Is GPL still the KING of sims ???

I remember a post a week or two ago in which someone cotended that " it is generally considered by most people in this newsgroup that NR2002 is a superior sim to GPL " . I was wondering if most people in this newsgroup do in fact concede that there is a new KING of sims, named NR2002. Has GPL finally been dethroned, or is NR2002 just better as a physics model but not a better overall sim?

N2002 and N4 are better 'sims' then GPL but what they simulate is far less engrossing so GPL is still on top for me. "Olly Greenfield" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:eD1p8.392$[email hidden]... > I remember a post a week or two ago in which someone cotended that " it is > generally considered by most people in this newsgroup that NR2002 is a > superior sim to GPL " . I was wondering if most people in this newsgroupdo > in fact concede that there is a new KING of sims, named NR2002. Has GPL > finally been dethroned, or is NR2002 just better as a physics model butnot > a better overall sim? > >

To pick up a DGF theory, there have been several sims that are superior to GPL in the physics arena. That has always been the GPL strong suit, it 'feels' right. But I would think that several titles, including Nr 2002 have surpassed GPL physics-wise. However, the core group of GPL drivers, probably won't appreciate the improved physics in those other titles. For some the bulk of ovals on NR 2002 limit's the appeal. For others, the modern chicane-laced tracks can be a stumbling block. While GPL may not be THE king anymore. I suspect you will find many users who haven't found anything yet that replaces the joy of GPL. YET. (just for info's sake...of the HUNDRED+ number of GPL tracks that have been privately built, are there many that resemble modern chicaned tracks or are the bulk of these tracks more open and flowing?) dave henrie "Olly Greenfield" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:eD1p8.392$[email hidden]... > I remember a post a week or two ago in which someone cotended that " it is > generally considered by most people in this newsgroup that NR2002 is a > superior sim to GPL "

"Olly Greenfield" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:eD1p8.392$[email hidden]... > I remember a post a week or two ago in which someone cotended that " it is > generally considered by most people in this newsgroup that NR2002 is a > superior sim to GPL " . I was wondering if most people in this newsgroupdo > in fact concede that there is a new KING of sims, named NR2002. Has GPL > finally been dethroned, or is NR2002 just better as a physics model butnot > a better overall sim? > > It really all depends in your personal choice of racing type. If like some people you think "turning circles" is boring then no matter how good a NASCAR sim is you won't be impressed. Now on the other hand if you are more of a fan of close bumper to bumper racing than NR2002 would be the king of the hill. So long story short I don't think you can really choose between the two because they are two different types of racing, and personal referance will way to much on the choice. MadDAWG

<Haqsau gets a bag of popcorn and sits back in his easy chair, waiting for the flames... er, entertainment to start> "Olly Greenfield" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:eD1p8.392$[email hidden]... > I remember a post a week or two ago in which someone cotended that "it is > generally considered by most people in this newsgroup that NR2002 is a > superior sim to GPL " . I was wondering if most people in thisnewsgroup do > in fact concede that there is a new KING of sims, named NR2002. HasGPL > finally been dethroned, or is NR2002 just better as a physics modelbut not > a better overall sim? > >

>For others, the modern chicane-laced tracks can be a stumbling block good point. I can't stand most modern road racing games, but have always liked the tracks in GPL. MadDAWG

The physics of N2k2 may be better than GPL...but it all comes down to what you enjoy driving. Some people, including myself, don't find oval racing to be fun. Thus the nascar titles could never be considered KINGs in my book. It is a matter of opinion...not a fact...we can fight about differences of opinion all day, but frankly, it gets old. Jesse Black

You guy's are getting soft! I remember back when it was GPL and all else is crap. I remember the days of long treads of Nascar is better than F1, and long treads of why F1 was better than Nascar. You guy's are getting pathetic! You guy's even listen to the arcade racers opinion. Shame! Now lets snap to it, this is the perfect opportunity to bash your least favorite racing series. :-) Have you guy's finally realized that this is a forum for opinions, and every one has one, and it might be different than your own? This isn't directed at Jesse, this is for ALL the regulars here in RAS. Oh, and by the way, these are just my opinions. :-) "Jesse Black" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:a82c8r$ed5$[email hidden]... > The physics of N2k2 may be better than GPL...but it all comes down to what > you enjoy driving. Some people, including myself, don't find oval racingto > be fun. Thus the nascar titles could never be considered KINGs in mybook. > It is a matter of opinion...not a fact...we can fight about differences of > opinion all day, but frankly, it gets old. > > Jesse Black > >

