NSR Review By Randy Magruder

http://pc.ign.com/articles/588/588381p1.html 9.2 out of 10. -- David G Fisher

http://pc.ign.com/articles/588/588381p1.html 9.2 out of 10. -- David G Fisher

http://pc.ign.com/articles/588/588381p1.html 9.2 out of 10. -- David G Fisher

Never heard of the guy. Does he own a wheel. Or is he just an EA brown noser ? In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says... > http://pc.ign.com/articles/588/588381p1.html > > 9.2 out of 10. >

PC24 wrote: > Never heard of the guy. Does he own a wheel. > Or is he just an EA brown noser ? You've never heard of Randy Magruder!??! Must be 10 years or more he's been involved in sims, reviewing, on this newsgroup etc. I guess he owns a wheel....! Maybe someone more "recent" than I can comment on the nasal shade?

"For multiplayer racing, EA has finally raised their game to the point where you can theoretically race in a full 43-car grid online. I did some test races with the folks at EA, as well as some members of the NASCAR gaming community, and I have been pleased with the results. There's not too much lag, and all the options Papyrus gave us for setting up and running race servers are here in abundance, including a dedicated race server program if you're running a league or just feel charitable." Hmm, so its good but laggy and has all the admin features we need yet I have read many posts already that states it has hardly any admin features at all. "Unfortunately, even if you follow every audible and visual instruction, the game can shaft you when it gets confused about where you are and what you should be doing." "In the course of a single caution, while accurately following the computer's directions, I still managed to go a lap down and earn a stop and go penalty. The in-game instructions in that situation were neither accurate nor timely: I was told to slow down to get behind a certain car. When I slowed down, I got a warning that I was going too slow and almost immediately was told I'd lost my place in the line for going too slow, even though I was just waiting for the other car to catch up to me." "After pitting, I exited the pit lane as the pace car was going by, and slowed to fall back to the end of the line, only to be told that I had lapped the field under yellow and would be assessed a stop and go. Things like this forced me to turn on the "auto-drive" feature during cautions. But even that mode didn't work right. I was told that I was the "Lucky Dog" and that I should proceed past the pace car to get my lap back. But the AI driving my car refused to budge. And I could not override it! So, I didn't feel like such a "Lucky Dog" after all. That will be an issue if it cannot properly track car placements. "Fortunately, you can turn off yellows and tweak other rules to minimize the negative effects of these problems until a fix is available. For multiplayer, it is a serious issue that will probably have many leagues resorting to turning off yellow flags until it is fixed." Thats nice, just turn off yellows for now for online. And it got a 9.2 Maybe a patch will fix all these issues but it seems to have some glaring bugs already :( "PC24" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > Never heard of the guy. Does he own a wheel. > Or is he just an EA brown noser ? > In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says... >> http://pc.ign.com/articles/588/588381p1.html >> >> 9.2 out of 10. >>

ROFL Randy may have even worked for Papy. I certainly remember him in beta testing in the closed beta days before Hawaii. John you're showing your age take it easy the newbies. :-) Good to see you still around. Do you ever hear anything about Crammond? Pete "John Wallace" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > You've never heard of Randy Magruder!??! Must be 10 years or more he's > been involved in sims, reviewing, on this newsgroup etc. > > I guess he owns a wheel....! Maybe someone more "recent" than I can > comment on the nasal shade?

In article <[email hidden]>, PC24 <[email hidden]> wrote: > >Never heard of the guy. Does he own a wheel. >Or is he just an EA brown noser ? Randy has written most of the best racing sim reviews I've had the pleasure of reading ... for years. Good to see he is still around. Now off to that review ...

On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 00:00:34 GMT, [email hidden] (Dave) wrote: >Randy has written most of the best racing sim reviews I've had the >pleasure of reading ... for years. Good to see he is still >around. Now off to that review ...Well I remember Randy from the old days and his review of EA's game is pretty generous to my mind. EA may have gotten "ex papy" people but I think they got the losers. All the good ones went with the lawyers to F1rst Racing lol. Sorry to see him suck up to the big company.

Thanks for the heads up Dave. This is the one review I've been waiting for. Randy has always been a straight shooter and I've always trusted and respected his views. -- See ya in the pits, Dean I have a terrible memory. In fact my memory's so bad I can't remember how long it's been since I've forgotten anything. "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > http://pc.ign.com/articles/588/588381p1.html > > 9.2 out of 10. > -- > David G Fisher > >

He's extremely knowledgable, has done some R/W racing, and has been a respected reviewer @ Digital Sportspage since forever. "John Wallace" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (9 lines)

> PC24 wrote: > > Never heard of the guy. Does he own a wheel. > > Or is he just an EA brown noser ? > > You've never heard of Randy Magruder!??! Must be 10 years or more he's > been involved in sims, reviewing, on this newsgroup etc. > > I guess he owns a wheel....! Maybe someone more "recent" than I can > comment on the nasal shade?

"not spam" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (11 lines)

> On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 00:00:34 GMT, [email hidden] (Dave) wrote: > > > >Randy has written most of the best racing sim reviews I've had the > >pleasure of reading ... for years. Good to see he is still > >around. Now off to that review ... > Well I remember Randy from the old days and his review of EA's game > is pretty generous to my mind. EA may have gotten "ex papy" people > but I think they got the losers. All the good ones went with the > lawyers to F1rst Racing lol. Sorry to see him suck up to the big > company.

