NSR2005

I think it's pretty cool!

"Shane Warfel" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:e63ff31e12e262b4e2f4e2e3235d9bc6$[email hidden]... >I think it's pretty cool! >I think it has potential IF, and these are big IF's: 1. I have not yet been fooled into feeling like I 'm driving a car yet by this sim....someone said it was like driving a boat on water, and so far for me, that's a pretty close appraisal. 2. I can't even get the car to follow a straight line, I spent quite a while trying to get my MOMO Racing setup to work....the car setups helped a bit once I freed them up, at least the car would turn, but at Indy right now, the car simply will not go straight for me, I come off a turn up high and the car gradually drifts down to the inside, small steering inputs have no effect, until the wheel is turned far enough, and then the car shoots into the outside wall...in all fairness, this same thing would happen in N2003 for me when I used certain setups, but i have not ben able to correct this yet. 3. Multiplayer will be the biggie, it's got to have good multi, but even then, if I can't drive the car, then I'll just be hazard in the crowd. I am currently running GPL, N2003, GTR, GTP, Rfactor, LFS with great results, good framerates, and I can get the car to "feel" right in all of them, but something in NSR is eluding me. If the release version is great and everyone else starts running it, I may be out of luck. Ed

I found out alot has to do with your wheel settings and sensitivity. If you go with the 'out of the box' settings it won't be right. I couldn't get my car to drive right on the shorter tracks so I moved to Talladega where I'm extremely comfortable there. After some tweaking I was able to get my car pretty comfortable. In case anybody is wondering why I have Talladega and you don't - I'm a rankings programmer for a website you probably heard of and I have a beta. http://www.nr2003.net http://www.nascarsimcentral.com http://www.onlineracin.com

> 2. I can't even get the car to follow a straight line, I spent quite awhile > trying to get my MOMO Racing setup to work....the car setups helped a bit > once I freed them up, at least the car would turn, but at Indy right now, > the car simply will not go straight for me, I come off a turn up high and > the car gradually drifts down to the inside, small steering inputs have no > effect, until the wheel is turned far enough, and then the car shootsinto > the outside wall...in all fairness, this same thing would happen in N2003 > for me when I used certain setups, but i have not ben able to correct this > yet. Sounds like your linearity's messed up. Make sure speed sensitivity is 0% or really close, and the axis sensitivity should be 50% to be completely linear. Alan

"Alan Le" <[email hidden]> wrote in

Quoted text (8 lines)

> Sounds like your linearity's messed up. Make sure speed sensitivity > is 0% or really close, and the axis sensitivity should be 50% to be > completely linear. > > Alan > > >

Alan is on the mark. WE HAVE DISCUSSED THESE VERY ISSUES WITH F1 2000, 2000 CS, 2001, 2002, AND F1C!!!! Where has everybody been? Google search ras with the groups option and look for contollers + F1 2001 etc. old ground folks...very old. dh

> Alan is on the mark. WE HAVE DISCUSSED THESE VERY ISSUES WITH F1 2000, > 2000 CS, 2001, 2002, AND F1C!!!! Where has everybody been? same place as me, with head stuck in ground :D cheers steve

see gamespot review/preview? http://www.gamespot.com/pc/driving/nascar2005/preview_6117437.html "Steve Whitty" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:nJkLd.142233$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (11 lines)

>> Alan is on the mark. WE HAVE DISCUSSED THESE VERY ISSUES WITH F1 2000, >> 2000 CS, 2001, 2002, AND F1C!!!! Where has everybody been? > > same place as me, with head stuck in ground > > :D > > cheers > > steve >

>"Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote > Alan is on the mark. WE HAVE DISCUSSED THESE VERY ISSUES WITH F1 2000, > 2000 CS, 2001, 2002, AND F1C!!!! Where has everybody been? Google > search ras with the groups option and look for contollers + F1 2001 etc. > old ground folks...very old. I think the question is more : How many freaking releases will EA continue before getting the clue and asking to their developpers a better controller configuration? It's pathetic that after half a decade we're still at the same place. -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez Corporation - helping America into the New World...