I think each to their own is very true but people's expectations sometimes are too high. What is the best overall game ever...? If that is the benchmark,whatever it may be,then why do we expect perfection when only a stupid person would ignore all that goes into marketing a game. How many people here know what happened with WRC the Playstation 2 release...? Well,read on and LEARN. At the beginning of the WRC idea there were 8 (eight) in the list to develop the game. This was whittled down to 3 (three). These three sets of people worked together in all facets of the game and then had a meeting 10 months into the task. There was a 'problem'. Do you know what the 'problem' was...? They had made it too hard,they had made it too realistic. It wouldn't sell well if it was too hard was the 'problem' The reason it was so realistic was that they had used actual data from the rally teams and got accuracy to a higher level than ever before. So,they were asked to 'dumb' it down and make it both easier and less realistic. This leaves me with one opinion and only one opinion. The data,the programming,the necessary and whatever else is needed to make a hardcore sim in any chosen field,rally,F1,Nascar,Cart,Touring cars etc etc is there. The thing i don't know and perhaps never will is why it isn't being used on a PC platform by someone. Is it cost....? Is it better to release Game Version 1 with some of it,add a little more for Version 2 and so on...? All i know is that i have 'played' on the best flight sims that PC can get and none come anywhere near the pilot training centre near my house. That is a real plane in every way but the obvious. So i dont think that we have the best available to us in PC racing by any stretch either. IMO If the top guys from Papy,Codemaster,Ubisoft,Wests and EA sat down and had a meeting of minds and technology there might just be a chance of us getting something..... " Dreams......can come true...." Morgan

"jlohman"wrote... > <snip> > Oh, and by the way, these are just my opinions. :-) Wuss. ;-) Jan. =---

GPL is still a reference, but King of sims... if ever certainly not anymore. NR2002 is better in almost every respect apart from subjectmatter appeal to some. I think a big reason for people sticking to a certain game (and the very reason GPL is still my major indulgence) is the community which surrounds it. It's easy to accept change and move on when there's no personal ties involved. If concentrating on a new game means not racing your buddies anymore then the step becomes harder to take. I therefore think it's harder for communities to embrace a new game, certainly one portraying a different genre of racing, than for the individual. This peer pressure can work both ways, of course. Suppose a GPL beating road racing sim with similar multiplayer capability were to be released tomorrow, enthousiastic individuals can sway the entire group to move forward. Jan. =--- "Olly Greenfield" wrote... > I remember a post a week or two ago in which someone > cotended that " it is generally considered by most > people in this newsgroup that NR2002 is a superior > sim to GPL " . I was wondering if most people in > this newsgroup do in fact concede that there is a > new KING of sims, named NR2002. <snip>

"Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<xN1p8.129169$Yv2.38936@rwcrnsc54>... > To pick up a DGF theory, there have been several sims that are superior to > GPL in the physics arena. That has always been the GPL strong suit, it > 'feels' right. But I would think that several titles, including Nr 2002 > have surpassed GPL physics-wise. Several? What besides N4 and N2k2 surpassed GPL in terms of physics? Rally Trophy and F1 2001 are great but I mean, the tire modelling and non-accident damage (suspension, engine, etc) are iffy at best (in the case of engine damage caused by abuse, non-existent). The fact that there's a 'speed sensitivity' setting in F12k1 is ridiculous, if the physics are plausible the car will require more effort to turn at higher speeds, you shouldn't need to set the effect via controller config. Jason

On Fri, 29 Mar 2002 20:08:27 GMT, "jlohman" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (8 lines)

>You guy's are getting soft! I remember back when it was GPL and all else is >crap. I remember the days of long treads of Nascar is better than F1, and >long treads of why F1 was better than Nascar. You guy's are getting >pathetic! You guy's even listen to the arcade racers opinion. Shame! >Now lets snap to it, this is the perfect opportunity to bash your least >favorite racing series. > >:-)

Alright, I usually won't bash but I'll do it since you begged me :) NASCAR sucks! 5000 laps around an oval?? Boring! I watch NASCAR to help me get to sleep :) WRC, and F1 rules, hands down.

Well I have to agree with you there, 5000 laps of NASCAR to determine the winner or F1 where the winner is usually determined after turn 1 :) <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Fri, 29 Mar 2002 20:08:27 GMT, "jlohman" <[email hidden]> > wrote: > > >You guy's are getting soft! I remember back when it was GPL and all elseis

Quoted text (12 lines)

> >crap. I remember the days of long treads of Nascar is better than F1, and > >long treads of why F1 was better than Nascar. You guy's are getting > >pathetic! You guy's even listen to the arcade racers opinion. Shame! > >Now lets snap to it, this is the perfect opportunity to bash your least > >favorite racing series. > > > >:-) > > Alright, I usually won't bash but I'll do it since you begged me :) > NASCAR sucks! 5000 laps around an oval?? Boring! I watch NASCAR to > help me get to sleep :) WRC, and F1 rules, hands down. >

Lol, you two. Here's a direct quote from my five-year old son, from the "Kid's say the darndest things" catagory :) Watching the F1 race last week, he said, "I don't understand the point of this racing." LOL! Totally unsolicited, believe it or not. He does love Nascar though :) -John "Schooner" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:QQ7p8.8471$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (9 lines)

