Some time ago High Gear posted three renders of Bethesda Softworks' upcoming
racing sim; Skip Barber Racing. Now we can present you with some more info
on this game, since Brent Erickson, designer of the game, agreed to do an
interview with us:
"Kenneth: One of the things every racing sim enthusiast likes to know about
is how realistic you consider the physics. Although comparing it with a game
might be a bit unfair, let's do it anyway. With what game do you like to
compare the physics model in Skip Barber Racing?
Brent: I'm not sure what to compare it to. Grand Prix Legends claims to have
a realistic system. I've played with it and it has some shortcomings. As far
as I know, SBR will have the most complete and realistic physics to date."
That does sound good, doesn't it? You can find the full 3-page Interview and
two new screenshots of the game at
http://www.simracingnews.com/pittalk/interviews/brenterickson/
Enjoy!
--
Kenneth Verburg
Editor-in-Chief, High Gear
http://www.simracingnews.com
When you have to do such a thing in an interview, it means the software
developers aren't 100% sure of their product, and prefer putting down others
to create hype. Sorry but for me it totally ruins any expectation I have
for this game. And no if it was even another game instead of GPL mentioned
I would had still not be happy.
--
-- Fran?ois Mnard <ymenard>
-- May the Downforce be with you...
"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."
The question Kenneth asked was reasonable and to the point...a point we are
all interested in.
The answer was also reasonable...we'll see whether it's true or exaggerated
soon, I guess.
Marc.
others
> to create hype. Sorry but for me it totally ruins any expectation I have
> for this game. And no if it was even another game instead of GPL mentioned
Quoted text (9 lines)
> > "Kenneth: One of the things every racing sim enthusiast likes to know > about > > is how realistic you consider the physics. Although comparing it with a > game > > might be a bit unfair, let's do it anyway. With what game do you like to > > compare the physics model in Skip Barber Racing? > When you have to do such a thing in an interview, it means the software > developers aren't 100% sure of their product, and prefer putting downQuoted text (8 lines)
> I would had still not be happy. > -- > -- Fran?ois Mnard <ymenard> > -- May the Downforce be with you... > "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."Quoted text (19 lines)
>Some time ago High Gear posted three renders of Bethesda Softworks' upcoming >racing sim; Skip Barber Racing. Now we can present you with some more info >on this game, since Brent Erickson, designer of the game, agreed to do an >interview with us: >"Kenneth: One of the things every racing sim enthusiast likes to know about >is how realistic you consider the physics. Although comparing it with a game >might be a bit unfair, let's do it anyway. With what game do you like to >compare the physics model in Skip Barber Racing? >Brent: I'm not sure what to compare it to. Grand Prix Legends claims to have >a realistic system. I've played with it and it has some shortcomings. As far >as I know, SBR will have the most complete and realistic physics to date." >That does sound good, doesn't it? You can find the full 3-page Interview and >two new screenshots of the game at >http://www.simracingnews.com/pittalk/interviews/brenterickson/. >Enjoy!Well I certainly hope his estimate is correct. More sims with accurate
physics would definitly be nice. Given the number of times I've seen
"accurate physics" touted as part of what are , IMNSHO, arcade racing games
I hope this isn't just a throwaway remark on his part. What I did find
interesting is when he stated that this was the 4th generation of the
physics engine. What other racing stuff has Bethesda done apart from a drag
racing sim? (honest question: I really don't know). Anyone playing a sim
using the 3rd generation physices model from Bethesda? Whats it like?
David
The last dozen or so game developpers have said that and failed (that is
would be the most realistic yet, which means better than GPL). Im just
being wary. He says the physics are "4th generation", so that means they
will use the X-Car game engine. And that's not necessary a good thing,
since there is a good chance it may use DOS, in the year 2000. The racing
market is over-saturated by sim-wannabees. They might throw an incredible
game, that would be great, but meanwhile it's "wary mode".
--
-- Fran?ois Mnard <ymenard>
-- May the Downforce be with you...
"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."
>I hope this isn't just a throwaway remark on his part. What I did find
>interesting is when he stated that this was the 4th generation of the
>physics engine. What other racing stuff has Bethesda done apart from a drag
>racing sim?
X-Car which was not impressive at all.
--
// rrev at mindspring dot com //
Sorry, gotta disagree. This is a pretty unusual sim, in that it attempts
to replicate (how well, only time will tell) the experience of attending
a very well-known driving school at some very well-known tracks -- which
means A) Skip Barber's got a lot riding on it, and in my experience,
Barber doesn't do things half-assed, and B) unlike GPL, the physics
model will be easily and multitudinously verifiable, as MANY people in
the sim community have taken a Skip Barber course and/or driven the
tracks that will be offered: Lime Rock is obvious in many of the screen
shots (and Barber owns the track!), and the 22 (at last count) tracks
that Barber operates his school on are among the most familiar in the
US...Watkins Glen, Summit Point, Road Atlanta,Mid-Ohio, Sebring, Pocono,
IRP, Las Vegas, New Hampshire. This won't be a fast-twitch arcade game;
it's got to uphold Barber's school's reputation, and that's a commodity
that is VERY avidly protected. If this stuff doesn't ring true in the
sim community, Barber will NOT be pleased, and you can bet your socks he
and his instructors have been in on this from day one, and won't put
their name on the box for final release until it's right.
