 will **INCREASE** the appeal of the game and will make your
investment in the GPL engine profitable.

Just please, please, don't cave in to the marketing ploy of targeting
the least common denominator.  Papy has always stood for quality --
and that reputation would be lost forever if you decide now to step
backward instead of continuing to produce the best games possible with
the available technology.

using Nascar or CART would be too much dangerous ...

my opinion ...

McKafre De La Rosa   (a new NASCAR sims fan) :)