rec.autos.simulators

"Boring" - "Oval Racing" and "Road Racing"

Tom Pabs

"Boring" - "Oval Racing" and "Road Racing"

by Tom Pabs » Tue, 01 Jan 2002 08:04:27

It seems to me the release of the N-2002 demo has rekindled the chide
remarks about NASCAR racing, oval racing and cries of "boredom" running the
sims we have available to us depicting those motorsports.  The sides are not
well defined, but can generally be divided on the broad basis of geography -
between the Europeans and the Americans.  Sadly, the chide remarks don't
help the discussion, naturally.

Here's my "two cents:"

1.  Comparing road racing and oval racing is like comparing American
football to soccer.  They are similar sports, played on similar types of
fields, both use a single ball (of different shape) and the goal is to score
points by moving the ball up the field to a "goal."  Past that, they are
night and day to each other, and attempts to apply adjectives to them like
"boring," "lacking skills," etc., is mostly a complete waste of time and
indicative of the writer's complete lack of understanding about them (or
lack of understanding about one of them).

2.  The same would be true of motorsports (IMHO).  If you follow and
appreciate (meaning = fully understand) road racing, but not oval racing -
then how is it you can make comparisons between the two motorsports that
create these chide comments?   I would like to add, the reverse applies if
you follow and appreciate oval racing, but not road racing.

[I would like to add:  Nothing about NASCAR racing is "redneck" today.
Certainly, not any more than F1 racing is only about the European "elite
socialites" - both are false terms based on the heritage of the two sports,
and do not apply to them today. - IMHO].

3.  I'm not going into a long definition/description of the two forms of
motor racing - but perhaps there is a good website that does this and it
will be useful to have it posted here?  I hope somebody can do that.  I
would dare to say only this:  Road racing is much more about the race car
driver, and the outcome of road races has more to do with the driving skills
during the race, less to do with the pit crew, race strategy, pitting
strategy and so forth.  Oval racing is the opposite, it is more like a chess
game and the outcome of oval races is less dependent on actually race
driving skills than pit crew and strategy.  Notice, I didn't say any of the
skills to win a race of both types....were completely missing in either form
of the motorsport.  Maybe it would be safe to say something like:  In road
racing, the outcome is based something like 60% on the driving skills and
40% on strategy, crew and team.....and in oval racing, the outcome is
something like 40% driving skills and 60% strategy, crew and team.  I don't
know that this is a completely fair statement, but it seems like it is to
me.

4.  Whether one personally likes one form of the motorsport over the other,
is mostly just that, personal taste.  However, I have found that when
someone gains deeper knowledge and understanding of the "other form" they
don't care for as much.....that tends to change their thoughts about it.
Isn't that just human nature?

5.  Statements about one sim or another being "boring" reflect, in my
opinion, only the "type" of sim driver the person is.  There are many
different levels of sim drivers in this community.  And, I think it would be
reasonable to form some kind of a general statement about the "categories"
along these lines:

    **Arcade/Game Racer**:  Likes to drive mostly sims that are easy to
drive.  Looks for "instant thrills and gratification" when driving and
doesn't really care about racing skills (strategy, racing lines, avoiding
collisions, etc.).  Usually drives from the "F2" view.

    **Arcade/Sim Racer**:  Still likes sims that are mostly easy to drive.
Pays more attention to racing lines and is likely to be turned on by
hotlapping activities.  Still doesn't care much about racing strategy or
racing lines, except where they can improve their "flyer" laps for a good
lap time.  Primarily doesn't understand the term "racing line" as opposed to
"fastest line" through a road course or oval track.  Tends to drive from the
***pit, but doesn't mind driving from the F2 view if it makes them post a
faster lap time.  Brags about their PB's at race tracks.

