Re: GPL & GP3 thoughts from a old-time newbie

> >2) NO! GPL isn't great, GPL is a religious experience! Oh dear, looks like old nick has trapped another one! Be careful, I wouldn't mind betting that Messrs Huttu, Woeger and the like have some pretty nasty looking portraits hidden away in their attics :-) Just keep your GPL rank +ve and your soul should be safe. -- Alan Goss GPLRank +14.26 (rfb)

<SNIP> > 3) I take it home and...... phththtogoguhghghgg < noise of whopee > cushion deflating >. LOL! And that is THE BEST written interpretation of that particular sound that I've ever heard! <G> > I cannot say how terribly disappointed I am with GP3, especially in > light of my recent discovery of GPL. I followed Mr Crammond's games > since Revs+ on the C64. I've had them all. Now I wish I hadn't bought > the last. It's very hard not to compare everything to GPL once you've experienced its goodness, but the overall playability (and accessibility) offered by GP3 is hard to match. The fact that you CAN play on a keyboard and still have an immersive "driving" experience makes it something special in its own right. If you're a fan of driving physics, though, I have to agree with you that GP3 does seem to fall short for pure simulated DRIVING thrills. Still, it definitely has its good points, but, like you, I don't find it to be my cup of tea, which is disappointing in itself, because I REALLY wanted to enjoy GP3 as much as I had enjoyed GP1 and GP2. Have you tried F1 2000, by chance? It leans more towards the GPL end of the spectrum, IMO, and even though the AI is pretty poor, I find myself getting immersed in the sheer enjoyment of DRIVING on the track by myself (I'm too slow for it to be called "hot-lapping"! <G>). I'd recommend giving it a try, but make sure you scour the Web for all the latest updates (check the Blackhole Motorsports site first -- http://www.bhmotorsports.com/). -- JB Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

Tom Steinberg <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:8nrqgc$uau$[email hidden]... > I've been following this group for a few weeks, and I thoughtI'd add my > tuppence. Unlike most people in this group I've come across GPLand GP3 at > the /same time/. That is to say that I bought GPL only about 2weeks before > GP3 came out. I also bought myself a Guillemot FF wheel ( ace,by the > way ). > I bought GP3 and GPL as part of the same order. I borrowed a Microsoft wheel one weekend and had my Logitech delivered the next. I've played GP3 exactly twice: once to discover that the MS wheel wouldn't configure; the other time with the Logitech. It just felt very dull and lifeless after GPL, although I think I'll probably go bacl to it if I get frustrated with the Ring in a few weeks and maybe persistence will pay off. I can't say that the graphics particularly bothered me; they are of a certain style. The only downside with GPL so far has been a few mouthy drivers on VROC who didn't like having slow traffic in their racing, but you get that with any online gaming. mwtb

I've been following this group for a few weeks, and I thought I'd add my tuppence. Unlike most people in this group I've come across GPL and GP3 at the /same time/. That is to say that I bought GPL only about 2 weeks before GP3 came out. I also bought myself a Guillemot FF wheel ( ace, by the way ). I partly bought the wheel because I was a HUGE fan of FIGP, the original on the Amiga, from way back when. I thought that the wheel was worth it so I could get back into racing proper. However, when I bought the wheel, I got myself GPL because I was aware of the status that the game held in the online racing community. My main thoughts went like this: 1) Wow! GPL is great! Very hard, but I expected that. Quite immersive. after a few days 2) NO! GPL isn't great, GPL is a religious experience! No driving game I had ever played before made it such a great joy just to take the car out and drive, alone, myself against the cicuit. The details feeding back through the screen, headphones and ff were incredible. I almost wept for joy the first time that I realised I was actually compensating for loading up the springs on one side. The satisfaction was enormous. A few more days, and bango! GP3 released. 3) I take it home and...... phththtogoguhghghgg < noise of whopee cushion deflating >. Having just realised how amazing computer driving now was in GPL, I was faced by the terrible, shocking, horrid realisation that the game I was playing was no better than F1GP. Many people in this group have made the comparison to the GP2, but as a hardcore GP1 fan, I must say, the 4 years figure often punted about this group cannot hide the age of this game. It just felt so terribly, terribly ancient. Firstly the wheel and pedals support was so bad I abandoned them and started playing with the keyboard. Then to my dismay I realised that the game is probably /better/ to play on a keyboard, so deeply embedded is the 16bit heritage of this game. Secondly, the GFX are not just 'not-good', they are distractingly BAD. GP1 did not have the horrid "Detuned TV" pixelation you get all over GP3 backdrops. I don't know about anyone else but I can hardly look at the sand traps because they give me a headache. I am enormously surprised that nobody else has mentioned the terrible 'messiness' of the graphics in GP3, lots of jagged, sharp pixels like were still playing in VGA. And no, my GFX card is not buggered and all my drivers are brand new :) The rain effect is only partially expemted from this criticism, as impressive as it is. Thirdly, and this is of course the kicker, the physics. GP1 was wonderful because at the time nothing had ever felt so real. Now GP3 feels terrible because so much of the racing physics is so obviously missing, or at least poorly communicated to the driver ( perhaps an even worse sin than not including them in the first place ). I hope that this little rant stirs up some more commentary. I think that a lot of people have believed their own hype when reviewing this game. How many people are actually playing this game a lot at the moment? I cannot say how terribly disappointed I am with GP3, especially in light of my recent discovery of GPL. I followed Mr Crammond's games since Revs+ on the C64. I've had them all. Now I wish I hadn't bought the last. There is more sheer beauty and driving interest in the recently released Solitude than their is in this whole game. I cannot express my sadness. Tom Steinberg

