N4: Will Papy and Sierra respect us in the morning?

While I love the game there are two things that are getting real old real quick. The first being the often occurring apparently causeless and totally unpredictable announcement "Cannot load track, weekend canceled" . This seems to be based purely on what mood the game is in. Sometimes it will start at the beginning of a session, sometimes the middle, sometimes the end. Sometimes "this" track, sometimes "that" track, sometimes EVERY track. Sometimes a simple reselection will clear it up, sometimes nothing will, not even a cold reboot. "Weekend canceled" indeed. Needless to say, this is maddening but I could put up this and other faults for a while if I knew a patch was coming but then we run into the second thing that is getting old quickly. Based on what is visible from Sierra and Papy the prospect of a patch seems dicey at best. While there are a great many here that seem to have faith that one is indeed in the works I fail to see what they base that faith on since both Sierra and Papy have been totally silent not only on the subject of a patch but on any subject at all. I have searched the web but except for a couple of non-updated, completely non-responding web sites there is no evidence that either Sierra or Papy even exist. This is not comforting. While it is true N4 has been selling very well it is equally true that other companies have totally abandoned new but buggy games that have sold as well or better. Those here who are also into Flight sims have seen this from Hasbro regarding Squad Leader, B-17 2, and Gunship! to name a few. These are names of sims as famous in the military sim community as NASCAR is in online racing. Hasbro used that fame to quickly sell many copies of very flawed sims then abruptly cut off all support for the games within weeks of release. Papy's and Sierra's release of a faulty game under a famous name followed by an apparent refusal to say anything beyond "ORDER NOW!!!" is so completely similar to the behavior of Hasbro that it is easier to believe Sierra and Papy intend to abandon NASCAR 4 then it is to believe that they intend to fix it. Unless and until either Sierra or Papy show themselves the safest course seems to be to assume that what we have is all we are ever going to get and then, based on that assumption, either keep N4 "as-is" or return it.

>"Joe L." <[email hidden]> wrote > Based on what is visible from Sierra and Papy the prospect of a patchseems > dicey at best. Lmao based on what? In all seriousness, anybody who has the slightest clue of previous titles by Papyrus knows how the process happens. Title gets released, there is a couple of bugs, Papyrus shuts their mouth after it's release, people whine about the product, almost all the bugs get fixed 2-3months after the title's release. It has always been like that. -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- May the Downforce be with you... -- http://www.ymenard.com/ -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimato Dominguez Corporation - helping America into the New World...

NR1999? "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:FfBv6.461749$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (8 lines)

> >"Joe L." <[email hidden]> wrote > > Based on what is visible from Sierra and Papy the prospect of a patch > seems > > dicey at best. > > Lmao based on what? > > In all seriousness, anybody who has the slightest clue of previous titles

by > Papyrus knows how the process happens. Title gets released, there is a > couple of bugs, Papyrus shuts their mouth after it's release, people whine > about the product, almost all the bugs get fixed 2-3months after thetitle's

Quoted text (16 lines)

> release. It has always been like that. > > > > > > -- > -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> > -- May the Downforce be with you... > -- http://www.ymenard.com/ > -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimato Dominguez > Corporation - helping America into the New World... > > > >

>"Mike White" <[email hidden]> wrote > NR1999? Grrrr knew you would probably catch me for that Mikey <G> :) Anyway, NR99 wasn't near the top of the charts for over 2 months now. Sierra always kept a policy of being quiet on post-release software updates and patches. Most of the time they come out of the dark without any notice, the patch will someday pop out, like they always did (except NR99 hehe). -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- May the Downforce be with you... -- http://www.ymenard.com/ -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimato Dominguez Corporation - helping America into the New World...

They are working on a patch. :) "Joe L." <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > While I love the game there are two things that are getting real old > real quick. The first being the often occurring apparently causeless and > totally unpredictable announcement "Cannot load track, weekend canceled" . > This seems to be based purely on what mood the game is in. Sometimes itwill > start at the beginning of a session, sometimes the middle, sometimes the > end. Sometimes "this" track, sometimes "that" track, sometimes EVERYtrack. > Sometimes a simple reselection will clear it up, sometimes nothing will,not > even a cold reboot. "Weekend canceled" indeed. > Needless to say, this is maddening but I could put up this and other > faults for a while if I knew a patch was coming but then we run into the > second thing that is getting old quickly. > Based on what is visible from Sierra and Papy the prospect of a patchseems > dicey at best. While there > are a great many here that seem to have faith that one is indeed in the > works I fail to see what they base that faith on since both Sierra andPapy > have been totally silent not only on the subject of a patch but on any > subject at all. I have searched the web but except for a couple of > non-updated, completely non-responding web sites there is no evidence that > either Sierra or Papy even exist. This is not comforting. > While it is true N4 has been selling very well it is equally true that > other companies have totally abandoned new but buggy games that have soldas > well or better. Those here who are also into Flight sims have seen thisfrom > Hasbro regarding Squad Leader, B-17 2, and Gunship! to name a few. Theseare > names of sims as famous in the military sim community as NASCAR is inonline > racing. Hasbro used that fame to quickly sell many copies of very flawed > sims then abruptly cut off all support for the games within weeks of > release. Papy's and Sierra's release of a faulty game under a famous name > followed by an apparent refusal to say anything beyond "ORDER NOW!!!" isso > completely similar to the behavior of Hasbro that it is easier to believe > Sierra and Papy intend to abandon NASCAR 4 then it is to believe that they > intend to fix it. Unless and until either Sierra or Papy show themselvesthe

Quoted text (8 lines)

> safest course seems to be to assume that what we have is all we are ever > going to get and then, based on that assumption, either keep N4 "as-is" or > return it. > > > > >

the difference is, Hasbro's financial well being doesn't depend on stuff like Gunship! (which I'll go on record as saying easily had the best terrain graphics in a helo sim to date), whereas Papy's livelihood very much depends on N4, which may as well be the only title they have. "Joe L." wrote:

Quoted text (34 lines)

> While I love the game there are two things that are getting real old > real quick. The first being the often occurring apparently causeless and > totally unpredictable announcement "Cannot load track, weekend canceled" . > This seems to be based purely on what mood the game is in. Sometimes it will > start at the beginning of a session, sometimes the middle, sometimes the > end. Sometimes "this" track, sometimes "that" track, sometimes EVERY track. > Sometimes a simple reselection will clear it up, sometimes nothing will, not > even a cold reboot. "Weekend canceled" indeed. > Needless to say, this is maddening but I could put up this and other > faults for a while if I knew a patch was coming but then we run into the > second thing that is getting old quickly. > Based on what is visible from Sierra and Papy the prospect of a patch seems > dicey at best. While there > are a great many here that seem to have faith that one is indeed in the > works I fail to see what they base that faith on since both Sierra and Papy > have been totally silent not only on the subject of a patch but on any > subject at all. I have searched the web but except for a couple of > non-updated, completely non-responding web sites there is no evidence that > either Sierra or Papy even exist. This is not comforting. > While it is true N4 has been selling very well it is equally true that > other companies have totally abandoned new but buggy games that have sold as > well or better. Those here who are also into Flight sims have seen this from > Hasbro regarding Squad Leader, B-17 2, and Gunship! to name a few. These are > names of sims as famous in the military sim community as NASCAR is in online > racing. Hasbro used that fame to quickly sell many copies of very flawed > sims then abruptly cut off all support for the games within weeks of > release. Papy's and Sierra's release of a faulty game under a famous name > followed by an apparent refusal to say anything beyond "ORDER NOW!!!" is so > completely similar to the behavior of Hasbro that it is easier to believe > Sierra and Papy intend to abandon NASCAR 4 then it is to believe that they > intend to fix it. Unless and until either Sierra or Papy show themselves the > safest course seems to be to assume that what we have is all we are ever > going to get and then, based on that assumption, either keep N4 "as-is" or > return it.

