rec.autos.simulators

NASCAR Racing 2003 Interview

TDRacin

NASCAR Racing 2003 Interview

by TDRacin » Wed, 30 Oct 2002 12:35:33

They say much better AI each time a new title comes out.  I don't know if it
is any better, but if you want smart "AI", race online.  If you have dialup,
fix it.  I raced for a long time with dialup when you weren't supposed to be
able to.  It is possible if you learn how to do it.





Jason Moy

NASCAR Racing 2003 Interview

by Jason Moy » Wed, 30 Oct 2002 12:45:27


>I think they would have been better off

>1) making sure the damage model actually modeled damage on the cars
>beyond just wrinkling the sheet metal

I agree.  Nascar Thunder's damage model is ugly, but it's also much
more realistic in terms of the effects it has on the car performance.

No question.  Would make Bristol/Martinsville races much better,
that's for sure.  Then again, I don't brake unless I can prove that
I'm faster that way. =)

Hehehe. =)  I'd probably rather have the glare, but that would rock
too.

I wonder if this may be part of the new track model?  Rich says the
physics engine is taking a huge leap, and I thought I read in an
earlier interview that debris would play a factor now.

An FTP client built into the multiplayer client would be handy for
league races.  I definitely do not want to have to download everyone's
car everytime I play a pickup race, tho.

Agreed, altho I swear to god I thought I read something about
debris/oil being added.

True.  I've been whining for DNS for human players since Nascar 1
(glad they added it for the AI finally) among many other things.
Still, every leap they take in the sim is huge since it's been a good
6 years since anyone has come close to their simulations in terms of
realism and multiplayer capability (I could care less about the
latter, but the former is #1 on my list).

You've got to admit that being blinded driving into turn 1 at Atlanta
on a sunny day sounds fun. =)

Jason

Jason Moy

NASCAR Racing 2003 Interview

by Jason Moy » Wed, 30 Oct 2002 12:40:17



N2002 is as open as GPL is.  You can unpack dat files and throw things
into the install directories and have the game recognize them.  The AI
is much more modifiable with the exception of the .lp files which
should be fixable soon (as Goy as hinted - I'll hopefully be releasing
my own set of "fast" and "qualify" setup AI with realistic pacing,
bunching, drafting, and brake-zone padding distances in both real WC
(i.e. what you see on TV) and average Joe (i.e. what you see online)
flavors).

I really wish that the guy who created new cars for GPL would release
a tool or some information on doing it (I'm talking about entire new
cars with car-specific handling, not new models for pre-existing cars
or engine swapping type utilities).  Alison Hine mentioned awhile ago
that she had a virtual version of her Cobra made and it would be
absolutely fantastic to get this sort of info for GPL or N2002/2003.
I realize that there is a concern about online cheating (which is very
easy to do in the open-ended ISI sims) but that sort of thing can be
policed if handled properly.

I also want to note something that pisses me off with the ISI clique.
The game is very editable, which is awesome, but there's no
documentation anywhere.  Sure anyone with MAS Studio can import
car/track models and textures, but good luck getting anyone on any of
the F12k* mod forums to answer real questions about the nitty gritty
stuff like .veh and .aiw files.  The GPL community, IMHO, is much
stronger in this regards.  If you want to make a track, you can go to
gplea.org and find out how.  There are tutorials on editing everything
in the game that has been edited.  Nothing like this exists for the
F12k series or I bet we'd have more tracks (hundreds more), fixes for
the tracks that came with the game, dozens of mods, and all
mods/tracks would likely be of higher quality if there were some real
competition among designers to outdo each other.  The drive to make
each new track in GPL the absolute best one released is IMHO what
keeps that sim fresh.  Who would have imagined something as realistic
as the Lime Rock circuits as recently as a year to a year and a half
ago?  That's the sort of thing that's possible when there is good
documentation and a helpful community.  GPL has gone through a few
distinct phases...  the "figuring stuff out" phase, the "omfg people
are releasing new shit" phase, the "omfg people are releasing new shit
that is actually of high-quality" phase and is now getting more
entrenched in the "omfg people are releasing realistic shit that far
surpasses the original game" phase.  IMHO F1 200x modding is still
stuck between the first two phases.  There needs to be documentation
so we can get past the "omfg a new track!!" everytime some low-quality
SCGT conversion comes out and move onto the "omfg, I'd pay money for
this track!!" phase.  So far only Simbin with the GT 2002 mod and the
heavily edited Superbike and GPL conversions seems to have the
information and quality control to do that.  

