Re: "Heat" Evaluation - SearsGroup Test Drivers

Adam <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:K2lo5.51388$[email hidden]... > > 6) The "rolling starts"........without a true, full pace lap,green

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > flag start....its very arcade-like and tends to "disengage" you from the > > race. > > 7) The lack of "player" control at race end....no "victory lap" > > capability....especially with being "ripped off the track" just as you > cross > > the S/F line at race end. > > These two things are NOT acceptable. PERIOD. A sim means you have

control > of your car at all junctions of the race....this means from the time the > pace lap starts until after the checkered when you drive back to yourpits. > Rolling starts just SCREAMS arcade racing and is not realistic at all. So > much can be gained or lost by how good of a start you get, and being ableto > get a good/bad jump on the green flag and on the rest of the field. Fine- don't buy it, then. We know how you feel. I would like to ask a question, though- how do you plan to get a "jump on the field" if it's not legal to pass on the left before the S/F line? There's rarely room enough up by the wall to get anything accomplished. I'd like to see the option to drive a pace lap, too(Heck, I'd much rather see standing starts like a real racing series should use[hint to CART implied]<g>), but it isn't that big a deal. The rest of Heat is good enough, for an oval- biased sim, to more than make up for those few shortcomings. people, by being so hardheaded about these things, you're missing some of the best experiences your PC has to offer. Lighten up a little. -- Scott Moore The Sports Gaming Network http://www.sports-gaming.com "Where are we going, and why are we in a handbasket?" > Ed has > CONFIRMED that this can not be turned off in the full version because things > are still 'loading' during the rolling start.....then give me the option to > add 20 seconds to the loading time so I can play a racing simulation Ed! A > rolling start reminds me of EASports efforts in the Nascar genre, and of > several arcade racing games I've played (Ultimate Race Pro rings a bell). > Those two listed items may affect my decision to purchase the game > unfortunately. > > For example.....go over to the flight sim newsgroup and tell them your > making this sweet Flight Sim that automatically takes off and lands for you, > but gives you control of the plane in mid-air! They will laugh you all the > way to Albuquerque. Totally unacceptable. > >

Scott With Adam's that attitude you would think HASBRO was suppose to make a commercial product instead of a consumer product. -- Scott B. Husted PA-Scott ICQ# 4395450 "Scott Moore" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > > Adam <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:K2lo5.51388$[email hidden]... > > > 6) The "rolling starts"........without a true, full pace lap, > green > > > flag start....its very arcade-like and tends to "disengage" you from the > > > race. > > > 7) The lack of "player" control at race end....no "victory lap" > > > capability....especially with being "ripped off the track" just as you > > cross > > > the S/F line at race end. > > > > These two things are NOT acceptable. PERIOD. A sim means you have > control > > of your car at all junctions of the race....this means from the time the > > pace lap starts until after the checkered when you drive back to your > pits. > > Rolling starts just SCREAMS arcade racing and is not realistic at all. So > > much can be gained or lost by how good of a start you get, and being able > to > > get a good/bad jump on the green flag and on the rest of the field. > > Fine- don't buy it, then. We know how you feel. I would like to ask a > question, though- how do you plan to get a "jump on the field" if it's not > legal to pass on the left before the S/F line? There's rarely room enough up > by the wall to get anything accomplished. > I'd like to see the option to drive a pace lap, too(Heck, I'd much rather > see standing starts like a real racing series should use[hint to CART > implied]<g>), but it isn't that big a deal. The rest of Heat is good enough, > for an oval- biased sim, to more than make up for those few shortcomings. > people, by being so hardheaded about these things, you're missing some of > the best experiences your PC has to offer. Lighten up a little. > -- > Scott Moore > The Sports Gaming Network > http://www.sports-gaming.com > > "Where are we going, and why are we in a handbasket?" > > > > Ed has > > CONFIRMED that this can not be turned off in the full version because > things > > are still 'loading' during the rolling start.....then give me the option > to > > add 20 seconds to the loading time so I can play a racing simulation Ed! > A > > rolling start reminds me of EASports efforts in the Nascar genre, and of > > several arcade racing games I've played (Ultimate Race Pro rings a bell). > > Those two listed items may affect my decision to purchase the game > > unfortunately. > > > > For example.....go over to the flight sim newsgroup and tell them your > > making this sweet Flight Sim that automatically takes off and lands for > you, > > but gives you control of the plane in mid-air! They will laugh you all > the > > way to Albuquerque. Totally unacceptable. > > > > > >

In article <Rygo5.122335$[email hidden]>, "Tom Pabst" <[email hidden]> wrote: > I have read with great interest all the varied opinions about whetherNASCAR > Heat<big snip> I just wanted to thank you Tom, for the information/opinion in your post. I'm glad you took the time. mr Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

I have read with great interest all the varied opinions about whether NASCAR Heat is a true sim, or an "arcade game".......with just about all degrees of variance in between. I don't think any one of us is a fully qualified "authority" on racing simulation "games"....so that our individual "judgment" of any racing sim is "the ultimate authoritative" verdict. But, that shouldn't matter! What does matter is that we each have our "beliefs".....about what makes a good racing simulation and what does not. We have things we like...things we don't care about....and things we don't like. Our opinions fall into these general categories and we have them for probably every racing sim we've ever installed on computers. I have my own set of "opinions" about GPL, NASCAR 2-3-4?, Viper Racing, SCGT, GP3.........and yes, about NASCAR Heat too. But, I don't think most of you are any more interested in "what I think" about NASCAR Heat......than any other person who makes reasonable "observations" about what they like about NH...or what they don't like about it. I would also like to point out, NH as we know it today.....is only a "demo" of the full product....... set to be released tomorrow. Now, of course we have the NH beta testers (some of whom are making "posts" here) who do know the full scope of the NH simulation. But by nature, beta testers are biased in favor of any "game" they beta test. I'm sure that's not a "revelation" to any of you. So the beta testers will probably have their "opinions" substantially discounted by the rest of us. At SearsGroup, we have our own set of criteria that we use to judge a racing simulation.....as to its viability to become software that we can use within our "Bulldozer" work. Since we haven't written our own racing simulation program (and we never will).........we are subject to the quality of the "retail racing sims" on the market.....and their ability to be "hacked" to the point of creating the purest form of simulation possible (which is what we need). When we have to sit a "Jeff Gordon" down in one of our simulators.....and ask him to race his buddy "Steve Park" over there in the sim next to him.....and tell him to race hard because we want some feedback about this new track configuration (change) we are thinking of building........well, we can't be worried about our race simulator "software" embarrassing us! So, we look at a new sim coming to market with some simple yard sticks: 1) How close is the "box" version to being the pure form of racing simulation we need? 2) How much is it possible to "hack" the box version to get it to our "pure sim" standards? 3) How willing is the developer to assist us...or the sim community in general, in making these modifications (hacks)? Another way to put this is, "Does the developer just want to sell 'games' or are they interested in longevity and creating a kind of 'cottage industry' within the racing sim community, where their "box" sales are stimulated over an extended period of time, because the "add-ons" available within the racing sim community....don't work without the original "box game." 4) What sim(s) are we using for Bulldozer now.....and how do they compare to "the new kid on the block?" For us, this process begins the first time there's an announcement made about a new racing simulation going into production. It then goes "on our radar screens." For NASCAR Heat, that was about 9 months ago (I believe......I could be off on that because I may be confused about when I first heard of NASCAR Heat.........as opposed to when I first saw a "public" announcement about it?). We went to E-3 so we could take a look at "Heat"...along with N-4 and GP-3 of course. And now, we have the "demo." As part of this process (and I would like to emphasis..."part of the process"...this means its ongoing and isn't conclusive just because we've had the NH demo for a few days)...I asked our "test drivers" to give me their opinions about the NH demo. I asked them to just...... "tell me what you like, and what you don't like" about Heat. Don't tell me what you think is wrong with it.....because we're not the game developer.....and "right or wrong" isn't important (at least not in this context it isn't). I asked the same question of all the people working in and around SearsGroup/Bulldozer....most of whom are sim racers...as well as real-world racers. There's a substantial number of Jim Russell School race instructors included in this group.....and their "likes/dislikes" are included below as well. It seemed to me this morning that it might be appropriate to share this "consensus" of likes and dislikes (mine are included too) with all of you. Especially on the "eve" of the NH full program release. Over the next few days, judgments will be made by all of us as to which things are better in the full program......and which things are not! Here's the list....... We'll start with "The Likes" NASCAR Heat Demo.......what we like about it: 1) The track surface graphics, coloring and textures. 2) The TSO's (trackside objects) graphics-detail. 3) The AI car graphics-detail. 4) The "car physics" model (**with some reservations). 5) The AI driver programming, especially the increased "aggressive driving" in the closing laps. 6) The UI screens, particularly the ease of navigation. 7) The race car "setup" modeling.....and UI screen interface with it. 8) The animated pit crew. 9) The "trueness" of the track geometry to the "real-world" race track it depicts (for the demo tracks only of course). 10) The infield grass/surface....texture and coloring. 11) Armco, walls and catch-fencing detail and rendering when at race speeds. 12) The "arcade functions" of Beat the Heat...and the other "challenges"...they are just plain fun!. 13) The sky and horizon texturing.....very realistic. **Note: The fact that the demo didn't include a road course, made it somewhat difficult to fully ascertain the quality of the car physics modeling. Also, leading to some confusion, was a valid confirmation that the config.cfg file wasn't being overwritten by the game engine...thus turning off the full physics model....even though the proper settings were made in it. There was enough of a general feeling that the car physics were too "tame" for something trying to be "GPL-like in a 3500 pound Winston Cup race car" to be fully evaluated....especially without the opportunity to drive on a road course. NASCAR Heat Demo.....what we do not like about it: 1) The sound....all of it. Including the spotter, engine, FX, crash, tire squeal, etc. It seems some of the "sound fields" have been mistakenly reversed (especially the engine sounds) and many of the "fx sounds are either not realistic...or outright irritating. The spotter sound/voice is not acceptable....we would turn this off at the first chance to hack it. The engines sound like they would if they were from outside the race car......maybe to a fan sitting in the stands or something???......not anything like the "presence" they have from inside a WC car cockpit. We are hoping Hasbro will open the "race.bin" code for the sounds, so the several excellent "sound hacks" in the sim community can fix this with patches.....quickly! We understand that MGI did not do any of the sound work for NH.....it was farmed out by Hasbro. Who ever they hired.....I'd fire them, or at least consider stopping payment on my check to them! At least they are not as bad as DTR....thank God! 2) The cockpit, specifically the graphics (lack of texture to the surfaces...and the arcade-like bright coloring which looks & feels nothing like a real-world WC car cockpit). 3) The "floating" rear view mirror! 4) The driver's FOV (too far back....almost a "fish-eye" looking view out the windshield) and the rear view mirror FOV (it has cruise ship engulfing, huge blind spots). 5) The "movement" of the cockpit. Its not realistic (moves in and out...not up and down)...and after a short time....the "movement" is irritating, distracting and tedious. This must have been somebody's cute idea for realism. Clearly the person has never been strapped into the seat of race car with a five-point harness and race seat! Guys...when you step on the brakes of a race car....the nose drops...and it stays down until you release from threshold braking! When you step on the gas....the nose rises slightly (or the rear hunches down...depending on your orientation)...and it stays that way until you release the throttle from threshold throttle. You might get a little bit of this forward and back movement in an open wheel race car (because of the geometry movement of the outboard suspension rolling up and down on itself)....but not in a sedan, GT type, closed-wheel race car. What were you thinking? It's hard to believe that feature was implemented when Labonte was driving the (sim) car. He gave us some "lip service" about our cockpit....and ours is light years better than the one in NH. 6) The "rolling starts"........without a true, full pace lap, green flag start....its very arcade-like and tends to "disengage" you from the race. 7) The lack of "player" control at race end....no "victory lap" capability....especially with being "ripped off the track" just as you cross the S/F line at race end. 8) The lack of driver control of the entire pit stop.....not acceptable as is. We really hope this can be turned off. 9) AI car programming on the transition roads (they run into you as if they don't see you). 10) The canned response of the car to impacting the wall....not variable with impact speed. 11) The positioning of the "race info" data screens within the cockpit...can't see them without taking your eyes substantially off the race line.......same problem as you had with Viper Racing! 12) The "spotter information" ....its either very redundant...or useless. 13) Although "multiplayer" was not in the demo......word that it will support only 8 drivers online is not good. We hope this can change with "hacks" and better "broad-band" multiplayer patch support. 14) The UI screen "button" sound FX. It is irritating, can't turn it off....and dangerous to speaker cones and human ear drums if the sound volume is turned up (which it would likely be just after exiting from a race). If you use headphones.....extreme caution is required to prevent some ear damage we think. 15) The static shadows and lighting in night races. This is the modern era of dynamic lighting effects, monster RAM video cards and cpu's measured with a new word........."GIGS!". If you guys couldn't implement this because of cpu or pixel budgets....you should have not done night races. You are going to get killed by Papyrus in this department at least. Ok...that's how we see the NH demo as a whole at SearsGroup. I don't know how this matches up with everyone's "lists"....nor do I even think this is some kind of a consensus....I doubt that very much (especially since I've seen very little posts here about the sound....and we think that "tops the list" of the worst features in NH)! I do want to say that I think "NASCAR Heat" is a monumental effort by Rich Garcia...and all the guys at MGI and the marketing team at Hasbro. They should be congratulated for their work, their innovative thinking....and the ability to implement ground braking features in a racing simulation. I always thought Viper Racing was an excellent racing simulation.....ahead of its time much like GPL was ahead of its time..... (funny.......they were both released on the same day.....by the same publisher, Sierra). NASCAR Heat shows just how good Viper Racing really is (not "was"...I still have it on my computer.....still race it online weekly almost)......and how good the guys who created Viper Racing......and now NASCAR Heat....really are! I think NH will be a retail/financial success.....no question about it. I do not think NH will become the "ultimate sim".....displacing GPL from that exalted status. No way....not in its present form that is. I think if Hasbro is forward thinking enough, and they decide to open the doors to the NH "bin" files structure and code.......encouraging and helping the sim racing community "hackers" who, as a group.....are probably the best racing sim graphic artists and programmers in the world.....fix some of this stuff.....then NH has a good chance of taking the throne maybe beside GPL? But it will never knock it off........at least that's my thinking today. I can always change my mind though....lol. Is there a "David Noonan" of NASCAR sims? We could sure use one! Regards, Tom Pabst SearsGroup PS: My after thoughts: Why has Papy "taken their toys and gone home?" Is it the stiff competition from NH? Maybe. Is it the natural side affects of major-league talent (like Charlie Heath) leaving Papyrus? Maybe. Is the "new blood" at Papyrus not up to the task of producing racing simulations of major innovation and invention? Maybe. Has Sierra swung the "axe" too far in throttling and punishing Papyrus for the financial failure of GPL? Is David Kaemmer a great car physics programmer...but a not-so-hot corporate leader? Maybe. When I think of these questions......I'm reminded of an old joke about "a million dollars.....and Las Vegas"......a "twist" of that version would go like this: "Do you want to know how to become the third ranked retail game developer in the world? Its very easy! All you need to do is........start out as "number one"....and make the same kind of marketing & production decisions that Papyrus & Sierra have made over the last three years! I wonder why I'm not laughing? Its kind of sad really....don't you think?

