Re: GP3 - ARE YOU GOING TO GET THE WAREZ COPY???

>Enough people will buy GP3 on the strenght of the Crammond name alone. >Furthermore, 95% of those sheep won't have the guts to come out and say it's >terrible, even if it is. There is nothing in this world which can prevent >GP3 becoming a commercial success. Personally, I'm very sceptic about the >title, but I soon found out even on RAS there's just a few who think alike There are also people (myself included) who bought GPL on the strength on Papy's name alone. What's the difference - I guess we're sheep, too? Eldred -- Tiger Stadium R.I.P. 1912-1999 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett Own Grand Prix Legends? http://www.vroc.net Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

In article <8i37hp$10j$[email hidden]>, "GraDee" <[email hidden]> writes:

Quoted text (13 lines)

>Perhaps if its some lamo kiddie movie/kiddie game that you wouldn't buy >anyway you might take the back door but its a bit pointless taking a warez >copy of something like GP3, only to see that everyone else has done it, GP3 >sells poorly and bye bye GP4 and 5..... even if there is a GP4 and 5 and the >income is low, its not much incentive to produce a quality product again as >it seems nobody really ant it, >In fact they do,...... they just wouldn't have the decency to show tier >approval to you. > >We don't know Geoff Crammond, in a way our thanks and request for a GP4 >comes from buying GP3. >Look at GPL, that sold poorly and now we aren't getting a GPL2. >

I don't think it sold poorly because people were getting it from warez, though. There were completely different circumstances...the era represented, lack of modern, 'well-known' drivers, the difficulty of controlling the car... Eldred -- Tiger Stadium R.I.P. 1912-1999 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett Own Grand Prix Legends? http://www.vroc.net Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

"Karl Zosel" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (8 lines)

>YES! > >If GP3 runs as bad on my system as GP2 did when it was released (and I had a >high performance PC then!) Mr Crammond and friend won't get any money from >me! > >Playability is ESSENTIAL. >Graphics are fun.

That's weird... The last time I checked, GP2 had a more than adequate level of playability. You know, some people understood that they could turn down the graphics without losing the playability. I guess the graphics WERE more important to you after all? Your philosophy is obviously that you pay for the graphics and get the playability as a bonus or something? :-) Oh well... JoH ------- The best way to accelerate a Mac is 9.81 m/s2 -------- --------------------------------------------------------------

Oooops, sorry man, didn't get it. I'll run with it next time, no matter what, 'k? ;-) Jan. =--- Bruce Kennewell wrote...

Quoted text (10 lines)

> (Sigh!) I DID understand, Jan. Just my pathetic > attempt at wordplay-humour. > God I HATE trying to be facetious via the written > word. > > -- > Regards, > Bruce Kennewell, > Canberra, Australia. > ---------------------------

ymenard <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:%4S05.58001$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (12 lines)

> "GraDee" <[email hidden]> wrote > > Now, I'm not usually in favour of warez anyway but if I had the option I > > don't think I'd do it to GP3. Geoff has put in enough work and effort so > > far. > > I think this analogy is even better : (please note that <cough> it has no > relation with my experience of the movie last year.. eh) > > > Let's say that you are a incredible big fan of Star Wars. You awaited > an incredible amount of years for the next installment of the saga. You > drooled at all the information you could get before the movie. You

visited

Quoted text (8 lines)

> websites for years to see any little tidbit about the movie. Now a week > before the opening of the movie, somebody in a dark alley comes to you and > say "Do you want to see Star Wars a week before everybody else? I know how > to sneak behind the complex and enter for free for the premiere". Of > course, the temptation is hard to resist. You know you will go see Star > Wars an incredible amount of time during the summer, so it won't change a > thing for Lucas's pocket. You even have tickets for the first screening > during the official release of the movie. What a dilemma you have. What

do > you do? ;) > > > Now replace the situation with "Gp3" and you have the perfect example of > what's going to happen. Of course, people here won't admit that theywould > accept a ticket to see the movie before! Well f course there are the stories of how people would never do such a thing as download the warez version but do it anyway..... Whether you believe it or not though I think that if somebody you know produces quality material is releasing a new game/film.... I think its only right to support them. Perhaps if its some lamo kiddie movie/kiddie game that you wouldn't buy anyway you might take the back door but its a bit pointless taking a warez copy of something like GP3, only to see that everyone else has done it, GP3 sells poorly and bye bye GP4 and 5..... even if there is a GP4 and 5 and the income is low, its not much incentive to produce a quality product again as it seems nobody really ant it, In fact they do,...... they just wouldn't have the decency to show tier approval to you. We don't know Geoff Crammond, in a way our thanks and request for a GP4 comes from buying GP3. Look at GPL, that sold poorly and now we aren't getting a GPL2.

> If GP3 runs as bad on my system as GP2 did when it was released (and I hada > high performance PC then!) Mr Crammond and friend won't get any money from > me! Yeah, but there were no 3d cards in those days... Most of the reason gp2 was slow was down to the graphics, I cant even get a decent framerate in svga mode 4 years later!