On Mon, 26 Mar 2001 01:02:16 -0500, "Joe L." <[email hidden]> wrote: > While it is true N4 has been selling very well it is equally true that >other companies have totally abandoned new but buggy games that have sold as >well or better. Those here who are also into Flight sims have seen this from >Hasbro regarding Squad Leader, B-17 2, and Gunship! to name a few. SL got a patch just a couple of weeks back. B17-2 got a patch and a new one is still being worked on. Gunship! got a patch too.

ROFL only title they have? You must not be a Sierra fan at all then. They have a number of games that are very good and I am currently waiting on one, just like we had to wait on N4. By that I mean, Tribes 2. They also have other games that may not appeal to you, however they appeal to other groups. Peter Walker Bagus51 http://www.typ-group.com andrew <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > the difference is, > > Hasbro's financial well being doesn't depend on stuff like Gunship! (whichI'll > go on record as saying easily had the best terrain graphics in a helo simto > date), whereas Papy's livelihood very much depends on N4, which may aswell be > the only title they have. > > "Joe L." wrote: > > > While I love the game there are two things that are getting realold > > real quick. The first being the often occurring apparently causeless and > > totally unpredictable announcement "Cannot load track, weekend canceled". > > This seems to be based purely on what mood the game is in. Sometimes itwill > > start at the beginning of a session, sometimes the middle, sometimes the > > end. Sometimes "this" track, sometimes "that" track, sometimes EVERYtrack. > > Sometimes a simple reselection will clear it up, sometimes nothing will,not > > even a cold reboot. "Weekend canceled" indeed. > > Needless to say, this is maddening but I could put up this and other > > faults for a while if I knew a patch was coming but then we run into the > > second thing that is getting old quickly. > > Based on what is visible from Sierra and Papy the prospect of a patchseems > > dicey at best. While there > > are a great many here that seem to have faith that one is indeed in the > > works I fail to see what they base that faith on since both Sierra andPapy > > have been totally silent not only on the subject of a patch but on any > > subject at all. I have searched the web but except for a couple of > > non-updated, completely non-responding web sites there is no evidencethat > > either Sierra or Papy even exist. This is not comforting. > > While it is true N4 has been selling very well it is equally truethat > > other companies have totally abandoned new but buggy games that havesold as > > well or better. Those here who are also into Flight sims have seen thisfrom > > Hasbro regarding Squad Leader, B-17 2, and Gunship! to name a few. Theseare > > names of sims as famous in the military sim community as NASCAR is inonline > > racing. Hasbro used that fame to quickly sell many copies of very flawed > > sims then abruptly cut off all support for the games within weeks of > > release. Papy's and Sierra's release of a faulty game under a famousname > > followed by an apparent refusal to say anything beyond "ORDER NOW!!!" isso > > completely similar to the behavior of Hasbro that it is easier tobelieve > > Sierra and Papy intend to abandon NASCAR 4 then it is to believe thatthey > > intend to fix it. Unless and until either Sierra or Papy show themselvesthe > > safest course seems to be to assume that what we have is all we are ever > > going to get and then, based on that assumption, either keep N4 "as-is"or > > return it. >

Papyrus is making Tribes 2? He is confused by comparing Hasbro and Papyrus' roles, but atleast read what he wrote. "Peter Walker" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:5pLv6.6346$[email hidden]... > ROFL only title they have? You must not be a Sierra fan at all then. They > have a number of games that are very good and I am currently waiting onone, > just like we had to wait on N4. By that I mean, Tribes 2. They also have > other games that may not appeal to you, however they appeal to othergroups.

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > Peter Walker > Bagus51 > http://www.typ-group.com > > andrew <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > the difference is, > > > > Hasbro's financial well being doesn't depend on stuff like Gunship!

(which > I'll > > go on record as saying easily had the best terrain graphics in a helosim

Quoted text (10 lines)

> to > > date), whereas Papy's livelihood very much depends on N4, which may as > well be > > the only title they have. > > > > "Joe L." wrote: > > > > > While I love the game there are two things that are getting real > old > > > real quick. The first being the often occurring apparently causeless

and > > > totally unpredictable announcement "Cannot load track, weekendcanceled" > . > > > This seems to be based purely on what mood the game is in. Sometimesit > will > > > start at the beginning of a session, sometimes the middle, sometimesthe > > > end. Sometimes "this" track, sometimes "that" track, sometimes EVERY > track. > > > Sometimes a simple reselection will clear it up, sometimes nothingwill, > not > > > even a cold reboot. "Weekend canceled" indeed. > > > Needless to say, this is maddening but I could put up this andother > > > faults for a while if I knew a patch was coming but then we run intothe > > > second thing that is getting old quickly. > > > Based on what is visible from Sierra and Papy the prospect of a patch > seems > > > dicey at best. While there > > > are a great many here that seem to have faith that one is indeed inthe

Quoted text (12 lines)

> > > works I fail to see what they base that faith on since both Sierra and > Papy > > > have been totally silent not only on the subject of a patch but on any > > > subject at all. I have searched the web but except for a couple of > > > non-updated, completely non-responding web sites there is no evidence > that > > > either Sierra or Papy even exist. This is not comforting. > > > While it is true N4 has been selling very well it is equally true > that > > > other companies have totally abandoned new but buggy games that have > sold as > > > well or better. Those here who are also into Flight sims have seen

this > from > > > Hasbro regarding Squad Leader, B-17 2, and Gunship! to name a few.These > are > > > names of sims as famous in the military sim community as NASCAR is in > online > > > racing. Hasbro used that fame to quickly sell many copies of veryflawed > > > sims then abruptly cut off all support for the games within weeks of > > > release. Papy's and Sierra's release of a faulty game under a famous > name > > > followed by an apparent refusal to say anything beyond "ORDER NOW!!!"is > so > > > completely similar to the behavior of Hasbro that it is easier to > believe > > > Sierra and Papy intend to abandon NASCAR 4 then it is to believe that > they > > > intend to fix it. Unless and until either Sierra or Papy showthemselves > the > > > safest course seems to be to assume that what we have is all we areever > > > going to get and then, based on that assumption, either keep N4"as-is" > or > > > return it. > > > > >

Yours and others here are the expressions of faith that I mentioned in the original post. If your comment on Hasbro's financial well being is saying that there are instances where a company might view a certain set of circumstances and then decide it more profitable to dump faulty software on an unsuspecting market then immediately abandon that software instead of fixing it I agree completely. But you seem to be implying that it is impossible for Papy to find itself in such a set of cricumstances or to make such a decision. Here I disagree. You are correct when you say "Hasbro's financial well being doesn't depend on stuff like Gunship!" but remember that it is equally true that Sierra's financial well being doesn't depend on stuff like NASCAR 4. However strong the reputation of Papy it is certainly no stronger than the reputation Microprose once enjoyed. You may have faith and that faith may eventually be rewarded but I prefer to operate on what is proven to exist. What exists now is a flawed NASCAR 4 and a totally silent Sierra/Papy. Those who bought Gunship! and had faith in Hasbro/Microprose may see certain uncomfortable similarities. For as long as Sierra /Papy choose to remain silent; for that long will the safest course be to assume that there will be no patch and the N4 we have now is all we are ever going to get. Those who are willing to accept N4 as it is now may do so with my complete blessing. Those who cannot accept N4 as it is now may return it for a refund with my complete blessing. If Sierra/Papy dont fix N4 everyone is happy. If Sierra/Papy do fix N4 those who returned it can buy it once again and apply the fix and everyone is still happy. Those who cannot accept N4 as it is now but keeps it in the hope of some future fix may find the long term relationship they hoped for is just a one-night-stand. So far the boy friend is not returning our calls. "andrew" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > the difference is, > > Hasbro's financial well being doesn't depend on stuff like Gunship! (whichI'll > go on record as saying easily had the best terrain graphics in a helo simto > date), whereas Papy's livelihood very much depends on N4, which may aswell be > the only title they have. >Yes, Gunship! is beautuful and had the programmers been premitted to carry out the original plans Gunship! would have been THE helo sim but Gunship! was strangled in its crib. Now we have the infant NASCAR 4.

