Is there something to this?

link to OLR forum, to follow.. http://www.onlineracin.com/forum/tm.asp?m=40869 Mr Nobody, did a dang fine post... here is a copy of the text, but you should check out the link too... :) Well, I got really curious after I started to get mad about the "ALL NEW GAME ENGINE" claim that EA specifically emulsed on the contents packaging. So I decided to find out if in fact it really was an "all new game engine." I downloaded a reader to take a peek at the EA pm suspension file. I took the mercy of not including the entire thing, but I think after ya'll notice exactly what it says... well, you'll get the picture. EA wasn't even smart enough to change the dates and actually this is on the verge of consumer fraud. Enjoy the buggy Thunder 03 "game" guys. I'll enjoy using both CDs for new coasters. At least it's "all new" in that regard. zx11 Nascar Thunder 2004 Suspension File - Developed By Doug Arnao 05-21-03 // Revised 5/21-03 A-Arm placement to reflect a more relaistic in-garage static camber setting // Revised 5/22/03 Shortened Torque Tube length to 60 inches (was 100") // Revised 6/06/03 Incresed length of steering arm // Roll center height = 3.14" with lower arm parallel to the ground // There is -0.96 degree camber GAIN per 1" of bump travel // Roll center moves linearly (more or less) with bump travel - IE if the chassis moves down 1 inch the RC moves down 1 inch // With roll, the RC height doesn't move up or down any appreciable amount (1/8" max over 2 deg roll) // With roll, the RC moves to the left (while turning left) .43" (11mm) per degree of roll // For every degree of roll we LOSE +.64 deg of camber on the loaded side and GAIN -.69 on the unloaded side

Sting32 wrote: > link to OLR forum, to follow.. > http://www.onlineracin.com/forum/tm.asp?m=40869 > > Mr Nobody, did a dang fine post... here is a copy of the text, but you > should check out the link too... :) I can't find this text in the link you provided. Whats an Mr Nobody?

Quoted text (31 lines)

> Well, I got really curious after I started to get mad about the "ALL NEW > GAME ENGINE" claim that EA specifically emulsed on the contents packaging. > So I decided to find out if in fact it really was an "all new game engine." > I downloaded a reader to take a peek at the EA pm suspension file. I took > the mercy of not including the entire thing, but I think after ya'll notice > exactly what it says... well, you'll get the picture. EA wasn't even smart > enough to change the dates and actually this is on the verge of consumer > fraud. > > Enjoy the buggy Thunder 03 "game" guys. I'll enjoy using both CDs for new > coasters. At least it's "all new" in that regard. > zx11 > > Nascar Thunder 2004 Suspension File - Developed By Doug Arnao 05-21-03 > // Revised 5/21-03 A-Arm placement to reflect a more relaistic in-garage > static camber setting > // Revised 5/22/03 Shortened Torque Tube length to 60 inches (was 100") > // Revised 6/06/03 Incresed length of steering arm > // Roll center height = 3.14" with lower arm parallel to the ground > // There is -0.96 degree camber GAIN per 1" of bump travel > // Roll center moves linearly (more or less) with bump travel - IE if the > chassis moves down 1 inch the RC moves down 1 inch > // With roll, the RC height doesn't move up or down any appreciable amount > (1/8" max over 2 deg roll) > // With roll, the RC moves to the left (while turning left) .43" (11mm) per > degree of roll > // For every degree of roll we LOSE +.64 deg of camber on the loaded side > and GAIN -.69 on the unloaded side > > >

In this thread "**Great Read**The Unrealistic Rear Differential in NSR Explained" and Mr. Nobody is the author.

I pasted the 1st time he pointed this out, half way though this post, there is a picture (snapshot of his desktop with Wordpad with a file open...) picture are worth 100's of words (from my keyboard anywho) then the text was from this link... http://www.onlineracin.com/forum/tm.asp?m=41811 hope that clears it up a bit for ya JTS "Darus" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > In this thread "**Great Read**The Unrealistic Rear Differential in NSR > Explained" and Mr. Nobody is the author. >

Sting32 wrote:

Quoted text (14 lines)

> I pasted the 1st time he pointed this out, half way though this post, there > is a picture (snapshot of his desktop with Wordpad with a file open...) > picture are worth 100's of words (from my keyboard anywho) > then the text was from this link... > > http://www.onlineracin.com/forum/tm.asp?m=41811 > > hope that clears it up a bit for ya JTS > > "Darus" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > >>In this thread "**Great Read**The Unrealistic Rear Differential in NSR >>Explained" and Mr. Nobody is the author.

