Although I say "Crammond Haters" in the title of the posting, perhaps
that should read "Death Eaters", casting an eye towards a certain
children's book...
Why are so many people jumping on the "Bash GP4/Crammond" bandwagon ?
I would really love to know how many of the people shouting their
mouths off are software developers.
We know NOTHING about the development of GP3 or GP4. For all we know
Hasbro have stuck deadlines and budgets on the project...
Jonathan Beckett
[email hidden]
http://www.kafooey.com
Defending and criticising Geoff Crammond ahead of GP4
A poster asked why so many people were attacking Geoff Crammond and GP4 before release. Most replies argued that GP3 had been a disappointment, that Crammond's approach was a decade out of date, and that releasing an F1 sim without internet multiplayer in 2002 was unacceptable. Others praised GP3 2000's AI and his earlier classics, and the thread drifted into whether Bernie Ecclestone's licensing blocked online play and whether UK dial-up costs justified a focus on single-player.
Automated summary.
Past history speaks for itself.
-John
"J Beckett" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
Quoted text (18 lines)
> > Although I say "Crammond Haters" in the title of the posting, perhaps > that should read "Death Eaters", casting an eye towards a certain > children's book... > > Why are so many people jumping on the "Bash GP4/Crammond" bandwagon ? > > I would really love to know how many of the people shouting their > mouths off are software developers. > > We know NOTHING about the development of GP3 or GP4. For all we know > Hasbro have stuck deadlines and budgets on the project... > > > > Jonathan Beckett > [email hidden] > http://www.kafooey.com
Hello Mrs Crammond, how is your son Geoffrey? I hear he's learning C
<BG>
J Beckett wrote:
>
> Although I say "Crammond Haters" in the title of the posting, perhaps
> that should read "Death Eaters", casting an eye towards a certain
> children's book...
>
> Why are so many people jumping on the "Bash GP4/Crammond" bandwagon ?
I'm under contract, Geoff asked me to knock gp4 so people won't be
disappointed again. :)
> I would really love to know how many of the people shouting their
> mouths off are software developers.
I'd say their all punters who paid out hard earned cash for what they
thought would be state of the art...and wasn't. :)
BTW Mrs C, can you tell young Geoffrey it's better to drop frames than
extend time? AND also tell him how much I hated the way the cars in GP3
switched from 3D shapes to 2D sprites when they got two feet in front of
my car! :)
> We know NOTHING about the development of GP3 or GP4. For all we know
> Hasbro have stuck deadlines and budgets on the project...
I know GP3 took 20 years to code! I hear GP4 is coming out on the CBM64,
on tape only though :(.
I also hear there's a new brand of bog roll just come out for us sim
racers. It has the code from GP3 printed on it, now when we wipe our
arses we can all think of GC. :)
Gerry
When Crammond put his names on a game, he put his name up to any praise or
complaints that the final product gives. The big problem is that the last
game he released was a huge disappointment. It was a disapointment because
it both took a long time and the end results didn't show why it took so
long. Therefore it is not a "bandwagon" it is a response to a issue that
many people argree with.
-Stuart Becktell
"J Beckett" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
Quoted text (18 lines)
> > Although I say "Crammond Haters" in the title of the posting, perhaps > that should read "Death Eaters", casting an eye towards a certain > children's book... > > Why are so many people jumping on the "Bash GP4/Crammond" bandwagon ? > > I would really love to know how many of the people shouting their > mouths off are software developers. > > We know NOTHING about the development of GP3 or GP4. For all we know > Hasbro have stuck deadlines and budgets on the project... > > > > Jonathan Beckett > [email hidden] > http://www.kafooey.com>"J Beckett" <[email hidden]> wrote
> Why are so many people jumping on the "Bash GP4/Crammond" bandwagon ?
He's stuck in the past. Not, a "year or two" past, but a DECADE past.
There is more idiosyncrasies in a Geoff Crammond product then 1001 other
games combines. Really, I think everybody once raised an eyebrow, even back
in GP2, about something weird, old and obsolete.
