UbiSoft's new F1 sim - things that make you go hmmm ...

Just read the german preview at www.gamesmania.de, two things really caught my eye ... Statements from the developers (free translation): -physics and dynamics: "We don't want another uncontrollable Grand Prix Legends, our cars are rather easy to drive anyway, but difficult to master - especially if you're fighting for position with the clever AI cars." -no Internet multiplay: "The FIA doesn't know Internet gaming, they don't know what happens to the virtual F1 circus if data is being transmitted during the race, therefor they don't allow it at all." On the other hand it's using plain TCP/IP, so a 3rd party tool could in theory enable 'net racing. But then, GP3 is using TCP as well but is just too damn slow ... Jan

Damned disappointing(sp?) To purposely shoot BELOW a target is sad indeed. And the internet fiasco is amazing. GP3 got ripped pretty bad for this and the FIA seems intent on continuing to cripple sales. I think a class action lawsuit should be considered. Several "in the know" users claimed that a vroc type interface for gp3 would be possible, from private users. the sim has been out for months without any hint of such a utility. I think Superbike 2k+1 may be the next 'sim of the moment', along with Merced trucks. But I haven't heard much on those titles multi-player abilities yet. (this posting was made about an hour after finishing a 51 lap PORRS event using the the uspits TPTCC patch for N3 at the great Sears99 track) Why do we have to keep going backwards regarding multiplayer? Papyrus has been able to run huge fields for years...what is the hurdle everyone else can't seem to clear? dave henrie "Jan Loebzien" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (18 lines)

> Just read the german preview at www.gamesmania.de, two things really > caught my eye ... Statements from the developers (free translation): > > -physics and dynamics: "We don't want another uncontrollable Grand > Prix Legends, our cars are rather easy to drive anyway, but difficult > to master - especially if you're fighting for position with the clever > AI cars." > > -no Internet multiplay: "The FIA doesn't know Internet gaming, they > don't know what happens to the virtual F1 circus if data is being > transmitted during the race, therefor they don't allow it at all." > > On the other hand it's using plain TCP/IP, so a 3rd party tool could > in theory enable 'net racing. But then, GP3 is using TCP as well but > is just too damn slow ... > > > Jan

Jan, Lemme see if I got this straight: the FIA (the international governing body of motor sports) doesn't allow Internet gaming? Presumably you mean the FIA doesn't allow Internet gaming involving FIA-licensed properties. By whose authority? Online auto racing involves no mechanical cars, no FIA-licensed drivers (I guess Montoya & Villeneuve might have to choose), no physical tracks, no gasoline, no oil, no rubber, no carbon fiber, no Jabroc, etc. IOW, online auto racing isn't real auto racing, thus the FIA has no authority to regulate it. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong here.... --Steve Smith Jan Loebzien <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (18 lines)

> Just read the german preview at www.gamesmania.de, two things really > caught my eye ... Statements from the developers (free translation): > > -physics and dynamics: "We don't want another uncontrollable Grand > Prix Legends, our cars are rather easy to drive anyway, but difficult > to master - especially if you're fighting for position with the clever > AI cars." > > -no Internet multiplay: "The FIA doesn't know Internet gaming, they > don't know what happens to the virtual F1 circus if data is being > transmitted during the race, therefor they don't allow it at all." > > On the other hand it's using plain TCP/IP, so a 3rd party tool could > in theory enable 'net racing. But then, GP3 is using TCP as well but > is just too damn slow ... > > > Jan

they have the authority to grant the license to "use" the F1 cars and teams. if they choose to limit, for whatever numbskull reason, the use of multiplayer they can.. in other words, you the developer will not be granted license to use f1 cars etc if you include a functional multiplayer... I smell a F1 sponsored TEN type system where online racers have to PAY FIA to race....you heard it here first folks... dave henrie "Stephen Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:kAb66.8526$[email hidden]... > Jan, > > Lemme see if I got this straight: the FIA (the international governingbody > of motor sports) doesn't allow Internet gaming? Presumably you mean theFIA > doesn't allow Internet gaming involving FIA-licensed properties. By whose > authority? Online auto racing involves no mechanical cars, noFIA-licensed

Quoted text (29 lines)

> drivers (I guess Montoya & Villeneuve might have to choose), no physical > tracks, no gasoline, no oil, no rubber, no carbon fiber, no Jabroc, etc. > IOW, online auto racing isn't real auto racing, thus the FIA has no > authority to regulate it. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong here.... > > --Steve Smith > > Jan Loebzien <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > Just read the german preview at www.gamesmania.de, two things really > > caught my eye ... Statements from the developers (free translation): > > > > -physics and dynamics: "We don't want another uncontrollable Grand > > Prix Legends, our cars are rather easy to drive anyway, but difficult > > to master - especially if you're fighting for position with the clever > > AI cars." > > > > -no Internet multiplay: "The FIA doesn't know Internet gaming, they > > don't know what happens to the virtual F1 circus if data is being > > transmitted during the race, therefor they don't allow it at all." > > > > On the other hand it's using plain TCP/IP, so a 3rd party tool could > > in theory enable 'net racing. But then, GP3 is using TCP as well but > > is just too damn slow ... > > > > > > Jan > >

On Mon, 08 Jan 2001 04:44:00 GMT, "Stephen Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Lemme see if I got this straight: the FIA (the international governing body >of motor sports) doesn't allow Internet gaming? Presumably you mean the FIA >doesn't allow Internet gaming involving FIA-licensed properties. Of course I (or better yet, the quoted game developer) was talking in the context of the FIA licensed new sim only. Duh! [snip] >online auto racing isn't real auto racing, thus the FIA has no >authority to regulate it. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong here.... What do you suggest, "real" tracks and cars in single play and fantasy tracks, cars, adverts etc. for multiplay? :-) Jan

On Mon, 08 Jan 2001 04:44:00 GMT, "Stephen Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote: > online auto racing isn't real auto racing, thus the FIA has no >authority to regulate it. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong here.... But the game that uses their license must adhere to their wishes, no? ~daxe

On Mon, 08 Jan 2001 04:11:44 GMT, "Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Several "in the know" users claimed that a vroc type interface for gp3 >would be possible, from private users. the sim has been out for months >without any hint of such a utility. Like I said, that may be due to the generally poor network performance of GP3, even on a LAN. In cases like this, an online play "ban" from the FIA is probably a welcome excuse. :-) Jan

That statement from Ubisoft is not new, they said the same when F1RS came out in 1997... either it's true or they simply can't code the game properly for TCP/IP. They should look what have been done with GPL in that area instead of saying "uncontrolable cars"..... Eric http://www.simracingmag.com � Stephen Smith wrote:

Quoted text (33 lines)

> Jan, > > Lemme see if I got this straight: the FIA (the international governing body > of motor sports) doesn't allow Internet gaming?� Presumably you mean the FIA > doesn't allow Internet gaming involving FIA-licensed properties.� By whose > authority?� Online auto racing involves no mechanical cars, no FIA-licensed > drivers (I guess Montoya & Villeneuve might have to choose), no physical > tracks, no gasoline, no oil, no rubber, no carbon fiber, no Jabroc, etc. > IOW, online auto racing isn't real auto racing, thus the FIA has no > authority to regulate it.� Somebody correct me if I'm wrong here.... > > --Steve Smith > > Jan Loebzien <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > Just read the german preview at www.gamesmania.de, two things really > > caught my eye ... Statements from the developers (free translation): > > > > -physics and dynamics: "We don't want another uncontrollable Grand > > Prix Legends, our cars are rather easy to drive anyway, but difficult > > to master - especially if you're fighting for position with the clever > > AI cars." > > > > -no Internet multiplay: "The FIA doesn't know Internet gaming, they > > don't know what happens to the virtual F1 circus if data is being > > transmitted during the race, therefor they don't allow it at all." > > > > On the other hand it's using plain TCP/IP, so a 3rd party tool could > > in theory enable 'net racing. But then, GP3 is using TCP as well but > > is just too damn slow ... > > > > > > Jan

Dave, So then F12KCS has no multiplayer capability? Help me out here. --Steve Dave Henrie <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:Ymc66.241633$[email hidden]... > they have the authority to grant the license to "use" the F1 cars and > teams. > if they choose to limit, for whatever numbskull reason, the use of > multiplayer > they can.. in other words, you the developer will not be granted licenseto > use > f1 cars etc if you include a functional multiplayer... > I smell a F1 sponsored TEN type system where online racers have to > PAY FIA to race....you heard it here first folks... > dave henrie

Daxe, Okay, then, what developer in his or her right mind would shoot themselves in the head by agreeing to publish a game without multiplayer capability? If the oil companies demanded a royalty for using their gasoline, would automakers manufacture cars without fuel tanks? There's a logical disconnect here somewhere.... --Steve daxe <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (10 lines)

> On Mon, 08 Jan 2001 04:44:00 GMT, "Stephen Smith" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > online auto racing isn't real auto racing, thus the FIA has no > >authority to regulate it. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong here.... > > But the game that uses their license must adhere to their wishes, no? > > ~daxe >

Well, we just have to consider that WE are MUCH better than ubi soft's programmers and engineer, because WE can control the cars, and THEY can't..

