Re: WSC - possible problem...

>Anyone know if they intend to purchase an up-to-date license for this >sim? If they do, there isn't much time to implement tracks, cars etc. for >the proposed Q4 2000 release. I hope they know what they're doing... From reading the bhmotorsports.com preview it seems the game will include loads of cars from historics right through to modern cars, and loads of tracks have already been made. They're just waiting for licenses to see which ones will be in? -- Cheers! Graeme Nash

I must admit the previews of WSC look incredible, and if the game lives up to the graphics, it might be the first game to contend with GPL since its release. However, I'm a bit worried about the graphics showing older sports prototypes and GT1 cars such as the Maclaren F1, and the Mercedes prototype from some years ago. I wouldn't bother me buying an early 90's sportscar sim, but I'd have thought this would kill the sim for the mass market. Anyone know if they intend to purchase an up-to-date license for this sim? If they do, there isn't much time to implement tracks, cars etc. for the proposed Q4 2000 release. I hope they know what they're doing... - Michael

On Tue, 30 May 2000 16:52:41 +0100, MichaelJP <[email hidden]> wrote: >Anyone know if they intend to purchase an up-to-date license for this >sim? If they do, there isn't much time to implement tracks, cars etc. for >the proposed Q4 2000 release. I hope they know what they're doing... A license for what? The current crop of wimpy GT2-3 cars they race in the FIA GT? I don't even know if there are any proper GT1 series going on at the moment (ALMS is really more about prototypes, then those would be neat as well).

Well, there is also a Ferrari 333SP, which is still pretty new (won the championship last year), so... -- Kenneth Verburg Editor-in-Chief, High Gear http://www.simracingnews.com

As I understand things, included in the package will be a car and track editor. The source code is also of an open nature so as to make add ons and modifications very easy. I'm sure we will not have to wait too long for the more creative and industrious amongst us to work things out and come up with a multitude of goodies. MS "MichaelJP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (16 lines)

> I must admit the previews of WSC look incredible, and if the game lives > up to the graphics, it might be the first game to contend with GPL since > its release. > > However, I'm a bit worried about the graphics showing older sports > prototypes and GT1 cars such as the Maclaren F1, and the Mercedes > prototype from some years ago. > > I wouldn't bother me buying an early 90's sportscar sim, but I'd have > thought this would kill the sim for the mass market. > > Anyone know if they intend to purchase an up-to-date license for this > sim? If they do, there isn't much time to implement tracks, cars etc. for > the proposed Q4 2000 release. I hope they know what they're doing... > > - Michael

hmm, I've seen a Panoz, 333SP, (still going) Sintura, and who knows what the Wests have up their sleeve? Anyway, have there been any great sportscars since? Of course I'm hoping for as many prototypes as possible (BMW, Audi, Lola, Caddillac et al) but the GTs racing today are a bore compared (Viper, Porsche 9something, Lister). Anyways, I don't need Need For Speed with a proper physics engine - I want racecars! Not boulevard cruisers....:) But most of all I cross my fingers for a nice car editor:-D Matt (still drooling) MichaelJP <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (16 lines)

> I must admit the previews of WSC look incredible, and if the game lives > up to the graphics, it might be the first game to contend with GPL since > its release. > > However, I'm a bit worried about the graphics showing older sports > prototypes and GT1 cars such as the Maclaren F1, and the Mercedes > prototype from some years ago. > > I wouldn't bother me buying an early 90's sportscar sim, but I'd have > thought this would kill the sim for the mass market. > > Anyone know if they intend to purchase an up-to-date license for this > sim? If they do, there isn't much time to implement tracks, cars etc. for > the proposed Q4 2000 release. I hope they know what they're doing... > > - Michael

OK Ed. I heard it on heresay anyway so I was just repeating a rumour I guess. Still, If all else is true, as stated in another post here, I'd be happy to be driving stock cars towing caravans <G> MS "Ed Solheim" <ed_solheim[SPAM-GUARD]@c2i.net> wrote in message news:k1TY4.2648$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (15 lines)

> > m.seery wrote: > > > As I understand things, included in the package will be a car and track > > editor. The source code is also of an open nature so as to make add ons > and > > modifications very easy. > > Sorry to disappoint you here Mark... but this is what Chris posed on the > High Gear forum a day or so ago: > > Originally posted by West Racing: > "Hi There > Just to save some confusion later on, the Track and Car editor will not be > in the first release of the game. We plan to do that as an add on later

on."

