rec.autos.simulators

>I'd also be curious to get some comments on how it will be sold and such,
>however the site and PR give little if any mention to the sim itself.

> You're right, most people will never know the difference. Those of us
> lucky enough to spend time on these tracks will very much appreciate
> having accurate, up-to-date representations to run on. It's a simple
> matter of purity, and the fact is 95% of sim buyers have 0 clue what
> any given track really looks like other than what their favorite game
> shows them or they see on TV. It will be great to have the exact same
> turn-in points, familiar glitches in the curb.

> Note to iRacing (if you are going to model wet weather) -
> West Bend inside curb is mashed away just beyond the apex, where a
> nice puddle forms. Easy to miss until someone doesn't..
> The right hander coming out of Big Bend feeding the "short chute"
> always gets a puddle and if some bozo hits it we usually lose the next
> 3-4 cars behind him into the weeds.
> A river runs accross No-Name straight when it rains right about where
> you need to brake for the uphill.. always a treat... and the right
> side rumble strip is usually under about 6" of water..
> If you try and pass at the wrong time on the main straight you will
> find yourself in one of a series of 1-2" deep puddles at 120+MPH..

> 8-)
> GP

>That's me in the R/T***pit in the wet while at Lime Rock. I had no
>race car experience and infact very rarely drive on every day roads - I
>had never driven in the wet in any car. I had been karting before, and
>by the third race I was quite happily*** the back end out the
>whole way around long turns. The nice thing when I was at Lime Rock
>Park was that I didn't need to learn the circuit, the sim had already
>done that. You're exactly right about the location of those puddles!

>That's something about TV too that I have only learned in the past
>year. I attended Brands Hatch last September (for the A1GP) and
>Silverstone in April, neither of them were like I have seen in any
>simulation (even to date). Silverstone, even though it's an airfield,
>is not flat at all when you actually have a view from the racing
>surface rather than the TV camera or grandstands. Before I worked for
>the company, I'd have wanted realistic tracks in their simulation, I'm
>frankly delighted to be a part of the team bringing these tracks to the
>community.

>Tim

>> >Only if you're planning on driving the track in real life and haven't
>> >been there.  For the rest of us it's a nice to have.   If a certain
>> >pothole is 2" or 2' away from reality I won't lose any sleep.

>> You're right, most people will never know the difference. Those of us
>> lucky enough to spend time on these tracks will very much appreciate
>> having accurate, up-to-date representations to run on. It's a simple
>> matter of purity, and the fact is 95% of sim buyers have 0 clue what
>> any given track really looks like other than what their favorite game
>> shows them or they see on TV. It will be great to have the exact same
>> turn-in points, familiar glitches in the curb.

>> Note to iRacing (if you are going to model wet weather) -
>> West Bend inside curb is mashed away just beyond the apex, where a
>> nice puddle forms. Easy to miss until someone doesn't..
>> The right hander coming out of Big Bend feeding the "short chute"
>> always gets a puddle and if some bozo hits it we usually lose the next
>> 3-4 cars behind him into the weeds.
>> A river runs accross No-Name straight when it rains right about where
>> you need to brake for the uphill.. always a treat... and the right
>> side rumble strip is usually under about 6" of water..
>> If you try and pass at the wrong time on the main straight you will
>> find yourself in one of a series of 1-2" deep puddles at 120+MPH..

>> 8-)
>> GP

> That's me in the R/T***pit in the wet while at Lime Rock. I had no
> race car experience and infact very rarely drive on every day roads - I
> had never driven in the wet in any car. I had been karting before, and
> by the third race I was quite happily*** the back end out the
> whole way around long turns. The nice thing when I was at Lime Rock
> Park was that I didn't need to learn the circuit, the sim had already
> done that. You're exactly right about the location of those puddles!

