Race Sim Central
Rec.Autos.Simulators Archive

Stop Flaming Papyrus/Sierra

18 posts by 9 people · 26 Nov 1997 - 29 Nov 1997

I have been lurking in this news group for about 2 years now. Mostly here to get information on Setups, Patches, Car Sets etc... Not very often do I let my opinion be known, but I have an urge to let it be known right now. I haven't been in here (R.A.S) for a while, and I just checked in to see what's up, and happened to come across the flames to Micheal Carver and Papyrus. When it comes to Racing Sims, I'm ***ed. I have bought almost every Racing Sim (and yes I have EVERY sim Papyrus has produced) that has ever come out. I've seen some crappy ones, and I've seen some good ones, and as far as I'm concerned, not anyone can touch Papyrus when it comes to making a racing SIM. For that reason, I don't even question a Papyrus SIM when it becomes available, I just buy it. For all of you who have a problem with the products not being delivered on time or not being 100% bug free... Hey! Welcome to the real world. I too am a developer and let me tell you, it is not an easy thing to estimate when a product will become avialable with so many unknowns, and changes in technology. You take your best shot at when it'll be ready, and go ahead and tell the public, and guess what? Sometimes you don't make it. But 99 times out of 100 I would rather wait and get a better product than have developers rush and cut corners to deliver inferior product. And let me ask all you who are doing the complaining... Are you still playing??? I would take a chance and say that you are, because there are no better sims out there. Dean
Tom Hansen 26 Nov 1997#384376
I fundementally agree with what you are saying. I tend to advocate a company like Papyrus that generally does a good job with their products. However, much of the complaining is not unwarranted. Papyrus - like all other software companies - tend to focus efforts where money can be made - in leiu of addressing problems and/or limitations with the existing products. We all know that N2 still lacks several fundemental pieces that basically make racing 100% races against the artificial cars impossible. I figure that another small incremental effort is required to make this sim truly enjoyable. Some intelligence in the AI is probably number 1. This almost but not quite implementation gets a lot of sim racers very frustrated and thereby cause them to pursue an outlet - yes - a flame on this newsgroup. This does not mean that they dislike N2 or other Papyrus products or that they will never use them or buy them again. It does mean that these people (paying customers) are very frustrated that these racing simulations are almost - but not quite finished. I think the voice of these people should matter since loyalty in ones customer base if very important. /TomH
Joe McGinn 26 Nov 1997#384378
>And let me ask all you who are doing the complaining... Are you still >playing??? No. Got tired of the frame-rate, waiting for 3dfx patches. (SODA I haven't bought yet, though I will when the 3dfx patch is relased.) Joe
Joe McGinn 26 Nov 1997#384379
>I fundementally agree with what you are saying. I tend to advocate a >company like Papyrus that generally does a good job with their products. >However, much of the complaining is not unwarranted. Precisely. And when the "complaining" is not unwarranted (i.e., they are real, detailed complaints, not generic "It SUX!" mesages) they are doing a SERVICE to both other gamers (by pressuring for better games) and to the developer (by telling them what we want). If everyone listened to these goody-two-shoes who seem to think it's a sin to ever complain about anything, then nothing would ever improve. Joe
(snip) Papyrus - like all other software companies - tend to focus efforts where money can be made - (unsnip) Show me a businessman who doesn't focus efforts where money can be made and I'll show you a future bankrupt. -- Bruce. "I envy people who drink. At least they have something to blame everything on." (Oscar Levant)
I am also here mainly for setups, patches, individual cars and websites that are related to Nascar 2. I read most of the postings articles (good or bad) that are related Nascar 2 but I am finally going to respond since I am also in the software industry. It is true that Nascar 2 does have its bugs but these bugs are NOT stopping me from enjoying a race. What really gets me is what people consider a bug? When Winston Cup went to double file restarts and Nascar 2 still had single file restarts some people were posting this as a bug. This is NOT A BUG. Just because a product doesn't do what you want it to do it doesn't mean it is a bug or the product sucks. I have never seen a piece of software that was bug free or would do everything that I would like it to do, that is why they have versions which address bugs and enhancements requests. I have seen some postings that request that you have the ability to drive to Victory Lane or be able to drive to the garage, I would rather see Papyrus spend time fixing the current bugs that they do have, instead of adding these requests. I have seen postings flaming Papyrus for being late with their release date, I would rather see the release date pushed back so they can fix the bugs that they do find. No matter how much a product is tested, they will never find all the bugs, due to the fact that it is impossible to replicate every environment out there. Papyrus