rec.autos.simulators

> On Tue, 6 Jan 2004 14:07:50 -0500, "MadDAWG"

> >Someone should tell him he dosen't need the CRAPCAR name on it.  Stock
car
> >racing 2004 would be just fine.  Hell make it a Trans Am game that can be
> >moded for stock cars.

> *** stock car racing 2004.  There are plenty of great licenses out
> there that no one has touched in ages that they could use.  Supercars,
> CART, Trans Am, and, hell, even lower formula classes like F2000 and
> F3000.  There are dozens of classes of motorsport out there that don't
> have licensed sims, and yet everyone has been pumping out NASCAR and
> F1 for the last 5 years.  I grew up with NASCAR/F1 so I don't have the
> dislike of them that some people do, but the same old thing being
> released year after year gets old.

> Jason

>You forgot the Greatest *** Franchise of them all: Can-Am!

> On Wed, 07 Jan 2004 20:32:37 GMT, "Steve Smith"

> >You forgot the Greatest *** Franchise of them all: Can-Am!

> Oh yeah, I wasn't really going historic.  Historic Can-Am, Trans-Am,
> 80's IMSA, etc.  There's a ton of great simulation material out there
> waiting for people to use it.

> How about late 60's champcar?  Those few years before USAC butchered
> the sport when we had Andretti, the Unsers, Foyt, Leonard, etc driving
> turbo open wheelers with primitive aero around classic road courses
> and ovals.  Not to mention the dirt tracks that were still part of the
> championship.  It would appeal to fans of dirt track racing and grand
> prix legends in one fell swoop, not to mention the near hysteria that
> a good sim with the Indy 500 would cause..  I'm salivating thinking
> about running a league where one week I'm sliding an Offy dirt car
> around Langhorne, the next I'm piloting a turbo Lotus wedge car around
> indy, the next I'm in a Brawner-Hawk at Mosport and St Jovite.

> It's surprising to me that after a game like IL-2 became such a
> success, no one has had another go at a proper historic racer.  We all
> know GPL was a commercial failure, but I think it would be naive to
> assume it was due to either the subject matter or the difficulty.  The
> racing sim community in 2003 is, imho, a lot larger and more dedicated
> than it was in 1998.  Hell, in 98 I had been simming for most of the
> decade and still hadn't even purchased my first wheel.

> I would love to see Papy take another chance with a sim that isn't
> nascar.  In fact, I think now would be the best time in their history
> to do it as they've garnered so much respect and attention with the
> last 3 nascar titles.  You know as well as I do if they released a
> half-horsepower lawnmower sim that every *** review site on the
> planet would be going nuts over how great it was and that there would
> be a huge online community for it.  If Sierra spent a little cash
> putting kiosks and nice displays for it in wal-mart and electronics
> boutique and slapped a fat "FROM THE MAKERS OF NASCAR RACING" sticker
> on it I'm sure it would sell.  Throw a big picture of Mario Andretti
> on the cover and you're all set, at least in the US.

> Jason

> I've determined it's the high grip being used for PTA

> I think a 1.03 would be perfectly fine on most tracks.

> > I think a 1.03 would be perfectly fine on most tracks.

> Heck, why not go mental and go for a perfectly round 1.0?   After all,
> if the design is right that's what the original track's grip oughta be
;)

> Regards, Rudy
> (GPLRank -21)

>sim.  Yes, the cars are largely ugly as sin, and not as exciting as ALMS
>LMP's, but the physics would more or less be PTA adjusted for mid-engine.
>Some quick tweaking, modelling 4-6 chassis, and

>Plus, given GA's close ties to NASCAR, Papy/Sierra would already have
>inroads toward the license.