    **Sim Racer**:  Doesn't care for sims that are easy to drive (although
still owns a few of them and runs them from time to time for pure fun).
Likes sims that have realistic car physics and are difficult to learn to
drive.  Almost always drives from the***pit view (99% of the time).  Still
is less interested in racing strategy, enjoys short races and hotlapping as
their primary sim racing activity.  Likes racing online more than offline
against the AI for that reason.

    **Serious Sim Racer**:  Doesn't keep sims that are easy to drive
installed on their computers (but generally tries them all out when they are
released).  Looks for realistic car physics and sims where the race car is
difficult to drive fast over long periods of racing sessions.  Generally
doesn't "hotlap" and primarily participates in online league racing where
race strategy is more important than fast laps.  Looks at a new sim from the
"total simulation" aspect - meaning, how well does the sim "simulate" that
particular form of racing, or series racing in total.  Never drives from
anything but the***pit view, probably has never even done a lap in the F2
view.

I'm sure these "categories" can be expanded, the definitions expanded and
maybe even sub-categories within each of the four created (levels).  I just
wanted to point out that there are different types of sim drivers in this
community...with different aspirations and expectations of what they like or
want in a new racing sim.....based on what type of sim driver they are.  I
would also like to point out that you can migrate from one type to another,
and many of us have done that.

So, with this in mind (and giving lots of flexibility to the definitions and
categories I've written) - doesn't make a lot of sense that an "Arcade/Game
Racer" would think that N-2002 (except for the two road courses) is
"boring."  On the other hand, a "Serious Sim Racer" would maybe think
something like Viper Racing or even Midtown Madness was totally boring?

Making comments about "boring this" or "unrealistic that" only serve to
categorize the writer.  It does not describe the racing sim in any
meaningful way.

Just my two cents (about $3 worth)....sorry for the length, but it seemed
like an important topic?

Regards,

Tom

John Pancoas

"Boring" - "Oval Racing" and "Road Racing"

by John Pancoas » Tue, 01 Jan 2002 08:12:37

  I always get a kick out of the comments too :)  Try to stay out of it
myself..........but one thing always noticed is how many open wheel fans
slam oval racing..........but how few oval fans slam open wheel
racing....hmmmmm    :)

  I like, always have, both, in real racing and simming.

-John


Christopher G Rossi

"Boring" - "Oval Racing" and "Road Racing"

by Christopher G Rossi » Tue, 01 Jan 2002 09:09:04

Tom, I also notice conflicts between oval and road racing. I am not
puzzled
by this. I started out as a fan of open wheel midgets and their big
brothers
the AAA Champ cars that ran on the dirt miles -- Syracuse, Langhorne,
and
the holy of holies -- IMS.

As a result I went all through high school having endless arguments with
a couple
of friends who loved road racing -- this was the era of Fangio and Moss.
One of
these guys raced at Sebring I believe and then ended up driving
modifieds at the
old Shanangra-La (sp?) 1/2 mile asphalt of all things.

My accepting of road racing took about 10 seconds when on Friday the 6th
of October
1961 I walked up to the fence that is opposite the pits at the Glen
(right where
the road that crosses the track and heads up the hill behind the pits
was located)
and I see a car rolling over just above the 90 and some kind of lump is
left on the
track. That lump gets up and walks away! It was Olivier Gendebien. Right
there I knew
that all racing is the same to me in the way that it counts for me.
Brave folks driving
fast beautiful 'noisy' cars.

arcman


> It seems to me the release of the N-2002 demo has rekindled the chide
> remarks about NASCAR racing, oval racing and cries of "boredom" running the
> sims we have available to us depicting those motorsports.  The sides are not
> well defined, but can generally be divided on the broad basis of geography -
> between the Europeans and the Americans.  Sadly, the chide remarks don't
> help the discussion, naturally.

<snip>
> Regards,

> Tom

Morgan V. Woote

"Boring" - "Oval Racing" and "Road Racing"

by Morgan V. Woote » Tue, 01 Jan 2002 09:20:15

Good Lord...

