GPL 65 is out :)

"Robert Gravel" <rgravel@@rocketmailNOSPAM.com> wrote in message news:rahkc.35301$[email hidden]... > http://55and65.speedgeezers.com/gpl65/ Damn you beat me to it ;-) Fast server right now too, big thanks to Paul Jackson & Speegeezers for hosting, particularly after the recent problems. Malc.

can't seem to open the link..in the northeastern US DC "Malc" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:MPhkc.37529$Y%[email hidden]...

Quoted text (12 lines)

> "Robert Gravel" <rgravel@@rocketmailNOSPAM.com> wrote in message > news:rahkc.35301$[email hidden]... > > http://55and65.speedgeezers.com/gpl65/ > > Damn you beat me to it ;-) > > Fast server right now too, big thanks to Paul Jackson & Speegeezers for > hosting, particularly after the recent problems. > > Malc. > >

> http://55and65.speedgeezers.com/gpl65/ Currently a bit puzzled. It seems to do a lot of installing, and Igor works fine, but I don't seem to have a 65mod anywhere I can find. Must look harder :-) Maybe it's because GPL isn't installed on my machine, merely copied from an old installation. Andrew "slow learner" McP

On Fri, 30 Apr 2004 03:04 +0100 (BST), [email hidden] (Andrew MacPherson) wrote: >Currently a bit puzzled. It seems to do a lot of installing, and Igor >works fine, but I don't seem to have a 65mod anywhere I can find. Must >look harder :-) You should have a pile of new (and mostly unnecessary) exe's in your GPL folder. Make a shortcut to gpl65.exe and call it "Grand Prix Legends 1965" or some such. I'm not sure why there's not an icon for it made by default for offline use. Jason

Andrew MacPherson <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (11 lines)

> > > http://55and65.speedgeezers.com/gpl65/ > > Currently a bit puzzled. It seems to do a lot of installing, and Igor > works fine, but I don't seem to have a 65mod anywhere I can find. Must > look harder :-) > > Maybe it's because GPL isn't installed on my machine, merely copied from > an old installation. > > Andrew "slow learner" McP

Could be that, but also make sure to select it in gem 2+.

In article <TAikc.52$[email hidden]>, [email hidden] (JP) wrote: > Could be that, but also make sure to select it in gem 2+. Thanks guys, turns out I missed something rather obvious... the GEM+ installed screen sat behind all my windows! :-) <blush> Igor just fired up after what I thought was full installation and I wasn't looking for something else. How embarrassing :-) Andrew "just plain slow" McP

"David Ciemny" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:umikc.4913$[email hidden]... > can't seem to open the link..in the northeastern US I'm in CT on broadband. No probs and only took 2 1/4 minutes for the big dload. Thanks for the hard work, guys ! Much appreciated !!

Andrew MacPherson <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (13 lines)

> In article <TAikc.52$[email hidden]>, [email hidden] (JP) > wrote: > > > Could be that, but also make sure to select it in gem 2+. > > Thanks guys, turns out I missed something rather obvious... the GEM+ > installed screen sat behind all my windows! :-) <blush> Igor just fired up > after what I thought was full installation and I wasn't looking for > something else. > > How embarrassing :-) > > Andrew "just plain slow" McP

Another thing, at least for me, sometimes I could swear I pick one mod, but when I fire up gpl, its some other anyway. Pick it again in gem, and its fine. Probably just operator error, but its happened more than once. Not a big deal, but anyway.

Andrew MacPherson <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (13 lines)

> In article <TAikc.52$[email hidden]>, [email hidden] (JP) > wrote: > > > Could be that, but also make sure to select it in gem 2+. > > Thanks guys, turns out I missed something rather obvious... the GEM+ > installed screen sat behind all my windows! :-) <blush> Igor just fired up > after what I thought was full installation and I wasn't looking for > something else. > > How embarrassing :-) > > Andrew "just plain slow" McP

p.s. You don't have to use gem if you don't want too; Jason's idea works just as well.