Quoted text (10 lines)

> > Chris > > -- > All the best, > Ed Solheim > ** Proud member of the GPLEA ** > (Remove SPAM-GUARD in address to reply) > >

From the sound of it...WSC will be just as easily modified as SCGT. If so...it will only take a few months before the new cars show up. In fact, if you buy say a 2000 season sim, then it will be old by xmas...the private car builders can update much faster than a company that must remake the sim every year or two... It is still too early to get giddy about this title, but it certainly is looking promising. dave henrie MichaelJP wrote: > > I must admit the previews of WSC look incredible, and if the game lives > up to the graphics, it might be the first game to contend with GPL since > its release. > > However, I

If the West brothers are smart they forget about the mass market and charge us poor slavering fools $500 for the game. ;-)) Jan. =--- MichaelJP wrote... <snip>

Quoted text (8 lines)

> I wouldn't bother me buying an early 90's sportscar sim, but I'd have > thought this would kill the sim for the mass market. > > Anyone know if they intend to purchase an up-to-date license for this > sim? If they do, there isn't much time to implement tracks, cars etc. for > the proposed Q4 2000 release. I hope they know what they're doing... > > - Michael

Jan Verschueren wrote: > If the West brothers are smart they forget about the mass market andcharge > us poor slavering fools $500 for the game. ;-)) If the sim is as good as it sounds... I'll gladly pay that price for a copy! And I bet I'm not alone! Terrifying tought - isn't it! :)) -- All the best, Ed Solheim ** Proud member of the GPLEA ** (Remove SPAM-GUARD in address to reply)

On Tue, 30 May 2000 16:45:30 GMT, [email hidden] (Toni Lassila) wrote: >A license for what? The current crop of wimpy GT2-3 cars they race in >the FIA GT? I don't even know if there are any proper GT1 series going >on at the moment (ALMS is really more about prototypes, then those >would be neat as well). Oddly enough there was a 993 GT-3 car at Sebring last weekend. It wasn't the fastest car out there as a supercharged NSX and a Trans Am (not the Pontiac but the tube-framed racing car) ate it for breakfast. It was, however, by far the loudest car out there! Come to think of it, even the Formula Mazda was putting down times that I think beat the GT3..

"m.seery" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:JQSY4.663$[email hidden]... > As I understand things, included in the package will be a car and track > editor. The source code is also of an open nature so as to make add onsand > modifications very easy. > > I'm sure we will not have to wait too long for the more creative and > industrious amongst us to work things out and come up with a multitude of > goodies. >Not only is it unlikely that the car and track editor will appear in a later release or as an add on, (this is just plain good marketing, ain't it? but it will help them get the game out the door, and people hooked on it, at the earliest possible time),BUT..... you are confused as to the nature of the core of the game. The structure of the game will be "open" in the sense that it won't be locked up in a way to PREVENT the end user from modifying it. The source code will be just as closed as any other commercial release. It will be designed so that cars and tracks "plug in" and all performance parameters will be user editable, perhaps with plain text files. This is what would be called an open structure, unlike, say, F1RS. This is a far cry from open source. It is, none the less, the way a sim OUGHT to be made from the standpoint of being a good program and a good tool. There is no reason whatso ever that N3/NL and GPL couldn't be just one single sim with plug in add ons. Only marketing. This is not neccessarily to say that people won't be modifying it right off the bat, look at what is done with other sims without the express ablility and permissions of the authors built into it. Official car and track editor be damned I'll bet it's going to be a damn sight easier to monkey with than, say, SCGT or GPL are.

