VERY Interesting Article About Which Sims Are Realistic

http://www.bhmotorsports.com/article/106/1 Excellent article. The author definitely knows what he's talking about. Coincidentally, he makes many of the same points I've been making for years. :-o David G Fisher

I also read it, and I thought it was good. I do have somethin' to say about it though. The guy seems to really "Hold Back" on what he really wants to say. Half of the article is him covering his ass for saying GPL isn't as realistic as people think. Seems like he really doesn't want to offend anyone, and I really can't blame him. Just from reading this forum, criticism of GPL is worse taken than... uhm.. something that people don't take to well. :) Also, I want to know WHY GTR2002 isn't realistic. He says there's things that are way beyond physics, but he never says what exactly.. It'd make a real interesting read if it was no-holds-barred, with more technical explanations. The whole thing about hot-lapping being more about exploiting small things in the game TOTALLY makes sense. I've seen a few replays and done a few multiplayer games with people doing things that make no sense, yet going way faster than me. My example is in LFS, people approaching a corner will slam on the brakes and downshift into 2nd from 5th right away sending the poor little GTR engine to like 16,000 RPM. I'm guessing it helps to brake faster.. Mike http://mikebeauchamp.com "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > http://www.bhmotorsports.com/article/106/1 > > Excellent article. The author definitely knows what he's talking about. > Coincidentally, he makes many of the same points I've been making foryears. > :-o > > David G Fisher > > >

Hmm, shame BH is so slow that I can't even read the article without it timing out... : (

"David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > http://www.bhmotorsports.com/article/106/1 > > Excellent article. The author definitely knows what he's talking about. Yes it is a very good article. But one thing to keep in mind is his criteria for evaluation and not take it as a general enthusiasts view of a sim. As an enthusiast, he gives very high ratings to both GPL and GTR2002. But as an instructor, he values reduced "unrealistic" features over additional "realistic" features. So he rates the more simplistic Heat engine higher because it doesn't introduce as many "unrealistic" effects as the more complex engines do. I'm not sure how many Sim Enthusiasts take the same approach. db

"Hoss" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Fri, 31 Jan 2003 03:50:55 GMT, "Dave Boyle" > <[email hidden]> reckoned: > > > >Yes it is a very good article. But one thing to keep in mind is hiscriteria > >for evaluation and not take it as a general enthusiasts view of a sim. Asan

Quoted text (12 lines)

> >enthusiast, he gives very high ratings to both GPL and GTR2002. But as an > >instructor, he values reduced "unrealistic" features over additional > >"realistic" features. So he rates the more simplistic Heat engine higher > >because it doesn't introduce as many "unrealistic" effects as the more > >complex engines do. I'm not sure how many Sim Enthusiasts take the same > >approach. > > > > > >db > > > > How do you know HEAT is more simplistic?

I don't. I was just going by what he said. db

"David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > http://www.bhmotorsports.com/article/106/1 > > Excellent article. The author definitely knows what he's talking about. > Coincidentally, he makes many of the same points I've been making for years. > :-o >Ralf is faster than Juan??? hehehe

"Dave Boyle" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:x3n_9.3557750$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (10 lines)

> > "Hoss" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > On Fri, 31 Jan 2003 03:50:55 GMT, "Dave Boyle" > > <[email hidden]> reckoned: > > > > > > >Yes it is a very good article. But one thing to keep in mind is his > criteria > > >for evaluation and not take it as a general enthusiasts view of a sim.

As > an > > >enthusiast, he gives very high ratings to both GPL and GTR2002. But asan > > >instructor, he values reduced "unrealistic" features over additional > > >"realistic" features. So he rates the more simplistic Heat enginehigher

Quoted text (11 lines)

> > >because it doesn't introduce as many "unrealistic" effects as the more > > >complex engines do. I'm not sure how many Sim Enthusiasts take the same > > >approach. > > > > > > > > >db > > > > > > > How do you know HEAT is more simplistic? > > I don't. I was just going by what he said.

Actually, Heat's 62.5hz physics engine IS more simplified than the latest stuff out these days. It was designed that way for low cpu-overhead, which was appropriate for the hardware of its day and its target market. No question about it if you've seen the guts of the physics files. But it still does a great job at that, and mainly runs into trouble trying to deal with very light, low mass objects or very high spring rates. Most of the complaints about Heat's realism were due to compromises made for gameplay by a mass-market audience. I'd love to see what the guys at MGI could do with a no-compromises encore designed for today's PC's. Let's hope they get the chance one of these days. SB

On Thu, 30 Jan 2003 21:00:18 -0500, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote: >http://www.bhmotorsports.com/article/106/1 > >Excellent article. The author definitely knows what he's talking about. >Coincidentally, he makes many of the same points I've been making for years. I dunno, I certainly agree with the points he mentions where GPL/GTR fail as perfect sims, but I'm not sure N Heat, as good as it was, is the answer either. I still can't get over the mid corner understeer that happens when you get off the gas in that sim, it's fun feeling the car understeering slightly and lifting to tuck the nose in and suddenly finding yourself in the fence. Oh yeah, you're good with Google, go dig up my post about how Nascar Heat was better than GPL. Yeah, I really said that when it came out, sue me. =) Jason

On Thu, 30 Jan 2003 23:28:05 -0500, Hoss <[email hidden]> wrote: >How do you know HEAT is more simplistic? He mentions it at least 3 times in that article. Jason

On Thu, 30 Jan 2003 21:24:39 -0500, "Mike Beauchamp" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Also, I want to know WHY GTR2002 isn't realistic. He says there's things >that are way beyond physics, but he never says what exactly.. One of the things that I think he was referring to in the article is the way the cars porpoise around certain tracks. I sort of assumed that was a fault in the track modelling rather than the car modelling however. Jump in the 360 and do a lap at Silverstone. From Priory until just before the start/finish line (i.e. the slow bits near the end of the lap) the car's rear end will bounce up and down like the early ground effect-based F1 cars. It's kinda funny to experience it from the cockpit cam. I do think that Doug did an absolutely killer job on the physics and I am eagerly anticipating his work with the historic F1 and GTP/Type C cars. <--- covering my ass here Jason

On Thu, 30 Jan 2003 21:00:18 -0500, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote: >http://www.bhmotorsports.com/article/106/1 > >Excellent article. The author definitely knows what he's talking about. >Coincidentally, he makes many of the same points I've been making for years. >:-o Btw, I'm pretty sure the author Malcolm Edeson is a.k.a. 'Maxx' in this newsgroup. The racing instructor with the driving lessons, remember?

On Fri, 31 Jan 2003 00:13:08 -0500, "Steve Blankenship" <[email hidden]> wrote: >I'd love to see what the guys at MGI could do with a no-compromises encore >designed for today's PC's. Let's hope they get the chance one of these >days. Viper Racing 2 would kick ass. *miffed there's no Dirt to Daytona for xbox* Jason

Juan is faster than Ralf. "rik zeppelin" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:Psn_9.96918$[email hidden]... > > > "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in messagenews:[email hidden]... > > http://www.bhmotorsports.com/article/106/1 > > > > Excellent article. The author definitely knows what he's talking about. > > Coincidentally, he makes many of the same points I've been making foryears. > > :-o > > > Ralf is faster than Juan??? > hehehe > >

"Magnus Svensson" wrote... > > <snip> > Btw, I'm pretty sure the author Malcolm Edeson is a.k.a. > 'Maxx' in this newsgroup. The racing instructor with the > driving lessons, remember? Indeed, the very same. Jan. =---

"David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> http://www.bhmotorsports.com/article/106/1 > > Excellent article. The author definitely knows what he's talking about. > Coincidentally, he makes many of the same points I've been making for years. > :-o > > David G Fisher

Wow - that must be because you're some sort of genius! I can't get to BHMotorsports from here, but from comments it sounds like a post that was made to the GTR2002 forum at Simmods a few days ago. I thought it was frustratingly long winded and devoid of any real substance. Time and time again he talks about physics model flaws and mentions that you can do unreal things in the sims, yet doesn't expand on what those flaws are and what it is that you can do that allows the "aliens" to run so fast. Well excuse me if I'm underwhelmed - these are consumer priced *games* that run on consumer grade hardware. WTF do people expect? Anyone who thinks they're gonna get a totally accurate experience is as delusional as DGF is egotistical. Here's the short version of that "VERY Interesting Article". No racing sim is totally realistic. They all have flaws. Some have more flaws than others. None are close enough to reality to be used as a teaching aid because they have flaws. Aliens can expoit flaws to go fast. GPL isn't realistic because of the limited tyre model (*gasp* I'd *never* heard that before) Err, did I miss anything? I don't doubt that the best of sims can give a reasonable approximation or real life racing within the limits of affordable hardware and marketable playability - that's all I ask for. Regards, Mark

"Redmist" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:b1crl6$11hr0r$[email hidden]... > Hmm, shame BH is so slow that I can't even read the article without it > timing out... : ( > I think it originated from the simmods forum. http://www.simmods.com/forums/index.php?s=4d65c1f313d2109f440514cbb4cd4004&a ct=ST&f=27&t=8232&st=60 Jone

Yes, the fact that they all have flaws <g> Achim "Mark" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... ... > Err, did I miss anything?

On 31 Jan 2003 01:04:48 -0800, [email hidden] (Mark) wrote: >Here's the short version of that "VERY Interesting Article". Get defensive much?

"David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > http://www.bhmotorsports.com/article/106/1 > > Excellent article. The author definitely knows what he's talking about. > Coincidentally, he makes many of the same points I've been making foryears. > :-o > > David G Fisher > > > Well if he makes the same points you've been making he *must*know what he's talking about, seeing as you know everything about everything ;)

> The guy seems to really "Hold Back" on what he really wants to say. Malcolm posts here as well, just ask him :) rms [email hidden]

ER: Quick, Watson! The logorrhea pump! Not surprisingly, the author prefers his own mod to Doug Arnao's. Vanity.... "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > http://www.bhmotorsports.com/article/106/1 > > Excellent article. The author definitely knows what he's talking about. > Coincidentally, he makes many of the same points I've been making foryears. > :-o > > David G Fisher > > >

"Joachim Trensz" <[email hidden]> wrote in news:b1dheo$11i0mh$1@ID- 99765.news.dfncis.de: > Yes, the fact that they all have flaws <g> > > Achim > Would those flaws be like the lack of proper Vipers in every sim? :) dave henrie (waiting for The Nurburgring for the f1 2k2 mods so I can properly destroy said Viper) dave henrie

Indeed, that's a major one. And since GTR2002 I know that a missing Marcos is also an unforgiveable omission <g> Achim "Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... ... > Would those flaws be like the lack of proper Vipers in every sim?

Yeah, same here :( Larry "Redmist" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:b1crl6$11hr0r$[email hidden]... > Hmm, shame BH is so slow that I can't even read the article without it > timing out... : ( > >

Yeah, I could go for Viper Racing 2 as well :) Heck, a track pack for Viper 1 would be great! And Goy isn't totally off-base when he says that it would be neet to see a Aussie-V8 sim. I've been watching those races during the season down-time, and it's pretty enjoyable. Although F1 looks to be a comical and fun experience next year as well :) Man, those Aussie-V8 races have some TOUGH rules! Larry "Jason Moyer" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Fri, 31 Jan 2003 00:13:08 -0500, "Steve Blankenship" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >I'd love to see what the guys at MGI could do with a no-compromisesencore

Quoted text (8 lines)

> >designed for today's PC's. Let's hope they get the chance one of these > >days. > > Viper Racing 2 would kick ass. > > *miffed there's no Dirt to Daytona for xbox* > > Jason

Magnus Svensson <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted text (8 lines)

> On 31 Jan 2003 01:04:48 -0800, [email hidden] (Mark) > wrote: > > > >Here's the short version of that "VERY Interesting Article". > > > Get defensive much?

I don't understand. Defensive about what? He says that GTR2002 and GPL are good, and I agree with him. He says NH may be even better (IIRC) which I can't comment on as I only dabbled with the demo - it never was released over here. If it's the same as the post that was made at simmods (which I'm pretty sure it is) I don't understand what sim fans are enthusing over. I've asked maxx to expand on the vague areas of "unrealness" that he refers to over in those forums and seriously look forward to his reply. It's just that, and of course I'm paraphrasing, "no sim can yet be used as a total instructional tool for race drivers" is stating the bleedin obvious as far as I'm concerned ;-) It was a *long* post, I'll give him that, and kudos to maxx for having a stab. I just thought word/content ratio was off! Best regards, Mark Reading, UK

"Joachim Trensz" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<b1dheo$11i0mh$[email hidden]>...

Quoted text (8 lines)

> Yes, the fact that they all have flaws <g> > > Achim > > "Mark" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > ... > > Err, did I miss anything?