LOL -It's gotta be our setups. ;-) Jan. =--- Txl wrote... > Well, we just have to consider that WE are MUCH > better than ubi soft's programmers and engineer, > because WE can control the cars, and THEY can't.. > > >

>"Jan Loebzien" <[email hidden]> wrote > -physics and dynamics: "We don't want another uncontrollable Grand > Prix Legends, our cars are rather easy to drive anyway, but difficult > to master - especially if you're fighting for position with the clever > AI cars." Another title we will soon forget, but I already knew about that ;-) ;-( -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- May the Downforce be with you... -- http://www.ymenard.com/ -- People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realise how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world.

>"Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote > Why do we have to keep going backwards regarding multiplayer? Papyrus > has been able to run huge fields for years...what is the hurdle everyone > else can't seem to clear? Long-term vision is lacking for about everybody in the industry Dave. It's why (even for Papyrus) we haven't yet to see a stable platform for multiplayer racing. We had one, about 3years ago and it was called Hawaii. Everything else in the history of racing simulation has had problems. Yes, even GPL. -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- May the Downforce be with you... -- http://www.ymenard.com/ -- People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realise how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world.

>"Stephen Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote > Lemme see if I got this straight: the FIA (the international governingbody > of motor sports) doesn't allow Internet gaming? It's just a PR way to say "We don't have time to focus on that aspect of the game". There is many F1 game on the market that support TCP/IP multiplayer racing. -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- May the Downforce be with you... -- http://www.ymenard.com/ -- People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realise how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world.

On Mon, 08 Jan 2001 06:16:09 GMT, "Stephen Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Okay, then, what developer in his or her right mind would shoot themselves >in the head by agreeing to publish a game without multiplayer capability? Because the FIA license is more attractive to the majority of potential customers than online multiplay? Which is a niche in an already niche market itself (the market for somewhat realistic racing sims, that is). Jan

On Mon, 08 Jan 2001 09:16:50 GMT, "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote: >It's just a PR way to say "We don't have time to focus on that aspect of the >game". There is many F1 game on the market that support TCP/IP multiplayer >racing. Well the *are* supporting TCP, just not over the Internet (at least not officially). Just like GP3. Jan

Stephen Smith wrote in message ? There's a logical >disconnect here somewhere.... A perfect description of the FIA! ;-) ZZ

? There's a logical A perfect description of the FIA! ;-) ZZ

"Stephen Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:gSc66.9069$[email hidden]... > Dave, > > So then F12KCS has no multiplayer capability? Help me out here. I thought it did and was going to try it soon. I think the so called FIA ban on multiplay is bogus (non existent). -- [email hidden]

On Mon, 08 Jan 2001 06:16:09 GMT, "Stephen Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Okay, then, what developer in his or her right mind would shoot themselves >in the head by agreeing to publish a game without multiplayer capability? Others are answering more eloquently than I with a variety of explanations, but the one that I would have given is that the FIA license is more important to them than online multiplayer. There are plenty of people who will NEVER play online against other people. I would wager to say that there are actually fewer people who would use it than not. >If the oil companies demanded a royalty for using their gasoline, would >automakers manufacture cars without fuel tanks? There's a logical >disconnect here somewhere.... The FIA, from what little I understand of it, seems to be more into throwing its weight around and making money than doing things for the benefit of the fans. They impress me as total control freaks. They can control what happens in an offline situation, how the cars and AI drivers behave, what the simulated awards cermonies and awards look like, etc. Online racing leads to all kinds of subcultures and cottage industries, none of which they can control or profit from, so in their eyes, that is likely unacceptable. ~daxe

"Jan Loebzien": > > -no Internet multiplay: "The FIA doesn't know Internet gaming, they > don't know what happens to the virtual F1 circus if data is being > transmitted during the race, therefor they don't allow it at all." Thanks! You just saved me 2hrs of download time for the demo (when it arrives) and $40 on a the game. I've said this befoe and i'll say it again: No internet multiplayer = no sale to this driver! Ed_ "Go WSC!"

I always knew these game engineer were crap ! "Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> a �crit dans le message news: [email hidden]...

Quoted text (14 lines)

> LOL -It's gotta be our setups. ;-) > > Jan. > =--- > Txl wrote... > > Well, we just have to consider that WE are MUCH > > better than ubi soft's programmers and engineer, > > because WE can control the cars, and THEY can't.. > > > > > > > > >

On Mon, 8 Jan 2001 16:42:18 +0100, "Ed Solheim" <[email hidden]> wrote: >You just saved me 2hrs of download time for the demo (when it arrives) and >$40 on a the game. You're welcome. :-) Although I find it hard to believe that you wouldn't even try the demo, just to *see* what the fuss is all about. Because, judging by the screenshots it going to *look* really great, and in the preview they're claiming they saw sustained 60fps on a PIII700 at 1024, no AI cars though. Jan

Daxe, Mebbe so, but I have a sneaking suspicion that it's not the FIA (a sporting body headed, ATM, by Max Mosely, son of Britain's infamous Nazi sympathizer, and one of March's founders) that's throwing its weight around--in this instance--but Bernie Ecclestone's various commercial groups, like FOCA (the Formula One Constructors Association). Make my day. For what it's worth, a Formula One license is probably worth more than a license to race online, but a hardcore auto racing sim without a healthy online component is DOA; they might as well not bother. --Steve daxe <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Mon, 08 Jan 2001 06:16:09 GMT, "Stephen Smith" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >Okay, then, what developer in his or her right mind would shootthemselves

Quoted text (23 lines)

> >in the head by agreeing to publish a game without multiplayer capability? > > Others are answering more eloquently than I with a variety of > explanations, but the one that I would have given is that the FIA > license is more important to them than online multiplayer. There are > plenty of people who will NEVER play online against other people. I > would wager to say that there are actually fewer people who would use > it than not. > > >If the oil companies demanded a royalty for using their gasoline, would > >automakers manufacture cars without fuel tanks? There's a logical > >disconnect here somewhere.... > > The FIA, from what little I understand of it, seems to be more into > throwing its weight around and making money than doing things for the > benefit of the fans. They impress me as total control freaks. They > can control what happens in an offline situation, how the cars and AI > drivers behave, what the simulated awards cermonies and awards look > like, etc. Online racing leads to all kinds of subcultures and > cottage industries, none of which they can control or profit from, so > in their eyes, that is likely unacceptable. > > ~daxe

Jan, All of UbiSoft's games have *looked* great. Gfx has never been their problem. --Steve Jan Loebzien <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Mon, 8 Jan 2001 16:42:18 +0100, "Ed Solheim" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >You just saved me 2hrs of download time for the demo (when it arrives)and

Quoted text (11 lines)

> >$40 on a the game. > > You're welcome. :-) > Although I find it hard to believe that you wouldn't even try the > demo, just to *see* what the fuss is all about. Because, judging by > the screenshots it going to *look* really great, and in the preview > they're claiming they saw sustained 60fps on a PIII700 at 1024, no > AI cars though. > > > Jan

In article <[email hidden]>, Jan Loebzien <[email hidden]> wrote: > On Mon, 8 Jan 2001 16:42:18 +0100, "Ed Solheim" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >You just saved me 2hrs of download time for the demo (when itarrives) and

Quoted text (8 lines)

> >$40 on a the game. > > You're welcome. :-) > Although I find it hard to believe that you wouldn't even try the > demo, just to *see* what the fuss is all about. Because, judging by > the screenshots it going to *look* really great, and in the preview > they're claiming they saw sustained 60fps on a PIII700 at 1024, no > AI cars though.