not wanting just to pick one small thing from a large post but... . >8) The lack of driver control of the entire pit stop.....not >acceptable as is. We really hope this can be turned off. I really like that bit, as it gives you a chance to decide on your pit settings, without stoving your car into the pit wall, whilst trying to hit the function keys. A minus point to this though, is when you have a sick engine and trundle into the pits, the engine roars back into life when you cross the pit entrance :(

FWIW, I think it's the lack of peripheral vision that messes me up on rolling starts, actually -- that, plus oblivious AI. I do agree with you that "option" is the operative term here -- it would be great if you had the option for a rolling start, standing start, or a computer-controlled rolling start. F12K offers you the option for assisted or unassisted pit stops, so why not offer the same on NASCAR-type games where pace laps are the norm? I'm perfectly happy with NASCAR Heat's assisted start implementation, but if I'm forced to do my own pace laps in N4, I may not be so happy, while for you, it's the exact opposite, which means that the answer that will keep EVRYBODY happy is to make EITHER choice an OPTION. Any developers listening out there? Let's hope . . . -- JB In article <8nujrq$6bb$[email hidden]>, [email hidden] wrote:

Quoted text (17 lines)

> I think I am bright enough to realize the difference between standing > starts (GPL) and rolling starts (Nascar, Cart, etc...). And just what > about the rolling starts gives you hell? I suspect poor driver AI > (cars bunching up and/or completely stopping in front of you...). If > that is the case, then the solution is to incorporate rolling starts > (with a full pace lap) with better driver AI!!! What do you think > happens at the end of yellow flag caution periods in Nascar racing? > Well, I can only hope in NH it's a ROLLING START. If not, you can bet > I'll be returning my copy of Nascar Heat. We didn't get a chance to > see how this is incorporated in the demo version of NH, but assuming > yellow caution periods are handled reasonably well, then I can't > understand why the same system cannot be incorporated for the start of > the race. My whole point is that I want control of the car - from the > start of the race (warmup lap) to the end of the race (drive back to > pit position). Anything less than that takes away from > the "simulation" experience for me. If you have too much problem with > rolling starts, then I'm sure you would appreciate the "option"

(option

Quoted text (12 lines)

> is the key work here!) to disable the warmup lap(s), etc... Yeah, > Nascar/Indycar starts and F1 style starts are too totally different > beasts. I don't recall saying that they are the same. My only point > is the similar feeling of anticipation a driver can feel before the > green flag waves -- No matter what style of start you are talking > about. I believe Nascar Heat takes away from that aspect. I still > love the demo and WILL buy the sim, so I guess my criticisms aren't > that serious... > > In article <8nugd5$1pl$[email hidden]>, > [email hidden] wrote: > > I think starts in GPL are MUCH different than a NASCAR rolling

start - > - > > I have NO problem at all with the starts in GPL, for example, but in > > ICR2 (or N2/N3/NASCAR Legends), the rolling starts always give me > > hell. They are two different beasts, so I think your comparisonmight

Quoted text (11 lines)

> > be a little bit off-base in that you are literally comparing apples > and > > oranges (standing starts vs. rolling starts, that is). > > > > -- JB > > > > In article <8nu6fj$krk$[email hidden]>, > > [email hidden] wrote: > > > Tom, > > > > > > Thanks for the time and effort you have taken to voice your

opinions > > of > > > Nascar Heat. I'm thinking you might need to ice down thosefingers

Quoted text (10 lines)

> by > > > now... :o) I could not agree with you more on your > > > observations/concerns regarding the sounds of NH and the lack of > > driver > > > control at the start of races. For me, one of the most exciting, > > > nervous points of a GPL race is at the start, when you are just > > sitting > > > on the grid, possibly revving your engine and hearing the cars > around > > > you do the same. IMHO, NH "must" incorporate a full

(controllable!) > > > pace lap to be considered a true sim. I will buy the product asis, > > > based on the demo, because I do feel it is a leap forward (in some > > > areas)in Nascar racing sims from what was previously available.But > I > > > am counting on someone "tweaking" (should I say... overhauling)the > > > sounds of Nascar Heat. All of them!!!! I don't hold out muchhope > > for > > > fully controllable, pace lap starts - Sounds like something asimple > > > patch might not be able to "fix" - But I will dream about it... > This > > > game is so close to becoming a great simulation. It is almost > > > depressing to me to think that these few issues might take awaymuch > > of > > > the enjoyment of the experience of racing Nascar Heat. > > > > > > btw - Is it not possible to turn down/off the menu music soundsvia > an > > > option or slider in the full release version? That could at least > > save > > > our eardrums. I did not look for such an option in the demo, soit

Quoted text (13 lines)

> > > might even be available on it. > > > > > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ > > > Before you buy. > > > > > > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ > > Before you buy. > > > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ > Before you buy. >

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

In article <[email hidden]>, "Scott Moore" <[email hidden]> wrote: <SNIP>

Quoted text (17 lines)

> Fine- don't buy it, then. We know how you feel. I would like to ask a > question, though- how do you plan to get a "jump on the field" if > it's not legal to pass on the left before the S/F line? There's > rarely room enough up by the wall to get anything accomplished. > I'd like to see the option to drive a pace lap, too(Heck, I'd much > rather see standing starts like a real racing series should use[hint > to CART implied]<g>), but it isn't that big a deal. The rest of Heat > is good enough, for an oval- biased sim, to more than make up for > those few shortcomings. people, by being so hardheaded about these > things, you're missing some of the best experiences your PC has to > offer. Lighten up a little. > -- > Scott Moore > The Sports Gaming Network > http://www.sports-gaming.com > > "Where are we going, and why are we in a handbasket?"

Amen, Scott -- too many people "cut off their noses to spite their faces" it seems, and they miss out on a lot of good stuff. If NH turns out to be the NFSPU (another great sim/game that a lot of people shunned, I think) of the NASCAR genre, then that's a pretty good thing, IMO. Much better than another "NASCAR Revolution," I would think. And, actually, I think it's going to be MUCH better than either. <G> -- JB Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

In article <XDpo5.123028$[email hidden]>, "Tom Pabst" <[email hidden]> wrote: <MAJOR SNIP> Just my $0.02 on this, Tom -- I'm not much of a NASCAR fan, but I am an IRL (and occasional CART) fan, so rolling starts should be important to me. From a sim standpoint, I love GPL, and I also like the NH demo so far. The standing starts in GPL (and Viper Racing, and NFSPU) work fine for me, but in things like ICR2 for example (which features rolling starts), I found the starts to be some of the most FRUSTRATING parts of the race. Keep in mind that I'm a sim guy -- I do love GPL (and my GPL Rank is moving up! <G>), but rolling starts are a pain in MY butt, so the starts in NH work fine for me as a sim guy. On the subject of being a "sim guy," while I do love sims, I also want to have some enjoyment from the hobby, too -- there's enough frustration at work (LOL!). I do think it would be GREAT if we could toggle things like the rolling start/standing start, and I understand why it is an issue for some of you guys, but in the consumer marketplace, I think NH will excel BECAUSE it does not force people to use a rolling start. MGI seemed to "err on the side of success in this instance, and, for me, that's acceptable. Good analysis on your part, though. Great to have you back in the forum! -- JB Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

I think starts in GPL are MUCH different than a NASCAR rolling start -- I have NO problem at all with the starts in GPL, for example, but in ICR2 (or N2/N3/NASCAR Legends), the rolling starts always give me hell. They are two different beasts, so I think your comparison might be a little bit off-base in that you are literally comparing apples and oranges (standing starts vs. rolling starts, that is). -- JB In article <8nu6fj$krk$[email hidden]>, [email hidden] wrote: > Tom, > > Thanks for the time and effort you have taken to voice your opinionsof > Nascar Heat. I'm thinking you might need to ice down those fingers by > now... :o) I could not agree with you more on your > observations/concerns regarding the sounds of NH and the lack ofdriver > control at the start of races. For me, one of the most exciting, > nervous points of a GPL race is at the start, when you are justsitting

Quoted text (7 lines)

> on the grid, possibly revving your engine and hearing the cars around > you do the same. IMHO, NH "must" incorporate a full (controllable!) > pace lap to be considered a true sim. I will buy the product as is, > based on the demo, because I do feel it is a leap forward (in some > areas)in Nascar racing sims from what was previously available. But I > am counting on someone "tweaking" (should I say... overhauling) the > sounds of Nascar Heat. All of them!!!! I don't hold out much hope

for > fully controllable, pace lap starts - Sounds like something a simple > patch might not be able to "fix" - But I will dream about it... This > game is so close to becoming a great simulation. It is almost > depressing to me to think that these few issues might take away muchof > the enjoyment of the experience of racing Nascar Heat. > > btw - Is it not possible to turn down/off the menu music sounds via an > option or slider in the full release version? That could at leastsave > our eardrums. I did not look for such an option in the demo, so it > might even be available on it. > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ > Before you buy. > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

I think I am bright enough to realize the difference between standing starts (GPL) and rolling starts (Nascar, Cart, etc...). And just what about the rolling starts gives you hell? I suspect poor driver AI (cars bunching up and/or completely stopping in front of you...). If that is the case, then the solution is to incorporate rolling starts (with a full pace lap) with better driver AI!!! What do you think happens at the end of yellow flag caution periods in Nascar racing? Well, I can only hope in NH it's a ROLLING START. If not, you can bet I'll be returning my copy of Nascar Heat. We didn't get a chance to see how this is incorporated in the demo version of NH, but assuming yellow caution periods are handled reasonably well, then I can't understand why the same system cannot be incorporated for the start of the race. My whole point is that I want control of the car - from the start of the race (warmup lap) to the end of the race (drive back to pit position). Anything less than that takes away from the "simulation" experience for me. If you have too much problem with rolling starts, then I'm sure you would appreciate the "option" (option is the key work here!) to disable the warmup lap(s), etc... Yeah, Nascar/Indycar starts and F1 style starts are too totally different beasts. I don't recall saying that they are the same. My only point is the similar feeling of anticipation a driver can feel before the green flag waves -- No matter what style of start you are talking about. I believe Nascar Heat takes away from that aspect. I still love the demo and WILL buy the sim, so I guess my criticisms aren't that serious... In article <8nugd5$1pl$[email hidden]>, [email hidden] wrote: > I think starts in GPL are MUCH different than a NASCAR rolling start -- > I have NO problem at all with the starts in GPL, for example, but in > ICR2 (or N2/N3/NASCAR Legends), the rolling starts always give me > hell. They are two different beasts, so I think your comparison might > be a little bit off-base in that you are literally comparing applesand

Quoted text (11 lines)

> oranges (standing starts vs. rolling starts, that is). > > -- JB > > In article <8nu6fj$krk$[email hidden]>, > [email hidden] wrote: > > Tom, > > > > Thanks for the time and effort you have taken to voice your opinions > of > > Nascar Heat. I'm thinking you might need to ice down those fingers

by

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > now... :o) I could not agree with you more on your > > observations/concerns regarding the sounds of NH and the lack of > driver > > control at the start of races. For me, one of the most exciting, > > nervous points of a GPL race is at the start, when you are just > sitting > > on the grid, possibly revving your engine and hearing the cars

around > > you do the same. IMHO, NH "must" incorporate a full (controllable!) > > pace lap to be considered a true sim. I will buy the product as is, > > based on the demo, because I do feel it is a leap forward (in some > > areas)in Nascar racing sims from what was previously available. ButI > > am counting on someone "tweaking" (should I say... overhauling) the > > sounds of Nascar Heat. All of them!!!! I don't hold out much hope > for > > fully controllable, pace lap starts - Sounds like something a simple > > patch might not be able to "fix" - But I will dream about it...This > > game is so close to becoming a great simulation. It is almost > > depressing to me to think that these few issues might take away much > of > > the enjoyment of the experience of racing Nascar Heat. > > > > btw - Is it not possible to turn down/off the menu music sounds viaan

Quoted text (12 lines)

> > option or slider in the full release version? That could at least > save > > our eardrums. I did not look for such an option in the demo, so it > > might even be available on it. > > > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ > > Before you buy. > > > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ > Before you buy. >

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

Tom, Thanks for the time and effort you have taken to voice your opinions of Nascar Heat. I'm thinking you might need to ice down those fingers by now... :o) I could not agree with you more on your observations/concerns regarding the sounds of NH and the lack of driver control at the start of races. For me, one of the most exciting, nervous points of a GPL race is at the start, when you are just sitting on the grid, possibly revving your engine and hearing the cars around you do the same. IMHO, NH "must" incorporate a full (controllable!) pace lap to be considered a true sim. I will buy the product as is, based on the demo, because I do feel it is a leap forward (in some areas)in Nascar racing sims from what was previously available. But I am counting on someone "tweaking" (should I say... overhauling) the sounds of Nascar Heat. All of them!!!! I don't hold out much hope for fully controllable, pace lap starts - Sounds like something a simple patch might not be able to "fix" - But I will dream about it... This game is so close to becoming a great simulation. It is almost depressing to me to think that these few issues might take away much of the enjoyment of the experience of racing Nascar Heat. btw - Is it not possible to turn down/off the menu music sounds via an option or slider in the full release version? That could at least save our eardrums. I did not look for such an option in the demo, so it might even be available on it. Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

