Re: A few observations

Jan, As usual a fantastic comment, couldn't have said it better :>) Jan. Jan Verschueren <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (9 lines)

> There's always one, isn't there? > > -"It's not real"... "it's just a game"... etc. > > Yes, it's not real, but so what? -It's the quality of the illusion that > matters, which, IMO, is best achieved by keeping the simulation as true to > life as possible. Full aero simulation is not a possibility yet, so > approximations are used to "simulate" it's effects, there's no reason to > discuss relative merit of games in this respect as the technology to "do

it > right" doesn't exist. Same with seat of the pants sensations. > > As simracers we are well aware of these facts, but just because of the > obvious links to computer _games_ we are forced to defend and justify our > hobby over and over. Sorry for the semi-rant, but this is wearing verythin

Quoted text (15 lines)

> with me at the moment. > > As for hype... what hype? -Comments "for" and "against" GP3 have been > exchanged here since the game was announced. Just more people jumping into > the foray and more issues clouding the discussion now release is imminent. > > BTW: GPL's gearboxes are not semi-automatic, the computer helps you make a > clutchless shift. ;-) > > Jan. > =--- > Jon Beckett wrote... > > <snip> > >

There's always one, isn't there? -"It's not real"... "it's just a game"... etc. Yes, it's not real, but so what? -It's the quality of the illusion that matters, which, IMO, is best achieved by keeping the simulation as true to life as possible. Full aero simulation is not a possibility yet, so approximations are used to "simulate" it's effects, there's no reason to discuss relative merit of games in this respect as the technology to "do it right" doesn't exist. Same with seat of the pants sensations. As simracers we are well aware of these facts, but just because of the obvious links to computer _games_ we are forced to defend and justify our hobby over and over. Sorry for the semi-rant, but this is wearing very thin with me at the moment. As for hype... what hype? -Comments "for" and "against" GP3 have been exchanged here since the game was announced. Just more people jumping into the foray and more issues clouding the discussion now release is imminent. BTW: GPL's gearboxes are not semi-automatic, the computer helps you make a clutchless shift. ;-) Jan. =--- Jon Beckett wrote... > <snip>

The paranoia in here really is running high, isn't it. With respect, you've jumped in (as seems to be the prerequisite in here) to both defend and attach whatever you can about things I didn't say. Some of the creative minds in here would do well in opposition in the House of Commons. Plenty of muck to throw, and if anybody else throws muck you've find fault in theirs. It would be nice if a lot of the people around here could take a step back and remember we're talking about GAMES! You may call them simulators, but if they are, then they're pretty damn poor. Jonathan Beckett [email hidden] www.btinternet.com/~jonbeckett

Observation 1. This newsgroup has begun to remind me of the British tabloid press. You all wait for a product to arrive, hype it up (yes, YOU hyped it up), then tear it down if you can. Observation 2. None of these "games" is realistic. You can't simulate motor racing anything like properly without simulating fluid dynamics - and to do that you need massively parrallel processing. There's lots of other things that can't be done in games too - the biggest culprit being the beloved GPL - since when did the cars in 67 have semi-automatic gearboxes? Jonathan Beckett [email hidden] www.btinternet.com/~jonbeckett

If that's the biggest criticism for GPL you could come up with, I think David Kaemer will sleep easy tonight. :) No one ever said GPL was perfect. The challenge for everyone who sets out to create a motor-sports simulation is to get as close to reality as is feasible given the limitations of modern computers. It's totally right that on a newsgroup called 'rec.autos.simulators' we should be judging their success. Also, understand it's not about hype and there is no group slamming here. If someone has posted that they don't like GP3, that's their own opinion only. If you disagree with them, tell them about it, don't assume everyone who uses the group as the same opinion. There have been plenty of positive comments here about GP3. With the exception of not being able to catch spins with opposite lock, I'm pretty happy with GP3.

