rec.autos.simulators

That would be :

Mr. Kennewell rock's! Mr. Brooks' suck's!

Get you're shit straight; man. Their are apostrophie's for a reason!

MRSisson (This took me ten or so minutes to fabricate. It's hard work
being illiterate.)

--
LOAD "GPL",8,1
RUN

Cheers,

uwe

--
mail replies to Uwe at schuerkamp dot de ( yahoo address is spambox)
Uwe Schuerkamp //////////////////////////// http://www.racesimcentral.net/
Herford, Germany \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ (52.0N/8.5E)
GPG Fingerprint:  2E 13 20 22 9A 3F 63 7F  67 6F E9 B1 A8 36 A4 61

(Doesn't your day just turn to ***when you're correcting someone but end
up making yourself look like an illiterate dork?)

bk

    Just about everyone who uses the term "whiner" is a complete ***a!
Maybe it's some sort of club protocol?

Does it turn to ***when you completely miss the deliberate irony of a
post?

Shit- were you being ironic too?

;-)

John

<snip>

Right.  Let's actually see how much of this previously posted schei?e is correct.

You have slammed Dan Olbuck's work in quite a few posts now, and stated how the realism "bear(s) no resemblance whatsoever" and
"but they are much more "arcade" than "simulation." and "I hope he hasn't quit his day job".  Yet I have not once seen you make
a public offer to help Mr. Olbuck get them up to speed, but plenty of public bashing.  Your attitude mirrors your description of
his tracks.  Is there some specific reason you feel obliged to mount such an ongoing and personal vendetta against Mr. Olbuck?
Because it certainly sounds like its personal, not to mention spiteful, especially since there are a whole host of incomplete
and poorly built tracks out there that you've not made a comment on.   It also speaks VOLUMES that you would stoop to
ridiculously immature comments like "Anthony sucks!" and "Mr. Brooks sucks!" Yeah, real professional.  And you were an editor?
You now stoop to calling people names for pointing out that you should have a bit more respect for people than to openly slam
them on a public forum?  Strange that you haven't posted on topics at The Pits directly relating to the track.  Why is that, eh?
Why did you find it necessary to vomit your opinion to a public newsgroup, but not bother to even make one suggestion to the
author about the original track you complained about, which was built...ohhhh...December, 2003?

Class act.

Alternatively, you could build it yourself, but I've not seen any of that, either.

You claim you are not helping Mr. Olbuck because of some trumped-up idea that he's too snobby to accept any help (or something
like that, I've not quite figured out what your argument is).  That's low class, considering you don't even know the guy.  If
you actually perused the forums that Mr. Olbuck hangs out on, you'd see he's quite happily accepted help from others, and has
asked for it.  Let's just go ahead and investigate this, shall we?

So Mr. Olbuck thinks he knows what is best and can't be bothered to get any input from anyone?

December, 2003:  http://www.tptcc.com/board/viewtopic.php?t=1829

Yep.  This sounds like someone who is too good to take input.  Strange.  I don't see your name on that thread.

Nor this one:
http://www.tptcc.com/board/viewtopic.php?t=1963

Wow.  Many chances for input there, Steve...and not a one made.  Oh, but you've made about as many slams on Mr. Olbuck's work,
though...
--------------------------------------------
You also made some completely clueless comments about tracks, which makes me wonder that you actually know what you're talking
about.

1) "he wild boys at PWF have released an alleged "beta" version of Riverside...only there's nothing beta about it.  It's close
to perfect, missing only the wonderful (and dead accurate) off-course sandstorms of Dave Noonan's earlier conversion"
(Newsgroups: rec.autos.simulators Date: 2004-03-20 10:45:29 PST)

    This reproduction is a direct copy of David Noonan's conversion.  Then you comment "PWF's Riverside is one of the finest
roadies to date".  Uhhhh...yeah.  Only the finest of copies of David Noonan's conversion?

-----------------------------------------------
2) "Not even close.  Mr. Olbuck's Riverside looks no more like the real Riverside than his Lime Rock bore any resemblance to
that circuit."

    Really?  That's rather strange.  Of people who HAVE driven on Lime Rock, we've had other people state quite the
opposite...in fact, they thought it was quite good (but did need some fixes).  Let's also go into Riverside here.  Here some
comments by people who HAVE been to the track:

   "Thank you for your work, it is as accurate as I remember it!"