Speaking of NSR reviews and Papy references, I can't believe no one's caught this gem from the Gamespot review. A direct quote: "it's no Grand Prix Legends". They must've been hanging around here! ;-)

Randy seems to have a blind eye for ISI. A close look at the file structure shows NSR is far more closely related to ISI's sims than Papy's. And since First bought the rights to Papy's code, it looks like the divide will continue (if First ever actually stops feeding the lawyers and gets some product out the door). Randy has also forgotten some sims he must have played. He yearns for an "automatic difficulty" system to speed up or slow down the AI cars based on the player's speed. Need for Speed had that in the previous century. Grand Prix Legends had that seven years ago (everybody hated it). But otherwise, I agree with his review. The graphics are great. The UI works. The AI and rules algorithms need some work. Even the road-racing is serviceable. Papy's games have always been more realistic to drive, but that was all you got. EA has dicked around with various "career" modes in an effort to bolster gameplay. Most have been hokey, but at least somebody is trying to put something on the table besides a great physics model. There is more to racing than going fast...but probably less than depicted in "Days of Thunder." If Papy sims have always been "Le Mans," EA's sims have been "Grand Prix." The amazing thing is that EA allowed its code monkeys to produce a hard-core (well, maybe more Jessica Simpson than Jenna Jameson) sim that's still accessible to casual players. IMO, EA/Tiburon's biggest contribution to advancing the art of racing sims, IMO, are the "stackable" info screens. Great idea! "not spam" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (11 lines)

> On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 00:00:34 GMT, [email hidden] (Dave) wrote: > > > >Randy has written most of the best racing sim reviews I've had the > >pleasure of reading ... for years. Good to see he is still > >around. Now off to that review ... > Well I remember Randy from the old days and his review of EA's game > is pretty generous to my mind. EA may have gotten "ex papy" people > but I think they got the losers. All the good ones went with the > lawyers to F1rst Racing lol. Sorry to see him suck up to the big > company.

Steve Blankenship wrote: > > Speaking of NSR reviews and Papy references, I can't believe no one'scaught > this gem from the Gamespot review. > > A direct quote: "it's no Grand Prix Legends". They must've beenhanging > around here! ;-) Even with it's age and it's faults, Grand Prix Legends just makes you feel good. Everyone involved in developing that game should be very proud. Games like that don't come around very often.

I guess if the flippin mirror worked it would have got a 9.3 huh? On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 15:57:10 -0500, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote: >http://pc.ign.com/articles/588/588381p1.html > >9.2 out of 10.

>"PC24" <[email hidden]> wrote > Never heard of the guy. Does he own a wheel. > Or is he just an EA brown noser ? Shut up newbie. -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez Corporation - helping America into the New World...

> Steve Blankenship wrote: > Even with it's age and it's faults, Grand Prix Legends just makes you > feel good. Everyone involved in developing that game should be very > proud. Games like that don't come around very often. Stop living in the past.

I think it has potential to be a 9.2, but not yet. -Larry "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> http://pc.ign.com/articles/588/588381p1.html > > 9.2 out of 10. > -- > David G Fisher > >

Fine Wine's do :) -Larry <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (8 lines)

>> Steve Blankenship wrote: > >> Even with it's age and it's faults, Grand Prix Legends just makes you >> feel good. Everyone involved in developing that game should be very >> proud. Games like that don't come around very often. > > Stop living in the past. >

Good post Steve. For the first time, I find myself wanting to like an EA based Nascar SIM. I'm about 80% the way there. They've got some issues to deal with. I have hope :) -Larry "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:UfcRd.18912$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (52 lines)

> Randy seems to have a blind eye for ISI. A close look at the file > structure > shows NSR is far more closely related to ISI's sims than Papy's. And > since > First bought the rights to Papy's code, it looks like the divide will > continue (if First ever actually stops feeding the lawyers and gets some > product out the door). > > Randy has also forgotten some sims he must have played. He yearns for an > "automatic difficulty" system to speed up or slow down the AI cars based > on > the player's speed. Need for Speed had that in the previous century. > Grand > Prix Legends had that seven years ago (everybody hated it). But > otherwise, > I agree with his review. The graphics are great. The UI works. The AI > and > rules algorithms need some work. Even the road-racing is serviceable. > > Papy's games have always been more realistic to drive, but that was all > you > got. EA has dicked around with various "career" modes in an effort to > bolster gameplay. Most have been hokey, but at least somebody is trying > to > put something on the table besides a great physics model. There is more > to > racing than going fast...but probably less than depicted in "Days of > Thunder." If Papy sims have always been "Le Mans," EA's sims have been > "Grand Prix." > > The amazing thing is that EA allowed its code monkeys to produce a > hard-core > (well, maybe more Jessica Simpson than Jenna Jameson) sim that's still > accessible to casual players. IMO, EA/Tiburon's biggest contribution to > advancing the art of racing sims, IMO, are the "stackable" info screens. > Great idea! > > "not spam" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... >> On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 00:00:34 GMT, [email hidden] (Dave) wrote: >> >> >> >Randy has written most of the best racing sim reviews I've had the >> >pleasure of reading ... for years. Good to see he is still >> >around. Now off to that review ... >> Well I remember Randy from the old days and his review of EA's game >> is pretty generous to my mind. EA may have gotten "ex papy" people >> but I think they got the losers. All the good ones went with the >> lawyers to F1rst Racing lol. Sorry to see him suck up to the big >> company. > >

A very good review for what is clearly the new benchmark for Nascar simulations. Let's hope EA's reign will be at least as long as Papyrus's was.

On 17 Feb 2005 22:29:11 -0800, [email hidden] wrote: >Stop living in the past.That would be valid if I didnt't run in two GPL leagues this week. The 65 mod is still the most fun I've had driving a sim car. The past is now my friend.

You ain't seen nuthin' yet. If SimBin manages to sort out GTR (they're about 85% there), they'll rule...altho I suspect it will take until they come out w. the rFactor-based GTR2. Of course, that's road racing. I've been very impressed with the care and attention EA Tiburon has been lavishing on the beta testers and beta testing for NSR. You don't spend that kind of time and effort and money unless you're dead serious about making it work. And for the kind of moolah EA laid out to get an exclusive (it undoubtedly would have been cheaper to buy Papyrus, and you'd think cash-strapped VU would have been only too happy to sell), they'd damn well better lean into it. "Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:bBiRd.43954$EG1.16671@lakeread04...