F1WGP from Lankhor LOOKED great, too, from a visual standpoint -- and my guess is that UbiSoft's title will be going head-to-head with F1WGP and Warm Up!, rather than GPL and F1CS2K. Time will tell, though. -- JB Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/

Ubi Soft was one of the first to do TCP/IP racing, and they did it very, very well. POD was released almost four years ago. David G Fisher "Eric Cote" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > That statement from Ubisoft is not new, they said the same when F1RS cameout in > 1997... either it's true or they simply can't code the game properly forTCP/IP. > They should look what have been done with GPL in that area instead ofsaying

Quoted text (12 lines)

> "uncontrolable cars"..... > > Eric > > http://www.simracingmag.com > > > Stephen Smith wrote: > > > Jan, > > > > Lemme see if I got this straight: the FIA (the international governing

body > > of motor sports) doesn't allow Internet gaming? Presumably you mean theFIA > > doesn't allow Internet gaming involving FIA-licensed properties. Bywhose > > authority? Online auto racing involves no mechanical cars, noFIA-licensed

Quoted text (28 lines)

> > drivers (I guess Montoya & Villeneuve might have to choose), no physical > > tracks, no gasoline, no oil, no rubber, no carbon fiber, no Jabroc, etc. > > IOW, online auto racing isn't real auto racing, thus the FIA has no > > authority to regulate it. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong here.... > > > > --Steve Smith > > > > Jan Loebzien <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:[email hidden]... > > > Just read the german preview at www.gamesmania.de, two things really > > > caught my eye ... Statements from the developers (free translation): > > > > > > -physics and dynamics: "We don't want another uncontrollable Grand > > > Prix Legends, our cars are rather easy to drive anyway, but difficult > > > to master - especially if you're fighting for position with the clever > > > AI cars." > > > > > > -no Internet multiplay: "The FIA doesn't know Internet gaming, they > > > don't know what happens to the virtual F1 circus if data is being > > > transmitted during the race, therefor they don't allow it at all." > > > > > > On the other hand it's using plain TCP/IP, so a 3rd party tool could > > > in theory enable 'net racing. But then, GP3 is using TCP as well but > > > is just too damn slow ... > > > > > > > > > Jan >

Hi David, well I can assure you that F1RS and MGPRS2 were a total flop in that area... guess it's not the same group of devellopers. Eric David G Fisher wrote:

Quoted text (60 lines)

> Ubi Soft was one of the first to do TCP/IP racing, and they did it very, > very well. POD was released almost four years ago. > > David G Fisher > > "Eric Cote" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > That statement from Ubisoft is not new, they said the same when F1RS came > out in > > 1997... either it's true or they simply can't code the game properly for > TCP/IP. > > They should look what have been done with GPL in that area instead of > saying > > "uncontrolable cars"..... > > > > Eric > > > > http://www.simracingmag.com > > > > > > Stephen Smith wrote: > > > > > Jan, > > > > > > Lemme see if I got this straight: the FIA (the international governing > body > > > of motor sports) doesn't allow Internet gaming? Presumably you mean the > FIA > > > doesn't allow Internet gaming involving FIA-licensed properties. By > whose > > > authority? Online auto racing involves no mechanical cars, no > FIA-licensed > > > drivers (I guess Montoya & Villeneuve might have to choose), no physical > > > tracks, no gasoline, no oil, no rubber, no carbon fiber, no Jabroc, etc. > > > IOW, online auto racing isn't real auto racing, thus the FIA has no > > > authority to regulate it. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong here.... > > > > > > --Steve Smith > > > > > > Jan Loebzien <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > news:[email hidden]... > > > > Just read the german preview at www.gamesmania.de, two things really > > > > caught my eye ... Statements from the developers (free translation): > > > > > > > > -physics and dynamics: "We don't want another uncontrollable Grand > > > > Prix Legends, our cars are rather easy to drive anyway, but difficult > > > > to master - especially if you're fighting for position with the clever > > > > AI cars." > > > > > > > > -no Internet multiplay: "The FIA doesn't know Internet gaming, they > > > > don't know what happens to the virtual F1 circus if data is being > > > > transmitted during the race, therefor they don't allow it at all." > > > > > > > > On the other hand it's using plain TCP/IP, so a 3rd party tool could > > > > in theory enable 'net racing. But then, GP3 is using TCP as well but > > > > is just too damn slow ... > > > > > > > > > > > > Jan > >

"Txl" <[email hidden]> wrote > Well, we just have to consider that WE are MUCH better than ubi soft's > programmers and engineer, because WE can control the cars, and THEYcan't.. That's about it, most of their employees have limited knowledge of motorsports (compared to per example Papyrus and other developers). It's a game factory, so they just jump from title to title, they aren't focused on doing *only* racing games. -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- May the Downforce be with you... -- http://www.ymenard.com/ -- People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realise how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world.

Jan Loebzien wrote: > On Mon, 8 Jan 2001 16:42:18 +0100, "Ed Solheim" wrote: > > >You just saved me 2hrs of download time for the demo (when it arrives)and

Quoted text (8 lines)

> >$40 on a the game. > > You're welcome. :-) > Although I find it hard to believe that you wouldn't even try the > demo, just to *see* what the fuss is all about. Because, judging by > the screenshots it going to *look* really great, and in the preview > they're claiming they saw sustained 60fps on a PIII700 at 1024, no > AI cars though.

'Looks' dont matter much to me if I cant race it - so why bother the d/l. The *first* thing I look for in any game I buy, is multiplayer capabilities. If they are lacking - my interrest is gone. What I cannot understand *at all* is why on earth anyone would release a game without 'net-play in this century!?!? I seriously dont think I've really raced AI's - since back in the NASCAR 1 days... and even then I'd fork out $$$ to race online on 'Hawaii'. Although it cost me *alot* of money [Int. calls to the U.S] - it got me hooked right away. Ed_

Ahah! One more title not worth the CD it will be imprinted on. Modern F1 sims=Shite in a pretty box. Maybe Papy will one day bestow upon us a GPL2, modeling the mid or late seventies...I guess we can dream. I'd rather race Mario Andretti and Gilles Villeneuve than Michael Scumsucker and Mika Hakkinen any day. In article <[email hidden]>, Jan Loebzien <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (18 lines)

> Just read the german preview at www.gamesmania.de, two things really > caught my eye ... Statements from the developers (free translation): > > -physics and dynamics: "We don't want another uncontrollable Grand > Prix Legends, our cars are rather easy to drive anyway, but difficult > to master - especially if you're fighting for position with the clever > AI cars." > > -no Internet multiplay: "The FIA doesn't know Internet gaming, they > don't know what happens to the virtual F1 circus if data is being > transmitted during the race, therefor they don't allow it at all." > > On the other hand it's using plain TCP/IP, so a 3rd party tool could > in theory enable 'net racing. But then, GP3 is using TCP as well but > is just too damn slow ... > > Jan >

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/

On Tue, 09 Jan 2001 00:11:22 GMT, [email hidden] wrote: >I'd rather race Mario Andretti and Gilles Villeneuve than Michael >Scumsucker and Mika Hakkinen any day. Get lost!