Hogwash. Enough people will buy GP3 on the strenght of the Crammond name alone. Furthermore, 95% of those sheep won't have the guts to come out and say it's terrible, even if it is. There is nothing in this world which can prevent GP3 becoming a commercial success. Personally, I'm very sceptic about the title, but I soon found out even on RAS there's just a few who think alike. The GPL analogy holds no water. The subjectmatter appeals to far fewer people than modern F1 and the game lacks scalability which makes it impossible to be enjoyed by the "casual" racers of this world. What matters is we got GPL and certain talented people have taken matters into their own hands as to keeping it going for some time to come. Jan. =--- GraDee wrote... > <snip> > > We don't know Geoff Crammond, in a way our thanks and request for a GP4 > comes from buying GP3. > Look at GPL, that sold poorly and now we aren't getting a GPL2 >

Surely you tried the demo and read what others on RAS had to say first? People who inform themselves via specialist media, web and usenet will be the minority of the total number of people buying GP3. My guess is at least 80% of sales will come via ads in lifestyle magazines/TV and from displays in mainstream stores. Jan. =--- EldredP wrote...

Quoted text (11 lines)

> ><snip> > There are also people (myself included) who bought GPL on the strength on > Papy's name alone. What's the difference - I guess we're sheep, too? > > Eldred > -- > Tiger Stadium R.I.P. 1912-1999 > Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett > Own Grand Prix Legends? http://www.vroc.net > > Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats

you > with experience... > Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

Andre Warringa <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... <snip> > Add the slomo problems to that, and I still deeply regret that I > bought GP2... > > Andre >Wow, I'm astounded by that comment....I have quite a few regrets regarding software purchases I have made over the years, but GP2 is certainly not one of them. It still sits on my hdd after some 5 or so years and with all the 3rd party addons available I will still be playing it for some time yet...well at least the few weeks....Roll on GP3 ! Cheers Phil

In article <[email hidden]>, "Bruce Kennewell" <[email hidden]> wrote: > >Rubbish! >I can run GP2 with all detail on (including sky) on a PII 450 and the only >tracks that slow down at all are those done by third-party fans. >(haven't tried it... but...) Does this include that eternal GP2 Hog, Monaco? :) Z. Please remove my_pants when replying.

In article <fxc15.189686$[email hidden]>, "Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> writes:

Quoted text (8 lines)

>Surely you tried the demo and read what others on RAS had to say first? > >People who inform themselves via specialist media, web and usenet will be >the minority of the total number of people buying GP3. My guess is at least >80% of sales will come via ads in lifestyle magazines/TV and from displays >in mainstream stores. > >Jan.

I tried the demo at work. I figured it ran poorly on my PII-300 because I didn't have a 3D graphics card. When I saw it at the store, I read the system requirements listed on the box. My system met the minimum requirements, so I bought it. My P166 with whatever 3D card I had at the time wouldn't run it smoothly at ALL, so it sat on the shelf for the next 6 months. I don't think I knew of r.a.s's existence at the time, or I had *just* found it, so I couldn't use it as a reference. I actually WAITED for the program, and bought it soley on my satisfaction with Papy's earlier programs. The only other company I've bought stuff sight unseen, without any other info, is SSI. I bought every wargame they had for Apple, and later the IBM. No disappointments. But, the software isn't as sophisticated as it is now. Reviews, and newsgroup comments kept me from buying F1 2000 yet... The demo kept me from buying TOCA2 for a long time. Long story short(g), I use the newsgroups now. I didn't before. Eldred -- Tiger Stadium R.I.P. 1912-1999 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett Own Grand Prix Legends? http://www.vroc.net Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

> That's weird... The last time I checked, GP2 had a more than adequatelevel of > playability. I guess you checked it on the the Pentium 166 available in those days? OF COURSE GP2 can run with all graphic detail on a P3-600. But still... only just. > You know, some people understood that they could turn down the > graphics without losing the playability. Just like I did. But GP2 look awful then. ICR2 was ten times better. My point always was: Geoff made a game that produced stunning screenshots, but NO ONE at the time was able to play the game with a graphic level that came close to the screenshots ... Isn't that misleading? That's the purpose of all the PREVIEWS: plain advertising that has NOTHING to do with the real quality of the product. It's just about creating a hype. I actually bought Official copies of many racing sims: Indycar 2 GP2 Nascar 2 GPL SCGT TOCA 2 My God I even bought a PC because GP2 was coming... only to find out that my 'high performance PC' was much to slow for the game. So Geoff Crammond owes me one, thats how I feel... If thats NOT ok with you... I don't give a ****

No worries :-) -- Regards, Bruce Kennewell, Canberra, Australia. --------------------------- Jan Verschueren <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:i5215.183325$[email hidden]... > Oooops, sorry man, didn't get it. I'll run with it next time, no matter > what, 'k? ;-) > > Jan. > =--- > Bruce Kennewell wrote... > > (Sigh!) I DID understand, Jan. Just my pathetic > > attempt at wordplay-humour. > > God I HATE trying to be facetious via the written > > word. > > > > -- > > Regards, > > Bruce Kennewell, > > Canberra, Australia. > > --------------------------- > > >

