GP4 Mini-Review

GP4 just came out in the US today. I had a moment of insanity and bought it. Pros: Graphics and Tracks beat every modern F1 sim hands down. It's also nice that someone out there realizes a race car isn't an indestructible tub with wheels and wings. Cons: Everything else. It would be nice if the car were semi-controllable or at least handled in a convincing if not completely realistic manner (a'la Rally Trophy). The menu system is the worst ever, I'd even give a nod to Madden 2000 in the menu department. Summary: $40 drink coaster. Someone please create a track converter or track conversion tutorial. Jason ----- GPLRank 24.50 N2002Rank -12.995

> Pros: Graphics and Tracks beat every modern F1 sim hands down. The track graphics are quite good but the car textures are pretty poor. Zoom in close to a car and you'll notice that the car textures aren't anywhere near as detailed as F1 2002. That, and the fact that the game makes virtually no use of modern graphics cards and relies almost solely on the CPU (barely 30fps if you've got a 2GHz+ CPU) means that I can't agree that it 'beats every modern F1 sim hands down' in terms of graphics. P.S. Compare the cockpit graphics in the two games. No comparison WHATSOEVER.

Thanx much, Jason! This review @ GameSpot: http://gamespot.com/gamespot/stories/reviews/0,10867,2879976,00.html almost had me convinced to buy it. I mean, one of the things they lauded was the UI: <<The menu interface is now extremely slick, using simple fonts set against stylized full-motion video for a look and feel that's similar to the menus in Gran Turismo 3: A-Spec. Likewise, the in-game graphics have also been updated with crisper textures and more polygons throughout. This change is most evident in the cars themselves, which are easily the best looking of any F1 game to date.>> I'm continually amazed at how ignorant game zines and e-zines are abt. sims - not just car sims, but flight sims. They seem to know the most abt. stuff that never existed: dragons, monsters, aliens, sorcery, alchemy, magic potions, and the Lost Dry-Cleaners of Atlantis. --Steve "jason moyer" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (21 lines)

> GP4 just came out in the US today. I had a moment of insanity and > bought it. > > Pros: Graphics and Tracks beat every modern F1 sim hands down. It's > also nice that someone out there realizes a race car isn't an > indestructible tub with wheels and wings. > > Cons: Everything else. It would be nice if the car were > semi-controllable or at least handled in a convincing if not > completely realistic manner (a'la Rally Trophy). The menu system is > the worst ever, I'd even give a nod to Madden 2000 in the menu > department. > > Summary: $40 drink coaster. Someone please create a track converter > or track conversion tutorial. > > Jason > > ----- > GPLRank 24.50 > N2002Rank -12.995

This just in: Infogrames just shuttered the U.K.-based MicroProse (remember them?) studio that developed GP4 with Geoff Crammond. Guess you weren't the only one disappointed, Jason. "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:nVkg9.253640$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (8 lines)

> Thanx much, Jason! This review @ GameSpot: > > http://gamespot.com/gamespot/stories/reviews/0,10867,2879976,00.html > > almost had me convinced to buy it. I mean, one of the things they lauded > was the UI: > > <<The menu interface is now extremely slick, using simple fonts set

against

Quoted text (8 lines)

> stylized full-motion video for a look and feel that's similar to the menus > in Gran Turismo 3: A-Spec. Likewise, the in-game graphics have also been > updated with crisper textures and more polygons throughout. This change is > most evident in the cars themselves, which are easily the best looking of > any F1 game to date.>> > > I'm continually amazed at how ignorant game zines and e-zines are abt. > sims - not just car sims, but flight sims. They seem to know the most

abt. > stuff that never existed: dragons, monsters, aliens, sorcery, alchemy,magic

Quoted text (29 lines)

> potions, and the Lost Dry-Cleaners of Atlantis. > > --Steve > > "jason moyer" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > GP4 just came out in the US today. I had a moment of insanity and > > bought it. > > > > Pros: Graphics and Tracks beat every modern F1 sim hands down. It's > > also nice that someone out there realizes a race car isn't an > > indestructible tub with wheels and wings. > > > > Cons: Everything else. It would be nice if the car were > > semi-controllable or at least handled in a convincing if not > > completely realistic manner (a'la Rally Trophy). The menu system is > > the worst ever, I'd even give a nod to Madden 2000 in the menu > > department. > > > > Summary: $40 drink coaster. Someone please create a track converter > > or track conversion tutorial. > > > > Jason > > > > ----- > > GPLRank 24.50 > > N2002Rank -12.995 > >

"Steve Smith" < > > I'm continually amazed at how ignorant game zines and e-zines are abt. > sims - not just car sims, but flight sims. They seem to know the mostabt. > stuff that never existed: dragons, monsters, aliens, sorcery, alchemy,magic > potions, and the Lost Dry-Cleaners of Atlantis. > > --Steve What do you mean they didn't exist? I can personally vouch for Nemo the owner of the Lost Dry-Cleaners of Atlantis... :) dave henrie

On Fri, 13 Sep 2002 18:25:59 +1000, "Damien Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote: >The track graphics are quite good but the car textures are pretty poor. >Zoom in close to a car and you'll notice that the car textures aren't >anywhere near as detailed as F1 2002. That, and the fact that the game >makes virtually no use of modern graphics cards and relies almost solely on >the CPU (barely 30fps if you've got a 2GHz+ CPU) means that I can't agree >that it 'beats every modern F1 sim hands down' in terms of graphics. I agree re: the car textures. As far as framerate goes, I have no problems cranking up all the details at 1280x1024 and holding 34fps with a PO of about 80. This is on a 1.4gHz athlon with a Ti4400 and hardware accelerated sound disabled because of soundcard problems. Jason ----- GPLRank 24.50 N2002Rank -12.995

On Fri, 13 Sep 2002 13:06:15 GMT, "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote: >This just in: Infogrames just shuttered the U.K.-based MicroProse (remember >them?) studio that developed GP4 with Geoff Crammond. Guess you weren't the >only one disappointed, Jason. Wow. Maybe they could become track designers for ISI... The worst thing about GP4 is how much I really want to like this, despite the sloppy interface and controls, because the tracks are really that good. Every subtle change in camber and elevation is there. Watching the AI race is actually more entertaining than playing the game because of the great tracks and weather effects. There are just little subtle things at each track that I haven't seen properly modelled in a same, but make a huge difference in the way you drive. The last chicane at Magny Cours has a very subtle banking to it, and the exit flows directly into the final right hand turn. In F1 2002 the chicane is flat and the exit has a short straight during which you steer to the left to setup for the final right hander. The first lap I ran there in GP4 I ended up driving into the pits because I was confused and followed the F1 2002 line. Likewise the 4th-gear esses require some braking and a drop to 4th gear, in F1 2002 it's 90% throttle for a moment and no gear change. I haven't tried the Hungary conversion from GP4 to F1 2002 yet, but I hope people are considering doing more of them. Monte Carlo especially is absolutely stunning. Jason ----- GPLRank 24.50 N2002Rank -12.995

On Fri, 13 Sep 2002 12:32:19 GMT, "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote: >almost had me convinced to buy it. I mean, one of the things they lauded >was the UI: The UI is horrendous. Software publishers should seriously start considering sending developers to training seminars on interface aesthetics, it would do a world of good. For starters, regardless of how I configure my split-axis Sidewinder wheel, the game wants to use it to navigate the menus. This means that I have to depress the throttle halfway to keep the menu selections from scrolling everywhere. A pain to the say the least. Interestingly, sometimes when I start the game it doesn't do this. Second, when you load game there are 4 or 5 options presented. The first one is "Main Menu". WTF? Is there something I'm missing here when the main menu isn't the main menu? That alone should clue you in on the UI design philosophy at work here. F1 2002 surprisingly has a much more useable interface (actually, so does Madden 2003, which is a great game this year for a change), and all of the things that matter most in a sim are far superior to any non-Papy sim on the market: car handling, car tuning, controllability (is that word). Sure, the textures are still a little too saturated in places (still, ISI shows marked improvement here with each release), the AI could be better but is at least interesting to race against, the track models are significantly flawed, and the wet-weather effects are pathetic (from an immersion standpoint, not driving), but the core gameplay is incredibly solid. At this point, ISI is so far ahead in the F1 battle it seems ridiculous that there are reviews being written that call GP4 the king of sims. Crammond hasn't even hit the GPL standard that was set 4 years ago. Jason ----- GPLRank 24.50 N2002Rank -12.995

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

Quoted text (7 lines)

> On Fri, 13 Sep 2002 12:32:19 GMT, "Steve Smith" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >almost had me convinced to buy it. I mean, one of the things they lauded > >was the UI: > F1 2002 surprisingly has a much more useable interface

I still think the F12k2 interface is shockingly clunky, un-necessarily 3d, and a pain in the arse. Better than GP4 - but thats not saying much Doug

That's CAPTAIN Nemo to you, Infidel! "Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:WDlg9.411489$me6.48377@sccrnsc01...

