rec.autos.simulators

by **myke** » Thu, 19 Jun 1997 04:00:00

Can we open a different can of worms for a while.

Instead of looking for a track "exactly" like Daytona, or
Indianapolis what about a track designed for Nascar2.

The real tracks are designed with real cars in mind.

Nascar2 cars however don't perform exactly like real cars
so why not design tracks around the strengths of Nascar2 to
promote good modem/network/NROS racing.

Who cares if it's not like a real track, if it's a blast
to race on that is what I would really like.

Just my opinion.

mykey

by **Phillip W. Malphrus, Jr** » Thu, 19 Jun 1997 04:00:00

> > Ok Adam,

> > What's your excuse for not getting Datona after this July?
> > Sega's rights expired then.

> Actually, they don't expire then.

> > If you spent the bucks that us hard
> > working people have been spending, hoping for the day we
> > could run on the Superbowl of Nascar tracks. Then you
> > should have one ready by fall?

> Papyrus spends more money and effort on licensing than you'll ever begin
> to realize.

> >Tony George may be an jerk
> > but Bill France seems to be a smart man with regards to
> > marketing the product. I sure he'd sell the right's for a
> > percentage of the profit's. Then you'd sell the game
> > even more and it would be complete.

> If you'd like to share your idea with Mr. France, the speedway's number
> is 1-904-253-RACE. Sega waived an incredible amount of money at ISC to
> get the Daytona rights; ISC did what they had to do, what any other
> person would do when considering the bottom line. I can't blame them a
> bit, even though I wish as much as you do that Daytona could be in
> NASCAR 2.

> God Bless,
> Steve

I disagree with that for one reason. ISC could have licenced Daytona to
both Sega and Papy and made a lot of money. After all, ISC owns Daytona
and since the demand for Daytona is high, ISC could have set their own
rules and do the multiple licensing thing.

by **Jim Sokolof** » Thu, 19 Jun 1997 04:00:00

Well, then ask yourself why they didn't do that? They aren't stupid.
Suppose Sega was willing to pay $3 million for the exclusive rights and
$1 million for non-exclusive rights.

I'm sure that, as much as I'd like for Papy to have gotten the rights to
Daytona, that ISC got the best deal they could. That deal was an
exclusive deal with Sega, and that's where we are today. Sega's the
bigger kid on the block; live with it.

---Jim

by **David Otternes** » Thu, 19 Jun 1997 04:00:00

> Can we open a different can of worms for a while.

> Instead of looking for a track "exactly" like Daytona, or
> Indianapolis what about a track designed for Nascar2.

> The real tracks are designed with real cars in mind.

> Nascar2 cars however don't perform exactly like real cars
> so why not design tracks around the strengths of Nascar2 to
> promote good modem/network/NROS racing.

> Who cares if it's not like a real track, if it's a blast
> to race on that is what I would really like.

> Just my opinion.

> mykey

That's where they draw the line between simulation and arcade game..
Papyrus advertised NASCAR2 as a sim, not an arcade game, so they have to
make everything like they are in real life.. So the AI isn't perfect,
they said they are working on it for future releases.. If I remember
correctrly, NASCAR '98 will have some fictional tracks, you should have
fun then..

just MY opinion..
--

Dave Otterness

by **Tom J. Ma** » Thu, 19 Jun 1997 04:00:00

>> Ok Adam,

>> What's your excuse for not getting Datona after this July?
>> Sega's rights expired then.

>Actually, they don't expire then.

>> If you spent the bucks that us hard
>> working people have been spending, hoping for the day we
>> could run on the Superbowl of Nascar tracks. Then you
>> should have one ready by fall?

>Papyrus spends more money and effort on licensing than you'll ever begin
>to realize.

>>Tony George may be an jerk
>> but Bill France seems to be a smart man with regards to
>> marketing the product. I sure he'd sell the right's for a
>> percentage of the profit's. Then you'd sell the game
>> even more and it would be complete.

>If you'd like to share your idea with Mr. France, the speedway's number
>is 1-904-253-RACE. Sega waived an incredible amount of money at ISC to
>get the Daytona rights; ISC did what they had to do, what any other
>person would do when considering the bottom line. I can't blame them a
>bit, even though I wish as much as you do that Daytona could be in
>NASCAR 2.

>God Bless,
>Steve

i think it cost about 1 or 2 million to get the daytona license. Papyrus
only sell their game for about 50 bucks. How many do they need to sale to
pay for the license fee.

by **Michael E. Carve** » Thu, 19 Jun 1997 04:00:00

: I disagree with that for one reason. ISC could have licenced Daytona to
: both Sega and Papy and made a lot of money. After all, ISC owns Daytona
: and since the demand for Daytona is high, ISC could have set their own
: rules and do the multiple licensing thing.

And since Sega would not be getting an "exclusive" license, do you think
ISC could have gotten as much money from Sega? Maybe Sega wouldn't play
unless they got an "exclusive" license. In that case Papy would have had
to match Sega's offer or ISC would have played with Sega. Which is more
than likely what happened.

--
**************************** Michael E. Carver *************************
Upside out, or inside down...False alarm the only game in town.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<[ /./. [- < ]>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

by **Simproje** » Sat, 21 Jun 1997 04:00:00

I don't think this was in the cards...Consider this: If ISC grants
license to both Sega and Papyrus, but Sega says "no deal",
then what's ISC to do?...I believe Sega wanted 'exclusive' rights
to the name and *likeness*<g> of Daytona...nothing less.

Marc

rec.autos.simulators

PAPYRUS AND IMS

PAPYRUS AND IMS

PAPYRUS AND IMS

PAPYRUS AND IMS

PAPYRUS AND IMS

PAPYRUS AND IMS

PAPYRUS AND IMS

PAPYRUS AND IMS