   "Having grown up in Riverside, Mr. Olbuck's update brings back some fond memories to me, much more so than any previous
version."

   "Well done, Dan. I'm particularly impressed that this was done by someone who lives on the other side of the country. I would
have expected a Southern California native to have offered the best rendition of my home track!"

   "Other than the already mentioned rise between 6 and 8 I can't really think of anything that is questionable."

So you are the only one of 5 people who have been to Riverside who has that opinion.  Some may not have driven it, but it sounds
to me it looks a lot more like Riverside than the "perfect" copy-job that you tout.

----------------------------------------------
3) "His version of Riverside seems to be a retexturing of the track that I helped Papy design for NASCAR Legends"

This is the most hilarious statement of all.  Anyone with just a few laps at this track can see that it is VERY different from
the David Noonan/Papyrus conversion (including the PWF copy).  And...you don't need to take MY word for it, here's a link to
David Noonan's 3doEdit.
http://www.theuspits.com/sims/files/3DOed.zip

Go ahead.  Open up ALL the tracks (David's conversion, the PWF version, and Dan's version and see which one(s) look the same.

Incidentally, Dan has used satellite photography, topo maps and SpeedTV footage (when available) to create these tracks.  While
it's not a perfect means of putting a track together, it's also not going to make something that "bear(s) no resemblance
whatsoever" to the original.  With constructive input, it could be even better.  However, I've not seen anything constructive
from your camp, and doubt I will, as you seem to be incensed at badmouthing other people's work rather than contributing.

The next time you feel like bashing someone, first try to actually use some FACTS, your argument may hold up better that way...

--------------------separate note to Brent Adams--------------------
Brent, what Dan did was pull the trackmap from BAPOM to do work on the mountain version of the track.  I don't think he realized
that you had "ad-libbed" that part of the track, and merely took the layout as an original that you had found somewhere.  I have
mentioned to Dan it would be good idea to include your name in the readme since you specially built that version, and it will be
included in the updated releases at The Pits.

Cheers!

?? Jan Kohl ??
::: computer security consultant :::
the pits - http://www.theuspits.com
castle graphics - http://www.castlegraphics.com

bk

Your passionate opposition to realism and integrity is as unseemly as it is
confused.

You counter my strongest argument as an aside to a third party at the very
bottom of your rambling list of particulars:

"What Dan did was pull the trackmap from BAPOM to do work on the mountain
version of the track.  I don't think he realized
that you had "ad-libbed" that part of the track, and merely took the layout
as an original that you had found somewhere."

Brent didn't "ad-lib" that part of the track; he did his homework.  It's
obvious from the placement of stuff like the creek (which isn't in the
trackmap) that Olbuck copied the more than that, particularly since he
got the elevations more or less correct (the elevations had previously
escaped Olbuck's abilities, Bridgehampton being the most conspicuous
example).

As Olbuck said of his version of Bridgehampton, "This track was not built
from a GPL conversion... I don't have GPL... The [track] is scratch-built
every foot (or meter) of the way... "  Clearly, he didn't build the Mountain
Circuit from scratch, and it sure looks like he got a copy of GPL since his
earlier post.

As to my toungue-in-cheek comment, "Brent rocks!  Anthony sucks!" I refer
you to Bruce Kennewell's earlier riposte in this thread, "I was being
sarcastic
and facetious."

Lighten up...and stop defending highway robbers.

--Steve Smith

On that note, why aren't you complaining about the SPEED GT Viper Comp Coupe
having been fancied as a Trans-Am racer by PWF for no other reason than to
shut up Mopar fans?  If we're that concerned about realism within NR2003...

You're approaching West status with that hyperbolic blurb. ;-)

Once again, at least make an effort to be constructive on The Pits' forum.
Attacking here, where the creator doesn't post, comes off as petty.

