rec.autos.simulators

by **Tony** » Sun, 28 Feb 1999 04:00:00

>>I think GPL is great. I just don't quite understand why people feel
>>so threatened by the thought of it containing difficulty options, as
>>long as the highest levels are there. To use your initial analogy,
>>Falcon 4 is hailed as the most complex, realistic flight sim ever -
>>yet it has quite a range of switchable difficulty optiions. None of
>>the ultra-hard core flight sim fanatics are screaming that this makes
>>Falcon 4 a "Novalogic arcade sim".

> I was gonna' stay away from this thread but..........
> Falcon 4.0 has 161 keystroke variables that you use to fly with (this
>does not include the basic "steering" and throttle controls) I think
>some scaleability is in order. GPL has 10 input variables that I can
>think of. It DOES have training cars and "help" for the shifting ,
>braking, and throttle. I don't know what else anyone would want.
> That having been said : T. Liam McDonald was spot on with the
>comment about GPL trying to recreate a 3d activity in a 2d world and
>about how it was probably more difficult than driving the real thing.
>I have felt this way about all of the driving sims that I have tried.
>In other words if you put a real 67 Cooper GP car on a real track and
>then set GPL on a computer right next to it (and also assume I have
>never seen/used either of them) I bet you I would be better ,at least
>initially ,at driving the real GP car around the circuit. (if anyone
>has a 67 cooper and would like to test this theory , I am available <
>G>) Now there is no way I could ever do laps as fast as I do in GPL (
>I'd be long dead by now) There just isn't the same level of feed back
>in a simulation. Try racing GPL without the sound on and you'll see
>what I mean.
> So to me all of the argument about realism is silly.(see the "what
>about rain "thread for example , geeesh!) There IS a level of realism
>that is just too high given the environment that we are currently
>using too create simulations in. GPL is a good compromise of realism
>and usability but ,only if you are complete racing "hack". If you are
>not there is always F1RS.
> (Daisy slips on the Nomex suit and awaits his punishment)

I have to agree with you on this.

A while back (I can't remember the thread or who posted it), someone went on
and on in response to a guy who said that GPL was too hard. He basically let
this guy have it with both barrels for saying that you can't fell anything,
and that makes GPL very hard.

Anyway, the guy went on and on saying things like, 'how can you say that?!
GPL has the best FELL of any racing sim ever!' I was very tempted to ask the
guy where he got his moving base simulator from, and did he hack the code of
GPL to get the base to work right.

Like I said, I agree with you: I think GPL is asking you to do with only
your eyes (and a little bit your hearing), what you normally do with all
five of your senses. It seems to me like they're almost asking you to so the
equivalent of air to air combat by only looking at the instrument panel. I
suppose you could do that to, but I'm not sure how much fun it would be.

TB

by **Tony** » Mon, 01 Mar 1999 04:00:00

That's nice to hear ... I bet your stereo tastes great too.

TB

>So then dont race a computer game, go do it in real life! Well about the
>feel part, gpl has the best feel of any racing game out there, they never
>give you feedback with the steering wheel and the***pit moving around and
>once you play it enough, you learn which way the car is going and which way
>you are pointed and can really sense the loose and pushness. I must admit,
>real life is much better because of all the feedback you get from your ***
>and the Gs that are put on you but of all the games Ive played, gpl has the
>most feedback it can give a person. Even if it is very limited, and the
>physics model is consistent and predictable unlike others, it handles
>realistically so you know how it should react and it normally reacts that
>way. So for modern day capabilities, gpl is highly sofisticated.

>Jesse

>>>>I think GPL is great. I just don't quite understand why people feel
>>>>so threatened by the thought of it containing difficulty options, as
>>>>long as the highest levels are there. To use your initial analogy,
>>>>Falcon 4 is hailed as the most complex, realistic flight sim ever -
>>>>yet it has quite a range of switchable difficulty optiions. None of
>>>>the ultra-hard core flight sim fanatics are screaming that this makes
>>>>Falcon 4 a "Novalogic arcade sim".