Did you read about what these patches fixed? Most reports say B-17 code is so incredibly sloppy and bloated that even 1 ghz CPU's and GForce 2's have a hard time running it. The GUNSHIP! patch took the flight model from horrendous to the merely terrible while touching none of the other flaws. "Jagg" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> On Mon, 26 Mar 2001 01:02:16 -0500, "Joe L." > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > SL got a patch just a couple of weeks back. > B17-2 got a patch and a new one is still being worked on. > Gunship! got a patch too.

On Mon, 26 Mar 2001 20:21:04 GMT, "Joe L." <[email hidden]> wrote: > Did you read about what these patches fixed? Most reports say B-17 >code is so incredibly sloppy and bloated that even 1 ghz CPU's and GForce >2's have a hard time running it. The GUNSHIP! patch took the flight model >from horrendous to the merely terrible while touching none of the other >flaws. I have B17-2. It does require a decent machine, but it runs ok on my P3@880 , V5, 256mb ram. Gunship! was put out as a light sim unfortunately, but it has no major bugs (yes I did have a copy of Gunship! and Squad Leader). That's my point here. All the games mentioned as not being supported with patches are in fact being/was supported with patches. Choice in design are a completely different subject.

I never mentioned Sierra. Peter Walker wrote:

Quoted text (76 lines)

> ROFL only title they have? You must not be a Sierra fan at all then. They > have a number of games that are very good and I am currently waiting on one, > just like we had to wait on N4. By that I mean, Tribes 2. They also have > other games that may not appeal to you, however they appeal to other groups. > > Peter Walker > Bagus51 > http://www.typ-group.com > > andrew <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > the difference is, > > > > Hasbro's financial well being doesn't depend on stuff like Gunship! (which > I'll > > go on record as saying easily had the best terrain graphics in a helo sim > to > > date), whereas Papy's livelihood very much depends on N4, which may as > well be > > the only title they have. > > > > "Joe L." wrote: > > > > > While I love the game there are two things that are getting real > old > > > real quick. The first being the often occurring apparently causeless and > > > totally unpredictable announcement "Cannot load track, weekend canceled" > . > > > This seems to be based purely on what mood the game is in. Sometimes it > will > > > start at the beginning of a session, sometimes the middle, sometimes the > > > end. Sometimes "this" track, sometimes "that" track, sometimes EVERY > track. > > > Sometimes a simple reselection will clear it up, sometimes nothing will, > not > > > even a cold reboot. "Weekend canceled" indeed. > > > Needless to say, this is maddening but I could put up this and other > > > faults for a while if I knew a patch was coming but then we run into the > > > second thing that is getting old quickly. > > > Based on what is visible from Sierra and Papy the prospect of a patch > seems > > > dicey at best. While there > > > are a great many here that seem to have faith that one is indeed in the > > > works I fail to see what they base that faith on since both Sierra and > Papy > > > have been totally silent not only on the subject of a patch but on any > > > subject at all. I have searched the web but except for a couple of > > > non-updated, completely non-responding web sites there is no evidence > that > > > either Sierra or Papy even exist. This is not comforting. > > > While it is true N4 has been selling very well it is equally true > that > > > other companies have totally abandoned new but buggy games that have > sold as > > > well or better. Those here who are also into Flight sims have seen this > from > > > Hasbro regarding Squad Leader, B-17 2, and Gunship! to name a few. These > are > > > names of sims as famous in the military sim community as NASCAR is in > online > > > racing. Hasbro used that fame to quickly sell many copies of very flawed > > > sims then abruptly cut off all support for the games within weeks of > > > release. Papy's and Sierra's release of a faulty game under a famous > name > > > followed by an apparent refusal to say anything beyond "ORDER NOW!!!" is > so > > > completely similar to the behavior of Hasbro that it is easier to > believe > > > Sierra and Papy intend to abandon NASCAR 4 then it is to believe that > they > > > intend to fix it. Unless and until either Sierra or Papy show themselves > the > > > safest course seems to be to assume that what we have is all we are ever > > > going to get and then, based on that assumption, either keep N4 "as-is" > or > > > return it. > >

Not confused - I'm saying that Papyrus would / should do its best to "fix up" N4, cause if they don't, it's possibly over for them. Hasbro, while not the developer, decided to pull the plug on Gunship, a remarkably selfish move, developed by Microprose - and Microprose has plenty of other stuff to fall back on... Mike White wrote:

Quoted text (105 lines)

> Papyrus is making Tribes 2? > > He is confused by comparing Hasbro and Papyrus' roles, but atleast read what > he wrote. > > "Peter Walker" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:5pLv6.6346$[email hidden]... > > ROFL only title they have? You must not be a Sierra fan at all then. They > > have a number of games that are very good and I am currently waiting on > one, > > just like we had to wait on N4. By that I mean, Tribes 2. They also have > > other games that may not appeal to you, however they appeal to other > groups. > > > > Peter Walker > > Bagus51 > > http://www.typ-group.com > > > > andrew <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > > the difference is, > > > > > > Hasbro's financial well being doesn't depend on stuff like Gunship! > (which > > I'll > > > go on record as saying easily had the best terrain graphics in a helo > sim > > to > > > date), whereas Papy's livelihood very much depends on N4, which may as > > well be > > > the only title they have. > > > > > > "Joe L." wrote: > > > > > > > While I love the game there are two things that are getting real > > old > > > > real quick. The first being the often occurring apparently causeless > and > > > > totally unpredictable announcement "Cannot load track, weekend > canceled" > > . > > > > This seems to be based purely on what mood the game is in. Sometimes > it > > will > > > > start at the beginning of a session, sometimes the middle, sometimes > the > > > > end. Sometimes "this" track, sometimes "that" track, sometimes EVERY > > track. > > > > Sometimes a simple reselection will clear it up, sometimes nothing > will, > > not > > > > even a cold reboot. "Weekend canceled" indeed. > > > > Needless to say, this is maddening but I could put up this and > other > > > > faults for a while if I knew a patch was coming but then we run into > the > > > > second thing that is getting old quickly. > > > > Based on what is visible from Sierra and Papy the prospect of a patch > > seems > > > > dicey at best. While there > > > > are a great many here that seem to have faith that one is indeed in > the > > > > works I fail to see what they base that faith on since both Sierra and > > Papy > > > > have been totally silent not only on the subject of a patch but on any > > > > subject at all. I have searched the web but except for a couple of > > > > non-updated, completely non-responding web sites there is no evidence > > that > > > > either Sierra or Papy even exist. This is not comforting. > > > > While it is true N4 has been selling very well it is equally true > > that > > > > other companies have totally abandoned new but buggy games that have > > sold as > > > > well or better. Those here who are also into Flight sims have seen > this > > from > > > > Hasbro regarding Squad Leader, B-17 2, and Gunship! to name a few. > These > > are > > > > names of sims as famous in the military sim community as NASCAR is in > > online > > > > racing. Hasbro used that fame to quickly sell many copies of very > flawed > > > > sims then abruptly cut off all support for the games within weeks of > > > > release. Papy's and Sierra's release of a faulty game under a famous > > name > > > > followed by an apparent refusal to say anything beyond "ORDER NOW!!!" > is > > so > > > > completely similar to the behavior of Hasbro that it is easier to > > believe > > > > Sierra and Papy intend to abandon NASCAR 4 then it is to believe that > > they > > > > intend to fix it. Unless and until either Sierra or Papy show > themselves > > the > > > > safest course seems to be to assume that what we have is all we are > ever > > > > going to get and then, based on that assumption, either keep N4 > "as-is" > > or > > > > return it. > > > > > > > > >

Papy will have a future as long as Sierra believes Papy can produce a product the public will purchase in large enough quantities. If Sierra decides not to fund Papy for patches on N4, I don't see how Sierra could then hold the lack of patches against Papy. The public however could hold it against Papy, even though it would be a Sierra decision. It's in Sierra's best interest to have Papy create patches in N4 because it most likely will have a long shelf life, unlike 90% of other games Sierra funds. "andrew" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Not confused - > > I'm saying that Papyrus would / should do its best to "fix up" N4, causeif > they don't, it's possibly over for them. > > Hasbro, while not the developer, decided to pull the plug on Gunship, a > remarkably selfish move, developed by Microprose - and Microprose hasplenty of