> I would really love to know how many of the people shouting their
> mouths off are software developers.
Somehow, we aren't denying that Geoff *was* a great programmer. His
previous lineup speaks for itself, it's very succesful. That doesn't deny
the fact, he's the most lazy programmer I've ever seen.
> We know NOTHING about the development of GP3 or GP4. For all we know
> Hasbro have stuck deadlines and budgets on the project...
They could had used that excuse for GP3, but even there there was almost
HALF a decade between Gp2 and Gp3. But after two other products, it's not
that anymore. It's not like Hasbro is holding Geoff back for 3 titles in a
row, especially when they are spouting all that great PR.
--
-- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard>
-- http://www.ymenard.8m.com/
-- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimato Dominguez
Corporation - helping America into the New World...
Yep. I raised both eyebrows myself :) Really loved the cutting edge
"slow everything down to a crawl/screw up the timing" feature of GP2. It
was such a hit, it became an industry standard, eh? <G>
He's made one good sim; World Circuit Racing, IMO.
-John
"ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:VRef8.15575$[email hidden]...
> >"J Beckett" <[email hidden]> wrote
> > Why are so many people jumping on the "Bash GP4/Crammond" bandwagon ?
>
> He's stuck in the past. Not, a "year or two" past, but a DECADE past.
> There is more idiosyncrasies in a Geoff Crammond product then 1001 other
> games combines. Really, I think everybody once raised an eyebrow, evenback
> in GP2, about something weird, old and obsolete.
>
>
>
I heard RM/Cobol...
"Gerry Aitken" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
>
> Hello Mrs Crammond, how is your son Geoffrey? I hear he's learning C
> <BG>
"Gerry Aitken" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
>
> Hello Mrs Crammond, how is your son Geoffrey? I hearhe's learning C
> <BG>
>
excuse me
he is attending NIGHT CLASSES
for "Internet Protocol : All you need to know and some
you don't"
He is expected to graduate in end2002.
YOu can expect GP5 to have LAN multiplayer by then.
In article <VRef8.15575$[email hidden]>,
[email hidden] says...
Unfortunately, it happens sometimes when people make millions in
royalties. Surely no one can blame Geoff for sitting back and taking it
easy for a few years?
- Michael
Quoted text (7 lines)
> >"J Beckett" <[email hidden]> wrote > > Why are so many people jumping on the "Bash GP4/Crammond" bandwagon ? > > He's stuck in the past. Not, a "year or two" past, but a DECADE past. > There is more idiosyncrasies in a Geoff Crammond product then 1001 other > games combines. Really, I think everybody once raised an eyebrow, even back > in GP2, about something weird, old and obsolete.
"MP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
back
> > in GP2, about something weird, old and obsolete.
>
> Unfortunately, it happens sometimes when people make millions in
> royalties. Surely no one can blame Geoff for sitting back and taking it
> easy for a few years?
Yes - no problem with that - but does he have to carry on producing shit F1
titles while he does it
Doug
Quoted text (8 lines)
> In article <VRef8.15575$[email hidden]>, > [email hidden] says... > > >"J Beckett" <[email hidden]> wrote > > > Why are so many people jumping on the "Bash GP4/Crammond" bandwagon ? > > > > He's stuck in the past. Not, a "year or two" past, but a DECADE past. > > There is more idiosyncrasies in a Geoff Crammond product then 1001 other > > games combines. Really, I think everybody once raised an eyebrow, even>"MP" <[email hidden]> wrote
> Unfortunately, it happens sometimes when people make millions in
> royalties. Surely no one can blame Geoff for sitting back and taking it
> easy for a few years?
Yes, of course :) Nobody here denies the genius of Geoff Crammond, that's
the thing. If he really stopped being a lazy arse, his titles would be
amazing. Amazing as Revs, amazing as the original World Circuit, amazing as
that other game I can't remember but it was some sort of landscaping 3d game
in the 80's.
