GPL has potential BUT

I've read all the post of people praising the GPL demo and I'm not so sure that it isn't due to anticipation rather than reality. I agree that this could become a clasic but the bottom line is that it falls drastically short of other sims(GP2, ICR2 & NASCAR2) when it comes to a sense of speed. Be honest, there is almost no, I say again "NO" sense of speed and very little realistic closure rates. Of course this is only MHO. I think it can be great and I realize this is a pre-beta but "It Aint There Yet" and if they don't solve this it it will only appeal to the diehards.

p tenhet wrote : <snip> Read the post I did to reply Marc. You probably are using the GP3 car, who is a "learning" car !!! Fran?ois Mnard <ymenard> Sponsored by http://www.awpss.com/ Good race at the Brickyard, (-o-) Official Mentally retarded guy of r.a.s. Excuse me for my English (I'm French speaking) Excuse me for being provocative (I'm dumb speaking) --"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realise how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."--

> Sorry, but I just cannot agree with your observation here. > I think that you have suffered a bad case of premature criticism. How > on earth can you make a sweeping statement about closure rates when > there are no other vehicles on the circuit? Maybe I didn"t make myself clear. when I was talking about closure rate I was referring to the lack of prepeceived closure rate to the turns not to cars. I think If you read my post I acknowledged that the Demo was a pre-alpha. What's wrong with some constructive critizism? Are only people with glowing reviews wright. Why don't we all say it is great just as it is and encourage Sierra to release it next week. Incredible physics don't sell PC games or sims. I love racing sims also, I'm a diehard and I will buy itbut that will not make it a success if the casual gamer won't buy it.

snip

Quoted text (11 lines)

>They warned us that this would be a beast to drive, and they were >right. But I like that. They'll have the aids available for those who >don't want to take the time to learn how to drive the car without >them. And I believe this indicates a sharp learning curve for N3 >coming this fall, and that's a good thing in my book. > *** Tim Wortman *** > NASS '98 Series Director > *** NASS '98 Homepage *** > www.nasscar.com/n2.html

snip Amen, the harder the better for N3 Rhawn Black

Are you running G3 or GP?? This makes a BIG difference in your sense of speed, since the G3 is no where near as fast as GP. Just wondering

Sorry, but I just cannot agree with your observation here. I think that you have suffered a bad case of premature criticism. How on earth can you make a sweeping statement about closure rates when there are no other vehicles on the circuit? It never ceases to amaze me when people dump on pre-release demos from a great height!! Why do you do it? This is, after all, slated as a "pre-alpha"! Even the engine sound is simply a filler (from N2). If you cannot accept the demo for what it is and if you cannotenjoy the incredible physics that are modelled then yes, I guess it will only appeal to the "diehards".......about 99% of those who love racing sims, huh? -- Bruce (Fyshwick) "I hate music, especially when it's played." (Jimmy Durante)

-Mark

I have to disagree. I find the sense of speed certainly no less than N2. Take the stock car around WG by yourself and you get the same sense of speed. More than anything, I am very impressed with the physical engine of the car. Totally awesome. They weren't lying when they said you could actually see the weight shift from in the***pit. They warned us that this would be a beast to drive, and they were right. But I like that. They'll have the aids available for those who don't want to take the time to learn how to drive the car without them. And I believe this indicates a sharp learning curve for N3 coming this fall, and that's a good thing in my book. *** Tim Wortman *** NASS '98 Series Director *** NASS '98 Homepage *** www.nasscar.com/n2.html

> I think If you read my post I acknowledged that the Demo was a > pre-alpha. What's wrong with some constructive critizism? How on earth do you qualify what you said as "constructive"?! And why waste time by criticising a *pre-alpha*!!!! But it *IS* great! The physics are incredible! If you cannot appreciate that then you are missing the whole point of this product! They certainly help to sell simulations, my friend. And the casual gamer will buy it....believe you me. -- Bruce (Fyshwick) "I hate music, especially when it's played." (Jimmy Durante)

