Re: GP3 pessimism?

Well said On Tue, 14 Mar 2000 18:01:33 +0100, Imar de Vries <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (43 lines)

>Hi all, > >For some reason I don't quite understand where some of the pessimistic >remarks on GP3 come from. I hear people complaining about how GP3 'looks >more like GP2.5', 'has unimpressive graphics', 'is missing the boat >because of lack of Force Feedback or lack of Internet-support', 'won't >ever come near to the driving model of GPL', etc. > >I would like to argue that I never expected GP3 not to look like GP2. >What should Crammond have done, throw his work on GP2 out of the window? >It is by far not easy to create such an immense simulation. If Crammond >has managed to lift GP2 up to a much higher level with improved >graphics, improved AI, an improved driving model and an improved weather >model, all by his own in less than four years, then we should be glad to >be able to play this game in July. > >(I may be going out on a limb here, but I would like to point out that I >think GP3's graphics for instance are better than those seen in F1 2000 >(based on the screenshots and movies of both simulations I saw on the >Internet). As SCREAMIN pointed out in the GP3 forum, the graphics are >more crisp. I would like to add that the F1 2000 shots look too glossy. >The first time I saw the 38 Mb Gamestar GP3 video full screen on my 17" >monitor my jaw dropped to the floor. When I saw the F1 2000 video I >thought "so these are the superior graphics? Where's the background in >Monaco for instance?") > >Of course, I would really love to race online. I would be thrilled to >see an animated pit crew. It would add to the realism if I could drive a >formation lap, or a victory lap into parc ferm�. I would feel like I >competed with the great if the cars looked like those in the 2000 >season. > >It is not to be in GP3. But I won't complain, because I am confident >that Crammond has real heart for making simulations that stay, that keep >me on the edge of my seat and that satisfy my hunger for speed, >competition and accuracy of simulation. I may be too sentimental about >this, call me a Crammond-fan, but then again, he hasn't disappointed me >or screwed up in a big way ever. > >An eagerly waiting F1-fan. > >(This message can also be found on the GP3 forum at >http://www.simracingnews.com )

> The lack of FF support is a major pile of BS. Like the lack of > accelerated support on GP2 (or a patch to do so) once again it's > behind the times. Does anybody even sell racing games w/out some FF > support anymore? > Whoa, back up here! No FF in GP3? I did not know that. I'm looking forward to F1 2000 even more now. (of course i'll still by GP3) Ivan Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

Hi all, For some reason I don't quite understand where some of the pessimistic remarks on GP3 come from. I hear people complaining about how GP3 'looks more like GP2.5', 'has unimpressive graphics', 'is missing the boat because of lack of Force Feedback or lack of Internet-support', 'won't ever come near to the driving model of GPL', etc. I would like to argue that I never expected GP3 not to look like GP2. What should Crammond have done, throw his work on GP2 out of the window? It is by far not easy to create such an immense simulation. If Crammond has managed to lift GP2 up to a much higher level with improved graphics, improved AI, an improved driving model and an improved weather model, all by his own in less than four years, then we should be glad to be able to play this game in July. (I may be going out on a limb here, but I would like to point out that I think GP3's graphics for instance are better than those seen in F1 2000 (based on the screenshots and movies of both simulations I saw on the Internet). As SCREAMIN pointed out in the GP3 forum, the graphics are more crisp. I would like to add that the F1 2000 shots look too glossy. The first time I saw the 38 Mb Gamestar GP3 video full screen on my 17" monitor my jaw dropped to the floor. When I saw the F1 2000 video I thought "so these are the superior graphics? Where's the background in Monaco for instance?") Of course, I would really love to race online. I would be thrilled to see an animated pit crew. It would add to the realism if I could drive a formation lap, or a victory lap into parc ferm�. I would feel like I competed with the great if the cars looked like those in the 2000 season. It is not to be in GP3. But I won't complain, because I am confident that Crammond has real heart for making simulations that stay, that keep me on the edge of my seat and that satisfy my hunger for speed, competition and accuracy of simulation. I may be too sentimental about this, call me a Crammond-fan, but then again, he hasn't disappointed me or screwed up in a big way ever. An eagerly waiting F1-fan. (This message can also be found on the GP3 forum at http://www.simracingnews.com ) -- Imar de Vries - [email hidden] - ICQ 6972439

Lawd, delusion is a t u r r i b l e thing . . . --DK raised his pale head and moaned in message

Quoted text (9 lines)

>"Imar de Vries" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >news:[email hidden]... >> Hi all, >> >> For some reason I don't quite understand where some of the pessimistic >> remarks on GP3 come from. I hear people complaining about how GP3 'looks >> more like GP2.5', 'has unimpressive graphics', 'is missing the boat >> because of lack of Force Feedback or lack of Internet-support', 'won't >> ever come near to the driving model of GPL', etc.

The lack of FF support is a major pile of BS. Like the lack of accelerated support on GP2 (or a patch to do so) once again it's behind the times. Does anybody even sell racing games w/out some FF support anymore?