"Tom Pabst" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:t_uo5.123694$[email hidden]... > But, when you say, "it has more than enough for the hardcore simracer....." > you are kind of "begging the question" there. "More than enough forwhat?" Heh. I probably should have said "enough" not "more than enough". >We are all suckers....and we are so hungry > for a good racing sim...we buy anything that comes out......"just incase!" > .....lol. Most of the "hardcore" guys.....became "hardcore" because they > had the time....and the money to buy the upper level computer equipmentthat > ends up turning them eventually into "hardcore." LOL. I have about $600 into my controller right now with another $60 order pending with Thomas Enterprises for new pedal pads. My next project is to buy a new Cup Wheel from TE for my Act Labs Force RS (it's wired to my TE pedals) - that'll be another $130... > And, in Heat's case....it has a "fatal flaw" in my book at least (maybenot > everyone's...I know that).....that is the "sounds"....... I don't carehow > good the graphics are, how good the physics model for the car is.....how > good "anything inserted here you want to insert here" is....... if it has > bad engine sounds and fx sounds.......I am not going to even keep it > installed on my computer (unless I can fix it). I would venture to guess that within weeks you'll have new sounds for NH. I will welcome those as well, but even if this doesn't occur it won't cause me to remove it from my computer... > I also am testing some "engine vibration" devices that are used by Lucas > Arts (they are only about 15 miles from my house and I know a lot of the > tech guys over there).....some of which were developed to be installed in > theaters for Star Wars movies. These things are awesome....they even have > their own, separate 300 watt amplifier to run them. They are like twohuge > magnets.....about 4 inches thick......and about 5 inches in > diameter.......bolted to the back of my Kirkey aluminum racingseat....just > above what would be my "belt" line if I was wearing jeans or somethingwith > a belt. Intellivibe looked like it was going to be the next great thing and was even supported in N3. It looks to me though, that VRF Corp is just going to fade away. I hope not, but their founder Craig Thorner has not kept his word regarding upgrades or return policy on his existing controller and ignores my e-mail now. Too bad... > I'm going to take up a collection.....to see if I can gather up enough > "cheese" to send to Broske to bribe him into telling me the names of the > engine sound files in the Heat "race.bin" file so I can alter their file > name so I can run Heat with my own engine sample file(s) at least! (And > Dave, there's an extra "fin" in the deal for you if you can also tell me > that "pop" sound in the UI screen "button" fx.....tooooo! Hehe. That "pop" is pretty annoying isn't it? It'll be gone very soon I'm sure. In the mean time, I'll be having a blast racing NH and accepting what I can get for what it's worth. Any enhancements by the sim community will be gladly accepted when and if they occur! --David Cook

Tom, Very well said, and I'm glad you said it. I somehow feel more 'normal' now. The sound issue has been mentioned before, either here or on the HG forum (or both). Especially the menu clicks. In the demo, you can change the FOV for the mirror now with this line in the options.cfg: mirror_fov 130.000000 There is hope for some of the other things that concern us with these lines that do not work yet but hopefully will work in the full version: auto_drive yes force_legal_pitspeed yes (both for the pits?) fov 130.000000 (forward vision FOV?) mirror 2 (will there be more than one mirror option?) -- Slot www.slottweak.com Tweaks & Reviews "Tom Pabst" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:Rygo5.122335$[email hidden]... > I have read with great interest all the varied opinions about whether NASCAR > Heat is a true sim, or an "arcade game".......with just about all degrees of > variance in between. I don't think any one of us is a fully qualified > "authority" on racing simulation "games"....so that our individual > "judgment" of any racing sim is "the ultimate authoritative" verdict. But, > that shouldn't matter! > > What does matter is that we each have our "beliefs".....about what makes a > good racing simulation and what does not. We have things we like...things > we don't care about....and things we don't like. Our opinions fall into > these general categories and we have them for probably every racing sim > we've ever installed on computers. I have my own set of "opinions" about > GPL, NASCAR 2-3-4?, Viper Racing, SCGT, GP3.........and yes, about NASCAR > Heat too. > > But, I don't think most of you are any more interested in "what I think" > about NASCAR Heat......than any other person who makes reasonable > "observations" about what they like about NH...or what they don't like about > it. > > I would also like to point out, NH as we know it today.....is only a "demo" > of the full product....... set to be released tomorrow. Now, of course we > have the NH beta testers (some of whom are making "posts" here) who do know > the full scope of the NH simulation. But by nature, beta testers are biased > in favor of any "game" they beta test. I'm sure that's not a "revelation" > to any of you. So the beta testers will probably have their "opinions" > substantially discounted by the rest of us. > > At SearsGroup, we have our own set of criteria that we use to judge a racing > simulation.....as to its viability to become software that we can use within > our "Bulldozer" work. Since we haven't written our own racing simulation > program (and we never will).........we are subject to the quality of the > "retail racing sims" on the market.....and their ability to be "hacked" to > the point of creating the purest form of simulation possible (which is what > we need). When we have to sit a "Jeff Gordon" down in one of our > simulators.....and ask him to race his buddy "Steve Park" over there in the > sim next to him.....and tell him to race hard because we want some feedback > about this new track configuration (change) we are thinking of > building........well, we can't be worried about our race simulator > "software" embarrassing us! > > So, we look at a new sim coming to market with some simple yard sticks: > > 1) How close is the "box" version to being the pure form of racing > simulation we need? > 2) How much is it possible to "hack" the box version to get it to our > "pure sim" standards? > 3) How willing is the developer to assist us...or the sim community in > general, in making these modifications (hacks)? Another way to put this is, > "Does the developer just want to sell 'games' or are they interested in > longevity and creating a kind of 'cottage industry' within the racing sim > community, where their "box" sales are stimulated over an extended period of > time, because the "add-ons" available within the racing sim > community....don't work without the original "box game." > 4) What sim(s) are we using for Bulldozer now.....and how do they > compare to "the new kid on the block?" > > For us, this process begins the first time there's an announcement made > about a new racing simulation going into production. It then goes "on our > radar screens." For NASCAR Heat, that was about 9 months ago (I > believe......I could be off on that because I may be confused about when I > first heard of NASCAR Heat.........as opposed to when I first saw a "public" > announcement about it?). We went to E-3 so we could take a look at > "Heat"...along with N-4 and GP-3 of course. And now, we have the "demo." > > As part of this process (and I would like to emphasis..."part of the > process"...this means its ongoing and isn't conclusive just because we've > had the NH demo for a few days)...I asked our "test drivers" to give me > their opinions about the NH demo. I asked them to just...... "tell me what > you like, and what you don't like" about Heat. Don't tell me what you think > is wrong with it.....because we're not the game developer.....and "right or > wrong" isn't important (at least not in this context it isn't). I asked the > same question of all the people working in and around > SearsGroup/Bulldozer....most of whom are sim racers...as well as real-world > racers. There's a substantial number of Jim Russell School race instructors > included in this group.....and their "likes/dislikes" are included below as > well. > > It seemed to me this morning that it might be appropriate to share this > "consensus" of likes and dislikes (mine are included too) with all of you. > Especially on the "eve" of the NH full program release. Over the next few > days, judgments will be made by all of us as to which things are better in > the full program......and which things are not! > > Here's the list....... We'll start with "The Likes" > > NASCAR Heat Demo.......what we like about it: > > 1) The track surface graphics, coloring and textures. > 2) The TSO's (trackside objects) graphics-detail. > 3) The AI car graphics-detail. > 4) The "car physics" model (**with some reservations). > 5) The AI driver programming, especially the increased "aggressive > driving" in the closing laps. > 6) The UI screens, particularly the ease of navigation. > 7) The race car "setup" modeling.....and UI screen interface with it. > 8) The animated pit crew. > 9) The "trueness" of the track geometry to the "real-world" race > track it depicts (for the demo tracks only of course). > 10) The infield grass/surface....texture and coloring. > 11) Armco, walls and catch-fencing detail and rendering when at race > speeds. > 12) The "arcade functions" of Beat the Heat...and the other > "challenges"...they are just plain fun!. > 13) The sky and horizon texturing.....very realistic. > > **Note: The fact that the demo didn't include a road course, made it > somewhat difficult to fully ascertain the quality of the car physics > modeling. Also, leading to some confusion, was a valid confirmation that > the config.cfg file wasn't being overwritten by the game engine...thus > turning off the full physics model....even though the proper settings were > made in it. There was enough of a general feeling that the car physics were > too "tame" for something trying to be "GPL-like in a 3500 pound Winston Cup > race car" to be fully evaluated....especially without the opportunity to > drive on a road course. > > NASCAR Heat Demo.....what we do not like about it: > > 1) The sound....all of it. Including the spotter, engine, FX, crash, > tire squeal, etc. It seems some of the "sound fields" have been mistakenly > reversed (especially the engine sounds) and many of the "fx sounds are > either not realistic...or outright irritating. The spotter sound/voice is > not acceptable....we would turn this off at the first chance to hack it. > The engines sound like they would if they were from outside the race > car......maybe to a fan sitting in the stands or something???......not > anything like the "presence" they have from inside a WC car cockpit. We are > hoping Hasbro will open the "race.bin" code for the sounds, so the several > excellent "sound hacks" in the sim community can fix this with > patches.....quickly! We understand that MGI did not do any of the sound > work for NH.....it was farmed out by Hasbro. Who ever they hired.....I'd > fire them, or at least consider stopping payment on my check to them! At > least they are not as bad as DTR....thank God! > 2) The cockpit, specifically the graphics (lack of texture to the > surfaces...and the arcade-like bright coloring which looks & feels nothing > like a real-world WC car cockpit). > 3) The "floating" rear view mirror! > 4) The driver's FOV (too far back....almost a "fish-eye" looking view > out the windshield) and the rear view mirror FOV (it has cruise ship > engulfing, huge blind spots). > 5) The "movement" of the cockpit. Its not realistic (moves in and > out...not up and down)...and after a short time....the "movement" is > irritating, distracting and tedious. This must have been somebody's cute > idea for realism. Clearly the person has never been strapped into the seat > of race car with a five-point harness and race seat! Guys...when you step > on the brakes of a race car....the nose drops...and it stays down until you > release from threshold braking! When you step on the gas....the nose rises > slightly (or the rear hunches down...depending on your orientation)...and it > stays that way until you release the throttle from threshold throttle. You > might get a little bit of this forward and back movement in an open wheel > race car (because of the geometry movement of the outboard suspension > rolling up and down on itself)....but not in a sedan, GT type, closed-wheel > race car. What were you thinking? It's hard to believe that feature was > implemented when Labonte was driving the (sim) car. He gave us some "lip > service" about our cockpit....and ours is light years better than the one in > NH. > 6) The "rolling starts"........without a true, full pace lap, green > flag start....its very arcade-like and tends to "disengage" you from the > race. > 7) The lack of "player" control at race end....no "victory lap" > capability....especially with being "ripped off the track" just as you cross > the S/F line at race end. > 8) The lack of driver control of the entire pit stop.....not > acceptable as is. We really hope this can be turned off. > 9) AI car programming on the transition roads (they run into you as > if they don't see you). > 10) The canned response of the car to impacting the wall....not > variable with impact speed. > 11) The positioning of the "race info" data screens within the > cockpit...can't see them without taking your eyes substantially off the race > line.......same problem as you had with Viper Racing! > 12) The "spotter information" ....its either very redundant...or > useless. > 13) Although "multiplayer" was not in the demo......word that it will > support only 8 drivers online is not good. We hope this can change with > "hacks" and better "broad-band" multiplayer patch support. > 14) The UI screen "button" sound FX. It is irritating, can't turn it > off....and dangerous to speaker cones and human ear drums if the sound > volume is turned up (which it would likely be just after exiting from a > race). If you use headphones.....extreme caution is required to prevent > some ear damage we think. > 15) The static shadows and lighting in night races. This is the > modern era of dynamic lighting effects, monster RAM video cards and cpu's > measured with a new word........."GIGS!". If you guys couldn't implement > this because of cpu or pixel budgets....you should have not done night > races. You are going to get killed by Papyrus in this department at least. > > Ok...that's how we see the NH demo as a whole at SearsGroup. I don't know > how this matches up with everyone's "lists"....nor do I even think this is > some kind of a consensus....I doubt that very much (especially since I've > seen very little posts here about the sound....and we think that "tops the > list" of the worst features in NH)! > > I do want to say that I think "NASCAR Heat" is a monumental effort by Rich > Garcia...and all the guys at MGI and the marketing team at Hasbro. They > should be congratulated for their work, their innovative thinking....and the > ability to implement ground braking features in a racing simulation. I > always thought Viper Racing was an excellent racing simulation.....ahead of > its time much like GPL was ahead of its time..... (funny.......they were > both released on the same day.....by the same publisher, Sierra). NASCAR > Heat shows just how good Viper Racing really is (not "was"...I still have it > on my computer.....still race it online weekly almost)......and how good the > guys who created Viper Racing......and now NASCAR Heat....really are! I > think NH will be a retail/financial success.....no question about it. I do > not think NH will become the "ultimate sim".....displacing GPL from that > exalted status. No way....not in its present form that is. > > I think if Hasbro is forward thinking enough, and they decide to open the > doors to the NH "bin" files structure and code.......encouraging and helping > the sim racing community "hackers" who, as a group.....are probably the best > racing sim graphic artists and programmers in the world.....fix some of this > stuff.....then NH has a good chance of taking the throne maybe beside GPL? > But it will never knock it off........at least that's my thinking today. I > can always change my mind though....lol. > > Is there a "David Noonan" of NASCAR sims? We could sure use one! > > Regards, > > Tom Pabst > SearsGroup > > PS: My after thoughts: Why has Papy "taken their toys and gone home?" Is > it the stiff competition from NH? Maybe. Is it the natural side affects of > major-league talent (like Charlie Heath) leaving Papyrus? Maybe. Is the > "new blood" at Papyrus not up to the task of producing racing simulations of > major innovation and invention? Maybe. Has Sierra swung the "axe" too far > in throttling and punishing Papyrus for the financial failure of GPL? Is > David Kaemmer a great car physics programmer...but a not-so-hot corporate > leader? Maybe. When I think of these questions......I'm reminded of an old > joke about "a million dollars.....and Las Vegas"......a "twist" of that > version would go like this: > > "Do you want to know how to become the third ranked retail game developer in > the world? Its very easy! All you need to do is........start out as > "number one"....and make the same kind of marketing & production decisions > that Papyrus & Sierra have made over the last three years! > > I wonder why I'm not laughing? Its kind of sad really....don't you think? > > > > > >

> 6) The "rolling starts"........without a true, full pace lap, green > flag start....its very arcade-like and tends to "disengage" you from the > race. > 7) The lack of "player" control at race end....no "victory lap" > capability....especially with being "ripped off the track" just as youcross > the S/F line at race end. These two things are NOT acceptable. PERIOD. A sim means you have control of your car at all junctions of the race....this means from the time the pace lap starts until after the checkered when you drive back to your pits. Rolling starts just SCREAMS arcade racing and is not realistic at all. So much can be gained or lost by how good of a start you get, and being able to get a good/bad jump on the green flag and on the rest of the field. Ed has CONFIRMED that this can not be turned off in the full version because things are still 'loading' during the rolling start.....then give me the option to add 20 seconds to the loading time so I can play a racing simulation Ed! A rolling start reminds me of EASports efforts in the Nascar genre, and of several arcade racing games I've played (Ultimate Race Pro rings a bell). Those two listed items may affect my decision to purchase the game unfortunately. For example.....go over to the flight sim newsgroup and tell them your making this sweet Flight Sim that automatically takes off and lands for you, but gives you control of the plane in mid-air! They will laugh you all the way to Albuquerque. Totally unacceptable.