Quoted text (16 lines)

> > "Steve Smith" < > > > > I'm continually amazed at how ignorant game zines and e-zines are abt. > > sims - not just car sims, but flight sims. They seem to know the most > abt. > > stuff that never existed: dragons, monsters, aliens, sorcery, alchemy, > magic > > potions, and the Lost Dry-Cleaners of Atlantis. > > > > --Steve > What do you mean they didn't exist? I can personally vouch for Nemo the > owner of the Lost Dry-Cleaners of Atlantis... :) > dave henrie > >

Just out of idle curiousity --- In which store did you find it, and what was the price? Thanks. jason moyer wrote:

Quoted text (21 lines)

> GP4 just came out in the US today. I had a moment of insanity and > bought it. > > Pros: Graphics and Tracks beat every modern F1 sim hands down. It's > also nice that someone out there realizes a race car isn't an > indestructible tub with wheels and wings. > > Cons: Everything else. It would be nice if the car were > semi-controllable or at least handled in a convincing if not > completely realistic manner (a'la Rally Trophy). The menu system is > the worst ever, I'd even give a nod to Madden 2000 in the menu > department. > > Summary: $40 drink coaster. Someone please create a track converter > or track conversion tutorial. > > Jason > > ----- > GPLRank 24.50 > N2002Rank -12.995

Just out of idle curiousity --- In which store did you find it, and what was the price? Thanks.

Quoted text (21 lines)

> GP4 just came out in the US today. I had a moment of insanity and > bought it. > Pros: Graphics and Tracks beat every modern F1 sim hands down. It's > also nice that someone out there realizes a race car isn't an > indestructible tub with wheels and wings. > Cons: Everything else. It would be nice if the car were > semi-controllable or at least handled in a convincing if not > completely realistic manner (a'la Rally Trophy). The menu system is > the worst ever, I'd even give a nod to Madden 2000 in the menu > department. > Summary: $40 drink coaster. Someone please create a track converter > or track conversion tutorial. > Jason > ----- > GPLRank 24.50 > N2002Rank -12.995

Doug Ellison wrote:

Quoted text (17 lines)

> > "jason moyer" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > On Fri, 13 Sep 2002 12:32:19 GMT, "Steve Smith" > > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > > >almost had me convinced to buy it. I mean, one of the things they lauded > > >was the UI: > > > F1 2002 surprisingly has a much more useable interface > > I still think the F12k2 interface is shockingly clunky, un-necessarily 3d, > and a pain in the arse. > > Better than GP4 - but thats not saying much > > Doug

But at least it's worth clunking through! Gerry

On Fri, 13 Sep 2002 22:49:23 GMT, BRH <"bertrh<no-spam>"@attbi.com> wrote: >Just out of idle curiousity --- In which store did you find it, and what >was the price? Electronics Boutique (Century III Pittsburgh) $40 Jason ----- GPLRank 24.50 N2002Rank -12.995

The UI is atrocious. It's as if Crammond wants GP4 to fail. (Maybe he does.) But, if you can manage to get all the helps turned off, the controller set up, the graphics at a sensible PO and FF turned off, you will be treated to the finest *driving* simulator offered for PC. The bitch is, with the attitude that 95% of the people here have, you will never actually experience GP4. ....as 95% of the people here have not, as is obvious from the inaccuracy of 95% of the posts about GP4. -- "Nothing gets closer!" - Crammond mark "jason moyer" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > GP4 just came out in the US today. I had a moment of insanity and > bought it. > > Pros: Graphics and Tracks beat every modern F1 sim hands down. It's > also nice that someone out there realizes a race car isn't an > indestructible tub with wheels and wings. > > Cons: Everything else. It would be nice if the car were > semi-controllable or at least handled in a convincing if not > completely realistic manner (a'la Rally Trophy). The menu system is > the worst ever, I'd even give a nod to Madden 2000 in the menu > department. > > Summary: $40 drink coaster. Someone please create a track converter > or track conversion tutorial. > > Jason > > ----- > GPLRank 24.50 > N2002Rank -12.995

>"mark jeangerard" <[email hidden]> wrote > The UI is atrocious. It's as if Crammond wants GP4 to fail. (Maybe hedoes.) > But, if you can manage to get all the helps turned off, the controller set > up, the graphics at a sensible PO and FF turned off, you will be treatedto > the finest *driving* simulator offered for PC. The bitch is, with the > attitude that 95% of the people here have, you will never actually > experience GP4. > > ....as 95% of the people here have not, as is obvious from the inaccuracyof > 95% of the posts about GP4. Sorry, that doesn't convince me at all. GP4, or any title in the history of gaming that will continue to bare all the idiosyncrasies of a Geoff Crammond game engine is and WILL fail to be considered by the simracing community as a serious racing simulator. Even if it hides some little hint of gem, it's still mixed up with a ton of turd. -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- http://www.ymenard.8m.com/ -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez Corporation - helping America into the New World...

Sorry if it looks like I'm quoting Frank, for some reason supernews doesn't have the original post. On Fri, 13 Sep 2002 21:03:00 -0400, "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (13 lines)

>>"mark jeangerard" <[email hidden]> wrote >> The UI is atrocious. It's as if Crammond wants GP4 to fail. (Maybe he >does.) >> But, if you can manage to get all the helps turned off, the controller set >> up, the graphics at a sensible PO and FF turned off, you will be treated >to >> the finest *driving* simulator offered for PC. The bitch is, with the >> attitude that 95% of the people here have, you will never actually >> experience GP4. >> >> ....as 95% of the people here have not, as is obvious from the inaccuracy >of >> 95% of the posts about GP4.

Hi, thanks for implying I'm a moron. Anyway, I spent 4 hours driving the simulation with all aids turned off, no steering help, and my controller properly configured (10 degree lock, 0% steering help, 0% reduce with speed). Granted, I spent about 2 of those hours trying to calibrate and configure my controller since, regardless of what you actually select, the game (as GP3 did) automatically uses the default controller to select things in the menus. The entire concept of having "steering lock" as a controller option rather than a car setup parameter is also ridiculous. Things I learned from this: - the driving model is less convincing than a need for speed game - anyone who has seen an in-car view of a modern F1 race knows that the drivers navigate turns by using constant wheel lock and steering with the throttle, something that is impossible in this game (and makes it overly difficult to drive since you have to vary wheel lock instead of throttle travel) - the Ferrari, BAR, etc all have 6 gears - welcome to the year 1996, Geoff - the invisible barriers are a curious design decision, as is the poor cllision detection in general - gotta love bringing the car to a stop, switching to a replay, then realizing that the car is hovering 2-3 inches above the ground - the tracks and graphics are incredible, almost to the point of making me want to play it anyway - almost Jason ----- GPLRank 24.50 N2002Rank -12.995

You are exactly the attitude I am talking about. I'm willing to bet you've never even driven GP4. In this group we get a lot of posts from guys like you, in the manner in which you post. A whole lot of "shirt", not so much "stuffing". You're statement on it's own indicates that you would never touch a Crammond game. It also indicates that, had you, you would slander it regardless of you real opinion. After all, you do have a reputation to keep up here, and changing your mind about something on r.a.s. would be to commit credible suicide. The problem, as I see it, is not your opinion of GP4 because you are well entitled to it whatever your reasons. The problem is in the fact that you answered my post. Reading through the GP4 posts on r.a.s., one comes away with the distinct impression that it is the single worst driving and racing simulator that has ever been produced. Nothing could be further from the truth. Also, the fact that you cite "the simracing community" as the authority in your post (another thing that leads me to believe you have never driven GP4, not having an opinion of your own) is a cheap trick. Unfortunately, it becomes more effective every time it is uttered. If the "simracing community" that will follow you and those like you, rather than think on their own, could have the clarity of mind to make their own decisions - an approach without bias and preconception - many of them would side against "the simracing community". No so much for the need to take a side, mind you. But rather to simply choose what they perceive to suit their individual needs more satisfactorily. That being said, GP4 is an excellent racing simulator. As good as anything else available anyway. It is a superior driving simulator because of the tire model alone. (Although you would have to have had some experience at the limit of adhesion to recognize it and there in lies the flaw with marketing it to the general public. In this forum however, I would have to assume that that is what we would treasure as much as anything else.) What it isn't, is racing software. All "sims" should be racing software, at least since GPL came out. It's unfortunate that more titles aren't up to date in multiplay. Confusing the abilities of any title is unfair to those who come here for information. In the case of GPx it's outright bigotry. There are so many things that I want to explore with GP4 but am afraid to post here. I fear asking a simple question and getting 40 replies that all but answer the question. I fear the prejudice and close minded conformity that will disallow even the good natured response from providing any real substance. ...and it's all because of assholes like you that have nothing constructive to add and, apparently, a whole bunch of spare time. ...maybe you should get a hobby... ...like driving a sim or something. At least then your posts would be on topic and substantive. -- "Nothing gets closer!" - Crammond mark "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:6Vvg9.5590$[email hidden]... > >"mark jeangerard" <[email hidden]> wrote > > The UI is atrocious. It's as if Crammond wants GP4 to fail. (Maybe he > does.) > > But, if you can manage to get all the helps turned off, the controller set > > up, the graphics at a sensible PO and FF turned off, you will be treated > to > > the finest *driving* simulator offered for PC. The bitch is, with the > > attitude that 95% of the people here have, you will never actually > > experience GP4. > > > > ....as 95% of the people here have not, as is obvious from the inaccuracy > of > > 95% of the posts about GP4. > > > Sorry, that doesn't convince me at all. GP4, or any title in the history of > gaming that will continue to bare all the idiosyncrasies of a Geoff Crammond > game engine is and WILL fail to be considered by the simracing community as > a serious racing simulator. > > > Even if it hides some little hint of gem, it's still mixed up with a ton of > turd. > > > > -- > -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> > -- http://www.ymenard.8m.com/ > -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez > Corporation - helping America into the New World... > >

"Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:ZTsg9.44951$[email hidden]... > That's CAPTAIN Nemo to you, Infidel! Well of Course it's Captain, but we don't go around saying Captain Penske now do we?? :) Besides calling him Captain brings back bad memories about loosing his boat.(see I didn't say ship like most non-squids would say.) dave henrie

Quoted text (14 lines)

> "Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:WDlg9.411489$me6.48377@sccrnsc01... > > > > "Steve Smith" < > > > > > > I'm continually amazed at how ignorant game zines and e-zines are abt. > > > sims - not just car sims, but flight sims. They seem to know the most > > abt. > > > stuff that never existed: dragons, monsters, aliens, sorcery, alchemy, > > magic > > > potions, and the Lost Dry-Cleaners of Atlantis. > > > > > > --Steve > > What do you mean they didn't exist? I can personally vouch for Nemo

the > > owner of the Lost Dry-Cleaners of Atlantis... :) > > dave henrie > > > > > >

The trouble is everyone has tried to tell him to burn the barn down (including all the turds) and build a new Barn. (a new physics engine). But he just continues trying to reorganise the turds in the old Barn, and keeps painting the outside to make it look pretty. How many of you guys have heard the Wiggles say " WAKE UP GEOFF " ? "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:6Vvg9.5590$[email hidden]... > >"mark jeangerard" <[email hidden]> wrote > Even if it hides some little hint of gem, it's still mixed up with a tonof > turd.

Not trying to get anybody upset here or start flamewars 3. Myself and quite a few of the guys that post here, guys that I race with, have tried GP4. People that I have spoken to about it, in general have the same opinion as myself. I have used racing sims / games since F1GP was around. As you know this was the first of the GP series. I have done extensive tampering with GP2 and 3. No matter what I have tried, I have never even closely reproduced the "feeling" of the physics engines of GPL or even F12002, or even LFS for that matter. IMHO even ICR2 had a lot better feel to it than any of the GP series. Now here I must admit the following: I heard a lot of bad reports about GP4, even before hearing the General consensus about it on R.A.S. With that in mind, I borrowed a copy of GP4, installed it and gave it a try. At first it was undrivable, after using the Auto Graphics Config. I then tried running it a few more times. It was better.Got onto R.A.S., Tried a few of the Tips, Tricks, Tweaks etc. Now Don't get me wrong, the game was playable. One guy on R.A.S. said that he loved the game as a non serious sim, and used the Hotseat function when his Buddies came around and got Zonked together. Now I admit that I have NOT spent hours tweaking it and messing with it to try and get the feel better. The reasons for this are: 1. IMHO GP4 still has the same feel as GP3 and 2. The Car seems to Handle like it is on rails, then suddenly it is gone. ( This is very reminiscent of F1RS ) 2. GP4 is letdown by the lack of any Online ability. Now just remember these 2 things: This is all only IMHO (everyone is entitled to that) If anyone has any more tips on setting the car or controls etc up, that will give the car a more realistic (IMHO) feel, please Post and I will try your recommendations and take the big McLaren out for a few more laps. Nobody wanted The GP series to be good more than I did. I rushed down to the Computer store like a Dog on Heat the day GP2 was released. This still didn't change my opinion of the Game or of what I think of the Series now. By very strong contrast, When I first installed GPL I thought it was the biggest pile of Shiite that had ever been written. But after learning a bit about it, and tampering a bit, and realising that these old (no winged) cars were supposed to be 4 wheel drifted around corners, It ended up as being the most rewarding SIM that I have ever used. My respect for it now has only increased, with the hardware that exists now, this SIM is truly awesome, even if its graphics by today's standards are only so so. After 2 years of the CD sitting in it's box, I am now enjoying it more than ever. I am always willing to keep an open mind about anything, no matter what others have to say about it. In my experience, most of the guys that post at R.A.S. are the same. Darf "mark jeangerard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:2_xg9.197204$[email hidden]... > You are exactly the attitude I am talking about. I'm willing to bet you've > never even driven GP4. > > In this group we get a lot of posts from guys like you, in the manner in > which you post. A whole lot of "shirt", not so much "stuffing". You're > statement on it's own indicates that you would never touch a Crammondgame. > It also indicates that, had you, you would slander it regardless of youreal

Quoted text (7 lines)

> opinion. After all, you do have a reputation to keep up here, and changing > your mind about something on r.a.s. would be to commit credible suicide. > > The problem, as I see it, is not your opinion of GP4 because you are well > entitled to it whatever your reasons. The problem is in the fact that you > answered my post. Reading through the GP4 posts on r.a.s., one comes away > with the distinct impression that it is the single worst driving and

racing

Quoted text (8 lines)

> simulator that has ever been produced. Nothing could be further from the > truth. Also, the fact that you cite "the simracing community" as the > authority in your post (another thing that leads me to believe you have > never driven GP4, not having an opinion of your own) is a cheap trick. > Unfortunately, it becomes more effective every time it is uttered. If the > "simracing community" that will follow you and those like you, rather than > think on their own, could have the clarity of mind to make their own > decisions - an approach without bias and preconception - many of them

would > side against "the simracing community". No so much for the need to take a > side, mind you. But rather to simply choose what they perceive to suittheir

Quoted text (9 lines)

> individual needs more satisfactorily. > > That being said, GP4 is an excellent racing simulator. As good as anything > else available anyway. It is a superior driving simulator because of the > tire model alone. (Although you would have to have had some experience at > the limit of adhesion to recognize it and there in lies the flaw with > marketing it to the general public. In this forum however, I would have to > assume that that is what we would treasure as much as anything else.) What > it isn't, is racing software. All "sims" should be racing software, at

least

Quoted text (11 lines)

> since GPL came out. It's unfortunate that more titles aren't up to date in > multiplay. > > Confusing the abilities of any title is unfair to those who come here for > information. In the case of GPx it's outright bigotry. There are so many > things that I want to explore with GP4 but am afraid to post here. I fear > asking a simple question and getting 40 replies that all but answer the > question. I fear the prejudice and close minded conformity that will > disallow even the good natured response from providing any real substance. > > ...and it's all because of assholes like you that have nothing

constructive

Quoted text (23 lines)

> to add and, apparently, a whole bunch of spare time. > > ...maybe you should get a hobby... > > ...like driving a sim or something. At least then your posts would be on > topic and substantive. > > > -- > > "Nothing gets closer!" - Crammond > > mark > > > "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:6Vvg9.5590$[email hidden]... > > >"mark jeangerard" <[email hidden]> wrote > > > The UI is atrocious. It's as if Crammond wants GP4 to fail. (Maybe he > > does.) > > > But, if you can manage to get all the helps turned off, the controller > set > > > up, the graphics at a sensible PO and FF turned off, you will be

treated

Quoted text (12 lines)

> > to > > > the finest *driving* simulator offered for PC. The bitch is, with the > > > attitude that 95% of the people here have, you will never actually > > > experience GP4. > > > > > > ....as 95% of the people here have not, as is obvious from the > inaccuracy > > of > > > 95% of the posts about GP4. > > > > > > Sorry, that doesn't convince me at all. GP4, or any title in the

history

Quoted text (24 lines)

> of > > gaming that will continue to bare all the idiosyncrasies of a Geoff > Crammond > > game engine is and WILL fail to be considered by the simracing community > as > > a serious racing simulator. > > > > > > Even if it hides some little hint of gem, it's still mixed up with a ton > of > > turd. > > > > > > > > -- > > -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> > > -- http://www.ymenard.8m.com/ > > -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez > > Corporation - helping America into the New World... > > > > > > >

Reading your post, I was about to ask if you'd tried the Hungary conversion. Then I saw this... > I haven't tried the Hungary conversion from GP4 to F1 2002 yet, but I > hope people are considering doing more of them. Monte Carlo > especially is absolutely stunning. Give it a go. It's a big improvement on the F1 2002 version and gives a glimpse of how good F1 200X could be if ISI got the tracks right. Monaco is probably the most disappointing track in F1 2002 - considering it's the most famous, you'd think they would have put more effort into it...