Quoted text (7 lines)

> other stuff to fall back on... > > Mike White wrote: > > > Papyrus is making Tribes 2? > > > > He is confused by comparing Hasbro and Papyrus' roles, but atleast read

what > > he wrote. > > > > "Peter Walker" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:5pLv6.6346$[email hidden]... > > > ROFL only title they have? You must not be a Sierra fan at all then.They > > > have a number of games that are very good and I am currently waitingon > > one, > > > just like we had to wait on N4. By that I mean, Tribes 2. They alsohave

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > > other games that may not appeal to you, however they appeal to other > > groups. > > > > > > Peter Walker > > > Bagus51 > > > http://www.typ-group.com > > > > > > andrew <[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:[email hidden]... > > > > the difference is, > > > > > > > > Hasbro's financial well being doesn't depend on stuff like Gunship! > > (which > > > I'll > > > > go on record as saying easily had the best terrain graphics in ahelo > > sim > > > to > > > > date), whereas Papy's livelihood very much depends on N4, which mayas > > > well be > > > > the only title they have. > > > > > > > > "Joe L." wrote: > > > > > > > > > While I love the game there are two things that are gettingreal > > > old > > > > > real quick. The first being the often occurring apparentlycauseless > > and > > > > > totally unpredictable announcement "Cannot load track, weekend > > canceled" > > > . > > > > > This seems to be based purely on what mood the game is in.Sometimes > > it > > > will > > > > > start at the beginning of a session, sometimes the middle,sometimes > > the > > > > > end. Sometimes "this" track, sometimes "that" track, sometimesEVERY

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > > track. > > > > > Sometimes a simple reselection will clear it up, sometimes nothing > > will, > > > not > > > > > even a cold reboot. "Weekend canceled" indeed. > > > > > Needless to say, this is maddening but I could put up this and > > other > > > > > faults for a while if I knew a patch was coming but then we run

into > > the > > > > > second thing that is getting old quickly. > > > > > Based on what is visible from Sierra and Papy the prospect of apatch > > > seems > > > > > dicey at best. While there > > > > > are a great many here that seem to have faith that one is indeedin > > the > > > > > works I fail to see what they base that faith on since both Sierraand > > > Papy > > > > > have been totally silent not only on the subject of a patch but onany > > > > > subject at all. I have searched the web but except for a couple of > > > > > non-updated, completely non-responding web sites there is noevidence > > > that > > > > > either Sierra or Papy even exist. This is not comforting. > > > > > While it is true N4 has been selling very well it is equallytrue > > > that > > > > > other companies have totally abandoned new but buggy games thathave

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > > sold as > > > > > well or better. Those here who are also into Flight sims have seen > > this > > > from > > > > > Hasbro regarding Squad Leader, B-17 2, and Gunship! to name a few. > > These > > > are > > > > > names of sims as famous in the military sim community as NASCAR is

in > > > online > > > > > racing. Hasbro used that fame to quickly sell many copies of very > > flawed > > > > > sims then abruptly cut off all support for the games within weeksof > > > > > release. Papy's and Sierra's release of a faulty game under afamous > > > name > > > > > followed by an apparent refusal to say anything beyond "ORDERNOW!!!" > > is > > > so > > > > > completely similar to the behavior of Hasbro that it is easier to > > > believe > > > > > Sierra and Papy intend to abandon NASCAR 4 then it is to believethat > > > they > > > > > intend to fix it. Unless and until either Sierra or Papy show > > themselves > > > the > > > > > safest course seems to be to assume that what we have is all weare

Quoted text (11 lines)

> > ever > > > > > going to get and then, based on that assumption, either keep N4 > > "as-is" > > > or > > > > > return it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

No major bugs in Gunship! ? 1 word: Waypoints. (Damn! And the graphics were the *best*.) Jagg wrote:

Quoted text (16 lines)

> On Mon, 26 Mar 2001 20:21:04 GMT, "Joe L." <[email hidden]> > wrote: > > > Did you read about what these patches fixed? Most reports say B-17 > >code is so incredibly sloppy and bloated that even 1 ghz CPU's and GForce > >2's have a hard time running it. The GUNSHIP! patch took the flight model > >from horrendous to the merely terrible while touching none of the other > >flaws. > > I have B17-2. It does require a decent machine, but it runs ok on my > P3@880 , V5, 256mb ram. Gunship! was put out as a light sim > unfortunately, but it has no major bugs (yes I did have a copy of > Gunship! and Squad Leader). That's my point here. All the games > mentioned as not being supported with patches are in fact being/was > supported with patches. Choice in design are a completely different > subject.

"andrew" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Not confused - > > I'm saying that Papyrus would / should do its best to "fix up" N4, causeif > they don't, it's possibly over for them. > > Hasbro, while not the developer, decided to pull the plug on Gunship, a > remarkably selfish move, developed by Microprose - and Microprose hasplenty of > other stuff to fall back on... Really? Have you seen any Microprose products lately? After Hasbro pulled the plug on those titles, they also...if I remember correctly, closed Microprose. dave henrie >

>"andrew" <[email hidden]> wrote > I'm saying that Papyrus would / should do its best to "fix up" N4, causeif > they don't, it's possibly over for them. Only senile people would even think that Papyrus will not produce a patch for Nascar Racing 4 ;-) And perhaps DGF <G> ! -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- May the Downforce be with you... -- http://www.ymenard.com/ -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimato Dominguez Corporation - helping America into the New World...

On Tue, 27 Mar 2001 00:35:59 GMT, "Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote: > Really? Have you seen any Microprose products lately? After Hasbro >pulled the >plug on those titles, they also...if I remember correctly, closed >Microprose. >dave henrie B17-2 is under the Microprose label. They closed down the F4 team. But, Microprose still exists, in name only.

On Tue, 27 Mar 2001 00:35:55 GMT, andrew <[email hidden]> wrote: >No major bugs in Gunship! ? > >1 word: Waypoints. Again, that's a design decision and not a bug. Waypoints work, you just have to know how to make them work. BTW, I didn't like Gunship! and I don't think much of Hasbro either. Just setting the facts straight.

No, the waypoints did not work. A waypoint is a fixed waypoint, always and forever. If you're passing waypoint 1, the next waypoint shouldn't becom #1. Yet, that's what happens. That's not a design decision, just poor programming. Jagg wrote:

Quoted text (10 lines)

> On Tue, 27 Mar 2001 00:35:55 GMT, andrew <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >No major bugs in Gunship! ? > > > >1 word: Waypoints. > > Again, that's a design decision and not a bug. Waypoints work, you > just have to know how to make them work. BTW, I didn't like Gunship! > and I don't think much of Hasbro either. Just setting the facts > straight.

On Tue, 27 Mar 2001 03:28:24 GMT, andrew <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (7 lines)

>No, the waypoints did not work. > >A waypoint is a fixed waypoint, always and forever. > >If you're passing waypoint 1, the next waypoint shouldn't becom #1. Yet, >that's what happens. That's not a design decision, just poor >programming.

You are always headed to waypoint one in Gunship! There was a certain keyboard combo to change to the next waypoint. It was a crap design, but it was a design decision and nothing else.