is the best race sim on the market today, I have purchased IndyCar 1& 2 and Nascar 1& 2 and the expansion packs and I am satisfied with the product. I wait for the patches to come out which address some of the problems and continue on racing. I would like to thank some of the employees that work for Papyrus from helping out with answering some of the questions that are posted in the newsgroup on there own time. It shows that they care about their product and what you have to say. I would also like thank the people who have designed cars, put up track settings, websites, and utilities for Nascar Racing. It has made the game more enjoyable. For all the people that claim the product sucks or hate the product I have some helpful advice for: 1. DONT PLAY IT, 2. Get the original box the product came in and put the software back in the box and return it. So we don't have to listen to you complain. 3. If you think you can do better, program your own racing sim, but wait What tracks will we race at? you don't have any of the rights to any of the tracks so good luck.
Point taken, score one for Joe and Bruce. I hope that you are right, and that Papyrus is smart enough to use the constructive feedback that is in here. And I will make an ammendment to my original post to state: " I too sometimes get frustrated with some of the problems (mostly AI related), but hey, I still love it." Dean
Quoted text (12 lines)> >I fundementally agree with what you are saying. I tend to advocate a > >company like Papyrus that generally does a good job with their products. > >However, much of the complaining is not unwarranted. > Precisely. And when the "complaining" is not unwarranted (i.e., they > are real, detailed complaints, not generic "It SUX!" mesages) they are > doing a SERVICE to both other gamers (by pressuring for better games) > and to the developer (by telling them what we want). If everyone > listened to these goody-two-shoes who seem to think it's a sin to ever > complain about anything, then nothing would ever improve. > Joe
Joe McGinn 27 Nov 1997#384525
>Point taken, score one for Joe and Bruce. I hope that you are right, and >that Papyrus is smart enough to use the constructive feedback that is in >here. Well, to their credit I think they probably have, and the 3dfx patches/support will be coming, albeit a bit slowly. Joe
I've yet to see any "goody two shoes" who think it's wrong to complain. I have however seen quite a few people that wish folks would engage their brain before their mouth, and yet mnore people who wish that people would offer something constructive and in a civil manner. That's not directed at you, just a general comment. We've seen developers around here less and less, and that must be due in large part to the grief that they get. There's nothing wrong with making your feelings known, but flaming someone for trying to help by offering a delivery estimate will serve only to make sure they never try to help in future. Telling a company that a game "sucks" is worse than useless. Nothing wrong with complaining when it's warranted, but just try to imagine that you're sitting in a pub chatting with the guy. Imagine somebody in that situation telling you that the result of your last two years effort "sucks"? Why should communicating via usenet be any different? Cheers! John
Joe McGinn 28 Nov 1997#384668
Quoted text (16 lines)>I've yet to see any "goody two shoes" who think it's wrong to >complain. I have however seen quite a few people that wish folks would >engage their brain before their mouth, and yet mnore people who wish >that people would offer something constructive and in a civil manner. >That's not directed at you, just a general comment. We've seen >developers around here less and less, and that must be due in large >part to the grief that they get. There's nothing wrong with making >your feelings known, but flaming someone for trying to help by >offering a delivery estimate will serve only to make sure they never >try to help in future. Telling a company that a game "sucks" is worse >than useless. >Nothing wrong with complaining when it's warranted, but just try to >imagine that you're sitting in a pub chatting with the guy. Imagine >somebody in that situation telling you that the result of your last >two years effort "sucks"? Why should communicating via usenet be any >different?
But hardly anyone has been making these kinds of statements about Papyrus (maybe one or two kids posts out of thousands - way tamer than on most newsgroups). Joe
>But hardly anyone has been making these kinds of statements about >Papyrus (maybe one or two kids posts out of thousands - way tamer than >on most newsgroups). No "defence" of Papyrus, I was speaking generally - MS/TRI, Microprose, Psygnosis, whoever. I've seen plenty of "CPR sucks" messages, which are not only totally useless in terms of giving information to developers of what they should be fixing, but totally wrong. It doesn't "suck", just needs some attention is specific areas. Actually here it is generally more sane than some other newsgroups, but since I am also participating over on CompuServe in the Sports Sims forum, I can't help but compare and contrast. This place is jungle-like compared to the measured comments more common there. Cheers! John
CART Te 28 Nov 1997#384670
