Viper only worth 66% or 3.5/5 stars?

http://Game-over.net/review/november/viper/index.html Viper Racing at 67%. They rate Need For Speed 3 at 90% and GPL at 86%. And http://www.simracingnews.com rates Viper at 3.5 stars. Not sure why I posted this, guess I just wondered what exactly is so bad about Viper that people are rating it so poorly. <shrug>

People arn't rating it poorly, reviewers are. Reviewers who often use phrases like "its no GPL" and "Its not arcade or complete simulation and we here really really hate anything inbetween". It isn't going to drive like a grand prix car from 1969 ppl!!! And i want to know if the reviewers own a viper to compare it to or what. Frankly i think they are trying to review something which they think is arcade, but is simulation and are therefor comfusing themselves. Me, i think is a great game! Game-over.net gave NFS3 a 90%? well i guess we know what kind of game they like <ppffftttttt!!!!!>

Quoted text (7 lines)

>http://Game-over.net/review/november/viper/index.html rates Viper >Racing at 67%. They rate Need For Speed 3 at 90% and GPL at 86%. >And http://www.simracingnews.com rates Viper at 3.5 stars. >Not sure why I posted this, guess I just wondered what exactly is so bad >about Viper that people are rating it so poorly. <shrug>

I find the best thing to do with any review is read the text to determine whether it might meet your desires/req'ts of a game. Rather than just looking at a final numerical summary which is a subjective evaluation of whether it met the particular reviewer's criteria. If the reviewer did his job, you should be able to do so. If not, why get worked up about it? Most of the reviews are worth what we pay for them.

These people wouldn't know fluid movement if a pail of water hit em' in the face... Viper is a fine, fine game, and it's release is well anticipated... I know of few other racing sim on the market that goes thru the trouble of: 1. Showing realistic levels of smoke coming up from the skid marks as they are laid down on the track. 2. Makes a reasonable effort to show realistic damage. 3. Makes a darned good effort at showing body leans, and other forces. 4. Has sound effects that are in sync with, and relate too, what the car is actually going thru. I could go on forever... It's not quite perfect SIM quality, but it sure is a hell of a lot better than NFS3, which is pure arcade inside and out. Viper will most certainly be in my shopping cart come the 23rd. -Larry > http://Game-over.net/review/november/viper/index.html rates Viper > Racing at 67%. They rate Need For Speed 3 at 90% and GPL at 86%.

Quoted text (7 lines)

> http://Game-over.net/review/november/viper/index.html rates Viper > Racing at 67%. They rate Need For Speed 3 at 90% and GPL at 86%. > And http://www.simracingnews.com rates Viper at 3.5 stars. > Not sure why I posted this, guess I just wondered what exactly is so bad > about Viper that people are rating it so poorly. <shrug>

Just what level of creditability would you assign to a reviewer that game NFS3(a GAME) 90% and GPL(a real SIM)86%, maybe 34%. The Demo(v2.2) alone should be rated higher than NFS3(which I have). Of course we are looking at this from a simmer's point of view and not as a gamer. Having not seen or played the release version of VR, I would still rate it as a 90%(based on the demo),NFS3 at 50% and GPL at 95%(nothing is perfect). That's my opinion anyway. Paul

I also totally agree, I have the two demos, the NFSIII and Viper Racing and I just keep playing Viper on and on. I like the real 3d space also. it will definitely be on my list of things to by on the 23rd also. I asked this in an earlier post but does anyone know if VR will have a build so we can make our own tracks ? Andre

Quoted text (14 lines)

>I could go on forever... >It's not quite perfect SIM quality, but it sure is a hell of a lot >better than NFS3, which is pure arcade inside and out. >Viper will most certainly be in my shopping cart come the 23rd. >-Larry >> http://Game-over.net/review/november/viper/index.html rates Viper >> Racing at 67%. They rate Need For Speed 3 at 90% and GPL at 86%.

Quoted text (18 lines)

>These people wouldn't know fluid movement if a pail of water hit em' in >the face... >Viper is a fine, fine game, and it's release is well anticipated... >I know of few other racing sim on the market that goes thru the trouble >of: >1. Showing realistic levels of smoke coming up from the skid > marks as they are laid down on the track. >2. Makes a reasonable effort to show realistic damage. >3. Makes a darned good effort at showing body leans, and > other forces. >4. Has sound effects that are in sync with, and relate too, what > the car is actually going thru.

5. the front brake disk "glow" under heavy braking. How much cooler can it get?

Quoted text (12 lines)

>It's not quite perfect SIM quality, but it sure is a hell of a lot >better than NFS3, which is pure arcade inside and out. >Viper will most certainly be in my shopping cart come the 23rd. >-Larry >> http://Game-over.net/review/november/viper/index.html rates Viper >> Racing at 67%. They rate Need For Speed 3 at 90% and GPL at 86%.

He/she may still be a creditable reviewer but it is obvious that he/she is a gamer and not a sim junkie. So what? You just need to remember what is important to the reviewer when reading reviews. People are bias...we need to understand this when attempting to glean info from a review. Mike

Quoted text (7 lines)

> He/she may still be a creditable reviewer but it is obvious that > he/she is a gamer and not a sim junkie. So what? You just need to > remember what is important to the reviewer when reading reviews. > People are bias...we need to understand this when attempting to glean > info from a review. > Mike

There is truth in what you say but reviewers should qualify their opinions and reviews. If they are reviewing a game/sim from a gammers point of view then say so, same for simmers POV. They then might have some creditability. The "so what" is that a review should be balanced and not slanted like the News or political statements.:-) Paul

Physics seem pretty well done, but (IMO) thet tracks are just too damn circusy and silly to take seriously--deracts from the overall experience for me.

3.5/5 sounds better than 66/100!!! > Physics seem pretty well done, but (IMO) thet tracks are just too damn > circusy and silly to take seriously--deracts from the overall > experience for me.