Exactly. How can you expect people to look up "controller +NSR2005" when they just bought the same game for their hard earned money in order to get it right? If I bought a car, and had to do a google search before I could get it to behave properly, I would have demanded a refund, fer crying out loud. ---A--- ymenard wrote:

Quoted text (17 lines)

>>"Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote >> Alan is on the mark. WE HAVE DISCUSSED THESE VERY ISSUES WITH F1 2000, >>2000 CS, 2001, 2002, AND F1C!!!! Where has everybody been? Google >>search ras with the groups option and look for contollers + F1 2001 etc. >>old ground folks...very old. > > > > > I think the question is more : How many freaking releases will EA continue > before getting the clue and asking to their developpers a better controller > configuration? > > It's pathetic that after half a decade we're still at the same place. > > >

Asgeir Nesoen <[email hidden]> wrote in news:cto4cg$an9$[email hidden]:

Quoted text (10 lines)

> Exactly. How can you expect people to look up "controller +NSR2005" > when they just bought the same game for their hard earned money in > order to get it right? > > If I bought a car, and had to do a google search before I could get it > to behave properly, I would have demanded a refund, fer crying out > loud. > > ---A--- >

The problem is...the controller code DOES work correctly. It works very well. ISI handles more axis, more buttons, more inputs and gives you dozens of options not even remotely available from Papyrus. But...it does work DIFFERENTLY than what you may be used to. So if you buy a car that has a starter button instead of a key, do you take it back? dave henrie

> The problem is...the controller code DOES work correctly. It works > very well. ISI handles more axis, more buttons, more inputs and gives you > dozens of options not even remotely available from Papyrus. > But...it does work DIFFERENTLY than what you may be used to. So if you > buy a car that has a starter button instead of a key, do you take it back? I never understood why people say Papyrus' controller setup is heads and tails above ISI's. ISI offers mostly the same adjustability (input momentum is the difference that comes to mind) with different labels. I will give a nod to Papyrus for making their layout more intuitive, but that doesn't make it more configurable... unless of course someone simply doesn't bother to find out how ISI's system works. The one thing Papyrus has handled better (and maybe GTR has improved this) is multiple controllers. ISI's two controller limitation can be frustrating. Alan

On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 21:45:58 -0600, Dave Henrie <[email hidden]> wrote: > But...it does work DIFFERENTLY than what you may be used to. So if you >buy a car that has a starter button instead of a key, do you take it back? > >dave henrieDave, if it was that simple do think you'd see all the posts here? It's a flawed design that need to be fixed but won't because EA just fired a ton of their developers because they paid huge sums to Nascar and the NFL for exclusive rights to produce mediocre products. This after they worked them to death. I won't buy another EA product.

<[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 21:45:58 -0600, Dave Henrie > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > But...it does work DIFFERENTLY than what you may be used to. So ifyou > >buy a car that has a starter button instead of a key, do you take itback? > > > >dave henrie > Dave, if it was that simple do think you'd see all the posts here? Because there are some people who think it has to be done the way papyrus did it, or it's wrong. They don't bother to do a little exploration before they start complaining. Dave's right, there are far more options, and it's an all around better controller setup system than anything papyrus ever gave us. -- David G Fisher

"David G Fisher" wrote: > Because there are some people who think it has to be done the way papyrus > did it, or it's wrong. They don't bother to do a little exploration before > they start complaining. > > Dave's right, there are far more options, and it's an all around better > controller setup system than anything papyrus ever gave us. As one who has tweaked and tweaked the ISI controller settings without personal success I would take issue with that. Also it relies on the Windows game controller settings rather than having its own calibration routines which hasn't always suited. Finally I did have an unusually complex controller setup at one point (separate wheel, pedals and gear change on separate axes) which only the papy system could cope with. Of course it easy to forget that the linearity slider in GPL and NR series was critical to feel and worked opposite ways or was fairly hidden, so it is not all glory for Papy, but overall the system gets my vote as one that works well on the majority of machines out of the box. All IMHO of course! Cheers Tony

"Tony Rickard" <[email hidden]> wrote in news:V2eMd.5910$[email hidden]:

Quoted text (32 lines)

> "David G Fisher" wrote: > >> Because there are some people who think it has to be done the way >> papyrus did it, or it's wrong. They don't bother to do a little >> exploration before they start complaining. >> >> Dave's right, there are far more options, and it's an all around >> better controller setup system than anything papyrus ever gave us. > > As one who has tweaked and tweaked the ISI controller settings without > personal success I would take issue with that. > > Also it relies on the Windows game controller settings rather than > having its own calibration routines which hasn't always suited. > > Finally I did have an unusually complex controller setup at one point > (separate wheel, pedals and gear change on separate axes) which only > the papy system could cope with. > > Of course it easy to forget that the linearity slider in GPL and NR > series was critical to feel and worked opposite ways or was fairly > hidden, so it is not all glory for Papy, but overall the system gets > my vote as one that works well on the majority of machines out of the > box. > > All IMHO of course! > > Cheers > Tony > > >

