rec.autos.simulators

by **Joe** » Sat, 16 Jul 2005 16:14:34

Hi

You are correct. I also said as much with "Papy's practice of
one-patch-per-game" I am glad you agree.
By the way, why did you put the quotes around "version"

You say "most" of the patches were for system specs and "some" were for
gameplay? GOOD FOR YOU! Your grasp of the obvious is impressive!
(By "funky systems specs" I assume you mean correcting code that was causing
lock-ups, desktop drops and the like.)

You say that each and every version of NR was patched. This is true. It is
also true that each and every version of NSR was patched. How, in your mind,
does this make NSR "the exact opposite"?

An opinion many disagree with. There are few who would not acknowledge that
NR2003 is superior to NSR but your "UTTERLY worthless" characterization of
NSR is simple minded. (A pattern emerges.)

In my post I said that the volume of complaints thrown at Papy were about
the same as that now leveled at EA and NSR By what mental process did you
take these statements to mean I think Papy "got off easy"?

I also said that every Papy release "had the advantage of being the best
available at the time" Run this through that mental process of yours and
tell me how you interpret it.

Just where did I imply EA had anything to bragg about?

Are you familier with the term "Straw Man"?

The name "Plowboy" carries with it a stereotype you do little to dispell.

Pay attention while I explain. The term "turds" was introduced by Darius in
the post I replied to. I repeated his term, *put it in quotes* and applied
it to NR2002, NR4, etc NOT to label these as "turds" but only as a mechanism
to point out that these were, like NSR, also inferior to NR2003. You seem to
be the only one in the thread who did not grasp this. In order to avoid such
misunderstandings in the future I suggest you announce your intention to
participate in a thread before you make any actual comments. That way others
involved in the discussion will know to write at a grade level less likely
to cause you the confusion you display throughout your post.

An example of your rapier wit?

In order to be effective, ridicule must be based on and aimed at some
observable aspects of the subject ridiculed. Without this anchor attempts at
ridicule are only pathetic, simple-minded name calling. There are only a
few posts from me in this thread so you should have no trouble at all
providing us with a cut-and-paste of the anchor on which you tie your
attempt at ridicule. Just where did I say anything remotely similar to your
"Here's you"?

Perhaps you would also grace us with an equally clever "Here's Darius" so
you can gibber and giggle at him for saying: "Joe You make some valid
points."

Forgive me Plowboy. I did not realize you are the spokesman for "the rest of
the sim racing community"

If you are saying that NSR (Mongoose Bicycles) is "not bad compared to" and
is "the same dollar price" as NR2003 (Schwin) then yes, that is indeed
"BOLOGNA!!!!"
Just where exactly did I ever state otherwise?

by **Joe** » Sun, 17 Jul 2005 01:37:39

EA did not kill Papy, NASCAR did.
EA may have bought exclusive license for NASCAR but only because NASCAR
decided to *sell* EA exclusive license. EA may have wished Papy gone but it
was NASCAR who granted that wish.

The balance of your post lists some of the reasons NR2003 is bringing in
such high prices while NSR sits in the bargan bin. I have NSR and have seen
each of these and more. You have no argument from me on your assessment of
NSR.

I think we here can all agree that NR2003 is superior to the current NSR. I
think we can also agree that NSR would already be a Papy beater if only the
darn thing worked like it was supposed to. So the question is, will EA fix
the darn code?

NASCAR demanded a LOT of money for that exclusive license and EA paid it. I
look at what EA did with other licenses they hold for football, baseball,
basketball, etc and I cannot believe EA will abandon NSR after only one
version and one patch. If I am wrong my copy of NS2003 is right beside my
copy of NSR and you will find me online near the end of the pack battling
for 18th place while also trying to stay out of the way of the leaders who
are about to lap me. (I said I liked racing, I never said I was good at
it.(-;)

by **Byron Forbe** » Sun, 17 Jul 2005 02:19:18

On my GTR box it is clearly marked - "Distributed by Electronic Arts".
It's all the same arseholes.

Nothing wrong with making a buck - unless your doing it by producing
garbage and packaging that garbage as something other than garbage. Simbin,
EA, 10tacle are a bunch of arseholes taking advantage of a non policed
market.

The arseholes handling the licensing for Nascar and F1 are exactly the
same - no interest in good products, just money. This will continue until
someone sticks their boot in their arse and keeps it in their arse until
they learn to do as they're told. That's the only way to deal with
disobedient little children.

by **Larr** » Sun, 17 Jul 2005 05:48:31

I think it's forgotten that Each version of NRx, once patched, had NO
SHOWSTOPPERS.