> That's something about TV too that I have only learned in the past
> year. I attended Brands Hatch last September (for the A1GP) and
> Silverstone in April, neither of them were like I have seen in any
> simulation (even to date). Silverstone, even though it's an airfield,
> is not flat at all when you actually have a view from the racing
> surface rather than the TV camera or grandstands. Before I worked for
> the company, I'd have wanted realistic tracks in their simulation, I'm
> frankly delighted to be a part of the team bringing these tracks to the
> community.

> Tim

>> >Only if you're planning on driving the track in real life and haven't
>> >been there.  For the rest of us it's a nice to have.   If a certain
>> >pothole is 2" or 2' away from reality I won't lose any sleep.

>> You're right, most people will never know the difference. Those of us
>> lucky enough to spend time on these tracks will very much appreciate
>> having accurate, up-to-date representations to run on. It's a simple
>> matter of purity, and the fact is 95% of sim buyers have 0 clue what
>> any given track really looks like other than what their favorite game
>> shows them or they see on TV. It will be great to have the exact same
>> turn-in points, familiar glitches in the curb.

>> Note to iRacing (if you are going to model wet weather) -
>> West Bend inside curb is mashed away just beyond the apex, where a
>> nice puddle forms. Easy to miss until someone doesn't..
>> The right hander coming out of Big Bend feeding the "short chute"
>> always gets a puddle and if some bozo hits it we usually lose the next
>> 3-4 cars behind him into the weeds.
>> A river runs accross No-Name straight when it rains right about where
>> you need to brake for the uphill.. always a treat... and the right
>> side rumble strip is usually under about 6" of water..
>> If you try and pass at the wrong time on the main straight you will
>> find yourself in one of a series of 1-2" deep puddles at 120+MPH..

>> 8-)
>> GP

> Take this as criticism or someone just being very honest, but GPS track
> making seems like it's being way over used as a gimmick to say, "Our sim is
> the most realistic." And that worries me that there might not be more and
> better things to offer.

> I 'd rather have 200 of the greatest current and historic tracks in the
> world modeled to 98% accuracy (plus an endless supply of others) than a
> small amount of mostly obscure tracks modeled to 99% accuracy (nothing will
> be 100%). Will every F1 track be made so I can run a full F1 season? They
> can't make any historic tracks without lessening their claims of the
> importance of GPS track accuracy, so they are off the list? All I think of
> when I hear the mention of GPS tracks is what a very, very long list of
> tracks that **won't** be in this sim.

> This talk of perfect GPS track accuracy just seems a little silly to me.
> Watch this side by side video of Schumacher at Monza in rFactor and in real
> life and tell me what I'm missing.
> http://www.racesimcentral.net/,
> the track has 6 layouts, including the historic banked oval. It's brilliant.
> Will there even be a GPS made version of Monza, or am I supposed to be
> happier with an obscure GPS made club track I've never heard of that can
> only run cars that bore me to death?

> As for the hype that GPS tracks will be a benefit to helping a person learn
> a track in preparation for real life racing more than a non GPS sim
> track....only an idiot and a lousy driver could say it makes a difference to
> them. I've heard real F1 drivers and other pros say it takes them a
> **dozen** laps to learn a track. If a bad arcade game has a basic layout of
> a track at 70 % accuracy, it should be more than enough to help a real
> driver with the first 10 minutes on the track. After that, reality is all
> you should need for the next 10 minutes and then you had better know the
> track, or please get very far away from any rolling machinery.

> This sim will be good if it has the **right**cars and tracks (absolutely
> critical), great graphics, excellent physics, and great multiplay.
> Partnerships mean nothing except I have to take $$$ from my pocket month
> after month .....put it into your hands.....which you put it into the
> pockets of grinning track owners because they let you drive around with a
> GPS device on their track for a day or two.  Screw them. :-)

> --
> David G Fisher

> > Gary:
> > http://www.racesimcentral.net/
> > http://www.racesimcentral.net/
> > http://www.racesimcentral.net/

> > That's me in the R/T***pit in the wet while at Lime Rock. I had no
> > race car experience and infact very rarely drive on every day roads - I
> > had never driven in the wet in any car. I had been karting before, and
> > by the third race I was quite happily*** the back end out the
> > whole way around long turns. The nice thing when I was at Lime Rock
> > Park was that I didn't need to learn the circuit, the sim had already
> > done that. You're exactly right about the location of those puddles!

