Oh, I wasn't speaking of necessarily just here, but you're right.
news:rQQX7.30039$uM.259858@rwcrnsc54...
> I'm tending to think of the "slamming" as being equally divided between
the
> two.....just depends on what day you come here.
> TP
> "John Pancoast" <jpanco...@tetontel.com> wrote in message
> news:u2v7p8drbgmg95@corp.supernews.com...
> > I always get a kick out of the comments too :) Try to stay out of it
> > myself..........but one thing always noticed is how many open wheel fans
> > slam oval racing..........but how few oval fans slam open wheel
> > racing....hmmmmm :)
> > I like, always have, both, in real racing and simming.
> > -John
> > Tom Pabst <tmpa...@attbi.com> wrote in message
> > news:%3NX7.28804$uM.247135@rwcrnsc54...
> > > 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
> > > cockpit, 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 cockpit 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 cockpit 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
