I just want to know how people can make a distinction between racing sims,
based on how contemporary the subject matter is. I really like GP3, but it
shouldn't be considered to be in a different category to GPL. I don't know
about everyone else, but the thrill of a racing sim for me isn't the thrill
of pretending to be my favourite F1 driver, or playing a game that looks
like something I can see on TV every other week. This shouldn't matter.
It should be about controlling the cars and racing, preferably with a steep
learning curve.
If someone created an entirely fictional series with made-up cars and
tracks, and it had the right ingredients like an excellent physics model and
a steep and long learning curve then I would buy it and I would love playing
it. And the individuality of a game comes from the handling characteristics
of the cars.
There isn't a seperate category "modern F1 racing sims", there are just
sims, good ones and bad ones.
On Sun 23 Jul 2000 11:46:47pm, Simon Brown wrote:
>If someone created an entirely fictional series with
>made-up cars and tracks,
Which would save a fortune on licensing costs...
> and it had the right ingredients like an
>excellent physics model and a steep and long learning curve then I
>would buy it and I would love playing it.<snip>
Well, there's Paul Hoad's glGP project (if it's still going). And
there's the (in)famous JTRC track from the GPLEA which may appear
sometime before 2004...
--
David. (GPLRank handicap: -1.17)
"After all, a mere thousand yards - such a harmless little knoll,
really."
(Raymond Mays on Shelsley Walsh)
Nice post Simon.
Jan.
=---
Simon Brown wrote...
> I just want to know how people <snip>
I totally agree, but I think the problem is there aren't enough of us to
make it commercially successful.
BTW, I like GP3 as well. It's like getting N3.
CC
Simon Brown <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:rBKe5.14017$[email hidden]...
> I just want to know how people can make a distinction between racing sims,
> based on how contemporary the subject matter is. I really like GP3, butit
> shouldn't be considered to be in a different category to GPL. I don'tknow
> about everyone else, but the thrill of a racing sim for me isn't thethrill
> of pretending to be my favourite F1 driver, or playing a game that looks
> like something I can see on TV every other week. This shouldn't matter.
> It should be about controlling the cars and racing, preferably with asteep
> learning curve.
> If someone created an entirely fictional series with made-up cars and
> tracks, and it had the right ingredients like an excellent physics modeland
> a steep and long learning curve then I would buy it and I would loveplaying
> it. And the individuality of a game comes from the handlingcharacteristics
> of the cars.
> There isn't a seperate category "modern F1 racing sims", there are just
> sims, good ones and bad ones.
>
>
Nice post Simon.
Jan.
=---
I wouldn't.
On Sun, 23 Jul 2000 22:46:47 GMT, "Simon Brown" <[email hidden]>
>If someone created an entirely fictional series with made-up cars and
>tracks, and it had the right ingredients like an excellent physics model and
>a steep and long learning curve then I would buy it and I would love playing
I wouldn't.
On Mon, 24 Jul 2000 17:59:43 GMT, "Simon Brown" <[email hidden]>
wrote:
>So you think it's more important to have the real sport recognition than to
>have a decent and long lasting learning curve? Oh well, enjoy F1WGP then.
Learn to read, dimwit. I can't stand make-belief cars on make-belief tracks, I
said nothing about not having a learning curve or realistic physics.
As they say, *PLONK*.
So you think it's more important to have the real sport recognition than to
have a decent and long lasting learning curve? Oh well, enjoy F1WGP then.
Did you really have to be so offensive?
You included in your quote of my original message my desire that a game
should have a good learning curve and excellent physics, and then stated you
wouldn't buy such a game. If that's not what you meant you should have cut
those parts. How exactly am I supposed to know what your comment was aimed
at? I'm not psychic.
You could have just as easily stated you don't like made-up tracks and cars.
"Simon Brown" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:SB0f5.17936$[email hidden]...
> Did you really have to be so offensive?
Apparently he did. Your bleeding heart GP3 stuff is probably grating
on some :-)
--
[email hidden]
> You included in your quote of my original message my desire that a game
> should have a good learning curve and excellent physics, and then stated
you
> wouldn't buy such a game. If that's not what you meant you should have
cut
> those parts. How exactly am I supposed to know what your comment was
aimed
> at? I'm not psychic.
> You could have just as easily stated you don't like made-up tracks and
cars.
>
>
Sorry, but what does that mean? My post had virtually nothing to do with
GP3. It was more about GPL. :)
David Buttery wrote:
I'm jealous of Pod Racer. Top-of-the-line franchise
and they didn't have to model tires ;)
- Matt
Quoted text (11 lines)
> On Sun 23 Jul 2000 11:46:47pm, Simon Brown wrote: > > >If someone created an entirely fictional series with > >made-up cars and tracks, > > Which would save a fortune on licensing costs... > > > and it had the right ingredients like an > >excellent physics model and a steep and long learning curve then I > >would buy it and I would love playing it. > <snip>Maybe you misunderstood my original post. The point I was trying to make is
that GP3 has to be judged against GPL and that there shouldn't, in my
opinion, be a seperate category called "modern F1 sims".
Although i've said some positive things elsewhere on the board about GP3,
i've been very careful to limit these remarks to the areas where the game
has genuine quality. My opinion of the physics is pretty much the same as
your own, that there has been only a modest improvement since GP2, and GP3
is way behind GPL and F1 2000 in this area.
Also I can see all the graphical failings that you see.
That shouldn't stop me praising the things which have been done well though,
and I think the gameplay and the wet weather are very nice. And overall the
game is pretty much fun to play.
Long term it won't be competing with GPL for my attention though. And I am
definitely dissapointed with it.
if it had decent multiplayer support (races with 10 players minimum) it would
share my hdd for the long run with GPL, but alas without decent play over the
net I won't be purchasin it
Martyn_D
Simon Brown wrote:
Quoted text (14 lines)
> Maybe you misunderstood my original post. The point I was trying to make is > that GP3 has to be judged against GPL and that there shouldn't, in my > opinion, be a seperate category called "modern F1 sims". > Although i've said some positive things elsewhere on the board about GP3, > i've been very careful to limit these remarks to the areas where the game > has genuine quality. My opinion of the physics is pretty much the same as > your own, that there has been only a modest improvement since GP2, and GP3 > is way behind GPL and F1 2000 in this area. > Also I can see all the graphical failings that you see. > That shouldn't stop me praising the things which have been done well though, > and I think the gameplay and the wet weather are very nice. And overall the > game is pretty much fun to play. > Long term it won't be competing with GPL for my attention though. And I am > definitely dissapointed with it.Simon Brown <[email hidden]> wrote:
: If someone created an entirely fictional series with made-up cars and
: tracks, and it had the right ingredients like an excellent physics model and
: a steep and long learning curve then I would buy it and I would love playing
: it. And the individuality of a game comes from the handling characteristics
: of the cars.
(Grin) Then I recommend you by Official F1 Racing Simulation - a 100%
accurate simulation of a racing series in another universe with
radically different physics and bizarre but strangely familiar racing
tracks.
--
Richard G. Clegg Only the mind is waving
Networks and Non-Linear Dynamics Group
Dept. of Mathematics, Uni. of York
UPDATED WWW: http://manor.york.ac.uk/
ROFL - superb comment
but does it have a steep and continuing learning curve?