You can't say that about any of the EA Games.

-Larry

"Joe" <NOmejoe...@SPAMcox.net> wrote in message

news:6kJBe.64222$R21.47724@lakeread06...

> "Plowboy" <DoNotre...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
> news:AYzBe.70805$%Z2.67811@lakeread08...
>> JOE, JOE, HELLO?

> Hi

>> Each and every "version" of NR that papy put out the door was
>> specifically eventually patched,

> You are correct. I also said as much with "Papy's practice of
> one-patch-per-game" I am glad you agree.
> By the way, why did you put the quotes around "version"

>>most of the patches were for funky systems specs some were for gameplay

> You say "most" of the patches were for system specs and "some" were for
> gameplay? GOOD FOR YOU! Your grasp of the obvious is impressive!
> (By "funky systems specs" I assume you mean correcting code that was
> causing lock-ups, desktop drops and the like.)

>>, however NSR it is the exact opposite.

> You say that each and every version of NR was patched. This is true. It is
> also true that each and every version of NSR was patched. How, in your
> mind, does this make NSR "the exact opposite"?

>> They shipped 'out the door' something that is UTTERLY worthless as not
>> only a sim, but for multiplayer.

> An opinion many disagree with. There are few who would not acknowledge
> that NR2003 is superior to NSR but your "UTTERLY worthless"
> characterization of NSR is simple minded. (A pattern emerges.)

>> Papyrus might have gotten off easy, in your mind because the not only
>> built the damn ruler but set the bar higher with every release and or
>> patch, what can EA honeslty bragg about?

> In my post I said that the volume of complaints thrown at Papy were about
> the same as that now leveled at EA and NSR By what mental process did you
> take these statements to mean I think Papy "got off easy"?

> I also said that every Papy release "had the advantage of being the best
> available at the time" Run this through that mental process of yours and
> tell me how you interpret it.

> Just where did I imply EA had anything to bragg about?

> Are you familier with the term "Straw Man"?

>>I know this is what you mean when you post that people popped money out
>>for Papy "turds?" lol I find that very funny.

> The name "Plowboy" carries with it a stereotype you do little to dispell.

> Pay attention while I explain. The term "turds" was introduced by Darius
> in the post I replied to. I repeated his term, *put it in quotes* and
> applied it to NR2002, NR4, etc NOT to label these as "turds" but only as a
> mechanism to point out that these were, like NSR, also inferior to NR2003.
> You seem to be the only one in the thread who did not grasp this. In order
> to avoid such misunderstandings in the future I suggest you announce your
> intention to participate in a thread before you make any actual comments.
> That way others involved in the discussion will know to write at a grade
> level less likely to cause you the confusion you display throughout your
> post.

>> Here's you...
>> "Uhm, UUUUHHHHM , well it is like a great racing game just like and as
>> great as 'Need For Speed' but you go around a circular track..."
>> Zero support. BTW I have tried most driving games, even EA's Bullshit,
>> and on the PC, what you playing, Nintendo?

> An example of your rapier wit?

> In order to be effective, ridicule must be based on and aimed at some
> observable aspects of the subject ridiculed. Without this anchor attempts
> at ridicule are only pathetic, simple-minded name calling. There are only
> a few posts from me in this thread so you should have no trouble at all
> providing us with a cut-and-paste of the anchor on which you tie your
> attempt at ridicule. Just where did I say anything remotely similar to
> your "Here's you"?

> Perhaps you would also grace us with an equally clever "Here's Darius" so
> you can gibber and giggle at him for saying: "Joe You make some valid
> points."

>> Here's the rest of the sim racing community,
>> "Need For Speed?" That is like saying Mongoose Bicycles (in walmart) are
>> not bad compared to Schwin's at the bicycle shop, for the same dollar
>> price"
>> BOLOGNA!!!!.

> Forgive me Plowboy. I did not realize you are the spokesman for "the rest
> of the sim racing community"

> If you are saying that NSR (Mongoose Bicycles) is "not bad compared to"
> and is "the same dollar price" as NR2003 (Schwin) then yes, that is indeed
> "BOLOGNA!!!!"
> Just where exactly did I ever state otherwise?

>> Joe enlightened us with:
>>> How much money did users drop on such "turds" as NR2002, NR4, etc
>>> along the years-long rocky road that ended with NR2003?

