CPR: my final opinion

Everyone seems to be talking about CPR a lot the past few days since the patch. Well, I'm tired of reading and am going to give everyone what my final take is on the matter. I've played almost every race game there was made for the computer, way back to pole position on the Amiga, autobahn on the apple 2+, Most of the test drive games, on the Apple 2GS, and anything you can think of for the PC. I've tried them all, so I have some idea of what I'm talking about. On top of this, I have racing experience in karts, besides, running on ovals, short sprint tracks, and large road courses such as Daytona, Hallett, Topeka, etc. This is to say that I know what it's like to race in competition for real, not on any game network, I know how other cars react around you. The last race I was in had over 150 entries in just one class I ran. You have to know the cars around you and how they will drive, in order to move through the field and stay in front. With all this said, I have to say CPR is the biggest disappointment I have seen in driving simulators. Forget about frame rate; I have a p266 with a nVidia and 3dfx card, my computer does not suffer from frame rate. Forget about visuals, this is one of the best looking games I have ever seen, Pysgnosis's f1 being probably the best. My main gripe with this game is AI and handling. I'm sorry, but cars just don't behave like this. I'm on the pole at Michigan, We take the green, and Pruett takes a hard left right at the flag and takes the whole field including me out of the race. pathetic. The cars are not very responsive to adjustments in the pits. I have yet to find a setting that gives you smooth steering through the corners. You can't apply the brakes even in little increments without them locking up and you pushing into the wall. And about this yellow flag thing! First there is none in the original, people told you need full course yellows, so in the patch you give us local yellows, and the cars don't slow down anyway so there might as well not be any, What part of we want full course yellows did you not understand? Or did you leave them out because you know if you put them in that is the only condition we will race under? You know, I've only tried maybe five different tracks out of the 17 on the game. Do you know why? Let me tell you why! Because I get so frustrated after trying the first few, I have a choice, either smash the computer or shut it off. You know it is almost impossible for a beginning player to make it more than 10 laps at any track without being taken out of the race by either a)the wall, b) the other cars, or c) all of the above. How can you play a game like this? Why should anyone play a game like this? You know what makes games like Nascar 2 or Grand Prix 2 so great, is not the visuals, or the interface, or the options, or the frame rate. (GP2 has one of the harder interfaces of the games I've tried.) What makes these games great is the fact that not only can you control the car around the track, and you can customize them enough to get a decent frame rate, but when you find the right difficulty level for yourself, you can race with other cars on the track for several laps in a row, fight with the computer cars, work you ass off for ten laps in a row just to get a few tenths closer to that car in front of you. They allow you to make consistent laps, you can adjust your car with ease, and you can make realistic passes on other cars. What is really neat about GP2 is if you catch a car that is running close to you , let's say you try to outbreak him into a corner. A lot of the cars will see this and try to go into the corner deeper, to keep you from getting by. This is one of the things that gets your mind thinking that you are racing against an opponent and not the computer. There are no other games that do that as well as GP2. Where Nascar excells, is the side by side racing you can do lap after lap. There is nothing like working a guy from the outside groove for five-ten laps, and taking him on the outside and making it stick, what satisfaction, and immersion. I recently tried the TOCA demo, and while I've seen some people complain in this group about frame rate, those of you will the muscle to run it have to admit that car model is a blast to drive around the track. Even the mighty Papyrus could learn a thing or two about the AI those cars have! Those cars race hard with each other, the game just needs more difficulty levels to make it more challenging. CPR provides none of the above things. If you can't get into the game it isn't worth playing. I'm sorry, but I've tried this game about two dozen time, and I've really tried hard to like it. It just has too many flaws, even with the patch. And I've decided I'm not wasting my time on it anymore, not when I've got N2, GP2, ICR2, SODA, F1, DD, and other fun games to play. I might consider dragging it out again if they try another patch, but as of today, I'm taking it off my drive for good. Long live Papyrus.

I agree with just about all of your points in full, but I still believe the remaining problems can be addressed in future patches. Microsoft...will they!?!?!?