LOL! I posted in the morning. I should *never* do that - I'm usually more than a tad cranky before noon... I didn't mean to have a go at maxx (although that's how it came off), I'm more baffled by what appeared to me as fawning over his post in the simmods forum. Fairly interesting and overly long but frustratingly skirting around issues that I would have liked him to dig into a bit more... Regards, Mark Reading, UK

Hi everyone, thanks for all your comments. It's been a hectic week and I've only just got in and read them all. I will respond to each in the next few hours but I just wanted to clarify the situation. The text was a post on the GTR2002 forum following my response to a thread "Have any GTR drivers raced in real life" - I has so responded. Some people probably knew of me and a coupld asked how REAListic I thought GTR2002 was - I also had about dozen email around the same time from buddies asking a similat question. This was on Jan 2nd. Over the next 3 weeks I made odd notes in an open .txt file until I had a fairly complete post. I felt is neccasary to elaborate on, and clarify most of the comments, otherwise it could have started a heated discussion and I would ahve been answering doxens of posts saying "what do you mean by that?", "I an get my car to do that", "what did you mean by that?" - you know the score from many posts seen here. I posted the final piece to the same thread on Sunday (I think) and have since been responding to questions and comments for a number of hours each day, not only in that forum but elsewhere where it has been picked up. In some of those posts I perhaps do expland on things I say a little more, plus the discussion broadens. Also, at this time BHMS contacted me and wanted to use the initial post as an "Article" on their site, I agreed although it was never written "AS" an article. This also received many responses which I again tried to respond to. I would suggest anyone particularly interested in this subject check out the varoius threads, the GTR one is perhaps the fuller but there is also quite a big thread at the West Racing forum. I have even posted on this subkect to my "Racers" forum at 10 Tenths which is where most real life racers read and post to. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ALSO : I have not finisged yet. I hear the cries for "tell me specifics" well I am going to try and respond, including a video/GTR replay comparison of a GT type car at Mugello and the GTR 550 at Mugello. This all tales time to prepare so please bear with me. I will generaly post new stuff to the GTR forum although anything significant I will try and announce here also. I am still responding to posts in all forums. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Here are the links GTR2002 forum post : http://makeashorterlink.com/?U2DA52B43 West Racing forum post : http://makeashorterlink.com/?R1FA21B43 BHMS Article (comments at the bottom) http://www.bhmotorsports.com/article/106 BTW, sorry to not share this with my r.a.s. buddies bit it got kinda out of hand, plus I figured most of you guys would pick up the posts at the various sim related forums on the web. Cheers Maxx

I guess I may as well put in my 2 cents worth. I enjoyed the article quite a bit, but didn't agree with it entirely and also would have liked more detail about what's been added to decrease realism. As far as I know, I was one of the first ones on here who stated that I thought the high speed handling of the GPL cars was convincing, but not the low speed. Well, I've changed my mind since then. It's been over 25 years since I've done any real racing, but I have done it. After watching some of my GPL replays and watching the speed I was going around 90� corners, hairpins, etc., I've come to the conclusion that it's a lack of the sense of speed while driving (under 60mph, for example), not the traction, that doesn't feel right. Aside from vibrating my back and feet and thowing me to one side of my chair, I don't know if it's even possible to give that feeling in a sim. Comparing some of the corners I used to take in one of the (many) sports cars I used to have (Fiat/Abarth X 1/9) to the corner speeds in GPL, has convinced me of this even more. He also mentioned tire squeal. I'm not sure that it isn't modelled right in GPL. I believe they still used bias belted tires back in '67 and it didn't take much to get them squealing, especailly in a 4 wheel drift or losing it in a corner. In fact, even after radial tires were introduced, a lot of race car drivers preferred bias belted because they gave more warning of when the car was losing traction. The loss was more gradual than radial tires. The other thing is that Malcolm hasn't raced an F1 car from that period so, while he can draw on racing experience in general, he can't really say how these particular cars handled. I agree with a lot of the Nascar stuff he said, so there's no fun in writing about that here. He did mention, briefly, that the sims try to give you a 'feel' for real racing. I think that's a key point. A physics model is, after all, a model. In any kind of modeling, certain liberties have to be taken to make the model convincing, even though they are not accurate. Let's take the old model railroad example again. Let's say I'm modeling an HO scale railroad on a 10 x12 foot table and I want to show a train in the mountains that's a mile away. I have a problem because I only have 10 feet to do this. If I reduce that train to N scale, it's perceived as being way off in the distance. It certainly isn't accurate, but it's convincing and definitely helps the experience.The same principle applies to the stone around the track. If I model 1" stone in HO scale it's perceived as being a smooth, flat surface. If I model it at 5", the texture shows and it 'looks' more real. Of course, a person with a keen eye can tell that the HO scale track laborer is trying to rake stones the size of the palm of his hand. At least it's better than having him rake something you can't see. Since we can't model a lot of the sensations you get in real racing, sometime liberties have to be taken to give you the 'feel' that more is happening and make the experience appear to be real. Otherwise it might just be bland. We all know that spinning into a corner and crashing in a GPL car is not going to feel the same as doing it in a real F1 car. Your heart may be a little faster, but you won't get that sick feeling just before you crash. So, I didn't agree with everything he said, but I think Malcolm did an admirable job trying to answer a question that wasn't phrased properly. He did make it clear when he was looking at it from a training point of view and when he was looking at it from a sim racer's viewpoint. Perhaps the question should have been 'which sims leave you with the best overall impression of real life racing?' -- Slot Tweaks & Reviews www.slottweak.com --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.443 / Virus Database: 248 - Release Date: 1/10/2003

Steve Smith wrote: > ER: Quick, Watson! The logorrhea pump! Not surprisingly, the author > prefers his own mod to Doug Arnao's. Vanity.... Yep. I saw that coming too. ;-) -jde

Mike, On Thu, 30 Jan 2003 21:24:39 -0500, "Mike Beauchamp" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (8 lines)

>I also read it, and I thought it was good. I do have somethin' to say about >it though. > >The guy seems to really "Hold Back" on what he really wants to say. Half of >the article is him covering his ass for saying GPL isn't as realistic as >people think. Seems like he really doesn't want to offend anyone, and I >really can't blame him. Just from reading this forum, criticism of GPL is >worse taken than... uhm.. something that people don't take to well. :)

Yes, I agree - I certainly was trying not to offend anyone but, really why should it offend anyone? no-one that I know of has ever suggested that GPL/GTR is truly realistic but fans in both camps would perhaps rate thier favourite as the best. A few people in the forum wondered how close to relaism GTR was and that was the question I was responding to. You can never have a conversation about the quality of a drivng simulation without mentioning GPL so thats where that came in. I also mentioned Heat and Netkar, those comments may well have been seen as controversial but the vast majority of GPL/GTR drivers would have not thought to try those products had I not mentioned them. I wasn't holding back, it is truly difficult to pass on this sort of information in an understable form. Both GTR/GPL slowed down when I pressed the break, speeded up when I pressed the gas and turned left when I turned the wheel left. What I could say was that using the controls (brake/gas/ wheel) as I would do in a real GT type car to negotiate a certain corner (say Redgate at Donington Park) would not produce the same responses as a real car. Equally the way I found myself using the control in GTR to negotiate Redgate would not work in real life. Braking and corner entry is about precision and finess (despite what you might see in hotlap replays). An 1/4" too much gas or split second delay in applying will see you well out of shape and most llikely off track (we are talking of driving at/close to the limit here). When you lift off the gas in a real car, or lift off the brake and make the start of your turn, the car will DO certain things ( specifically, it will try to rotate). The sensation of this and the way you deal with it is the bread and butter of fast driving. GTR and to an extent and in some circumstances, GPL do not behave this way. The sensation and degree of this will differ between different formats of car, salloon, single-seater, FWD, RWD but is always present and recognisable (only the way you deal with it differs significantly). > >Also, I want to know WHY GTR2002 isn't realistic. He says there's things >that are way beyond physics, but he never says what exactly.. I have triied to explain why this is difficult above. If I was to say that "the car does not rotate sufficiently on corner entry based on the control inputs I provide" - would that shut people up, you bet it won't .... "what do you mean" "it works great for me" "you are probably driving it wrong - do this" " what do you mean sufficiently? by what percentage" "Have you ever driven this exact car on this exact track ... No, well then you can't know" Does anyone here think there is something unrealistic about GTR, or GPL, or V8 Challenge, or TOCA2, or CMR2, or LFS or NetKar - care to elaborate? > >It'd make a real interesting read if it was no-holds-barred, with more >technical explanations. Well, I'm not really holding anything back, all the products above have their merits, as games, sims, pastimes, coasters, training aids, competitions etc. etc. I was specifically talking about realism of handling at which GTR/GPL/NHeat mods/Netkar all do very well but some do it better than others and it is a question of how much REALNESS they have vs. How much UNREALNESS they have. And! why is this important to the casual gamer? it isn';t. Thing is most of you here know that GPL is not played by casual gamers. A lot of GTR players are also deadly serious (and many are also GPLr's)

Quoted text (10 lines)

> >The whole thing about hot-lapping being more about exploiting small things >in the game TOTALLY makes sense. I've seen a few replays and done a few >multiplayer games with people doing things that make no sense, yet going way >faster than me. My example is in LFS, people approaching a corner will slam >on the brakes and downshift into 2nd from 5th right away sending the poor >little GTR engine to like 16,000 RPM. I'm guessing it helps to brake >faster.. > >Mike

I didn't want to get into the old "hotlapper" debate and made it quite clear that exploiting every loophole and oddity in the game is no bad thing - it's what real racers do with real cars. The "aliens" are not cheating or being unfair to anyone, it's just they have the motivation to go faster and faster and have learnt how to do this. Maxx

Redmist On Fri, 31 Jan 2003 13:48:20 +1000, "Redmist" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Hmm, shame BH is so slow that I can't even read the article without it >timing out... : ( > Check out the post below (83 lines) it has links to the original discussion and all the follow up posts. Maxx

Jason, On Fri, 31 Jan 2003 05:36:26 GMT, [email hidden] (Jason Moyer) wrote:

Quoted text (16 lines)

>On Thu, 30 Jan 2003 21:24:39 -0500, "Mike Beauchamp" ><[email hidden]> wrote: > >>Also, I want to know WHY GTR2002 isn't realistic. He says there's things >>that are way beyond physics, but he never says what exactly.. > >One of the things that I think he was referring to in the article is >the way the cars porpoise around certain tracks. I sort of assumed >that was a fault in the track modelling rather than the car modelling >however. > >Jump in the 360 and do a lap at Silverstone. From Priory until just >before the start/finish line (i.e. the slow bits near the end of the >lap) the car's rear end will bounce up and down like the early ground >effect-based F1 cars. It's kinda funny to experience it from the >cockpit cam.

I have heard there are some track modelling issues here, not sure why the F1 cars don't have probs though. Not tried Silverstone myself though yet. > >I do think that Doug did an absolutely killer job on the physics and I >am eagerly anticipating his work with the historic F1 and GTP/Type C >cars. <--- covering my ass here So do I, one reason I refuse to stoop to criticise such a great piece of work - merely to comment on it's realism compared to real life, which, as far as I know, Doug has not proclaimed is perfect. Maxx

Dave, On Fri, 31 Jan 2003 03:50:55 GMT, "Dave Boyle" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (15 lines)

> >"David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >news:[email hidden]... >> http://www.bhmotorsports.com/article/106/1 >> >> Excellent article. The author definitely knows what he's talking about. > >Yes it is a very good article. But one thing to keep in mind is his criteria >for evaluation and not take it as a general enthusiasts view of a sim. As an >enthusiast, he gives very high ratings to both GPL and GTR2002. But as an >instructor, he values reduced "unrealistic" features over additional >"realistic" features. So he rates the more simplistic Heat engine higher >because it doesn't introduce as many "unrealistic" effects as the more >complex engines do. I'm not sure how many Sim Enthusiasts take the same >approach.

THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU. I couldn't have said it better myself :) Maxx

HOss On Fri, 31 Jan 2003 00:21:39 -0500, Hoss <[email hidden]> wrote: >OK, sorry. I never read it yet. I never felt HEAT had a simplistic >engine though. Always felt pretty realisitc to me even in comparison >to N2002. Exactly, more simplistic doesn't = less realistic. Heat does what it does well and throws up very few "oddities". GTR/GPL do MORE THINGS but as a consequence (perhaps) introduce a few more oddities. From my viewpoint this equates to a less attractive driver training tool. I know not everyone thinks of sims as a driver training tool BUT unfortunately, many sim drivers feel they are better potential racing drivers because they are good/fast at a sim. So, I think the point was of more relevance than it was perhaps perceived. Maxx

Hoss, On Fri, 31 Jan 2003 06:11:11 -0500, Hoss <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (7 lines)

>Yes, I've read it now. I just downloaded that Ferrari360 mod that he >talks about and drove it around a bit. Feels pretty good but I need to >tweak the car setups because going around corners on road courses is >pretty hard with the stock setup. But I can't seem to access the >setups they included, when I go to load a setup all I see is Advanced >and Default. When I look in the folder though I can see more setups >that they provided themselves. Anyone know how I load these setups?

The car must feel AWFUL with the stock NASCAR setups, 1200lbs springs at the front!! not surprised you are having probs. The setups are key to getting these mod cars to run well, they are so different to the Nascar Cars. You should have found 3 setups (at least) in ALL road course directories. They are stored in the track folders, in the setups folder, in the mod folder i.e. \Ferrari360\Setups\Mosport. They end with .gar - there may be the odd track missing but they are just base setups anyway and are the same for all road courses, just copy them from a track where they do exist. Actually, I don't think Brands was out when the mod was released so there may not be any in that directory. I did suggest Brands with the "HARD" setup (refers to springs) as a good one to try as it is the same track as GTR and you could compare the 2 360s (The Heat one is not quite the same class, FC instead of GT). You could also try Sachsenring with the SOFT setups, this really shows up the handling. If you have trouble still post back here and I'll try and help. Maxx

Hoss, ALSO make sure you are running in HARDCORE mode. Maxx

On Fri, 31 Jan 2003 05:28:57 GMT, [email hidden] (Jason Moyer) wrote:

Quoted text (7 lines)

> >I dunno, I certainly agree with the points he mentions where GPL/GTR >fail as perfect sims, but I'm not sure N Heat, as good as it was, is >the answer either. I still can't get over the mid corner understeer >that happens when you get off the gas in that sim, it's fun feeling >the car understeering slightly and lifting to tuck the nose in and >suddenly finding yourself in the fence.

That was the thnig that bugged me about Heat and the first few mods that came out (DTM etc,) It is really only this lasy 6-9 months that we have managed to get a better understanding of Heat physics and all but elimiated this effect. In some ways we moved on from simply entering real world data to actually figuring out what a change to a variable felt like and adjusting it to get the feel we wanted. Try mods like the Ferrrari 360 mod or, if you can find it, the Caterham 7 mod. Also, the TPTCC cars which you can find at the uspits (www.theuspits.com) are now much improved over the old DTM cars. Maxx PS. I actually had very little involvement with the F360 mod save for some final physics tweaks and tidying up the setups.

On Fri, 31 Jan 2003 06:57:27 +0100, Magnus Svensson >Btw, I'm pretty sure the author Malcolm Edeson is a.k.a. 'Maxx' in >this newsgroup. The racing instructor with the driving lessons, >remember? >Yes, you have me Magnus, you are referring to GPLEGS and the infamous "How to go faster in GPL" post from Mr Eldred himself. You see I do very much value GPL as a training aid - reality costs money - 6 laps in a formula ford is about �100 plus your expenses getting the track :) Maxx

Mark, I am going to resond to your later post ... Maxx On 31 Jan 2003 01:04:48 -0800, [email hidden] (Mark) wrote:

Quoted text (33 lines)

> >I can't get to BHMotorsports from here, but from comments it sounds >like a post that was made to the GTR2002 forum at Simmods a few days >ago. I thought it was frustratingly long winded and devoid of any >real substance. Time and time again he talks about physics model >flaws and mentions that you can do unreal things in the sims, yet >doesn't expand on what those flaws are and what it is that you can do >that allows the "aliens" to run so fast. Well excuse me if I'm >underwhelmed - these are consumer priced *games* that run on consumer >grade hardware. WTF do people expect? Anyone who thinks they're >gonna get a totally accurate experience is as delusional as DGF is >egotistical. > >Here's the short version of that "VERY Interesting Article". > >No racing sim is totally realistic. >They all have flaws. >Some have more flaws than others. >None are close enough to reality to be used as a teaching aid because >they have flaws. >Aliens can expoit flaws to go fast. >GPL isn't realistic because of the limited tyre model (*gasp* I'd >*never* heard that before) > >Err, did I miss anything? > >I don't doubt that the best of sims can give a reasonable >approximation or real life racing within the limits of affordable >hardware and marketable playability - that's all I ask for. > >Regards, > >Mark

Mark, On 31 Jan 2003 08:57:33 -0800, [email hidden] (Mark) wrote:

Quoted text (10 lines)

>LOL! > >I posted in the morning. I should *never* do that - I'm usually more >than a tad cranky before noon... > >I didn't mean to have a go at maxx (although that's how it came off), >I'm more baffled by what appeared to me as fawning over his post in >the simmods forum. Fairly interesting and overly long but >frustratingly skirting around issues that I would have liked him to >dig into a bit more...