I don't care what Erickson says about GPL, I don't care about "X-Car",
and I especially don't care about the opinion of someone NOT in the
business of software development when they stentoriously declaim "it
means the software developers aren't 100% sure of their product" -- no
offense, M. Menard, but we've read your "authoritative" opinions for
several years now, and find them just as loopy and completely uninformed
as ever (though your English has improved!) -- the bottom line here is
Skip Barber himself. He is an absolute hard-ass stickler for things
being right, he knows personally and from the seat of his own pants what
IS right, and if this sim AIN'T right, he'll pull his name off it faster
than John Force can sign an autograph.
Bart Brown
> When you have to do such a thing in an interview, it means the software
> developers aren't 100% sure of their product, and prefer putting down others
> to create hype.
Hey, it's Brent here. Let me first assure you that the XCar physics were
scrapped after XCar. Second let me assure you that the graphics engine and
code base is all DirectX based. The graphics engine is all new.
The fourth generation physics comes from the fact that since developing the
new physics for Burnout, it has evolved through two other drag racing
products which leaves Skip at the fourth generation. The engine has been
improved and added to at each stage. I know some of you will say; "yea, but
that was drag racing." Well, let me assure you that you still have to model
the entire car to make a drag race product accurate. I would be happy to
share as much information as I can with anyone who's curious. Just ask here
or email me (email if you want a quicker response). I think you'll all be
peasantly surprised.
-Brent Erickson
Quoted text (18 lines)
> > The answer was also reasonable...we'll see whether it's true or > exaggerated > > soon, I guess. > The last dozen or so game developpers have said that and failed (that is > would be the most realistic yet, which means better than GPL). Im just > being wary. He says the physics are "4th generation", so that means they > will use the X-Car game engine. And that's not necessary a good thing, > since there is a good chance it may use DOS, in the year 2000. The racing > market is over-saturated by sim-wannabees. They might throw an incredible > game, that would be great, but meanwhile it's "wary mode". > -- > -- Fran?ois Mnard <ymenard> > -- May the Downforce be with you... > "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."Thanks for the encouragement. We'll try not to disappoint.
Btw, I don't know that Skip would approve of the BFG concept..
> > Hey, it's Brent here. Let me first assure you that the XCar physics were
> > scrapped after XCar. Second let me assure you that the graphics engine and
be
> > peasantly surprised.
> Thank you very much. By actively supporting the customer and so, posting on
> this newsgroup, you show great respect for the product you are doing. You
> are a step ahead of all the "GPL-contenders" with such a thing. I actually
> liked the physics in Burnout and it's successors, even if it was simply drag
> racing, which is simple on paper yet complicated.
> Some stuff in the bethesda game engine, especially what I consider the
> "mechanical parts", such as engine and transmission settings, have not been
> achieved in any other title.
> Oh and btw, RPG-it so we can walk around the circuit, and interact with some
> AI. Just talk to the guys doing the Elder Scrolls series. Ok I was joking,
> but many of us often dreamed about being able to actually go outside our car
Quoted text (14 lines)
> > code base is all DirectX based. The graphics engine is all new. > > The fourth generation physics comes from the fact that since developing > the > > new physics for Burnout, it has evolved through two other drag racing > > products which leaves Skip at the fourth generation. The engine has been > > improved and added to at each stage. I know some of you will say; "yea, > but > > that was drag racing." Well, let me assure you that you still have to > model > > the entire car to make a drag race product accurate. I would be happy to > > share as much information as I can with anyone who's curious. Just ask > here > > or email me (email if you want a quicker response). I think you'll allQuoted text (9 lines)
> and have something... an RPG based on the racing world. Maybe add a FPS > portion so we can use a BFG-3000 on those cars after a crash ;-D > -- > -- Fran?ois Mnard <ymenard> > -- May the Downforce be with you... > "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."> FWIW, Brent Erickson is the creator of X-Car.
Is there a demo of X-car?
The interview didn't give me any confidence
that the sim will be as good as I've been hoping
it will be.
--
Pat Dotson
IMPACT Motorsports
http://www.impactmotorsports.com/pd.html
Quoted text (7 lines)
>> FWIW, Brent Erickson is the creator of X-Car. >Is there a demo of X-car? >The interview didn't give me any confidence >that the sim will be as good as I've been hoping >it will be.> Hey, it's Brent here. Let me first assure you that the XCar physics were
> scrapped after XCar. Second let me assure you that the graphics engine and
> code base is all DirectX based. The graphics engine is all new.