I can control GPL cars? Whats wrong with these people? If they can't drive then they shouldn't be making Racing Sims. Wouldn't have bought it anyway! Now I'm quite sure of that! Chris -- GPL FD League http://www.egroups.com/group/gplfd Simbok Racing www.geocities.com/simbokza Remove _your_clothes before replying "Jan Loebzien" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Just read the german preview at www.gamesmania.de, two things really > caught my eye ... Statements from the developers (free translation): > > -physics and dynamics: "We don't want another uncontrollable Grand > Prix Legends, our cars are rather easy to drive anyway, but difficult > to master - especially if you're fighting for position with the clever > AI cars." > > -no Internet multiplay: "The FIA doesn't know Internet gaming, they > don't know what happens to the virtual F1 circus if data is being > transmitted during the race, therefor they don't allow it at all." > >

In article <[email hidden]>, Jan Loebzien <[email hidden]> writes: >-no Internet multiplay: "The FIA doesn't know Internet gaming, they >don't know what happens to the virtual F1 circus if data is being >transmitted during the race, therefor they don't allow it at all." > What?!? WTF does a computer SIM have to do with an actual F1 race??? Eldred -- Tiger Stadium R.I.P. 1912-1999 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett GPL F1 hcp. +28.80...F2 +151.26...F3 hcp. +373.73 Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

Quoted text (8 lines)

> >-no Internet multiplay: "The FIA doesn't know Internet gaming, they > >don't know what happens to the virtual F1 circus if data is being > >transmitted during the race, therefor they don't allow it at all." > > > > What?!? WTF does a computer SIM have to do with an actual F1 race??? > > Eldred

Two possible explanations. 1: they are worried that a good online sim will draw viewers away from the Sunday televised race. 2: In the proper hands, an Prost could kick a Ferrari's behind during an online race...perhaps the manufactuers don't want to see the pecking order upset. dave henrie

Hi Francois btw :) another note we haven't brought, Ubisoft beta testers (well at least back to� F1RS and MGPRS2 days ) are using keyboards.... shows you how serious they are about racing sims <g> ymenard wrote:

Quoted text (14 lines)

> >"Jan Loebzien" <[email hidden]> wrote > > -physics and dynamics: "We don't want another uncontrollable Grand > > Prix Legends, our cars are rather easy to drive anyway, but difficult > > to master - especially if you're fighting for position with the clever > > AI cars." > > Another title we will soon forget, but I already knew about that ;-) ;-( > > -- > -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> > -- May the Downforce be with you... > -- http://www.ymenard.com/ > -- People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realise > how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world.

Quoted text (7 lines)

>"Jan Loebzien" <[email hidden]> wrote > On Tue, 09 Jan 2001 00:11:22 GMT, [email hidden] wrote: > > >I'd rather race Mario Andretti and Gilles Villeneuve than Michael > >Scumsucker and Mika Hakkinen any day. > > Get lost!

Shut up, people have different opinions. I agree with him, I would much rather drive those cars then boring and bland modern Formula One's. -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- May the Downforce be with you... -- http://www.ymenard.com/ -- People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realise how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world.

>"Eric Cote" <[email hidden]> wrote > Ubisoft beta testers (well at least back to > F1RS and MGPRS2 days ) are using keyboards.... Actually not to contrary you Eric but the Thrustmaster GP1 was the most used wheel during the test phase for F1RS and MGPRS2. Some of them used keyboard, and yes most of them didn't really have motorsports knowledge. We have to make the difference between a game developper and a racing game developper. Ubisoft does multi-type games, their testers (and all the staff let's remember) are employed to do any type of game, not specifically racing games. -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- May the Downforce be with you... -- http://www.ymenard.com/ -- People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realise how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world.

On Tue, 09 Jan 2001 07:31:12 GMT, "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Shut up, people have different opinions. I agree with him, I would much >rather drive those cars then boring and bland modern Formula One's. If you didn't notice, I did not reply to his opinion about modern F1 and the respective sims, which I partially share, but to the childish part of his post. Jan

please fix your news program. You are posting in html, which isn't good. -- Mika Takala [email hidden] ICQ UIN 14314015

"Mika Takala" <[email hidden]> writes: > please fix your news program. You are posting in html, which isn't good. Nice intentions, but WHO is posting in html ? :P -- Olav K. Malmin remove .spam when replying

> > please fix your news program. You are posting in html, which isn't good. > > Nice intentions, but WHO is posting in html ? :P apparently, this outlook express sucks more than I thought. -- Mika Takala [email hidden] ICQ UIN 14314015

>I'd rather race Mario Andretti and Gilles Villeneuve than Michael >Scumsucker and Mika Hakkinen any day. I'd rather race Michael Andretti and Gil de Ferran. :) ----------------------------------------- Dan Belcher Team Racing Unlimited http://simcrash.00game.com

Could there be two licences involved? $ for FIA licence $$ for FIA licence with multiplayer Michael "Greg Cisko" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:Tzj66.15471$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (18 lines)

> "Stephen Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:gSc66.9069$[email hidden]... > > Dave, > > > > So then F12KCS has no multiplayer capability? Help me out here. > > I thought it did and was going to try it soon. > > I think the so called FIA ban on multiplay is bogus (non existent). > > -- > > [email hidden] > > > > >

> > So then F12KCS has no multiplayer capability? Help me out here. > > I thought it did and was going to try it soon. > > I think the so called FIA ban on multiplay is bogus (non existent). [email hidden] > But the makers of gp3 said almost word for word what the Ubisoft guy has said. I think uncle bernie doesn't want to let the genie out of the bottle until he knows what the genie is and how much money can be made.... dave henrie

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

Quoted text (8 lines)

> >I'd rather race Mario Andretti and Gilles Villeneuve than Michael > >Scumsucker and Mika Hakkinen any day. > > > I'd rather race Michael Andretti and Gil de Ferran. :) > > ----------------------------------------- > Dan Belcher

http://champweb.net/index.htm follow the link to the 'search for a new cart sim' dave henrie

http://champweb.net/index.htm follow the link to the 'search for a new cart sim' dave henrie

In article <osx66.244303$[email hidden]>, "Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> writes:

Quoted text (15 lines)

>> >-no Internet multiplay: "The FIA doesn't know Internet gaming, they >> >don't know what happens to the virtual F1 circus if data is being >> >transmitted during the race, therefor they don't allow it at all." >> > >> >> What?!? WTF does a computer SIM have to do with an actual F1 race??? >> >> Eldred > Two possible explanations. 1: they are worried that a good online sim >will >draw viewers away from the Sunday televised race. 2: In the proper hands, >an Prost could kick a Ferrari's behind during an online race...perhaps the >manufactuers don't want to see the pecking order upset. >dave henrie >

Man, that's WEAK on the organization's part. Letting people race online would probably bring more fans. These fans might watch the actual race to see how the real guys do it... As for the different cars, the same thing could happen in a real race. Is Ferrari going to pull out of F1 if they get beaten by a 'lesser' car? I'd love to see their rationalization of that...<g> Eldred -- Tiger Stadium R.I.P. 1912-1999 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett GPL F1 hcp. +28.80...F2 +151.26...F3 hcp. +373.73 Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

In article <[email hidden]>, Eric Cote <[email hidden]> wrote: >Hi David, well I can assure you that F1RS and MGPRS2 were a total flop in that >area... guess it's not the same group of devellopers. > >Eric > >David G Fisher wrote: [100 lines snipped] please make sure to quote only relevant parts of the article you�re following up on. Thank you. Cheers, Uwe -- Uwe Schuerkamp http://www.schuerkamp.de/ GnuPG Fingerprint: 2093 20B8 B861 9358 A356 B01A E145 9249 5D27 33EA PGP Fingerprint: 2E 13 20 22 9A 3F 63 7F 67 6F E9 B1 A8 36 A4 61

Childish? You would argue that F12KCS or GP3 are top shelf sims??? I consider them shite and did not spend a dime of my money on either of them. One is essentially six years old while the other is ISI's next best try at a real physics engine. Neither has surpassed GPL in terms of polish and overall performance and NEITHER SUPPORTS VIABLE INTERNET PLAY!!! This is 2001, the internet is a pretty big thing. GPL worked rather nicely over the wires while these titles are totally incapable or damn close to it. In my opinion, modern F1 sims are totally deficient. If you cannot play online against other people, what the hell is the point?? In article <[email hidden]>, Jan Loebzien <[email hidden]> wrote: > On Tue, 09 Jan 2001 07:31:12 GMT, "ymenard" <[email hidden]> > wrote: > > >Shut up, people have different opinions. I agree with him, I wouldmuch

Quoted text (8 lines)

> >rather drive those cars then boring and bland modern Formula One's. > > If you didn't notice, I did not reply to his opinion about modern F1 > and the respective sims, which I partially share, but to the childish > part of his post. > > Jan >

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/

In article <93lh2t$3l3$[email hidden]>, [email hidden] writes:

Quoted text (12 lines)

>Childish? You would argue that F12KCS or GP3 are top shelf sims??? I >consider them shite and did not spend a dime of my money on either of >them. One is essentially six years old while the other is ISI's next >best try at a real physics engine. Neither has surpassed GPL in terms >of polish and overall performance and NEITHER SUPPORTS VIABLE INTERNET >PLAY!!! This is 2001, the internet is a pretty big thing. GPL worked >rather nicely over the wires while these titles are totally incapable >or damn close to it. In my opinion, modern F1 sims are totally >deficient. > >If you cannot play online against other people, what the hell is the >point??

