Re: Nascar Heat - Doug Arnao's thoughts ..

He's spot on IMO -- Tim, [email hidden]|[email hidden] http://legends.sports-gaming.com/forums.shtml FREE forums for your league... http://legends.sports-gaming.com Sim racing website loosely based on gpl... Ed Bain <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > http://www.delphi.com/nascarheat/messages/?msg=597.2 > > From: DOUG914 10:06 am > To: CHRISTSR unread (2 of 3) > 611.2 in reply to 611.1 prev next > > I've been driving at the Glen for over 20 years. The first time I > ever drove there, they had a chicane in the esses!........showing my > age I guess<g>. Actually I was there just last weekend for 3-days > where I instructed for a local club........did about 3 hours track > time , so the track is very fresh in my mind. MGI's track is missing > some things, but the over all layout is dead on. There is the big wide > curbing exiting turns 1, the fast left, and the last turn onto the > front straight that's missing. Also there's the brake markers going > into turn 1 thats not there (300,200,100). Only other nitpick is the > drive down hill out of turn 1 is not steep enough or ends to soon. The > real track bottoms out just as you turn back right, to go up the > esses. Bus stop chicane is perfect. > > Driving model: I think this shows how convincing a driving experience > can be inside a computer. Don't know what compromises the MGI guys > have done to make it so, but it's something Papy could stand to take > notice of. After working on the GPL beta team, and "discussing" at > length the unnecessary difficulty of driving GPL with Keammer and > Sentell, I thought no other company could ever truly deliver. I was > wrong. I loved GPL, it was revolutionary, it was incredibly accurate - > by the numbers, it was a labor of love for Keammer and the team, it > was a too difficult because the team wouldn't compromise. When you > mastered it, you felt you really had acomplished > something......problem was if you walked away from it for any length > of time, you had to put, IMHO, too much work to return to that form. > This eventually kept me from returning to it. Maybe I'm just getting > too old? <g> > > You see, never in twenty years of driving race cars, and all different > types, have I ever found one "difficult" to drive (unless there's a > real problem). Any reasonably well setup car can be driven to 85-90% of > its capability within a few sessions. This has always been an > underlying, nagging problem for me with sims - you need to switch mind > set to drive the computer with a car inside....... With HEAT, I can > pull out on the track cold, and forget about adapting my thoughts for > driving inside a computer - or "playing" the game - and just > drive_the_car............the first 85% or so no problem - the last ten > not so easy. > > AI is very good , right up there with GPL - a little too much brakes > at the Glen - But still good > > While I care very little about the yellow/damage/save game issue's, I > agree it would be nice to have them working. > > Sorry for rambling, but after being totally bored with racing sims for > over a year, this one took me by surprise :) > > It has a great foundation - well done guys :) > > --Doug Arnao >

That's exactly the way I feel. If you have talent, you should be able to step in to a sim and post reasonably fast times within a few laps. It shouldn't be 49% setup, 49% seat time, and 2% talent. Seat time and setups should get you from reasonably fast to winning races, not from keeping the car going in the right direction to completing a lap. I just wish the guys that put N3 together in such a short time would have had the Viper physics engine to work with rather than the ICR/N1 engine. N3 has all the little details that six years of doing NASCAR sims allows, whereas NH is about as immature of a product as Indianapolis 500: the Simulation. > You see, never in twenty years of driving race cars, and alldifferent > types, have I ever found one "difficult" to drive (unless there's a > real problem). Any reasonably well setup car can be driven to 85-90%of > its capability within a few sessions. This has always been an > underlying, nagging problem for me with sims - you need to switchmind > set to drive the computer with a car inside....... With HEAT, I can > pull out on the track cold, and forget about adapting my thoughtsfor > driving inside a computer - or "playing" the game - and just > drive_the_car............the first 85% or so no problem - the lastten > not so easy.