"Kevin Gavitt" <[email hidden]> writes:

Quoted text (26 lines)

> "m.seery" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:JQSY4.663$[email hidden]... > > As I understand things, included in the package will be a car and track > > editor. The source code is also of an open nature so as to make add ons > and > > modifications very easy. > > > > I'm sure we will not have to wait too long for the more creative and > > industrious amongst us to work things out and come up with a multitude of > > goodies. > > > Not only is it unlikely that the car and track editor will appear in a later > release or as an add on, (this is just plain good marketing, ain't it? but > it will help them get the game out the door, and people hooked on it, at the > earliest possible time),BUT..... > > you are confused as to the nature of the core of the game. The structure of > the game will be "open" in the sense that it won't be locked up in a way to > PREVENT the end user from modifying it. The source code will be just as > closed as any other commercial release. It will be designed so that cars and > tracks "plug in" and all performance parameters will be user editable, > perhaps with plain text files. This is what would be called an open > structure, unlike, say, F1RS. This is a far cry from open source. It is, > none the less, the way a sim OUGHT to be made from the standpoint of being a > good program and a good tool. There is no reason whatso ever that N3/NL and > GPL couldn't be just one single sim with plug in add ons. Only marketing.

It looks like this will be to program we will all be waiting for. A core sim where we can put in whatever car and track we like. They say that a script-language to define series will also be in the sim. <Pure Speculation> One reason they make is a sportscar sim first ? A sportscar contains all the elements that needs to be modeled in any other car </Pure Speculation> Can anyone say CART ? 80's F1 ? 30's F1 ? I really hope they make a rock solid multiplayer system to not allow people showing up with 2000 HP homemade cars :) But then again, it would be interesting with a league with some limitations on engine and measurments, and then up to the driver to make the car himself. > This is not neccessarily to say that people won't be modifying it right off > the bat, look at what is done with other sims without the express ablility > and permissions of the authors built into it. Official car and track editor > be damned I'll bet it's going to be a damn sight easier to monkey with than, > say, SCGT or GPL are. My only fear is the good old quote "If it's too good to be true, it probably is" -- Olav K. Malmin remove spam when replying

m.seery wrote: > As I understand things, included in the package will be a car and track > editor. The source code is also of an open nature so as to make add onsand > modifications very easy. Sorry to disappoint you here Mark... but this is what Chris posed on the High Gear forum a day or so ago: Originally posted by West Racing: "Hi There Just to save some confusion later on, the Track and Car editor will not be in the first release of the game. We plan to do that as an add on later on." Chris -- All the best, Ed Solheim ** Proud member of the GPLEA ** (Remove SPAM-GUARD in address to reply)

A scripting system to put in different series is no harder to impliment for the original coder than a carset manager is. The only reason every sim dosn't have one is that authors don't want us to have one. They want to sell us every series seperately. Even in GPL to write an "aftermarket" series scripter would be no more difficult to impliment than GPLSeason was. A season is defined in a plain text file. Simply write a vbs that takes the text for each track, inserts it into a new document, and renumbers the tracks. Then replace the existing tracks document with the newly generated one.A programing newbie could tackle it as a first project with every expectation of succeding. With all the tracks currently available I'm surprised noone has done it already. I've been figuring on doing it myself if I ever get around to starting a USAC oval league. Anyway, the things that the West Bros. say they are going to give us are great. I look forward to them and sincerly hope they deliver, but the fact is they arn't doing anything revolutionary, we'll only be getting the user support that FPS and RPG players have enjoyed for years, including actual open source code, but the auto sim companies have been denying us.