--
-- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard>
-- http://www.ymenard.8m.com/
-- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimato Dominguez
Corporation - helping America into the New World...
On Thu, 28 Feb 2002 08:50:15 -0500, "ymenard"
<[email hidden]> wrote:
>Yes, of course :) Nobody here denies the genius of Geoff Crammond, that's
>the thing. If he really stopped being a lazy arse, his titles would be
>amazing. Amazing as Revs, amazing as the original World Circuit, amazing as
>that other game I can't remember but it was some sort of landscaping 3d game
>in the 80's.
Revs, The Sentinel, Stunt Car Racer, GP1, GP2.. one by one
groundbreaking classics.
GP3 was a disappointing update of GP2 with many of the same flaws GP1
and GP2 had.
Allthough GP3 was groundbraking in another area, I heard the director
of The Matrix got the idea of the slowmotion effect by playing GP3.
Andre
ymenard wrote:
Sentinel.
Gerry
Quoted text (11 lines)
> > >"MP" <[email hidden]> wrote > > Unfortunately, it happens sometimes when people make millions in > > royalties. Surely no one can blame Geoff for sitting back and taking it > > easy for a few years? > > Yes, of course :) Nobody here denies the genius of Geoff Crammond, that's > the thing. If he really stopped being a lazy arse, his titles would be > amazing. Amazing as Revs, amazing as the original World Circuit, amazing as > that other game I can't remember but it was some sort of landscaping 3d game > in the 80's.And why do the "Crammond can do no wrong" bandwagon feel they have to
publicly defend him. GP1 was a classic no denying it, I was slightly
dissapointed in GP2 but it was still the best out there for a while and then
he released GP3 with all the hype and it was a dog, a dog with fleas, a
rabid dog with fleas, a rabid dog with fleas that spat more fleas. It looked
no more than a minor update to GP2 and when you got deep down in to it you
saw this realyl was the case. EA's series got off to a shaky start but have
gone from strength to strength and spawned a great mod in the form of the GT
cars mod which makes it worth buying F12001 just to play that. Maybe
Crammond can return to his glory days but I hold more faith in EA's series
now for a regular fix of F1 racing knowing I will be able to play the latest
season and expect some decent upgrades in each version from the last.
"J Beckett" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
Quoted text (18 lines)
> > Although I say "Crammond Haters" in the title of the posting, perhaps > that should read "Death Eaters", casting an eye towards a certain > children's book... > > Why are so many people jumping on the "Bash GP4/Crammond" bandwagon ? > > I would really love to know how many of the people shouting their > mouths off are software developers. > > We know NOTHING about the development of GP3 or GP4. For all we know > Hasbro have stuck deadlines and budgets on the project... > > > > Jonathan Beckett > [email hidden] > http://www.kafooey.comIn article <[email hidden]>,
[email hidden] (J Beckett) writes:
>
> Why are so many people jumping on the "Bash GP4/Crammond" bandwagon ?
>
I don't hate Crammond. I'd never even heard of the guy until I started
reading this newsgroup. But right now, I drive GPL. I drive it online,
with a league. Exclusively. A new sim that can't at least match
(and jeez, shouldn't it really improve upon?) GPL in that department
is at best uninteresting. And I don't care who the guilty party is,
be it Crammond, Hasbro, the FIA, the FBI, the CIA, the BBC, B.B. King
(Dig It!), or whomever. The bottom line is-- no multiplayer seems
awful lame.
Marc
"Revvin" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:PCtf8.66667$[email hidden]...
> And why do the "Crammond can do no wrong" bandwagon feel they haveto
> publicly defend him. GP1 was a classic no denying it, I wasslightly
> dissapointed in GP2 but it was still the best out there for awhile and then
> he released GP3 with all the hype and it was a dog, a dog withfleas, a
> rabid dog with fleas, a rabid dog with fleas that spat more fleas.It looked
> no more than a minor update to GP2 and when you got deep down into it you
> saw this realyl was the case. EA's series got off to a shaky startbut have
> gone from strength to strength and spawned a great mod in the formof the GT
> cars mod which makes it worth buying F12001 just to play that.Maybe
> Crammond can return to his glory days but I hold more faith inEA's series
> now for a regular fix of F1 racing knowing I will be able to playthe latest
> season and expect some decent upgrades in each version from thelast.