> > That's something about TV too that I have only learned in the past
> > year. I attended Brands Hatch last September (for the A1GP) and
> > Silverstone in April, neither of them were like I have seen in any
> > simulation (even to date). Silverstone, even though it's an airfield,
> > is not flat at all when you actually have a view from the racing
> > surface rather than the TV camera or grandstands. Before I worked for
> > the company, I'd have wanted realistic tracks in their simulation, I'm
> > frankly delighted to be a part of the team bringing these tracks to the
> > community.

> > Tim

> >> >Only if you're planning on driving the track in real life and haven't
> >> >been there.  For the rest of us it's a nice to have.   If a certain
> >> >pothole is 2" or 2' away from reality I won't lose any sleep.

> >> You're right, most people will never know the difference. Those of us
> >> lucky enough to spend time on these tracks will very much appreciate
> >> having accurate, up-to-date representations to run on. It's a simple
> >> matter of purity, and the fact is 95% of sim buyers have 0 clue what
> >> any given track really looks like other than what their favorite game
> >> shows them or they see on TV. It will be great to have the exact same
> >> turn-in points, familiar glitches in the curb.

> >> Note to iRacing (if you are going to model wet weather) -
> >> West Bend inside curb is mashed away just beyond the apex, where a
> >> nice puddle forms. Easy to miss until someone doesn't..
> >> The right hander coming out of Big Bend feeding the "short chute"
> >> always gets a puddle and if some bozo hits it we usually lose the next
> >> 3-4 cars behind him into the weeds.
> >> A river runs accross No-Name straight when it rains right about where
> >> you need to brake for the uphill.. always a treat... and the right
> >> side rumble strip is usually under about 6" of water..
> >> If you try and pass at the wrong time on the main straight you will
> >> find yourself in one of a series of 1-2" deep puddles at 120+MPH..

> >> 8-)
> >> GP

> LRP is a scary place in the rain Tim, you did well to make it around.
> GP

> >Gary:
> >http://www.racesimcentral.net/
> >http://www.racesimcentral.net/
> >http://www.racesimcentral.net/

> >That's me in the R/T***pit in the wet while at Lime Rock. I had no
> >race car experience and infact very rarely drive on every day roads - I
> >had never driven in the wet in any car. I had been karting before, and
> >by the third race I was quite happily*** the back end out the
> >whole way around long turns. The nice thing when I was at Lime Rock
> >Park was that I didn't need to learn the circuit, the sim had already
> >done that. You're exactly right about the location of those puddles!

> >That's something about TV too that I have only learned in the past
> >year. I attended Brands Hatch last September (for the A1GP) and
> >Silverstone in April, neither of them were like I have seen in any
> >simulation (even to date). Silverstone, even though it's an airfield,
> >is not flat at all when you actually have a view from the racing
> >surface rather than the TV camera or grandstands. Before I worked for
> >the company, I'd have wanted realistic tracks in their simulation, I'm
> >frankly delighted to be a part of the team bringing these tracks to the
> >community.

> >Tim

> >> >Only if you're planning on driving the track in real life and haven't
> >> >been there.  For the rest of us it's a nice to have.   If a certain
> >> >pothole is 2" or 2' away from reality I won't lose any sleep.

> >> You're right, most people will never know the difference. Those of us
> >> lucky enough to spend time on these tracks will very much appreciate
> >> having accurate, up-to-date representations to run on. It's a simple
> >> matter of purity, and the fact is 95% of sim buyers have 0 clue what
> >> any given track really looks like other than what their favorite game
> >> shows them or they see on TV. It will be great to have the exact same
> >> turn-in points, familiar glitches in the curb.