Jason

Jason Moy

NASCAR Racing 2003 Interview

by Jason Moy » Wed, 30 Oct 2002 12:54:57

On Mon, 28 Oct 2002 18:23:32 -0500, "David G Fisher"


>> 8) Bumps in track surface modeled

>About time too.

On the bright side, Papy waited until they could produce a physics
engine capable of running on PC hardware that could do proper bump
modelling.  As much fun as I have getting 3 feet airborne over little
bumps in the F12k2 and Thunder tracks, I'd rather they were smooth
until the High Frequency Physics are replaced by Super High Frequency
Physics.

The Papy games do a good job of modelling the big bumps, imho,
especially since GPL.  Tell me you haven't shit your pants on worn
tires taking the high line out of 4 at the superspeedways with a loose
setup.  That bump coming out of 4 at Daytona especially has caused me
way too much grief racing 3-wide with the AI.

I doubt they would do accelerated tire wear and fuel consumption since
the aim of the game is realism, and you either model tire wear
correctly or you don't.  I read the above as meaning that leagues
could enforce minimum pitstop rules during races like they have during
the All-Star races.

Maybe there isn't one?  I remember reading in interviews from the
pre-GPL era that the track editing tools that they use could never be
released to the public because of the way they work.  Programmers and
programmer/artists write tools that allow them to get the job done in
the most efficient way possible.  That doesn't usually translate well
into a commercial software environment.

That said, if Papyrus did take an extra 6 months or something and
wrote a professional editor, one like Neverwinter Nights or Morrowind
with lots of documentation, one that could actually be used to design
the game (again, a'la NWN or MW), I would applaud.  I'd favor a car
editor/manager more than a track editor tho.

Jason

Jason Moy

NASCAR Racing 2003 Interview

by Jason Moy » Wed, 30 Oct 2002 12:59:23

On Mon, 28 Oct 2002 18:00:52 -0500, "David G Fisher"


>Papyrus knows what they are doing next. It's silly that they act like a
>little computer sim is crucial to world security. With them and some other
>developers, the secrecy thing goes beyond ridiculous.

But ISI might copy their ideas and outdo them!!

Haha.  Sorry, crack myself up sometimes.

Seriously, tho, in the interview posted earlier Rich seemed to
indicate that they didn't know what they were doing next...

Jason

Jason Moy

NASCAR Racing 2003 Interview

by Jason Moy » Wed, 30 Oct 2002 12:58:04

On Mon, 28 Oct 2002 17:01:33 -0700, "John Pancoast"


>  Yep.  It's a business, not a hobby.  Purpose of a business is to make
>money, period.

It's a business and a hobby.  For some it's both, for most it's one or
the other.  In an ideal world it's certainly both.

The same thing can be said about any creative endeavor.  Music is a
perfect example of this, if you've had any experiences with the
industry (as an artist or a fan).

Jason

Marc Collin

NASCAR Racing 2003 Interview

by Marc Collin » Wed, 30 Oct 2002 14:04:51

That is the point exactly...it's all licensing...assuming they actually have
something real to work on.

Marc


> But if the next generation of Papy products includes the needs for any
type
> licensing, then you would want to keep quiet until everything is lined up,
> or else you may have EA running out and trying to prevent the next Papy
> titles.  If it wasn't for Papy, no one would know just how bad the EA
games
> are...Just a thought.

> Glen Pittman





> > > On Mon, 28 Oct 2002 07:31:53 -0500, "David G Fisher"

> > > >Don't you know that a future computer auto sim is of such incredible
> > > >importance that it has to be kept top secret? The earth could explode
> if
> > > >this information slips out too early.

> > > Consider how people were freaking out about the GPL 72 rumors being
> > > false not to mention the whole West Bros fiasco, I'm not surprised
> > > Papy is tighted lipped about their upcoming games.  Personally, I'd
> > > rather wait for a press release after the game has been slated for
> > > definite release than read about it in an interview 2 years before it
> > > ships.