You know the Vipers and Porsche 911's aren't the top of the line GT1 cars. They're like GT2's from SCGT, at least in the ALMS the Vipers are a class down from the open-top supercars. I personally am looking forward to the "Boulevard cruisers" I like driving cars that are more stock that super cars. Matthew B.Knutsen <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:q2SY4.16146$[email hidden]... > hmm, I've seen a Panoz, 333SP, (still going) Sintura, and who knows what > the Wests have up their sleeve? > > Anyway, have there been any great sportscars since? Of course I'm hopingfor

Quoted text (27 lines)

> as many prototypes as possible (BMW, Audi, Lola, Caddillac et al) but the > GTs racing today are a bore compared (Viper, Porsche 9something, Lister). > Anyways, I don't need Need For Speed with a proper physics engine - I want > racecars! Not boulevard cruisers....:) > > But most of all I cross my fingers for a nice car editor:-D > > Matt > (still drooling) > > > > MichaelJP <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > I must admit the previews of WSC look incredible, and if the game lives > > up to the graphics, it might be the first game to contend with GPL since > > its release. > > > > However, I'm a bit worried about the graphics showing older sports > > prototypes and GT1 cars such as the Maclaren F1, and the Mercedes > > prototype from some years ago. > > > > I wouldn't bother me buying an early 90's sportscar sim, but I'd have > > thought this would kill the sim for the mass market. > > > > Anyone know if they intend to purchase an up-to-date license for this > > sim? If they do, there isn't much time to implement tracks, cars etc.

for > > the proposed Q4 2000 release. I hope they know what they're doing... > > > > - Michael > >

In article <3934733e$[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says... > Well, he HAS had a "cooler" image, actually....when he was alive and doing > the likes of The Sand Pebbles, Bullit, The Great Escape, The Getaway (the > ONLY version!) etc. > > Yep....he was certainly cool back then. > I know what you mean - but celebrities always gain popularity after death. cf. James Dean, Marilyn Monroe etc. The Ford motor company had his image used in a recent advertisement here in the UK driving a Ford Puma round San Francisco in scenes from Bullit. Pretty seamless compositing job, but I bet SMcQ was spinning in his grave:-) - Michael

"Olav K. Malmin" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > I really hope they make a rock solid multiplayer system to not allow > people showing up with 2000 HP homemade cars :) But then again, it > would be interesting with a league with some limitations on engine and > measurments, and then up to the driver to make the car himself. "Formula Zero" and a proper "X-Car" rolled into one. Fun, fun, fun. I'll allow the 2000hp engines, as long as they burn tons of fuel and grenade on the second lap. Stephen

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...

Quoted text (9 lines)

> On Tue, 30 May 2000 16:52:41 +0100, MichaelJP <[email hidden]> wrote: > >Anyone know if they intend to purchase an up-to-date license for this > >sim? If they do, there isn't much time to implement tracks, cars etc. for > >the proposed Q4 2000 release. I hope they know what they're doing... > > A license for what? The current crop of wimpy GT2-3 cars they race in > the FIA GT? I don't even know if there are any proper GT1 series going > on at the moment (ALMS is really more about prototypes, then those > would be neat as well).

Exactly - that's what I'm worried about! - Michael

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says... > The mass market? > I doubt very sincerely whether the mass market would have the faintest idea > of the difference between a 1998 model and a 2000 model! It is a non-issue, > Michael. > Maybe you're right, Bruce - but usually racing games only do really well if they are either a big-name license such as F1 or NASCAR, or they are arcarde-style games such as NFS. If it was down to me it would be 1970's sportscars like the Porsche 917 and tracks like the Ring, Spa and Le Mans. Probably no-one else would buy it though! (This newsgroup excepted:-) That gives me an idea - maybe that would work if they could get the Steve McQueen Le Mans movie licence and hook the game off that for a sportscar series - he's never had a cooler image than now. Die-hards could always change the names back to the correct ones. - Michael

You are quite welcome sir.