On 12 Jun 2000 20:43:09 GMT, [email hidden] (EldredP) wrote: >There are also people (myself included) who bought GPL on the strength on >Papy's name alone. What's the difference - I guess we're sheep, too? When I read about GPL for the first time, I thought it would be just another racing game, with the 'old cars' just as a gimmick. I tried the demo which was on the cd from a games magazine, and the demo didn't work. I didn't try to get it to work, since it didn't look like it was worth the trouble. A couple of months later the warez version came out. Mostly out of boredom I downloaded it, to see if the full version would work. It worked immediately, and I was amazed... didn't have a wheel at that time, didn't know a thing about car physics, but I immediately saw that this was something very special... I called my friends to tell them about GPL. They were surprised too, they also didn't think it would be interesting. Bought a wheel just for this game, and I was hooked... I went to the shop to buy it, but it was not yet released here in Holland. On the day it came out I bought it. If it wasn't for the warez version, I probably would have completely missed out on GPL. Warez versions make me spend money on games that are worth the money (RC2000, SCGT), and to save my money from games that were complete crap (SOS, LeMans). GP3? As soon as the warez version comes out, it will be on my HD. Big chances that I will like it and that I will buy it after that. Most importantly for me is that the game should run with a decent fps on my PII450. GP2 was not playable in SVGA mode, which was allready a standard at that time. I had to run it in VGA mode, which looked really outdated at that time. If I rememeber correctly I had a P133 at that time, a quite fast computer when GP2 came out. Add the slomo problems to that, and I still deeply regret that I bought GP2... Andre

On Mon, 12 Jun 2000 08:02:39 GMT, "Karl Zosel" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (8 lines)

>YES! > >If GP3 runs as bad on my system as GP2 did when it was released (and I had a >high performance PC then!) Mr Crammond and friend won't get any money from >me! > >Playability is ESSENTIAL. >Graphics are fun.

Exactly. Andre

Quoted text (18 lines)

> > > >T0NT0 <[email hidden]> schreef in berichtnieuws >8hve1j$42d$[email hidden]... >> Since GP3 is going to be going gold at the end of this month (thats june >and >> thats not a rumor but a fact). I wouldnt be surprise if a warez copy came >> out soon after. I am wonder if anyone will try to get it so they can try >> the game out ahead of time. If you get are you going to buy the game our >> keep the game. I'm going to buy the game, just wondering about you other >> guys. >> >> T0NT0 >> >> > >

On Tue, 13 Jun 2000 20:59:33 +1000, "Phil" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (15 lines)

> >Andre Warringa <[email hidden]> wrote in message >news:[email hidden]... ><snip> >> Add the slomo problems to that, and I still deeply regret that I >> bought GP2... >> >> Andre >> >Wow, I'm astounded by that comment....I have quite a few regrets regarding >software purchases I have made over the years, but GP2 is certainly not one >of them. It still sits on my hdd after some 5 or so years and with all the >3rd party addons available I will still be playing it for some time >yet...well at least the few weeks....Roll on GP3 ! >Cheers Phil

After the for it's time superb GP1, I didn't even wait for the first reviews, but just went out and bought it as soon as it was in the shops. It was one huge dissappointment because of the formerly mentioned problems. Now, on my PIII600, it runs smooth in svga, but imho it's really outdated now, after GPL and F1 2000. I really tried to like it, but everytime I installed it, I felt bad about my wasted money again... Andre

On Tue, 13 Jun 2000 14:41:23 GMT, [email hidden] (Jo Helsen) wrote:

Quoted text (13 lines)

>The playability was there, the higher detail graphics levels were a >bonus. > >>OF COURSE GP2 can run with all graphic detail on a P3-600. >>But still... only just. > >With the exception of Monaco, I'm sure most run very adequately full >detail on something like a PII-350. And with "a lot" of detail it ran >ok on p166-p200 (with typical framerates of '96). Don't judge the >whole game based on Monaco. > >>> You know, some people understood that they could turn down the >>> graphics without losing the playability.

<Snip> JoH, I understand your points, and when I bought the game I didn't expect that I could run it in SVGA with all details on. But I could not run it on my P133 in SVGA with allmost all the details off, the slowmo problems were terrible. VGA really was outdated when GP2 was released, and the bad fps was a huge dissappointment after all the beautiful screenshots. The 'slowmo' problem was and still is a ridiculous solution. For me, it made the game unplayable and took away all sense of speed. I allmost got a heart attack when the same slowmo problem appeared in GPL 1.1, thank God they fixed that with 1.2! Andre

On Tue, 13 Jun 2000 15:12:14 GMT, [email hidden] (Jo Helsen) wrote:

Quoted text (9 lines)

>>>Playability is ESSENTIAL. >>>Graphics are fun. >> >>Exactly. > >I find this quite amazing..... > >You say "A", and act "B"; GP2 always had the "essential", and got more >and more graphics through time.

This is getting confusing :) Graphics are not important, but I did expect GP2 to run in SVGA, even with most details off. In SVGA it was completely unplayable. But, as I allready said, the biggest problem for me was the slowmo problem. I could not believe it when I found out that Geoff used such a stupid solution. Andre >JoH

On Mon, 12 Jun 2000 23:10:26 GMT, "Karl Zosel" <[email hidden]> wrote: >> That's weird... The last time I checked, GP2 had a more than adequate >level of >> playability. > >I guess you checked it on the the Pentium 166 available in those days? Yes I did. Turned down the graphics. Enjoyed the playability. As you said: "playability is ESSENTIAL", graphics only "fun". The playability was there, the higher detail graphics levels were a bonus. >OF COURSE GP2 can run with all graphic detail on a P3-600. >But still... only just. With the exception of Monaco, I'm sure most run very adequately full detail on something like a PII-350. And with "a lot" of detail it ran ok on p166-p200 (with typical framerates of '96). Don't judge the whole game based on Monaco.

