rec.autos.simulators

by **Worker Workin** » Thu, 07 Oct 1999 04:00:00

> Hey, I am with you, we both want the same! But why does GP2 sell 1.5
> million copys, where GPL does (estimated) 40000? Is it only the
> drivers assistance, or is it because GP2 was about modern F1? Maybe
> someone knows the sale figures of Ubisoft's F1RS and MGPRS2?
> That could be interesting....

As an Arcade Racing fan I have to admit that I was drooling over GPL
when I saw previews of it. The idea of driving the older cars was very
intriguing.

When I downloaded the demo I assumed that it was the crappiest driving
model ever, because I couldn't keep the damn car on the track. It ended
up that I was just the crappiest driver ever, spoiled by arcade racers
with the physics of a Flinstones car.

In every arcade racer I've bought I have always enjoyed learning the
tracks on EASY mode and building up my skills from there. I just didn't
have the patience to learn the tracks of GPL at 5mph until I could
handle the car better. I would have much rather learned the tracks in
an Arcade mode and then slowly added realism feature-by-feature or
level-by-level...

by **Bruno Sens Chan** » Thu, 07 Oct 1999 04:00:00

> > >Tracks, such as Sebring, Daytona (If they could see fit to loosen
> the knot in their
> > >shorts) Nassau, Targa Florio, Mille Miglia, LeMans and Goodwood
> would make for some
> > >fun racing IMHO.

> > >Well, I can dream, can't I?

> Allow me to delurk and make a (probably) dumb contribution. Why not
> revise the game to allow third parties add tracks and cars - a la GP2?

> I am painfully aware that I'm probably just the latest in a long line
> of newbies to suggest this, but surely it is within their compass to
> re-engineer the current game to allow this and so give the title a much
> longer shelf-life. It would also sidestep any licensing issues with
> FOCA.

> I know the physics engine is complex, and that the cars and tracks are
> consequently harder to "build". But wouldn't this have a greater
> potential return on investment than a GPL2? There isn't much wrong
> with GPL that a range of tracks and cars wouldn't fix IMHO.

> Sent via Deja.com http://www.racesimcentral.net/
> Before you buy.

I agree with you. I still play GP2 a lot because there are lots of tracks,
carsets,***pits, graphic enhancements...

by **Tracey A Mille** » Thu, 07 Oct 1999 04:00:00

Bruce Kennewell wrote

Guys, it doesn't matter whether or not Tracey Miller ever heard of
these guys. What matters is if the majority of the buying public has
not only heard of them, but has a deep down desire to race against
them. I can't speak for Europe, but here in the U.S. it's "what have
you done for me lately", or "out of sight out of mind".

A Legends of the Brickyard sim could work because most of the
legendary CART drivers (A.J. Foyt, Rick Mears, Mario Andretti, Tom
Sneva, the Unsers, etc.) are still public figures either as car
owners, race commentators, or spokesmen. Not to mention that Papy
apparently has a working relationship with I.M.S. since they got to
include it in N3, and Indy needs all the publicity it can get right
now.

Maybe if the Gran Prix of the U.S. is a huge success then they can
start looking at doing another F1 sim, but for right now it's a dead
issue.

by **david kar** » Thu, 07 Oct 1999 04:00:00

I shudder to think that as a GPL fan I might someday (thru biz-wiz
hageographies) be linked with the Rand Bozos . . .

DK

by **Bruce Kennewel** » Fri, 08 Oct 1999 04:00:00

Dan Gurney?
Richie Ginther? (deceased)

> > I seriously doubt it. GPL didn't sell in the U.S. because Gran Prix
> > doesn't sell in the U.S. There are no "legends" of Gran Prix over here
> > other than Mario Andretti, and he became a legend at Indy not because
> > of what he did in '76.

> Never heard of Phil Hill then?

> Mark

-----------== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
http://www.newsfeeds.com The Largest Usenet Servers in the World!
------== Over 73,000 Newsgroups - Including Dedicated Binaries Servers ==-----

by **Bruce Kennewel** » Fri, 08 Oct 1999 04:00:00

How nice it would have been if Papyrus had the time and money during
development to create Formula 3 (Trainers) and Formula 2 (Advanced Trainers)
utilising different car/engine graphics and thinner wheels/tyres.

Three racing classes in the one package........the interest level would have
been immeasurable.

> >> Anyone can drive GPL's Basic Trainer. Nobody, even top professional
> >> real time race drivers, can drive GPL's Grand Prix cars out of the box.

