Why is it that the setups I get on the web are always so loose? I have
to add a lot of front bias to get around the track.
Thanks
Charlie
Loose NR2003 web setups, then a Papyrus versus EA argument
A user asked why setups downloaded for NR2003 always felt loose. Answers covered driving style, left-foot braking, and claims that system and controller differences affect handling. The thread turned into a long argument between JP and ymenard over whether Papyrus's NASCAR games were ever truly good simulations and whether EA's coming NASCAR SimRacing would be better. Beta tester Pete added critical recollections of Papyrus's management and online collision code.
Automated summary.
"Charles F. Castor Jr." wrote...
> Why is it that the setups I get on the web are always
> so loose? I have to add a lot of front bias to get
> around the track.
All good setups start off loose and "come in" after a couple of laps, but
you might be up against a difference in driving style. Try not taking your
foot off the accellerator and left foot braking to slow for the turns
instead of lifting, especially at the faster tracks.
Jan.
=---
"Charles F. Castor Jr." <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
> Why is it that the setups I get on the web are always so loose? I have
> to add a lot of front bias to get around the track.
>
> Thanks
> Charlie
When you download the setup, download a matching replay if you can. One of
Andi Wilke or Achim Trenz would be good. Watch the replay paying particular
attention to gas and brake - all will become clear. This may look a little
more extreme in real life but watching the NASN telemetry of Dale Junior
last year shows him often bablancing his braking with some throttle. In
short, the only way to get round quick in Nascar is to use both feet
simultaneously (I believe). Once you get used to it, the setups fit like a
glove (sometimes).
Have fun :)
"Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:spYDd.25197$[email hidden]...
Which of course, is not done in real life, except at the ss tracks. Any
other track would toast the brakes long before the race end.
Charles, gradual actions are the key; easy off the gas, easy on it. If
you "jump" on or off it, problems.
>
Quoted text (12 lines)
> "Charles F. Castor Jr." wrote... > > Why is it that the setups I get on the web are always > > so loose? I have to add a lot of front bias to get > > around the track. > > All good setups start off loose and "come in" after a couple of laps, but > you might be up against a difference in driving style. Try not taking your > foot off the accellerator and left foot braking to slow for the turns > instead of lifting, especially at the faster tracks. > > Jan. > =---I still say that system differences make up about 90% of the problems
currently. I can trade setups between teammates and a setup can be stable
for me and unctrollable loose for them and vice versa. SMALL changes in the
setups make some big handling changes. That is one nice thing EA Sim-Racing
will fix thank goodness.
Also heard that EA Sim-Racing will get rid of this idea of whomever runs the
loosest setup will be the fastest.
Bill Bollinger
www.gsxn.com
"JP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:edcEd.774$[email hidden]...
Quoted text (29 lines)
> > "Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:spYDd.25197$[email hidden]... >> "Charles F. Castor Jr." wrote... >> > Why is it that the setups I get on the web are always >> > so loose? I have to add a lot of front bias to get >> > around the track. >> >> All good setups start off loose and "come in" after a couple of laps, but >> you might be up against a difference in driving style. Try not taking >> your >> foot off the accellerator and left foot braking to slow for the turns >> instead of lifting, especially at the faster tracks. >> >> Jan. >> =--- > > Which of course, is not done in real life, except at the ss tracks. Any > other track would toast the brakes long before the race end. > > Charles, gradual actions are the key; easy off the gas, easy on it. If > you "jump" on or off it, problems. > > > > >> > > Yep, not only controller setup, but pc setup too. Agreed also about
SimRacing. From what I've seen, it also models spins better than 03,
specifically, correctly modeling the way to get out of one (steer opposite
direction, stomp on gas, etc. as done in actual stock car racing vs. the
wacko way 03 handles it).
For that matter, the only thing I'm still worried about is the online
aspect. Having said that, that's the most crucial part imo.
"Bill Bollinger" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:z5gEd.13126$[email hidden]...
> I still say that system differences make up about 90% of the problems
> currently. I can trade setups between teammates and a setup can be stable
> for me and unctrollable loose for them and vice versa. SMALL changes inthe
> setups make some big handling changes. That is one nice thing EASim-Racing
> will fix thank goodness.
>
> Also heard that EA Sim-Racing will get rid of this idea of whomever runsthe
but
Any
Quoted text (17 lines)
> loosest setup will be the fastest. > > Bill Bollinger > www.gsxn.com > > > "JP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:edcEd.774$[email hidden]... > > > > "Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:spYDd.25197$[email hidden]... > >> "Charles F. Castor Jr." wrote... > >> > Why is it that the setups I get on the web are always > >> > so loose? I have to add a lot of front bias to get > >> > around the track. > >> > >> All good setups start off loose and "come in" after a couple of laps,Quoted text (9 lines)
> >> you might be up against a difference in driving style. Try not taking > >> your > >> foot off the accellerator and left foot braking to slow for the turns > >> instead of lifting, especially at the faster tracks. > >> > >> Jan. > >> =--- > > > > Which of course, is not done in real life, except at the ss tracks.Quoted text (13 lines)
> > other track would toast the brakes long before the race end. > > > > Charles, gradual actions are the key; easy off the gas, easy on it. If > > you "jump" on or off it, problems. > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > >"JP" wrote:
> > All good setups start off loose and "come in" after a couple of laps,but
> > you might be up against a difference in driving style. Try not takingyour
You may be right, but think of the abuse 4WD & FWD rally cars brakes must
have with much greater requirements for decelerating than Nascar even
allowing for the shorter distance.
Even comparing it with road courses where 100+ mph are taken off at some
tight corners it would seem not inappropriate to use the brake instead of
lifting.
As I know bugger all about Nascar rules on brakes I could be talking rubbish
of course...
Cheers
Tony
Quoted text (8 lines)
> > foot off the accellerator and left foot braking to slow for the turns > > instead of lifting, especially at the faster tracks. > > > > Jan. > > =--- > > Which of course, is not done in real life, except at the ss tracks. Any > other track would toast the brakes long before the race end.
"Tony Rickard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:xXiEd.92369$[email hidden]...
Any
rubbish
> of course...
