NR2002 Demo would be great if...

1) we could see if they have improved the damage model 2) you could set the graphics and field options above 19 to see how much lower than low the frame rates might get 3) FFB was better than the limp N3 and N4 4) OpenGL rasterizer was included for a better comparison to N4 (most NVidia users use OpenGL) The improvements I can see look good, although the driver car new engine sound is too quiet relative to the other sounds for my liking (even when it is set to 100%). Haven't tested much to gauge whether the AI are any better than N4 but if they are, and the frame rates are improved in the final version or with OpenGL and if they could get decent feedback in the FFB, I will not hesitate to get this in Feb. Marc -- **************************************************************************** Marc Collins [email hidden] Your mouse has moved. Windows must be restarted for the change to take effect. Reboot now? ****************************************************************************

Are you willing to pay $45 for this enhanced N4? I'm not. Marc Collins wrote:

Quoted text (33 lines)

> 1) we could see if they have improved the damage model > > 2) you could set the graphics and field options above 19 to see how much > lower than low the frame rates might get > > 3) FFB was better than the limp N3 and N4 > > 4) OpenGL rasterizer was included for a better comparison to N4 (most NVidia > users use OpenGL) > > The improvements I can see look good, although the driver car new engine > sound is too quiet relative to the other sounds for my liking (even when it > is set to 100%). > > Haven't tested much to gauge whether the AI are any better than N4 but if > they are, and the frame rates are improved in the final version or with > OpenGL and if they could get decent feedback in the FFB, I will not hesitate > to get this in Feb. > > Marc > > -- > **************************************************************************** > Marc Collins > [email hidden] > > Your mouse has moved. Windows must be restarted for the change > to take effect. Reboot now? > **************************************************************************** > > > >

Yeah. And if they included all tracks. : ) "Marc Collins" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:RhJX7.462$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (8 lines)

> 1) we could see if they have improved the damage model > > 2) you could set the graphics and field options above 19 to see how much > lower than low the frame rates might get > > 3) FFB was better than the limp N3 and N4 > > 4) OpenGL rasterizer was included for a better comparison to N4 (most

NVidia > users use OpenGL) > > The improvements I can see look good, although the driver car new engine > sound is too quiet relative to the other sounds for my liking (even whenit > is set to 100%). > > Haven't tested much to gauge whether the AI are any better than N4 but if > they are, and the frame rates are improved in the final version or with > OpenGL and if they could get decent feedback in the FFB, I will nothesitate > to get this in Feb. > > Marc > > -- >**************************************************************************** > Marc Collins > [email hidden] > > Your mouse has moved. Windows must be restarted for the change > to take effect. Reboot now? >**************************************************************************** > > >

Yeah. And if they included all tracks. : ) **************************************************************************** > Marc Collins > Your mouse has moved. Windows must be restarted for the change > to take effect. Reboot now? ****************************************************************************

I'm guessing a lot of people are, just look at the EA Sports franchise. They have released basically the same NHL game for the last 4 years, and people still buy it. While a lot of people are saying, "Oh...it is just N4.1, I'm not going to pay for THAT." The sales figures will show that these same people ARE buying the new version. -Stuart Becktell "dstruye" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (12 lines)

> Are you willing to pay $45 for this enhanced N4? I'm not. > > Marc Collins wrote: > > > 1) we could see if they have improved the damage model > > > > 2) you could set the graphics and field options above 19 to see how much > > lower than low the frame rates might get > > > > 3) FFB was better than the limp N3 and N4 > > > > 4) OpenGL rasterizer was included for a better comparison to N4 (most

NVidia > > users use OpenGL) > > > > The improvements I can see look good, although the driver car new engine > > sound is too quiet relative to the other sounds for my liking (even whenit > > is set to 100%). > > > > Haven't tested much to gauge whether the AI are any better than N4 butif > > they are, and the frame rates are improved in the final version or with > > OpenGL and if they could get decent feedback in the FFB, I will nothesitate > > to get this in Feb. > > > > Marc > > > > -- > >**************************************************************************** > > Marc Collins > > [email hidden] > > > > Your mouse has moved. Windows must be restarted for the change > > to take effect. Reboot now? > >**************************************************************************** > > > > > > > > >

I will be first in line with my $50 and if you want to race online I would guess that you will be there as well. It'll be interesting to see what happens with regard to the Sierra service for sure. Chad "Mario Petrinovic" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:a0noku$ejtp$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (24 lines)

> Yeah. And if they included all tracks. : ) > > > > > "Marc Collins" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:RhJX7.462$[email hidden]... > > 1) we could see if they have improved the damage model > > > > 2) you could set the graphics and field options above 19 to see how much > > lower than low the frame rates might get > > > > 3) FFB was better than the limp N3 and N4 > > > > 4) OpenGL rasterizer was included for a better comparison to N4 (most > NVidia > > users use OpenGL) > > > > The improvements I can see look good, although the driver car new engine > > sound is too quiet relative to the other sounds for my liking (even when > it > > is set to 100%). > > > > Haven't tested much to gauge whether the AI are any better than N4 but

if

Quoted text (10 lines)

> > they are, and the frame rates are improved in the final version or with > > OpenGL and if they could get decent feedback in the FFB, I will not > hesitate > > to get this in Feb. > > > > Marc > > > > -- > > >

****************************************************************************

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > Marc Collins > > [email hidden] > > > > Your mouse has moved. Windows must be restarted for the change > > to take effect. Reboot now? > > >

**************************************************************************** > > > > > > > >

The demo would be really nice if...........it wasn't incredibally boring NASCAR. David G Fisher "Marc Collins" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:RhJX7.462$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (8 lines)

> 1) we could see if they have improved the damage model > > 2) you could set the graphics and field options above 19 to see how much > lower than low the frame rates might get > > 3) FFB was better than the limp N3 and N4 > > 4) OpenGL rasterizer was included for a better comparison to N4 (most

NVidia > users use OpenGL) > > The improvements I can see look good, although the driver car new engine > sound is too quiet relative to the other sounds for my liking (even whenit > is set to 100%). > > Haven't tested much to gauge whether the AI are any better than N4 but if > they are, and the frame rates are improved in the final version or with > OpenGL and if they could get decent feedback in the FFB, I will nothesitate > to get this in Feb. > > Marc > > -- >**************************************************************************** > Marc Collins > [email hidden] > > Your mouse has moved. Windows must be restarted for the change > to take effect. Reboot now? >**************************************************************************** > > >

the same could be said about your post ... "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:%DKX7.339329$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (24 lines)

> The demo would be really nice if...........it wasn't incredibally boring > NASCAR. > > David G Fisher > > "Marc Collins" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:RhJX7.462$[email hidden]... > > 1) we could see if they have improved the damage model > > > > 2) you could set the graphics and field options above 19 to see how much > > lower than low the frame rates might get > > > > 3) FFB was better than the limp N3 and N4 > > > > 4) OpenGL rasterizer was included for a better comparison to N4 (most > NVidia > > users use OpenGL) > > > > The improvements I can see look good, although the driver car new engine > > sound is too quiet relative to the other sounds for my liking (even when > it > > is set to 100%). > > > > Haven't tested much to gauge whether the AI are any better than N4 but

if

Quoted text (10 lines)