Amen "Imar de Vries" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (47 lines)

> Hi all, > > For some reason I don't quite understand where some of the pessimistic > remarks on GP3 come from. I hear people complaining about how GP3 'looks > more like GP2.5', 'has unimpressive graphics', 'is missing the boat > because of lack of Force Feedback or lack of Internet-support', 'won't > ever come near to the driving model of GPL', etc. > > I would like to argue that I never expected GP3 not to look like GP2. > What should Crammond have done, throw his work on GP2 out of the window? > It is by far not easy to create such an immense simulation. If Crammond > has managed to lift GP2 up to a much higher level with improved > graphics, improved AI, an improved driving model and an improved weather > model, all by his own in less than four years, then we should be glad to > be able to play this game in July. > > (I may be going out on a limb here, but I would like to point out that I > think GP3's graphics for instance are better than those seen in F1 2000 > (based on the screenshots and movies of both simulations I saw on the > Internet). As SCREAMIN pointed out in the GP3 forum, the graphics are > more crisp. I would like to add that the F1 2000 shots look too glossy. > The first time I saw the 38 Mb Gamestar GP3 video full screen on my 17" > monitor my jaw dropped to the floor. When I saw the F1 2000 video I > thought "so these are the superior graphics? Where's the background in > Monaco for instance?") > > Of course, I would really love to race online. I would be thrilled to > see an animated pit crew. It would add to the realism if I could drive a > formation lap, or a victory lap into parc ferm�. I would feel like I > competed with the great if the cars looked like those in the 2000 > season. > > It is not to be in GP3. But I won't complain, because I am confident > that Crammond has real heart for making simulations that stay, that keep > me on the edge of my seat and that satisfy my hunger for speed, > competition and accuracy of simulation. I may be too sentimental about > this, call me a Crammond-fan, but then again, he hasn't disappointed me > or screwed up in a big way ever. > > An eagerly waiting F1-fan. > > (This message can also be found on the GP3 forum at > http://www.simracingnews.com ) > -- > Imar de Vries - [email hidden] - ICQ 6972439 > >

Excuse me, I've got to vent a little.... <rant mode> Crammond this, Crammond that.... this is really getting to me. Is this man like a CE-label?? A guaranty for the pinnacle in simracing? He's just a coder... one that hasn't done a 32-bit windows game before at that. Admit it, here and now. Knowing what you know about GP3 and imagining for a second this was being made by some upstart company you'd never heard of before (like RatBag when they made DTR) without an impressive gaming pedigree behind them. Would you be "eagerly awaiting" this title? -NO!! IMO, a Crammond game should bring more than just his name on the box. GP3 is several features short of a modern racing sim (and in a "sim" I'm willing to overlook graphic issues), fact. It now even appears some of the annoyances that were in previous versions aren't fixed. Is it any wonder I, and many others, aren't very optimistic about it?? <rant off> This is not to mean GP3 will not be a good F1 game. For from it more than likely. However, I think we can be pretty confident it will not raise the bar for simracing games. Crammond appears to be resting on his laurels instead of pushing the envelope, which I find very disappointing. GP3 should have been the game to blow GPL out of the water, just like it's demo sunk GP2 nearly 2 years ago. GP3 doesn't appear to even challenge GPL (except for the weather, maybe), which means Crammond has failed, IMO. I bet Cassidy, Keammer and Co are reading all this with a very smug grin on their face and so they should!! -As long as they don't start resting on their laurels too and get right back to work on GPL2. ;-) I am calling out in the vain hope some of this will trickle down to the development team, but even if it does, it's probably too late anyway. I will give GP3 a go, but without internet mulitplayer, FF and with those <censored> instant black flags (to add insult to injury when you lose it) in place, it'll have to be <f-word> incredible before I'm actually buying a copy. Hopefully the "Crammond believers" will come crashing down off cloud nine when the game ships so we can form a united front to put some pressure on GP4. Jan. =--- Imar de Vries <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Hi all, > > For some reason I don't quite understand where some of the pessimistic > remarks on GP3 come from. <snip>

"Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote > Excuse me, I've got to vent a little.... Looks like we think the same Jan (on many other points also on various different subject). I consider myself a hardcore racing simulation fan. I personally do not mind having the same game engine in GP3, as I found it had great potential and good versalitity. I also found the graphics pretty good, actually. If you go to http://www.bhmotorsports.com/ you'll see a new video for the software with some great TV-camera shot. The car model is incredible, I will now say. Graphics is not important to me really, except that they need to be accurate for a racing simulation. GPL achieved that for me. Graphics actually benefited from the game engine, with a great virtual cockpit (which GP3 will have and Im happy), great pallette and great versatility in the 3d structure of the tracks. I do hope GP3 will have complex track accuracy, it has to. I know that GP2 can have a complex track accuracy from some of the user-created tracks I've seen. But it's normal some of us whine. No sorry, we aren't whining, we are just very dissapointed. Some features after 4years will not be fixed nor simply advanced. Geoff Crammond has been I would say a synonym of "technology pusher" in all the products he has released. If this was the real case, then for GP3 we would have Force Feedback. We would have Internet racing at least. For me internet racing isn't simply the average. Look at Papyrus, they give us "Community online tools" as I would name them. Geoff will not even give us TCP/IP racing!!!! > Hopefully the "Crammond believers" will come crashing down off cloud nine > when the game ships so we can form a united front to put some pressure on > GP4. I have my doubts on that. They will all buy Gp3 whatever the case. It looks like a good quality title in terms of physics and gameplay. But every other essential isn't really pushed like a Geoff Crammond software should be pushed. Or like a Kaemmer software is. Microprose/Hasbro are known to have a poor service. Probably 1 patch, but nothing more. They just want our money, you know... -- -- 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.

"Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:PWvz4.35316$[email hidden]... > > GP3 should have been the game to blow GPL out of the water, just like it's > demo sunk GP2 nearly 2 years ago. GP3 doesn't appear to even challenge GPL > (except for the weather, maybe), which means Crammond has failed, IMO. Ibet > Cassidy, Keammer and Co are reading all this with a very smug grin ontheir > face and so they should!! -As long as they don't start resting on their > laurels too and get right back to work on GPL2. ;-) It's already blown GPL out of the water. David G Fisher

"ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:cYyz4.59010$[email hidden]... > If this was the real case, then for GP3 we would have Force Feedback. We > would have Internet racing at least. For me internet racing isn't simply > the average. Look at Papyrus, they give us "Community online tools" as I > would name them. Geoff will not even give us TCP/IP racing!!!! GPL was a royal pain in the a** online, so even with no internet play at all, Crammond has no reason to feel inferior to Papyrus in that department. If GP3 would would have similiar online performance to GPL, then I'm glad they left it out. I dont want to waste more hours of my life trying to pound a square peg into a round hole. MS and Ratbag know how to do it right. David G Fisher

You could insert the name of any title in the thread header and ask "Why the pessimism? It's just how things are here. David G Fisher "Imar de Vries" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Hi all, > > For some reason I don't quite understand where some of the pessimistic > remarks on GP3 come from.

Lawd, delusion is a t u r r i b l e thing . . . --DK "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> peeped out from behind the blanket, raised his pale head and moaned in message news:qAAz4.205$[email hidden]... > GPL was a royal pain in the a** online, so even with no internet play at > all, Crammond has no reason to feel inferior to Papyrus in thatdepartment. > If GP3 would would have similiar online performance to GPL, then I'm glad > they left it out. I dont want to waste more hours of my life trying topound > a square peg into a round hole. > > MS and Ratbag know how to do it right. > > David G Fisher >

Ehm... in what way? Number of posts? Jan. ---- David G Fisher <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:dqAz4.201$[email hidden]... > <snip> > David G Fisher > > > >

On Wed, 15 Mar 2000 00:13:10 GMT David G Fisher <[email hidden]> wrote: % "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message % news:cYyz4.59010$[email hidden]... % > If this was the real case, then for GP3 we would have Force Feedback. We % > would have Internet racing at least. For me internet racing isn't simply % > the average. Look at Papyrus, they give us "Community online tools" as I % > would name them. Geoff will not even give us TCP/IP racing!!!! % GPL was a royal pain in the a** online, so even with no internet play at % all, Crammond has no reason to feel inferior to Papyrus in that department. % If GP3 would would have similiar online performance to GPL, then I'm glad % they left it out. I dont want to waste more hours of my life trying to pound % a square peg into a round hole. I beg to differ! I have adminstrated several online GPL leagues and host events on Monday and Thursday night for quite some time now. GPL online is a royal BLAST! I think you should go to your doctor as the pain in you ass may be something you should have looked into. <G> % MS and Ratbag know how to do it right. % David G Fisher -- **************************** Michael E. Carver ************************* Upside out, or inside down...False alarm the only game in town. [email hidden] http://www.teleport.com/~mcarver =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<[ /./. [- < ]>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

The game does not have FF? The game has no TCP/IP support? I thought this was a modern sim. Maybe it should be called, I don't know, Grand Prix3: The Simulation<G>. What the heck kinda sim or even arcade smasher developed in the year 2000 is lacking in FF support? Even Nascar Revulsion has that! No Tcp/Ip? Has Crammond been in a cave since GP2? Gimme a break, I don't care how good it looks. If the game doesnt support TCP/IP, it will not last on my hd for more than a new toy to a 2 year old on Christmas morning. Nascar 3 would sell a billion copies if it was sold on the basis of looks. It's great. It has FF but without internet, where would it be? I guess if you folks think Nascar 3 was a patch then what will GP3 be? A graphics driver download? Imar de Vries <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (47 lines)