>
> Cheers
> Tony
True, but you're talking about completely different vehicles; besides
being much lighter than say, a WC stock car, they have completely different
powertrains. I.e., 4wd/fwd vs rear wheel drive stock cars, along with
different brake component materials. Among other things.
On a non-ss oval, lift/brake is the norm. Left foot braking is done, but
there's still lifting too. On SS tracks, they don't lift, even when they
*ride the brake.* But then, their top rpms are about 1/3 less or more than
normal too, among other things.
Quoted text (13 lines)
> "JP" wrote: > > > > All good setups start off loose and "come in" after a couple of laps, > but > > > you might be up against a difference in driving style. Try not taking > your > > > foot off the accellerator and left foot braking to slow for the turns > > > instead of lifting, especially at the faster tracks. > > > > > > Jan. > > > =--- > > > > Which of course, is not done in real life, except at the ss tracks.Quoted text (11 lines)
> > other track would toast the brakes long before the race end. > > You may be right, but think of the abuse 4WD & FWD rally cars brakes must > have with much greater requirements for decelerating than Nascar even > allowing for the shorter distance. > > Even comparing it with road courses where 100+ mph are taken off at some > tight corners it would seem not inappropriate to use the brake instead of > lifting. > > As I know bugger all about Nascar rules on brakes I could be talking>"Bill Bollinger" <[email hidden]> wrote
>I still say that system differences make up about 90% of the problems
>currently. I can trade setups between teammates and a setup can be stable
>for me and unctrollable loose for them and vice versa. SMALL changes in
>the setups make some big handling changes. That is one nice thing EA
>Sim-Racing will fix thank goodness.
Why do you trust them to do so ?
--
-- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard>
-- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez
Corporation - helping America into the New World...
Bill, its funny I have been saying this since N1 and no one believed me.
One of the cheats
(so called) on Hawaii and TEN was to run the slowest system you could get to
run the game and
then play with the timing settings for the MB in the bios and you could run
a setup so loose no
one could touch you. Papyrus refused to acknowledge it publically but they
told me privately if
I changed the timing settings on the MB I was cheating. We also found the
guys running in Europe
with the different voltages than we have in North America also had an unfair
advantage with the
setups being run were much looser(affected the timing). Pekka and Jure
weren't as fast as people
thought. :-)
All Papy sims had a timing issue with them. Change the timing change the
setup.
Pete
"Bill Bollinger" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:z5gEd.13126$[email hidden]...
> I still say that system differences make up about 90% of the problems
> currently. I can trade setups between teammates and a setup can be stable
> for me and unctrollable loose for them and vice versa. SMALL changes inthe
> setups make some big handling changes. That is one nice thing EASim-Racing
> will fix thank goodness.
>
> Also heard that EA Sim-Racing will get rid of this idea of whomever runsthe
> loosest setup will be the fastest.
>
> Bill Bollinger
> www.gsxn.com
>
>"Pete" <[email hidden]> wrote
> All Papy sims had a timing issue with them. Change the timing change
> the
> setup.
What makes you think it would be better with that EA thingy? Has EA even
proven anything about such things?
--
-- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard>
-- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez
Corporation - helping America into the New World...
"ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:C0HEd.18519$[email hidden]...
Fanboy Alert !
>
>
Quoted text (16 lines)
> >"Pete" <[email hidden]> wrote > > All Papy sims had a timing issue with them. Change the timing change > > the > > setup. > > > What makes you think it would be better with that EA thingy? Has EA even > proven anything about such things? > > > > > -- > -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> > -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez > Corporation - helping America into the New World... I haven't looked at any of the EA sims but if I understand what Bill is
saying Papy was doing their timing different to other software companies
and it shouldn't be an issue with EA. If you remember when processors went
faster than a certain speed with GPL a patch was issued to deal with it.
Clock
timing was the issue.
Bethesda when it did its Drag Racing series also got into timing issues
and they changed the way their timing was done to correct it.
Papy would have had to have gutted their whole game engine in order
to fix the issue, so they decided the problem didn't officially exist.
It's been awhile so all of the details I once knew are lost into the
ether.
But for those of you who have been around awhile you will remember the
controversy that exploded when Julian Data of BHMS hinted about the
grey areas of the original Nascar from Papyrus. Well this was one of those
grey areas.
Pete
"ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:C0HEd.18519$[email hidden]...
Quoted text (14 lines)
> > > What makes you think it would be better with that EA thingy? Has EA even > proven anything about such things? > > > > > -- > -- Frangois Minard <ymenard> > -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez > Corporation - helping America into the New World... > >>"JP" <[email hidden]> wrote
> "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote
>> What makes you think it would be better with that EA thingy? Has EA even
>> proven anything about such things?
>
> Fanboy Alert !
No, just an sceptical feeling, especially considering the entire history of
EA Nascar "simulations". They have proven only one thing, it's that their
entire Nascar racing line has been arcade games with little attemps to
simulate anything. Of course this time, the chances are better then ever
that history will not repeat itself, but anyway what makes you think that
such attemps to push the limit of software won't happen in EA? Nothing.
<yawn> Anyway you have no knowledge of this NG history
--
-- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard>
-- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez
Corporation - helping America into the New World...
"Pete" <[email hidden]> wrote
> I haven't looked at any of the EA sims but if I understand what Bill is
> saying Papy was doing their timing different to other software companies
All companies do all their things different. Is there anything concrete
here about EA, or it's just a wishfull hope? There's going to be the SAME
attemps to cheating in any kind of software, just in a different way. So I
don't see how it's "positive". EA has never been into anti-cheating stuff
anway. They are almost the WORST offenders in that case. People try to
find faults in their software forever. Just look at their entire sporting
line, per example Madden where everybody just plays in the "grey zone" and
EA does nothing to fix it.
The "Grey zone" will always be there.
And no, Julian is no "god" or anything for saying about grey areas.
Everybody knew about it, he wasn't the first at all to talk abou tit. We
ain't stupid people.
--
-- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard>
-- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez
Corporation - helping America into the New World...
"ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:pLLEd.24187$[email hidden]...