Well, some of us DO play more against the AI than against other carbon-units... Reasons? Poor connections, frustration at T1 pileups, frustration at always being the slowest driver on the track...pick one. I'm sure there are others, too... Eldred -- Tiger Stadium R.I.P. 1912-1999 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett GPL F1 hcp. +28.80...F2 +151.26...F3 hcp. +373.73 Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

Bingo... we have a winner. It's all about bucks fellas. MGPRS2 (RS2) did not include the FIA liscense to enable multiplayer ability. Not because the FIA wouldn't grant it... but because Ubi didn't want to fork out the cash, and particularly the amount required for Net play (this from my sources in Ubi at the time) However... general consensus amongst the "majority buyers" is that they are more likely to buy a game with official liscensing, hence another dollar decision. They are a business, and need to sell the games to pay for the development/marketing. Its a balancing act. Will multiplay REALLY recoup the extra funds needed in swaying a buying decision that is required for the "upped liscensing fee"? Or, is the official liscense enough to sway the buying decision on its own (as per the general consensus). Or is dropping the liscensing altogether to achieve multiplay worth even a thought (knowing the general consensus). Now... we also get into some grey areas regarding the liscensing, which may bode well for those who want F1RC online. Ubi could hide behind the "we need TCP/IP support to be playable over a LAN" and hence support TCP/IP (thus enabling online play). However... they could NOT make it playable (with any intent) on say a matchmaking service like Game Service. That is blatant attempt to make it playable online, and hence a breach of contract (which probably holds penalties for such, not to mention blowing the opportunity to get official liscensing in teh future). Having said all of this, Ubi may have paid the extra bucks needed for it to be played online (which I witnessed in person to the contrary the day Ubi Montreal found about about Internet play restriction from Ubi France), Although... ya never know until its released, maybe things have changed since then. But I DO know it is a dollar issue... not a "FIA cornering the market conspiracy". Cheers, Schumi "Michael Veldman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:6rQ66.159$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (30 lines)

> Could there be two licences involved? > > $ for FIA licence > > $$ for FIA licence with multiplayer > > Michael > > "Greg Cisko" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:Tzj66.15471$[email hidden]... > > "Stephen Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:gSc66.9069$[email hidden]... > > > Dave, > > > > > > So then F12KCS has no multiplayer capability? Help me out here. > > > > I thought it did and was going to try it soon. > > > > I think the so called FIA ban on multiplay is bogus (non existent). > > > > -- > > > > [email hidden] > > > > > > > > > > > >

Bingo... we have a winner. It's all about bucks fellas. MGPRS2 (RS2) did not include the FIA liscense to enable multiplayer ability. Not because the FIA wouldn't grant it... but because Ubi didn't want to fork out the cash, and particularly the amount required for Net play (this from my sources in Ubi at the time) However... general consensus amongst the "majority buyers" is that they are more likely to buy a game with official liscensing, hence another dollar decision. They are a business, and need to sell the games to pay for the development/marketing. Its a balancing act. Will multiplay REALLY recoup the extra funds needed in swaying a buying decision that is required for the "upped liscensing fee"? Or, is the official liscense enough to sway the buying decision on its own (as per the general consensus). Or is dropping the liscensing altogether to achieve multiplay worth even a thought (knowing the general consensus). Now... we also get into some grey areas regarding the liscensing, which may bode well for those who want F1RC online. Ubi could hide behind the "we need TCP/IP support to be playable over a LAN" and hence support TCP/IP (thus enabling online play). However... they could NOT make it playable (with any intent) on say a matchmaking service like Game Service. That is blatant attempt to make it playable online, and hence a breach of contract (which probably holds penalties for such, not to mention blowing the opportunity to get official liscensing in teh future). Having said all of this, Ubi may have paid the extra bucks needed for it to be played online (which I witnessed in person to the contrary the day Ubi Montreal found about about Internet play restriction from Ubi France), Although... ya never know until its released, maybe things have changed since then. But I DO know it is a dollar issue... not a "FIA cornering the market ***". Cheers, Schumi

Quoted text (22 lines)

> Could there be two licences involved? > $ for FIA licence > $$ for FIA licence with multiplayer > Michael > > > Dave, > > > So then F12KCS has no multiplayer capability? Help me out here. > > I thought it did and was going to try it soon. > > I think the so called FIA ban on multiplay is bogus (non existent). > > --

"Jason \"Schumi\" Murray" <[email hidden]> writes:

Quoted text (10 lines)

> The FIA own the rights to Formula One. This means legally they own the likes > of: names/logos (trademarks), and ALL likenesses/representations thereof in > reference to anything to do with Formula One that might easily be misleading > as official or liscensed. > > Meaning: > > If it sounds like F1, looks like F1, it "legally" IS F1, and all > trademarks/patents blanket it across the board, unless liscense is granted > by F1 (ie. the FIA) to the using party.

Will that mean FIA owns the right to champcars since most people can't tell the difference ? :) -- Olav K. Malmin remove .spam when replying

The FIA own the rights to Formula One. This means legally they own the likes of: names/logos (trademarks), and ALL likenesses/representations thereof in reference to anything to do with Formula One that might easily be misleading as official or liscensed. Meaning: If it sounds like F1, looks like F1, it "legally" IS F1, and all trademarks/patents blanket it across the board, unless liscense is granted by F1 (ie. the FIA) to the using party. Cheers, Schumi "Stephen Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:kAb66.8526$[email hidden]... > Jan, > > Lemme see if I got this straight: the FIA (the international governingbody > of motor sports) doesn't allow Internet gaming? Presumably you mean theFIA > doesn't allow Internet gaming involving FIA-licensed properties. By whose > authority? Online auto racing involves no mechanical cars, noFIA-licensed

Quoted text (29 lines)

> drivers (I guess Montoya & Villeneuve might have to choose), no physical > tracks, no gasoline, no oil, no rubber, no carbon fiber, no Jabroc, etc. > IOW, online auto racing isn't real auto racing, thus the FIA has no > authority to regulate it. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong here.... > > --Steve Smith > > Jan Loebzien <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > Just read the german preview at www.gamesmania.de, two things really > > caught my eye ... Statements from the developers (free translation): > > > > -physics and dynamics: "We don't want another uncontrollable Grand > > Prix Legends, our cars are rather easy to drive anyway, but difficult > > to master - especially if you're fighting for position with the clever > > AI cars." > > > > -no Internet multiplay: "The FIA doesn't know Internet gaming, they > > don't know what happens to the virtual F1 circus if data is being > > transmitted during the race, therefor they don't allow it at all." > > > > On the other hand it's using plain TCP/IP, so a 3rd party tool could > > in theory enable 'net racing. But then, GP3 is using TCP as well but > > is just too damn slow ... > > > > > > Jan > >

The FIA own the rights to Formula One. This means legally they own the likes of: names/logos (trademarks), and ALL likenesses/representations thereof in reference to anything to do with Formula One that might easily be misleading as official or liscensed. Meaning: If it sounds like F1, looks like F1, it "legally" IS F1, and all trademarks/patents blanket it across the board, unless liscense is granted by F1 (ie. the FIA) to the using party. Cheers, Schumi > Jan, > Lemme see if I got this straight: the FIA (the international governing body > of motor sports) doesn't allow Internet ***? Presumably you mean the FIA > doesn't allow Internet *** involving FIA-licensed properties. By whose > authority? Online auto racing involves no mechanical cars, no FIA-licensed

Quoted text (27 lines)

