The Great "RoofCam vs Cockpit" Debate....another thought!

Are we not forgetting that a properly installed and set surround sound system will do wonders about telling us whether we have a car on our right...or left....in mirror view or not? How about our spotter? While he is not perfect....its better with him than without him. I think N2002 does a great job of 3D sound implementation...for opponent track position at least. Just food for further thought......

Agreed, the 3D sound does help a lot, however I find the positional sound in N4 was better than N2002, maybe it was just the volume levels I had set for opponents. Will have to play around with it more, but a good point none the less. "Tom Pabst" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:47%e8.12199$9o.238570@sccrnsc02... > Are we not forgetting that a properly installed and set surround sound > system will do wonders about telling us whether we have a car on our > right...or left....in mirror view or not? How about our spotter? Whilehe > is not perfect....its better with him than without him. I think N2002does > a great job of 3D sound implementation...for opponent track position at > least. > > Just food for further thought...... > >

Don't even get me started on the crappy sound in NR2002. The sound samples used in NR2002 are better, but the sound engine is junk. I don't know if they tried to "fix" it for the SB Live problems in N4, but I have Philips AE sound card and I can't even run 3d sound because it just screams as soon as I apply the changes. N4 with the improved samples that came out after the NR2002 was released was why better than anything I can get out of NR2002. Not to pick on you directly Tom, but this is just another perfect example of how the cockpit cam users just can't let it go that some people don't agree with them. I'm not sure if agree is even the right word to use. I'd even agree that the cockpit cam is more realistic than roof/kite views, but I'm still gonna use the roof view because its where I most comfortable, end of story. MadDAWG

"MadDAWG" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Don't even get me started on the crappy sound in NR2002. The sound samples > used in NR2002 are better, but the sound engine is junk. I don't know if > they tried to "fix" it for the SB Live problems in N4, but I have PhilipsAE > sound card and I can't even run 3d sound because it just screams as soonas > I apply the changes. N4 with the improved samples that came out after the > NR2002 was released was why better than anything I can get out of NR2002. dang my poor old and I do mean old Aureal Vortex 2 does the N4 and N 2002 3d sound without complaining. No squeals here. Nvidia didn't buy Soundblaster did they? (<{[sorry I HAD to but that last line in for Tom's benefit]}>) dave henrie > > Not to pick on you directly Tom, but this is just another perfect exampleof > how the cockpit cam users just can't let it go that some people don'tagree

Quoted text (8 lines)

> with them. I'm not sure if agree is even the right word to use. I'd even > agree that the cockpit cam is more realistic than roof/kite views, but I'm > still gonna use the roof view because its where I most comfortable, end of > story. > > MadDAWG > >

MadDAWG..... Then....you must ever be known as a "lame gamer!" That would be something akin to a "lower life form"....than us "cockpit drivers!" What Papy should do for you.....is come out with a version of N2002.....instead of requiring the CD to be inserted, it would require a "quarter" to be inserted into a slot in the side of your computer. See?....you'd feel right at home then, huh? ....lol.....MadDAWG....I'm just "bustin' your chops" a little bit here. I really don't think it matters all that much where a person chooses to drive from....its a personal preference. If you (any sim driver) are a clean driver....I don't care, that's for sure. If you are not a clean driver....then I don't care if you drive from the cockpit or the roofcam....or from the f'ing grandstand-TV view.......I don't want to race with you. See my point? Have fun....keep the rubber side down.... Regards, Tom "MadDAWG" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Don't even get me started on the crappy sound in NR2002. The sound samples > used in NR2002 are better, but the sound engine is junk. I don't know if > they tried to "fix" it for the SB Live problems in N4, but I have PhilipsAE > sound card and I can't even run 3d sound because it just screams as soonas > I apply the changes. N4 with the improved samples that came out after the > NR2002 was released was why better than anything I can get out of NR2002. > > Not to pick on you directly Tom, but this is just another perfect exampleof > how the cockpit cam users just can't let it go that some people don'tagree

Quoted text (8 lines)

> with them. I'm not sure if agree is even the right word to use. I'd even > agree that the cockpit cam is more realistic than roof/kite views, but I'm > still gonna use the roof view because its where I most comfortable, end of > story. > > MadDAWG > >

> Nvidia didn't buy Soundblaster did they? (<{[sorry I HAD to but that last > line in for Tom's benefit]}>) > dave henrie I think they just swap driver writing personnel. lol MadDAWG