>>> While NR2003 may be way ahead of NSR Papy's lead shrinks when NSR is
>>> stacked up against earlier Papy releases such as NR2002, NASCAR4,
>>> etc. Each of these had the advantage of being the best available at
>>> the time but each of these still had glaring faults that propted
>>> shrill condemnations that sound remarkably like those now heaped upon
>>> NSR.
>>> The seeming eternal wait for EA's promised "parade of patches" does
>>> not mean another patch is not on the way any more than did the
>>> equally eternal wait for a patch from Papy. The appearent
>>> impossibility of getting any word at all from EA about future patches
>>> (if any) is remarkably similar to the stony silence that was Papy's
>>> non-reply to the pleadings of its fans. Both Papy then and EA now
>>> seem content to ignore fans and let them stew in their own jucies
>>> wondering if/when a future patch will fix one or another glaring
>>> fault (remember wall-riding?).
>>> Assuming that the one patch EA did release is the only patch and such
>>> things as are still broken will remain broken until "NSR2" hits the
>>> market; will this not also equal Papy's practice of
>>> one-patch-per-game? The current running joke in NSR forums that "EA
>>> will be realeasing the next patch as NSR2 and will sell for $39.95"
>>> originated in the Papy forums but with "Papy" in place of "EA".

>>> Goggle reviews of NR2003, NR2002, NR4, etc and count the number of
>>> comments along the lines of "In the new version Papy FINALLY fixed
>>> "this" long standing fault but "that other trouble" still plagues the
>>> sim."
>>> Are there any here who doubt that Papy *could* have patched NR2002 to
>>> equal NR2003? Did Papy "screw" us when they chose to call the NR2002
>>> patch NR2003 and sell us the patch for $49.95. Shoving the "screw" a
>>> little deeper into the fans, what possible reason did Papy have for
>>> "screwing" us out of NR2002's Darrell Waltrip narrated "Track
>>> Tours"? The Papy fanbois took the elimination of the Track Tours as
>>> an opportunity to puff themselves up and present themselves as NASCAR
>>> GODS who's exalted expertise rendered the Waltrip tours an insult to
>>> their knowledge and skill but I somehow think Papy had a different
>>> motive for eliminating the Waltrip tours than worshipful deference to
>>> the over-inflated egos of this self-proclaimed pantheon.

>>> While all of this is little help to the current incarnation of NSR it
>>> does lend some reason for hope that NSR has a future.Whatever NSR's
>>> current shortcomings there are few who would deny that the current
>>> code is a potential Papy beater. There is no need for EA to start
>>> from scratch, they need only make improvements on the code they
>>> have.The fact that NR2003 is selling for so much should be a clue to
>>> EA that there are a lot of folks willing to throw a lot of money at
>>> them if the needed improvements are made. I find it hard to believe
>>> that EA paid NASCAR all that money for the name only to let NSR die
>>> after one version and one patch.
>>> It may well be that NSR will never equal NR2003 and that NR2003 will
>>> become the next "Grand Prix Legends" as the best available year after
>>> year after year but I think it is a little too early to place any
>>> bets.

by **Daru** » Sun, 17 Jul 2005 06:26:12

I'm not sure where the hate mail for GTR came from, as this WAS a
NSR/NR2003 thread, but I have no problem with GTR. What's yours?

As for the licensing authorities for F1 and NASCAR not interested in
good products, I guess I'll have to step up and let you in on a dirty
little secret......come closer.....closer now......a little
more......EVERYONE DOES IT!!!!!!!!! If "it" <happens> to be a good
product, it's a bonus. What is important is that it SELLS. And EA being
a marketing powerhouse, they SELL A LOT OF CRAP. No matter if it cars,
VCR's, clothing, rugs, whatever, quality is not the priority any
longer, QUANTITY is. If we want to start a "back in MY day, products
lasted for 100 years" thread, perhaps there is a "Made in the USA"
usenet group out there.

The question now returns to the original topic, (sort of): how many
copies of NSR did they need to sell to justify more work on it and thus
further patches? Judging by how fast the price fell out on NSR at the
big name retailers near me, not a whole lot. Therefore, the "entry
price" of $50+ for NR2003 IS the price that must be paid to gain entry
to the true "King of Ovals".

by **Daru** » Sun, 17 Jul 2005 06:27:03

HUH?

by **Byron Forbe** » Sun, 17 Jul 2005 14:47:32

You must be insane.

Thanks for that utterly worthless, pointless lesson in the obvious.