> Hi all, > > For some reason I don't quite understand where some of the pessimistic > remarks on GP3 come from. I hear people complaining about how GP3 'looks > more like GP2.5', 'has unimpressive graphics', 'is missing the boat > because of lack of Force Feedback or lack of Internet-support', 'won't > ever come near to the driving model of GPL', etc. > > I would like to argue that I never expected GP3 not to look like GP2. > What should Crammond have done, throw his work on GP2 out of the window? > It is by far not easy to create such an immense simulation. If Crammond > has managed to lift GP2 up to a much higher level with improved > graphics, improved AI, an improved driving model and an improved weather > model, all by his own in less than four years, then we should be glad to > be able to play this game in July. > > (I may be going out on a limb here, but I would like to point out that I > think GP3's graphics for instance are better than those seen in F1 2000 > (based on the screenshots and movies of both simulations I saw on the > Internet). As SCREAMIN pointed out in the GP3 forum, the graphics are > more crisp. I would like to add that the F1 2000 shots look too glossy. > The first time I saw the 38 Mb Gamestar GP3 video full screen on my 17" > monitor my jaw dropped to the floor. When I saw the F1 2000 video I > thought "so these are the superior graphics? Where's the background in > Monaco for instance?") > > Of course, I would really love to race online. I would be thrilled to > see an animated pit crew. It would add to the realism if I could drive a > formation lap, or a victory lap into parc ferm�. I would feel like I > competed with the great if the cars looked like those in the 2000 > season. > > It is not to be in GP3. But I won't complain, because I am confident > that Crammond has real heart for making simulations that stay, that keep > me on the edge of my seat and that satisfy my hunger for speed, > competition and accuracy of simulation. I may be too sentimental about > this, call me a Crammond-fan, but then again, he hasn't disappointed me > or screwed up in a big way ever. > > An eagerly waiting F1-fan. > > (This message can also be found on the GP3 forum at > http://www.simracingnews.com ) > -- > Imar de Vries - [email hidden] - ICQ 6972439 > >

I just got back from the doctor. Square peg. Round hole. Cause of pain. :-P David G Fisher "Michael E. Carver" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:w%Bz4.53$[email hidden]... > On Wed, 15 Mar 2000 00:13:10 GMT David G Fisher <[email hidden]> wrote: > > % "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > % news:cYyz4.59010$[email hidden]... > % > If this was the real case, then for GP3 we would have Force Feedback.We > % > would have Internet racing at least. For me internet racing isn'tsimply > % > the average. Look at Papyrus, they give us "Community online tools"as I > % > would name them. Geoff will not even give us TCP/IP racing!!!! > > % GPL was a royal pain in the a** online, so even with no internet play at > % all, Crammond has no reason to feel inferior to Papyrus in thatdepartment. > % If GP3 would would have similiar online performance to GPL, then I'mglad > % they left it out. I dont want to waste more hours of my life trying topound

Quoted text (17 lines)

> % a square peg into a round hole. > > I beg to differ! I have adminstrated several online GPL leagues and > host events on Monday and Thursday night for quite some time now. GPL > online is a royal BLAST! I think you should go to your doctor as the > pain in you ass may be something you should have looked into. <G> > > % MS and Ratbag know how to do it right. > > % David G Fisher > > > -- > **************************** Michael E. Carver ************************* > Upside out, or inside down...False alarm the only game in town. > [email hidden] http://www.teleport.com/~mcarver > =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<[ /./. [- < ]>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

"David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote > GPL was a royal pain in the a** online And where do you assume Im talking about Grand Prix Legends, which FYI has a good online support now (easily in the 5best on the market), even in the original version. But GP3 will have NONE of that. Nadda, zip, niet, non. I was more talking about Nascar Racing 3, Hawaii and the Nascar Racing Online Series back in the days. They have not been matched yet in terms of online community tools which is much more than simply TCP/IP. What is your opinion about the lack of Force Feedback also? Will you pay for an offline hoplap racing simulation, even if a good one? > MS and Ratbag know how to do it right. Oh your right about that. So there is Ratbag (even if I consider the prediction code "good" like GPL, not excellent like the one on the NROS or N3), Microsoft (C:PR had great online racing, and their arcade series of software has excellent online racing) and Papyrus. You see the pattern here David? We have now Geoff with his elitist attitude who won't have any online racing. -- -- 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.

David G Fisher skrev i meldingen <1CAz4.207$[email hidden]>... >You could insert the name of any title in the thread header and ask "Whythe

Quoted text (14 lines)

>pessimism? > >It's just how things are here. > >David G Fisher > > >"Imar de Vries" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >news:[email hidden]... >> Hi all, >> >> For some reason I don't quite understand where some of the pessimistic >> remarks on GP3 come from. >

"ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:fUDz4.41948$[email hidden]... > "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote > > GPL was a royal pain in the a** online > > > And where do you assume Im talking about Grand Prix Legends, which FYI hasa > good online support now (easily in the 5best on the market), even in the > original version. Jan referred to GPL and since you replied to his post in agreement, I carried it through. >But GP3 will have NONE of that. Nadda, zip, niet, non. > I was more talking about Nascar Racing 3, Hawaii and the Nascar Racing > Online Series back in the days. They have not been matched yet in termsof > online community tools which is much more than simply TCP/IP. You are right about N3/N2. Having good perfromance with a large field of cars in an online race is pretty impressive. Why not the same with GPL? Maybe because Kraemmer was just as hard-headed as Crammond is being accused of?