Can you just confirm for me - you _are_ driving the full "GP" car aren't you? If you're driving the G2 or, heaven forfend, the G3 then your speed will be, ah, "slightly reduced". :-) If you are driving the GP car then that is surprising, as the sensation of speed through, for example, the long left hander after the backstraight is excellent IMO. Cheers! John

They may also have to add some more "aids" to make things easier for the casual gamer if this is to succeed. There can be such a thing as "too much realism" in the physics, etc. when you consider that the driver "feedback" is very far from being realistic. In a real racing situation, situational clues come at you from many different sources -- vibrations, g-forces, peripheral vision, etc. -- whereas in a computer sim you only have the very small, limited viewport of the screen and some sound input. For example, when road racing my motorcycle, I shift mainly by a combination of "ear" and "feeling" the power curve drop off. This is difficult to sense in a computer sim. In GPL I am having much more trouble feeling the car being on the verge of a slide than if I were really sitting in the vehicle, yet sensing this is very important in being able to catch the slide before it's too late! -- Doug Gordon (Remove "nospam." from e-mail address) >I've read all the post of people praising the GPL demo and I'm not so >sure that it isn't due to anticipation rather than reality. I agree >that this could become a clasic but the bottom line is that it falls >drastically short of other sims(GP2, ICR2 & NASCAR2) when it comes to a >sense of speed. Be honest, there is almost no, I say again "NO" sense >of speed and very little realistic closure rates. Of course this is >only MHO. I think it can be great and I realize this is a pre-beta but >"It Aint There Yet" and if they don't solve this it it will only appeal >to the diehards.

Quoted text (13 lines)

> I've read all the post of people praising the GPL demo and I'm not so > sure that it isn't due to anticipation rather than reality. I agree > that this could become a clasic but the bottom line is that it falls > drastically short of other sims(GP2, ICR2 & NASCAR2) when it comes to > a > sense of speed. Be honest, there is almost no, I say again "NO" > sense > of speed and very little realistic closure rates. Of course this is > only MHO. I think it can be great and I realize this is a pre-beta > but > "It Aint There Yet" and if they don't solve this it it will only > appeal > to the diehards.

I may be the only other person here to agree with you, but none the less I do. I feel that these cars are way to slow to be fun to drive. For some reason papy seems to want to make every sim BUT a return to cart, the fastest cars in the world. They seem to pick slower and slower cars to simulate each time. Whats next, Flinstones cars? I went back to GP2 last night after playing GPL an Im like, "Woa! The car actually turns and has good horse power and brakes!" I am pretty sure they won't do this, but IMO it would be nice to see the grip levels raised just slightly, enough to make the cars about 5 to 7 sec faster per lap would make it much more fun, if slightly unrealistic. It should be noted that the fastest lap in the race that year was about 1:05 and people with the demo are running about 1:10 at best now. Assuming people get about five seconds faster, it would be nice IMO to see the final laps just a hair better than one min. Also I should say that the new physics (virtual***pit movement ect) and grafx optimization are A+. I just wish they picked faster cars to use it with. p.s. the calib route was really nice also, I commend papy for doing what Microshit should have long ago, i.e. fixing DirectInput

Quoted text (10 lines)

> > I've read all the post of people praising the GPL demo and I'm not so > > sure that it isn't due to anticipation rather than reality. I agree > > that this could become a clasic but the bottom line is that it falls > > drastically short of other sims(GP2, ICR2 & NASCAR2) when it comes to > > a sense of speed. Be honest, there is almost no, I say again "NO" > I may be the only other person here to agree with you, but none the > less I do. I feel that these cars are way to slow to be fun to drive. > For some reason papy seems to want to make every sim BUT a return to > cart, the fastest cars in the world. They seem to pick slower and

Are both of you sure you are using the GP car and not the GP3? Also, are you talking about sensation of speed in the turns or on the straights? These cars are going a lot slower than modern F1 or CART cars go through the turns. How exactly can the sensation of speed be changed when the physics engine is simulating reality? -- Pat Dotson IMPACT Motorsports

Quoted text (11 lines)

> I may be the only other person here to agree with you, but none the > less I do. I feel that these cars are way to slow to be fun to drive. > For some reason papy seems to want to make every sim BUT a return to > cart, the fastest cars in the world. They seem to pick slower and > slower cars to simulate each time. Whats next, Flinstones cars? I went > back to GP2 last night after playing GPL an Im like, "Woa! The car > actually turns and has good horse power and brakes!" > I am pretty sure they won't do this, but IMO it would be nice to see > the grip levels raised just slightly, enough to make the cars about 5 to > 7 sec faster per lap would make it much more fun, if slightly > unrealistic.