Hey, a nice look at NH from someone who actually knows what they're talking about. Thanks for the re-post Ed. Bottom line: harder does NOT always equal better and/or more realistic. -- Joe Marques Please remove "NO SPAM" to e-mail me. "Ed Bain" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > http://www.delphi.com/nascarheat/messages/?msg=597.2 > > From: DOUG914 10:06 am > To: CHRISTSR unread (2 of 3) > 611.2 in reply to 611.1 prev next > > I've been driving at the Glen for over 20 years. The first time I > ever drove there, they had a chicane in the esses!........showing my > age I guess<g>. Actually I was there just last weekend for 3-days > where I instructed for a local club........did about 3 hours track > time , so the track is very fresh in my mind. MGI's track is missing > some things, but the over all layout is dead on. There is the big wide > curbing exiting turns 1, the fast left, and the last turn onto the > front straight that's missing. Also there's the brake markers going > into turn 1 thats not there (300,200,100). Only other nitpick is the > drive down hill out of turn 1 is not steep enough or ends to soon. The > real track bottoms out just as you turn back right, to go up the > esses. Bus stop chicane is perfect. > > Driving model: I think this shows how convincing a driving experience > can be inside a computer. Don't know what compromises the MGI guys > have done to make it so, but it's something Papy could stand to take > notice of. After working on the GPL beta team, and "discussing" at > length the unnecessary difficulty of driving GPL with Keammer and > Sentell, I thought no other company could ever truly deliver. I was > wrong. I loved GPL, it was revolutionary, it was incredibly accurate - > by the numbers, it was a labor of love for Keammer and the team, it > was a too difficult because the team wouldn't compromise. When you > mastered it, you felt you really had acomplished > something......problem was if you walked away from it for any length > of time, you had to put, IMHO, too much work to return to that form. > This eventually kept me from returning to it. Maybe I'm just getting > too old? <g> > > You see, never in twenty years of driving race cars, and all different > types, have I ever found one "difficult" to drive (unless there's a > real problem). Any reasonably well setup car can be driven to 85-90% of > its capability within a few sessions. This has always been an > underlying, nagging problem for me with sims - you need to switch mind > set to drive the computer with a car inside....... With HEAT, I can > pull out on the track cold, and forget about adapting my thoughts for > driving inside a computer - or "playing" the game - and just > drive_the_car............the first 85% or so no problem - the last ten > not so easy. > > AI is very good , right up there with GPL - a little too much brakes > at the Glen - But still good > > While I care very little about the yellow/damage/save game issue's, I > agree it would be nice to have them working. > > Sorry for rambling, but after being totally bored with racing sims for > over a year, this one took me by surprise :) > > It has a great foundation - well done guys :) > > --Doug Arnao >

On Sun, 27 Aug 2000 14:35:09 -0500 Ed Bain <[email hidden]> wrote: <huge snipping> % While I care very little about the yellow/damage/save game issue's, I % agree it would be nice to have them working. The first 2 really need addressing (we've heard that they are looking at damage, but any word on yellows?). Otherwise this package is a great marriage of Papy N3 and NSF:PU (fun with some decent feeling physics). There are a few other rough spots (haven't tried multi-player yet, but this seems to be one). On the superspeedways being the lead car in a train doesn't seem to have a benefit. Seems you have to follow cars to get any real drafting benefit. Some have complained about the "ease" of door-to-door rubbing. I wonder if this doesn't have something to do with collision detection in the multi-player portions of the code. Besides, Nx was always weak in this department (too sensitive). Seems that NH has tried to bridge the gap between arcade and hardcore here and have done a fairly good job. -- **************************** Michael E. Carver ************************* Upside out, or inside down...False alarm the only game in town. [email hidden] http://www.teleport.com/~mcarver =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<[ /./. [- < ]>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Good job! In all actuality a race car should easily out handle a consumer car. "Ed Bain" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (12 lines)

> You see, never in twenty years of driving race cars, and all different > types, have I ever found one "difficult" to drive (unless there's a > real problem). Any reasonably well setup car can be driven to 85-90% of > its capability within a few sessions. This has always been an > underlying, nagging problem for me with sims - you need to switch mind > set to drive the computer with a car inside....... With HEAT, I can > pull out on the track cold, and forget about adapting my thoughts for > driving inside a computer - or "playing" the game - and just > drive_the_car............the first 85% or so no problem - the last ten > not so easy. > --Doug Arnao >

well said. "Michael E. Carver" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:rufq5.36473$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (14 lines)

> The first 2 really need addressing (we've heard that they are looking at > damage, but any word on yellows?). Otherwise this package is a great > marriage of Papy N3 and NSF:PU (fun with some decent feeling physics). > > There are a few other rough spots (haven't tried multi-player yet, but > this seems to be one). On the superspeedways being the lead car in a > train doesn't seem to have a benefit. Seems you have to follow cars to > get any real drafting benefit. > > Some have complained about the "ease" of door-to-door rubbing. I wonder > if this doesn't have something to do with collision detection in the > multi-player portions of the code. Besides, Nx was always weak in this > department (too sensitive). Seems that NH has tried to bridge the gap > between arcade and hardcore here and have done a fairly good job.

