RAS & Papyrus

Its probably been said many times but... Isn't it refreshing to see posts from the Papyrus guys - it makes the group seem somehow even more worthwhile to think our discussions are being read & entered into by the makers of our beloved software. Having produced the best sim currently - it would be easy for Papyrus to leave it at that. RAS is a critical place - we seek perfection - so we want more from GPL & voice it. Unfortunately that voice can range from the the constructive to the downright rude. Despite the general agreement about how good GPL (& other Papyrus products) is, there always will be some who will refer to their products as "sucks" & significantly worse. I remember the guy working on the Cart Presicion Racing sim, putting a great deal of effort in to RAS - eventually it got too much & he left. Now CPR let the guy down, but it was still a shame that he was forced out. Papyrus have the advantage in terms of excellent products. But there are some problems that need fixing - which are voiced on RAS. It must be galling to see some of the less constructive comments about your own product. (Imagine if there was a newsgroup about the work you have been involved with), so I take my hat off to Randy et al for sticking with it. I'm sure they have seen it all before & can filter out the relevant threads to get involved in expertly. I'm not naive enough to suggest the group cleans up its act - I might as well ask Soccer fans not to make fun of the opposition. Just to air my thanks to Papyrus for tolerating us as I believe we have something to offer. Cheers Tony

Three cheers for Tony! Very good post! // Johan

> Its probably been said many times but... > Isn't it refreshing to see posts from the Papyrus guys - it makes the group > seem somehow even more worthwhile to think our discussions are being read & > entered into by the makers of our beloved software. Didn't you know? Software makers NEVER participate on RAS (sorry for the jab Mr. Fisher :) ) I'd like to salute Randy too, for posting here and actually joining in the GPL racing on VROC. It's nice to see someone who really cares about and enjoys their product! -- Pat Dotson IMPACT Motorsports http://www.impactmotorsports.com/pd.html

People forget to mention that there have been posts by the folks from EAI [Trans Am Racing] and the guys from MSI [AMA Superbike]. I think there are also have been posts from MGI [Viper Racing] and maybe from the Sports Car GT guys. I'm sure there are also other companies that make racing games lurking in this newsgroup just waiting until they announce their next games. ;-) John >> Its probably been said many times but... >> Isn't it refreshing to see posts from the Papyrus guys - it makes the group >> seem somehow even more worthwhile to think our discussions are being read &

Quoted text (15 lines)

>> entered into by the makers of our beloved software. >Didn't you know? Software makers NEVER >participate on RAS (sorry for the jab >Mr. Fisher :) ) >I'd like to salute Randy too, for posting >here and actually joining in the GPL racing >on VROC. It's nice to see someone who >really cares about and enjoys their product! >-- >Pat Dotson >IMPACT Motorsports >http://www.impactmotorsports.com/pd.html

Nice, thoughtful post, Tony! Rickard for President! Oh, sorry... Rickard for Prime Minister!

This is definetly something that is good. Its always nice to know that somewhere what matters to you in a racing game is at the very least being read by the developers. :) Sometimes too critical or not critical enough in the right places however. Often times I think that "we" (and I use that very loosely) get too caught up in either praise or flames of particular companies/publishers/developers. Not to mention, it must be understood that not everyone, and this includes the developers or maybe more specifically includes the developers, sees "prefection" the same way as everyone else. Yup....but hey, poor EA just got lamblasted. And Microsoft/TRI did before them instead of dealing solely in constructive critism. Speaking of Papyrus, they have always done a good job and generally produce a fairly bug free game, but they also have their work to do in other areas such as graphics or sound. Yes, it was. Too much flaming and too little constructive critism. However, TRI did produce a pretty bad product for what the marketing said it would be. Perhaps thats what developers and PR people for publishers/developers need to realise about RAS....marketing hype will NOT fly here and if a racing game does NOT live up to its hype then critism will happen. Nothing is prefect. :) I'm still waiting to be able to adjust the null zones in Papy products. It SUCKS to be honest...it truly, truly does. However, I can attest that often marketing hypes a product beyond what the developers had in mind and so the expectations of the buying or using public can often be ruined not by what you produced but by the marketing gimmicks. offer. Yup..the computer racing community does. Heck, the game community does. Many people doing side projects such as mods, hacks of track and car editors, model editors, map editors, 3d artists, etc are getting picked up by game developers because of their work. This is especially prevalent in other sections of the industry and not so much so in the computer racing maybe because instead of using proprietary tools, a lot of racing developers tend to use large and expensive modeling packages to design tracks, etc and then port them to their format.