I'm an oval racer and road racer. I don't think either is boring although I
can certainly understand how Europeans can get the idea that oval racing is
boring when all they see is Winston Cup and ASCAR pretty boys who care more
about points and cash than actual racing, running around boring 1.5 Las
Vegas clones for four hours at a time. It's unfortunate they don't get to
see what real stock car racing is about in the ASA, USAR, regional NASCAR
touring series', etc.. It's also unfortunate that so many American oval
racing fans are prejudiced about road racing. I'd love to see more oval
series' running maybe 20% to 40% road courses in addition to perhaps 70%
short ovals and an occasional 1-mile+ speedway for special events.

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Morgan Vincent Wooten
System Specs:
    http://www.racesimcentral.net/
-----------------------------------------------------------------


Alan Coate

"Boring" - "Oval Racing" and "Road Racing"

by Alan Coate » Tue, 01 Jan 2002 09:29:44

As a European (UK) and speaking personally, I have a great respect for all
forms of motor racing. Not least because it is a sport where one can get
seriously injured or killed.

It is sad that despite sattelite tv in the UK we do not get much chance to
see Nascar, Cart or IRL etc. So it is a great unknown to the average UK
lover of ms. Unfortunately there are too many people who will dismiss the
quality and skills of these sports because of the lack of TV coverage,
assuming that tv companies would only cover worthwhile programs.(JOKE).

Still, having attempted to play Nascar 4 and the new demo has only deepened
my admiration for the real drivers who participate in this scary (3 or 4
a*** at 200+ on a corner) sport. And my attempts at the short oval tracks
is a bit of a joke. And yet GPL which seems to most to be the REAL sim I do
well at.

I probably would not agree with all that Tom said in the original post but I
think the flavour of it rings true. BTW I would not buy an arcade racer if
my life depended upon it!

Just a point, in Nascar you can draught and pass, modern day F1 seems to
have lost the ability here. Wouldn't it be great to see the wings removed
from F1 cars?

Alan

Jens H. Kruus

"Boring" - "Oval Racing" and "Road Racing"

by Jens H. Kruus » Tue, 01 Jan 2002 09:33:21



<Snip a lot! Some good, some bad.>

Personally I don't enjoy watching or driving on Ovaloid tracks. Could very well
be because I have never, ever watched a complete race and have only seen 15 min.
summeries, which don't tell you anything at all about the race. Bad tv coverage
is the reason. I have tried it once or twice in GPL but it didn't tickle my
fancy. Just a matter of personal opinion,- I don't like it but I don't slam
those who do.

Regarding your categories of simmers/gamers, I think you are going at it in the
wrong way by lumping people in those categories. I think a better way of looking
at it would be to compare it to eg. a football fan. You have your casual
watchers, your interested watcher, your serious fans, and the grognards.
Regardless of which way you split the groups, there will be some in each group
who fancies the passing game, some like the defensive game, some enjoy the
kicking game, some are thrilled by a good run, etc. In a similar way, you can
have all types of simmer/gamers who like to race other humans, some who enjoy
hotlapping, some who fancy short races, some who like ovals better than road
courses, etc. See what I mean?

Cheers,
Jens

Txl

"Boring" - "Oval Racing" and "Road Racing"

by Txl » Tue, 01 Jan 2002 09:34:59

Generally speaking american sports are more "show" than european ones...the
rules, the format (TV), the players, everything is more "show" in the
states....good or bad is another question...

On top of this american football is a spinoff from rugby, not football....

Just like baseball is a spinoff from cricket...

Basketball is the only "real" american sport, maybe that's why you're so
good at it...



