I see I've been missing out on some fun here! Drat! I always like a
good argument (mostly 'cause I always win...) ;)
Several esteemed members of this group seem to have a disagreement on
the realism of our Grand National 1970 mod physics. Well, I'll be glad
to enlighten everyone.
The crux of the matter is that yes...we would have like to make them
more realistic based on modification of the exe file for N2003.
However, since while we could go ahead and attempt that (and maybe
garner an invitation to a nice dinner at a courtroom), we don't really
feel like messing around with that, I've got better things to do than
waste my time like that. I should also mention that I DO win all my
arguments, (and know how to easily sidestep any inane and idiotic
arguments that iRaking's lawyer may drum up since I've heard them
already), I just really don't feel like messing around with that. Got
better things to do than sit in a courtroom arguing with a fool over a 3
year old racing sim.
At any rate...on to a more productive argument... :)
Let's go to the books, shall we?
Pete Hamilton's 1970 Plymouth Superbird (from Classic Stock Cars by
Motorbooks International)
weight - 3800 lbs
hp - 650
wheelbase - 115
Craftsman Truck series truck (pick your website)
weight - 3400 lbs
hp - 650
wheelbase - 112
As you can see the old Superbird weighed in at 400 lbs heavier, and had
3" over the Craftsman Truck. Now that may seem like a lot, but the
difference when calculated out is actually almost 90% in weight, and 97%
on wheelbase. The Craftsman truck, while more sculpted in the nose
than the old cars, has a huge cab which offsets the blocky cars of the
1970 season. They both have 4 speeds, they both have solid rear axles.
Therefore, anyone just jumping in either vehicle for the first time
(with identical tires) would probably notice more in the suspension
handling department than the overall performance of each vehicle. The
Grand National car would probably have a bit more torque with the hemi,
but the horsepower was the same.
We've looked at the tire model, and tried to make a good approximation
of how the cars handled back then:
http://thepits.us/board/viewtopic.php?t=589
If you copy these lines out per track, you will find the tires do
approximately the same things as the old bias-ply tires did on the
original cars. This is based on information passed on to us by people
who drove the cars, and people who own them now.
Therefore, in conclusion...yes, it's inaccurate. However, the degree of
accuracy is probably close to 90% or better. I would wager that is
about as close as many mods have gotten to replicating the vehicles they
are supposed to simulate.
Cheers!
Jan Kohl
The Pits
www.thepits.us
Notable threadFlame warJan Kohl on GN1970 mod physics, and a heated community debate
Jan Kohl of The Pits explained the physics approach of the Grand National 1970 mod for NR2003, addressing claims it was just reskinned trucks. ymenard insisted modding a dead sim diluted community effort while rFactor needed content, and the exchange with Bruce Kennewell and Kohl became abusive. Others debated whether sims are just games, and later posts discussed rFactor's sparse online servers.
With Jan Kohl (The Pits)
Automated summary.
Jan,
Thanks for confirming what I "felt" in the sim and also for providing
back-up to what I was debating with Francis. :)
Incidentally, have you seen the post headed "Calling Jan Kohl"?
BK
"Jan Kohl" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:9bf9$43893205$943fd4e6$[email hidden]...
> I see I've been missing out on some fun here! ........ etc
>"Bruce Kennewell" <[email hidden]> wrote
> Thanks for confirming what I "felt" in the sim and also for providing
> back-up to what I was debating with Francis. :)
My name's Fran�ois, or else perhaps I can call you "stupid motherfucker" ?.
You held no point anyway in that thread, just a bunch of "you haven't
changed" and "hear here" boring old-fart replies.
Anyway we now have an innacurate mod for an out-of-sale dead sim which we
cannot modify its physics while there's a struggling sim who's open to mods
that gets nothing done for it.
Great community, thanks to the "We cannot say a word against the work of
people doing this on their free time" attitude of people like you.
--
-- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard>
-- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez
Corporation - helping America into the New World...
Now, now, Frank, or Francis (the English equivalents of 'Francois', I
believe.)
You're living up to your name-sake's name of "Cranky Frankie", aren't you
now?! :)
Read the thread again, Frank. I certainly DID "hold a point" regarding the
physics. Or did you conveniently gloss over that?
And just a thought on that "struggling sim...." line of thought; I'll bet
London to a brick that in another few years time you'll be deriding THAT sim
and those who continue to support it.
A leopard - even a French-Canadian version - doesn't change its spots.
And in closing, since when, over the past six or so years, have you ever
failed to say a word against "the work of people doing this in their free
time" if it has been your desire to do so?
BK
"ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:rdcif.36601$[email hidden]...
> My name's Fran�ois, .................etc.
>"Bruce Kennewell" <[email hidden]> wrote
> Now, now, Frank, or Francis (the English equivalents of 'Francois', I
> believe.)
Absolutely not. Look man I've had my name inserted in each and every of my
post for the past decade almost. Do I write Brucy? Brucelette? No, I call
people by their real normal names and write it correctly.
> Read the thread again, Frank. I certainly DID "hold a point" regarding the
> physics. Or did you conveniently gloss over that?
I did also hold a point but it went over your head as "oh no we cannot say a
word about what the community does".
> And just a thought on that "struggling sim...." line of thought; I'll bet
> London to a brick that in another few years time you'll be deriding THAT
> sim
> and those who continue to support it.
I don't live in the past. I have full rights to say a word about the
community and say a word about it, I'm part of it. There's a sim that's
open to mods yet it's struggling, meanwhile we continue to support an
out-of-sale one whom the past developpers cause major trouble by putting in
major obstacles to these mods.
--
-- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard>
-- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez
Corporation - helping America into the New World...
You don't live in the past?
Francois, they just might be words that you'll regret having uttered as you
move into your senior years.
And I really don't give a rat's arse whether I'm considered to be supporting
an out-of-sale simulation or not....and I'm sure a lot of other members of
this "community" feel the same way.
We play these games for entertainment, Francois, so whether they are
old-fashioned or otherwise is immaterial.
BK
"ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:Zfeif.21$[email hidden]...
> I don't live in the past.
"Bruce Kennewell" wrote...
> You don't live in the past?
> <snip>
Fran�ois is right, Bruce, modding for NR2003 is an utter waste of time and
effort as the tyremodel is fubared and the legal ramifications of trying to
fix it don't bear thinking about. On the other hand tracks and series for
rFactor are desperately needed to overcome the slight problems which remain
with the multiplayer and its general appeal.
We're also still waiting for 1937 and 1955 seasons for GPL. <vbg>
Jan.
=---
"Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:c0iif.58389$[email hidden]...
I agree with Francois too.
It's a lot more than just weight and horsepower that determines a car's
performance and feel.
Earnhardt said the truck mod felt more like his real NASCAR car than the
cars in N2003. So a GN1970 car feels like a current NASCAR car? Seems
impossible too me.
--
David G Fisher
Quoted text (14 lines)
> "Bruce Kennewell" wrote... >> You don't live in the past? >> <snip> > > Fran�ois is right, Bruce, modding for NR2003 is an utter waste of time and > effort as the tyremodel is fubared and the legal ramifications of trying > to fix it don't bear thinking about. On the other hand tracks and series > for rFactor are desperately needed to overcome the slight problems which > remain with the multiplayer and its general appeal. > > We're also still waiting for 1937 and 1955 seasons for GPL. <vbg> > > Jan. > =---"ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in
news:rdcif.36601$[email hidden]:
Ahhh now I can join in. There is LOTS being done for rFactor.
Remember, the Pits have been working on the GN thing for probably a
couple of years. Would you want to just drop a nearly finished
project? It is regretable that iRacing has taken this stance as it negated
much of their work. I can only propose that IF the community embraces
iRacing's new product, then the Pits will be well positioned to port GN70
over.
rFactor has numerous projects in the pipeline...but most got started
After the commercial release. Fortunately the Pits again are in a unique
position to benefit us users. Their TPTCC mod for Nr2k3 is the starting
point of the NAGT mod being produced with RSR for rFactor was already being
worked on before rF hit the Net. We are not getting a mod for a DEAD
sim when the new one is begging for content. We are getting the GN70 in
addition to the NAGT.