-jde

You'd think a man with Steve's experience and background would have
handled the situation better, but instead he acted like some 12 year old
from the Sierra forums, certainly seems like he was more interested in a
public execution of Dan than getting credit and recognition where it's
due

I honestly don't know why I bother anymore, but then again I hardly do,
I think I'll buy Dan a virtual beer, afaik he's a decent bloke and I
honestly don't think he deserves this, I may be proven wrong, but I
doubt it

Beers and cheers
(uncle) Goy
"goyl at nettx dot no"

http://www.theuspits.com

"A man is only as old as the woman he feels........"
--Groucho Marx--

Because I pre-date the Cretacious Period, I'm not familiar with much that
happened after the invention of the wheel.  The mag wheel, that is.  For all
I know, the Spa in GTR is nothing like the Spa that was on TV last weekend
(altho I'm told the chicane is different), but I know that I like it, even
tho I do know what the demo embodies what might be termed "voodoo" physics.
(I"m told this issue has been addressed.)

I *do* know what Bridgehampton looks like from the***pit of a race car.
And Lime Rock and Riverside.  I don't know every road course that has been
developed for N2003 as intimately as I know those three, but I have driven
race cars at a couple dozen venues that have been released for GPL (among
those--from best-known to least--Marlboro, Laguna Seca, VIR, Sebring,
Mid-Ohio, Willow Springs, Louden when it was Bryar Motorsport Park, Mosport,
the infield circuit at Hockenheim, Solitude, the Nordschleife, and
Indianapolis in a solar-powered car in the 1990 GM Sunrayce).

But I have only only volunteered to help with--and comment on the realism
of--the three tracks I know best: Bridgehampton, Lime Rock, and Riverside.
(Until somebody wants to recreate the old road circuit at Thompson,
Connecticut.)

--Steve

ROTFL!!!  That's classic!  You've just pulled the chair legs (multiple times) out from someone you know nothing about (and know
nothing about editing, as well) and say *I* am opposing integrity!  LOL!  That is truely being a legend in your own mind...we'll
get to the realism here in a minute.  Confused?  I think I'll be able to show who is truely confused here...

 Come on, no sidestepping here, you missed a whole page of comments and questions.  Let's hear why you can't tell an
exact copy of David Noonan's track from an original work.  Or why others disagree with your view of "realism".  Or
why you decided to blather on rec.autos.simulators instead of going to the horses mouth.  Or why you chose to
disrespect someone instead of offering to help.  Or why you chose only one author to slam for whatever unknown reason.

And, the comment of Dan copying a track was only the LAST item in your long line of disparaging remarks, and a
very recent one, so don't change the subject.  Answer the questions above first, since those are the ones you started with.

Depends on your meaning for ad-lib.  What *I* meant was that Brent didn't find an old layout of the original
mountain course somewhere, he built it as he thought it might have looked.  Which means that Dan's version was
obviously built from his idea, not built upon a long-lost map that Brent found somewhere.

Really.  Strange that others don't agree with that.  But then again, they haven't agreed with much that you've said.

Is that so?  Shall we bet on that?  Are you prepared to back up your clueless insinuations?

http://www.theuspits.com/pics/lime_mc_gpl_n2003.gif

Know what this is?  It's an extract of vertical track maps from a GPL mountain circuit from Brent Adams (dark red) with a vert
map of the N2003 mountain circuit from Dan Olbuck (light green).  Since I doubt you'll be able to figure out what I'm getting
at, it's the fact that you can easily tell that these two circuits are drastically different.  Yes, while they are modeled on
the same track, they are so far removed that it would be ridiculous to state that one was built from the other one...if the
author had done so, it would have been a strange undertaking, as they would have made more work to make the circuits different
than if they had built it from scratch to begin with.

Again, another example of you not knowing anything that you're talking about.

Then stop being a bonehead.  You've only come upon this argument as your latest, and have not even explained
yourself on any other ones.  Even if Dan's work WAS truly as horrendous as you say, you still haven't explained
why you didn't help instead of holler.  You still haven't explained how your ludicrous examples of how horrible it
was were attained, when others (who have been there) have a completely different opinion.  Finally, you haven't
even proved your final point (which I just disproved) that it was a complete copy of Brent's GPL track.

As long as you feel the need to come in here and mouth off at some author's hard work with bad manners, insults,
and lousy information, I'll be more than happy to show up and shoot holes in your inane comments.

Cheers!

?? Jan Kohl ??
::: computer security consultant :::
the pits - http://www.theuspits.com
castle graphics - http://www.castlegraphics.com

read on ............