Well it is real easy to post about products that haven't been produced... (MGI not included). Personally I'd like to see more posts by the developers that give us insight to the reasons behind their decisions. We get to know these games so intimately sometimes that it is really nice to understand the background to their creation. Jeff

Great post, Tony (P.M. elect). Software developers put a lot (a mean a very big LOT) of work into their products. Different products concentrate on different aspects - some like EA do the graphics BIG, Papyrus do the best physics, many are wothwhile in some way to someone or another. As a software developer, I can feel the hurt that some of this abuse must cause - though I must confess that in my more reckless moods, I'm as guilty as the next poster. After a couple of months of only playing GPL, I pulled out MGP earlier tonight to familiarise myself with the Melbourne circuit prior to the opening race of the 1999 calendar and decided that it is, actually, rather good. It's reception on r.a.s. was mixed, some good, some bad - fair enough - but there were also liberal amounts of vitriol doused on it and UbiSoft. When playing it you can't help but feel that these guys have tried very, very hard to produce what is a very worthy attempt at an F1 sim. It has its faults, but comparing it to F1RS, you have to conclude that they listened to the sorts of things we were saying, maybe not enough for some, but they have. Now that EA have an F1 licence, we should encourage them to develop it in our direction and not declare them incompetant for the task - they certainly won't listen to us if we do that. Cheers, Paul

Quoted text (35 lines)

> Its probably been said many times but... > Isn't it refreshing to see posts from the Papyrus guys - it makes the group > seem somehow even more worthwhile to think our discussions are being read & > entered into by the makers of our beloved software. > Having produced the best sim currently - it would be easy for Papyrus to > leave it at that. RAS is a critical place - we seek perfection - so we want > more from GPL & voice it. > Unfortunately that voice can range from the the constructive to the > downright rude. Despite the general agreement about how good GPL (& other > Papyrus products) is, there always will be some who will refer to their > products as "sucks" & significantly worse. > I remember the guy working on the Cart Presicion Racing sim, putting a great > deal of effort in to RAS - eventually it got too much & he left. Now CPR let > the guy down, but it was still a shame that he was forced out. > Papyrus have the advantage in terms of excellent products. But there are > some problems that need fixing - which are voiced on RAS. > It must be galling to see some of the less constructive comments about your > own product. (Imagine if there was a newsgroup about the work you have been > involved with), so I take my hat off to Randy et al for sticking with it. > I'm sure they have seen it all before & can filter out the relevant threads > to get involved in expertly. > I'm not naive enough to suggest the group cleans up its act - I might as > well ask Soccer fans not to make fun of the opposition. Just to air my > thanks to Papyrus for tolerating us as I believe we have something to offer. > Cheers > Tony