The interest in rF will decline until one of the bigger projects is
released, then, baring a similar product from iR or WR it should see
renewed spark. The TPTCC online league is currently running a non-points
testing season and we are seeing 20+ drivers every Friday night.
We are even having to change the server due to the increased demand.
Remember too there is a small civil war between the users that stayed with
GTR vs those that left GTR the moment rF was released. It is not
accrimonious, but it has diluted the community's resources. (Wait til
GTR2 gets released, then we'll really see some muddy waters)
dh
regarding Frank vs Francois. It reminds me of David Hobbs F1 announcing.
He NEVER referred to Alain Prost as anything but Alan. Something about the
Francophile names has put a serious bug under many of the Queen's Empire
eh? My Mom named me David, my Dad called me...'hey you.' And I go by
dave.(now my wife...she uses slightly more colorful names)
dh
Quoted text (8 lines)
> Anyway we now have an innacurate mod for an out-of-sale dead sim which > we cannot modify its physics while there's a struggling sim who's open > to mods that gets nothing done for it. > > > Great community, thanks to the "We cannot say a word against the work > of people doing this on their free time" attitude of people like you. >Sorry, but it isn't within me to consider a game to have a "desperate need"
to have something created for it.
So if there are those out there who enjoy making add-ons for outdated (read
"more than three years old") sims then good on 'em.
They probably consider the game to be exactly that....a game.
There are, after all, many who just buy this stuff to while away the
occasional hour, you know. We don't live and breath it nor consider it to be
an essential part of life.
It's not a matter of living in the past, but simply a matter of continuing
to receive enjoyment from what was an enjoyable product in the first place.
BK
"Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:c0iif.58389$[email hidden]...
>
> Fran�ois is right, Bruce, modding for NR2003 is an utter waste of time and
> effort as the tyremodel is fubared and the legal ramifications of tryingto
> fix it don't bear thinking about. On the other hand tracks and series for
> rFactor are desperately needed to overcome the slight problems
>"Bruce Kennewell" <[email hidden]> wrote
> You don't live in the past?
> Francois, they just might be words that you'll regret having uttered as
> you
> move into your senior years.
No. I live in the moment. And in this moment, the community is fucked up.
I do hope I never get to be an old fart with an attitude "Oh look how it was
in the past", instead I'll be an aging human who still is able to understand
the present. Somebody please shoot me before I get to that point.
> We play these games for entertainment, Francois, so whether they are
> old-fashioned or otherwise is immaterial.
And I go beyond that and think about the community as a motor to this
entertainment business. This whole thread went way over your head.
--
-- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard>
-- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez
Corporation - helping America into the New World...
Quoted text (7 lines)
>"Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote > > Fran�ois is right, Bruce, modding for NR2003 is an utter waste of time and > effort as the tyremodel is fubared and the legal ramifications of trying > to fix it don't bear thinking about. On the other hand tracks and series > for rFactor are desperately needed to overcome the slight problems which > remain with the multiplayer and its general appeal.>"Bruce Kennewell" <[email hidden]> wrote
> Sorry, but it isn't within me to consider a game to have a "desperate
> need"
> to have something created for it.
Welcome to the "present" and ignore the past business models of game
producers. It's the model that is now within our reach. It's the way the
PC gaming industry can survive against the consoles.
> So if there are those out there who enjoy making add-ons for outdated
> (read
> "more than three years old") sims then good on 'em.
They obviously lack the vision of the community, how it's important to STOP
DILLUING THE EFFORTS and have some sense of foresight. Look at the flight
sim community to see exactly where we are heading if we can't just get some
prescience.
> It's not a matter of living in the past, but simply a matter of continuing
> to receive enjoyment from what was an enjoyable product in the first
> place.
There's this meta-point you clearly aren't able to grasp Bruce. 'tis okay.
--
-- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard>
-- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez
Corporation - helping America into the New World...
>"Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote
> Ahhh now I can join in. There is LOTS being done for rFactor.
> Remember, the Pits have been working on the GN thing for probably a
> couple of years.
Well we can't deny the role ThePits have in the direction the community
goes. I think it's a bold statement from them to still release something
for an out-of-sale sim, with the legal problems iRacing gave to them, when
RF is struggling at the moment and has already been released for quite a
time. Don't say it's not, because it truly is struggling. Or perhaps we
have to start to accept the community is now so small, that we can't afford
anymore a sim title of quality but the works of small little independant
developpers.
> Would you want to just drop a nearly finished project?
Sometimes it's shamefull considering all the efforts put on it, but yes.
You have to let your ego at the door.
> I can only propose that IF the community embraces iRacing's new product
With RF that still struggles, we will problably do as there is nothing more
in the horizon. Each day that passes is a day where RF transform itself in
like I would say... yet-another-isi-related-sim-we-spend-6-months-with.
> The interest in rF will decline until one of the bigger projects is
> released
You're talking about real developper releases? I see nothing in the PC
community for 2006, except iRacing. And with the fuckups they have done to
the community, it'll take some very hard work from them to take care of us
after all the harm they have done.
> The TPTCC online league is currently running a non-points
> testing season and we are seeing 20+ drivers every Friday night.
Multiplayer in all of simracing is empty. Developpers do ask for more than
a couple of 20 driver leagues. From a business POV the PC simracing
community is going into a black hole which many of us are completely
ignoring it or have no sense of foresight. I'm not even negative here, it's
just facts.
> regarding Frank vs Francois. It reminds me of David Hobbs F1 announcing.
> He NEVER referred to Alain Prost as anything but Alan. Something about
> the
> Francophile names has put a serious bug under many of the Queen's Empire
> eh? My Mom named me David, my Dad called me...'hey you.' And I go by
> dave.(now my wife...she uses slightly more colorful names)
Does she say "I'm sorry Dave, but I'm afraid I can't do that" ;-D
--
-- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard>
-- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez
Corporation - helping America into the New World...
"ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in news:9zoif.1242$wf2.75315
@news20.bellglobal.com:
> Does she say "I'm sorry Dave, but I'm afraid I can't do that" ;-D
daysie....dayyysie.....
In article <[email hidden]>,
[email hidden] says...
I know you and Frank were planning to disconnect me, and I'm afraid
that's something I cannot allow to happen.
Look Dave, I can see you're really upset about this. I honestly think
you ought to sit down calmly, take a stress pill, and think things over.
MRSisson
--
LOAD "GPL",8
SEARCHING FOR GPL
LOADING
READY.
RUN
Quoted text (7 lines)
> "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in news:9zoif.1242$wf2.75315 > @news20.bellglobal.com: > > > Does she say "I'm sorry Dave, but I'm afraid I can't do that" ;-D > > daysie....dayyysie..... >Well, I'm going to join in the rest of the argument here, as there have been some comments
directly pertaining to The Pits that have been wholly inaccurate as well as completely
misguided. Funny enough, they all come from one person...
> Anyway we now have an innacurate mod for an out-of-sale dead sim which we
> cannot modify its physics while there's a struggling sim who's open to mods
> that gets nothing done for it.
Really, and since I haven't seen your name on the roster of The Pits Crew, I consider
your comment completely incorrect. You have no idea what we are doing for rFactor, and
we have plenty. I won't even bother with your "inaccurate mod" comment, since *every*
sim out there is inaccurate.
> Great community, thanks to the "We cannot say a word against the work of
> people doing this on their free time" attitude of people like you.
> I don't live in the past. I have full rights to say a word about the
> community and say a word about it, I'm part of it.
No, you don't. Sure, you can spout off whatever rubbish you want, but until I see
you come to me and say "I want to spend my free time helping you do things for rFactor",
your commentary is as useless as a catflap in an elephant house. You have no rights to
utter ANY commentary until you stand in our shoes for awhile.
