Re: NH vs GPL

to re iterate what was posted earlier... show a cgi sfx shot of an explosion to a pyrotechnician and he'll go wow....show it to a cgi sfx bloke and he'll show you the faults..... pez rrevved wrote in message <[email hidden]>... >On Thu, 17 Aug 2000 07:21:14 GMT, Andrew Britton <[email hidden]>wrote:

Quoted text (33 lines)

> >>I've run the NH demo since it was released and it plays pretty well, >>especially in "hardcore" mode. I'm not really sure if I'm sold on the >>physics or not... they are definitely different than N3 but I'm not sure >>if they are "correct". > >From the Lightspeed Forum, here are some people who helped test the sim: > >============================================================= > >Dan_Hasbro > > Crew Chief Date Posted: Aug/16/2000 1:06 AM > > Here's the list of guys who have played and commented: > > Bobby Labonte > Ward Burton > Kenny Wallace > Kenny Irwin > Rusty Wallace > Dale Earnhardt > Dale Jr... He loves it > Joe Nemechek > Steve Park... GO STEVE !! > Chad Little > Sterling Marlin > Ken Schrader > Michael Waltrip > Some Guy named Petty... Think his name was Richard > Andy Petree , he showed me some cool setups > > I'd really like to thank all of these guys for their help in

this > game >=============================================================

The thing is that you drive real race cars by feel, and you cant do that in a sim, therefore, JSs main input was not available to him, hence his feeling that the grip was too low..... In real life you feel a slide before your eyes pick it up.....Look at the CART in car shots (esp Motoya), and youll see his hands correcting slides all the time, and its almost impossible to see the car sliding from the cockpit shot....he felt it....You make an accurate sim, and people will say 'Not enough grip' because they wont pick up on the tiny visual cues.... did the cars corner at the speeds they do in GPL.....Yes they did.... pez David G Fisher wrote in message ...

Quoted text (29 lines)

> >"Andrew Britton" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >news:[email hidden]... >> The fact I have never driven a 1967 Grand Prix racer > >Jackie Stewart has, and he said the real cars had more grip and were more >drivable than the cars in GPL. The physics in GPL are not as accurate as >some here would want you to believe (by drilling the idea into your brain >every day). > >Get NH now, and worry about N4 in six months. > >David G Fisher > >> or a 700hp Winston >> Cup car gives me no true frame of reference but I want to know what >> everyone thinks. NH definitely looks to be far ahead of N3 but if the >> majority place it behind GPL in the physics category then N4 (based on >> GPL) should (stress "should") be more to the liking of the sim >> community. >> >> About 5 more days I guess for NH and what's the latest on N4.... 5 more >> months? >> >> Andrew B. >> >> >> >

OK, I shouldn't post this because I haven't switched NH over to "Hardcore" mode yet, but so far I'm not a fan. If N4 is based on GPL physics (and photo graphics) then I'll wait instead of shelling out for Heat because I thought it looked and played cartoony. (Don't flame me yet, let me try Hardcore mode first) But that's just the initial view of one of Larry's "GPL centric, loser, POS, a-holes" :-) Kevin Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

I've run the NH demo since it was released and it plays pretty well, especially in "hardcore" mode. I'm not really sure if I'm sold on the physics or not... they are definitely different than N3 but I'm not sure if they are "correct". Then again, its a demo and the final may be even better. Anyway, the point of my post (troll by nature) is what everyone thinks of the two physics engines.... GPL vs NH? I went back today and played some more GPL (have not in about a month) and felt it was a more "realistic" feel of driving. The fact I have never driven a 1967 Grand Prix racer or a 700hp Winston Cup car gives me no true frame of reference but I want to know what everyone thinks. NH definitely looks to be far ahead of N3 but if the majority place it behind GPL in the physics category then N4 (based on GPL) should (stress "should") be more to the liking of the sim community. About 5 more days I guess for NH and what's the latest on N4.... 5 more months? Andrew B.

I am sure N4 will be a bit more realistic and hard core in ways that r.a.s.-types will appreciate. But is NH worth the price to have fun over the next 6 to 8 months until N4 comes out? Absolutely, since there is virtually 100% agreement that it blows the current best NASCAR game, N3, out of the water. Marc. "Andrew Britton" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (26 lines)

> I've run the NH demo since it was released and it plays pretty well, > especially in "hardcore" mode. I'm not really sure if I'm sold on the > physics or not... they are definitely different than N3 but I'm not sure > if they are "correct". Then again, its a demo and the final may be even > better. > > Anyway, the point of my post (troll by nature) is what everyone thinks > of the two physics engines.... GPL vs NH? > > I went back today and played some more GPL (have not in about a month) > and felt it was a more "realistic" feel of driving. > > The fact I have never driven a 1967 Grand Prix racer or a 700hp Winston > Cup car gives me no true frame of reference but I want to know what > everyone thinks. NH definitely looks to be far ahead of N3 but if the > majority place it behind GPL in the physics category then N4 (based on > GPL) should (stress "should") be more to the liking of the sim > community. > > About 5 more days I guess for NH and what's the latest on N4.... 5 more > months? > > Andrew B. > > >

"Andrew Britton" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > The fact I have never driven a 1967 Grand Prix racer Jackie Stewart has, and he said the real cars had more grip and were more drivable than the cars in GPL. The physics in GPL are not as accurate as some here would want you to believe (by drilling the idea into your brain every day). Get NH now, and worry about N4 in six months. David G Fisher

Quoted text (14 lines)

> or a 700hp Winston > Cup car gives me no true frame of reference but I want to know what > everyone thinks. NH definitely looks to be far ahead of N3 but if the > majority place it behind GPL in the physics category then N4 (based on > GPL) should (stress "should") be more to the liking of the sim > community. > > About 5 more days I guess for NH and what's the latest on N4.... 5 more > months? > > Andrew B. > > >

"David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote > Jackie Stewart has, and he said the real cars had more grip and were more > drivable than the cars in GPL. The physics in GPL are not as accurate as > some here would want you to believe (by drilling the idea into your brain > every day). Proof, proof David. Tell us where he said that. -- -- 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.

On TalkSport radio station in the UK following his resignation from Jaguar. David G Fisher "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:lxWm5.161626$[email hidden]... > "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote > > Jackie Stewart has, and he said the real cars had more grip and weremore > > drivable than the cars in GPL. The physics in GPL are not as accurate as > > some here would want you to believe (by drilling the idea into yourbrain

Quoted text (12 lines)

> > every day). > > Proof, proof David. Tell us where he said that. > > > > > -- > -- 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. > > >

I say GPL is still the best physics engine. I can't use any of my real life experiences in a 67 F1 car and Modern Cup car. Because I have none. I am judging these games by the way the car feels in the game and the kind of feedback I get from the car in the game. In NH demo,(i love the demo) I don't get a feel for when the front brake locks as oppsed to rear, But in GPL I can feel (and see) exactly which wheel is locked. I just feel that GPL gives more feed back to the driver, And that is what makes a game realistic. -- Kevin Anderson [email hidden] --------------------------------------------------- "Andrew Britton" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > I've run the NH demo since it was released and it plays pretty well, > especially in "hardcore" mode. I'm not really sure if I'm sold on the > physics or not... they are definitely different than N3 but I'm not sure > if they are "correct". Then again, its a demo and the final may be even > better. > > Anyway, the point of my post (troll by nature) is what everyone thinks > of the two physics engines.... GPL vs NH? > > I went back today and played some more GPL (have not in about a month) > and felt it was a more "realistic" feel of driving. > > The fact I have never driven a 1967 Grand Prix racer or a 700hp Winston > Cup car gives me no true frame of reference but I want to know what > everyone thinks. NH definitely looks to be far ahead of N3 but if the > majority place it behind GPL in the physics category then N4 (based on > GPL) should (stress "should") be more to the liking of the sim > community. > > About 5 more days I guess for NH and what's the latest on N4.... 5 more > months? > > Andrew B. > > >

ymenard wrote in message ...