"JP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:eMikc.55$[email hidden]... > > Another thing, at least for me, sometimes I could swear I pick onemod, > but when I fire up gpl, its some other anyway. > Pick it again in gem, and its fine. Probably just operator error,but its > happened more than once. > Not a big deal, but anyway. I made the same mistake. There's one option to choose the carset (ie just the graphics) and another to change the physics. Malc.

In article <aNikc.56$[email hidden]>, [email hidden] (JP) wrote: > Jason's idea works just as well. I'm sure it will, but GEM+ seems to be an excellent interface. Very nice work from the team, and I've already thrown a donation into the pot for their efforts. My first impressions, having only driven a few practise laps and the start of a race at Monza so far, is that I'm unlikely to drive this much long term for the same reasons F2 never really grabbed me (even though I appreciated the class's contribution to online racing). The graphics are great (the track updates are nice, wringing more out of this old format, the cars are excellent, and I love the 3d modelling on the wheels from inside the cockpit), the integration with GEM & Igor is brilliant, but the performance of these cars leaves me fairly cold. The animal appeal of GPL for me has always been intimately tied up with that moment when you hit the pedal and unleash the engine power through those inadequate tyres. The knowledge that you're likely to go nowhere other than sideways if you get it wrong is still part of the thrill. Online though 65 could be a great recipe for closer F2-style racing. And if the mod helps beginners (there still are some, after all these years) and revives some interest in those, like me, who've been too busy flying Lomac or playing Far Cry, then that can't do any harm. I just need to learn to appreciate a less tense driving experience :-) Of course it's that which drew me deep into GPL in the first place! It's great that this mod's been developed. Thanks to everyone concerned. I'm going to give it a few weeks and see if I can't convert my brain to these things. I guess I've driven LFS more than GPL in recent months, and GPL has started to feel very slippery after LFS's modelling (for obvious reasons). But I'm never going to be able to hold 65 *and* 67 brake points in my head at once. It's bad enough trying to keep up to speed with 67 :-) Andrew McP FWIW when I start at the back of a 65mod race grid behind the AI I have no cockpit (or vehicle in the F10 view) until I'd driven a few yards... over the start/finish line it seems. Normal 67 works fine. No doubt a vid card driver issue... I'm kind of used to them with GPL though after all these years :-)

Andrew MacPherson <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (43 lines)

> In article <aNikc.56$[email hidden]>, [email hidden] (JP) > wrote: > > > Jason's idea works just as well. > > I'm sure it will, but GEM+ seems to be an excellent interface. Very nice > work from the team, and I've already thrown a donation into the pot for > their efforts. > > My first impressions, having only driven a few practise laps and the start > of a race at Monza so far, is that I'm unlikely to drive this much long > term for the same reasons F2 never really grabbed me (even though I > appreciated the class's contribution to online racing). The graphics are > great (the track updates are nice, wringing more out of this old format, > the cars are excellent, and I love the 3d modelling on the wheels from > inside the cockpit), the integration with GEM & Igor is brilliant, but the > performance of these cars leaves me fairly cold. The animal appeal of GPL > for me has always been intimately tied up with that moment when you hit > the pedal and unleash the engine power through those inadequate tyres. The > knowledge that you're likely to go nowhere other than sideways if you get > it wrong is still part of the thrill. > > Online though 65 could be a great recipe for closer F2-style racing. And > if the mod helps beginners (there still are some, after all these years) > and revives some interest in those, like me, who've been too busy flying > Lomac or playing Far Cry, then that can't do any harm. I just need to > learn to appreciate a less tense driving experience :-) Of course it's > that which drew me deep into GPL in the first place! > > It's great that this mod's been developed. Thanks to everyone concerned. > I'm going to give it a few weeks and see if I can't convert my brain to > these things. I guess I've driven LFS more than GPL in recent months, and > GPL has started to feel very slippery after LFS's modelling (for obvious > reasons). But I'm never going to be able to hold 65 *and* 67 brake points > in my head at once. It's bad enough trying to keep up to speed with 67 :-) > > Andrew McP > > FWIW when I start at the back of a 65mod race grid behind the AI I have no > cockpit (or vehicle in the F10 view) until I'd driven a few yards... over > the start/finish line it seems. Normal 67 works fine. No doubt a vid card > driver issue... I'm kind of used to them with GPL though after all these > years :-)