"MadDAWG" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Don't even get me started on the crappy sound in NR2002. The sound samples > used in NR2002 are better, but the sound engine is junk. I don't know if > they tried to "fix" it for the SB Live problems in N4, but I have PhilipsAE > sound card and I can't even run 3d sound because it just screams as soonas > I apply the changes. N4 with the improved samples that came out after the > NR2002 was released was why better than anything I can get out of NR2002. > > Not to pick on you directly Tom, but this is just another perfect exampleof > how the cockpit cam users just can't let it go that some people don'tagree

Quoted text (7 lines)

> with them. I'm not sure if agree is even the right word to use. I'd even > agree that the cockpit cam is more realistic than roof/kite views, but I'm > still gonna use the roof view because its where I most comfortable, end of > story. > > MadDAWG >

I got to be the boss on a papy open server last night, and accidentally left force cockpit view on. I am amazed at the number of drivers that DON'T use cockpit view. Seems like everyone started bitching and whining about it. I always drive cockpit and some other guys on the server do as well. I don't think cockpit view=sim, but the roof cam is cheesy. The cockpit view would be much improved if: 1. Wider FOV. That would help with lack of peripheral vision. Driving to work today, noticed that I can see out side windows while looking ahead. 2. Smooth out the panning on the snap view. A slow pan would be better, and controlling how far to the side I "glance" would be great. 3. Adjust the camera position. Up, down, back, forward. Not extreme positioning, but small adjustments would help a lot. My seat "feels" too low. 4. Is it me or is the windshield extremely narrow (vertical height) ? 5. Give me 16 X 9 monitor support. I can dream, can't I? Jeff

> ....lol.....MadDAWG....I'm just "bustin' your chops" a little bit here. I > really don't think it matters all that much where a person chooses todrive

Quoted text (11 lines)

> from....its a personal preference. If you (any sim driver) are a clean > driver....I don't care, that's for sure. If you are not a clean > driver....then I don't care if you drive from the cockpit or the > roofcam....or from the f'ing grandstand-TV view.......I don't want to race > with you. See my point? > > Have fun....keep the rubber side down.... > > Regards, > > Tom

This exactly what I have been trying to get across. It doesn't matter what view anyone uses as long as its clean and green. To be honest online I see alot more wrecks in forced cockpit races than I do non forced races. Does this mean that everyone should use the non cockpit views? Hell no. To me it shows use what your comfortable with and who cares what anyone else thinks you should use. If you work backwards from your 6/10 rule it then I would say most people are NOT comfortable to use the cockpit view. How I come to this is based on the fact that most people are not real race car drivers so therefore their brains would discount as being wrong, what could be 100% dead on because they are use to passenger cars. Does this mean they take the game any less seriously than someone using the cockpit cam? I sure don't see it that way. I ran a offline *gasp* race at Daytona a couple nights ago and after 60 laps my hands were wet from sweat. My heart rate was probably up from running door to door and trying to draft my way to the front. So by your previous post this means it must seem real to me, right? (sorry but I'd hit pause before I puked). Its simply a game and people should have fun and stop worrying about what someone else does. If someone asks for something and you can help them great, if not there is no need to preach a sermon on how its wrong to do that. MadDAWG P.S. don't even get me started on online vs. offline ROFL!

> It also shows that driving from cockpit view is more challenging and > therefor the cockpit drivers are the _better_ sim racers... <bg,d&rvf> > ;-) > > Achim Could be argued that they are a bunch of wreckers too. :) MadDAWG

Hi Mad, > ...online I see alot more wrecks in forced cockpit races > than I do non forced races... [snip] ...To me it shows use > what your comfortable with and who cares what anyone > else thinks you should use It also shows that driving from cockpit view is more challenging and therefor the cockpit drivers are the _better_ sim racers... <bg,d&rvf> ;-) Achim To anyone feeling his adrenaline rising after reading the above: this was a friendly joke and does not express the opinion of the author's wife ;-)