Quoted text (7 lines)

>"David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote >> Jackie Stewart has, and he said the real cars had more grip and were more >> drivable than the cars in GPL. The physics in GPL are not as accurate as >> some here would want you to believe (by drilling the idea into your brain >> every day). > >Proof, proof David. Tell us where he said that.

It's irrelevant, whether it's true or not regarding what JackieS said, or DavidGF dreamt, GPL remains the most realistic racing sim. Does it have flaws? Sure it does. Are those flaws as large as an elephant's scrotum? No, unlike some other racing sims which shall remain unmentioned *cough* RC2000 *cough*. Bendito;

"David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote > On TalkSport radio station in the UK following his resignation fromJaguar. Yeah uh.... And I've heard Jackie Stewart say that GPL is the most incredible racing simulation ever and it's so realistic it sent shivers down his spine. It was uh... hmmmm on uhh BBC international an interview on TV with him racing on inside an Hyperstimulator. Yeah maybe ;) -- -- 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.

I think it's the best NASCAR sim out but still not very realistic, even in Hardcore mode. Atleast were out of the 2D physics world. Andrew Britton wrote:

Quoted text (24 lines)

> > I've run the NH demo since it was released and it plays pretty well, > especially in "hardcore" mode. I'm not really sure if I'm sold on the > physics or not... they are definitely different than N3 but I'm not sure > if they are "correct". Then again, its a demo and the final may be even > better. > > Anyway, the point of my post (troll by nature) is what everyone thinks > of the two physics engines.... GPL vs NH? > > I went back today and played some more GPL (have not in about a month) > and felt it was a more "realistic" feel of driving. > > The fact I have never driven a 1967 Grand Prix racer or a 700hp Winston > Cup car gives me no true frame of reference but I want to know what > everyone thinks. NH definitely looks to be far ahead of N3 but if the > majority place it behind GPL in the physics category then N4 (based on > GPL) should (stress "should") be more to the liking of the sim > community. > > About 5 more days I guess for NH and what's the latest on N4.... 5 more > months? > > Andrew B.

Yes, it's completely and totally irrelevant that someone who actually drove the cars, and raced the races, doesn't feel that the simulation realistically reproduces his experience. People that have never driven those cars and competed in those races definitely have a much better idea of what the real life experience is like. This place is f**ken nuts sometimes. David G Fisher "Bendito" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:8nhkvt$r3f$[email hidden]... > It's irrelevant, whether it's true or not regarding what JackieS said, > or DavidGF dreamt, GPL remains the most realistic racing sim. Does it have > flaws? Sure it does. Are those flaws as large as an elephant's scrotum?No, > unlike some other racing sims which shall remain unmentioned *cough*RC2000 > *cough*. > > Bendito; > >

What the helll would they know about the real NASCAR experience? :-) David G Fisher "rrevved" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Thu, 17 Aug 2000 07:21:14 GMT, Andrew Britton <[email hidden]>wrote:

Quoted text (33 lines)

> > >I've run the NH demo since it was released and it plays pretty well, > >especially in "hardcore" mode. I'm not really sure if I'm sold on the > >physics or not... they are definitely different than N3 but I'm not sure > >if they are "correct". > > From the Lightspeed Forum, here are some people who helped test the sim: > > ============================================================= > > Dan_Hasbro > > Crew Chief Date Posted: Aug/16/2000 1:06 AM > > Here's the list of guys who have played and commented: > > Bobby Labonte > Ward Burton > Kenny Wallace > Kenny Irwin > Rusty Wallace > Dale Earnhardt > Dale Jr... He loves it > Joe Nemechek > Steve Park... GO STEVE !! > Chad Little > Sterling Marlin > Ken Schrader > Michael Waltrip > Some Guy named Petty... Think his name was Richard > Andy Petree , he showed me some cool setups > > I'd really like to thank all of these guys for their help in

this > game > =============================================================

I see what your saying Ed, but Jeff Gordon helped with his not so simly XS Racing, so names don't necessarily mean that it's a really good simulation. How do we know these guys don't just like the game for the fun factor? Have they all said it's just like driving a real cup car, or what? so your reply is very low on actual useful information without additional background. rrevved <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Thu, 17 Aug 2000 07:21:14 GMT, Andrew Britton <[email hidden]>wrote:

Quoted text (33 lines)

> > >I've run the NH demo since it was released and it plays pretty well, > >especially in "hardcore" mode. I'm not really sure if I'm sold on the > >physics or not... they are definitely different than N3 but I'm not sure > >if they are "correct". > > From the Lightspeed Forum, here are some people who helped test the sim: > > ============================================================= > > Dan_Hasbro > > Crew Chief Date Posted: Aug/16/2000 1:06 AM > > Here's the list of guys who have played and commented: > > Bobby Labonte > Ward Burton > Kenny Wallace > Kenny Irwin > Rusty Wallace > Dale Earnhardt > Dale Jr... He loves it > Joe Nemechek > Steve Park... GO STEVE !! > Chad Little > Sterling Marlin > Ken Schrader > Michael Waltrip > Some Guy named Petty... Think his name was Richard > Andy Petree , he showed me some cool setups > > I'd really like to thank all of these guys for their help in

this > game > =============================================================

the cars not having enough grip sounds like a car modeling problem than a physics issue problem David. You could use the same physics engine, and just add some more grip factor to the cars. Sine the N4 will be using the GPL physics and obviously not the 1967 car modeling I don't see how this relates. Just like SCGT, there is one physics engine, but look how much different each car drives due to the modeling of each, let alone the cars in F12K... I've said it a million times before, but once again, car dynamics\modeling is separate from the physics engine, they interact with one another. Anything else wouldn't be dynamic and would be "canned." I know there are people that think that it's just one big program and if the grip is off on the car, then it's something to do with the physics engine... I have spoken with some sim developers, and they have told me that my interpretation is correct, the physics engine in a sim like GPL says how the objects within the environment interact, this is the easy part getting the modeling right is the hard part. I believe that David has said before that he thinks in F12K it's the physics that are good and the modeling that is bad, if so I think this is the case with Stewert's comments. So this doesn't mean that the enhanced GPL engine will be a problem with N4, but it does bring up the question, how well can papy model the cars? They weren't perfect in GPL, so how close will they get with NASCAR? Who do they have to help? It sure sounds like NH has more input from the real drivers, so maybe N4 won't have the modeling that Heat does, and heat won't quite have the underlying physics that N4 does... Who knows till we get a shot at both. David G Fisher <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:paWm5.108283$A%[email hidden]...

Quoted text (29 lines)

> > "Andrew Britton" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > The fact I have never driven a 1967 Grand Prix racer > > Jackie Stewart has, and he said the real cars had more grip and were more > drivable than the cars in GPL. The physics in GPL are not as accurate as > some here would want you to believe (by drilling the idea into your brain > every day). > > Get NH now, and worry about N4 in six months. > > David G Fisher > > > or a 700hp Winston > > Cup car gives me no true frame of reference but I want to know what > > everyone thinks. NH definitely looks to be far ahead of N3 but if the > > majority place it behind GPL in the physics category then N4 (based on > > GPL) should (stress "should") be more to the liking of the sim > > community. > > > > About 5 more days I guess for NH and what's the latest on N4.... 5 more > > months? > > > > Andrew B. > > > > > > >

I think it was Scooby Doo. Anyway, who care who said what. The real point is that GPL is an open wheel racecar with little downforce. A Nascar is a regular looking car with good downforce. It will stick to the track better and be easier to drive. With the pedal control you learn in GPL you should be able to rocket around Nascar. NH's physics are just fine, this is the closest anyone has come to modeling a Nascar. When N4 comes out you might be shocked on how it really drives like NH! Vintook P.S. by the way, Nascar 4 is vaporware at the moment and NH is about to hit the shelves. If you want to sit around racing N3 for 6 to 8 months go ahead but you might not find the rest of the world joining you, they'll be racing the most realistic Nascar game on the planet. "Andre Warringa" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (12 lines)