Yeah, I kind of felt the same way at first, but it grows on ya. Especially the twisty tracks, Mosport, MC, Zandy, etc. Great stuff in these cars. Once you get the hang of it, you can actually drift, etc. more than with the 67 version, and it somehow feels more realistic to me when doing so. >

On Thu, 29 Apr 2004 20:36:13 -0400, "Robert Gravel" <rgravel@@rocketmailNOSPAM.com> wrote: >http://55and65.speedgeezers.com/gpl65/ Any idea when they're going to patch igor so this shit doesn't happen 9 out of 10 times: Last host/join caused an authentication error: 'Problem with authentication - wrong exe?' Jason

Jason Moyer <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (12 lines)

> On Thu, 29 Apr 2004 20:36:13 -0400, "Robert Gravel" > <rgravel@@rocketmailNOSPAM.com> wrote: > > >http://55and65.speedgeezers.com/gpl65/ > > Any idea when they're going to patch igor so this shit doesn't happen > 9 out of 10 times: > > Last host/join caused an authentication error: 'Problem with > authentication - wrong exe?' > > Jason

Chances are the server had some settings wrong for that to happen. Try again, and check the Client Authentication info. before you join, and see what it says.

JP <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:SSjkc.71$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (19 lines)

> > Jason Moyer <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > On Thu, 29 Apr 2004 20:36:13 -0400, "Robert Gravel" > > <rgravel@@rocketmailNOSPAM.com> wrote: > > > > >http://55and65.speedgeezers.com/gpl65/ > > > > Any idea when they're going to patch igor so this shit doesn't happen > > 9 out of 10 times: > > > > Last host/join caused an authentication error: 'Problem with > > authentication - wrong exe?' > > > > Jason > > Chances are the server had some settings wrong for that to happen. Try > again, and check the Client Authentication info. before you join, and see > what it says.

I should have added, the Client stuff needs to be checked by the host. I'd be surprised if thats not whats causing it; they probably have something checked wrong there. Have someone uncheck it and it should work. > > >

In article <ZCjkc.68$[email hidden]>, [email hidden] (JP) wrote: > Especially the twisty tracks, Mosport, MC, Zandy, etc. Yes, Monza & Spa are recipes for falling asleep at the wheel, but a couple of laps at the Ring put a smile on my face... at least until I saw the times :-) Racing these online could be great fun, allowing concentration upon racing rather than staying on the track. Andrew McP

Andrew MacPherson <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (11 lines)

> In article <ZCjkc.68$[email hidden]>, [email hidden] (JP) > wrote: > > > Especially the twisty tracks, Mosport, MC, Zandy, etc. > > Yes, Monza & Spa are recipes for falling asleep at the wheel, but a couple > of laps at the Ring put a smile on my face... at least until I saw the > times :-) Racing these online could be great fun, allowing concentration > upon racing rather than staying on the track. > > Andrew McP

Exactly. Been in a few races, going side by side through corners, etc. Stuff that could never be done with the 67 versions.