I've made the same decision. CPR is toast. If you want to give yourself a real treat, get a copy of Ubi Soft F1RS. In the US, call 1/800-UBI-SOFT. It's as awesome as GP2, with gorgeous graphics and a great physics engine. You'll need a 3Dfx card for it to run well, but you can get a Guillemot Maxi Gamer 3D* for $150 at Electronics Boutique. It's worth it! The menus are awful, and some of the tracks are unfortunately flat, but running around Monaco with all detail turned on just has to be experienced to be believed. And I only have an AMD K6/200 with Monster 3D. Your comments about CPR are very articulate and I totally agree with you. I have a lot of racing experience in real cars, karts, and many sims, and I find the behavior of CPR's car to be ludicrous. After F1RS, CPR's graphics seem mighty dull, too. Alison *Download the Monster 3D drivers from Diamond if necessary to make the Ubi Soft installer recognize the Maxi Gamer as a Voodoo card. Eagle Woman Remove the spam blocker NOSPAM to email me. http://www.nh.ultranet.com/~alison

Oops! Forgot you said you already had a 3Dfx card. F1RS looks at least as good as Psygnosis F1 and plays so much better, it's in a different universe. It's *well* worth the 45 bucks. Eagle Woman Remove the spam blocker NOSPAM to email me. http://www.nh.ultranet.com/~alison

Go with FIRS

I remember when I was in Juniour High back in grade 7, the school used to have Apple 2E's and they had Autobahn, I spend many lunch hours playing that game! (I never seemed to be able to beat my friends at it, however!) John

I agree with you 100% on everything but the car handling aspect, it could use a little more tweaking, but I find it to be quite nice. As fo everything else, it stinks.

not the visuals, or the interface, or the options, or the frame rate. (GP2 has one of the harder interfaces of the games I've tried.) What makes these games great is the fact that not only can you control the car around the track, and you can customize them enough to get a decent frame rate, but when you find the right difficulty level for yourself, you can race with other cars on the track for several laps in a row, fight with the computer cars, work you ass off for ten laps in a row just to get a few tenths closer to that car in front of you. They allow you to make consistent laps, you can adjust your car with ease, and you can make realistic passes on other cars. What is really neat about GP2 is if you catch a car that is running close to you , let's say you try to outbreak him into a corner. A lot of the cars will see this and try to go into the corner deeper, to keep you from getting by. This is one of the things that gets your mind thinking that you are racing against an opponent and not the computer. There are no other games that do that as well as GP2. Where Nascar excells, is the side by side racing you can do lap after lap. There is nothing like working a guy from the outside groove for five-ten laps, and taking him on the outside and making it stick, what satisfaction, and immersion. ... << Absolutely positively right on. Well said. Until would-be and pretender sim race producers understand this then they are not even thinking the right thoughts to conceptualise what a sim racing program is all about. Phillip McNelley The Grandprix 2 Unofficial Manual http://www.powerup.com.au/~philmak/GP2MAN/

You seem to be doing a bit of fence hopping here Alison, does this mean you are going to change your review again. I totally agreed with your first review and couldn't understand why you went and changed it. If you are going to review sims, you cant let yourself be persuaded by outside influences, if your review causes a stink then so what if its what you believe then stick with it. Todd

Quoted text (19 lines)

>I've made the same decision. CPR is toast. >Your comments about CPR are very articulate and I totally agree with >you. I have a lot of racing experience in real cars, karts, and many >sims, and I find the behavior of CPR's car to be ludicrous. After F1RS, >CPR's graphics seem mighty dull, too. >Alison >*Download the Monster 3D drivers from Diamond if necessary to make the >Ubi Soft installer recognize the Maxi Gamer as a Voodoo card. >Eagle Woman >Remove the spam blocker NOSPAM to email me. >http://www.nh.ultranet.com/~alison

Quoted text (7 lines)

> You seem to be doing a bit of fence hopping here Alison, does this mean you >are going to change your review again. I totally agreed with your first >review and couldn't understand why you went and changed it. If you are going >to review sims, you cant let yourself be persuaded by outside influences, if >your review causes a stink then so what if its what you believe then stick >with it. > Todd