> On Thu, 17 Aug 2000 21:32:16 GMT, "ymenard" <[email hidden]> > wrote: > > >"David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote > >> On TalkSport radio station in the UK following his resignation from > >Jaguar. > > > >Yeah uh.... > > > >And I've heard Jackie Stewart say that GPL is the most incredible racing > >simulation ever and it's so realistic it sent shivers down his spine. It > >was uh... hmmmm on uhh BBC international an interview on TV with him

racing

Quoted text (7 lines)

> >on inside an Hyperstimulator. Yeah maybe ;) > > You're wrong. That was Jim Clark who said that. Or was it Graham Hill? > > Andre > >

ROTFLMAO! Great point! Ain't it the truth! Vintook "pez" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:8nhie7$prb$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (47 lines)

> to re iterate what was posted earlier... > > show a cgi sfx shot of an explosion to a pyrotechnician and he'll go > wow....show it to a cgi sfx bloke and he'll show you the faults..... > > pez > rrevved wrote in message <[email hidden]>... > >On Thu, 17 Aug 2000 07:21:14 GMT, Andrew Britton <[email hidden]> > wrote: > > > >>I've run the NH demo since it was released and it plays pretty well, > >>especially in "hardcore" mode. I'm not really sure if I'm sold on the > >>physics or not... they are definitely different than N3 but I'm not sure > >>if they are "correct". > > > >From the Lightspeed Forum, here are some people who helped test the sim: > > > >============================================================= > > > >Dan_Hasbro > > > > Crew Chief Date Posted: Aug/16/2000 1:06 AM > > > > Here's the list of guys who have played and commented: > > > > Bobby Labonte > > Ward Burton > > Kenny Wallace > > Kenny Irwin > > Rusty Wallace > > Dale Earnhardt > > Dale Jr... He loves it > > Joe Nemechek > > Steve Park... GO STEVE !! > > Chad Little > > Sterling Marlin > > Ken Schrader > > Michael Waltrip > > Some Guy named Petty... Think his name was Richard > > Andy Petree , he showed me some cool setups > > > > I'd really like to thank all of these guys for their help in > this > > game > >============================================================= > >

I think what you feel is a very good Force Feedback implementation by Papy. NH is the closest we have come to a Nascar on our computers so buy it and enjoy it till something better comes along. (which hopefully will be 6 months from now) Vintook "Kevin Anderson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:sjYm5.1457$[email hidden]... > I say GPL is still the best physics engine. I can't use any of myreal > life experiences in a 67 F1 car and Modern Cup car. Because I have none. I > am judging these games by the way the car feels in the game and the kindof

Quoted text (44 lines)

> feedback I get from the car in the game. In NH demo,(i love the demo) I > don't get a feel for when the front brake locks as oppsed to rear, But in > GPL I can feel (and see) exactly which wheel is locked. I just feel that > GPL gives more feed back to the driver, And that is what makes a game > realistic. > > > > -- > Kevin Anderson > [email hidden] > --------------------------------------------------- > > > "Andrew Britton" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > I've run the NH demo since it was released and it plays pretty well, > > especially in "hardcore" mode. I'm not really sure if I'm sold on the > > physics or not... they are definitely different than N3 but I'm not sure > > if they are "correct". Then again, its a demo and the final may be even > > better. > > > > Anyway, the point of my post (troll by nature) is what everyone thinks > > of the two physics engines.... GPL vs NH? > > > > I went back today and played some more GPL (have not in about a month) > > and felt it was a more "realistic" feel of driving. > > > > The fact I have never driven a 1967 Grand Prix racer or a 700hp Winston > > Cup car gives me no true frame of reference but I want to know what > > everyone thinks. NH definitely looks to be far ahead of N3 but if the > > majority place it behind GPL in the physics category then N4 (based on > > GPL) should (stress "should") be more to the liking of the sim > > community. > > > > About 5 more days I guess for NH and what's the latest on N4.... 5 more > > months? > > > > Andrew B. > > > > > > > >

I really think NH is close to what a real car feels like. I have actually driven a Stock Car at Texas Motor Speedway and NH feels pretty good, although TMS is not in the demo. The car seems to feel pretty close. It sure feels a lot closer than N3. The controls in that game are really bad. One touch and you are gone...My $.02

Well if their brakes are the same as NH they better get them fixed. I would say NH was spot on if they paid me too. ;) David G Fisher wrote:

Quoted text (45 lines)

> > What the helll would they know about the real NASCAR experience? :-) > > David G Fisher > > "rrevved" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > On Thu, 17 Aug 2000 07:21:14 GMT, Andrew Britton <[email hidden]> > wrote: > > > > >I've run the NH demo since it was released and it plays pretty well, > > >especially in "hardcore" mode. I'm not really sure if I'm sold on the > > >physics or not... they are definitely different than N3 but I'm not sure > > >if they are "correct". > > > > From the Lightspeed Forum, here are some people who helped test the sim: > > > > ============================================================= > > > > Dan_Hasbro > > > > Crew Chief Date Posted: Aug/16/2000 1:06 AM > > > > Here's the list of guys who have played and commented: > > > > Bobby Labonte > > Ward Burton > > Kenny Wallace > > Kenny Irwin > > Rusty Wallace > > Dale Earnhardt > > Dale Jr... He loves it > > Joe Nemechek > > Steve Park... GO STEVE !! > > Chad Little > > Sterling Marlin > > Ken Schrader > > Michael Waltrip > > Some Guy named Petty... Think his name was Richard > > Andy Petree , he showed me some cool setups > > > > I'd really like to thank all of these guys for their help in > this > > game > > =============================================================

Maybe JYS did say that, I don't know, but I'm pretty sure that when he drove those cars back in 67 he wasn't using a PC to do it. He would have had the benefit of feeling the G forces acting on the car and the seat of the pants feel, something lacking from a simulation. These are compensated for by the over exaggerated movement of the car in the graphics display on the screen IMO. I also think that the cars in GPL do slide slightly more than they should, but overall I still believe it is the most accurate (non commercial) sim currently available on a PC. I also believe that different people get / use different feedback cues from simulators. Due to the lack of feedback available we have to utilise what is available ie. a moving 2d image on a screen, sounds normally from 2 speakers and sometimes FF wheels. I'd guess that a lot of real drivers would find it difficult to adapt to these limited cues and therefore would find a sim difficult / unrealistic. -- Ian P <email invalid due to spam> David G Fisher <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:m8Zm5.108525$A%[email hidden]... > Yes, it's completely and totally irrelevant that someone who actually drove > the cars, and raced the races, doesn't feel that the simulation > realistically reproduces his experience. > > People that have never driven those cars and competed in those races > definitely have a much better idea of what the real life experience is like. > > This place is f**ken nuts sometimes. > > David G Fisher > > "Bendito" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:8nhkvt$r3f$[email hidden]... > > It's irrelevant, whether it's true or not regarding what JackieS said, > > or DavidGF dreamt, GPL remains the most realistic racing sim. Does it have > > flaws? Sure it does. Are those flaws as large as an elephant's scrotum? > No, > > unlike some other racing sims which shall remain unmentioned *cough* > RC2000 > > *cough*. > > > > Bendito; > > > > >

On Thu, 17 Aug 2000 20:55:52 GMT, "Kevin Anderson" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (8 lines)

>I say GPL is still the best physics engine. I can't use any of my real >life experiences in a 67 F1 car and Modern Cup car. Because I have none. I >am judging these games by the way the car feels in the game and the kind of >feedback I get from the car in the game. In NH demo,(i love the demo) I >don't get a feel for when the front brake locks as oppsed to rear, But in >GPL I can feel (and see) exactly which wheel is locked. I just feel that >GPL gives more feed back to the driver, And that is what makes a game >realistic.