Speaking as one of the team who reads each posting to decide what we should and should not consider for implementation, it goes without saying that any posting that has a clear agenda to discredit a product, publisher or dev team for no reason other than taking cheap shots immediately discounts itself from any further consideration. I don't suppose anyone who submits a posting entitled "XYZ SUX!" really cares if the dev team read their nonsense or not. But if you do want to make a contribution to this newsgroup and feel that you are helping to raise the quality bar further in your favorite simulation category then a balanced assessment of what you like and dislike goes a long way to getting your posting printed out and discussed during the next team meeting. And acted on. And to your point about publishers not visiting r.a.s. any more - I can totally understand this. It is extremely hard work sometimes*** around here to read the bizarre "MS *** theory" threads and cheap shots posted here. It is the few constructive postings that keep us coming back - a nugget of insight here can make all the difference as we decide what to do next. Anyway, this posting isn't going to make a bit of difference to the vocal minority of generic bashers (I notice the flames have moved on from CPR and onto the next victim already - they have my sympathy). But if you wonder why your voice isn't being heard or heeded - think about your message.
Quoted text (29 lines)>> Precisely. And when the "complaining" is not unwarranted (i.e., they >> are real, detailed complaints, not generic "It SUX!" mesages) they are >> doing a SERVICE to both other gamers (by pressuring for better games) >> and to the developer (by telling them what we want). If everyone >> listened to these goody-two-shoes who seem to think it's a sin to ever >> complain about anything, then nothing would ever improve. >I've yet to see any "goody two shoes" who think it's wrong to >complain. I have however seen quite a few people that wish folks would >engage their brain before their mouth, and yet mnore people who wish >that people would offer something constructive and in a civil manner. >That's not directed at you, just a general comment. We've seen >developers around here less and less, and that must be due in large >part to the grief that they get. There's nothing wrong with making >your feelings known, but flaming someone for trying to help by >offering a delivery estimate will serve only to make sure they never >try to help in future. Telling a company that a game "sucks" is worse >than useless. >Nothing wrong with complaining when it's warranted, but just try to >imagine that you're sitting in a pub chatting with the guy. Imagine >somebody in that situation telling you that the result of your last >two years effort "sucks"? Why should communicating via usenet be any >different? >Cheers! >John >.
Joe McGinn 28 Nov 1997#384671
>Actually here it is generally more sane than some other newsgroups, >but since I am also participating over on CompuServe in the Sports >Sims forum, I can't help but compare and contrast. This place is >jungle-like compared to the measured comments more common there. I don't doubt it, the "civility standards" of CIS have always been higher than newsgroups. Probably in part because it's more expensive (at least it used to be) so there's a lot less kids there. Joe
Joe McGinn 28 Nov 1997#384672
I agree. There usually is more of this surrounding the hype (and sometimes over-expactations?) of new products. I hope you don't let it get to you. I appreciate your presense and feedback here on this forum. Joe
Tom Hansen 28 Nov 1997#384673
I agree - that was my point - hence "like all other software companies". I am only pointing out that this mentality often frustrates existing customers who are looking for fixes. /TomH
On Fri, 28 Nov 1997 11:37:04 -0800, "Dean (CART Team)" >Anyway, this posting isn't going to make a bit of difference to the vocal >minority of generic bashers (I notice the flames have moved on from CPR >and onto the next victim already - they have my sympathy). Yes, I would agree pretty much with what you said. I do however think it is dangerous to assume that because people move on to another product that means they are "generic bashers". Eventually pretty much everything has been said about a product, and a new one comes along (in this case F1RS and Andretti Racing) to capture people's attention and with issues for discussion and opinions for exchanging. That in itself doesn't change anything about, in this case, CPR - only you guys can do that with the quality of the patch. Best Regards, John

Sponsors

Affiliate Links

Sim Gaming Expo MOZA Racing Sim-Lab Fanatec TrakRacer Asetek Internet Privacy From NordVPN Dreamhost Capital One Credit Card Application Fanatical CDKeys Amazon Amazon UK Project Motor Racing iRacing Get your racing gloves, boots and more from Demon Tweeks. Enlist at Roberts Space Industries, developers of Star Citizen and Squadron 42


Back from the ashes since July, 2019. First created in 2001 with the merger of Legends Central (founded 1999) and simracing.dk.

A site by a sort of sim racer, for sim racers, about racing sims. News and information on both modern and historic sim racing software titles.

All products and licenses property of their respective owners.


Facebook Threads Bluesky Twitter Mastodon Instagram YouTube Tiktok Twitch Reddit Google News Apple News Subscribe via WordPress Flipboard eBay

Race Sim Central © 1999-2026 | Some links pay RSC a commission. Advertising does not equal endorsement.Cookie Policy