Re: I disagree

> GP3 is a sim, or it's considered a sim by most. A Sim???? ROTFL

Okay, bonehead, I'm typing real slow, so try to keep up: GP3 is a sim, or it's considered a sim by most. It's definitely more of a sim than virtually anything out there besides GPL, Viper Racing, N3, SCGT, F12000, and maybe NFSPU. It's FAR better than a whole slew of would-be sims (Johnny Herbert, Andretti Racing, etc.), and it's being MARKETED as a HARDCORE SIM, not some "Test Drive" arcade racer. If GP3 sells big (which is already has, based on pre-orders alone), then it will be viewed as a big success, and others will want to follow suit with their own HARDCORE SIM products. That will undoubtedly produce a ton of sim-wannabes like "Johnny Herbert" and such, but there will also be more room for some TRUE sims to occur, too. Sierra/Havas has most likely pigeonholed Papy, resigning them to only produce NASCAR titles after the lack of sales success that GPL brought them, but if people catch wind of Hasbro's profits from GP3, they just might start turning their developers on, URGING them to produce hardcore driving sims. If that happens, then we may se something surpass GPL in the very near future. The issue here isn't how good or bad GP3 is, but, rather, the effect it will have on the future of our genre. Do you see what I mean, now, or do I have to type even more slowly? Besides, GP3 is pretty darn good in its own right -- if it's not a "sim," then I'd like to know how N3 qualifies, because I've NEVER seen cars catch air, get airborne, or roll in N3, and it's pretty much regarded as being near the top of the sim-heap around these parts. Did I say "bonehead" already, by the way? -- JB In article <[email hidden]>, Mrv <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (7 lines)

> Emulate Crammond's success with GP3? You must be joking. I hope that > other do not follow Crammond's work. Please gives us a real sim, not > something so incomplete as Gp2.5!!!! > > [email hidden] wrote: > > > Amazing how opinions can differ -- I spent last night turning laps

at > > Suzuka in GP3 and F12K, and I have to say that I am even moreimpressed > > with F12K now. I really like GP3, so I'm not posting to slam > > Crammond's latest effort, but I was immediately faster in GP3 thanin > > F12K, which told me that the level of difficulty -- AND, presumably, > > the level of simulation detail -- was much higher in F12K. The feelof > > the F12K physics model really amazed me while doing the comparison, > > too -- it didn't feel at all like a descendent of SCGT (which ispretty > > darn good in its own right), but it DID feel a lot like somethingPapy > > might have produced. In fact, if F12K had been released with Papy's > > name on the box and the existing ISI code on the CD, nobody would be > > playing GPL anymore, I don't think. > > > > GP3 is a great sim, and I think Crammond's latest effort is going to > > spark a wave of realism-oriented driving sims as other publisherstry > > to emulate his success (which hopefully means fewer "Test Drive"games

Quoted text (14 lines)

> > in the future, and more NFSPU/Viper Racing/SCGT/F12K/GPL/GP3 types). > > GP3 is VERY accessible, has some very convincing physics, and it's a > > blast, but I think my nod for accuracy goes to F12K -- and I think > > there's room for BOTH on my hard drive, thankfully! > > > > ;-) > > > > -- JB > > > > In article <8lrvbc$t6t$[email hidden]>, > > "Harri Vainio" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > Have you tried F12000 again after installing GP3? > > > > > > I was really surprised how bad F12000 actually was in simulating

F1

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > car. GP3 > > > is light years ahead of this crap. > > > > > > Although I too was very disapointed in GP3, especially graphics... > > > > > > -harri > > > > > > > Conculsion is f1200 not the greastest f1sim but the best we

got

Quoted text (13 lines)

> > for now, > > > > Links good over the internet links good networked, feels pretty > > good on > > > the > > > > track,graphics are > > > > not to bad either, > > > > > > > > > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ > > Before you buy. > >