In general I agree. I too was a little disappointed with GP2 over my
expectations of GP1. GP3 even more so.
BUT, there IMHO the AI in GP3 2000 are second to none. Ok a little
over exaggerated to ensure more fun than simulating a real GP, but
still the most exciting and immersive experience. That is if you can
forget about the graphics engine and the limited (my view) feel from
the physics. Plus the list of flaws I won't go into again.
Programming AI is not easy. Not impressed with F1-2001 - even after
3 goes (F1-2000 & F1-2000CS) a lot of work is being done by the
third parties to "fix" it but still I have not experienced wheel to
wheel racing throughout a lap. F1RC - plenty challenging at times
but too prone for bonehead moves. GPL & Nascar X - pretty good but
still some annoying problems especially lapping traffic.
If licensing is going to prevent multiplayer then good AI is the
only answer. I would have some faith in GP4 extending the capability
of the AI. I just hope at least some of the other issues are
addressed, but writing the best car racing AI should not be sneered
at.
Tony
On Thu, 28 Feb 2002 19:23:58 GMT, "Tony Rickard"
<[email hidden]> wrote:
Yup, AI was amazing, even better in GP3 2000.
Gp3 2000 was really much better than GP3, but unfortunately GP3 2000
was ignored by most because GP3 was such a bummer.
Not much use speculating how GP4 will be, but I'm quite sure it will
be GP3 with some gfx updates and a new carset.. we'll see.
Andre
Quoted text (7 lines)
>If licensing is going to prevent multiplayer then good AI is the >only answer. I would have some faith in GP4 extending the capability >of the AI. I just hope at least some of the other issues are >addressed, but writing the best car racing AI should not be sneered >at. > >TonyJ Beckett wrote:
>
> We know NOTHING about the development of GP3 or GP4. For all we know
> Hasbro have stuck deadlines and budgets on the project...
Lack of planning on their part does not constitute an emergency on my
part. In other words, their problems are not our problems. I can't
cook either, but if the steak I get at the restaurant sucks, I have no
problem about making it known. Know what I mean Vern?
--
Fester
"Is it that we need a nobrainer Linux desktop OS for people with no
brains or should people do a little more reading and smarten up?"
from alt.linux.mandrake NG
John Metcow wrote:
> YOu can expect GP5 to have LAN multiplayer by then.
No. They can't get the license! (License to program nor the license
to do multiplayer from Bernie Boy)
PS - Gotta love Bernie's hair do. Looks like an upper class English
grandmother!
Byron Forbes wrote:
Show us the contract!
Quoted text (7 lines)
> > John Metcow wrote: > > > YOu can expect GP5 to have LAN multiplayer by then. > > No. They can't get the license! (License to program nor the license > to do multiplayer from Bernie Boy)MP wrote:
Yeah, I can!
Hey Geoff? Yeah, you! The "just another cashin merchant in the
computer business" common pissant! Why don't you take your pathetic
insults to our intelligence's (GP3 and 4), a few containers of whisky
and just piss off into the wilderness so that we can completely and
utterly forget you?
See? Easy! :)
Quoted text (16 lines)
> > In article <VRef8.15575$[email hidden]>, > [email hidden] says... > > >"J Beckett" <[email hidden]> wrote > > > Why are so many people jumping on the "Bash GP4/Crammond" bandwagon ? > > > > He's stuck in the past. Not, a "year or two" past, but a DECADE past. > > There is more idiosyncrasies in a Geoff Crammond product then 1001 other > > games combines. Really, I think everybody once raised an eyebrow, even back > > in GP2, about something weird, old and obsolete. > > Unfortunately, it happens sometimes when people make millions in > royalties. Surely no one can blame Geoff for sitting back and taking it > easy for a few years? > > - MichaelTony Rickard wrote:
>
> If licensing is going to prevent multiplayer then good AI is the
> only answer. I would have some faith in GP4 extending the capability
> of the AI. I just hope at least some of the other issues are
> addressed, but writing the best car racing AI should not be sneered
> at.