> > they are, and the frame rates are improved in the final version or with > > OpenGL and if they could get decent feedback in the FFB, I will not > hesitate > > to get this in Feb. > > > > Marc > > > > -- > > >

****************************************************************************

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > Marc Collins > > [email hidden] > > > > Your mouse has moved. Windows must be restarted for the change > > to take effect. Reboot now? > > >

**************************************************************************** > > > > > > > >

Gee once we get bored we always have F1 2001 :) You just have to get into the left only mood aka mode & run those suckers down! I do!! hahaha "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:%DKX7.339329$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (24 lines)

| The demo would be really nice if...........it wasn't incredibally boring | NASCAR. | | David G Fisher | | "Marc Collins" <[email hidden]> wrote in message | news:RhJX7.462$[email hidden]... | > 1) we could see if they have improved the damage model | > | > 2) you could set the graphics and field options above 19 to see how much | > lower than low the frame rates might get | > | > 3) FFB was better than the limp N3 and N4 | > | > 4) OpenGL rasterizer was included for a better comparison to N4 (most | NVidia | > users use OpenGL) | > | > The improvements I can see look good, although the driver car new engine | > sound is too quiet relative to the other sounds for my liking (even when | it | > is set to 100%). | > | > Haven't tested much to gauge whether the AI are any better than N4 but

if

Quoted text (10 lines)

| > they are, and the frame rates are improved in the final version or with | > OpenGL and if they could get decent feedback in the FFB, I will not | hesitate | > to get this in Feb. | > | > Marc | > | > -- | > |

****************************************************************************

Quoted text (7 lines)

| > Marc Collins | > [email hidden] | > | > Your mouse has moved. Windows must be restarted for the change | > to take effect. Reboot now? | > |

**************************************************************************** | > | > | > | |

I ran the demo last night and even though I have 0 interest or admiration of NASCAR, I had some fun.......for awhile. Then, all of a sudden, I got this feeling like I ate too much chocolate. Going around and around in circles does that to me. :-) Still, just like N4, if someone loves NASCAR then I'd guess they'd love this sim. I did notice one odd thing that was mentioned here by someone else. I saw a few incidents of the cars flipping over at very low speeds in a pileup. David G Fisher "Thom j." <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:BJKX7.339338$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (16 lines)

> Gee once we get bored we always have F1 2001 :) > You just have to get into the left only mood aka > mode & run those suckers down! I do!! hahaha > > "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:%DKX7.339329$[email hidden]... > | The demo would be really nice if...........it wasn't incredibally boring > | NASCAR. > | > | David G Fisher > | > | "Marc Collins" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > | news:RhJX7.462$[email hidden]... > | > 1) we could see if they have improved the damage model > | > > | > 2) you could set the graphics and field options above 19 to see how

much

Quoted text (9 lines)

> | > lower than low the frame rates might get > | > > | > 3) FFB was better than the limp N3 and N4 > | > > | > 4) OpenGL rasterizer was included for a better comparison to N4 (most > | NVidia > | > users use OpenGL) > | > > | > The improvements I can see look good, although the driver car new

engine > | > sound is too quiet relative to the other sounds for my liking (evenwhen > | it > | > is set to 100%). > | > > | > Haven't tested much to gauge whether the AI are any better than N4 but > if > | > they are, and the frame rates are improved in the final version orwith

Quoted text (10 lines)

> | > OpenGL and if they could get decent feedback in the FFB, I will not > | hesitate > | > to get this in Feb. > | > > | > Marc > | > > | > -- > | > > | >

****************************************************************************

Quoted text (8 lines)

> | > Marc Collins > | > [email hidden] > | > > | > Your mouse has moved. Windows must be restarted for the change > | > to take effect. Reboot now? > | > > | >

****************************************************************************

Quoted text (7 lines)

> | > > | > > | > > | > | > >

My post would be really nice if it wasn't about incredibly boring NASCAR? The demo would be nice if my post wasn't incredibly boring? David G Fisher (who noticed how incredibly badly I spelled "incredibly" in my first post?) "Phillip Malphrus, Jr." <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (14 lines)

> the same could be said about your post ... > > "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:%DKX7.339329$[email hidden]... > > The demo would be really nice if...........it wasn't incredibally boring > > NASCAR. > > > > David G Fisher > > > > "Marc Collins" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:RhJX7.462$[email hidden]... > > > 1) we could see if they have improved the damage model > > > > > > 2) you could set the graphics and field options above 19 to see how

much

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > > lower than low the frame rates might get > > > > > > 3) FFB was better than the limp N3 and N4 > > > > > > 4) OpenGL rasterizer was included for a better comparison to N4 (most > > NVidia > > > users use OpenGL) > > > > > > The improvements I can see look good, although the driver car new

engine > > > sound is too quiet relative to the other sounds for my liking (evenwhen > > it > > > is set to 100%). > > > > > > Haven't tested much to gauge whether the AI are any better than N4 but > if > > > they are, and the frame rates are improved in the final version orwith

Quoted text (10 lines)

> > > OpenGL and if they could get decent feedback in the FFB, I will not > > hesitate > > > to get this in Feb. > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > -- > > > > > >

****************************************************************************

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > > Marc Collins > > > [email hidden] > > > > > > Your mouse has moved. Windows must be restarted for the change > > > to take effect. Reboot now? > > > > > >

****************************************************************************

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

Nascar is certainly no brain burner for any tactician but I just love playing a 'Redneck Nascar Racer' for awhile :) "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:TOKX7.339343$[email hidden]... | I ran the demo last night and even though I have 0 interest or admirationof | NASCAR, I had some fun.......for awhile. Then, all of a sudden, I got this | feeling like I ate too much chocolate. Going around and around in circles | does that to me. :-) | | Still, just like N4, if someone loves NASCAR then I'd guess they'd lovethis | sim. | | I did notice one odd thing that was mentioned here by someone else. I sawa

Quoted text (13 lines)

| few incidents of the cars flipping over at very low speeds in a pileup. | | David G Fisher | | "Thom j." <[email hidden]> wrote in message | news:BJKX7.339338$[email hidden]... | > Gee once we get bored we always have F1 2001 :) | > You just have to get into the left only mood aka | > mode & run those suckers down! I do!! hahaha | > | > "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message | > news:%DKX7.339329$[email hidden]... | > | The demo would be really nice if...........it wasn't incredibally

boring

Quoted text (15 lines)

| > | NASCAR. | > | | > | David G Fisher | > | | > | "Marc Collins" <[email hidden]> wrote in message | > | news:RhJX7.462$[email hidden]... | > | > 1) we could see if they have improved the damage model | > | > | > | > 2) you could set the graphics and field options above 19 to see how | much | > | > lower than low the frame rates might get | > | > | > | > 3) FFB was better than the limp N3 and N4 | > | > | > | > 4) OpenGL rasterizer was included for a better comparison to N4

