Was GPL a commercial disaster?

In terms of low sales? Does anybody know? James

No. It may have not been the best selling software, but it wasn't a "disaster".

How do you know?

Quoted text (9 lines)

> No. It may have not been the best selling software, but it wasn't a > "disaster". > > In terms of low sales? Does anybody know? > > James

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > > In terms of low sales? Does anybody know? > > No. It may have not been the best selling software, but it wasn't a > > "disaster". > How do you know?

Depends whether (a) you believe the figure of 36,000 we've been given and (b) whether they could break even on those sales. Seems unlikely, looking at the huge list of people involved in writing the game and the time it must have taken them. Back in the 80's when I was writing games those sorts of sales figures would have been pretty respectable, but then again all the games I wrote had exactly one person working on them - me. Well, OK, someone had to do the box artwork and distribution etc., but the development costs were way lower, and I didn't have to share the royalties with anyone else, hehe... it's mine, all mine, I tell you, you fools etc. ;-) Anyway, I suspect that Papy aren't too worried about the sales - they are probably thinking long-term with this project: even if they won't be using the physics engine in Nascar 3, it's sure to form part of a more mainstream product sooner or later. Not sure what Sierra thinks of the sales though! ;-)

they didnt get back the money they had hoped to make on gpl probably due to very very bad advertising stratagies.

Quoted text (14 lines)

> How do you know? > > No. It may have not been the best selling software, but it wasn't a > > "disaster". > > > In terms of low sales? Does anybody know? > > > James

Plus I tend to agree with Alison Hines' assessment that word-of-mouth would have sold a ton of copies and cut way down on returns had the default setups been easier. With the advent of FF support and her Ferrari setups, perhaps a remarketing campaign for GPL is in order? Jerry Morelock

They didn't make the money they excepted cause they didn't think Sports Car GT was going to be so awesome, and whoever makes GPL made the same mistake McLaren did with Ferrari, to under value their competition's potential. Schumacher

Quoted text (22 lines)

> they didnt get back the money they had hoped to make on gpl > probably due to very very bad advertising stratagies. > > How do you know? > > > No. It may have not been the best selling software, but it wasn't a > > > "disaster". > > > > In terms of low sales? Does anybody know? > > > > James

Aarrgh. "NASCAR is popular because of advertising." "GPL didn't sell a lot because of advertising." Give me a break. The market isn't that irrational. NASCAR is popular because people like the close racing. Otherwise they wouldn't spend the incredible $/time they do. GPL is not a major commercial success because most people want something easier to drive. In both cases there are plenty of widely known alternatives. But I will admit advertising sells plenty of Splitfires :-). bob

I agree. It's not like this game is going to get old quickly.

Quoted text (12 lines)

> Plus I tend to agree with Alison Hines' assessment that word-of-mouth would > have sold a ton of copies and cut way down on returns had the default setups > been easier. With the advent of FF support and her Ferrari setups, perhaps > a remarketing campaign for GPL is in order? > Jerry Morelock > > they didnt get back the money they had hoped to make on gpl > > probably due to very very bad advertising stratagies.

-- Bob Curtin Worcester Area Strategy & Tactics Exchange http://www.tiac.net/users/ten10ths/ "If God had intended man to join the Army he would have given us green, baggy skin"

Well, SCGT is certainly fun, but "awesome" is not exactly the word I'd use to describe the game. If you ever in your life get an automobile up to racing speeds, you'll know instantly why GPL is so far ahead of SCGT in the "realism" dept. that there's really no comparison. Unfortunately, that in itself is not enough to make it a best seller in a country which loves Jerry Springer, the WWF and "Titanic."