From someone who has been racing GPL since day 1 and GP1 and GP2 since their day 1's....I agree 100%. Marc. "Tom Steinberg" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:8nrqgc$uau$[email hidden]... > I've been following this group for a few weeks, and I thought I'd add my > tuppence. Unlike most people in this group I've come across GPL and GP3 at > the /same time/. That is to say that I bought GPL only about 2 weeksbefore > GP3 came out. I also bought myself a Guillemot FF wheel ( ace, by the > way ). > > I partly bought the wheel because I was a HUGE fan of FIGP, the originalon

Quoted text (12 lines)

> the Amiga, from way back when. I thought that the wheel was worth it so I > could get back into racing proper. However, when I bought the wheel, I got > myself GPL because I was aware of the status that the game held in the > online racing community. > > My main thoughts went like this: > > 1) Wow! GPL is great! Very hard, but I expected that. Quite immersive. > > after a few days > > 2) NO! GPL isn't great, GPL is a religious experience! No driving game I

had

Quoted text (19 lines)

> ever played before made it such a great joy just to take the car out and > drive, alone, myself against the cicuit. The details feeding back through > the screen, headphones and ff were incredible. I almost wept for joy the > first time that I realised I was actually compensating for loading up the > springs on one side. The satisfaction was enormous. > > A few more days, and bango! GP3 released. > > 3) I take it home and...... phththtogoguhghghgg < noise of whopee cushion > deflating >. > > Having just realised how amazing computer driving now was in GPL, I was > faced by the terrible, shocking, horrid realisation that the game I was > playing was no better than F1GP. Many people in this group have made the > comparison to the GP2, but as a hardcore GP1 fan, I must say, the 4 years > figure often punted about this group cannot hide the age of this game. It > just felt so terribly, terribly ancient. > > Firstly the wheel and pedals support was so bad I abandoned them and

started

Quoted text (7 lines)

> playing with the keyboard. Then to my dismay I realised that the game is > probably /better/ to play on a keyboard, so deeply embedded is the 16bit > heritage of this game. > > Secondly, the GFX are not just 'not-good', they are distractingly BAD. GP1 > did not have the horrid "Detuned TV" pixelation you get all over GP3 > backdrops. I don't know about anyone else but I can hardly look at the

sand > traps because they give me a headache. I am enormously surprised thatnobody > else has mentioned the terrible 'messiness' of the graphics in GP3, lotsof > jagged, sharp pixels like were still playing in VGA. And no, my GFX cardis

Quoted text (14 lines)

> not buggered and all my drivers are brand new :) The rain effect is only > partially expemted from this criticism, as impressive as it is. > > Thirdly, and this is of course the kicker, the physics. GP1 was wonderful > because at the time nothing had ever felt so real. Now GP3 feels terrible > because so much of the racing physics is so obviously missing, or at least > poorly communicated to the driver ( perhaps an even worse sin than not > including them in the first place ). > > I hope that this little rant stirs up some more commentary. I think that a > lot of people have believed their own hype when reviewing this game. How > many people are actually playing this game a lot at the moment? > > I cannot say how terribly disappointed I am with GP3, especially in light

of

Quoted text (11 lines)