(most

Quoted text (11 lines)

| > | NVidia | > | > users use OpenGL) | > | > | > | > The improvements I can see look good, although the driver car new | engine | > | > sound is too quiet relative to the other sounds for my liking (even | when | > | it | > | > is set to 100%). | > | > | > | > Haven't tested much to gauge whether the AI are any better than N4

but

Quoted text (14 lines)

| > if | > | > they are, and the frame rates are improved in the final version or | with | > | > OpenGL and if they could get decent feedback in the FFB, I will not | > | hesitate | > | > to get this in Feb. | > | > | > | > Marc | > | > | > | > -- | > | > | > | | > |

****************************************************************************

Quoted text (9 lines)

| > | > Marc Collins | > | > [email hidden] | > | > | > | > Your mouse has moved. Windows must be restarted for the change | > | > to take effect. Reboot now? | > | > | > | | > |

****************************************************************************

Quoted text (9 lines)

| > | > | > | > | > | > | > | | > | | > | > | |

Go Away! -- ed_ DGF: > The demo would be really nice if...........it wasn't incredibally boring > NASCAR. > > David G Fisher

If Sierra *really* wanted to follow the lead of other companies, they could always drop the price of N2002 to $30-40 and charge us $20/month to use their matchmaking service... "Stuart Becktell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<%4KX7.49462$[email hidden]>...

Quoted text (52 lines)

> I'm guessing a lot of people are, just look at the EA Sports franchise. They > have released basically the same NHL game for the last 4 years, and people > still buy it. While a lot of people are saying, "Oh...it is just N4.1, I'm > not going to pay for THAT." The sales figures will show that these same > people ARE buying the new version. > -Stuart Becktell > "dstruye" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > Are you willing to pay $45 for this enhanced N4? I'm not. > > > > Marc Collins wrote: > > > > > 1) we could see if they have improved the damage model > > > > > > 2) you could set the graphics and field options above 19 to see how much > > > lower than low the frame rates might get > > > > > > 3) FFB was better than the limp N3 and N4 > > > > > > 4) OpenGL rasterizer was included for a better comparison to N4 (most > NVidia > > > users use OpenGL) > > > > > > The improvements I can see look good, although the driver car new engine > > > sound is too quiet relative to the other sounds for my liking (even when > it > > > is set to 100%). > > > > > > Haven't tested much to gauge whether the AI are any better than N4 but > if > > > they are, and the frame rates are improved in the final version or with > > > OpenGL and if they could get decent feedback in the FFB, I will not > hesitate > > > to get this in Feb. > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > -- > > > > **************************************************************************** > > > Marc Collins > > > [email hidden] > > > > > > Your mouse has moved. Windows must be restarted for the change > > > to take effect. Reboot now? > > > > **************************************************************************** > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

Maybe you could get NASCAR to drop their royalty fees and they could sell it to us for $20. -- Mike Grandy www.precision-racing.com "jason moyer" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > If Sierra *really* wanted to follow the lead of other companies, they > could always drop the price of N2002 to $30-40 and charge us $20/month > to use their matchmaking service... > > > "Stuart Becktell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<%4KX7.49462$[email hidden]>... > > I'm guessing a lot of people are, just look at the EA Sports franchise. They > > have released basically the same NHL game for the last 4 years, and people > > still buy it. While a lot of people are saying, "Oh...it is just N4.1, I'm > > not going to pay for THAT." The sales figures will show that these same > > people ARE buying the new version. > > -Stuart Becktell > > "dstruye" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:[email hidden]... > > > Are you willing to pay $45 for this enhanced N4? I'm not. > > > > > > Marc Collins wrote: > > > > > > > 1) we could see if they have improved the damage model > > > > > > > > 2) you could set the graphics and field options above 19 to see how much > > > > lower than low the frame rates might get > > > > > > > > 3) FFB was better than the limp N3 and N4 > > > > > > > > 4) OpenGL rasterizer was included for a better comparison to N4 (most > > NVidia > > > > users use OpenGL) > > > > > > > > The improvements I can see look good, although the driver car new engine > > > > sound is too quiet relative to the other sounds for my liking (even when > > it > > > > is set to 100%). > > > > > > > > Haven't tested much to gauge whether the AI are any better than N4 but > > if > > > > they are, and the frame rates are improved in the final version or with > > > > OpenGL and if they could get decent feedback in the FFB, I will not > > hesitate > > > > to get this in Feb. > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > **************************************************************************** > > > > Marc Collins > > > > [email hidden] > > > > > > > > Your mouse has moved. Windows must be restarted for the change > > > > to take effect. Reboot now? > > > > > > **************************************************************************** > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

I would pay $20 a month for online racing, but NOT the current system. I was more than happy to pay that for NROS (though most of us bought the 3-month blocks at around $13 a month). Payment for a matchmaking system doesn't make sense. Now, like NROS, paying for high-quality servers, a TRUE rankings system (WON's is very weak compared to NROS) would be worth it. One could only wish for NROS to come back. I'm suprised that Nascar itself hasn't shown interest in it. -Larry "jason moyer" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > If Sierra *really* wanted to follow the lead of other companies, they > could always drop the price of N2002 to $30-40 and charge us $20/month > to use their matchmaking service... > > > "Stuart Becktell" <[email hidden]> wrote in messagenews:<%4KX7.49462$[email hidden]>... > > I'm guessing a lot of people are, just look at the EA Sports franchise.They > > have released basically the same NHL game for the last 4 years, andpeople > > still buy it. While a lot of people are saying, "Oh...it is just N4.1,I'm

Quoted text (12 lines)

> > not going to pay for THAT." The sales figures will show that these same > > people ARE buying the new version. > > -Stuart Becktell > > "dstruye" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:[email hidden]... > > > Are you willing to pay $45 for this enhanced N4? I'm not. > > > > > > Marc Collins wrote: > > > > > > > 1) we could see if they have improved the damage model > > > > > > > > 2) you could set the graphics and field options above 19 to see how

much > > > > lower than low the frame rates might get > > > > > > > > 3) FFB was better than the limp N3 and N4 > > > > > > > > 4) OpenGL rasterizer was included for a better comparison to N4(most > > NVidia > > > > users use OpenGL) > > > > > > > > The improvements I can see look good, although the driver car newengine > > > > sound is too quiet relative to the other sounds for my liking (evenwhen > > it > > > > is set to 100%). > > > > > > > > Haven't tested much to gauge whether the AI are any better than N4but > > if > > > > they are, and the frame rates are improved in the final version orwith

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > > > OpenGL and if they could get decent feedback in the FFB, I will not > > hesitate > > > > to get this in Feb. > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > >

****************************************************************************

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > > > Marc Collins > > > > [email hidden] > > > > > > > > Your mouse has moved. Windows must be restarted for the change > > > > to take effect. Reboot now? > > > > > >

