A good word for ICR2

Dear All, I just felt I needed to write in after noticing the ump***th article slating Indycar II and it's many flaws/how it's not worth the CD it's printed on/blahblahblah. I have recently rediscovered it - it's a ***y good game and you can't deny me that fact. I have all the racing sims (except GP2 which cold very well be the greatest of them all, who knows - I don't) but Indycar2 is by far the most enjoyable *to me* of the whole lot. I know Nascar's a good romp, but ICR2 has the speediest graphical engine I've seen (compared to its previous competitors - I can't compare it to GP2 for reasons of ignorance). If you don't know a good, rounded, fun game when you see it then... I don't know. Just don't start swearing on this nws group to the likes of Ed Martin/Adam/et al. To the aformentioned company reps: I enjoy reading your responses on this site, like many other unspokens, I'm sure. Much appreciated. By the way, my vote goes to r.a.s.nascar/F1/Indy also. 'Til we meet again (don't know where, don't know when) David

Quoted text (22 lines)

> Dear All, > I just felt I needed to write in after noticing the ump***th article > slating Indycar II and it's many flaws/how it's not worth the CD it's > printed on/blahblahblah. I have recently rediscovered it - it's a ***y > good game and you can't deny me that fact. I have all the racing sims > (except GP2 which cold very well be the greatest of them all, who knows - > I don't) but Indycar2 is by far the most enjoyable *to me* of the whole > lot. I know Nascar's a good romp, but ICR2 has the speediest graphical > engine I've seen (compared to its previous competitors - I can't compare > it to GP2 for reasons of ignorance). If you don't know a good, > rounded, fun game when you see it then... I don't know. Just don't start > swearing on this nws group to the likes of Ed Martin/Adam/et al. > To the aformentioned company reps: I enjoy reading your responses on this > site, like many other unspokens, I'm sure. Much appreciated. > By the way, my vote goes to r.a.s.nascar/F1/Indy also. > 'Til we meet again (don't know where, don't know when) > David

I agree with your view on this. I too love ICR2. My favorite cars are the Indycars, my favorite tracks are the F1 courses, so I have a split on that matter. My only problem with ICR2, and why I now prefer GP2, is that ICR2 cars are too hard to keep on the track. I have simply never believed that an Indycar was that hard to keep on the track, and I'm referring to road courses. On ovals, I think ICR2 is awesome. On the road courses, it is unrealistic. You would/will find that GP2 'simulates' the action of road course racing much better, it is a shame that we can not have Indycars that run like the GP2 cars, only with the Indycar POWER...that would be the best racing sim period. JEB

: I agree with your view on this. I too love ICR2. My favorite cars are : the Indycars, my favorite tracks are the F1 courses, so I have a split : on that matter. My only problem with ICR2, and why I now prefer GP2, is : that ICR2 cars are too hard to keep on the track. I have simply never : believed that an Indycar was that hard to keep on the track, and I'm : referring to road courses. On ovals, I think ICR2 is awesome. On the : road courses, it is unrealistic. : You would/will find that GP2 'simulates' the action of road course : racing much better, it is a shame that we can not have Indycars that : run like the GP2 cars, only with the Indycar POWER...that would be : the best racing sim period. I don't know. If driving a real Indycar was that easy, you would see me this Sunday on TV. I think Papyrus' approach to their sims are completely different to Geoff's. Papyrus seems to be attempting to model the real thing and Geoff seems to be modelling the real thing also. However, Geoff's approach seems to be to simulate F1 so as to make it feel like one is handling a car. I think the physics of actual driving model are extremely "toned" down. For example. Taking the default setup for Monza, one shouldn't be able to just make a hard right on the final turn while applying the gas and still "stick" as well as the GP2 car does. I find that totally unrealistic. But, then I could be wrong (it's happened once before ;-)) since I haven't driven a real F1 or Indy car. Don't get me wrong GP2 is great, I just think that Geoff's approach is to make a more "playable" sim. In the process I think some of the "reality" is arcadish. -- **************************** Michael E. Carver ************************* Upside out, or inside down...False alarm the only game in town. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<[ /./. [- < ]>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Quoted text (34 lines)