Agree. But NH comes close, very close to GPL when it concerns feeling what the car is doing (or better: what it's about to do). But then again I can imagine that a '67 F1 car feels more twitchy than a Nascar car, so I think that the NH physics come very close. Andre

While interesting, JS's comments would only really have value to the sim racing gang if he had a lot of experience racing sims as well as real cars (he may have this experience for all I know). As we all know, limitations of no true depth perception, no "feeling" the suspension/brakes/ghost in the machine, imprecise wheel and pedals, etc. etc. make sim driving very different than real driving. A good sim gives the driver the feeling that he is really driving and allows the sim driver to do the same things in the sim that real drivers could do on the circuits. GPL does this very well. Given all these disadvantages, if GPL "felt" as grippy to JS as his honda, Huttu would be lapping Spa in under 3 minutes--he isn't is he? :-) Chris --who thinks stewart drove a honda but can't quite remember. IMHOOn Thu, 17 Aug 2000 21:52:18 GMT, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (25 lines)

>Yes, it's completely and totally irrelevant that someone who actually drove >the cars, and raced the races, doesn't feel that the simulation >realistically reproduces his experience. > >People that have never driven those cars and competed in those races >definitely have a much better idea of what the real life experience is like. > >This place is f**ken nuts sometimes. > >David G Fisher > >"Bendito" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >news:8nhkvt$r3f$[email hidden]... >> It's irrelevant, whether it's true or not regarding what JackieS said, >> or DavidGF dreamt, GPL remains the most realistic racing sim. Does it have >> flaws? Sure it does. Are those flaws as large as an elephant's scrotum? >No, >> unlike some other racing sims which shall remain unmentioned *cough* >RC2000 >> *cough*. >> >> Bendito; >> >> >

And just HOW do we "all know N4 will be the most advanced racing simulation at its release"??? I do think we all "hope" it will be... but until I see the actual game (or at least a demo!) I'm not about to jump on that bandwagon... For now, is there really anyone out there that does not believe NH is the top Nascar sim available today (well, ALMOST available)? I think the only real question remaining about NH is how its multi-player will perform. I just don't understand some of the thinking here that since something better "might" be available in the distant future, you will not buy the current "best-in-class". I'm willing to bet that by the time N4 is released (I'd guess about March of 2001), development will be underway for an even better sim (NH2?). Should we then not buy N4??? Stop the insanity!!!! :o) > Change their tune for what? And why? We all know N4 will be the most > advanced racing simulation at it's release. As for GPL, people will > continue to race it because of the racing series it models itself (how > enjoyable the era, the cars, the tracks is). I mean people still race > vintage cars. Do you shout at them "Well you could race much bettermodern > cars! You suck!". That's what your saying. Troll. Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

well said > Exactly. We are now in the era (with the GPL, MGI and possibly other > engines like the West one) that racing simulations are a completely > different racing entity. It's on it's own. People like DGF have yet to > understand such thing and still consider us as inferiors, but I really see > many people who have understood that we are equal to other forms ofracing. > Are we naive? Should we face the reality that this is only games? Wellreal > racing is also just games,. Events like LikeReal or the NROS are perfect > example that it's a real form of motorsport, with it's advantages and > disadvantages.

"Vintook" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:_XZm5.24$[email hidden]... > P.S. by the way, Nascar 4 is vaporware at the moment and NH is about tohit > the shelves. If you want to sit around racing N3 for 6 to 8 months goahead > but you might not find the rest of the world joining you, they'll beracing > the most realistic Nascar game on the planet. You and 7 of your best online friends.... I'll continue to use N3 and race with 30 of my best online friends... -/- Walk Walker Proud Member - Hawaii Ace League

I think you are missing my point here. I'm not suggesting Mr. Stewart doesn't have the ability to play a race car game and compare it to his own experience driving F-1s (or that his comments re: GPL are in any way wrong--at least I'm not arguing he never made them :-)). However, without experience with race car games, how can he tell how good the "game" is? There is no doubt in my mind that GPL or any other game is a pale imitation of the real thing. Unfortunately I don't get to choose to play either GPL or race real 67 F-1s, I get to choose between GPL and (per arguendo for the purposes of this thread) Nascar Heat. IMHO, the GPL engine places realistic car behavior (for the most part the cars exhibit respect for the laws of physics) over ease of use. Had Jackie Stewart worked with Papy in making GPL, JS might very well have agreed with the design decisions that ended up making the cars so slippery and hard to drive. Chris --sheesh!! In article <E46n5.109988$A%[email hidden]>, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote: > LOL. Yes, I couldn't back out of the driveway tonight because I hadjust > played some GP3. > > You are one of the r.a.s. regulars who has kept some perspective onour > hobby. > > I also don't understand why it is that a professional driver cannot be > expected to comprehend auto simulators. Wittle kids do. The truth is,that > line of thinking is just a feeble way to dismiss an opposing expertopinion. > I think it would be wiser to listen and learn. > > You know what's really funny? Every time somone who knows someoneelse, who > has a cousin who's delivered the mail to a guy who races FF's, whosaid GPL > was realistic, we will hear about it. Yet, a legend like JS isdismissed as

Quoted text (9 lines)

> a turnip who can't comprehend what a car sim is all about. > > David G Fisher > > <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:8ni1ep$903$[email hidden]... > > In article <[email hidden]>, > > [email hidden] wrote: > > > While interesting, JS's comments would only really have value to

the > > > sim racing gang if he had a lot of experience racing sims<snip> > > > Chris > > > > > > Thats a whole lot of presumption: that the former World Champion > > couldnt himself realize (quickly) and adjust to the circumstancesof a > > computer sim. Jackie S's professional career revolved aroundoperating > > racing cars.. and you mean to say you doubt he couldnt easily graspthe > > nature of the vehicle he was driving?? And this other idea thatbecause > > he is used to more physical input he would be confused by the lackof > > input in a computer sim is also idiotic. Hellloooooo??? How many of > > you get into your street cars and become disoriented by the extra > > physical cues you are now getting? Ok, so there are less cues in a > > computer sim, but this can be quickly processed by any 'racingbrain' > > worth the title. And the former World Champion must surely have the > > ability (in spades) to process the differences. > > > > ..reminds me of that Saturday Night Live sketch about the caveman- > > lawyer. As if JS would be saying, 'your magic world of picturesinside

Quoted text (10 lines)

> > the electro-device is confusing and frightening to me!' > > > > mr > > > > > > > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ > > Before you buy. > >

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

'Becoming one with the car' is something that all racecar drivers understand as being critically important. A professional driver understands this better than an amateur, and it follows that the former Formula One World Champion would understand it better than just about anyone! The key feature of the talent is to get into a vehicle (any vehicle) and quickly, and without undue shunting, determine what the characteristics of that vehicle are under stress (the car's, not your own(!)) Jackie should be able to get into a Yugo, a pickup truck, a school bus, *or a computer game*, and quickly and accurately come to grips with the vehicle performance traits (if he were asked to.) The overwhelming fact is that this man, this former Champ, is able to grasp vehicle behavior in a way that few men will (ever) surpass. He could probably go out today and do things on the track with your family car that would make your hair stand right up on end! Look at it this way: if the highest decorated F-16 jet fighter ace were to try out the latest F-16 flight sim and yet couldnt shoot down a thing, where does the problem rest? I'm not myself a former World Champion or an ex F-16 fighter ace, but if I were asked to compare driving my Toyota Supra in real life to one depicted in a computer game, I'd feel confident I could do a good job of it. Its what I know. mr In article <E46n5.109988$A%[email hidden]>, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote: > LOL. Yes, I couldn't back out of the driveway tonight because I hadjust > played some GP3. > > You are one of the r.a.s. regulars who has kept some perspective onour > hobby. > > I also don't understand why it is that a professional driver cannot be > expected to comprehend auto simulators. Wittle kids do. The truth is,that > line of thinking is just a feeble way to dismiss an opposing expertopinion. > I think it would be wiser to listen and learn. > > You know what's really funny? Every time somone who knows someoneelse, who > has a cousin who's delivered the mail to a guy who races FF's, whosaid GPL > was realistic, we will hear about it. Yet, a legend like JS isdismissed as