Quoted text (29 lines)

> They didn't make the money they excepted cause they didn't think Sports Car > GT was going to be so awesome, and whoever makes GPL made the same mistake > McLaren did with Ferrari, to under value their competition's potential. > Schumacher > > they didnt get back the money they had hoped to make on gpl > > probably due to very very bad advertising stratagies. > > > How do you know? > > > > No. It may have not been the best selling software, but it wasn't a > > > > "disaster". > > > > > In terms of low sales? Does anybody know? > > > > > James

-- Bob Curtin Worcester Area Strategy & Tactics Exchange http://www.tiac.net/users/ten10ths/ "If God had intended man to join the Army he would have given us green, baggy skin"

He counted up he number of GPL posts here over a 6-month period, divided them by pi, took away the few posts that complained about the sim, then multiplied that number by the entire population of New Zealand (because it's as good a number as any), and Hey Presto!......as the number was a positive and not a negative, proof that it was not a commercial disaster!! :o)

Quoted text (14 lines)

> How do you know? > > No. It may have not been the best selling software, but it wasn't a > > "disaster". > > > In terms of low sales? Does anybody know? > > > James

WH-A-A-A-T???? > They didn't make the money they excepted cause they didn't think Sports Car

Quoted text (28 lines)

> GT was going to be so awesome, and whoever makes GPL made the same mistake > McLaren did with Ferrari, to under value their competition's potential. > Schumacher > > they didnt get back the money they had hoped to make on gpl > > probably due to very very bad advertising stratagies. > > > How do you know? > > > > No. It may have not been the best selling software, but it wasn't a > > > > "disaster". > > > > > In terms of low sales? Does anybody know? > > > > > James

GPL was not a sales success because: Americans hate realism!!! Marc Mercer

population of newzealand, a farmer, his wife, four other people and 4000,0000 sheep! > He counted up he number of GPL posts here over a 6-month period, divided > them by pi, took away the few posts that complained about the sim, then > multiplied that number by the entire population of New Zealand (because it's > as good a number as any), and Hey Presto!......as the number was a positive

Quoted text (21 lines)

> and not a negative, proof that it was not a commercial disaster!! :o) > > How do you know? > > > No. It may have not been the best selling software, but it wasn't a > > > "disaster". > > > > In terms of low sales? Does anybody know? > > > > James

Don't bother Bruce... he's just fishing for flames. Sorry 'bout setting this guy off in another thread... it's him against the world now. Jan. ------ >WH-A-A-A-T???? ><snip>

Whoa there big guy... you're losing 90% of the population here. This ain't the VegeServer ya old git!!<g> Can't post shit like that in here... it's too good for 'm. ;-)) Jan. ------ >He counted up he number of GPL posts here over a 6-month period, divided >them by pi, took away the few posts that complained about the sim, then >multiplied that number by the entire population of New Zealand (because it's >as good a number as any), and Hey Presto!......as the number was a positive >and not a negative, proof that it was not a commercial disaster!! :o) ><snip>

> Plus I tend to agree with Alison Hines' assessment that word-of-mouth would have sold a ton of copies and cut way down on returns had the default setups been easier. With the advent of FF support and her Ferrari setups, perhaps a remarketing campaign for GPL is in order? > Jerry Morelock I know! They could package GPL with ICR2 but they call ICR2 something else, like CART2000. Yeah that would sell a ton of em..oh, and make the price 14.95 US$ dave henrie

If that was intended as humour rather than bigotry, it failed.