> : I agree with your view on this. I too love ICR2. My favorite cars are > : the Indycars, my favorite tracks are the F1 courses, so I have a split > : on that matter. My only problem with ICR2, and why I now prefer GP2, is > : that ICR2 cars are too hard to keep on the track. I have simply never > : believed that an Indycar was that hard to keep on the track, and I'm > : referring to road courses. On ovals, I think ICR2 is awesome. On the > : road courses, it is unrealistic. > : You would/will find that GP2 'simulates' the action of road course > : racing much better, it is a shame that we can not have Indycars that > : run like the GP2 cars, only with the Indycar POWER...that would be > : the best racing sim period. > I don't know. If driving a real Indycar was that easy, you would see me > this Sunday on TV. I think Papyrus' approach to their sims are > completely different to Geoff's. Papyrus seems to be attempting to > model the real thing and Geoff seems to be modelling the real thing > also. However, Geoff's approach seems to be to simulate F1 so as to > make it feel like one is handling a car. I think the physics of actual > driving model are extremely "toned" down. > For example. Taking the default setup for Monza, one shouldn't be able > to just make a hard right on the final turn while applying the gas and > still "stick" as well as the GP2 car does. I find that totally > unrealistic. But, then I could be wrong (it's happened once before > ;-)) since I haven't driven a real F1 or Indy car. > Don't get me wrong GP2 is great, I just think that Geoff's approach is > to make a more "playable" sim. In the process I think some of the > "reality" is arcadish. > -- > **************************** Michael E. Carver ************************* > Upside out, or inside down...False alarm the only game in town. > =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<[ /./. [- < ]>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

On the basis of that argument I would say that ICR2 is as unrealistic to the "realistic" side as GP2 is unrealistic to the "unrealistic" side. However, the enjoyment factor for GP2 is much greater. ICR2 is simply not any fun on road courses, in my view. I LOVE IT ON OVALS....LOVE IT....phew...had to get that in. And I ADMIRE the realism, but I do not believe that an IndyCar is that hard to hold on corners on road courses. I've had the opportunity to drive a high performance sports car in excess of 160 mph on canyon type "road course" curves and I did not see that kind of handling, referring to ICR2. It was, to be truthful, more like the smooth transition that GP2 gives you into a curve, much more. Keeping the car at the proper speed, that is the speed that keeps you on the road. Great sims, both. ICR2 for ovals...GP2 for the road. JEB in Vegas

Quoted text (52 lines)

> >Forget GP2...it's not a realistic racing sim...it leans heavily toward > >the arcade side of the scales...they are all so rapped-up in the > >graphics,they don't see it...so ignore the raving revues... > I'm not so sure about this. Have you played GP2 with all the driver aid's > turned off? The car is extremely difficult to control. If you aren't locking > up the brakes, you'll be applying to much throttle on corner exit and > spinning. I love it! Wouldn't want it any other way. > It's just that some people would prefer to see GP2 as a game, and with auto > everything turned on (especially steering assistance) it is definitely > arcadish. The beauty of this is that you get a great game as well as an > awesome simulator. > BTW, I'm running the graphics in VGA on GP2 whereas I use SVGA on ICR2, so I > don't think it's the graphics that are blowing me away. > >Papyrus,without anything else to compare,went out and designed a very > >true to life racing sim(all things considered),with "feel" and > >"feedback",that no-one else has come close to... > >Microprose with GP2,responded with a graphically superb ARCADE game! > >And that's fine...except that they are promoting it as a simulation... > I don't think you're giving GP2 a fair shake here. If you haven't yet, please > turn off steering assistance and the other arcade mode features and take your > F1 car out for another spin. > >ICR2 is still the Benchmark for all future SIMULATIONS..if it was'nt for > >the Papyrus crew,we'd all be ignorantly playing the latest microprose > >ARCADE game,thinking we were "really racing just like the big guys do", > >without any clue as to what a true racing sim is like... > ICR2 has probably captured more of my leisure time then any other program. I > absolutely love throwing my IndyCar around street courses. It had a steep > learning curve, but now, I really feel like I accomplish something when I run > fast laps at the road and street courses. In fact, my two favorite tracks in > ICR2 are Portland and Detroit. To me, the Portland implementation is > *brilliant*. > BTW, GP2 also has a yellow flag bug. I mean you aren't supposed to pass under > a local yellow are you? My understanding is you wait until you see a green > flag waved at you before you are allowed to overtake. Wish someone would > inform the AI cars of that fact. > >PS I appreciated the tone of your Post...as I'm sure,so did Ed Martin > >and the Papayrus crew... > >rgs > >John. > Clark Archer Speed Tribe > IVGA #3920 1996 Lola Honda Firestone

