rec.autos.simulators

by **AlanRC** » Tue, 01 Jul 2003 08:00:19

Nice lot of replies.....

I see that the old argument between Nascar 2003 and GPL still gets quite an
airing.

My two pennies worth is that modern racing is very technically advanced and
seems to have lost a lot of the human fun element, dare I say, soul? For
example I would rather fly a Spitfire than an F15 anyday. The F15 makes
flying 'easy' so you can concentrate on the enemy, but hey, I like flying!
Similar with say modern F1. All the tech gadgets, auto-gears, traction
control, wings etc just means the driver can concentrate on getting round
the track with much less regard for the car. And most of all the very small
degree of suspension travel on modern cars including Nascar 2003 means you
get much less feel of the beast your driving.

No. Give me GPL with its trail-braking, slipping and sliding into corners
and always in control when your've mastered the cars still gives me the
driving buzz it did nearly five years ago.

Not to mention the art form:
They say beauty is in the eye of the beholder. To me the GPL (GPLEA) cars
are paintings on wheels.

Aside:
I stood outside my house yesterday watching a solitary Spitfire do 8 loops
and rolls. To me one of the most awe-inspiring sites I have ever seen.

I apologise in advance for my rambling....

Alan

by **Haqsa** » Tue, 01 Jul 2003 09:17:42

Did you actually just use the words "technically advanced" and "Nascar" in
the same paragraph? ;o)

by **Jan Verschuere** » Tue, 01 Jul 2003 09:26:18

It's only 5 years and it has been surpassed in every way but
subjectmatter/nostalgia.

Well, Linux is, but GPL has not been ported over yet.

Jan. ;-)
=---

by **Haqsa** » Tue, 01 Jul 2003 09:28:49

First truly 3D shooter (i.e. no sprites and no height maps), first
client-server network game, first game to support 3D cards, first game to
unabashedly open itself up to mod development, the game that fathered both
the CTF and Team Fortress mods and thus became the father of all subsequent
teamplay shooters, the game that defined the mouse and keyboard interface
that we have used ever since, the first game to use light maps and bsp
trees, thus creating a paradigm that dominated game programming for the next
6 years, the first game with a particle system, ... I'm sure there's more
but that ought to do for now. Basically nearly everything that happened in
first person *** between 1996 and 2002 or so was done first by Quake, and
it is only more recent technological advancements like T&L and shaders that
have enabled people to move beyond the paradigm that Id created 7 years ago
(although I would hasten to add that Id pioneered those newer technologies
also, in their later games).

by **Jan Verschuere** » Tue, 01 Jul 2003 09:48:44

Ok... you try and make a 427 cubic inch, caburated V8 engine run 9200rpm and
hold together for 400 miles. Not to mention the aerodynamics of the bodies
or the fact that entire 43 car fields have less performance spread than the
top 6 at most F1 venues.

The level of technology used may be lower, but the standard of engineering
is just as high, if not higher seeing as there's less scope for finding an
edge.

Jan.
=--

by **Haqsa** » Tue, 01 Jul 2003 11:37:43

Didn't say first 3D game since flight sims were clearly the first. I said
first 3D shooter. There were also other games that did 3D levels first,
such as Ultima Underworld, but they still used sprites instead of models for
the characters and items. BTW what is POD? Don't remember that one. And
yes Quake had a particle system. Not a very good one, but it had one. The
rocket smoke and several other effects were implemented using it.

by **Ruud Dingeman** » Tue, 01 Jul 2003 13:38:58

> Well, for me, it stands just behind Quake as one of the best games ever
> made. Some might question the Q word, but as a developer, it really was/is
> something special,

Of course - it was developed on the NeXT :)

(Like the WWW, btw)

Regards, Rudy

by **Joachim Trens** » Tue, 01 Jul 2003 16:29:57

Alan, you may like the 67 F1 cars more than you like Nascars, but that has
little to do with how well GPL or N2k3 simulate the cars they simulate. N2k3
is two generations ahead of GPL, N2k3's tire model alone is so much better
that it renders GPL obsolete.

You may enjoy driving the cars simulated by GPL more for various reasons,
but N2k3 is by a huge margin the better sim :-)

To tell you the truth, I'm not a huge fan of Nascars as racing vehicles
either. They're big, heavy, and comparatively unresponsive. But, racing is
racing, no matter which car you do it in - it always requires the same
dedication, the same effort, the same attitude, and the same expertise. I've
come to think that it's a little snobbish to insist that racing one car is
worth more or better than racing another, and rather decided to accept the
challenge and get good at racing Nascars now. And racing Nascars is as much
fun as racing anything else, it's just a little more difficult :-)

Meanwile, I'm enjoying N2k3 tremendously, I don't even miss GPL2. Would I
quit racing Nascars if there were a GPL2 or Racing Legends (if it lived up
to its promise)? Probably. But until then, I'll use the most challenging and
best racing simulation, and if that's a Nascar sim, you'll see me racing
Nascars :)

And I can ramble at least as much as you do ;-)

Achim

by **elrik** » Tue, 01 Jul 2003 16:31:53

Futuristic racing game set on a doomed planet.

The winner of a series of races gets to use the only escape pod left.