>
>
> All companies do all their things different. Is there anything concrete
> here about EA, or it's just a wishfull hope? There's going to be the SAME
> attemps to cheating in any kind of software, just in a different way. SoI
> don't see how it's "positive". EA has never been into anti-cheating stuff
> anway. They are almost the WORST offenders in that case. People try to
> find faults in their software forever. Just look at their entire sporting
> line, per example Madden where everybody just plays in the "grey zone" and
> EA does nothing to fix it.
Papy did nothing to fix many of the grey areas either. After dealing
with both
companies on beta problems I would say it was a wash on who was better or
worse
in regards to flaws and grey areas. Neither was great.
> The "Grey zone" will always be there.
Yes, people will always exploit and look for the holes to get an
advantage. It's
human nature.
> And no, Julian is no "god" or anything for saying about grey areas.
> Everybody knew about it, he wasn't the first at all to talk abou tit. We
> ain't stupid people.
Never said Julian was a "god". But he was the first to bring it up in
here when
everyone was pointing fingers at who was cheating. He got pillared for
admitting to
using grey areas and you were one of the worst at name calling. In fact
Frank some
people here still deny that there was any cheating going on at all.
No everyone didn't know it. And if they suspected it they didn't have a
clue on how
it was being done. In fact very few would have had the guts to admit that it
did exist.
Papy's official line was that it didn't but privately was another story.
I will be pleasantly surprised if EA brings out a quality sim. I know
that if the ex-papy
crew brings out a product that's online only and pay as you play I won't be
paying for it.
I was hoping First Racing was starting with a clean slate and would
learn from past
experiences but from what I'm hearing through the grape vine is "same old,
same old".
But we'll just have to wait and see.
By the way I'll say hi to Julian for you. LOL He'll love the "god"
comment.
>"Pete" <[email hidden]> wrote
> Papy did nothing to fix many of the grey areas either.
They did fix many things, but other things, well cmon you know how
development companies work, and they wouldn't spend X ammount of cash,
especially a fragile one like Papyrus with a low # of employees and cash
flow, to repair something that affects a small % of all customers. Anyway,
in that aspect EA is worse as they simply don't care at all, powerful they
are, and just milk the cow.
>. Neither was great.
Exactly. So why am I labeled a fanboy when I am just severly doubting
anything by EA. WTF is the world going to when people are pro-EA instead of
the small factory of Papyrus that have gave us an incredible quality of
product over the last decade? I mean fucking Electronic Arts, with their
slavery fascist intentions? If they barely touch NR2003 in terms of the
overall aspect of the sim (considering that NR2003 is already outdated in
many aspects, we have to consider the different timeline), you know how
sturdy it is, possible customisation, overall quality of it's game engine,
etc... I'll be surprised.
Sure it had flaws and exploits. So does any game, even the 90% rated ones.
And developpers of the 90%+ games, they can't fix them all either. Still,
don't say they didn't cared, 'cause you are comparing and putting them lower
than the KINGS of "don't care", which is Electronic Arts.
>> The "Grey zone" will always be there.
>
> Yes, people will always exploit and look for the holes to get an
> advantage. It's
> human nature.
I call it 'racing' ;-D
> I was hoping First Racing was starting with a clean slate and would
> learn from past
> experiences but from what I'm hearing through the grape vine is "same old,
> same old".
"Same old same old" = established quality at it's basis
> By the way I'll say hi to Julian for you. LOL He'll love the "god"
> comment.
Never had anything against him you know.
--
-- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard>
-- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez
Corporation - helping America into the New World...
"ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:wILEd.24186$[email hidden]...
> >"JP" <[email hidden]> wrote
> > "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote
> >> What makes you think it would be better with that EA thingy? Has EAeven
of
Actually, it's exactly your history that produced my post. <yawn>
Quoted text (7 lines)
> >> proven anything about such things? > > > > Fanboy Alert ! > > > > No, just an sceptical feeling, especially considering the entire historyQuoted text (8 lines)
> EA Nascar "simulations". They have proven only one thing, it's that their > entire Nascar racing line has been arcade games with little attemps to > simulate anything. Of course this time, the chances are better then ever > that history will not repeat itself, but anyway what makes you think that > such attemps to push the limit of software won't happen in EA? Nothing. > > > <yawn> Anyway you have no knowledge of this NG history
"ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:_gXEd.28468$[email hidden]...
<laughter>
Kind of like how in N3, the fastest way around some tracks was on the
apron. Never fixed. And so on. And nooo, Papy was never deceitful/didn't
care, did they ? LOL. "Wow, has this GPL patch changed the physics ?
Papy: NO..........um, well, yes, maybe.
Will N3 have the GPL engine ? Papy: YES........um, sorry, no.
Or how about the myriad Papy Nascar releases with no or marginal
improvements, simply to make some $ ? Nothing wrong with that, but funny
how EA gets slammed for doing it.
And so on.
I doubt if anyone is really pro-EA. It's more a matter of not using
rose-colored glasses with Papy and/or being willing to take the blinders
off.
Quoted text (10 lines)
> >"Pete" <[email hidden]> wrote > > Papy did nothing to fix many of the grey areas either. > > > They did fix many things, but other things, well cmon you know how > development companies work, and they wouldn't spend X ammount of cash, > especially a fragile one like Papyrus with a low # of employees and cash > flow, to repair something that affects a small % of all customers. Anyway, > in that aspect EA is worse as they simply don't care at all, powerful they > are, and just milk the cow.The physics in the Thunder series has been very good, BUT they lacked in
Multiplayer and Track details. Everything else was very good if not better
than NR2003. Of course I will get pounded for saying this, but those that
would say it, have never beaten me on the track with NR2003 either :)
Bill Bollinger
www.gsxn.com
"ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:wILEd.24186$[email hidden]...
Quoted text (31 lines)
> >"JP" <[email hidden]> wrote >> "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote >>> What makes you think it would be better with that EA thingy? Has EA >>> even >>> proven anything about such things? >> >> Fanboy Alert ! > > > > No, just an sceptical feeling, especially considering the entire history > of EA Nascar "simulations". They have proven only one thing, it's that > their entire Nascar racing line has been arcade games with little attemps > to simulate anything. Of course this time, the chances are better then > ever that history will not repeat itself, but anyway what makes you think > that such attemps to push the limit of software won't happen in EA? > Nothing. > > > <yawn> Anyway you have no knowledge of this NG history > > > > > > -- > -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> > -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez > Corporation - helping America into the New World... > >>"JP" <[email hidden]> wrote
> Kind of like how in N3, the fastest way around some tracks was on the
> apron. Never fixed.
