N2002 or N4???

Ok I seriously don't mean to start a debate about which is better, but I'm ready to get back into Nascar racing and don't know anything about either titles. So I'm hoping some of ya'll can give me some pointers...... I've played GPL for some time. I want real simulation, no arcade stuff. Good community support. And most importantly, ONLINE RACING. Which sim has the best online quality? Thanks!

N2002 is what you want if you want online. Mostly because that's what the majority are running. -- Sean Higgins PRI-- http://www.performance-racing.net/ My Ferrari pics http://home.sprintmail.com/~higgy/ "Ken Tarvin (Bahnzo)" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Ok I seriously don't mean to start a debate about which is better, but I'm > ready to get back into Nascar racing and don't know anything about either > titles. So I'm hoping some of ya'll can give me some pointers...... > > I've played GPL for some time. > I want real simulation, no arcade stuff. > Good community support. > And most importantly, ONLINE RACING. Which sim has the best online quality? > > Thanks! >

Since they are both from papy and Nr2002 is the current release, I recommend it. There isn't that many people still playing N4 on-line anymore and most leagues have switched as well. They are similar in many ways, but 2002 improved the gfx, car shape, and with the patches many other little things. N4 was a GIANT leap over N3 for realism, 2002 was a smaller jump over N4, but still much improved in the driveability department. There are those that feel it was a ripoff and should have been a patch to N4 but I don't agree, IMO they problably were upset about having to spend money, and lashing out. -- Biz "Don't touch that please, your primitive intellect wouldn't understand alloys and compositions and,......things with molecular structures,....and the....." - Ash Ken Tarvin (Bahnzo) <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Ok I seriously don't mean to start a debate about which is better, but I'm > ready to get back into Nascar racing and don't know anything about either > titles. So I'm hoping some of ya'll can give me some pointers...... > > I've played GPL for some time. > I want real simulation, no arcade stuff. > Good community support. > And most importantly, ONLINE RACING. Which sim has the best online quality? > > Thanks! >

>"Ken Tarvin (Bahnzo)" <[email hidden]> wrote > Ok I seriously don't mean to start a debate about which is better It's okay, nobody would say N4. NR2002 is simply an evolution of N4, therefore it's evidently superior. Like N2 was superior to the original Nascar Racing, or N3 versus N2. Or N4 versus N3 (see my point?) :) > And most importantly, ONLINE RACING. Which sim has the best onlinequality? When Papyrus releases a new stockcar sim, the community migrates to it. NR2002 is the only way to go. -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- http://www.ymenard.8m.com/ -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez Corporation - helping America into the New World...

If you enjoy this game and sim racing it is a very small price to pay each year for even minor improvements. I'll gladly by NASCAR 2003 and the rest as they come out as long as Papy continues to build on what they have. "Player" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Sun, 07 Jul 2002 05:11:59 GMT, "Biz" <[email hidden]> > posted: > > >There are those that feel it was a ripoff and should have > >been a patch to N4 but I don't agree, IMO they problably were upset abouthaving to spend money, and > >lashing out. > > You will be too once you find out that you have to buy a new version > *every* year to be able to play online with your mates.

"Find out"?, I've known about it for quite awhile, and thanks for proving my point, $30-40US a year for a great game that I get 100's of hours of enjoyment out of makes it one of the best investments I make in pc software every year.... -- Biz "Don't touch that please, your primitive intellect wouldn't understand alloys and compositions and,......things with molecular structures,....and the....." - Ash Player <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Sun, 07 Jul 2002 05:11:59 GMT, "Biz" <[email hidden]> > posted: > > >There are those that feel it was a ripoff and should have > >been a patch to N4 but I don't agree, IMO they problably were upset about having to spend money, and > >lashing out. > > You will be too once you find out that you have to buy a new version > *every* year to be able to play online with your mates.