"Robert Gravel" <rgravel@@rocketmailNOSPAM.com> wrote in message news:rahkc.35301$[email hidden]... > http://55and65.speedgeezers.com/gpl65/ > :-/ I'm getting an error message when I try to run GPL65. I'll toss out some of the particulars here in the hope that somebody might have a suggestion (I did also send an e-mail to the developer, as was advised in the debug file mentioned below.) Thanks for your suggestions, Itazura What I did and what happened: 1. downloaded GPLS_1_1_Full.exe 2. double clicked on the above 3. watched as all the files unzipped to a temp folder 4. ran through the GEM+ 2 and Igor install wizard (accepted the terms, accepted the default installation directory, watched the progress window as files were copied...selected English as the language at some point). 5. received a message indicating that installation was compete -- confirmed that shortcuts for both GEM+ 2 and iGOR had been created on my desktop. 6. double-clicked the GEM+ 2 shortcut 7. chose the '65' year in a drop-down box in the upper left of the GEM+ interface, but kept everything else the same 8. clicked on the red box in the lower left corner 9. saw an indication that some files were being transferred, but then received an error message indicating that GEM+ had encountered an error from which it could not recover. This led to GEM+ shutting down, and the creation of a large "debug" file, which I briefly glanced at. 10. Tried double-clicking the GEM+ icon again...this time immediately received a small popup saying GEM+ 2 with only an "OK" button on it...clicked "OK". The "Initialising" GEM+ splash screen displayed for a few seconds before I got dumped back to the debug file. This time, however, the debug file was massive....listing nearly every file and program on my C: drive. 11. Uninstalled GEM+ 2 and iGOR through "add and remove programs" tool. 12. Launched and ran original GPL to confirm that it was working. It was -- ran a few laps...had some fun. 13. Ran through steps 1-6 again....but this time, the main GEM+ window never opened, and instead things skipped straight to the step 10 outcome (basically, straight to the error message/debug file after the "initialising" screen. System particulars: Win98SE (Japanese version) GeForce 4 Ti4600 128MB graphics card with detonator 45.23 drivers DX 9.0b 512MB RAM USB joystick (CH Products) and USB MS Sidewinder FF wheel/pedals

On Thu, 29 Apr 2004 20:36:13 -0400, "Robert Gravel" <rgravel@@rocketmailNOSPAM.com> wrote: >http://55and65.speedgeezers.com/gpl65/ I like what they did to the tire model A LOT. Granted, it was going to be easier to drive than F2 because of the higher grip to power ratio, but I like that it seems there's a bit more flex in the tires and a little less slip angle. It reminds me a lot of PTA to be honest, with a similar power to grip to weight ratio, and with a tire model that gives you really good feedback at the limit and punishes your times if you get sideways. It's a total blast online (when it works). I wish they'd release a similar workover for the 67 cars, or at least a full 66 mod. Jason

On Fri, 30 Apr 2004 04:00 +0100 (BST), [email hidden] (Andrew MacPherson) wrote: >FWIW when I start at the back of a 65mod race grid behind the AI I have no >cockpit (or vehicle in the F10 view) until I'd driven a few yards... over >the start/finish line it seems. Normal 67 works fine. No doubt a vid card >driver issue... I'm kind of used to them with GPL though after all these >years :-) This happens when you use the D3D rasterizer, and the Z buffer has to handle more than 31000 polygons. You can solve this by disableing the Z buffer in CORE.INI, although the performance will be less. Cheers! Remco

try using the lite version of the cars. took care of the problem below for me . DC ----- Original Message ----- From: "Remco Moedt" <[email hidden]> Newsgroups: rec.autos.simulators Sent: Friday, April 30, 2004 4:59 AM Subject: Re: GPL 65 is out :) > On Fri, 30 Apr 2004 04:00 +0100 (BST), > [email hidden] (Andrew MacPherson) wrote: > > >FWIW when I start at the back of a 65mod race grid behind the AI I haveno

Quoted text (15 lines)

> >cockpit (or vehicle in the F10 view) until I'd driven a few yards... over > >the start/finish line it seems. Normal 67 works fine. No doubt a vid card > >driver issue... I'm kind of used to them with GPL though after all these > >years :-) > > This happens when you use the D3D rasterizer, and the Z buffer has to > handle more than 31000 polygons. You can solve this by disableing the > Z buffer in CORE.INI, although the performance will be less. > > > Cheers! > > > Remco >