**************************************************************************** > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

Mike that's an excellent point, probably one most of us loose sight of, royalties that is. They're a large part of the price we pay. Bob "Mike Grandy" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:iI_X7.52264$[email hidden]... > Maybe you could get NASCAR to drop their royalty fees and they could sellit

Quoted text (16 lines)

> to us for $20. > > > -- > Mike Grandy > www.precision-racing.com > "jason moyer" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > If Sierra *really* wanted to follow the lead of other companies, they > > could always drop the price of N2002 to $30-40 and charge us $20/month > > to use their matchmaking service... > > > > > > "Stuart Becktell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:<%4KX7.49462$[email hidden]>... > > > I'm guessing a lot of people are, just look at the EA Sports

franchise. > They > > > have released basically the same NHL game for the last 4 years, and > people > > > still buy it. While a lot of people are saying, "Oh...it is just N4.1, > I'm > > > not going to pay for THAT." The sales figures will show that thesesame

Quoted text (11 lines)

> > > people ARE buying the new version. > > > -Stuart Becktell > > > "dstruye" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > news:[email hidden]... > > > > Are you willing to pay $45 for this enhanced N4? I'm not. > > > > > > > > Marc Collins wrote: > > > > > > > > > 1) we could see if they have improved the damage model > > > > > > > > > > 2) you could set the graphics and field options above 19 to see

how

Quoted text (13 lines)

> much > > > > > lower than low the frame rates might get > > > > > > > > > > 3) FFB was better than the limp N3 and N4 > > > > > > > > > > 4) OpenGL rasterizer was included for a better comparison to N4 > (most > > > NVidia > > > > > users use OpenGL) > > > > > > > > > > The improvements I can see look good, although the driver car new > engine > > > > > sound is too quiet relative to the other sounds for my liking

(even

Quoted text (10 lines)

> when > > > it > > > > > is set to 100%). > > > > > > > > > > Haven't tested much to gauge whether the AI are any better than N4 > but > > > if > > > > > they are, and the frame rates are improved in the final version or > with > > > > > OpenGL and if they could get decent feedback in the FFB, I will

not

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > > hesitate > > > > > to get this in Feb. > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > >

****************************************************************************

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > > > > Marc Collins > > > > > [email hidden] > > > > > > > > > > Your mouse has moved. Windows must be restarted for the change > > > > > to take effect. Reboot now? > > > > > > > > >

****************************************************************************

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

-- "Larry (The Other Larry)" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:La0Y7.13321$[email hidden]... > I would pay $20 a month for online racing, but NOT the current system. > > I was more than happy to pay that for NROS (though most of us bought the > 3-month blocks at around $13 a month). I am one of those that wouldn't pay for such a service. I did back when TEN first started with the racing and all the way up to 1998/99. But now that the matching system works better for me, I'd rather keep it that way. Save money, better connections, and I personally can do something about it when the server has fits. TEN was good for it's time but in my opinion, that time is well in the past now that high bandwidth connections are here, cheap, and spreading out all over the place. > > Payment for a matchmaking system doesn't make sense. This is VERY true. kind of like paying your ISP twice. ;-) > > Now, like NROS, paying for high-quality servers, a TRUE rankings system > (WON's is very weak compared to NROS) would be worth it. A dedicated server is a good idea but we have that now with the matching system. There are many dedicated servers on VROC and i can only assume there's quite a few on WON(?). As far as the rankings system, I liked it when i first started racing on TEN but found out how easy it is to manipulate and how many were doing just that. So, i started paying less and less attention to it. besides that, In My Opionion, A rankings system is a bit arcadish any more. If there were a community in the NASCAR sim racing such as what the GPL community has, I bet the rankings system would be less and less used and probably the user created rankings system would bring the NASCAR community closer together. Just My Opinions though!! > > One could only wish for NROS to come back. I'm suprised that Nascar itself > hasn't shown interest in it. > > -Larry I thought NASCAR did have interest in NROS? I remember something being said about it, in fact just a little bit ago someone posted a press release about it here. I have an original copy of that on my system. Why NASCAR left Online Racing is something I don't know anything about though.

Yes, but the quality of the racing isn't nearly as good :( High-skill races under TEN were _relatively_ safe. Reputations meant a lot more on TEN. Not so on WON. -Larry "Michael Barlow" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:p_0Y7.52866$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (11 lines)

> > > -- > "Larry (The Other Larry)" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:La0Y7.13321$[email hidden]... > > I would pay $20 a month for online racing, but NOT the current system. > > > > I was more than happy to pay that for NROS (though most of us bought the > > 3-month blocks at around $13 a month). > > I am one of those that wouldn't pay for such a service. I did back

when > TEN first started with the racing and all the way up to 1998/99. But now > that the matching system works better for me, I'd rather keep it that way. > Save money, better connections, and I personally can do something about it > when the server has fits. TEN was good for it's time but in my opinion, > that time is well in the past now that high bandwidth connections arehere,

Quoted text (12 lines)

> cheap, and spreading out all over the place. > > > > > Payment for a matchmaking system doesn't make sense. > > This is VERY true. kind of like paying your ISP twice. ;-) > > > > > Now, like NROS, paying for high-quality servers, a TRUE rankings system > > (WON's is very weak compared to NROS) would be worth it. > > A dedicated server is a good idea but we have that now with the

matching > system. There are many dedicated servers on VROC and i can only assume > there's quite a few on WON(?). As far as the rankings system, I liked it > when i first started racing on TEN but found out how easy it is to > manipulate and how many were doing just that. So, i started paying lessand > less attention to it. besides that, In My Opionion, A rankings system isa > bit arcadish any more. If there were a community in the NASCAR sim racing > such as what the GPL community has, I bet the rankings system would beless > and less used and probably the user created rankings system would bringthe

Quoted text (12 lines)

> NASCAR community closer together. > > Just My Opinions though!! > > > > > One could only wish for NROS to come back. I'm suprised that Nascar > itself > > hasn't shown interest in it. > > > > -Larry > > I thought NASCAR did have interest in NROS? I remember something

being > said about it, in fact just a little bit ago someone posted a pressrelease > about it here. I have an original copy of that on my system. Why NASCAR > left Online Racing is something I don't know anything about though. > >

"Stuart Becktell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:%4KX7.49462$[email hidden]... > I'm guessing a lot of people are, just look at the EA Sports franchise.They > have released basically the same NHL game for the last 4 years, and people > still buy it. While a lot of people are saying, "Oh...it is just N4.1, I'm > not going to pay for THAT." The sales figures will show that these same > people ARE buying the new version. > -Stuart Becktell I think putting out an improved version every year is great for us and is a good business model for them too. EA started this method of doing games and it has worked well for them. That doesn't mean I buy every version that comes out. Sometimes I skip a version if it doesn't improve enough on what I already have. No one is making anyone buy anything so don't know why the complaints. Just wait for the 2003 or 2004 version if you want more enhancements than what 2002 offers.

