rec.autos.simulators

Yes, and on slicks, and with slow steering ratios... a lower
power/weight ratio... etc.

--Dave

PS -- Toni, great quote! :-)

cut it

--
Dave Schwabe
The Aussie Toad -- Grand Prix Legends & Brabham site
http://www.racesimcentral.net/~schwabe

I have to concur, Chris... I jumped in at Bristol with 105% just for
grins, started at the rear and DEMOLISHED the (AI) field in a short
race. The car is so easy to throw around... I think GPL is great
sensitivity training for N2, not the reverse.

The GPL car feels ALIVE, while the N2 car feels very PLASTIC...

N2 is still BIG FUN, but the driving model feels like, well, it's a
generation behind GPL! ;-)

-_dave

--
Dave Schwabe
The Aussie Toad -- Grand Prix Legends & Brabham site
http://users.wi.net/~schwabe

    Don't forget one BIG difference: there are a LOT more fans of Nascar
than there are of 1967 "Indy" cars.  Nascar's a lot more flexible to addon
to than GPL.  As we all know there are THREE different series included (not
just one), there are a LOT more tracks (tho' most ARE oval), a LOT more
carset/truckset patches, etc.
    It's MY belief that if Sierra learns how to market it to INCLUDE all the
stuff on the 'net that can be (or will be) "added" to it to expand it, I
think it'll do better.  As it is, if Sierra promoted more of the GPL sites
that're out there (or at least mentioned them on the packaging) I think
sales could go up exponentially.  I think most people that HAVEN'T bought it
aren't aware of the full capabilities of the game.  If Sierra makes a big
production about all the different carsets, utilities, etc. I think it'll
prove to be a BIG seller.
    They should also make more of a production out of the "arcade"
capabilities of NR99 (and NR3).  Certainly most reviewers (at least for the
N2 series) rave on and on about the "sim" capabilities of it with only
brushing mention of being able to "dumb down" the AI and crank up braking
and steering help for those that are more interested in a NasRev sort of
game.
    I believe that MARKETING will either sell it, or kill it.

"Gunner"
ORSA #78 Navy Dodge truck

Heheheh you don't want to go there with me :)

In regards to the arcade mode, it probably isn't too "Easy" for the
first time user which is what market IMHO will be purchasing this
product over the next 5 years.

The KEY will be the success of having those first time users take the
game and continue to use it.  Sell add ons, more tracks etc....Get
online, use NROS etc...

But if N2 is easy, then why do we still see sooo many people on NROS
that struggle at some tracks 3-5 years after the original physics engine
was created?  I would assume that if the physics engine was that easy we
would see people running the same speeds as you.   OH, I forgot they
already are ROFLMAO.... Teasing BTW :)

Bill / Amish on TEN

TRUE TRUE, Oval racing is more SETUP vs. Driving Skill.

Road Racing is more Driver Skill vs. Setup.

Bill / Amish on TEN

That is exactly what I am thinking.  It is CRUCIAL for the long term
success of this title to allow the "Newbies" the ability to succeed and
"GROW" into the sim.

Bill / Amish on TEN

P.S.  Here are a FEW things that were NOT in the recent BETA I was able
to watch and discuss with the Papy Design Team while I was in Daytona
for the NROS finals.

1.  NO "S"peed Key
2.  Limited Arcade View
3.  NO F4 or F5 keys (Tire Wear and Tire Temps)
4.  NO F2+Enter

These are a few things that may or may not have made it into the final
version.  I know there are some of you out there that will/would say...
"Hey the WC don't have that then why should we?".  Bottom line, the end
sim user just needs choices.  You take them away and you just hurt sales
IMHO.

Bill / Amish on TEN

Dave you really need to try that online.  Running in NROS with a top
level field at Bristol is a totally different experiece.  But I do
agree, that the "Feel" of the cars are totally different.  You guys will
prolly be right as I will prolly enjoy N2+GPL Physics much more.  I am
just concerned that for the masses it could hurt sales and then see the
death of our game.  Especially if they don't have "Choices" for the
masses.

Bill / Amish on TEN

It is SOOO hard for me to explain because the majority of people that
use or have used N2 are not looking at the physics model like I do.
Being at or close to the top of the NROS means VAST hours of testing.
To make a top of the line Bristol Car per example (Top Speed 126.5 and
go 100 laps of 125) takes hundreds of hours of practice and knowledge
about the cars.  You can't "Throw" the car arround and expect it to last
and perform like that.  We have 6 guys on our team and each of us on
average have spent 500+ hours per month developing our cars.  The BIG
question I must pose... If the physics engine is that "Easy" why does it
take that many hours to find good cars and or get "good" at this sim?

Note:  500 hours is documented through our TEN billing.