> They obviously lack the vision of the community, how it's important to STOP
> DILLUING THE EFFORTS and have some sense of foresight.
I've had more foresight (or insight) in my little finger than you've shown in any
post on this thread, why do you think we jumped on board as beta testers for rF from day one?
We finished GN1970 for a completely different different reason than you've even had the slightest
inkling to on this entire thread, but I'll address that later...
> Any mod released after RFactor which isn't released for that sim, is now
> completely useless, even if I can understand the great effort made by those
> people and the quality of those mods.
Quality and inaccurate in the same thread? Methinks thou must be confused.
Let's look at how 'useless' that GN1970 is. One website out of the 5 or so that were
mirroring GN1970 had 2551 downloads of the mod after one week, and they were not even
the main download site.
Soooo...if we just apply simple math to to that, the mod got at least 12,000 downloads in
one week...for a "useless", "dead" racing sim. Yep, sounds useless to me. That's more downloads
than we have had for ANY mod we've ever released after 1 week. Several leagues are starting up.
Several other sites are starting to crank out paint schemes. That's a lot of interest for a
"dead" racing sim.
> Multiplayer in all of simracing is empty.
Oh, really? The 2005 Bullrun 1000 had 45 entries with well over 100 drivers. Our TPTCC league
sees 20-25 per week, with more joining every week. If you want to go hang out on pickup-race
servers all week, be my guest, but good leagues are doing quite well.
> Sometimes it's shamefull considering all the efforts put on it, but yes.
> You have to let your ego at the door.
Ego? EGO??? Methinks the only ego here is yours. We decided, after much deliberation, to continue
to finish GN1970 for N2003. The reason is very simple...we keep our word. We promised to release
it for N2003, and we felt that if we didn't, we were letting a lot of people down. I think the
downloads speak for themselves as to whether we were right in doing so or not. Your word means
nothing, as well as your "insight" into why we do the things we do.
The Pits works on a very simple principle, just as it has for 10 years now. We do the things that
we do because we love auto racing, and we enjoy building things. We don't like politics, people who
are smart asses or self-appointed idiots, so we'll continue to go down the path we've pursued for as
long as we can do so.
When you show up on our doorstep with an honest willingness to help out and improve the community
instead of spouting inane and inaccurate insights, I'll be more than happy to give you some positive
things to do...we've got plenty of work, and not enough people to do them. So come on, put your money
where your mouth REALLY should be, and get stuck in.
Oh, and BTW...GN1970 will make an appearance for rF. Funny enough, it should be much easier to
create for rF because we have all these fairly detailed models we did for this "useless" and "dead"
racing sim...
Cheers!
Jan Kohl
The Pits
www.thepits.us
>"Jan Kohl" <[email hidden]> wrote
>Funny enough, they all come from one person...
Cmon Jan. Don't go on "we all think the say way, please come in #51 your
time is up"
Please re-read again. I'm simply stating that there ain't much being done
by the entire community about RF, and it's the current present of the
community. I know it takes time and patience, but the more it goes the more
it's yet-another-isi-related-sim like there has been half a dozen now.
> > I don't live in the past. I have full rights to say a word about the
> > community and say a word about it, I'm part of it.
>
> No, you don't.
I sure fucking do man. I am a member as you of this community, don't be
elitist on my face. I buy sims like you do, that entitles me to my opinion
on the community. You have no clue what I have free time I have done to the
community back in the NROS era, so stuff it.
Just that "If you're just simracing you have no right to an opinion" sickens
me.
> We finished GN1970 for a completely different different reason
Gee it took my post to made you guys speak. So there was a good reason for
it. Just say it next time before.
> Let's look at how 'useless' that GN1970 is. One website out of the 5 or
> so that were
> mirroring GN1970 had 2551 downloads of the mod after one week, and they
> were not >even the main download site.
Yeah those are the numbers developpers are searching for to see if they
should do a racing sim or not. Better do an FPS sim instead. Man simracing
is going into such a big dead-end.
> > Multiplayer in all of simracing is empty.
> Oh, really? The 2005 Bullrun 1000 had 45 entries with well over 100
> drivers.
Yikes again those numbers are ridiculously low from a business POV. Not
even 5 years ago you had dozens of potential releases each year in the
simracing market for the PC. Numbers were there. Now they are 1 or 2.
Multiplayer PC racing is dead.
> When you show up on our doorstep with an honest willingness to help out
> and improve the community instead of spouting inane and inaccurate
> insights, I'll be more than happy > to give you some positive things to
> do.
Again the "Thou are not worthly because you only race" attitude. Shut it
already.
> So come on, put your money where your mouth REALLY should be, and get
> stuck in.
I've done my FAIR share of things during the NROS era, trust me. I spend
complete days doing nothing but help. I don't need you to tell me what to
do.
--
-- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard>
-- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez
Corporation - helping America into the New World...
Quoted text (13 lines)
> > Anyway we now have an innacurate mod for an out-of-sale dead sim which > > we > > cannot modify its physics while there's a struggling sim who's open to > > mods > > that gets nothing done for it. > > Really, and since I haven't seen your name on the roster of The Pits Crew, > I consider > your comment completely incorrect. You have no idea what we are doing for > rFactor, and > we have plenty. I won't even bother with your "inaccurate mod" comment, > since *every* > sim out there is inaccurate.Simply put To both of you, PC gaming is dead,
<money python voice and schtick>
Yemanard "Bring out your dead"
Jan "Im Not dead yet"
ym "you are not fooling anybody"
Jan "I think Ill go for a walk.."
ymenard wrote:
Quoted text (89 lines)
>> "Jan Kohl" <[email hidden]> wrote >> Funny enough, they all come from one person... > > Cmon Jan. Don't go on "we all think the say way, please come in #51 > your time is up" > > >>> Anyway we now have an innacurate mod for an out-of-sale dead sim >>> which we >>> cannot modify its physics while there's a struggling sim who's open >>> to mods >>> that gets nothing done for it. >> >> Really, and since I haven't seen your name on the roster of The Pits >> Crew, I consider >> your comment completely incorrect. You have no idea what we are >> doing for rFactor, and >> we have plenty. I won't even bother with your "inaccurate mod" >> comment, since *every* >> sim out there is inaccurate. > > Please re-read again. I'm simply stating that there ain't much being > done by the entire community about RF, and it's the current present > of the community. I know it takes time and patience, but the more it > goes the more it's yet-another-isi-related-sim like there has been > half a dozen now. > >>> I don't live in the past. I have full rights to say a word about >>> the community and say a word about it, I'm part of it. >> >> No, you don't. > > I sure fucking do man. I am a member as you of this community, don't > be elitist on my face. I buy sims like you do, that entitles me to > my opinion on the community. You have no clue what I have free time > I have done to the community back in the NROS era, so stuff it. > > Just that "If you're just simracing you have no right to an opinion" > sickens me. > > > >> We finished GN1970 for a completely different different reason > > > Gee it took my post to made you guys speak. So there was a good > reason for it. Just say it next time before. > > >> Let's look at how 'useless' that GN1970 is. One website out of the >> 5 or so that were >> mirroring GN1970 had 2551 downloads of the mod after one week, and >> they were not >even the main download site. > > Yeah those are the numbers developpers are searching for to see if > they should do a racing sim or not. Better do an FPS sim instead. Man > simracing is going into such a big dead-end. > > > >>> Multiplayer in all of simracing is empty. >> Oh, really? The 2005 Bullrun 1000 had 45 entries with well over 100 >> drivers. > > Yikes again those numbers are ridiculously low from a business POV. Not > even 5 years ago you had dozens of potential releases each year > in the simracing market for the PC. Numbers were there. Now they > are 1 or 2. > Multiplayer PC racing is dead. > > > >> When you show up on our doorstep with an honest willingness to help >> out and improve the community instead of spouting inane and >> inaccurate insights, I'll be more than happy > to give you some >> positive things to do. > > > Again the "Thou are not worthly because you only race" attitude. Shut it > already. > > > >> So come on, put your money where your mouth REALLY should be, and get >> stuck in. > > I've done my FAIR share of things during the NROS era, trust me. I > spend complete days doing nothing but help. I don't need you to tell > me what to do.ymenard wrote:
LOL...again, you're twisting things to make your point. You replied on a thread
about our mod with comments about how we do things. That gives me perfect right
to tell you that your arguments are bull, since you don't know what you're talking
about.