> > From: DOUG914 10:06 am: > > > > I've been driving at the Glen for over 20 years .... Bus stop chicane is perfect. Say what? Did they rename the Inner Loop? Surely "Bus Stop" is at Spa? The "chicane in the esses" to which Mr. Arnao refers used to be called the "Scheckter Chicane" (I think because Scheckter used to try -- and succeed! -- in making the Esses pretty much a straight line). It was actually put up in the wake of Fran�ois Cevert's death, to slow the cars as they crested the hill leading to the front straight. They put such high curbing in the Scheckter chicane that it became a launching ramp. Among others, I saw George Follmer in one of the early 934s straightline the curb and get at least 4-6 feet in the air (I was in the grandstand opposite the old Kendall Tower, actually higher than Follmer's car, and I could see LOTS of daylight under it), making a perfect all-points landing. Destroyed all four corners of the suspension. In the late 70s, when the Glen was financially flat on its kiester and about to lose the USGP, they actually had a Late-Model Stocker race there -- I think it was called the Genessee (or Genesewer if you're from upstate NY!) 150. All local guys who'd never turned right in their entire racing careers. That chicane had them absolutely goggle-eyed -- it was tricky enough getting through there with an F1 car, so imagine what it was like with something the size of a '77 MonteCarlo (or whatever they were) with gigantic oval-track slicks. When NASCAR bought the track, apparently they deep-sixed the chicane so them Ol' Boys good get through it without coming to a complete stop. I used to enjoy going to practice when the Trans-Am ran on the Saturday of the NASCAR race. My favorite spot was the Inner Loop, 'cause you could really see right there why the "amateur" and underpaid Trans-Am guys were absolutely waxing the lap times of the big-buck Winston Cup stars. But I digress... BB

In article <[email hidden]>, daxe <[email hidden]> writes: ><pedant> >habit ></pedant> > >That habit is rampant (the 'of' thing) by the way. Right up there >with folks who can't tell the difference between lose and loose. The 'lose' and 'loose' could be a typo, unless it's done multiple times. I did it myself(once) theother day. Eldred -- Tiger Stadium R.I.P. 1912-1999 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett GPL hcp. +50.77 Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

They had satellite photos of the tracks, so the turns are at the correct spot (I assume) but the elevation had to come from some other medium. This is probably why the elevations are not within 1/4". Jason. Terry Connors wrote:

Quoted text (14 lines)

> > MGI's track is missing some things, but the over all layout > > is dead on. There is the big wide curbing exiting turns 1, > > the fast left, and the last turn onto the front straight that's > > missing. Also there's the brake markers going into turn 1 > > thats not there (300,200,100). Only other nitpick is the > > drive down hill out of turn 1 is not steep enough or ends > > to soon. > > Quick question, MGI reps have stated on numerous occasions that the tracks > are modeled to "a quarter of an inch"! If so, how can they be missing whole > turns, brake markers, the steepness of a whole turn, etc? Wouldn't this guy > actually be contradicting what MGI has been saying all along? If the Glen > is missing this much, who's to say what other tracks are "missing" some > things here and there?

-- Jason Monds http://www.proracingclub.com - Pro Racing Club! (N3, GPL, Fun Run Sims) http://www.racersdomain.com - Race hosting. (Please remove 'no extra spork' when replying)