> drivers (I guess Montoya & Villeneuve might have to choose), no physical > tracks, no gasoline, no oil, no ***, no carbon fiber, no Jabroc, etc. > IOW, online auto racing isn't real auto racing, thus the FIA has no > authority to regulate it. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong here.... > --Steve Smith > > Just read the german preview at www.gamesmania.de, two things really > > caught my eye ... Statements from the developers (free translation): > > -physics and dynamics: "We don't want another uncontrollable Grand > > Prix Legends, our cars are rather easy to drive anyway, but difficult > > to master - especially if you're fighting for position with the clever > > AI cars." > > -no Internet multiplay: "The FIA doesn't know Internet ***, they > > don't know what happens to the virtual F1 circus if data is being > > transmitted during the race, therefor they don't allow it at all." > > On the other hand it's using plain TCP/IP, so a 3rd party tool could > > in theory enable 'net racing. But then, GP3 is using TCP as well but > > is just too damn slow ... > > Jan

On Fri, 12 Jan 2001 01:17:57 -0800, "Jason \"Schumi\" Murray" <[email hidden]> wrote: >It's all about bucks fellas. Most likely, but why do they come up with the lame "FIA doesn't know about Internet gaming" instead of just saying "it's too expensive for us"? >But I DO know it is a dollar issue... not a "FIA cornering the market >conspiracy". Pretty much the same, IMO. :-) Jan

On Thu, 11 Jan 2001 23:54:08 GMT, [email hidden] wrote: >Childish? You would argue that F12KCS or GP3 are top shelf sims??? You just don't get it, eh? Please check which part of your original message I quoted in my reply. Jan

ISI's physics engine is superb. They are both top shelf sims. I love racing online, but only a fraction of the people who buy a sim or even an arcade game ever race online. David G Fisher <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:93lh2t$3l3$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (32 lines)

> Childish? You would argue that F12KCS or GP3 are top shelf sims??? I > consider them shite and did not spend a dime of my money on either of > them. One is essentially six years old while the other is ISI's next > best try at a real physics engine. Neither has surpassed GPL in terms > of polish and overall performance and NEITHER SUPPORTS VIABLE INTERNET > PLAY!!! This is 2001, the internet is a pretty big thing. GPL worked > rather nicely over the wires while these titles are totally incapable > or damn close to it. In my opinion, modern F1 sims are totally > deficient. > > If you cannot play online against other people, what the hell is the > point?? > > In article <[email hidden]>, > Jan Loebzien <[email hidden]> wrote: > > On Tue, 09 Jan 2001 07:31:12 GMT, "ymenard" <[email hidden]> > > wrote: > > > > >Shut up, people have different opinions. I agree with him, I would > much > > >rather drive those cars then boring and bland modern Formula One's. > > > > If you didn't notice, I did not reply to his opinion about modern F1 > > and the respective sims, which I partially share, but to the childish > > part of his post. > > > > Jan > > > > > Sent via Deja.com > http://www.deja.com/

In the end it is all a matter of opinion and you are as welcome to yours as I am to mine. I'm not sure I would consider either GP3 or F1CS2K advancements over previous titles and that is the problem. Progression, it is something we should demand and the only thing I am really interested in. NASCAR4 is probably going to be absolutely fantastic for internet play...the demo is at least the equal to GPL with 15 cars or less. WSC is the next step as I see it. Script run AI, think Quake, fully editable physics, tracks, etc. It sounds to be a simmer's dream come true! I consider these to be top shelf sims. I feel as if I am flying in GP3 and F1CS2K just does not impress. The car just does not seem as flickable to me as Schumacher's or Hakkinen's cars look to be in real life. I can't drive as hard as I would like because the car just can't seem to take it. In article <uaL76.4906$[email hidden]>, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote: > ISI's physics engine is superb. They are both top shelf sims. > I love racing online, but only a fraction of the people who buy a simor > even an arcade game ever race online. > > David G Fisher > > <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:93lh2t$3l3$[email hidden]... > > Childish? You would argue that F12KCS or GP3 are top shelfsims??? I > > consider them shite and did not spend a dime of my money on eitherof > > them. One is essentially six years old while the other is ISI'snext > > best try at a real physics engine. Neither has surpassed GPL interms > > of polish and overall performance and NEITHER SUPPORTS VIABLEINTERNET > > PLAY!!! This is 2001, the internet is a pretty big thing. GPLworked > > rather nicely over the wires while these titles are totallyincapable

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > or damn close to it. In my opinion, modern F1 sims are totally > > deficient. > > > > If you cannot play online against other people, what the hell is the > > point?? > > > > In article <[email hidden]>, > > Jan Loebzien <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > On Tue, 09 Jan 2001 07:31:12 GMT, "ymenard"

<[email hidden]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > >Shut up, people have different opinions. I agree with him, Iwould > > much > > > >rather drive those cars then boring and bland modern FormulaOne's. > > > > > > If you didn't notice, I did not reply to his opinion about modernF1 > > > and the respective sims, which I partially share, but to thechildish

Quoted text (10 lines)

> > > part of his post. > > > > > > Jan > > > > > > > > > Sent via Deja.com > > http://www.deja.com/ > >

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/

Ahhh...you do not like my referring to Scummy as Scumsucker? Well, that my friend is just too bad. ::) I have a direct link to Germany through my grandfather and beyond, but I will be damned if I ever cheer for a man so devoid of character. $50M/year for six years and one title to show for it. Offensive tactics and an utterly pompous aura do not a favorite of mine make. Sure he wins, but he is no Alain Prost or Gilles Villeneuve or Mario Andretti or...the list could go on forever. Michael Schumacher is the reason Stirling Moss contends that racing should not be so sanitary a sport, i.e. safe...because the money will attract all types. I idolize Ayrton Senna for his sheer speed and will, but I recognize that he crossed the line more than once during his career. In a perfect world, blocking would still be a coward's tactic and drivers like Jimmy Clark would not die in meaningless F2 races while drivers like Schulicker live to a ripe old age. I wish Jackie Stewart were not such a philosophical and low-key gentleman, so that he would speak out against what has become of modern racing drivers. We have made too much of these men. In article <[email hidden]>, Jan Loebzien <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (9 lines)

> On Thu, 11 Jan 2001 23:54:08 GMT, [email hidden] wrote: > > >Childish? You would argue that F12KCS or GP3 are top shelf sims??? > > You just don't get it, eh? > Please check which part of your original message I quoted in my reply. > > Jan >

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/

So . . . you like him then, eh? DK (purposefully posting entire replied-to post) <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:93o5ch$bvf$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (18 lines)

> Ahhh...you do not like my referring to Scummy as Scumsucker? Well, > that my friend is just too bad. ::) I have a direct link to Germany > through my grandfather and beyond, but I will be damned if I ever cheer > for a man so devoid of character. $50M/year for six years and one > title to show for it. Offensive tactics and an utterly pompous aura do > not a favorite of mine make. Sure he wins, but he is no Alain Prost or > Gilles Villeneuve or Mario Andretti or...the list could go on forever. > Michael Schumacher is the reason Stirling Moss contends that racing > should not be so sanitary a sport, i.e. safe...because the money will > attract all types. I idolize Ayrton Senna for his sheer speed and > will, but I recognize that he crossed the line more than once during > his career. In a perfect world, blocking would still be a coward's > tactic and drivers like Jimmy Clark would not die in meaningless F2 > races while drivers like Schulicker live to a ripe old age. I wish > Jackie Stewart were not such a philosophical and low-key gentleman, so > that he would speak out against what has become of modern racing > drivers. We have made too much of these men. >

/

That is where trademarks and "intent" and "damages" specifically come into play. Meaning: You have a "leagally speaking" "famous" brandname that is close in proximity, but does not claim to be the other. Or even more simplified: the fact that the car shapes look alike has no bearing on the issue, since CART is not "attempting to proclaim it is F1", nor does F1 hold the rights to the "shape of the cars" since that is "too generic to differentiate, thus transcending intent or rights thereof". Even more simply speaking: You cannot patent/trademark/hold-rights-to say: My Name... it is simply too generic to be deemed "unique". It is a fine line, and often the reason why patent/trademark lawyers are always full of work, and the decision is left in the hands of the judge in teh appropriate jurisdiction. I think the more pointiant issue regarding all theis leagal mumbo-jumbo is how Bernie as a recognized monopoly (broadcastingly speaking) can conduct business in the US which is a technically "monopoly free country by law". Perhaps something to think about. BTW... I have been deep in a trademark lawsuit (specifically internet) for two years, and finally settled. I am the unfortunate expert on the topic. Cheers, Schumi "Olav K. Malmin" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > "Jason \"Schumi\" Murray" <[email hidden]> writes: > > > The FIA own the rights to Formula One. This means legally they own thelikes > > of: names/logos (trademarks), and ALL likenesses/representations thereofin > > reference to anything to do with Formula One that might easily bemisleading > > as official or liscensed. > > > > Meaning: > > > > If it sounds like F1, looks like F1, it "legally" IS F1, and all > > trademarks/patents blanket it across the board, unless liscense isgranted