>they didnt get back the money they had hoped to make on gpl >probably due to very very bad advertising stratagies. I have trouble with the concept of "bad advertising strategies" with regard to GPL -- the wonderful 2-page spreads that I saw in most of the computer magazines were impressive. These ads even made their way into mainstream automotive publications as well (though I could be wrong here). Plus, I think I also saw some ads on television, too -- I believe I recall seeing GPL ads on Speedvision that used live-action footage to portray the same ad on TV that they used in the 2-page magazine ads ("In 1968, they changed the rules to make the cars safer. Welcome to 1967."). I could be wrong about the ads making their way into mainstream automotive magazines (I swear I remember seeing it in Car & Driver, though), and the TV ads may also be a figment of my automotively-deranged imagination, but I don't recall seeing more advertising push for any other sim, ever. Seems to me like the advertising push for GPL was at least equal to any other racing/driving sim. Despite that, though, I've heard from reliable sources at MGI/Sierra that Viper Racing has out-sold GPL. And I don't think Viper Racing got even HALF the advertising support that GPL did. I don't recall seeing ANY magazine ads for Viper Racing, yet GPL had those wonderful 2-page spreads (FWIW, I'd love to have a GPL poster with a reproduction of those ads -- it would look great over my computer desk!). All in all, I think it was more an accessibility issue, rather than a lack of advertising support/hype, that has kept GPL from becoming an all-time bestseller. Without the ability to adjust the difficulty level, it's just too hard for the average Joe or Jane to get any kind of satisfaction from the competition in GPL. Executing a good 4-wheel drift though a turn is surely a thrill, but a lot of people just can't find even that enjoyable if they don't feel like they have the ability to be competitive with the AI, and GPL fell down in that area. With the addition of Allison's setups and the AI Tweak utility, GPL is much more accessible for the non-*** driving sim fan, but it should have had these things right out of the box, not as add-ons only available on the Web. Sierra/Papyrus desperately needs to re-release GPL with the better setups, the AI Tweak utility, and the V1.1 patch all in place on the installation CD -- they need to call it "Grand Prix Legends Gold" or even "Grand Prix Legends 2" (we'd know the difference, and the "2" would give the general public reason to take a 2nd look -- plus, it would be no worse than re-releasing ICR2 as CART Racing . . .). Plaster stickers all over the package indicating that this version features "FULL FORCE FEEDBACK SUPPORT" (a catch-phrase that's sure to guarantee more sales), and then come up with some additional hook to make it more accessible to beginners -- something like a gentle, high-banked oval track that novices could use to get used to the GPL physics model (the Louden track is okay, but I think something like the Dover track would be better). Advertise on the box that GPL "Now includes exclusive test skidpad track!", and GPL would be on the way to higher sales and greater popularity. Then again, who asked me? Perhaps somebody should, come to think of it. You listening, Papy? -- John Bodin Publisher, The IRL Insider Magazine http://irlinsider.adnetweb.com/

Quoted text (14 lines)

> How do you know? > > No. It may have not been the best selling software, but it wasn't a > > "disaster". > > > In terms of low sales? Does anybody know? > > > James

Quoted text (8 lines)

>> Unfortunately, that in itself is not enough to make it a best seller in a >> country which loves Jerry Springer, the WWF and "Titanic." >GPL was not a sales success because: >Americans hate realism!!! >Marc Mercer

And your basis for that generalized statement is...? Eldred __ Put your message in a modem, and throw it in the ***-sea... remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

Quoted text (7 lines)

>>they didnt get back the money they had hoped to make on gpl >>probably due to very very bad advertising stratagies. >I have trouble with the concept of "bad advertising strategies" with regard >to GPL -- the wonderful 2-page spreads that I saw in most of the computer >magazines were impressive. These ads even made their way into mainstream >automotive publications as well (though I could be wrong here). Plus, I

I didn't see any GPL ads in mainstream magazines. There have been ads for models of 1960s and 1970s F1 cars in C&D lately. Maybe that's what you're thinking of. I think Nascar 1 and 2 were pushed harder / better, at least in the US. Yep. Sometimes companies release too early and patch too late. The Papy guys could have added the ability to race the F2 and F3 cars and some spiffy AI tweaking utilities pretty easily. If they did that, it should be called Gold, not 2. Truth in advertising is a good thing. GPL2 (if it ever happens) should model a different season. (Early 60s 1.5L formula would be best from the standpoint of controllability and minimal work; early 1980s turbo cars would appeal more to younger F1 fans, but would require a lot of work for aerodynamics and licensing.) I don't see GPL Gold happening, because of the licensing hassles involved with adding more tracks or drivers or cars, which is what you'd expect from a Gold edition. If they wanted to go to all that effort, they could do an Indy Legends game, which would sell better, at least in the US. -- spamgard(tm): To email me, put "geek" in your Subject line.