I'll confirm his post, too. I just reinstalled NT2004 (to broke to buy NSR right now) last night, and from the file comments I seen....it is /the/ same exact file. -Will

Check the text in your NSR full or Demo version. It is all right there, I posted this as well last week here. "William Bradshaw" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (22 lines)

> Sting32 wrote: >> I pasted the 1st time he pointed this out, half way though this post, >> there is a picture (snapshot of his desktop with Wordpad with a file >> open...) picture are worth 100's of words (from my keyboard anywho) >> then the text was from this link... >> >> http://www.onlineracin.com/forum/tm.asp?m=41811 >> >> hope that clears it up a bit for ya JTS >> >> "Darus" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >> news:[email hidden]... >> >>>In this thread "**Great Read**The Unrealistic Rear Differential in NSR >>>Explained" and Mr. Nobody is the author. > > I'll confirm his post, too. I just reinstalled NT2004 (to broke to buy NSR > right now) last night, and from the file comments I seen....it is /the/ > same exact file. > > > -Will

"Schooner" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:13jTd.15902$9a3.8770@edtnps91... > Check the text in your NSR full or Demo version. It is all right there, I > posted this as well last week here. It's no big deal that the suspension file is the same, since it's not like Cup cars have undergone a big redesign since then. Doug certainly knows what he's doing, and if it was right then it's fine to keep that file the same. No value in reinventing the wheel (or rather the suspension it connects to). Some of the other files, though, DO make you scratch your head... SB

I agree there is no value in reinventing the heel, but I think the point is this was made out to be "all new" not "partly new with some old code that we had kicking around mixed in". They seem to be pushing it being all new as they know many had issues with previous titles. "Steve Blankenship" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (17 lines)

> "Schooner" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:13jTd.15902$9a3.8770@edtnps91... >> Check the text in your NSR full or Demo version. It is all right there, >> I >> posted this as well last week here. > > It's no big deal that the suspension file is the same, since it's not like > Cup cars have undergone a big redesign since then. Doug certainly knows > what he's doing, and if it was right then it's fine to keep that file the > same. No value in reinventing the wheel (or rather the suspension it > connects to). > > Some of the other files, though, DO make you scratch your head... > > SB > >

"Schooner" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:s6lTd.15925$9a3.2091@edtnps91... > I agree there is no value in reinventing the heel, but I think the pointis > this was made out to be "all new" not "partly new with some old code thatwe > had kicking around mixed in". They seem to be pushing it being all new as > they know many had issues with previous titles. Kind of, no, actually, exactly, like when N3 was released :)

Not arguing that papy did the same thing, again just stating that EA is promoting this as all new and it is not is all. Couldn't care less who makes the next great sim but this certainly isn't it from all I have read to date. "JP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:4kmTd.3$p%[email hidden]...

Quoted text (15 lines)

> > "Schooner" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:s6lTd.15925$9a3.2091@edtnps91... >> I agree there is no value in reinventing the heel, but I think the point > is >> this was made out to be "all new" not "partly new with some old code that > we >> had kicking around mixed in". They seem to be pushing it being all new >> as >> they know many had issues with previous titles. > > > Kind of, no, actually, exactly, like when N3 was released :) > >

Nah, I know <g> I'm liking it more and more, but one little "options" button on the ui would solve a lot of problems. "Schooner" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:jrmTd.295$ab2.137@edtnps89... > Not arguing that papy did the same thing, again just stating that EA is > promoting this as all new and it is not is all. > Couldn't care less who makes the next great sim but this certainly isn'tit

Quoted text (8 lines)

> from all I have read to date. > > "JP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:4kmTd.3$p%[email hidden]... > > > > "Schooner" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:s6lTd.15925$9a3.2091@edtnps91... > >> I agree there is no value in reinventing the heel, but I think the

point > > is > >> this was made out to be "all new" not "partly new with some old codethat

Quoted text (11 lines)

> > we > >> had kicking around mixed in". They seem to be pushing it being all new > >> as > >> they know many had issues with previous titles. > > > > > > Kind of, no, actually, exactly, like when N3 was released :) > > > > > >

Yeah, the "all new" bit is pure marketing-speak (otherwise known as BS), but then I knew NSR was based on the ISI physics engine to begin with. But it's a capable physics engine to build a sim on as GTR shows, so that wasn't a big issue for me. Still can't quite get ISI's tires to behave the way I'd like, but if you've done any reading on tire models you can see they've done a thorough job of building one. Really interesting subject, by the way. It's pure conjecture on my part, but it's almost as if the physics end of this project is the neglected stepchild. You get the feeling Tiburon was focusing elsewhere and assumed their middleware physics solution was solid. How else could they have missed something as obvious and easy to fix as the rear diff issue? It doesn't make the cars that much harder to drive, only a touch less forgiving and in need of a bit more care with the right foot. But as delivered, it's unarguably not a SIMulation of a Cup car rear end. There are some other questions in the HDV and TBC files as well, like some of the aero values and the increased low-speed grip for road course tires vs. oval ones. Interesting to note that you can tweak the diff values in the SVM files (values that are inaccessible in the game setup menu) and race online with no problem. Not that it's any advantage, mind you. I actually spun off T4 in an online race at Kansas last night using a locked diff, when I could've just flat-tracked it with the LS one. I guess some folks might gripe about the cars being less forgiving like that, but the thing is I SHOULD have spun then, so I didn't mind it happening. Having to stay more focused when you're on the limit just adds to the game in my opinion. But then "floor it and steer" obviously has appeal; what else would explain the predominance of plate tracks on race servers over the years... ;-) SB "Schooner" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:s6lTd.15925$9a3.2091@edtnps91... > I agree there is no value in reinventing the heel, but I think the pointis > this was made out to be "all new" not "partly new with some old code thatwe

Quoted text (9 lines)