I used to think just like you Joe. Papyrus is different. Largely because most of the guys who work on the product play it just as much or more than we do. I almost think they would make a patch with our without funding. They want to play it. Yes it's blind faith, but it's an educated blind faith. Tom "Joe L." <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:jiNv6.13911$[email hidden]... > Yours and others here are the expressions of faith that I mentionedin > the original post. If your comment on Hasbro's financial well being is > saying that there are instances where a company might view a certain setof > circumstances and then decide it more profitable to dump faulty softwareon > an unsuspecting market then immediately abandon that software instead of > fixing it I agree completely. But you seem to be implying that it is > impossible for Papy to find itself in such a set of cricumstances or tomake > such a decision. Here I disagree. > You are correct when you say "Hasbro's financial well being doesn't > depend on stuff like Gunship!" but remember that it is equally true that > Sierra's financial well being doesn't depend on stuff like NASCAR 4.However > strong the reputation of Papy it is certainly no stronger than the > reputation Microprose once enjoyed. > You may have faith and that faith may eventually be rewarded but I > prefer to operate on what is proven to exist. What exists now is a flawed > NASCAR 4 and a totally silent Sierra/Papy. Those who bought Gunship! andhad > faith in Hasbro/Microprose may see certain uncomfortable similarities. For > as long as Sierra /Papy choose to remain silent; for that long will the > safest course be to assume that there will be no patch and the N4 we have > now is all we are ever going to get. Those who are willing to accept N4 as > it is now may do so with my complete blessing. Those who cannot accept N4as > it is now may return it for a refund with my complete blessing. If > Sierra/Papy dont fix N4 everyone is happy. If Sierra/Papy do fix N4 those > who returned it can buy it once again and apply the fix and everyone is > still happy. Those who cannot accept N4 as it is now but keeps it in the > hope of some future fix may find the long term relationship they hoped for > is just a one-night-stand. So far the boy friend is not returning ourcalls. > > > > > "andrew" <[email hidden]> wrote in messagenews:[email hidden]... > > the difference is, > > > > Hasbro's financial well being doesn't depend on stuff like Gunship!(which > I'll > > go on record as saying easily had the best terrain graphics in a helosim

Quoted text (12 lines)

> to > > date), whereas Papy's livelihood very much depends on N4, which may as > well be > > the only title they have. > > > Yes, Gunship! is beautuful and had the programmers been premitted to carry > out the original plans Gunship! would have been THE helo sim but Gunship! > was strangled in its crib. Now we have the infant NASCAR 4. > > > >

My mistake. I had Sierra on my mind and that was why my post stated what it did. I apologize. -- Peter Walker Bagus51 http://www.typ-group.com Mike White <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:A8Mv6.13655$[email hidden]... > Papyrus is making Tribes 2? > > He is confused by comparing Hasbro and Papyrus' roles, but atleast read what > he wrote. > > > "Peter Walker" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:5pLv6.6346$[email hidden]... > > ROFL only title they have? You must not be a Sierra fan at all then. They > > have a number of games that are very good and I am currently waiting on > one, > > just like we had to wait on N4. By that I mean, Tribes 2. They also have > > other games that may not appeal to you, however they appeal to other > groups. > > > > Peter Walker > > Bagus51 > > http://www.typ-group.com > > > > andrew <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > > the difference is, > > > > > > Hasbro's financial well being doesn't depend on stuff like Gunship! > (which > > I'll > > > go on record as saying easily had the best terrain graphics in a helo > sim > > to > > > date), whereas Papy's livelihood very much depends on N4, which may as > > well be > > > the only title they have. > > > > > > "Joe L." wrote: > > > > > > > While I love the game there are two things that are getting real > > old > > > > real quick. The first being the often occurring apparently causeless > and > > > > totally unpredictable announcement "Cannot load track, weekend > canceled" > > . > > > > This seems to be based purely on what mood the game is in. Sometimes > it > > will > > > > start at the beginning of a session, sometimes the middle, sometimes > the > > > > end. Sometimes "this" track, sometimes "that" track, sometimes EVERY > > track. > > > > Sometimes a simple reselection will clear it up, sometimes nothing > will, > > not > > > > even a cold reboot. "Weekend canceled" indeed. > > > > Needless to say, this is maddening but I could put up this and > other > > > > faults for a while if I knew a patch was coming but then we run into > the > > > > second thing that is getting old quickly. > > > > Based on what is visible from Sierra and Papy the prospect of a patch > > seems > > > > dicey at best. While there > > > > are a great many here that seem to have faith that one is indeed in > the > > > > works I fail to see what they base that faith on since both Sierra and > > Papy > > > > have been totally silent not only on the subject of a patch but on any > > > > subject at all. I have searched the web but except for a couple of > > > > non-updated, completely non-responding web sites there is no evidence > > that > > > > either Sierra or Papy even exist. This is not comforting. > > > > While it is true N4 has been selling very well it is equally true > > that > > > > other companies have totally abandoned new but buggy games that have > > sold as > > > > well or better. Those here who are also into Flight sims have seen > this > > from > > > > Hasbro regarding Squad Leader, B-17 2, and Gunship! to name a few. > These > > are > > > > names of sims as famous in the military sim community as NASCAR is in > > online > > > > racing. Hasbro used that fame to quickly sell many copies of very > flawed > > > > sims then abruptly cut off all support for the games within weeks of > > > > release. Papy's and Sierra's release of a faulty game under a famous > > name > > > > followed by an apparent refusal to say anything beyond "ORDER NOW!!!" > is > > so > > > > completely similar to the behavior of Hasbro that it is easier to > > believe > > > > Sierra and Papy intend to abandon NASCAR 4 then it is to believe that > > they > > > > intend to fix it. Unless and until either Sierra or Papy show > themselves > > the > > > > safest course seems to be to assume that what we have is all we are > ever > > > > going to get and then, based on that assumption, either keep N4 > "as-is" > > or > > > > return it. > > > > > > > > > > >

Name one other title where the waypoints move. How do you find you way back to the base? Jagg wrote:

Quoted text (13 lines)

> On Tue, 27 Mar 2001 03:28:24 GMT, andrew <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >No, the waypoints did not work. > > > >A waypoint is a fixed waypoint, always and forever. > > > >If you're passing waypoint 1, the next waypoint shouldn't becom #1. Yet, > >that's what happens. That's not a design decision, just poor > >programming. > > You are always headed to waypoint one in Gunship! There was a certain > keyboard combo to change to the next waypoint. It was a crap design, > but it was a design decision and nothing else.

"andrew" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Name one other title where the waypoints move. > > How do you find you way back to the base? Toss breadcrumbs out the window every so often...then follow the trail of squirrels and ducks back to base. dave henrie

On Tue, 27 Mar 2001 12:27:04 GMT, andrew <[email hidden]> wrote: >Name one other title where the waypoints move. > >How do you find you way back to the base? > Cycle the waypoints til you hit the last one.

But it the waypoints have changed, is the last one the base? Jagg wrote:

Quoted text (8 lines)

> On Tue, 27 Mar 2001 12:27:04 GMT, andrew <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >Name one other title where the waypoints move. > > > >How do you find you way back to the base? > > > > Cycle the waypoints til you hit the last one.

try this.. pretty interesting, no? http://www.microprose.com Dave Henrie wrote:

Quoted text (18 lines)

> "andrew" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > Not confused - > > > > I'm saying that Papyrus would / should do its best to "fix up" N4, cause > if > > they don't, it's possibly over for them. > > > > Hasbro, while not the developer, decided to pull the plug on Gunship, a > > remarkably selfish move, developed by Microprose - and Microprose has > plenty of > > other stuff to fall back on... > Really? Have you seen any Microprose products lately? After Hasbro > pulled the > plug on those titles, they also...if I remember correctly, closed > Microprose. > dave henrie > > >

After Hasbro gutted Microprose of resources and ruined the name by selling much hyped but half finished buggy titles under the Microprose name in order to make a quick buck; Hasbro then sold the wreckage for scrap to Infogames during the same fire sale where they dumped the whole of "Hasbro Interactive" and "Games.com" This is how the word "Microprose" appeared on the "Infogames" site. Yes, the **Infogames** site is interesting and I did see that word "Microprose" but except for the display of that single word that one time in that one place there is precious little else to indicate that Microprose still has a pulse. I suppose one could say Microprose is "technically" still alive but by the same reasoning we can also say that, since NVidia purchased 3DFX and the word "3DFX" can be found on a page of the NVidia site then 3DFX is also still alive. I guess it all depends on what the definition of "is", is. "andrew" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> try this.. pretty interesting, no? > > http://www.microprose.com > > Dave Henrie wrote: > > > "andrew" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:[email hidden]... > > > Not confused - > > > > > > I'm saying that Papyrus would / should do its best to "fix up" N4,cause > > if > > > they don't, it's possibly over for them. > > > > > > Hasbro, while not the developer, decided to pull the plug on Gunship,a