"Bruce Kennewell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Kevin, I am somewhat bemused by what, exactly, it is that forms the coreof

Quoted text (16 lines)

> your complaint. > > I get the impression, and please correct me if I'm coming at this from a > completely wrong tack, that the essence of your complaint is that the > software companies charge us for "new games" (my quotes) when, in fact, > these should be available as add-ons (I assume at little or no additional > expense) to an original game. > > Is that correct? > > -- > Regards, > Bruce Kennewell, > Canberra, Australia. > --------------------------- >

Be as bemused as you want. Yes that is the core of my "complaint." It's a charge really though. Small but subtle difference. Who said anything about no charge? A hell of a lot less than the original game yes, say $10 for an add on. How about the '57 season for GPL? Some new tracks, some new cars, and tweaked physics. This would take Papy a matter of a few months compared to the years it took to develop GPL in the first place. Done mostly by the lower echelon of "programers." Maybe even in odd moments they arn't working on N4. $10 would be a perfectly fair price. I'd pay $10. I'd pay ANOTHER $10 for the '55 season, and the '72 season, and the '37 season. We havn't even gotten to the sporty cars yet. Another $40 for the end user track and car editor. Papy could do ok here, just on the installed base of GPL. I certainly don't see how letting the end user have easy access to modifying the game as they like could hurt them in the long run. In the specific case of GPL it might actually generate sales! I'm a physicist, programer, and businessman. I know what's involved in writing a game of this nature. I also know what's involved in making a profit off your work. I'm no pie in the sky gimme gimme gimme little kid. My charge still stands. It's valid. Played Doom lately? Is id doing ok? You can download the source code for Quake and by a level editor from id. None of this seems to have hurt their sales any. In face it is generally aknowledged that this is the key factor that put, and kept them, on top of the FPS field.

The mass market? I doubt very sincerely whether the mass market would have the faintest idea of the difference between a 1998 model and a 2000 model! It is a non-issue, Michael. The mass market are interested in (a) easy, trouble-free installation, (b) easy, trouble free operation, (c) easy, trouble free driving experience and (d) the ability to save a race in progress. Take it from an ex-retailer, mate! -- Regards, Bruce Kennewell, Canberra, Australia. --------------------------- MichaelJP <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > I must admit the previews of WSC look incredible, and if the game lives > up to the graphics, it might be the first game to contend with GPL since > its release. > > However, I'm a bit worried about the graphics showing older sports > prototypes and GT1 cars such as the Maclaren F1, and the Mercedes > prototype from some years ago. > > I wouldn't bother me buying an early 90's sportscar sim, but I'd have > thought this would kill the sim for the mass market. > > Anyone know if they intend to purchase an up-to-date license for this > sim? If they do, there isn't much time to implement tracks, cars etc. for > the proposed Q4 2000 release. I hope they know what they're doing... > > - Michael

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

Quoted text (7 lines)

> Thanks. > -- > Regards, > Bruce Kennewell, > Canberra, Australia. > --------------------------- >

You are quite welcome sir.

Kevin, I am somewhat bemused by what, exactly, it is that forms the core of your complaint. I get the impression, and please correct me if I'm coming at this from a completely wrong tack, that the essence of your complaint is that the software companies charge us for "new games" (my quotes) when, in fact, these should be available as add-ons (I assume at little or no additional expense) to an original game. Is that correct? -- Regards, Bruce Kennewell, Canberra, Australia. --------------------------- Kevin Gavitt <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:UDVY4.9951$[email hidden]... > A scripting system to put in different series is no harder to impliment for > the original coder than a carset manager is. > > The only reason every sim dosn't have one is that authors don't want us to > have one. They want to sell us every series seperately. > > Even in GPL to write an "aftermarket" series scripter would be no more > difficult to impliment than GPLSeason was. > > A season is defined in a plain text file. Simply write a vbs that takes the > text for each track, inserts it into a new document, and renumbers the > tracks. Then replace the existing tracks document with the newly generated > one.A programing newbie could tackle it as a first project with every > expectation of succeding. With all the tracks currently available I'm > surprised noone has done it already. > > I've been figuring on doing it myself if I ever get around to starting a > USAC oval league. > > Anyway, the things that the West Bros. say they are going to give us are > great. I look forward to them and sincerly hope they deliver, but the fact > is they arn't doing anything revolutionary, we'll only be getting the user > support that FPS and RPG players have enjoyed for years, including actual > open source code, but the auto sim companies have been denying us. > >