> had kicking around mixed in". They seem to be pushing it being all new as > they know many had issues with previous titles. > > > "Steve Blankenship" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > "Schooner" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:13jTd.15902$9a3.8770@edtnps91... > >> Check the text in your NSR full or Demo version. It is all right

there, > >> I > >> posted this as well last week here. > > > > It's no big deal that the suspension file is the same, since it's notlike > > Cup cars have undergone a big redesign since then. Doug certainly knows > > what he's doing, and if it was right then it's fine to keep that filethe

Quoted text (10 lines)

> > same. No value in reinventing the wheel (or rather the suspension it > > connects to). > > > > Some of the other files, though, DO make you scratch your head... > > > > SB > > > > > >

Hehehe... Steve Blankenship enlightened us with: > > But then "floor it and steer" obviously has appeal; what else would > explain the predominance of plate tracks on race servers over the > years... ;-) > > SB I was online with this again, for a few minutes, I swear to gosh almighty... but 1st, why is it that about the only track anyone ever sets up, is Dega-tona... Jeebus, especially now that just about eveyone agree's that this is x10 easier to drive, it seems? Well, at least the lobbies in NR03 are less conjested with typists... heheheh. What is the deal with allowing "modified .exe" files on the servers? Nah I dont care, supposedly it is "just the no CD patch" but Im sorry after the last few years of people cheating, It made me go back to here http://www.miniclip.com/trialscy/trialscy_game.htm and then back to Richard Burns Rally to get my game & Sim-Fix. LOL!

"Plowboy" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:4VnTd.9296$7z6.1825@lakeread04... > > I was online with this again, for a few minutes, I swear to goshalmighty... > but 1st, why is it that about the only track anyone ever sets up, is > Dega-tona... Jeebus, especially now that just about eveyone agree's that > this is x10 easier to drive, it seems? Well, at least the lobbies in NR03 > are less conjested with typists... heheheh. > > What is the deal with allowing "modified .exe" files on the servers? NahI > dont care, supposedly it is "just the no CD patch" but Im sorry after the > last few years of people cheating, It made me go back to here > http://www.miniclip.com/trialscy/trialscy_game.htm > > and then back to Richard Burns Rally to get my game & Sim-Fix. LOL! Great link! As a former TY250 owner, I can attest that the ones he says are really hard - really ARE! Think I may have injured myself... ;-) SB

Or like N2003 was to N4. Isn't physics math based anyways? If it accurate, why change it? Or are we ASSUMING it isn't accurate? Or are we ASSUMING it isn't accurate because EA made it and Papy didn't? Or are we ASSUMING it isn't accurate because EA made it 2 years ago and most simmers purchased N2003 vs. Thunder 03? Bottom line is if it is right, it is right. Bill Bollinger www.gsxn.com "JP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:4kmTd.3$p%[email hidden]...

Quoted text (15 lines)

> > "Schooner" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:s6lTd.15925$9a3.2091@edtnps91... >> I agree there is no value in reinventing the heel, but I think the point > is >> this was made out to be "all new" not "partly new with some old code that > we >> had kicking around mixed in". They seem to be pushing it being all new >> as >> they know many had issues with previous titles. > > > Kind of, no, actually, exactly, like when N3 was released :) > >

I'm not assuming anything. I was just saying it was reused and not all new like was claimed, which it is not. The fact they can drop old files into a "all new engine" makes me think it is not so "all new". Heck they could have at least cleaned up the files. Looks like they never did anything other than saying "ya just grab this file and use that as is" Again I couldn't care less who makes the sim, Papy, EA, or my dog. Its funny how you can point out an issue like this and all of a sudden the replies are "but but but Papy did it too!" Does that make EA marketing it as all new ok? Too many people jumping on both bandwagons for my liking. State the truth and pick the best sim available. "Bill Bollinger" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:lGrTd.3402$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (31 lines)

> Or like N2003 was to N4. Isn't physics math based anyways? If it > accurate, why change it? Or are we ASSUMING it isn't accurate? Or are we > ASSUMING it isn't accurate because EA made it and Papy didn't? Or are we > ASSUMING it isn't accurate because EA made it 2 years ago and most simmers > purchased N2003 vs. Thunder 03? Bottom line is if it is right, it is > right. > > Bill Bollinger > www.gsxn.com > > > "JP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:4kmTd.3$p%[email hidden]... >> >> "Schooner" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >> news:s6lTd.15925$9a3.2091@edtnps91... >>> I agree there is no value in reinventing the heel, but I think the point >> is >>> this was made out to be "all new" not "partly new with some old code >>> that >> we >>> had kicking around mixed in". They seem to be pushing it being all new >>> as >>> they know many had issues with previous titles. >> >> >> Kind of, no, actually, exactly, like when N3 was released :) >> >> > >

So Bill, You think it is "right" then? sheit, I is just wondering... Bill Bollinger enlightened us with:

Quoted text (23 lines)

> Or like N2003 was to N4. Isn't physics math based anyways? If it > accurate, why change it? Or are we ASSUMING it isn't accurate? Or > are we ASSUMING it isn't accurate because EA made it and Papy didn't? > Or are we ASSUMING it isn't accurate because EA made it 2 years ago > and most simmers purchased N2003 vs. Thunder 03? Bottom line is if > it is right, it is right. > Bill Bollinger > www.gsxn.com > > > "JP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:4kmTd.3$p%[email hidden]... >> >> "Schooner" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >> news:s6lTd.15925$9a3.2091@edtnps91... >>> I agree there is no value in reinventing the heel, but I think the >>> point is this was made out to be "all new" not "partly new with >>> some old code that we had kicking around mixed in". They seem to >>> be pushing it being all new as >>> they know many had issues with previous titles. >> >> >> Kind of, no, actually, exactly, like when N3 was released :)