Quoted text (9 lines)

> a turnip who can't comprehend what a car sim is all about. > > David G Fisher > > <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:8ni1ep$903$[email hidden]... > > In article <[email hidden]>, > > [email hidden] wrote: > > > While interesting, JS's comments would only really have value to

the > > > sim racing gang if he had a lot of experience racing sims<snip> > > > Chris > > > > > > Thats a whole lot of presumption: that the former World Champion > > couldnt himself realize (quickly) and adjust to the circumstancesof a > > computer sim. Jackie S's professional career revolved aroundoperating > > racing cars.. and you mean to say you doubt he couldnt easily graspthe > > nature of the vehicle he was driving?? And this other idea thatbecause > > he is used to more physical input he would be confused by the lackof > > input in a computer sim is also idiotic. Hellloooooo??? How many of > > you get into your street cars and become disoriented by the extra > > physical cues you are now getting? Ok, so there are less cues in a > > computer sim, but this can be quickly processed by any 'racingbrain' > > worth the title. And the former World Champion must surely have the > > ability (in spades) to process the differences. > > > > ..reminds me of that Saturday Night Live sketch about the caveman- > > lawyer. As if JS would be saying, 'your magic world of picturesinside

Quoted text (10 lines)

> > the electro-device is confusing and frightening to me!' > > > > mr > > > > > > > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ > > Before you buy. > >

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

In article <8njmtf$4l1$[email hidden]>, [email hidden] wrote: However, > without experience with race car games, how can he tell how good the > "game" is? Jackie's experience is that the real cars had more grip and are less slippery on the road than GPL indicates. This isnt about if the game is good or not. This isnt about if he thinks a sequel to GPL would sell like hotcakes. This isnt even about if he could compete with the GPL hotlappers if his life depended on it. He just said the real cars had more grip and behaved better. mr Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

David G Fisher wrote in message ... >Yes, it's completely and totally irrelevant that someone who actually drove >the cars, and raced the races, doesn't feel that the simulation >realistically reproduces his experience. No, you said he said that the grip wasn't the same. We've explained to you here before how a racer feels grip. We've explained to you before how a racer needs to be aware of the inherent limitations that a PC has when it comes to feedback, especially feedback on grip. We've explained to you how comments like his can easily be taken out of context. I'd like to see JackieS try all the major racing sims, and then hear his comments about GPL. This is why I tend to rely on the judgements of racers who actively play racing sims, such as Juan Montoya and Jacques Villeneuve. Not a computer neophyte who is either thrilled by the novelty of the experience, or a cynic who overestimates the power of computers. >People that have never driven those cars and competed in those races >definitely have a much better idea of what the real life experience islike. My strawman argument meter is off the scale. >This place is f**ken nuts sometimes. What's "f**ken nuts" is that you don't get it. Bendito;

Kai Fuller wrote in message >the cars not having enough grip sounds like a car modeling problem than a >physics issue problem David. You could use the same physics engine, andjust >add some more grip factor to the cars. Yes, this is something I've also concluded. When you have a physics model, like the one in GPL, that is quite thorough and realistic (though not perfect by any stretch of the imagination), then a criticism like the one of JackieS's is not necessarily directed at the physics model, but maybe at the parameters chosen by the game developers. It would be easy to fix, just adjust the grip parameters. But if your physics model is incomplete, like RC2000 lacking proper inertial modeling, then there's bugger all you can do with the parameters of your model to answer someone's criticism. So JackieS's criticism may or may not be justified, but it's not necessarily a criticism directed at the physics engine. Bendito;

ymenard wrote in message ... >Btw, your above quote makes obvious how blatant Star Wars : Episode 1 was >stolen at the Academy Awards this year. "robbed", not "stolen". We have to get the few remaining babelfish translation cells out of your brain. ;) Bendito;

ymenard wrote in message <8U5n5.144327 >I never use or have used any kind of translator. My English is better than >a vast portion of Enlish-speakers. As we are all humans, we from time to >time make errors in our typing. I doubt it's a typing error! :) > In my view, both are adjective and are synonyms, so I stick to the idiom > I've written. Fair enough, I was just trying to be helpful and friendly. My mother once told me that pedants aren't held in high regard. I think it was after I tried to explain to her the proper way of burping a baby. Bendito;

David G Fisher wrote in message ... >Just to be clear, he said the real cars had a lot more grip and were more >driveable. Yeah, a real car is generally more driveable. It's called more feedback. JackieS may be right about the grip, but this is not necessarily related to a major flaw in the physics engine. So when he says that real life '67 GP cars were more driveable and had more grip than those in GPL, his comments may not apply to GPL specifically at all, but rather to auto sims in general. >What needs to be explained to you is that someone like JS doesn't needthose >things explained to him before he tries a car sim. It comes down to experience, like any other pursuit of life. The more you experience something, the better able you are to judge it with the proper perspective. I'm not calling it a secret, that's you with your strawman bag o' tricks. Would you be happy if the judge knew nothing of school pranks if you were being charged with "borrowing" the school bus? That is why I said that JackieS's comments, as they stand now, are largely irrelevant. With the right context and enough perspective, though, they might be very relevant. We just don't know. Bendito;

On Thu, 17 Aug 2000 21:32:16 GMT, "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (10 lines)

>"David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote >> On TalkSport radio station in the UK following his resignation from >Jaguar. > >Yeah uh.... > >And I've heard Jackie Stewart say that GPL is the most incredible racing >simulation ever and it's so realistic it sent shivers down his spine. It >was uh... hmmmm on uhh BBC international an interview on TV with him racing >on inside an Hyperstimulator. Yeah maybe ;)

You're wrong. That was Jim Clark who said that. Or was it Graham Hill? Andre

Thanks to everyone for responding to my thread. I rely on the "majority" in this newsgroup along with a select few individuals to harvest information. The limited number of useless flames made reading the responses very productive. I have to believe the AI racing will wear thin quickly and the multi-player capability will be the "deciding" factor along with the realism. N3 has been good enough for everyone online to support many leagues of dedicated and hard core simmers. If NH can't push the online field size much past 8 then I say that may be the death of it. I know the first time I raced on Hawaii in a pickup race.... I was absolutely STUNNED. I was paying the long distance from Arizona to Connecticut or wherever that Hawaii server was (Boston maybe) and it was a very fun time. Multi-player is where the true action is at. From Half-Life's CounterStrike to NASCAR sims it is best against other humans..... as long as they are not using proxy servers :) Andrew B.

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] wrote: > While interesting, JS's comments would only really have value to the > sim racing gang if he had a lot of experience racing sims<snip> > Chris Thats a whole lot of presumption: that the former World Champion couldnt himself realize (quickly) and adjust to the circumstances of a computer sim. Jackie S's professional career revolved around operating racing cars.. and you mean to say you doubt he couldnt easily grasp the nature of the vehicle he was driving?? And this other idea that because he is used to more physical input he would be confused by the lack of input in a computer sim is also idiotic. Hellloooooo??? How many of you get into your street cars and become disoriented by the extra physical cues you are now getting? Ok, so there are less cues in a computer sim, but this can be quickly processed by any 'racing brain' worth the title. And the former World Champion must surely have the ability (in spades) to process the differences. ..reminds me of that Saturday Night Live sketch about the caveman- lawyer. As if JS would be saying, 'your magic world of pictures inside the electro-device is confusing and frightening to me!' mr Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

"pez" <[email hidden]> wrote > show a cgi sfx shot of an explosion to a pyrotechnician and he'll go > wow....show it to a cgi sfx bloke and he'll show you the faults..... Exactly. We are now in the era (with the GPL, MGI and possibly other engines like the West one) that racing simulations are a completely different racing entity. It's on it's own. People like DGF have yet to understand such thing and still consider us as inferiors, but I really see many people who have understood that we are equal to other forms of racing. Are we naive? Should we face the reality that this is only games? Well real racing is also just games,. Events like LikeReal or the NROS are perfect example that it's a real form of motorsport, with it's advantages and disadvantages. I still say that whatever the experience a real-life racecar driver has (actually, we are also real-life racecar drivers remember), it's pointless for him to judge virtual reality motorsports if he doesn't have the experience of such thing. Like a F1 driver won't go judge Rally racing, or a stock-car driver won't judge SBK bikes. Btw, your above quote makes obvious how blatant Star Wars : Episode 1 was stolen at the Academy Awards this year. Everybody who has experience in CGI knows that the movie was a revolution. -- -- 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.