I have to object to this. People aren't robots. First impressions can stick or be changed by spending more time with something. Racing sims, in particular, have a rather long learning curve. Its not uncommon for it to take several weeks to really decide ultimately whether or not your'e satisfied with a game. I can relate to Alison's mixed opinion and how initially she hated what she saw, then she dealt with some of her issues and captured some of the experiences she wanted. Then ultimately, she realized she'd gotten about as good at it as she wanted to get, and realized that even with all the practice in the world, it wasn't making much of a difference, so she realized the problem was not HER, but the game. In every case, Alison has backed up her opinion with solid facts and observations, and even though I don't agree with everything she says, I've seen enough to realize that her reasoning is her own. She's a human being, just like the rest of us, and allowed to alter her opinion as her experiences increase. Why are you so interested in seeing opinions be static and eternal? Randy Randy Magruder Contributing Reviewer Digital Sportspage http://www.digitalsports.com

Quoted text (24 lines)

>I have to object to this. People aren't robots. First impressions >can stick or be changed by spending more time with something. Racing >sims, in particular, have a rather long learning curve. Its not >uncommon for it to take several weeks to really decide ultimately >whether or not your'e satisfied with a game. I can relate to Alison's >mixed opinion and how initially she hated what she saw, then she dealt >with some of her issues and captured some of the experiences she >wanted. Then ultimately, she realized she'd gotten about as good at >it as she wanted to get, and realized that even with all the practice >in the world, it wasn't making much of a difference, so she realized >the problem was not HER, but the game. In every case, Alison has >backed up her opinion with solid facts and observations, and even >though I don't agree with everything she says, I've seen enough to >realize that her reasoning is her own. She's a human being, just like >the rest of us, and allowed to alter her opinion as her experiences >increase. >Why are you so interested in seeing opinions be static and eternal? >Randy >Randy Magruder >Contributing Reviewer >Digital Sportspage >http://www.digitalsports.com

First off I must apologise to Alison for not going to her page before posting. The fact is that the review has been changed again and once again I agree with her 100%. I dont however agree with you . Alison has taken on a job (hobby) whatever to review racing sims and from what I have read she does a very good job. A reviewers job is come up with an impression as quickly as possible in order to give other people the benefit of their experience. It would be a bit silly for a magazine reviewer to print a different review in 3 separate issues. From her own experience I think Alison is capable of coming up with a correct first impression quickly and I believe she did that in her first review. The point I was trying to make was that I think her second review was not motivated by her own findings but by the stink the first review had caused here and with Dean announcing his intentions to leave on her review thread. Todd

Quoted text (32 lines)

> > You seem to be doing a bit of fence hopping here Alison, does this mean you > >are going to change your review again. I totally agreed with your first > >review and couldn't understand why you went and changed it. If you are going > >to review sims, you cant let yourself be persuaded by outside influences, if > >your review causes a stink then so what if its what you believe then stick > >with it. > > Todd > I have to object to this. People aren't robots. First impressions > can stick or be changed by spending more time with something. Racing > sims, in particular, have a rather long learning curve. Its not > uncommon for it to take several weeks to really decide ultimately > whether or not your'e satisfied with a game. I can relate to Alison's > mixed opinion and how initially she hated what she saw, then she dealt > with some of her issues and captured some of the experiences she > wanted. Then ultimately, she realized she'd gotten about as good at > it as she wanted to get, and realized that even with all the practice > in the world, it wasn't making much of a difference, so she realized > the problem was not HER, but the game. In every case, Alison has > backed up her opinion with solid facts and observations, and even > though I don't agree with everything she says, I've seen enough to > realize that her reasoning is her own. She's a human being, just like > the rest of us, and allowed to alter her opinion as her experiences > increase. > Why are you so interested in seeing opinions be static and eternal? > Randy > Randy Magruder > Contributing Reviewer > Digital Sportspage > http://www.digitalsports.com

I remember Alison's views being altered after pressure from one eyed CPR fanatics. She is now back to the COMPLETE truth. Who want's to see so called "fair" reviews? I want to know what people think, not what they see a diplomatic or some total bullshit like that. Here's my review of CPR - if your in the states and can use it with many others on the Zone - B, otherwise it's a big Z-.