Steve, The older 2 versions (std and Pro that you can buy in one "pack") the bikes react faster, alas I bought the one that the demo is online (construction) it is just as slow at home & work as at the website, you just get full screen, LOL... I was a former TY-80 owner got the 1st one sold in Colorado in 74, LOL. We quit competing in 83 or there abouts... BUT, I have recenlty gone back to competing after 20 years off, I even had a 75 250 model here for friends & an 80 for sonny. The last bike I had back in the 80's was 79 Sherpa-t. Now 2 weeks ago I bought me a GasGas 300 Pro. they are awesome. http://www.gasgas.com/Gas-Gas-Media/2005-bikes/TXT300x700w.gif I dont mean to change the thread Steve, but have you thought about getting back in? dang it is soo much fun again... I am sooo glad we did. Goto our club, check through their links, eventually you will find some dudes near you that are going at it... :^) Wichita KS Club is here http://www.gasgas.com/Gas-Gas-Media/2005-bikes/TXT300x700w.gif I cant help it, I like the sport so much I try and spread the word, ya know. well enough of me being one of those "spokes men"... LOL Steve Blankenship enlightened us with:

Quoted text (23 lines)

> "Plowboy" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:4VnTd.9296$7z6.1825@lakeread04... >> >> I was online with this again, for a few minutes, I swear to gosh >> almighty... but 1st, why is it that about the only track anyone ever >> sets up, is Dega-tona... Jeebus, especially now that just about >> eveyone agree's that this is x10 easier to drive, it seems? Well, >> at least the lobbies in NR03 are less conjested with typists... >> heheheh. >> >> What is the deal with allowing "modified .exe" files on the servers? >> Nah I dont care, supposedly it is "just the no CD patch" but Im >> sorry after the last few years of people cheating, It made me go >> back to here http://www.miniclip.com/trialscy/trialscy_game.htm >> >> and then back to Richard Burns Rally to get my game & Sim-Fix. LOL! > > Great link! As a former TY250 owner, I can attest that the ones he > says are really hard - really ARE! > > Think I may have injured myself... ;-) > > SB

I should point out this link... (oops) about the 300... the bike has more spec's here but notice... WEIGHT: 146lb's http://www.gasgas.com/Pages/2005's/Trials-models-main.html you got to scroll down. I think My bultaco weighed in a a svelt 225? (no idea) back when. Last thing, go here, watch the "training Video" clips (yeah some are advanced) http://www.trialstrainingcenter.com/html/how_to_ride.html Plowboy enlightened us with: > Steve,snipped this from earlier goof.

Quoted text (11 lines)

>"JP" <[email hidden]> wrote > "Schooner" <[email hidden]> wrote >> I agree there is no value in reinventing the heel, but I think the point >> is >> this was made out to be "all new" not "partly new with some old code that >> we >> had kicking around mixed in". They seem to be pushing it being all new >> as >> they know many had issues with previous titles. > > Kind of, no, actually, exactly, like when N3 was released :)

Papyrus never, ever said that the released N3 was all new. Please stop with your history revisionism. It's pathetic that you're comparing something that was made 6 years ago. -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez Corporation - helping America into the New World...

"Plowboy" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:s9sTd.9369$7z6.6443@lakeread04... > Steve, > > The older 2 versions (std and Pro that you can buy in one "pack") thebikes > react faster, alas I bought the one that the demo is online (construction) > it is just as slow at home & work as at the website, you just get full > screen, LOL... > > I was a former TY-80 owner got the 1st one sold in Colorado in 74, LOL.We

Quoted text (15 lines)

> quit competing in 83 or there abouts... BUT, I have recenlty gone back to > competing after 20 years off, I even had a 75 250 model here for friends & > an 80 for sonny. The last bike I had back in the 80's was 79 Sherpa-t. > Now 2 weeks ago I bought me a GasGas 300 Pro. they are awesome. > http://www.gasgas.com/Gas-Gas-Media/2005-bikes/TXT300x700w.gif > > I dont mean to change the thread Steve, but have you thought about getting > back in? dang it is soo much fun again... I am sooo glad we did. Goto our > club, check through their links, eventually you will find some dudes near > you that are going at it... :^) > > Wichita KS Club is here > http://www.gasgas.com/Gas-Gas-Media/2005-bikes/TXT300x700w.gif > > I cant help it, I like the sport so much I try and spread the word, ya

know. > well enough of me being one of those "spokes men"... LOL Hey, nice ride. 146lbs! That's amazing; they've come a looong way. I was a motocrosser myself, but enjoyed plonking around on the side for a change of pace. Great for learning balance too, when you don't have fast-spinning wheels and a ton of momentum to lean on. Amazing how easy it is to screw up going that slow! You think you can ride until you try trials... Funny link about the TTC - I live in Chattanooga, so they're only about an hour away. See a fair number of trials bikes around here. As for returning to the fold, afraid I got into to the non-motorized version of 2-wheeling when I got out of motocross, and race bicycles these days. Season's about to get going again in a few weeks actually. Been a total slacker this winter though, so it's going to be an ugly spring! Oh well, at least my ride is lighter than yours; shade under 16lbs... ;-) SB