Don't wanna be to cynical ............but
the best car racing AI is called "Multiplayer" and that's exactly
what poor old Geoff cant do!
No need to see any contract IMHO.. the game developers are not complete
idiots, so the missing multiplayer features in all newer F1 games must have
some other reason (Read Bernie)
Mikkel
Gerry Aitken <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
Quoted text (12 lines)
> > > Byron Forbes wrote: > > > > John Metcow wrote: > > > > > YOu can expect GP5 to have LAN multiplayer by then. > > > > No. They can't get the license! (License to program nor the license > > to do multiplayer from Bernie Boy) > > Show us the contract!Byron Forbes wrote:
Amen!
--
Fester
"Is it that we need a nobrainer Linux desktop OS for people with no
brains or should people do a little more reading and smarten up?"
from alt.linux.mandrake NG
Quoted text (13 lines)
> > Tony Rickard wrote: > > > > If licensing is going to prevent multiplayer then good AI is the > > only answer. I would have some faith in GP4 extending the capability > > of the AI. I just hope at least some of the other issues are > > addressed, but writing the best car racing AI should not be sneered > > at. > > Don't wanna be to cynical ............but > > the best car racing AI is called "Multiplayer" and that's exactly > what poor old Geoff cant do!Gerry Aitken wrote:
Was being sarcastic :) But it must be true anyway
otherwise.................
Quoted text (11 lines)
> > Byron Forbes wrote: > > > > John Metcow wrote: > > > > > YOu can expect GP5 to have LAN multiplayer by then. > > > > No. They can't get the license! (License to program nor the license > > to do multiplayer from Bernie Boy) > > Show us the contract!Crammond is just an older generation programmer. He's from the days where
one programmer could write an entire game by himself. In that context I
think there is (was) no one better than Geoff. But today, that approach no
longer cuts it. Game writing today requires a team of highly qualified
programmers, designers and artists to compete. The only way Geoff is going
to keep up is if he eases off of the "control freak" mode and delegates some
aspects (especially graphics!).
"Gerry Aitken" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
>
> Show us the contract!
Show me the Money!!!
;-)
Quoted text (10 lines)
> > If licensing is going to prevent multiplayer then good AI is the > > only answer. I would have some faith in GP4 extending the capability > > of the AI. I just hope at least some of the other issues are > > addressed, but writing the best car racing AI should not be sneered > > at. > > Don't wanna be to cynical ............but > > the best car racing AI is called "Multiplayer" and that's exactly > what poor old Geoff cant do!
> > Multiplayer is all very well if you are rich enough to afford to be online
> > a lot. In the UK (where, I believe, Geoff is) most people pay for their
> > time online through the phone bill rather than via a flat fee so it is
> > perhaps
> > not surprising that a UK produced game would emphasise the single
> > player game.
> > It's not exactly a consolation to those who don't pay their bill thisway
No, most people in the UK, who use the internet even a little, are on
unmetered ISPs.
ADSL, which has been recently lowered in price too...a mere �25 / month ;)
Once you have had decent multiplayer AI just seems silly. Matt invest in
some ADSL, buy GPL (for a fiver!) and start playing online. Although saying
that, you can play GPL with a 33.6 modem absolutely fine, and there are
quite a few UK / european servers to choose from these days :)
All the best,
Ash
Quoted text (7 lines)
> > but from my perspective I don't care about multiplayer. GP3 and GP3 > > 2000 had great AI and that was more important. > > --Matt > > So just to be clear > > - all phone companies in the UK have a per minute rate????????Mattew Wooding wrote:
So just to be clear
- all phone companies in the UK have a per minute rate????????