nsacar\icr2 are alot realistic in the drivingand damage. Steve Tanner

>Forget GP2...it's not a realistic racing sim...it leans heavily toward >the arcade side of the scales...they are all so rapped-up in the >graphics,they don't see it...so ignore the raving revues... I'm not so sure about this. Have you played GP2 with all the driver aid's turned off? The car is extremely difficult to control. If you aren't locking up the brakes, you'll be applying to much throttle on corner exit and spinning. I love it! Wouldn't want it any other way. It's just that some people would prefer to see GP2 as a game, and with auto everything turned on (especially steering assistance) it is definitely arcadish. The beauty of this is that you get a great game as well as an awesome simulator. BTW, I'm running the graphics in VGA on GP2 whereas I use SVGA on ICR2, so I don't think it's the graphics that are blowing me away. >Papyrus,without anything else to compare,went out and designed a very >true to life racing sim(all things considered),with "feel" and >"feedback",that no-one else has come close to... >Microprose with GP2,responded with a graphically superb ARCADE game! >And that's fine...except that they are promoting it as a simulation... I don't think you're giving GP2 a fair shake here. If you haven't yet, please turn off steering assistance and the other arcade mode features and take your F1 car out for another spin. >ICR2 is still the Benchmark for all future SIMULATIONS..if it was'nt for >the Papyrus crew,we'd all be ignorantly playing the latest microprose >ARCADE game,thinking we were "really racing just like the big guys do", >without any clue as to what a true racing sim is like... ICR2 has probably captured more of my leisure time then any other program. I absolutely love throwing my IndyCar around street courses. It had a steep learning curve, but now, I really feel like I accomplish something when I run fast laps at the road and street courses. In fact, my two favorite tracks in ICR2 are Portland and Detroit. To me, the Portland implementation is *brilliant*. BTW, GP2 also has a yellow flag bug. I mean you aren't supposed to pass under a local yellow are you? My understanding is you wait until you see a green flag waved at you before you are allowed to overtake. Wish someone would inform the AI cars of that fact. >PS I appreciated the tone of your Post...as I'm sure,so did Ed Martin >and the Papayrus crew... > >rgs >John. Clark Archer Speed Tribe IVGA #3920 1996 Lola Honda Firestone

Quoted text (22 lines)

> Dear All, > I just felt I needed to write in after noticing the ump***th article > slating Indycar II and it's many flaws/how it's not worth the CD it's > printed on/blahblahblah. I have recently rediscovered it - it's a ***y > good game and you can't deny me that fact. I have all the racing sims > (except GP2 which cold very well be the greatest of them all, who knows - > I don't) but Indycar2 is by far the most enjoyable *to me* of the whole > lot. I know Nascar's a good romp, but ICR2 has the speediest graphical > engine I've seen (compared to its previous competitors - I can't compare > it to GP2 for reasons of ignorance). If you don't know a good, > rounded, fun game when you see it then... I don't know. Just don't start > swearing on this nws group to the likes of Ed Martin/Adam/et al. > To the aformentioned company reps: I enjoy reading your responses on this > site, like many other unspokens, I'm sure. Much appreciated. > By the way, my vote goes to r.a.s.nascar/F1/Indy also. > 'Til we meet again (don't know where, don't know when) > David