Quoted text (20 lines)

> Good post Steve. > > For the first time, I find myself wanting to like an EA based Nascar SIM. > I'm about 80% the way there. > > They've got some issues to deal with. I have hope :) > > -Larry > > "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:UfcRd.18912$[email hidden]... > > Randy seems to have a blind eye for ISI. A close look at the file > > structure > > shows NSR is far more closely related to ISI's sims than Papy's. And > > since > > First bought the rights to Papy's code, it looks like the divide will > > continue (if First ever actually stops feeding the lawyers and gets some > > product out the door). > > > > Randy has also forgotten some sims he must have played. He yearns for

an

Quoted text (45 lines)

> > "automatic difficulty" system to speed up or slow down the AI cars based > > on > > the player's speed. Need for Speed had that in the previous century. > > Grand > > Prix Legends had that seven years ago (everybody hated it). But > > otherwise, > > I agree with his review. The graphics are great. The UI works. The AI > > and > > rules algorithms need some work. Even the road-racing is serviceable. > > > > Papy's games have always been more realistic to drive, but that was all > > you > > got. EA has dicked around with various "career" modes in an effort to > > bolster gameplay. Most have been hokey, but at least somebody is trying > > to > > put something on the table besides a great physics model. There is more > > to > > racing than going fast...but probably less than depicted in "Days of > > Thunder." If Papy sims have always been "Le Mans," EA's sims have been > > "Grand Prix." > > > > The amazing thing is that EA allowed its code monkeys to produce a > > hard-core > > (well, maybe more Jessica Simpson than Jenna Jameson) sim that's still > > accessible to casual players. IMO, EA/Tiburon's biggest contribution to > > advancing the art of racing sims, IMO, are the "stackable" info screens. > > Great idea! > > > > "not spam" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:[email hidden]... > >> On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 00:00:34 GMT, [email hidden] (Dave) wrote: > >> > >> > >> >Randy has written most of the best racing sim reviews I've had the > >> >pleasure of reading ... for years. Good to see he is still > >> >around. Now off to that review ... > >> Well I remember Randy from the old days and his review of EA's game > >> is pretty generous to my mind. EA may have gotten "ex papy" people > >> but I think they got the losers. All the good ones went with the > >> lawyers to F1rst Racing lol. Sorry to see him suck up to the big > >> company. > > > > > >

On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 02:18:28 GMT, "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Randy has also forgotten some sims he must have played. He yearns for an >"automatic difficulty" system to speed up or slow down the AI cars based on >the player's speed. Need for Speed had that in the previous century. Grand >Prix Legends had that seven years ago (everybody hated it). Not everybody...I personally think it's the best way to do it. I remember racing the AI in GPL for months untill I succeeded in winning races. I really had to fight to earn places. In sims like the ones from ISI it is just passing the AI on the straight, where they don't go faster than 50 mph....urgh. Cheers! Remco

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

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > Steve Blankenship wrote: > > > Even with it's age and it's faults, Grand Prix Legends just makes you > > feel good. Everyone involved in developing that game should be very > > proud. Games like that don't come around very often. > > Stop living in the past. >

1. You're quoting the wrong poster, Jethro. 2. Whoooshhh....

On 18 Feb 2005 03:12:13 -0800, [email hidden] wrote: >A very good review for what is clearly the new benchmark for Nascar >simulations. > >Let's hope EA's reign will be at least as long as Papyrus's was.It will be as long as they keep paying money to keep real competition out. Screw EA. I hate to rain on your parade.

On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 13:32:49 GMT, "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (10 lines)

>You ain't seen nuthin' yet. If SimBin manages to sort out GTR (they're >about 85% there), they'll rule...altho I suspect it will take until they >come out w. the rFactor-based GTR2. Of course, that's road racing. I've >been very impressed with the care and attention EA Tiburon has been >lavishing on the beta testers and beta testing for NSR. You don't spend >that kind of time and effort and money unless you're dead serious about >making it work. And for the kind of moolah EA laid out to get an exclusive >(it undoubtedly would have been cheaper to buy Papyrus, and you'd think >cash-strapped VU would have been only too happy to sell), they'd damn well >better lean into it.

I don't care what they do with the product, I have a major problem with a big company excluding everyone else. There is no incentive to create a better product. Nascar morons will buy whatever they're given. One only has to look at the t shirts they wear to see that. ISI and F1rst racing are where I'm turning to. EA can rot in hell.

Another quote... It's been six years in coming, but EA has finally delivered the goods. They rewrote their physics engine, spent extra long months tweaking and tuning and testing after the console versions shipped. The extra time has paid off handsomely... Is this like saying "if you like raw food like say, sushi, you'll love our undercooked hambergers...? What the hell did they do in Beta Testing? I fking hat to think how bad it was, back when they though "well it is done, lets see what they find wrong with it" or do they actually just go through "beta-test" only to fullfill accepted developement cycles? Schooner enlightened us with:

Quoted text (60 lines)