> Just out of idle curiousity --- In which store did you find it, and what > was the price? No! Don't do it. We must, as sim racers, do everything in our power to discourage big companies making wannabe sim-rubbish like GP4. ; )

."mark jeangerard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message Reading through the GP4 posts on r.a.s., one comes away > with the distinct impression that it is the single worst driving andracing > simulator that has ever been produced. Nothing could be further from the > truth. While I have yet to try GP4 , my experiences with GP3 would tend to lead me to expect that it is at least a decent simulator with some significant virtues, even if it maybe lacking in some areas , and overall compared to the competition. Generally, I have found that if the concensus of opinion in this group is that a game is the "best" of its genre, then I will probably love that game. If the majority think it's "crap", but at least a few people think its "great", then the game is probably a flawed gem ( GP4 would seem to fit this category). Then there are the games that nobody seems to have a good opinion of or are just lukewarm about , and chances are those games are not worth my time investigating. I have played alot of good racing games that have been declared " utter crap " by some of the more knowledgeable members of this newsgroup, but I have learned over the years to read between the lines of their posts, and cull the worthwhile information from their reviews, and ignore their personal biases, as well as their tendencies to see things as black and white ("great sim or Arcade crap"} . You have those who love Papyrus products to the extent that all other non-PAPY products are "crap" or just a notch above being "crap". You have those people for whom GPL was such a revelation in authenticity, that they will only grudgingly acknowledge any virtues in any new sims, lest they be disloyal to their first love , GPL. So I look for those grudging compliments in their posts, and figure that the game must be pretty good in those areas. Then you have the "console game haters", from whom you can pretty much ignore any of their opinions of console racing games, and only pay attention to their PC sim reviews. For valid console racing game reviews you pretty much have to look for reviews from people who like both GPL as well as GT3, since they know what great sim physics feel like, and are not PC snobs. If you read plenty of magazine or e-zine reviews along with numerous posts in R.A.S. , you can get a pretty good feel for which games are Great, good, adequate, or truly "crap". GP3 certainly had a number of faults, but it also had it's virtues, which made it great fun to play, at least until I started playing F12001, which also had it's flaws but a few more virtues ( particularly the great force feedback effects ). GP3 did not suddenly become "crap" to me simply because F12001 was so much more fun, it just became second rate by comparison. "mark jeangerard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:2_xg9.197204$[email hidden]... > You are exactly the attitude I am talking about. I'm willing to bet you've > never even driven GP4. > > In this group we get a lot of posts from guys like you, in the manner in > which you post. A whole lot of "shirt", not so much "stuffing". You're > statement on it's own indicates that you would never touch a Crammondgame. > It also indicates that, had you, you would slander it regardless of youreal

Quoted text (7 lines)

> opinion. After all, you do have a reputation to keep up here, and changing > your mind about something on r.a.s. would be to commit credible suicide. > > The problem, as I see it, is not your opinion of GP4 because you are well > entitled to it whatever your reasons. The problem is in the fact that you > answered my post. Reading through the GP4 posts on r.a.s., one comes away > with the distinct impression that it is the single worst driving and

racing

Quoted text (8 lines)

> simulator that has ever been produced. Nothing could be further from the > truth. Also, the fact that you cite "the simracing community" as the > authority in your post (another thing that leads me to believe you have > never driven GP4, not having an opinion of your own) is a cheap trick. > Unfortunately, it becomes more effective every time it is uttered. If the > "simracing community" that will follow you and those like you, rather than > think on their own, could have the clarity of mind to make their own > decisions - an approach without bias and preconception - many of them

would > side against "the simracing community". No so much for the need to take a > side, mind you. But rather to simply choose what they perceive to suittheir

Quoted text (9 lines)

> individual needs more satisfactorily. > > That being said, GP4 is an excellent racing simulator. As good as anything > else available anyway. It is a superior driving simulator because of the > tire model alone. (Although you would have to have had some experience at > the limit of adhesion to recognize it and there in lies the flaw with > marketing it to the general public. In this forum however, I would have to > assume that that is what we would treasure as much as anything else.) What > it isn't, is racing software. All "sims" should be racing software, at

least

Quoted text (11 lines)

> since GPL came out. It's unfortunate that more titles aren't up to date in > multiplay. > > Confusing the abilities of any title is unfair to those who come here for > information. In the case of GPx it's outright bigotry. There are so many > things that I want to explore with GP4 but am afraid to post here. I fear > asking a simple question and getting 40 replies that all but answer the > question. I fear the prejudice and close minded conformity that will > disallow even the good natured response from providing any real substance. > > ...and it's all because of assholes like you that have nothing

constructive

Quoted text (23 lines)

> to add and, apparently, a whole bunch of spare time. > > ...maybe you should get a hobby... > > ...like driving a sim or something. At least then your posts would be on > topic and substantive. > > > -- > > "Nothing gets closer!" - Crammond > > mark > > > "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:6Vvg9.5590$[email hidden]... > > >"mark jeangerard" <[email hidden]> wrote > > > The UI is atrocious. It's as if Crammond wants GP4 to fail. (Maybe he > > does.) > > > But, if you can manage to get all the helps turned off, the controller > set > > > up, the graphics at a sensible PO and FF turned off, you will be

treated

Quoted text (12 lines)

> > to > > > the finest *driving* simulator offered for PC. The bitch is, with the > > > attitude that 95% of the people here have, you will never actually > > > experience GP4. > > > > > > ....as 95% of the people here have not, as is obvious from the > inaccuracy > > of > > > 95% of the posts about GP4. > > > > > > Sorry, that doesn't convince me at all. GP4, or any title in the

history

Quoted text (24 lines)

> of > > gaming that will continue to bare all the idiosyncrasies of a Geoff > Crammond > > game engine is and WILL fail to be considered by the simracing community > as > > a serious racing simulator. > > > > > > Even if it hides some little hint of gem, it's still mixed up with a ton > of > > turd. > > > > > > > > -- > > -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> > > -- http://www.ymenard.8m.com/ > > -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez > > Corporation - helping America into the New World... > > > > > > >

Mark, The reason that most people in this group have a dislike for GP4 mainly comes down to physics. Being a simulation group, obviously means that physics is the number one priority for most of us. Unfortunately, Geoff Crammond is quite ignorant of car behaviour (he's not the only one.) Sure, there's some nice things in GP4 like the beautiful track scenary and the wet weather effects. But the physics are primitive. Want an example? Try turning all aids off, then, while cornering, try violently lifting your foot off the throttle. Heck, you can even violently pump the throttle with no (realistic) consequences. Try doing that in F1 2002 or better still - a real (powerful) car. I found it strange that you mentioned the tyre model in GP4. This is yet another category where F1 2002 simply walks all over it.....??? FWIW - The following have a reputation for good physics :- Nascar 2002, GPL, Live For Speed, F1 2002 You also mentioned prejudice in this group, and in the case of ymenard, your comments are probably justified! FYI there's also a few yanks who don't have much time for modern F1 in general like Gerry Aitken, Doug Ellison & Co so their comments should bew taken with a grain of salt, though they're usually pretty honest. ; ) Feel free to ask questions about GP4. I *have* spent some time with it. (It's just that in that time I found a few too many shortcomings) Cheers Damien

I think you'll find that Gerry and Doug are not "yanks" but British. -- Ian P <email invalid due to spam> "Damien Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:alv1er$1a226$[email hidden]... > FYI there's also a few yanks who don't > have much time for modern F1 in general like Gerry Aitken, Doug Ellison & Co > so their comments should bew taken with a grain of salt, though they're > usually pretty honest. ; ) > > Cheers > Damien > > >

Nice post where you laud the tire model... the tire model that take NO account whatsoever of Camber, Pressure and temperature... hmm, yes I see... Excellent tire model. "mark jeangerard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:2_xg9.197204$[email hidden]... > You are exactly the attitude I am talking about. I'm willing to bet you've > never even driven GP4. > > In this group we get a lot of posts from guys like you, in the manner in > which you post. A whole lot of "shirt", not so much "stuffing". You're > statement on it's own indicates that you would never touch a Crammondgame. > It also indicates that, had you, you would slander it regardless of youreal

Quoted text (7 lines)

> opinion. After all, you do have a reputation to keep up here, and changing > your mind about something on r.a.s. would be to commit credible suicide. > > The problem, as I see it, is not your opinion of GP4 because you are well > entitled to it whatever your reasons. The problem is in the fact that you > answered my post. Reading through the GP4 posts on r.a.s., one comes away > with the distinct impression that it is the single worst driving and

racing

Quoted text (8 lines)