"Remco Moedt" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Fri, 30 Apr 2004 04:00 +0100 (BST), > [email hidden] (Andrew MacPherson) wrote: > > >FWIW when I start at the back of a 65mod race grid behind the AI I haveno

Quoted text (15 lines)

> >cockpit (or vehicle in the F10 view) until I'd driven a few yards... over > >the start/finish line it seems. Normal 67 works fine. No doubt a vid card > >driver issue... I'm kind of used to them with GPL though after all these > >years :-) > > This happens when you use the D3D rasterizer, and the Z buffer has to > handle more than 31000 polygons. You can solve this by disableing the > Z buffer in CORE.INI, although the performance will be less. > > > Cheers! > > > Remco >

Remco Moedt <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted text (12 lines)

> On Fri, 30 Apr 2004 04:00 +0100 (BST), > [email hidden] (Andrew MacPherson) wrote: > > >FWIW when I start at the back of a 65mod race grid behind the AI I have no > >cockpit (or vehicle in the F10 view) until I'd driven a few yards... over > >the start/finish line it seems. Normal 67 works fine. No doubt a vid card > >driver issue... I'm kind of used to them with GPL though after all these > >years :-) > > This happens when you use the D3D rasterizer, and the Z buffer has to > handle more than 31000 polygons. You can solve this by disableing the > Z buffer in CORE.INI, although the performance will be less.

Wasn't this also a problem for some people when the detail bias is at 100%? Mine is set to 99% for just this reason (and I still get the occasional disintigrating cars in replays). HTH, Kendt

Jason Moyer wrote:

Quoted text (18 lines)

> On Thu, 29 Apr 2004 20:36:13 -0400, "Robert Gravel" > <rgravel@@rocketmailNOSPAM.com> wrote: > >> http://55and65.speedgeezers.com/gpl65/ > > I like what they did to the tire model A LOT. Granted, it was going > to be easier to drive than F2 because of the higher grip to power > ratio, but I like that it seems there's a bit more flex in the tires > and a little less slip angle. It reminds me a lot of PTA to be > honest, with a similar power to grip to weight ratio, and with a tire > model that gives you really good feedback at the limit and punishes > your times if you get sideways. It's a total blast online (when it > works). > > I wish they'd release a similar workover for the 67 cars, or at least > a full 66 mod. > > Jason\

For what ever good it does, I DITTO your post.

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

Quoted text (15 lines)

> "Robert Gravel" <rgravel@@rocketmailNOSPAM.com> wrote in message > news:rahkc.35301$[email hidden]... > > http://55and65.speedgeezers.com/gpl65/ > > > > :-/ I'm getting an error message when I try to run GPL65. I'll toss out some > of the particulars here in the hope that somebody might have a suggestion (I > did also send an e-mail to the developer, as was advised in the debug file > mentioned below.) > > Thanks for your suggestions, > Itazura > > > What I did and what happened:

<snipped> You must have the cpufix patch (1.2.0.2) applied before you run GEM+. Was it?

> > > > > > What I did and what happened: > <snipped> > > You must have the cpufix patch (1.2.0.2) applied before you run GEM+. Wasit? Yes -- may be some complication introduced by the Japanese language OS.

SS wrote: > received an error message indicating that GEM+ had encountered an error from > which it could not recover. This led to GEM+ shutting down, and the > creation of a large "debug" file, which I briefly glanced at. > 10. Tried double-clicking the GEM+ icon again...this time immediately > received a small popup saying GEM+ 2 with only an "OK" button on > it...clicked "OK". The "Initialising" GEM+ splash screen displayed for a I got this kind of error and found out that my gpl.exe was set to read-only. After fixing that, GEM worked ok. 65 is fun! Regards, Rudy -------------------- GPLRank: -22

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] (Kendt Eklund) wrote: > Wasn't this also a problem for some people when > the detail bias is at 100%? Thanks for the other suggestions guys, but that's worked perfectly Kendt. And the view from the back of the grid is *superb* with all these excellently modelled cars. I didn't have this problem with 67 and updated cars, but I guess the tweaked tracks took me over a threshold. I only started GPL65 up to test it, but I had to drive a bit because it just looked so good. Andrew McP