> my recent discovery of GPL. I followed Mr Crammond's games since Revs+ on > the C64. I've had them all. Now I wish I hadn't bought the last. > > There is more sheer beauty and driving interest in the recently released > Solitude than their is in this whole game. I cannot express my sadness. > > Tom Steinberg > > > >

Tom Steinberg wrote: <snip> > Thirdly, and this is of course the kicker, the physics. GP1 was wonderful > because at the time nothing had ever felt so real. Now GP3 feels terrible > because so much of the racing physics is so obviously missing, or at least > poorly communicated to the driver ( perhaps an even worse sin than not > including them in the first place ).</snip> While the sound and graphics points are in teh domain of aesthetics and can hardly be discussed for preferences (I also believe that in the artistic sense GPL is still the sim to beat, but this would require a whole new thread), the physics is an objective matter. Your point of communicating the physics to the driver is very valid. I however, have not found an element of the racing physics that would be obviously missing (okay, the camber settings aren't there, but that's about all I can think of, when driving all elements seem to be there). I tend to think that it is the type of racing that doesn't suit you. Weight transfers, while still there, are much lower in a modern F1 machine due to the extremely low center of gravity. The suspension is extremely stiff as it needs to counter the aerodynamic forces (in fact, the tire deformation contributes about the same amount to the suspension travel than the springs themselves). Large slip angles are also a way towards a spin rather than a necessary means towards a fast lap due to the nature of the modern radial tires that operate in a really narrow slip angle regime. This altogether gives response times that are really short, and gives the car a feel that is really hard to replicate on a PC, and I think that GP3 actually does this as good as it can. -Gregor

On Thu, 24 Aug 2000 10:30:40 +0200 Gregor Veble <[email hidden]> wrote: % Your point of communicating the physics to the driver is very valid. I % however, have not found an element of the racing physics that would be % obviously missing (okay, the camber settings aren't there, but that's % about all I can think of, when driving all elements seem to be there). Probably tied to the fact that camber isn't there is why no tire temps as well. One would think that in a racing sim, tire modeling would be a primary concern. I use tire temps to fine tune my setup (spring rate, dampers, and even ARB). The only reason I can think of not including this important piece of data is that it isn't modeled in GP3 (or its earlier incarnations). -- **************************** Michael E. Carver ************************* Upside out, or inside down...False alarm the only game in town. [email hidden] http://www.teleport.com/~mcarver =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<[ /./. [- < ]>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

"\"Michael E. Carver\" mcarver"@teleport.com wrote:

Quoted text (20 lines)

> > On Thu, 24 Aug 2000 10:30:40 +0200 Gregor Veble <[email hidden]> wrote: > > % Your point of communicating the physics to the driver is very valid. I > % however, have not found an element of the racing physics that would be > % obviously missing (okay, the camber settings aren't there, but that's > % about all I can think of, when driving all elements seem to be there). > > Probably tied to the fact that camber isn't there is why no tire temps > as well. One would think that in a racing sim, tire modeling would be a > primary concern. I use tire temps to fine tune my setup (spring rate, > dampers, and even ARB). The only reason I can think of not including > this important piece of data is that it isn't modeled in GP3 (or its > earlier incarnations). > > -- > **************************** Michael E. Carver ************************* > Upside out, or inside down...False alarm the only game in town. > [email hidden] http://www.teleport.com/~mcarver > =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<[ /./. [- < ]>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Tire temps indeed seem to be modelled (try taking a corner after a few full power donuts), it is just that one does not have access to them in the setup menu. The camber modelling is probably not there, but I don't miss it that much as it is only a secondary setup option and my driving is not as good as to expose the subtleties, especially considering that modern radial tires have much less camber thrust than the GPL era bias-ply ones. Otherwise, tire modelling seems to be very good, as slip angles/ratios seem to be rather small (but still there) as one would imagine and not like in, say, F1 2000 where the car slides all over the place and wears the tires after 10 laps, and the secondary effects of camber / temperature in that sim are a very poor substitute for the otherwise awkward tire models. -Gregor P.S.: In fact, the tire parameters and the inertia in F1 2000 can be tweaked to more acceptable values making it really great to drive, but then the AI has trouble driving those cars, so it's rather a no win situation.

Whilst I agree to a certain extent with your points, one thing that I think GP3 does do very well is give an impression of speed. When I used to play F1GP, and GP2, my reflexes were pin sharp - GPL requires smoothness, and less sawing at the wheel, GP3 has shown me how a few years have dulled my response times. They're coming back though... Cheers, Steve.