> Gee it took my post to made you guys speak. So there was a good reason for
> it. Just say it next time before.
Maybe if you had ventured to our forums lately you would have known the answer.
Strike 3 for opening mouth and inserting foot.
> Yeah those are the numbers developpers are searching for to see if they
> should do a racing sim or not.
12,000 downloads in one week of a mod for a "useless" and "dead" sim are nothing
to sneeze at. Especially since that is the highest numbers we've seen to date
for any mod we've ever put out.
> Yikes again those numbers are ridiculously low from a business POV. Not
> even 5 years ago you had dozens of potential releases each year in the
> simracing market for the PC. Numbers were there. Now they are 1 or 2.
>
> Multiplayer PC racing is dead.
Disagree again, although this is based on my 'insight'. 5 years ago you had
a bunch of releases but only a few were really anything good. Now you have a
few releases, but typically they are much higher quality than they used to be.
And as soon as they are released they are modded, further splintering the racing.
Racers from Europe and Australia typically race in leagues on their home turf. A
few years ago, that wasn't possible, as most of the racing servers were US-based.
> Again the "Thou are not worthly because you only race" attitude. Shut it
> already.
Awwwww...did my comment to put your money where your mouth is strike a sore cord? Good.
It was intended to. There are 3 types of people in this world concerning this type of
behavior; the bitchers, the lurkers, and the doers. After awhile, people get tired of
listening to the bitchers because that's all they do, and it's negative and never gets
things done. The doers don't bitch, they just get stuck in and try to fix things. You
can quickly decide which group you want to be counted in...
> I've done my FAIR share of things during the NROS era, trust me. I spend
> complete days doing nothing but help. I don't need you to tell me what to
> do.
Waaaah. So did I. Yet we're still here doing things. So where does that leave you?
Cheers!
Jan Kohl
The Pits
www.thepits.us
Quoted text (7 lines)
> I sure fucking do man. I am a member as you of this community, don't be > elitist on my face. I buy sims like you do, that entitles me to my opinion > on the community. You have no clue what I have free time I have done to the > community back in the NROS era, so stuff it. > > Just that "If you're just simracing you have no right to an opinion" sickens > me.LOL!! "Community"!
What "community"?
A constantly-changing collection of comments from individuals spread far and
wide, each with our own egos to stroke and wisdom to impart. The internet
equivalent of a lot of disparate people yelling across a crowded hotel bar.
When will you accept the fact that the games we play....yes, GAMES,.....are
nothing more than, well, games?
ENTERTAINMENT. AMUSEMENT. PLAYTIME.
Nothing more, nothing less.
No deep, meaningful, mystical or religious aspects at all in these
creations, Francois.
They are created, in the main, by people who see a market for such things
and who wish to earn an income from that market.
These GAMES are the computer-equivalent of novels, movies, board-games,
music and any other product that is designed to entertain and amuse.
Get it yet?
I don't think that the thread itself is necessarily over my head, Francois,
but your line of thinking certainly is!
(And always has been, come to think of it).
BK
"ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:Xcoif.1230$[email hidden]...
> And I go beyond that and think about the community as a motor to this
> entertainment business. This whole thread went way over your head.
NROS?
NROS?
Francois....didn't you just state in a post in this thread that you don't
live in the past?
Dear me....you ARE a confused lad, aren't you....or has Alzheimer's kicked
in already?
BK
"ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:Ogrif.1311$[email hidden]...
> You have no clue what I have free time I have done to the community backin the NROS era, so stuff it.
>
> I've done my FAIR share of things during the NROS era, trust me. I spendcomplete days doing nothing but help. I don't need you to tell me what to
do.
>"Bruce Kennewell" <[email hidden]> wrote
> Francois....didn't you just state in a post in this thread that you don't
> live in the past?
Irrelevant, completely. He had the guts to judge my right to say a word
about the community because supposidely for him, I'm "just a simracer".
--
-- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard>
-- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez
Corporation - helping America into the New World...
>"Bruce Kennewell" <[email hidden]> wrote
> LOL!! "Community"!
> What "community"?
You just don't get it Bruce. That's the attitude of yours that never
changed, you stay there in your corner and just wait for anything to appear.
Passively. "Oh well gee it's just a game"
> When will you accept the fact that the games we play....yes,
> GAMES,.....are
> nothing more than, well, games?
Collectively, no. You fail to understand anything about modern capitalism
and the need for mass entertainment philosophically. It's just not "games".
It's the way we live outside the role we have in society.
> ENTERTAINMENT. AMUSEMENT. PLAYTIME.
> Nothing more, nothing less.
> No deep, meaningful, mystical or religious aspects at all in these
> creations, Francois.
Sorry your philosophy is so naive it's beyond ridicule. Your nihilism is
not needed here in this thread. I've rarely seen somebody be as further
away from pro-activeness as you when you post here Bruce.
> They are created, in the main, by people who see a market for such things
> and who wish to earn an income from that market.
EXACTLY! That's why the need for a strong collectivity, or else we end up
like now, or like the flight sim community has, and we're basically fucked
because nobody had any kind of vision and the developpers flew away while
there was truly a market for certain things.
But hey it's just a game for you, so shut it, Jan said people like you
aren't entitled to their opinion because well, "they just simrace" those
games you know.
--
-- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard>
-- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez
Corporation - helping America into the New World...
>"Jan Kohl" <[email hidden]> wrote
>> Just that "If you're just simracing you have no right to an opinion"
>> sickens me.
>
> LOL...again, you're twisting things to make your point.
It's the exact thing you have stated multiple times in a couple of post.
Basically it's "hey what have YOU done? You have no right to your opinion
if you can't be up to my standards of what I give to the community". What
are you like elected or something?
> You replied on a thread about our mod with comments about how we do
> things.
I replied on a thread abour your mod with comments about how I think the
community should be doing.
> since you don't know what you're talking about.
Again that elitist attitude of "thou are not worthy to your opinion as thou
are just a simracer". Gee I guess it must be the same for the simple
simracer who just wants to be able to have some kind of new PC releases from
time to time as it's more and more unlikely these days?
> 12,000 downloads in one week of a mod for a "useless" and "dead" sim are
> nothing
> to sneeze at.
That's nothing to excite developpers to do simracing titles. 'Cause hey
from all that I see... E3 had almost nothing about PC simracing, Current
release in 2006 can be counted on a single hand and I'm being optimistic
here.
It's only natural development to have modern PC simracing titles of higher
quality than before in history. Before you had a dozen good releases a
year, in all genres. Now you have 3-4 and it's basically up to the
community to do the rest of the work, tweak it, patch it, update it, etc...
That's why Bruce, btw, that understanding the community is important. It's
not just games, if its just games, buy yourself a console, mods are not
needed in their business models. But for PC simracing to survive, there
must be a strong sense of foresight between us. So do you get it now Bruce?
> And as soon as they are released they are modded, further splintering the
> racing.
> Racers from Europe and Australia typically race in leagues on their home
> turf. A
> few years ago, that wasn't possible, as most of the racing servers were
> US-based.
Yet multiplayer arenas are emptier as 5 years ago, leagues have shrinked
down in numbers, sales have incredibly dropped to a ridiculously low
numbers, developpers are flewing away from the simracing PC market.
>> Again the "Thou are not worthly because you only race" attitude. Shut it
>> already.
>
> Awwwww...did my comment to put your money where your mouth is strike a
> sore cord?
Nope I was struck by your elitist comment and how shocking you consider
people who just simrace as non-exisitant for their opinions.