LOL, no problem - As you have said, I've had lots of kind remarks following the forum post but I was expecting many negative ones, "you can't please all the people ...." and all that. I take the criticism about not being that specific but only because I know I found and still find it hard to be so. I did try and explain this in an earlier post here and I will repost that section later in case you miss it (I know newservers are not that reliable). I am an instructor for a living these days. So that means I am a professional "tell them they are crap/dangerous but don't upset them - in fact, make them think they are pretty good". So, I'm a diplomat - not just because that is often demanded of me, but because I prefer to be that way - nothing bugs me that much that I'm going to be rude or terse about it (OK, I have the occasional bad day - I think I ranted at DGF once - but then who hasn't) I think the reason I got so many good comments was that they appreciated someone who had some real world experience taking the time to not just type in that post but to think about all the issues fully and try and cover all bases. Also, I've found that if you explain something twice using different words it usually stands more chance of being understood, and some of what I was saying was not that easy for a multi-national audience to perhaps take in. I copied the next bit from your earlier post. I'm sure you were not totally serious with it bit what do you think the response would be to that post - I'd kinda like to stick around the sim community for a while yet. I think I did say a lot more than this, yes, it was wordy and perhaps repetitive in parts but I think I just covered that ...

Quoted text (7 lines)

>Here's the short version of that "VERY Interesting Article". >No racing sim is totally realistic. >They all have flaws. >Some have more flaws than others. >None are close enough to reality to be used as a teaching aid because >they have flaws.

I didn't say that, all sims mentioned have value as a training aid. Just that, just because a sim models more varriables and has a higher sampling rate doesn't make it more REAListic and that the more "quirks" a sim has the more flawed it is as a training aid. >Aliens can expoit flaws to go fast. >GPL isn't realistic because of the limited tyre model (*gasp* I'd >*never* heard that before) There are lots more reasons why GPL isn't realistic but I wasn't specifically talking about GPL, and PLEASE DONT ask me to be specific about GPL.Maybe one day I will but I really will need a flame proof suit for that one :) Maxx PS. The bit I posted ealier about why it's tough to be specific

Quoted text (15 lines)

>I have triied to explain why this is difficult above. If I was to say >that "the car does not rotate sufficiently on corner entry based >on the control inputs I provide" - would that shut people up, you >bet it won't .... >"what do you mean" >"it works great for me" >"you are probably driving it wrong - do this" >" what do you mean sufficiently? by what percentage" >"Have you ever driven this exact car on this exact track >... No, well then you can't know" >Does anyone here think there is something unrealistic about >GTR, or GPL, or V8 Challenge, or TOCA2, or CMR2, or LFS >or NetKar - care to elaborate?

And I also said as to why I thought it was an important point to make, even though my evaluation was based on a training aid.

Quoted text (7 lines)

>From my viewpoint this equates to a less attractive driver training >tool. I know not everyone thinks of sims as a driver training tool >BUT unfortunately, many sim drivers feel they are better potential >racing drivers because they are good/fast at a sim. >So, I think the point was of more relevance than it was perhaps >perceived.

Mark, On 31 Jan 2003 08:51:04 -0800, [email hidden] (Mark) wrote: >He says that GTR2002 and GPL are good, and I agree with him. He says >NH may be even better (IIRC) which I can't comment on as I only >dabbled with the demo - it never was released over here. Yes, it's a real shame Heat wasn't distributed more widely. It is now being imported in considerable bulk by the UK by the Oval Racing News magazine as there are 5 mods (and a couple of dozen tracks) based on UK short oval racing .. Brisca F1 Brisca Legends Brisca F2 Saloon Stock Car Heat Banger Car Heat It has a VERY large following and there are multiple leagues operating. I wasn't involved in any of the above but the F2 mod in particular is very realistic (and yes, I do have some UK short oval experience).

Quoted text (8 lines)

> >If it's the same as the post that was made at simmods (which I'm >pretty sure it is) I don't understand what sim fans are enthusing >over. I've asked maxx to expand on the vague areas of "unrealness" >that he refers to over in those forums and seriously look forward to >his reply. It's just that, and of course I'm paraphrasing, "no sim >can yet be used as a total instructional tool for race drivers" is >stating the bleedin obvious as far as I'm concerned ;-)

OK. I have tried to explain the reasons for this, BUT what I haven't yet covered (I dont think - I'm getting a bit tired now) is that IT IS AN ONGOING DISCUSSION. I AM going to try and be more specific and have already spent a lot of time getting a GTR .VCR replay file and an in-car REAL LIFE movie of the same (type of) car and the same track. This will only show a litte of what I mean however as most of it is in the control input vs. reaction area and it's just not possible to deminstrate that effectively, Also, why should I bother ? I've given my opinion, and answered questions. Seems most folks know it's not THAT real anyway - I have no ace to grind with Doug and the SBDT guys, far from it. However, whilst I have the time I will try and go a little further. >It was a *long* post, I'll give him that, and kudos to maxx for having >a stab. I just thought word/content ratio was off! I agree 100% and thanks for the kudos (where can I spend these, South America ? :) > >Best regards, > >Mark >Reading, UK Cheers Maxx

Extract from one of the forums - this thread seems more active so I am going to reply here! "(1) I'm not sure if this was said or implied, personally I value all opinion. I do however think that most drivers who have never driven or been driven on a track at high speed any real idea what it's like. Part of what I do as an instructor is giving high speed passenger rides to members of the public (rotten job but someone has to do it). The cars are often of the supercar variety (i.e. Ferrrai 360s) and as such are expensive on tires, brakes etc. so we are told to drive at about 60% but who knows what 60% is? we don't really push though, well off race speed but still extracting plenty of squeal from the treaded road tires. I doubt anyone here has ever driven at this level on the road, I wouldn't. Most people say very little during (especially) and after but those who do talk pretty much all say it's nothing like they expected and they were convinced they were going to tip over, slide off at every corner. I dare say some were not totally taken aback but they'd be very few." In my experience the feel for most drivers who are not co-driver material from the passenger seat is way different than the driver seat. It is easy to impress (or scare the s*&% out of a passenger). I was taken by an instructor around a track in a Honda TypeR - not a supercar but plenty of grip and impressive turn in under power for a FWD. The instructor was explaining the braking points, apexes, exits etc. whilst hurling me around the track. Sure enough I got the feeling we were destined to go off, and didn't pay too much attention to his commentary! Yet when driving myself the sensation of incredible grip and "it will never get around here" went immediately. Sure enough 2-3 laps I lost the back end when ignoring advice not to brake and turn (GPL training - cough) at a quick third gear corner. So yes as a passenger I was taken aback, but once driving it was just the opportunity to drive really hard rather than experiencing a whole new sensation. Final proof though that GPL is not the perfect trainer (at least not without 3 pedals) came when I climbed in the F2000. Despite driving a manual for 20 odd years, driving manual saloons around the track, when my brain was faced with a single seater viewpoint, gear lever on the right my brain was in GPL mode. I *really* had to train myself for a couple of laps that my left foot was for the clutch rather than brake and I had to brake with my right. Forget heel & toeing I was concentrating on finding the right pedals for the first time since day one of learning to drive! Plus it started to rain half way around and the high speed flat in top kink stopped being a flat in top kink when wet. Needless to say this was discovered with a multiple spin and embarassing stall. It doesn't bloody rain in GPL!!! I later spun an Imprezza as well, but was about the only one not to spin the Caterham in the downpour, so maybe we can attribute some some throttle control to GPL seat time :) Cheers Tony

On Fri, 31 Jan 2003 12:51:55 GMT, "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote: >ER: Quick, Watson! The logorrhea pump! Not surprisingly, the author >prefers his own mod to Doug Arnao's. Vanity.... Steve Hiya my old GPL buddy, long time no speak. I think you know me well enough to know thats not true :) I do think the handlling of the Ferrari in the Team Players F360 mod is more REAListic than the 360 in GTR, based on my own criteria (i.e. the REAL v UNREAL equation). I perhaps spent no more than 5-6 hours on that mod with the TP guys whereas Doug must have spent 100s of hours on GTR2002. What I and even the TOP guys did with F360 pails beside this level of work. MAYBE the ISI F1-2002 physics engine IS better OR CAN produce a mod that scored higher on my scale than the Heat mods I mention. I bought Heat and F1-2002 so both developers have my money and I'm very happy with both purchases. I like Nascar Heat for a number of other reasons that I haven't mentioned (that also make it a great training tool). ie. Ghost Cars (you can chase another/your own best ghost) The ability to watch a replay and see throttle & gas application levels in real time - also gear changes, speeds etc. Maxx

Hi Gary, On Fri, 31 Jan 2003 12:15:47 -0500, "GTX_SlotCar" <[email hidden]> wrote: Just a few quick responses, I'm missing my dinner sat here :(

Quoted text (9 lines)

>He also mentioned tire squeal. I'm not sure that it isn't modelled right in >GPL. I believe they still used bias belted tires back in '67 and it didn't >take much to get them squealing, especailly in a 4 wheel drift or losing it >in a corner. In fact, even after radial tires were introduced, a lot of race >car drivers preferred bias belted because they gave more warning of when the >car was losing traction. The loss was more gradual than radial tires. The >other thing is that Malcolm hasn't raced an F1 car from that period so, >while he can draw on racing experience in general, he can't really say how >these particular cars handled.

I mentioned tire squeal as not being realistic for slick tires. Generally any treaded tire will squeal if pushed to sliding. I've often wondered if the old crossply's did in fact squeal as I've never heard it on any video (in car and external) of a 67 GP car. This could be that they didn't squeal (or not loudly) or that the drivers of the day didn't push them to the levels where they would squeal as loudly as we hear in GPL. >So, I didn't agree with everything he said, but I think Malcolm did an >admirable job trying to answer a question that wasn't phrased properly. He >did make it clear when he was looking at it from a training point of view >and when he was looking at it from a sim racer's viewpoint. Thanks for that - of course if I'd expected everyone to agree it would have been pointles posting it :) >Perhaps the question should have been 'which sims leave you with the best >overall impression of real life racing?' The n I would have had to type a LOT more words :) LOL Cheers Maxx

Hey MAXX, thanks for responding to my post! Mike http://mikebeauchamp.com "Maxx" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > Mike, > > On Thu, 30 Jan 2003 21:24:39 -0500, "Mike Beauchamp" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >I also read it, and I thought it was good. I do have somethin' to say

about > >it though. > > > >The guy seems to really "Hold Back" on what he really wants to say. Halfof

Quoted text (84 lines)

> >the article is him covering his ass for saying GPL isn't as realistic as > >people think. Seems like he really doesn't want to offend anyone, and I > >really can't blame him. Just from reading this forum, criticism of GPL is > >worse taken than... uhm.. something that people don't take to well. :) > > Yes, I agree - I certainly was trying not to offend anyone but, really > why should it offend anyone? no-one that I know of has ever suggested > that GPL/GTR is truly realistic but fans in both camps would perhaps > rate thier favourite as the best. A few people in the forum wondered > how close to relaism GTR was and that was the question I was > responding to. You can never have a conversation about the > quality of a drivng simulation without mentioning GPL so thats > where that came in. I also mentioned Heat and Netkar, those > comments may well have been seen as controversial but the > vast majority of GPL/GTR drivers would have not thought to > try those products had I not mentioned them. > > I wasn't holding back, it is truly difficult to pass on this sort > of information in an understable form. Both GTR/GPL slowed > down when I pressed the break, speeded up when I pressed > the gas and turned left when I turned the wheel left. > > What I could say was that using the controls (brake/gas/ > wheel) as I would do in a real GT type car to negotiate a certain > corner (say Redgate at Donington Park) would not produce the > same responses as a real car. > > Equally the way I found myself using the control in GTR to > negotiate Redgate would not work in real life. > > Braking and corner entry is about precision and finess (despite > what you might see in hotlap replays). An 1/4" too much gas > or split second delay in applying will see you well out of shape > and most llikely off track (we are talking of driving at/close > to the limit here). > > When you lift off the gas in a real car, or lift off the brake and > make the start of your turn, the car will DO certain things ( > specifically, it will try to rotate). The sensation of this and the > way you deal with it is the bread and butter of fast driving. > > GTR and to an extent and in some circumstances, GPL do > not behave this way. The sensation and degree of this will > differ between different formats of car, salloon, single-seater, > FWD, RWD but is always present and recognisable (only > the way you deal with it differs significantly). > > > >Also, I want to know WHY GTR2002 isn't realistic. He says there's things > >that are way beyond physics, but he never says what exactly.. > > I have triied to explain why this is difficult above. If I was to say > that "the car does not rotate sufficiently on corner entry based > on the control inputs I provide" - would that shut people up, you > bet it won't .... > > "what do you mean" > "it works great for me" > "you are probably driving it wrong - do this" > " what do you mean sufficiently? by what percentage" > "Have you ever driven this exact car on this exact track > ... No, well then you can't know" > > Does anyone here think there is something unrealistic about > GTR, or GPL, or V8 Challenge, or TOCA2, or CMR2, or LFS > or NetKar - care to elaborate? > > > > >It'd make a real interesting read if it was no-holds-barred, with more > >technical explanations. > > Well, I'm not really holding anything back, all the products above > have their merits, as games, sims, pastimes, coasters, training aids, > competitions etc. etc. I was specifically talking about realism of > handling at which GTR/GPL/NHeat mods/Netkar all do very well > but some do it better than others and it is a question of how much > REALNESS they have vs. How much UNREALNESS they have. > > And! why is this important to the casual gamer? it isn';t. Thing is > most of you here know that GPL is not played by casual gamers. > A lot of GTR players are also deadly serious (and many are also > GPLr's) > > > > >The whole thing about hot-lapping being more about exploiting small

things > >in the game TOTALLY makes sense. I've seen a few replays and done a few > >multiplayer games with people doing things that make no sense, yet goingway > >faster than me. My example is in LFS, people approaching a corner willslam