Yes, it was. Nice try ommiting that EA's Nascar games had 100x times more
problems.
> Papy was never deceitful/didn't care, did they ?
They never really had the funds for it by Sierra/Vivendi/Cendant/whatever.
> Or how about the myriad Papy Nascar releases with no or marginal
> improvements, simply to make some $ ?
Compared to what EA does, they were excellent�
> Nothing wrong with that, but funny
> how EA gets slammed for doing it.
EA gets slammed for their slavery fascist ideology of gaming. Get with the
news, fellow.
--
-- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard>
-- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez
Corporation - helping America into the New World...
>"JP" <[email hidden]> wrote
> Actually, it's exactly your history that produced my post. <yawn>
That's just false, or (again) you'll know that I've bashed them more than
the opposite. I just can understand how a small company like them, who
lasted more than a decade against tough competition, has given us quality
products throughout the years. And that everybody else had not, except a
few sparsely.
--
-- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard>
-- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez
Corporation - helping America into the New World...
"Pete" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:pYUEd.26533$[email hidden]...
Totally agree with Pete on this.
> Yes, people will always exploit and look for the holes to get an
> advantage. It's
> human nature.
>
Yes, it is in every game. But like in golf, whose golf game do you respect
the most? The guy who cheats every time he plays or the guy who counts
every stroke like he is supposed to according to the rules? I respect those
that play by the rules and have less respect for those that cheat.
TOTALLY agree with Pete on this. I for one didn't know of MANY of the grey
areas until N3. Heck even then, was learning stuff until we moved to N4.
The bottom line is that certain people KNEW of the grey areas (Those that
were "in the know" at Papy) and the majority did not.
I have heard the same thing unfortunately. They have some good guys
involved. Havn't always agreed with everyone, but I think guys like Nim,
have a good understanding. The only problem is that he doesn't do the
coding and it is almost like the inmates controlling the asylum.
>
> By the way I'll say hi to Julian for you. LOL He'll love the "god"
> comment.
>
Give him a good FU from Amish :)
Bill Bollinger
www.gsxn.com
Quoted text (11 lines)
> > "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:pLLEd.24187$[email hidden]... >> >> > Papy did nothing to fix many of the grey areas either. After dealing > with both > companies on beta problems I would say it was a wash on who was better or > worse > in regards to flaws and grey areas. Neither was great. >Quoted text (13 lines)
> Never said Julian was a "god". But he was the first to bring it up in > here when > everyone was pointing fingers at who was cheating. He got pillared for > admitting to > using grey areas and you were one of the worst at name calling. In fact > Frank some > people here still deny that there was any cheating going on at all. > No everyone didn't know it. And if they suspected it they didn't have a > clue on how > it was being done. In fact very few would have had the guts to admit that > it > did exist. > Papy's official line was that it didn't but privately was another story.Quoted text (11 lines)
> > I will be pleasantly surprised if EA brings out a quality sim. I know > that if the ex-papy > crew brings out a product that's online only and pay as you play I won't > be > paying for it. > I was hoping First Racing was starting with a clean slate and would > learn from past > experiences but from what I'm hearing through the grape vine is "same old, > same old". > But we'll just have to wait and see.
"ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:_gXEd.28468$[email hidden]...
>
> "Same old same old" = established quality at it's basis
Like he said before.... PapyFanboy. Which kind of amazes me Frankie. Never
thought you were. But, I for one can say that NR2003 is not that great.
UNFORTUNATELY, you are right, I am HOPING EA comes out with something good,
because they have disappointed me before. However, just because NR2003 is
better than the lame attempts we have had before from other companies, does
not make it an excellent attempt or therefore "quality".
Bill Bollinger
www.gsxn.com
"ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:rE_Ed.32249$[email hidden]...
<shrug> If you say so, but we'll disagree on that.
Tough competition ? Who ? No one even really tried, including EA, which
is part of the root of the "if it's Papy, it must be realistic, etc."
mindset. Of course, Jr. has said some not so complimentary things about 03,
but I've noticed that doesn't seem to matter to some (head in sand comes to
mind)
And Papy quit being a small company once they hooked up with Sierra. But
it's a quaint myth to hold onto.
p.s. guess who was one of Papy's first publishers ? Hint; two letters in
the name, first one is E.....
Quoted text (10 lines)
> >"JP" <[email hidden]> wrote > > Actually, it's exactly your history that produced my post. <yawn> > > > > That's just false, or (again) you'll know that I've bashed them more than > the opposite. I just can understand how a small company like them, who > lasted more than a decade against tough competition, has given us quality > products throughout the years. And that everybody else had not, except a > few sparsely.
"ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:CA_Ed.32173$[email hidden]...
> >"JP" <[email hidden]> wrote
> > Kind of like how in N3, the fastest way around some tracks was on the
> > apron. Never fixed.
>
> Yes, it was. Nice try ommiting that EA's Nascar games had 100x times moreproblems.
100x ? Interesting how that figure came up. And how was it fixed in N3 ?
None of the patches did. Of course, N3 being the umptienth game in the
series, one wonders how such an obvious flaw existed in the first place....
>
> > Papy was never deceitful/didn't care, did they ?
>
> They never really had the funds for it by Sierra/Vivendi/Cendant/whatever.
But then why did they trumpet it loud and clear ? It's not just Sierra,
etc. fault.
<laughter> Riiiiight. Let's see, we had N1, N2, GNEP, N1999(with no
multi either), Nascar 50 anniversary, N3....all one the same engine, with
very little physics difference. Wow, only took, what, eight years for a
change.
the
> news, fellow.
Lol, whew, a stargazer, in addition to being a fanboy. Not bad. Just
keep repeating, "Serenity Now !", and listen to some Kumbaya tapes.