Quoted text (11 lines)

> What is your opinion about the lack of Force Feedback also? > Will you pay > for an offline hoplap racing simulation, even if a good one? > > > MS and Ratbag know how to do it right. > > Oh your right about that. So there is Ratbag (even if I consider the > prediction code "good" like GPL, not excellent like the one on the NROS or > N3), Microsoft (C:PR had great online racing, and their arcade series of > software has excellent online racing) and Papyrus. You see the pattern

here > David? We have now Geoff with his elitist attitude who won't have anyonline > racing. Actually, I really think the reason there is no TCP/IP racing with GP3 is because they couldn't/wouldn't pay the price. The reason given to the public is just a cover. I think GP3 is going to be THE sim I've always wanted. Modern F1, great physics, graphics, sound, etc., and I'll buy it the day it's released. If so, I'm going to be even more disappointed that it doesn't have online racing than I would if it was just an ok sim. I'd like my practice time in a sim to amount to something, and in my mind, only online racing does that. Hotlapping bores me, and racing the AI just isn't the same as real people. No sim yet has had everything I've wanted, but GP3 wil probably come closest. F1 2000 may save the day though. :-) David G Fisher

"David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:ynCz4.258$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (11 lines)

> I just got back from the doctor. > > Square peg. > > Round hole. > > Cause of pain. :-P > > David G Fisher > >

And here I thought it was caused by that *gigiantic * chip on your shoulder. Perhaps a touch of bursitis from all the trolling you do? Simple remedy for all those problems but I think you're enjoying yourself too much to take it. Doctor David

On the Contrary, GPL sits merrily atop the waves, bobbing along, ready to depth charge the already sinkning carcasses of all inferior sims... David G Fisher wrote in message ... ><snipped>

Quoted text (7 lines)

>It's already blown GPL out of the water. > >David G Fisher > > > >

Berno wrote in message ... > >Thank god im not the only one with a brain in this forum. Careful... >Only a moron would >post negatively about a game that hasnt been release and has a track record >and history as deep as papyrus. Oh yes, the GP series stretches back over so many titles. When it takes this many years to develop a "new" game, we, as the buyers, have a right to expect improvements to be implemented. If they're not going to make improvements, despite the fact the technology is available, naturally, some will be upset >And then to compare it to an upcoming EA >sports game? What are you people on? >Now *you're* starting on EA sports, and about a game that's not been released, where's that brain, in a jar?

Ehmmm... it's not by Papyrus. Personally, I think it's more testament of a simple disposition to assume that "if it's by such_and_such, it'll be ok." Wake up man. Jan. ---- Berno <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:tMIz4.873$[email hidden]... > > Thank god im not the only one with a brain in this forum. Only a moronwould > post negatively about a game that hasnt been release and has a trackrecord

Quoted text (9 lines)

> and history as deep as papyrus. And then to compare it to an upcoming EA > sports game? What are you people on? > > > Imar de Vries <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > Hi all, > > > > <Snip>

Ehm... in what way? Number of posts? Jan. ----

"David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Actually, I really think the reason there is no TCP/IP racing with GP3 is >because they couldn't/wouldn't pay the price. The reason given to the public >is just a cover. I also think it's a cover, but for a different reason. _IF_ GP3 still has the same core engine as GP2, regarding the timing, it is hard to synchronize multiple clients over the Internet. (Think slomo) That said, and reading the feature list, I wonder how they will support 16 LAN drivers.... >I think GP3 is going to be THE sim I've always wanted. Modern F1, great >physics, graphics, sound, etc., and I'll buy it the day it's released. If >so, I'm going to be even more disappointed that it doesn't have online >racing than I would if it was just an ok sim. I'd like my practice time in a >sim to amount to something, and in my mind, only online racing does that. >Hotlapping bores me, and racing the AI just isn't the same as real people. I agree with you. >No sim yet has had everything I've wanted, but GP3 wil probably come >closest. GP3 will be a great game, I'm sure. But I know I'll be bored with it after a few weeks, and will return to GPL just to drive humans and test the flight model of the Eagle at Curva Grande <g>. Of course, if the rumors about an anual upgrade for GP3 are true, we can expect thing like FF and online play soon. (note: soon for a GPx title) >F1 2000 may save the day though. :-) Everytime I see something about F1 2000 I'm a bit dissapointed. Not that it's bad, but it's a bit pale compared to the hype (by you, for example) created. I remember the same regarding SCGT and RC2000..... Of course, like always in cases like this, I love to be wrong... Remco