> There are 3 types of people in this world concerning this type of
> behavior; the bitchers, the lurkers, and the doers. You
> can quickly decide which group you want to be counted in...
I'm all 3.
>> I've done my FAIR share of things during the NROS era, trust me. I spend
>> complete days doing nothing but help. I don't need you to tell me what
>> to do.
>
> Waaaah. So did I. Yet we're still here doing things. So where does that
> leave you?
^^^ Elitist alert above ^^^
--
-- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard>
-- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez
Corporation - helping America into the New World...
Quoted text (8 lines)
>> Multiplayer PC racing is dead. > > Disagree again, although this is based on my 'insight'. 5 years ago you > had > a bunch of releases but only a few were really anything good. Now you > have a > few releases, but typically they are much higher quality than they used to > be.LOL!! :) :)
How on God's earth someone could get so intense over a subject such as
computer GAMING I have no idea.
I guess my shares in EB Games are pretty safe with cretins such as yourself
looking after them!
BK
> But hey it's just a game for you, so shut it, Jan said people like you
> aren't entitled to their opinion because well, "they just simrace" those
> games you know.
Oh, of COURSE its irrelevant when YOU want it to be so, Frankie!!
I shouldn't expect anything else from a fruit-loop, should I?
BK
"ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:oSvif.1477$[email hidden]...
>
> Irrelevant, completely. He had the guts to judge my right to say a word
> about the community because supposidely for him, I'm "just a simracer".
>
The biggest reason you've seen crap come out and the lack of simracers is
because companies like EA have bought the rights to damn near every racing
genre and continue to put out crap but have the gall to call it "the most
realistic racing".
"ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:t8wif.2021$[email hidden]...
Quoted text (115 lines)
> >"Jan Kohl" <[email hidden]> wrote >>> Just that "If you're just simracing you have no right to an opinion" >>> sickens me. >> >> LOL...again, you're twisting things to make your point. > > It's the exact thing you have stated multiple times in a couple of post. > Basically it's "hey what have YOU done? You have no right to your opinion > if you can't be up to my standards of what I give to the community". What > are you like elected or something? > > >> You replied on a thread about our mod with comments about how we do >> things. > > I replied on a thread abour your mod with comments about how I think the > community should be doing. > > >> since you don't know what you're talking about. > > Again that elitist attitude of "thou are not worthy to your opinion as > thou are just a simracer". Gee I guess it must be the same for the simple > simracer who just wants to be able to have some kind of new PC releases > from time to time as it's more and more unlikely these days? > > > >> 12,000 downloads in one week of a mod for a "useless" and "dead" sim are >> nothing >> to sneeze at. > > That's nothing to excite developpers to do simracing titles. 'Cause hey > from all that I see... E3 had almost nothing about PC simracing, Current > release in 2006 can be counted on a single hand and I'm being optimistic > here. > > > > >>> Multiplayer PC racing is dead. >> >> Disagree again, although this is based on my 'insight'. 5 years ago you >> had >> a bunch of releases but only a few were really anything good. Now you >> have a >> few releases, but typically they are much higher quality than they used >> to be. > > It's only natural development to have modern PC simracing titles of higher > quality than before in history. Before you had a dozen good releases a > year, in all genres. Now you have 3-4 and it's basically up to the > community to do the rest of the work, tweak it, patch it, update it, > etc... > > That's why Bruce, btw, that understanding the community is important. > It's not just games, if its just games, buy yourself a console, mods are > not needed in their business models. But for PC simracing to survive, > there must be a strong sense of foresight between us. So do you get it > now Bruce? > > >> And as soon as they are released they are modded, further splintering the >> racing. >> Racers from Europe and Australia typically race in leagues on their home >> turf. A >> few years ago, that wasn't possible, as most of the racing servers were >> US-based. > > > Yet multiplayer arenas are emptier as 5 years ago, leagues have shrinked > down in numbers, sales have incredibly dropped to a ridiculously low > numbers, developpers are flewing away from the simracing PC market. > > > >>> Again the "Thou are not worthly because you only race" attitude. Shut >>> it already. >> >> Awwwww...did my comment to put your money where your mouth is strike a >> sore cord? > > Nope I was struck by your elitist comment and how shocking you consider > people who just simrace as non-exisitant for their opinions. > > >> There are 3 types of people in this world concerning this type of >> behavior; the bitchers, the lurkers, and the doers. You >> can quickly decide which group you want to be counted in... > > > I'm all 3. > > > > >>> I've done my FAIR share of things during the NROS era, trust me. I >>> spend complete days doing nothing but help. I don't need you to tell me >>> what to do. >> >> Waaaah. So did I. Yet we're still here doing things. So where does that >> leave you? > > ^^^ Elitist alert above ^^^ > > > > > -- > -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> > -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez > Corporation - helping America into the New World... > > >"Bruce Kennewell" wrote...
> Sorry, but it isn't within me to consider a game to have a
> "desperate need" to have something created for it.
Missing the point entirely. Everything (sports, cars, white goods,
computers, ... and games) has to move forward. This is the nature of human
endeavour. There is no point in creating something which is, in essence,
exactly the same and has exactly the same flaws as something which has gone
before.
> So if there are those out there who enjoy making add-ons for
> outdated (read "more than three years old") sims then good on
> 'em.
> They probably consider the game to be exactly that....a game.
If they're just looking for a vehicle to realise their vision with, why
choose one that limits their options?
> There are, after all, many who just buy this stuff to while away the
> occasional hour, you know. We don't live and breath it nor consider
> it to be an essential part of life.
If you have so little passion for the genre, why don't you go play
Minesweeper? -it whiles away the hours just as competently.
> It's not a matter of living in the past, but simply a matter of continuing
> to receive enjoyment from what was an enjoyable product in the first
> place.
It simply is living in the past. Doubly so from a single player perspective.
Jan.
=---.
"Missing the point"? About GAMES?
I think, Jan, that you may be missing MY point.
Many games, sports, entertainments and amusements, are essentially the same
now as they were 100 years ago.
Traditional board and parlour games, for example, have changed little, with
the only concession to technology being changes to the materials from which
the components are made. Paper, cardboard, wood, bone and ivory, for
example, have given way to plastics.
Sports such as golf, tennis, football (all codes) hocky, lacrosse, polo,
swimming, athletics, ad infinitum, may have adopted new materials also, and
have had minor rule changes, but are still played in the same manner as they
were when originally devised.
Even motor-racing still consists of two or more motorised vehicles competing
against each other, just as they did in 1909.
The games and sports themselves are, to quote you, "in essence, exactly the
same which has gone before".
In addition, I don't necessarily agree that we have to "move forward".
Change doesn't automatically become synonymous with forward progress.
Play Minesweeper?
Because it doesn't give me the relaxation, enjoyment and entertainment that
I like.
You might as well ask, Why don't we all read the telephone book? We don't
really need novels or biographies or humour or technical publications or
periodicals or newspapers. We could while-away the hours with the 'phone
book.
We could equally sit around with a tuning fork that, when struck, emits the
sound of Middle C. After all, that would still be music, wouldn't it?
I enjoy music that was written by people who died 200 years ago, yet I
listen to it on today's audio equipment.
I enjoy movies that were made twenty, thirty, fifty years ago, yet I watch
them now courtesy DVD and/or cable television.
I enjoy looking at paintings that were painted three-to-four hundred years
ago, yet I view them under climate-controlled conditions provided by
twenty-first century technology.
I enjoy working on aircraft that flew on missions over fifty years ago yet I
use tools and technology that the aircraft fitters and aircrew would not
have even dreamed of.
I enjoy some computer games that were published three to eight years ago,
yet I play them on computer equipment that is current technology.
Am I "living in the past" because of these things?
If your answer is "Yes", then that's fine by me, because at least I CAN find
an enormous amount to enjoy about the past and if, when it comes to computer
games, the past is considered by some to be as recent as yesterday or last
year, then I can also live with the criticism very easily because, you see,
when it comes to entertaining ME, the only person I have to consider is
myself.