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

Amazing how opinions can differ -- I spent last night turning laps at Suzuka in GP3 and F12K, and I have to say that I am even more impressed with F12K now. I really like GP3, so I'm not posting to slam Crammond's latest effort, but I was immediately faster in GP3 than in F12K, which told me that the level of difficulty -- AND, presumably, the level of simulation detail -- was much higher in F12K. The feel of the F12K physics model really amazed me while doing the comparison, too -- it didn't feel at all like a descendent of SCGT (which is pretty darn good in its own right), but it DID feel a lot like something Papy might have produced. In fact, if F12K had been released with Papy's name on the box and the existing ISI code on the CD, nobody would be playing GPL anymore, I don't think. GP3 is a great sim, and I think Crammond's latest effort is going to spark a wave of realism-oriented driving sims as other publishers try to emulate his success (which hopefully means fewer "Test Drive" games in the future, and more NFSPU/Viper Racing/SCGT/F12K/GPL/GP3 types). GP3 is VERY accessible, has some very convincing physics, and it's a blast, but I think my nod for accuracy goes to F12K -- and I think there's room for BOTH on my hard drive, thankfully! ;-) -- JB In article <8lrvbc$t6t$[email hidden]>, "Harri Vainio" <[email hidden]> wrote: > Have you tried F12000 again after installing GP3? > > I was really surprised how bad F12000 actually was in simulating F1car. GP3

Quoted text (7 lines)

> is light years ahead of this crap. > > Although I too was very disapointed in GP3, especially graphics... > > -harri > > > Conculsion is f1200 not the greastest f1sim but the best we got

for now, > > Links good over the internet links good networked, feels prettygood on > the > > track,graphics are > > not to bad either, > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

Have you tried F12000 again after installing GP3? I was really surprised how bad F12000 actually was in simulating F1 car. GP3 is light years ahead of this crap. Although I too was very disapointed in GP3, especially graphics... -harri > Conculsion is f1200 not the greastest f1sim but the best we got for now, > Links good over the internet links good networked, feels pretty good onthe > track,graphics are > not to bad either,

Ok i read all the comments from my previous post Yes i have a wheel and no how to set it up, you guys who ask if i no how to setup a sim for driving ive been simming since half you guys were still in diapers, And yes GP2 was good, played that sim for thousands of hours(you played gp2 for 24 1/2 hours) lol As for the hyperstim steering thats a piece of shit did you ever see inside the controller it looks like a boat steering setup with a bunch of springs not even close to feeling real, (the peddels not to bad tho)Im not here to bitch about that, Im here to bitch about GP3, This sim isnt like GPL wich drives and simulates a race car with no wings very good, But come on F1 cars have huge wings and are very aerodynamic they just dont spin out like on gp3 you cant even counter steer and pull out of it, the graphics are wavy and the game is full of bugs, The link in a network is better than before but dont pit while some one is out on the track the game cant figure out what is going on and you haft to update the link,This and all the other problems(to long to list)means crammond didnt do his home work he rushed out to make some quick cash off of us, face it were all disapointed with the work that was done we expected so much more from the sim king and he gave us CRAP! now shell out you money becuse you think gp2 was good and crammond is the best, at best gp3 is CRAP, I"ll wipe my ass with the 50 bucks and flush it down the toilet before i give it to crammond for his lame and despreat attempt at GP3, I mean come on do you think were gunna pay for all the head achs these lamers could"nt figure out I would rather wait another 4 years for him to get it right, even tho i think he was despreat for cash and did the sim in 4 months not 4 years, Conculsion is f1200 not the greastest f1sim but the best we got for now, Links good over the internet links good networked, feels pretty good on the track,graphics are not to bad either, P,S Please donate to the crippled crammond despreate sim fund

Amazing how opinions can differ -- I spent last night turning laps at Suzuka in GP3 and F12K, and I have to say that I am even more impressed with F12K now. I really like GP3, so I'm not posting to slam Crammond's latest effort, but I was immediately faster in GP3 than in F12K, which told me that the level of difficulty -- AND, presumably, the level of simulation detail -- was much higher in F12K. The feel of the F12K physics model really amazed me while doing the comparison, too -- it didn't feel at all like a descendent of SCGT (which is pretty darn good in its own right), but it DID feel a lot like something Papy might have produced. In fact, if F12K had been released with Papy's name on the box and the existing ISI code on the CD, nobody would be playing GPL anymore, I don't think. GP3 is a great sim, and I think Crammond's latest effort is going to spark a wave of realism-oriented driving sims as other publishers try to emulate his success (which hopefully means fewer "Test Drive" games in the future, and more NFSPU/Viper Racing/SCGT/F12K/GPL/GP3 types). GP3 is VERY accessible, has some very convincing physics, and it's a blast, but I think my nod for accuracy goes to F12K -- and I think there's room for BOTH on my hard drive, thankfully! ;-) -- JB Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