> >I think that's one of the problems for the mass market - everybody likes
> >to think of themselves as a superhuman when they play computer games.
> >Luke Skywalker defeating the Deathstar is just one example - in racing
> >games they want to be able to race with the best.

> >So you can't call them Trainers - people won't try them. I think the only
> >way to do it is to have difficulty settings that use neutral terms so
> >people will not feel bad selecting them.

> Agreed. I wish we'd been able to come up with better names. The terms
> Advanced Trainer and Basic Trainer are descriptive but unappealing, and
> probably contribute to many peoples' unwillingness to try them.

> This is unfortunate, because many people find the Trainers to be great
> fun. I don't find the Basic Trainers to be terribly exciting, but there
> are many people running them and several series organized for them. The
> participants love these cars and some won't even bother to drive the
> more powerful cars.

> Personally, I love the Advanced Trainers.

> I've hosted many Advanced Trainer races on VROC. Sometimes someone who
> joins says something like, "Yuk! Why am I stuck in the F2 car?".

> After the race, I frequently see comments like, "Wow, I never tried the
> F2 car before! These are great!"

> The Trainers are particularly great for online racing because the lower
> straightline and cornering speeds result in less warping. Also, people
> tend to make fewer mistakes, which leads to closer racing and battles
> which can last for much of the race.

> And because you're not coping with monstrous horsepower all the time,
> things like subtleties of line, accuracy of car placement, smoothness,
> and precision assume greater importance. These are the things which
> make race driving fun, and for most people, it's much easier to enjoy
> them in the Trainers.

> Alison

> Remove the spam blocker NOSPAM to email me.
> http://eaglewoman.maximumspeed.com

-----------== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
http://www.newsfeeds.com The Largest Usenet Servers in the World!
------== Over 73,000 Newsgroups - Including Dedicated Binaries Servers ==-----

by **Bruce Kennewel** » Fri, 08 Oct 1999 04:00:00

Thanks Jerry.
Yes....I know that there was (and no doubt still is) a very large support
base in the USA for F1 and "European"-type racing but, as we all know, it
isn't sufficiently large enough to warrant sim developers spending too much
time and money on developing "niche" products.

Similarly here we certainly have a following for NASCAR-style (oval) racing
but it pales into insignificance when compared to the enormous (by our
population standards!) interest in V8 Touring Cars. This eventually
resulted in an Aussie edition of "Need for Speed" being produced which
features the Holden/Falcon cars.

> As a youngster here in the U.S. in the '60's my hero was Graham Hill.
(And
> how odd do you think that made me? <g>) I was one happy kid when he won
the
> Indy 500. Unfortunately, the only type of motorsports info that was easy
> for me to come by in those days was about drag racing and "Big Daddy"
this,
> and "Big Daddy" that. NASCAR was strictly a regional thing at that time,
> but nationwide it seemed that the only thing on most people's minds
> concerning racing was the quarter mile.

> Jerry Morelock

> > Dave...I said "as a group"........meaning as a nation. By this I was
> trying
> > to say that if only you people embraced the same motor-sport tastes as
the
> > majority of those enthusiasts world-wide then we would have
> > open-wheeler/sports car heaven in sim-land!

> > > > Which _really_ makes one wish that you Yanks were (as a group) a bit
> > more
> > > > selective in your motor-racing pleasures!

> > > Sure we can be selective. Comming up are the SCCA Runnoff's at Mid
> > > Ohio. 700 cars, about a million classes. Just imagine about 40 or
50
> > > Neons in a gaggle flocking around the famed Mid Ohio.
> > > Or Pike's Peak Hillclimb. 10 minutes of racing to heaven.
> > > Or One Lap Around America.(learn the fine art of Cooking 4 course
meals
> > > on your engine block and exhaust headers)
> > > dave henrie

> > -----------== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News
> ==----------
> > http://www.newsfeeds.com The Largest Usenet Servers in the
World!
> > ------== Over 73,000 Newsgroups - Including Dedicated Binaries Servers
> ==-----

-----------== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
http://www.newsfeeds.com The Largest Usenet Servers in the World!
------== Over 73,000 Newsgroups - Including Dedicated Binaries Servers ==-----

by **Schlom** » Fri, 08 Oct 1999 04:00:00

Now i may be wrong...but i think the thing that hurt sales was actually the
era. If it was 1976-79 instead of 67 it would have been more popular for a
couple reasons. The casual F1 fan knows about the Ferrari 312T and the Tyrell
P34(76&77 only). They know about Laudas crash and about the old Nurburgring.
They know about the Turbo Charging craze in the late 70s and about Ground
Effects. Many of them even saw some of these guys drive if they're old enough.