Jon, "Jon Beckett" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (13 lines)

> The paranoia in here really is running high, isn't it. > > With respect, you've jumped in (as seems to be the prerequisite in > here) to both defend and attach whatever you can about things I didn't > say. > > Some of the creative minds in here would do well in opposition in the > House of Commons. Plenty of muck to throw, and if anybody else throws > muck you've find fault in theirs. > > It would be nice if a lot of the people around here could take a step > back and remember we're talking about GAMES! >

How long have you been reading this NG, Jon? > You may call them simulators, but if they are, then they're pretty > damn poor. >Compared to what? Compared to reality, yes these sims have got to be just the tiniest taste of the real thing and no one in this group as long as I have been reading and posting in this group has ever said otherwise. But that doesn't make them any the less a simulator. The simulators that are used to train pilots and astronauts only approximate reality, yet no one calls those games. If code is used to approximate "reality" as nearly as possible than I think you would have to call the result a simulator. Cheers, Kent Hosterman Long time GPL fan and still a crappy driver.

since when did the cars in 67 have semi-automatic > gearboxes? How do you make this out? Clutchless gearchanges were possible in 1967 as they are in gpl. Without lifting the gas, you blow the motor. Hardly how I'd define semi automatic! MS > > > > Jonathan Beckett > [email hidden] > www.btinternet.com/~jonbeckett

On Mon, 24 Jul 2000 11:57:49 GMT, [email hidden] (Jon Beckett) wrote: >that you need massively parrallel processing. There's lots of other >things that can't be done in games too - the biggest culprit being the >beloved GPL - since when did the cars in 67 have semi-automatic >gearboxes? It's actually one of the few that supports a clutch pedal if you happen to have one implemented in you controller set. Obviously only so much can be done for appropriate simulation of racing an automobile at speed. If there weren't any, there'd probably be a lot of dead sim'ers out there... <g> Regards, Brett C. Cammack That's Racing! Motorsports Pompano Beach, FL

Pretty poor compared to what? Like I said, "given the limitations of modern computers". You said- >Observation 1. >This newsgroup has begun to remind me of the British tabloid press. >You all wait for a product to arrive, hype it up (yes, YOU hyped it >up), then tear it down if you can. Well, I didn't hype GP3, and I haven't tore it down. If you look you'll see my comments on GP3 have been balanced and positive. Look at what you've said here. You've made a sweeping statement that acuses everyone.

"Jon Beckett" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (16 lines)

> Observation 1. > This newsgroup has begun to remind me of the British tabloid press. > You all wait for a product to arrive, hype it up (yes, YOU hyped it > up), then tear it down if you can. > > Observation 2. > None of these "games" is realistic. You can't simulate motor racing > anything like properly without simulating fluid dynamics - and to do > that you need massively parrallel processing. There's lots of other > things that can't be done in games too - the biggest culprit being the > beloved GPL - since when did the cars in 67 have semi-automatic > gearboxes? > > > > Jonathan Beckett

That would be why they call it a *simulation.* No one claims identity. And chess is just a 'game.' So is tennis, football, Scrabble, Bridge. All are deadly serious professions which people devote their lives to and in the pursuit of which millions of dollars change hands. Sim racing is just as legitimate a 'game' as football or tennis. . . or chess. Using 'game' as a synonym for 'frivolous' is, . . . well. . . frivolous, and makes any other point you have look frivolous standing next to it. If you don't want to take your 'games' seriously that's ok. Plenty more people don't take tennis seriously than do. It's ok just to play around and have fun, but don't come into the pro's clubhouse, which is what r.a.s. is, and bitch that it's "just a game." There's always the 'duffer's' clubhouse over at alt.games.

Hahahahaaaaah!!! LOL ;-) Jan. =--- Jo Helsen wrote... > <snip> > I better tell you NOW: don't try to convince Jan of this because you > are wasting time... :-D > > JoH >

Stephen Ferguson wrote... > <snip> > To whom? And why? I have never felt myself "forced > to defend and justify my hobby". It's subjective, for sure, but as you can probably see the urge is present within me. ;-)

Quoted text (8 lines)

> I play games. They happen to do a good job of > suspending my disbelief and putting me in the > cockpit of a racing car. People either accept > that I play games or they don't. And I don't > get caught up in semantics, trying to drill > into everyone's head that I am "driving a sim" > as opposed to "playing a game", because then > I would just become a crashing bore.