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > by F1 (ie. the FIA) to the using party. > > Will that mean FIA owns the right to champcars since most people can't > tell the difference ? :) > > -- > Olav K. Malmin > remove .spam when replying

That is where trademarks and "intent" and "damages" specifically come into play. Meaning: You have a "leagally speaking" "famous" brandname that is close in proximity, but does not claim to be the other. Or even more simplified: the fact that the car shapes look alike has no bearing on the issue, since CART is not "attempting to proclaim it is F1", nor does F1 hold the rights to the "shape of the cars" since that is "too generic to differentiate, thus transcending intent or rights thereof". Even more simply speaking: You cannot patent/trademark/hold-rights-to say: My Name... it is simply too generic to be deemed "unique". It is a fine line, and often the reason why patent/trademark lawyers are always full of work, and the decision is left in the hands of the judge in teh appropriate jurisdiction. I think the more pointiant issue regarding all theis leagal mumbo-jumbo is how Bernie as a recognized monopoly (broadcastingly speaking) can conduct business in the US which is a technically "monopoly free country by law". Perhaps something to think about. BTW... I have been deep in a trademark lawsuit (specifically internet) for two years, and finally settled. I am the unfortunate expert on the topic. Cheers, Schumi > > The FIA own the rights to Formula One. This means legally they own the likes > > of: names/logos (trademarks), and ALL likenesses/representations thereof in > > reference to anything to do with Formula One that might easily be misleading > > as official or liscensed. > > Meaning: > > If it sounds like F1, looks like F1, it "legally" IS F1, and all > > trademarks/patents blanket it across the board, unless liscense is granted

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > by F1 (ie. the FIA) to the using party. > Will that mean FIA owns the right to champcars since most people can't > tell the difference ? :) > -- > Olav K. Malmin > remove .spam when replying

Well I certainly cannot comment or even intelligently speak for the FIA regarding the intent for upping the liscensing for Net play. That is another issue that I think F1 fans can already draw their conclusions considering Bernie's schrewd and often maligned track record. But I DO know it is a matter of money as far as the publisher is concerned :) Cheers, Schumi "Jan Loebzien" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (16 lines)

> On Fri, 12 Jan 2001 01:17:57 -0800, "Jason \"Schumi\" Murray" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >It's all about bucks fellas. > > Most likely, but why do they come up with the lame "FIA doesn't know > about Internet gaming" instead of just saying "it's too expensive for > us"? > > >But I DO know it is a dollar issue... not a "FIA cornering the market > >conspiracy". > > Pretty much the same, IMO. :-) > > > Jan

Well I certainly cannot comment or even intelligently speak for the FIA regarding the intent for upping the liscensing for Net play. That is another issue that I think F1 fans can already draw their conclusions considering Bernie's schrewd and often maligned track record. But I DO know it is a matter of money as far as the publisher is concerned :) Cheers, Schumi

Quoted text (15 lines)

> On Fri, 12 Jan 2001 01:17:57 -0800, "Jason \"Schumi\" Murray" > >It's all about bucks fellas. > Most likely, but why do they come up with the lame "FIA doesn't know > about Internet ***" instead of just saying "it's too expensive for > us"? > >But I DO know it is a dollar issue... not a "FIA cornering the market > >***". > Pretty much the same, IMO. :-) > Jan

>I think the more pointiant issue regarding all theis leagal mumbo-jumbo is >how Bernie as a recognized monopoly (broadcastingly speaking) can conduct >business in the US which is a technically "monopoly free country by law". No, not really. Technically it is just fine to have a monopoly in the U.S. However, you cannot illegally gain a monopoly status nor can you try to utilize your monopoly in one marketspace to gain leverage in another. Basically. And Bernie doesn't have a monopoly. At all. There are plenty of other racing series. No other is called F1, true, but he hardly controlls all of racing. -Tim

What about the broadcasting though? "The Enigmatic One" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:3lT76.1666$[email hidden]... > > >I think the more pointiant issue regarding all theis leagal mumbo-jumbois > >how Bernie as a recognized monopoly (broadcastingly speaking) can conduct > >business in the US which is a technically "monopoly free country by law". > > No, not really. Technically it is just fine to have a monopoly in the > U.S. However, you cannot illegally gain a monopoly status nor can you tryto > utilize your monopoly in one marketspace to gain leverage in another. > Basically. > > And Bernie doesn't have a monopoly. At all. There are plenty of other > racing series. No other is called F1, true, but he hardly controlls allof > racing. > > > -Tim >

What about the broadcasting though?

>"David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote > ISI's physics engine is superb. They are both top shelf sims. Nope, it's not superb and Nope, they are not top shelf sims. > I love racing online, but only a fraction of the people who buy a sim or > even an arcade game ever race online. You are extrapolating without any base David. That number is much higher then you probably think. -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- May the Downforce be with you... -- http://www.ymenard.com/ -- People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realise how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world.

Yes, it is and yes, they are both top shelf sims. So is Nascar Heat. And nope, I'm not wrong about online racing numbers. Unfortunately, the number of people who race online comapred to the number of games sold, and the total population, is tiny. I've been racing online for about four years now, and I often see the same people from one game to the next. FYI, there's six billion people on the planet. David G Fisher "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:Tx686.63419$n%[email hidden]...

Quoted text (18 lines)

> >"David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote > > ISI's physics engine is superb. They are both top shelf sims. > > Nope, it's not superb and Nope, they are not top shelf sims. > > > I love racing online, but only a fraction of the people who buy a sim or > > even an arcade game ever race online. > > You are extrapolating without any base David. That number is much higher > then you probably think. > > > > -- > -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> > -- May the Downforce be with you... > -- http://www.ymenard.com/ > -- People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't

realise > how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world. > > >

On Tue, 09 Jan 2001 07:31:12 GMT, "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (10 lines)

>>"Jan Loebzien" <[email hidden]> wrote >> On Tue, 09 Jan 2001 00:11:22 GMT, [email hidden] wrote: >> >> >I'd rather race Mario Andretti and Gilles Villeneuve than Michael >> >Scumsucker and Mika Hakkinen any day. >> >> Get lost! > >Shut up, people have different opinions. I agree with him, I would much >rather drive those cars then boring and bland modern Formula One's.

I'd like one of those turbo cars (early 80's??) with the turbo button. As Nige Mansell said "You can overtake nicely with it. But if the guy in front of you hit the button 1/10th second before you did, you couldn't pass him--you just went down the straight faster!" Plus think about it: G. Villeneuve, Lauda, Stewart, etc.

On 11 Jan 2001 05:20:16 GMT, [email hidden] (EldredP) wrote:

Quoted text (24 lines)

>In article <osx66.244303$[email hidden]>, "Dave Henrie" ><[email hidden]> writes: > >>> >-no Internet multiplay: "The FIA doesn't know Internet gaming, they >>> >don't know what happens to the virtual F1 circus if data is being >>> >transmitted during the race, therefor they don't allow it at all." >>> > >>> >>> What?!? WTF does a computer SIM have to do with an actual F1 race??? >>> >>> Eldred >> Two possible explanations. 1: they are worried that a good online sim >>will >>draw viewers away from the Sunday televised race. 2: In the proper hands, >>an Prost could kick a Ferrari's behind during an online race...perhaps the >>manufactuers don't want to see the pecking order upset. >>dave henrie >> > >Man, that's WEAK on the organization's part. Letting people race online would >probably bring more fans. These fans might watch the actual race to see how >the real guys do it... As for the different cars, the same thing could happen >in a real race. Is Ferrari going to pull out of F1 if they get beaten by a >'lesser' car? I'd love to see their rationalization of that...<g>

I find I enjoy the race a LOT more when I know the circuit like the back of my hand.