Mario Petrinovi

"Boring" - "Oval Racing" and "Road Racing"

by Mario Petrinovi » Tue, 01 Jan 2002 09:33:34

        Tom, man, with all respect, I have some serious comments about
what you wrote.
        In most worshiped for off road racing, it isn't driver who wins, but
the constructor of silver machine. Driver wins only when is in most
powerfull car. On the other hand, in oval racing you the same driver won
7 times championship with all the different makes. I mean Mikka Hakinnen
will again win championship only if he again sit in most powerfull car.
        I must tell my story again. I'm European who was watching F1 since
1973, and I can tell you, when cars are equal, suddenly you see that
difference in driving skill is actually small amongst the fastest. In that
situation strategy become more important. I know, I saw it in 70's.
Problem with F1 is that there is no equality. People who watch that
don't watch racing, but procession of silver expensive machines. They
are elitist, but not for racing. It isn't strange that most famous F1 race
is
in money mekka. F1 has so big audience because money has biger audience
than racing. They don't want to bother themselfs with racing. F1 world
with their point system and their rules, is ajusted for that kind of
audience.
You know two names, and this is enough for you to be expert in F1. Add
another name, and it will be too much for them to remember, and money
will go somewhere else.


Mario Petrinovi

"Boring" - "Oval Racing" and "Road Racing"

by Mario Petrinovi » Tue, 01 Jan 2002 09:41:52

        Sorry for bad English. It wa sto be " In most worshiped form of
road racing"


jason moy

"Boring" - "Oval Racing" and "Road Racing"

by jason moy » Tue, 01 Jan 2002 10:04:48

This is why we need a CART sim. =)  People who had roadies can hotlap
Michigan for awhile, people who hate ovals can bang off the walls at
Long Beach.

Seriously, I dunno why no one is cashing in on a CART sim, it wouldn't
sell as well as NASCAR but you know every single racing sim fan would
want it.  It could also be one of those rare instances where a sim
attracts more fans to the sport it's simulating.

Jason


> I always get a kick out of the comments too :)  Try to stay out of it
> myself..........but one thing always noticed is how many open wheel fans
> slam oval racing..........but how few oval fans slam open wheel
> racing....hmmmmm    :)

>   I like, always have, both, in real racing and simming.

> -John



> > It seems to me the release of the N-2002 demo has rekindled the chide
> > remarks about NASCAR racing, oval racing and cries of "boredom" running
>  the
> > sims we have available to us depicting those motorsports.  The sides are
>  not
> > well defined, but can generally be divided on the broad basis of
>  geography -
> > between the Europeans and the Americans.  Sadly, the chide remarks don't
> > help the discussion, naturally.

> > Here's my "two cents:"

> > 1.  Comparing road racing and oval racing is like comparing American
> > football to soccer.  They are similar sports, played on similar types of
> > fields, both use a single ball (of different shape) and the goal is to
>  score
> > points by moving the ball up the field to a "goal."  Past that, they are
> > night and day to each other, and attempts to apply adjectives to them like
> > "boring," "lacking skills," etc., is mostly a complete waste of time and
> > indicative of the writer's complete lack of understanding about them (or
> > lack of understanding about one of them).

> > 2.  The same would be true of motorsports (IMHO).  If you follow and
> > appreciate (meaning = fully understand) road racing, but not oval racing -
> > then how is it you can make comparisons between the two motorsports that
> > create these chide comments?   I would like to add, the reverse applies if
> > you follow and appreciate oval racing, but not road racing.

> > [I would like to add:  Nothing about NASCAR racing is "redneck" today.
> > Certainly, not any more than F1 racing is only about the European "elite
> > socialites" - both are false terms based on the heritage of the two
>  sports,
> > and do not apply to them today. - IMHO].

> > 3.  I'm not going into a long definition/description of the two forms of
> > motor racing - but perhaps there is a good website that does this and it
> > will be useful to have it posted here?  I hope somebody can do that.  I
> > would dare to say only this:  Road racing is much more about the race car
> > driver, and the outcome of road races has more to do with the driving
>  skills
> > during the race, less to do with the pit crew, race strategy, pitting
> > strategy and so forth.  Oval racing is the opposite, it is more like a
>  chess
> > game and the outcome of oval races is less dependent on actually race
> > driving skills than pit crew and strategy.  Notice, I didn't say any of
>  the
> > skills to win a race of both types....were completely missing in either
>  form
> > of the motorsport.  Maybe it would be safe to say something like:  In road
> > racing, the outcome is based something like 60% on the driving skills and
> > 40% on strategy, crew and team.....and in oval racing, the outcome is
> > something like 40% driving skills and 60% strategy, crew and team.  I
>  don't
> > know that this is a completely fair statement, but it seems like it is to
> > me.