Hi Jeff, AAMOF, I think at least on Sierra.com quite a few of the really fast guys use roof or kite views. Some of the fastest GPL hotlappers used to use kite view, too. I was most surprised when I found that out :-) Achim "Jeff Leonard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:a5iv6p$ds6$[email hidden]... > > "MadDAWG" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > Don't even get me started on the crappy sound in NR2002. The soundsamples > > used in NR2002 are better, but the sound engine is junk. I don't know if > > they tried to "fix" it for the SB Live problems in N4, but I havePhilips > AE > > sound card and I can't even run 3d sound because it just screams as soon > as > > I apply the changes. N4 with the improved samples that came out afterthe > > NR2002 was released was why better than anything I can get out ofNR2002. > > > > Not to pick on you directly Tom, but this is just another perfectexample > of > > how the cockpit cam users just can't let it go that some people don't > agree > > with them. I'm not sure if agree is even the right word to use. I'd even > > agree that the cockpit cam is more realistic than roof/kite views, butI'm > > still gonna use the roof view because its where I most comfortable, endof > > story. > > > > MadDAWG > > > > I got to be the boss on a papy open server last night, and accidentallyleft > force cockpit view on. > > I am amazed at the number of drivers that DON'T use cockpit view. Seems > like everyone started bitching and whining about it. I always drivecockpit

Quoted text (9 lines)

> and some other guys on the server do as well. I don't think cockpit > view=sim, but the roof cam is cheesy. > > The cockpit view would be much improved if: > > 1. Wider FOV. That would help with lack of peripheral vision. Driving to > work today, noticed that I can see out side windows while looking ahead. > > 2. Smooth out the panning on the snap view. A slow pan would be better,

and

Quoted text (15 lines)

> controlling how far to the side I "glance" would be great. > > 3. Adjust the camera position. Up, down, back, forward. Not extreme > positioning, but small adjustments would help a lot. My seat "feels" too > low. > > 4. Is it me or is the windshield extremely narrow (vertical height) ? > > 5. Give me 16 X 9 monitor support. I can dream, can't I? > > Jeff > > > >

In article <47%e8.12199$9o.238570@sccrnsc02>, "Tom Pabst" <[email hidden]> writes: >Are we not forgetting that a properly installed and set surround sound >system will do wonders about telling us whether we have a car on our >right...or left....in mirror view or not? How about our spotter? While he >is not perfect....its better with him than without him. I think N2002 does >a great job of 3D sound implementation...for opponent track position at >least. Not everyone *has* surround sound... Eldred -- Dale Earnhardt, Sr. R.I.P. 1951-2001 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett GPLRank - under construction... Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

"Tom Pabst" <[email hidden]> skrev i en meddelelse news:47%e8.12199$9o.238570@sccrnsc02...

Quoted text (9 lines)

> Are we not forgetting that a properly installed and set surround sound > system will do wonders about telling us whether we have a car on our > right...or left....in mirror view or not? How about our spotter? While he > is not perfect....its better with him than without him. I think N2002 does > a great job of 3D sound implementation...for opponent track position at > least. > > Just food for further thought...... >

Good food. ;-) Based on a recurring debate in the Danish GPL League, I have to ask this of you people: Assuming the same sound setup, do you you find the information conveyed by sound more useful in either view or is it the same? It has been claimed by some F10 drivers, that they do not need the rear view mirror as they have the same information through the sound. True or false? (I am very bad at using sounds myself (rev-deaf?), and thus have never invested more than the absolute minimum in sound card, speakers, and headphones. Thus my opinion is null and void :^( ). /Jens

"Joachim Trensz" > AAMOF, I think at least on Sierra.com quite a few of the really fast guys > use roof or kite views. Some of the fastest GPL hotlappers used to usekite > view, too. I was most surprised when I found that out :-) > > Achim That gives me all the more reason to stay inside. Last thing I need is to be associated with fast guys... ;) dave henrie

IMO a good 3d sound is a plus no matter what view. One of the best games for 3d sound was DTR. I never even needed a mirror in that game becasue I could hear where they were at. I don't seem to get near the positional sence out of the Papy games like I did DTR. Of course Ratbag went and screwed it up when the made DTRSC. MadDAWG

hehe, that is true :-) Achim "MadDAWG" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (12 lines)

> > > It also shows that driving from cockpit view is more challenging and > > therefor the cockpit drivers are the _better_ sim racers... <bg,d&rvf> > > ;-) > > > > Achim > > Could be argued that they are a bunch of wreckers too. :) > > MadDAWG > >

<g> Achim "Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:bcaf8.39714$[email hidden]... > > "Joachim Trensz" > AAMOF, I think at least on Sierra.com quite a few ofthe