Quoted text (11 lines)

> > > remarkably selfish move, developed by Microprose - and Microprose has > > plenty of > > > other stuff to fall back on... > > Really? Have you seen any Microprose products lately? After Hasbro > > pulled the > > plug on those titles, they also...if I remember correctly, closed > > Microprose. > > dave henrie > > > > > >

I am perfectly willing to take Papy at their word regarding a patch but there has been no word. There are two possible reasons for this: 1. They are incapable of communication or 2. They are unwilling to communicate. If there is a third possibility, what it is? If there is only these two then in my skeptical mind neither of these possibilities bode well. In the real world as it stands now I have a choice of either keeping a game I cannot accept in its present state or getting back the $45 I paid for it. I choose the cash. And, as I said, your faith may be rewarded. In which case I shall run down to the store and again purchase NASCAR 4 and it will give me the greatest pleasure to take all the "I TOLD YOU SO!'s" you or anyone else care to hand out. There are still a few days until the cutoff for returning the game for a refund. I await some word from Papy. I will believe what they say. If Papy says nothing then nothing is what I will believe. "Tom Oliver" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:99pi9q$9eo$[email hidden]... > I used to think just like you Joe. Papyrus is different. Largely because > most of the guys who work on the product play it just as much or more than > we do. I almost think they would make a patch with our without funding.They > want to play it. > > Yes it's blind faith, but it's an educated blind faith. > > Tom >

Very true, in fact most of the guys working on the product came from our ranks. -- Don Burnette D Burnette in N4 Some people do nothing wrong. The problem is, they do nothing. And THAT is wrong. "Tom Oliver" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:99pi9q$9eo$[email hidden]... > I used to think just like you Joe. Papyrus is different. Largely because > most of the guys who work on the product play it just as much or more than > we do. I almost think they would make a patch with our without funding. They > want to play it. > > Yes it's blind faith, but it's an educated blind faith. > > Tom > > "Joe L." <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:jiNv6.13911$[email hidden]... > > Yours and others here are the expressions of faith that I mentioned > in > > the original post. If your comment on Hasbro's financial well being is > > saying that there are instances where a company might view a certain set > of > > circumstances and then decide it more profitable to dump faulty software > on > > an unsuspecting market then immediately abandon that software instead of > > fixing it I agree completely. But you seem to be implying that it is > > impossible for Papy to find itself in such a set of cricumstances or to > make > > such a decision. Here I disagree. > > You are correct when you say "Hasbro's financial well being doesn't > > depend on stuff like Gunship!" but remember that it is equally true that > > Sierra's financial well being doesn't depend on stuff like NASCAR 4. > However > > strong the reputation of Papy it is certainly no stronger than the > > reputation Microprose once enjoyed. > > You may have faith and that faith may eventually be rewarded but I > > prefer to operate on what is proven to exist. What exists now is a flawed > > NASCAR 4 and a totally silent Sierra/Papy. Those who bought Gunship! and > had > > faith in Hasbro/Microprose may see certain uncomfortable similarities. For > > as long as Sierra /Papy choose to remain silent; for that long will the > > safest course be to assume that there will be no patch and the N4 we have > > now is all we are ever going to get. Those who are willing to accept N4 as > > it is now may do so with my complete blessing. Those who cannot accept N4 > as > > it is now may return it for a refund with my complete blessing. If > > Sierra/Papy dont fix N4 everyone is happy. If Sierra/Papy do fix N4 those > > who returned it can buy it once again and apply the fix and everyone is > > still happy. Those who cannot accept N4 as it is now but keeps it in the > > hope of some future fix may find the long term relationship they hoped for > > is just a one-night-stand. So far the boy friend is not returning our > calls. > > > > > > > > > > "andrew" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > > the difference is, > > > > > > Hasbro's financial well being doesn't depend on stuff like Gunship! > (which > > I'll > > > go on record as saying easily had the best terrain graphics in a helo > sim > > to > > > date), whereas Papy's livelihood very much depends on N4, which may as > > well be > > > the only title they have. > > > > > Yes, Gunship! is beautuful and had the programmers been premitted to carry > > out the original plans Gunship! would have been THE helo sim but Gunship! > > was strangled in its crib. Now we have the infant NASCAR 4. > > > > > > > > > >

They listed about a half-dozen developers that team with infogrames...no mention of microprose at all. Kinda makes me wanna go find my very first Commodore 64 flight sim...F15 and dig it out. (bombing triangles...shooting down triangles, landing by overflying triangles....OY! those were the days. dave henrie "Joe L." <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > After Hasbro gutted Microprose of resources and ruined the name

> I am perfectly willing to take Papy at their word regarding a patchbut

Quoted text (7 lines)

> there has been no word. There are two possible reasons for this: > > 1. They are incapable of communication > or > 2. They are unwilling to communicate. > > If there is a third possibility, what it is? If there is only these

two > then in my skeptical mind neither of these possibilities bode well<snipsy> yes there are more possibilities...I'll fly one by you... papyrus has a history of working methodically and privately when building patches. They are not ID. They do not throw out a quick fix and and allow the world to beta test for them. They did try that with N3's patches and it quickly got out of control. From what I heard it was supposed to be a small limited beta testing that became public by the force of the internet. Now...as to another Papyrus pattern. They often use the first release to beta test for what-ever items are also in the pipeline. The multiplayer screens easily indicate they plan at LEAST one if not two additons to the N4 line. So they HAVE to fix N4 if they hope to use it for the other products. This is similiar to the patching process for N3 then that was applied to NL and the CTS package. Finally a scenario know one seems to be aware of. At least one member of the N3 multiplayer communty has filed 'cease and desist' orders aagainst several of his former partners and possibly Papyrus also. (this is rumoured with no proof as yet) If a C&D order is in effect...Papyrus cannot move forward until that problem is resolved. While surely they can continue to refine N4, they may not be inclined to do so if they have to scrap a module of the program due to legal actions. So rather than waste funds building a possibly unreleaseable product...they "MAY" be hunkering down and waiting for the lawyers to finish first. You wanted a third possibility...there it is... dave henrie

Well you have to do whatever you're most comfortable with, obviously, but Papyrus hasn't communicated with anyone in the three and half years I've been doing this. Lack of communication from them doesn't tell us a thing. I know, it frustrates me as well, but I've gotten used to it. Tom "Joe L." <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:Mz9w6.2254$[email hidden]... > > I am perfectly willing to take Papy at their word regarding a patchbut

Quoted text (7 lines)

> there has been no word. There are two possible reasons for this: > > 1. They are incapable of communication > or > 2. They are unwilling to communicate. > > If there is a third possibility, what it is? If there is only these

two > then in my skeptical mind neither of these possibilities bode well. In the > real world as it stands now I have a choice of either keeping a game I > cannot accept in its present state or getting back the $45 I paid for it.I > choose the cash. And, as I said, your faith may be rewarded. In which caseI > shall run down to the store and again purchase NASCAR 4 and it will giveme > the greatest pleasure to take all the "I TOLD YOU SO!'s" you or anyoneelse > care to hand out. > There are still a few days until the cutoff for returning the game fora

Quoted text (7 lines)

> refund. I await some word from Papy. I will believe what they say. If Papy > says nothing then nothing is what I will believe. > > "Tom Oliver" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:99pi9q$9eo$[email hidden]... > > I used to think just like you Joe. Papyrus is different. Largely because > > most of the guys who work on the product play it just as much or more

than

Quoted text (11 lines)

> > we do. I almost think they would make a patch with our without funding. > They > > want to play it. > > > > Yes it's blind faith, but it's an educated blind faith. > > > > Tom > > > > >

"Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote > 1. They are incapable of communication > or > 2. They are unwilling to communicate. > > If there is a third possibility, what it is? Oh cmon, it's quite normal that Papyrus does not control any kind of public information concerning post-release updates or patches. It all comes from Sierra, it's normal THEY are the producers. It has always been like that, back since Nascar Racing 2. Thus, Sierra choose to release any kind of information. Please note that several people at Papyrus have greatly hinted the upcoming patch. Anybody who is not senile knows that there will be a patch. It's quite obvious, you think they basically released an early 1.0.0.1 patch and that's all? They have wrote everywhere things like "it's a known issue", thus there will be a patch. C'mon wake up. Do people forget that easily? Don't act like a chicken with it's head chopped. -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- May the Downforce be with you... -- http://www.ymenard.com/ -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimato Dominguez Corporation - helping America into the New World...