> "For multiplayer racing, EA has finally raised their game to the > point where you can theoretically race in a full 43-car grid online. > I did some test races with the folks at EA, as well as some members > of the NASCAR gaming community, and I have been pleased with the > results. There's not too much lag, and all the options Papyrus gave > us for setting up and running race servers are here in abundance, > including a dedicated race server program if you're running a league > or just feel charitable." > Hmm, so its good but laggy and has all the admin features we need yet > I have read many posts already that states it has hardly any admin > features at all. > > "Unfortunately, even if you follow every audible and visual > instruction, the game can shaft you when it gets confused about where > you are and what you should be doing." > > "In the course of a single caution, while accurately following the > computer's directions, I still managed to go a lap down and earn a > stop and go penalty. The in-game instructions in that situation were > neither accurate nor timely: I was told to slow down to get behind a > certain car. When I slowed down, I got a warning that I was going too > slow and almost immediately was told I'd lost my place in the line > for going too slow, even though I was just waiting for the other car > to catch up to me." > "After pitting, I exited the pit lane as the pace car was going by, > and slowed to fall back to the end of the line, only to be told that > I had lapped the field under yellow and would be assessed a stop and > go. Things like this forced me to turn on the "auto-drive" feature > during cautions. But even that mode didn't work right. I was told > that I was the "Lucky Dog" and that I should proceed past the pace > car to get my lap back. But the AI driving my car refused to budge. > And I could not override it! So, I didn't feel like such a "Lucky > Dog" after all. > That will be an issue if it cannot properly track car placements. > > > "Fortunately, you can turn off yellows and tweak other rules to > minimize the negative effects of these problems until a fix is > available. For multiplayer, it is a serious issue that will probably > have many leagues resorting to turning off yellow flags until it is > fixed." > Thats nice, just turn off yellows for now for online. > > > And it got a 9.2 > > Maybe a patch will fix all these issues but it seems to have some > glaring bugs already :( > > > "PC24" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... >> >> Never heard of the guy. Does he own a wheel. >> Or is he just an EA brown noser ? >> In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] >> says... >>> http://pc.ign.com/articles/588/588381p1.html >>> >>> 9.2 out of 10.

On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 20:49:41 -0500, "Dean Purdy" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Thanks for the heads up Dave. This is the one review I've been waiting for. >Randy has always been a straight shooter and I've always trusted and >respected his views. Really. RM also thinks Gran Turismo is the best thing since sliced bread while I think it's pure arcade eye candy console shite.

I know some people like GTR, but I have to be honest and say I'm definitely not one of them. It has that old ISI engine feel to it. Like driving on Ice. Not enough feedback to the driver. Feels like the rotation point is WAY off and centered about 2 feet in front of the driver. It's a feeling I've had every since EA came out with the F1 titles (and I have all of them) and I can't shake it. I feel a _small_ amount of that in NSR but I think I can deal with it. To me, the only SIM since NR200x that feels substantial to me has been rFactor. It apparantly has a 2nd generation ISI engine in it and I think it's superior in every way to GTR. It is my understanding that GTR uses the old engine that was in the F1 series so I'm not suprised I feel the way I do. I have hope for NSR but I have a lot of work to do to get where I want to be. -Larry "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:58mRd.20085$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (11 lines)

> You ain't seen nuthin' yet. If SimBin manages to sort out GTR (they're > about 85% there), they'll rule...altho I suspect it will take until they > come out w. the rFactor-based GTR2. Of course, that's road racing. I've > been very impressed with the care and attention EA Tiburon has been > lavishing on the beta testers and beta testing for NSR. You don't spend > that kind of time and effort and money unless you're dead serious about > making it work. And for the kind of moolah EA laid out to get an > exclusive > (it undoubtedly would have been cheaper to buy Papyrus, and you'd think > cash-strapped VU would have been only too happy to sell), they'd damn well > better lean into it.

Considering the rotation point in front-engined cars IS abt. 2 feet ahead of the drivers, maybe that's why I like the FE cars (like the Vertigo Streiff and the C5-R) in GTR a lot better than the RE cars (like the Saleen and the Porsches...altho, to be fair, the German wunderwagens are a lot like that in real life: initial front-end washout followed by snap oversteer). "Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:6EpRd.46841$EG1.15352@lakeread04... > I know some people like GTR, but I have to be honest and say I'mdefinitely

Quoted text (14 lines)

> not one of them. > > It has that old ISI engine feel to it. Like driving on Ice. Not enough > feedback to the driver. Feels like the rotation point is WAY off and > centered about 2 feet in front of the driver. > > It's a feeling I've had every since EA came out with the F1 titles (and I > have all of them) and I can't shake it. > > I feel a _small_ amount of that in NSR but I think I can deal with it. > > To me, the only SIM since NR200x that feels substantial to me has been > rFactor. It apparantly has a 2nd generation ISI engine in it and I think > it's superior in every way to GTR. It is my understanding that GTR uses

the

Quoted text (13 lines)

> old engine that was in the F1 series so I'm not suprised I feel the way I > do. > > I have hope for NSR but I have a lot of work to do to get where I want to > be. > > -Larry > > "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:58mRd.20085$[email hidden]... > > You ain't seen nuthin' yet. If SimBin manages to sort out GTR (they're > > about 85% there), they'll rule...altho I suspect it will take until they > > come out w. the rFactor-based GTR2. Of course, that's road racing.

I've

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > been very impressed with the care and attention EA Tiburon has been > > lavishing on the beta testers and beta testing for NSR. You don't spend > > that kind of time and effort and money unless you're dead serious about > > making it work. And for the kind of moolah EA laid out to get an > > exclusive > > (it undoubtedly would have been cheaper to buy Papyrus, and you'd think > > cash-strapped VU would have been only too happy to sell), they'd damn

well > > better lean into it. > >

Larry wrote: I think your problem is you dont like Road Courses and you let that dislike over-ride the reality of GTRs greatness as a simulation. I just took the GTR demo2 out for another spin and it really puts NSR to shame in the Physics, Graphics, Sound, Multi and Controller depts. Other than that NSR is better ;) Mitch -- Remove "nospam." to reply. SuSE 9.2 Pro KDE 3.3.2a

"Larry" wrote: > To me, the only SIM since NR200x that feels substantial to me has been > rFactor. It apparantly has a 2nd generation ISI engine in it and I think > it's superior in every way to GTR. It is my understanding that GTR usesthe > old engine that was in the F1 series so I'm not suprised I feel the way I > do. I am in complete agreement, Larry, although some think we are being duped and rFactor isn't really that different to other ISI sims. For me at least it is the first ISI sim with a decent feel to it. Cheers Tony

Not really. I don't dislike road courses, I just suck at them :) And I DO like rFactor. I do NOT like GTR (based on the demo's). -Larry "Mitch_A" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:LiqRd.1333$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (13 lines)