I am going to love hearing from the GPL fans once N4 comes out....lets see how many change their tune. Dave Krammer already stated the physic model, while based on the GPL engine, is still completely different beacuse you are dealing with a completely different beast. I really want to see N4 do good but I would also love to see it blow up in all your dork faces just like GP3 blew crap all over its DEVOTEES. One thing that doesn't look good so far is DELAY....as far as Ive can remember in the game industry that is usually (not always) a sign that stuff is going wrong...not, as many of you believe, that they just want to TWEAK it so it is the best.....HAHAHA just like they tweaked GP3 or Diablo or Daikatana. ymenard <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:lxWm5.161626$[email hidden]... > "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote > > Jackie Stewart has, and he said the real cars had more grip and weremore > > drivable than the cars in GPL. The physics in GPL are not as accurate as > > some here would want you to believe (by drilling the idea into yourbrain

Quoted text (12 lines)

> > every day). > > Proof, proof David. Tell us where he said that. > > > > > -- > -- 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. > > >

"L_NiN0" <[email hidden]> wrot > I am going to love hearing from the GPL fans once N4 comes out....lets see > how many change their tune. Change their tune for what? And why? We all know N4 will be the most advanced racing simulation at it's release. As for GPL, people will continue to race it because of the racing series it models itself (how enjoyable the era, the cars, the tracks is). I mean people still race vintage cars. Do you shout at them "Well you could race much better modern cars! You suck!". That's what your saying. Troll. > One thing that doesn't look good so far is DELAY....as far as Ive can > remember in the game industry that is usually (not always) a sign thatstuff > is going wrong...not, as many of you believe, that they just want to TWEAK > it so it is the best.....HAHAHA just like they tweaked GP3 or Diablo or > Daikatana. Or GPL, or MechWarrior 2, or <insert many games that were delayed and were incredible>. It goes both way. -- -- 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.

Most realistic NASCAR racing game on the planet? Do you think that on alien worlds there are more realistic Nascar titles? Probably just now making a modern sim for early F1 racing do to video signal delays... Vintook <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:_XZm5.24$[email hidden]... > I think it was Scooby Doo. Anyway, who care who said what. The real pointis > that GPL is an open wheel racecar with little downforce. A Nascar is a > regular looking car with good downforce. It will stick to the track better > and be easier to drive. With the pedal control you learn in GPL you should > be able to rocket around Nascar. NH's physics are just fine, this is the > closest anyone has come to modeling a Nascar. When N4 comes out you mightbe > shocked on how it really drives like NH! > > Vintook > > P.S. by the way, Nascar 4 is vaporware at the moment and NH is about tohit > the shelves. If you want to sit around racing N3 for 6 to 8 months goahead > but you might not find the rest of the world joining you, they'll beracing

Quoted text (14 lines)

> the most realistic Nascar game on the planet. > > "Andre Warringa" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > On Thu, 17 Aug 2000 21:32:16 GMT, "ymenard" <[email hidden]> > > wrote: > > > > >"David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote > > >> On TalkSport radio station in the UK following his resignation from > > >Jaguar. > > > > > >Yeah uh.... > > > > > >And I've heard Jackie Stewart say that GPL is the most incredible

racing > > >simulation ever and it's so realistic it sent shivers down his spine.It

Quoted text (11 lines)

> > >was uh... hmmmm on uhh BBC international an interview on TV with him > racing > > >on inside an Hyperstimulator. Yeah maybe ;) > > > > You're wrong. That was Jim Clark who said that. Or was it Graham Hill? > > > > Andre > > > > > >

"rrevved" <[email hidden]> wrote > >Change their tune for what? And why? We all know N4 will be the most > >advanced racing simulation at it's release. > > How do you know this, Frank? Why wouldn't it be? If everything goes correctly, it should and will be. There is nothing that tell us the opposite, everything that tells us it will be the most advanced racing sim to date. Especially since WSC should be released after, there is no other that can match it. I mean even people from MGI and the West brothers have said such thing in various interviews. -- -- 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.

"rrevved" <[email hidden]> wrote > I, like you, hope N4 very realistic, but to say that 'we all know' that N4 > will be the 'most advanced' sim makes you sound as if you belong > on one of those Psychic Friends info-mercials.. :) No, I'm just stating the obvious. Why can't we (or the way you want --> *I and they*) extrapolate and have a majority agree on something from time to time? Everybody says it will be, and every indication shows it, even their competitors. The game engine has prooved it's quality and how superior it is to everything else. Some people have way too many problems with the usage of "we". I write it objectively. That's all. It englobes a neutral portion of people, unspecified and equitable. -- -- 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.

"Bendito" <[email hidden]> wrote > "robbed", not "stolen". We have to get the few remaining babelfish > translation cells out of your brain. ;) I never use or have used any kind of translator. My English is better than a vast portion of Enlish-speakers. As we are all humans, we from time to time make errors in our typing. In my view, both are adjective and are synonyms, so I stick to the idiom I've written. -- -- 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.

LOL. Yes, I couldn't back out of the driveway tonight because I had just played some GP3. You are one of the r.a.s. regulars who has kept some perspective on our hobby. I also don't understand why it is that a professional driver cannot be expected to comprehend auto simulators. Wittle kids do. The truth is, that line of thinking is just a feeble way to dismiss an opposing expert opinion. I think it would be wiser to listen and learn. You know what's really funny? Every time somone who knows someone else, who has a cousin who's delivered the mail to a guy who races FF's, who said GPL was realistic, we will hear about it. Yet, a legend like JS is dismissed as a turnip who can't comprehend what a car sim is all about. David G Fisher <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:8ni1ep$903$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (30 lines)

> In article <[email hidden]>, > [email hidden] wrote: > > While interesting, JS's comments would only really have value to the > > sim racing gang if he had a lot of experience racing sims<snip> > > Chris > > > Thats a whole lot of presumption: that the former World Champion > couldnt himself realize (quickly) and adjust to the circumstances of a > computer sim. Jackie S's professional career revolved around operating > racing cars.. and you mean to say you doubt he couldnt easily grasp the > nature of the vehicle he was driving?? And this other idea that because > he is used to more physical input he would be confused by the lack of > input in a computer sim is also idiotic. Hellloooooo??? How many of > you get into your street cars and become disoriented by the extra > physical cues you are now getting? Ok, so there are less cues in a > computer sim, but this can be quickly processed by any 'racing brain' > worth the title. And the former World Champion must surely have the > ability (in spades) to process the differences. > > ..reminds me of that Saturday Night Live sketch about the caveman- > lawyer. As if JS would be saying, 'your magic world of pictures inside > the electro-device is confusing and frightening to me!' > > mr > > > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ > Before you buy.

"Bendito" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:8nio8r$8nb$[email hidden]... > David G Fisher wrote in message ... > >Yes, it's completely and totally irrelevant that someone who actuallydrove > >the cars, and raced the races, doesn't feel that the simulation > >realistically reproduces his experience. > > No, you said he said that the grip wasn't the same. We've explained to > you here before how a racer feels grip. We've explained to you before howa > racer needs to be aware of the inherent limitations that a PC has when it > comes to feedback, especially feedback on grip. We've explained to you how > comments like his can easily be taken out of context. Just to be clear, he said the real cars had a lot more grip and were more driveable. What needs to be explained to you is that someone like JS doesn't need those things explained to him before he tries a car sim. A 2 year old child knows those things. JS does too. EVERYBODY knows what you seem to think is a deep dark secret written on hidden scrolls, only to be seen by the eyes of SERIOUS sim racers. David G Fisher

"David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (9 lines)

> >"Andrew Britton" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >news:[email hidden]... >> The fact I have never driven a 1967 Grand Prix racer > >Jackie Stewart has, and he said the real cars had more grip and were more >drivable than the cars in GPL. The physics in GPL are not as accurate as >some here would want you to believe (by drilling the idea into your brain >every day).