No I do not, but the one thing I REALLY like is the multiplayer bumping code. That has given me more hope than anything. I also like that the cars that are THE fastest are balanced, not on one extreme (Loose). That by itself makes it a lot more realistic for me. Other stuff SUCKS. Dedicated Server is bad... Lots is bad, but I hope they support it (via patches that advance the title). Bill Bollinger www.gsxn.com "Plowboy" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:1XrTd.9365$7z6.4497@lakeread04...

Quoted text (31 lines)

> So Bill, > > You think it is "right" then? sheit, I is just wondering... > > > Bill Bollinger enlightened us with: >> Or like N2003 was to N4. Isn't physics math based anyways? If it >> accurate, why change it? Or are we ASSUMING it isn't accurate? Or >> are we ASSUMING it isn't accurate because EA made it and Papy didn't? >> Or are we ASSUMING it isn't accurate because EA made it 2 years ago >> and most simmers purchased N2003 vs. Thunder 03? Bottom line is if >> it is right, it is right. >> Bill Bollinger >> www.gsxn.com >> >> >> "JP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >> news:4kmTd.3$p%[email hidden]... >>> >>> "Schooner" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >>> news:s6lTd.15925$9a3.2091@edtnps91... >>>> I agree there is no value in reinventing the heel, but I think the >>>> point is this was made out to be "all new" not "partly new with >>>> some old code that we had kicking around mixed in". They seem to >>>> be pushing it being all new as >>>> they know many had issues with previous titles. >>> >>> >>> Kind of, no, actually, exactly, like when N3 was released :) > >

Wrongo Frankie :) They did in fact say it was new. The "new part" was the front and rear sway bar stuff. Bill Bollinger www.gsxn.com "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:9ktTd.44987$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (28 lines)

> >"JP" <[email hidden]> wrote >> "Schooner" <[email hidden]> wrote >>> I agree there is no value in reinventing the heel, but I think the point >>> is >>> this was made out to be "all new" not "partly new with some old code >>> that we >>> had kicking around mixed in". They seem to be pushing it being all new >>> as >>> they know many had issues with previous titles. >> >> Kind of, no, actually, exactly, like when N3 was released :) > > > Papyrus never, ever said that the released N3 was all new. Please stop > with your history revisionism. > > > > It's pathetic that you're comparing something that was made 6 years ago. > > > > -- > -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> > -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez > Corporation - helping America into the New World... > >

"Bill Bollinger" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:52wTd.3456$[email hidden]... > No I do not, but the one thing I REALLY like is the multiplayer bumping > code. That has given me more hope than anything. I also like that the > cars that are THE fastest are balanced, not on one extreme (Loose). That > by itself makes it a lot more realistic for me. Other stuff SUCKS. > Dedicated Server is bad... Lots is bad, but I hope they support it (via > patches that advance the title). That I could agree with, although I cant say I have experienced it. I haven't been in on any bumping, I ran over one poor soul who lost it before I got to him, and then the other turd took me out (you been around enough to know a takeout via pit diving ) Last I was in for a few practice laps though last night, it seemed kinda warpy... course only ran bumper to spoiler with a couple guys though, so I cant say it was everyone, nor the server. I am betting you have a circle of guys your talking to, are they actually going to patch this up or is it just "*talk*" and pony shows?

"Bill Bollinger" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:52wTd.3456$[email hidden]... > No I do not, but the one thing I REALLY like is the multiplayer bumping > code. That has given me more hope than anything. I also like that thecars > that are THE fastest are balanced, not on one extreme (Loose). That by > itself makes it a lot more realistic for me. Other stuff SUCKS.Dedicated > Server is bad... Lots is bad, but I hope they support it (via patches that > advance the title). > > Bill Bollinger > www.gsxn.com Good to be able to rub doors without catastrophe, for sure. But the current bumping code's a bit too lenient for my taste. As I noted in an earlier post, I've seen it getting exploited to excess already. Someone can't get by you, they can just cream you and go on their merry way. I got a run on a guy the other night, and he just wheeled it hard right into me as I went by on his outside. Slammed me into the wall, but he just cruised on unharmed (and unpenalized). Went into spectator mode and he did it again to someone else. That shouldn't be a viable option online. SB

Yah, it needs to be turned down a little. Which should be easier than what we have in N2003. Right now, I will take more bumping than flying spaceships. Both are not perfect, but my vote towards more bumping ability (if there are only two choices). Bill Bollinger www.gsxn.com "Steve Blankenship" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (31 lines)