> 6) The "rolling starts"........without a true, full pace lap, green > flag start....its very arcade-like and tends to "disengage" you from the > race. > 7) The lack of "player" control at race end....no "victory lap" > capability....especially with being "ripped off the track" just as youcross > the S/F line at race end. These two things are NOT acceptable. PERIOD. A sim means you have control of your car at all junctions of the race....this means from the time the pace lap starts until after the checkered when you drive back to your pits. Rolling starts just SCREAMS arcade racing and is not realistic at all. So much can be gained or lost by how good of a start you get, and being able to get a good/bad jump on the green flag and on the rest of the field. Ed has CONFIRMED that this can not be turned off in the full version because things are still 'loading' during the rolling start.....then give me the option to add 20 seconds to the loading time so I can play a racing simulation Ed! A rolling start reminds me of EASports efforts in the Nascar genre, and of several arcade racing games I've played (Ultimate Race Pro rings a bell). Those two listed items may affect my decision to purchase the game unfortunately. For example.....go over to the flight sim newsgroup and tell them your making this sweet Flight Sim that automatically takes off and lands for you, but gives you control of the plane in mid-air! They will laugh you all the way to Albuquerque. Totally unacceptable.

On Mon, 21 Aug 2000 21:12:15 -0400, "GTX_SlotCar" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (15 lines)

>Tom, >Very well said, and I'm glad you said it. I somehow feel more 'normal' now. >The sound issue has been mentioned before, either here or on the HG forum >(or both). Especially the menu clicks. In the demo, you can change the FOV >for the mirror now with this line in the options.cfg: >mirror_fov 130.000000 >There is hope for some of the other things that concern us with these lines >that do not work yet but hopefully will work in the full version: >auto_drive yes >force_legal_pitspeed yes >(both for the pits?) >fov 130.000000 >(forward vision FOV?) >mirror 2 >(will there be more than one mirror option?)

the mirror 0 1 and 2 control either no mirror, cars only, and all. You *WILL* be able to control your car in the pits, and under yellow in the full version. The rolling starts looks to stay, though =(

It would be nice but not mandatory, the Sim makes up for its shortcomings four fold. In N3 the cars on the pace lap stop and go several times not very realistic as so the cars convulsing when you get behind them. Pitiful, SCREAMS..... POOR PHYSICS ENGINE. Don't like NH don't buy it, but you'll be missing a lot. I've bought just about all Papys releases but I know when something good comes along and I'm not going to demean it basically because its not a Papy release. Many of the folks who worked on NH are old Papy employees and I think they brought their racing passion to this sim. And I might add the passion for racing that appears to be lacking at Papyrus nowadays. Just this mans opinion. Dennis

Adam.... Thank you for your comments. I was wondering why there wasn't more of a "clamor" about this issue of the starts and finishes? I can accept it in DTR Sprint Cars.....and only there because the races are relatively short "heat" races (no pun intended.....lol). But, even there.....it goes against my grain! But heck, in a NASCAR race (real or simulated).......the starts are part of the drama and strategy of the race. I have the same physical reactions during a pace lap at sim-Talladega...or sim-Daytona.....or sim-Indy.....that I had when I was fortunate to be the starting driver in and ESCORT Endurance race back in the late 80's (or a National SCCA race for that matter). I get a nervous-jumpy kind of thing going on in my stomach.....I have a little problem with focusing my eyes and my hand eye coordination is a "tenth off".......I even get a mild light-headed feeling, too. But, by the time I'm rolling down the back stretch...all of that stuff is gone. It's been replaced by an incredible ability to concentrate and to think in a multi-task kind of way....... to the point where it seems I can actually visualize every car in the field.....simultaneously. I know that sounds weird....but I know for sure I'm not the only driver that experiences this kind of thing during the pace lap of a race. These couple of minutes I spend at pace speed serve to set the stage in my mind for the race that is to follow. I need this short "transition" period to get my "racing hat" on....and that is often the same response you'd hear from a real-world race driver. Why would a racing simulation be any different in this regard? For the last four days, I have been vigorously trying to make this "rolling start" thing work for me.....immersion-wise. I want it to work for me....because I'm pretty sure NH can't "toggle that off!" Man, I just can't make it happen. Now, I think I might know why Hasbro/MGI was motivated to have "rolling starts" in NH? I think we need to remember that this is basically the Viper Racing "game engine". Back during the first six months when Viper first came out, we tried to find a way to eliminate that "F1 - drag racing" type of start that Viper used (we were going to put that into "the official Sierra patch"........remember that?). But, changing the starts......required a base code re-write for the "game engine" and that wasn't a simple task or procedure.....certainly not something you'd attempt to do in a "patch." But if "the reason" is not something like this.......then why not provide a "toggle-off" capability so as to satisfy the hardcore sim community? Why no "toggle-off?" Because, I don't think they could do it! But I could be very wrong here! And, I hope I am wrong. I hope Ed says, "Hey...we just didn't think you guys really would value that....so we didn't bother to make the code re-write for NH......!" To tell you the truth, it never occurred to me that these rolling starts would be in anything but the "arcade" features of the "challenge" races. At E-3, we didn't get to "free race" like you can in the demo (at least I didn't)..........so this wasn't something that came up. Frankly, I was shocked the first time I clicked on "Race"....and wasn't placed immediately in my cockpit....sitting in a pre-grid position on the track...at a dead stop behind the field and the pace car! I remember hitting the ESC key immediately.....thinking I'd accidentally entered one of the "Beat The Whatever" challenge races by mistake or something. Sadly, I hadn't............ What I am hoping.....and perhaps maybe Ed Martin or one of the beta testers can shed some light on this for those of us that feel this way (although the "full version" is out in a couple of days...so we'll find out for ourselves shortly)....I hope we'll find out that the "multiplayer races" don't have rolling starts. If that is not the case, boy....I have a hard time visualizing the sim racing community embracing NH as a serious race simulation for league races (although the 8 driver field limit may just kill this all by itself anyway). I've heard some discussion that the leagues may try to institute some sort of mandatory pace lap procedure....where the field doesn't start the race at the "game green flag"...but continues at pace speed...with the pole sitter "starting" the race for the rest of the field on lap #2. I'm not sure how viable of a solution that is....we'll just have to give it a try? That would sure tend to motivate me to want to be on the pole......lol. It is my opinion that this "experiment".........an attempt to create a racing simulation that appeals to both the arcade-level racing enthusiast....and the hardcore racing sim community......is not only a bold undertaking....but a very "high-risk" one as well. Could this be done (and still have limits as to "minimum" specs for the computer systems required to run the "game") in a fashion where there would be "no compromises" for each of the "modes"....? Maybe. But probably not on the first try! That means it was essential (in my opinion) to make a study of what areas of a hardcore sim.....there was room to compromise....and what areas there was not room to compromise! That means either being totally confident that the "beta test group" represented a reasonably good cross-section of the hardcore sim community's "body of thought!" Or, doing some plain old fashion "market research" to find out! Will this make NH financially unsuccessful? Absolutely not. It has enough "pizzazz" already...... to just about guarantee strong sales...... as far as I'm concerned. And for reasons I've stated in earlier posts....I am glad for that and I congratulate the NH production team for giving us a better "introductory" racing game so we can attract more hardcore sim drivers to our ranks (like the flight sim community has done). I will vigorously recommend NASCAR Heat to just about anyone.....except you guys of course! On the grand scale of things, if the entire sim racing community fails to embrace NASCAR Heat......which will not be something we'll measure with our words...........but something that will be a measure of our actions (will NH league racing proliferate and replace GPL and N3 or SCGT leagues.....or even the few Viper Racing groups that are left...over the next few months......particularly as the winter off-season in real racing approaches which is the "on-season" for sim league racing......???).....I don't think there will be much more than a little "chink" in the sales armor of NH. That........I believe is our problem and not Hasbro's problem! We don't carry much "market strength" as a group of users! We need to find ways to change that......or we will be forced for ever to continue to have to "hack" away at "popular racing games".....so we can go serious sim racing! And, we will continue to be frustrated that the current hardcore sim "hack de'jure" is close.......but not...... exactly....... what we want to race! The "failure" of GPL was a precursor to this fact. How many more companies are going to "test the waters" and risk another GPL sales disaster? None I hope! We as a community have got to show software (game) developers that a serious racing simulation can also have a successful revenue model! If we can't do that (and soon), then we have to find another source for the software we want to use! Until we can demonstrate some "numbers" as a community that approach those of the flight sim community.....I don't think the "Ed Martins and Hasbros" of the software (gaming) industry.....can afford to seriously "give a rat's ass" what we think about their product. Really! I know Ed does care what we think......I'm just saying this as a means to illustrate my "point" about our market power.....or lack thereof...... He might think what we are doing is "really cool!" But his job depends on him making the "stockholders" think "he's really cool"....by making profits for Hasbro! Right now, he can do that without us can't he? So, Ed is not the person we should be upset with here because we have to endure these "75-cents-a-play" rolling starts! We need to be upset with ourselves! And, if we are not willing to do something about it.....then we need to shut up about it.....when a new "racing game" comes to market. Tom Pabst "Adam" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:eBlo5.51396$[email hidden]... > > 6) The "rolling starts"........without a true, full pace lap,green

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > flag start....its very arcade-like and tends to "disengage" you from the > > race. > > 7) The lack of "player" control at race end....no "victory lap" > > capability....especially with being "ripped off the track" just as you > cross > > the S/F line at race end. > > These two things are NOT acceptable. PERIOD. A sim means you have

control > of your car at all junctions of the race....this means from the time the > pace lap starts until after the checkered when you drive back to yourpits. > Rolling starts just SCREAMS arcade racing and is not realistic at all. So > much can be gained or lost by how good of a start you get, and being ableto > get a good/bad jump on the green flag and on the rest of the field. Edhas > CONFIRMED that this can not be turned off in the full version becausethings > are still 'loading' during the rolling start.....then give me the optionto > add 20 seconds to the loading time so I can play a racing simulation Ed!A

Quoted text (7 lines)

> rolling start reminds me of EASports efforts in the Nascar genre, and of > several arcade racing games I've played (Ultimate Race Pro rings a bell). > Those two listed items may affect my decision to purchase the game > unfortunately. > > For example.....go over to the flight sim newsgroup and tell them your > making this sweet Flight Sim that automatically takes off and lands for

you, > but gives you control of the plane in mid-air! They will laugh you allthe

Quoted text (7 lines)

> way to Albuquerque. Totally unacceptable. > > > > > >

Sean..... There's nothing wrong with you "liking the automated pit stops!" The "operative word" in that sentence being "liking"........and you have every right to like something that might be discussed in this newsgroup in what would appear to be "negative terms." We are not discussing what we "like" and/or "don't like" from a subjective standpoint. We are discussing some of the features of NH (or any new simulation....or an existing one for that matter) that we don't think should be part of a "serious racing simulation." And, I'm not sure this "community" has ever done a very good job of clearly defining what we mean by that. Have we? Boy, I'd like to get a group of some of the more notable sim racers in this "community" (drivers like Alison Hine, Jure, Scott Husted, Jacob Butner...who is a very good real-world driver as well...Pekka Heino, Allen Boyd, George Sandman, Ken Hower........and I'm leaving out a few hundred more names), together in a locked room somewhere for a weekend and have them come up with a detailed, written definition....a comprehensive one......of what we mean by a "serious racing simulation!" Even more important.....this "list" should contain things we definitely "don't think" should be included in a "serious racing simulation." This is serious question. Has this ever been done? I haven't seen it.......but that doesn't mean someone hasn't undertaken a serious "study" of what we define as a "serious racing simulation." I just haven't seen it. I wonder, are we expecting Ed Martin and Hasbro and "YourNameHere" game developer to wonder into this newsgroup daily....for about a month....and paste n' cut .........and assemble a line here, a line there.......so they can have a clear understanding of what this community thinks is a "serious racing simulation." Could any of these people really take a "laundry" list compiled in such a way......back to their company programmers and graphic artists and say, "Here, this is what we want you guys to create!" I don't think so. Tom Pabst "S�an Connolly" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:FKgo5.10272$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (15 lines)

> not wanting just to pick one small thing from a large post but... > . > >8) The lack of driver control of the entire pit stop.....not > >acceptable as is. We really hope this can be turned off. > > I really like that bit, as it gives you a chance to decide on your pit > settings, without stoving your car into the pit wall, whilst trying to hit > the function keys. > > A minus point to this though, is when you have a sick engine and trundle > into the pits, the engine roars back into life when you cross the pit > entrance :( > > >

Thanks Mark.......that's a pretty cool thing to do! I appreciate you taking the time to say this......and I note that it didn't appear to depend on whether you agreed with my thoughts about NH or not. I like that.......its a refreshing thing to hear in this newsgroup! Regards, Tom Pabst <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:8ns9m5$gha$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (14 lines)

> In article <Rygo5.122335$[email hidden]>, > "Tom Pabst" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > I have read with great interest all the varied opinions about whether > NASCAR > > Heat<big snip> > > I just wanted to thank you Tom, for the information/opinion in your > post. I'm glad you took the time. > > mr > > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ > Before you buy.