indeed, did not TSW users have to discover an extremely arcane product called a ROCKFIRE convertor? Should they take GPL back because the sim did not work at all with their hardware unless they had some product hithero unknown to man except for here and the tsw support? Don't some Soundblaster users, to this day, have problems with sound issues, even tho SB is the worlds most common computer sound product. Should they take back GPL, and all the Nx series? ICR2, one of the world's first 3d racing sims, yet to get it to run in 3d, you had to have batch files and file swaps and all sorts of headaches...should they have not bothered with that either? Have not many 'high end' wheel users have had to resort to resoldering the polarity of the their pots? Surely sims should recognize quality wheels? If you don't understand something, fine. But to smack-down something just because it doesn't conform to your concept of perfect means just about everything eventually would fail some criteria. To this day I don't understand the delay settins in Papyrus controller routines, despite many users attempts to explain testing methods via driving over curbs etc. I know also that GTR has some GAWD=Awful copy protection schemes. I haven't paid attention to those discussions, but I know where to look for them when GTR finally gets to Washington State. I don't say ISI's controller routines are better than Papyrus, I do say they function like they are supposed to and do provide more options and possibilities. And I do race in a Papyrus online league...I don't currently compete with ISI stuff. dave henrie

"Dave Henrie" wrote: > > "David G Fisher" wrote:<snip> > >> Dave's right, there are far more options, and it's an all around > >> better controller setup system than anything papyrus ever gave us. <snip> > > Of course it easy to forget that the linearity slider in GPL and NR > > series was critical to feel and worked opposite ways or was fairly > > hidden, so it is not all glory for Papy, but overall the system gets > > my vote as one that works well on the majority of machines out of the > > box. <snip> > If you don't understand something, fine. But to smack-down something > just because it doesn't conform to your concept of perfect means just > about everything eventually would fail some criteria. My response was to DGF's comment about the ISI controller being the best - which it clearly is for him. My point was my own experience was the opposite. Not quite sure where any "smack-down" took place but then as you kindly point out I don't understand anyway...

"Alan Le" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:Tj_Ld.131$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (11 lines)

>> The problem is...the controller code DOES work correctly. It works >> very well. ISI handles more axis, more buttons, more inputs and gives >> you >> dozens of options not even remotely available from Papyrus. >> But...it does work DIFFERENTLY than what you may be used to. So if >> you >> buy a car that has a starter button instead of a key, do you take it >> back? > > I never understood why people say Papyrus' controller setup is heads and > tails above ISI's.

[snip] > ISI's two controller limitation can be frustrating. > > Alan >This is exactly why Papy's is 'heads and tails' above ISI. Except ..... I have a momo force on ID1, Shifter on ID2 and BRD Speed7s on ID3 (all usb). With XP, I can find no way of changing the ID # of the latter two. On the F1C and NRS, it therefore means that my pedals are not recognised. With F1C I could get round it by unplugging the shifter and using the momo paddles. On NASCAR sims, I want to use the shifter but this means that I cannot use my pedals in NSR. This is stupid - particularly so as GTR and rFactor allow me to do this. It appears from the demo that little if any development has happened since F1C - we've even got a NASCAR sim without a solid rear axle. As a demo of a piece of 2005 software, it's about as bad as I've seen. However, I'll wait for reviews of the full package, particularly to look at the multiplayer, but I'm not holding my breath. Regards

Neil Charlton wrote:

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > It appears from the demo that little if any development has happened since > F1C - we've even got a NASCAR sim without a solid rear axle. As a demo of > a piece of 2005 software, it's about as bad as I've seen. However, I'll > wait for reviews of the full package, particularly to look at the > multiplayer, but I'm not holding my breath. > > Regards

I feel the same way Neil. A very weak effort based on the demo. Ive not seen many demos change much to the full release so Im not holding my breath that this will be any different. Aint no GTR ;) Mitch -- Remove "nospam." to reply. SuSE 9.2 Pro KDE 3.3.2a

You can have every option in the world but if you still can't get a good feel out of it then it doesn't matter. I've got dozens of hours on it and I _still_ can't get it right. Hoping the final is better. -Larry "Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (20 lines)

> Asgeir Nesoen <[email hidden]> wrote in > news:cto4cg$an9$[email hidden]: > >> Exactly. How can you expect people to look up "controller +NSR2005" >> when they just bought the same game for their hard earned money in >> order to get it right? >> >> If I bought a car, and had to do a google search before I could get it >> to behave properly, I would have demanded a refund, fer crying out >> loud. >> >> ---A--- >> > The problem is...the controller code DOES work correctly. It works > very well. ISI handles more axis, more buttons, more inputs and gives you > dozens of options not even remotely available from Papyrus. > But...it does work DIFFERENTLY than what you may be used to. So if you > buy a car that has a starter button instead of a key, do you take it back? > > dave henrie

The Papy way worked :) It's not the fact that it's Papy. It's the fact that they got it (mostly) right. -Larry "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (27 lines)