> >> Note to iRacing (if you are going to model wet weather) -
> >> West Bend inside curb is mashed away just beyond the apex, where a
> >> nice puddle forms. Easy to miss until someone doesn't..
> >> The right hander coming out of Big Bend feeding the "short chute"
> >> always gets a puddle and if some bozo hits it we usually lose the next
> >> 3-4 cars behind him into the weeds.
> >> A river runs accross No-Name straight when it rains right about where
> >> you need to brake for the uphill.. always a treat... and the right
> >> side rumble strip is usually under about 6" of water..
> >> If you try and pass at the wrong time on the main straight you will
> >> find yourself in one of a series of 1-2" deep puddles at 120+MPH..

> >> 8-)
> >> GP

> Tim

> Dave F wrote:

>> Silverstone in rFactor just came out a few months ago, and isn't flat at
>> all.

>> Take this as criticism or someone just being very honest, but GPS track
>> making seems like it's being way over used as a gimmick to say, "Our sim
>> is
>> the most realistic." And that worries me that there might not be more and
>> better things to offer.

>> I 'd rather have 200 of the greatest current and historic tracks in the
>> world modeled to 98% accuracy (plus an endless supply of others) than a
>> small amount of mostly obscure tracks modeled to 99% accuracy (nothing
>> will
>> be 100%). Will every F1 track be made so I can run a full F1 season? They
>> can't make any historic tracks without lessening their claims of the
>> importance of GPS track accuracy, so they are off the list? All I think
>> of
>> when I hear the mention of GPS tracks is what a very, very long list of
>> tracks that **won't** be in this sim.

>> This talk of perfect GPS track accuracy just seems a little silly to me.
>> Watch this side by side video of Schumacher at Monza in rFactor and in
>> real
>> life and tell me what I'm missing.
>> http://youtube.com/watch?v=Nr5zu4bE3jw&mode=related&search= On top of
>> that,
>> the track has 6 layouts, including the historic banked oval. It's
>> brilliant.
>> Will there even be a GPS made version of Monza, or am I supposed to be
>> happier with an obscure GPS made club track I've never heard of that can
>> only run cars that bore me to death?

>> As for the hype that GPS tracks will be a benefit to helping a person
>> learn
>> a track in preparation for real life racing more than a non GPS sim
>> track....only an idiot and a lousy driver could say it makes a difference
>> to
>> them. I've heard real F1 drivers and other pros say it takes them a
>> **dozen** laps to learn a track. If a bad arcade game has a basic layout
>> of
>> a track at 70 % accuracy, it should be more than enough to help a real
>> driver with the first 10 minutes on the track. After that, reality is all
>> you should need for the next 10 minutes and then you had better know the
>> track, or please get very far away from any rolling machinery.

>> This sim will be good if it has the **right**cars and tracks (absolutely
>> critical), great graphics, excellent physics, and great multiplay.
>> Partnerships mean nothing except I have to take $$$ from my pocket month
>> after month .....put it into your hands.....which you put it into the
>> pockets of grinning track owners because they let you drive around with a
>> GPS device on their track for a day or two.  Screw them. :-)

>> --
>> David G Fisher

>> "Tim Wheatley" <tim.wheat...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:1163981676.558818.53070@j44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>> > Gary:
>> > http://youtube.com/watch?v=j5udic-Uh18
>> > http://youtube.com/watch?v=uYXwVY7fpbE
>> > http://youtube.com/watch?v=-mHh_K8HAls

>> > That's me in the R/T cockpit in the wet while at Lime Rock. I had no
>> > race car experience and infact very rarely drive on every day roads - I
>> > had never driven in the wet in any car. I had been karting before, and
>> > by the third race I was quite happily hanging the back end out the
>> > whole way around long turns. The nice thing when I was at Lime Rock
>> > Park was that I didn't need to learn the circuit, the sim had already
>> > done that. You're exactly right about the location of those puddles!