"David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote > Jan referred to GPL and since you replied to his post in agreement, I > carried it through. Okie. Don't forget SODA Off-Road, who had good multiplayer racing actually I say. > You are right about N3/N2. Having good perfromance with a large field of > cars in an online race is pretty impressive. Why not the same with GPL? > Maybe because Kraemmer was just as hard-headed as Crammond is beingaccused > of? I guess it goes back to having cars with high sideway momemtum (GPL cars) and having a much more complex packet setting. You need more bandwith/car in GPL compared to any other Papyrus racing simulator. Formula 1 cars have a high front/rear momemtum, and that's much more easy to recreate in a prediction code. > Actually, I really think the reason there is no TCP/IP racing with GP3 is > because they couldn't/wouldn't pay the price. The reason given to thepublic > is just a cover. I personally think it's a cover for the actual reason of not being able to. But I would rather see them put a very basic TCP/IP code then patching it (like the current GPL online racing, or even the Nascar Racing 3 racing). > I think GP3 is going to be THE sim I've always wanted. Modern F1, great > physics, graphics, sound, etc., and I'll buy it the day it's released. If > so, I'm going to be even more disappointed that it doesn't have online > racing than I would if it was just an ok sim. I'd like my practice time ina > sim to amount to something, and in my mind, only online racing does that. > Hotlapping bores me, and racing the AI just isn't the same as real people. Your right. Unfortunately I do not want to race any AI anymore, and for me offline racing is not what Im searching for. Even if it's the best friggin physics, sound, graphics, it will dissapoint me. I also feel that GP3 is THE sim I've always wanted. > F1 2000 may save the day though. :-) I have my doubts. I would say in that case "I have a bad feeling about this" ;-) -- -- 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.

You're right Dave. I'm a troll, and I live under a bridge. David G fisher "David Erb" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:TwJz4.64481$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (15 lines)

> > "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:ynCz4.258$[email hidden]... > > I just got back from the doctor. > > > > Square peg. > > > > Round hole. > > > > Cause of pain. :-P > > > > David G Fisher > > > > > And here I thought it was caused by that *gigiantic * chip on your

shoulder. > Perhaps a touch of bursitis from all the trolling you do? Simple remedyfor > all those problems but I think you're enjoying yourself too much to takeit. > > Doctor David > > > >

"Remco Moedt" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > Everytime I see something about F1 2000 I'm a bit dissapointed. Not > that it's bad, but it's a bit pale compared to the hype (by you, for > example) created. If you can find one post by me where I hype F1 2000, I'd love to see it. >I remember the same regarding SCGT and RC2000... RC 2000 lived up to the hype. Ask anyone.............outside r.a.s. (offisial headquarters of the GPL fan club). > Of course, like always in cases like this, I love to be wrong... > > > Remco > David G Fisher

That's not even a consensus on the RC board at High Gear! -DK "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> spit Tokyo out of his mouth, kissed Gamara goodbye, and screeched in message news:FTTz4.519$[email hidden]... [snip]

Quoted text (7 lines)

> RC 2000 lived up to the hype. Ask anyone.............outside r.a.s. > (offisial headquarters of the GPL fan club). > > > David G Fisher >

Thank god im not the only one with a brain in this forum. Only a moron would post negatively about a game that hasnt been release and has a track record and history as deep as papyrus. And then to compare it to an upcoming EA sports game? What are you people on? Imar de Vries <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (47 lines)

> Hi all, > > For some reason I don't quite understand where some of the pessimistic > remarks on GP3 come from. I hear people complaining about how GP3 'looks > more like GP2.5', 'has unimpressive graphics', 'is missing the boat > because of lack of Force Feedback or lack of Internet-support', 'won't > ever come near to the driving model of GPL', etc. > > I would like to argue that I never expected GP3 not to look like GP2. > What should Crammond have done, throw his work on GP2 out of the window? > It is by far not easy to create such an immense simulation. If Crammond > has managed to lift GP2 up to a much higher level with improved > graphics, improved AI, an improved driving model and an improved weather > model, all by his own in less than four years, then we should be glad to > be able to play this game in July. > > (I may be going out on a limb here, but I would like to point out that I > think GP3's graphics for instance are better than those seen in F1 2000 > (based on the screenshots and movies of both simulations I saw on the > Internet). As SCREAMIN pointed out in the GP3 forum, the graphics are > more crisp. I would like to add that the F1 2000 shots look too glossy. > The first time I saw the 38 Mb Gamestar GP3 video full screen on my 17" > monitor my jaw dropped to the floor. When I saw the F1 2000 video I > thought "so these are the superior graphics? Where's the background in > Monaco for instance?") > > Of course, I would really love to race online. I would be thrilled to > see an animated pit crew. It would add to the realism if I could drive a > formation lap, or a victory lap into parc ferm�. I would feel like I > competed with the great if the cars looked like those in the 2000 > season. > > It is not to be in GP3. But I won't complain, because I am confident > that Crammond has real heart for making simulations that stay, that keep > me on the edge of my seat and that satisfy my hunger for speed, > competition and accuracy of simulation. I may be too sentimental about > this, call me a Crammond-fan, but then again, he hasn't disappointed me > or screwed up in a big way ever. > > An eagerly waiting F1-fan. > > (This message can also be found on the GP3 forum at > http://www.simracingnews.com ) > -- > Imar de Vries - [email hidden] - ICQ 6972439 > >