> Heck, why not go mental and go for a perfectly round 1.0?   After all,
> if the design is right that's what the original track's grip oughta be   ;)

> Mild disagreement.  I think one of the reasons we don't have CART to kick
> around any more (unless you like abusing dead horses) is that its
> jack-of-all-trades orientation didn't hunt.  I don't detect much crossover
> interest between dirt-track trailer-trash, oval-track low-lifes, and
> road-racing cogniscenti (ahem).  Long after CART's oval races stopped
> putting asses in seats, road races like Mid-O were still packing 'em in.
At
> its best, IndyCar Racing (as it was then known) was Can-Am with fenders.
> The one-size-fits-all approach lacks focus, interest, and (this is why the
> marketing-savvy sponsors deserted the series in in droves) actionable
> demographics.  Otherwise, triathalons would outdraw baisbol, fussbol, and
> horse-track betting.  After being shepherded by 3 alledged marketing
> geniuses (Stokkan, Heitzler and Pook), CART is all but dead.  Q.E.D.

> And I can tell you from personal experience that Mario Andretti can't draw
> flies any more.  Brock Yates gave wine from Mario's vinyards the place of
> honor in The Cannonball Pub (which is heavy on bench-racing types swilling
> brewskis amidst automobilia like the steering wheel from Fangio's Chevy)
and
> never sold a single bottle.  Sic transit and all that....

> > On Wed, 07 Jan 2004 20:32:37 GMT, "Steve Smith"

> > >You forgot the Greatest *** Franchise of them all: Can-Am!

> > Oh yeah, I wasn't really going historic.  Historic Can-Am, Trans-Am,
> > 80's IMSA, etc.  There's a ton of great simulation material out there
> > waiting for people to use it.

> > How about late 60's champcar?  Those few years before USAC butchered
> > the sport when we had Andretti, the Unsers, Foyt, Leonard, etc driving
> > turbo open wheelers with primitive aero around classic road courses
> > and ovals.  Not to mention the dirt tracks that were still part of the
> > championship.  It would appeal to fans of dirt track racing and grand
> > prix legends in one fell swoop, not to mention the near hysteria that
> > a good sim with the Indy 500 would cause..  I'm salivating thinking
> > about running a league where one week I'm sliding an Offy dirt car
> > around Langhorne, the next I'm piloting a turbo Lotus wedge car around
> > indy, the next I'm in a Brawner-Hawk at Mosport and St Jovite.

> > It's surprising to me that after a game like IL-2 became such a
> > success, no one has had another go at a proper historic racer.  We all
> > know GPL was a commercial failure, but I think it would be naive to
> > assume it was due to either the subject matter or the difficulty.  The
> > racing sim community in 2003 is, imho, a lot larger and more dedicated
> > than it was in 1998.  Hell, in 98 I had been simming for most of the
> > decade and still hadn't even purchased my first wheel.

> > I would love to see Papy take another chance with a sim that isn't
> > nascar.  In fact, I think now would be the best time in their history
> > to do it as they've garnered so much respect and attention with the
> > last 3 nascar titles.  You know as well as I do if they released a
> > half-horsepower lawnmower sim that every *** review site on the
> > planet would be going nuts over how great it was and that there would
> > be a huge online community for it.  If Sierra spent a little cash
> > putting kiosks and nice displays for it in wal-mart and electronics
> > boutique and slapped a fat "FROM THE MAKERS OF NASCAR RACING" sticker
> > on it I'm sure it would sell.  Throw a big picture of Mario Andretti
> > on the cover and you're all set, at least in the US.

> > Jason

> Steve, it's posts like this one that make me wish you were writing for a
> major mainstream motorsports publication...except then we'd have to pay
for
> these little pearls!