Yeah David, I agree, IMO GPL lacks lateral grip. However.... Mr. Stewart isn't an expert regarding racing games, and without knowing how much time he spent with GPL, and with what configuration, his words doesn't mean anything. But of course, everyone who claims that a game behaves exactly like in real life, doesn't know anything, or is paid. I do remember certain people who used comments of real rally drivers to "prove" that the physics in RC2000 are "real"... <g> I'm amazed that you, David, still doesn't know the difference between a physics model and data used by a model, like tyre data. I also wonder why you keep saying that the GPL physics are flawed, that while you did say in the past that the RC2000 physics were like real life.... It's hard to take you serious this way.... Remco

Thats right! What thell would someone like Jackie Stewart know about any sort of F1 car, I mean he's only won actual World Championships and owned actual F1 Teams and you've played some Computer games, of course this makes you much more qualified than he to comment on what FEELS real and what doesn't LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

You critics will find anything in any post to poke fun at. :) Vintook "Kai Fuller" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:Oz4n5.258379$[email hidden]... > Most realistic NASCAR racing game on the planet? Do you think that onalien > worlds there are more realistic Nascar titles? Probably just now making a > modern sim for early F1 racing do to video signal delays... > > Vintook <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:_XZm5.24$[email hidden]... > > I think it was Scooby Doo. Anyway, who care who said what. The realpoint > is > > that GPL is an open wheel racecar with little downforce. A Nascar is a > > regular looking car with good downforce. It will stick to the trackbetter > > and be easier to drive. With the pedal control you learn in GPL youshould > > be able to rocket around Nascar. NH's physics are just fine, this is the > > closest anyone has come to modeling a Nascar. When N4 comes out youmight

Quoted text (41 lines)

> be > > shocked on how it really drives like NH! > > > > Vintook > > > > P.S. by the way, Nascar 4 is vaporware at the moment and NH is about to > hit > > the shelves. If you want to sit around racing N3 for 6 to 8 months go > ahead > > but you might not find the rest of the world joining you, they'll be > racing > > the most realistic Nascar game on the planet. > > > > "Andre Warringa" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:[email hidden]... > > > On Thu, 17 Aug 2000 21:32:16 GMT, "ymenard" <[email hidden]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > >"David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote > > > >> On TalkSport radio station in the UK following his resignation from > > > >Jaguar. > > > > > > > >Yeah uh.... > > > > > > > >And I've heard Jackie Stewart say that GPL is the most incredible > racing > > > >simulation ever and it's so realistic it sent shivers down his spine. > It > > > >was uh... hmmmm on uhh BBC international an interview on TV with him > > racing > > > >on inside an Hyperstimulator. Yeah maybe ;) > > > > > > You're wrong. That was Jim Clark who said that. Or was it Graham Hill? > > > > > > Andre > > > > > > > > > > > >

Marc Davey wrote in message <[email hidden]>... >Thats right! What thell would someone like Jackie Stewart know about >any sort of F1 car, I mean he's only won actual World Championships >and owned actual F1 Teams and you've played some Computer games, of >course this makes you much more qualified than he to comment on what >FEELS real and what doesn't LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL You must be some sort of a thicky. Comprehension 101. I suggest you enrol. Bendito;

and no one wants someone else to be their mother. :) hehe > Fair enough, I was just trying to be helpful and friendly. My mother > once told me that pedants aren't held in high regard. I think it was afterI > tried to explain to her the proper way of burping a baby. > > Bendito; > >

On Fri, 18 Aug 2000 08:11:06 GMT, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote: >>Just to be clear, he said the real cars had a lot more grip and were more >driveable. Maybe I missed it some time ago, but what were his exact words regarding GPL? >What needs to be explained to you is that someone like JS doesn't need those >things explained to him before he tries a car sim. I remember reading about how Alain Prost famously crashed his Virtua Racing car at a Sega promotional event. Hardly a sim by today's standards (or compard to Hard Drivin), but it was still an approximation of driving an F1 car. What happened? Intriguingly, the late Greg Moore was reportedly a Virtua Racing ace on his Sega Genesis. Can one really generalize about how well a racing driver adapts to a computer sim? Martin Long Live Nigel Mansell!

On Fri, 18 Aug 2000 20:44:12 GMT, [email hidden] (Martin Ursua) wrote: >>>Just to be clear, he said the real cars had a lot more grip and were more >>driveable. > > Maybe I missed it some time ago, but what were his exact words >regarding GPL? You don't suppose they gave him the "default" setup with full fuel tanks, do you? That would sorta make this whole thread subject moot, IMO. <g> Regardsm Brett C. Cammack That's Racing! Motorsports Pompano Beach, FL

And I suggest you get your self some actual experience driving real race cars. GPL is a good game, but thats all it is, a game On Sat, 19 Aug 2000 01:29:43 +1000, "Bendito" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (13 lines)

>Marc Davey wrote in message <[email hidden]>... >>Thats right! What thell would someone like Jackie Stewart know about >>any sort of F1 car, I mean he's only won actual World Championships >>and owned actual F1 Teams and you've played some Computer games, of >>course this makes you much more qualified than he to comment on what >>FEELS real and what doesn't LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL > > You must be some sort of a thicky. Comprehension 101. I suggest you >enrol. > >Bendito; > >

"ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:8U5n5.144327$[email hidden]... > "Bendito" <[email hidden]> wrote > > "robbed", not "stolen". We have to get the few remaining babelfish > > translation cells out of your brain. ;) > > > I never use or have used any kind of translator. My English is betterthan > a vast portion of Enlish-speakers. As we are all humans, we from time to > time make errors in our typing. In my view, both are adjective and are > synonyms, so I stick to the idiom I've written. > And where do they speak Enlish? Chris

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > > > -- > -- 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. > > >

Do you have proof that only 8 people will be supported? I haven't seen this anywhere so if you have a link please post it so I can read it. If not then at least wait for the real game to show up before you write it off for a feature nobody has yet to even see. Vintook "Walk Walker" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:399d7e99$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (20 lines)

> > "Vintook" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:_XZm5.24$[email hidden]... > > > P.S. by the way, Nascar 4 is vaporware at the moment and NH is about to > hit > > the shelves. If you want to sit around racing N3 for 6 to 8 months go > ahead > > but you might not find the rest of the world joining you, they'll be > racing > > the most realistic Nascar game on the planet. > > You and 7 of your best online friends.... > > I'll continue to use N3 and race with 30 of my best online friends... > > -/- Walk Walker > Proud Member - Hawaii Ace League > >

In Enland! :-) Pete "Chris Bloom" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > > And where do they speak Enlish? > > Chris >

Marc Davey wrote in message <[email hidden]>... >And I suggest you get your self some actual experience driving real >race cars. GPL is a good game, but thats all it is, a game Totally irrelevant to the point I was making. If you had the ability to comprehend or the desire the read carefully, you'd notice that I left open the possibility that JackieS may be dead right with his observations. So I'll let this unproductive conversation rest. Bendito;

"David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Yes, it's completely and totally irrelevant that someone who actually drove >the cars, and raced the races, doesn't feel that the simulation >realistically reproduces his experience. Actually as just a single data point, it is pretty irrelavent. I'm not dissing the guy, I'm sure he knows what the cars feel like. But some people just don't "get" virtual sims, they don't read the virtual/artificial cues the game has to make up for the lack of "seat of your pants" feel. Joe McGinn _____________________ Radical Entertainment

"Marty" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > I have now doubt the best sim drivers are equal to the best 'real' race > drivers....given equal equipment and opportunity. > > Marty I'm not 100 percent sure about that statement. One thing that we are missing from all racing games is the element of fear. I've never driven a race car in which I didn't have at least a small pang of fear. You also have to really struggle to fight the human brain's natural instinct of preserving itself. Forgive me for being crass, but it takes a lot of balls to drive any vehicle at its limit. You just can replicate this is a game. Because no matter how many times we wreck or flip the car, our brain knows we are safe. It's really hard to say if all great sim drivers would make good racers. We tend to take many more chances in a game, and we aren't afraid to push it to the limit or even past it. In the actual situation, it's just not that easy. -Jeff

How dare you say anything negative about GPL in this GPL foru.............RAS forum. Don't you know your flawed if you do not like GPL? And we will swear at you in GPL speak......ARCADE ARCADE ! It can be the second coming of the greatest Sim ever, but if its not this 1960 racing game called GPL its Arcade !