You're absolutely right,David...All the moaners and groaners out there,have NO IDEA,just how lucky they are having ICR2...but then,I'm sure,they'd be complaining that the 1 million dollars they just won in a raffel,did'nt come with a nice wallet! Forget GP2...it's not a realistic racing sim...it leans heavily toward the arcade side of the scales...they are all so rapped-up in the graphics,they don't see it...so ignore the raving revues... Papyrus,without anything else to compare,went out and designed a very true to life racing sim(all things considered),with "feel" and "feedback",that no-one else has come close to... Microprose with GP2,responded with a graphically superb ARCADE game! And that's fine...except that they are promoting it as a simulation... ICR2 is still the Benchmark for all future SIMULATIONS..if it was'nt for the Papyrus crew,we'd all be ignorantly playing the latest microprose ARCADE game,thinking we were "really racing just like the big guys do", without any clue as to what a true racing sim is like... PS I appreciated the tone of your Post...as I'm sure,so did Ed Martin and the Papayrus crew... rgs John.

: On the basis of that argument I would say that : ICR2 is as unrealistic to the "realistic" side as : GP2 is unrealistic to the "unrealistic" side. : However, the enjoyment factor for GP2 is much greater. : ICR2 is simply not any fun on road courses, in my view. : I LOVE IT ON OVALS....LOVE IT....phew...had to get that : in. And I ADMIRE the realism, but I do not believe that : an IndyCar is that hard to hold on corners on road : courses. I've had the opportunity to drive a high : performance sports car in excess of 160 mph on canyon : type "road course" curves and I did not see that kind : of handling, referring to ICR2. It was, to be truthful, : more like the smooth transition that GP2 gives you into : a curve, much more. Keeping the car at the proper speed, : that is the speed that keeps you on the road. : Great sims, both. ICR2 for ovals...GP2 for the road. No arguement from me on the above, just a question. Are you basing ICR2's road course performance on the 1.02 version which corrected some weight/shift-traction errors in the original? I think the patched version has a much more realistic road course feel now. : JEB in Vegas -- **************************** Michael E. Carver ************************* Upside out, or inside down...False alarm the only game in town. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<[ /./. [- < ]>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

you're right on that one. 1.02 does the job of correcting most of the problems I had with 1.00. It sticks ground longer that 1.00 . reading along the thread I've seen some posts on how indycar2 is great on ovals. I hate ovals. I almost never run them. street courses Australia, Elkhart, Loudon(sp), portland, detroit and vancour are my favorite. I love hearing the engine rev, and that mad dash into the tight corners at the end of the straight aways. the worst course is cleveland. absolutely unplayable if you have braking assistance on since it slows you down even when there's no corner in front of you. best course is Australia ( tight chiganes<sp> ) but Portland is turning out to be a real quick one... if I get that tricky double curve figured out.

<...> Good point, I do the same. OTOH, i'm finding that VGA on GP2 is *Better* than VGA in ICR2- I know that sounds strange, but I get the feeling that doing the SVGA isn't the slowest part for ICR2- maybe the AI is. So I tend to use the SVGA in ICR2 because it adds enough (without losing much speed) to make everything engaging. Maybe UNIVBE is making the difference. Put it another way- even the old ICR runs better in VGA (for me) than ICR2 runs in VGA, but ICR2 runs SVGA well enough (while a little slower than either) to use it, so it makes for a great improvement over ICR. I love the fact that they are so different. Makes it great for those of us who get bored easy. I also think that Geoff had to (as a programmer working in the field) look closely at what ICR2 was doing- I like to think that ICR2 helped Geoff know what he did and did not want for GP2, and set certain benchmarks for him to meet. Imagine if he could have access to the code for ICR2. Better yet, imagine if Crammond did an IndyCar sim... Seeing how Sierra is apparently done with the Indycar series; it would be interesting if Crammond started a new one. GP2 is a hell of a lot easier to drive, for me. ICR2 is like taking a ride on ice, I never really feel completely stable. Which one is more real? My subjective opinion: I think GP2 is easier to drive than a real F1, and I think in some ways ICR2 is harder to drive than a real indycar. Both of those statements don't take in to account the real athletic aspects of both racing- exhaustion and G forces and, well, adrenal fear... but in terms of pure visual driving- no feedback from steering wheel and no G-force feedback, ICR2 ends up being a very difficult sim. I really wish ICR2 had engine braking designed in to it- that is probably my favorite part of GP2- carefully modulating my speed without having to stab on the brake all the time. Also, GP2 has a real advantage with it's realistic wheel-spin and brake-lock simulation- ICR2 has always had a bit of a problem with the brake in particular being essentially lock-free. But so far I still like the AI in ICR2 better. It is deadly, it doesn't give an inch, but once you know it's quirks, you can really imagine there's an intelligence opposite you. Maybe GP2's will grow on me, but so far, I feel they are kind of dull. And they do punt you quite a lot- any of you get shoved out in to the marbles by an AI guy, only to get black-flagged for trying to take a shortcut?! That's always a kicker. GP2 really takes an awful lot in to account- I had a car spitting a cloud of oil in front of me for a whole lap today. Was amazing. GP2 is amazing. I feel sure ICR2 set a kind of standard. Detroit!?! Wow, you must really be a hard-core ICR2er! Great! My fav is Long Beach. It would be wonderfull if ICR2 didn't have those damn Jersey barriers; kerbs are absolutely amazing in GP2. I guess that was the next step in the eacing sim evolution. <...>