Heheheh, you wouldn't want to go there Chris with me... You know better
:)

You probably would whip me as bad at GPL in those yuckie roadies as I
would whip you in the "Easy" version of N2 :)

Bill / Amish on TEN

Bill Bollinger wrote

So your saying that having good laptimes on road course on the NROS is more
pure skill and less setup ? That people can't do 124's at the Glen, 93's at
Sears Point and 130's at Bull Run without the driving techniques and
abilities ?

Thanks Bill, I always knew you understood my NROS road course talents and
driving skills (heh getting back on you)  ;-)

-= Fran?ois Mnard <ymenard/Nas-Frank>
-= NROS Nascar sanctioned Guide http://www.nros.com/
-= SimRacing Online http://www.simracing.com/
-= Official mentally retarded guy of r.a.s.
-= May the Downforce be with you...

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realise
how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

schwabe wrote

Im challenging you to get on the NROS schwabe ;-)

Nascar Stock-car racing needs technical racing skills but alot of
preparation before and after the race. Both for setup and pit strategy/tyre
wear.  I was teasing Bill when I said N2 is easy, because there is subtle
physics in it that is very had to master and takes thousands of laps to
learn it.  Controlling a drift slide at Darlington doing 170mph laps or
powersliding off Turn2 at Nazareth and doing a 125mph lap is as difficult
and challenging as anything else.  the NROS is a complete new ballpark.
Nobody can say they have mastered N2 until they reach the top10 on the NROS.

It's easy to be good, but difficult to be great.

-= Fran?ois Mnard <ymenard/Nas-Frank>
-= NROS Nascar sanctioned Guide http://www.nros.com/
-= SimRacing Online http://www.simracing.com/
-= Official mentally retarded guy of r.a.s.
-= May the Downforce be with you...

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realise
how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

Hi Frank... (sorry for the english translation :-) but it's easier for
my feeble mind to spell...)

Well, NROS would be fun to try... I love VROC to death, so it could be
great. But I have to admit I'm spoiled by GPL and it's lovely physics
engine... plus VROC is free! :-)

I guess I wasn't clear enough on my reply... sorry. When I said easy, I
mean "easy," as in "I can floor it in any gear and keep the back end in
check." I was referring to the simple act of keeping the car under
control, as compared to GPL. I may catch flak for this, but IMHO, the
GPL physics model is just unparalleled in terms of realism.

But like you allude to, going fast over a long distance and at an
ultra-competitive pace, well, that's the same probably for any sim. It's
tough at the top! ;-)

I do love N2... especially the TPTCC patch. Cutting a TOP lap is not
ultra easy... but controlling the car feels much easier after mastering
GPL... that's all my point was.... :-)

-_Dave

--
Dave Schwabe
The Aussie Toad -- Grand Prix Legends & Brabham site
http://users.wi.net/~schwabe

Heheheheh, I will have to CONCEDE to you and schletter that ROAD RACING
is more driver skill.  However, in oval racing PART of the skill is
understanding EXACTLY what the car is doing and how to use that talent
and transfer that into setup changes.  My skill is in that.  You
"Roadies" are obviously good at driving the car, but I am better at
taking the information my brain gets and making adjustments to the car.
You can see exactly that in my skill ranking or performance in oval vs
road racing.  

You had said in the chat rooms before that N3 will be more driving skill
vs. setup and I say that in the long run that IF N3 is a realistic
physics model which you and I have discussed isn't 100% accurate that on
a OVAL track that SETUPS will be even MORE important than N2.

Oval Racing puts more emphasis on SETUPS
Road Raing put more emphais on DRIVER

We can all say how good the GPL Physics Engine is... But the one
question I would pose is.... WHY is the setups being designed that are
the quickest NOT realistic?

Bill / Amish on TEN

The skill/speed level of computer drivers also needs to be in-game
adjustable. But I'm sure Papy has laearned that since every GPL review
(even the glowing ones) mentioned it.

Joe

Heheheheh, I will have to CONCEDE to you and schletter that ROAD RACING

Wooohoo. :)  There are lots of carry over in both...both require some
modicrum of skill to race at high levels and both require being able to
understand what the car is doing at any particular time and how setups can
change that.

I wonder.  I think that they will definetly be as important in N3 as N2.  N3
will be much easier to drive (relatively) than GPL just due to the cars
themselves...I don't know that it will be even more important.

Actually they are very realistic....within the framework of the GPL physics
universe. :)  Since GPL or any other racing game can not hope to model every
physical law that is at work on a real racing car, they only model a subset
of our real physical laws.  And even the model of that subset may not be
100% correct either. :)

Hehehehhe, that is exactly what I say to people that complain about the
"realism" of the n2 physics engine.  From what I have gathered over time
in N2 is that the Front to Rear, Cross and Camber is about the only
things that are fairly accurate.  Havn't spent enough time with the GPL
physics engine to say what things are being modeled properly and what
things are not.

Bill / Amish on TEN