> > > Jason

> > How many people on htis planet really were freaking out? I bet it wasn't
> > actually all that many. :-) Those were rumours created by fans, not the
> > company so they are irrelevant anyway.

> > The West Brothers are two guys who haven't done anything yet, not an
> > establised company.

> > Papyrus knows what they are doing next. It's silly that they act like a
> > little computer sim is crucial to world security. With them and some
other
> > developers, the secrecy thing goes beyond ridiculous.

> > These are just GAMES played by kids and grown ups for entertainment.

> > David G Fisher

Jason Moy

NASCAR Racing 2003 Interview

by Jason Moy » Wed, 30 Oct 2002 14:08:50

On Mon, 28 Oct 2002 21:52:43 -0500, "David G Fisher"


>Please. It was a flop. I'd love to know how many were returned too.

Depends on how you define flop.  To Sierra I'd imagine anything that
sells less than Half-Life is a flop.  No one swoons over how well
N2002 and N4 sold even though they were both top-sellers when they
were released and for several weeks afterwards.

Jason

John Pancoas

NASCAR Racing 2003 Interview

by John Pancoas » Wed, 30 Oct 2002 14:18:33


> On Mon, 28 Oct 2002 17:01:33 -0700, "John Pancoast"

> >  Yep.  It's a business, not a hobby.  Purpose of a business is to make
> >money, period.

> It's a business and a hobby.  For some it's both, for most it's one or
> the other.  In an ideal world it's certainly both.

> The same thing can be said about any creative endeavor.  Music is a
> perfect example of this, if you've had any experiences with the
> industry (as an artist or a fan).

> Jason

  That's fine, but when it comes time to pay the bills, no CEO on the planet
is going to have sympathy(and rightly so)for a starving artist and his
unrealistic dreams  :)

John

Joachim Trens

NASCAR Racing 2003 Interview

by Joachim Trens » Wed, 30 Oct 2002 19:27:12

Hi David,

IMHO there's more than just economics to look at when defining success.

GPL has become a classic, and its lifecycle of 5 years is an eternity for a
computer racing game. Especially considering how very much alive it still
is, looking at its driver and add-on creation base. I can't think of any
other racing game achieving something similar, and its impact on sim racing
and online racing has been immense.

GPL has revolutionized car physics (which continue to live in
N4/N2002/N2003), it's revolutionised online racing (and is still arguably
unequalled in that field except by its own kin also coming from Papyrus),
and it's given its buyers a fun-bang-for-the-buck longevity by far exceeding
that of any other contemporary racing game.

GPL has become a classic, and there aren't many around like it. IMO GPL's
been very successful, just not in terms of money.

Achim



> Didn



> > > Surely you aren't assuming that all 200,000 copies are being used
> > > online?

> > Hmm he's talking about "copies sold".  Is there something you don't
> > understand in that for you to assume they are "used online" ?? :)

> Proof! Proof! Show me proof of 200,000 copies sold or be quiet.

> I'm ymenard.

> Weren't they dumping copies of it for a few bucks on shelves even three
> years after it's release?

> Please. It was a flop. I'd love to know how many were returned too.

> David G Fisher

Jason Moy

NASCAR Racing 2003 Interview

by Jason Moy » Wed, 30 Oct 2002 18:01:54



I don't think he was referring to VROC, which still has a pretty good
crowd.  Think about the sheer number of web resources for GPL.  It
dwarfs any game I can think of in terms of organization and the size
is second to none in the racing sim community.

I think Steve was referring primarily to how huge the online community
is as far as support and enthusiasm for the game are concerned.

Jason

Ed Solhei

NASCAR Racing 2003 Interview

by Ed Solhei » Wed, 30 Oct 2002 18:12:49

"Doug Ellison" said:

Well...  it is over 4 years old Doug....  a lot of us has actually moved on
to newer pastuers (sp?)

--
ed_

David G Fishe

NASCAR Racing 2003 Interview

by David G Fishe » Wed, 30 Oct 2002 20:04:56

I have to respectfully disagree with you on a few points. :-)


Yes, there is more than just economics to consider when defining success,
but we are talking about sales right now and sales wise, it did poorly
compared to other racing games.

MTM2 is actually older than GPL, and still has a larger online community
than GPL with thousands of truck and track add ons. It actually has had two
sequals in 4 X 4 Evo 1 and 2.