> > <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... >> On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 21:45:58 -0600, Dave Henrie >> <[email hidden]> wrote: >> >> > But...it does work DIFFERENTLY than what you may be used to. So if > you >> >buy a car that has a starter button instead of a key, do you take it > back? >> > >> >dave henrie >> Dave, if it was that simple do think you'd see all the posts here? > > > Because there are some people who think it has to be done the way papyrus > did it, or it's wrong. They don't bother to do a little exploration before > they start complaining. > > Dave's right, there are far more options, and it's an all around better > controller setup system than anything papyrus ever gave us. > > > -- > David G Fisher > >

Which is why you and I are scrapping our MS wheels because they are not able to be configured properly in a papy sim to work well on rc's. MS wheel works just fine in an ISI sim. :-) -- David G Fisher "Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:o2PMd.54912$jn.26551@lakeread06... > The Papy way worked :) It's not the fact that it's Papy. It's the fact > that they got it (mostly) right. > > -Larry > > "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > > > <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:[email hidden]... > >> On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 21:45:58 -0600, Dave Henrie > >> <[email hidden]> wrote: > >> > >> > But...it does work DIFFERENTLY than what you may be used to. So if > > you > >> >buy a car that has a starter button instead of a key, do you take it > > back? > >> > > >> >dave henrie > >> Dave, if it was that simple do think you'd see all the posts here? > > > > > > Because there are some people who think it has to be done the way papyrus > > did it, or it's wrong. They don't bother to do a little exploration before > > they start complaining. > > > > Dave's right, there are far more options, and it's an all around better > > controller setup system than anything papyrus ever gave us. > > > > > > -- > > David G Fisher > > > > > >

Well, I haven't scrapped mine yet. Still thinking about it. For me, it's fine for NASCAR. I think the 64-step resolution of the pedals is killing me at Road Courses though. -Larry "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (51 lines)

> Which is why you and I are scrapping our MS wheels because they are not > able > to be configured properly in a papy sim to work well on rc's. > > MS wheel works just fine in an ISI sim. :-) > -- > David G Fisher > > "Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:o2PMd.54912$jn.26551@lakeread06... >> The Papy way worked :) It's not the fact that it's Papy. It's the fact >> that they got it (mostly) right. >> >> -Larry >> >> "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >> news:[email hidden]... >> > >> > <[email hidden]> wrote in message >> > news:[email hidden]... >> >> On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 21:45:58 -0600, Dave Henrie >> >> <[email hidden]> wrote: >> >> >> >> > But...it does work DIFFERENTLY than what you may be used to. So >> >> > if >> > you >> >> >buy a car that has a starter button instead of a key, do you take it >> > back? >> >> > >> >> >dave henrie >> >> Dave, if it was that simple do think you'd see all the posts here? >> > >> > >> > Because there are some people who think it has to be done the way > papyrus >> > did it, or it's wrong. They don't bother to do a little exploration > before >> > they start complaining. >> > >> > Dave's right, there are far more options, and it's an all around better >> > controller setup system than anything papyrus ever gave us. >> > >> > >> > -- >> > David G Fisher >> > >> > >> >> > >

I cannot come up with ONE good reason why a controller setup for a given game/sim shouldn't contain the following functionality: 1) The ability to cope with *any* number of axis' on *any* number of game controllers 2) The choice of calibrating all axis' in-game OR OS, since some setups are impossible to calibrate in OS (Logi FF with custom pedals for instance, since Logi FF panel has no option for calibration of pedals) 3) The ability to adjust the slope of any axis, linear or logarithmic both ways I would say, given the *extremely*, almost ridiculously, simple programming controllers with DirectInput, that there is simply NO EXCUSE for not having these aspects of controller setup in *ANY* game out there. I am OK with the ambition to let new customers race at the click of a button as long as I can get all my stuff to work. Why is to such a terrible thing to let customers choose whatever axis they have connected to whatever function they like? Why is this so stupidously difficult to do??? I would also claim that anyone contradicting me on this hasn't got a complicated setup, OR the aptitude to see things from several angles. The only game I have YET to see do this is GPL, albeit GPL is not perfect by any means either. Slope is only controllable for steering, for one. ---Asgeir--- Dave Henrie wrote:

Quoted text (22 lines)

> Asgeir Nesoen <[email hidden]> wrote in > news:cto4cg$an9$[email hidden]: > > >>Exactly. How can you expect people to look up "controller +NSR2005" >>when they just bought the same game for their hard earned money in >>order to get it right? >> >>If I bought a car, and had to do a google search before I could get it >>to behave properly, I would have demanded a refund, fer crying out >>loud. >> >>---A--- >> > > The problem is...the controller code DOES work correctly. It works > very well. ISI handles more axis, more buttons, more inputs and gives you > dozens of options not even remotely available from Papyrus. > But...it does work DIFFERENTLY than what you may be used to. So if you > buy a car that has a starter button instead of a key, do you take it back? > > dave henrie