> simulator that has ever been produced. Nothing could be further from the > truth. Also, the fact that you cite "the simracing community" as the > authority in your post (another thing that leads me to believe you have > never driven GP4, not having an opinion of your own) is a cheap trick. > Unfortunately, it becomes more effective every time it is uttered. If the > "simracing community" that will follow you and those like you, rather than > think on their own, could have the clarity of mind to make their own > decisions - an approach without bias and preconception - many of them

would > side against "the simracing community". No so much for the need to take a > side, mind you. But rather to simply choose what they perceive to suittheir

Quoted text (9 lines)

> individual needs more satisfactorily. > > That being said, GP4 is an excellent racing simulator. As good as anything > else available anyway. It is a superior driving simulator because of the > tire model alone. (Although you would have to have had some experience at > the limit of adhesion to recognize it and there in lies the flaw with > marketing it to the general public. In this forum however, I would have to > assume that that is what we would treasure as much as anything else.) What > it isn't, is racing software. All "sims" should be racing software, at

least

Quoted text (11 lines)

> since GPL came out. It's unfortunate that more titles aren't up to date in > multiplay. > > Confusing the abilities of any title is unfair to those who come here for > information. In the case of GPx it's outright bigotry. There are so many > things that I want to explore with GP4 but am afraid to post here. I fear > asking a simple question and getting 40 replies that all but answer the > question. I fear the prejudice and close minded conformity that will > disallow even the good natured response from providing any real substance. > > ...and it's all because of assholes like you that have nothing

constructive

Quoted text (23 lines)

> to add and, apparently, a whole bunch of spare time. > > ...maybe you should get a hobby... > > ...like driving a sim or something. At least then your posts would be on > topic and substantive. > > > -- > > "Nothing gets closer!" - Crammond > > mark > > > "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:6Vvg9.5590$[email hidden]... > > >"mark jeangerard" <[email hidden]> wrote > > > The UI is atrocious. It's as if Crammond wants GP4 to fail. (Maybe he > > does.) > > > But, if you can manage to get all the helps turned off, the controller > set > > > up, the graphics at a sensible PO and FF turned off, you will be

treated

Quoted text (12 lines)

> > to > > > the finest *driving* simulator offered for PC. The bitch is, with the > > > attitude that 95% of the people here have, you will never actually > > > experience GP4. > > > > > > ....as 95% of the people here have not, as is obvious from the > inaccuracy > > of > > > 95% of the posts about GP4. > > > > > > Sorry, that doesn't convince me at all. GP4, or any title in the

history

Quoted text (24 lines)

> of > > gaming that will continue to bare all the idiosyncrasies of a Geoff > Crammond > > game engine is and WILL fail to be considered by the simracing community > as > > a serious racing simulator. > > > > > > Even if it hides some little hint of gem, it's still mixed up with a ton > of > > turd. > > > > > > > > -- > > -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> > > -- http://www.ymenard.8m.com/ > > -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez > > Corporation - helping America into the New World... > > > > > > >

I get the distinct impression that the GP4 engine is a retrograde step from GP3 2000. I have information from a well placed chap who says that the physics engine was 'pruned' to allow the game to run properly on an XBox with the very detailed tracks (and if you check the mesh, you'll find that they are severely unoptimised, with high poly counts in places you could never see). Then of course, the engine is shared on XBox and PC. Ian www.simbin.com "Darf" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:3d82b5c0$0$18871$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (17 lines)

> The trouble is everyone has tried to tell him to burn the barn down > (including all the turds) and build a new Barn. (a new physics engine). > But he just continues trying to reorganise the turds in the old Barn, and > keeps painting the outside to make it look pretty. > How many of you guys have heard the Wiggles say > " WAKE UP GEOFF " ? > > > "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:6Vvg9.5590$[email hidden]... > > >"mark jeangerard" <[email hidden]> wrote > > Even if it hides some little hint of gem, it's still mixed up with a ton > of > > turd. > > >

"jason moyer" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Hi, thanks for implying I'm a moron. No problem, any time, it's one of my gifts... Sorry about that. Never can be sure how much any one has tried.

Quoted text (9 lines)

> Anyway, I spent 4 hours driving the simulation with all aids turned > off, no steering help, and my controller properly configured (10 > degree lock, 0% steering help, 0% reduce with speed). Granted, I > spent about 2 of those hours trying to calibrate and configure my > controller since, regardless of what you actually select, the game (as > GP3 did) automatically uses the default controller to select things in > the menus. The entire concept of having "steering lock" as a > controller option rather than a car setup parameter is also > ridiculous.

I agree. But, why would you expect more? On the track is all I really care about. I tend to let the little things slide. As far as steering lock goes, 10 degrees is not enough to get out of the pits. (Let's forget for a moment that putting it in this menu is a bad choice.) 14 would be more effective in all respects. Then you must go to the track and dial in the low sensitivity zone. Sound like a pain in the ass? Yeah, well I've been adjusting GP4 for six weeks and I'm almost done. My goal is to simulate driving a high performance car and a very important part of that is allowing me to exert finely tuned control inputs - getting the thing to react how I expect. It takes some tweaking. (By comparison I tweaked GPL for about 3 years before giving up. I have used many mechanical devices as well as third party software and it never worked out, perfectly.) Low Sensitivity Zones are not a "help" like steering help is, (I am not intending to call you a moron, merely covering all bases.) they are there to help control the slope of the controller curve. So is Reduce With Speed. Fear not, you may use these adjustments and still be a proper simmer. My point is, take a couple of weeks with the game and head back to this screen often. Fortunately, even though this is not the place for steering lock to be, for once it seems like one setup will work for all tracks. > Things I learned from this: > > - the driving model is less convincing than a need for speed game - That kind of statement is not helpful. Unless you mean it, in which case you have not driven GP4 yet. You need to spend more time tweaking. > anyone who has seen an in-car view of a modern F1 race knows that the > drivers navigate turns by using constant wheel lock and steering with > the throttle, something that is impossible in this game (and makes it > overly difficult to drive since you have to vary wheel lock instead of > throttle travel) I have no problem driving with the real technique you describe above. The trick is to get the thing on the limit, it's not going to pitch, from either side of the throttle input, when it's got gobs of headroom traction wise. I also drive it as you describe in the negative. The point here being that there is vocabulary. The depth of the traction model stuns me. (Again, not calling you a moron... ) Watch the real guys again, more closely this time. They use both techniques you describe and a few more. What I probably like most is the way the slip angle is represented. I have always had problems in sims, knowing where the optimum slip angle was. Sawing at the wheel, and over driving were techniques that became habit. It's so nice to relax, drive in a realistic manner, and be able to 'feel' the tire on it's way *up* to the traction limit. A new sensation in my book. And another defining moment in sim evolution. > - the Ferrari, BAR, etc all have 6 gears - welcome to the year 1996, > Geoff There's that menu system again. All the cars have the ability to choose between 6 an 7 gears. You have to go into the pits and choose it in car setup. (Another thing that I could personally give a monkey's knuckle about.) > - the invisible barriers are a curious design decision, as is the poor > cllision detection in general Unfair. I think we can find these particular anomalies in anybody's favorite game. :-) > - gotta love bringing the car to a stop, switching to a replay, then > realizing that the car is hovering 2-3 inches above the ground That makes me laugh. They've been fine tuning this software for how long? They've had the same problem from the beginning. Must be a doozey. (Once again... monkey's knuckle.) > - the tracks and graphics are incredible, almost to the point of > making me want to play it anyway - almost > > Jason Let the tracks inspire you to play more, and don't be afraid to get in there and get your hands dirty. Set the game up to represent reality on your terms. Learn to use the FOV and sensitivity zones. Get that PO down and if you are using FF, loose it and build a simple sprung wheel. There is much GP4 has to offer. The depth of the tire model is fantastic. But there's more. I find myself using more an more real life driving techniques and, just as importantly, psychological driving techniques that make me appreciate this sim more every day. One thing that GP4 is not strong in is the chassis dynamics dept. That's not to say they are bad, or in anyway incorrect, they are simply not as apparent as other games. Once you learn to read it it gives you all you need. My point in saying this is that if you jump from say, GPL right into GP4, GP4 will seem to lack considerably. But, if you take into account that 90% of your awareness of the tires is represented through the chassis in GPL and that GP4 relays tire info as a separate identity on it's own, then you learn to put the two together to read the situation of the car. I think this may lead to a more natural interpretation. Anyway, I personally find GP4 to offer more than any other sim. But then, I'm a traction freak. I love it on the limit. -- "Nothing gets closer!" - Crammond mark

"Darf" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:3d82c231$0$18872$[email hidden]... > 1. IMHO GP4 still has the same feel as GP3 and 2. > The Car seems to Handle like it is on rails, then suddenly it is gone. > ( This is very reminiscent of F1RS ) I can't imagine how you would come away with this impression. I don't want to call you a flame monger, but the statement is unrealistically false. It would be like me saying that I feel no difference between GPL, and SODA or ICR. While that's a fun statement, and in some obscure ways, vaporously truthful, it is not a good descriptive and leads to confusion. -- "Nothing gets closer!" - Crammond mark

>>"mark jeangerard" <[email hidden]> wrote > You are exactly the attitude I am talking about. I'm willing to bet you've > never even driven GP4. Bwahahaha nice try. Just this line above completely refutes your entire troll post, as it's the basis of your post and it's completely untrue. <snip> Again, you only indicate stuff about "us", you are unable to prove anything that would lead me into thinking that GP4 is even relatively good. Like I wrote, it has a couple of gems hidden under a ton of turd. > The problem is in the fact that you answered my post. I'll fucking reply to whatever post that I want. > Reading through the GP4 posts on r.a.s., one comes away > with the distinct impression that it is the single worst driving andracing > simulator that has ever been produced. No, it's the most shameful release ever, just after GP3. It will surpassed probably by yet-another-Geoff Crammond release that features his 15 years old game engine. > GP4 is an excellent racing simulator. No it's not. It could have had been one if it was released a long time ago (that's why nobody really puts down Gp2), but in modern gaming it's anything but excellent. A true shame with all it's idiosyncrasies. > ...maybe you should get a hobby... maybe you should shut the fuck up? -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- http://www.ymenard.8m.com/ -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez Corporation - helping America into the New World...