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] (Andrew MacPherson) wrote: > but the performance of these cars leaves > me fairly cold For the record I just want to say this is true... until you realise you're using 67 setups for the 65 cars. Download some of the setups from the sticky posts in the GPL forums at http://forum.rscnet.org/ (some of which are every bit as wild and scary as many 67 setups) and it's a different game altogether. The cars can be thrown around just as much (and almost as accidentally) as the 67 cars, but they do seem to be much more "catchable" when they do go. In fact I've survived some ridiculous sideways moments... maybe too ridiculous, I should have lost it, I'm sure :-) Andrew McP

I am calling for/begging for/pleading for a reworked '67 .exe with the new tire model. If I had the skills I would do it myself and distribute it, too. The original GPL will live on with it...and wither away without it. I know which way I lean! Apparently it is already done, but no one is willing to unleash it due to quite pedantic concerns about hotlap records, etc. :( Hope that changes very quickly. Marc "Jason Moyer" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (18 lines)

> On Thu, 29 Apr 2004 20:36:13 -0400, "Robert Gravel" > <rgravel@@rocketmailNOSPAM.com> wrote: > > >http://55and65.speedgeezers.com/gpl65/ > > I like what they did to the tire model A LOT. Granted, it was going > to be easier to drive than F2 because of the higher grip to power > ratio, but I like that it seems there's a bit more flex in the tires > and a little less slip angle. It reminds me a lot of PTA to be > honest, with a similar power to grip to weight ratio, and with a tire > model that gives you really good feedback at the limit and punishes > your times if you get sideways. It's a total blast online (when it > works). > > I wish they'd release a similar workover for the 67 cars, or at least > a full 66 mod. > > Jason

On Sun, 2 May 2004 19:14:42 -0400, "Marc Collins" <[email hidden]> wrote: >I am calling for/begging for/pleading for a reworked '67 .exe with the new >tire model. If I had the skills I would do it myself and distribute it, >too. The original GPL will live on with it...and wither away without it. I >know which way I lean! Apparently it is already done, but no one is willing >to unleash it due to quite pedantic concerns about hotlap records, etc. >:( Hope that changes very quickly. I would expect a realism-patch for GPL would raise the laptimes if anything, considering the real cars came nowhere near the times even a mediocre GPL driver can attain. Jason

Jason Moyer wrote: > I would expect a realism-patch for GPL would raise the laptimes if > anything, considering the real cars came nowhere near the times even a > mediocre GPL driver can attain. Oh yeah? I'm nowhere near alien, but know Zandvoort like the back of me hand, and after two years still cannot get near that super hot 1:24.6 that Graham Hill did in his very real car, back then. (Currently at 1:25.3 myself) Silverstone IRL was an 1:25.3 and that is hyper alien even now, and Clark's 8:04 at the Ring is something few GPL drivers achieve. Papy definitely was off on a few track, but not on all. Regards, Rudy -------------------- GPLRank: -22

Ruud Dingemans <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:c74a6e$fu8$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (20 lines)

> Jason Moyer wrote: > > > I would expect a realism-patch for GPL would raise the laptimes if > > anything, considering the real cars came nowhere near the times even a > > mediocre GPL driver can attain. > > > Oh yeah? I'm nowhere near alien, but know Zandvoort like the back of me > hand, and after two years still cannot get near that super hot 1:24.6 > that Graham Hill did in his very real car, back then. (Currently at > 1:25.3 myself) > > Silverstone IRL was an 1:25.3 and that is hyper alien even now, and > Clark's 8:04 at the Ring is something few GPL drivers achieve. Papy > definitely was off on a few track, but not on all. > > > Regards, Rudy > -------------------- > GPLRank: -22

Wouldn't the differences be attributed to the different engines used start/mid/finish of season ? What, Lotus, Eagle, and Honda all changed engine and/or chassis.