In a recent poll, the readers of High Gear voted RC the sim of the year over SCGT, DTR, GP500, and N3 It wasn't even close. But you're right......as usual. Actually, nobody at HG ever even bothers to talk about RC because it's so bad. Take a look at the numbers. http://forums.simracingnews.com/cgi-bin/Ultimate.cgi?action=intro&BypassCook ie=true David G Fisher "David Karr" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:8apchm$9pc$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (18 lines)

> That's not even a consensus on the RC board at High Gear! > > -DK > > "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> spit Tokyo out of his mouth, kissed > Gamara goodbye, and screeched in message > news:FTTz4.519$[email hidden]... > [snip] > > > RC 2000 lived up to the hype. Ask anyone.............outside r.a.s. > > (offisial headquarters of the GPL fan club). > > > > > > > David G Fisher > > > >

>> Everytime I see something about F1 2000 I'm a bit dissapointed. Not >> that it's bad, but it's a bit pale compared to the hype (by you, for >> example) created. >If you can find one post by me where I hype F1 2000, I'd love to see it. IMO this is hype... <START EARLIER POST> Subject: Re: Request a snapshot of openwheel sims Date: 03/01/2000 F12000 is due to be released at the end of the month, and GP3 this summer. Forget the rest. David G Fisher <END EARLIER POST> You once said that RC2000 would be a better simulation then GPL. Do you still believe that? I don't think that RC2000 is a good simulation. As a matter of fact, beside the beautifull graphics, it is quite mediocre... Remco

Hmmm, have to disagree with you here. GPL on-line is awesome. Racing these beasts wheel to wheel with anything from a few other drivers up to 19 other drivers is fantastic, especially if its part of an on-line racing league. I accept that casual racing via Win VROC can sometimes be a pain, if the other casual racers are disconnecting, or otherwise spoiling your fun, or you cannot get a decent ping or connection, but this can hardly be blaimed on GPL! GPL on-line racing works, and it works well. 8-) *Peter* - http://www.cix.co.uk/~peterpc/home.html [address restored]

> The lack of FF support is a major pile of BS. Like the lack of > accelerated support on GP2 (or a patch to do so) once again it's > behind the times. Does anybody even sell racing games w/out some FF > support anymore? Accelarated games were virtually non-existent in 1996, and making 'a patch' is not as easy as it sounds. Making GP3 was higher on the priority-list than adapting GP2 (read the interview with Crammond on www.grandprixgames.com/grandprix3/english/ ) FF support is a major issue, I agree, but so far I have only driven two games that have implemented FF in such a way that it does not distract from racing, namely GPL and RC. I would find it very irritating if FF would not enhance gameplay and be just another 'hip' feature. No excuse though for not trying to implement it, of course. We'll see in the final product. --

As I tried to point out in an earlier post in this thread (got no follow up so nobody read it, or everyone agreed:) is that good FF can easily be implemented as long as all the forces on the front tires are modelled. When GPL was released FF was omitted because Papy didn't belive the technology was good enough. But during Mr. Cassidy's wonderful job with the 1.1 patch he was able to put the best FF ever in GPL with little effort (pure speculation) because the forces to send to the wheel was already there in the model. Of course, if the only FF in a sim is some rumbling on the kerbs and the grass, it is better without. I agree 100% on that. I just hope that Mr. Crammond stay clear of any not-good-enough-technology argument similar to his snobby and hopeless internet-play argument. Papy proved on both topics that the technology is here already. -- Olav K. Malmin remove spam when replying

> Ehmmm... it's not by Papyrus. > Personally, I think it's more testament of a simple disposition to assume > that "if it's by such_and_such, it'll be ok." > Wake up man. May be, may be not. If you like movies directed by Scorsese or Stone, you'll probably eagerly waiting for their next project to come to a cinema near you too. That does not mean their next movies are as briljant or fun as their last ones, of course, but you can expect some typical elements to be present, or to believe that they made their next movie with the same passion as in previous ones. Even if Stone was going to leave out action-sequences for instance, it would probably be interesting to watch his movie, and it would not make much sense to bash it before you had a chance to see it in the cinema. If you don't like Stone movies, then you'll have the easy option of not going to the cinema at all, but that does not mean his movie is going to be ***beforehand. Geoff left out TCP/IP play. That's a shame. I never raced online, but probably will in the near future. So far I have had much pleasure in hotlapping and racing AI. I am sure there's a very good reason it was left out (probably money, probably a not-so-Internet-ready game-engine), and I'm sure we'll see FF in GP3, maybe GP4. Greetz. --

> snip > > FF support is a major issue, I agree, but so far I have only driven two games > > that have implemented FF in such a way that it does not distract from racing, > > namely GPL and RC. I would find it very irritating if FF would not enhance

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > gameplay and be just another 'hip' feature. > So you didn't try Viper Racing?? It's FF effects are close to GPL's, and > you > should be able to get VR quite cheap. You really should... > BTW, no FF support in GP3 really is a surprise. I was so sure it would > be > in the sim, that I didn't check for it in the previews!