Quoted text (22 lines)
> > > > If licensing is going to prevent multiplayer then good AI is the > > > only answer. I would have some faith in GP4 extending the capability > > > of the AI. I just hope at least some of the other issues are > > > addressed, but writing the best car racing AI should not be sneered > > > at. > > > > Don't wanna be to cynical ............but > > > > the best car racing AI is called "Multiplayer" and that's exactly > > what poor old Geoff cant do! > > Multiplayer is all very well if you are rich enough to afford to be on line > a lot. In the UK (where, I believe, Geoff is) most people pay for their > time online through the phone bill rather than via a flat fee so it is > perhaps > not surprising that a UK produced game would emphasise the single > player game. > It's not exactly a consolation to those who don't pay their bill this way > but from my perspective I don't care about multiplayer. GP3 and GP3 > 2000 had great AI and that was more important. > --MattBut not everyone in the UK can get ADSL yet - only within 3 miles of a
suitable exchange. BT just doesn't give a stuff if you live out in the
sticks. Great AI is better.
"Ashley McConnell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:a600hg$p2m$[email hidden]...
>
> > > Multiplayer is all very well if you are rich enough to afford to be on
> line
> > > a lot. In the UK (where, I believe, Geoff is) most people pay fortheir
saying
Quoted text (21 lines)
> > > time online through the phone bill rather than via a flat fee so it is > > > perhaps > > > not surprising that a UK produced game would emphasise the single > > > player game. > > > It's not exactly a consolation to those who don't pay their bill this > way > > > but from my perspective I don't care about multiplayer. GP3 and GP3 > > > 2000 had great AI and that was more important. > > > --Matt > > > > So just to be clear > > > > - all phone companies in the UK have a per minute rate???????? > > No, most people in the UK, who use the internet even a little, are on > unmetered ISPs. > > ADSL, which has been recently lowered in price too...a mere �25 / month ;) > > Once you have had decent multiplayer AI just seems silly. Matt invest in > some ADSL, buy GPL (for a fiver!) and start playing online. AlthoughQuoted text (7 lines)
> that, you can play GPL with a 33.6 modem absolutely fine, and there are > quite a few UK / european servers to choose from these days :) > > All the best, > Ash > >Both multiplayer and great AI is best :-)
Are there any stats about what type of connections most people have? I know
that broadband is on the increase but it would surprise me if most people
were
not on freeserve or similar. Then again, it is only the the PC racing
community
which matters.
And I do have GPL :-)
But I am quite bad at it (though improving)
--Matt
on
> > line
> > > > a lot. In the UK (where, I believe, Geoff is) most people pay for
> their
> > > > time online through the phone bill rather than via a flat fee so itis
> > > > perhaps
> > > > not surprising that a UK produced game would emphasise the single
> > > > player game.
> > > > It's not exactly a consolation to those who don't pay their billthis
;)
> >
> > Once you have had decent multiplayer AI just seems silly. Matt investin
Quoted text (7 lines)
> But not everyone in the UK can get ADSL yet - only within 3 miles of a > suitable exchange. BT just doesn't give a stuff if you live out in the > sticks. Great AI is better. > "Ashley McConnell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:a600hg$p2m$[email hidden]... > > > > > > Multiplayer is all very well if you are rich enough to afford to beQuoted text (13 lines)
> > way > > > > but from my perspective I don't care about multiplayer. GP3 and GP3 > > > > 2000 had great AI and that was more important. > > > > --Matt > > > > > > So just to be clear > > > > > > - all phone companies in the UK have a per minute rate???????? > > > > No, most people in the UK, who use the internet even a little, are on > > unmetered ISPs. > > > > ADSL, which has been recently lowered in price too...a mere �25 / monthQuoted text (11 lines)
> > some ADSL, buy GPL (for a fiver!) and start playing online. Although > saying > > that, you can play GPL with a 33.6 modem absolutely fine, and there are > > quite a few UK / european servers to choose from these days :) > > > > All the best, > > Ash > > > > > >
David Lyttle wrote:
>
> But not everyone in the UK can get ADSL yet - only within 3 miles of a
> suitable exchange. BT just doesn't give a stuff if you live out in the
You DON'T need broadband to race online as a client! 28.8k is enough.