He's calling the turns what they used to be called.... is it so difficult to read someone's post without doing this and giving a reply like that? -- Tim, [email hidden]|[email hidden] http://legends.sports-gaming.com/forums.shtml FREE forums for your league... http://legends.sports-gaming.com Sim racing website loosely based on gpl... Barton Brown <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > > From: DOUG914 10:06 am: > > > > > > I've been driving at the Glen for over 20 years .... Bus stop chicane is perfect. > > Say what? Did they rename the Inner Loop? Surely "Bus Stop" is at Spa? > > The "chicane in the esses" to which Mr. Arnao refers used to be called > the "Scheckter Chicane" (I think because Scheckter used to try -- and > succeed! -- in making the Esses pretty much a straight line). It was > actually put up in the wake of Fran�ois Cevert's death, to slow the cars > as they crested the hill leading to the front straight. They put such > high curbing in the Scheckter chicane that it became a launching ramp. > Among others, I saw George Follmer in one of the early 934s straightline > the curb and get at least 4-6 feet in the air (I was in the grandstand > opposite the old Kendall Tower, actually higher than Follmer's car, and > I could see LOTS of daylight under it), making a perfect all-points > landing. Destroyed all four corners of the suspension. > > In the late 70s, when the Glen was financially flat on its kiester and > about to lose the USGP, they actually had a Late-Model Stocker race > there -- I think it was called the Genessee (or Genesewer if you're from > upstate NY!) 150. All local guys who'd never turned right in their > entire racing careers. That chicane had them absolutely goggle-eyed -- > it was tricky enough getting through there with an F1 car, so imagine > what it was like with something the size of a '77 MonteCarlo (or > whatever they were) with gigantic oval-track slicks. When NASCAR bought > the track, apparently they deep-sixed the chicane so them Ol' Boys good > get through it without coming to a complete stop. I used to enjoy going > to practice when the Trans-Am ran on the Saturday of the NASCAR race. My > favorite spot was the Inner Loop, 'cause you could really see right > there why the "amateur" and underpaid Trans-Am guys were absolutely > waxing the lap times of the big-buck Winston Cup stars. > > But I digress... > > BB

Yeah LOL I know damn well that when I touched an N3 car in a turn with my front I'd leap sideways and spin 180.... in NH if I do the same thing I just dent my front and the other cars side..... so realistic? Yes. :-) -- Tim, [email hidden]|[email hidden] http://legends.sports-gaming.com/forums.shtml FREE forums for your league... http://legends.sports-gaming.com Sim racing website loosely based on gpl... DoubleU <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:RXfq5.1558$[email hidden]... > well said. > > "Michael E. Carver" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:rufq5.36473$[email hidden]... > > The first 2 really need addressing (we've heard that they are looking at > > damage, but any word on yellows?). Otherwise this package is a great > > marriage of Papy N3 and NSF:PU (fun with some decent feeling physics). > > > > There are a few other rough spots (haven't tried multi-player yet, but > > this seems to be one). On the superspeedways being the lead car in a > > train doesn't seem to have a benefit. Seems you have to follow cars to > > get any real drafting benefit. > > > > Some have complained about the "ease" of door-to-door rubbing. I wonder > > if this doesn't have something to do with collision detection in the > > multi-player portions of the code. Besides, Nx was always weak in this > > department (too sensitive). Seems that NH has tried to bridge the gap > > between arcade and hardcore here and have done a fairly good job. > > >

Well said, Doug. I knew I wasn't in crazy in thinking NHeat was far superior in driving model over N3. Thanks, Aaron Markham *Kart44* --------------------------------------- Inaugural Talladega Tournament 2000 Champion #54 FSSRL Online Series www.fssrl.com #41 RTOS Online Series http://208.245.164.150/Racing-Thunder/index.shtml Weekly Competitor at www.ameliamotorraceway.com "Tim Wheatley" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:8obrnu$79q$[email hidden]... > He's spot on IMO > > -- > Tim, > [email hidden]|[email hidden] > http://legends.sports-gaming.com/forums.shtml FREE forums for yourleague... > http://legends.sports-gaming.com Sim racing website loosely based ongpl...

Quoted text (63 lines)