"Larry (The Other Larry)" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:Kr1Y7.14255$[email hidden]... > Yes, but the quality of the racing isn't nearly as good :( High-skillraces > under TEN were _relatively_ safe. Reputations meant a lot more on TEN. > > Not so on WON. !!Everything I say is just an opinion with little to nothing to back it up!! This is true! But Remember that TEN was last running three years ago(?) and how many more SimRacers do we have today? Back then SimRacing online was still relatively new so the numbers were quite small. I think we got up to 6,000 registered drivers and out of them there where many multiple accounts. I haven't heard yet from WON/Sierra what the account numbers are today. I can imagine it's up there to the 6,000 mark of non-multiple accounts (If that's the right way to say it(?)). With a pay-to-play system, the serious Sim driver (In my opinion) would find a way to race on private servers as the racing is always best there. and the non-serious drivers, those that just want to race, will pay-to-play. So, In my opinion, (there's that phrase again), A Pay-To-Play system will result in the same thing as what's on WON now. Don't get me wrong, I'm not against Pay-to-play systems, I will only be against them if there is no way to race on private servers through the Internet.

I think having to invest monthly (i.e. spend $20) would help weed out the non-serious. Not all, but some. Before any major corporation out there gets a greedy idea, I am NOT saying that paying for something like WON, simply a match-making service, is acceptable. I am speaking solely of an NROS like, in-house, full ranking type of system. -Larry "Michael Barlow" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:pd3Y7.53933$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (9 lines)

> "Larry (The Other Larry)" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:Kr1Y7.14255$[email hidden]... > > Yes, but the quality of the racing isn't nearly as good :( High-skill > races > > under TEN were _relatively_ safe. Reputations meant a lot more on TEN. > > > > Not so on WON. > > !!Everything I say is just an opinion with little to nothing to back it

up!! > > This is true! But Remember that TEN was last running three yearsago(?) > and how many more SimRacers do we have today? Back then SimRacing online > was still relatively new so the numbers were quite small. I think we gotup > to 6,000 registered drivers and out of them there where many multiple > accounts. I haven't heard yet from WON/Sierra what the account numbersare > today. I can imagine it's up there to the 6,000 mark of non-multiple > accounts (If that's the right way to say it(?)). With a pay-to-playsystem, > the serious Sim driver (In my opinion) would find a way to race on private > servers as the racing is always best there. and the non-serious drivers, > those that just want to race, will pay-to-play. So, In my opinion,(there's > that phrase again), A Pay-To-Play system will result in the same thing as > what's on WON now. > > Don't get me wrong, I'm not against Pay-to-play systems, I will onlybe > against them if there is no way to race on private servers through the > Internet. > > >

I highly doubt you will find many, if any that would be willing to pay $20 a month for a game. I also don't like the idea of charging to play online. We have enough crap we have to pay for anymore, we don't need more bills. From what I have seen there are plenty of leagues around that do their own private racing that this isn't a problem. "Larry (The Other Larry)" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:LPaY7.15447$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (17 lines)

> I think having to invest monthly (i.e. spend $20) would help weed out the > non-serious. Not all, but some. > > Before any major corporation out there gets a greedy idea, I am NOT saying > that paying for something like WON, simply a match-making service, is > acceptable. I am speaking solely of an NROS like, in-house, full ranking > type of system. > > -Larry > > "Michael Barlow" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:pd3Y7.53933$[email hidden]... > > "Larry (The Other Larry)" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:Kr1Y7.14255$[email hidden]... > > > Yes, but the quality of the racing isn't nearly as good :( High-skill > > races > > > under TEN were _relatively_ safe. Reputations meant a lot more on

TEN.

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > > > > > Not so on WON. > > > > !!Everything I say is just an opinion with little to nothing to back it > up!! > > > > This is true! But Remember that TEN was last running three years > ago(?) > > and how many more SimRacers do we have today? Back then SimRacing

online > > was still relatively new so the numbers were quite small. I think wegot

Quoted text (8 lines)

> up > > to 6,000 registered drivers and out of them there where many multiple > > accounts. I haven't heard yet from WON/Sierra what the account numbers > are > > today. I can imagine it's up there to the 6,000 mark of non-multiple > > accounts (If that's the right way to say it(?)). With a pay-to-play > system, > > the serious Sim driver (In my opinion) would find a way to race on

private > > servers as the racing is always best there. and the non-seriousdrivers, > > those that just want to race, will pay-to-play. So, In my opinion, > (there's > > that phrase again), A Pay-To-Play system will result in the same thingas > > what's on WON now. > > > > Don't get me wrong, I'm not against Pay-to-play systems, I willonly

Quoted text (8 lines)

> be > > against them if there is no way to race on private servers through the > > Internet. > > > > > > > >

I'm sure there would be a group that would willingly pay $20 to be free of wreckers and no-talents. However, that group would most likely be too small to support the OC-3 costs, the server maintence etc etc. I haven't looked at the numbers, but how many race on onlineracing.net compared to the won servers? Even tho OLR doesn't charge, they still have the inconvience of a separate program and that seems enough to discourage the average simmer. dave henrie "nospam" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > I highly doubt you will find many, if any that would be willing to pay $20a

Quoted text (9 lines)

> month for a game. I also don't like the idea of charging to play online. > We have enough crap we have to pay for anymore, we don't need more bills. > > From what I have seen there are plenty of leagues around that do their own > private racing that this isn't a problem. > > "Larry (The Other Larry)" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:LPaY7.15447$[email hidden]... > > I think having to invest monthly (i.e. spend $20) would help weed out

the > > non-serious. Not all, but some. > > > > Before any major corporation out there gets a greedy idea, I am NOTsaying > > that paying for something like WON, simply a match-making service, is > > acceptable. I am speaking solely of an NROS like, in-house, fullranking

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > type of system. > > > > -Larry > > > > "Michael Barlow" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:pd3Y7.53933$[email hidden]... > > > "Larry (The Other Larry)" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > news:Kr1Y7.14255$[email hidden]... > > > > Yes, but the quality of the racing isn't nearly as good :(

High-skill

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > > races > > > > under TEN were _relatively_ safe. Reputations meant a lot more on > TEN. > > > > > > > > Not so on WON. > > > > > > !!Everything I say is just an opinion with little to nothing to back

it

Quoted text (11 lines)

> > up!! > > > > > > This is true! But Remember that TEN was last running three years > > ago(?) > > > and how many more SimRacers do we have today? Back then SimRacing > online > > > was still relatively new so the numbers were quite small. I think we > got > > up > > > to 6,000 registered drivers and out of them there where many multiple > > > accounts. I haven't heard yet from WON/Sierra what the account

numbers

Quoted text (26 lines)