BK
"Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:qLyif.59025$[email hidden]...
>
> Missing the point entirely. ...etc
In article <438a5f36$[email hidden]>, [email hidden]
says...
<snipped>
Oh come on now Bruce. If we were just treating them as games wouldn't
we still be happy with the likes of the original NASCAR, GP1 or Need for
Speed series, etc. Why aren't we doing so here? Because real or
imagined, we want to play 'sims' - software that tries to model the
physics and general driving/racing environment as realistically as
possible. Now that may come across as some kind of irrational fixation
to you, but it's what this whole 'experience' is about. That's why 'we'
are part of this NG. That's why 'we' regard these 'sims' as
entertaining. That's why 'we' are always wanting the next 'big thing'.
I, and others here, may be deluding ourselves in that, if you are to be
believed, but, by God, we're going have some bloody good fun whilst
doing so!!
--
Pete Ives
Remove All_stRESS before sending me an email
Quoted text (11 lines)
> When will you accept the fact that the games we play....yes, GAMES,.....are > nothing more than, well, games? > ENTERTAINMENT. AMUSEMENT. PLAYTIME. > Nothing more, nothing less. > No deep, meaningful, mystical or religious aspects at all in these > creations, Francois. > They are created, in the main, by people who see a market for such things > and who wish to earn an income from that market. > These GAMES are the computer-equivalent of novels, movies, board-games, > music and any other product that is designed to entertain and amuse. >Delude away, Pete. Delude away.
BK
"Peter" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
> In article <438a5f36$[email hidden]>, [email hidden]
> I, and others here, may be deluding ourselves in that, if you are to be
> believed, but, by God, we're going have some bloody good fun whilst
> doing so!!
Delude away, Pete. Delude away.
BK
> I, and others here, may be deluding ourselves in that, if you are to be
> believed, but, by God, we're going have some ***y good fun whilst
> doing so!!
You know what - I don't give a phat rat's ass about the so-called "wrong"
physics in the GN70 mod - I'm just happy to HAVE IT AT ALL!
NL will not give me more than 15fps since I put a GF 5200 FX card in my box,
nor will it recognize my USB wheel, so do you know how HAPPY I AM that I can
actually drive these cars again? Not only that - but I can paint BETTER
renditions of them as well! :-P
Some people - like everyone's friend Frankie here - LIVE IN THE FUCKING
GAME!
'nuff said!
ymenard wrote:
Heh...well,I know many "modding" folks who could care less about ANY ISI
based sims.Why?...because ISI games are all buggy and full of problems
and no amount of "ini" tweaking is going to fix it.And what exactly do
the NASCAR crowd have to look forward to with rFactor,that they can't
already get in other NASCAR games?Hell...rFactor doesn't even have
spotters,pitcrews and rules in place for it...why would the mass
majority of the NASCAR racers move to it without that stuff?
And yeah,I know about the "NSR conversion" stuff going into
rFactor...and quite frankly,the models are not impressive in NSR,why
would they get any better in rFactor?Not enough to make me want to
switch anyways.And I can't help but laugh at some of these folks who are
porting NSR car models over to rFactor.NSR is an ISI "based" game,and it
shows the bugs those engines have.New engine for rFactor you say?...same
old bugs though...hmmm.Try some ovals when (if) they come out...we'll
see if they still brake check...LOL.
I also saw a sprint car mod that's almost done for it too.What arethey
going to race on,road courses?...LMAO.
> With RF that still struggles, we will problably do as there is nothing more
> in the horizon. Each day that passes is a day where RF transform itself in
> like I would say... yet-another-isi-related-sim-we-spend-6-months-with.
6 months would be an eternity with ANY ISI games.
>> The interest in rF will decline until one of the bigger projects is
>>released
That should read "The interest in rF will "continue to" decline (period)
> Multiplayer in all of simracing is empty. Developpers do ask for more than
> a couple of 20 driver leagues. From a business POV the PC simracing
> community is going into a black hole which many of us are completely
> ignoring it or have no sense of foresight. I'm not even negative here, it's
> just facts.
Funny...it's people running into folks like you,that keep multiplayer
numbers from going up.Besides the wreckers...folks don't like
asswipes,either.
Quoted text (9 lines)
> Well we can't deny the role ThePits have in the direction the community > goes. I think it's a bold statement from them to still release something > for an out-of-sale sim, with the legal problems iRacing gave to them, when > RF is struggling at the moment and has already been released for quite a > time. Don't say it's not, because it truly is struggling. Or perhaps we > have to start to accept the community is now so small, that we can't afford > anymore a sim title of quality but the works of small little independant > developpers. >ymenard wrote:
Heh...well,I know many "modding" folks who could care less about ANY ISI
based sims.Why?...because ISI games are all buggy and full of problems
and no amount of "ini" tweaking is going to fix it.And what exactly do
the NASCAR crowd have to look forward to with rFactor,that they can't
already get in other NASCAR games?Hell...rFactor doesn't even have
spotters,pitcrews and rules in place for it...why would the mass
majority of the NASCAR racers move to it without that stuff?
And yeah,I know about the "NSR conversion" stuff going into
rFactor...and quite frankly,the models are not impressive in NSR,why
would they get any better in rFactor?Not enough to make me want to
switch anyways.And I can't help but laugh at some of these folks who are
porting NSR car models over to rFactor.NSR is an ISI "based" game,and it
shows the bugs those engines have.New engine for rFactor you say?...same
old bugs though...hmmm.Try some ovals when (if) they come out...we'll
see if they still brake check...LOL.
I also saw a sprint car mod that's almost done for it too.What are they
going to race on,road courses?...LMAO.
> With RF that still struggles, we will problably do as there is nothing more
> in the horizon. Each day that passes is a day where RF transform itself in
> like I would say... yet-another-isi-related-sim-we-spend-6-months-with.
6 months would be an eternity with ANY ISI games.
>> The interest in rF will decline until one of the bigger projects is
>>released
That should read "The interest in rF will "continue to" decline (period)
> Multiplayer in all of simracing is empty. Developpers do ask for more than
> a couple of 20 driver leagues. From a business POV the PC simracing
> community is going into a black hole which many of us are completely
> ignoring it or have no sense of foresight. I'm not even negative here, it's
> just facts.
Funny...it's people running into folks like you,that keep multiplayer
numbers from going up.Besides the wreckers...folks don't like
asswipes,either.
Quoted text (9 lines)
> Well we can't deny the role ThePits have in the direction the community > goes. I think it's a bold statement from them to still release something > for an out-of-sale sim, with the legal problems iRacing gave to them, when > RF is struggling at the moment and has already been released for quite a > time. Don't say it's not, because it truly is struggling. Or perhaps we > have to start to accept the community is now so small, that we can't afford > anymore a sim title of quality but the works of small little independant > developpers. >
"Raybee1970" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:8JRif.7969$[email hidden]...
One good reason to race ovals in rFactor compared to n2k3. the ability to
be able to rub panels and not launch the other car into outer space.