> > 4.  Whether one personally likes one form of the motorsport over the
>  other,
> > is mostly just that, personal taste.  However, I have found that when
> > someone gains deeper knowledge and understanding of the "other form" they
> > don't care for as much.....that tends to change their thoughts about it.
> > Isn't that just human nature?

> > 5.  Statements about one sim or another being "boring" reflect, in my
> > opinion, only the "type" of sim driver the person is.  There are many
> > different levels of sim drivers in this community.  And, I think it would
>  be
> > reasonable to form some kind of a general statement about the "categories"
> > along these lines:

> >     **Arcade/Game Racer**:  Likes to drive mostly sims that are easy to
> > drive.  Looks for "instant thrills and gratification" when driving and
> > doesn't really care about racing skills (strategy, racing lines, avoiding
> > collisions, etc.).  Usually drives from the "F2" view.

> >     **Arcade/Sim Racer**:  Still likes sims that are mostly easy to drive.
> > Pays more attention to racing lines and is likely to be turned on by
> > hotlapping activities.  Still doesn't care much about racing strategy or
> > racing lines, except where they can improve their "flyer" laps for a good
> > lap time.  Primarily doesn't understand the term "racing line" as opposed
>  to
> > "fastest line" through a road course or oval track.  Tends to drive from
>  the
> >***pit, but doesn't mind driving from the F2 view if it makes them post a
> > faster lap time.  Brags about their PB's at race tracks.

> >     **Sim Racer**:  Doesn't care for sims that are easy to drive (although
> > still owns a few of them and runs them from time to time for pure fun).
> > Likes sims that have realistic car physics and are difficult to learn to
> > drive.  Almost always drives from the***pit view (99% of the time).
>  Still
> > is less interested in racing strategy, enjoys short races and hotlapping
>  as
> > their primary sim racing activity.  Likes racing online more than offline
> > against the AI for that reason.

> >     **Serious Sim Racer**:  Doesn't keep sims that are easy to drive
> > installed on their computers (but generally tries them all out when they
>  are
> > released).  Looks for realistic car physics and sims where the race car is
> > difficult to drive fast over long periods of racing sessions.  Generally
> > doesn't "hotlap" and primarily participates in online league racing where
> > race strategy is more important than fast laps.  Looks at a new sim from
>  the
> > "total simulation" aspect - meaning, how well does the sim "simulate" that
> > particular form of racing, or series racing in total.  Never drives from
> > anything but the***pit view, probably has never even done a lap in the
>  F2
> > view.

> > I'm sure these "categories" can be expanded, the definitions expanded and
> > maybe even sub-categories within each of the four created (levels).  I
>  just
> > wanted to point out that there are different types of sim drivers in this
> > community...with different aspirations and expectations of what they like
>  or
> > want in a new racing sim.....based on what type of sim driver they are.  I
> > would also like to point out that you can migrate from one type to
>  another,
> > and many of us have done that.

> > So, with this in mind (and giving lots of flexibility to the definitions
>  and
> > categories I've written) - doesn't make a lot of sense that an
>  "Arcade/Game
> > Racer" would think that N-2002 (except for the two road courses) is
> > "boring."  On the other hand, a "Serious Sim Racer" would maybe think
> > something like Viper Racing or even Midtown Madness was totally boring?

> > Making comments about "boring this" or "unrealistic that" only serve to
> > categorize the writer.  It does not describe the racing sim in any
> > meaningful way.

> > Just my two cents (about $3 worth)....sorry for the length, but it seemed
> > like an important topic?

