rec.autos.simulators

hehe, I'll admit that I had a few goes at NH myself, the graphic problems
weren't to my liking at all. We're right to criticise "constructively". Its
just that telling a designer to give up and that we'll never buy their
products doesn't give incentive to help us (the minority) o get what we want
does it? Hmmm....

As for sacrificing profit, what's the problem? Papy went for total realism
with GPL and lost profit to satisfy real sim racers. Compare that to
something like F12000 which wasn't pure sim but I imagine sold like hotcakes
due to its accessibility and playability and EA rep. If companies will give
up some profits to help real sim racers, we could at least encourage them a
little, not kiss their arses but encourage a little. We don't have to say
they're sim is great, but telling them how to improve is better than saying
we'll never buy their sims again.

That's right- let's get back to exciting and interesting topics like the
ramp angles of simulated late 60s race cars! :-)

Wrong answer.  That's where we part ways.  Papy didn't *lose* profit in
order to *satisfy* real sim racers.  What they did is they gambled, and
they *lost*.  These companies aren't out here to do anybody any favors
(except maybe themselves).  They attempt to read the potential market
for their product in a way that can maximize profits for themselves.  

Don't make martyrs of them.

--
Chuck Kandler

Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.

Registered Linux User #180746
http://counter.li.org

 Agreed!  If they were willing to sacrifice for the good of the sim racer,
then they would have pushed ahead with a fully completed opengl patch.
The D3d project would have had the official blessing of the entire
management,
not the midnights and weekends that a single staff member had to put into
it...
also the multi-colored flag issue would have been sorted out as well.
Sierra saw the financial albatross that GPL was/is and I'll bet forbade any
further use of company funds to continue development of the product.
dave henrie
 These companies aren't out here to do anybody any favors

Furthermore I don't think GPL "bombed" because of it's "ultimate"
realism, it "bombed" because it was GPL, a simulation of the 1967 (ish)
F1 season, the market for a 1967 F1 simulator is somewhat limited I'd
say

But it was a vice choice to introduce their new "game engine" in this
sim, it's just what major Automotive manufacturers do in real life, they
introduce new and experimental technology in "niche" models, that way
they can sit back and look at the feedback from their customers buying a
product that was never intended to be their "bread and butter" anyway,
like Audi did with their aluminium bodies for their A8 series of cars

In my opinion, introducing this stuff to us in GPL was a brilliant move
on their part, it was a win/win situation really, they would get the
feedback they needed to make sure they didn't mess up N4, they got their
new "game engine" thoroughly tested by some 40 000 + customers, and with
a a little luck they could have sold a few more copies and broke even on
the project, assuming they lost money on it in the first place, and the
guys at Papy that *really* wanted to do GPL as GPL because they wanted
to do a historic F1 sim got to do it

In my opinion it was a pretty wise move, they got their new physics
engine tested, their new gfx engine tested and their new and improved
online racing networking tested, all of this partly paid for by their
customers.....

Beers and cheers
(uncle) Goy

"Team Mirage" http://www.teammirage.com/
"The Pits"    http://www.theuspits.com/

* Spam is for losers who can't get business any other way *
"Spamkiller"    http://www.spamkiller.com

Ya know, if you're going to be all reasonable and logical I'm afraid you'll
just have to leave! We (the ever ubiquitous "we" ) will have to mark you
down for not using "sux"  or "goddam suits" in a grammatically incorrect
sentence. How do you expect to be taken seriously?

Nice post ,BTW :)
David

(the following remains unsnipped because it could stand to be read again)

Not to mention all the responses are at the bottom of the quote, not the
top.

Why don't people set their Newsreaders to put the reply at the TOP ?

Scrolling down to read a reply gets old...

-Larry

What is preventing someone from putting their reply at the top or
bottom of the quoted material, regardless of how their newsreaders are
set?

~daxe

But there's nothing old about replying to post from 59 days ago, huh?

~daxe

I did that in the beginning, but then people complained that I started
my answer at the top. And indeed, it's easier to read a couple of
lines from the original post first, with a reply after that.

Andre