Race Sim Central
Rec.Autos.Simulators Archive

Re: Why Don't The Developers Use 3rd-Party Tracks?

11 posts by 9 people · 04 Aug 2000 - 06 Aug 2000 07:06 UTC

Alexander Marx <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:8mf843$65k0q$[email hidden]... > I agree, but apart from the issues that you've mentioned, Hockenheim inGP3 > is the best ever seen in a sim, especially the mobil curve... they gotthat > one just right. Looking at the GP3 monza I can't seem to lose that feeling > that crammond did in fact take a very close look at the user created Monza > tracks out there - it's very similar. The missing run-off areas are a > design choice that should keep people from running unrealistic lines and > cutting the chicanes - you can argue about that, but it's done on purpose. Rubbish. That's what his black flag idea is for (slows you up for 10 seconds!) There is no excuse for the chronic mistakes in some tracks. The Hockenheim is one of the worse. I must admit, it's very poor that there is only ever track, curb, grass or gravel. I love GP3 over F12000, but at least F12000 got the circuit layout right (even if the elevation was SOoo bad it's not even funny) >
I agree, but apart from the issues that you've mentioned, Hockenheim in GP3 is the best ever seen in a sim, especially the mobil curve... they got that one just right. Looking at the GP3 monza I can't seem to lose that feeling that crammond did in fact take a very close look at the user created Monza tracks out there - it's very similar. The missing run-off areas are a design choice that should keep people from running unrealistic lines and cutting the chicanes - you can argue about that, but it's done on purpose.
Jeneral 04 Aug 2000 20:09 UTC#245417
After having downloaded some great tracks for GP3, I wondered - Why doesn't Mr. Crammond and his team use the tracks made available by all the various people on the Internet? Admittedly, GP3's tracks are improved from GP2's but there are still a few errors that most 3rd party tracks correct. The reason I'm getting at this is, when GP4 (or 2.7 in some people's opinion : ) is released, will Hockenheim finally look like it is supposed to? I mean how hard can it be to put some elevation at the Ostkurve? Run-off areas and unused parts of tracks (like in last week's GP of Germany qualifying, notice HHF bypassing chicanes? Why aren't they in the game?) would also be nice. All the talented people on the Internet are already doing the work for him, why not take advantage of it? Michael M
EldredP 05 Aug 2000#245016
In article <LoVi5.75522$[email hidden]>, "Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> writes:
Quoted text (10 lines)> The biggest single reason why companies rarely use private efforts are >because of Lawyers. Corporate lawyers prevent companies from exposing >themselves to lawsuits and this limits the outside materials they can use. >Plus >especially in real world sims like racing, the tracks and various other >participants want their own cut. So if GP3 starts marketing a-lot of well >built >addons by private users, the track owners will sick "THIER" lawyers on >Hasbro. Same with the Sponsors, the Participants etc etc... >dave henrie
So why not make an agreement with those 'private' designers? I've seen a few game expansions that had 'best of the net' compilations as well as 'in-house' work... Eldred -- Tiger Stadium R.I.P. 1912-1999 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett GPL hcp. +52.52 Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.
Karl Zosel 05 Aug 2000 01:39 UTC#245366
I am very against the way Mr Crammond and co do bussiness, and I will NOT buy GP 2.5 All effort goes into advertising, very little in programming. BUT: apart from some armco in the chicanes on some tracks, I always found tracks in GP2 were very accurate. Jeneral <[email hidden]> schreef in berichtnieuws ypFi5.32660$[email hidden]... > After having downloaded some great tracks for GP3, I wondered - Whydoesn't > Mr. Crammond and his team use the tracks made available by all the various > people on the Internet? Admittedly, GP3's tracks are improved from GP2'sbut > there are still a few errors that most 3rd party tracks correct. Thereason > I'm getting at this is, when GP4 (or 2.7 in some people's opinion : ) is > released, will Hockenheim finally look like it is supposed to? I mean how > hard can it be to put some elevation at the Ostkurve? Run-off areas and > unused parts of tracks (like in last week's GP of Germany qualifying, > notice HHF bypassing chicanes? Why aren't they in the game?) would also be > nice. All the talented people on the Internet are already doing the workfor > him, why not take advantage of it? > > Michael M > >
GraDee 05 Aug 2000 11:41 UTC#245270
Jeneral <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:ypFi5.32660$[email hidden]... > After having downloaded some great tracks for GP3, I wondered - Whydoesn't > Mr. Crammond and his team use the tracks made available by all the various > people on the Internet? Admittedly, GP3's tracks are improved from GP2'sbut > there are still a few errors that most 3rd party tracks correct. Thereason > I'm getting at this is, when GP4 (or 2.7 in some people's opinion : ) is > released, will Hockenheim finally look like it is supposed to? I mean how > hard can it be to put some elevation at the Ostkurve? Run-off areas and > unused parts of tracks (like in last week's GP of Germany qualifying, > notice HHF bypassing chicanes? Why aren't they in the game?) would also be > nice. All the talented people on the Internet are already doing the workfor > him, why not take advantage of it? > > Michael M >Actually the structure of the tracks (providing there are no major changes from GP2, obviously not) does not allow the addition of such run off spaces like the one HHF by-passed. You could probably makeit so that it looked as thought there was a by-pas but if you drove on it would feel like gravel.
Dave Henrie 05 Aug 2000 14:20 UTC#245140