> Well I have to agree with you there, 5000 laps of NASCAR to determine the > winner or F1 where the winner is usually determined after turn 1 :) > > <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > On Fri, 29 Mar 2002 20:08:27 GMT, "jlohman" <[email hidden]> > > wrote: > > > > >You guy's are getting soft! I remember back when it was GPL and all

else > is > > >crap. I remember the days of long treads of Nascar is better than F1,and

Quoted text (13 lines)

> > >long treads of why F1 was better than Nascar. You guy's are getting > > >pathetic! You guy's even listen to the arcade racers opinion. Shame! > > >Now lets snap to it, this is the perfect opportunity to bash your least > > >favorite racing series. > > > > > >:-) > > > > Alright, I usually won't bash but I'll do it since you begged me :) > > NASCAR sucks! 5000 laps around an oval?? Boring! I watch NASCAR to > > help me get to sleep :) WRC, and F1 rules, hands down. > > > >

On Fri, 29 Mar 2002 17:48:13 GMT, "Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote: >(just for info's sake...of the HUNDRED+ number of GPL tracks that have been >privately built, are there many that resemble modern chicaned tracks or are >the bulk of these tracks more open and flowing?) >dave henrie The only really modern-feeling track for GPL I can think of is Adelaide.. and it's damn fun in GPL :) Andre

On Fri, 29 Mar 2002 20:41:48 -0400, "Schooner" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Well I have to agree with you there, 5000 laps of NASCAR to determine the >winner or F1 where the winner is usually determined after turn 1 :) I can't wait for Interlagos. There has to be a big mess in that turn. I go around T1 there all the time in F1 2001 and it's so easy to lose your backend. Who's going to get the stop and go this time?

On Fri, 29 Mar 2002 17:49:46 -0700, "John Pancoast" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (9 lines)

> Lol, you two. Here's a direct quote from my five-year old son, from the >"Kid's say the darndest things" catagory :) > > Watching the F1 race last week, he said, "I don't understand the point of >this racing." LOL! > > Totally unsolicited, believe it or not. He does love Nascar though :) > >-John

This only proves my point that NASCAR is so boring and juvenile only a 5-year old can love it. F1 is a complex, edge-of-your-seat experience only a mature adult can appreciate :) I have to admit the last 5 laps of a NASCAR race is usually exciting but the first 5000 is better spent looking for lint in my bellybutton. :)

On 29 Mar 2002 15:18:28 -0800, [email hidden] (jason moyer) wrote:

Quoted text (10 lines)

>"Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<xN1p8.129169$Yv2.38936@rwcrnsc54>... >> To pick up a DGF theory, there have been several sims that are superior to >> GPL in the physics arena. That has always been the GPL strong suit, it >> 'feels' right. But I would think that several titles, including Nr 2002 >> have surpassed GPL physics-wise. > >Several? What besides N4 and N2k2 surpassed GPL in terms of physics? >Rally Trophy and F1 2001 are great but I mean, the tire modelling and >non-accident damage (suspension, engine, etc) are iffy at best (in the >case of engine damage caused by abuse, non-existent).

Well, damage I don't even consider part of the physics, it's mostly scripted anyway. I don't quite see how one could simulate enginedamage, maybe aside from oil/water temperatures. Otherwise it's probably random and/or a random chance of breaking if overrevving. But the ragging on the tyremodel in F1 2001? I think it's heads and shoulders above GPL's. However I'm not speaking on how close it is to a real F1 tyre, but it behaves a *lot* more like a real tyre should. At least it's got progressive slip, instead of GPL's 'always slip'.

"rolls eyes" :) -John <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Fri, 29 Mar 2002 17:49:46 -0700, "John Pancoast" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > Lol, you two. Here's a direct quote from my five-year old son, fromthe > >"Kid's say the darndest things" catagory :) > > > > Watching the F1 race last week, he said, "I don't understand the pointof

Quoted text (13 lines)

> >this racing." LOL! > > > > Totally unsolicited, believe it or not. He does love Nascar though :) > > > >-John > > This only proves my point that NASCAR is so boring and juvenile only a > 5-year old can love it. F1 is a complex, edge-of-your-seat experience > only a mature adult can appreciate :) > > I have to admit the last 5 laps of a NASCAR race is usually exciting > but the first 5000 is better spent looking for lint in my bellybutton. > :)