Quoted text (8 lines)

>> You know, some people understood that they could turn down the >> graphics without losing the playability. > >Just like I did. But GP2 look awful then. ICR2 was ten times better. >My point always was: Geoff made a game that produced stunning screenshots, >but NO ONE at the time was able to play the game with a graphic level that >came close to the screenshots ... >Isn't that misleading?

Aren't you a just a little bit naive? "Don Quixote" battling against all the marketing departments of the world... Good luck. At least the playability ("the playability is ESSENTIAL" etc...)was there, unlike some other recent resource hogs that I will not name. Do you try to run Quake III in 32bit 1920*1600 on your lousy system because they made it possible to scale with hardware? >My God I even bought a PC because GP2 was coming... >only to find out that my 'high performance PC' was much to slow for the >game. For full-detail graphics, not for the "playability" part. >So Geoff Crammond owes me one, thats how I feel... Very convenient. Smart. I guess some people are good at finding reasons to act wrong without feeling guilty <G> >If thats NOT ok with you... I don't give a **** Hmmmmmm.. I'm not surprised really..... JoH

On Tue, 13 Jun 2000 08:50:55 GMT, [email hidden] (Andre Warringa) wrote:

Quoted text (13 lines)

>On Mon, 12 Jun 2000 08:02:39 GMT, "Karl Zosel" <[email hidden]> >wrote: > >>YES! >> >>If GP3 runs as bad on my system as GP2 did when it was released (and I had a >>high performance PC then!) Mr Crammond and friend won't get any money from >>me! >> >>Playability is ESSENTIAL. >>Graphics are fun. > >Exactly.

I find this quite amazing..... You say "A", and act "B"; GP2 always had the "essential", and got more and more graphics through time. JoH

> I don't think it sold poorly because people were getting it from warez,though. > There were completely different circumstances...the era represented, lackof > modern, 'well-known' drivers, the difficulty of controlling the car... > > Eldred I concur with that statement. I've tried the GPL demo many times and I have a very hard time completing a lap without going into the grass or what not. This game is extremely difficult. That is why I have not purchased it. Maybe someday if I see it in a bargain bin, I'll pick it up. But for now, I can't justify paying $50-60 for this game based on the demo. Papyrus IMO has always been a little guilty of not translating loss of grip. I remember having to be oh so gentle in road courses in ICR2 (and the original for that matter!) because I could never tell when I was at the limit. Even though GP2 ran like a dog when it first came out (hell, I bought a Pentium Pro 200 thinking it would run better) it was always far more accessible to the average sim racer. By that, I mean people who like the simulation of an F1 season or race without being constantly frustrated. Regardless, based on the playability of World Circuit (GP1 across the pond) and GP2 I will buy GP3. Although I will pick up the warez if it's available before GP3 arrives in North America. Michael M [email hidden]

On Tue, 13 Jun 2000 14:17:51 GMT, [email hidden] (Andre Warringa) wrote:

Quoted text (27 lines)

>On Tue, 13 Jun 2000 14:41:23 GMT, [email hidden] (Jo Helsen) >wrote: > >>The playability was there, the higher detail graphics levels were a >>bonus. >> >>>OF COURSE GP2 can run with all graphic detail on a P3-600. >>>But still... only just. >> >>With the exception of Monaco, I'm sure most run very adequately full >>detail on something like a PII-350. And with "a lot" of detail it ran >>ok on p166-p200 (with typical framerates of '96). Don't judge the >>whole game based on Monaco. >> >>>> You know, some people understood that they could turn down the >>>> graphics without losing the playability. > ><Snip> > >JoH, I understand your points, and when I bought the game I didn't >expect that I could run it in SVGA with all details on. But I could >not run it on my P133 in SVGA with allmost all the details off, the >slowmo problems were terrible. >VGA really was outdated when GP2 was released, and the bad fps was a >huge dissappointment after all the beautiful screenshots. >The 'slowmo' problem was and still is a ridiculous solution. For me, >it made the game unplayable and took away all sense of speed.

It's not that I disagree about GP2 being slow in the graphics department. And that the fixed framerate solution has its problems. It's just that GP2 is just about the worst example to illustrate that "graphics mean nothing and playability is all" JoH

On Tue, 13 Jun 2000 14:27:52 GMT, [email hidden] (Andre Warringa) wrote:

Quoted text (19 lines)

>On Tue, 13 Jun 2000 15:12:14 GMT, [email hidden] (Jo Helsen) >wrote: > >>>>Playability is ESSENTIAL. >>>>Graphics are fun. >>> >>>Exactly. >> >>I find this quite amazing..... >> >>You say "A", and act "B"; GP2 always had the "essential", and got more >>and more graphics through time. > >This is getting confusing :) >Graphics are not important, but I did expect GP2 to run in SVGA, even >with most details off. In SVGA it was completely unplayable. >But, as I allready said, the biggest problem for me was the slowmo >problem. I could not believe it when I found out that Geoff used such >a stupid solution.

F1GP has the same "problem". But surely there was a way to make it playable in SVGA on a P133. You must have had a below-average P133 then :-) Of course, not talking about +20 fs here. 16 was quite good at the time. Not exceptional, but surely tolerable in '96. JoH

"Bruce Kennewell" <[email hidden]> wrote > I can run GP2 with all detail on (including sky) on a PII 450 and the only > tracks that slow down at all are those done by third-party fans. GP2 can run at 25fps with all details on with a 485 DX2 in SVGA. Of course, it will take you 30minutes just to make a lap. -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- May the Downforce be with you... -- http://www.WeRace.net -- People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realise how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world.