Quoted text (7 lines)
> > > > Or how about the myriad Papy Nascar releases with no or marginal > > improvements, simply to make some $ ? > > > Compared to what EA does, they were excellent�Quoted text (7 lines)
> > > > > Nothing wrong with that, but funny > > how EA gets slammed for doing it. > > EA gets slammed for their slavery fascist ideology of gaming. Get with>"Bill Bollinger" <[email hidden]> wrote
> The physics in the Thunder series has been very good, BUT they lacked in
> Multiplayer and Track details. Everything else was very good if not
> better than NR2003. Of course I will get pounded for saying this, but
> those that would say it, have never beaten me on the track with NR2003
> either :)
Well I beat you, and I think that there's other stuff better in NR2003 :)
--
-- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard>
-- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez
Corporation - helping America into the New World...
>"JP" <[email hidden]> wrote
> Tough competition ? Who ? No one even really tried, including EA,
How is competing against the #1 gaming company in the world, with an almost
fascist culture of developing games, a small thing? We're talking about a
small development company with Papyrus. They were never even a medium shop.
Papy lasted about 10 years between 1994 with N1 and NR2003 until EA finally
was able, with their cashflow to stop having competition.
> Of course, Jr. has said some not so complimentary things about 03,
Heck Jr. said to me N2 on the NROS was semi-accurate, so there.
> p.s. guess who was one of Papy's first publishers ? Hint; two letters in
> the name, first one is E.....
Well they published stuff before Indianapolis 500 ;-D
--
-- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard>
-- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez
Corporation - helping America into the New World...
Quoted text (8 lines)
>"JP" <[email hidden]> wrote >> Compared to what EA does, they were excellent� > > > <laughter> Riiiiight. Let's see, we had N1, N2, GNEP, N1999(with no > multi either), Nascar 50 anniversary, N3....all one the same engine, with > very little physics difference. Wow, only took, what, eight years for a > change.Quoted text (8 lines)
>"Bill Bollinger" <[email hidden]> wrote > "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote >> "Same old same old" = established quality at it's basis > > > Like he said before.... PapyFanboy. Which kind of amazes me Frankie. > Never thought you were. But, I for one can say that NR2003 is not that > great.
"ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:cm2Fd.33137$[email hidden]...
> >"JP" <[email hidden]> wrote
> How is competing against the #1 gaming company in the world, with analmost
> fascist culture of developing games, a small thing? We're talking about a
> small development company with Papyrus. They were never even a mediumshop.
> Papy lasted about 10 years between 1994 with N1 and NR2003 until EAfinally
> was able, with their cashflow to stop having competition.
>
Frank, read up on the history of Papy. They have been around since 1988
or slightly before.
"ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:_gXEd.28468$[email hidden]...
The problem I had with Papyrus was they forgot their strengths and
catered
to their egos. The average employee wasn't treated that well financially at
Papy,
from what I witnessed. If you watch your boss drive to work in a new Porsche
or
Ferrari and you get turned down for a few dollar raise because they are cost
cutting...
When I was there they had 110 employees if I recall correctly. Plus
there was
the military division working upstairs. They made their name and money on
contract
work they did for other companies. Thats what paid the bills.
Frank they had patches and fixes that they had made and didn't release.
They
were ordered by management not to fix things as it wasn't cost effective.
Some of the
patches and fixes were done by the employees on their own time. The
employees of
Papyrus weren't the bad guys here, I think you can put 2 and 2 together.
They spent a ton of money and time on Hawaii and TEN. That's what broke
the bank.
Sierra wasn't seeing any return on investment and when it came it was too
little too late.
Add to that the cost of licencing and the fact all their contract work
was ended you
had a one-horse pony.
EA wanted to buy Papy and never got a shot at it. They probably would
have lost
some of their creative control but they would have had corporate financial
security.
All water under the bridge now and it's past history. Of course all the
above is
hearsay and supposition on my part. ;-)
Pete
>
Quoted text (9 lines)
> >"Pete" <[email hidden]> wrote > > > They did fix many things, but other things, well cmon you know how > development companies work, and they wouldn't spend X ammount of cash, > especially a fragile one like Papyrus with a low # of employees and cash > flow, to repair something that affects a small % of all customers. Anyway, > in that aspect EA is worse as they simply don't care at all, powerful they > are, and just milk the cow.
"Bill Bollinger" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:JF_Ed.13983$[email hidden]...
Bill, they have a lot of talented people working there but what they
need
is an objective and honest critic that isn't given the beta 3 days before it
goes
gold. Hawaii pre-beta was fantastic and every week we saw the fruits of our
labours rewarded with constant code and bug tweaking. We had a direct line
to the coders and they listened. Unfortunately, it was the highwater mark.
It was 5 months before it went open beta. It would never happen that way
again.
>
> Give him a good FU from Amish :)
>
LOL, I'll tell him. Julian has gone over to the darkside. He now has his
own software
company and he is doing commercial flight simulation programming. I guess it
proves
the old addage if you can't beat them join them. :-)
Pete
Quoted text (7 lines)
> > "Pete" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > I have heard the same thing unfortunately. They have some good guys > involved. Havn't always agreed with everyone, but I think guys like Nim, > have a good understanding. The only problem is that he doesn't do the > coding and it is almost like the inmates controlling the asylum.Quoted text (8 lines)
>"Pete" <[email hidden]> wrote >> Papy lasted about 10 years between 1994 with N1 and NR2003 until EA > finally >> was able, with their cashflow to stop having competition. >> > > Frank, read up on the history of Papy. They have been around since 1988 > or slightly before.
"ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:Tn2Fd.33140$[email hidden]...
> >"JP" <[email hidden]> wrote
> >> Compared to what EA does, they were excellent�
> >
> >
> > <laughter> Riiiiight. Let's see, we had N1, N2, GNEP, N1999(with no
> > multi either), Nascar 50 anniversary, N3....all one the same engine,with
<laughter> Man, this just gets better. "Never has Papy made a crap sim"
Rose colored, hell, you could watch an atomic test with your glasses.
p.s. I have everything Papy ever made, including 500.
Quoted text (9 lines)
> > very little physics difference. Wow, only took, what, eight years for a > > change. > > > Aren't you forgetting the annual EA Nascar game also? Never has Papyrus > made a "crap" sim. They were still always of quality if you never owned > one. Now EA, geeze they released Nascar Revolution, Nascar Road Racing > (worse racing game ever) and tons of annual arcade crapfest while shouting > they were sims. At least you knew with Papyrus they were sims.
"ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:cm2Fd.33137$[email hidden]...
> >"JP" <[email hidden]> wrote
> > Tough competition ? Who ? No one even really tried, including EA,
>
>
> How is competing against the #1 gaming company in the world, with analmost
> fascist culture of developing games, a small thing? We're talking about a
> small development company with Papyrus. They were never even a mediumshop.
> Papy lasted about 10 years between 1994 with N1 and NR2003 until EAfinally
> was able, with their cashflow to stop having competition.
<sound of black helicopters overhead> Welcome to the world of business.
Tough. Papy could have played too, they chose not too. Don't blame EA or
anyone else for that. And get over this quaint, small Papy company myth.
It's been obvious for a long time, you're niave as hell, but do try to move
on.
Cool. EA games have been semi-accurate too, so I guess we're set, eh ?
>
>
>
> > p.s. guess who was one of Papy's first publishers ? Hint; two lettersin
> > the name, first one is E.....
>
> Well they published stuff before Indianapolis 500 ;-D
Yes, but that was without the fascist, slavery EA <laughter>
Quoted text (7 lines)
> > > > > > Of course, Jr. has said some not so complimentary things about 03, > > Heck Jr. said to me N2 on the NROS was semi-accurate, so there.>"JP" <[email hidden]> wrote
> <laughter> Man, this just gets better. "Never has Papy made a crap sim"
> Rose colored, hell, you could watch an atomic test with your glasses.
>
> p.s. I have everything Papy ever made, including 500.
So tell me, which Papyrus released software, if you take it individually,
was bad at it's time of it's release? Sorry but they were *all* good. Icr,
N1, Icr2, N2, N3, Nr99, Gpl, Soda, Nr2002, Nr2003, etc.. The only one,
borderline, was Nascar Racing 4. And even that was a good release with the
standard quality tracks, multi, replay, gui, sound, etc... if you compared
it to any EA game.
And tell me, which EA released Nascar game, if you take it individually, was
bad at it's time of it's release? Almost all of them. Like I wrote, they
produced more then bad sims, they were even BAD arcade games. "Nascar Road
Racing", again, ouch. "Nascar Rumble", "Nascar 99", "Nascar 2000", "Nascar
2001", "Nascar Thunder 2002". Yikes "Nascar Revolution".
--
-- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard>
-- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez
Corporation - helping America into the New World...
"ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:gW4Fd.33203$[email hidden]...
> Cmon you know I know it. I'm talking about NASCAR games here.
You do realize that the original Nascar was built with the Indy Car
code? In fact some of
the earliest cheats I discovered were using the tire compounds, gearing and
wing settings
from Indy Car Racing in the Nascar game. I don't believe these were ever
fixed when I
pointed it out to Papyrus. I had great fun racing Bristol with an Indy Car.
After the beta
that was changed and you couldn't do that anymore.
"ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:L8eFd.35758$[email hidden]...
> >"JP" <[email hidden]> wrote
> > <laughter> Man, this just gets better. "Never has Papy made a crapsim"
Icr,
> N1, Icr2, N2, N3, Nr99, Gpl, Soda, Nr2002, Nr2003, etc.. The only one,
> borderline, was Nascar Racing 4. And even that was a good release withthe
> standard quality tracks, multi, replay, gui, sound, etc... if youcompared
> it to any EA game.
>
>
> And tell me, which EA released Nascar game, if you take it individually,was
I'd say the only one good at its release, as you ask, was gpl. Come on,
all Nx up until N4 was, was icr with stock car graphics (and poor ones at
that) instead. They sure didn't simulate stock cars any more than any of
the EA stuff you list.
Going to another company, Heat blew Papy stuff away, not only in "minor"
stuff like graphics, but realism too. But if failed in a crucial area;
online, specifically yellows. Right now, that's the only thing (albeit a
huge one) Papy has on anyone imo; online code.
And even that has decreased in quality after Heath left Papy.
Quoted text (8 lines)
> > Rose colored, hell, you could watch an atomic test with your glasses. > > > > p.s. I have everything Papy ever made, including 500. > > > > So tell me, which Papyrus released software, if you take it individually, > was bad at it's time of it's release? Sorry but they were *all* good.Quoted text (12 lines)
> bad at it's time of it's release? Almost all of them. Like I wrote, they > produced more then bad sims, they were even BAD arcade games. "Nascar Road > Racing", again, ouch. "Nascar Rumble", "Nascar 99", "Nascar 2000", "Nascar > 2001", "Nascar Thunder 2002". Yikes "Nascar Revolution". > > > > > -- > -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> > -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez > Corporation - helping America into the New World...Pete wrote:
Hehe....almost like old times
Beers and cheers
(uncle) Goy
"goyl at nettx dot no"
http://www.theuspits.com
"A man is only as old as the woman he feels........"
--Groucho Marx--
Quoted text (15 lines)
> > "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:gW4Fd.33203$[email hidden]... > > > Cmon you know I know it. I'm talking about NASCAR games here. > > You do realize that the original Nascar was built with the Indy Car > code? In fact some of > the earliest cheats I discovered were using the tire compounds, gearing and > wing settings > from Indy Car Racing in the Nascar game. I don't believe these were ever > fixed when I > pointed it out to Papyrus. I had great fun racing Bristol with an Indy Car. > After the beta > that was changed and you couldn't do that anymore.Rumor has it that DMP League will be moving to EA's SimRacing Mid Summer.
Bill Bollinger
www.gsxn.com
"ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:_p2Fd.33142$[email hidden]...
Quoted text (31 lines)
> >"Bill Bollinger" <[email hidden]> wrote >> "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote >>> "Same old same old" = established quality at it's basis >> >> >> Like he said before.... PapyFanboy. Which kind of amazes me Frankie. >> Never thought you were. But, I for one can say that NR2003 is not that >> great. > > > Sure man it's outdatted nowadays. It was perhaps even outdated back then, > but it's a solid, damn good simulation. Wish is better than *anything* EA > has ever released for a Nascar sim to this day. Why can't I be sceptikal? > I'm all for a better sim then NR2003 anyway, but it'll be a very, very > rough road and all that EA has gave us in the past was a failure > considering their cashflow and power. > > > All in all, if you consider NR2003 to be "not that great", how did you > deal with N2? How can you deal with anything related to simracing as > NR2003 is pretty much near the top of everything done to date. > > > > > -- > -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> > -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez > Corporation - helping America into the New World... > >"JP" wrote...