> Ed Bain <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > > > http://www.delphi.com/nascarheat/messages/?msg=597.2 > > > > From: DOUG914 10:06 am > > To: CHRISTSR unread (2 of 3) > > 611.2 in reply to 611.1 prev next > > > > I've been driving at the Glen for over 20 years. The first time I > > ever drove there, they had a chicane in the esses!........showing my > > age I guess<g>. Actually I was there just last weekend for 3-days > > where I instructed for a local club........did about 3 hours track > > time , so the track is very fresh in my mind. MGI's track is missing > > some things, but the over all layout is dead on. There is the big wide > > curbing exiting turns 1, the fast left, and the last turn onto the > > front straight that's missing. Also there's the brake markers going > > into turn 1 thats not there (300,200,100). Only other nitpick is the > > drive down hill out of turn 1 is not steep enough or ends to soon. The > > real track bottoms out just as you turn back right, to go up the > > esses. Bus stop chicane is perfect. > > > > Driving model: I think this shows how convincing a driving experience > > can be inside a computer. Don't know what compromises the MGI guys > > have done to make it so, but it's something Papy could stand to take > > notice of. After working on the GPL beta team, and "discussing" at > > length the unnecessary difficulty of driving GPL with Keammer and > > Sentell, I thought no other company could ever truly deliver. I was > > wrong. I loved GPL, it was revolutionary, it was incredibly accurate - > > by the numbers, it was a labor of love for Keammer and the team, it > > was a too difficult because the team wouldn't compromise. When you > > mastered it, you felt you really had acomplished > > something......problem was if you walked away from it for any length > > of time, you had to put, IMHO, too much work to return to that form. > > This eventually kept me from returning to it. Maybe I'm just getting > > too old? <g> > > > > You see, never in twenty years of driving race cars, and all different > > types, have I ever found one "difficult" to drive (unless there's a > > real problem). Any reasonably well setup car can be driven to 85-90% of > > its capability within a few sessions. This has always been an > > underlying, nagging problem for me with sims - you need to switch mind > > set to drive the computer with a car inside....... With HEAT, I can > > pull out on the track cold, and forget about adapting my thoughts for > > driving inside a computer - or "playing" the game - and just > > drive_the_car............the first 85% or so no problem - the last ten > > not so easy. > > > > AI is very good , right up there with GPL - a little too much brakes > > at the Glen - But still good > > > > While I care very little about the yellow/damage/save game issue's, I > > agree it would be nice to have them working. > > > > Sorry for rambling, but after being totally bored with racing sims for > > over a year, this one took me by surprise :) > > > > It has a great foundation - well done guys :) > > > > --Doug Arnao > > > >

Quoted text (7 lines)

> MGI's track is missing some things, but the over all layout > is dead on. There is the big wide curbing exiting turns 1, > the fast left, and the last turn onto the front straight that's > missing. Also there's the brake markers going into turn 1 > thats not there (300,200,100). Only other nitpick is the > drive down hill out of turn 1 is not steep enough or ends > to soon.

Quick question, MGI reps have stated on numerous occasions that the tracks are modeled to "a quarter of an inch"! If so, how can they be missing whole turns, brake markers, the steepness of a whole turn, etc? Wouldn't this guy actually be contradicting what MGI has been saying all along? If the Glen is missing this much, who's to say what other tracks are "missing" some things here and there?

They should of listened to Doug. David G Fisher "Ed Bain" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (59 lines)

> > http://www.delphi.com/nascarheat/messages/?msg=597.2 > > From: DOUG914 10:06 am > To: CHRISTSR unread (2 of 3) > 611.2 in reply to 611.1 prev next > > I've been driving at the Glen for over 20 years. The first time I > ever drove there, they had a chicane in the esses!........showing my > age I guess<g>. Actually I was there just last weekend for 3-days > where I instructed for a local club........did about 3 hours track > time , so the track is very fresh in my mind. MGI's track is missing > some things, but the over all layout is dead on. There is the big wide > curbing exiting turns 1, the fast left, and the last turn onto the > front straight that's missing. Also there's the brake markers going > into turn 1 thats not there (300,200,100). Only other nitpick is the > drive down hill out of turn 1 is not steep enough or ends to soon. The > real track bottoms out just as you turn back right, to go up the > esses. Bus stop chicane is perfect. > > Driving model: I think this shows how convincing a driving experience > can be inside a computer. Don't know what compromises the MGI guys > have done to make it so, but it's something Papy could stand to take > notice of. After working on the GPL beta team, and "discussing" at > length the unnecessary difficulty of driving GPL with Keammer and > Sentell, I thought no other company could ever truly deliver. I was > wrong. I loved GPL, it was revolutionary, it was incredibly accurate - > by the numbers, it was a labor of love for Keammer and the team, it > was a too difficult because the team wouldn't compromise. When you > mastered it, you felt you really had acomplished > something......problem was if you walked away from it for any length > of time, you had to put, IMHO, too much work to return to that form. > This eventually kept me from returning to it. Maybe I'm just getting > too old? <g> > > You see, never in twenty years of driving race cars, and all different > types, have I ever found one "difficult" to drive (unless there's a > real problem). Any reasonably well setup car can be driven to 85-90% of > its capability within a few sessions. This has always been an > underlying, nagging problem for me with sims - you need to switch mind > set to drive the computer with a car inside....... With HEAT, I can > pull out on the track cold, and forget about adapting my thoughts for > driving inside a computer - or "playing" the game - and just > drive_the_car............the first 85% or so no problem - the last ten > not so easy. > > AI is very good , right up there with GPL - a little too much brakes > at the Glen - But still good > > While I care very little about the yellow/damage/save game issue's, I > agree it would be nice to have them working. > > Sorry for rambling, but after being totally bored with racing sims for > over a year, this one took me by surprise :) > > It has a great foundation - well done guys :) > > --Doug Arnao >