>"Darf" <[email hidden]> wrote > 1. IMHO GP4 still has the same feel as GP3 and 2. > The Car seems to Handle like it is on rails, then suddenly it is gone. > ( This is very reminiscent of F1RS ) Exactly. Strip down GP4 of all it's gimmicks, new features and graphical update and what do you have? F1GP or GP2. > 2. GP4 is letdown by the lack of any Online ability. Which is directly related to it's dropping frames versus stretching time weird reality, something that flaws all Crammond's games. -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- http://www.ymenard.8m.com/ -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez Corporation - helping America into the New World...

>"mark jeangerard" <[email hidden]> wrote > It is a superior driving simulator because of the > tire model alone. Oh yeah Mark, where are the tyre temp reading in GP4??? Again, another idiosyncrasy that flaws a Crammond game. -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- http://www.ymenard.8m.com/ -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez Corporation - helping America into the New World...

"Damien Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:alv1er$1a226$[email hidden]... > Mark, > > The reason that most people in this group have a dislike for GP4 mainly > comes down to physics. Being a simulation group, obviously means that > physics is the number one priority for most of us. Unfortunately, Geoff > Crammond is quite ignorant of car behaviour (he's not the only one.)Sure, > there's some nice things in GP4 like the beautiful track scenary and thewet > weather effects. I can't agree with the first sentence. Most people in this group dislike GP4 because it's the proper r.a.s. thing to do. I agree that the physics could be subjective to some extent, but as far as what's available for PC, GP4 is as accurate as any other. IMO, more so, and to small degree. >But the physics are primitive. Want an example? Try > turning all aids off, then, while cornering, try violently lifting yourfoot > off the throttle. Heck, you can even violently pump the throttle with no > (realistic) consequences. Try doing that in F1 2002 or better still - a > real (powerful) car. You know what? That's a good idea. So I did it. I tried it in GP4, the four games you mention, my 1987 Isuzu Trooper, and my Gold Firefox with a balanced Suzuki RM125. (We can go through in depth analysis where I may lay out detailed descriptions of the actual stages of the tire model in both the sim and real vehicles but for the purpose of this post you'll have to trust that I have taken all into account before making comparisons.) Bearing in mind that I have meticulously set up the driver interfaces in all of these games and the racing kart... In the computer games I found next to no difference. Which surprised me. The experiment raised my opinions of N2K2 and F12002. They all displayed excellent grip below the limit, in which neither flooring or lifting had much effect. I would expect this to some degree, depending on hp/weight. At the limit they all displayed the same general characteristics but with different personalities. Something I would also expect. I found nothing out of character if we think of the reactions expected in the most broad terms. None of them had the resolution of sensation that the real vehicles had, and one of them had the depth of slip angle represented on a much higher level than the rest, that was GP4. LFS should not be in this discussion, so anything I say should not be attributed to it. It would take a whole other conversation to pick out the inaccuracies in LFS's physics model. Oddly enough, the Trooper and kart acted very much like the sims when below the limit. The feel in the tires was almost mute with the major difference being that I had a direct sense of how much strain was being put on the tires, no matter how low, in any given maneuver in both of the real vehicles. (Stay tuned to this thought as it is the very best thing GP4 has to offer.) Once I approached the limit the cars became very much different and not altogether unaligned with the sim counterparts. Acclerating, decelerating, and laccelerating were all aided by very tangable personality traits which could be desribed as elasticity, grittyness, squirmyness, scuffing, and so on. Overall, the real cars have a much higher resolution. Unfortunately, I found the GPL cars handle much more like the trooper than the kart. I won't believe a 67 F1 car was that bad. On the flip side, I found GPL to be stunningly realistic physically. (As good as GP4, better than all the rest.) Which leads me to my next point: If these sims are all close in their representation of reality then what makes it a realistic experience? Simple. Drive model or user interface. I know you don't want to hear that term. But it's the key. Imagine driving GPL from a spreadsheet. You would enter braking pressure and steering angle and the program would come up with a response. How hideous would that be? Well that's what we are doing. Fortunately, the programmers have also given us a real time interface. So directness of input and feedback are key in this real time spreadsheet, yeah? > I found it strange that you mentioned the tyre model in GP4. This is yet > another category where F1 2002 simply walks all over it.....??? I'm not sure what the problem is with F12002. But the tire model is far to slow for modern racing tires, the depth is good but lacks authenticity compared to GP4 in the way the tire breaks loose and how the chassis responds to that change, and the 'feel' is nonexistent. I suspect you are using FF and have not set up GP4 well. Let's take understeer, for example. In F12002 it comes on as a function of speed, regardless of steering angle. It is also too slow, too late, and too forgiving. The forgiving part was by design, I'm convinced, because a lot of the drive model in F12002 is delayed to accommodate both the ping to FF wheels and the average driver. Real understeer can be very progressive with a street tire at street speeds, but with racing tires and a line that's already at the limit... well... it can be a real surprise. One thing that is good about F12002 is the fact that it's consistent. So, while certain physical portrayals may not be accurate to real life, they are learnable. Once again the 'Translation Factor' is introduced unnecesarily. For me though, F12002 has too many flaws in the physics/drive model (which are interconnected and inseparable) that keep me from embracing it as a sim. Such as: No obstacle under two inches in height has any effect on the car. Surface differences do not influence grip. (Both of these bug me because I want my balls to shrivel when I put a wheel off at 170.) An F1 car that can be floored in 1st and 2nd gear? C'mon...! There is a huge latency of no less than 200ms between an action happening in the physics engine and when it is displayed for the user. (They did do a good job of allowing corrective measures to be retroactive.) For the non-FF user, who feels more detail than the FF user does by the nature of the interface, there is no indication of grip whatsoever until the limit has been passed. (I understand this is probably the source of latency in 'feel'.) The perspective is way off and seeing things in the distance 'proper' is very hard, leading to unnatural mistake. Upsets caused by variations in surface texture are nonsensical and therefore uncorrectable. Setup changes do nothing. The controller setup does not allow for slope adjustments but rather, has deadzones? (Deadzones have no place in simulation control systems.) Ultimately, even if the latency was a non-issue, the translation factor is too high for me to consider F12002 a sim. > FWIW - The following have a reputation for good physics :- Nascar 2002, > GPL, Live For Speed, F1 2002 These reputations are part of the problem. Where GPL earned it's, I have a distinct suspicion that F12002 is preferred over GP4 because of the name "Crammond" and prejudices therein. I was considering going into detail with the flaws in each of the titles you've mentioned but they are sims of different racing classes and my comparisons would garner much criticism and the bandwidth is better wasted on what I find good about GP4 that I don't find in the other sims. (LFS excluded.) Let me summarize by saying that I find the papy games, even after the flaws are removed, to be very much chassis driven representations. That is to say, the information about the tires is derived from the chassis rather than the tires themselves. First things first, I think the personality of the tire is on a level that no other PC game has brought to us before. I can 'feel' the grip accumulating, which is new, up to the point of optimum slip angle, can feel it at the limit, have a hard time judging when it's slightly over but can tell when I'm going to over cook it. The chassis dynamics, physics model, drive model, and A/V presentation are such that I can drive with anticipation in the same mental and physical state that I drive a real car in at the limit. Also a first in PC games. Sure, I can drive GPL with anticipation but only through translating what it is doing into what responses will rectify the problems. That is a personal latency that I would rather not have in my games. (Read - very low translation factor.) I find the perspective to be head and shoulders above anything that has come before. I find that I can look more freely where I would in real life. The distractions that seem to be inherent in every other title I've played are simply not in this one. This leads again to a more fluid and natural approach to the mental and physical aspects of driving. (Read - more realistic.) Peripheral 'senses' are at an all time high in PC simming, I just 'know' where the wheels are and never give it a second thought. (Or more dangerously, a second look.) After that the tracks are great, the chassis responds well to even the most minor setup change, the graphics and sound are good enough (Which is my highest rating for graphics and sound.), the AI are fantastic, I can feel when one or two wheels go light, and I have to state again that the grip is stunning. Skipping sideways is a real joy. The only way to 'feel' these thing in any sim is trough a transparent interface. So that means things like slope control, intelligently applied controller setup, an open mind, low latency in the game engine itself, and most unfortunately, no force feedback. The new games have too high a resolution in responsiveness to allow an electric motor to represent them and FF by it's nature masks A/V feedback. > Feel free to ask questions about GP4. I *have* spent some time with it. > (It's just that in that time I found a few too many shortcomings) > > Cheers > Damien Sure, here's one. What do you look for in the performance traces help you to decide which differential settings to change? Right now I'm looking at shaft speed changes as I would ramp angles in GPL, and input torque like I would clutches. So far I am not having much luck like that and usually end up simple moving both at the same time. Also, with what intent should one take the term "cheers"? -- "Nothing gets closer!" - Crammond mark