> > Regards,

> > Tom

send reply to excite.co

"Boring" - "Oval Racing" and "Road Racing"

by send reply to excite.co » Tue, 01 Jan 2002 10:07:12


It's a lot of the NIH symptom (Not Invented Here).

Oval racing is mainly in endurance, drafting, fuel strategy,
and finding the setup for the proper racing line. These
aspects aren't exactly "obvious" to non-fans.

Similarly, road-racing (Grand Prix) is about having good
endurance, fuel strategy, knowing what corners to pass,
and so on. Those aren't exactly obvious to non-fans either.

To each their own. I enjoy ALL FORMS of racing (heck
I like to watch horse racing too).

--KC

TRUSRS

"Boring" - "Oval Racing" and "Road Racing"

by TRUSRS » Tue, 01 Jan 2002 10:31:44

CART
JM

"Boring" - "Oval Racing" and "Road Racing"

by JM » Tue, 01 Jan 2002 10:42:53



Interesting, in my experience the reverse is true :o)

cheers
John

Christopher G Rossi

"Boring" - "Oval Racing" and "Road Racing"

by Christopher G Rossi » Tue, 01 Jan 2002 11:21:56

With a pinch of DIRT for flavor!
arcman

> CART

Tom Pabs

"Boring" - "Oval Racing" and "Road Racing"

by Tom Pabs » Tue, 01 Jan 2002 12:20:55

I'm tending to think of the "slamming" as being equally divided between the
two.....just depends on what day you come here.

TP


>   I always get a kick out of the comments too :)  Try to stay out of it
> myself..........but one thing always noticed is how many open wheel fans
> slam oval racing..........but how few oval fans slam open wheel
> racing....hmmmmm    :)

>   I like, always have, both, in real racing and simming.

> -John



> > It seems to me the release of the N-2002 demo has rekindled the chide
> > remarks about NASCAR racing, oval racing and cries of "boredom" running
> the
> > sims we have available to us depicting those motorsports.  The sides are
> not
> > well defined, but can generally be divided on the broad basis of
> geography -
> > between the Europeans and the Americans.  Sadly, the chide remarks don't
> > help the discussion, naturally.

> > Here's my "two cents:"

> > 1.  Comparing road racing and oval racing is like comparing American
> > football to soccer.  They are similar sports, played on similar types of
> > fields, both use a single ball (of different shape) and the goal is to
> score
> > points by moving the ball up the field to a "goal."  Past that, they are
> > night and day to each other, and attempts to apply adjectives to them
like
> > "boring," "lacking skills," etc., is mostly a complete waste of time and
> > indicative of the writer's complete lack of understanding about them (or
> > lack of understanding about one of them).

> > 2.  The same would be true of motorsports (IMHO).  If you follow and
> > appreciate (meaning = fully understand) road racing, but not oval
racing -
> > then how is it you can make comparisons between the two motorsports that
> > create these chide comments?   I would like to add, the reverse applies
if
> > you follow and appreciate oval racing, but not road racing.

> > [I would like to add:  Nothing about NASCAR racing is "redneck" today.
> > Certainly, not any more than F1 racing is only about the European "elite
> > socialites" - both are false terms based on the heritage of the two
> sports,
> > and do not apply to them today. - IMHO].

> > 3.  I'm not going into a long definition/description of the two forms of
> > motor racing - but perhaps there is a good website that does this and it
> > will be useful to have it posted here?  I hope somebody can do that.  I
> > would dare to say only this:  Road racing is much more about the race
car
> > driver, and the outcome of road races has more to do with the driving
> skills
> > during the race, less to do with the pit crew, race strategy, pitting
> > strategy and so forth.  Oval racing is the opposite, it is more like a
> chess
> > game and the outcome of oval races is less dependent on actually race
> > driving skills than pit crew and strategy.  Notice, I didn't say any of
> the
> > skills to win a race of both types....were completely missing in either
> form
> > of the motorsport.  Maybe it would be safe to say something like:  In
road
> > racing, the outcome is based something like 60% on the driving skills
and
> > 40% on strategy, crew and team.....and in oval racing, the outcome is
> > something like 40% driving skills and 60% strategy, crew and team.  I
> don't
> > know that this is a completely fair statement, but it seems like it is
to
> > me.