Terry Connors wrote:

Quoted text (14 lines)

> > MGI's track is missing some things, but the over all layout > > is dead on. There is the big wide curbing exiting turns 1, > > the fast left, and the last turn onto the front straight that's > > missing. Also there's the brake markers going into turn 1 > > thats not there (300,200,100). Only other nitpick is the > > drive down hill out of turn 1 is not steep enough or ends > > to soon. > > Quick question, MGI reps have stated on numerous occasions that the tracks > are modeled to "a quarter of an inch"! If so, how can they be missing whole > turns, brake markers, the steepness of a whole turn, etc? Wouldn't this guy > actually be contradicting what MGI has been saying all along? If the Glen > is missing this much, who's to say what other tracks are "missing" some > things here and there?

Sorry, i meant it was only missing the *curbing* in those turns.............like I said, I was rambling after doing a 30% hardcore race and being totally convinced I was really there :) The down hill steepness issue after turn one is only my opinion........ --Doug

I would think certain features like Brake markers are variable. Does the Winston Cup circuit use the same off track markers as SCCA etc? or do they provide thier own. Does a Racing School have different markers set-up for the benefit of the students? If so...when MGI modeled the track, the trackside markers "may" have benn different than what Doug witnessed. This is 100 % speculation tho on my part. dave henrie "Terry Connors" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:Qcjq5.59515$[email hidden]... > > Quick question, MGI reps have stated on numerous occasions that the tracks > are modeled to "a quarter of an inch"! If so, how can they be missingwhole > turns, brake markers, the steepness of a whole turn, etc? Wouldn't thisguy

Quoted text (7 lines)

> actually be contradicting what MGI has been saying all along? If the Glen > is missing this much, who's to say what other tracks are "missing" some > things here and there? > > > >

Doug, It's really interesting to hear your comments on NH and I only wish that Papyrus had listened to your plea for a comprimise on GPL. I think comments from people like yourself, who have real racing experience and in depth knowlege of vehicle dynamics is something that is sorely lacking in r.a.s., hope to see more of you here from time to time. TJSB

[email hidden] (David G Fisher) wrote: > They should of listened to Doug. <pedant> should *have* </pedant> You're not from Nottingham originally are you David? Had a mate at University who had exactly the same annoying habbit :-) You're right though... Doug's suggestion of a "lo-fi" mode would have helped GPL's sales a lot. I think everyone knows that by now though <g>. Andrew McP

On Mon, 28 Aug 2000 05:36 +0100 (BST), [email hidden] (Andrew MacPherson) wrote:

Quoted text (10 lines)

>[email hidden] (David G Fisher) wrote: > >> They should of listened to Doug. > ><pedant> >should *have* ></pedant> > >You're not from Nottingham originally are you David? Had a mate at University who had exactly >the same annoying habbit :-)

<pedant> habit </pedant> That habit is rampant (the 'of' thing) by the way. Right up there with folks who can't tell the difference between lose and loose. ~daxe

> <pedant> > habit > </pedant> ROFL. Hoist by my own petard. <fx: slinks away looking embarrassed>

Doug, long time since beta days and racing in the Mid West Hawaii league! Wondered where you had got to! Nice post by the way! Pete "Doug Arnao" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:4Kjq5.5177$[email hidden]... > > Quick question, MGI reps have stated on numerous occasions that thetracks > > are modeled to "a quarter of an inch"! If so, how can they be missingwhole > > turns, brake markers, the steepness of a whole turn, etc? Wouldn't thisguy > > actually be contradicting what MGI has been saying all along? If theGlen > > is missing this much, who's to say what other tracks are "missing" some > > things here and there? > > Sorry, i meant it was only missing the *curbing* in thoseturns.............like

Quoted text (7 lines)