Quoted text (17 lines)

> >on the brakes and downshift into 2nd from 5th right away sending the poor > >little GTR engine to like 16,000 RPM. I'm guessing it helps to brake > >faster.. > > > >Mike > > I didn't want to get into the old "hotlapper" debate and made it quite > clear that exploiting every loophole and oddity in the game is no bad > thing - it's what real racers do with real cars. > > The "aliens" are not cheating or being unfair to anyone, it's just > they have the motivation to go faster and faster and have learnt > how to do this. > > Maxx > >

On Fri, 31 Jan 2003 19:25:09 GMT, "Tony Rickard" <[email hidden]> wrote: >I was taken by an instructor around a track in a Honda TypeR ..... Great story Tony, thanks for sharing. ... an yes, I agree, it's much scarier in the passenger seat :) Maxx

Yup, you're right. You did say slicks :-) I'm an old guy, so I drove on bias belted tires quite a bit. It's been a long time, so I can only try to remember how much they would squeal. Perhaps thinking of it in this way would give an idea. Take 10 lbs out of all the tires on your typical passenger car and drive it around. It will probably squeal about as much as the old tires did. (well, it's a guess, anyway) Of course, these old F1 cars were very light. The squeal modeled in GPL is way too loud compared to the engine noise, but again, the game might seem bland if it wasn't. As I recall, the intake on these cars was also very loud, not just the exhaust. I drive the FV cars in GPL with setups that include 1/2" or 1" bumper stops and 2 1/2" or 2 3/4" ride heights. I certainly know that's not realistic ;-) But what the heck, I also have nice spacing on my pedals and a roomy, comfortable seat. As I remember it, at least in the Lotus, there was almost no foot room (very uncomfortable), the seat was hard and my shoulders would almost touch the sides of the cockpit. While my GPL FOV is more limited, at least the mirrors aren't vibrating so much that I can't see anything but a blur. Hey, I liked how you explained that you had to get back into a real race car after becoming acclimated to the sim car. I've thought about this often and wondered how much of a sim's physics model was done after getting used to driving the game. It's the first time I've actually heard someone else mention it. So, Malcolm, how about doing my FV setups for me. LOL I look forward to the next installment of your article. -- Slot Tweaks & Reviews www.slottweak.com "Maxx" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > Hi > > Gary, > > > On Fri, 31 Jan 2003 12:15:47 -0500, "GTX_SlotCar" <[email hidden]> > wrote: > > Just a few quick responses, I'm missing my dinner sat here :( > > >He also mentioned tire squeal. I'm not sure that it isn't modelled right in > >GPL. I believe they still used bias belted tires back in '67 and it didn't > >take much to get them squealing, especailly in a 4 wheel drift or losing it > >in a corner. In fact, even after radial tires were introduced, a lot of race > >car drivers preferred bias belted because they gave more warning of when the > >car was losing traction. The loss was more gradual than radial tires. The > >other thing is that Malcolm hasn't raced an F1 car from that period so, > >while he can draw on racing experience in general, he can't really say how > >these particular cars handled. > > I mentioned tire squeal as not being realistic for slick tires. > Generally any treaded tire will squeal if pushed to sliding. I've > often wondered if the old crossply's did in fact squeal as I've > never heard it on any video (in car and external) of a 67 GP > car. > > This could be that they didn't squeal (or not loudly) or that the > drivers of the day didn't push them to the levels where they would > squeal as loudly as we hear in GPL. > > >So, I didn't agree with everything he said, but I think Malcolm did an > >admirable job trying to answer a question that wasn't phrased properly. He > >did make it clear when he was looking at it from a training point of view > >and when he was looking at it from a sim racer's viewpoint. > > Thanks for that - of course if I'd expected everyone to agree it > would have been pointles posting it :) > > >Perhaps the question should have been 'which sims leave you with the best > >overall impression of real life racing?' > > The n I would have had to type a LOT more words :) LOL > > Cheers > > Maxx --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.443 / Virus Database: 248 - Release Date: 1/10/2003

Larry wrote: > > And Goy isn't totally off-base when he says that it would be neet to see a > Aussie-V8 sim. I've been watching those races during the season down-time, > and it's pretty enjoyable. I speaketh the truth Beers and cheers (uncle) Goy http://www.theuspits.com "A man is only as old as the woman he feels........" --Groucho Marx--

"Maxx" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (8 lines)

> >Aliens can expoit flaws to go fast. > >GPL isn't realistic because of the limited tyre model (*gasp* I'd > >*never* heard that before) > > There are lots more reasons why GPL isn't realistic but I wasn't > specifically talking about GPL, and PLEASE DONT ask me to be > specific about GPL.Maybe one day I will but I really will need a > flame proof suit for that one :)

You know, if it's coming from someone who talks sense, I don't think you'd need that suit... I do like GPL but don't play it so much now. Assisting in running an N2002 league takes up most of my sim time! I may have sounded like a GPL/Papy Nazi (newsgroup legend, IMO) but I sometimes can't help responding to posts by a certain contributor, who, as Jan Verschueren put it in another thread: "hasn't, in my recollection, posted about or quoted an article without an agenda.". And it *was* before 5 cups of coffee...

Quoted text (13 lines)

> PS. The bit I posted ealier about why it's tough to be specific > > >I have triied to explain why this is difficult above. If I was to say > >that "the car does not rotate sufficiently on corner entry based > >on the control inputs I provide" - would that shut people up, you > >bet it won't .... > > >"what do you mean" > >"it works great for me" > >"you are probably driving it wrong - do this" > >" what do you mean sufficiently? by what percentage" > >"Have you ever driven this exact car on this exact track > >... No, well then you can't know"

OK, OK, I get your point now! :-) I like to hear real world experience vs sims stories, but you're right about the potential for it to descend into a shambles... Perhaps a series of articles for websites as opposed to posts to forums.groups would be better way of relaying your experiences - no problems in trying to sort the wheat from the chaff then! Regards, Mark

On Fri, 31 Jan 2003 22:37:15 -0000, "Mark Davison" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Perhaps a series of articles for websites as opposed to posts to >forums.groups would be better way of relaying your experiences - no problems >in trying to sort the wheat from the chaff then! Ah for the luxury of hindsight - I'm not sure at this stage (one week on and having not one lap in any sim and a very disgruntled wife) whether I was wise to put finger to keyboard, as you have noted, I am somewhat "wordy" :) Cheers Maxx

"Maxx" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Fri, 31 Jan 2003 22:37:15 -0000, "Mark Davison" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >Perhaps a series of articles for websites as opposed to posts to > >forums.groups would be better way of relaying your experiences - noproblems

Quoted text (7 lines)

> >in trying to sort the wheat from the chaff then! > > Ah for the luxury of hindsight - I'm not sure at this stage (one week > on and having not one lap in any sim and a very disgruntled wife) > whether I was wise to put finger to keyboard, as you have noted, > I am somewhat "wordy" :) >

I really like his idea about a series of articles. Perhaps you can discuss the major sims vs. real world driving by analyzing just one major aspect of the racing per article (grip, body physics, motor and transmission dynamics, etc.) Breaking it down piece by piece would really help a curious amateur like me understand how the different components come together to create a racing experience in the real world. At the same time, I would learn what is realistic and unrealistic about current simulations. -- Joe M.

Malc! (Gulp!) No dis intended; none taken I trust. I must admit your lengthy monograph intrigued me sufficiently to revisit NH. I liked the initial game (so much more customer-oriented than Papy's stern, punishing gameplay!) and had intended to mess around w. Spirit of Heat (d/l'd everything but the latest iteration), but never got around to it. Inspired by your description of the Ferrari F360's physics, I spent this morning d/l'ing all the Ferrari Challenge files and a dozen 'maps' (i.e., tracks), and intend to spend the weekend sampling your wares. I admit I shouldn't have shot my mouth off without doing this FIRST, but I do wish you'd stuck to the specifics of your role in the Ferrari F360--how you got the physics to where it felt right to you--which I'm sure I'd find fascinating, and spent less time on philosophy/opinion, which is all too abundant on the internet. Again, sorry if I offended. Consider this a public apology. Will report back my findings on the Ferrari F360 ASAP. --Steve (humbled) "Maxx" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (38 lines)

> On Fri, 31 Jan 2003 12:51:55 GMT, "Steve Smith" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >ER: Quick, Watson! The logorrhea pump! Not surprisingly, the author > >prefers his own mod to Doug Arnao's. Vanity.... > > Steve > > Hiya my old GPL buddy, long time no speak. > > I think you know me well enough to know thats not true :) > > I do think the handlling of the Ferrari in the Team Players F360 > mod is more REAListic than the 360 in GTR, based on my > own criteria (i.e. the REAL v UNREAL equation). > > I perhaps spent no more than 5-6 hours on that mod with > the TP guys whereas Doug must have spent 100s of hours > on GTR2002. What I and even the TOP guys did with F360 > pails beside this level of work. > > MAYBE the ISI F1-2002 physics engine IS better OR CAN > produce a mod that scored higher on my scale than the > Heat mods I mention. > > I bought Heat and F1-2002 so both developers have my money > and I'm very happy with both purchases. > > I like Nascar Heat for a number of other reasons that I haven't > mentioned (that also make it a great training tool). > > ie. > > Ghost Cars (you can chase another/your own best ghost) > The ability to watch a replay and see throttle & gas application > levels in real time - also gear changes, speeds etc. > > Maxx

Maxx, I was at Indy in '67 when Parnelli Jones ran the STP turbine car ("Silent Sam") and was sitting down by the creek in Turn 1 during qualifying. When the turbine came thru the corner, it was so quiet that you could hear the tub working - it was creaking like a boat at anchor - and, yes, the car was on bias-ply slicks. They didn't squeal, exactly, but you could hear them grumbling in protest as they scuffed through the turn. --Steve "Maxx" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (12 lines)

> > Hi > > Gary, > > > On Fri, 31 Jan 2003 12:15:47 -0500, "GTX_SlotCar" <[email hidden]> > wrote: > > Just a few quick responses, I'm missing my dinner sat here :( > > >He also mentioned tire squeal. I'm not sure that it isn't modelled right

in > >GPL. I believe they still used bias belted tires back in '67 and itdidn't > >take much to get them squealing, especailly in a 4 wheel drift or losingit > >in a corner. In fact, even after radial tires were introduced, a lot ofrace > >car drivers preferred bias belted because they gave more warning of whenthe > >car was losing traction. The loss was more gradual than radial tires. The > >other thing is that Malcolm hasn't raced an F1 car from that period so, > >while he can draw on racing experience in general, he can't really sayhow

Quoted text (14 lines)

> >these particular cars handled. > > I mentioned tire squeal as not being realistic for slick tires. > Generally any treaded tire will squeal if pushed to sliding. I've > often wondered if the old crossply's did in fact squeal as I've > never heard it on any video (in car and external) of a 67 GP > car. > > This could be that they didn't squeal (or not loudly) or that the > drivers of the day didn't push them to the levels where they would > squeal as loudly as we hear in GPL. > > >So, I didn't agree with everything he said, but I think Malcolm did an > >admirable job trying to answer a question that wasn't phrased properly.

He

Quoted text (14 lines)

> >did make it clear when he was looking at it from a training point of view > >and when he was looking at it from a sim racer's viewpoint. > > Thanks for that - of course if I'd expected everyone to agree it > would have been pointles posting it :) > > >Perhaps the question should have been 'which sims leave you with the best > >overall impression of real life racing?' > > The n I would have had to type a LOT more words :) LOL > > Cheers > > Maxx

"Maxx" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > There are lots more reasons why GPL isn't realistic but I wasn't > specifically talking about GPL, and PLEASE DONT ask me to be > specific about GPL.Maybe one day I will but I really will need a > flame proof suit for that one :) > > Maxx I won't ask, but if you decide to do so anyway (hehe), then please don't forget the F2s and FDs. My guess is that for real-life-race-driver training purposes they'd fare better than the GPL F1 cars.... (?)

Steve, On Sat, 01 Feb 2003 01:06:35 GMT, "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Malc! > >(Gulp!) No dis intended; none taken I trust. No of course not, my reply was in jest, hence the :) you are not the first to suspect I had taken on a marketing role at MGI :)

Quoted text (12 lines)

>I must admit your lengthy >monograph intrigued me sufficiently to revisit NH. I liked the initial game >(so much more customer-oriented than Papy's stern, punishing gameplay!) and >had intended to mess around w. Spirit of Heat (d/l'd everything but the >latest iteration), but never got around to it. Inspired by your description >of the Ferrari F360's physics, I spent this morning d/l'ing all the Ferrari >Challenge files and a dozen 'maps' (i.e., tracks), and intend to spend the >weekend sampling your wares. I admit I shouldn't have shot my mouth off >without doing this FIRST, but I do wish you'd stuck to the specifics of your >role in the Ferrari F360--how you got the physics to where it felt right to >you--which I'm sure I'd find fascinating, and spent less time on >philosophy/opinion, which is all too abundant on the internet.

I'm sure it would but it wasn't the seemingly innocent question that I answered and everything since has sort of cascaded from that. I agree there is lots of philosophy and opinion around and I didn't want my post to be solely that, hence my (granted very wordy) post and follow ups. I know some folks want more substance and although I'm still unsure how exactly I can word some of it, I will try. > >Again, sorry if I offended. Consider this a public apology. Will report >back my findings on the Ferrari F360 ASAP. Great, I'd be interested to know what you think. You can try any track you wish but please ensure you use one of the "-360" setups as these cars are very sensitive to setups, the default Nascar setups remove most of the feel from the car. Also, that you run in Hardcore mode. The cars we get to drive (in the instring work I do) are pretty much standard and the "SOFT" setups feel very much like that. I did quite a bit of testing at Sachsenring as there is a wide variety of corners and some interesting camber etc. There is a little variation in Heat tracks also (as there are grip related settings in the track file itself) so you may find some variation in the driving experience. Maxx

On Fri, 31 Jan 2003 18:49:42 +0000, Maxx <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (8 lines)

>On Fri, 31 Jan 2003 06:57:27 +0100, Magnus Svensson > >>Btw, I'm pretty sure the author Malcolm Edeson is a.k.a. 'Maxx' in >>this newsgroup. The racing instructor with the driving lessons, >>remember? >> >Yes, you have me Magnus, you are referring to GPLEGS and the >infamous "How to go faster in GPL" post from Mr Eldred himself.