> > 4.  Whether one personally likes one form of the motorsport over the
> other,
> > is mostly just that, personal taste.  However, I have found that when
> > someone gains deeper knowledge and understanding of the "other form"
they
> > don't care for as much.....that tends to change their thoughts about it.
> > Isn't that just human nature?

> > 5.  Statements about one sim or another being "boring" reflect, in my
> > opinion, only the "type" of sim driver the person is.  There are many
> > different levels of sim drivers in this community.  And, I think it
would
> be
> > reasonable to form some kind of a general statement about the
"categories"
> > along these lines:

> >     **Arcade/Game Racer**:  Likes to drive mostly sims that are easy to
> > drive.  Looks for "instant thrills and gratification" when driving and
> > doesn't really care about racing skills (strategy, racing lines,
avoiding
> > collisions, etc.).  Usually drives from the "F2" view.

> >     **Arcade/Sim Racer**:  Still likes sims that are mostly easy to
drive.
> > Pays more attention to racing lines and is likely to be turned on by
> > hotlapping activities.  Still doesn't care much about racing strategy or
> > racing lines, except where they can improve their "flyer" laps for a
good
> > lap time.  Primarily doesn't understand the term "racing line" as
opposed
> to
> > "fastest line" through a road course or oval track.  Tends to drive from
> the
> >***pit, but doesn't mind driving from the F2 view if it makes them post
a
> > faster lap time.  Brags about their PB's at race tracks.

> >     **Sim Racer**:  Doesn't care for sims that are easy to drive
(although
> > still owns a few of them and runs them from time to time for pure fun).
> > Likes sims that have realistic car physics and are difficult to learn to
> > drive.  Almost always drives from the***pit view (99% of the time).
> Still
> > is less interested in racing strategy, enjoys short races and hotlapping
> as
> > their primary sim racing activity.  Likes racing online more than
offline
> > against the AI for that reason.

> >     **Serious Sim Racer**:  Doesn't keep sims that are easy to drive
> > installed on their computers (but generally tries them all out when they
> are
> > released).  Looks for realistic car physics and sims where the race car
is
> > difficult to drive fast over long periods of racing sessions.  Generally
> > doesn't "hotlap" and primarily participates in online league racing
where
> > race strategy is more important than fast laps.  Looks at a new sim from
> the
> > "total simulation" aspect - meaning, how well does the sim "simulate"
that
> > particular form of racing, or series racing in total.  Never drives from
> > anything but the***pit view, probably has never even done a lap in the
> F2
> > view.

> > I'm sure these "categories" can be expanded, the definitions expanded
and
> > maybe even sub-categories within each of the four created (levels).  I
> just
> > wanted to point out that there are different types of sim drivers in
this
> > community...with different aspirations and expectations of what they
like
> or
> > want in a new racing sim.....based on what type of sim driver they are.
I
> > would also like to point out that you can migrate from one type to
> another,
> > and many of us have done that.

> > So, with this in mind (and giving lots of flexibility to the definitions
> and
> > categories I've written) - doesn't make a lot of sense that an
> "Arcade/Game
> > Racer" would think that N-2002 (except for the two road courses) is
> > "boring."  On the other hand, a "Serious Sim Racer" would maybe think
> > something like Viper Racing or even Midtown Madness was totally boring?

> > Making comments about "boring this" or "unrealistic that" only serve to
> > categorize the writer.  It does not describe the racing sim in any
> > meaningful way.

> > Just my two cents (about $3 worth)....sorry for the length, but it
seemed
> > like an important topic?

> > Regards,

> > Tom


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.