.> SNIP<

and Dan's version and see which one(s) look the same.
footage (when available) to create these tracks.  While
to make something that "bear(s) no resemblance
better.  However, I've not seen anything constructive
badmouthing other people's work rather than contributing.
some FACTS, your argument may hold up better that way...

Good advice. I opened said N2003 Mountain Circuit and our GPL version to
have look in 3doed (nice tool BTW, thanks Dave N.!!! , I use it ALOT .) .  A
few things come to mind ...

As Steve points out in a following post ... " It's obvious from the
placement of stuff like the creek (which isn't in the
trackmap) ..... " ,  I find that ( with the help of  some photo editing
tools ) I can overlay the N2003 track onto the GPL version and
the CREEK, Vail's Bend , Beagles nest, Klee Kurve and the Hine Hairpin match
up EXACTLY. The radius of beagles nest is however a little tighter, and
(ironically.. LOL) Smith's Straight is differs slightly in geometry. One
could say that these just represent errors in converting a GPL track to
N2003 using a converter supplied by Noonan. It's well documented that his
conversions require some cleanup before they are N2003 ready. Just an
observation for thought, not an accusation ........ mainly due to Dan's
association with Noonan on other N2003 tracks.

On a quick look thru the mips, I've also noticed that trees expressly
created for Lime/MC for GPL by the genius Jim Barnse (aka Dunkie Dunkoid)
make an appearance in at least the N2003 LimeMC. Trees16.mip and
trees_group24.mip etc......

"LIME/LRP/MC for GPL" are unique in the fact that Jim personally created (by
Hand) virtually ever mip used. Any exceptions (which are few) are noted on
our official website or the readme's. Quite an achievement to be proud of
considering how easy it is to be tempted to just use "readily available"
graphics. The N2003 version seems to be  a mix of SportsCar GT, NXXX and
"whatever" graphics.

The track section names of the N2003 LimeMC version also seem to be rather
(read: exactly ) similar; which is curious since the corners were named
after the people who participated in the GPL project. Since the MC was never
finished we needed corner names ....... the obvious choice was to recognize
those who participated.

I think Steve is entitled to voice his opinion based on his involvement with
"real world" motorsports and also with Papy during  the GPL development
days. Remember, we were all still drooling over pre-release articles in
magazines when the likes of Steve ( and ALi H. of course!! ) were fighting
with Papy to get it right for OUR benefit.

On a personal note, Steve's trashed me and the rest of the
"Lime/LRP/MC/Paramount Ranch" gang on numerous occasions ( LOL !!!  ). One
quickly realizes that his "criticisms" are not self-indulgent, but are made
to "raise the bar" , so to speak. I guarantee he's as passionate (and
dedicated to) these PAPY sims as we are.

Now, I'm not here to defend anyone, or to trash anyone for that matter. I am
however, always concerned that the "Lime/LRP/MC/Paramount Ranch" development
crew get all the credit they deserve.

During the early development stages of  "Lime for GPL", we had someone take
a beta , changed some graphics , rewrote the readme file stating he was the
sole creator .... distribute the track to a league he was driving with for a
special league night race ... and never revealed to his driving mates that
it was simply not his work. Only problem was one of the drivers in his
league was also one of our beta testers,who, just days before had received
the same beta track from us. Well ,you can see were this is going ... .

Everyone involved in a track project, as you well know, can invest a huge
amount of time during the course of a project. As such, they deserve every
little crumb of credit that is due them. This is still a pretty "HIP"
community of dedicated "CATS" we're involved with here.

Cheers!

Brent Adams
"Lime/LRP/MC/Paramount Ranch" for GPL

mountain version of the track.  I don't think he realized
layout as an original that you had found somewhere.  I have
since you specially built that version, and it will be

Coupla questions:

A couple of months ago you were offering me a job as a columnist, and now
when I express an opinion and expose a fraud, you're parading thru town
with a pitchfork, demanding my head.  Sour grapes?

You excoriate me for expressing my views in public, but then disseminate my
private emails to you all over town?  Hypocracy?

This is beginning to feel like a hatchet job: I've criticized a member of
The
Pits' clique, so you guys are circling the wagons.  Cronyism?

A couple of track devlopers have complained that unless they kow-tow to a
bunch of self-aggrandizing egotists, their work is ignored.  Are they right?

--Steve