Rrevved..... That's a pretty darn insightful question! But I think the "itch" you have with this question.......isn't going to get "scratched" by the answer. At least, it doesn't scratch my itch....and I think we have pretty much the same one regarding racing sim programs! At the moment.....no current racing sim...."out of the box" .....even comes close to measuring up to what we look for as a sim we can use with a Bulldozer client track. With the work we did at SPR....which basically involved developing track configuration change "suggestions" for the WC Chute portion of the track (T-4 to T-7 bypass area that is only used for WC races at Sears Point), we used a very refined (spelled: "h.a.c.k.e.d.") version of N3. In addition to this, we modeled the existing Sears Point track ourselves.....from scratch........ with a great deal of detail......accurate track surface geometry....accurately measured every foot of racing surface as to width, elevation and camber........combined with realistic texturing and hillside coloring (within the confines of the N3 track palette process which is very limiting) and TSO's (track side objects) that were on the order of magnitude of 10 times those in the retail box version of SPR. The track even had flaggers (SCCA Turn Marshals) in all the flagging stations...that really worked (displayed flags to you...much like the GPL flaggers do). Even though the N3 car physics model isn't the most realistic.....on a road course....those big 3500 pound WC cars drive like "hogs" anyway. So, after we tested with real race cars....we felt the N3 physics model was good enough for the purpose we had in mind for it. And, that was specifically, to present the Winston Cup drivers (when they came to race at SPR......and "test" also.......which a few of them did about a month earlier - Labonte, Earnhard, Jr., Steve Park and John Andretti....with Boris Said acting as Junior's driving coach) with "possible" modifications to the existing WC Chute.....so we could get feedback from them about what they liked and didn't like about each one. And, in their opinion....did any of the modifications solve the problem with this portion of the track "as they perceived it." We didn't have any preconceived ideas about what those "mods" might be. We used a whole bunch of your fellow sim racers (along with some newly converted-to-sim-racing real world drivers at Sears Point)......running "test races" on the base track after it was completed......several nights a week......hundreds of hours of race laps.........and came up with three "possible" solutions, which we presented to the Cup drivers over the SPR WC race weekend. We had a large "tent" display set up right in the Winston Cup Garage Compound for the four-day race weekend (which was no small political victory in itself.....to get NASCAR officials to agree to this....and let us be in "their garage" as its called). This was done so the Cup drivers could basically come and go as they pleased, run the simulators (we had two of them hooked up by a LAN connection).....give us their thoughts and ideas.....suggestions....you name it...we got it....without be hassled by the press or by the general race fans attending the race. We didn't want the drivers to feel self-conscious about what their skill...or lack thereof was......with regard to driving a racing simulator. We knew some of them had a lot of experience with this......but most of them didn't. We were very surprised by the way, by some of the drivers who completely embraced the idea of racing these simulators to test out track modification possibilities.......and by the ones who didn't.....also! We felt if this was "totally private .....we'd get them to give us their honest opinion. Since we didn't want information about anything other than how the car "raced" in the "modified Chute" areas.....they didn't need to show us how fast they were on a simulator. (.........lol......that was very naive on our part!) You know, Winston Cup drivers aren't too bashful about sharing with you what their opinions are.......or how "fast" they are! The track's management had become frustrated with spending hundreds of thousands of dollars......each year trying to make "adjustments" to this portion of the track.....only to get more negative comments from the drivers....in the press......for their investment! In a sense, the track engineers were just making "educated guesses on paper"......then spending the time and money to build something that looked promising on a drawing........only to find out it didn't work like it looked like it would work! This was a testing and development project for Bulldozer....and a very challenging one indeed. It was a very high profile issue.....with all the negative press....and attention NASCAR officials were giving to the Sears WC Chute controversy. This was a big risk for us.........but we were lucky......and the fact that Bulldozer is such a simple concept, helped us out in a big way. We had an enormous amount of success with this whole project. I can't go into details...but the "success" went far beyond our imagination.....and "purpose"....which was just to present the Cup drivers with some choices....and get feedback. We got that..... x times ten! I'd like to say that I played a big role in this. But I didn't. I had come up with the "idea" of using a racing simulator to help race track owners, architects and engineers build and "fix" problems on race tracks.....as sort of a "design tool" that lives and breathes in a 3-dimensional world......two years earlier. But the real success we enjoyed doing this work for Sears Point came as a result of some very talented people we'd managed to cross paths with several months before all this started to come to fruition. One of those people was Tim McArthur....who did our track geometry programming work. Tim is one of the best in the business.....with taking a basic CAD-like track geometry program (DOS based and very unsophisticated I might add) and turning out "works of art" really......in the form of ribbon tracks. Some of you might know of Tim and his work.....producing some fantasy N3 tracks for the guys over at Sim Cyberworld. Unfortunately, the work we were doing was demanding of not only our "talent pool" but our time as well (we were re-inventing the wheel almost every day for a long period of time). And, we were not being paid for this because we were in development with Bulldozer. Tim had recently moved back into the Bay Area....and he was a full-time "dad" with a family that was really used to eating on a regular basis....lol. Tim couldn't really afford to see the "Bulldozer" project all the way through to its completion.....he needed to get a job. Or I should say, he needed to get a job that also paid him! Whether we liked it or not, we were still a year or so away from being able to "charge" client fees for Bulldozer design services.........and more development work still laid in front of us....than we had managed to put behind us. So, Tim had to leave the project completion to someone else. We had a lot of others working on various aspects of this development work. Vu Barnes built some of our sim computer "boxes".....Clark Brownstein was in charge of the physical construction of the simulator frames and controllers....and our display tent which was pretty elaborate (for a tent that is). Some names you might recognize from online racing on WON...and TEN........ are Bob Rowden, who handled setting up our website (with about a total of 5 minutes notice!!!).......which was originally only used to service our test racing program (hold driver meetings, transfer files to our sim "Test Drivers", etc.) and Allen Boyd who acted as our "Chief Of Test Drivers," running the entire test racing program for the original Sears base track ........and the "mod tracks" testing too. Both Bob and Allen are still working with us in these capacities. We had some real-world race drivers working with us too. One of them was Ralph Alexander, who is the Chief Of Instructors for NASA (a real-world professional racing "sanctioning body"....similar to the SCCA), Ralph handled all of our "real-world" track testing, including acquiring the race cars we need to do this. The other real-world driver was Dave McEntee....who is a Jim Russell Racing School Instructor/ops manager....and a professional driver who runs in some of the American LeMans Series events. Dave and I worked pretty close.....we were the "gopher" guys.....doing anything that wasn't getting done by someone else! When I first met Dave......at the Russell School at SPR.....he had never driven on a race simulator.....in fact, he didn't even know they existed....and he had only a casual knowledge about the "race games" (his term...not mine) he saw on the shelves at CompUSA. When I told him what we were attempting to do....he looked at me like I was the craziest guy he'd ever seen.....lol. When I asked him if he wanted to try the simulator out......if he wanted to try racing a 1967 Formula 1 Ferrari....on the existing Sears Point track....in the simulator......lol......he was doing the real-world equivalent of "R.O.F.L." ......for about 30 minutes! Then I bet him $10 bucks that he couldn't get within 20 seconds of my lap time at Sears ....in the Ferrari! .....lol..... Of course those of you who race GPL know that I not only knew Dave couldn't get close to my lap times at Sears in GPL....that he could even make a complete lap without crashing...probably several times. So,.....lol....I figured I had a sure thing bet for $10 bucks. And, if by some miracle of miracles....he did manage to complete a lap? Well, heck...it was a good investment of $10 bucks just to get him into one of our simulator seats. Because, there was no way otherwise that he thought that we were serious about having a "realistic race simulator!" We met over at my house later that afternoon (this was before we had our race simulators permanently setup in a special room at the SPR offices). I showed him my race setup at my house....and asked him what number of laps he'd like to have as some sort of a limit .........on the bet. I told him that I didn't think it was a fair bet if he could just keep trying indefinitely to get within 20 seconds of my times. Now this is about the tenth time I kept emphasizing this "20 seconds" thing...and to a real-world race driver, .2 secs is a "light-year" equivalent amount of time. So, he said.......laughing at me....."ok, heck...how about 5 laps?" It was killing me not to just die laughing...but I kept a straight face and asked if he wanted to up the bet? Dave goes......how about $20 bucks! Sure Dave! So....we decided he should run first.....because it wouldn't be fair for me to just give him this huge advantage by showing him the fast line around SPR (now I'm nearly in tears.....laughing.....but inside....not letting him see my face because I'm having problems controlling this laughter......here I am, telling a Jim Russell School Competition Race Instructor.....AT SEARS POINT.....a guy who has won like two Russell Pro Races at Sears in their open wheel Pro Division Mazda race cars - a $10 grand a weekend program by the way.......that it wouldn't be a fair bet if he got a look at the line at SPR first!!!!!!!!!...this was killing me!!!!!) Of course, Dave has this look on his face like I'm some "retard"......and he wants to up the bet with "the retard!"....lol..... So...what do you guys think happened? Dave runs two laps ...........stops the Ferrari at the S/F line....no, he "crashes" the Ferrari to a stop at the S/F line on the second lap....gets up from my race seat and hands me the $20 bucks! The first lap took him like 5 minutes.....lol.....the second lap took him like 10 minutes.......because he was so pissed about the first lap....so he drove a little harder.....lol...... He doesn't not have even a hint of a smile on his face! I mean he is so pissed off.......he says, "let me see you drive this!" As I fired up the GPL car on the track....I told him I'd have to take it easy for a couple laps because the Ferrari was really slow to warm up the tires to race temps! He has not one little "hint" of belief on his face at these words.....lol..... I click off a couple warm up laps like about 1:22's....then turn up the wick and crank a few 1:18's.....and pull back into the pits. Heck...my PB there in GPL is a 1:16 something...so I'm not even sliding the car around yet....let alone having any hint of going off track! When I turn around and look at Dave's face standing behind me.....his eyes are like the size of basketballs! Dave and I raced until about 3:00 am that night....on the LAN setup.....in GPL, Viper, N-3....I think we ran every track on my computer...some of them three times! Dave has been a die-hard sim racing driver ever since that day (it took him less than a week to go buy a computer and racing wheel.......and a DSL line to run on from his house). He firmly believes in the future of using racing simulators to teach the skills of racing (not driving fast....the "skills of racing".....there's a huge difference) to new drivers. And, he will be heading up the Jim Russell School "simulator" training program for them....as well as being a permanent member of SearsGroup. This winter, Dave is going to start developing our (SearsGroup) test driver certification program.....working with Allen Boyd in the process. We need a good program to screen drivers in the sim community to become Bulldozer Test Drivers for us....so this will be a kind of one-day school....followed by several weeks of "twice-weekly" test races....where the sim driver will graduate...and receive a Bulldozer, "Certified Test Driver" Competition License" which qualifies him (or her) to run in our client Test Races.....next year. Depending on our track client....and "what services" Bulldozer is performing for them......we'll be paying our Certified Test Drivers....about $100 per race to participate in the test races we need to do for Bulldozer work. We couldn't get a better person for this than Dave! [By the way, he's made like $300 bucks so far, making the same bet I made with him......only with the other Russell School instructors.....lol Although, "the word" is getting around now so he's running out of "patsies" for this bet!] Every Wednesday night now, Dave and a dozen or so of the Russell School instructors are running races on VROC in GPL. If any of GPL drivers would like to "guest race" with these guys....send me an email and I'll get it over to Dave so he can send you an invite. By the way, don't take any bets with him....he's doing something like 1:15's now.....he stomps me at Sears in GPL. Most of our test drivers for this SPR - Bulldozer development work - are N-3 drivers. But many have crossed over to GPL since we use that sim for some of our "open wheel" track clients. We've got a big project coming up this winter for a new NASCAR-style super speedway track being built in England (with a road course designed to attract CART, IRL and/or F1 races laid out in the infield of the oval). We will probably be using GPL for the Bulldozer design work on the infield road course (by the way, the Russell School in England will be moving their entire operation to this facility when it is completed next year. They obviously have a key role to play with providing us input about what their needs are for the infield road course...since this will be their new "training track" as well). We haven't made a decision yet....on what "sim" to use for the NASCAR-style super speedway oval. So Rrevved, I don't know if this totally answered your question? But I think you have a better idea of why we might look at a new sim program a little different than some of the drivers in the racing sim community. We have to be able to strip anything and everything that is "gamey" out of a simulation.....before we can make use of it. And, the track building process needs to be "flexible" enough so we can build the tracks as accurate...and as detailed as possible. I'm sure we'll get better and better at this as time goes on. And, as word of our "process" gets out a little more within the sim (game) developers industry....I think they'll better understand "what" we are doing.....and that we are not "competing" with them. We have no interest in being in the retail gaming industry...in any way, shape or form. I expect that eventually one of the sim developers will look at Bulldozer with a "marketing" eye....and just "partner up" with us....to provide tech support and open code source to their game engine, car physics model and track building tools (which we intend to purchase from such a "partner" on a client by client basis). The "issue" of SearsGroup having access to their code....isn't such a tough one to overcome really. We just have "cross-pollinated" NDA's to protect our "trade secrets" and their "trade secrets" simultaneously.....and we'll let the "lawyers" work out the legal stuff. Oh....I wanted to mention as many of the N3 drivers who did test racing for us during the SPR "WC Chute" project. Not all of our drivers currently were around during this period....so I can't just go to our "email" list or something to get all their names. I am going to go off of memory....so if I forget someone.....I apologize in advance...... Besides, it's late here (3:45 am)...and my brain is numb.........!!! So are my fingers....sorry this is such a long post........but Rrevved' question was such a good one! There was a time when I wondered how these guys could be married...or hold down real jobs. The "hours" they put in test driving for us (and practicing too) were substantial. Many of them......even gave up running in some league events where they had been "regulars" for a few seasons! That was a big sacrifice for them to make all on its own! We really appreciated their time...their commitment....their consistency in showing up on-time for driver's meetings...but most of all....we appreciated them for their racing skills....and professional conduct on the race track. When we start up this work for the track in England in a few months....these guys are all "automatically" invited back. Hey, guys! This will be a "paying" client too........so you get paid, as well! They are as follows (from my memory): Kurt Nunez Brian Hoff Carl Burk Bruce English Chip Bieber Rob Hitchings (Rob worked on the "cams" for us too) Steve Fries Oh man, I know I'm missing some guys who raced early on the deal with us.....damn....hmmm Of course, Allen Boyd, myself, Tim, Vu, Clark, Dave McEntee, Ralph Alexander and Bob Rowden all participated in the test races if they weren't working directly on something with Bulldozer that night....or their wives were out of town.....lol...... Oh yeah, Bob Davis...the Sears Point architect raced with us too....as often as he could anyway. We are looking to have around 40 test drivers for this Winter's work with the track in England. We'll need some more GPL drivers I know for sure....but all the guys above get preference for getting "paid race assignments" over any of the new drivers.......that's just got to be the fair way for us to do it....but, we may be running multiple test driver race groups...since this "client" really has two tracks for us to test. Thanks for accepting this pretty long post.... I really mean that. I know this is a "no no"....but I'll keep my next one down to 50 pages or less....lol. Regards, Tom Pabst "rrevved" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (11 lines)