>> <snip>
> <shrug> If you say so, but we'll disagree on that.
I can attest Frank has always given his honest opinion on every racing game
he's tried, including the Papy ones.
In fact I've ribbed him on many occasions, saying he would play a game he
didn't like much to death, just to make sure he didn't like it. ;-)
Jan.
=---
JP wrote:
There you go, that was the name I was trying to remember, Charlie Heath.
Great guy, and worked hard on the online collision code to try and make it
better. Too bad he was the only one that wanted it better at the time.
--
Don Burnette
"When you decide something is impossible to do, try to stay out of the
way of the man that's doing it."
Quoted text (45 lines)
> "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:L8eFd.35758$[email hidden]... >>> "JP" <[email hidden]> wrote >>> <laughter> Man, this just gets better. "Never has Papy made a >>> crap sim" Rose colored, hell, you could watch an atomic test with >>> your glasses. >>> >>> p.s. I have everything Papy ever made, including 500. >> >> >> >> So tell me, which Papyrus released software, if you take it >> individually, was bad at it's time of it's release? Sorry but they >> were *all* good. Icr, N1, Icr2, N2, N3, Nr99, Gpl, Soda, Nr2002, >> Nr2003, etc.. The only one, borderline, was Nascar Racing 4. And >> even that was a good release with the standard quality tracks, >> multi, replay, gui, sound, etc... if you compared it to any EA game. >> >> >> And tell me, which EA released Nascar game, if you take it >> individually, was bad at it's time of it's release? Almost all of >> them. Like I wrote, they produced more then bad sims, they were >> even BAD arcade games. "Nascar Road Racing", again, ouch. "Nascar >> Rumble", "Nascar 99", "Nascar 2000", "Nascar 2001", "Nascar Thunder >> 2002". Yikes "Nascar Revolution". >> >> >> >> >> -- >> -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> >> -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez >> Corporation - helping America into the New World... > > > I'd say the only one good at its release, as you ask, was gpl. Come > on, all Nx up until N4 was, was icr with stock car graphics (and poor > ones at that) instead. They sure didn't simulate stock cars any more > than any of the EA stuff you list. > > Going to another company, Heat blew Papy stuff away, not only in > "minor" stuff like graphics, but realism too. But if failed in a > crucial area; online, specifically yellows. Right now, that's the > only thing (albeit a huge one) Papy has on anyone imo; online code. > And even that has decreased in quality after Heath left Papy.
"Don Burnette" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
Yeah, iirc, it's been a different "team" doing the online stuff from N4
on. Hell, N3 had better collision code than what we have now.
Quoted text (56 lines)
> JP wrote: > > "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:L8eFd.35758$[email hidden]... > >>> "JP" <[email hidden]> wrote > >>> <laughter> Man, this just gets better. "Never has Papy made a > >>> crap sim" Rose colored, hell, you could watch an atomic test with > >>> your glasses. > >>> > >>> p.s. I have everything Papy ever made, including 500. > >> > >> > >> > >> So tell me, which Papyrus released software, if you take it > >> individually, was bad at it's time of it's release? Sorry but they > >> were *all* good. Icr, N1, Icr2, N2, N3, Nr99, Gpl, Soda, Nr2002, > >> Nr2003, etc.. The only one, borderline, was Nascar Racing 4. And > >> even that was a good release with the standard quality tracks, > >> multi, replay, gui, sound, etc... if you compared it to any EA game. > >> > >> > >> And tell me, which EA released Nascar game, if you take it > >> individually, was bad at it's time of it's release? Almost all of > >> them. Like I wrote, they produced more then bad sims, they were > >> even BAD arcade games. "Nascar Road Racing", again, ouch. "Nascar > >> Rumble", "Nascar 99", "Nascar 2000", "Nascar 2001", "Nascar Thunder > >> 2002". Yikes "Nascar Revolution". > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> > >> -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez > >> Corporation - helping America into the New World... > > > > > > I'd say the only one good at its release, as you ask, was gpl. Come > > on, all Nx up until N4 was, was icr with stock car graphics (and poor > > ones at that) instead. They sure didn't simulate stock cars any more > > than any of the EA stuff you list. > > > > Going to another company, Heat blew Papy stuff away, not only in > > "minor" stuff like graphics, but realism too. But if failed in a > > crucial area; online, specifically yellows. Right now, that's the > > only thing (albeit a huge one) Papy has on anyone imo; online code. > > And even that has decreased in quality after Heath left Papy. > > > There you go, that was the name I was trying to remember, Charlie Heath. > Great guy, and worked hard on the online collision code to try and make it > better. Too bad he was the only one that wanted it better at the time. > -- > Don Burnette > > "When you decide something is impossible to do, try to stay out of the > way of the man that's doing it."
"Goy Larsen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
>
> Hehe....almost like old times
Wish we could go back in time. :-)
Quoted text (10 lines)
> > > Beers and cheers > (uncle) Goy > "goyl at nettx dot no" > > http://www.theuspits.com > > "A man is only as old as the woman he feels........" > --Groucho Marx-- Bill, was talking with JD tonight. He asked if you had been deported
yet.
Something about being a "foreigner". :-)
Frank, Julian wanted to know if you ever got a job. I told him yes,
you were working for Papyrus doing there public relations work. :-)
Pete
"Bill Bollinger" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:JF_Ed.13983$[email hidden]...
Quoted text (12 lines)
> > By the way I'll say hi to Julian for you. LOL He'll love the "god" > > comment. > > > > Give him a good FU from Amish :) > > Bill Bollinger > www.gsxn.com > > > >>"Pete" <[email hidden]> wrote
>
> Frank, Julian wanted to know if you ever got a job. I told him yes,
> you were working for Papyrus doing there public relations work. :-)
Tehehe.
