Nascar Legends 2 ?

How about a sequel to NL based on the new N4 physics model ? (or the "old" GPL engine, depends on how you look at it...) Seen a lot of request for CART but nobody for NL ? Blues

considering how NOBODY races NL I can't imagine them getting the approval to build another version of it. The tptcc guys even added the 1970's trans am cars and still we get VERY LITTLE action with NL. There is one league that I know of...Almost everytime I check out the multiplayer lobby it is stone cold empty. dave henrie "Blues DeVille" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:99e4al$lad$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (9 lines)

> How about a sequel to NL based on the new N4 physics model ? > (or the "old" GPL engine, depends on how you look at it...) > > Seen a lot of request for CART but nobody for NL ? > > Blues > > >

>"Blues DeVille" <[email hidden]> wrote > Seen a lot of request for CART but nobody for NL ? NL bombed, I doubt we'll ever see against an historical sim unless Sierra changes their mentality and gives the approval at Papy to do a less mainstream software. -- -- 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 Fri, 23 Mar 2001 02:24:12 GMT, "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote: >NL bombed, I doubt we'll ever see against an historical sim unless Sierra >changes their mentality and gives the approval at Papy to do a less >mainstream software. Just guessing, but I bet NL would have done at least a bit better if it had been developed and released as an expansion pack for N3, and sold for an appropriate price. Only real reason I bought it was curiousity, and wanting Papy to have money for GPL2 ;). I would imagine that right now all Papy is working on is finishing N4. For offline racers, they have simply never released a more incomplete product. I understand how ambitious and complicated N4 is, I'm just sad they had to succumb to the pressure and release at the beginning of the NASCAR season. It would be a damn shame if Sierra uses any failings of N4 to restrict plans for future hardcore sims. Papyrus! Sierra! Pay attention! Look how old GPL is, and what a loyal following it *still* has. I've said it before - give me a GPL-level sim of 70's F1, or late 60-70's sports cars, and I'd gladly pay $100 the day it arrived in the store. The West brothers can get the extra $60 too if they include classic LeMans racers ;). Kendt

On Fri, 23 Mar 2001 04:52:47 GMT, [email hidden] (Kendt Eklund) wrote: >The West brothers can get the extra $60 too if they include >classic LeMans racers ;). > >Kendt WSC is supposed to be quite open ended so 3rd party users can add them if they don't in the initial software package.

"ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in <gtyu6.438066$Pm2.6852513 @news20.bellglobal.com>: >NL bombed, I doubt we'll ever see against an historical sim unless Sierra >changes their mentality and gives the approval at Papy to do a less >mainstream software. translates to, Sierra/Papy change there minds not to seek profitable gaming ;) Sadly, it's safe to say that historical sims are probably not going to happen again. (who desperately wanted a early 80's Group C sim). Z. -- Please remove my_pants when replying by email.

[email hidden] (Kendt Eklund) wrote in <3abad398.19182677 @news.netmcr.com>: >It would be a damn shame if Sierra uses any failings of N4 to restrict >plans for future hardcore sims. Papyrus! Sierra! Pay attention! >Look how old GPL is, and what a loyal following it *still* has. Loyal followings is nice and all, but where is the revenue? Be realistic. Z. -- Please remove my_pants when replying by email.

According to the info provided at the High Gear site, I don't think it's a problem as Nascar 4 reached up to the 5th place in th US selling charts, and is still in the top 10. I'm sure we'll see Nascar 5 as well :). -Gregor Kendt Eklund wrote: > > It would be a damn shame if Sierra uses any failings of N4 to restrict > plans for future hardcore sims. >

In article <gtyu6.438066$[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says... > > Seen a lot of request for CART but nobody for NL ? > > > NL bombed, I doubt we'll ever see against an historical sim unless Sierra > changes their mentality and gives the approval at Papy to do a less > mainstream software. Can't see that there's much point to a Nascar Legends 2, after all GPL modelled an F1 era that was totally different to today's safety-first boring-tracks formula. The cars in NL in so much that they are big-ass V8 heavyweights, are not that different to todays. Neither are the tracks. Now 70's F1 - that would be cool. If only Papyrus/Sierra would license their GPL engine to other developers. - Michael

MP <[email hidden]> wrote in <[email hidden]>: >Now 70's F1 - that would be cool. If only Papyrus/Sierra would license >their GPL engine to other developers. What is the point? GPL was a sales disaster. Who in their right mind is going to want to use that engine on another historical sim? Please live in the real world :) Z. -- Please remove my_pants when replying by email.