> Larry wrote: > > I think your problem is you dont like Road Courses and you let that > dislike > over-ride the reality of GTRs greatness as a simulation. I just took the > GTR demo2 out for another spin and it really puts NSR to shame in the > Physics, Graphics, Sound, Multi and Controller depts. Other than that NSR > is better ;) > > Mitch > -- > Remove "nospam." to reply. > SuSE 9.2 Pro KDE 3.3.2a

> > Even with it's age and it's faults, Grand Prix Legends just makes you > > feel good. Everyone involved in developing that game should be very > > proud. Games like that don't come around very often. > > Stop living in the past. You'd think... Having downloaded the 2005 demo of NSR and put in a few laps and thought it looked quite nice I then loaded up GPL running the 65 cars and a rather nice rendition of Zeltweg and it looked fantastic. NSR looked a bit cartoonish in comparison and the colours in GPL looked far more like real life. Of course this is down to the sim community for creating the superb graphics, but the underlying GPL engine is more than capable of matching the new stuff with the exception of some of the 2 dimensional images like trees and crowds. It certainly doesn't look that dated in comparison. Cheers Tony

I think this might be because NR2003 is a bit brighter and the colors are a bit more pastel. Turn off the Specular Lighting in NSR and it gets pretty close, plus it brightens up to the point where I can actually see things :) -Larry "Tony Rickard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:z8rRd.17793$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (26 lines)

>> > Even with it's age and it's faults, Grand Prix Legends just makes you >> > feel good. Everyone involved in developing that game should be very >> > proud. Games like that don't come around very often. >> >> Stop living in the past. > > You'd think... > > Having downloaded the 2005 demo of NSR and put in a few laps and thought > it > looked quite nice I then loaded up GPL running the 65 cars and a rather > nice > rendition of Zeltweg and it looked fantastic. > > NSR looked a bit cartoonish in comparison and the colours in GPL looked > far > more like real life. Of course this is down to the sim community for > creating the superb graphics, but the underlying GPL engine is more than > capable of matching the new stuff with the exception of some of the 2 > dimensional images like trees and crowds. It certainly doesn't look that > dated in comparison. > > Cheers > Tony > >

not spam wrote:

Quoted text (8 lines)

> On 18 Feb 2005 03:12:13 -0800, [email hidden] wrote: > > >A very good review for what is clearly the new benchmark for Nascar > >simulations. > > > >Let's hope EA's reign will be at least as long as Papyrus's was. > It will be as long as they keep paying money to keep real competition > out. Screw EA. I hate to rain on your parade.

Have you even tried the sim?

"Tony Rickard" wrote...

Quoted text (7 lines)

>> > <snip> > You'd think... > > Having downloaded the 2005 demo of NSR and put in a > few laps and thought it looked quite nice I then > loaded up GPL running the 65 cars and a rather nice > rendition of Zeltweg and it looked fantastic.

Almost a week to go to the race and you're already practising... ya bloody cheat!! Jan. ;-)) =---

Never played a console racing game in my life, so I really can't comment; but from what I've heard your opinion of GT seems to be in the minority... -- See ya in the pits, Dean I have a terrible memory. In fact my memory's so bad I can't remember how long it's been since I've forgotten anything. "Chris Klink" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 20:49:41 -0500, "Dean Purdy" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > Really. RM also thinks Gran Turismo is the best thing since sliced > bread while I think it's pure arcade eye candy console shite.

To any die-hard PC fanboy who's never played Gran Turismo and is curious: it ain't bad. For less than some of us reality ascetics have spent on a steering wheel or a video card, you get the whole shebang (including a Logi DFP, should you ever want to go back to PC sims). The physics model is credible, the AI is about as good as you'd find in the SCCA run-offs (minus a few A.J. Allmendingers), the game play is entertaining (and ought to improve by leaps & bounds when, as and if Sony finally implements online play), the graphics are amazing considering its being generated by a device with less power than yer average cell phone, and you get to drive hundreds of cars on dozens of tracks. For fifty bucks. What's not to like? "Dean Purdy" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:C8GRd.1908$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (19 lines)

> Never played a console racing game in my life, so I really can't comment; > but from what I've heard your opinion of GT seems to be in the minority... > -- > See ya in the pits, > Dean > > I have a terrible memory. In fact my memory's so bad I can't remember how > long it's been since I've forgotten anything. > > "Chris Klink" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 20:49:41 -0500, "Dean Purdy" > > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > > > > Really. RM also thinks Gran Turismo is the best thing since sliced > > bread while I think it's pure arcade eye candy console shite. > >

In article <sCGRd.20945$[email hidden]>, "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote: [re: Gran Turismo series] >The physics model is >credible, the AI is about as good as you'd find in the SCCA run-offs (minus >a few A.J. Allmendingers),[...] > and you get to drive hundreds >of cars on dozens of tracks. For fifty bucks. What's not to like? Not sure what to make of your SCCA comment. A quip or not? Anyway, I'd have to say that the AI is perhaps GT's weakest element. Horrible. Follows the line regardless of your position. Classic smash into you to make a turn (sometimes it is the worst choice to be slightly in front coming into the last turn). Typical console rubber-band AI that slows when you lag and speeds up when you are ahead. It works for gameplay, but interrupts suspension of disbelief. Then, of course, is the lack of any dash or fender work, i.e. its a HUD type view. I can live with that. Next for many is the lack of damage. To some a killer, to me not a big issue. But as Steve said: 700 cars in the latest game, probably including your personal ride. Good physics (some say great, others say mediocre - who to believe?). Countless hours of hot-lapping fun. Latest one has the 'Ring as well as a few other real tracks. I bought a PSX for GT, a PS2 for GT3. It was worth it.

Dave wrote:

Quoted text (7 lines)

> In article <sCGRd.20945$[email hidden]>, "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote: >>The physics model is >>credible, the AI is about as good as you'd find in the SCCA run-offs (minus >>a few A.J. Allmendingers), > > > Not sure what to make of your SCCA comment. A quip or not?