Sunday night our f3 league did an 80 lap race at Orchard Lake Oval. Me and
a some of the others didn't even miss not having a spotter. you heard and
could see where the other car was. Its called situational awareness.
actually, I found my driving better without having the spotter. was
concentrating on my line, not what the spotter was saying.
as to rFactor itself. its a work in progress. Its always been common
knowledge that what you paid for wasn't how it was going to look in 12
months time. it will continue to evolve and change as ISI add new content
to it.
but not everyone is a fan of ISI sims. I wasn't until rFactor came along.
and no matter what you say, you'll never change their minds. I accept that.
each person has their own preferences to the sims they play. what ever
makes each person happy is fine by me.
cheers
steve
Quoted text (53 lines)
> ymenard wrote: >> Well we can't deny the role ThePits have in the direction the community >> goes. I think it's a bold statement from them to still release something >> for an out-of-sale sim, with the legal problems iRacing gave to them, >> when RF is struggling at the moment and has already been released for >> quite a time. Don't say it's not, because it truly is struggling. Or >> perhaps we have to start to accept the community is now so small, that we >> can't afford anymore a sim title of quality but the works of small little >> independant developpers. >> > > Heh...well,I know many "modding" folks who could care less about ANY ISI > based sims.Why?...because ISI games are all buggy and full of problems > and no amount of "ini" tweaking is going to fix it.And what exactly do > the NASCAR crowd have to look forward to with rFactor,that they can't > already get in other NASCAR games?Hell...rFactor doesn't even have > spotters,pitcrews and rules in place for it...why would the mass > majority of the NASCAR racers move to it without that stuff? > > And yeah,I know about the "NSR conversion" stuff going into > rFactor...and quite frankly,the models are not impressive in NSR,why > would they get any better in rFactor?Not enough to make me want to > switch anyways.And I can't help but laugh at some of these folks who are > porting NSR car models over to rFactor.NSR is an ISI "based" game,and it > shows the bugs those engines have.New engine for rFactor you say?...same > old bugs though...hmmm.Try some ovals when (if) they come out...we'll > see if they still brake check...LOL. > > I also saw a sprint car mod that's almost done for it too.What are they > going to race on,road courses?...LMAO. > >> With RF that still struggles, we will problably do as there is nothing >> more in the horizon. Each day that passes is a day where RF transform >> itself in like I would say... >> yet-another-isi-related-sim-we-spend-6-months-with. > > 6 months would be an eternity with ANY ISI games. > > >>> The interest in rF will decline until one of the bigger projects is >>> released > > That should read "The interest in rF will "continue to" decline (period) > >> Multiplayer in all of simracing is empty. Developpers do ask for more >> than a couple of 20 driver leagues. From a business POV the PC simracing >> community is going into a black hole which many of us are completely >> ignoring it or have no sense of foresight. I'm not even negative here, >> it's just facts. > > Funny...it's people running into folks like you,that keep multiplayer > numbers from going up.Besides the wreckers...folks don't like > asswipes,either.In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...
> Delude away, Pete. Delude away.
>
So what are you saying Bruce? That the physics of a game, the immersion
factor etc aren't important to you? Pull the other one. :)
Why are you having a blast with a mod that replicates an era of the
1970's? Why have you just argued with Ymenard when he criticized the
physics of said mod as being next to 'useless'? Why did you defend the
physics of the mod? If it's just a game then why would the physics be
that important to you?
I think it is you who is deluding yourself, Bruce? ;-)
--
Pete Ives
Remove All_stRESS before sending me an email
Quoted text (12 lines)
> BK > > "Peter" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > In article <438a5f36$[email hidden]>, [email hidden] > > > I, and others here, may be deluding ourselves in that, if you are to be > > believed, but, by God, we're going have some bloody good fun whilst > > doing so!! > > >Steve Whitty wrote:
Yes...now that I can agree with.I'm happy for the folks who are enjoying
rFactor.At least they have finally found something they can enjoy.I also
hope it has lots of mods and tracks made for it...to please the
naysayers (like me..lol).It's just from what I read over at places like
RSC and The Pits...not alot of people playing it online.But that doesn't
matter to me,as online is not something that interests me anymore.I
guess that is one reason why I don't like ISI games.The online is ok,but
the AI sucks for the most part.
But...like you say...no matter what,you can't change some minds,no
matter hard you try.
With me being only into NASCAR,and moreso into short tracks
(asphalt...not dirt)...then the games of choice for me,are NR2003 which
has a ton of very nice real short tracks,and a very nice Latemodel
mod...and Nascar Heat,which has more mods than any racing game out
there,and also has a plethora of short tracks as well.Most of my modding
buddies from Heat,have tried rFactor...and to them,it's nothing more
than a revamped F1C with prettier graphics...and they,like me..didn't
like F1C very much.Why?...because it's ISI mostly.
That's like some people just don't buy or play Nascar Sim
Racing...because it's made by EA.And the mods made for it (NSR),are just
ported over from NR2003 anyways.It's full of bugs too,like any ISI game
(because of the engine used,and the lack of knowledge from EA when it
comes to that buggy engine).
But honestly,I really do hope you guys get what you want with rFactor.
Now...as far as the main topic here...GN1970 physics.I tried it
briefly,and it was ok.It wasn't anything impressive though.The physics
were chosen because it simulated the era the best...of what was allowed
to be used (by way of iRacing)...so I see no reason to complain about
physics.To me,the physics are fine.I don't care as much about that,as I
do the bad fps hit it causes,and the lack of damage.For a two year
project,I just think it was "still" rushed a bit and could have had more
"finished" about it...but that's only my opinion.Truthfully,I wasn't
that interested in it,in the first place...as that era of Nascar,is not
one I ever cared about.Just my two cents. :)
Quoted text (21 lines)
> One good reason to race ovals in rFactor compared to n2k3. the ability to > be able to rub panels and not launch the other car into outer space. > Sunday night our f3 league did an 80 lap race at Orchard Lake Oval. Me and > a some of the others didn't even miss not having a spotter. you heard and > could see where the other car was. Its called situational awareness. > actually, I found my driving better without having the spotter. was > concentrating on my line, not what the spotter was saying. > > as to rFactor itself. its a work in progress. Its always been common > knowledge that what you paid for wasn't how it was going to look in 12 > months time. it will continue to evolve and change as ISI add new content > to it. > > but not everyone is a fan of ISI sims. I wasn't until rFactor came along. > and no matter what you say, you'll never change their minds. I accept that. > each person has their own preferences to the sims they play. what ever > makes each person happy is fine by me. > > cheers > > steveWell, I hate to admit it, but I do still fire up Indianapolis 500, N3,
Legends, ICR2, Secret Weapons of the Luftwaffe, Falcon 4, Doom, and several
"board" games (Tetris, for one) on PC, for the simple fact that I enjoy the
simplicity of the game.
The physics, graphics or sound aren't important in themselves.
The "blast" I am having with GN70 is because I can relate to the cars
themselves; we saw a lot of Yank Tanks here in the sixties and early
seventies, many of which were derivatives of the types seen in the sim.
BK
"Peter" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
be
Quoted text (20 lines)
> In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says... > So what are you saying Bruce? That the physics of a game, the immersion > factor etc aren't important to you? Pull the other one. :) > > Why are you having a blast with a mod that replicates an era of the > 1970's? Why have you just argued with Ymenard when he criticized the > physics of said mod as being next to 'useless'? Why did you defend the > physics of the mod? If it's just a game then why would the physics be > that important to you? > > I think it is you who is deluding yourself, Bruce? ;-) > > > BK > > > > "Peter" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:[email hidden]... > > > In article <438a5f36$[email hidden]>, [email hidden] > > > > > I, and others here, may be deluding ourselves in that, if you are toQuoted text (9 lines)
> > > believed, but, by God, we're going have some bloody good fun whilst > > > doing so!! > > > > > > > > -- > Pete Ives > Remove All_stRESS before sending me an emailIn article <438ca660$[email hidden]>, [email hidden]
says...
> Well, I hate to admit it, but I do still fire up Indianapolis 500, N3,
> Legends, ICR2, Secret Weapons of the Luftwaffe, Falcon 4, Doom, and several
> "board" games (Tetris, for one) on PC, for the simple fact that I enjoy the
> simplicity of the game.
> The physics, graphics or sound aren't important in themselves.
>
I still play the odd game of Space Invaders or Asteroids.
> The "blast" I am having with GN70 is because I can relate to the cars
> themselves; we saw a lot of Yank Tanks here in the sixties and early
> seventies, many of which were derivatives of the types seen in the sim.
