thread), why not download the demo and find out for yourself.
My apologies if this has already been said. It was probably the first
posted response :o)
>I don't have a problem with that Mike. In fact I think you have stated your
>idea very well. My problem becomes this, and this all started by one guy
>asking the simple question has anyone heard of Nascar Revolution and is it
>any good?
>The first reply was "it sucks, it's arcady". Well the game isn't even out
>yet. Some take the position as if their looking down off the almighty
racing
>game mountain and pass judgements for everyone else. I think it would be
>more fitting to say to an individual like that...well they (EA Sports) tend
>to leave out certain aspects of their games that tend to not make them as
>realistic, as other games. Then the person could decide if they should by a
>racing title like GPL or NFSIII.
>In reality I have played "ALL" the racing titles to date with the exception
>of Viper and GPL. ALL the racing titles from NFSIII to GPL can offer some
>entertainment value.To me that's where I differ with most here, and 'it's
>not a knock or slam on anyone here'. I just view these games as
>entertainment, and try not to take them too seriously.
>I have played Nascar Revolution and yes it picks up where Nascar 99 for the
>Playstation left off last year. Honestly it's both fun and challenging.
>Sadly though more and more *** companies are going the route of EA.
>Nascar 99 for the PSX was their top selling game.
>>Well, here's my somewhat subjective take on the "is it a sim, or is it a
>>game" issue.
>>A sim by definition is not reality (and of course neither is a "game").
>>So what's the difference? To my mind a simulation, using the best
>>available technology attempts, through as many observations of the real
>>world (i.e., in the case of racing simulations, real world physics), to
>>"simulate" reality. A game, OTOH, only tries to "mimic" reality. As
>>in, if a car attempts to take a corner faster than the "game" developer
>>thinks is feasible he/she programs in a routine that "mimics" what the
>>programer thinks should happen. And probably can only use a limited
>>number of "canned routines". A simulation uses the observations (real
>>world physics) and the results are the results, and sometimes seem
>>infinite in number of possibilities. Which is why I think GPL is very
>>difficult for some (most?). It's hard to get a handle on what's going
>>to happen the next time I enter/exit a particular corner (depending on
>>weight shift, braking, line, suspension suppleness, etc).
>>Throw in a few "TOCA-like" cheats and it becomes easier and easier for
>>me to tell the difference. I'm not even crazy about so-called career
>>modes (they seem kind of limited).
>>I'm not sure whether anyone going from a game/sim to real world
>>participation has anything to do with it.
>>P.S. A little off topic, but I've always liked Hemingway's rule to
>>determine if it's a game or sport. I don't have the exact quote but it
>>goes something like: If the participants are risking their lives it's
>>sport, everything else is a game. Car racing is sport, football is a
>>game. In 1967 car racing was more sport than it is today.
>>-Mike
>>> But there's a difference with aiding a real driver in developing his or
>hers
>>> skills, and becoming a real driver like Earnhardt Jr. by playing these
>>> games.
>>> >Although nobody from sim-racing has gotten ride with a major racing
>series,
>>> >that does not mean that they do not do any "real" racing. Serveral
>>> >sim-racers now drive street stocks, legends cars, and late models at
>their
>>> >local short tracks because of their love for racing in general. The
>NASCAR
>>> >Busch Series Champion Dale Earnhardt Jr. has raced hundreds of times on
>TEN
>>> >and he has said himself that it helps him in real life.
>>> >Gary243