I thought it was pretty funny (as a Regional driver), considering some of the "racecraft" displayed year after year with inconsistent (or generally nonexistant) penalties. Touring 2 was a mess last year, with lots of red mist, and boneheaded moves. GT3 featured a "lead change" of which Earnhardt would've been proud. Ditto SSC, albeit with an actual penalty. GT2 featured a similar "lead change" gone wrong, allowing 3rd to win. -jde

Ok, I never got to the SCCA run-offs - maybe those guys are better than the clowns in GT3. (George Carlin's classic remark: anybody driving slower than you are is an "idiot"; and anybody driving faster than you are is a "maniac".) But in my experience in SCCA Regionals and Nationals, club drivers are very little--if any--better than the AIs in GT3. "Dave" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:tRGRd.20947$[email hidden]... > In article <sCGRd.20945$[email hidden]>, "Steve Smith"<[email hidden]> wrote: > > [re: Gran Turismo series] > > >The physics model is > >credible, the AI is about as good as you'd find in the SCCA run-offs(minus

Quoted text (25 lines)

> >a few A.J. Allmendingers), > [...] > > and you get to drive hundreds > >of cars on dozens of tracks. For fifty bucks. What's not to like? > > Not sure what to make of your SCCA comment. A quip or not? > Anyway, I'd have to say that the AI is perhaps GT's weakest > element. Horrible. Follows the line regardless of your position. > Classic smash into you to make a turn (sometimes it is the worst > choice to be slightly in front coming into the last turn). > Typical console rubber-band AI that slows when you lag and speeds > up when you are ahead. It works for gameplay, but interrupts > suspension of disbelief. > > Then, of course, is the lack of any dash or fender work, i.e. > its a HUD type view. I can live with that. Next for many is the > lack of damage. To some a killer, to me not a big issue. > > But as Steve said: 700 cars in the latest game, probably > including your personal ride. Good physics (some say great, > others say mediocre - who to believe?). Countless hours of > hot-lapping fun. Latest one has the 'Ring as well as a few other > real tracks. > > I bought a PSX for GT, a PS2 for GT3. It was worth it.

I don't think of myself as a quipster, more like a bloviator. "J.D. Ellis" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:zCIRd.3039$[email hidden]... > Dave wrote: > > In article <sCGRd.20945$[email hidden]>, "Steve Smith"<[email hidden]> wrote: > >>The physics model is > >>credible, the AI is about as good as you'd find in the SCCA run-offs(minus

Quoted text (20 lines)

> >>a few A.J. Allmendingers), > > > > > > Not sure what to make of your SCCA comment. A quip or not? > > I thought it was pretty funny (as a Regional driver), considering some > of the "racecraft" displayed year after year with inconsistent (or > generally nonexistant) penalties. > > Touring 2 was a mess last year, with lots of red mist, and boneheaded > moves. GT3 featured a "lead change" of which Earnhardt would've been > proud. Ditto SSC, albeit with an actual penalty. GT2 featured a > similar "lead change" gone wrong, allowing 3rd to win. > > -jde > > > > >

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

Quoted text (13 lines)

> > not spam wrote: >> On 18 Feb 2005 03:12:13 -0800, [email hidden] wrote: >> >> >A very good review for what is clearly the new benchmark for Nascar >> >simulations. >> > >> >Let's hope EA's reign will be at least as long as Papyrus's was. >> It will be as long as they keep paying money to keep real competition >> out. Screw EA. I hate to rain on your parade. > > Have you even tried the sim? >

can't believe this sim is rated so high in this article. At times it is promising but really it's more like a glorified nascar heat (which was fun to mess with in its time but it is now 2005). The cts use a generic truck instead of the four manufacturers. Been tweaking and messing with it over the last few days. Said the heck with it a few hours ago and ran a long daytona cts race in N2003. The difference in quality with all the gfx updates and ai modding is almost a joke. Only chance for this release is that the modders turn it into something decent. My 2 cents.. DC

Pete wrote:

Quoted text (7 lines)

> ROFL Randy may have even worked for Papy. I certainly remember him in > beta testing > in the closed beta days before Hawaii. John you're showing your age take it > easy the newbies. :-) > Good to see you still around. Do you ever hear anything about Crammond? > > Pete

Hi Pete :-) No, I've heard nothing of Crammond for some time now. With few companies making games, enormous license costs and huge development budgets, it must be tough to be in the right place to do what you want! Sorry I don't type much - I broke my wrist in a mountain biking accident last week, and it takes me AGES to type anything with one finger (and I'm still anal enough to want correct punctuation and capitalisation!) John

Not in my house they don't, or not for very long at least :-) Larry wrote:

Quoted text (18 lines)

> Fine Wine's do :) > > -Larry > > <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > >>>Steve Blankenship wrote: >> >>>Even with it's age and it's faults, Grand Prix Legends just makes you >>>feel good. Everyone involved in developing that game should be very >>>proud. Games like that don't come around very often. >> >>Stop living in the past. >> > > >

"John Wallace" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Hi Pete :-) > > No, I've heard nothing of Crammond for some time now. With few companies > making games, enormous license costs and huge development budgets, it > must be tough to be in the right place to do what you want! Often wondered whatever became of him. At one time he was one of the best but he sort of just fell off the face of the earth after his last effort. I thought I had read he was going to redo his Amiga stunt racing game but never heard any more. > Sorry I don't type much - I broke my wrist in a mountain biking accident > last week, and it takes me AGES to type anything with one finger (and > I'm still anal enough to want correct punctuation and capitalisation!) > > John Sorry, to hear that but I know where you're coming from. :-( Some days my health barely allows me to type coherently as well. I've been invited by a cousin to go with him and his wife to Tighnabruaich next year, if I have to crawl on my hands and knees I'm going! :-) Get well. Pete

Pete wrote:

Quoted text (7 lines)

> Sorry, to hear that but I know where you're coming from. :-( Some days > my > health barely allows me to type coherently as well. > I've been invited by a cousin to go with him and his wife to > Tighnabruaich next year, > if I have to crawl on my hands and knees I'm going! :-) > Get well.