Somehow, this strikes me as a bit like saying, "This is really good wine, but it sucks because it's not beer." -- Bringing up the rear in the 1998 F1RS Racing League ... http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/as/f1rl.htm http://www.wenet.net/~josefk/f1rl/

> How exactly can the sensation of speed be changed when the physics > engine is simulating reality? > -- > Pat Dotson > IMPACT Motorsports R: Skew the image by making it a wider angle will cause a greater sensation of speed without tampering with any physics. But a sticker needs to be added "objects are actually closer than they appear". Q.B.M.

> Are both of you sure you are using the GP car and not the GP3? yes very sure they sure do. actually I was talking about both, but the turns espically simulate faster carshears to hoping we will see a CART product with the same engine in this lifetime cheers!

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > I am pretty sure they won't do this, but IMO it would be nice to > see > > the grip levels raised just slightly, enough to make the cars about > 5 to > > 7 sec faster per lap would make it much more fun, if slightly > > unrealistic. > Oh....right.Then we could call it GP Legends Arcade?

Whoa there ace, you got me all wrong. I don't play arcade games. All I meant was Id like to see the cars possibly a little closer to the cars of today. What would you figure a CART of F1 car would do around the 67 Glen config now, about 0:45 perhaps? Compared to 1:05 - 1:15 in GLP this is roughly a 25 sec diff. Id like to see perhaps 1/4 of this gap bridged, which would still leave plenty of challenge.

> I am pretty sure they won't do this, but IMO it would be nice to see > the grip levels raised just slightly, enough to make the cars about 5 to > 7 sec faster per lap would make it much more fun, if slightly > unrealistic. Oh....right.Then we could call it GP Legends Arcade? -- Bruce. (At home)

But William.....but, but, but............it is *supposed* to represent cars of *YESTERDAY*!! I do not want a simulation that represents 1967 in all respects other than car dymnamics/performance. I don't want the cars performing like those of 1997....or 1987.....or 1977. I just don't see the point, mate! Why not rush out and buy F1RS....or wait for Papy to do CART 2 or Nascar 3 or "GP Legends of the 1990s"? What you are suggesting is akin to looking at a Battle of Britain Spitfire and complaining that it doesn't perform like an F-16!! > Whoa there ace, you got me all wrong. I don't play arcade games. All I > meant was Id like to see the cars possibly a little closer to the cars > of today. What would you figure a CART of F1 car would do around the 67 > Glen config now, about 0:45 perhaps? Compared to 1:05 - 1:15 in GLP > this is roughly a 25 sec diff. Id like to see perhaps 1/4 of this gap > bridged, which would still leave plenty of challenge. -- Bruce (Fyshwick) "I hate music, especially when it's played." (Jimmy Durante)

But then we wouldn't be talking about realism, would we? CART and F1 have both been done, and done again. I don't know about you, but I want realism, even at the expense of slower laps. But you do have a choice. If you don't like what you see, speak with your dollar$ and don't buy it. Maybe we'll get lucky, and CART will be on the Papyrus plate for '99. *** Tim Wortman *** NASS '98 Series Director *** NASS '98 Homepage *** www.nasscar.com/n2.html

Quoted text (12 lines)

> They may also have to add some more "aids" to make things easier for the > casual gamer if this is to succeed. There can be such a thing as "too much > realism" in the physics, etc. when you consider that the driver "feedback" > is very far from being realistic. In a real racing situation, situational > clues come at you from many different sources -- vibrations, g-forces, > peripheral vision, etc. -- whereas in a computer sim you only have the very > small, limited viewport of the screen and some sound input. For example, > when road racing my motorcycle, I shift mainly by a combination of "ear" and > "feeling" the power curve drop off. This is difficult to sense in a computer > sim. In GPL I am having much more trouble feeling the car being on the verge > of a slide than if I were really sitting in the vehicle, yet sensing this is > very important in being able to catch the slide before it's too late!