"Bruce Kennewell" <[email hidden]> wrote > Usenet comments have an insignificant effect on sales and How can you be so sure Bruce? The Internet has the power for that even today. Why do you think the movie BattleField Earth or Batman&Robin have failed at the box-office? One of the reason was the backslash on the net. Or how can you understand the success of the Blair Witch project, with almost only internet marketing? Same goes for games, I do think it can apply to the same situation. The internet (Usenet in this case, but technically this has more wisdom than any other "sectors" of the net) has the power to effect significantly sales for any type of Entertainment. -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- May the Downforce be with you... -- http://www.WeRace.net -- People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realise how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world.

"Andre Warringa" <[email hidden]> wrote <snip> I know for a fact that you speak for a big portion of simracing fans Andre. Thanks for saying what others fear to... > Add the slomo problems to that, and I still deeply regret that I > bought GP2... ...apart for that GP2 bashing. How can you not like it? I had fun with it on my old Pentium 100 back in the days, in VGA with most of the graphics eliminated. But it was still an incredible feeling. I have yet to see (excluding GPL) that same sense of "being in a real F1 car". ;-) -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- May the Downforce be with you... -- http://www.WeRace.net -- People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realise how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world.

"Andre Warringa" <[email hidden]> wrote > Graphics are not important, but I did expect GP2 to run in SVGA, even > with most details off. In SVGA it was completely unplayable. Grand Prix 2 is the best VGA game ever made. The SVGA mode for me was just a gift for the future. -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- May the Downforce be with you... -- http://www.WeRace.net -- People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realise how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world.

I can only speak for what happens down here but the majority of sales stem from, as Jan says, in-store display and, to a lesser extent, games-specific or platform-specific magazines. In-store promotion (static display as well as running demo) plays an ENORMOUS part in the sale of a game and if magazine reviews have been favourable then the game sells very well (applies to all platforms). Usenet comments have an insignificant effect on sales and, when brought into play, only ever concern those who are fanatics and know the subject of their passion inside-out! (I refer specifically to flight-simmers and RPGers) -- Regards, Bruce Kennewell, Canberra, Australia. --------------------------- Jan Verschueren <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:fxc15.189686$[email hidden]... > Surely you tried the demo and read what others on RAS had to say first? > > People who inform themselves via specialist media, web and usenet will be > the minority of the total number of people buying GP3. My guess is at least > 80% of sales will come via ads in lifestyle magazines/TV and from displays > in mainstream stores. > > Jan. > =--- > EldredP wrote... > > ><snip> > > There are also people (myself included) who bought GPL on the strength on > > Papy's name alone. What's the difference - I guess we're sheep, too? > > > > Eldred > > -- > > Tiger Stadium R.I.P. 1912-1999 > > Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett > > Own Grand Prix Legends? http://www.vroc.net > > > > Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats > you > > with experience... > > Remove SPAM-OFF to reply. > >

Rubbish! I can run GP2 with all detail on (including sky) on a PII 450 and the only tracks that slow down at all are those done by third-party fans. -- Regards, Bruce Kennewell, Canberra, Australia. --------------------------- Karl Zosel <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:C5e15.190343$[email hidden]... > > That's weird... The last time I checked, GP2 had a more than adequate > level of > > playability. > > I guess you checked it on the the Pentium 166 available in those days? > OF COURSE GP2 can run with all graphic detail on a P3-600. > But still... only just. > > > You know, some people understood that they could turn down the > > graphics without losing the playability. > > Just like I did. But GP2 look awful then. ICR2 was ten times better. > My point always was: Geoff made a game that produced stunning screenshots, > but NO ONE at the time was able to play the game with a graphic level that > came close to the screenshots ... > Isn't that misleading? > > That's the purpose of all the PREVIEWS: plain advertising that has NOTHING > to do with the real quality of the product. > It's just about creating a hype. > > I actually bought Official copies of many racing sims: > Indycar 2 > GP2 > Nascar 2 > GPL > SCGT > TOCA 2 > > My God I even bought a PC because GP2 was coming... > only to find out that my 'high performance PC' was much to slow for the > game. > > So Geoff Crammond owes me one, thats how I feel... > If thats NOT ok with you... I don't give a **** > > > > >

In article <72u15.1870$[email hidden]>, "Jeneral" <[email hidden]> writes:

Quoted text (24 lines)

>> I don't think it sold poorly because people were getting it from warez, >though. >> There were completely different circumstances...the era represented, lack >of >> modern, 'well-known' drivers, the difficulty of controlling the car... >> >> Eldred > >I concur with that statement. I've tried the GPL demo many times and I have >a very hard time completing a lap without going into the grass or what not. >This game is extremely difficult. That is why I have not purchased it. Maybe >someday if I see it in a bargain bin, I'll pick it up. But for now, I can't >justify paying $50-60 for this game based on the demo. Papyrus IMO has >always been a little guilty of not translating loss of grip. I remember >having to be oh so gentle in road courses in ICR2 (and the original for that >matter!) because I could never tell when I was at the limit. Even though GP2 >ran like a dog when it first came out (hell, I bought a Pentium Pro 200 >thinking it would run better) it was always far more accessible to the >average sim racer. By that, I mean people who like the simulation of an F1 >season or race without being constantly frustrated. >Regardless, based on the playability of World Circuit (GP1 across the pond) >and GP2 I will buy GP3. Although I will pick up the warez if it's available >before GP3 arrives in North America. >