On Fri, 26 Feb 1999 03:25:16 +0000, Paul Jones >As a software developer, I can feel the hurt that some of this abuse must cause >- though I must confess that in my more reckless moods, I'm as guilty as the >next poster. I suppose that is down to relative effort or importance, but I would be none too happy at all to find NASCAR Revolution lurking on my hard disk after forking over 40. If developers come to this newsgroup looking for feedback then they must expect to be appraised based upon the values that are important here - if a product concentrated on flash graphics and not much else then the developers should stick to the arcade forums if that was their intended market. All the same, there is no excuse for much of the vitriol seen here. Magazines cost very little, demo downloads are available and online reviews are free - any reasons for buying a real turkey are your own problem. Much of the problem with MGPR2 was not over whether it was a great sim or not, it certainly was. The problem is as with N99 - is it a sufficiently "new" product over F1RS to warrant another 30-40? I ranked F1RS in the mid-high 80s when reviewing it for Sim-News, and niggled over only a few points which have been done to death here since. MGPRS2 is little different and while reviewed on a standalone basis would rank the same as F1RS (perhaps slightly lower since time has moved on and the goalposts have shifted), but taken in context with F1RS would score pretty low for me. We have no voice with which to convince EA. GP2 sold millions on the back of the Crammond name and an excellent arcade/sim mix - F1RS sold far less than that despite an F1 license and an equally good sim/arcade mix. Psygnosis F1 massively outsold them all, with no sim mode whatsoever, Outrun style gameplay and a Murray Walker voiceover. the arcade market is very much larger than the sim, easier to program for, console friendly and offers far larger sales potential - with the _massive_ cost of an F1 license I'd be surprised to see EA target sim racing except as an afterthought. I'd like to be wrong, but I don't think we have enough of a voice to be heard, nor to make a whit of difference versus the cash mountain which argues the case for arcade. IMO Papyrus make far and away the best products for sim-racers, in the sense of quality and also volume - the number of titles released. If anything I'd like to see Papyrus incorporate more and more arcade principles into their releases, provided that would not compromise development and quality of the simulation side. I think that not only would that provide an easy path into sim-racing for people (rather than jumping into the GPL deep-end) but it would also open Papyrus to a wider market, increasing profits and providing more backing for them to further develop simulations. This is all just speculation on my part from observing their market, and without seeing market analysis and their sales volume/demographic it's impossible to know, but it may be a good direction. Only they know for sure, and they're marketing department have looked at it I'm sure. Cheers! John

Quoted text (11 lines)

> On Fri, 26 Feb 1999 03:25:16 +0000, Paul Jones > The problem is as with N99 - is it a > sufficiently "new" product over F1RS to warrant another 30-40? I > ranked F1RS in the mid-high 80s when reviewing it for Sim-News, and > niggled over only a few points which have been done to death here > since. MGPRS2 is little different and while reviewed on a standalone > basis would rank the same as F1RS (perhaps slightly lower since time > has moved on and the goalposts have shifted), but taken in context > with F1RS would score pretty low for me.

Yes and no. I would be clambering over the other shoppers at the till to get hold of a GPL update for 40.00 even if it were just another F1 season with some new tracks and appropriate-to-the-season cars but exactly the same basic physics model as GPL (taking into account the vehicle dynamics of the new cars, of course). What you say about sim market share versus arcade market share is true. So is what you say about the amount of work involved in doing the development. In view of this, I am prepared to pay 100.00 or more for a GPL-equivalent sim and I imagine that many of the r.a.s. posters would as well - especially given the cost of a top-notch computer, graphics card, wheel and a good internet connection - all of which sim-racers are happy to dig deep into their pockets for. I would estimate that the hardware and connection costs exceed 2000 for most racers whereas GPL costs a meagre 35.00 (now 19.99). That means that the most irreplaceable component of a good sim racing setup costs a mere 1.75% of the total budget. People are prepared to fork out loads more than 35.00 for other specialist titles (eg. ray-tracing programs, C++ compilers). I think we should be prepared to spend more for good sim racing titles, to recompense the developers for their work. GPL, GP2(3), N2(3) and F1RS(MGP) are some titles that, IMO, would merit this kind of expenditure. Cheers, Paul What galls me is that anyone arcade racer or sim racer, alike, would prefer to drive a car that didn't behave like a car over a car that did. Even more galling is the typical arcade slogan "Hyper-realistic physics" which turns out to be hogwash. Doesn't it contravene the trade descriptions act? Yes, but you don't go down to the race track and expect a race car to behave other than like a race car. Why should you get into a '67 Lotus and expect it to cling to the track like it was on rails? I think the marketing department should emphasise this - "This is like a real car" - and the hardcopy reviewers should back this up. They, the latter, should say "NFS3 okay, arcade, but nothing like a car" and "GPL - yes, this is the best yet". Jeez, is that a pig flying up there? They've caught a niche. It's almost a captive market - we WILL buy Papy products. I doubt whether any arcade title can be so sure of it's minimum sales figure. Data, data, data, we need sales data. Cheers, Paul