> "Bill Bollinger" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:52wTd.3456$[email hidden]... >> No I do not, but the one thing I REALLY like is the multiplayer bumping >> code. That has given me more hope than anything. I also like that the > cars >> that are THE fastest are balanced, not on one extreme (Loose). That by >> itself makes it a lot more realistic for me. Other stuff SUCKS. > Dedicated >> Server is bad... Lots is bad, but I hope they support it (via patches >> that >> advance the title). >> >> Bill Bollinger >> www.gsxn.com > > Good to be able to rub doors without catastrophe, for sure. But the > current > bumping code's a bit too lenient for my taste. As I noted in an earlier > post, I've seen it getting exploited to excess already. Someone can't get > by you, they can just cream you and go on their merry way. I got a run on > a > guy the other night, and he just wheeled it hard right into me as I went > by > on his outside. Slammed me into the wall, but he just cruised on unharmed > (and unpenalized). Went into spectator mode and he did it again to > someone > else. That shouldn't be a viable option online. > > SB > >

My GUESS is that we are 50/50 if some of the issues get fixes. Example: Today I heard through the grapevine that "someone" said that EA said that the dedicated server running at 100% CPU was only "graphical" and that in fact it isn't running at 100%. That is FALSE. The people I know I am almost positive forwarding the info witch what is wrong or needs to be addressed, the million dollard question is "Are they listening and going to fix it"? Bill Bollinger www.gsxn.com "Sting32" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:grwTd.41064$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (23 lines)

> "Bill Bollinger" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:52wTd.3456$[email hidden]... >> No I do not, but the one thing I REALLY like is the multiplayer bumping >> code. That has given me more hope than anything. I also like that the >> cars that are THE fastest are balanced, not on one extreme (Loose). That >> by itself makes it a lot more realistic for me. Other stuff SUCKS. >> Dedicated Server is bad... Lots is bad, but I hope they support it (via >> patches that advance the title). > > That I could agree with, although I cant say I have experienced it. I > haven't been in on any bumping, I ran over one poor soul who lost it > before I got to him, and then the other turd took me out (you been around > enough to know a takeout via pit diving ) > > Last I was in for a few practice laps though last night, it seemed kinda > warpy... course only ran bumper to spoiler with a couple guys though, so > I cant say it was everyone, nor the server. > > I am betting you have a circle of guys your talking to, are they actually > going to patch this up or is it just "*talk*" and pony shows? > > >

"ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:9ktTd.44987$[email hidden]... > >"JP" <[email hidden]> wrote > > "Schooner" <[email hidden]> wrote > >> I agree there is no value in reinventing the heel, but I think thepoint > >> is > >> this was made out to be "all new" not "partly new with some old codethat

Quoted text (9 lines)

> >> we > >> had kicking around mixed in". They seem to be pushing it being all new > >> as > >> they know many had issues with previous titles. > > > > Kind of, no, actually, exactly, like when N3 was released :) > > > Papyrus never, ever said that the released N3 was all new. Please stop

with

Quoted text (12 lines)

> your history revisionism. > > > > It's pathetic that you're comparing something that was made 6 years ago. > > > > -- > -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> > -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez > Corporation - helping America into the New World...

It's pathetic that you have a selective memory. GPL physics.......N3........do some research. > >

"ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:9ktTd.44987$[email hidden]... > >"JP" <[email hidden]> wrote > > "Schooner" <[email hidden]> wrote > >> I agree there is no value in reinventing the heel, but I think thepoint > >> is > >> this was made out to be "all new" not "partly new with some old codethat

Quoted text (9 lines)

> >> we > >> had kicking around mixed in". They seem to be pushing it being all new > >> as > >> they know many had issues with previous titles. > > > > Kind of, no, actually, exactly, like when N3 was released :) > > > Papyrus never, ever said that the released N3 was all new. Please stop

with

Quoted text (12 lines)

> your history revisionism. > > > > It's pathetic that you're comparing something that was made 6 years ago. > > > > -- > -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> > -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez > Corporation - helping America into the New World.

p.s. so, if Papy did the exact same thing x years ago, that EA is being accused of doing now.......somehow the difference in time frame makes Papy's actions ok, eh ? <laughter> yeah, that's fanboy logic for sure. >

JP wrote:

Quoted text (37 lines)

> > "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:9ktTd.44987$[email hidden]... >> >"JP" <[email hidden]> wrote >> > "Schooner" <[email hidden]> wrote >> >> I agree there is no value in reinventing the heel, but I think the > point >> >> is >> >> this was made out to be "all new" not "partly new with some old code > that >> >> we >> >> had kicking around mixed in". They seem to be pushing it being all >> >> new as >> >> they know many had issues with previous titles. >> > >> > Kind of, no, actually, exactly, like when N3 was released :) >> >> >> Papyrus never, ever said that the released N3 was all new. Please stop > with >> your history revisionism. >> >> >> >> It's pathetic that you're comparing something that was made 6 years ago. >> >> >> >> -- >> -- Franois Mnard <ymenard> >> -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez >> Corporation - helping America into the New World... > > > It's pathetic that you have a selective memory. GPL > physics.......N3........do some research. >

Im not exactly sure whos arguing what but just to be sure we all remember there was a supposed alpha of N3 that had the GPL physics engine but the retail version ended up closer to NR1.3 than NR3.0 ;) The early N4 demo was about the best of the bunch if ya ask me. Mitch -- Remove "nospam." to reply. SuSE 9.2 Pro KDE 3.3.2a

William Bradshaw wrote:

Quoted text (10 lines)

> Sting32 wrote: > >> I pasted the 1st time he pointed this out, half way though this post, >> there is a picture (snapshot of his desktop with Wordpad with a file >> open...) picture are worth 100's of words (from my keyboard anywho) >> then the text was from this link... >> >> http://www.onlineracin.com/forum/tm.asp?m=41811 >> >> hope that clears it up a bit for ya JTS

Thanks Will. Pretty interesting read.