(snip) he's never had a cooler image than now. (unsnip) Well, he HAS had a "cooler" image, actually....when he was alive and doing the likes of The Sand Pebbles, Bullit, The Great Escape, The Getaway (the ONLY version!) etc. Yep....he was certainly cool back then. -- Regards, Bruce Kennewell, Canberra, Australia. --------------------------- MichaelJP <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says... > > The mass market? > > I doubt very sincerely whether the mass market would have the faintest idea > > of the difference between a 1998 model and a 2000 model! It is a non-issue, > > Michael. > > > > Maybe you're right, Bruce - but usually racing games only do really well > if they are either a big-name license such as F1 or NASCAR, or they are > arcarde-style games such as NFS. > > If it was down to me it would be 1970's sportscars like the Porsche 917 > and tracks like the Ring, Spa and Le Mans. Probably no-one else would buy > it though! (This newsgroup excepted:-) > > That gives me an idea - maybe that would work if they could get the Steve > McQueen Le Mans movie licence and hook the game off that for a > sportscar series - he's never had a cooler image than now. Die-hards > could always change the names back to the correct ones. > > - Michael

There was also a computer-generated advert on TV here where he talked about the evils of smoking and how, if he were still alive, he'd have quit. I believe (from what heard) that his son gave permission for that with little hesitation when approached by the Australian Medical Assc. The commercial was very well put together and was startling in how real it was. -- Regards, Bruce Kennewell, Canberra, Australia. --------------------------- MichaelJP <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > In article <3934733e$[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says... > > Well, he HAS had a "cooler" image, actually....when he was alive and doing > > the likes of The Sand Pebbles, Bullit, The Great Escape, The Getaway (the > > ONLY version!) etc. > > > > Yep....he was certainly cool back then. > > > > I know what you mean - but celebrities always gain popularity after > death. cf. James Dean, Marilyn Monroe etc. > > The Ford motor company had his image used in a recent advertisement here > in the UK driving a Ford Puma round San Francisco in scenes from Bullit. > Pretty seamless compositing job, but I bet SMcQ was spinning in his > grave:-) > > - Michael

Thanks. -- Regards, Bruce Kennewell, Canberra, Australia. --------------------------- Kevin Gavitt <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:nZ7Z4.10877$[email hidden]... > > "Bruce Kennewell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > Kevin, I am somewhat bemused by what, exactly, it is that forms the core > of > > your complaint. > > > > I get the impression, and please correct me if I'm coming at this from a > > completely wrong tack, that the essence of your complaint is that the > > software companies charge us for "new games" (my quotes) when, in fact, > > these should be available as add-ons (I assume at little or no additional > > expense) to an original game. > > > > Is that correct? > > > > -- > > Regards, > > Bruce Kennewell, > > Canberra, Australia. > > --------------------------- > > > Be as bemused as you want. Yes that is the core of my "complaint." It's a > charge really though. Small but subtle difference. > > Who said anything about no charge? A hell of a lot less than the original > game yes, say $10 for an add on. > > How about the '57 season for GPL? Some new tracks, some new cars, and > tweaked physics. This would take Papy a matter of a few months compared to > the years it took to develop GPL in the first place. Done mostly by the > lower echelon of "programers." Maybe even in odd moments they arn't working > on N4. $10 would be a perfectly fair price. > > I'd pay $10. I'd pay ANOTHER $10 for the '55 season, and the '72 season, > and the '37 season. We havn't even gotten to the sporty cars yet. > > Another $40 for the end user track and car editor. > > Papy could do ok here, just on the installed base of GPL. > > I certainly don't see how letting the end user have easy access to modifying > the game as they like could hurt them in the long run. In the specific case > of GPL it might actually generate sales! > > I'm a physicist, programer, and businessman. I know what's involved in > writing a game of this nature. I also know what's involved in making a > profit off your work. I'm no pie in the sky gimme gimme gimme little kid. > > My charge still stands. It's valid. Played Doom lately? Is id doing ok? You > can download the source code for Quake and by a level editor from id. None > of this seems to have hurt their sales any. In face it is generally > aknowledged that this is the key factor that put, and kept them, on top of > the FPS field. > > >