>> > That's something about TV too that I have only learned in the past
>> > year. I attended Brands Hatch last September (for the A1GP) and
>> > Silverstone in April, neither of them were like I have seen in any
>> > simulation (even to date). Silverstone, even though it's an airfield,
>> > is not flat at all when you actually have a view from the racing
>> > surface rather than the TV camera or grandstands. Before I worked for
>> > the company, I'd have wanted realistic tracks in their simulation, I'm
>> > frankly delighted to be a part of the team bringing these tracks to the
>> > community.

>> > Tim

>> > GaryP wrote:

>> >> >On 19 Nov 2006 10:49:03 -0800, "mcewena" <art.mce...@moh.gov.on.ca>
>> >> >wrote:
>> >> >Only if you're planning on driving the track in real life and haven't
>> >> >been there.  For the rest of us it's a nice to have.   If a certain
>> >> >pothole is 2" or 2' away from reality I won't lose any sleep.

>> >> You're right, most people will never know the difference. Those of us
>> >> lucky enough to spend time on these tracks will very much appreciate
>> >> having accurate, up-to-date representations to run on. It's a simple
>> >> matter of purity, and the fact is 95% of sim buyers have 0 clue what
>> >> any given track really looks like other than what their favorite game
>> >> shows them or they see on TV. It will be great to have the exact same
>> >> turn-in points, familiar glitches in the curb.

>> >> Note to iRacing (if you are going to model wet weather) -
>> >> West Bend inside curb is mashed away just beyond the apex, where a
>> >> nice puddle forms. Easy to miss until someone doesn't..
>> >> The right hander coming out of Big Bend feeding the "short chute"
>> >> always gets a puddle and if some bozo hits it we usually lose the next
>> >> 3-4 cars behind him into the weeds.
>> >> A river runs accross No-Name straight when it rains right about where
>> >> you need to brake for the uphill.. always a treat... and the right
>> >> side rumble strip is usually under about 6" of water..
>> >> If you try and pass at the wrong time on the main straight you will
>> >> find yourself in one of a series of 1-2" deep puddles at 120+MPH..

>> >> 8-)
>> >> GP

> You said, "I attended Brands Hatch last September (for the A1GP) and
>  Silverstone in April, neither of them were like I have seen in any
> simulation (even to date). Silverstone, even though it's an airfield,
>  is not flat at all when you actually have a view from the racing
> surface rather than the TV camera or grandstands."

> "neither of them were like I have seen in any
> simulation (even to date)" sure sounds to me like you don't think there's a
> good version of Silverstone available right now. I said the one recently
> released with rFactor wasn't flat at all. That's all I said. No idea if
> you've actually seen that particular version or not.

> > Other than that, your points really don't have much relevance to
> > anything I'm talking of because most of them don't apply to where we're
> > going and/or things that you and the community are not aware of at this
> > point.

> My post is about the track accuracy issue in the new sim. That's what
> everyone is discussing in this thread, including you.

> > Also, GPS isn't what we use - so critisizing it is a little confusing,
> > I assume you meant it the other way around.

> Laser scanning then.

> > I have absolutely no intention to attack other simulations, I don't
> > recall mentioning any other simulation?

> Don't know what you are referring to there. Who said you attacked another
> sim? What sim?

> > I am delighted to be bringing this simulation to you guys because I
> > know how good I believe it is and I can't wait for the wider community
> > to race it. I can quite easily roll back and give you no information at
> > all if every point I make is going to be misread or taken as some sort
> > of assumed insult. I don't want to do that, because I care about the
> > community, I have served it for a long time.

> Again, no idea what you are talking about with this insult stuff. I didn't
> see you refer to any other sim, either directly or indirectly. Did you?