What kind of racing, tour d france types or those speedway bike (you know the wooden "bristol" ish tracks, or BMX?) My bud that is really good, national HS champ a year or 2 ago I think it was, did Bicycle trials. either way, all that pedaling, that to me looks more like work, LOL. >http://www.trialstrainingcenter.com/html/how_to_ride.htmlSteve Blankenship enlightened us with: > "Plowboy" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:s9sTd.9369$7z6.6443@lakeread04... >> Steve, >>snipped

"Plowboy" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:M_FTd.11853$7z6.3981@lakeread04... > What kind of racing, tour d france types or those speedway bike (you know > the wooden "bristol" ish tracks, or BMX?) My bud that is really good, > national HS champ a year or 2 ago I think it was, did Bicycle trials. > either way, all that pedaling, that to me looks more like work, LOL. Road racing - I'd suck at bicycle trials even worse than I did on the motorbike. Which should help me doing plate tracks in sims; low power, lots of drag, big packs. Really striking how much bike racing's like restrictor plate racing. Use your teammates, find the right combination of guys to work with, get a small bunch clear to the finish - and then it hits the fan when you get close to the line... ;-) SB

Well, yeah. It's not quite the "Entirely New Engine" we are led to believe. I think we knew that though :) -Larry "Sting32" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:c9bTd.40339$[email hidden]... > >

Yes, but the previous wheel was very, very broken. It needed to be reinvented and we were led to believe they did. -Larry "Steve Blankenship" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (17 lines)

> "Schooner" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:13jTd.15902$9a3.8770@edtnps91... >> Check the text in your NSR full or Demo version. It is all right there, >> I >> posted this as well last week here. > > It's no big deal that the suspension file is the same, since it's not like > Cup cars have undergone a big redesign since then. Doug certainly knows > what he's doing, and if it was right then it's fine to keep that file the > same. No value in reinventing the wheel (or rather the suspension it > connects to). > > Some of the other files, though, DO make you scratch your head... > > SB > >

Yeah, The box even advertises "All New Game Engine". Whether you like the game or not (I do - mostly), the whole advertising campaign behind this title was terribly misleading. -Larry "Schooner" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:jrmTd.295$ab2.137@edtnps89... > Not arguing that papy did the same thing, again just stating that EA is > promoting this as all new and it is not is all. > Couldn't care less who makes the next great sim but this certainly isn't > it from all I have read to date.

Last week I got bumped out of the universe, onto another plane of existance. I'm not kidding :) I got warp-whammed in the rear, my car went flying (and flying and flying) up in the air, and it NEVER came down! It stayed up in the air, spinning and rolling. I could see out the windshield and saw grass, sky, grass, sky, grass, sky, grass, sky.... Had to esc out of the game. If you remember Viper Racing... At the default course (silverdale I think) the field on the left at the S/F line.. .If you 4-wheeled out there and drove off the cliff you fell towards the ocean forever and forever, never falling back to earth. This was the SAME thing :) -Larry "Bill Bollinger" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:aTwTd.3477$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (46 lines)

> Yah, it needs to be turned down a little. Which should be easier than > what we have in N2003. Right now, I will take more bumping than flying > spaceships. Both are not perfect, but my vote towards more bumping > ability (if there are only two choices). > > Bill Bollinger > www.gsxn.com > > > "Steve Blankenship" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... >> "Bill Bollinger" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >> news:52wTd.3456$[email hidden]... >>> No I do not, but the one thing I REALLY like is the multiplayer bumping >>> code. That has given me more hope than anything. I also like that the >> cars >>> that are THE fastest are balanced, not on one extreme (Loose). That by >>> itself makes it a lot more realistic for me. Other stuff SUCKS. >> Dedicated >>> Server is bad... Lots is bad, but I hope they support it (via patches >>> that >>> advance the title). >>> >>> Bill Bollinger >>> www.gsxn.com >> >> Good to be able to rub doors without catastrophe, for sure. But the >> current >> bumping code's a bit too lenient for my taste. As I noted in an earlier >> post, I've seen it getting exploited to excess already. Someone can't >> get >> by you, they can just cream you and go on their merry way. I got a run >> on a >> guy the other night, and he just wheeled it hard right into me as I went >> by >> on his outside. Slammed me into the wall, but he just cruised on >> unharmed >> (and unpenalized). Went into spectator mode and he did it again to >> someone >> else. That shouldn't be a viable option online. >> >> SB >> >> > >

It does ? :) -Larry "Steve Blankenship" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... "But it's a capable physics engine to build a sim on as GTR shows"

It does ? :) -Larry "But it's a capable physics engine to build a sim on as GTR shows"

I will still take NSR online code right now over N2003 in a heartbeat. Hands down a better and more enjoyable online experience (In Race) than N2003. Of course this doesn't include yellows, physics, admin control, dedicated server support etc... LOL Bill Bollinger www.gsxn.com "Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:EfMTd.11882$7z6.3765@lakeread04...