Did I hear you right? ""There can be such a thing as "too much realism" in the physics"". SIN! There are many things IN FAVOUR of us simmers too. Millions of laps for next to no $$$$$, easy setup tweaking, millions of laps, no fear and last but not least......... millions of laps. Still, I think all sims need a way to ease people in that have little or no sim racing experience. I have not tried it (and am experienced enough to not be a good judge anyway I suppose), but I would imagine that the G3 Brabham would be fairly easy with the aids on. It seems Papy have chosen this more interesting way rather than heaps of aids. Good idea too since it negates the possibility of people using advantageous aids in comps. Something other clueless developers seem to somehow overlook.

Quoted text (17 lines)

> I may be the only other person here to agree with you, but none the > less I do. I feel that these cars are way to slow to be fun to drive. > For some reason papy seems to want to make every sim BUT a return to > cart, the fastest cars in the world. They seem to pick slower and > slower cars to simulate each time. Whats next, Flinstones cars? I went > back to GP2 last night after playing GPL an Im like, "Woa! The car > actually turns and has good horse power and brakes!" > I am pretty sure they won't do this, but IMO it would be nice to see > the grip levels raised just slightly, enough to make the cars about 5 to > 7 sec faster per lap would make it much more fun, if slightly > unrealistic. It should be noted that the fastest lap in the race that > year was about 1:05 and people with the demo are running about 1:10 at > best now. Assuming people get about five seconds faster, it would be > nice IMO to see the final laps just a hair better than one min. > Also I should say that the new physics (virtual***pit movement ect) > and grafx optimization are A+. I just wish they picked faster cars to > use it with.

William, when I first heard that Papy was doing GPL I thought "big deal". Don't forget MS had the CART license so how could Papy do ICR3 (which they are doing you know). Do yourself a big favour and stay out on the track with GPL. It is brilliant and I can tell you that our lives would have definantly been much less without it (and this is just the demo). Also, last I heard, the 1.07 barrier was about to be broken and when I hop over to the Apex I'll bet it has been. 1.08.11 last I heard. I'm in the 1.10s at the moment and appreciate it immensly. When you get the car performing at near it's peak you'll change your tune for sure.

> > Are both of you sure you are using the GP car and not the GP3? > yes very sure You realise that each time you re enter the track you need to reselect G1?

Quoted text (15 lines)

> > > I am pretty sure they won't do this, but IMO it would be nice to > > see > > > the grip levels raised just slightly, enough to make the cars about > > 5 to > > > 7 sec faster per lap would make it much more fun, if slightly > > > unrealistic. > > Oh....right.Then we could call it GP Legends Arcade? > Whoa there ace, you got me all wrong. I don't play arcade games. All I > meant was Id like to see the cars possibly a little closer to the cars > of today. What would you figure a CART of F1 car would do around the 67 > Glen config now, about 0:45 perhaps? Compared to 1:05 - 1:15 in GLP > this is roughly a 25 sec diff. Id like to see perhaps 1/4 of this gap > bridged, which would still leave plenty of challenge.

Sorry Will but I just gotta be a funny bastard here :) I want ICR3 with rocket propulsion and cars that run on monorails! Like that thingo in Japan except much faster please. Just push 1 button and sit back and enjoy the ride. Just have the scenery as a blur :)

Quoted text (11 lines)

> > How exactly can the sensation of speed be changed when the physics > > engine is simulating reality? > > -- > > Pat Dotson > > IMPACT Motorsports > Skew the image by making it a wider angle will cause a greater sensation > of speed without tampering with any physics. > But a sticker needs to be added "objects are actually closer than they > appear".

That's a good idea. I think it would work best though if the middle 3/4 of the screen were normal, and the outer 1/8 of the screen on each side was skewed to a wider angle. Then you could simulate peripheral vision while leaving the majority of the driving view unchanged. How much extra cpu power would that require? -- Pat Dotson IMPACT Motorsports