Glad to see the COMPLETE truth is only complete when it agrees with you. Your assuming all the rest of us think ICR2 shoots the moon. Sorry, to me it's outdated and tiresome, with extremely poor feel. Of course, most of r.a.s. thinks SODA was an amazing product too, so I'm not sure what to think of that. Did you ever think she changed her mind BACK because of pressure from the r.a.s. brotherhood? Hmm, I wonder... Rich >She is now back to the COMPLETE truth.

with her 100%.>> Let me see if I understand you. If she writes positively about the game, then she's being influenced by other people and being too wishy washy. If she trashes the game, then its her own opinion and hooray for her for having her own mind???? I.e. your opinion about Allison's independence and integrity are based upon whether or not she agrees with your point of view. Hm... in 3 separate issues. Not silly. Unusual, but not silly. Is your mind open enough to realize that the 'standard' review process is perhaps not perfect, either? first impression quickly and I believe she did that in her first review.> See my first response to you. How is her first impression "correct" or "incorrect"? You mean: you agreed with her first impression. motivated by her own findings but by the stink the first review had caused here and with Dean announcing his intentions to leave on her review thread. > Well, I'm going to stop defending Alison, but if you were saying these things about me, I'd be pretty insulted. Randy Randy Magruder Staff Writer Digital Sportspage http://www.digitalsports.com/

fanatics. Puhlease. I just love the way you only admire her when she agrees with you. Otherwise, you just state that she's caving under pressure. Give the woman some credit. For my money, she was right each time she wrote the review. In every single case, she wrote honest impressions. I respect her first, second, and third reviews, and I will respect her fourth should she have anything else to add, because I think she's honestly conveying her experiences. I don't have to agree with her decision to respect her ability to have independent thought. Unlike some people here, I don't base my opinions on a person's credibility on whether or not I agree with what they write. Please. think, not what they see a diplomatic or some total bullshit like that. >> No. You want to see her trash the game. You aren't interested in the truth. The only truth you care about is whether or not she flames the game or not. others on the Zone - B, otherwise it's a big Z-. Good for you. Randy Randy Magruder Staff Writer Digital Sportspage http://www.digitalsports.com/

The problem with all this bad/good review stuff is that these reviews are people's opinions. I have collected a "TON" of feedback on CART Precision Racing on The APEX site [link lost in import] What I have found out is that people are pretty polarized on the game. People either love the game and think its the best in the world (better than ICR2, GP2, F1RS, etc..) while there are others that just hate the game and don't want anything to do with it. What you have to realize is that many of these magazine reviewers are not hard-core race sim fans that you usually see on this news group. Maybe for them the game truly is great. I have had some people tell me they get awesome frame rate on low powered machines while others have gotten terrible framerates on high powered machines. Some people say the game drives great others say not so good. Basically what I'm saying is that maybe CART PR works great for people with the right machines whatever they be. The vast difference in opinions has perplexed me but I can't deny the 100's of emails I have in my inbox that testify to it. So your probably asking what am I trying to say by all this? What I'm trying to say is that people's opinions and experiences with CART PR vary drastically. If you are sitting on the fence considering if to buy CART PR or not I would read as many reviews as possible and read as many news posts as you can. Next I would go to The APEX [link lost in import] and read the FAQ and all the information on the game there. Lastly I would go and download the demo (the demo does not reflect the latest build though). After playing the demo if you are satisfied with the game go buy it. Once you have the game download the latest patch of the MS site or The APEX and play all the tracks. If you still like it keep it and have fun! If you hate it take it bake to the store or send it back to MS and get your money back. CART Precision Racing has a 30 day money back guarantee from Microsoft. Only after playing the game yourself will you be able to decide if the game is enjoyable for you or not. If you do not do all of the above you are hurting yourself and not making an informed buying decision. When making any decision you should look at all avenues and collect as much information as possible whether it be good or bad. Thanks John The APEX [link lost in import] ... >> I remember Alison's views being altered after pressure from one eyed CPR >fanatics. > >Puhlease. I just love the way you only admire her when she agrees with you. >Otherwise, you just state that she's caving under pressure. Give the woman some >credit. For my money, she was right each time she wrote the review. In every >single case, she wrote honest impressions. I respect her first, second, and >third reviews, and I will respect her fourth should she have anything else to >add, because I think she's honestly conveying her experiences. I don't have to >agree with her decision to respect her ability to have independent thought. >Unlike some people here, I don't base my opinions on a person's credibility on