Heh, yeah, figured as much, 'cause for some reason you have me in your buddy list in GPLRank(with your real name and nick) . :-) >You see I do very much value GPL as a training aid - reality >costs money - 6 laps in a formula ford is about �100 plus >your expenses getting the track :) No kidding, however, lately I've grown more and more frustrated with sims in general and GPL in particular. Somehow I just gotta get some of the real stuff. A man can't live on nutrasweet alone! ;-)

In article <HcF_9.12401$[email hidden]>, "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> writes: >I was at Indy in '67 when Parnelli Jones ran the STP turbine car ("Silent >Sam") and was sitting down by the creek in Turn 1 during qualifying. When >the turbine came thru the corner, it was so quiet that you could hear the >tub working - it was creaking like a boat at anchor - and, yes, the car was >on bias-ply slicks. They didn't squeal, exactly, but you could hear them >grumbling in protest as they scuffed through the turn. Cool...! Eldred -- Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett GPLRank:-0.381 N2002 Rank:+17.59 Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

"Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in news:HcF_9.12401$[email hidden]:

Quoted text (12 lines)

> Maxx, > > I was at Indy in '67 when Parnelli Jones ran the STP turbine car > ("Silent Sam") and was sitting down by the creek in Turn 1 during > qualifying. When the turbine came thru the corner, it was so quiet > that you could hear the tub working - it was creaking like a boat at > anchor - and, yes, the car was on bias-ply slicks. They didn't > squeal, exactly, but you could hear them grumbling in protest as they > scuffed through the turn. > > --Steve >

My only exposure to big time racing was about 6 or 7 years ago at a CART Weekend at Portland. The thing that suprised me was the sound of the air. You could hear the cars compressing the air as they came down the straight. Because of where I was sitting, you'd hear the engine note as they hit the straight, but by the time they got down to the first turn,(where I was) you could hear this whooshing sound preceding the cars slightly. dave henrie

I sure wish I could have seen that, Steve. It must have been a blast! Your reply reconfirms 3 things: 1. Slicks squeal less. 2. It's easier to set up a car for an oval than a road course. 3. You're an old guy like me :-) -- Slot Tweaks & Reviews www.slottweak.com "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:HcF_9.12401$[email hidden]... > Maxx, > > I was at Indy in '67 when Parnelli Jones ran the STP turbine car ("Silent > Sam") and was sitting down by the creek in Turn 1 during qualifying. When > the turbine came thru the corner, it was so quiet that you could hear the > tub working - it was creaking like a boat at anchor - and, yes, the car was > on bias-ply slicks. They didn't squeal, exactly, but you could hear them > grumbling in protest as they scuffed through the turn. > > --Steve > > "Maxx" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > > > Hi > > > > Gary, > > > > > > On Fri, 31 Jan 2003 12:15:47 -0500, "GTX_SlotCar" <[email hidden]> > > wrote: > > > > Just a few quick responses, I'm missing my dinner sat here :( > > > > >He also mentioned tire squeal. I'm not sure that it isn't modelled right > in > > >GPL. I believe they still used bias belted tires back in '67 and it > didn't > > >take much to get them squealing, especailly in a 4 wheel drift or losing > it > > >in a corner. In fact, even after radial tires were introduced, a lot of > race > > >car drivers preferred bias belted because they gave more warning of when > the > > >car was losing traction. The loss was more gradual than radial tires. The > > >other thing is that Malcolm hasn't raced an F1 car from that period so, > > >while he can draw on racing experience in general, he can't really say > how > > >these particular cars handled. > > > > I mentioned tire squeal as not being realistic for slick tires. > > Generally any treaded tire will squeal if pushed to sliding. I've > > often wondered if the old crossply's did in fact squeal as I've > > never heard it on any video (in car and external) of a 67 GP > > car. > > > > This could be that they didn't squeal (or not loudly) or that the > > drivers of the day didn't push them to the levels where they would > > squeal as loudly as we hear in GPL. > > > > >So, I didn't agree with everything he said, but I think Malcolm did an > > >admirable job trying to answer a question that wasn't phrased properly. > He > > >did make it clear when he was looking at it from a training point of view > > >and when he was looking at it from a sim racer's viewpoint. > > > > Thanks for that - of course if I'd expected everyone to agree it > > would have been pointles posting it :) > > > > >Perhaps the question should have been 'which sims leave you with the best > > >overall impression of real life racing?' > > > > The n I would have had to type a LOT more words :) LOL > > > > Cheers > > > > Maxx > >

I'm older than everybody else put together. "GTX_SlotCar" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:b1gmvm$1358fh$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (19 lines)

> I sure wish I could have seen that, Steve. It must have been a blast! Your > reply reconfirms 3 things: > 1. Slicks squeal less. > 2. It's easier to set up a car for an oval than a road course. > 3. You're an old guy like me :-) > > > -- > Slot > > Tweaks & Reviews > www.slottweak.com > > > "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:HcF_9.12401$[email hidden]... > > Maxx, > > > > I was at Indy in '67 when Parnelli Jones ran the STP turbine car

("Silent > > Sam") and was sitting down by the creek in Turn 1 during qualifying.When > > the turbine came thru the corner, it was so quiet that you could hearthe > > tub working - it was creaking like a boat at anchor - and, yes, the car > was > > on bias-ply slicks. They didn't squeal, exactly, but you could hearthem

Quoted text (26 lines)

> > grumbling in protest as they scuffed through the turn. > > > > --Steve > > > > "Maxx" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:[email hidden]... > > > > > > Hi > > > > > > Gary, > > > > > > > > > On Fri, 31 Jan 2003 12:15:47 -0500, "GTX_SlotCar" <[email hidden]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > Just a few quick responses, I'm missing my dinner sat here :( > > > > > > >He also mentioned tire squeal. I'm not sure that it isn't modelled > right > > in > > > >GPL. I believe they still used bias belted tires back in '67 and it > > didn't > > > >take much to get them squealing, especailly in a 4 wheel drift or > losing > > it > > > >in a corner. In fact, even after radial tires were introduced, a lot

of

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > race > > > >car drivers preferred bias belted because they gave more warning of > when > > the > > > >car was losing traction. The loss was more gradual than radial tires. > The > > > >other thing is that Malcolm hasn't raced an F1 car from that period

so, > > > >while he can draw on racing experience in general, he can't reallysay

Quoted text (14 lines)

> > how > > > >these particular cars handled. > > > > > > I mentioned tire squeal as not being realistic for slick tires. > > > Generally any treaded tire will squeal if pushed to sliding. I've > > > often wondered if the old crossply's did in fact squeal as I've > > > never heard it on any video (in car and external) of a 67 GP > > > car. > > > > > > This could be that they didn't squeal (or not loudly) or that the > > > drivers of the day didn't push them to the levels where they would > > > squeal as loudly as we hear in GPL. > > > > > > >So, I didn't agree with everything he said, but I think Malcolm did

an > > > >admirable job trying to answer a question that wasn't phrasedproperly.

Quoted text (21 lines)

> > He > > > >did make it clear when he was looking at it from a training point of > view > > > >and when he was looking at it from a sim racer's viewpoint. > > > > > > Thanks for that - of course if I'd expected everyone to agree it > > > would have been pointles posting it :) > > > > > > >Perhaps the question should have been 'which sims leave you with the > best > > > >overall impression of real life racing?' > > > > > > The n I would have had to type a LOT more words :) LOL > > > > > > Cheers > > > > > > Maxx > > > > > >

"Mark Davison" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (17 lines)

> > "Maxx" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > > >Aliens can expoit flaws to go fast. > > >GPL isn't realistic because of the limited tyre model (*gasp* I'd > > >*never* heard that before) > > > > There are lots more reasons why GPL isn't realistic but I wasn't > > specifically talking about GPL, and PLEASE DONT ask me to be > > specific about GPL.Maybe one day I will but I really will need a > > flame proof suit for that one :) > > You know, if it's coming from someone who talks sense, I don't think you'd > need that suit... > > I do like GPL but don't play it so much now. Assisting in running an

N2002 > league takes up most of my sim time! I may have sounded like a GPL/Papy > Nazi (newsgroup legend, IMO) but I sometimes can't help responding toposts > by a certain contributor, who, as Jan Verschueren put it in anotherthread: > "hasn't, in my recollection, posted about or quoted an article without an > agenda.". And it *was* before 5 cups of coffee... Whatever. I was right five years ago and I'm right now. BTW, I'd love to see these articles you and Jan are talking about. Are you talking about the "How Smart Are My Fellow Americans :-) " article? Yes, there was a bit of an agenda there. Also a :-) . Don't people often use articles to support or counter opinions anyway? Since when is there something wrong with that? David G Fisher

"David G Fisher" wrote: > Whatever. I was right five years ago and I'm right now. I thought it was a pretty fair consensus on RAS that the current state of racings sims back a couple of years ago was still way off simulating real car racing. Maxx's article reaffirms this for the heavily modded sims of today. Probably won't be achieved without some serious hydraulics, more processing power etc. This has been accepted by even the most extreme Papy fan boys. However, for many GPL *conveys* the greatest *feel* of driving up until now - relative to the other games available. These are *games* and provide a fantasy trip in driving a racing car. By at least conveying the feel of a car on the limit it fools the brain into equating to driving a real car. It certainly is not a suitable equivalent. The ability to replace real world physics with visual and audible guides may not transfer to a real car, let alone the limitations of the physics model with this method of delivery. Conveying this feel on a computer screen and a stationary seat is something of a black art and is not "simply" simulating exact physics. The disappointment for those that found GPL provided this feel for the first time is that we don't seem to have moved forward and seen similar feel matched to a more developed model which eliminates some of the flaws. However, an improved model will not get us anywhere near a true racing simulator - it is stil a game in comparison. The GTR2002 model is in a similar state. In that sense I believe Maxx confirms this to us as a reasonable authority on the subject. I am not sure quite how it confirms the voice of DGF, except to say that GPL is not the same as real racing - well if you want to insult our intelligence and suggest that is common view of RAS then go ahead. The most interesting revelation is that modding Nascar Heat may provide the greatest basis for providing the most race car like experience in the author's experience. Whilst out of the box it certainly doesn't. DGF - Show me just where you said that and I'll agree with your statement above. Cheers Tony

"Dalek" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Sun, 02 Feb 2003 12:59:46 GMT, "Tony Rickard" > <[email hidden]> reckoned: > > > >The most interesting revelation is that modding Nascar Heat may providethe > >greatest basis for providing the most race car like experience in theauthor's > >experience. Whilst out of the box it certainly doesn't. > > I downloaded and installed that Ferrari360 mod the author was talking > about as being the most realistic and the wheels lock up and smoke > everytime I just touch the brake. Is that realistic? You must have missed his point. He didn't say F360 mod was the most realistic of the 3. He said it had enough realism to reasonably simulate driving and at the same time it introduced the LEAST amount of unrealistic oddities that negatively impact realism so as a whole it's the BEST driver trainer. BTW, if you use the right set-ups and tweak your pedals I think the braking in F360 improves. It needs some dead zone for finesse. I was locking the brakes too quickly until I tweaked a bit. Still not GTR 2002 realism but again comparing the depth of one feature wasn't his point. -- Joe M.

Dalek On Sun, 02 Feb 2003 09:27:24 -0500, Dalek <[email hidden]> wrote: >I downloaded and installed that Ferrari360 mod the author was talking >about as being the most realistic and the wheels lock up and smoke >everytime I just touch the brake. Is that realistic? Must be a controller issue, the brakes will lock if you brake at 100% (you see a readout of brake pressure on screen as a percentage) but not at 80-85%. Make sure your controller is calibrated OK in windows and go into the OPTIONS->CONTROLS screen in HEAT, press the pedals a couple of times and see how the red bars react (should be smooth). You can select ADVANCED which gives you the option to setup a DEADZONE and an OVERSHOOT amount for both pedals. I generally have neither (poss 5% deadzone on brake) Also, make sure you are using one of the "-360" setups as they have more suitable brake bias settings (the default and advanced ones are for NASCARS and make the F360 feel awful). Brake bias is best at about 65%-68% IMO. If you still have problems or further questions, please post here and I'll try to help (seeing as it was me that persuaded you to try it). Maxx

Maxx, No joy. I spent all day at this, and all I got to work was NH itself, not the Ferrari Challenge mod. The file at OSRC said to install, in the following order: NASCAR HEAT (in it's default install location) No CD Patch (REQUIRED) 1.73 Patch (REQUIRED) then the Ferrari Challenge mod. Installed NH, no prob, but when I ran the noCD patch, its batch file generated the following error message: ----------- C:\Program Files\Hasbro Interactive\NASCAR Heat>rename data run File not found - data C:\Program Files\Hasbro Interactive\NASCAR Heat>Move binkw32.dll run Cannot move binkw32.dll - No such file or directory C:\Program Files\Hasbro Interactive\NASCAR Heat>move drivers.dat run Cannot move drivers.dat - No such file or directory C:\Program Files\Hasbro Interactive\NASCAR Heat> C:\Program Files\Hasbro Interactive\NASCAR Heat> ------------- There is a readme in the noCD executable that says, in part: "In the iso game [presumably the writer means the CD] there should be a run folder. In that run folder is a Data folder." However, there is no Data folder in the run folder on the CD - in fact, there are no folders in the run folder at all; only 87 files. I followed the remainder of the instructions and moved the other files/folders from the CD to the C:\Program Files\Hasbro Interactive\NASCAR Heat folder, but when I clicked on the executable, I got the following error message: ------------- Unable to copy race.bin! (C:\PROGRAM FILES\HASBRO INTERACTIVE\NASCAR HEAT\Run\race.bin --> C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\heat.bin) ------------- Note: There is no race.bin file in first path above, nor is there a heat.bin file in the second path. Any suggestions gratefully accepted. P.S. I did run a few races on NH (which patched perfectly to ver. 1.73), Daytona and the Glen; my first forays into the game since it originally appeared two years ago, and found the physics simplistic if forgiving. --Steve "Maxx" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (15 lines)

> > Steve, > > On Sat, 01 Feb 2003 01:06:35 GMT, "Steve Smith" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >Malc! > > > >(Gulp!) No dis intended; none taken I trust. > > No of course not, my reply was in jest, hence the :) you are not the > first to suspect I had taken on a marketing role at MGI :) > > >I must admit your lengthy > >monograph intrigued me sufficiently to revisit NH. I liked the initial

game > >(so much more customer-oriented than Papy's stern, punishing gameplay!)and > >had intended to mess around w. Spirit of Heat (d/l'd everything but the > >latest iteration), but never got around to it. Inspired by yourdescription > >of the Ferrari F360's physics, I spent this morning d/l'ing all theFerrari > >Challenge files and a dozen 'maps' (i.e., tracks), and intend to spendthe > >weekend sampling your wares. I admit I shouldn't have shot my mouth off > >without doing this FIRST, but I do wish you'd stuck to the specifics ofyour > >role in the Ferrari F360--how you got the physics to where it felt rightto