> :-) don

> > Mild disagreement.  I think one of the reasons we don't have CART to
kick
> > around any more (unless you like abusing dead horses) is that its
> > jack-of-all-trades orientation didn't hunt.  I don't detect much
crossover
> > interest between dirt-track trailer-trash, oval-track low-lifes, and
> > road-racing cogniscenti (ahem).  Long after CART's oval races stopped
> > putting asses in seats, road races like Mid-O were still packing 'em in.
> At
> > its best, IndyCar Racing (as it was then known) was Can-Am with fenders.
> > The one-size-fits-all approach lacks focus, interest, and (this is why
the
> > marketing-savvy sponsors deserted the series in in droves) actionable
> > demographics.  Otherwise, triathalons would outdraw baisbol, fussbol,
and
> > horse-track betting.  After being shepherded by 3 alledged marketing
> > geniuses (Stokkan, Heitzler and Pook), CART is all but dead.  Q.E.D.

> > And I can tell you from personal experience that Mario Andretti can't
draw
> > flies any more.  Brock Yates gave wine from Mario's vinyards the place
of
> > honor in The Cannonball Pub (which is heavy on bench-racing types
swilling
> > brewskis amidst automobilia like the steering wheel from Fangio's Chevy)
> and
> > never sold a single bottle.  Sic transit and all that....

> > > On Wed, 07 Jan 2004 20:32:37 GMT, "Steve Smith"

> > > >You forgot the Greatest *** Franchise of them all: Can-Am!

> > > Oh yeah, I wasn't really going historic.  Historic Can-Am, Trans-Am,
> > > 80's IMSA, etc.  There's a ton of great simulation material out there
> > > waiting for people to use it.

> > > How about late 60's champcar?  Those few years before USAC butchered
> > > the sport when we had Andretti, the Unsers, Foyt, Leonard, etc driving
> > > turbo open wheelers with primitive aero around classic road courses
> > > and ovals.  Not to mention the dirt tracks that were still part of the
> > > championship.  It would appeal to fans of dirt track racing and grand
> > > prix legends in one fell swoop, not to mention the near hysteria that
> > > a good sim with the Indy 500 would cause..  I'm salivating thinking
> > > about running a league where one week I'm sliding an Offy dirt car
> > > around Langhorne, the next I'm piloting a turbo Lotus wedge car around
> > > indy, the next I'm in a Brawner-Hawk at Mosport and St Jovite.

> > > It's surprising to me that after a game like IL-2 became such a
> > > success, no one has had another go at a proper historic racer.  We all
> > > know GPL was a commercial failure, but I think it would be naive to
> > > assume it was due to either the subject matter or the difficulty.  The
> > > racing sim community in 2003 is, imho, a lot larger and more dedicated
> > > than it was in 1998.  Hell, in 98 I had been simming for most of the
> > > decade and still hadn't even purchased my first wheel.

> > > I would love to see Papy take another chance with a sim that isn't
> > > nascar.  In fact, I think now would be the best time in their history
> > > to do it as they've garnered so much respect and attention with the
> > > last 3 nascar titles.  You know as well as I do if they released a
> > > half-horsepower lawnmower sim that every *** review site on the
> > > planet would be going nuts over how great it was and that there would
> > > be a huge online community for it.  If Sierra spent a little cash
> > > putting kiosks and nice displays for it in wal-mart and electronics
> > > boutique and slapped a fat "FROM THE MAKERS OF NASCAR RACING" sticker
> > > on it I'm sure it would sell.  Throw a big picture of Mario Andretti
> > > on the cover and you're all set, at least in the US.

> > > Jason

>The one-size-fits-all approach lacks focus, interest, and (this is why the
>marketing-savvy sponsors deserted the series in in droves) actionable
>demographics.

>Heck with ALMS. How about Japanese Touring Cars? Check them out Thurday
>night on Speed.

> On Wed, 07 Jan 2004 23:21:08 GMT, "Steve Smith"

> >The one-size-fits-all approach lacks focus, interest, and (this is why
the
> >marketing-savvy sponsors deserted the series in in droves) actionable
> >demographics.

> Isn't a little odd that CART has no fanbase yet their biggest events
> draw far more people than the biggest F1 events?

> I still suspect if Tony George hadn't gotten a big head that CART
> would be right there with NASCAR, as it was in the early 90's.

> Jason