Quoted text (11 lines)

> really fast guys > > use roof or kite views. Some of the fastest GPL hotlappers used to use > kite > > view, too. I was most surprised when I found that out :-) > > > > Achim > That gives me all the more reason to stay inside. Last thing I need is > to be associated with fast guys... ;) > dave henrie > >

Tom Pabst wrote:

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > Are we not forgetting that a properly installed and set surround sound > system will do wonders about telling us whether we have a car on our > right...or left....in mirror view or not? How about our spotter? While he > is not perfect....its better with him than without him. I think N2002 does > a great job of 3D sound implementation...for opponent track position at > least. > > Just food for further thought......

My only problem with using the cockpit view is that I have a hard time telling when the back wheels are stepping out. A quality surround sound would help me immensely, at least when I'm starting to go sideways under acceleration. I suppose it would help me with braking too, as I might be able to hear the rear wheels locking up. I don't know. What I do know is that the only clue I have now is visual, and if I'm in the cockpit and I "see" that the back end is coming around...it's too late to save it. If I'm riding the rooftop (F10 in GPL), I can usually save it. FWIW, in real life I drive a '95 Mercury Cougar with the 210hp 4.6L V8. I live in Wisconsin, and driving that pig around in the snow and ice has given me an acute sense for "tail-happiness". Even in a heavy car like that, I can "feel" when the back end gets light before my eyes or ears tell me. So there, I drive mostly on the rooftop for that reason. The only exception is when I'm driving in my GPL F2 league, there I need my mirrors. (The only online racing I do.) Gary Stephenson

Jeff Leonard wrote: > The cockpit view would be much improved if: > > 1. Wider FOV. That would help with lack of peripheral vision. Driving to > work today, noticed that I can see out side windows while looking ahead. Next time you ride to work, put a full-face helmet on (make pretend it's still 2001, so you don't have to use a head and neck restraint device if you don't want to), replace your driver side window with a net, and throw a shitload of pipes on the front passenger seat and the back seat. How's the FOV look? IMO, the cockpit views are spot on accurate. One only needs to see the in-car camera shots on TV broadcasts to get a feel for how claustrophobic a race car can be. Modern day open wheel cars aren't any better. Gary <snip>

Jens H. Kruuse wrote:

Quoted text (7 lines)

> Based on a recurring debate in the Danish GPL League, I have to ask this of you > people: > Assuming the same sound setup, do you you find the information conveyed by sound > more useful in either view or is it the same? > > It has been claimed by some F10 drivers, that they do not need the rear view > mirror as they have the same information through the sound. True or false?

For me, when I was running in F10 mode, false. Yes, if someone was coming up from behind I could hear them, but when they were close it was hard to tell how close. Plus, I could never tell the difference between engine revs, and driving GPL in F10, one doesn't have a tachometer (rev-counter). I blew alot of motors running the F10 view. To me the sounds in GPL are the same with F10 or cockpit view (at least with my computer). I race using the cockpit view so I can have mirrors and a tachometer, I hotlap using F10. (My "hotlapping" is done mostly on new tracks that I'm trying to learn.) Gary <snip>

"Gary Stephenson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (17 lines)

> Jeff Leonard wrote: > > The cockpit view would be much improved if: > > > > 1. Wider FOV. That would help with lack of peripheral vision. Driving to > > work today, noticed that I can see out side windows while looking ahead. > > Next time you ride to work, put a full-face helmet on (make pretend it's > still 2001, so you don't have to use a head and neck restraint device if > you don't want to), replace your driver side window with a net, and > throw a shitload of pipes on the front passenger seat and the back seat. > How's the FOV look? IMO, the cockpit views are spot on accurate. One > only needs to see the in-car camera shots on TV broadcasts to get a feel > for how claustrophobic a race car can be. Modern day open wheel cars > aren't any better. > > Gary >

Ok, I understand what you're saying here, but read some interviews with RL drivers (a DEjr one comes to mind, playboy maybe?), and they say their peripheral vision is one reason (of many) for their racing success. Sorry, but I don't buy the helmet opinion. What racer would wear a helmet that restricted their vision? I'm not a RL racer, maybe someone here could clear this up. I only drive cockpit view, and its good. I'm not bashing it. But, it could be improved. My FOV opinion still stands. It needs to be a little wider, but not "walleye-vision". Jeff

In article <a5lnos$h03$[email hidden]>, "Jeff Leonard" <[email hidden]> writes:

Quoted text (7 lines)

>Ok, I understand what you're saying here, but read some interviews with RL >drivers (a DEjr one comes to mind, playboy maybe?), and they say their >peripheral vision is one reason (of many) for their racing success. > >Sorry, but I don't buy the helmet opinion. What racer would wear a helmet >that restricted their vision? I'm not a RL racer, maybe someone here could >clear this up.