>>> I was gonna' stay away from this thread but..........
>>> Falcon 4.0 has 161 keystroke variables that you use to fly with (this
>>>does not include the basic "steering" and throttle controls) I think
>>>some scaleability is in order. GPL has 10 input variables that I can
>>>think of. It DOES have training cars and "help" for the shifting ,
>>>braking, and throttle. I don't know what else anyone would want.
>>> That having been said : T. Liam McDonald was spot on with the
>>>comment about GPL trying to recreate a 3d activity in a 2d world and
>>>about how it was probably more difficult than driving the real thing.
>>>I have felt this way about all of the driving sims that I have tried.
>>>In other words if you put a real 67 Cooper GP car on a real track and
>>>then set GPL on a computer right next to it (and also assume I have
>>>never seen/used either of them) I bet you I would be better ,at least
>>>initially ,at driving the real GP car around the circuit. (if anyone
>>>has a 67 cooper and would like to test this theory , I am available <
>>>G>) Now there is no way I could ever do laps as fast as I do in GPL (
>>>I'd be long dead by now) There just isn't the same level of feed back
>>>in a simulation. Try racing GPL without the sound on and you'll see
>>>what I mean.
>>> So to me all of the argument about realism is silly.(see the "what
>>>about rain "thread for example , geeesh!) There IS a level of realism
>>>that is just too high given the environment that we are currently
>>>using too create simulations in. GPL is a good compromise of realism
>>>and usability but ,only if you are complete racing "hack". If you are
>>>not there is always F1RS.
>>> (Daisy slips on the Nomex suit and awaits his punishment)

>>I have to agree with you on this.

>>A while back (I can't remember the thread or who posted it), someone went
>on
>>and on in response to a guy who said that GPL was too hard. He basically
>let
>>this guy have it with both barrels for saying that you can't fell
anything,
>>and that makes GPL very hard.

>>Anyway, the guy went on and on saying things like, 'how can you say that?!
>>GPL has the best FELL of any racing sim ever!' I was very tempted to ask
>the
>>guy where he got his moving base simulator from, and did he hack the code
>of
>>GPL to get the base to work right.

>>Like I said, I agree with you: I think GPL is asking you to do with only
>>your eyes (and a little bit your hearing), what you normally do with all
>>five of your senses. It seems to me like they're almost asking you to so
>the
>>equivalent of air to air combat by only looking at the instrument panel. I
>>suppose you could do that to, but I'm not sure how much fun it would be.

>>TB

by **Brett Resch** » Mon, 01 Mar 1999 04:00:00

Hi Tony,

Your point is completely correct, and impossible to argue against.
However, when speaking of sims in RAS, it seems that "feel" takes on
an esoteric meaning that does not necessarily relate to the sense of
touch. Given the fact that this sense was, until recently, a
non-factor in sims, I think one could relate "feel" to how a sim acts
relative to how one would expect its real life counterpart to act.

Consider your quote below: "That's nice to hear..." You may, or may
not, have written that phrase tongue-in-cheek to make your point, but
many people write the same thing in posts. We don't really "hear"
anyone's post, but we all understand the intent of the phrase.

With this understood, it makes perfect sense to say that GPL has
excellent "feel" in comparison to other sims, even though one can not
really "feel" anything.

With the emergence of force feedback technology, "feel" will obviously
need to be considered in a different light, with a meaning closer to
what you are saying -- correctly -- that it should mean.

A sim like Viper Racing... Now *that* I can feel! I hope Papy can
come up with an implementation of FF tech that is on par with Viper in
the near future.

Brett

>That's nice to hear ... I bet your stereo tastes great too.

>TB

>>So then dont race a computer game, go do it in real life! Well about the
>>feel part, gpl has the best feel of any racing game out there, they never
>>give you feedback with the steering wheel and the***pit moving around and
>>once you play it enough, you learn which way the car is going and which way
>>you are pointed and can really sense the loose and pushness. I must admit,
>>real life is much better because of all the feedback you get from your ***
>>and the Gs that are put on you but of all the games Ive played, gpl has the
>>most feedback it can give a person. Even if it is very limited, and the
>>physics model is consistent and predictable unlike others, it handles
>>realistically so you know how it should react and it normally reacts that
>>way. So for modern day capabilities, gpl is highly sofisticated.