Quoted text (10 lines)

>whether or not I agree with what they write. > >>> She is now back to the COMPLETE truth. >> > >Please. > >>> Who want's to see so called "fair" reviews? I want to know what people >think, not what they see a diplomatic or some total bullshit like that. >> > >No. You want to see her trash the game. You aren't interested in the

truth. >The only truth you care about is whether or not she flames the game or not. > >>> Here's my review of CPR - if your in the states and can use it with many

Quoted text (11 lines)

>others on the Zone - B, otherwise it's a big Z-. > > >Good for you. > >Randy >Randy Magruder >Staff Writer >Digital Sportspage >[link lost in import] >

Bug's aren't opinion though... I hope they just fix the bugs. For example: - online starts are out of sync always, they should do a countdown - autopilot mode grabbed me from _outside_ the pits and nailed me to the wall (wish i could shut off auto!) - online games can get out of sync easily - if player quits in online game cars just sit there ramming walls And there are just some things that aren't bugs but silly, like for onling racing, it says car numbers etc, but car numbers aren't displayed on the pit board, and after you hit reverse button if in auto shift, letting go puts you in neutral. It actually is fun to drive once it runs... and I sure miss having a good framerate! Rick

Quoted text (8 lines)

>The problem with all this bad/good review stuff is that these reviews are >people's opinions. >What I have found out is that people are pretty polarized on the game. >People either love the game and think its the best in the world (better than >ICR2, GP2, F1RS, etc..) while there are others that just hate the game and >don't want anything to do with it. What you have to realize is that many of >these magazine reviewers are not hard-core race sim fans that you usually >see on this news group.

If you want an opinion on your car you don't go to a hospital - nor would you leave your wedding tackle in the secure hands of your local grease monkey. If CPR is supposed to be a sim, is being lauded by arcade-fan magazine reviewers and slammed by sim-racers, doesn't that alone speak volumes? That's not a comment on whether or not the game is good, every individual must decide that for themselves. We can however form a collective opinion on whether it lives up to what it was supposed to be and marketed to be, and that seems to be a resounding NO. Cheers! John

>>The problem with all this bad/good review stuff is that these reviews are >>people's opinions. >>What I have found out is that people are pretty polarized on the game. >>People either love the game and think its the best in the world (better than >>ICR2, GP2, F1RS, etc..) while there are others that just hate the game and >>don't want anything to do with it. What you have to realize is that many of

Quoted text (9 lines)

>>these magazine reviewers are not hard-core race sim fans that you usually >>see on this news group. >If you want an opinion on your car you don't go to a hospital - nor >would you leave your wedding tackle in the secure hands of your local >grease monkey. >If CPR is supposed to be a sim, is being lauded by arcade-fan magazine >reviewers and slammed by sim-racers, doesn't that alone speak volumes?

Um, no it doesn't speak volumes. John that would be an excellent point if CPR had not been reviewed by any sim racing sites. The only problem is that The Pits which is a fairly respectable sim racing site gave CPR a V8 rating which is their highest rating. There are also several sim racers who have said they love the game on R.A.S. and I would be more than happy to forward all of the email that I have received that says they love the game also. I do not deny that there are many people that are unhappy with the game, but there are many people that also love the game and their oppinions speak as much as yours and others. I totally agree with you that everyone must judge for themselves by using every resource available to them. The game was marketed towards not being an arcade racer and providing as much realism as possible (I'm going more off my own assumptions than what is neccessarily written on the box). For many people that have sent me email CART PR has suceeded in that endeavor. For many others it has not. For a few more it never will no matter how good it gets. I think CART PR has made huge steps towards providing that realism and innovation i.e. race engineer, sounds, garage settings, tracks, track editor etc. Now there are some flaws in the game such as no full course yellows, some tweaks required for AI speeds, and some tweaks required for the physics model. Do I think CART PR has resoundingly lived up to my ultimate expectations? Probably not but I think it has blazed trails where some sim companies have not even taken a first step. I don't think there is a single sim that can achieve the ultimate status and approval because people are diverse. A realistic sim may mean one thing to you, and another to me. There will always be some people that complain or are not satisfied becasue we live in a diverse world. Fortunately for us we are not all "cloned" like Dolly :-) (had to throw in the UK joke) otherwise we would all like the same thing and it would be a boring world! Cheers! The other John

<big snip> Ok Randy, this is what I hear about build 90. Decreased traction - probably good except that I hear that it's a joke when it comes to ovals. Speed limits - excuse me but hehehehehehehehehehe. Still bad AI, particularly on ovals. And now with this G.O.D. stuff it's under an even darker cloud. and etc, etc, etc. I have one simple question for you Randy- is CPR a total pig or what?