I'm getting better, thanks! I hope you enjoy the trip to Tighnabruaich, it's great to visit and see places where rampant consumerism just passes by! John

My kind of place. :-) Pete "John Wallace" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > I'm getting better, thanks! I hope you enjoy the trip to Tighnabruaich, > it's great to visit and see places where rampant consumerism just passesby! > > John

Hi guys, Wow, can't believe the size of this thread. It hadn't even occurred to me to pop in here and see what people were saying. It's nice to know some people remember me anyway (for better or worse). Okay, a few comments -- 1st, the first time I drove NSR it was pre-release and the physics definitely had that ISI icy feel and I didn't feel like I could 'feel' the car. I did complain...but also I noticed part of the problem was I still driving the car like I expected it to drive like NR 2003. I had to sort of 'unlearn' a few of my NR2003 habits because the physics model is definitely different. The more time I spent with it, the more hooked I got. As with Grand Prix Legends and a very few other sims, physics is the king, and when it's done right, the score shoots up in my book. Maybe too high for some, but we all have our priorities. Also, if any of you have the NASCAR 2 manual from Papyrus, you'll see me in the back credited as a beta tester. So I've been a Papy fan going back to Indy Car I. I have vivid memories of Papyrus releases where the rules governing the AI, the flag system, etc came out buggy. It took Papyrus lots patches and annual revs to get it to where NR2003 was, but somehow the game still scored very highly the whole time. If this were a console game and it shipped with these problems, I probably would have knocked it down an entire point because there's no 'patchability' inherent in console games. I try to write reviews with a bit of the long run in mind, and there's no such thing as a PC game that doesn't get patched 50 times these days to fix these kinds of problems. Now, if the shortcomings were in the PHYSICS arena, that's death to the thing. You don't "patch" a crummy physics model. You *can* patch things like rules glitches. So that's the way I look at it. I also biased my review more towards online racing than offline racing, and some people might disagree with that. At any rate, I do understand those people who say I rated it too high. I know where they are coming from, but I do stand by my score. It's been a long time since I thoroughly got addicted to a NASCAR sim. To be honest, late nights online with NR2003 I have been known to nod off. Once into a rhythm, it can be very easy to get 'highway hypnosis' late at night. For some reason, I'm able to do very long races in NSR and the physics engine keeps me on my toes, more like the way GPL used to keep me on my toes online (okay, not nearly as squirrelly, but you get the idea). 'nuff said. I will stand by my review and defend it -- I like the developers at EA that I've met, but some of them have been on this for several years, and I haven't given them a pass in all the reviews up to this point, and I'm not starting now. In fact, their console NASCAR titles SUCKED this year, and they KNOW I feel that way. So disagree with me if you want, tell me I'm on mushrooms, but don't tell me that I'm sucking up to EA, because that dog don't hunt. Let me clarify about Gran Turismo. I loved GT's *driving* model, but it was at its best when you used "Simulation tires" (a lot of people never bothered messing with them or knew they existed) as they took out some of the ease of going into and out of slides. But GT3 (and now GT4) *Suck* as racing games. No damage, AI that slams into you stupidly, cars bouncing off each other and leaning on one another, only 6 cars on the track, the whole "I'll win easily with just one more upgrade" approach to driving, etc. Just a lousy RACING GAME. But a great 'driving game. I love just driving laps in it in the various cars. The actual racing on it is just a necessary evil to get access to the cool cars and tracks. I had hoped the GT team would actually address this stuff, but not to be. Oh well, the new Logitech 900 degree wheel is cool. I've also been using the NaturalPoint Track IR device on the PC and that totally rocks. And of course I'm trying out games like GTR, Live for Speed, and whatever else is out there these days....so there ya're. FOr those that know me, good to see ya again, sorry I've been incommunicado for awhile ... raising kids and a long commute do that to one... Cheers, Randy

LNWD 10 year reunion planned? ;) Terry "rmagruder" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (75 lines)