>>Jesse

by **Wosc** » Mon, 01 Mar 1999 04:00:00

So then dont race a computer game, go do it in real life! Well about the
feel part, gpl has the best feel of any racing game out there, they never
give you feedback with the steering wheel and the***pit moving around and
once you play it enough, you learn which way the car is going and which way
you are pointed and can really sense the loose and pushness. I must admit,
real life is much better because of all the feedback you get from your ***
and the Gs that are put on you but of all the games Ive played, gpl has the
most feedback it can give a person. Even if it is very limited, and the
physics model is consistent and predictable unlike others, it handles
realistically so you know how it should react and it normally reacts that
way. So for modern day capabilities, gpl is highly sofisticated.

Jesse

>>>I think GPL is great. I just don't quite understand why people feel
>>>so threatened by the thought of it containing difficulty options, as
>>>long as the highest levels are there. To use your initial analogy,
>>>Falcon 4 is hailed as the most complex, realistic flight sim ever -
>>>yet it has quite a range of switchable difficulty optiions. None of
>>>the ultra-hard core flight sim fanatics are screaming that this makes
>>>Falcon 4 a "Novalogic arcade sim".

>> I was gonna' stay away from this thread but..........
>> Falcon 4.0 has 161 keystroke variables that you use to fly with (this
>>does not include the basic "steering" and throttle controls) I think
>>some scaleability is in order. GPL has 10 input variables that I can
>>think of. It DOES have training cars and "help" for the shifting ,
>>braking, and throttle. I don't know what else anyone would want.
>> That having been said : T. Liam McDonald was spot on with the
>>comment about GPL trying to recreate a 3d activity in a 2d world and
>>about how it was probably more difficult than driving the real thing.
>>I have felt this way about all of the driving sims that I have tried.
>>In other words if you put a real 67 Cooper GP car on a real track and
>>then set GPL on a computer right next to it (and also assume I have
>>never seen/used either of them) I bet you I would be better ,at least
>>initially ,at driving the real GP car around the circuit. (if anyone
>>has a 67 cooper and would like to test this theory , I am available <
>>G>) Now there is no way I could ever do laps as fast as I do in GPL (
>>I'd be long dead by now) There just isn't the same level of feed back
>>in a simulation. Try racing GPL without the sound on and you'll see
>>what I mean.
>> So to me all of the argument about realism is silly.(see the "what
>>about rain "thread for example , geeesh!) There IS a level of realism
>>that is just too high given the environment that we are currently
>>using too create simulations in. GPL is a good compromise of realism
>>and usability but ,only if you are complete racing "hack". If you are
>>not there is always F1RS.
>> (Daisy slips on the Nomex suit and awaits his punishment)

>I have to agree with you on this.

>A while back (I can't remember the thread or who posted it), someone went
on
>and on in response to a guy who said that GPL was too hard. He basically
let
>this guy have it with both barrels for saying that you can't fell anything,
>and that makes GPL very hard.

>Anyway, the guy went on and on saying things like, 'how can you say that?!
>GPL has the best FELL of any racing sim ever!' I was very tempted to ask
the
>guy where he got his moving base simulator from, and did he hack the code
of
>GPL to get the base to work right.

>Like I said, I agree with you: I think GPL is asking you to do with only
>your eyes (and a little bit your hearing), what you normally do with all
>five of your senses. It seems to me like they're almost asking you to so
the
>equivalent of air to air combat by only looking at the instrument panel. I
>suppose you could do that to, but I'm not sure how much fun it would be.

>TB

by **Paul Jone** » Wed, 03 Mar 1999 04:00:00

My letter to Mr. McDonald:

Dear Liam McDonald,
Your review of Grand Prix Legends in the March issue of Maximum PC is missplaced
and rather galling.
I have owned GPL since mid-October and since then it has hardly come out of my
CD tray. No computer game and certainly no racing simulation has given me more
pleasure and more fun.
I have no idea if you have ever driven a race car but from your article, I can
only presume that you haven't.
It is not easy.
Sure, you can potter around the track at 4000 rpm and feel, hey I'm in charge of
this. But anyone can potter around the track at 4000 rpm in a GPL car - even my
4 year old can do that (no, he really can). But if you push it, and try and run
around the track near the red-line, you will find it very hard. You have to
practice. And you have to practice in GPL.
For you to say that the game is over-modelled and too exacting, offends me. How
can it be over-modelled? Why on earth would you want to drive a racing game
where the cars were deliberately under-modelled? The only reason I can think of
is that you want a little light entertainment and do not want the challenge of
the real thing. If this is the case, then you are not the person who should be
reviewing this title. It's rather like a non-programmer reviewing a C++ compiler
and declaring that it is far too difficult. Yes, GPL is difficult, but it is not
randomly difficult - it is difficult because the thing that it models is
difficult.
You claim that the overmodelling makes it harder than it should be because you
cannot feel the cars. Papyrus have given us other cues, the tyres squeal in an
"unrealistic" way so that we can detect when they are approaching the limits of
traction. Sure elements of force-feedback would have been another way this could
have been acheived. However you can only pass on very little of the race car
"feel" with FF as it currently exists. G-Forces, which are far and away the most
important physical sensation you can feel when racing, cannot be modelled with
FF. I agree that FF is an omission, but it is not as glaring a one as you
suggest and it is certainly not "stupid". Do you imagine that a racing
simulation software house didn't consider it - just who is being stupid here?
You make comparison with flying. Flying is difficult, but flying certain
aeroplanes is even more so. Only a handful of pilots in the world could fly a
Hawker Harrier - they are reputed to be extremely unforgiving - and death-traps
as well. An accurate Harrier simulation would be very, very difficult. I don't
doubt that they exist and are used in the airforces that own Harriers. Grand
Prix Legends is the same. These cars are as unforgiving as were the real cars of
that era. Jim Clark and Jack Brabham were extremely good drivers and GPL gives
us the opportunity to see what they faced - but without the danger.
For many of us driving a hyper-realistic 1967 Formula One simulation is a real
delight. You acknowledge this fact by saying "Racing fans lap this up, nonfans
admire the attention to detail." Why then do you say "Mandatory real-world
physics in a game are stupid." They may not be to your taste - that is your
predeliction - but they are not stupid. Many of us revel in titles like GPL and
regret that so many people like you, who are unprepared to put in the time to
achieve the satisfaction possible, are prepared to bad-mouth it and damage its
sales. What this does is to make it less likely that such a masterpiece will be
written again. For that I despise you,
Yours sincerely,
Paul Jones

by **Paul Jone** » Wed, 03 Mar 1999 04:00:00

> Exactly. Most "gamers" are exactly that - gamers. They aren't concerned
> with the accuracy of the car models, or the period accuracy of the track-
> side graphics, or the intensity of the physics model. The typical gamer
> wants to kill or mame, or generally break the law in a virtual world. To
> that group, companies have provided test-drive 5, Need For Speed, Grand
> Theft Auto, Pod, and games of that ilk.

That is true of many gamers but by no means all. Three examples of three
gamers:
A guy at work said that he didn't care much for racing games but GPL was
different - it was like a real car - it is the only one he plays.
The guy opposite comes round to race on my LAN. At first, we raced NFS3, TOCA
and MGP because I thought he would find GPL too difficult. When we put it on
he said, "Now this is the real thing - let's just race this".
A nine year old friend of my son loves GPL. He likes the challenge. It feels
to him fuller - more real - and of course he's never driven a car.

Cheers,
Paul

by **DHensle** » Wed, 03 Mar 1999 04:00:00

What a great letter, I could not have said it better myself. I just hope
Papyrus doesn't "detune" the next version of Nascar Racing to appease
idiots like this, that is what I'm afraid is going to happen.

Dave

by **Larr** » Wed, 03 Mar 1999 04:00:00

This has changed?

-Larry

> At the time, Grand Prix 2 was the top Formula Sim.

by **Peter Gag** » Fri, 05 Mar 1999 04:00:00

> My letter to Mr. McDonald:

****Excellent letter snipped****

Great letter, well written, to the point, accurate.

I agree wholeheartedly.

8-)

*Peter* #:-)

rec.autos.simulators

MaximumPC flames PAPY and GPL

MaximumPC flames PAPY and GPL

MaximumPC flames PAPY and GPL

MaximumPC flames PAPY and GPL

MaximumPC flames PAPY and GPL

MaximumPC flames PAPY and GPL

MaximumPC flames PAPY and GPL

MaximumPC flames PAPY and GPL

MaximumPC flames PAPY and GPL

MaximumPC flames PAPY and GPL