> Now if you are going to imagine things that aren't there and threaten not to
> say anything else about this sim, then just go right ahead and do so. No
> time for that kind of bullshit to be honest. Sim developers who act as if
> they are doing me some great favor by revealing bits of info of something
> they want me to **buy** doesn't fly anymore.

> --
> David G Fisher

> > Tim

> > Dave F wrote:

> >> Silverstone in rFactor just came out a few months ago, and isn't flat at
> >> all.

> >> Take this as criticism or someone just being very honest, but GPS track
> >> making seems like it's being way over used as a gimmick to say, "Our sim
> >> is
> >> the most realistic." And that worries me that there might not be more and
> >> better things to offer.

> >> I 'd rather have 200 of the greatest current and historic tracks in the
> >> world modeled to 98% accuracy (plus an endless supply of others) than a
> >> small amount of mostly obscure tracks modeled to 99% accuracy (nothing
> >> will
> >> be 100%). Will every F1 track be made so I can run a full F1 season? They
> >> can't make any historic tracks without lessening their claims of the
> >> importance of GPS track accuracy, so they are off the list? All I think
> >> of
> >> when I hear the mention of GPS tracks is what a very, very long list of
> >> tracks that **won't** be in this sim.

> >> This talk of perfect GPS track accuracy just seems a little silly to me.
> >> Watch this side by side video of Schumacher at Monza in rFactor and in
> >> real
> >> life and tell me what I'm missing.
> >> http://youtube.com/watch?v=Nr5zu4bE3jw&mode=related&search= On top of
> >> that,
> >> the track has 6 layouts, including the historic banked oval. It's
> >> brilliant.
> >> Will there even be a GPS made version of Monza, or am I supposed to be
> >> happier with an obscure GPS made club track I've never heard of that can
> >> only run cars that bore me to death?

> >> As for the hype that GPS tracks will be a benefit to helping a person
> >> learn
> >> a track in preparation for real life racing more than a non GPS sim
> >> track....only an idiot and a lousy driver could say it makes a difference
> >> to
> >> them. I've heard real F1 drivers and other pros say it takes them a
> >> **dozen** laps to learn a track. If a bad arcade game has a basic layout
> >> of
> >> a track at 70 % accuracy, it should be more than enough to help a real
> >> driver with the first 10 minutes on the track. After that, reality is all
> >> you should need for the next 10 minutes and then you had better know the
> >> track, or please get very far away from any rolling machinery.

> >> This sim will be good if it has the **right**cars and tracks (absolutely
> >> critical), great graphics, excellent physics, and great multiplay.
> >> Partnerships mean nothing except I have to take $$$ from my pocket month
> >> after month .....put it into your hands.....which you put it into the
> >> pockets of grinning track owners because they let you drive around with a
> >> GPS device on their track for a day or two.  Screw them. :-)

> >> --
> >> David G Fisher

> >> "Tim Wheatley" <tim.wheat...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >> news:1163981676.558818.53070@j44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> >> > Gary:
> >> > http://youtube.com/watch?v=j5udic-Uh18
> >> > http://youtube.com/watch?v=uYXwVY7fpbE
> >> > http://youtube.com/watch?v=-mHh_K8HAls

> >> > That's me in the R/T cockpit in the wet while at Lime Rock. I had no
> >> > race car experience and infact very rarely drive on every day roads - I
> >> > had never driven in the wet in any car. I had been karting before, and
> >> > by the third race I was quite happily hanging the back end out the
> >> > whole way around long turns. The nice thing when I was at Lime Rock
> >> > Park was that I didn't need to learn the circuit, the sim had already
> >> > done that. You're exactly right about the location of those puddles!