> Glad to see the COMPLETE truth is only complete when it agrees with you. Garbage. This and confusion about who was responsible for Dean departing from r.a.s. No two ways about it! The game was a pig and still is a pig and if I read a review that's what I want to hear. Not something toned down to keep CPR fanatics calm! Now you tell me Richard, is CPR a pig or not? > Rich > >She is now back to the COMPLETE truth.

Quoted text (13 lines)

> <big snip> > Ok Randy, this is what I hear about build 90. > Decreased traction - probably good except that I hear that it's a >joke when it comes to ovals. > Speed limits - excuse me but hehehehehehehehehehe. > Still bad AI, particularly on ovals. > And now with this G.O.D. stuff it's under an even darker cloud. > and etc, etc, etc. > I have one simple question for you Randy- is CPR a total pig or >what?

Sorry, but you're not going to get me to defend build 90. I was a tester of it, and I gave MS my opinions about it, and that's all the power I had. As far as it being under a darker cloud? I don't know about that. Consider how many people have been bashing TR for poor programming since the game came out. I'm not going to register an opinion either way on that one, but I WILL say that those who have been slamming TR as bad coders should certainly be hopeful that this means MS will find someone more qualified to continue coding the CPR line. It might mean stuff gets changed that otherwise wouldn't have? As far as MS abandoning the product? Could happen, but I don't think it will. I'm sure there are a lot of small, hungry game development shops who would love to have a piece of that pie. If MS wants to find someone else who can code an optimized sim, I'm sure they will. I just hope they don't try to do it in-house at Redmond! Randy Randy Magruder Contributing Reviewer Digital Sportspage http://www.digitalsports.com

Well, all I know is that I was racing CART and that sunovabich Sullivan saw me trying to pass on the outside with an 8 second lead with two laps to go and he RAN ME INTO THE WALL! One of these days. And this was at Michigan where there is PLENTY of room on the track for more than one car across. Grrrrrrr. Dave http://www.geocities.com/sunsetstrip/4340

>Um, no it doesn't speak volumes. >John that would be an excellent point if CPR had not been reviewed by any >sim racing sites. The only problem is that The Pits which is a fairly >respectable sim racing site gave CPR a V8 rating which is their highest >rating. Yes, something which utterly astonished me. Not that CPR should be so highly regarded, but that The Pits could get it so wrong. I'm sure that no even CPR's most ardent fans would assert that it is without significant flaws, and as soon as you concede that a game has significant flaws then it follows that it cannot be given the ultimate rating. What would happen if tomorrow MS/TRI released CPR2 with perfect steering, AI, frame-rate etc? Would it get exactly the same "ultimate rating"? There's still people in the world who belong to the flat earth society as well. If people cannot see the _glaring_ flaws in CPR then who am I to bleat on about them and try to spoil their fun? Their money is already wasted (IMO), so why try to spoil their fun as well? Marketed toward "not being an arcade racer"?!?! <chuckle> How carefully was _that_ worded? Whatever the semantics employed it most certainly doesn't accurately simulate the driving of a CART car, far less "push the limits of racing reality". I see very few entirely innovative aspects in CART, nothing which has not been done before to some degree. MS/TRI have taken the best ingredients of other products and pulled them together in CART, but bitten off more than they can chew (again IMO). I would far rather see a solid product with a few well implemented features, than a lot of features bolted onto a shaky foundation (which is what the driving and AI constitute). Incidentally, if CPR as not lived up to your expectations, how can you support it being givn the ultimate accolade by a review? Aye, that would be "baaaaaaaa"d (although not as baaaaad as that joke!). Cheers! John