>In view of this, >I am prepared to pay 100.00 or more for a GPL-equivalent sim and I imagine that >many of the r.a.s. posters would as well. Yeh - but shhhhh don't tell the wife. Tony

On Sun, 28 Feb 1999 20:17:06 +0000, Paul Jones >Yes and no. I would be clambering over the other shoppers at the till to get hold of >a GPL update for 40.00 even if it were just another F1 season with some new tracks >and appropriate-to-the-season cars but exactly the same basic physics model as GPL >(taking into account the vehicle dynamics of the new cars, of course). Like NR99 perchance? I suppose it depends upon exactly what is on offer and what is important to the consumer in question. Take your example of GPL. If I offered up two new tracks, no car licenses and improved netplay would you say that was worthy of 40? How about NR99, with truck bodies and physics etc, substantially the same tracks and drivers? I would be unhappy about paying 40 for a couple of new GPL tracks - that's not to say I wouldn't buy it, I truly enjoy GPL and to be able to add more tracks to race one would be great. I would see it as exploitative though. NR99 did, IMO, have the saving point that essentially it bundled together N2, BGN pack, 3dFX support etc and added some features also, so depending upon what combination of products you already had it was more or less of a bargain. Dangerous path there, and would require a supremely good knowledge of the market. Put simply, I utterly fail to see why EA should reap the same money for NASCAR Revolting that Sierra/Papy would recover for N3 - that would be unfair in terms of the effort put in and the quality delivered. On that reasoning I, and many others here would, as you said, happily pay a truckload of money for N3 (100? Why not? In the last year I've played GPL easily four or five times more than any other product, in fact the only other things I've played in the last year for any length of time have been Tribes, Unreal, Quake2 and FIFA98/99 - in terms of Value For Money GPL is streets ahead). OTOH it instantly lifts Papy out of the arcade and casual purchase market and into the specialist market, for those wanting to race online or on NROS. If the casual buyer is 5% of your market that's not a big deal - your overall revenue will be up. If they make up a significant portion you could end up losing money and market perception, which may be very bad in the long run. I doubt you could even develop the arcade side of the sim to capture a market - if I'm forking over 100 I expect more than Need for Speed! Mind you, with console titles (some of which are utter pish) are costing 50 and up then the world is totally screwed up somewhere. Mario Kart is quite a fun little game, but no WAY is it worth anything like what GPL or Gran Turismo are. That's a good game too - others (like Cruisin' USA?) are just as expensive, AND crap. Cheers! John

Quoted text (15 lines)

>> On Fri, 26 Feb 1999 03:25:16 +0000, Paul Jones >Yes and no. I would be clambering over the other shoppers at the till to get > hold of >a GPL update for 40.00 even if it were just another F1 season with some new > tracks >and appropriate-to-the-season cars but exactly the same basic physics model as > GPL >(taking into account the vehicle dynamics of the new cars, of course). >What you say about sim market share versus arcade market share is true. So is > what >you say about the amount of work involved in doing the development. In view of > this, >I am prepared to pay 100.00 or more for a GPL-equivalent sim and I imagine > that

I'm not personally. I'm in fave of scalability on the physics engine, such that it can be arcadey if people choose. therefore, more broadband appeal, more sales, higher product profitability and more likely a sequel will be. Pushing the price up to a 100 level is simply silly. For one, no will stock a ~50 (cost to retailer) product, competing for shelf space against ~15 products, especially as the ~50 product has only a tiny niche appeal. Sounds like a recipe for disaster. Z. Please remove NOSPAM from my email address when replying.

My goodness, the NasRev thread would need it's own server :) -Larry > Personally I'd like to see more posts > by the developers that give us insight to the reasons behind their > decisions.