> >> > That's something about TV too that I have only learned in the past
> >> > year. I attended Brands Hatch last September (for the A1GP) and
> >> > Silverstone in April, neither of them were like I have seen in any
> >> > simulation (even to date). Silverstone, even though it's an airfield,
> >> > is not flat at all when you actually have a view from the racing
> >> > surface rather than the TV camera or grandstands. Before I worked for
> >> > the company, I'd have wanted realistic tracks in their simulation, I'm
> >> > frankly delighted to be a part of the team bringing these tracks to the
> >> > community.

> >> > Tim

> >> > GaryP wrote:

> >> >> >On 19 Nov 2006 10:49:03 -0800, "mcewena" <art.mce...@moh.gov.on.ca>
> >> >> >wrote:
> >> >> >Only if you're planning on driving the track in real life and haven't
> >> >> >been there.  For the rest of us it's a nice to have.   If a certain
> >> >> >pothole is 2" or 2' away from reality I won't lose any sleep.

> >> >> You're right, most people will never know the difference. Those of us
> >> >> lucky enough to spend time on these tracks will very much appreciate
> >> >> having accurate, up-to-date representations to run on. It's a simple
> >> >> matter of purity, and the fact is 95% of sim buyers have 0 clue what
> >> >> any given track really looks like other than what their favorite game
> >> >> shows them or they see on TV. It will be great to have the exact same
> >> >> turn-in points, familiar glitches in the curb.

> >> >> Note to iRacing (if you are going to model wet weather) -
> >> >> West Bend inside curb is mashed away just beyond the apex, where a
> >> >> nice puddle forms. Easy to miss until someone doesn't..
> >> >> The right hander coming out of Big Bend feeding the "short chute"
> >> >> always gets a puddle and if some bozo hits it we usually lose the next
> >> >> 3-4 cars behind him into the weeds.
> >> >> A river runs accross No-Name straight when it rains right about where
> >> >> you need to brake for the uphill.. always a treat... and the right
> >> >> side rumble strip is usually under about 6" of water..
> >> >> If you try and pass at the wrong time on the main straight you will
> >> >> find yourself in one of a series of 1-2" deep puddles at 120+MPH..

> >> >> 8-)
> >> >> GP

>> I'm not a group or picking holes, I made a simple comment on what I seen
>> in
>> the graphics.  It is all we have to go on and I made a comment.  I guess
>> no
>> one is allowed to comment on anything regarding this sim.  God forbid
>> someone ask a question about it.  I have yet to see a single PR that was
>> even related to the sim itself, most seem to be marketing deals with race
>> series which is great but I think many of us want to know more about the
>> sim
>> itself in terms of features, release dates, etc.

>> Tim - can we possibly get some real info on the sim beyond the marketing
>> PR,
>> that is all I am looking for.

>> >> The comments on graphics are quite amusing to me to be honest, having
>> >> come from simracing to sim development. Try shrinking a 1600x1200
>> >> image
>> >> of something you think looks good down to the same width and height of
>> >> the right side of that video, then tell me if you can see the detail
>> >> you could at 1600x1200. That's all I have to say.

>> > It is the old damned if you do damned if you don't dilemma, Tim.

>> > We have one group clamoring for early WIP as evidence that an iRacing
>> > sim
>> > exists in the making and another group picking holes at the small video
>> > which aims to show how accurate the track is rather than showing off
>> > the
>> > graphics engine.

>> > FWIW I think the real video is worse than the simulated one, with its
>> > fish
>> > eye view, low quality and it was filmed on such a dull day. Perhaps we
>> > should take it to a film makers forum and see what they have to say :)

>> > Thanks for sharing the video. I only hope you (and all other sim racing
>> > devs) have broad enough shoulders to keep these WIP snippets coming,
>> > hopefully there will be some constructive comments to pick out, but to
>> > demonstrate track accuracy and then have to field questions on the
>> > "missing" dynamic lighting makes you wonder if the effort is
>> > worthwhile,
>> > which would be a shame for the rest of us keen to monitor progress.

>> > Cheers
>> > Tony