<LIBERAL SNIP> Indy Legends? Funny you should mention it -- you might want to check this out: http://irlinsider.adnetweb.com/sims/gtirl/ I'm not sure now if this is a GT Interactive effort, or if this is a Papy and/or third-party effort to create a conversion for GPL, but I have heard reference to an "Indy Racing Legends" sim. Let's hope it happens! -- John Bodin Publisher, The IRL Insider Magazine http://irlinsider.adnetweb.com/ >-- >spamgard(tm): To email me, put "geek" in your Subject line.

My apologies to all americans :) my newsreader decided it would be amusing to chop off the end of my post to get me in trouble there were a good 100 words more to my post.. had these words been included along with the initial 2 lines hopefully you'd have been chuckling along with me (probably because of the rather cruel joke included about my fellow brits :) as you might have guessed the realism dig was linked to Jerry Springer the WWF and Titanic :) and nothing more sinister. My apologies again (unless of course you believe that Jerry Springer the WWF and Titanic are all real! - in this case all I will say is get help! :) Marc

I just couldn't figure out what the hell he was saying!!! :o)

Quoted text (13 lines)

> Don't bother Bruce... he's just fishing for flames. > Sorry 'bout setting this guy off in another thread... it's him against the > world now. > Jan. > ------ > >WH-A-A-A-T???? > ><snip>

LOL! Thanks for bringing me back to reality, Jan! :o)

Quoted text (13 lines)

> Whoa there big guy... you're losing 90% of the population here. This ain't > the VegeServer ya old git!!<g> > Can't post shit like that in here... it's too good for 'm. ;-)) > Jan. > ------ > >He counted up he number of GPL posts here over a 6-month period, divided > >them by pi, took away the few posts that complained about the sim, then > >multiplied that number by the entire population of New Zealand (because > it's > >as good a number as any), and Hey Presto!......as the number was a

positive > >and not a negative, proof that it was not a commercial disaster!! :o) > ><snip>

On Fri, 13 Aug 1999 22:20:21 +0200, "Schumacher" >They didn't make the money they excepted cause they didn't think Sports Car >GT was going to be so awesome, and whoever makes GPL made the same mistake >McLaren did with Ferrari, to under value their competition's potential. OK, we all know you're full of it, but let's prove it... Please explain, oh marketing maven, how a game released in May '99 (without a lot of advance fanfare) would adversely impact the sales of a game released 9/30/98 -- a full *seven months* before it. "Ummm, GPL doesn't sound that good, I'll keep playing Need For Speed for another seven months until something better comes along..." LOL. "But in a way, fear is a big part of racing, because if there was nothing to be frightened of, and no limit, any fool could get into a motor car and racing would not exist as a sport." -- Jim Clark

>>I have trouble with the concept of "bad advertising strategies" with regard >>to GPL -- the wonderful 2-page spreads that I saw in most of the computer >>magazines were impressive. These ads even made their way into mainstream >>automotive publications as well (though I could be wrong here). Plus, I >I didn't see any GPL ads in mainstream magazines. I regularly read "On Track" and "Autoweek". It seems that the ad appeared in "On Track" and a review appeared in "Autoweek". "But in a way, fear is a big part of racing, because if there was nothing to be frightened of, and no limit, any fool could get into a motor car and racing would not exist as a sport." -- Jim Clark

Quoted text (8 lines)