> On Mon, 21 Aug 2000 20:46:41 GMT, "Tom Pabst" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > > > [snip long article] > > Tom, which sim measures up to Bulldozer's standards? > > Which sim are you using, in your project, that a Jeff G. or > Bobby L. can drive and evaluate your race track? >

GTX.... I had tried a couple of those same settings......(they are similar to the ones in the Viper config.cfg file too....and fooled around with this stuff when the "beta testers" were helping out with the production of the "official" Viper Racing patch work). However, I figured these were either not implemented (being able to change the parameter settings)...or not working in the demo....or I wasn't being allowed to "write protect" the config.cfg file so the "game" would change it back to default? I also thought maybe these were only "on" when racing in multiplayer? I'm just recently getting the time to monitor the sim newsgroups....after a layoff of about 9 months (since no one from SearsGroup could talk about this stuff until the "development" period was over and we were given permission to do so by SPR).....and man there are so many "Forums" that weren't active 9 months ago....I'm going to have limit how much "monitoring" I can afford to do. But I know I can do a better job than I have over the last couple weeks! It takes a little break-in period to get used to doing this on a regular basis. And, I'm not "broken in" yet....lol. Thanks for the info.......see you on the "full-version" Heat track by Wednesday....it looks like? Tom Pabst "GTX_SlotCar" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:8tko5.5464$[email hidden]... > Tom, > Very well said, and I'm glad you said it. I somehow feel more 'normal'now. > The sound issue has been mentioned before, either here or on the HG forum > (or both). Especially the menu clicks. In the demo, you can change the FOV > for the mirror now with this line in the options.cfg: > mirror_fov 130.000000 > There is hope for some of the other things that concern us with theselines

Quoted text (23 lines)

> that do not work yet but hopefully will work in the full version: > auto_drive yes > force_legal_pitspeed yes > (both for the pits?) > fov 130.000000 > (forward vision FOV?) > mirror 2 > (will there be more than one mirror option?) > > > -- > Slot > > www.slottweak.com > Tweaks & Reviews > > > > "Tom Pabst" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:Rygo5.122335$[email hidden]... > > I have read with great interest all the varied opinions about whether > NASCAR > > Heat is a true sim, or an "arcade game".......with just about all

degrees

Quoted text (8 lines)

> of > > variance in between. I don't think any one of us is a fully qualified > > "authority" on racing simulation "games"....so that our individual > > "judgment" of any racing sim is "the ultimate authoritative" verdict. > But, > > that shouldn't matter! > > > > What does matter is that we each have our "beliefs".....about what makes

a > > good racing simulation and what does not. We have things welike...things > > we don't care about....and things we don't like. Our opinions fallinto > > these general categories and we have them for probably every racing sim > > we've ever installed on computers. I have my own set of "opinions"about > > GPL, NASCAR 2-3-4?, Viper Racing, SCGT, GP3.........and yes, aboutNASCAR

Quoted text (11 lines)

> > Heat too. > > > > But, I don't think most of you are any more interested in "what I think" > > about NASCAR Heat......than any other person who makes reasonable > > "observations" about what they like about NH...or what they don't like > about > > it. > > > > I would also like to point out, NH as we know it today.....is only a > "demo" > > of the full product....... set to be released tomorrow. Now, of course

we > > have the NH beta testers (some of whom are making "posts" here) who do > know > > the full scope of the NH simulation. But by nature, beta testers are > biased > > in favor of any "game" they beta test. I'm sure that's not a"revelation"

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > to any of you. So the beta testers will probably have their "opinions" > > substantially discounted by the rest of us. > > > > At SearsGroup, we have our own set of criteria that we use to judge a > racing > > simulation.....as to its viability to become software that we can use > within > > our "Bulldozer" work. Since we haven't written our own racing

simulation > > program (and we never will).........we are subject to the quality of the > > "retail racing sims" on the market.....and their ability to be "hacked"to

Quoted text (16 lines)

> > the point of creating the purest form of simulation possible (which is > what > > we need). When we have to sit a "Jeff Gordon" down in one of our > > simulators.....and ask him to race his buddy "Steve Park" over there in > the > > sim next to him.....and tell him to race hard because we want some > feedback > > about this new track configuration (change) we are thinking of > > building........well, we can't be worried about our race simulator > > "software" embarrassing us! > > > > So, we look at a new sim coming to market with some simple yard sticks: > > > > 1) How close is the "box" version to being the pure form of racing > > simulation we need? > > 2) How much is it possible to "hack" the box version to get it to

our

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > "pure sim" standards? > > 3) How willing is the developer to assist us...or the sim community > in > > general, in making these modifications (hacks)? Another way to put this > is, > > "Does the developer just want to sell 'games' or are they interested in > > longevity and creating a kind of 'cottage industry' within the racing

sim > > community, where their "box" sales are stimulated over an extendedperiod

Quoted text (8 lines)

> of > > time, because the "add-ons" available within the racing sim > > community....don't work without the original "box game." > > 4) What sim(s) are we using for Bulldozer now.....and how do they > > compare to "the new kid on the block?" > > > > For us, this process begins the first time there's an announcement made > > about a new racing simulation going into production. It then goes "on

our > > radar screens." For NASCAR Heat, that was about 9 months ago (I > > believe......I could be off on that because I may be confused about whenI > > first heard of NASCAR Heat.........as opposed to when I first saw a > "public" > > announcement about it?). We went to E-3 so we could take a look at > > "Heat"...along with N-4 and GP-3 of course. And now, we have the"demo." > > > > As part of this process (and I would like to emphasis..."part of the > > process"...this means its ongoing and isn't conclusive just becausewe've

Quoted text (20 lines)

> > had the NH demo for a few days)...I asked our "test drivers" to give me > > their opinions about the NH demo. I asked them to just...... "tell me > what > > you like, and what you don't like" about Heat. Don't tell me what you > think > > is wrong with it.....because we're not the game developer.....and "right > or > > wrong" isn't important (at least not in this context it isn't). I asked > the > > same question of all the people working in and around > > SearsGroup/Bulldozer....most of whom are sim racers...as well as > real-world > > racers. There's a substantial number of Jim Russell School race > instructors > > included in this group.....and their "likes/dislikes" are included below > as > > well. > > > > It seemed to me this morning that it might be appropriate to share this > > "consensus" of likes and dislikes (mine are included too) with all of

you. > > Especially on the "eve" of the NH full program release. Over the nextfew > > days, judgments will be made by all of us as to which things are betterin

Quoted text (11 lines)

> > the full program......and which things are not! > > > > Here's the list....... We'll start with "The Likes" > > > > NASCAR Heat Demo.......what we like about it: > > > > 1) The track surface graphics, coloring and textures. > > 2) The TSO's (trackside objects) graphics-detail. > > 3) The AI car graphics-detail. > > 4) The "car physics" model (**with some reservations). > > 5) The AI driver programming, especially the increased

"aggressive

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > driving" in the closing laps. > > 6) The UI screens, particularly the ease of navigation. > > 7) The race car "setup" modeling.....and UI screen interface with > it. > > 8) The animated pit crew. > > 9) The "trueness" of the track geometry to the "real-world" race > > track it depicts (for the demo tracks only of course). > > 10) The infield grass/surface....texture and coloring. > > 11) Armco, walls and catch-fencing detail and rendering when at

race

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > speeds. > > 12) The "arcade functions" of Beat the Heat...and the other > > "challenges"...they are just plain fun!. > > 13) The sky and horizon texturing.....very realistic. > > > > **Note: The fact that the demo didn't include a road course, made it > > somewhat difficult to fully ascertain the quality of the car physics > > modeling. Also, leading to some confusion, was a valid confirmation

that > > the config.cfg file wasn't being overwritten by the game engine...thus > > turning off the full physics model....even though the proper settingswere

Quoted text (15 lines)

> > made in it. There was enough of a general feeling that the car physics > were > > too "tame" for something trying to be "GPL-like in a 3500 pound Winston > Cup > > race car" to be fully evaluated....especially without the opportunity to > > drive on a road course. > > > > NASCAR Heat Demo.....what we do not like about it: > > > > 1) The sound....all of it. Including the spotter, engine, FX, > crash, > > tire squeal, etc. It seems some of the "sound fields" have been > mistakenly > > reversed (especially the engine sounds) and many of the "fx sounds are > > either not realistic...or outright irritating. The spotter sound/voice

is > > not acceptable....we would turn this off at the first chance to hack it. > > The engines sound like they would if they were from outside the race > > car......maybe to a fan sitting in the stands or something???......not > > anything like the "presence" they have from inside a WC car cockpit. We > are > > hoping Hasbro will open the "race.bin" code for the sounds, so theseveral > > excellent "sound hacks" in the sim community can fix this with > > patches.....quickly! We understand that MGI did not do any of the sound > > work for NH.....it was farmed out by Hasbro. Who ever theyhired.....I'd > > fire them, or at least consider stopping payment on my check to them!At > > least they are not as bad as DTR....thank God! > > 2) The cockpit, specifically the graphics (lack of texture to the > > surfaces...and the arcade-like bright coloring which looks & feelsnothing

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > like a real-world WC car cockpit). > > 3) The "floating" rear view mirror! > > 4) The driver's FOV (too far back....almost a "fish-eye" looking > view > > out the windshield) and the rear view mirror FOV (it has cruise ship > > engulfing, huge blind spots). > > 5) The "movement" of the cockpit. Its not realistic (moves in

and > > out...not up and down)...and after a short time....the "movement" is > > irritating, distracting and tedious. This must have been somebody'scute > > idea for realism. Clearly the person has never been strapped into the > seat > > of race car with a five-point harness and race seat! Guys...when youstep > > on the brakes of a race car....the nose drops...and it stays down until > you > > release from threshold braking! When you step on the gas....the nose > rises > > slightly (or the rear hunches down...depending on yourorientation)...and > it > > stays that way until you release the throttle from threshold throttle. > You > > might get a little bit of this forward and back movement in an openwheel > > race car (because of the geometry movement of the outboard suspension > > rolling up and down on itself)....but not in a sedan, GT type, > closed-wheel > > race car. What were you thinking? It's hard to believe that featurewas > > implemented when Labonte was driving the (sim) car. He gave us some"lip > > service" about our cockpit....and ours is light years better than theone > in > > NH. > > 6) The "rolling starts"........without a true, full pace lap,green

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > flag start....its very arcade-like and tends to "disengage" you from the > > race. > > 7) The lack of "player" control at race end....no "victory lap" > > capability....especially with being "ripped off the track" just as you > cross > > the S/F line at race end. > > 8) The lack of driver control of the entire pit stop.....not > > acceptable as is. We really hope this can be turned off. > > 9) AI car programming on the transition roads (they run into you

as

Quoted text (10 lines)

> > if they don't see you). > > 10) The canned response of the car to impacting the wall....not > > variable with impact speed. > > 11) The positioning of the "race info" data screens within the > > cockpit...can't see them without taking your eyes substantially off the > race > > line.......same problem as you had with Viper Racing! > > 12) The "spotter information" ....its either very redundant...or > > useless. > > 13) Although "multiplayer" was not in the demo......word that it

will > > support only 8 drivers online is not good. We hope this can change with > > "hacks" and better "broad-band" multiplayer patch support. > > 14) The UI screen "button" sound FX. It is irritating, can't turnit > > off....and dangerous to speaker cones and human ear drums if the sound > > volume is turned up (which it would likely be just after exiting from a > > race). If you use headphones.....extreme caution is required to prevent > > some ear damage we think. > > 15) The static shadows and lighting in night races. This is the > > modern era of dynamic lighting effects, monster RAM video cards andcpu's > > measured with a new word........."GIGS!". If you guys couldn'timplement > > this because of cpu or pixel budgets....you should have not done night > > races. You are going to get killed by Papyrus in this department at > least. > > > > Ok...that's how we see the NH demo as a whole at SearsGroup. I don'tknow > > how this matches up with everyone's "lists"....nor do I even think thisis > > some kind of a consensus....I doubt that very much (especially sinceI've > > seen very little posts here about the sound....and we think that "topsthe > > list" of the worst features in NH)! > > > > I do want to say that I think "NASCAR Heat" is a monumental effort byRich

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > Garcia...and all the guys at MGI and the marketing team at Hasbro. They > > should be congratulated for their work, their innovative thinking....and > the > > ability to implement ground braking features in a racing simulation. I > > always thought Viper Racing was an excellent racing simulation.....ahead > of > > its time much like GPL was ahead of its time..... (funny.......they were > > both released on the same day.....by the same publisher, Sierra).

NASCAR > > Heat shows just how good Viper Racing really is (not "was"...I stillhave

Quoted text (10 lines)

> it > > on my computer.....still race it online weekly almost)......and how good > the > > guys who created Viper Racing......and now NASCAR Heat....really are! I > > think NH will be a retail/financial success.....no question about it. I > do > > not think NH will become the "ultimate sim".....displacing GPL from that > > exalted status. No way....not in its present form that is. > > > > I think if Hasbro is forward thinking enough, and they decide to open

the

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > doors to the NH "bin" files structure and code.......encouraging and > helping > > the sim racing community "hackers" who, as a group.....are probably the > best > > racing sim graphic artists and programmers in the world.....fix some of > this > > stuff.....then NH has a good chance of taking the throne maybe beside

GPL?

Quoted text (14 lines)

> > But it will never knock it off........at least that's my thinking today. > I > > can always change my mind though....lol. > > > > Is there a "David Noonan" of NASCAR sims? We could sure use one! > > > > Regards, > > > > Tom Pabst > > SearsGroup > > > > PS: My after thoughts: Why has Papy "taken their toys and gone home?" > Is > > it the stiff competition from NH? Maybe. Is it the natural side

affects > of > > major-league talent (like Charlie Heath) leaving Papyrus? Maybe. Isthe > > "new blood" at Papyrus not up to the task of producing racingsimulations > of > > major innovation and invention? Maybe. Has Sierra swung the "axe" too > far > > in throttling and punishing Papyrus for the financial failure of GPL?Is > > David Kaemmer a great car physics programmer...but a not-so-hotcorporate > > leader? Maybe. When I think of these questions......I'm reminded of an > old > > joke about "a million dollars.....and Las Vegas"......a "twist" of that > > version would go like this: > > > > "Do you want to know how to become the third ranked retail gamedeveloper > in > > the world? Its very easy! All you need to do is........start out as > > "number one"....and make the same kind of marketing & productiondecisions > > that Papyrus & Sierra have made over the last three years! > > > > I wonder why I'm not laughing? Its kind of sad really....don't youthink?