Oh but yes, in direct contacts with my surroundings it just "is". I always talk about playing games as a fact of life, take it or leave it, see if I care, etc. However in here, "the Pro's Club House" as someone called it, I take great exception to those who attempt to rub my nose in it. I mean, I don't go out to a Star Trek convention with a sign saying "It's just a TV program!!", now do I? > It's my own thing, just like riding a long alpine > board when everyone else is down in the park doing > tricks. I don't try to educate the masses that > alpine riding is somehow more pure or refined, > because I have no such opinions. I just ride. Ok, got me there, I *am* vain in that respect.... what's an alpine board BTW? -A type of skateboard? Jan. =---

"Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (24 lines)

> Stephen Ferguson wrote... > > <snip> > > To whom? And why? I have never felt myself "forced > > to defend and justify my hobby". > > It's subjective, for sure, but as you can probably see the urge is present > within me. ;-) > > > I play games. They happen to do a good job of > > suspending my disbelief and putting me in the > > cockpit of a racing car. People either accept > > that I play games or they don't. And I don't > > get caught up in semantics, trying to drill > > into everyone's head that I am "driving a sim" > > as opposed to "playing a game", because then > > I would just become a crashing bore. > > Oh but yes, in direct contacts with my surroundings it just "is". I always > talk about playing games as a fact of life, take it or leave it, see if I > care, etc. However in here, "the Pro's Club House" as someone called it, I > take great exception to those who attempt to rub my nose in it. I mean, I > don't go out to a Star Trek convention with a sign saying "It's just a TV > program!!", now do I? >

Point taken, but what bothers me lately (besides the feeding frenzy on downloading GP3) is the outcry that Crammond has deceived us, that he has committed some heinous crime. Hello... you downloaded a warez copy of the game ("you" being a general term here, not you specifically) and you didn't like it. Your total cost is zero. I don't see the problem. Others have downloaded the program, tried it, and can't get enough of the racing experience. I should point out that you are making some bold assumptions with your Pro Club House. In a clubhouse, there will be as many people (high level players, mind you) who discuss only the relative challenge of a particular course, or the sublime feeling of nailing a particular hole. Others will discuss why their Taylor Made titanium driver, together with expert coaching, improved their drive by twenty yards. Some get their satisfaction from the techincal, some from the esoteric. GP2 and (it seems) GP3 fall into the "simulation" category because it offers a believable driving experience, and layers on top a fabulous portrayal of the race weekend. I suppose it's naiive to think this could happen in USENET, but those who enjoy the "atmosphere" aspect of a simulation should be able to discuss why GP3 is the new king of race weekend strategy without taunting the gearheads who want a 30DOF model, but at the same time the gearheads should not be so elitist to think that their idea of what constitutes a "simulation" is universal. Commercial "simulators" also broadly include systems which accurately duplicate a situation, without an emphasis on the mechanics of the task.

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > It's my own thing, just like riding a long alpine > > board when everyone else is down in the park doing > > tricks. I don't try to educate the masses that > > alpine riding is somehow more pure or refined, > > because I have no such opinions. I just ride. > > Ok, got me there, I *am* vain in that respect.... what's an alpine board > BTW? -A type of skateboard? >

Sorry, I meant to include the word "snowboard" in there, not that it is particularly relevant to r.a.s. Stephen

"Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > As simracers we are well aware of these facts, but just because of the > obvious links to computer _games_ we are forced to defend and justify our > hobby over and over. Sorry for the semi-rant, but this is wearing verythin > with me at the moment. > To whom? And why? I have never felt myself "forced to defend and justify my hobby". I play games. They happen to do a good job of suspending my disbelief and putting me in the cockpit of a racing car. People either accept that I play games or they don't. And I don't get caught up in semantics, trying to drill into everyone's head that I am "driving a sim" as opposed to "playing a game", because then I would just become a crashing bore. It's my own thing, just like riding a long alpine board when everyone else is down in the park doing tricks. I don't try to educate the masses that alpine riding is somehow more pure or refined, because I have no such opinions. I just ride. Stephen