Just one thing that, as a businessman, puzzles me: You say that you don't agree with the way in which add-ons (or what should be treated as such) are marketed as new games or new products yet I would have thought that, as you are a businessman, you would have considered that this makes extremely good marketing sense. You see, as a businessman, I have no axe to grind with those who market "add-ons" as new packages because the mass market doesn't have the faintest bloody clue and will continue to buy....so long as the add-on is packaged and promoted as either a major enhancement to the original or a significant improvement to the original. I know this from my entertainement-software retailing experiences. I also have no problems with this philosophy as it supports the case (put forward by a book-selling acquaintance) that when an author writes a new book yet includes the character and background from the previous book(s) the new book(s) should be sold at a cheaper rate than the original because we already know about the character and something of his/her background! She went on to use movies as another example...sequels should be cheaper to get into than the original!! I suppose "prequels" (dreadful word!) should be *more* expensive! Cheers! -- Regards, Bruce Kennewell, Canberra, Australia. --------------------------- Kevin Gavitt <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:lHgZ4.434$[email hidden]... > > "Bruce Kennewell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > Thanks. > > -- > > Regards, > > Bruce Kennewell, > > Canberra, Australia. > > --------------------------- > > > > You are quite welcome sir. > >

A second book and a second movie cost just as much to make and promote as the first. Maybe more. A carset dosn't. Perhaps I'm an odd business man, and yes, I have extensive experience at the retail trade and have even owned my own store, but... I've never believed that getting the most pennies in the shortest possible period of time is the best way to do business. I strive to build a relationship with my customers based on mutually perceive value of the product and services rendered. I like my customers to feel as if they were in charge of the transaction. I have kept rabidly loyal customers for decades by this policy. Again, in the software gaming industry I would refer you to id. If GPL, which has to be considered a "failed" product were suppurted the way id supports its older games, and its customers, it could continue to be a revenue source for relatively little time, effort, and expense. What's more it would keep Papyrus as the flagship label of the sim community. Did you know that every Porsche 959 was sold at a LOSS? Why did they do it? Because it sold a lot of 911s. Plus they reaped the R&D benifits which they recouped at a later time, they got a lot of press they couldn't have bought for any amount of money for free, and they got to promote themselves as the makers of the ultimate car. There are a lot of ways that selling things for less, or even giving them away, can result in overall greater profits for a company that knows how to go about it. In the history of computing all open architechtures have beaten out all closed architectures in the marketplace. How many Apples have you bought lately? Microsoft used to know a bit about this, now they have forgotten. Microsoft became dominant in the market when they were more open, and now...well, time will tell. I know that if I could buy GPL for Linux I wouldn't have a Windows box anymore. One word, Betamax. In the mass market $10 is a magic number. People will by 10 things for $10 before they will buy one thing for $50. Two words, Proctor & Gamble. Now THOSE people know how to market. The software industry could buy itself a clue here. And, as always, if you don't do it, some new and hungry competitor will. Sure Papy is generating maximum cash for their products NOW, but the West Bros. are looming on the horizon. They are going where Papy could have been a year ago. Papy left the door open for it. Now maybe they'll lose both market share and market perception. If the English boys deliver I may never buy another Papy product again and I think the folks at Papy are Gods. I'd rather have bought from them, but I can't. They left the door open for Noonan too. Why didn't they get my $20? Or $10 for a graphics upgrade to ICR2? Sure, the market's small here, but the customer loyalty to be generated isn't anything to piss away. The software industry is too young to fully understand the value of this. The very fact that I could get a graphics upgrade to ICR2 would make me more likely to buy N4. If N4 has an open architecture it will make me more likely to buy N5. Of course, as I've mentioned, id seems to have a clue here. Too bad FPSs bore the hell out of me.