The fact that those numbers aren't reported is of no consequence to me. GPL shows numbers that indicate what those attributes may be and I can't tell if the brakes are on or off unless one of the front tires locks up. Take a hike, asshole. -- mark "Ian Bell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:yTEg9.9362$[email hidden]... > Nice post where you laud the tire model... the tire model that take NO > account whatsoever of Camber, Pressure and temperature... hmm, yes I see... > Excellent tire model.

How could you possibly think that temp readings have anything to do with a believable driving experience. That's like saying the steak you just enjoyed more than any other steak in your life was invalid because it was not Kansas corn fed. As simulations, all these dopey games we play don't even come close. I don't care, I want a driving game that's real. If I wanted a simulation I'd get a math physics degree to start with and Papy and Infogames would not be on my short list of must buy items. You are an anti-Crammond troll. If you can't see that you need a hobby... ..oops, that is your hobby. Tread on, brother, -- "Nothing gets closer!" - Crammond mark "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:aaOg9.6994$[email hidden]... > >"mark jeangerard" <[email hidden]> wrote > > It is a superior driving simulator because of the > > tire model alone. > > Oh yeah Mark, where are the tyre temp reading in GP4??? > > > > Again, another idiosyncrasy that flaws a Crammond game. > > > > > > -- > -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> > -- http://www.ymenard.8m.com/ > -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez > Corporation - helping America into the New World... > >

I haven't mentioned numbers Mark. The fact is that these settings arent available in the garage is because the tyre model is hilariously primitive and takes no account of any of these vital aspects of car physics modelling. The 'sim' you call GP4 models a constant contact patch which is unaffected by track camber, roll, and surface changes - kerbs, dips, bumps etc. I don't need numbers either, but the reason they are unavailable is not down to some cosmetic choice in the garage screen, it's simply not modelled. Cheers Ian "mark jeangerard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:5gWg9.797$[email hidden]... > The fact that those numbers aren't reported is of no consequence to me.GPL > shows numbers that indicate what those attributes may be and I can't tellif

Quoted text (17 lines)

> the brakes are on or off unless one of the front tires locks up. > > Take a hike, asshole. > -- > > mark > > > "Ian Bell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:yTEg9.9362$[email hidden]... > > Nice post where you laud the tire model... the tire model that take NO > > account whatsoever of Camber, Pressure and temperature... hmm, yes I > see... > > Excellent tire model. > > >

On Sun, 15 Sep 2002 01:14:35 -0600, mark jeangerard wrote: > How could you possibly think that temp readings have anything to do with a > You are an anti-Crammond troll. If you can't see that you need a hobby... > I cannot believe seeing my trusty f2 league admin Mark calling Ian Bell (co-developer of the GT mod, I believe) an "asshole". Something very strange is going on, and I think none of us should resort to name calling in a discussion of a computer program. Maybe we should all get together for a beer or two and help Ruud's Racer onto the professional "stage". Regards, Uwe -- mail replies to Uwe at schuerkamp dot de ( yahoo address is spambox) Uwe Schuerkamp //////////////////////////// http://www.schuerkamp.de/ Herford, Germany \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ (52.0N/8.5E) GPG Fingerprint: 2E 13 20 22 9A 3F 63 7F 67 6F E9 B1 A8 36 A4 61

He called me an asshole?? LOL Must have missed that one. Sorry if I bothered you in some way Mark. Really. I do know some well placed people from the 2nd team involved in the development of GP4, and any information I posted comes from there. I wasn't guessing. Hi Uwe, yeah, I set up and coordinate the GT mod team but they all know much more than me :-) Latest work is looking good btw, you guys are going to love it. Doug (Arnao) has been working on the physics for months and this time in addition to all the cars, we have some of the tracks from the FIA GT season built and ready too. Ian www.simbin.com "Uwe Schuerkamp" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Sun, 15 Sep 2002 01:14:35 -0600, mark jeangerard wrote: > > How could you possibly think that temp readings have anything to do witha > > > You are an anti-Crammond troll. If you can't see that you need ahobby...

Quoted text (20 lines)

> > > > I cannot believe seeing my trusty f2 league admin Mark calling > Ian Bell (co-developer of the GT mod, I believe) an "asshole". > Something very strange is going on, and I think none of us > should resort to name calling in a discussion of a computer > program. > > Maybe we should all get together for a beer or two and help > Ruud's Racer onto the professional "stage". > > Regards, > > Uwe > > -- > mail replies to Uwe at schuerkamp dot de ( yahoo address is spambox) > Uwe Schuerkamp //////////////////////////// http://www.schuerkamp.de/ > Herford, Germany \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ (52.0N/8.5E) > GPG Fingerprint: 2E 13 20 22 9A 3F 63 7F 67 6F E9 B1 A8 36 A4 61

"Ian Bell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:ER3h9.2009$[email hidden]... > He called me an asshole?? LOL Must have missed that one. Sorry if I > bothered you in some way Mark. Really. I do know some well placed people > from the 2nd team involved in the development of GP4, and any informationI > posted comes from there. I wasn't guessing. > > Hi Uwe, yeah, I set up and coordinate the GT mod team but they all knowmuch > more than me :-) Latest work is looking good btw, you guys are going tolove > it. Doug (Arnao) has been working on the physics for months and this time > in addition to all the cars, we have some of the tracks from the FIA GT > season built and ready too. > > Ian > www.simbin.com Speaking of tracks Ian...I would hope SOMEBODY gets a look at Mt Tremblant and Virginia International Raceway...two of my new favorite N.A. tracks. (yeah I know, not FIA GT, but they do host Sportscar races) dave henrie > "Uwe Schuerkamp" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > On Sun, 15 Sep 2002 01:14:35 -0600, mark jeangerard wrote: > > > How could you possibly think that temp readings have anything to dowith

Quoted text (26 lines)

> a > > > > > You are an anti-Crammond troll. If you can't see that you need a > hobby... > > > > > > > I cannot believe seeing my trusty f2 league admin Mark calling > > Ian Bell (co-developer of the GT mod, I believe) an "asshole". > > Something very strange is going on, and I think none of us > > should resort to name calling in a discussion of a computer > > program. > > > > Maybe we should all get together for a beer or two and help > > Ruud's Racer onto the professional "stage". > > > > Regards, > > > > Uwe > > > > -- > > mail replies to Uwe at schuerkamp dot de ( yahoo address is spambox) > > Uwe Schuerkamp //////////////////////////// http://www.schuerkamp.de/ > > Herford, Germany \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ (52.0N/8.5E) > > GPG Fingerprint: 2E 13 20 22 9A 3F 63 7F 67 6F E9 B1 A8 36 A4 61 > >

Yeah, that was a little over the top and I apologize to all involved. For the record, here's what I was thinking yesterday: "I've had it up to fucking here with these fucking fuckwits naysaying everyfuckingthing they don't fucking like or think they shouldn't fucking like or just fucking cause shit for fuck sake of it. Fucking fuckers fuckity fuck." You may care to notice that you quoted me as saying something to Ian, which I did in fact aim at Frank. -- "Nothing gets closer!" - Crammond mark Uwe Schuerkamp <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>... > On Sun, 15 Sep 2002 01:14:35 -0600, mark jeangerard wrote: > > How could you possibly think that temp readings have anything to do with a > > > You are an anti-Crammond troll. If you can't see that you need a hobby... > > > > I cannot believe seeing my trusty f2 league admin Mark calling > Ian Bell (co-developer of the GT mod, I believe) an "asshole". > Something very strange is going on, and I think none of us > should resort to name calling in a discussion of a computer > program. > > Maybe we should all get together for a beer or two and help > Ruud's Racer onto the professional "stage". > > Regards, > > Uwe