No, won't go there... ;-) Jan. =--- Andre Warringa wrote...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> <snip> > Jan! You're back!! > > :) > > Andre >

On Mon, 24 Jul 2000 22:36:06 +0200, "Jan Hovius" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Jan, > >As usual a fantastic comment, couldn't have said it better :>) Jan! You're back!! :) Andre

Kent Hosterman wrote:

Quoted text (8 lines)

> Compared to what? Compared to reality, yes these sims have got to be just > the > tiniest taste of the real thing and no one in this group as long as I have > been reading and posting in this group has ever said otherwise. But that > doesn't make them any the less a simulator. The simulators that are used to > train pilots and astronauts only approximate reality, yet no one calls those > games. If code is used to approximate "reality" as nearly as possible than I > think you would have to call the result a simulator.

The real world can suck compared to virtual reality. The simulator we used in hundreds of hours of training missions for ground support of an actual spacecraft simulated only two out of the hundreds of telemetry variables of interest to my subsystem. Racing sims won't be up to real world aerospace standards until the computerized stewards send a "green card" to the driver to indicate elevated oil temperature ;) - Matt

No, won't go there... ;-) Jan. =---

To whom? And why? I have never felt myself "forced to defend and justify my hobby". I play games. They happen to do a good job of suspending my disbelief and putting me in the***pit of a racing car. People either accept that I play games or they don't. And I don't get caught up in semantics, trying to drill into everyone's head that I am "driving a sim" as opposed to "playing a game", because then I would just become a crashing bore. It's my own thing, just like riding a long alpine board when everyone else is down in the park doing tricks. I don't try to educate the masses that alpine riding is somehow more pure or refined, because I have no such opinions. I just ride. Stephen

Hahahahaaaaah!!! LOL ;-) Jan. =---

On Tue, 25 Jul 2000 13:33:03 +0200, "Stephen Ferguson" <[email hidden]> wrote: >GP2 and (it seems) >GP3 fall into the "simulation" category because it offers a believable >driving experience, and layers on top a fabulous portrayal of the race >weekend. I better tell you NOW: don't try to convince Jan of this because you are wasting time... :-D JoH

Oh great. Now it's going to go to his head. He'll be unbearable to talk to. Just like that Barlow guy :) Mike Horton "Jan Hovius" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:u2GDL7a9$GA.80@net025s...

Quoted text (13 lines)

> Jan, > > As usual a fantastic comment, couldn't have said it better :>) > > Jan. > Jan Verschueren <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > There's always one, isn't there? > > > > -"It's not real"... "it's just a game"... etc. > > > > Yes, it's not real, but so what? -It's the quality of the illusion that > > matters, which, IMO, is best achieved by keeping the simulation as true

to

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > life as possible. Full aero simulation is not a possibility yet, so > > approximations are used to "simulate" it's effects, there's no reason to > > discuss relative merit of games in this respect as the technology to "do > it > > right" doesn't exist. Same with seat of the pants sensations. > > > > As simracers we are well aware of these facts, but just because of the > > obvious links to computer _games_ we are forced to defend and justify

our > > hobby over and over. Sorry for the semi-rant, but this is wearing very > thin > > with me at the moment. > > > > As for hype... what hype? -Comments "for" and "against" GP3 have been > > exchanged here since the game was announced. Just more people jumpinginto > > the foray and more issues clouding the discussion now release isimminent. > > > > BTW: GPL's gearboxes are not semi-automatic, the computer helps you makea

Quoted text (10 lines)

> > clutchless shift. ;-) > > > > Jan. > > =--- > > Jon Beckett wrote... > > > <snip> > > > > > >