What crap! They need to make a certain profit to "justify" patching a
game to make it work properly do they?

What they need buddy, is a huge boot in their arse that continues to
boot their arse until -

a) it's fixed
b) they learn to not release games that need fundamental finishing in the
first place.

by **Daru** » Mon, 18 Jul 2005 03:45:51

First off, I ain't your "buddy" in any sense. Second, I'd like to thank
you for your eloquent reply to the GTR question. Rather than post ANY
kind of sensible response about your problems, you accuse of me mental
illness. Nope, sorry, wrong there too. Continuing, no, I didn't say
they needed to make a profit to offer up a patch, I said that they need
to sell product, period. Let's use a simple example (as that is
probably one you could handle). If EA produced 100 copies of NSR, but
only 20 sold, would it make ANY sense (to a reasonable person, leave
yourself out for this one) to patch a product that only 20% of their
target audience purchased, regardless of how "Bad" the product has been
received by the 20 users? NO, of course not. Finally, it's sad to see
that such an intellectual like yourself feels that "arse" kicking is
the best way to resolve a computer software/dev problem. Here's an
idea: How about I put my size 13 Corcoran II Field Boot so far up your
"arse" that you could*** a shine onto the toe? It would accomplish 2
things at once, you'd STFU and I'd have shiny boots! What a deal! Have
a pleasant weekend!

by **Byron Forbe** » Mon, 18 Jul 2005 18:42:34

You need to get a bib to catch this stuff b4 it ends up on the net!

by **Larr** » Wed, 20 Jul 2005 05:33:14

The words GTR are not in my post.

-Larry

by **Daru** » Wed, 20 Jul 2005 05:46:58

You're right. You're only post was "I think it's forgotten that Each
version of NRx, once patched, had NO
SHOWSTOPPERS.

You can't say that about any of the EA Games.

-Larry"

and I still have no idea what you are talking about. Thus my reply from
earlier "HUH?" still applies. So now you have TWO posts that make
absolutely no sense.

by **jason moye** » Thu, 21 Jul 2005 05:45:43

> I think it's forgotten that Each version of NRx, once patched, had NO
> SHOWSTOPPERS.

I dunno if you'd consider them showstoppers, but the physics bugs in
n2003 that survived the patch are pretty bad.

- RF tire temps on road courses
- trick setups on superspeedways
- low drag/grip levels in cup/bgn physics

by **Plowbo** » Thu, 21 Jul 2005 06:23:49

Joe,

Ok, I forgot about this argument I started with you, LOL...

Joe enlightened us with:

> "Plowboy" <DoNotre...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
> news:AYzBe.70805$%Z2.67811@lakeread08...
>> JOE, JOE, HELLO?

> Hi

>> Each and every "version" of NR that papy put out the door was
>> specifically eventually patched,

FWIW, even back to NR04, When the patch was done, the GD game worked, to the
reasonable ability of the game & the rules and the representation it was
attempting to make. Black flags, passing under yellow wrecks, spotters, pit
road violations, driving conditions all that taken into account. This is
so unlike what EA produced. IMHO they spent more time racing a car at the
track than they did writing the code and testing the game? the only
solution is a complete code rewrite. Not my fault, but it is true, wont
work as established, of the rules in place before the beta was even out for
private testing, only a bout 1 in 3 are done even close. in fact that is
probably exactly why they quit fixing it, I think they have realized it is
beyond fixing... sorry. my guess is, that if they continue with this game,
next
release of any kind will be NSR2006. They proven this with their other
titles. what more proof do ya need?
last projection was at A minimum 3 patches away from a usable product...
papy's stuff was usable, might have had a glitch in scoring, or drawing the
cars or collisions (depending on your view of how important those are) but
the concept of the game, gameplay and online play were proven to run since
the 1st version (you ever hear of the online beta testing referred to as
Nascar Racing's Hawaii?) then came the1st place even have multiplayer (TEN
gaming) then one of the 1st few games to freely host open lobbies for
customers.

> You are correct. I also said as much with "Papy's practice of
> one-patch-per-game" I am glad you agree.
> By the way, why did you put the quotes around "version"

Because my point was like Madden football for christ's sake, or everything
else EA produces, they dont fix shit, they re release with what the
community already does on its own on this Papyrus tittle. for cryin out
loud, if madden or tiger woods could not even keep score if you kicked a
field goal, or sacked the qb, or if sinking a 5 over par shot on the green
from the fringe more or less crashed the game for you, you would be livid!!!
you dont think a bullshit black flag by passing a car that has crashed into
the wall at full speed with 12 other cars, is a unbeliveable serious bug?