JJ Thomas wrote in message <8p2uld$pfh$[email hidden]>... >How dare you say anything negative about GPL in this GPL >foru.............RAS forum. >Don't you know your flawed if you do not like GPL? And we will swear at you >in GPL speak......ARCADE ARCADE ! It can be the second coming of the >greatest Sim ever, but if its not this 1960 racing game called GPL its >Arcade ! Help! Am I going blind? Oh, hang on. The reason I can't see anything is due to enormous chip on your shoulder. :) Bendito;

"Jeff Wong" <[email hidden]> wrote > GPL is 'flawed' to have left out the majority of the gamers who doesn'thave > the time or the talent to play that game. Realism is a flaw? -- -- 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.

>How dare you say anything negative about GPL in this GPL >foru.............RAS forum. >Don't you know your flawed if you do not like GPL? And we will swear at you >in GPL speak......ARCADE ARCADE ! It can be the second coming of the >greatest Sim ever, but if its not this 1960 racing game called GPL its >Arcade ! Absolute heresy, Blasphemy, to joke about GPL, in this newsgroup, how dare you, what were you thinking ! Don't you know that it has become more than a game, it's a virtual deity among games, you don't "play" GPL, you live it. Even Nascar 4 won't be the equal of GPL, because it will be too easy, and therefore the GPL physics will have been tainted for the unholy masses, and it shall be declared, dare I say it, ARCADE.

LOL, classic!! ;-) Jan. =--- Loosay2 wrote...

Quoted text (9 lines)

> <snip> > Absolute heresy, Blasphemy, to joke about GPL, in this newsgroup, > how dare you, what were you thinking ! Don't you know that it has > become more than a game, it's a virtual deity among games, you > don't "play" GPL, you live it. > Even Nascar 4 won't be the equal of GPL, because it will be too > easy, and therefore the GPL physics will have been tainted for the > unholy masses, and it shall be declared, dare I say it, ARCADE. >

>Realism is a flaw? Yes ! Incomplete realism can be a flaw. Assuming that GPL is realistic, that being a relative term, if it provides insufficient visual,audible and tactile feedback (insufficient totality of realism) for most avid sim players to readily gauge when a car is about to exceed its cornering limits, then it is flawed IMHO. GPL replicates very lightweight 1200lb vehicles with the horsepower of a Dodge Viper. Most of us either have to run numerous laps spinning out and crashing in order to get some sense of how the cars in this sim will react in a given situation, and it is not because GPL is so much more accurate than any other sim that we may have played before it(or has come since), but because the cars that it simulates are very different from Nascar,modern F1's,Cart, or dodge vipers. I am certain that I would have a better sense of when I had reached the cornering limits in a "real" 1967 F1 car, since there would be more "real" cues than are,or can be, offered by GPL, and I would not crash perpetually after my first 2 hours of driving it. These cars cry for more clues as to what the car is doing than any other sim, given their no downforce, high power to weight ratio natures, being simulated. If you can't feel the G-forces in a sim, you need to convey those forces in some other manner, or failing that, you have to accept that only those who are willing to overlook this inherent "flaw in realism", who learn to compensate by adapting to that sims given subset of reality, will enjoy the game. For me, GPL is a challenge. Sometimes it's fun (when I break my records), but sometimes it's just frustrating ( when I spinout in a low speed turn for no obvious reason that I can see on replay). It really frustrates me to not be able to tell whether I did something wrong, or the sim was in error, or the sim was correct but did not provide as much feedback as I would have felt in a real car. That shortcoming in "realism" is what makes GPL an excellent model of simulated car physics, but for many of us, it is not among our most favorite racing sims. I personally much prefer Viper Racing and Nascar Heat, since I can tell when I am about to lose control in these sims. Even the creator of GPL and Nascar 4 is already warning people not to expect Nascar 4 to feel like GPL even with the same GPL physics engine, because he knows that the diehard GPL fans will assume that they have dumbed down the GPL physics model, if they can get around a track without crashing every other turn . As he said, just because a game if difficult does not make it realistic. Having just spent a few hours trying to enjoy SEGA GT, a rave reviewed supposed console sim, I have once again learned that their are arcade racers which will have you crashing into the walls at low speeds, and weaving all over the course, and throughly uncompetitve with the AI drivers. This game is not sufficiently realistic in "feel" to me to be called a sim, and yet it has been harder for me to complete a fast lap in this game than it now is for me in GPL after months of practice. It is a hard game, but it is not very real.

>...because it takes above average ability to play GPL well. >> >> For those who can't, GPL is 'flawed'. If by flawed you are debating whether GPL has a less than perfect physics model, of course it has flaws, simply less than most other sims. GPL does some quirky not so realistic things on screen from time to time. I have hit walls at high speeds and just sat there stuck in the wall in a very unrealistic fashion, no bouncing back or tumbling or anything,just stuck in the wall, and I have seen some pretty unrealistic motions in the cars behavior in replays while on the track as well. But GPL's primary flaw has less to do with accurate physics than it has to do with lack of compelling fun gameplay. The operative word is "play", it is a "game" afterall. If it is not fun for you then it is flawed. For you , presumably, it is fun and has no flaws, beauty being in the eyes of the beholder. For others it is flawed because the game fails to bring them some measure of fun due to some shortcoming in the game, versus their preferences, or perhaps it is simply a bit less fun than they would like it to be. The game was not a commercial sucess due to a fun "flaw" for most people. Fun is the overriding component in any game. I think the game "Deer Hunter" is stupid and boring and flawed, for me. It might be accurate, and I might even become good at it if I cared to , but because it does not hold my interest, it is a poor excuse for a game, accuracy not withstanding. And yet I am in the great minority in my dislike for Deer Hunter, given that it sells extremely well. Is the majority opinion what determines who is right? It's a matter of personal preference, and does not always have to do with how well you play the game. Some games I hate because I am not very good at them, so I don't have any fun, for me they are flawed because they are not sufficiently compelling to get me to play them in spite of my ineptitude. Other times, I am able to play a game well, but it just is too lacking in some game component to hold my interest, its simply not fun. So it is simplistic to assume that everyone who sees a flaw in your favorite game must not play it well, or even that just because someone thinks a game is flawed that they do not enjoy playing that flawed game. As far as whether it takes "above average ability" to play GPL well, that's highly debatable,and sounds as much like your ego talking, as common sense. What it takes is lots of practice, and if you don't play it long enough to get past the steep learning curve,because you are not having fun, you will not become adequately proficient,and consequently you will not enjoy the game. Gpl has it's shortcomings for many of us who have even learned to play it well and like it in spite of them. For me, it just means that the game is not as good as it could be.

> As far as whether it takes "above average ability" to play GPL well,that's > highly debatable,and sounds as much like your ego talking, as commonsense. > What it takes is lots of practice, and if you don't play it long enough toget > past the steep learning curve,because you are not having fun, you will not > become adequately proficient,and consequently you will not enjoy the game.Gpl > has it's shortcomings for many of us who have even learned to play it welland > like it in spite of them. For me, it just means that the game is not asgood as > it could be. True Indeed !