> I said, I was rambling after doing a 30% hardcore race and being totally > convinced I was really there :) > > The down hill steepness issue after turn one is only my opinion........ > > --Doug >

Yes. I am not originally from Nottingham. :-) David G Fisher "Andrew MacPherson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (9 lines)

> [email hidden] (David G Fisher) wrote: > > > They should of listened to Doug. > > <pedant> > should *have* > </pedant> > > You're not from Nottingham originally are you David? Had a mate at

University who had exactly > the same annoying habbit :-) > > You're right though... Doug's suggestion of a "lo-fi" mode would havehelped GPL's sales a lot. I > think everyone knows that by now though <g>. > > Andrew McP

[email hidden] (David G Fisher) wrote: > Yes. I am not originally from Nottingham. :-) Heh. Good answer. Andrew McP

[email hidden] (Ed Bain) wrote: > He is talking about how a hi-fidelity racing sim should drive. I see what you mean. I believe GPL's problem is that it has all the authenticity but with no significant concessions to the lack of physical feedback -- which I think we'll agree is what gives any driver the ability to feel the limits of any car they're not used to. To imitate the RW experience Doug refers to, PC racers have to be -- for want of a better phrase -- protected. So when I say lo-fi I don't mean it in a derogatory sense, but it boils down to cushioning the experience to the user to the point where a playability balance mimicking RW experiences is reached. I think what I'm saying that if, in its raw state, a simulation is harder than real life it's probably got the simulation core right. What the developer adds on top of that core to compensate for the lack of feedback is about accessibility, and there's no doubt optional layers of help should be there for those who don't have the time/inclination to face the consequences of an in-your-face simulation of real world physics without real world feedback. But that core must be there in the first place... as I believe it is in NH, which is why the demo's put it into second place on my sim list way above the nearest competitor. I wish Doug had been listened to for a variety of reasons. But looking back on the last 2.5 years, would I have had GPL any other way? Hell no! But then I would say that wouldn't I <g>. As I said after yet another thrilling race last week, if only we could bottle the VROC experience at its best we'd be almost as wealthy as someone selling next week's lottery results. As I've said before, all the things I've done in life that have been really rewarding have required significant effort. GPL fits that model precisely... though maybe I've just been doing life the hard way so far <g>. Andrew McP

On Mon, 28 Aug 2000 02:21:10 -0500, Ed Bain <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (20 lines)

>On Mon, 28 Aug 2000 05:36 +0100 (BST), [email hidden] (Andrew MacPherson) wrote: > >>Doug's suggestion of a "lo-fi" mode would have helped GPL's sales a lot. I >>think everyone knows that by now though <g>. > >Andrew, I'm not sure that's the point Doug was making. > >He said, when discussing GPL: > > "You see, never in twenty years of driving race cars, and all different > types, have I ever found one "difficult" to drive (unless there's a > real problem). Any reasonably well setup car can be driven to 85-90% of > its capability within a few sessions. This has always been an > underlying, nagging problem for me with sims - you need to switch mind > set to drive the computer with a car inside......." > >It sounds to me as if he is saying that GPL should NOT be that >hard to drive based on his real-life racing experience. >I don't think he is talking about a 'lo-fi mode' at all. >He is talking about how a hi-fidelity racing sim should drive.

The question here is if Doug ever drove something near a '67 F1 car... (yes David, Jackie Steward once said that bla bla bla) Andre