Not so sure about it revolutionizing car physics. Old debate.

The NASCAR series did that before GPL ever came out because of the high
numbr of cars they could handle.  A number of arcade racers had excellent
online racing before GPL, just not as high a number.

This is where GPL fans lose me. A lot of racing sims have sequels. That's
why I always stop playing one sim and move on to another in a series. Look
at the various F1 series like Crammond's GP series, Ubi Soft's, ISI's, etc.
If GPL had been successful, it would of had a sequel, and it's small fan
base would of moved on to it. Then all this importance about GPL's longevity
would never be able to be claimed as relevant. A sequel wouldn't of sold
much better than the original GPL because historic auto sims aren't in
demand. The GPL series would of been a sales flop compared to the modern F1
series from the other developers, and also compared to something like
Magnetic Field's rally series of sims, and of course the Papyrus NASCAR
series. I don't see how the other individual sims in each series should be
seen as being less than GPL when their quality and success forced sequels to
be made which moved the fan base on. I guarantee everyone in RASCAR moves on
from N2002 to N2003 when it's released.

Also, GPL is an exteme niche product (again, without a sequel) with no
competitors, unlike modern F1 sims. Doesn't surprise me at all it would
retain some fans, especially since they are older. Where else could a fan of
historic auto sims have gone to these past few years? No competition until
the West brothers produce something.

As long as there are people who enjoy it and it's a quality product, then
that's all that really matters IMO.

David G Fisher

> Achim



> > Didn



> > > > Surely you aren't assuming that all 200,000 copies are being used
> > > > online?

> > > Hmm he's talking about "copies sold".  Is there something you don't
> > > understand in that for you to assume they are "used online" ?? :)

> > Proof! Proof! Show me proof of 200,000 copies sold or be quiet.

> > I'm ymenard.

> > Weren't they dumping copies of it for a few bucks on shelves even three
> > years after it's release?

> > Please. It was a flop. I'd love to know how many were returned too.

> > David G Fisher

John Simmon

NASCAR Racing 2003 Interview

by John Simmon » Wed, 30 Oct 2002 20:07:20


says...

But are they gonna:

1) Allow us to turn that off? (Online racing is already hard enough to
pull off without pissing off everyone else on the track.)

2) Allow server admins to force it on? (People with less capable systems
will probably automatically be eliminated from  alot of races if it is
forced on due to graphics load.)

3) Have it also affect people that don't drive in-car (if it is forced
on)?

--
=========================================================
Redneck Techno-Biker & "programming deity"
  http://www.paddedwall.org/john
DeMONS/1 for Nascar Racing 3 & Nascar Legends
  http://www.paddedwall.org/demons
DeMONS/2 for Nascar Racing 4 and 2002 Season (in development)
  http://www.paddedwall.org/demons2
RASCAR Roster
  http://www.paddedwall.org/rascar
Barbarian Diecast Collector (490+ cars and counting)
  http://www.paddedwall.org/diecast

If you want to send me email, go to the first URL shown
above & click "Send Me Mail" in the contents frame.
=========================================================

John Simmon

NASCAR Racing 2003 Interview

by John Simmon » Wed, 30 Oct 2002 20:12:31



I still fire it up once in a while.   There's nothing better available -
NR2002 and GPL.

--
=========================================================
Redneck Techno-Biker & "programming deity"
  http://www.paddedwall.org/john
DeMONS/1 for Nascar Racing 3 & Nascar Legends
  http://www.paddedwall.org/demons
DeMONS/2 for Nascar Racing 4 and 2002 Season (in development)
  http://www.paddedwall.org/demons2
RASCAR Roster
  http://www.paddedwall.org/rascar
Barbarian Diecast Collector (490+ cars and counting)
  http://www.paddedwall.org/diecast

If you want to send me email, go to the first URL shown
above & click "Send Me Mail" in the contents frame.
=========================================================


rec.autos.simulators is a usenet newsgroup formed in December, 1993. As this group was always unmoderated there may be some spam or off topic articles included. Some links do point back to racesimcentral.net as we could not validate the original address. Please report any pages that you believe warrant deletion from this archive (include the link in your email). RaceSimCentral.net is in no way responsible and does not endorse any of the content herein.