A Sim???? ROTFL

On Fri, 28 Jul 2000 15:47:41 +0300, "Harri Vainio" <[email hidden]> thus spoke: >Have you tried F12000 again after installing GP3? > >I was really surprised how bad F12000 actually was in simulating F1 car. GP3 >is light years ahead of this crap. I did compare the two back to back a number of times and my conclusion was not the same as yours. I don't know why that is, but it could be because I have a number of hacks added to F1 2000 that improve it quite a bit. Sound, cockpit position, tire wear, driver abilities, wheel sensitivities etc. The cars feel better to me in F1 2000, but that could be because I have controller issues with GP3. Will have to compare again after I get these issues resolved. -- Nos

Emulate Crammond's success with GP3? You must be joking. I hope that other do not follow Crammond's work. Please gives us a real sim, not something so incomplete as Gp2.5!!!! [email hidden] wrote:

Quoted text (49 lines)

> Amazing how opinions can differ -- I spent last night turning laps at > Suzuka in GP3 and F12K, and I have to say that I am even more impressed > with F12K now. I really like GP3, so I'm not posting to slam > Crammond's latest effort, but I was immediately faster in GP3 than in > F12K, which told me that the level of difficulty -- AND, presumably, > the level of simulation detail -- was much higher in F12K. The feel of > the F12K physics model really amazed me while doing the comparison, > too -- it didn't feel at all like a descendent of SCGT (which is pretty > darn good in its own right), but it DID feel a lot like something Papy > might have produced. In fact, if F12K had been released with Papy's > name on the box and the existing ISI code on the CD, nobody would be > playing GPL anymore, I don't think. > > GP3 is a great sim, and I think Crammond's latest effort is going to > spark a wave of realism-oriented driving sims as other publishers try > to emulate his success (which hopefully means fewer "Test Drive" games > in the future, and more NFSPU/Viper Racing/SCGT/F12K/GPL/GP3 types). > GP3 is VERY accessible, has some very convincing physics, and it's a > blast, but I think my nod for accuracy goes to F12K -- and I think > there's room for BOTH on my hard drive, thankfully! > > ;-) > > -- JB > > In article <8lrvbc$t6t$[email hidden]>, > "Harri Vainio" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > Have you tried F12000 again after installing GP3? > > > > I was really surprised how bad F12000 actually was in simulating F1 > car. GP3 > > is light years ahead of this crap. > > > > Although I too was very disapointed in GP3, especially graphics... > > > > -harri > > > > > Conculsion is f1200 not the greastest f1sim but the best we got > for now, > > > Links good over the internet links good networked, feels pretty > good on > > the > > > track,graphics are > > > not to bad either, > > > > > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ > Before you buy.

I'm sorry, I already used the word "bonehead." By the way, how would you describe a "sim," anyway? I believe that a "simulation" is something that simulates a real-life activity. By that basic definition, even Test Drive 6 and Swamp Buggy Racing qualify as "sims." That is, of course, a huge stretch, but GP3 is definitely a sim by any definition of the word -- it may fall short in terms of absolute accuracy in some areas, but it definitely serves as a pretty darn good basic simulation. -- JB In article <3981fefa$0$[email hidden]>, "A. Grund" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > GP3 is a sim, or it's considered a sim by most. > > A Sim???? ROTFL > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

A sim? Heheeeeeeeeeeeeeee obviously you are much to young to understand the deficiencies of GP3. Carry on MR BONEHEAD. [email hidden] wrote:

Quoted text (22 lines)

> I'm sorry, I already used the word "bonehead." > > By the way, how would you describe a "sim," anyway? I believe that > a "simulation" is something that simulates a real-life activity. By > that basic definition, even Test Drive 6 and Swamp Buggy Racing qualify > as "sims." That is, of course, a huge stretch, but GP3 is definitely a > sim by any definition of the word -- it may fall short in terms of > absolute accuracy in some areas, but it definitely serves as a pretty > darn good basic simulation. > > -- JB > > In article <3981fefa$0$[email hidden]>, > "A. Grund" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > GP3 is a sim, or it's considered a sim by most. > > > > A Sim???? ROTFL > > > > > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ > Before you buy.