Normally I'd hate to post an "I agree" post but Andrew MacPherson has put it so nicely that I feel it necessary to applaud. The experience of GPL, coupled with the necessary VROC, is greater than the sum of its technical points. Other sims do many things well and I more or less enjoy them all but GPL is the one I keep coming back to. That said I do hope that one day I find one that outdoes it. NH's demo definitly has several elements of what I look for in a sim and I will certainly buy when it becomes available here. Just hope it doesn't pander to me too much . "hardcore" (who picks these names anyway :) ) here I come. David "Andrew MacPherson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > I see what you mean. I believe GPL's problem is that it has all theauthenticity but with no > significant concessions to the lack of physical feedback -- which I thinkwe'll agree is what gives > any driver the ability to feel the limits of any car they're not used to.To imitate the RW > experience Doug refers to, PC racers have to be -- for want of a betterphrase -- protected. So > when I say lo-fi I don't mean it in a derogatory sense, but it boils downto cushioning the > experience to the user to the point where a playability balance mimickingRW experiences is > reached. > > I think what I'm saying that if, in its raw state, a simulation is harderthan real life it's probably got > the simulation core right. What the developer adds on top of that core tocompensate for the lack > of feedback is about accessibility, and there's no doubt optional layersof help should be there for > those who don't have the time/inclination to face the consequences of anin-your-face simulation of > real world physics without real world feedback. But that core must bethere in the first place... as I > believe it is in NH, which is why the demo's put it into second place onmy sim list way above the > nearest competitor. > > I wish Doug had been listened to for a variety of reasons. But lookingback on the last 2.5 years, > would I have had GPL any other way? Hell no! But then I would say thatwouldn't I <g>. As I said > after yet another thrilling race last week, if only we could bottle theVROC experience at its best > we'd be almost as wealthy as someone selling next week's lottery results. > > As I've said before, all the things I've done in life that have beenreally rewarding have required > significant effort. GPL fits that model precisely... though maybe I'vejust been doing life the hard > way so far <g>. > > Andrew McP

Pete wrote: > Doug, long time since beta days and racing in the Mid West > Hawaii league! Wondered where you had got to! Nice post by > the way! > Mister Reston :) How are you old man! <g>. I should talk , eh? God, we had some great races back then ....... --Doug

If you really want to reflect real world experience, why not simulate injuries, and the high expense of vehicle repairs and having and getting bitched at by your team owner for snagging your rear wheels on a downshift etc.? I don't see the reasoning behind making things artificially difficult, it certainly didn't help Papyrus financially in the long run. Nor does it make for better racing, online or off. What about WSC? From what I've read they don't feel that harder=realistic either. Does that mean that since the cars will be "easier" to drive that there will be no challenge?? I dont need "protection" from my sims thanks. TJSB

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > experience Doug refers to, PC racers have to be -- for want of a better > phrase -- protected. So > > when I say lo-fi I don't mean it in a derogatory sense, but it boils down > to cushioning the > > experience to the user to the point where a playability balance mimicking > RW experiences is > > reached.

Thats a big me too to your sentiments....though a private little person inside wishes that more concessions would have been made and then perhaps it would have sold better and we would all be awaiting GPL 1971....<VBG> PAPA DOC >As I've said before, all the things I've done in life that have been really rewarding have required >significant effort. GPL fits that model precisely... though maybe I've just been doing life the hard >way so far <g>. > >Andrew McP Pierre PAPA DOC Legrand Voodoo 5 vs Geforce Shootout http://www.papadoc.net/Voodoo_vs_Geforce2.htm Flanker Target Grand Prix Legends Crash Test Dummy Aim-120 Propellent Addict Infamous Pink Flamingo Pilot...<VBG> Rants, Bullshit and Help Guides availible at www.papadoc.net

Thomas JS Brown wrote: > > I don't see the reasoning behind making things artificially difficult, Ah, but Doug didn't say that is was artificially difficult. He said "it was incredibly accurate - by the numbers", and that they wouldn't compromise. The compromises needed to deliver the "returnability" (for lack of a better word), would be a compromise on accuracy, but a compromise that might be closer to the real experience. The purpose of the compromise would be to allow for the difficulty of adapting to the feedback given by sims. To be clear, I think GPL provides plenty of feedback to be driven well without compromise, but the feedback is nothing close to the real world. As others said, mastery of GPL is too rewarding for me to heartily support compromise! :) -- Pat Dotson

Pat You are of course quite right. No racing sim can give you the real feedback; a substantial amount is coming through your body. The other sensation you don't get is the fear!! Hugh Pat Dotson <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (23 lines)

> Thomas JS Brown wrote: > > > > I don't see the reasoning behind making things artificially difficult, > > Ah, but Doug didn't say that is was artificially difficult. He > said "it was incredibly accurate - by the numbers", and that > they wouldn't compromise. > > The compromises needed to deliver the "returnability" (for > lack of a better word), would be a compromise on accuracy, > but a compromise that might be closer to the real experience. > The purpose of the compromise would be to allow for the > difficulty of adapting to the feedback given by sims. > > To be clear, I think GPL provides plenty of feedback to > be driven well without compromise, but the feedback is > nothing close to the real world. > > As others said, mastery of GPL is too rewarding for me to > heartily support compromise! :) > > -- > Pat Dotson