I think it already IS in the bargain bin. Try www.dragon.ca or www.interactcd.com. As for grip in Papy sims, I thought ICR2 was a LOT worse than ICR. I had to re-learn all the tracks again. I couldn't get through them as fast in the second one as I could in the first... Eldred -- Tiger Stadium R.I.P. 1912-1999 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett GPL hcp. 2:12.80 minutes GPLRank:333 and falling.. Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

In article <7gx15.65405$[email hidden]>, "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (11 lines)

>"Bruce Kennewell" <[email hidden]> wrote >> Usenet comments have an insignificant effect on sales and > >How can you be so sure Bruce? The Internet has the power for that even >today. Why do you think the movie BattleField Earth or Batman&Robin have >failed at the box-office? One of the reason was the backslash on the net. >Or how can you understand the success of the Blair Witch project, with >almost only internet marketing? Same goes for games, I do think it can >apply to the same situation. The internet (Usenet in this case, but >technically this has more wisdom than any other "sectors" of the net) has >the power to effect significantly sales for any type of Entertainment.

Usenet is pretty much useless these days. No one comes here, no one pays attention. The web is the focus. Z. Please remove my_pants when replying.

IMHO graphics are really important in racing sims when you are relying pretty much on nothing other than the graphics (and the sound to a lesser extent) for everything. It doesn't have to be pretty but it does have to make it easy to spot braking points, get a sense of speed, and get a feel for how far away things are. Chris On Tue, 13 Jun 2000 14:41:23 GMT, [email hidden] (Jo Helsen) wrote:

Quoted text (58 lines)

>On Mon, 12 Jun 2000 23:10:26 GMT, "Karl Zosel" <[email hidden]> >wrote: > >>> That's weird... The last time I checked, GP2 had a more than adequate >>level of >>> playability. >> >>I guess you checked it on the the Pentium 166 available in those days? > >Yes I did. Turned down the graphics. Enjoyed the playability. > >As you said: "playability is ESSENTIAL", graphics only "fun". > >The playability was there, the higher detail graphics levels were a >bonus. > >>OF COURSE GP2 can run with all graphic detail on a P3-600. >>But still... only just. > >With the exception of Monaco, I'm sure most run very adequately full >detail on something like a PII-350. And with "a lot" of detail it ran >ok on p166-p200 (with typical framerates of '96). Don't judge the >whole game based on Monaco. > >>> You know, some people understood that they could turn down the >>> graphics without losing the playability. >> >>Just like I did. But GP2 look awful then. ICR2 was ten times better. >>My point always was: Geoff made a game that produced stunning screenshots, >>but NO ONE at the time was able to play the game with a graphic level that >>came close to the screenshots ... >>Isn't that misleading? > >Aren't you a just a little bit naive? "Don Quixote" battling against >all the marketing departments of the world... Good luck. > >At least the playability ("the playability is ESSENTIAL" etc...)was >there, unlike some other recent resource hogs that I will not name. > >Do you try to run Quake III in 32bit 1920*1600 on your lousy system >because they made it possible to scale with hardware? > >>My God I even bought a PC because GP2 was coming... >>only to find out that my 'high performance PC' was much to slow for the >>game. > >For full-detail graphics, not for the "playability" part. > >>So Geoff Crammond owes me one, thats how I feel... > >Very convenient. Smart. I guess some people are good at finding >reasons to act wrong without feeling guilty <G> > >>If thats NOT ok with you... I don't give a **** > >Hmmmmmm.. I'm not surprised really..... > >JoH

Having just checked that point I must admit that Monaco is choppy and I turn the sky off for that track. -- Regards, Bruce Kennewell, Canberra, Australia. --------------------------- Zonky <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:8i5412$s34$[email hidden]... > In article <[email hidden]>, "Bruce Kennewell" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > > >Rubbish! > >I can run GP2 with all detail on (including sky) on a PII 450 and the only > >tracks that slow down at all are those done by third-party fans. > > > (haven't tried it... but...) > > Does this include that eternal GP2 Hog, Monaco? :) > > Z. > > > Please remove my_pants when replying.

On Tue, 13 Jun 2000 21:04:02 GMT, "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (14 lines)

>"Andre Warringa" <[email hidden]> wrote ><snip> > >I know for a fact that you speak for a big portion of simracing fans Andre. >Thanks for saying what others fear to... > >> Add the slomo problems to that, and I still deeply regret that I >> bought GP2... > >...apart for that GP2 bashing. How can you not like it? I had fun with it >on my old Pentium 100 back in the days, in VGA with most of the graphics >eliminated. But it was still an incredible feeling. I have yet to see >(excluding GPL) that same sense of "being in a real F1 car". ;-) >

I knew I would offend people with this :) I immeditately admit that I didn't give GP2 enough chance, I hardly played it. Everytime I installed it again and gave it another try, I was so frustrated with the slowmo thing, I really hated it. I didn't know anything about car physics at that time, and I hardly knew anything about F1 racing at all, so I didn't give GP2 the attention it deserved. It's since GPL that I've become deeply interested in car physics and car racing in general. The more I learn about physics and racing, the more fun it becomes watching real races. Andre

Quoted text (13 lines)

> > > > >-- >-- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> >-- May the Downforce be with you... >-- http://www.WeRace.net >-- People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realise >how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world. > > >

Uncle Fester wrote: > > I feel sorry for those who have to pay the tel. co. for online time. :-( Thx, appreciated :-) Beers and cheers (uncle) Goy "Team Mirage" http://www.teammirage.com/ "The Pits" http://www.theuspits.com/ * Spam is for losers who can't get business any other way * "Spamkiller" http://www.spamkiller.com

T0NT0 wrote:

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > Since GP3 is going to be going gold at the end of this month (thats june and > thats not a rumor but a fact). I wouldnt be surprise if a warez copy came > out soon after. I am wonder if anyone will try to get it so they can try > the game out ahead of time. If you get are you going to buy the game our > keep the game. I'm going to buy the game, just wondering about you other > guys.