John, did you actually give GP2 a decent chance before you came to these conclusions? I felt just like you say for about the first 2 hours of playing GP2, pretty graphics and sounds but not all that realistic. Then I turned down the graphics, turned off all the driving aids and started messing with the car setups. I think all the default car setups are equivalent to the EASY setups that came with ICR2, to actually compete in GP2 you will have to tune the setups and in effect make the car a lot more nervous and realistic handling. You will have to drop wing, lose downforce and extend the gear ratios out, then you will see that the game really becomes a challenge. By then you will be able to keep up and even sometimes pass the oponents, here is where the game really shines, the oponents have some great AI, they will fake you out in the turns, make you defend your line etc. All this time you will be struggling to keep the car from spinning in the turns and chicanes, without all the downforce, this happens very easily. I still feel that the damage model is not as realistic as I would like, it is the one thing that feels arcadish, but hopefully the damage model can be fixed in a patch. Something along the lines of ICR2's damage choices would make it alot better. I am also a longtime fan of ICR2 and Papyrus, and own all their games since Indy 500, but I think if you don't give GP2 a chance you will be missing out on a terrific racing experience. Cheers. --John -- ------------------- John (Joao) Silva http://weber.u.washington.edu/~jsilva Seattle, Washington USA.

I agree with the tone thing !! Nice debate guys !! Like to see/hear more of it.

I think the problem is that GP2 shipped with some very slow and downforce-heavy default setups, unlike ICR2 which gave you some easy setups but also some ACE setups too. If you modify your Monza setup in order to be able to keep up with the higher level oponents you will have to give up lots of wing and downforce to achieve decent straightaway speeds, once you do this, you will see just how great the driving model is, no longer can you turn the wheel and pour on the gas, unless you want to end up facing the wrong way in a cloud of smoke <G>. This of course is with no steering/traction/opposite-lock aids on. I think people will judge this sim too early with the default setups, much like when a person first starts it with all the driving aids on and says, hey this is too easy, once all that stuff is turned off though, you really see the realism shine. When I first got GP2, I spent the first 2 hours saying, well it's nice, but not living up to all the hype, just an improved GP1 with pretty graphics and sound, however once I tuned down the graphics and turned off the driving aids and spent some time driving I began to appreciate just how nice the driving model feels. I really encourage people to go ahead and modify the setups, drop the car down a few mm, add packers, loose some wing, and you will see just what a handfull these cars are. Of course with some decent practice you will also be amazed at just what a terrific driving experience GP2 gives. You will soon find yourself shouting with joy in a puddle of sweat as you shave .200 of a second off your record lap time, wondering how you managed to hold the gas pedal down while on the curbs in turn 5. Then again maybe I am just getting a bit too e***d and you will all tell me I am wrong <G>. Cheers. --John -- ------------------- John (Joao) Silva http://weber.u.washington.edu/~jsilva Seattle, Washington USA.

I agree with both of you, I have one problem however. Why do you slagg off the other product to promote the one you favour, this is just not constructive.