Yep, FF as well as TCP/IP support should be a no brainer in ANY current sim IMO. I get a kick reading all the posts attempting to justify their exclusion in GP3.....my favorite is the one that suggests GC might wait until GP4 to implement FF and/or TCP/IP... which could be his gameplan but my guess is that when 4 is released <2002-3?>those features will be antiquated to say the least. Dino

snip > FF support is a major issue, I agree, but so far I have only driven two games > that have implemented FF in such a way that it does not distract from racing, > namely GPL and RC. I would find it very irritating if FF would not enhance > gameplay and be just another 'hip' feature. So you didn't try Viper Racing?? It's FF effects are close to GPL's, and you should be able to get VR quite cheap. You really should... BTW, no FF support in GP3 really is a surprise. I was so sure it would be in the sim, that I didn't check for it in the previews! -- l8er ronny Your mouse has moved. Windows must be restarted for the change to take effect. Reboot now? |\ _,,,---,,_ I want to die like my Grandfather, ZZZzz /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ in his sleep. |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' Not like the people in his car, '---''(_/--' `-'\_) screaming their heads off!

Hi, went to bhmotorsports.com and I can't find that video clip. Could one please post the whole URL to the clip ? P.S. : please send me an email also. Thanks, Tadej

Quoted text (43 lines)

> > Excuse me, I've got to vent a little.... > Looks like we think the same Jan (on many other points also on various > different subject). I consider myself a *** racing simulation fan. I > personally do not mind having the same game engine in GP3, as I found it had > great potential and good versalitity. I also found the graphics pretty > good, actually. If you go to http://www.bhmotorsports.com/'ll see a new > video for the software with some great TV-camera shot. The car model is > incredible, I will now say. Graphics is not important to me really, except > that they need to be accurate for a racing simulation. GPL achieved that > for me. Graphics actually benefited from the game engine, with a great > virtual***pit (which GP3 will have and Im happy), great pallette and great > versatility in the 3d structure of the tracks. I do hope GP3 will have > complex track accuracy, it has to. I know that GP2 can have a complex track > accuracy from some of the user-created tracks I've seen. > But it's normal some of us whine. No sorry, we aren't whining, we are just > very dissapointed. Some features after 4years will not be fixed nor simply > advanced. Geoff Crammond has been I would say a synonym of "technology > pusher" in all the products he has released. > If this was the real case, then for GP3 we would have Force Feedback. We > would have Internet racing at least. For me internet racing isn't simply > the average. Look at Papyrus, they give us "Community online tools" as I > would name them. Geoff will not even give us TCP/IP racing!!!! > > Hopefully the "Crammond believers" will come crashing down off cloud nine > > when the game ships so we can form a united front to put some pressure on > > GP4. > I have my doubts on that. They will all buy Gp3 whatever the case. It > looks like a good quality title in terms of physics and gameplay. But every > other essential isn't really pushed like a Geoff Crammond software should be > pushed. Or like a Kaemmer software is. Microprose/Hasbro are known to have > a poor service. Probably 1 patch, but nothing more. They just want our > money, you know... > -- > -- Fran?ois Mnard <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.

Same here. I simply wouldn't consider purchasing a sim that isn't state of the art, doesn't have online racing, nor Force Feed back. Joel Willstein

> > GP3 should have been the game to blow GPL out of the water, just like it's > > demo sunk GP2 nearly 2 years ago. GP3 doesn't appear to even challenge GPL

Quoted text (10 lines)

> > (except for the weather, maybe), which means Crammond has failed, IMO. I > bet > > Cassidy, Keammer and Co are reading all this with a very smug grin on > their > > face and so they should!! -As long as they don't start resting on their > > laurels too and get right back to work on GPL2. ;-) > It's already blown GPL out of the water. > David G Fisher

David, And just what do you base your opinion on? Online play Force Feedback ground breaking technical advancements or just that it's GP3 Joel Willstein

> > If this was the real case, then for GP3 we would have Force Feedback. We > > would have Internet racing at least. For me internet racing isn't simply > > the average. Look at Papyrus, they give us "Community online tools" as I > > would name them. Geoff will not even give us TCP/IP racing!!!! > GPL was a royal pain in the a** online, so even with no internet play at > all, Crammond has no reason to feel inferior to Papyrus in that department. > If GP3 would would have similiar online performance to GPL, then I'm glad > they left it out. I dont want to waste more hours of my life trying to pound > a square peg into a round hole. > MS and Ratbag know how to do it right. > David G Fisher Would be isn't the same as did it. You're assuming. And when you assume, you make a ASS out of U and ME. Joel Willstein

[snip] Okay two questions here. Even though GP3 won't have TCP/IP, it will have IPX for LAN play. So wouldn't it be possible if one uses Kali (which I think allows IPX play over the net) to play GP3 on-line? Also I know the January dated alpha version doesn't have FF. But has it been definitely ascertained that the final version of GP3 won't have FF? -------- remove aluminium to mail