Have you ever WORN a full-face helmet? Think of it this way:the sides of the helmet have to be at LEAST a bit in front of your eyes. Even if it's only 1 inch, that cuts off that much angle in your peripheral vision. Even when I've run indoor go-karts, it's hard to see someone right behind you - you just can't turn around far enough. Just look at the next race that's on TV and see where the driver's eyes are in relation to the side of the helmet. Eldred -- Dale Earnhardt, Sr. R.I.P. 1951-2001 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett GPLRank - under construction... Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

"EldredP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > In article <a5lnos$h03$[email hidden]>, "Jeff Leonard" <[email hidden]> > writes: > > >Ok, I understand what you're saying here, but read some interviews withRL > >drivers (a DEjr one comes to mind, playboy maybe?), and they say their > >peripheral vision is one reason (of many) for their racing success. > > > >Sorry, but I don't buy the helmet opinion. What racer would wear a helmet > >that restricted their vision? I'm not a RL racer, maybe someone herecould > >clear this up. > > Have you ever WORN a full-face helmet? Think of it this way:the sides ofthe > helmet have to be at LEAST a bit in front of your eyes. Even if it's only1 > inch, that cuts off that much angle in your peripheral vision. Even whenI've > run indoor go-karts, it's hard to see someone right behind you - you justcan't > turn around far enough. > Just look at the next race that's on TV and see where the driver's eyesare in > relation to the side of the helmet. I think it's not so restrictive for the newer helmets. There are probably better pictures, but look at Jacques' helmet. http://www.forix.com/asp/photos.asp?z=0&k=0&l=0&x=101&f=pi/Villeneuve+Jacque s_1998_xx_3.jpg That should give at least 180� vision (based on the Ferguson "hands on the temples" test). It's certainly less than without the helmet, but not so limited. Now, the old Bell I wore for infrequent motorcycle rides in the 80s was a disaster... Stephen

In article <3c7f361a$[email hidden]>, "Stephen F." <[email hidden]> writes: >I think it's not so restrictive for the newer helmets. There are probably >better pictures, but look at Jacques' helmet. > >http://www.forix.com/asp/photos.asp?z=0&k=0&l=0&x=101&f=pi/Villeneuve+Jacque >s_1998_xx_3.jpgGot an error, even pasting the URL back together... ----------------- Microsoft JET Database Engine error '80004005' System resource exceeded. /asp/photos.asp, line 38 ---------------- Not sure what went wrong... :( Eldred -- Dale Earnhardt, Sr. R.I.P. 1951-2001 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett GPLRank - under construction... Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

EldredP wrote:

Quoted text (19 lines)

> > In article <3c7f361a$[email hidden]>, "Stephen F." > <[email hidden]> writes: > > >I think it's not so restrictive for the newer helmets. There are probably > >better pictures, but look at Jacques' helmet. > > > >http://www.forix.com/asp/photos.asp?z=0&k=0&l=0&x=101&f=pi/Villeneuve+Jacque > >s_1998_xx_3.jpg > Got an error, even pasting the URL back together... > ----------------- > Microsoft JET Database Engine error '80004005' > > System resource exceeded. > > /asp/photos.asp, line 38 > ---------------- > > Not sure what went wrong... :(

Works fine with my Netscape 4.79! -- 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

In article <[email hidden]>, Uncle Fester <[email hidden]> writes:

Quoted text (11 lines)

>> Microsoft JET Database Engine error '80004005' >> >> System resource exceeded. >> >> /asp/photos.asp, line 38 >> ---------------- >> >> Not sure what went wrong... :( > > >Works fine with my Netscape 4.79!

It *just* worked for me, using the *same* IE5.5 I tried before... Weird. Eldred -- Dale Earnhardt, Sr. R.I.P. 1951-2001 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett GPLRank - under construction... Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.