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

Man...that is just great news.....thanks! "d0le" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Mon, 21 Aug 2000 21:12:15 -0400, "GTX_SlotCar" <[email hidden]> > wrote: > > >Tom, > >Very well said, and I'm glad you said it. I somehow feel more 'normal'now. > >The sound issue has been mentioned before, either here or on the HG forum > >(or both). Especially the menu clicks. In the demo, you can change theFOV > >for the mirror now with this line in the options.cfg: > >mirror_fov 130.000000 > >There is hope for some of the other things that concern us with theselines

Quoted text (16 lines)

> >that do not work yet but hopefully will work in the full version: > >auto_drive yes > >force_legal_pitspeed yes > >(both for the pits?) > >fov 130.000000 > >(forward vision FOV?) > >mirror 2 > >(will there be more than one mirror option?) > > > the mirror 0 1 and 2 control either no mirror, cars only, and all. > > You *WILL* be able to control your car in the pits, and under yellow > in the full version. > > The rolling starts looks to stay, though =(

In article <news1.frmt1.sfba.home.com>, [email hidden] wrote... > This is serious question. Has this ever been done? I haven't seen > it...but that doesn't mean someone hasn't undertaken a serious > "study"of what we define as a "serious racing simulation." I just > haven't seen it. I think one of the most serious points Hasbro/MGI considered when they created Nascar Heat was MONEY. They are going to make some SERIOUS MONEY with this title. Why? Because it has more than enough for the hardcore sim racer while maintaining the "fun" for the arcade as well as the (not so serious) sim racer. Oh yeah - THEY ADVERTISE. I see spots during Happy Hour and Winston Cup races every week now. --David Cook

David... I couldn't agree with you more that Hasbro will make a financial success out of Heat. I think this would still be the case even without the "serious hardcore" elements. But, when you say, "it has more than enough for the hardcore sim racer....." you are kind of "begging the question" there. "More than enough for what?" More than enough to entice the hardcore sim racer to buy it? Who cares...our ranks aren't strong enough that those sales....or lack there of.....are going to have any real impact on the sales performance overall...of Heat. And, my observations of this sim racing community for the last five years or so is this: The "hardcore sim racer" is the "easiest sale there is on this planet." We are all suckers....and we are so hungry for a good racing sim...we buy anything that comes out......"just in case!" .....lol. Most of the "hardcore" guys.....became "hardcore" because they had the time....and the money to buy the upper level computer equipment that ends up turning them eventually into "hardcore." Most of these guys are not concerned about $50 bucks for another sim....heck it may even "capture their imagination" for a couple days! To these guys, that's worth the $50 bucks anyway. The bottom line is.....Hasbro gets our money.....no matter what. Its the rest of the "gaming" market that Hasbro is competing for "dollars" with the competition....the competition of other pc games...not only those for racing "games." And, for this reason....Heat gets my accolades. Here's why I say that. We need to attract "new blood" into sim racing (hardcore if you want to use that term too)...as much as possible. That's true of all racing series....in the real world...why not in sim racing too? New hardcore racers are "cultivated and converted" from casual "gamers" who might buy a racing sim....like it...get more involved....get addicted like the rest of us...and bingo...we have another hardcore sim racer! Racing "sim" software like Heat does a much better job of capturing.....and cultivating our new sim "player" ....so that we have his interest long enough to really grab him......so he becomes hardcore. Other racing "sim" software might not do such a good job of that. You know? Example: I was talking to a guy who runs one of the "overclocking" info websites through email exchange the other night. Somehow we got on the topic of "gaming"...and what we played, etc. You know the drill? Well, this guy was a pretty regular player of the FPS titles.......and when I told him I was a sim racer......he said the following, "Oh really? I thought those looked pretty cool..... so I bought one....but I decided I didn't really like that kind of "game"....so I've never really tried any sim racing "games" after that!" When I asked him "which sim game did he buy?" I wasn't even getting that question fully off my hands and fingers and on the email page when I went, "oh, oh......bet this guy bought GPL....oh, geeeesh! No wonder he didn't like racing sims!" And sure enough.....his reply was "Grand Prix Legends.....but it wasn't fun to keep slamming into the walls and crashing....and I never could get the car back on the track going straight again.......I thought this was a pretty stupid racing game." So, for this reason....the best racing simulation around (hardcore sim-wise) actually robbed us of another hardcore simmer (maybe?)....at least this guy never had a chance! Would "Heat" have done a better job of keeping this guy's attention a little longer than GPL? Of course....stupid question, huh? So, this is why I think Heat is good for the hardcore sim racing community....even though it may not turn out on its own merit to be a hardcore racing simulation....or at least one with wide-spread appeal in this community. That, however, is not my final judgment on Heat.......but it is currently my inclination of what my final opinion of it might be.....assuming a lot of this stuff we've discussed in here for a week....can't be changed, hacked or eliminated from Heat. And, in Heat's case....it has a "fatal flaw" in my book at least (maybe not everyone's...I know that).....that is the "sounds"....... I don't care how good the graphics are, how good the physics model for the car is.....how good "anything inserted here you want to insert here" is....... if it has bad engine sounds and fx sounds.......I am not going to even keep it installed on my computer (unless I can fix it). I have a very sophisticated sound system on my race computer. I have created engine sounds for almost every popular racing sim for the last few years....and when they have been available for dl on the internet....the number of "file transfer" hits on those web pages has been substantial (over 20,000 in a week at High Gear for my GPL SoundPak files a year or so back). I haven't had new engines for GPL for maybe a year....and I still get email almost every week from somebody thanking me for them......or asking questions about tweaking their sound cards or something. Regardless of what I think, that represents a fact that says, I must know something about what a race engine should sound like for the driver in a race car. I'd think you'd have to agree with that. I have also been hired as an independent outside consultant to do the "official" sound package for two racing simulations that have not yet been released. So, software developers are willing to pay me money to create engine sounds for them too. That's yet another "fact" that points to my ability to have a pretty good "ear" for creating engine sounds that racing sim drivers seem to like. No? So, when I say that I have tried to do just about everything I can think of........ anything.........something.......to try and at least get the sounds in the Heat demo to something I can reasonably live with....even if just for the week that I'll be running the demo....and I can't do it. Hmmmm? No matter what I do.....the sound fields for Heat seem "reversed" to me and the best I can do is get the thing so I can hear the engine........just barely above the "wind-cockpit" noise....that gets louder....or softer....or brighter....or bassier....right along with the engines too! I also am testing some "engine vibration" devices that are used by Lucas Arts (they are only about 15 miles from my house and I know a lot of the tech guys over there).....some of which were developed to be installed in theaters for Star Wars movies. These things are awesome....they even have their own, separate 300 watt amplifier to run them. They are like two huge magnets.....about 4 inches thick......and about 5 inches in diameter.......bolted to the back of my Kirkey aluminum racing seat....just above what would be my "belt" line if I was wearing jeans or something with a belt. In N3...these things make my butt get numb from the vibration....just like my GT-3 race car did in a long National race. In DTR Sprint Car......they blur my vision (...lol.....an 800 hp WoO ...methanol "down-nozzle" injected V-8 engine is the baldest engine in all of racing...that is if the race car can turn left ...or right).....I'm not kidding...these things actually blur my vision....I have to turn the "cross over" and the amplitude down like to 50% of what I have them set at for N-3. In Viper Racing.......they produce the sweetest.......buzzing, breathy vibration that is perfectly in tune with that big Viper bad boy engine.....and Viper isn't really noted for having awesome engines...right? So, if I tell you that these things don't even make the "actuators" rattle a little bit....at full 300 watts...and at full cross-over settings......does that say something about how "weak" the engines are in Heat. Now, I know Hasbro has no obligation to make engines tweaked for Tom Pabst's sound system. I don't expect that....and I didn't create the engines for DTR Sprint Car for my system either. But, give me a break! I only hope that: a. I got a bad download of the Heat demo, or b. My sound card is going bad....but it shows up only when I'm running NASCAR Heat, or c. My actuators are going bad....but it also only shows up when I'm running Heat, or d. The NASCAR Heat engines are awesome.....and I don't know a thing about racing sim engine sounds or how to set my sound system...or the $1,500 FX box I have inserted in it. I have tried every "fx tweak" trick I know....nothing works. I would love to see a post from Ed Martin saying that they realized the problems with the engine sounds....just minutes before dropping the "master" for Heat...and a "tweak" of the sound code fixed everything! C'mon Ed.....just make that post even if it isn't true so I can get some sleep at night! I have had this re-occurring dream ever since last Wednesday night....... that I'm at the "gates" and St Peter is sending my "down"......for a little disciplinary action from the "horned guy"....and my punishment is I have to race NASCAR Heat all day long....with the engine sounds from the demo! Oh man, I'd rather scrape my finger nails on a blackboard all day long! I hope its clear that I don't like the engine sounds in Heat? I did test them on the two other "sims" I have in my workshop. One has a AWE 64 Gold sound card with a set of MS "sub" speaker systems attached. There is a miniscule improvement because these speakers (they are small) can filter the "bass tones" slightly that helps to "clean" the sound. I also tried Heat on a pair of desktop "satellite" speakers running off a "legacy" sound card integrated with the mother board. They sound like crap...but then every sound I run through that setup sounds like crap! On headphones.....the sound is even worse.....because the sound fields are flattened or merged so to speak.......and I also add the danger of breaking an eardrum if I forget to turn the volume down when exiting the race track! That's no good. I'm going to take up a collection.....to see if I can gather up enough "cheese" to send to Broske to bribe him into telling me the names of the engine sound files in the Heat "race.bin" file so I can alter their file name so I can run Heat with my own engine sample file(s) at least! (And Dave, there's an extra "fin" in the deal for you if you can also tell me that "pop" sound in the UI screen "button" fx.....tooooo! Tom Pabst "David L. Cook" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> In article <news1.frmt1.sfba.home.com>, [email hidden] wrote... > > This is serious question. Has this ever been done? I haven't seen > > it...but that doesn't mean someone hasn't undertaken a serious > > "study"of what we define as a "serious racing simulation." I just > > haven't seen it. > > I think one of the most serious points Hasbro/MGI considered when they

created > Nascar Heat was MONEY. They are going to make some SERIOUS MONEY withthis > title. Why? Because it has more than enough for the hardcore sim racerwhile > maintaining the "fun" for the arcade as well as the (not so serious) simracer. > Oh yeah - THEY ADVERTISE. I see spots during Happy Hour and Winston Cupraces > every week now. > > --David Cook

On Tue, 22 Aug 2000 07:36:05 GMT, "Tom Pabst" <[email hidden]> wrote: I am glad my newsreader has a save game feature. It's the only way I can get through the marathon posts by this guy. ~daxe

On Mon, 21 Aug 2000 21:52:52 -0600, "JJ Thomas" <[email hidden]> wrote: >It would be nice but not mandatory, the Sim makes up for its shortcomings >four fold. In N3 the cars on the pace lap stop and go several times not >very realistic as so the cars convulsing when you get behind them. Pitiful, >SCREAMS..... POOR PHYSICS ENGINE. Can you distinguish the difference between bad AI design and a bad physics engine? Didn't think so.

On Tue, 22 Aug 2000 02:29:51 -0500, rrevved <[email hidden]> wrote: >In which flightsim do you have 42 planes which are inches from >yours and surrounded by concrete while you all takeoff? Falcon 4?-)

[excellent post snipped...to save bandwidth ;) ] Man, what a post! 'Post Of The Year' IMHO, Thanks Tom, BTW, where abouts in England is this track gonna be?, can you say? (I wanna know if its gonna be near, I'm in the Midlands, and miss dearly the racing we 'used' to get at Mallory Park) Freeburn

daxe wrote: > > On Tue, 22 Aug 2000 07:36:05 GMT, "Tom Pabst" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > I am glad my newsreader has a save game feature. It's the only way I > can get through the marathon posts by this guy. > Yeah, but the physics sucks. <g> Well, at least this guy has something *useful* to say. More than is the case in many posts around here. (Not aimed at you, Daxe ;-) ) Keep up the good work, Tom. -- Chuck Kandler Windows--computing for the Unwashed Masses Registered Linux User #180746 http://counter.li.org