I'm taking the 5th on this one :-) Beers and cheers (uncle) Goy "Team Mirage" http://www.teammirage.com/ "The Pits" http://www.theuspits.com/ * Spam is for losers who can't get business any other way * "Spamkiller" http://www.spamkiller.com

Karl Zosel wrote: > > YES! > > If GP3 runs as bad on my system as GP2 did when it was released (and I had a > high performance PC then!) Mr Crammond and friend won't get any money from > me! Funny, I had no problems getting it to run good on my P120, guess I'm just incredibly good at configuring my PC.... Beers and cheers (uncle) Goy "Team Mirage" http://www.teammirage.com/ "The Pits" http://www.theuspits.com/ * Spam is for losers who can't get business any other way * "Spamkiller" http://www.spamkiller.com

EldredP wrote: > > I don't think it sold poorly because people were getting it from warez, though. > There were completely different circumstances...the era represented, lack of > modern, 'well-known' drivers, the difficulty of controlling the car... Anyone who thought GPL would be a huge "best seller" ought to get their heads examined, it had everything against it in the mass market, I'm surprised it sold as bad as it did though, but I'm sure Papy would have been delighted if this had ended up with a minimal loss, that way a lot of the development needed for N4 would already have been paid for by those of us who bought GPL Wonder how much they actually lost on GPl when everything they could use for N4 have been calculated into it .... Beers and cheers (uncle) Goy "Team Mirage" http://www.teammirage.com/ "The Pits" http://www.theuspits.com/ * Spam is for losers who can't get business any other way * "Spamkiller" http://www.spamkiller.com

Andre Warringa wrote: > > JoH, I understand your points, and when I bought the game I didn't > expect that I could run it in SVGA with all details on. But I could > not run it on my P133 in SVGA with allmost all the details off, the > slowmo problems were terrible. Andre, if you couldn't get a decent (not perfect :-) frame rate on a 133 at the time in SVGA, then your vid card must have sucked really bad, I ran it just fine (time has diluted the experience of course and I only remember the good stuff :-) on my P120 with a 2MB S3 based Diamond Stealth and 32 MB of RAM, yes, I DID turn off the smoke and sky :-), I did some research before I got the S3 based card though, as it was one of the best for SVGA-DOS at the time, but that's no different that hunting around for the best 3D card now is it ? Beers and cheers (uncle) Goy "Team Mirage" http://www.teammirage.com/ "The Pits" http://www.theuspits.com/ * Spam is for losers who can't get business any other way * "Spamkiller" http://www.spamkiller.com

I've never owned a 485 DX2, Frank. Maybe that's why it was a bit slow, d'you think? -- Regards, Bruce Kennewell, Canberra, Australia. --------------------------- ymenard <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:95x15.65401$[email hidden]... > "Bruce Kennewell" <[email hidden]> wrote > > I can run GP2 with all detail on (including sky) on a PII 450 and the only > > tracks that slow down at all are those done by third-party fans. > > > GP2 can run at 25fps with all details on with a 485 DX2 in SVGA. Of course, > it will take you 30minutes just to make a lap. > > > > > > -- > -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> > -- May the Downforce be with you... > -- http://www.WeRace.net > -- People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realise > how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world. > > >

Because I was directly involved for seven years in the retail of games software, Francois, and indirectly for the past two-and-a-half years. That's how. -- Regards, Bruce Kennewell, Canberra, Australia. --------------------------- ymenard <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:7gx15.65405$[email hidden]... > "Bruce Kennewell" <[email hidden]> wrote > > Usenet comments have an insignificant effect on sales and > > How can you be so sure Bruce? The Internet has the power for that even > today. Why do you think the movie BattleField Earth or Batman&Robin have > failed at the box-office? One of the reason was the backslash on the net. > Or how can you understand the success of the Blair Witch project, with > almost only internet marketing? Same goes for games, I do think it can > apply to the same situation. The internet (Usenet in this case, but > technically this has more wisdom than any other "sectors" of the net) has > the power to effect significantly sales for any type of Entertainment. > > > > -- > -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> > -- May the Downforce be with you... > -- http://www.WeRace.net > -- People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realise > how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world. > > >

On Wed, 14 Jun 2000 18:38:36 +0200, Goy Larsen <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (8 lines)

>Andre, if you couldn't get a decent (not perfect :-) frame rate on a 133 >at the time in SVGA, then your vid card must have sucked really bad, I >ran it just fine (time has diluted the experience of course and I only >remember the good stuff :-) on my P120 with a 2MB S3 based Diamond >Stealth and 32 MB of RAM, yes, I DID turn off the smoke and sky :-), I >did some research before I got the S3 based card though, as it was one >of the best for SVGA-DOS at the time, but that's no different that >hunting around for the best 3D card now is it ?