In article <8lsaam$l7r$[email hidden]>, [email hidden] wrote: > Amazing how opinions can differ -- I spent last night turning laps at > Suzuka in GP3 and F12K, and I have to say that I am even moreimpressed > with F12K now. I really like GP3, so I'm not posting to slam > Crammond's latest effort, but I was immediately faster in GP3 than in > F12K, which told me that the level of difficulty -- AND, presumably, > the level of simulation detail -- was much higher in F12K. The feel of > the F12K physics model really amazed me while doing the comparison, > too -- it didn't feel at all like a descendent of SCGT (which ispretty

Quoted text (42 lines)

> darn good in its own right), but it DID feel a lot like something Papy > might have produced. In fact, if F12K had been released with Papy's > name on the box and the existing ISI code on the CD, nobody would be > playing GPL anymore, I don't think. > > GP3 is a great sim, and I think Crammond's latest effort is going to > spark a wave of realism-oriented driving sims as other publishers try > to emulate his success (which hopefully means fewer "Test Drive" games > in the future, and more NFSPU/Viper Racing/SCGT/F12K/GPL/GP3 types). > GP3 is VERY accessible, has some very convincing physics, and it's a > blast, but I think my nod for accuracy goes to F12K -- and I think > there's room for BOTH on my hard drive, thankfully! > > ;-) > > -- JB > > In article <8lrvbc$t6t$[email hidden]>, > "Harri Vainio" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > Have you tried F12000 again after installing GP3? > > > > I was really surprised how bad F12000 actually was in simulating F1 > car. GP3 > > is light years ahead of this crap. > > > > Although I too was very disapointed in GP3, especially graphics... > > > > -harri > > > > > Conculsion is f1200 not the greastest f1sim but the best we got > for now, > > > Links good over the internet links good networked, feels pretty > good on > > the > > > track,graphics are > > > not to bad either, > > > > > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ > Before you buy. > Dear JB

I think that a better physics model within a driving simulator should make it more easy to drive and therby yeild better more consistent lap times than a sim with a lower resolution physics model. I've never driven an F1 car or any car with downforce so its difficult to jugde the realism. I have driven cars though,and GPL feels 'REAL' to me and many people because most of us know how real world normal cars behave,which is what GPL does a good job of simulating,cars without downforce. as for F1 2000 I did't like it at all,I can't say why,just didn't feel good to play.(i didnt try any patches or whatever with it). Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] (EldredP) wrote: > In article <8ltlv4$m06$[email hidden]>, [email hidden] writes: > > >By the way, how would you describe a "sim," anyway? I believe that > >a "simulation" is something that simulates a real-life activity. By > >that basic definition, even Test Drive 6 and Swamp Buggy Racingqualify > >as "sims." > > Oh, Swamp Buggy Racing is a REAL game?!? I thought you were kiddingin our > 'argument' thread... :) Oh, no -- it's real, unfortunately! -- JB Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

In article <8ltlv4$m06$[email hidden]>, [email hidden] writes: >By the way, how would you describe a "sim," anyway? I believe that >a "simulation" is something that simulates a real-life activity. By >that basic definition, even Test Drive 6 and Swamp Buggy Racing qualify >as "sims." Oh, Swamp Buggy Racing is a REAL game?!? I thought you were kidding in our 'argument' thread... :) Eldred -- Tiger Stadium R.I.P. 1912-1999 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett GPL hcp. +60.31 Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

Point taken, Glen -- call ME a bonehead, I guess, but it wears thin pretty quickly when people just plain miss the point and resort to slamming perfectly decent products simply because it doesn't exceed GPL in terms of physics perfection. Yes, I know nobody in this thread has actually compared GP3 to GPL, but the implication is there when they try to deny that GP3 is a sim. I can understand people's disappointment that it does not really improve all that much on what was done in GP2, but there HAVE been a lot of improvements, and I'd say that it's at least a complete overhaul of that game engine, rather than a mild update -- AND I would also have to call it a "sim" by any definition of the word. Anyway, my point was that GP3 may have a huge impact on the overall quality and quantity of racing sims that we may see in the future, and, if so, then Crammond deserves tons of praise, regardless of what we may think of GP3 overall. So, that said, my apologies to all for my intolerant tone. -- JB In article <[email hidden]>, Glen Priest <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (8 lines)

> Hey Bodin! I hope you are not taking nastiness lessons from some of > the very able practioners who lurk around this NG. I hope someone who > disagrees with you, or is clumsy in expression and language use is not > therefore a "bonehead" As far as I am concerned, you could lose the > insult mode and still be worth reading; insulting invective I can do > without. > > * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion

Network * > The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet -Free! > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

In article <[email hidden]>, Mrv <[email hidden]> wrote: > A sim? Heheeeeeeeeeeeeeee obviously you are much to young tounderstand

Quoted text (9 lines)