Quoted text (33 lines)

> >you--which I'm sure I'd find fascinating, and spent less time on > >philosophy/opinion, which is all too abundant on the internet. > > I'm sure it would but it wasn't the seemingly innocent question > that I answered and everything since has sort of cascaded from > that. I agree there is lots of philosophy and opinion around and > I didn't want my post to be solely that, hence my (granted very > wordy) post and follow ups. I know some folks want more > substance and although I'm still unsure how exactly I can word > some of it, I will try. > > > > >Again, sorry if I offended. Consider this a public apology. Will report > >back my findings on the Ferrari F360 ASAP. > > Great, I'd be interested to know what you think. You can try any > track you wish but please ensure you use one of the "-360" setups > as these cars are very sensitive to setups, the default Nascar setups > remove most of the feel from the car. Also, that you run in Hardcore > mode. > > The cars we get to drive (in the instring work I do) are pretty much > standard and the "SOFT" setups feel very much like that. I did > quite a bit of testing at Sachsenring as there is a wide variety of > corners and some interesting camber etc. > > There is a little variation in Heat tracks also (as there are grip > related settings in the track file itself) so you may find some > variation in the driving experience. > > Maxx > >

"Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in news:Pif%9.24433$[email hidden]:

Quoted text (60 lines)

> Maxx, > > No joy. I spent all day at this, and all I got to work was NH itself, > not the Ferrari Challenge mod. > > The file at OSRC said to install, in the following order: > > NASCAR HEAT (in it's default install location) > No CD Patch (REQUIRED) > 1.73 Patch (REQUIRED) > then the Ferrari Challenge mod. > > Installed NH, no prob, but when I ran the noCD patch, its batch file > generated the following error message: > > ----------- > C:\Program Files\Hasbro Interactive\NASCAR Heat>rename data run > File not found - data > > C:\Program Files\Hasbro Interactive\NASCAR Heat>Move binkw32.dll run > Cannot move binkw32.dll - No such file or directory > > C:\Program Files\Hasbro Interactive\NASCAR Heat>move drivers.dat run > Cannot move drivers.dat - No such file or directory > > C:\Program Files\Hasbro Interactive\NASCAR Heat> > C:\Program Files\Hasbro Interactive\NASCAR Heat> > ------------- > > There is a readme in the noCD executable that says, in part: > > "In the iso game [presumably the writer means the CD] there should be > a run folder. In that run folder is a Data folder." > > However, there is no Data folder in the run folder on the CD - in > fact, there are no folders in the run folder at all; only 87 files. > > I followed the remainder of the instructions and moved the other > files/folders from the CD to the C:\Program Files\Hasbro > Interactive\NASCAR Heat folder, but when I clicked on the executable, > I got the following error message: > > ------------- > Unable to copy race.bin! > (C:\PROGRAM FILES\HASBRO INTERACTIVE\NASCAR HEAT\Run\race.bin --> > C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\heat.bin) > ------------- > > Note: There is no race.bin file in first path above, nor is there a > heat.bin file in the second path. > > Any suggestions gratefully accepted. > > P.S. I did run a few races on NH (which patched perfectly to ver. > 1.73), Daytona and the Glen; my first forays into the game since it > originally appeared two years ago, and found the physics simplistic if > forgiving. > > --Steve >

Mods on Heat can be tricky to first get running but then they are extremely simple. First you need to cover some basic issues. Did you do a FULL install of Heat? Did you NOT CHANGE the installation path? Heat is very very very picky about where it sits on your hard drive. You CAN move it around but that makes the mod installers confused. For ease of use, let it install itself in the default pathway on your boot drive. You can find a multipatch/nocd utility at the tptcc league site. Link from the uspits.com. That will take your Heat install, create the nocd files/folders and patch it...I don't think it has been updated to 1.73 yet, but once you get the 1.72e installed with the multipatch, the newer 1.73 installs right over it. Only after you have run Heat and tested it's native winston cup cars should you attempt to install a mod. dave henrie

Thanks, Dave. Some progress. NH itself runs fine (the the stockers run like Jacques le Ursine on all 16 road courses I d/l'd - hoo-ah!). After a lotta fiddling, I got the Ferrari Challenge to run fine as well (I did about a zillion laps of Brands in what appeared to be a red F40, no prob). I even got the Ferrari 360 mod to run...once. Thereafter, it gets as far as the 3D screen, then crashes to the desktop. A perusal of the log yields (among a cornucopia of seemingly irrelevant data): "Couldn't load ModelInfo Ferr360.car/high1.mod" I couldn't find this item. Is it a file? A command-line argument? A replacement for Viagra? Any further help also much appreciated. TIA. --Steve "Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (67 lines)

> "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in > news:Pif%9.24433$[email hidden]: > > > Maxx, > > > > No joy. I spent all day at this, and all I got to work was NH itself, > > not the Ferrari Challenge mod. > > > > The file at OSRC said to install, in the following order: > > > > NASCAR HEAT (in it's default install location) > > No CD Patch (REQUIRED) > > 1.73 Patch (REQUIRED) > > then the Ferrari Challenge mod. > > > > Installed NH, no prob, but when I ran the noCD patch, its batch file > > generated the following error message: > > > > ----------- > > C:\Program Files\Hasbro Interactive\NASCAR Heat>rename data run > > File not found - data > > > > C:\Program Files\Hasbro Interactive\NASCAR Heat>Move binkw32.dll run > > Cannot move binkw32.dll - No such file or directory > > > > C:\Program Files\Hasbro Interactive\NASCAR Heat>move drivers.dat run > > Cannot move drivers.dat - No such file or directory > > > > C:\Program Files\Hasbro Interactive\NASCAR Heat> > > C:\Program Files\Hasbro Interactive\NASCAR Heat> > > ------------- > > > > There is a readme in the noCD executable that says, in part: > > > > "In the iso game [presumably the writer means the CD] there should be > > a run folder. In that run folder is a Data folder." > > > > However, there is no Data folder in the run folder on the CD - in > > fact, there are no folders in the run folder at all; only 87 files. > > > > I followed the remainder of the instructions and moved the other > > files/folders from the CD to the C:\Program Files\Hasbro > > Interactive\NASCAR Heat folder, but when I clicked on the executable, > > I got the following error message: > > > > ------------- > > Unable to copy race.bin! > > (C:\PROGRAM FILES\HASBRO INTERACTIVE\NASCAR HEAT\Run\race.bin --> > > C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\heat.bin) > > ------------- > > > > Note: There is no race.bin file in first path above, nor is there a > > heat.bin file in the second path. > > > > Any suggestions gratefully accepted. > > > > P.S. I did run a few races on NH (which patched perfectly to ver. > > 1.73), Daytona and the Glen; my first forays into the game since it > > originally appeared two years ago, and found the physics simplistic if > > forgiving. > > > > --Steve > > > Mods on Heat can be tricky to first get running but then they are > extremely simple. First you need to cover some basic issues. > Did you do a FULL install of Heat? Did you NOT CHANGE the installation > path? Heat is very very very picky about where it sits on your hard

drive. > You CAN move it around but that makes the mod installers confused. For > ease of use, let it install itself in the default pathway on your boot > drive. > You can find a multipatch/nocd utility at the tptcc league site. Link > from the uspits.com. That will take your Heat install, create the nocd > files/folders and patch it...I don't think it has been updated to 1.73yet, > but once you get the 1.72e installed with the multipatch, the newer 1.73 > installs right over it. > Only after you have run Heat and tested it's native winston cup cars > should you attempt to install a mod. > dave henrie

"Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in news:kIi%9.20574$[email hidden]:

Quoted text (108 lines)

> Thanks, Dave. > > Some progress. NH itself runs fine (the the stockers run like Jacques > le Ursine on all 16 road courses I d/l'd - hoo-ah!). After a lotta > fiddling, I got the Ferrari Challenge to run fine as well (I did about > a zillion laps of Brands in what appeared to be a red F40, no prob). > I even got the Ferrari 360 mod to run...once. Thereafter, it gets as > far as the 3D screen, then crashes to the desktop. A perusal of the > log yields (among a cornucopia of seemingly irrelevant data): > > "Couldn't load ModelInfo Ferr360.car/high1.mod" > > I couldn't find this item. Is it a file? A command-line argument? A > replacement for Viagra? > > Any further help also much appreciated. TIA. > > --Steve > > "Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... >> "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in >> news:Pif%9.24433$[email hidden]: >> >> > Maxx, >> > >> > No joy. I spent all day at this, and all I got to work was NH >> > itself, not the Ferrari Challenge mod. >> > >> > The file at OSRC said to install, in the following order: >> > >> > NASCAR HEAT (in it's default install location) >> > No CD Patch (REQUIRED) >> > 1.73 Patch (REQUIRED) >> > then the Ferrari Challenge mod. >> > >> > Installed NH, no prob, but when I ran the noCD patch, its batch >> > file generated the following error message: >> > >> > ----------- >> > C:\Program Files\Hasbro Interactive\NASCAR Heat>rename data run >> > File not found - data >> > >> > C:\Program Files\Hasbro Interactive\NASCAR Heat>Move binkw32.dll >> > run Cannot move binkw32.dll - No such file or directory >> > >> > C:\Program Files\Hasbro Interactive\NASCAR Heat>move drivers.dat >> > run Cannot move drivers.dat - No such file or directory >> > >> > C:\Program Files\Hasbro Interactive\NASCAR Heat> >> > C:\Program Files\Hasbro Interactive\NASCAR Heat> >> > ------------- >> > >> > There is a readme in the noCD executable that says, in part: >> > >> > "In the iso game [presumably the writer means the CD] there should >> > be a run folder. In that run folder is a Data folder." >> > >> > However, there is no Data folder in the run folder on the CD - in >> > fact, there are no folders in the run folder at all; only 87 files. >> > >> > I followed the remainder of the instructions and moved the other >> > files/folders from the CD to the C:\Program Files\Hasbro >> > Interactive\NASCAR Heat folder, but when I clicked on the >> > executable, I got the following error message: >> > >> > ------------- >> > Unable to copy race.bin! >> > (C:\PROGRAM FILES\HASBRO INTERACTIVE\NASCAR HEAT\Run\race.bin --> >> > C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\heat.bin) >> > ------------- >> > >> > Note: There is no race.bin file in first path above, nor is there a >> > heat.bin file in the second path. >> > >> > Any suggestions gratefully accepted. >> > >> > P.S. I did run a few races on NH (which patched perfectly to ver. >> > 1.73), Daytona and the Glen; my first forays into the game since it >> > originally appeared two years ago, and found the physics simplistic >> > if forgiving. >> > >> > --Steve >> > >> Mods on Heat can be tricky to first get running but then they are >> extremely simple. First you need to cover some basic issues. >> Did you do a FULL install of Heat? Did you NOT CHANGE the >> installation path? Heat is very very very picky about where it sits >> on your hard > drive. >> You CAN move it around but that makes the mod installers confused. >> For ease of use, let it install itself in the default pathway on your >> boot drive. >> You can find a multipatch/nocd utility at the tptcc league site. >> Link >> from the uspits.com. That will take your Heat install, create the >> nocd files/folders and patch it...I don't think it has been updated >> to 1.73 > yet, >> but once you get the 1.72e installed with the multipatch, the newer >> 1.73 installs right over it. >> Only after you have run Heat and tested it's native winston cup >> cars >> should you attempt to install a mod. >> dave henrie > > >

some of the things we recomend til a mod is running right, is to turn off the ghost car option(in the track setup menu), use LOW DETAIL cars(in the graphics area), and limit the carfield to 22 or less.(back in the track setup area). The key line of the error log is about 2/3rds of the way down, where it starts with: Panic: can't.... It sounds like you found that line. It may be you have the cars set to high detail and the mod makers didn't include that level of detail. dave henrie

"Steve" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:vgq_9.65415$[email hidden]... > Juan is faster than Ralf. >no shit, but try telling dave that. -- "I'm not going to drive one of those CRAPWAGONS"- Paul Tracy

"Dalek" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> On Sun, 2 Feb 2003 12:00:24 -0500, "Joe M." <[email hidden]> > reckoned: > > > >You must have missed his point. He didn't say F360 mod was the most > >realistic of the 3. He said it had enough realism to reasonably simulate > >driving and at the same time it introduced the LEAST amount of

unrealistic > >oddities that negatively impact realism so as a whole it's the BESTdriver > >trainer. > > > >BTW, if you use the right set-ups and tweak your pedals I think thebraking > >in F360 improves. It needs some dead zone for finesse. I was lockingthe > >brakes too quickly until I tweaked a bit. Still not GTR 2002 realism but > >again comparing the depth of one feature wasn't his point. > > What would you know about realism Joe? You're the one that was telling > everyone TIR is realsistic. Hehe. Nos? FU! If not, FU anyway. :0) Now that's a low blow. I was taking some medication that week and any posts regarding my impressions of TIR are hereby disclaimed. Actually, with full tweaking TIR wasn't that bad. <damn drug flashbacks> -- Joe M.