> The fourth generation physics comes from the fact that since developing the
> new physics for Burnout, it has evolved through two other drag racing
> products which leaves Skip at the fourth generation. The engine has been
> improved and added to at each stage. I know some of you will say; "yea, but
> that was drag racing." Well, let me assure you that you still have to model
> the entire car to make a drag race product accurate. I would be happy to
> share as much information as I can with anyone who's curious. Just ask here
> or email me (email if you want a quicker response). I think you'll all be
> peasantly surprised.
Thank you very much. By actively supporting the customer and so, posting on
this newsgroup, you show great respect for the product you are doing. You
are a step ahead of all the "GPL-contenders" with such a thing. I actually
liked the physics in Burnout and it's successors, even if it was simply drag
racing, which is simple on paper yet complicated.
Some stuff in the bethesda game engine, especially what I consider the
"mechanical parts", such as engine and transmission settings, have not been
achieved in any other title.
Oh and btw, RPG-it so we can walk around the circuit, and interact with some
AI. Just talk to the guys doing the Elder Scrolls series. Ok I was joking,
but many of us often dreamed about being able to actually go outside our car
and have something... an RPG based on the racing world. Maybe add a FPS
portion so we can use a BFG-3000 on those cars after a crash ;-D
--
-- Fran?ois Mnard <ymenard>
-- May the Downforce be with you...
"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."
<snip>
Great point, and I truly agree with you. I say any product that is marketed
as a sim SHOULD be a sim when it's on the shelves. Unfortunately, the year
1999 has gave us a bitter taste on everybody's mouth here, so it's normal
that many of us, including me, are wary.
Of course there will be good quality titles, and when such come out, they
will have full support of the me and especially the community. Why wouldn't
we ? ;)
--
-- Fran?ois Mnard <ymenard>
-- May the Downforce be with you...
"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."
Quoted text (38 lines)
> Hey, it's Brent here. Let me first assure you that the XCar physics were > scrapped after XCar. Second let me assure you that the graphics engine and > code base is all DirectX based. The graphics engine is all new. > The fourth generation physics comes from the fact that since developing the > new physics for Burnout, it has evolved through two other drag racing > products which leaves Skip at the fourth generation. The engine has been > improved and added to at each stage. I know some of you will say; "yea, but > that was drag racing." Well, let me assure you that you still have to model > the entire car to make a drag race product accurate. I would be happy to > share as much information as I can with anyone who's curious. Just ask here > or email me (email if you want a quicker response). I think you'll all be > peasantly surprised. > -Brent Erickson >>> The answer was also reasonable...we'll see whether it's true or >> exaggerated >>> soon, I guess. >> The last dozen or so game developpers have said that and failed (that is >> would be the most realistic yet, which means better than GPL). Im just >> being wary. He says the physics are "4th generation", so that means they >> will use the X-Car game engine. And that's not necessary a good thing, >> since there is a good chance it may use DOS, in the year 2000. The racing >> market is over-saturated by sim-wannabees. They might throw an incredible >> game, that would be great, but meanwhile it's "wary mode". >> -- >> -- Fran?ois Mnard <ymenard> >> -- May the Downforce be with you... >> "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."Well you know dragracing a high powered car lets say something that will
run 9.90 in the qtr mile or faster is very different and actaully pretty
hard. its not just mash the gas and go. Road Racing seems harder due to
the corners, but in drag racing the driving is only part of it. I drove a
Comp Eliminator car that ran low 8s. It would fuzz your vision thru the
first 1/8 mile and the work inbetween rounds would make you dizzy as well.
Dave
> <snip>
> Great point, and I truly agree with you. I say any product that is marketed
> as a sim SHOULD be a sim when it's on the shelves. Unfortunately, the year
> 1999 has gave us a bitter taste on everybody's mouth here, so it's normal
> that many of us, including me, are wary.
Huh? Wary of WHAT? 1999 was the year that brought us such all-time
greats as SoS and Ford Racing -- what's to be wary of? <G>
TRUE -- look at the online communities that have sprung up in support
of such great titles like GPL and DTR (neither of which enjoy the
benefit of NASCAR or F1 licensing).
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
What if you had to sit in the school for the lesson of the day and walk the
track before racing? Ok, its lame but at least it's on topic ;-) Just give us
realistic physics and we'll be happy. Ok, I'll be happy. Other people like
pretty graphics too.
Jason.
> Thanks for the encouragement. We'll try not to disappoint.
> Btw, I don't know that Skip would approve of the BFG concept..
--
Jason Monds
http://members.home.net/gpl.mondsj/gpl - For my combined gas/brake setups
http://members.home.net/stuff.mondsj/n3prc - Nascar3 Pro Racing Club
(Please remove 'no extra spork' when replying)