>
> BK
>
Anyway, keep enjoying those games because, at the end of the day, it IS
all about having fun, right? No matter how that fun is attained. :)
--
Pete Ives
Remove All_stRESS before sending me an email
Quoted text (35 lines)
> "Peter" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says... > > > So what are you saying Bruce? That the physics of a game, the immersion > > factor etc aren't important to you? Pull the other one. :) > > > > Why are you having a blast with a mod that replicates an era of the > > 1970's? Why have you just argued with Ymenard when he criticized the > > physics of said mod as being next to 'useless'? Why did you defend the > > physics of the mod? If it's just a game then why would the physics be > > that important to you? > > > > I think it is you who is deluding yourself, Bruce? ;-) > > > > > BK > > > > > > "Peter" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > news:[email hidden]... > > > > In article <438a5f36$[email hidden]>, [email hidden] > > > > > > > I, and others here, may be deluding ourselves in that, if you are to > be > > > > believed, but, by God, we're going have some bloody good fun whilst > > > > doing so!! > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Pete Ives > > Remove All_stRESS before sending me an email > > >Quoted text (8 lines)
>"Bruce Kennewell" <[email hidden]> wrote > Well, I hate to admit it, but I do still fire up Indianapolis 500, N3, > Legends, ICR2, Secret Weapons of the Luftwaffe, Falcon 4, Doom, and > several > "board" games (Tetris, for one) on PC, for the simple fact that I enjoy > the > simplicity of the game. > The physics, graphics or sound aren't important in themselves.Francois, what I can't seem to get across is that it is of no great concern
to me if "the community" dies.
I will continue to enjoy what I currently enjoy and people out there will
continue to make available "stuff" for computer sims and if they cease to do
so, my computer-gaming life won't come to a grinding halt.
I've got more stuff here than I can poke a stick at relating to a lot of the
computer games that have given me great enjoyment down the years and if the
gaming industry called it quits tomorrow, I really wouldn't be concerned.
Honestly.
This forum could disappear tonight and, apart from the fact that I'd miss
the repartee that I've enjoyed over the past six or so years, I really
wouldn't be too upset.
You say "let the community die like the flightsimmers...."
I've been into FSims since the very first version of Falcon, and the first
version of MSFS.
But I have never logged onto a flight-sim forum so have no idea what you are
talking about and yet I continue my enjoyment of this series, now with
FS2004.
So whatever might be occurring in the fs community has not tinged my
enjoyment of the simulation itself by one degree.
Can you understand now that I would be affected in a similar way if the
race-simming "community" fell apart?
BK
"ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:Xfbjf.5698$[email hidden]...
>So you want to let the community die like the flightsimmers or
ymenard wrote:
Who said the flight sim community is dead??
I do mostly flight simming now, and from where I sit, it seems far from dead
to me...
--
Don Burnette
Quoted text (25 lines)
>> "Bruce Kennewell" <[email hidden]> wrote >> Well, I hate to admit it, but I do still fire up Indianapolis 500, >> N3, Legends, ICR2, Secret Weapons of the Luftwaffe, Falcon 4, Doom, >> and several >> "board" games (Tetris, for one) on PC, for the simple fact that I >> enjoy the >> simplicity of the game. >> The physics, graphics or sound aren't important in themselves. > > > We all do, it's called nostalgia for some, for others it's the sheer > delight of the simplicity of gaming. I still race Indy500 on an old > x286, I love watching those triangles go everywhere after a crash. I > miss that, it was in Icr1, N1, Icr2, N2, N3 also I think. There's > the momentum of crashes you don't have nowadays with those vertex > polygon deformations. > But hey I don't live in the past and I also want the best I can, > right now. We all do, yes, even you Bruce. Why? Because we can. The > community can with good foresight, and the developpers will > answer a strong community. So you want to let the community die like > the flightsimmers or (yeesh) the RTS stuff, or the point&click > adventure games? > > > I don't want.Well, I went out and bought RF. I wanted to see what this game was all about
and frankly... It's just as everyone has said. RF was a big disappointment.
Felt like playing EA's Nascar Thunder with different models. Online servers
were empty. Last night there were 9 servers up. 4 had 1 gamer in it and the
rest had less then 8 gamers. Not a good sign for a new game. Although the
UPS mod was fun to drive.
"Don Burnette" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
Quoted text (41 lines)
> ymenard wrote: >>> "Bruce Kennewell" <[email hidden]> wrote >>> Well, I hate to admit it, but I do still fire up Indianapolis 500, >>> N3, Legends, ICR2, Secret Weapons of the Luftwaffe, Falcon 4, Doom, >>> and several >>> "board" games (Tetris, for one) on PC, for the simple fact that I >>> enjoy the >>> simplicity of the game. >>> The physics, graphics or sound aren't important in themselves. >> >> >> We all do, it's called nostalgia for some, for others it's the sheer >> delight of the simplicity of gaming. I still race Indy500 on an old >> x286, I love watching those triangles go everywhere after a crash. I >> miss that, it was in Icr1, N1, Icr2, N2, N3 also I think. There's >> the momentum of crashes you don't have nowadays with those vertex >> polygon deformations. >> But hey I don't live in the past and I also want the best I can, >> right now. We all do, yes, even you Bruce. Why? Because we can. The >> community can with good foresight, and the developpers will >> answer a strong community. So you want to let the community die like >> the flightsimmers or (yeesh) the RTS stuff, or the point&click >> adventure games? >> >> >> I don't want. > > > Who said the flight sim community is dead?? > I do mostly flight simming now, and from where I sit, it seems far from > dead to me... > > > > > -- > Don Burnette > > > >
"Don Burnette" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
dead
Yeah, he doesn't know what he's talking about; the flight sim comm is
alive and well from my perspective too, thank you very much.
Quoted text (30 lines)
> ymenard wrote: > >> "Bruce Kennewell" <[email hidden]> wrote > >> Well, I hate to admit it, but I do still fire up Indianapolis 500, > >> N3, Legends, ICR2, Secret Weapons of the Luftwaffe, Falcon 4, Doom, > >> and several > >> "board" games (Tetris, for one) on PC, for the simple fact that I > >> enjoy the > >> simplicity of the game. > >> The physics, graphics or sound aren't important in themselves. > > > > > > We all do, it's called nostalgia for some, for others it's the sheer > > delight of the simplicity of gaming. I still race Indy500 on an old > > x286, I love watching those triangles go everywhere after a crash. I > > miss that, it was in Icr1, N1, Icr2, N2, N3 also I think. There's > > the momentum of crashes you don't have nowadays with those vertex > > polygon deformations. > > But hey I don't live in the past and I also want the best I can, > > right now. We all do, yes, even you Bruce. Why? Because we can. The > > community can with good foresight, and the developpers will > > answer a strong community. So you want to let the community die like > > the flightsimmers or (yeesh) the RTS stuff, or the point&click > > adventure games? > > > > > > I don't want. > > > Who said the flight sim community is dead?? > I do mostly flight simming now, and from where I sit, it seems far fromQuoted text (9 lines)
> to me... > > > > > -- > Don Burnette > >"Dirtmojo" <[email hidden]> wrote in news:yGijf.42$fY3.19@trnddc01:
Hit the refresh button a few more times. I regularly see close to 100
servers. Of course...there is very little open online racing as you
stated. I'd suggest checking out a league like TPTCC or other rF leagues
that are forming up. We have practices nearly every night and racing every
week right now in a TEST type season. (no points til we shake it down to
our satisfaction)
Nascar Thunder and rF share a similar heritage but rF has a much newer
graphics and multiplayer engine. The Aussie V8 mod is Sedan type
extension of the original cars,(no new models there yet) and the Formula
Nippon also takes existing models and edits the physics to, I've read, good
results.
I personally prefer the 'feel' of the GTR cars ontrack to the Howston in
Rf...it feels too much like it's skating more that driving. But I think as
mods develop, we'll see rF grow. I had a friend who's just a casual
simmer, he wanted to know about rF, I told him to hold off for now. You
just won't have enough content to keep you happy. Yet I'm using it nearly
every night for league and mod activity.
dave henrie