I used to think NASCAR was boring, but then last year I started watching it a little more and I realized that it's all in the driver-to-driver competition. By making the track wide and relatively unchallenging, it puts the emphasis on human vs. human instead of human vs. track. Driver tactics and pit strategy become pre-eminent. NASCAR is a 200 mph chess game. I find it very interesting to watch and play now. Hotlapping in NASCAR is certainly boring, but racing is great fun. <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Fri, 29 Mar 2002 17:49:46 -0700, "John Pancoast" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > Lol, you two. Here's a direct quote from my five-year old son,from the > >"Kid's say the darndest things" catagory :) > > > > Watching the F1 race last week, he said, "I don't understand thepoint of > >this racing." LOL! > > > > Totally unsolicited, believe it or not. He does love Nascar though:)

Quoted text (10 lines)

> > > >-John > > This only proves my point that NASCAR is so boring and juvenile only a > 5-year old can love it. F1 is a complex, edge-of-your-seat experience > only a mature adult can appreciate :) > > I have to admit the last 5 laps of a NASCAR race is usually exciting > but the first 5000 is better spent looking for lint in my bellybutton. > :)

The question is: Is there a market for reality in racing sims? (Sure, there's aslo a market for "reality" TV. Lowest common denominator. How real is that?!?!) It's clear there's a market in this NG. Is that market large enough for software developers? Evidently not! As for F1 vs NASCAR, both of them are marketing exercises, and quite successful in their own markets. Neither of them are very fun for me any more. I watch F1 more than NASCAR, but tend to fall asleep during both. One of the things a I like about GPL is that it simulates a time when racing was not marketing. The sport has suffered IMO. Racing drivers race because their lives are empty without it. Some other people figured out how to get rich on that. Vampires. Jim Morgan Boof wrote:

Quoted text (64 lines)

> I think each to their own is very true but people's expectations sometimes > are too high. > > What is the best overall game ever...? > > If that is the benchmark,whatever it may be,then why do we expect perfection > when only a stupid person would ignore all that goes into marketing a game. > > How many people here know what happened with WRC the Playstation 2 > release...? > > Well,read on and LEARN. > > At the beginning of the WRC idea there were 8 (eight) in the list to develop > the game. > > This was whittled down to 3 (three). > > These three sets of people worked together in all facets of the game and > then had a meeting 10 months into the task. > > There was a 'problem'. > > Do you know what the 'problem' was...? > > They had made it too hard,they had made it too realistic. > > It wouldn't sell well if it was too hard was the 'problem' > > The reason it was so realistic was that they had used actual data from the > rally teams and got accuracy to a higher level than ever before. > > So,they were asked to 'dumb' it down and make it both easier and less > realistic. > > This leaves me with one opinion and only one opinion. > > The data,the programming,the necessary and whatever else is needed to make a > hardcore sim in any chosen field,rally,F1,Nascar,Cart,Touring cars etc etc > is there. > > The thing i don't know and perhaps never will is why it isn't being used on > a PC platform by someone. > > Is it cost....? > > Is it better to release Game Version 1 with some of it,add a little more for > Version 2 and so on...? > > All i know is that i have 'played' on the best flight sims that PC can get > and none come anywhere near the pilot training centre near my house. > > That is a real plane in every way but the obvious. > > So i dont think that we have the best available to us in PC racing by any > stretch either. > > IMO If the top guys from Papy,Codemaster,Ubisoft,Wests and EA sat down and > had a meeting of minds and technology there might just be a chance of us > getting something..... > > " Dreams......can come true...." > > Morgan

F1 2001 is by far the best and King of all sims so far, and the ALMS and GT mods make 3 awesome games for the price of one. GPL is dead, R.I.P.

[email hidden] (jason moyer) wrote in

Quoted text (7 lines)

> case of engine damage caused by abuse, non-existent). The fact that > there's a 'speed sensitivity' setting in F12k1 is ridiculous, if the > physics are plausible the car will require more effort to turn at > higher speeds, you shouldn't need to set the effect via controller > config. > > Jason

And GPL's "steering speed hack" setting is different to this in what way exactly? check your core.ini if you haven't already, chances are you've been using a different steering ratio under 60mph without even realising it. If you've switched it to OFF, then I doubt you spend much time manouvering at low speed (hairpins, getting out from behind the AI in the pits ahead of you) or you've set your steering to <10:1, or you have NASA grade pots in your wheel ;o). cheers John

"Jim Morrison" <[email hidden]> wrote in news:8vqp8.84170$[email hidden]: > F1 2001 is by far the best and King of all sims so far, and the ALMS > and GT mods make 3 awesome games for the price of one. GPL is dead, > R.I.P. > > > Maybe when F1 2001 has any remotely interesting tracks to drive those cars on... maybe. cheers John

>I have to admit the last 5 laps of a NASCAR race is usually exciting >but the first 5000 is better spent looking for lint in my bellybutton. >:) Surely that couldn't take too long...? Rafe Mc

[email hidden] wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>... > F1 is a complex, edge-of-your-seat experience > only a mature adult can appreciate :) Was this originally posted in the mid 80's and slipped through some kind of bizarre usenet timewarp? Jason