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

Quoted text (7 lines)

> MP <[email hidden]> wrote in <[email hidden]>: > > >Now 70's F1 - that would be cool. If only Papyrus/Sierra would license > >their GPL engine to other developers. > > What is the point? GPL was a sales disaster. Who in their right mind is > going to want to use that engine on another historical sim?

It's also the best driving simulator yet written, due to the quality of the physics engine. If it was a sales disaster it probably reflects the fact that it's so hard to learn, and didn't work well on a lot of the systems that were out there at the time of its release. It may also reflect a lack of interest in '67 F1, but I couldn't say for sure. I don't see why the physics engine itself is a drawback, as long as there is an arcade mode for the drooling masses to enjoy. > Please live in the real world :) What, when we could be driving '67 F1 cars on the original tracks? No thanks! ;-)

Hey don't forget putting a bunch of wacky Europeans running on & off the tracks too.. hahahaha Demolition-GPL70s... <vbg> Btw: Why not an 80s version instead? Cheers Thom_j. "Neil Raine" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:%gGu6.43670$[email hidden]... <snipped> | I don't see why the physics engine itself is a drawback, as long as thereis | an arcade mode for the drooling masses to enjoy.<snipped again>

> > It may also reflect a lack of interest in '67 F1, but I couldn't say for > sure. > Well, you can't ignore the fact that it's easier for a lot of people to identify themselfs with today's drivers. I personally bought GPL because it was the first to have the Zandvoort track (i live in Holland), and i never even had heard of guys like Rodriguez or Siffert. GPL got me more interested in the history of racing, as did NL with Nascar's history, but that doesn't apply to everyone, i'm afraid... Blues

How did Sierra/Papyrus seriously expect to sell many copies of NL? Nascar 3 just came out, and people were complaining that N3 should have been GPL bla bla bla, and then a couple months later, NL with the same engine, and not a whole lot of difference, comes out. Of course it didnt sell well. "Zonky" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (16 lines)

> [email hidden] (Kendt Eklund) wrote in <3abad398.19182677 > @news.netmcr.com>: > > >It would be a damn shame if Sierra uses any failings of N4 to restrict > >plans for future hardcore sims. Papyrus! Sierra! Pay attention! > >Look how old GPL is, and what a loyal following it *still* has. > > Loyal followings is nice and all, but where is the revenue? > > Be realistic. > > Z. > > -- > Please remove my_pants when replying by email. >

>"Zonky" <[email hidden]> wrote > translates to, Sierra/Papy change there minds not to seek profitablegaming > ;) Hehe sad indeed but true. I've always been at the frontline of a less mainstream line of software in the simracing community. I'm absolutely sure it's possible. TV, movies, music, most of the "entertainment" types have since long been able to do so, so why not the gaming industry? Sierra has difficulties understanding that, which is quite interesting if you look at their business concept. They said they "lost" money, as in, Papyrus could had created something that would had sold much more in the time-span that GPL was created. Papyrus isn't the biggest box in the industry, they aren't 500 employees. They are still not super-small as they do have multiple project within the development group. It's imho the perfect size for my "less mainstream" philosophy. GPL and NL are incredibly good titles. I agree that NL wasn't marketed properly even to us the hardcore simracers. It barely had recognition by anybody :( > Sadly, it's safe to say that historical sims are probably not going to > happen again. > (who desperately wanted a early 80's Group C sim). Unless somebody brings us an real open-source sim. <hint: WSC> -- -- 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...

>"Zonky" <[email hidden]> wrote > What is the point? GPL was a sales disaster. I still disagree with that, from a certain point of view. That's like saying the newest Jazz album by Wynton Marsalis was a sales disaster only because it did not sell multi-million copies to every teen. That's how Sierra thinks, as they were never able to have an approach. NL bombed not because it didn't sell well, but even for the market it was aimed for, it did not sell. GPL was a hit for us, an incredible hit! -- -- 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...