> > are > > > today. I can imagine it's up there to the 6,000 mark of non-multiple > > > accounts (If that's the right way to say it(?)). With a pay-to-play > > system, > > > the serious Sim driver (In my opinion) would find a way to race on > private > > > servers as the racing is always best there. and the non-serious > drivers, > > > those that just want to race, will pay-to-play. So, In my opinion, > > (there's > > > that phrase again), A Pay-To-Play system will result in the same thing > as > > > what's on WON now. > > > > > > Don't get me wrong, I'm not against Pay-to-play systems, I will > only > > be > > > against them if there is no way to race on private servers through the > > > Internet. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

"Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:ntEY7.1696$3z4.4228@rwcrnsc52... > I'm sure there would be a group that would willingly pay $20 to be freeof > wreckers and no-talents. However, that group would most likely be toosmall > to support the OC-3 costs, the server maintence etc etc. I haven't looked > at the numbers, but how many race on onlineracing.net compared to the won > servers? Even tho OLR doesn't charge, they still have the inconvience ofa > separate program and that seems enough to discourage the average simmer. > dave henrie The reason I don't use OLR is not because you have to run a separate program. But I could not get the service to work from behind my firewall. It was a while ago when I tried but I think the service basically said if you are behind a firewall you are out of luck. If I could open up ports to make it work, I would have been happy to try OLR :) -Dave B

Again, this is for MANAGED SERVERS, with full and useful ranking systems, like NROS was. I would NOT pay for a simple match-making services like WON. I also doubt they could get $20 a month. Remember, most of us on NROS paid $13 a month, which was reasonable. -Larry "nospam" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > I highly doubt you will find many, if any that would be willing to pay $20a

Quoted text (9 lines)

> month for a game. I also don't like the idea of charging to play online. > We have enough crap we have to pay for anymore, we don't need more bills. > > From what I have seen there are plenty of leagues around that do their own > private racing that this isn't a problem. > > "Larry (The Other Larry)" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:LPaY7.15447$[email hidden]... > > I think having to invest monthly (i.e. spend $20) would help weed out

the > > non-serious. Not all, but some. > > > > Before any major corporation out there gets a greedy idea, I am NOTsaying > > that paying for something like WON, simply a match-making service, is > > acceptable. I am speaking solely of an NROS like, in-house, fullranking

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > type of system. > > > > -Larry > > > > "Michael Barlow" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:pd3Y7.53933$[email hidden]... > > > "Larry (The Other Larry)" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > news:Kr1Y7.14255$[email hidden]... > > > > Yes, but the quality of the racing isn't nearly as good :(

High-skill

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > > races > > > > under TEN were _relatively_ safe. Reputations meant a lot more on > TEN. > > > > > > > > Not so on WON. > > > > > > !!Everything I say is just an opinion with little to nothing to back

it

Quoted text (11 lines)

> > up!! > > > > > > This is true! But Remember that TEN was last running three years > > ago(?) > > > and how many more SimRacers do we have today? Back then SimRacing > online > > > was still relatively new so the numbers were quite small. I think we > got > > up > > > to 6,000 registered drivers and out of them there where many multiple > > > accounts. I haven't heard yet from WON/Sierra what the account

numbers

Quoted text (26 lines)

> > are > > > today. I can imagine it's up there to the 6,000 mark of non-multiple > > > accounts (If that's the right way to say it(?)). With a pay-to-play > > system, > > > the serious Sim driver (In my opinion) would find a way to race on > private > > > servers as the racing is always best there. and the non-serious > drivers, > > > those that just want to race, will pay-to-play. So, In my opinion, > > (there's > > > that phrase again), A Pay-To-Play system will result in the same thing > as > > > what's on WON now. > > > > > > Don't get me wrong, I'm not against Pay-to-play systems, I will > only > > be > > > against them if there is no way to race on private servers through the > > > Internet. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

Thanks for the tip! I will be checking out OLR tonight :) I don't care about separate clients, as long as they work. -Larry "Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:ntEY7.1696$3z4.4228@rwcrnsc52... > I'm sure there would be a group that would willingly pay $20 to be freeof > wreckers and no-talents. However, that group would most likely be toosmall > to support the OC-3 costs, the server maintence etc etc. I haven't looked > at the numbers, but how many race on onlineracing.net compared to the won > servers? Even tho OLR doesn't charge, they still have the inconvience ofa > separate program and that seems enough to discourage the average simmer. > dave henrie > "nospam" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > I highly doubt you will find many, if any that would be willing to pay$20 > a > > month for a game. I also don't like the idea of charging to playonline. > > We have enough crap we have to pay for anymore, we don't need morebills. > > > > From what I have seen there are plenty of leagues around that do theirown

Quoted text (34 lines)

> > private racing that this isn't a problem. > > > > "Larry (The Other Larry)" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:LPaY7.15447$[email hidden]... > > > I think having to invest monthly (i.e. spend $20) would help weed out > the > > > non-serious. Not all, but some. > > > > > > Before any major corporation out there gets a greedy idea, I am NOT > saying > > > that paying for something like WON, simply a match-making service, is > > > acceptable. I am speaking solely of an NROS like, in-house, full > ranking > > > type of system. > > > > > > -Larry > > > > > > "Michael Barlow" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > news:pd3Y7.53933$[email hidden]... > > > > "Larry (The Other Larry)" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > > news:Kr1Y7.14255$[email hidden]... > > > > > Yes, but the quality of the racing isn't nearly as good :( > High-skill > > > > races > > > > > under TEN were _relatively_ safe. Reputations meant a lot more on > > TEN. > > > > > > > > > > Not so on WON. > > > > > > > > !!Everything I say is just an opinion with little to nothing to back > it > > > up!! > > > > > > > > This is true! But Remember that TEN was last running three

years > > > ago(?) > > > > and how many more SimRacers do we have today? Back then SimRacing > > online > > > > was still relatively new so the numbers were quite small. I thinkwe > > got > > > up > > > > to 6,000 registered drivers and out of them there where manymultiple > > > > accounts. I haven't heard yet from WON/Sierra what the account > numbers > > > are > > > > today. I can imagine it's up there to the 6,000 mark ofnon-multiple

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > > > accounts (If that's the right way to say it(?)). With a pay-to-play > > > system, > > > > the serious Sim driver (In my opinion) would find a way to race on > > private > > > > servers as the racing is always best there. and the non-serious > > drivers, > > > > those that just want to race, will pay-to-play. So, In my opinion, > > > (there's > > > > that phrase again), A Pay-To-Play system will result in the same

thing

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > as > > > > what's on WON now. > > > > > > > > Don't get me wrong, I'm not against Pay-to-play systems, I will > > only > > > be > > > > against them if there is no way to race on private servers through

the

Quoted text (10 lines)

> > > > Internet. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

Uh, oh.... Do they give the ports to open up? There HAS to be a way this will work. -Larry "DB" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > "Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:ntEY7.1696$3z4.4228@rwcrnsc52... > > I'm sure there would be a group that would willingly pay $20 to befree > of > > wreckers and no-talents. However, that group would most likely be too > small > > to support the OC-3 costs, the server maintence etc etc. I haven'tlooked > > at the numbers, but how many race on onlineracing.net compared to thewon > > servers? Even tho OLR doesn't charge, they still have the inconvienceof

