> > Gerry,
> > I know you try hard to make your point and prove other wrong but the
next
> > time you quote me how about using a quote from me as opposed to someone
else
> > and then saying I contradicted myself.
> Your quit write, of course. I made an honest mistake, very sorry about
> that.
> Gerry
> Yes ! , and I would like to "eloquently" add......... there's no such word
> as "irregardless" ! !
> "Try a large monitor, fresnal lens, 3D glasses and you'll find it won't."
> But wouldn't that be cheating ;-)
Gerry
BTW is there anything you're NOT an expert on ?
-=JL
> From http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary:
> Main Entry: irregardless
> Pronunciation: "ir-i-'g?rd-l&s
> Function: adverb
> Etymology: probably blend of irrespective and regardless
> Date: circa 1912
> nonstandard : REGARDLESS
> usage Irregardless originated in dialectal American speech in the early
20th
> century. Its fairly widespread use in speech called it to the attention of
> usage commentators as early as 1927. The most frequently repeated remark
> about it is that "there is no such word." There is such a word, however.
It
> is still used primarily in speech, although it can be found from time to
> time in edited prose. Its reputation has not risen over the years, and it
is
> still a long way from general acceptance. Use regardless instead.
> > Yes ! , and I would like to "eloquently" add......... there's no such
> word
> > as "irregardless" ! !
> > -=JL
> > > > May I ask what makes you such an expert on what is or isn't an
> > > advantage
> > > > on the sim racing track ?
> > > > IMO anyone who thinks that roof riding, [where "little johnny" can
> see
> > > for
> > > > friggin' miles in all directions] does not offer am UNFAIR
advantage,
> > > should
> > > > give himself a little shake .
> > > > -=JL
> > > So, just because you can SEE "for friggin' miles" as you so eloquently
> put
> > > it, do you actually think that, that person can GET to that spot they
> are
> > > LOOKING at before a "Cage Driver" does? If you do you have a LOT to
> learn
> > > about Sim Racing. Given that they are both running fixed setup, the
> better
> > > driver will always get there first irregardless of which View he is
> using.
> > > And if it is open setup it is opened up to even more variables, none
of
> > > which include which view either of them are using. Just because you
can
> > SEE
> > > it doesnt mean you can GET there any faster.
> > > - Isotrip?
> No problem. We all seem to get too caught up in these discussions and focus
> on calling people names and shooting them down that the point is lost.
> Driving view is just one of the touchy topics here.
Gerry
> BTW is there anything you're NOT an expert on ?
> -=JL
> > Actually irregardless is a word and means the same thign as regardless.
> It
> > is a common misconception that it is not a real english word however
that
> is
> > not correct. Although I'm sure Mr Aitken will quote me as saying
> > differently ;-)
> > From http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary:
> > Main Entry: irregardless
> > Pronunciation: "ir-i-'g?rd-l&s
> > Function: adverb
> > Etymology: probably blend of irrespective and regardless
> > Date: circa 1912
> > nonstandard : REGARDLESS
> > usage Irregardless originated in dialectal American speech in the early
> 20th
> > century. Its fairly widespread use in speech called it to the attention
of
> > usage commentators as early as 1927. The most frequently repeated remark
> > about it is that "there is no such word." There is such a word, however.
> It
> > is still used primarily in speech, although it can be found from time to
> > time in edited prose. Its reputation has not risen over the years, and
it
> is
> > still a long way from general acceptance. Use regardless instead.
> > > Yes ! , and I would like to "eloquently" add......... there's no such
> > word
> > > as "irregardless" ! !
> > > -=JL
> > > > > May I ask what makes you such an expert on what is or isn't an
> > > > advantage
> > > > > on the sim racing track ?
> > > > > IMO anyone who thinks that roof riding, [where "little johnny"
can
> > see
> > > > for
> > > > > friggin' miles in all directions] does not offer am UNFAIR
> advantage,
> > > > should
> > > > > give himself a little shake .
> > > > > -=JL
> > > > So, just because you can SEE "for friggin' miles" as you so
eloquently
> > put
> > > > it, do you actually think that, that person can GET to that spot
they
> > are
> > > > LOOKING at before a "Cage Driver" does? If you do you have a LOT to
> > learn
> > > > about Sim Racing. Given that they are both running fixed setup, the
> > better
> > > > driver will always get there first irregardless of which View he is
> > using.
> > > > And if it is open setup it is opened up to even more variables, none
> of
> > > > which include which view either of them are using. Just because you
> can
> > > SEE
> > > > it doesnt mean you can GET there any faster.
> > > > - Isotrip?
I shall continue to use any word that actually IS a word thanks very much...
And is that all you can use as a rebuttal? An incorrect Grammar issue?
*shaking my head* ;-)
- Isotrip?
They could call it Grand Prix Legends 2
--
Some Call Me Tim
-Tim
> >4. Allow hosts/server-admins to force sun-glare/lens flare/shadows (if
this
> >is something you see in the car and not just on replays.)
> about lense flare. you do know that this only happens when you view it
> through a camera lense? you never get lense flare in real life while
driving
> down the highway.
> lense flare in games = unrealistic = not sim. unless you go around
driving
> with a camera attached to you face?
I race from the***pit because it's THE ONLY FRICKIN WAY I CAN TELL WHAT
THE CAR'S DOING!
If you watch closely, your view remains locked in relation to the track.
What you see is the movement of the car on the track, not your head in the
car. Subtle but important difference. CMR1 had virtual head movement and
was undriveable (IMO) because of it. Don't know about the sequels - never
tried them.
People can use whatever view they want as far as I'm concerned. Whatever
works for them. I'd rather race them clean than not at all or stuggle and
wreck. The seeing further down the road argument means nothing as soon as
you know a track, and I've never raced a track online that I didn't know...
Regards,
Mark
Reading, UK
I'm sure you would, .... doing things incorrectly really would go hand in
hand with the distorted ideas of an arcade roof rider !
But I would like to add one thing that just occurred to me and would support
your roof rider theory.....
If Dale Earnhardt had been roof riding when he hit the wall at Daytona, he
would be alive today ! Heck , he would have just sailed right on by and
watched the whole thing from 40 feet up ! ! LOL
* shaking my head *
-=JL
No, this is not the case, because sometimes I have hit the barrier really
hard at Sears and my 'virtual head' has ended up over the top of the
steering wheel. I thought that was extremely odd, because if you are
strapped into the car tight, your head can't move forwards as much as it
does in this situation. I watched the replay to check. The view definitely
wasn't locked to the track because the car had stopped moving when it hit
the barrier, and it didn't really bounce away much, but my 'virtual head'
kept moving forwards, into the barrier, then returned to centre exactly as
if it was modelled as a spring (the further the distance from the rest
point, the larger the force trying to return it there).
The only reason I remember this is because it stood out so blatantly...
Just a small point. Dale Earnhardt was driving a race car at a race track.
We are sitting at home looking at a rectangle with glowing dots on it,
holding a plastic circular tube which occasionally shakes, pressing down on
two rectangular pieces of plastic which always seem to be designed to move
in exactly the way that real pedals don't.
Not to mention, if he'd been sat on the roof, he wouldn't have been able to
reach the throttle and so wouldn't have crashed....
Blasphemy! Why take the best physics engine around and model something fun
with it? <g>
N2003 should have about 15 right turns anyway, don't know what you are
complaining about...
PS/ Don't tell anybody, but I'm with you all the way!