>"Neil Raine" <[email hidden]> wrote > If it was a sales disaster it probably reflects the fact that it's so hard > to learn, and didn't work well on a lot of the systems that were out there > at the time of its release. That can't be the reason anymore, see how Nascar Racing 4 is at the top of the charts since it's release. All the points above are applied to it. > It may also reflect a lack of interest in '67 F1, but I couldn't say for > sure. It's the one and only reason. -- -- 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 is the point? GPL was a sales disaster. Who in their right mind is >going to want to use that engine on another historical sim? > Was it the engine's fault or the license? Who cares if its just historical sims? Hell, ANY sim...they could be made cheaper as a result and maybe, just maybe, turn a profit. - Alan

GPL was an impulse buy for me, mostly driven by RAS. I would normally never have bought it for the reason ymenard says: 1967 F1 was of no interest to me. I'm sure glad I did - it has been a major part of my life ever since. Lets face it, brand recognition is the major marketing force these days - the majority of PC gamers were born after 1967. "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:rUNu6.447960$[email hidden]... > >"Neil Raine" <[email hidden]> wrote > > If it was a sales disaster it probably reflects the fact that it's sohard > > to learn, and didn't work well on a lot of the systems that were outthere

Quoted text (24 lines)

> > at the time of its release. > > That can't be the reason anymore, see how Nascar Racing 4 is at the top of > the charts since it's release. All the points above are applied to it. > > > > It may also reflect a lack of interest in '67 F1, but I couldn't say for > > sure. > > It's the one and only reason. > > > > > > -- > -- 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... > > >

> > It may also reflect a lack of interest in '67 F1, but I couldn't say for > > sure. > > It's the one and only reason. > It must be, N4 or GP3 aren't exactly "easy" when you turn off driver aids but they have something for the buying masses to associate with. I bought GPL with a vague knowledge of F1 in the late 60's (I had heard of the Lotus 49 and a handful of the drivers from the time), the people who could associate with it truly would have been the people there at the time, a general age group that don't buy a lot of computer games. The difficulty was still quoted as an issue and I think N4 and GP3 provide the user with better driver aids so that they can be playable for all, plus of course GP3 can be played on keys (Not everyone who might want to buy games has a wheel!) which GPL cannot. Of course, I don't suggest that driver aids or decent keyboard control would have saved GPL, but I caught a friend of mine father in law trying to throw away his copy because it was "Rubbish, I just kept crashing", he was using keys!! Papyrus should knock out an add on pack that gives us either 1976 or 1982, but they won't :o( Jon.

> Lets face it, brand recognition is the major marketing force these days - > the majority of PC gamers were born after 1967. The nearest to brand recognition they got was to put a picture of a Ferrari on the front! I bet that alone counted for most of the impulse purchases!!

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] (Zonky) writes:

Quoted text (9 lines)

>MP <[email hidden]> wrote in <[email hidden]>: > >>Now 70's F1 - that would be cool. If only Papyrus/Sierra would license >>their GPL engine to other developers. > >What is the point? GPL was a sales disaster. Who in their right mind is >going to want to use that engine on another historical sim? > >Please live in the real world :)

Doesn't N4 also use the GPL engine(or derivative)? That doesn't seem to have a problem selling. It's not the engine. It's the subject matter, and the fact that they TOTALLY missed the boat on advertising/promotion. The number we see a lot is 40,000 copies sold. Does that mean that only 40,000 TOTAL were sold, or 100,000 sold with 60,000 returns because the game was 'too hard'? If it's the latter, then I'll agree with you. If it's the former, then someone dropped the ball on promotion... Eldred -- Dale Earnhardt, Sr. R.I.P. 1951-2001 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett F1 hcp. +28.67...F2 +151.26... Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] (Zonky) writes: >Sadly, it's safe to say that historical sims are probably not going to >happen again. > >(who desperately wanted a early 80's Group C sim). Group C? I'm not familiar with that term. Eldred -- Dale Earnhardt, Sr. R.I.P. 1951-2001 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett F1 hcp. +28.67...F2 +151.26... Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.