Quoted text (72 lines)

> Last week I got bumped out of the universe, onto another plane of > existance. > > I'm not kidding :) > > I got warp-whammed in the rear, my car went flying (and flying and flying) > up in the air, and it NEVER came down! > > It stayed up in the air, spinning and rolling. I could see out the > windshield and saw grass, sky, grass, sky, grass, sky, grass, sky.... > > Had to esc out of the game. > > If you remember Viper Racing... At the default course (silverdale I think) > the field on the left at the S/F line.. .If you 4-wheeled out there and > drove off the cliff you fell towards the ocean forever and forever, never > falling back to earth. > > This was the SAME thing :) > > -Larry > > "Bill Bollinger" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:aTwTd.3477$[email hidden]... >> Yah, it needs to be turned down a little. Which should be easier than >> what we have in N2003. Right now, I will take more bumping than flying >> spaceships. Both are not perfect, but my vote towards more bumping >> ability (if there are only two choices). >> >> Bill Bollinger >> www.gsxn.com >> >> >> "Steve Blankenship" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >> news:[email hidden]... >>> "Bill Bollinger" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >>> news:52wTd.3456$[email hidden]... >>>> No I do not, but the one thing I REALLY like is the multiplayer bumping >>>> code. That has given me more hope than anything. I also like that the >>> cars >>>> that are THE fastest are balanced, not on one extreme (Loose). That by >>>> itself makes it a lot more realistic for me. Other stuff SUCKS. >>> Dedicated >>>> Server is bad... Lots is bad, but I hope they support it (via patches >>>> that >>>> advance the title). >>>> >>>> Bill Bollinger >>>> www.gsxn.com >>> >>> Good to be able to rub doors without catastrophe, for sure. But the >>> current >>> bumping code's a bit too lenient for my taste. As I noted in an earlier >>> post, I've seen it getting exploited to excess already. Someone can't >>> get >>> by you, they can just cream you and go on their merry way. I got a run >>> on a >>> guy the other night, and he just wheeled it hard right into me as I went >>> by >>> on his outside. Slammed me into the wall, but he just cruised on >>> unharmed >>> (and unpenalized). Went into spectator mode and he did it again to >>> someone >>> else. That shouldn't be a viable option online. >>> >>> SB >>> >>> >> >> > >

What is such a JOKE, is than N2003 DEFINES dirt tracking style racing. To be fast in N2003, you MUST dirt track it on the edge. So much on the edge that people whine if the tempature isn't set to one temp with no wind. What I think NSR has as a BIG advantage is that to go fast with NSR your car must be balanced. Neither tight nor loose. Bill Bollinger www.gsxn.com "JTS" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (14 lines)

> William Bradshaw wrote: >> Sting32 wrote: >> >>> I pasted the 1st time he pointed this out, half way though this post, >>> there is a picture (snapshot of his desktop with Wordpad with a file >>> open...) picture are worth 100's of words (from my keyboard anywho) >>> then the text was from this link... >>> >>> http://www.onlineracin.com/forum/tm.asp?m=41811 >>> >>> hope that clears it up a bit for ya JTS > > Thanks Will. Pretty interesting read. >

Thats not accurate, you go slower in n2003 if you are too loose, which just makes it dull to drive (as opposed to N4 which positively encouraged you to drive sideways :) ). I guess what appears loose to one person may appear neutral to another. pez "Bill Bollinger" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:aQ_Td.8961$[email hidden]... > What is such a JOKE, is than N2003 DEFINES dirt tracking style racing. To > be fast in N2003, you MUST dirt track it on the edge. So much on the edge > that people whine if the tempature isn't set to one temp with no wind.What > I think NSR has as a BIG advantage is that to go fast with NSR your carmust

Quoted text (24 lines)

> be balanced. Neither tight nor loose. > > Bill Bollinger > www.gsxn.com > > > "JTS" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > William Bradshaw wrote: > >> Sting32 wrote: > >> > >>> I pasted the 1st time he pointed this out, half way though this post, > >>> there is a picture (snapshot of his desktop with Wordpad with a file > >>> open...) picture are worth 100's of words (from my keyboard anywho) > >>> then the text was from this link... > >>> > >>> http://www.onlineracin.com/forum/tm.asp?m=41811 > >>> > >>> hope that clears it up a bit for ya JTS > > > > Thanks Will. Pretty interesting read. > > > >

That is funny, PEZ, that you write exactly opposite of just about anyone has ever posted about setups & handling, including the Bob Stanly, and others. BTW, Bollinger has been a round a freaking while.

Anyone who's been around to see the progression from GPL through n4, n2002 to nr2003 will see that comparitively nr2003 doesnt like to be driven sideways. ultra loose setups hurt lap times in nr2003 compared to how they were in the previous releases. But as i said, what seems neutral to one person may seem loose to another. Ive also seen posts re. nsr saying its more realistic because you can opposite lock to save slides. id say that if these people arent doing the same in Nr2003 then they are letting the car go too far around before attempting it. pez "Plowboy" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:0uFUd.24030$7z6.7305@lakeread04... > That is funny, > PEZ, > > that you write exactly opposite of just about anyone has ever posted about > setups & handling, including the Bob Stanly, and others. BTW, Bollingerhas > been a round a freaking while. > > >