On Sun, 07 Jul 2002 10:19:27 -0400, Player <[email hidden]> wrote: >You will be too once you find out that you have to buy a new version >*every* year to be able to play online with your mates. Big Deal! What does the cost come out to? Less than a dollar a week? Like I said..."Big Deal"! Jim Tester

Exactly. People bitch that Papy doesn't make new sims then they bitch when a new version comes out. Perhaps this new sales model will allow Papy to not only do yearly updates to NASCAR but maybe create a new sim as well. "Jim Tester" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (11 lines)

> On Sun, 07 Jul 2002 10:19:27 -0400, Player <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >You will be too once you find out that you have to buy a new version > >*every* year to be able to play online with your mates. > > Big Deal! What does the cost come out to? Less than a dollar a week? > > > Like I said..."Big Deal"! > > Jim Tester

If you are going to do Online Racing, then the decision is made for you. While some still run N4, and maybe even N3 online, NR2002 has the bulk of the Online Activity. And since you have to run not only the same game version, but the same patch version as everyone else, you have no decision but NR2002 if you want the best online experience. -Larry "Ken Tarvin (Bahnzo)" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (8 lines)

> Ok I seriously don't mean to start a debate about which is better, but I'm > ready to get back into Nascar racing and don't know anything about either > titles. So I'm hoping some of ya'll can give me some pointers...... > > I've played GPL for some time. > I want real simulation, no arcade stuff. > Good community support. > And most importantly, ONLINE RACING. Which sim has the best online

quality? > > Thanks! >

On Sun, 07 Jul 2002 14:25:51 -0400, Player #2 <[email hidden]> wrote: > >When every game on the planet uses the same business model you will >soon change your apethetic attitude. Dear "Player #2"... I have no interest in buying every game on the planet. Nor could I afford to do so if I HAD an interest! And just FYI...the definition of an "apethetic attitude" is: "Feeling or showing a lack of interest or concern; indifferent." "Feeling or showing little or no emotion; unresponsive." The very fact that I responded to your post shows that I have an interest...and am not indifferent. Therefore, my attitude cannot be described as "apethetic". Jim Tester

On Sun, 07 Jul 2002 20:21:49 -0400, Player #7 <[email hidden]> wrote: >I wasn't talking about your attitude towards me but rather an >indifference to being charged full price for the same game over and >over. No wonder there are no revolutions anymore. ;-) > Ok...I give. This is going nowhere. You're right...I'm wrong...let's just drop it. Believe me...I've done my share of revolting in my 63 years. If the cause was worth it. This one isn't. ;-) Jim Tester

Well, I liked N4 better since setting up a car is more important to me in any sim, plus once I saw drafting at Texas and California in N2002 :) I don't know where you get that leap that an evolution of a product is automatically an improvement. Maybe I am misunderstanding what your saying but since Papy clearly dummied down the physics from N4 I wouldn't necessarily call it a blanket improvement. jmo -- Tim White INTRAC Motorsports www.birds-i-view.com/intrac "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:iWRV8.3$[email hidden]... > >"Ken Tarvin (Bahnzo)" <[email hidden]> wrote > > Ok I seriously don't mean to start a debate about which is better > > It's okay, nobody would say N4. NR2002 is simply an evolution of N4, > therefore it's evidently superior. Like N2 was superior to the original > Nascar Racing, or N3 versus N2. Or N4 versus N3 (see my point?) :) >

On Tue, 16 Jul 2002 20:49:07 GMT, "Tim" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Maybe I am misunderstanding what your saying but since Papy clearly dummied >down the physics from N4 I wouldn't necessarily call it a blanket >improvement. > >jmo Please explain? Andre

I'd disagree with the physics being dumbed down, but the drafting model is whacked, agreed. John "Tim" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:7F%Y8.28434$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> Well, I liked N4 better since setting up a car is more important to me in > any sim, plus once I saw drafting at Texas and California in N2002 :) > > I don't know where you get that leap that an evolution of a product is > automatically an improvement. > > Maybe I am misunderstanding what your saying but since Papy clearly

dummied

Quoted text (21 lines)

> down the physics from N4 I wouldn't necessarily call it a blanket > improvement. > > jmo > -- > Tim White > INTRAC Motorsports > www.birds-i-view.com/intrac > > "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:iWRV8.3$[email hidden]... > > >"Ken Tarvin (Bahnzo)" <[email hidden]> wrote > > > Ok I seriously don't mean to start a debate about which is better > > > > It's okay, nobody would say N4. NR2002 is simply an evolution of N4, > > therefore it's evidently superior. Like N2 was superior to the original > > Nascar Racing, or N3 versus N2. Or N4 versus N3 (see my point?) :) > > > > >