I'm in the field of architecture now.
--
-- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard>
-- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez
Corporation - helping America into the New World...
Quoted text (23 lines)
>>"JP" <[email hidden]> wrote >> So tell me, which Papyrus released software, if you take it individually, >> was bad at it's time of it's release? Sorry but they were *all* good. >> Icr, >> N1, Icr2, N2, N3, Nr99, Gpl, Soda, Nr2002, Nr2003, etc.. The only one, >> borderline, was Nascar Racing 4. And even that was a good release with >> the >> standard quality tracks, multi, replay, gui, sound, etc... if you >> compared >> it to any EA game. >> >> >> And tell me, which EA released Nascar game, if you take it individually, >> was >> bad at it's time of it's release? Almost all of them. Like I wrote, they >> produced more then bad sims, they were even BAD arcade games. "Nascar >> Road >> Racing", again, ouch. "Nascar Rumble", "Nascar 99", "Nascar 2000", >> "Nascar >> 2001", "Nascar Thunder 2002". Yikes "Nascar Revolution". >> > > I'd say the only one good at its release, as you ask, was gpl.
"ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:9jAFd.40845$[email hidden]...
> >>"JP" <[email hidden]> wrote
> >> So tell me, which Papyrus released software, if you take itindividually,
individually,
> >> was
> >> bad at it's time of it's release? Almost all of them. Like I wrote,they
words"
> and immature flaming, that response is just totally wrong and you know it.
> To say that no Papyrus game, even back then, was good and that you had no
> fun, is plain 100% wrong. You just dislike simracing. This is over forme.
<laughter>
Show me where I said I had no fun. I did. Still do. But to say they
were quality sims (before N4) of stock car racing, as you said, is wrong.
They weren't. They were quality racing sim. Just not of stock cars.
>
>
> P.s.: Dale Jr. said that Nascar Heat was the worst one he tried.
Oh well. Seeing as you manage to ignore all his complaints about 03,
guess you can pick whichever comment you want.
Quoted text (11 lines)
> >> was bad at it's time of it's release? Sorry but they were *all* good. > >> Icr, > >> N1, Icr2, N2, N3, Nr99, Gpl, Soda, Nr2002, Nr2003, etc.. The only one, > >> borderline, was Nascar Racing 4. And even that was a good release with > >> the > >> standard quality tracks, multi, replay, gui, sound, etc... if you > >> compared > >> it to any EA game. > >> > >> > >> And tell me, which EA released Nascar game, if you take itQuoted text (11 lines)
> >> produced more then bad sims, they were even BAD arcade games. "Nascar > >> Road > >> Racing", again, ouch. "Nascar Rumble", "Nascar 99", "Nascar 2000", > >> "Nascar > >> 2001", "Nascar Thunder 2002". Yikes "Nascar Revolution". > >> > > > > I'd say the only one good at its release, as you ask, was gpl. > > > Ok that's enough. Not only were you the first to trigger the "tough Yes, I did tell him that. He wished you well.
Pete
"ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:TgAFd.40797$[email hidden]...
Quoted text (15 lines)
> > > Tehehe. > > > I'm in the field of architecture now. > > > > -- > -- Frangois Minard <ymenard> > -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez > Corporation - helping America into the New World... > >It is a F-ing Foreigner LOL
Bill Bollinger
www.gsxn.com
"Pete" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:%drFd.37749$[email hidden]...
Quoted text (26 lines)
> Bill, was talking with JD tonight. He asked if you had been deported > yet. > Something about being a "foreigner". :-) > Frank, Julian wanted to know if you ever got a job. I told him yes, > you were working for Papyrus doing there public relations work. :-) > > Pete > > > > "Bill Bollinger" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:JF_Ed.13983$[email hidden]... >> > By the way I'll say hi to Julian for you. LOL He'll love the "god" >> > comment. >> > >> >> Give him a good FU from Amish :) >> >> Bill Bollinger >> www.gsxn.com >> >> >> >> > >I disagree. SODA seemed like an unfinished product.
"ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:9jAFd.40845$[email hidden]...
Quoted text (48 lines)
>>>"JP" <[email hidden]> wrote >>> So tell me, which Papyrus released software, if you take it >>> individually, >>> was bad at it's time of it's release? Sorry but they were *all* good. >>> Icr, >>> N1, Icr2, N2, N3, Nr99, Gpl, Soda, Nr2002, Nr2003, etc.. The only one, >>> borderline, was Nascar Racing 4. And even that was a good release with >>> the >>> standard quality tracks, multi, replay, gui, sound, etc... if you >>> compared >>> it to any EA game. >>> >>> >>> And tell me, which EA released Nascar game, if you take it individually, >>> was >>> bad at it's time of it's release? Almost all of them. Like I wrote, >>> they >>> produced more then bad sims, they were even BAD arcade games. "Nascar >>> Road >>> Racing", again, ouch. "Nascar Rumble", "Nascar 99", "Nascar 2000", >>> "Nascar >>> 2001", "Nascar Thunder 2002". Yikes "Nascar Revolution". >>> >> >> I'd say the only one good at its release, as you ask, was gpl. > > > Ok that's enough. Not only were you the first to trigger the "tough > words" and immature flaming, that response is just totally wrong and you > know it. To say that no Papyrus game, even back then, was good and that > you had no fun, is plain 100% wrong. You just dislike simracing. This is > over for me. > > > P.s.: Dale Jr. said that Nascar Heat was the worst one he tried. > > > > > > > > -- > -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> > -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez > Corporation - helping America into the New World... > >LOL...I guess that is why Dale Jr. had Nascar Heat as his favorite racing
game way back when he was a part of Blackhole Motorsports then,right?
Heck....there aren't ANY racing games I like better than Heat..and that
includes NR2003,NR2002,any Thunder game or even so far back as Nascar 2.With
all the mods and tracks Nascar Heat has,and the longevity it's
sustained,I'll just keep right on playing it.Dale Jr or no Dale Jr...LOL.
"HH catholic.org>" <hhohn@<nospam> wrote in message
news:41ec014e$[email hidden]...
one,
> >>> borderline, was Nascar Racing 4. And even that was a good releasewith
individually,
is