On Sun, 02 Feb 2003 20:35:59 GMT, "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Maxx, > >No joy. I spent all day at this, and all I got to work was NH itself, not >the Ferrari Challenge mod. Steve, Sorry I didn't respond, I got quite tied up in forum post replies. Seems like Dave got you going OK though (Thanks Dave). I see you still have some probs, have read Dave's reply and agree 100% so hopefully you will get it sorted. If you still have probs your welcome to mail me (just remove the GPL's from the email address here). Maxx

'k, will try turning down the wick. Thx again, Dave! "Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (113 lines)

> "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in > news:kIi%9.20574$[email hidden]: > > > Thanks, Dave. > > > > Some progress. NH itself runs fine (the the stockers run like Jacques > > le Ursine on all 16 road courses I d/l'd - hoo-ah!). After a lotta > > fiddling, I got the Ferrari Challenge to run fine as well (I did about > > a zillion laps of Brands in what appeared to be a red F40, no prob). > > I even got the Ferrari 360 mod to run...once. Thereafter, it gets as > > far as the 3D screen, then crashes to the desktop. A perusal of the > > log yields (among a cornucopia of seemingly irrelevant data): > > > > "Couldn't load ModelInfo Ferr360.car/high1.mod" > > > > I couldn't find this item. Is it a file? A command-line argument? A > > replacement for Viagra? > > > > Any further help also much appreciated. TIA. > > > > --Steve > > > > "Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:[email hidden]... > >> "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in > >> news:Pif%9.24433$[email hidden]: > >> > >> > Maxx, > >> > > >> > No joy. I spent all day at this, and all I got to work was NH > >> > itself, not the Ferrari Challenge mod. > >> > > >> > The file at OSRC said to install, in the following order: > >> > > >> > NASCAR HEAT (in it's default install location) > >> > No CD Patch (REQUIRED) > >> > 1.73 Patch (REQUIRED) > >> > then the Ferrari Challenge mod. > >> > > >> > Installed NH, no prob, but when I ran the noCD patch, its batch > >> > file generated the following error message: > >> > > >> > ----------- > >> > C:\Program Files\Hasbro Interactive\NASCAR Heat>rename data run > >> > File not found - data > >> > > >> > C:\Program Files\Hasbro Interactive\NASCAR Heat>Move binkw32.dll > >> > run Cannot move binkw32.dll - No such file or directory > >> > > >> > C:\Program Files\Hasbro Interactive\NASCAR Heat>move drivers.dat > >> > run Cannot move drivers.dat - No such file or directory > >> > > >> > C:\Program Files\Hasbro Interactive\NASCAR Heat> > >> > C:\Program Files\Hasbro Interactive\NASCAR Heat> > >> > ------------- > >> > > >> > There is a readme in the noCD executable that says, in part: > >> > > >> > "In the iso game [presumably the writer means the CD] there should > >> > be a run folder. In that run folder is a Data folder." > >> > > >> > However, there is no Data folder in the run folder on the CD - in > >> > fact, there are no folders in the run folder at all; only 87 files. > >> > > >> > I followed the remainder of the instructions and moved the other > >> > files/folders from the CD to the C:\Program Files\Hasbro > >> > Interactive\NASCAR Heat folder, but when I clicked on the > >> > executable, I got the following error message: > >> > > >> > ------------- > >> > Unable to copy race.bin! > >> > (C:\PROGRAM FILES\HASBRO INTERACTIVE\NASCAR HEAT\Run\race.bin --> > >> > C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\heat.bin) > >> > ------------- > >> > > >> > Note: There is no race.bin file in first path above, nor is there a > >> > heat.bin file in the second path. > >> > > >> > Any suggestions gratefully accepted. > >> > > >> > P.S. I did run a few races on NH (which patched perfectly to ver. > >> > 1.73), Daytona and the Glen; my first forays into the game since it > >> > originally appeared two years ago, and found the physics simplistic > >> > if forgiving. > >> > > >> > --Steve > >> > > >> Mods on Heat can be tricky to first get running but then they are > >> extremely simple. First you need to cover some basic issues. > >> Did you do a FULL install of Heat? Did you NOT CHANGE the > >> installation path? Heat is very very very picky about where it sits > >> on your hard > > drive. > >> You CAN move it around but that makes the mod installers confused. > >> For ease of use, let it install itself in the default pathway on your > >> boot drive. > >> You can find a multipatch/nocd utility at the tptcc league site. > >> Link > >> from the uspits.com. That will take your Heat install, create the > >> nocd files/folders and patch it...I don't think it has been updated > >> to 1.73 > > yet, > >> but once you get the 1.72e installed with the multipatch, the newer > >> 1.73 installs right over it. > >> Only after you have run Heat and tested it's native winston cup > >> cars > >> should you attempt to install a mod. > >> dave henrie > > > > > > > > some of the things we recomend til a mod is running right, is to turn

off > the ghost car option(in the track setup menu), use LOW DETAIL cars(in the > graphics area), and limit the carfield to 22 or less.(back in the track > setup area). The key line of the error log is about 2/3rds of the way > down, where it starts with: > Panic: can't.... It sounds like you found that line. It may be you have > the cars set to high detail and the mod makers didn't include that levelof > detail. > dave henrie

Thx, Mx! "Maxx" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Sun, 02 Feb 2003 20:35:59 GMT, "Steve Smith" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >Maxx, > > > >No joy. I spent all day at this, and all I got to work was NH itself,not

Quoted text (13 lines)

> >the Ferrari Challenge mod. > > Steve, > > Sorry I didn't respond, I got quite tied up in forum post replies. > Seems like Dave got you going OK though (Thanks Dave). > > I see you still have some probs, have read Dave's reply > and agree 100% so hopefully you will get it sorted. If you > still have probs your welcome to mail me (just remove > the GPL's from the email address here). > > Maxx

DH, ME, Success! Right you are/were, Dave. I unchecked High Detail Cars (or whatever) and the 3D view fired right up. Now to some *serious* track testing. BTW, the road courses look fabulous (at least compared to GTR: kinder, gentler colours--if a little pastel-y--and softer, less grainy textures). I particularly love Brands; both the way it looks and the way it drives. Also appreciate the huge selection (and ease of installation) of tracks. --Steve "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:0Jt%9.21891$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (119 lines)

> 'k, will try turning down the wick. Thx again, Dave! > > "Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in > > news:kIi%9.20574$[email hidden]: > > > > > Thanks, Dave. > > > > > > Some progress. NH itself runs fine (the the stockers run like Jacques > > > le Ursine on all 16 road courses I d/l'd - hoo-ah!). After a lotta > > > fiddling, I got the Ferrari Challenge to run fine as well (I did about > > > a zillion laps of Brands in what appeared to be a red F40, no prob). > > > I even got the Ferrari 360 mod to run...once. Thereafter, it gets as > > > far as the 3D screen, then crashes to the desktop. A perusal of the > > > log yields (among a cornucopia of seemingly irrelevant data): > > > > > > "Couldn't load ModelInfo Ferr360.car/high1.mod" > > > > > > I couldn't find this item. Is it a file? A command-line argument? A > > > replacement for Viagra? > > > > > > Any further help also much appreciated. TIA. > > > > > > --Steve > > > > > > "Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > news:[email hidden]... > > >> "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in > > >> news:Pif%9.24433$[email hidden]: > > >> > > >> > Maxx, > > >> > > > >> > No joy. I spent all day at this, and all I got to work was NH > > >> > itself, not the Ferrari Challenge mod. > > >> > > > >> > The file at OSRC said to install, in the following order: > > >> > > > >> > NASCAR HEAT (in it's default install location) > > >> > No CD Patch (REQUIRED) > > >> > 1.73 Patch (REQUIRED) > > >> > then the Ferrari Challenge mod. > > >> > > > >> > Installed NH, no prob, but when I ran the noCD patch, its batch > > >> > file generated the following error message: > > >> > > > >> > ----------- > > >> > C:\Program Files\Hasbro Interactive\NASCAR Heat>rename data run > > >> > File not found - data > > >> > > > >> > C:\Program Files\Hasbro Interactive\NASCAR Heat>Move binkw32.dll > > >> > run Cannot move binkw32.dll - No such file or directory > > >> > > > >> > C:\Program Files\Hasbro Interactive\NASCAR Heat>move drivers.dat > > >> > run Cannot move drivers.dat - No such file or directory > > >> > > > >> > C:\Program Files\Hasbro Interactive\NASCAR Heat> > > >> > C:\Program Files\Hasbro Interactive\NASCAR Heat> > > >> > ------------- > > >> > > > >> > There is a readme in the noCD executable that says, in part: > > >> > > > >> > "In the iso game [presumably the writer means the CD] there should > > >> > be a run folder. In that run folder is a Data folder." > > >> > > > >> > However, there is no Data folder in the run folder on the CD - in > > >> > fact, there are no folders in the run folder at all; only 87 files. > > >> > > > >> > I followed the remainder of the instructions and moved the other > > >> > files/folders from the CD to the C:\Program Files\Hasbro > > >> > Interactive\NASCAR Heat folder, but when I clicked on the > > >> > executable, I got the following error message: > > >> > > > >> > ------------- > > >> > Unable to copy race.bin! > > >> > (C:\PROGRAM FILES\HASBRO INTERACTIVE\NASCAR HEAT\Run\race.bin --> > > >> > C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\heat.bin) > > >> > ------------- > > >> > > > >> > Note: There is no race.bin file in first path above, nor is there a > > >> > heat.bin file in the second path. > > >> > > > >> > Any suggestions gratefully accepted. > > >> > > > >> > P.S. I did run a few races on NH (which patched perfectly to ver. > > >> > 1.73), Daytona and the Glen; my first forays into the game since it > > >> > originally appeared two years ago, and found the physics simplistic > > >> > if forgiving. > > >> > > > >> > --Steve > > >> > > > >> Mods on Heat can be tricky to first get running but then they are > > >> extremely simple. First you need to cover some basic issues. > > >> Did you do a FULL install of Heat? Did you NOT CHANGE the > > >> installation path? Heat is very very very picky about where it sits > > >> on your hard > > > drive. > > >> You CAN move it around but that makes the mod installers confused. > > >> For ease of use, let it install itself in the default pathway on your > > >> boot drive. > > >> You can find a multipatch/nocd utility at the tptcc league site. > > >> Link > > >> from the uspits.com. That will take your Heat install, create the > > >> nocd files/folders and patch it...I don't think it has been updated > > >> to 1.73 > > > yet, > > >> but once you get the 1.72e installed with the multipatch, the newer > > >> 1.73 installs right over it. > > >> Only after you have run Heat and tested it's native winston cup > > >> cars > > >> should you attempt to install a mod. > > >> dave henrie > > > > > > > > > > > > > some of the things we recomend til a mod is running right, is to turn > off > > the ghost car option(in the track setup menu), use LOW DETAIL cars(in

the > > graphics area), and limit the carfield to 22 or less.(back in the track > > setup area). The key line of the error log is about 2/3rds of the way > > down, where it starts with: > > Panic: can't.... It sounds like you found that line. It may be youhave > > the cars set to high detail and the mod makers didn't include that level > of > > detail. > > dave henrie > >

"Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in news:1Vt%9.31839$[email hidden]:

Quoted text (17 lines)

> DH, ME, > > Success! > > Right you are/were, Dave. I unchecked High Detail Cars (or whatever) > and the 3D view fired right up. > > Now to some *serious* track testing. > > BTW, the road courses look fabulous (at least compared to GTR: kinder, > gentler colours--if a little pastel-y--and softer, less grainy > textures). I particularly love Brands; both the way it looks and the > way it drives. Also appreciate the huge selection (and ease of > installation) of tracks. > > --Steve >

I have a tough time going back and forth between my TPTCC DTMHeat league and running the F1 2k2 mods. The steering is different in Heat, More flowing, So I have a tendancy to oversteer when I first go back to Heat to get ready for the next round(which I haven't done yet, and it's Troi Rivers<Becanour> which I don't have many laps at yet.) Gotta focus more. dave henrie

"Tony Rickard" wrote... > <snip good stuff> > The most interesting revelation is that modding > Nascar Heat may provide the greatest basis for > providing the most race car like experience in > the author's experience. Whilst out of the box > it certainly doesn't. I'm fairly sceptical in this respect. While it didn't bother me much (I got rid of NH because of controller assignment and AI/gameplay issues before any mods surfaced), to me the difference in physics rate seemed really tangible (as it is in F1 2k2 when toggling the half_rate setting). It might go unnoticed if one were to use Heat as one's sole training aid, just like one can't tell if A on a piano is really 440Hz when you hear it alone, but compared to other titles there is a difference, IMO. Just like a trained musician can hear differences of even a couple Hertz when instruments play in unison. Regardless of individual handling there is, IMO, a certain crispness to handling in GPL/NR2k2 and F1 2k2/GTR2002 which just isn't there in "standard" NH. Would be interesting to have people comment on how they feel this situation is with any of the mods. > DGF - Show me just where you said that and I'll > agree with your statement above. I think Dave means the bit where Malcolm says it's more important to simulate the feel than get the actual numbers correct. As in the past I go along with that to a certain extend. IMO GPL, NR2k2 and GTR2002 are very good and most convincing at creating the illusion one's piloting a high performance car on ones computer. All of these push real numbers around, so as hardware gets more powerfull, capable of calculating more complex models in real time and provinding more feedback to the user (motion) this is, IMO, an avenue to pursue. While I do enjoy other efforts which, supposedly, lean more towards "simulating the experience", it's my experience that after some use there's always something that pops up to destroy the illusion for me. I'm ready to be proved wrong on this count, but not able to test this particular setup at the moment. Jan. =---

"Jan Verschueren" wrote:

Quoted text (7 lines)

> "Tony Rickard" wrote... > > DGF - Show me just where you said that and I'll > > agree with your statement above. > > I think Dave means the bit where Malcolm says it's more important to > simulate the feel than get the actual numbers correct. As in the past I go > along with that to a certain extend.