>My apologies to all americans :) >my newsreader decided it would be amusing to chop off the end of my post to >get me in trouble >there were a good 100 words more to my post.. >had these words been included along with the initial 2 lines hopefully

you'd >have been chuckling along with me (probably because of the rather cruel joke >included about my fellow brits :) >as you might have guessed the realism dig was linked to Jerry Springer the >WWF and Titanic :) and nothing more sinister. >My apologies again (unless of course you believe that Jerry Springer the WWF >and Titanic are all real! - in this case all I will say is get help! :) Well, I'm not a huge fan of the WWF, but I did cry the first time I saw "Titanic" (Leonardo didn't die soon enough, and the nudity was too brief). Springer, on the other hand, is my favorite pick-me-up (it's great to know that I'm not THAT screwed up!) . . . ;-) -- JB

>>>I have trouble with the concept of "bad advertising strategies" with regard

Quoted text (8 lines)

>>>to GPL -- the wonderful 2-page spreads that I saw in most of the computer >>>magazines were impressive. These ads even made their way into mainstream >>>automotive publications as well (though I could be wrong here). Plus, I >>I didn't see any GPL ads in mainstream magazines. > I regularly read "On Track" and "Autoweek". It seems that the ad >appeared in "On Track" and a review appeared in "Autoweek".

Thanks -- I didn't think I was going crazy! I know Car & Driver features the ads for GPL-era models all the time, but I think the GPL ad also ran in C&D back in late '98. I could be wrong, but if it appeared in On Track, there's a good chance I'm right -- or else I'm confusing the On Track ad with C&D . . . moot point, actually, but the On Track tie-in does prove that Sierra DID do a bit of marketing with GPL. -- JB

>On Fri, 13 Aug 1999 22:20:21 +0200, "Schumacher" >>They didn't make the money they excepted cause they didn't think Sports Car

Quoted text (11 lines)

>>GT was going to be so awesome, and whoever makes GPL made the same mistake >>McLaren did with Ferrari, to under value their competition's potential. > OK, we all know you're full of it, but let's prove it... > Please explain, oh marketing maven, how a game released in May '99 >(without a lot of advance fanfare) would adversely impact the sales of >a game released 9/30/98 -- a full *seven months* before it. > "Ummm, GPL doesn't sound that good, I'll keep playing Need For >Speed for another seven months until something better comes along..."

Sorry, Jeff, but that theory doesn't hold water. Why would anybody tear themselves away from something as wonderful as NFS for something as hopelessly difficult as SCGT? ;-) -- JB

> Sorry, Jeff, but that theory doesn't hold water. Why would anybody tear > themselves away from something as wonderful as NFS for something as > hopelessly difficult as SCGT? Maybe they want a game where the cars oversteer in the front as they should... -;) /ft, sick of you-know-who already (although I _do_ find it a bit too amusing to killfile just yet, I'm a terrible plonker)

Or they wanted one with a realistic Porsche 911 with no oversteer (front or back) - not some fantasy-world 911 that had it's tail snapping out when dropping throttle or braking in a turn ;-) -- Ken's Sig 3.0 "Who is the more foolish? The fool, or the fool who follows him?" - Obi-Wan Kenobi Go #43 and #44! volksy (at) geocities (dot) com volksy (at) yahoo (dot) com >> Sorry, Jeff, but that theory doesn't hold water. Why would anybody tear >> themselves away from something as wonderful as NFS for something as >> hopelessly difficult as SCGT? >Maybe they want a game where the cars oversteer in the front as they should... >-;) > /ft, sick of you-know-who already (although I _do_ find it a bit too >amusing to killfile just yet, I'm a terrible plonker)

[Snip) They had that ad in PC Gamer UK last year, and another one with the picture of Graham Hill and a very little Daemon asking "When will i get to race dad" (or something like that, doesn't remember), and Graham answering, "In August 1998". Yeah, or not only FULL FORCE FEEDBACK SUPPORT, what about THE BEST FORCE FEEDBACK EVER. And put a big A2 size poster with that ad you mentioned with that great picture of an accelerating starting grid, and i would bought it again. What they should do is to make some new car-shapes, model wing-aerodynamics, make some new track and a new interface and call in CART Racing 2000 :) -- Olav K. Malmin remove spam when replying

I agree. Just wanted to throw my 2 cents into the discussion. I almost did not buy GPL when in came out, not because it was too hard, but because I had little interest in '67 formula one racing, which is probably the case for most 20-30 years old computer users. Which is the age of most computer users (flame away).