Quoted text (11 lines)

> a > > separate program and that seems enough to discourage the average simmer. > > dave henrie > > The reason I don't use OLR is not because you have to run a separate > program. But I > could not get the service to work from behind my firewall. It was a while > ago when I > tried but I think the service basically said if you are behind a firewall > you are out of luck. > If I could open up ports to make it work, I would have been happy to

try > OLR :) > -Dave B > > >

In article <LPaY7.15447$[email hidden]>, "Larry \(The Other Larry\)" <[email hidden]> writes: >I think having to invest monthly (i.e. spend $20) would help weed out the >non-serious. Not all, but some. > It would also weed out some of the *serious* players. Just one more bill to pay...? Eldred -- Dale Earnhardt, Sr. R.I.P. 1951-2001 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett GPLRank - under construction... Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

In article <Kr1Y7.14255$[email hidden]>, "Larry \(The Other Larry\)" <[email hidden]> writes: > >Yes, but the quality of the racing isn't nearly as good :( High-skill races >under TEN were _relatively_ safe. Reputations meant a lot more on TEN. > >Not so on WON. > Why is that? Eldred -- Dale Earnhardt, Sr. R.I.P. 1951-2001 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett GPLRank - under construction... Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

In article <%DKX7.339329$[email hidden]>, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> writes: >The demo would be really nice if...........it wasn't incredibally boring >NASCAR. > >David G Fisher I'm guessing you don't see this as a slam on a racing series you don't like...? Unprovoked, even... Eldred -- Dale Earnhardt, Sr. R.I.P. 1951-2001 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett GPLRank - under construction... Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

In article <%4KX7.49462$[email hidden]>, "Stuart Becktell" <[email hidden]> writes: >I'm guessing a lot of people are, just look at the EA Sports franchise. They >have released basically the same NHL game for the last 4 years, and people >still buy it. While a lot of people are saying, "Oh...it is just N4.1, I'm >not going to pay for THAT." The sales figures will show that these same >people ARE buying the new version. We're back to "perceived value". Currently, that's low for a lot of people. Retail at $50, perceived value at $10 or less. When the perceived value is equal to or greater than the retail value, people will buy it. And that value, with causal indicators, may be different for each person. It might be a whiz-bang feature they can't do without, or support for their favorite hardware, or a track converter from Dave Noonan... :-) Eldred -- Dale Earnhardt, Sr. R.I.P. 1951-2001 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett GPLRank - under construction... Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

Yes, I do see it as an unprovoked slam on a racing series I don't like. I'm not running for mayor of Everybody'sgreattown. I'm not making fun of a sick child either. I'm dissing a multimillion dollar sporting event. Big deal. In case you haven't noticed, NASCAR jokes are plentiful on late night TV and just about everywhere you go in this country. David G Fisher "EldredP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (9 lines)

> In article <%DKX7.339329$[email hidden]>, "David G > Fisher" <[email hidden]> writes: > > >The demo would be really nice if...........it wasn't incredibally boring > >NASCAR. > > > >David G Fisher > > I'm guessing you don't see this as a slam on a racing series you don't

like...?

Quoted text (9 lines)

> Unprovoked, even... > > Eldred > -- > Dale Earnhardt, Sr. R.I.P. 1951-2001 > Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett > GPLRank - under construction... > > Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats

you > with experience... > Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

Not everything good in life is free. Sorry :) -Larry "EldredP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > In article <LPaY7.15447$[email hidden]>, "Larry\(The

Quoted text (7 lines)

> Other Larry\)" <[email hidden]> writes: > > >I think having to invest monthly (i.e. spend $20) would help weed out the > >non-serious. Not all, but some. > > > > It would also weed out some of the *serious* players. Just one more bill

to

Quoted text (9 lines)

> pay...? > > Eldred > -- > Dale Earnhardt, Sr. R.I.P. 1951-2001 > Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett > GPLRank - under construction... > > Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats

you > with experience... > Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

I guess you had to be there... -Larry "EldredP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > In article <Kr1Y7.14255$[email hidden]>, "Larry\(The > Other Larry\)" <[email hidden]> writes: > > > > >Yes, but the quality of the racing isn't nearly as good :( High-skillraces

Quoted text (14 lines)

> >under TEN were _relatively_ safe. Reputations meant a lot more on TEN. > > > >Not so on WON. > > > > Why is that? > > Eldred > -- > Dale Earnhardt, Sr. R.I.P. 1951-2001 > Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett > GPLRank - under construction... > > Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats

you > with experience... > Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

In article <RhTY7.351644$[email hidden]>, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> writes:

Quoted text (8 lines)

>Yes, I do see it as an unprovoked slam on a racing series I don't like. > >I'm not running for mayor of Everybody'sgreattown. I'm not making fun of a >sick child either. > >I'm dissing a multimillion dollar sporting event. Big deal. In case you >haven't noticed, NASCAR jokes are plentiful on late night TV and just about >everywhere you go in this country.

And I could say you're an arrogant asshole, since plenty of other people in the newsgroup say it. But, that still wouldn't make it right, so I won't. You make umprovoked insults towards a racing series that others like. Then you're surprised(or 'hurt') at the responses you get, and use that as a basis for more attacks...or as proof of your 'victim' status. That's too bad, David - you seem like an otherwise intelligent person... :( Eldred -- Dale Earnhardt, Sr. R.I.P. 1951-2001 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett GPLRank - under construction... Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

I could say you're a member of a little club who, like most people who join groups, has a hard time thinking for yourself. But I won't. Like I said, I insulted (with a pretty soft insult) a multi-million dollar sports series. I didn't insult a sick child. I'm not surprised by any response I get from that insult, nor am I hurt. LOL. I don't know what newsgroup you've been reading, but at this one, people criticize and insult all the time. It's not a place for political correctness. People criticize and insult sims (surprise) every day. When they do that, they are insulting the people who made them and the people who play them. Occasionally they criticize F1 or NASCAR. You've NEVER done either? Andre W. said a sim was "utter crap" two weeks ago. Did you scold him for insulting everyone connected with it? So what's the difference if I call NASCAR incredibly boring? David G Fisher (who can't believe he has to explain these things) "EldredP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > In article <RhTY7.351644$[email hidden]>, "David G > Fisher" <[email hidden]> writes: > > >Yes, I do see it as an unprovoked slam on a racing series I don't like. > > > >I'm not running for mayor of Everybody'sgreattown. I'm not making fun ofa > >sick child either. > > > >I'm dissing a multimillion dollar sporting event. Big deal. In case you > >haven't noticed, NASCAR jokes are plentiful on late night TV and justabout > >everywhere you go in this country. > > And I could say you're an arrogant asshole, since plenty of other peoplein the > newsgroup say it. But, that still wouldn't make it right, so I won't.You > make umprovoked insults towards a racing series that others like. Thenyou're > surprised(or 'hurt') at the responses you get, and use that as a basis formore > attacks...or as proof of your 'victim' status. That's too bad, David -you

Quoted text (9 lines)

> seem like an otherwise intelligent person... :( > > Eldred > -- > Dale Earnhardt, Sr. R.I.P. 1951-2001 > Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett > GPLRank - under construction... > > Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats

you > with experience... > Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

"David G Fisher" wrote... > I could say you're a member of a little club who, like most > people who join groups, has a hard time thinking for yourself. > But I won't. > <snip> You've jumped to the defense of a sport/sim you thought was misrepresented by another poster as well. So why is Eldred wrong to scold you? Jan./ Who kinda figured he'd have to point this out. ;-) =--- "Pay attention when I'm talking to you boy!" -Foghorn Leghorn.