> the deficiencies of GP3. Carry on MR BONEHEAD. > > [email hidden] wrote: > > > I'm sorry, I already used the word "bonehead." > > > > By the way, how would you describe a "sim," anyway? I believe that > > a "simulation" is something that simulates a real-life activity. By > > that basic definition, even Test Drive 6 and Swamp Buggy Racing

qualify > > as "sims." That is, of course, a huge stretch, but GP3 isdefinitely a > > sim by any definition of the word -- it may fall short in terms of > > absolute accuracy in some areas, but it definitely serves as apretty

Quoted text (16 lines)

> > darn good basic simulation. > > > > -- JB > > > > In article <3981fefa$0$[email hidden]>, > > "A. Grund" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > > GP3 is a sim, or it's considered a sim by most. > > > > > > A Sim???? ROTFL > > > > > > > > > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ > > Before you buy. > >

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

Yup, you're right -- at 38 years old, and as an owner of World Circuit GP, ICR, GP2, ICR2, Viper Racing, GPL, SCGT, F12K, Powerslide, DTR, N3, NASCAR Legends, NFS, NFS2SE, NFS3, NFSHS, NFSPU, I am obviously too young and too inexperienced to understand the deficiencies of GP3. Of course, the fact that I also own TD6 and Swamp Buggy Racing (much to my embarrassment) also puts me in a good position to recognize a truly horrible title when I see one, and GP3 looks like it stacks up pretty well in the big scheme of things to me -- definitely in the same league as N3 and SCGT, at the very least. Just for the record, my work as a beta tester for DTR and DTRSC also gives me some level of expertise when it comes to evaluating games, too, and while I freely admit that the physics modeling in GP3 is not quite in the same league as GPL, I cannot see how anybody can fail to rank it as a sim, plain and simple -- this is NOT some simplistic, simple-minded arcade racer, and from what I've seen so far, it seems to compare pretty well to its own immediate competition, namely, F1WGP and F12K (although I do find that I personally prefer the physics modeling in F12K over GP3 at this point). Anyway, given all this, I will yield to your obviously-superior evaluation. How could I even begin to argue with such incisive, insightful commentary and analysis as "A sim?" and "something so incomplete as Gp2.5" in the first place? I bow down before your wisdom that obviously only comes with age, while at the same time resign myself to forever be known as "Mr. Bonehead." Please accept my apologies for ever assuming that GP3 could have a positive impact on our genre as a whole. -- JB In article <[email hidden]>, Mrv <[email hidden]> wrote: > A sim? Heheeeeeeeeeeeeeee obviously you are much to young tounderstand

Quoted text (9 lines)

> the deficiencies of GP3. Carry on MR BONEHEAD. > > [email hidden] wrote: > > > I'm sorry, I already used the word "bonehead." > > > > By the way, how would you describe a "sim," anyway? I believe that > > a "simulation" is something that simulates a real-life activity. By > > that basic definition, even Test Drive 6 and Swamp Buggy Racing

qualify > > as "sims." That is, of course, a huge stretch, but GP3 isdefinitely a > > sim by any definition of the word -- it may fall short in terms of > > absolute accuracy in some areas, but it definitely serves as apretty

Quoted text (16 lines)

> > darn good basic simulation. > > > > -- JB > > > > In article <3981fefa$0$[email hidden]>, > > "A. Grund" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > > GP3 is a sim, or it's considered a sim by most. > > > > > > A Sim???? ROTFL > > > > > > > > > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ > > Before you buy. > >

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

Hey Bodin! I hope you are not taking nastiness lessons from some of the very able practioners who lurk around this NG. I hope someone who disagrees with you, or is clumsy in expression and language use is not therefore a "bonehead" As far as I am concerned, you could lose the insult mode and still be worth reading; insulting invective I can do without. * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network * The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!

Swamp buggy racing, is that F1 2000 ? ;) -- Ian Parker "Ambition is a poor excuse for not having sense enough to be lazy." <email invalid due to spam> <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:8m27su$l1u$[email hidden]... > In article <[email hidden]>, > [email hidden] (EldredP) wrote: > > In article <8ltlv4$m06$[email hidden]>, [email hidden] writes: > > > > >By the way, how would you describe a "sim," anyway? I believe that > > >a "simulation" is something that simulates a real-life activity. By > > >that basic definition, even Test Drive 6 and Swamp Buggy Racing > qualify > > >as "sims." > > > > Oh, Swamp Buggy Racing is a REAL game?!? I thought you were kidding > in our > > 'argument' thread... :) > > Oh, no -- it's real, unfortunately! > > -- JB > > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ > Before you buy.