rec.autos.simulators

by **Jenera** » Sat, 05 Aug 2000 04:00:00

After having downloaded some great tracks for GP3, I wondered - Why doesn't
Mr. Crammond and his team use the tracks made available by all the various
people on the Internet? Admittedly, GP3's tracks are improved from GP2's but
there are still a few errors that most 3rd party tracks correct. The reason
I'm getting at this is, when GP4 (or 2.7 in some people's opinion : ) is
released, will Hockenheim finally look like it is supposed to? I mean how
hard can it be to put some elevation at the Ostkurve? Run-off areas and
unused parts of tracks (like in last week's GP of Germany qualifying,
notice HHF bypassing chicanes? Why aren't they in the game?) would also be
nice. All the talented people on the Internet are already doing the work for
him, why not take advantage of it?

Michael M

by **Alexander Mar** » Sat, 05 Aug 2000 04:00:00

I agree, but apart from the issues that you've mentioned, Hockenheim in GP3
is the best ever seen in a sim, especially the mobil curve... they got that
one just right. Looking at the GP3 monza I can't seem to lose that feeling
that crammond did in fact take a very close look at the user created Monza
tracks out there - it's very similar. The missing run-off areas are a
design choice that should keep people from running unrealistic lines and
cutting the chicanes - you can argue about that, but it's done on purpose.

by **Karl Zose** » Sat, 05 Aug 2000 04:00:00

I am very against the way Mr Crammond and co do bussiness, and I will NOT
buy GP 2.5
All effort goes into advertising, very little in programming.

BUT: apart from some armco in the chicanes on some tracks, I always found
tracks in GP2 were very accurate.

by **Douglas Elliso** » Sat, 05 Aug 2000 04:00:00

Rubbish.

That's what his black flag idea is for (slows you up for 10 seconds!)

There is no excuse for the chronic mistakes in some tracks. The Hockenheim
is one of the worse. I must admit, it's very poor that there is only ever
track, curb, grass or gravel. I love GP3 over F12000, but at least F12000
got the circuit layout right (even if the elevation was SOoo bad it's not
even funny)

by **GraDe** » Sun, 06 Aug 2000 04:00:00

Actually the structure of the tracks (providing there are no major changes
from GP2, obviously not) does not allow the addition of such run off spaces
like the one HHF by-passed. You could probably makeit so that it looked as
thought there was a by-pas but if you drove on it would feel like gravel.

by **Dave Henri** » Sun, 06 Aug 2000 04:00:00

The biggest single reason why companies rarely use private efforts are
because of Lawyers. Corporate lawyers prevent companies from exposing
themselves to lawsuits and this limits the outside materials they can use.
Plus
especially in real world sims like racing, the tracks and various other
participants want their own cut. So if GP3 starts marketing a-lot of well
built
addons by private users, the track owners will sick "THIER" lawyers on
Hasbro. Same with the Sponsors, the Participants etc etc...
dave henrie

by **Matthew V. Jessic** » Sun, 06 Aug 2000 04:00:00

> The biggest single reason why companies rarely use private efforts are
> because of Lawyers.

Nah, actually it's because at least when one of your own
track designers / artists puts an outhouse on the track grounds
with your name on it it's comforting to be able to walk
down the hall and beat them up ;)

- Matt

by **Eldre** » Sun, 06 Aug 2000 04:00:00

> The biggest single reason why companies rarely use private efforts are
>because of Lawyers. Corporate lawyers prevent companies from exposing
>themselves to lawsuits and this limits the outside materials they can use.
>Plus
>especially in real world sims like racing, the tracks and various other
>participants want their own cut. So if GP3 starts marketing a-lot of well
>built
>addons by private users, the track owners will sick "THIER" lawyers on
>Hasbro. Same with the Sponsors, the Participants etc etc...
>dave henrie

So why not make an agreement with those 'private' designers? I've seen a few
game expansions that had 'best of the net' compilations as well as 'in-house'
work...

Eldred
--
Tiger Stadium R.I.P. 1912-1999
Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett
GPL hcp. +52.52

Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you
with experience...
Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

by **Dave Henri** » Mon, 07 Aug 2000 04:00:00

Henrie"

> > The biggest single reason why companies rarely use private efforts are
> >because of Lawyers. > So why not make an agreement with those 'private'

designers? I've seen a few
Because you have more layers of participants. You have the FIA, the Local
track, even the EuroCommerce thing....If somebody puts up a track with
Joe Camel Advertising, it fall afoul of many international regulations the
list goes onandonandon.

dave henrie

by **Davi** » Mon, 07 Aug 2000 04:00:00

YOu know that makes me laugh since I recently read that Hyperstimulator at
a Booth at a car show was using Danny Gelston's creation of Bathurst
without even asking him for permission or even informing him. they were
also charging for rides. I can understand that since its there hardware,
but I would be willing to bet one reason they were able to charge was due
to having Bathurst available for people to drive.

With all the work guys are doing for games and not getting even a attaboy
for it I can understand why Dave Noonan charges for his convertor.

Dave

> Henrie"

> > > The biggest single reason why companies rarely use private efforts
are
> > >because of Lawyers. > So why not make an agreement with those
'private'
> designers? I've seen a few
> > game expansions that had 'best of the net' compilations as well as
> 'in-house'
> > work...

> > Eldred
> Because you have more layers of participants. You have the FIA, the
Local
> track, even the EuroCommerce thing....If somebody puts up a track with
> Joe Camel Advertising, it fall afoul of many international regulations
the
> list goes onandonandon.

> dave henrie

by **Dave Henri** » Mon, 07 Aug 2000 04:00:00

Boy that raises a thorny issue...most of the tracks have some line in the
release statement saying it is ok to distrbute blah blah blah as long as
they don't charge anything...hmmmm I wonder if Hyperstim violated that by
chargeing for rides....couldn't Danny Gelston "reasonably" expect a part of
whatever money the hyperstim guys brought in???
fortunately I'm not a lawyer so I can't answer that...let alone an Aussie
lawyer.
dave henrie

> With all the work guys are doing for games and not getting even a attaboy
> for it I can understand why Dave Noonan charges for his convertor.

> Dave

> > Henrie"

> > > > The biggest single reason why companies rarely use private efforts
> are
> > > >because of Lawyers. > So why not make an agreement with those
> 'private'
> > designers? I've seen a few
> > > game expansions that had 'best of the net' compilations as well as
> > 'in-house'
> > > work...

> > > Eldred
> > Because you have more layers of participants. You have the FIA, the
> Local
> > track, even the EuroCommerce thing....If somebody puts up a track with
> > Joe Camel Advertising, it fall afoul of many international regulations
> the
> > list goes onandonandon.

> > dave henrie

rec.autos.simulators

GP3: Why Don't The Developers Use 3rd-Party Tracks?

GP3: Why Don't The Developers Use 3rd-Party Tracks?

GP3: Why Don't The Developers Use 3rd-Party Tracks?

GP3: Why Don't The Developers Use 3rd-Party Tracks?

GP3: Why Don't The Developers Use 3rd-Party Tracks?

GP3: Why Don't The Developers Use 3rd-Party Tracks?

GP3: Why Don't The Developers Use 3rd-Party Tracks?

GP3: Why Don't The Developers Use 3rd-Party Tracks?

GP3: Why Don't The Developers Use 3rd-Party Tracks?

GP3: Why Don't The Developers Use 3rd-Party Tracks?

GP3: Why Don't The Developers Use 3rd-Party Tracks?

GP3: Why Don't The Developers Use 3rd-Party Tracks?