rec.autos.simulators

Part of this is economics: it's a lot cheaper in software development
expenses to skip the complex physics and simulation aspects of racing
and just "cut to the chase" so to speak. Complex sims are going to sell
a lot fewer copies than the jump-in-and-race games, and with so many
companies producing similar titles the game dollars are getting spread
that much more thinly. An easy-to-drive NASCAR game has a huge market
potential, while one with a long learning curve will just not sell
enough copies to turn a profit (or at least as much of a profit).

IMHO, the introduction of 3D cards has sped up this trend a lot, since
it is so easy now to trade realism and depth for eye candy. A hell of a
lot more time is now spent getting those trick "camera angles" looking
good than is spent on how the cars are to race. Some newer games now
don't even have a decent***pit view, which is where I spend 100% of
my time when playing GPL! The use of 3D accelerators also makes it much
easier to port or co-develop for the various *** platforms, so the
newer games are now developed with that in mind and the things that a
PC is much better at are no longer in the game at all. Frankly, GP2 had
much more depth and playability features than the latest 1999 F1 sims.

BTW, this trend is not limited to sim racing. Flight sims, strategy
games, and even adventure games are going down the same path -- if your
3D graphics look good, who cares about the gameplay?

  -- Doug Gordon

Sent via Deja.com http://www.racesimcentral.net/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.

It's a shame that people ask for realism then will complain about the lack of
a techno in-game music or that it's too hard.  A common complaint I seem to
hear is "I drive my car everyday without crashing, so if I crash constantly
in a sim it can't be realistic".  That simplistic attitude drives me to
despair.

People dedicate massive amounts of time to FPS - easily as much as we do to
our 'driving'.  If a sim of the quality of GPL was more thoughtfully put
together as far as attracting an audience goes, sim racing could find it's
feet again.  I'm sure there are plenty out there who want something meaty to
get their new FF controllers into.  GPL physics, but with more forgiving,
recognisable 1990s cars and a game structure that caters for beginners, maybe
a race driving school, would sell big time - I'm convinced of it.  You don't
need the vast number of makes, just a few and some recognisable tracks.  At
it's haghest level it could be as challenging as GPL, but at least you're not
thrown into the deep end.

Cheers

Mark
Reading, UK

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.

However, if we are abaonded for sometime, then expect a killer niche product
that we're all expected to buy :P

Z.

Please remove NOSPAM from my email address when replying.

Although the first 1/2 of 1999 has really been pathetic for sim racers,  I
believe the second 1/2 will see a few improvements and into 2000.

Sim racing development is NOT dead.  It just seemed to be in hibernation ;)

Scott
PA-Scott
G.T.S. Racing - http://www.GTS-Racing.com
High Gear Editor - "The View" - http://www.simracingnews.com

--
Scott B. Husted
ICQ# 4395450

So whats all this mean?  It means you need to take off your silly
rose-colored glasses and pay attention.  Simulated racing will never be
mainstream, but its not going to go away anymore than the Falcons or the
Warbirds, etc are either.  Not to mention its quite possible to have a game
with enough depth to appeal to both the arcade racer and the hard-core
junkie.

Goddamn, Scott, I sure as hell hope you're right.

Mark
Reading, UK

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.

  Put yourself in a Crammond or Kaemer situation. Ok, they can probably
make big bucks churning out run of the mill products. But how long will
they want to do that for? They might have all the money in the world,
but guess what? They can't go for a stroll down to the local games shop
and buy a decent sim no matter how full their wallets are! Their
interest in the job diminishes and I could see the likes of these two
just handing in their resignations and going off to do something else.
Like going off and starting their own Racing Sim Companies, hopefully,
for example :)

I presume one of the reasons why GPL didn't fair as well as it could
would have been because new software is developed to work best on the
latest technology, ie whatever high end PCs are currently out there.

Without a doubt, what put a lot of people off GPL was the fact that it
was so difficult 'out of the box', due partly to the fact that FPS is so
important when playing this game.  

When I first played the game on my lower-end machine I too thought,
'Well, I've never needed to worry about frame rates higher than 25fps on
any of my other racing sims so why should this one be any different?'
and just thought the cars were undrivable without any consideration that
upping the frame rate was going to make that much difference.

It wasn't until hearing from other people that FPS was essential for
this game that I went back to it after leaving it on the shelf for
several months.  I'm sure there were many others out there who put
their's on the shelf and also advised their friends not to bother as
well.  Hence fewer sales than it might have and hence software companies
a little more reticent to try something similar.
--
Peter Ives

You're not wrong.  It's just disheartening when two of the most amazing
sounding products on the horizon were canned/'put on hold' - these being TAR
and the -real- N3.

I'm sure GP3 will be a great accomplishment, but as with the sport itself,
will it be enjotable?  Current F1 drivers complain that the latest cars are
no fun to drive at all, so what hope does an accurate sim have?  I'd rather
see Crammond turn his attention to CART.  Montoya was as overjoyed at how
good Champ Cars were to drive compared to F1 as  Zanardi was infuriated with
F1 machinery.  Hell, even Hill retired because he couldn't get to grips with
them.

Why simulate that?

Mark
Reading, UK

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.

Mark,

    Producing a current top of the line F1 sim would surely be a bore. You
have your choice or a Ferrari or a Mclaren. Everything else would be a also
ran.

Joel Willstein

:     Producing a current top of the line F1 sim would surely be a bore. You
: have your choice or a Ferrari or a Mclaren. Everything else would be a also
: ran.

  But doesn't GPL have this to some extent?  Everyone seems to agree
that the Lotus is fastest, you have your chance in an Eagle or a
Ferrari but in a "Cooper", BRM or "Murasama", you're likely to be hoping
that the leader crashes out or breaks down.

  I don't think that is necessarily a problem.  What would be a problem
is that I can't see (for example) Williams saying "Oh yeah, the cars a
pig, make sure you model the drastic mid-corner understeer and snap
entry and exit oversteer."  In modern F1, all the teams are going to
be really cagey about the handling of the cars and the HPs.  

  Still, I'd quite like a modern F1 game - the cars can't be worse to
handle than the GPL cars - can they?

--
Richard G. Clegg     Only the mind is waving
Dept. of Mathematics (Network Control group) Uni. of York.

www: http://manor.york.ac.uk/top.html

I agree, I think there are to many F1 games (most are not sims). I would
like to see a good CART racing sim. Even the Trans Am racing game would be a
nice change (I know there are a lot of Trans Am fans out there).

Joel Willstein