According to some info I just received, setting mirrors to 4 will probably be a 3D mirror. -- Slot Tweaks & Reviews www.slottweak.com "Tom Pabst" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:HWso5.123270$[email hidden]... > GTX.... > > I had tried a couple of those same settings......(they are similar to the > ones in the Viper config.cfg file too....and fooled around with this stuff > when the "beta testers" were helping out with the production of the > "official" Viper Racing patch work). > > However, I figured these were either not implemented (being able to change > the parameter settings)...or not working in the demo....or I wasn't being > allowed to "write protect" the config.cfg file so the "game" would change it > back to default? I also thought maybe these were only "on" when racing in > multiplayer? > > I'm just recently getting the time to monitor the sim newsgroups....after a > layoff of about 9 months (since no one from SearsGroup could talk about this > stuff until the "development" period was over and we were given permission > to do so by SPR).....and man there are so many "Forums" that weren't active > 9 months ago....I'm going to have limit how much "monitoring" I can afford > to do. But I know I can do a better job than I have over the last couple > weeks! It takes a little break-in period to get used to doing this on a > regular basis. And, I'm not "broken in" yet....lol. > > Thanks for the info.......see you on the "full-version" Heat track by > Wednesday....it looks like? > > Tom Pabst > > > > > "GTX_SlotCar" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:8tko5.5464$[email hidden]... > > Tom, > > Very well said, and I'm glad you said it. I somehow feel more 'normal' > now. > > The sound issue has been mentioned before, either here or on the HG forum > > (or both). Especially the menu clicks. In the demo, you can change the FOV > > for the mirror now with this line in the options.cfg: > > mirror_fov 130.000000 > > There is hope for some of the other things that concern us with these > lines > > that do not work yet but hopefully will work in the full version: > > auto_drive yes > > force_legal_pitspeed yes > > (both for the pits?) > > fov 130.000000 > > (forward vision FOV?) > > mirror 2 > > (will there be more than one mirror option?) > > > > > > -- > > Slot > > > > www.slottweak.com > > Tweaks & Reviews > > > > > > > > "Tom Pabst" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:Rygo5.122335$[email hidden]... > > > I have read with great interest all the varied opinions about whether > > NASCAR > > > Heat is a true sim, or an "arcade game".......with just about all > degrees > > of > > > variance in between. I don't think any one of us is a fully qualified > > > "authority" on racing simulation "games"....so that our individual > > > "judgment" of any racing sim is "the ultimate authoritative" verdict. > > But, > > > that shouldn't matter! > > > > > > What does matter is that we each have our "beliefs".....about what makes > a > > > good racing simulation and what does not. We have things we > like...things > > > we don't care about....and things we don't like. Our opinions fall > into > > > these general categories and we have them for probably every racing sim > > > we've ever installed on computers. I have my own set of "opinions" > about > > > GPL, NASCAR 2-3-4?, Viper Racing, SCGT, GP3.........and yes, about > NASCAR > > > Heat too. > > > > > > But, I don't think most of you are any more interested in "what I think" > > > about NASCAR Heat......than any other person who makes reasonable > > > "observations" about what they like about NH...or what they don't like > > about > > > it. > > > > > > I would also like to point out, NH as we know it today.....is only a > > "demo" > > > of the full product....... set to be released tomorrow. Now, of course > we > > > have the NH beta testers (some of whom are making "posts" here) who do > > know > > > the full scope of the NH simulation. But by nature, beta testers are > > biased > > > in favor of any "game" they beta test. I'm sure that's not a > "revelation" > > > to any of you. So the beta testers will probably have their "opinions" > > > substantially discounted by the rest of us. > > > > > > At SearsGroup, we have our own set of criteria that we use to judge a > > racing > > > simulation.....as to its viability to become software that we can use > > within > > > our "Bulldozer" work. Since we haven't written our own racing > simulation > > > program (and we never will).........we are subject to the quality of the > > > "retail racing sims" on the market.....and their ability to be "hacked" > to > > > the point of creating the purest form of simulation possible (which is > > what > > > we need). When we have to sit a "Jeff Gordon" down in one of our > > > simulators.....and ask him to race his buddy "Steve Park" over there in > > the > > > sim next to him.....and tell him to race hard because we want some > > feedback > > > about this new track configuration (change) we are thinking of > > > building........well, we can't be worried about our race simulator > > > "software" embarrassing us! > > > > > > So, we look at a new sim coming to market with some simple yard sticks: > > > > > > 1) How close is the "box" version to being the pure form of racing > > > simulation we need? > > > 2) How much is it possible to "hack" the box version to get it to > our > > > "pure sim" standards? > > > 3) How willing is the developer to assist us...or the sim community > > in > > > general, in making these modifications (hacks)? Another way to put this > > is, > > > "Does the developer just want to sell 'games' or are they interested in > > > longevity and creating a kind of 'cottage industry' within the racing > sim > > > community, where their "box" sales are stimulated over an extended > period > > of > > > time, because the "add-ons" available within the racing sim > > > community....don't work without the original "box game." > > > 4) What sim(s) are we using for Bulldozer now.....and how do they > > > compare to "the new kid on the block?" > > > > > > For us, this process begins the first time there's an announcement made > > > about a new racing simulation going into production. It then goes "on > our > > > radar screens." For NASCAR Heat, that was about 9 months ago (I > > > believe......I could be off on that because I may be confused about when > I > > > first heard of NASCAR Heat.........as opposed to when I first saw a > > "public" > > > announcement about it?). We went to E-3 so we could take a look at > > > "Heat"...along with N-4 and GP-3 of course. And now, we have the > "demo." > > > > > > As part of this process (and I would like to emphasis..."part of the > > > process"...this means its ongoing and isn't conclusive just because > we've > > > had the NH demo for a few days)...I asked our "test drivers" to give me > > > their opinions about the NH demo. I asked them to just...... "tell me > > what > > > you like, and what you don't like" about Heat. Don't tell me what you > > think > > > is wrong with it.....because we're not the game developer.....and "right > > or > > > wrong" isn't important (at least not in this context it isn't). I asked > > the > > > same question of all the people working in and around > > > SearsGroup/Bulldozer....most of whom are sim racers...as well as > > real-world > > > racers. There's a substantial number of Jim Russell School race > > instructors > > > included in this group.....and their "likes/dislikes" are included below > > as > > > well. > > > > > > It seemed to me this morning that it might be appropriate to share this > > > "consensus" of likes and dislikes (mine are included too) with all of > you. > > > Especially on the "eve" of the NH full program release. Over the next > few > > > days, judgments will be made by all of us as to which things are better > in > > > the full program......and which things are not! > > > > > > Here's the list....... We'll start with "The Likes" > > > > > > NASCAR Heat Demo.......what we like about it: > > > > > > 1) The track surface graphics, coloring and textures. > > > 2) The TSO's (trackside objects) graphics-detail. > > > 3) The AI car graphics-detail. > > > 4) The "car physics" model (**with some reservations). > > > 5) The AI driver programming, especially the increased > "aggressive > > > driving" in the closing laps. > > > 6) The UI screens, particularly the ease of navigation. > > > 7) The race car "setup" modeling.....and UI screen interface with > > it. > > > 8) The animated pit crew. > > > 9) The "trueness" of the track geometry to the "real-world" race > > > track it depicts (for the demo tracks only of course). > > > 10) The infield grass/surface....texture and coloring. > > > 11) Armco, walls and catch-fencing detail and rendering when at > race > > > speeds. > > > 12) The "arcade functions" of Beat the Heat...and the other > > > "challenges"...they are just plain fun!. > > > 13) The sky and horizon texturing.....very realistic. > > > > > > **Note: The fact that the demo didn't include a road course, made it > > > somewhat difficult to fully ascertain the quality of the car physics > > > modeling. Also, leading to some confusion, was a valid confirmation > that > > > the config.cfg file wasn't being overwritten by the game engine...thus > > > turning off the full physics model....even though the proper settings > were > > > made in it. There was enough of a general feeling that the car physics > > were > > > too "tame" for something trying to be "GPL-like in a 3500 pound Winston > > Cup > > > race car" to be fully evaluated....especially without the opportunity to > > > drive on a road course. > > > > > > NASCAR Heat Demo.....what we do not like about it: > > > > > > 1) The sound....all of it. Including the spotter, engine, FX, > > crash, > > > tire squeal, etc. It seems some of the "sound fields" have been > > mistakenly > > > reversed (especially the engine sounds) and many of the "fx sounds are > > > either not realistic...or outright irritating. The spotter sound/voice > is > > > not acceptable....we would turn this off at the first chance to hack it. > > > The engines sound like they would if they were from outside the race > > > car......maybe to a fan sitting in the stands or something???......not > > > anything like the "presence" they have from inside a WC car cockpit. We > > are > > > hoping Hasbro will open the "race.bin" code for the sounds, so the > several > > > excellent "sound hacks" in the sim community can fix this with > > > patches.....quickly! We understand that MGI did not do any of the sound > > > work for NH.....it was farmed out by Hasbro. Who ever they > hired.....I'd > > > fire them, or at least consider stopping payment on my check to them! > At > > > least they are not as bad as DTR....thank God! > > > 2) The cockpit, specifically the graphics (lack of texture to the > > > surfaces...and the arcade-like bright coloring which looks & feels > nothing > > > like a real-world WC car cockpit). > > > 3) The "floating" rear view mirror! > > > 4) The driver's FOV (too far back....almost a "fish-eye" looking > > view > > > out the windshield) and the rear view mirror FOV (it has cruise ship > > > engulfing, huge blind spots). > > > 5) The "movement" of the cockpit. Its not realistic (moves in > and > > > out...not up and down)...and after a short time....the "movement" is > > > irritating, distracting and tedious. This must have been somebody's > cute > > > idea for realism. Clearly the person has never been strapped into the > > seat > > > of race car with a five-point harness and race seat! Guys...when you > step > > > on the brakes of a race car....the nose drops...and it stays down until > > you > > > release from threshold braking! When you step on the gas....the nose > > rises > > > slightly (or the rear hunches down...depending on your > orientation)...and > > it > > > stays that way until you release the throttle from threshold throttle. > > You > > > might get a little bit of this forward and back movement in an open > wheel > > > race car (because of the geometry movement of the outboard suspension > > > rolling up and down on itself)....but not in a sedan, GT type, > > closed-wheel > > > race car. What were you thinking? It's hard to believe that feature > was > > > implemented when Labonte was driving the (sim) car. He gave us some > "lip > > > service" about our cockpit....and ours is light years better than the > one > > in > > > NH. > > > 6) The "rolling starts"........without a true, full pace lap, > green > > > flag start....its very arcade-like and tends to "disengage" you from the > > > race. > > > 7) The lack of "player" control at race end....no "victory lap" > > > capability....especially with being "ripped off the track" just as you > > cross > > > the S/F line at race end. > > > 8) The lack of driver control of the entire pit stop.....not > > > acceptable as is. We really hope this can be turned off. > > > 9) AI car programming on the transition roads (they run into you > as > > > if they don't see you). > > > 10) The canned response of the car to impacting the wall....not > > > variable with impact speed. > > > 11) The positioning of the "race info" data screens within the > > > cockpit...can't see them without taking your eyes substantially off the > > race > > > line.......same problem as you had with Viper Racing! > > > 12) The "spotter information" ....its either very redundant...or > > > useless. > > > 13) Although "multiplayer" was not in the demo......word that it > will > > > support only 8 drivers online is not good. We hope this can change with > > > "hacks" and better "broad-band" multiplayer patch support. > > > 14) The UI screen "button" sound FX. It is irritating, can't turn > it > > > off....and dangerous to speaker cones and human ear drums if the sound > > > volume is turned up (which it would likely be just after exiting from a > > > race). If you use headphones.....extreme caution is required to prevent > > > some ear damage we think. > > > 15) The static shadows and lighting in night races. This is the > > > modern era of dynamic lighting effects, monster RAM video cards and > cpu's > > > measured with a new word........."GIGS!". If you guys couldn't > implement > > > this because of cpu or pixel budgets....you should have not done night > > > races. You are going to get killed by Papyrus in this department at > > least. > > > > > > Ok...that's how we see the NH demo as a whole at SearsGroup. I don't > know > > > how this matches up with everyone's "lists"....nor do I even think this > is > > > some kind of a consensus....I doubt that very much (especially since > I've > > > seen very little posts here about the sound....and we think that "tops > the > > > list" of the worst features in NH)! > > > > > > I do want to say that I think "NASCAR Heat" is a monumental effort by > Rich > > > Garcia...and all the guys at MGI and the marketing team at Hasbro. They > > > should be congratulated for their work, their innovative thinking....and > > the > > > ability to implement ground braking features in a racing simulation. I > > > always thought Viper Racing was an excellent racing simulation.....ahead > > of > > > its time much like GPL was ahead of its time..... (funny.......they were > > > both released on the same day.....by the same publisher, Sierra). > NASCAR > > > Heat shows just how good Viper Racing really is (not "was"...I still > have > > it > > > on my computer.....still race it online weekly almost)......and how good > > the > > > guys who created Viper Racing......and now NASCAR Heat....really are! I > > > think NH will be a retail/financial success.....no question about it. I > > do > > > not think NH will become the "ultimate sim".....displacing GPL from that > > > exalted status. No way....not in its present form that is. > > > > > > I think if Hasbro is forward thinking enough, and they decide to open > the > > > doors to the NH "bin" files structure and code.......encouraging and > > helping > > > the sim racing community "hackers" who, as a group.....are probably the > > best > > > racing sim graphic artists and programmers in the world.....fix some of > > this > > > stuff.....then NH has a good chance of taking the throne maybe beside > GPL? > > > But it will never knock it off........at least that's my thinking today. > > I > > > can always change my mind though....lol. > > > > > > Is there a "David Noonan" of NASCAR sims? We could sure use one! > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Tom Pabst > > > SearsGroup > > > > > > PS: My after thoughts: Why has Papy "taken their toys and gone home?" > > Is > > > it the stiff competition from NH? Maybe. Is it the natural side > affects > > of > > > major-league talent (like Charlie Heath) leaving Papyrus? Maybe. Is > the > > > "new blood" at Papyrus not up to the task of producing racing > simulations > > of > > > major innovation and invention? Maybe. Has Sierra swung the "axe" too > > far > > > in throttling and punishing Papyrus for the financial failure of GPL? > Is > > > David Kaemmer a great car physics programmer...but a not-so-hot > corporate > > > leader? Maybe. When I think of these questions......I'm reminded of an > > old > > > joke about "a million dollars.....and Las Vegas"......a "twist" of that > > > version would go like this: > > > > > > "Do you want to know how to become the third ranked retail game > developer > > in > > > the world? Its very easy! All you need to do is........start out as > > > "number one"....and make the same kind of marketing & production > decisions > > > that Papyrus & Sierra have made over the last three years! > > > > > > I wonder why I'm not laughing? Its kind of sad really....don't you > think? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

Ya Tom great to hear your opinion, thanks. By the way could you please track down the Craftsman SAE wrench set I ordered. Sears line of craftsman tools are the best.

First Tom, Congrats on a very thorough review, the length of the tread should be more than enough evidence that you have touched on many valid points. 2nd: MID OHIO!!! if you could produce a Mid Ohio track and/or Road America with the same detail as Sears99, we'd love ya for it. 3rd: Rolling starts. 99% of the time, I don't have TIME for a pace lap. But this comes from YEARS of racing the TPTCC touring cars which use standing starts. Heck, MOST of my solo racing, I don't even bother to qualify(shaddup GOY!) I get to the race as quick a possible. So the rolling start doesn't hurt me. Heck until we can exit the garage, drive through the pits and return after a session on the track, the idea of a pace lap just doesn't seem that important....trying to think how MANY multiplayer N3 races had LOTS of drivers drop out rather than 'coast' for a pace lap. 4. Sound...YES it is weak. But...either MGI will improve it or I'm sure the private community will do the same. SCGT had AWFUL sounds, I don't even remember what they had cause I instantly popped in user created efforts. Same with ICR2, N99/3 and EVEN GPL. This most assuredly will be fixed...by somebody. Seeya...remember....Bulldoze MORE tracks.... dave henrie

> I have a very sophisticated sound system on my race computer. I have > created engine sounds for almost every popular racing sim for the last few > years....and when they have been available for dl on the internet....the > number of "file transfer" hits on those web pages has been substantial (over "Sounds" like you will have a lot of work on your hands then ;). If you can come up with better sounds, that's great! BTW, your GPL engine sound are still on my system... -- Philippe "Philster" Sergerie SNS1 Champion http://members.home.net/n3-shootout/

"Tom Pabst" <[email hidden]> wrote > At the moment.....no current racing sim...."out of the box" .....evencomes > close to measuring up to what we look for as a sim we can use with a > Bulldozer client track. Even Motorsims's game engine? I find that curious... hmm -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- May the Downforce be with you... -- http://www.WeRace.net -- People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realise how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world.