> Hi guys, > > Wow, can't believe the size of this thread. It hadn't even occurred to > me to pop in here and see what people were saying. It's nice to know > some people remember me anyway (for better or worse). > > Okay, a few comments -- 1st, the first time I drove NSR it was > pre-release and the physics definitely had that ISI icy feel and I > didn't feel like I could 'feel' the car. I did complain...but also I > noticed part of the problem was I still driving the car like I expected > it to drive like NR 2003. I had to sort of 'unlearn' a few of my > NR2003 habits because the physics model is definitely different. The > more time I spent with it, the more hooked I got. As with Grand Prix > Legends and a very few other sims, physics is the king, and when it's > done right, the score shoots up in my book. Maybe too high for some, > but we all have our priorities. > > Also, if any of you have the NASCAR 2 manual from Papyrus, you'll see > me in the back credited as a beta tester. So I've been a Papy fan > going back to Indy Car I. I have vivid memories of Papyrus releases > where the rules governing the AI, the flag system, etc came out buggy. > It took Papyrus lots patches and annual revs to get it to where NR2003 > was, but somehow the game still scored very highly the whole time. If > this were a console game and it shipped with these problems, I probably > would have knocked it down an entire point because there's no > 'patchability' inherent in console games. I try to write reviews with > a bit of the long run in mind, and there's no such thing as a PC game > that doesn't get patched 50 times these days to fix these kinds of > problems. Now, if the shortcomings were in the PHYSICS arena, that's > death to the thing. You don't "patch" a crummy physics model. You > *can* patch things like rules glitches. So that's the way I look at > it. I also biased my review more towards online racing than offline > racing, and some people might disagree with that. At any rate, I do > understand those people who say I rated it too high. I know where they > are coming from, but I do stand by my score. It's been a long time > since I thoroughly got addicted to a NASCAR sim. To be honest, late > nights online with NR2003 I have been known to nod off. Once into a > rhythm, it can be very easy to get 'highway hypnosis' late at night. > For some reason, I'm able to do very long races in NSR and the physics > engine keeps me on my toes, more like the way GPL used to keep me on my > toes online (okay, not nearly as squirrelly, but you get the idea). > 'nuff said. I will stand by my review and defend it -- I like the > developers at EA that I've met, but some of them have been on this for > several years, and I haven't given them a pass in all the reviews up to > this point, and I'm not starting now. In fact, their console NASCAR > titles SUCKED this year, and they KNOW I feel that way. So disagree > with me if you want, tell me I'm on mushrooms, but don't tell me that > I'm sucking up to EA, because that dog don't hunt. > > Let me clarify about Gran Turismo. I loved GT's *driving* model, but > it was at its best when you used "Simulation tires" (a lot of people > never bothered messing with them or knew they existed) as they took out > some of the ease of going into and out of slides. But GT3 (and now > GT4) *Suck* as racing games. No damage, AI that slams into you > stupidly, cars bouncing off each other and leaning on one another, only > 6 cars on the track, the whole "I'll win easily with just one more > upgrade" approach to driving, etc. Just a lousy RACING GAME. But a > great 'driving game. I love just driving laps in it in the various > cars. The actual racing on it is just a necessary evil to get access > to the cool cars and tracks. I had hoped the GT team would actually > address this stuff, but not to be. Oh well, the new Logitech 900 > degree wheel is cool. > > I've also been using the NaturalPoint Track IR device on the PC and > that totally rocks. And of course I'm trying out games like GTR, Live > for Speed, and whatever else is out there these days....so there ya're. > > FOr those that know me, good to see ya again, sorry I've been > incommunicado for awhile ... raising kids and a long commute do that to > one... > > Cheers, > > Randy >

LOL! Actually Dave S and are I doing some racing online together with NSR. Terry wrote:

Quoted text (86 lines)

> LNWD 10 year reunion planned? ;) > > Terry > > > "rmagruder" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > Hi guys, > > > > Wow, can't believe the size of this thread. It hadn't even > > occurred to me to pop in here and see what people were saying. > > It's nice to know some people remember me anyway (for better or > > worse). > > > > Okay, a few comments -- 1st, the first time I drove NSR it was > > pre-release and the physics definitely had that ISI icy feel and I > > didn't feel like I could 'feel' the car. I did complain...but > > also I noticed part of the problem was I still driving the car like > > I expected it to drive like NR 2003. I had to sort of 'unlearn' a > > few of my NR2003 habits because the physics model is definitely > > different. The more time I spent with it, the more hooked I got. > > As with Grand Prix Legends and a very few other sims, physics is > > the king, and when it's done right, the score shoots up in my book. > > Maybe too high for some, but we all have our priorities. > > > > Also, if any of you have the NASCAR 2 manual from Papyrus, you'll > > see me in the back credited as a beta tester. So I've been a Papy > > fan going back to Indy Car I. I have vivid memories of Papyrus > > releases where the rules governing the AI, the flag system, etc > > came out buggy. It took Papyrus lots patches and annual revs to > > get it to where NR2003 was, but somehow the game still scored very > > highly the whole time. If this were a console game and it shipped > > with these problems, I probably would have knocked it down an > > entire point because there's no 'patchability' inherent in console > > games. I try to write reviews with a bit of the long run in mind, > > and there's no such thing as a PC game that doesn't get patched 50 > > times these days to fix these kinds of problems. Now, if the > > shortcomings were in the PHYSICS arena, that's death to the thing. > > You don't "patch" a crummy physics model. You can patch things > > like rules glitches. So that's the way I look at it. I also > > biased my review more towards online racing than offline racing, > > and some people might disagree with that. At any rate, I do > > understand those people who say I rated it too high. I know where > > they are coming from, but I do stand by my score. It's been a long > > time since I thoroughly got addicted to a NASCAR sim. To be > > honest, late nights online with NR2003 I have been known to nod > > off. Once into a rhythm, it can be very easy to get 'highway > > hypnosis' late at night. For some reason, I'm able to do very long > > races in NSR and the physics engine keeps me on my toes, more like > > the way GPL used to keep me on my toes online (okay, not nearly as > > squirrelly, but you get the idea). 'nuff said. I will stand by my > > review and defend it -- I like the developers at EA that I've met, > > but some of them have been on this for several years, and I haven't > > given them a pass in all the reviews up to this point, and I'm not > > starting now. In fact, their console NASCAR titles SUCKED this > > year, and they KNOW I feel that way. So disagree with me if you > > want, tell me I'm on mushrooms, but don't tell me that I'm sucking > > up to EA, because that dog don't hunt. > > > > Let me clarify about Gran Turismo. I loved GT's driving model, but > > it was at its best when you used "Simulation tires" (a lot of people > > never bothered messing with them or knew they existed) as they took > > out some of the ease of going into and out of slides. But GT3 (and > > now GT4) Suck as racing games. No damage, AI that slams into you > > stupidly, cars bouncing off each other and leaning on one another, > > only 6 cars on the track, the whole "I'll win easily with just one > > more upgrade" approach to driving, etc. Just a lousy RACING GAME. > > But a great 'driving game. I love just driving laps in it in the > > various cars. The actual racing on it is just a necessary evil to > > get access to the cool cars and tracks. I had hoped the GT team > > would actually address this stuff, but not to be. Oh well, the new > > Logitech 900 degree wheel is cool. > > > > I've also been using the NaturalPoint Track IR device on the PC and > > that totally rocks. And of course I'm trying out games like GTR, > > Live for Speed, and whatever else is out there these days....so > > there ya're. > > > > FOr those that know me, good to see ya again, sorry I've been > > incommunicado for awhile ... raising kids and a long commute do > > that to one... > > > > Cheers, > > > > Randy > >