Silly . . . but fun. ;o)

Elrikk

by **Steve Smit** » Tue, 01 Jul 2003 20:10:39

Strongly disagree. N2003 is much easier to drive than GPL 'cuz yer getting
so much more feedback from the physics engine...and much more fun 'cuz the
car feels so much more alive!

> Pretty sure it was 1998. I remember it coming out about the same time as
> Half-Life. Just felt like being nit-picky. ;o)

> As far as seat of the pants feel I think I get more from NR 2003, at least
> on the road courses. Honestly I sometimes feel like I can feel the
texture
> of the pavement in NR2003, it's uncanny. But admittedly in a lot of way
> it's not as *fun* a feeling as GPL. Yep, GPL is the most fun arcade racer
I
> have ever played...

> <runs away very very quickly>

> > October 1997

> > My mistake, Nearly 6 years...

by **Steve Smit** » Tue, 01 Jul 2003 20:15:12

What Achim said....

> Alan, you may like the 67 F1 cars more than you like Nascars, but that has
> little to do with how well GPL or N2k3 simulate the cars they simulate.
N2k3
> is two generations ahead of GPL, N2k3's tire model alone is so much better
> that it renders GPL obsolete.

> You may enjoy driving the cars simulated by GPL more for various reasons,
> but N2k3 is by a huge margin the better sim :-)

> To tell you the truth, I'm not a huge fan of Nascars as racing vehicles
> either. They're big, heavy, and comparatively unresponsive. But, racing is
> racing, no matter which car you do it in - it always requires the same
> dedication, the same effort, the same attitude, and the same expertise.
I've
> come to think that it's a little snobbish to insist that racing one car is
> worth more or better than racing another, and rather decided to accept the
> challenge and get good at racing Nascars now. And racing Nascars is as
much
> fun as racing anything else, it's just a little more difficult :-)

> Meanwile, I'm enjoying N2k3 tremendously, I don't even miss GPL2. Would I
> quit racing Nascars if there were a GPL2 or Racing Legends (if it lived up
> to its promise)? Probably. But until then, I'll use the most challenging
and
> best racing simulation, and if that's a Nascar sim, you'll see me racing
> Nascars :)

> And I can ramble at least as much as you do ;-)

> Achim

> > Nice lot of replies.....

> > I see that the old argument between Nascar 2003 and GPL still gets quite
> an
> > airing.

> > My two pennies worth is that modern racing is very technically advanced
> and
> > seems to have lost a lot of the human fun element, dare I say, soul? For
> > example I would rather fly a Spitfire than an F15 anyday. The F15 makes
> > flying 'easy' so you can concentrate on the enemy, but hey, I like
flying!
> > Similar with say modern F1. All the tech gadgets, auto-gears, traction
> > control, wings etc just means the driver can concentrate on getting
round
> > the track with much less regard for the car. And most of all the very
> small
> > degree of suspension travel on modern cars including Nascar 2003 means
you
> > get much less feel of the beast your driving.

> > No. Give me GPL with its trail-braking, slipping and sliding into
corners
> > and always in control when your've mastered the cars still gives me the
> > driving buzz it did nearly five years ago.

> > Not to mention the art form:
> > They say beauty is in the eye of the beholder. To me the GPL (GPLEA)
cars
> > are paintings on wheels.

> > Aside:
> > I stood outside my house yesterday watching a solitary Spitfire do 8
loops
> > and rolls. To me one of the most awe-inspiring sites I have ever seen.

> > I apologise in advance for my rambling....

> > Alan

by **David Butter** » Tue, 01 Jul 2003 22:37:55

Most enjoyable sim = best sim. ;-)

--
Above address *is* valid - but snip spamtrap to get me to *read*!

Support the world's oldest motorsport venue!
http://www.shelsley-walsh.co.uk/future.html

by **Joachim Trens** » Tue, 01 Jul 2003 23:38:53

Nope :)

Most enjoyable sim = most enjoyable sim

Most accurate sim = best sim :)

Achim

...

by **Gerry Aitke** » Wed, 02 Jul 2003 00:17:19

>>But the real answer is, NR2003 is technically superior in about every

> aspect

>>to GPL, it's truly the "king of sims". F1C is a couple of years behind
>>NR2003.

> In most respects, yes, except the ones that really matter.

Which are? <AWAITING ENLIGHTENMENT>

by **Gerry Aitke** » Wed, 02 Jul 2003 00:23:59

>>And for those of us who don't get e***d by NASCAR games[1],
>>excellent as they may be, that's still the case.

>>[1] No, not even on road courses.

> That's the thing I don't get - I love GPL, GTR2002, F1C etc. but N2003 even
> on the road courses feels like it's lacking something and I can't work out
> what it is....

For me it the V8 engine. It's low revving and doesn't convey the feeling
of speed needed in a racing sim as well as a buzzing cosworth does.

And another thing: you cannot spin the wheels from a standing start like
you should be able to. That says to me that something is wrong in the
physics department.

Gerry

rec.autos.simulators

Seat of your pants....

Seat of your pants....

Seat of your pants....

Seat of your pants....

Seat of your pants....

Seat of your pants....

Seat of your pants....

Seat of your pants....

Seat of your pants....

Seat of your pants....

Seat of your pants....

Seat of your pants....

Seat of your pants....

Seat of your pants....

Seat of your pants....

Seat of your pants....