The biggest single reason why companies rarely use private efforts are because of Lawyers. Corporate lawyers prevent companies from exposing themselves to lawsuits and this limits the outside materials they can use. Plus especially in real world sims like racing, the tracks and various other participants want their own cut. So if GP3 starts marketing a-lot of well built addons by private users, the track owners will sick "THIER" lawyers on Hasbro. Same with the Sponsors, the Participants etc etc... dave henrie
Matthew V. Jessick 05 Aug 2000 20:32 UTC#244996
Dave Henrie wrote: > The biggest single reason why companies rarely use private efforts are > because of Lawyers. Nah, actually it's because at least when one of your own track designers / artists puts an outhouse on the track grounds with your name on it it's comforting to be able to walk down the hall and beat them up ;) - Matt
Dave Henrie 06 Aug 2000 04:09 UTC#244975
"EldredP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > In article <LoVi5.75522$[email hidden]>, "DaveHenrie" > <[email hidden]> writes: > > > The biggest single reason why companies rarely use private efforts are > >because of Lawyers. > So why not make an agreement with those 'private'designers? I've seen a few > game expansions that had 'best of the net' compilations as well as'in-house' > work... > > Eldred Because you have more layers of participants. You have the FIA, the Local track, even the EuroCommerce thing....If somebody puts up a track with Joe Camel Advertising, it fall afoul of many international regulations the list goes onandonandon. dave henrie
David 06 Aug 2000 05:26 UTC#244983
YOu know that makes me laugh since I recently read that Hyperstimulator at a Booth at a car show was using Danny Gelston's creation of Bathurst without even asking him for permission or even informing him. they were also charging for rides. I can understand that since its there hardware, but I would be willing to bet one reason they were able to charge was due to having Bathurst available for people to drive. With all the work guys are doing for games and not getting even a attaboy for it I can understand why Dave Noonan charges for his convertor. Dave Dave Henrie <[email hidden]> wrote in article <0y5j5.77121$[email hidden]>...
Quoted text (8 lines)> > "EldredP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > In article <LoVi5.75522$[email hidden]>, "Dave > Henrie" > > <[email hidden]> writes: > > > > > The biggest single reason why companies rarely use private efforts
are > > >because of Lawyers. > So why not make an agreement with those'private'
Quoted text (7 lines)> designers? I've seen a few > > game expansions that had 'best of the net' compilations as well as > 'in-house' > > work... > > > > Eldred > Because you have more layers of participants. You have the FIA, the
Local > track, even the EuroCommerce thing....If somebody puts up a track with > Joe Camel Advertising, it fall afoul of many international regulations the > list goes onandonandon. > > dave henrie > > >
Dave Henrie 06 Aug 2000 07:06 UTC#244890
"David" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:01bfff3c$f8e151e0$f9d2fc3f@packardbell...
Quoted text (8 lines)> > YOu know that makes me laugh since I recently read that Hyperstimulator at > a Booth at a car show was using Danny Gelston's creation of Bathurst > without even asking him for permission or even informing him. they were > also charging for rides. I can understand that since its there hardware, > but I would be willing to bet one reason they were able to charge was due > to having Bathurst available for people to drive. >
Boy that raises a thorny issue...most of the tracks have some line in the release statement saying it is ok to distrbute blah blah blah as long as they don't charge anything...hmmmm I wonder if Hyperstim violated that by chargeing for rides....couldn't Danny Gelston "reasonably" expect a part of whatever money the hyperstim guys brought in??? fortunately I'm not a lawyer so I can't answer that...let alone an Aussie lawyer. dave henrie
Quoted text (37 lines)> > > With all the work guys are doing for games and not getting even a attaboy > for it I can understand why Dave Noonan charges for his convertor. > > Dave > > Dave Henrie <[email hidden]> wrote in article > <0y5j5.77121$[email hidden]>... > > > > "EldredP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:[email hidden]... > > > In article <LoVi5.75522$[email hidden]>, "Dave > > Henrie" > > > <[email hidden]> writes: > > > > > > > The biggest single reason why companies rarely use private efforts > are > > > >because of Lawyers. > So why not make an agreement with those > 'private' > > designers? I've seen a few > > > game expansions that had 'best of the net' compilations as well as > > 'in-house' > > > work... > > > > > > Eldred > > Because you have more layers of participants. You have the FIA, the > Local > > track, even the EuroCommerce thing....If somebody puts up a track with > > Joe Camel Advertising, it fall afoul of many international regulations > the > > list goes onandonandon. > > > > dave henrie > > > > > >

Sponsors

Affiliate Links

Sim Gaming Expo MOZA Racing Sim-Lab Fanatec TrakRacer Asetek Internet Privacy From NordVPN Dreamhost Capital One Credit Card Application Fanatical CDKeys Amazon Amazon UK Project Motor Racing iRacing Get your racing gloves, boots and more from Demon Tweeks. Enlist at Roberts Space Industries, developers of Star Citizen and Squadron 42


Back from the ashes since July, 2019. First created in 2001 with the merger of Legends Central (founded 1999) and simracing.dk.

A site by a sort of sim racer, for sim racers, about racing sims. News and information on both modern and historic sim racing software titles.

All products and licenses property of their respective owners.


Facebook Threads Bluesky Twitter Mastodon Instagram YouTube Tiktok Twitch Reddit Google News Apple News Subscribe via WordPress Flipboard eBay

Race Sim Central © 1999-2026 | Some links pay RSC a commission. Advertising does not equal endorsement.Cookie Policy