>"Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote<snip> Errr sorry to have quoted you Dave in that first post, I messed up my edit. My apologies. -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- May the Downforce be with you... -- http://www.ymenard.com/ -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimato Dominguez Corporation - helping America into the New World...

The question was: "Why do we have no word from Papy?". Your post does not present a third possibility but merely a catalog of speculations that: 1. They are incapable of communicating or 2. They are unwilling to communicate. Note that we are all talking "mabe". "might be", "could be", etc, etc, etc. Everything here is a guess or a surmise or an assumption or a hope with no "Thus sayith Papy" for anyone to hang a hat on. This is PRECISELY my point. I do not demand a beta patch or some quick fix.or even a guess on how long a patch would take. I only want some message from Papy stating: "We have documented: Bug "A", Bug "B", Bug "C" and we are working on a patch to correct same". Just this and I will be happy to crash and lock and reboot for months while Papy works to get it right. I have patents and understanding by the ton. I am one of those who bought Falcon 4 Version 1 at full price on day one and kept it! The Falcon 4 team communicated, NASCAR 4 team does not, there is the difference for me. Well, it's your $45 or, more accuratly, it's Papy's $45. I hope you are right and you just might be but, as I said in the first post, the safest thing to do at this point is to take the game back for a cash refund. From there one of two things will happen: 1. Papy produces a patch and the game is fixed. In which case we can buy the game again, apply the patch and race. or 2. Papy does not produce a patch and the game is NOT fixed. In which case the we have $45. As I have said, I am willing to take Papy at thier word but they have not given thier word. They have only given a buggy program and silence. Some here seem to take this silence as a sign of support, they are welcome; I consider it rude. Papy can be as rude as they like but then if they want me to swallow thier rudness and hand them my money they are going to have to come up with a pretty damn good program that works. NASCAR 4, in its present condition, aint it. "Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:N_bw6.632338$[email hidden]... > yes there are more possibilities...I'll fly one by you... > papyrus has a history of working methodically and privately when building > patches. > They are not ID. They do not throw out a quick fix and and allow theworld

Quoted text (7 lines)

> to beta > test for them. They did try that with N3's patches and it quickly got out > of control. > From what I heard it was supposed to be a small limited beta testing that > became public > by the force of the internet. > Now...as to another Papyrus pattern. They often use the first release

to > beta test for > what-ever items are also in the pipeline. The multiplayer screens easily > indicate they plan at LEAST one if not two additons to the N4 line. Sothey > HAVE to fix N4 if they hope to use it for the other products. This is > similiar to the patching process for N3 then that was applied to NL andthe > CTS package. > Finally a scenario know one seems to be aware of. At least one memberof > the N3 > multiplayer communty has filed 'cease and desist' orders aagainst severalof > his former partners and possibly Papyrus also. (this is rumoured with no > proof as yet) > If a C&D order is in effect...Papyrus cannot move forward until thatproblem > is resolved. > While surely they can continue to refine N4, they may not be inclined todo > so if they have > to scrap a module of the program due to legal actions. So rather thanwaste

Quoted text (7 lines)

> funds building a possibly unreleaseable product...they "MAY" be hunkering > down and waiting for the lawyers to finish first. > You wanted a third possibility...there it is... > dave henrie > > >

Perhaps you would list some of the "everywhere"'s these "Great Hints" have been posted? If I could direct you to an "everywhere" you have apparently not visited you may note in my original post that I refer NOT to Papy alone but to Sierra/Papy. One and all, each and severally.... silent. Your argument seems to be that they have always been rude and inconsiderate to their customers. An odd justification for your faith. Considering the fact that I that I did not mention the 1001 patch at all how is it you consider it "quite obvious" that I think it the only patch? If you wish to dispute me please confine your arguments to what I have said and not any "quite obvious" straw-men you may dream up. But if you insist on arguing against positions no one holds I would advise you against mentioning senility in the midst of the argument. "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:4Xcw6.471915$[email hidden]... > "Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote > Oh cmon, it's quite normal that Papyrus does not control any kind ofpublic > information concerning post-release updates or patches. It all comes from > Sierra, it's normal THEY are the producers. It has always been like that, > back since Nascar Racing 2. Thus, Sierra choose to release any kind of > information. Please note that several people at Papyrus have greatlyhinted > the upcoming patch. Anybody who is not senile knows that there will be a > patch. It's quite obvious, you think they basically released an early > 1.0.0.1 patch and that's all? They have wrote everywhere things like"it's

Quoted text (19 lines)

> a known issue", thus there will be a patch. C'mon wake up. > > Do people forget that easily? > > Don't act like a chicken with it's head chopped. > > > > > -- > -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> > -- May the Downforce be with you... > -- http://www.ymenard.com/ > -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimato Dominguez > Corporation - helping America into the New World... > > > >

andrew wrote: > Name one other title where the waypoints move. > > How do you find you way back to the base? Falcon 3/4. You could alter the flight route by altering waypoints.

>"Joe L." <[email hidden]> wrote > Perhaps you would list some of the "everywhere"'s these "Great Hints" > have been posted? Where most of the NASCAR community is, the simracing.org newsgroup > Considering the fact that I that I did not mention the 1001 patch at > all how is it you consider it "quite obvious" that I think it the only > patch? It's quite obvious there will be a bigger patch in the future. Anybody who even thinks the opposite is senile. > If you wish to dispute me please confine your arguments to what I > have said and not any "quite obvious" straw-men you may dream up. But ifyou > insist on arguing against positions no one holds I would advise youagainst > mentioning senility in the midst of the argument. Teeheehee nice failed attempt to rhetoric flaming. Big words 'brotha! -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- May the Downforce be with you... -- http://www.ymenard.com/ -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimato Dominguez Corporation - helping America into the New World...

>"Joe L." <[email hidden]> wrote > I do not demand a beta patch or some quick fix.or even a guess on how > long a patch would take. I only want some message from Papy stating: "We > have documented: Bug "A", Bug "B", Bug "C" and we are working on a patchto > correct same". It's not important. They do not waste valuable time (especially since it comes from Sierra, not Papyrus) on that. It's their philosophy. You either like it or not. I don't see the necessity to whine about that fact. This same discussion happened for N1, Icr2, N2, GPL and N3. > Just this and I will be happy to crash and lock and reboot > for months while Papy works to get it right. You have faith or not? It's all what counts. > I am one of those who bought Falcon 4 Version 1 at > full price on day one and kept it! The Falcon 4 team communicated, NASCAR4 > team does not, there is the difference for me. You simply cannot put in your mind that they perhaps can't ? Anyway it all goes back to the developer's philosophy like I previously said. Papyrus has well known (for people like us who've been long simracing fans in the community) to shut up and deliver the goods. Someday you will wake up and see a big patch posted at papy.com that fixes a vast majority of the problems. That's all you need to know, rest assured it will happen. > 2. Papy does not produce a patch and the game is NOT fixed. In which case > the we have $45. It will not happen. It never happened (spare me NR99, it wasn't selling like hotcakes as N4 is). > They have only given a buggy program That's quite stretching. -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- May the Downforce be with you... -- http://www.ymenard.com/ -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimato Dominguez Corporation - helping America into the New World...

"ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:p1gw6.472631$[email hidden]... > >"Joe L." <[email hidden]> wrote > > Perhaps you would list some of the "everywhere"'s these "GreatHints" > > have been posted? > > Where most of the NASCAR community is, the simracing.org newsgroup Strange, I have been there as much as here. I recall no statement from Papy or Sierra. You, of course, can provide message numbers or quotes? Even stranger is that none of these "Great Hints" that are "everywhere" on simracing.org appear "nowhere" on the Sierra/Papy message base itself. Perhaps you could explain how it is that they have managed to find the time to post these "Great Hints" everywhere EXCEPT thier own message base. > > Considering the fact that I that I did not mention the 1001 patchat > > all how is it you consider it "quite obvious" that I think it the only > > patch? > > It's quite obvious there will be a bigger patch in the future. Anybodywho > even thinks the opposite is senile. The only thing that is quite obvious is that is that you are trying to make up for your inability to state a cohesive reasoned argument by continually chanting "It's Quite Obvious" and labeling as senile any who disagree with you. Your statement is proof of a massive conceit but little else.

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > If you wish to dispute me please confine your arguments to what I > > have said and not any "quite obvious" straw-men you may dream up. But if > you > > insist on arguing against positions no one holds I would advise you > against > > mentioning senility in the midst of the argument. > > Teeheehee nice failed attempt to rhetoric flaming. Big words 'brotha!

It is "quite obvious" you are unfamiliar with "Big Words" if all you can muster are giggles and a blanket dismissal with no reference at all to the subject. To start off your education may I suggest you look up "rhetoric". If you find a dictionary with the term "verb" anywhere in the definition please let me know. In the mean time, having "rhetoriced" for the last few days I am done with my "rhetoricing" but if you want to "rhetoric" some more then by all means the last is yours. Enjoy "brotha".

>"Joe L." <[email hidden]> wrote <snip> We had this same conversation for Nascar Racing 1, IndyCar Racing 2, Nascar Racing 2, Grand Prix Legends and Nascar Racing 3. Just search dejanews, it's stupid to even argument about the patch, it's 100% official there will be one. What's the point of officially saying there will be a patch? It would make your life so much more enjoyable if somebody from Papyrus told you "yes, we are creating a patch presently" Hello? McFly? -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- May the Downforce be with you... -- http://www.ymenard.com/ -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimato Dominguez Corporation - helping America into the New World...

. What's the point of officially saying there will be a patch? It > would make your life so much more enjoyable if somebody from Papyrus told > you "yes, we are creating a patch presently" No, but then we could begin phase two of the official internet whiners guide... after complaining about a patch, we must be ready to move on and start complaining about the patch being late. The sooner Papyrus announces the patch, the sooner we can move on and begin our carping all over again. dave henrie

>"Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote > No, but then we could begin phase two of the official internet whinersguide... > after complaining about a patch, we must be ready to move on and startcomplaining > about the patch being late. The sooner Papyrus announces the patch, thesooner we > can move on and begin our carping all over again. Hehehehe ;-) "It's quite obvious" -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- May the Downforce be with you... -- http://www.ymenard.com/ -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimato Dominguez Corporation - helping America into the New World...

He's got a point Frank. It's very frustrating when they never say anything. Now I totally understand why they don't communicate in these forums as even I've given up on simracing.org (talk about a mess), but they could post something somewhere. The truth is he is right. We don't know KNOW for sure there will ever be a patch since Papy hasn't said there would be. Now I do believe there will be one as I've stated, but I don't know that for sure and quite honestly neither do you. Tom "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:77gw6.472641$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (16 lines)

>From: "Dave Henrie" [email hidden] >Date: 03/28/2001 5:41 PM Eastern Standard Time >Message-id: <BMtw6.637580$[email hidden]> > >. What's the point of officially saying there will be a patch? It >> would make your life so much more enjoyable if somebody from Papyrus told >> you "yes, we are creating a patch presently" > > No, but then we could begin phase two of the official internet whiners >guide... >after complaining about a patch, we must be ready to move on and start >complaining >about the patch being late. The sooner Papyrus announces the patch, the >sooner we >can move on and begin our carping all over again. >dave henrie

OK if we're going to get into a discussion about "CARP" I suggest we move it on over to rec.aquaria.freshwater.misc <g> (Don't gimme NOCRAP in E-mail)

>"Tom Oliver" <[email hidden]> wrote > He's got a point Frank. It's very frustrating when they never sayanything. I don't disagree with that. It's just that shouting from the roofs won't change anything. Papyrus has always done that, it's like the fifth time we have about the same discussion on r.a.s. over the years. It won't change anything. > Now I totally understand why they don't communicate in these forums aseven > I've given up on simracing.org (talk about a mess), Hehehe ;-) It's not a mess, it's just us! > but they could post something somewhere. The truth is he is right. Wedon't know KNOW for sure > there will ever be a patch since Papy hasn't said there would be. Now I do > believe there will be one as I've stated, but I don't know that for sureand > quite honestly neither do you. There will be a patch. Trust me. -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- May the Downforce be with you... -- http://www.ymenard.com/ -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimato Dominguez Corporation - helping America into the New World...

In the software industry there is a "practice" that is sometimes employed, it involves releasing the final beta of your software to the customer then sit tight and take the complaints for the first three months of release. When you have gathered enough knowledge about the problems that exist with the software from irate customers reporting problems you fix them, and release a patch, and with that you release what should have been the original product. The problems being that PC's represent such a variety of differing system configurations worldwide that testing them all is nigh on impossible. Sadly, the consumer can do very little in this situation but wait for the software house to perform their work, the customers of Hasbro suffered when they realised that no patch was coming. But I don't think there is anything to suggest that Papyrus's future at risk here. At least I hope not. I hope they are working on a patch but if they are they need to give it enough time to make sure that someone finds EVERY problem there is with the software so that they don't have to release a sequence of small patches (See BattleCruiser 3000AD or Rally Championship). Jon. "Joe L." <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:Mz9w6.2254$[email hidden]... > > I am perfectly willing to take Papy at their word regarding a patchbut

Quoted text (7 lines)

> there has been no word. There are two possible reasons for this: > > 1. They are incapable of communication > or > 2. They are unwilling to communicate. > > If there is a third possibility, what it is? If there is only these

two > then in my skeptical mind neither of these possibilities bode well. In the > real world as it stands now I have a choice of either keeping a game I > cannot accept in its present state or getting back the $45 I paid for it.I > choose the cash. And, as I said, your faith may be rewarded. In which caseI > shall run down to the store and again purchase NASCAR 4 and it will giveme > the greatest pleasure to take all the "I TOLD YOU SO!'s" you or anyoneelse > care to hand out. > There are still a few days until the cutoff for returning the game fora

Quoted text (7 lines)

> refund. I await some word from Papy. I will believe what they say. If Papy > says nothing then nothing is what I will believe. > > "Tom Oliver" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:99pi9q$9eo$[email hidden]... > > I used to think just like you Joe. Papyrus is different. Largely because > > most of the guys who work on the product play it just as much or more

than

Quoted text (11 lines)

> > we do. I almost think they would make a patch with our without funding. > They > > want to play it. > > > > Yes it's blind faith, but it's an educated blind faith. > > > > Tom > > > > >

On Wed, 28 Mar 2001 02:18:36 GMT, "Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (7 lines)

> They listed about a half-dozen developers that team with infogrames...no >mention >of microprose at all. Kinda makes me wanna go find my very first Commodore >64 >flight sim...F15 and dig it out. (bombing triangles...shooting down >triangles, landing by overflying triangles....OY! those were the days. >dave henrie

After playing Gunship for months on my C64, hiding my Gunship behind triangle mountains, slowly raising altitude, shooting a couple of rockets and quickly ducking behind the traingle again, imagine my surprise when I played Gunship later on my Amiga 500.. The triangles weren't see-through anymore, they were filled! Whoa! :) Andre >"Joe L." <[email hidden]> wrote in message >news:[email hidden]... >> After Hasbro gutted Microprose of resources and ruined the name > >