"David Lyttle" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
> But not everyone in the UK can get ADSL yet - only within 3 miles of a
> suitable exchange. BT just doesn't give a stuff if you live out in the
> sticks. Great AI is better.
In Switzerland I have the choice between dial-up at about 1USD per hour,
flat-rate dial-up at 30USD per month, or ASDL / Cable at 40USD per month,
plus modem rental and a hefty installation fee. ASDL is available in most
mid-sized towns, cable only close to urban centres.
I also vote for great AI. I'm not saying great AI is better than great
multiplayer, but I think there is a bias in this group against the offline
experience, like it is for the great unwashed masses or something. I've
said before I don't always have time for online racing. Sure, in a global
community there is always someone out there on VROC, but often I just want
to run a 5-lap race right away, and if I crash out, I want to start again
right away. Online your have a certain obligation to meet other peoples'
requirements for scheduling, qualifying, seeing the race to the end etc. I
love the online experience, but I also love a well-programmed AI, partly
just for the sheer technical challenge of getting it right (the programming,
that is).
Stephen
"Stephen F." wrote:
This is all getting away from the main point now really. No one is
saying forget about the AI. We are just saying that in the year 2002, to
release a "sim" without multiplayer over the net is a joke! GP2 had good
AI. A good programmer could have tweaked it a little and made it good
enough for GP3 in a few days! But where's the multiplayer that is
prevalent in just about every other genre? Where's the concrete
explanation?
Quoted text (25 lines)
> > "David Lyttle" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > But not everyone in the UK can get ADSL yet - only within 3 miles of a > > suitable exchange. BT just doesn't give a stuff if you live out in the > > sticks. Great AI is better. > > In Switzerland I have the choice between dial-up at about 1USD per hour, > flat-rate dial-up at 30USD per month, or ASDL / Cable at 40USD per month, > plus modem rental and a hefty installation fee. ASDL is available in most > mid-sized towns, cable only close to urban centres. > > I also vote for great AI. I'm not saying great AI is better than great > multiplayer, but I think there is a bias in this group against the offline > experience, like it is for the great unwashed masses or something. I've > said before I don't always have time for online racing. Sure, in a global > community there is always someone out there on VROC, but often I just want > to run a 5-lap race right away, and if I crash out, I want to start again > right away. Online your have a certain obligation to meet other peoples' > requirements for scheduling, qualifying, seeing the race to the end etc. I > love the online experience, but I also love a well-programmed AI, partly > just for the sheer technical challenge of getting it right (the programming, > that is). > > StephenOn Thu, 28 Feb 2002 19:23:58 GMT, Tony Rickard <[email hidden]> wrote:
> If licensing is going to prevent multiplayer then good AI is the
> only answer. I would have some faith in GP4 extending the capability
I don't agree. Forget the licensing, make the game easily extensible,
concentrate on multiplayer and show Bernie the finger. The community
will come up with "Season updates" in no time straight, I guess.
Uwe
[email hidden] (Uwe Schuerkamp) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...
> I don't agree. Forget the licensing, make the game easily extensible,
> concentrate on multiplayer and show Bernie the finger. The community
> will come up with "Season updates" in no time straight, I guess.
a. F1RC should show that the community isn't immune to legal threats
b. Doesn't Bernie own the rights to several tracks on the F1 calendar?
I kind of thought that Spa, at least, was handled by Bernie nowadays.
If so, we'd have to rely on the community for tracks too.
c. If a game were made that was nearly identical to F1 but didn't
include real names and drivers, it wouldn't surprise me if they were
sued anyway just based on similarities. It hasn't happened before,
that i'm aware of, but I don't see why it couldn't.
Jason
jason moyer wrote:
Pardon me. I haven't been around for a while. What was the legal
stuff with F1RC?