I don't know about sales or whatever. My opinion is solely based on what I've read in this newsgroup and it appears that GPL could have done better comercially (in terms of sim there's no doubt it's currently the best there's around). What I think is the main cause off this low-sales figures is the era (1967) the game acts in: consider yourself being an average guy who wants to buy a racing sim/game standing in this computer shop (never having heard of the RAS discussion group, after all we are only a small bunch of fanatics!) what would you buy? I think it would be something you can reflect yourself with the "real" guys on the real modern circuits. So for you americans this will be probably NASCAR or Indycar and for us europeans it will more likely be modern formula1. Believe I never would have bought GPL if I wouldn't have had access to this newsgroup. I did buy GP2 and MGPRS2 however (and in fact I loved them both up until GPL arrived :)) No matter how much advertising they would have made for that bunch of old cars you want "reality": You see the guys driving around on your favourite tracks live on ESPN or whatever and want to copy that on your own PC! I think that's all there is to the fact that GPL's not being sold that massively. I have two friend who are ***ed to mgprs2 and laugh at me because I keep on telling them that there's really no alternative to GPL. I should get rid of those dusty cars they say! The other day I showed one of them my new Logitech WFF and demonstrated MGPRS2 and GPL with it. At that moment he (finally) became convinced of GPL's qualities. My point: GPL didn't sell that much because of its first impression it makes: Old cars racing around. Just my $0.02 worth thoughts.

> [SNIP] > My point: GPL didn't sell that much because of its first impression it makes: > Old cars racing around. I'd agree with you there - in my case I just wandered into a Game store to buy a racing game and just asked them which ones they thought were best. He shoved a copy of GPL into my hands and said "this one has a very good rating" - which convinced me, because I always believe what the reviewers say rather than what the publishers say! However, I do remember thinking that I wasn't particularly interested in old-fashioned cars and it was only my faith in the reviewers that persuaded me. That said, I also remember that my initial reaction to the game wasn't particularly good either - it didn't seem anywhere near as exciting (or realistic!) right from the off as Colin McRae Rally, for example. Of course, once you've put in the effort to learn how to drive the thing you start to "feel" the limits of the car and discover so much more about it, but by then most people will already have made up their minds. On the other hand if you like to trawl the internet to find out about games you will discover huge amounts of interest and positive comments for GPL, so maybe it just shows that not as many people surf the net in anger as has been supposed!

Reasons I did not buy GPL until March 1999 1) It wouldn't run on my PC (P166 + STB Velocity 128) - demo ran at about 4 fps with everything off :-) 2) I wasn't particularly interested in the era. 3) No force feedback 4) Nobody I knew had it. 5) All the reviews said it was extremely difficult -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Nortel, London Road, Harlow, Essex. CM17 9NA

Quoted text (12 lines)

> Reasons I did not buy GPL until March 1999 > 1) It wouldn't run on my PC (P166 + STB Velocity 128) - demo ran at > about 4 fps with everything off :-) > 2) I wasn't particularly interested in the era. > 3) No force feedback > 4) Nobody I knew had it. > 5) All the reviews said it was extremely difficult

The other problem is that no game shop is going to recommend it once they realize that once you're hooked, you won't bother coming back to buy any more games!

Quoted text (16 lines)

> > Reasons I did not buy GPL until March 1999 > > 1) It wouldn't run on my PC (P166 + STB Velocity 128) - demo ran at > > about 4 fps with everything off :-) > > 2) I wasn't particularly interested in the era. > > 3) No force feedback > > 4) Nobody I knew had it. > > 5) All the reviews said it was extremely difficult > The other problem is that no game shop is going to recommend it once > they realize that once you're hooked, you won't bother coming back to > buy any more games!