Unfortunately, even though the Lotus 49 came out, 1967 didnt have as many
easily recognisable cars. They couldnt be identified by shape unless you know
what your looking for. Plus theres some tracks no one really knows. I had
never even heard of Rouen untill GPL. Zandvoort is before alot of peoples time
as well as Mosport (though still quite visible in North America). In all 1967
would have been a GREAT idea IF 1976-79 had been done first or if they were
both featured in the game (or as an add-on pack).

They also left out alot of important features such as an arcade mode and an
adjustable opponent strength slider. Now im looking at this from a slightly
sideways point of view...but i think im right to some extent. Maybe not
everything i said is correct...but i know im on the right track.

Chris

by **Dave Henri** » Fri, 08 Oct 1999 04:00:00

ah but hasn't Papy/Sierra gone through a couple of different owners in
that time frame. And in case you haven't noticed, Sierra has recently
reshuffled much of it's resources and cancelled several projects that
were very near completion. Now I would love to have a new CART sim, but
think about this...Microsoft had CART precision Racing. They took alot
of heat for that thing, but what if they still had license to produce
another CART product, with Sierra's abcense in that genre it may have
suceeded with a 2nd attempt.
So Sierra "may" have bought the CART rights NOT just to keep a
competitor from making one, but also to SAVE THEMSELVES from spending
the time and money of making a new CART product.
Lastly, remember the core programmers for ICR2 left several years ago
and tried to start up a new company. To date I haven't heard of any
product released by them, nor have I heard of that group rejoining Papy.
I am pesimistic at best.
dave henrie

> > I seriously doubt it. GPL didn't sell in the U.S. because Gran Prix
> > doesn't sell in the U.S. There are no "legends" of Gran Prix over here
> > other than Mario Andretti, and he became a legend at Indy not because
> > of what he did in '76.

> > Papy keeps making NASCAR sims because NASCAR sells. Both NASCAR '99 as
> > well as NASCAR 3 are in the top 20 for sales last week. It wouldn't
> > matter what physics engine they use in a NASCAR sim (as long as it has
> > one, unlike Revolution) or how hard it is, American kids that buy
> > software want to race against Jeff Gordon, not Jim Clark.

> > If you really want to see another open wheel sim, give up on the GP
> > idea and start pushing for a CART sim, or maybe a Legends of the
> > Brickyard product. The idea of racing against A.J Foyt or Mario
> > Andretti would be a much easier sell than any F1 based product.

> > Alison Hine wrote
> > > I really believe this version would sell much better than the
> > original,

> Tracey,

> You've hit the nail right on the head. I really don't think that The
> "boys" at Sierra blamed GPLs poor sales on the fact that it was too hard,as
> that could have been rectified with a sequel using the F3s. Rather the
> subject matter was not contempory enough for the average sim buyer.
> Afterall,this is Nascar country.

> As for a new Cart sim using the gpl physics engine,I'm willing to bet
> that's the direction Papyrus/Sierra is heading. Why? How many of you
> remember a post more than a year ago stating that Sierra had purchased the
> rights to produce a Cart sim through the year 2000. Do you really think that
> they would have spent the money,then just shelved the project only to keep
> anyone else from do it? Rather,they set their priorities based on consumer
> sales trends : anything to do with Nascar will be a winner. Well we had
> Nas99,Nas3 is out,Nascar Legends is just about ready to go gold. Nascar3
> doesn't have the trucks,so you know that will be an expansion pack within
> 3-6 months. Nascar4 will most likely be released the 4th quarter of 2000,as
> the average home computer should be able to run it by then and take
> advantage of the big holiday season. So what's left for the Papyrus team:
> Cart2,that's what.

> They certainly aren't going to go head to head with GP3. Nor are they
> interested in sprint car racing,as we've asked for a sprint car sim for
> years and it has always fell on deaf ears.

> Joel Willstein

by **Eldre** » Fri, 08 Oct 1999 04:00:00

>I seriously doubt it. GPL didn't sell in the U.S. because Gran Prix
>doesn't sell in the U.S. There are no "legends" of Gran Prix over here
>other than Mario Andretti, and he became a legend at Indy not because
>of what he did in '76.

I *think* it was '78...
But yes, I agree with you that F1 doesn't sell well here.

Eldred
___
Tiger Stadium R.I.P. 1912-1999

Own Grand Prix Legends? Goto http://gpl.gamestats.com/vroc

If all the world's a stage, where is the audience sitting?
Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

by **Steve Ferguso** » Fri, 08 Oct 1999 04:00:00

: Lastly, remember the core programmers for ICR2 left several years ago
: and tried to start up a new company. To date I haven't heard of any
: product released by them, nor have I heard of that group rejoining Papy.