Well so do I and many others, hence I am not sure how it is proving DGF right (so who is wrong?). As for NH - no idea as it has never been available here and no obvious suggestion it was a must have to get by importing. Cheers Tony

"Tony Rickard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:gWA%9.4063$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> "Jan Verschueren" wrote: > > "Tony Rickard" wrote... > > > DGF - Show me just where you said that and I'll > > > agree with your statement above. > > > > I think Dave means the bit where Malcolm says it's more important to > > simulate the feel than get the actual numbers correct. As in the past I

go > > along with that to a certain extend. > > Well so do I and many others, hence I am not sure how it is proving DGFright

Quoted text (7 lines)

> (so who is wrong?). > > As for NH - no idea as it has never been available here and no obvious > suggestion it was a must have to get by importing. > > Cheers > Tony

You guys are funny. David G Fisher

"David G Fisher" wrote: > You guys are funny. You're the guy with the one liners :)

"Tony Rickard" wrote... > <snip> > You're the guy with the one liners :) Hehehe... ;-) Jan. =---

"David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>... > Whatever. I was right five years ago and I'm right now. Right about what, again? Five years ago.... Um, was it that a rally game was better than GPL? I'm getting old and my memory is fuzzy. > BTW, I'd love to see these articles you and Jan are talking about. Are you > talking about the "How Smart Are My Fellow Americans :-) " article? Yes, > there was a bit of an agenda there. Also a :-) . Many people will post simply because the given article may be of interest. You, however, often post so you can "prove" you were right in old arguments that you won't let lie, for example: Modern F1 cars are not easy to drive (quoting J.Stewart IIRC) GPL is not a 100% accurate (this very thread) Papyrus get things wrong (The Jasper article snippet) Well blow me down if all of the above are not completely obvious. Hey - we agree! Where we disagree is perspective. You seem to think that Papyrus, or people who like their *games*, should somehow be corrected, be taught the gospel according to DGF, to SEE THE LIGHT! Yay, you've spotted that these games aren't like total realism. Whoopee. What's wrong with them just being as close as an approximation of a given racing series as the developers can muster? And if there are one or two delusional souls out there who are kidding themselves into thinking that simracing is totally authentic, why not let them have their jollies? Is it that important that you are seen to be right? Tell you what, Dave, if Ralf gets to be F1 Champion before Juan then I will paypal you a tenner if that will get you to shut up about that particular argument. Please, remember this post. I am a man of my word. > Don't people often use articles to support or counter opinions anyway? Since > when is there something wrong with that? Nope :-) Mark

UPDATE FOR THOSE WHO HAVE ASKED FOR SPECIFICS ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The ONLY reason I am continuing to post against this topic is that I have been asked by a large number of people in all the various forums and newsgroups to be specific about what the UNREAL elements of GTR are. I have tried to explain how difficult this is to do as I may be talking about slight variations in the control inputs required and the way the car reacts to both those and to the actual processes of car/track/phyiscs interaction. I have stated many, many times this is not in any way whatsoever a criticism of the SBDT who have done a sensational job with GTR2002. I am total admiration of them and from posts within this topic they do not seem to be offended in any way and I hope that is the same for any GTR2002 fan reading this. I have also had email communication with Doug Arnao who also is not offended by the content of my postings. I could equally as well do a similar post on GPL/GP4/Netkar/LFS or the Nascar Heat mods that I referred to in my earlier posts. On the question of handling realism and taking into account computer sim limitations none are fully realistic. All have realistic elements, all have unrealistic elements. I didn't for one moment expect anyone to doubt that, but it seems many did and asked for specifics - so what follows is the start of that process. What good will it do? Well, maybe it will spur the developers of products such as Netkar (and I only mention this as an example) to strive to lessen the unreal elements that might creep into their simulation products. Also, it might just save someone some embarassment and possibly even injury should they get it into their heads that real life cars will handle identically to those they have driven on the PC. Thankfully, fear may well prevent them from going fast enough to need to call on the instinctive reactions they have picked up in driving sims At the moment I am following 2 paths : 1) To try and do something to demonstrate that the driving style that gets results in GTR is not that which gets results in real-life, also that you are able to drive GTR in an unrealistic fashion. 2) In 1) you might be able to "spot" the differences in driving technique from listening to the engines revs etc. and see the way the car appears to behave. But this does not really cover what it feels like vs. the real-world or how the technique required differs. Please don't forget that again, my purpose here is to comment on handling physics and not any other aspect of the game. This post is related to section 1 As I said, it is not just the premise of the super-quick to exploit handling oddities of a sim. We all run the same program and are all open to these oddities. Initialy they may hamper us but as we continue to drive and go quicker we develop a technique which gives the results we want - faster lap times. To show these up fully though I did need a GTR lap replay from soneone who had learnt to exploit these, i.e. a "fast" guy. I also needed some good real-life footage that would demonstrate how that same car/track would be run in real-life. I got very close to this by finding, on the internet, a VCR of a GTR lap from a "very" fast guy and also an in-car lap, from the same track, with virtually the same car. Now, I could have used footage frmo another track and another car but I know many would say "well it's a different track", or, "it's a different car". So, I got as close as I could. The first thing I did was to write to the guy who had produce the GTR lap, explain my intention, point him to the article and ask if he would consent to me using HIS lap in this way. Had he not replied and given permission I would not have used it. He understood that it was neither a criticism of him or GTR. The reply I got was far better than I'd expected. It seems he was also someone who had real-life racing experience and agreed with much of what I was saying. Even if he had not agreed with me, but still agreed to have his lap used, I would have posted his response here, out of courtesy. Without further delay I'd like to introduce this guy, his name is Dominik Binz (a.k.a. Slasher_GT). The reason I picked his .vcr is that his was one of the few I found that I could also get a good quality real-life video for comparison of. I did a quick check at the time of writing and Dominik is No. 6 at Find The Limit (GTRank) - his Mugello time was in the top 10 when I first looked but has slipped a little since - Dominik agrees that his line was not as good as it could have been. Here, in full and un-edited, is his reply to me following my initial request to use his VCR file : ====================================================== I think you've found the right one here :) I'm not only a simracer, I also had the pleasure to test a real touring car. A VW Lupo GTI (slick tyres, 140hp, 750kg, race suspension) last year in October at Oschersleben for two days in a talent triage. I did quite well and I can say that I had qualified myself to be allowed to do full season. It was very professional organized by Volkswagen and we learned how to drive a race car fast.I also own the international C License to compete in every racing series except F1 :) Well and to answer your question. What I do in GTR2002 to drive fast is not comparable to the real life situation. I was quite impressed when I was playing GTR for the first time. I took a NGT car and the first laps I did were at Oschersleben. I found it pretty similar to the things I was also doing in the Lupo (though a Lupo is not a 996 lol). But I was more or less carrying the car through the track at that point because I wasn't sure about the physics. What I discovered is the faster I tried to go the more unrealistic my driving became...driving this sim on the limit is far away from reality. Ok you also have to do the right line in the sim, find your braking points etc but the driving on the edge, I mean the things you do to be fast are very different from the things you would do in real life to be fast. For example braking! I lock the tyres in nearly every bend as you have seen! In real life my tyres would have been ruined after 3 corners ;) But I have to brake so late in addition with a high use (unrealistic high use) of engine break to be fast. In real life my engine would have blown and or I would have spun cause of too high revs on the back. Etc etc. Endless list. Though I have to admit that Mugello is a bad example, also for simracing. My lines were quite bad and also I exeggerated some things. I was overdriving the car in that lap. I also didn't have much practise. I overall have done around 1000 laps in GTR. On 10 tracks, means 100 laps on every track. I have done laps for all tracks with GT and NGT cars. Means 50 laps with a 2 different cars on every track. That's not much. With more practise and a better setup my lines would have been smoother and more fluid in Mugello :) Sure you can use my Vcr to show that it's not right what I'm doing cause I know it's not right :) No problem here, hehe. What cars have you been driving in your life? Nice posts btw, I was following this discussion since it was opened but was too lazy to reply ;) ======================================================== I am aware that there are different fidelity levels when recording a .VCR file. I believe Dominiks lap was not set on the highest value hence is not a 100% represenation of exactly how the car behaved when he as driving it. As I understand it, it is like sampling at a lower frame rate. It is pretty close however and the best we have at the moment. You can easilly spot how Dominik is having to drive the car to produce the fast lap. Things to note are the whole braking and corner entry process. Now, of course Dominik is going for the fastest lap possible, with no damage/wear modelled - so he is able to abuse (lock) the tires under braking. Of course, no one would dream of driving like this in an online race (with damage/wear) switched on and many wouldn't push the car like this even in testing BUT, the fact remains that when you start to push the car it will behave unrealistically adn will "lull" the driver into driving unrealistacally. The "normal" (race school taught) approach to a corner is to brake smoothly and progressively, ease off the brakes prior to turn-in, turn in smoothly but directly whilst appying a "balanced" throttle (neither accell not decell). To hold the car on the balanced throttle, ideally at the limit of grip until the apex, then to start to accellerate whilst unwinding the lock (if you are on the limit you can accellerate whilst holding the same lock). Of course there are slight variations between corners, some you get on the gas before the apex, some after, as you improve your technique, on some corners you may hold some braking on as you begin to turn (trail-braking) but that is it. Using the available grip where it is needed most (grip is finite, can be used for braking, cornering, accell but increasing the requirement for one detracts what is left for the others - traction budget/circle). I have sought approval from Dominik to post the above text but he has also asked me to include the following. As you see, Dominik, like me, wishes to make clear that there is still great benefit in sims beyond simply providing ultra-realistic handling phyics and that GTR is a fabulous product. I recognise this desire so as not to be criticised for things that you are not actually commenting on. The following is complete and un-edited. =================================================== I want this to be added too: But for a game it's not necessary to be 100% realistic. Ok it shouldn't handle like a chewing gum. The fun factor is very high in GTR and that's cool for me. Also Doug Arnao admitted that it's not very close to reality but convinving :) And yes it is convincing. Sometimes you really can learn from sims. For example the coordination of throttlle , brake and steering. Also the feeling for lines etc. Concentration is a main factor too which is imo even more important in simracing than in real life because you don't have all inputs which a real driver has. So it's easy to get deflected from driving. Also in simracing you can go much easier on the limit because u wont get hurt if you crash :) ================================================= OK, now to the specifics. You will need to download 2 files to do this comparison yourself. One is Dominik's VCR file of his lap of Mugello in a Ferrari 550. You can get this here : http://gearbox.mart-in.com/ and going to the "Hotlaps VCR" section, then to the Mugello area. Or, you can use this direct download link : http://makeashorterlink.com/?I14D22553 (the file is 61k) The next is an in-car lap from the Ferrai Challenge series at Mugello. You can (only) download the file by using this direct download link : http://makeashorterlink.com/?L15D21553 (the file is 22Mb). You can "view" the file via streaming video at this address : http://makeashorterlink.com/?R56D23553 The in-car real-life lap is not technically perfect in every way but does a reasonable job. Maxx PS. This will also be posted to the GTR2002 forum, RSC GPL Forum and the West Racing forum. where this subject is also receiving much attention and comment and calls have been made for me to provide specifics.

On Mon, 03 Feb 2003 21:11:40 GMT, "Tony Rickard" <[email hidden]> wrote: >As for NH - no idea as it has never been available here and no obvious >suggestion it was a must have to get by importing. Tony, I'm "not" pushing heat but you can order it here : http://www.strategic-plus.co.uk/ Also, I think you can get it from Oval Racing News, see info here : http://briscaheat.m4driving.sm/faq.htm Some also say you can find it on ebay. Maxx

Jan, On Mon, 03 Feb 2003 18:45:49 GMT, "Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (17 lines)

>"Tony Rickard" wrote... >> <snip good stuff> >> The most interesting revelation is that modding >> Nascar Heat may provide the greatest basis for >> providing the most race car like experience in >> the author's experience. Whilst out of the box >> it certainly doesn't. > >I'm fairly sceptical in this respect. While it didn't bother me much (I got >rid of NH because of controller assignment and AI/gameplay issues before any >mods surfaced), to me the difference in physics rate seemed really tangible >(as it is in F1 2k2 when toggling the half_rate setting). It might go >unnoticed if one were to use Heat as one's sole training aid, just like one >can't tell if A on a piano is really 440Hz when you hear it alone, but >compared to other titles there is a difference, IMO. Just like a trained >musician can hear differences of even a couple Hertz when instruments play >in unison.

Patches released fairly soon after release allowed multiples controllers and also now the ACT Labs shifter. AI is perhaps the best thing in Heat IMO. Many mods provide mod specific AI which is very competitive but also user can "create" their own AI in the time it takes them to drive a clean/fast lap plus 30 secs to copy and rename a file (this is since 1.7x). Essentially, you create a ghostlap (heat does this by default for your fastest lap) you copy itn and rename it to reside in your mod directory. Then, next time you race the AI it will use YOUR ghost as the basis for it's AI. I'm not sure what the relative sampling rates are but it's a small issue in relation to he overall physics mdoelling IMO. >Regardless of individual handling there is, IMO, a certain crispness to >handling in GPL/NR2k2 and F1 2k2/GTR2002 which just isn't there in >"standard" NH. Would be interesting to have people comment on how they feel >this situation is with any of the mods. I think there is still a little lack of crispness as you refer to it. Maybe it's (partly) this that makes the Heat tire model feel more convincing to me. Just speaking of GTR, the tires feel like they are solid rubber with no flex. As soon as you turn and get any degree of slide you seem to get a fairly constant squeal - in Heat the tires feel like they are flexing, maybe it's just the physics engine lagging a little before "biting" - I think in fact it is more tham this as there are variables in the physics files for stiffness of the tire walls.

Quoted text (13 lines)

> >> DGF - Show me just where you said that and I'll >> agree with your statement above. > >I think Dave means the bit where Malcolm says it's more important to >simulate the feel than get the actual numbers correct. As in the past I go >along with that to a certain extend. > >IMO GPL, NR2k2 and GTR2002 are very good and most convincing at creating the >illusion one's piloting a high performance car on ones computer. All of >these push real numbers around, so as hardware gets more powerfull, capable >of calculating more complex models in real time and provinding more feedback >to the user (motion) this is, IMO, an avenue to pursue.

I agree, I'm all for higher sampling rates and the future progress of sims but Heat as well as those you mention push real numbers around.Certainly GTR/F12002 has more "numbers" to deal with than Heat but that plus a higher sampling rate does not mean it will automatically produce a more realistic feel. In many ways I feel it is BECAUSE of the extra effects being catered for in GTR that it thows up more UNREAL elements - clearly, in terms of progress we should work on improving that level of physics model rather than sit on the the laurels of Heat's less sophisticted but, IMO more realistic feeling (at the moment) handling. >While I do enjoy other efforts which, supposedly, lean more towards >"simulating the experience", it's my experience that after some use there's >always something that pops up to destroy the illusion for me. I'm ready to >be proved wrong on this count, but not able to test this particular setup at >the moment. Yes, the illlusion is much more than the handling phsyics. The Mini-Cooper in Netkar feels spookilly realistic at times (in terms of handling) but the current level of sophistication in terms of graphics and such is not as convincing as some other products. Maxx

Hi Maxx, Well, no one can acuse you of not following through:) *Much* appreciated you taking all this time to respond and start this rather interesting issue.. Cheers, Willem

Quoted text (21 lines)

>UPDATE FOR THOSE WHO HAVE ASKED FOR SPECIFICS >------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > >The ONLY reason I am continuing to post against this topic is that I >have been asked by a large number of people in all the various forums >and newsgroups to be specific about what the UNREAL elements of GTR >are. I have tried to explain how difficult this is to do as I may be >talking about slight variations in the control inputs required and the >way the car reacts to both those and to the actual processes of >car/track/phyiscs interaction. > >The in-car real-life lap is not technically perfect in every way but >does a reasonable job. > >Maxx > >PS. This will also be posted to the GTR2002 forum, RSC GPL Forum >and the West Racing forum. where this subject is also receiving much >attention and comment and calls have been made for me to provide >specifics.

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says... > Hi Maxx, > > Well, no one can acuse you of not following through:) > *Much* appreciated you taking all this time to respond and start this > rather interesting issue.. > Yes, thank you Maxx. Very much appreciated; the time you spend. MRSisson -- LOAD "GPL",8,1 RUN

says... Yes, thank you Maxx. Very much appreciated; the time you spend. MRSisson -- LOAD "GPL",8,1 RUN