I should add that I fixed (1) by building a PC which could handle GPL. GPL itself helped with (2), Papy fixed (3) in the 1.1.0.3 patch. (4) is not a problem with VROC and Spyboy around (which should be more heavily advertised in the magazines). and last but not least, (5) is not fixed but actually adds to the ***ion and challenge of the game. I've not seriously played any other game since I got GPL, and it is the ONLY game I have played online over the internet. Any GPL Gold pack that gets released should have on the box in large letters - full support for force feedback and an online *** community. It should also have the functionality that GPaL was going to give us, and it should have a more driveable set of default setups. The game should also have either direct3d and/or opengl in the box, since by limiting it to 3dfx/rendition, Papy have effectively eliminated 75% of the market since most of the OEM graphics cards bundled in machines are ATI cards or TNT/TNT2. I believe that only a very small percentage of the public are prepared to open up their PCs to put in a new graphics card. They will instead stick with what they were given when they bought the PC, and buy another one in 3 years time. Paul. -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Nortel, London Road, Harlow, Essex. CM17 9NA

> Reasons I did not buy GPL until March 1999 > 1) It wouldn't run on my PC (P166 + STB Velocity 128) - demo ran at > about 4 fps with everything off :-) Was this the first or the second demo? I think they made a mistake in releasing the first one. a) It had _very_ non-optimized code for handling skidding and wheels offroad. It ran well on my P166/Voodoo2 with detail off, but as soon as I started to skid the car or got a wheel off the road - slideshow. This convinced me that I didn't have the machine necessary to run GPL. Sheer luck I re-downloaded the demo (which wasn't clearly announced as being an updated one, AIR) and found out that it worked flawlessly. b) The car setups in the first demo were just plain awful as many people have pointed out. They should of scared a buncha ppl off right there. Better (more forgiving) car setups from the first to the final release versions would have been desirable. The ICR model of having different setups for rookie, intermediate and advanced drivers was good IMO. Cheers, /ft

Yes it was. And there are lots of reasons why, none of them actually tells something about the quality of the game but almost all of them could have been solved before release. Off the top of my head I think these were the most important mistakes that caused such a commercial disaster (and 40000 *is* a disaster): 1. no D3D or OpenGL support out of the box > limitation to 3DFX or Rendition (!) instead 2. completely unusable software renderer as alternative 3. no options to tone down AI as well as driving difficulty 4. resulting from 3. a couple of rather mixed reviews (i.e. great sim but too hard) 5. a mediocre first demo 6. too steep hardware requirements to run a full field of cars (a sim that only allows you to hotlap with yourself does not appeal to everyone) 7. poor advertisment and marketing of the game and 8. 1967 F1 cars & drivers & tracks don't mean much for the casual sim racer either... --Tel

I disagree on this point, I think the add was the final selling point for me. Although I bought it before the reviews were out, if I had waited, and read the reviews, I'm not sure I would have bought it (GPL was my first Papy sim).

Quoted text (12 lines)

> > 1) It wouldn't run on my PC (P166 + STB Velocity 128) - demo ran at > > about 4 fps with everything off :-) > Was this the first or the second demo? I think they made a mistake in > releasing the first one. > a) It had _very_ non-optimized code for handling skidding and wheels offroad. > It ran well on my P166/Voodoo2 with detail off, but as soon as I started to > skid the car or got a wheel off the road - slideshow. This convinced me that I > didn't have the machine necessary to run GPL. Sheer luck I re-downloaded the > demo (which wasn't clearly announced as being an updated one, AIR) and found > out that it worked flawlessly.

I think it must have been the first demo. Theres a big difference running with a 3dfx compared with software renderer on a P166 :-) With all the detail off, I was wondering why the Glen had all these grey walls down both sides of the track. It was only when I looked at the replay with all details on that I saw they were really fences :-) -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Nortel, London Road, Harlow, Essex. CM17 9NA