I debated the guy's criticisms. I didn't say it wrong of him to voice them here, or anywhere else. Big difference. David G Fisher "Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (16 lines)

> "David G Fisher" wrote... > > I could say you're a member of a little club who, like most > > people who join groups, has a hard time thinking for yourself. > > But I won't. > > <snip> > > You've jumped to the defense of a sport/sim you thought was misrepresented > by another poster as well. So why is Eldred wrong to scold you? > > Jan./ Who kinda figured he'd have to point this out. ;-) > =--- > "Pay attention when I'm talking to you boy!" -Foghorn Leghorn. > > > >

In article <lM_Y7.29204$[email hidden]>, "Larry \(The Other Larry\)" <[email hidden]> writes:

Quoted text (19 lines)

>I guess you had to be there... > >-Larry > >"EldredP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >news:[email hidden]... >> In article <Kr1Y7.14255$[email hidden]>, "Larry >\(The >> Other Larry\)" <[email hidden]> writes: >> >> > >> >Yes, but the quality of the racing isn't nearly as good :( High-skill >races >> >under TEN were _relatively_ safe. Reputations meant a lot more on TEN. >> > >> >Not so on WON. >> > >> >> Why is that?

I was. I didn't race OFTEN, but I ran a few. I was also on Hawaii, those many years(and phone bills) ago...<g> Eldred -- Dale Earnhardt, Sr. R.I.P. 1951-2001 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett GPLRank - under construction... Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

In article <3G3Z7.352426$[email hidden]>, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> writes: >I could say you're a member of a little club who, like most people who join >groups, has a hard time thinking for yourself. But I won't. Ok, I guess I had that one coming... >Like I said, I insulted (with a pretty soft insult) a multi-million dollar >sports series. I didn't insult a sick child. It was actually humorous. My response was based on the fact that you said in an earlier 'discussion' that you DON'T do things like that. I simply called you on it. >I'm not surprised by any response I get from that insult, nor am I hurt. >LOL. No, I don't expect you *would* be.

Quoted text (10 lines)

>I don't know what newsgroup you've been reading, but at this one, people >criticize and insult all the time. It's not a place for political >correctness. People criticize and insult sims (surprise) every day. When >they do that, they are insulting the people who made them and the people who >play them. Occasionally they criticize F1 or NASCAR. You've NEVER done >either? Andre W. said a sim was "utter crap" two weeks ago. Did you scold >him for insulting everyone connected with it? So what's the difference if I >call NASCAR incredibly boring? > >David G Fisher (who can't believe he has to explain these things)

Well, that's a link I honestly hadn't thought of. Criticizing a sim insults the people who made them and the people who play them. If that's the way you feel, then I can't argue that. I might DISAGREE, but I can't argue with it. But, there's a big difference between saying "x series is boring" or "x series has a dumb rule", and "x series's fans are stupid". There's also a big difference beteen having a civil discussion about something, and insulting someone because they disagree with you. Eldred -- Dale Earnhardt, Sr. R.I.P. 1951-2001 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett GPLRank - under construction... Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

I avoid it...not by choice but because I just don't do to many online oval races. I've stayed in the tptcc league even when we had outdated software because the roadcourses all worked. If OLR would open up it's service some to allow non WC tracks...I might try it from time to time. dave henrie "DB" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > "Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:ntEY7.1696$3z4.4228@rwcrnsc52... > > I'm sure there would be a group that would willingly pay $20 to befree > of > > wreckers and no-talents. However, that group would most likely be too > small > > to support the OC-3 costs, the server maintence etc etc. I haven'tlooked > > at the numbers, but how many race on onlineracing.net compared to thewon > > servers? Even tho OLR doesn't charge, they still have the inconvienceof

Quoted text (11 lines)

> a > > separate program and that seems enough to discourage the average simmer. > > dave henrie > > The reason I don't use OLR is not because you have to run a separate > program. But I > could not get the service to work from behind my firewall. It was a while > ago when I > tried but I think the service basically said if you are behind a firewall > you are out of luck. > If I could open up ports to make it work, I would have been happy to

try > OLR :) > -Dave B > > >

BTW, that is multi-BILLION dollar racing series...and CART would be the sick child you are referring to... -Stuart Becktell "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:3G3Z7.352426$[email hidden]... > I could say you're a member of a little club who, like most people whojoin

Quoted text (12 lines)

> groups, has a hard time thinking for yourself. But I won't. > > Like I said, I insulted (with a pretty soft insult) a multi-million dollar > sports series. I didn't insult a sick child. > > I'm not surprised by any response I get from that insult, nor am I hurt. > LOL. > > I don't know what newsgroup you've been reading, but at this one, people > criticize and insult all the time. It's not a place for political > correctness. People criticize and insult sims (surprise) every day. When > they do that, they are insulting the people who made them and the people

who > play them. Occasionally they criticize F1 or NASCAR. You've NEVER done > either? Andre W. said a sim was "utter crap" two weeks ago. Did you scold > him for insulting everyone connected with it? So what's the difference ifI

Quoted text (12 lines)

> call NASCAR incredibly boring? > > David G Fisher (who can't believe he has to explain these things) > > "EldredP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > In article <RhTY7.351644$[email hidden]>, "David G > > Fisher" <[email hidden]> writes: > > > > >Yes, I do see it as an unprovoked slam on a racing series I don't like. > > > > > >I'm not running for mayor of Everybody'sgreattown. I'm not making fun

of

Quoted text (15 lines)

> a > > >sick child either. > > > > > >I'm dissing a multimillion dollar sporting event. Big deal. In case you > > >haven't noticed, NASCAR jokes are plentiful on late night TV and just > about > > >everywhere you go in this country. > > > > And I could say you're an arrogant asshole, since plenty of other people > in the > > newsgroup say it. But, that still wouldn't make it right, so I won't. > You > > make umprovoked insults towards a racing series that others like. Then > you're > > surprised(or 'hurt') at the responses you get, and use that as a basis

for

Quoted text (17 lines)

> more > > attacks...or as proof of your 'victim' status. That's too bad, David - > you > > seem like an otherwise intelligent person... :( > > > > Eldred > > -- > > Dale Earnhardt, Sr. R.I.P. 1951-2001 > > Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett > > GPLRank - under construction... > > > > Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats > you > > with experience... > > Remove SPAM-OFF to reply. > >