Shit man, I mean, give some credit where credit is due, the fact that at one
track the pace car might act up, or if you followed too close to another car
as he pitted and gave you a BF, are workable & avoidable bugs, but oly way
to not get a BF while racing NSR is to sit in the pits, sorry.... IMHO.

>> most of the patches were for funky systems specs some were for
>> gameplay

> You say "most" of the patches were for system specs and "some" were
> for gameplay? GOOD FOR YOU! Your grasp of the obvious is impressive!
> (By "funky systems specs" I assume you mean correcting code that was
> causing lock-ups, desktop drops and the like.)

No, just one example for you, and admittely worse back then than now, bu not
unlike now there were 2 competing (3 if you count Microsoft's
dirctx) graffix card languages used to draw games to the monitors, of them
each were new, they supported and half of the 'specs' for each, there was
one standard (remember the OPENGL?) and one MFG of cards (voodoo) decide to
build their own custom language. They were not fully used, documented, let
alone debugged, plus you had MS monkeying with everything, Back then, you
didn't necessarily have the latest and greatest everytime a game came along,
for crying out loud my 1st 3 pc's cost about 3 grand each without even a OS
on my 1st 2. Toss into the mix the adware and crap 90% of the gaming
population have with their pc's it is a wonder some games can even run!

Oh and some MS's History for you... this doesn't even include the long list
of DOS you could buy in the same time frames...
1983Microsoft Windows was announced November, 1983 and sells for $100.00.
1985Microsoft Windows 1.0 is introduced in November, 1985 and is initially
sold for $100.00.
1987Microsoft Windows 2.0 was released December 9, 1987 and is initially
sold for $100.00.
1987Microsoft Windows/386 or Windows 386 is introduced December 9, 1987 and
is initially sold for $100.00.
1988Microsoft Windows/286 or Windows 286 is introduced June, 1988 and is
initially sold for $100.00.
1990Microsoft Windows 3.0 was released May, 22 1990. Microsoft Windows 3.0
full version was priced at $149.95 and the upgrade version was priced at
$79.95.
1991Microsoft Windows 3.0 or Windows 3.0a with multimedia was released
October, 1991.
1992Microsoft Windows 3.1 was released April, 1992 and sells more than 1
Million copies within the first two months of its release.
1992Microsoft Windows for Workgroups 3.1 was released October, 1992.
1993Microsoft Windows NT 3.1 was released August, 1993.
1993The number of licensed users of Microsoft Windows now totals more then
25 Million.
1994Microsoft Windows for Workgroups 3.11 was released February, 1994

So now today, what are we on, like direct x revision version 23, since
inception?

In this argument.... I think it is not fair in reality to hold everyone to
a higher standard than you hold your own arguments, at least I can be
relative and correct when I said in the 1st 2 versions windows itself
compromised most of the problems, or DOS versions, but you prolly don't know
that since you prolly been gaming since what, win98 (sorry it is a guess)?
do you know my 1st PC with any version of windows, was my 2nd or 3rd PC?
and that the version I had was version 2.0 that POS operating system
wouldn't
run Nascar, but 3.1 did finally so who's fault? I don't think it was Papy's
sorry...

>> , however NSR it is the exact opposite.

> You say that each and every version of NR was patched. This is true.
> It is also true that each and every version of NSR was patched. How,
> in your mind, does this make NSR "the exact opposite"?

NSR has not been patched other than to say "technically" it has because they
said so, they fixed what, how a couple things are drawn? did they fix
multiplayer? Fix the flags (offline) or anything? no!!!!

did they attempt to yet? no. did they make the game usable with the
patch as it is? no, so how you call it a patch? you do because it was
called a patch. shit, the aftermarket cars and stuff that used to be found
online like the US-Pits would be called Patches 'technically' by your
definition. yet I don't have to have the patch to go online NsR AFAIK.

>> They shipped 'out the door' something that is UTTERLY worthless as
>> not only a sim, but for multiplayer.

> An opinion many disagree with. There are few who would not
> acknowledge that NR2003 is superior to NSR but your "UTTERLY
> worthless" characterization of NSR is simple minded. (A pattern
> emerges.)