Viper Racing. I hear it's not so bad :)

Stephen

by **Bruce Kennewel** » Fri, 08 Oct 1999 04:00:00

I don't mean to appear rude, Joel, but I meant the longevity of the product
itself, not an increase in the numbers of people interested in the sim in
the first place.

> > How nice it would have been if Papyrus had the time and money during
> > development to create Formula 3 (Trainers) and Formula 2 (Advanced
> Trainers)
> > utilising different car/engine graphics and thinner wheels/tyres.

> > Three racing classes in the one package........the interest level would
> have
> > been immeasurable.

> Bruce,

> I really don't think that having 3 different classes would have
> increased sales or interest one bit.

> Joel Willstein

-----------== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
http://www.newsfeeds.com The Largest Usenet Servers in the World!
------== Over 73,000 Newsgroups - Including Dedicated Binaries Servers ==-----

by **Bruce Kennewel** » Fri, 08 Oct 1999 04:00:00

GranD Prix. GranD.

-----------== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
http://www.newsfeeds.com The Largest Usenet Servers in the World!
------== Over 73,000 Newsgroups - Including Dedicated Binaries Servers ==-----

by **Bruce Kennewel** » Fri, 08 Oct 1999 04:00:00

Look....it's very, very simple to explain the reason for GPL being set in
the 1967 period: David Kaemmer's passion for that era.
Now I, for one, agree with his subjective choice 110%.
Why? because I'm old enough to remember with clarity the cars, drivers and
races.

So please.....forget about searching for some mysterious reason behind the
era represented because there isn't one. It was simply at least one mans
love of that period which resulted in GPL.

-----------== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
http://www.newsfeeds.com The Largest Usenet Servers in the World!
------== Over 73,000 Newsgroups - Including Dedicated Binaries Servers ==-----

by **mark jeangerar** » Fri, 08 Oct 1999 04:00:00

I agree with Bruce on this one. I don't remember much of it myself. I was 6
in '67. Just some visuals. Flashes of stark white teeth glowing through the
grimy faces beneath those open faced helmets. I do remember growing up with
a sense of respect for guys like Gurney, Stewart, Rindt, Moss, Hill, Hill,
and Clark. Why I knew about them I can't say. I grew up on the west coast of
the USA. Their heroism just seemed to take the world by storm. Since buying
GPL I have a greater understanding of those days. I watch more historic
races, read more articles and interviews, and feel like I understand GPL
better because of it. My interest in those years is still growing. Kaemmer
was definitely on to something.

(Now if only he would learn how to make a decent racing sim.) :-0

:-)

--
Mark Jeangerard
www.soundchaserweb.com
New Mexico USA

> Look....it's very, very simple to explain the reason for GPL being set in
> the 1967 period: David Kaemmer's passion for that era.
> Now I, for one, agree with his subjective choice 110%.
> Why? because I'm old enough to remember with clarity the cars, drivers
and
> races.

> So please.....forget about searching for some mysterious reason behind the
> era represented because there isn't one. It was simply at least one mans
> love of that period which resulted in GPL.

> > Now i may be wrong...but i think the thing that hurt sales was actually
> the
> > era. If it was 1976-79 instead of 67 it would have been more popular
for
> a
> > couple reasons. The casual F1 fan knows about the Ferrari 312T and the
> Tyrell
> > P34(76&77 only). They know about Laudas crash and about the old
> Nurburgring.
> > They know about the Turbo Charging craze in the late 70s and about
Ground
> > Effects. Many of them even saw some of these guys drive if they're old
> enough.

> > Unfortunately, even though the Lotus 49 came out, 1967 didnt have as
many
> > easily recognisable cars. They couldnt be identified by shape unless
you
> know
> > what your looking for. Plus theres some tracks no one really knows. I
> had
> > never even heard of Rouen untill GPL. Zandvoort is before alot of
peoples
> time
> > as well as Mosport (though still quite visible in North America). In
all
> 1967
> > would have been a GREAT idea IF 1976-79 had been done first or if they
> were
> > both featured in the game (or as an add-on pack).

> > They also left out alot of important features such as an arcade mode and
> an
> > adjustable opponent strength slider. Now im looking at this from a
> slightly
> > sideways point of view...but i think im right to some extent. Maybe not
> > everything i said is correct...but i know im on the right track.

> > Chris