I can't even remember what video card I had, it was a Diamond Stealth, but I can't remember which version it was or how much memory my pc had at that time. Fact was that is was a very good system for all the other sims released at that time, all racing and flight sims run perfectly in SVGA. Andre

Quoted text (10 lines)

> > >Beers and cheers >(uncle) Goy > >"Team Mirage" http://www.teammirage.com/ >"The Pits" http://www.theuspits.com/ > >* Spam is for losers who can't get business any other way * >"Spamkiller" http://www.spamkiller.com

Andre Warringa wrote: > > I can't even remember what video card I had, it was a Diamond Stealth, > but I can't remember which version it was or how much memory my pc had > at that time. Fact was that is was a very good system for all the > other sims released at that time, all racing and flight sims run > perfectly in SVGA. Strange, not saying that GP2 wasn't a CPU hog, but I honestly didn't have much trouble running it in SVGA, except in multiplayer of course :-), but we even ran it on a P90 here in the shop, although at that point we didn't have much detail on of course, but we still maxed out the FPS without much slomo.... Having said all that, I tied GP2 on my P3-600 a couple of months back, still can't get constant FPS at Monaco with everything on :-) Beers and cheers (uncle) Goy "Team Mirage" http://www.teammirage.com/ "The Pits" http://www.theuspits.com/ * Spam is for losers who can't get business any other way * "Spamkiller" http://www.spamkiller.com

On Thu, 15 Jun 2000 12:08:14 +0200, Goy Larsen <[email hidden]> wrote: >Strange, not saying that GP2 wasn't a CPU hog, but I honestly didn't >have much trouble running it in SVGA, except in multiplayer of course >:-), but we even ran it on a P90 here in the shop, although at that >point we didn't have much detail on of course, but we still maxed out >the FPS without much slomo.... Weird indeed. Well, it was way before I had my internet connection, and I didn't even know what Usenet was, let alone RAS, so I never took the time to find out if GP2 could run any better on my system. I had a couple of friends who also bought GP2, and it run really bad in their systems as well, so I never thought it could be much improved. >Having said all that, I tied GP2 on my P3-600 a couple of months back, >still can't get constant FPS at Monaco with everything on :-) As I said, I found that problem even bigger than the bad framerate in SVGA problem! Andre

Quoted text (10 lines)

> > >Beers and cheers >(uncle) Goy > >"Team Mirage" http://www.teammirage.com/ >"The Pits" http://www.theuspits.com/ > >* Spam is for losers who can't get business any other way * >"Spamkiller" http://www.spamkiller.com

Andre Warringa wrote: > I do seem to remember that we used to load some kind of driver though, but I can't remember the name of it, UniVBE was the "plain Vanilla" variant, and then there was this other thing....memory ain't what it used to be :-) Beers and cheers (uncle) Goy "Team Mirage" http://www.teammirage.com/ "The Pits" http://www.theuspits.com/ * Spam is for losers who can't get business any other way * "Spamkiller" http://www.spamkiller.com

Likewise... I was running it on my old 486-66 (remember those....) and had many, many fun filled hours racing \ practicing. Value for money wise I would still place GP2 at the top of the tree when I think how much I paid for it and how much of my free time I spent using it. GPL is running it pretty close and will take over that top spot without doubt as I envisage still using it years down the line but GP2 will always be one of my top ever leisure purchases. Regards Peter Hooper Goy Larsen <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Karl Zosel wrote: > > > > YES! > > > > If GP3 runs as bad on my system as GP2 did when it was released (and Ihad a > > high performance PC then!) Mr Crammond and friend won't get any moneyfrom

Quoted text (14 lines)

> > me! > > Funny, I had no problems getting it to run good on my P120, guess I'm > just incredibly good at configuring my PC.... > > > Beers and cheers > (uncle) Goy > > "Team Mirage" http://www.teammirage.com/ > "The Pits" http://www.theuspits.com/ > > * Spam is for losers who can't get business any other way * > "Spamkiller" http://www.spamkiller.com

I concur with your sentiments 100%, Peter. GP2 gave me enormous pleasure and, to be honest, it wasn't until GPL came along that I received the same amount of enjoyment. -- Regards, Bruce Kennewell, Canberra, Australia. --------------------------- Peter Hooper <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:95e25.35648$[email hidden]... > Likewise... I was running it on my old 486-66 (remember those....) and had > many, many fun filled hours racing \ practicing. Value for money wise I > would still place GP2 at the top of the tree when I think how much I paid > for it and how much of my free time I spent using it. GPL is running it > pretty close and will take over that top spot without doubt as I envisage > still using it years down the line but GP2 will always be one of my top > ever leisure purchases. > > Regards > > Peter Hooper > > Goy Larsen <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > Karl Zosel wrote: > > > > > > YES! > > > > > > If GP3 runs as bad on my system as GP2 did when it was released (and I > had a > > > high performance PC then!) Mr Crammond and friend won't get any money > from > > > me! > > > > Funny, I had no problems getting it to run good on my P120, guess I'm > > just incredibly good at configuring my PC.... > > > > > > Beers and cheers > > (uncle) Goy > > > > "Team Mirage" http://www.teammirage.com/ > > "The Pits" http://www.theuspits.com/ > > > > * Spam is for losers who can't get business any other way * > > "Spamkiller" http://www.spamkiller.com > >