"John Pancoast" wrote... > I'd disagree with the physics being dumbed down, but > the drafting model is whacked, agreed. In what way John? -Cars have definate slipstreams and having a car close enough behind gives extra speed as well (because airflow doesn't detach until the other guy's spoiler you don't have to pull a turbulent wake along). "Aero push and "aero loose" due to other cars can also be felt. So what I would expect to happen from a theorethical point of view is there. Whether these effects are on the right scale I wouldn't know, neither what other factors should come into play. Some people have reported "feeling the wall" or another car due to air being bunched up between it and their car, other say this is not modelled. Personally, I wouldn't know. I know when I've really taken it out to the wall, but whether this is due to tactual or solely visual feedback I can't determine. I'm not trying to contradict you as I have no actual knowledge to base a rebuttal on. I have no real idea of what it should be like. I would say that given my basic knowledge of aerodynamics it's plausable but I wouldn't stake anything on it. It would be instructive if you could elaborate on your views a little. Jan. =---

"Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:GN0Z8.11715$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (10 lines)

> "John Pancoast" wrote... > > I'd disagree with the physics being dumbed down, but > > the drafting model is whacked, agreed. > > In what way John? -Cars have definate slipstreams and having a car close > enough behind gives extra speed as well (because airflow doesn't detach > until the other guy's spoiler you don't have to pull a turbulent wake > along). "Aero push and "aero loose" due to other cars can also be felt. > > So what I would expect to happen from a theorethical point of view is

there. > Whether these effects are on the right scale I wouldn't know, neither what > other factors should come into play. Some people have reported "feelingthe > wall" or another car due to air being bunched up between it and their car, > other say this is not modelled. Personally, I wouldn't know. I know when > I've really taken it out to the wall, but whether this is due to tactualor > solely visual feedback I can't determine. > > I'm not trying to contradict you as I have no actual knowledge to base a > rebuttal on. I have no real idea of what it should be like. I would saythat > given my basic knowledge of aerodynamics it's plausable but I wouldn'tstake

Quoted text (7 lines)

> anything on it. > > It would be instructive if you could elaborate on your views a little. > > Jan. > =--- >

Jan, short version is that it's to strong, especially at tracks it shouldn't be. I.e., Texas, Charlotte, Michigan, etc. Places where the draft does exist in actual racing to a lesser degree, but in the game, you get the same drafting affects at these tracks as you do at Tally/Daytona. Darn near *every* track seems to have this. Strictly IMO of course, but seen a *lot* of things happen in sim races that make you go "huh" ? John

Also, do a search of Bill Bollinger's posts. He explained it much better than I :) John "John Pancoast" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (15 lines)

> > "Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:GN0Z8.11715$[email hidden]... > > "John Pancoast" wrote... > > > I'd disagree with the physics being dumbed down, but > > > the drafting model is whacked, agreed. > > > > In what way John? -Cars have definate slipstreams and having a car close > > enough behind gives extra speed as well (because airflow doesn't detach > > until the other guy's spoiler you don't have to pull a turbulent wake > > along). "Aero push and "aero loose" due to other cars can also be felt. > > > > So what I would expect to happen from a theorethical point of view is > there. > > Whether these effects are on the right scale I wouldn't know, neither

what > > other factors should come into play. Some people have reported "feeling > the > > wall" or another car due to air being bunched up between it and theircar,

Quoted text (29 lines)

> > other say this is not modelled. Personally, I wouldn't know. I know when > > I've really taken it out to the wall, but whether this is due to tactual > or > > solely visual feedback I can't determine. > > > > I'm not trying to contradict you as I have no actual knowledge to base a > > rebuttal on. I have no real idea of what it should be like. I would say > that > > given my basic knowledge of aerodynamics it's plausable but I wouldn't > stake > > anything on it. > > > > It would be instructive if you could elaborate on your views a little. > > > > Jan. > > =--- > > > Jan, short version is that it's to strong, especially at tracks it > shouldn't be. I.e., Texas, Charlotte, Michigan, etc. Places where the > draft does exist in actual racing to a lesser degree, but in the game, you > get the same drafting affects at these tracks as you do at Tally/Daytona. > Darn near *every* track seems to have this. > > Strictly IMO of course, but seen a *lot* of things happen in sim races > that make you go "huh" ? > > John > >