Look, here's my point. I am not trying to build cars here and I get no kick out of noodling the numbers. I am not trying to pretend I am a mechanic. I am trying to pretend I am a race driver and that necessarily involves me 'feeling' what the tires are doing. To add to the confusion, I do have considerable experience *and* talent in driving four wheel vehicles at the limit, movement analysis, and working with very small time fragments. So I must not only 'feel' the tires, they have to represent in some way what I have learned about tires and the program should stay out of my way in judging those things. Transparency and accuracy, you see? Otherwise, I'm not convinced and haven't gotten my moneys worth. So, I guess there's tire modeling and then there's getting that to the user. Drive model? For all the numbers that GPL and N2K2 crunch and all the adjustment available they still have no 'feel' at the pavement. So what difference does it make? You either get the drive model right or all your 'simulations' are for nothing. In this particular sense, I mean. The gaming thing... Actually, that's not my point either. My point is that this is r.a.s.. When someone mentions GP4 or SOS or whatever, there is a point where, having said what you feel is right, one should quit with the negative posts and concentrate on something that interests them. GP4 has been out long enough that people accept that it exists and allow those who enjoy it to feel welcome to openly discuss it. Personally I think I get more out of simming from keeping an open mind. I have hated GPL since the day the demo came out but still am trying to see it "your" way. Just last night I learned a technique that has helped me drive it more instinctually. There is a difference between saying "Papy games all suck" and, "Papy has only produced games that I think suck". Sorry about that asshole thing, mark "Ian Bell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<g1%g9.128$[email hidden]>...

Quoted text (36 lines)

> I haven't mentioned numbers Mark. The fact is that these settings arent > available in the garage is because the tyre model is hilariously primitive > and takes no account of any of these vital aspects of car physics modelling. > The 'sim' you call GP4 models a constant contact patch which is unaffected > by track camber, roll, and surface changes - kerbs, dips, bumps etc. I > don't need numbers either, but the reason they are unavailable is not down > to some cosmetic choice in the garage screen, it's simply not modelled. > > Cheers > > Ian > > > "mark jeangerard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:5gWg9.797$[email hidden]... > > The fact that those numbers aren't reported is of no consequence to me. > GPL > > shows numbers that indicate what those attributes may be and I can't tell > if > > the brakes are on or off unless one of the front tires locks up. > > > > Take a hike, asshole. > > -- > > > > mark > > > > > > "Ian Bell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:yTEg9.9362$[email hidden]... > > > Nice post where you laud the tire model... the tire model that take NO > > > account whatsoever of Camber, Pressure and temperature... hmm, yes I > see... > > > Excellent tire model. > > > > > >

I don't know if you read my previous post, but as I said, I hated GPL when it first came out, but now it is my fave. When I first fired up GP2, I thought it was pretty good, mainly cos it was the prettiest thing that was released to date. After trying it for a while, I realised what I later saw as its limitations. You say that RAS guys won't give GP4 a go just because it is written by Geoff, or it is not Cool around here to say that it is good. The guys from RAS that I have talked to would give it a go if it could be tweaked to the point where it felt good. I feel the same way, I have always tried each new sim that Crammond has done, tried to make it feel good, and then given up. As I said before, if you or anyone have any suggestions tweaks etc. let us know and we will give it another crack. I like to have as many sims as possible to use, and wouldn't deny myself a good sim just because it was written by Geoff, or cos I thought it wasn't cool. IMHO, the qualities that make a good sim in order of importance are: 1. Physics 2. Internet playability with 20 plus players 3. Graphics 4. Car Type ( Open Wheelers preferred ) Darf "mark jeangerard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Look, here's my point. I am not trying to build cars here and I get nokick

Quoted text (8 lines)

> out of noodling the numbers. I am not trying to pretend I am a mechanic. I > am trying to pretend I am a race driver and that necessarily involves me > 'feeling' what the tires are doing. To add to the confusion, I do have > considerable experience *and* talent in driving four wheel vehicles at the > limit, movement analysis, and working with very small time fragments. So I > must not only 'feel' the tires, they have to represent in some way what I > have learned about tires and the program should stay out of my way in > judging those things. Transparency and accuracy, you see? Otherwise, I'm

not > convinced and haven't gotten my moneys worth. So, I guess there's tire > modeling and then there's getting that to the user. Drive model? > > For all the numbers that GPL and N2K2 crunch and all the adjustment > available they still have no 'feel' at the pavement. So what differencedoes > it make? You either get the drive model right or all your 'simulations'are > for nothing. > > In this particular sense, I mean. The gaming thing... > > Actually, that's not my point either. My point is that this is r.a.s..When > someone mentions GP4 or SOS or whatever, there is a point where, havingsaid

Quoted text (7 lines)

> what you feel is right, one should quit with the negative posts and > concentrate on something that interests them. GP4 has been out long enough > that people accept that it exists and allow those who enjoy it to feel > welcome to openly discuss it. > > Personally I think I get more out of simming from keeping an open mind. I > have hated GPL since the day the demo came out but still am trying to see

it > "your" way. Just last night I learned a technique that has helped me drive > it more instinctually. There is a difference between saying "Papy gamesall > suck" and, "Papy has only produced games that I think suck". > > Sorry about that asshole thing, > > mark >

Damien Smith wrote: <SNIP> > > You also mentioned prejudice in this group, and in the case of ymenard, your > comments are probably justified! FYI there's also a few yanks who don't > have much time for modern F1 in general like Gerry Aitken, Doug Ellison & Co > so their comments should bew taken with a grain of salt, though they're > usually pretty honest. ; ) For the record: 1. I think real F1 is shit. 2. I think GP4 is shit. 3. I think F12002 is a pretty good sim, and great fun to drive. 4. But...it's not GPL. ;) Gerry

And Remember Mark, GP4 just came out here in the states...I usually don't buy two competing products...if others here are like me they will have likely already purchased F1 2k2 and not have GP4 to compare. Both have crappy multiplayer, although at least F1 2k2 has SOMETHING. For me the biggest purchase decision for an F1 title, since the few leagues I run in don't use it, would have to be how much extra use will I get out of it...here the mods for the EA line crush any other product, at least at this time. dave henrie

> And Remember Mark, GP4 just came out here in the states...I usuallydon't > buy two competing products...if others here are like me they will have > likely already purchased F1 2k2 and not have GP4 to compare. > Both have crappy multiplayer, although at least F1 2k2 has SOMETHING. Yeah, I actually fired it up the other day and managed to join a two player only race - both of us had 56K modems and the performance was great. The racing too was very intense (for 4 hours!) - despite only having two players. I always feel extremely lucky when I find a half-decent open server with drivers that have a similar level of ability to me. But to do it with F1 2002, heck, I was ready to buy a lottery ticket...!

Yeah, I was thinking about writing something. Now is not the time unfortunately. But I really do find GP4 very transparent. As much so as GPL or N2K2 which seem to hold highest honors around here. You aint gonna get multiplayer with it, but you do get physics. -- "Nothing gets closer!" - Crammond mark "Darf" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:3d85d39a$0$18873$[email hidden]... > I don't know if you read my previous post, but as I said, I hated GPL when > it first came out, but now it is my fave. When I first fired up GP2, I > thought it was pretty good, mainly cos it was the prettiest thing that was > released to date. After trying it for a while, I realised what I later saw > as its limitations. You say that RAS guys won't give GP4 a go just because > it is written by Geoff, or it is not Cool around here to say that it is > good. > The guys from RAS that I have talked to would give it a go if it could be > tweaked to the point where it felt good. I feel the same way, I have always > tried each new sim that Crammond has done, tried to make it feel good, and > then given up. > As I said before, if you or anyone have any suggestions tweaks etc. let us > know and we will give it another crack. > I like to have as many sims as possible to use, and wouldn't deny myself a > good sim just because it was written by Geoff, or cos I thought it wasn't > cool. > > IMHO, the qualities that make a good sim in order of importance are: > 1. Physics > 2. Internet playability with 20 plus players > 3. Graphics > 4. Car Type ( Open Wheelers preferred ) > > Darf

But, the difference is, you have a reason to not own GP4. That is your choice, and being yours, a good one. I'm not up in arms against non GP4 users, it's the ones that condemn me for using it... -- "Nothing gets closer!" - Crammond mark "Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:Owvh9.123728$Jo.33342@rwcrnsc53... > And Remember Mark, GP4 just came out here in the states...I usually don't > buy two competing products...if others here are like me they will have > likely already purchased F1 2k2 and not have GP4 to compare. > Both have crappy multiplayer, although at least F1 2k2 has SOMETHING. > For me the biggest purchase decision for an F1 title, since the few > leagues I run in don't use it, would have to be how much extra use will I > get out of it...here the mods for the EA line crush any other product, at > least at this time. > dave henrie > >

> But I really do find GP4 very transparent. Me too. I can see straight through it (mainly because it's full of holes)