Not worthless as what? I mean technically my 1st non PC computer (circa
1977 which is a TANDY 1000) is not WORHTLESS, I mean I could use it, if
nothing else as a boat anchor... You cannot race online UNLESS you
equivocally deny any and all standards that are out for gameplay, at that
point, I say fine, you don't care it doesn't matter, but I hate it. BTW I
liked some of NSR, do I bother to race it? No, not where there are much
better alternatives to the POS.

>> Papyrus might have gotten off easy, in your mind because the not only
>> built the damn ruler but set the bar higher with every release and or
>> patch, what can EA honestly bragg about?

> In my post I said that the volume of complaints thrown at Papy were
> about the same as that now leveled at EA and NSR By what mental
> process did you take these statements to mean I think Papy "got off
> easy"?
> I also said that every Papy release "had the advantage of being the
> best available at the time" Run this through that mental process of
> yours and tell me how you interpret it.

Look, I had to make an assumption cause you and I aren't siskell and or
ebert
on TV, arguing across the aisle in real time, I also used that 'analogy and
statement' to impart some information to you as to why I might say it is
thumbs up or down, to me it is down, I've documented my side although thinly
here in this thread, as I could prolly write a thick book nobody wants to
read about why I say what I say...

> Just where did I imply EA had anything to bragg about?

> Are you familier with the term "Straw Man"?

>> I know this is what you mean when you post that people popped money
>> out for Papy "turds?" lol I find that very funny.

> The name "Plowboy" carries with it a stereotype you do little to
> dispell.

I finish this diviersion below...

> Pay attention while I explain. The term "turds" was introduced by
> Darius in the post I replied to. I repeated his term, *put it in
> quotes* and applied it to NR2002, NR4, etc NOT to label these as
> "turds" but only as a mechanism to point out that these were, like
> NSR, also inferior to NR2003. You seem to be the only one in the
> thread who did not grasp this. In order to avoid such
> misunderstandings in the future I suggest you announce your intention
> to participate in a thread before you make any actual comments. That
> way others involved in the discussion will know to write at a grade
> level less likely to cause you the confusion you display throughout
> your post.

>> Here's you...
>> "Uhm, UUUUHHHHM , well it is like a great racing game just like and
>> as great as 'Need For Speed' but you go around a circular track..."
>> Zero support. BTW I have tried most driving games, even EA's
>> Bullshit, and on the PC, what you playing, Nintendo?

> An example of your rapier wit?

I thought it was funny as I think your comebacks are witty, ...

read more »

by **Plowbo** » Fri, 22 Jul 2005 06:12:12

hell, there are bugs in the NASA simulator, Ill bet you, but the frikken
machine can at least do what it is supposed to be able to do, test the skill
of the pilots in a set criteria of realism, you cant do what NSR says or
implies that you and or up to what, 20 other drivers can race with the
nascar rules and physics... yada yada, does it even come close (hell I
wouldnt nitpick a tire bug, but shazam man, open difs, and the flag bugs, I
mean bad bugs, not the little "need a human' there to decide the penalties
merrrits, that and you cannot undo (server commands) like you do in NRXX...

again all about degree of nits to pick...

jason moyer enlightened us with:

>> I think it's forgotten that Each version of NRx, once patched, had NO
>> SHOWSTOPPERS.

> I dunno if you'd consider them showstoppers, but the physics bugs in
> n2003 that survived the patch are pretty bad.

> - RF tire temps on road courses
> - trick setups on superspeedways
> - low drag/grip levels in cup/bgn physics

by **jason moye** » Sat, 23 Jul 2005 00:04:41

Oh, I agree. I wouldn't spend $30 on NSR after playing the demo. I
have no idea how the open diff bug slipped through beta testing when I
noticed it within 3 laps at Kansas in the demo.

rec.autos.simulators

NR2003 entry fee $100. How many new guys pay it?

NR2003 entry fee $100. How many new guys pay it?

NR2003 entry fee $100. How many new guys pay it?

NR2003 entry fee $100. How many new guys pay it?

NR2003 entry fee $100. How many new guys pay it?

NR2003 entry fee $100. How many new guys pay it?

NR2003 entry fee $100. How many new guys pay it?

NR2003 entry fee $100. How many new guys pay it?

NR2003 entry fee $100. How many new guys pay it?

NR2003 entry fee $100. How many new guys pay it?

NR2003 entry fee $100. How many new guys pay it?

NR2003 entry fee $100. How many new guys pay it?

NR2003 entry fee $100. How many new guys pay it?

NR2003 entry fee $100. How many new guys pay it?

NR2003 entry fee $100. How many new guys pay it?

NR2003 entry fee $100. How many new guys pay it?