>What about the broadcasting though? He controlls the broadcasting of all racing? I didn't know that. -Tim

On Sun, 14 Jan 2001 00:38:11 GMT, "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote: >You are extrapolating without any base David. That number is much higher >then you probably think. Sounds like you *do* have a solid base. Care to share your numbers and sources? Jan

>"David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote > Yes, it is and yes, they are both top shelf sims. So is Nascar Heat. No, it is not and no, they aren't quality sims. Nascar Heat is another example of a game that attemps to be a sim. > And nope, I'm not wrong about online racing numbers. Unfortunately, the > number of people who race online comapred to the number of games sold, and > the total population, is tiny. Your choice if words is so obvious. "tiny" is far from the actual reality. A couple of years ago perhaps, but 2000 was a gigantic boom for multiplayer gaming. >FYI, there's six billion people on the planet. LMAO! Actually that's not true either. -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- May the Downforce be with you... -- http://www.ymenard.com/ -- People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realise how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world.

>"Jan Loebzien" <[email hidden]> wrote > Sounds like you *do* have a solid base. Care to share your numbers and > sources? Number of people using OLR, IRF, WON, Gamespy, etc.. each day. Per example with N3, it was said that a majority of people will try the multiplayer aspects of the game. Note the word : majority. -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- May the Downforce be with you... -- http://www.ymenard.com/ -- People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realise how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world.

Jason, <<I think the more pointiant issue regarding all theis leagal mumbo-jumbo is how Bernie as a recognized monopoly (broadcastingly speaking) can conduct business in the US which is a technically "monopoly free country by law".>> Anybody who thinks the U.S. is "monopoly-free," with specific regard to motor racing, has obviously not (yet) suffered an encounter with ISC's phalanx of lawyers. Theoretically, if you accept a press pass to cover a NASCAR event, you can't file a race report without having it vetted by the Daytona mafia. As to monopolies, you can't, "broadcastingly speaking," originate any sort of NASCAR broadcast without the Frances' approval, not just from the race track, but from anywhere, ever. Just ask the producers of the now-cancelled "NASCAR Today" show, which was on radio for abt. 20 years before they got their mammaries caught in ISC's legal wringer. --Steve Jason "Schumi" Murray <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (11 lines)

> That is where trademarks and "intent" and "damages" specifically come into > play. > > Meaning: > > You have a "leagally speaking" "famous" brandname that is close in > proximity, but does not claim to be the other. Or even more simplified: > > the fact that the car shapes look alike has no bearing on the issue, since > CART is not "attempting to proclaim it is F1", nor does F1 hold the rights > to the "shape of the cars" since that is "too generic to differentiate,

thus > transcending intent or rights thereof". > > Even more simply speaking: > > You cannot patent/trademark/hold-rights-to say: My Name... it is simplytoo

Quoted text (18 lines)

> generic to be deemed "unique". > > It is a fine line, and often the reason why patent/trademark lawyers are > always full of work, and the decision is left in the hands of the judge in > teh appropriate jurisdiction. > > I think the more pointiant issue regarding all theis leagal mumbo-jumbo is > how Bernie as a recognized monopoly (broadcastingly speaking) can conduct > business in the US which is a technically "monopoly free country by law". > > Perhaps something to think about. > > BTW... I have been deep in a trademark lawsuit (specifically internet) for > two years, and finally settled. I am the unfortunate expert on the topic. > > Cheers, > > Schumi

On Sun, 14 Jan 2001 11:19:17 GMT, "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Number of people using OLR, IRF, WON, Gamespy, etc.. each day. What is that number and how does it compare to the total sales numbers of the games that are played there? >Per example >with N3, it was said that a majority of people will try the multiplayer >aspects of the game. Note the word : majority. Said by whom? How many units did N3 sell, and how many of the customers not just tried the multiplayer aspects but are actually using it? I'm really curious, because you made it sound like you're "in the know". Jan

>"Jan Loebzien" <[email hidden]> wrote > What is that number and how does it compare to the total sales > numbers of the games that are played there? Quite high, considering people don't race each day (more each week and even so...).

Quoted text (10 lines)

> >Per example > >with N3, it was said that a majority of people will try the multiplayer > >aspects of the game. Note the word : majority. > > Said by whom? How many units did N3 sell, and how many of the > customers not just tried the multiplayer aspects but are actually > using it? > > I'm really curious, because you made it sound like you're "in the > know".

The N3 community is closely related to Papyrus, as opposed to this NG. -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- May the Downforce be with you... -- http://www.ymenard.com/ -- People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realise how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world.

On Sun, 14 Jan 2001 19:17:45 GMT, "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Quite high, considering people don't race each day (more each week and even >so...). >The N3 community is closely related to Papyrus, as opposed to this NG. What's the purpose of broad statements such as "quite high", "more than you probably think" etc, if you don't have numbers to back it up or if you are unwilling to disclose them, while at the same time 'accusing' other people to "extrapolate without any base"? Jan

NASCAR Heat? You race the AI and STILL like NASCAR Heat? Hmmm... In article <Z5986.8250$[email hidden]>, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote: > Yes, it is and yes, they are both top shelf sims. So is Nascar Heat. > > And nope, I'm not wrong about online racing numbers. Unfortunately,the > number of people who race online comapred to the number of gamessold, and > the total population, is tiny. I've been racing online for about fouryears > now, and I often see the same people from one game to the next. FYI,there's

Quoted text (12 lines)

> six billion people on the planet. > > David G Fisher > > "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:Tx686.63419$n%[email hidden]... > > >"David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote > > > ISI's physics engine is superb. They are both top shelf sims. > > > > Nope, it's not superb and Nope, they are not top shelf sims. > > > > > I love racing online, but only a fraction of the people who buy a

sim or > > > even an arcade game ever race online. > > > > You are extrapolating without any base David. That number is muchhigher

Quoted text (16 lines)

> > then you probably think. > > > > > > > > -- > > -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> > > -- May the Downforce be with you... > > -- http://www.ymenard.com/ > > -- People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't > realise > > how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world. > > > > > > > >

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/

LOL! Yes, I like him about as much as I would like a root canal or a hammer bashing my head. In article <93od8b$nit$[email hidden]>, "David Karr" <[email hidden]> wrote: > So . . . you like him then, eh? > > DK > (purposefully posting entire replied-to post) > > <[email hidden]> wrote in messagenews:93o5ch$bvf$[email hidden]... > > Ahhh...you do not like my referring to Scummy as Scumsucker? Well, > > that my friend is just too bad. ::) I have a direct link to Germany > > through my grandfather and beyond, but I will be damned if I evercheer > > for a man so devoid of character. $50M/year for six years and one > > title to show for it. Offensive tactics and an utterly pompousaura do > > not a favorite of mine make. Sure he wins, but he is no AlainProst or > > Gilles Villeneuve or Mario Andretti or...the list could go onforever. > > Michael Schumacher is the reason Stirling Moss contends that racing > > should not be so sanitary a sport, i.e. safe...because the moneywill > > attract all types. I idolize Ayrton Senna for his sheer speed and > > will, but I recognize that he crossed the line more than once during > > his career. In a perfect world, blocking would still be a coward's > > tactic and drivers like Jimmy Clark would not die in meaningless F2 > > races while drivers like Schulicker live to a ripe old age. I wish > > Jackie Stewart were not such a philosophical and low-key gentleman,so > > that he would speak out against what has become of modern racing > > drivers. We have made too much of these men. > > > / > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/

Jan Loebzien wrote:

Quoted text (14 lines)

> > On Sun, 14 Jan 2001 19:17:45 GMT, "ymenard" <[email hidden]> > wrote: > > >Quite high, considering people don't race each day (more each week and even > >so...). > > >The N3 community is closely related to Papyrus, as opposed to this NG. > > What's the purpose of broad statements such as "quite high", > "more than you probably think" etc, if you don't have numbers > to back it up or if you are unwilling to disclose them, while at > the same time 'accusing' other people to "extrapolate without > any base"?

To sound important ? :-) Beers and cheers (uncle) Goy "Team Mirage" http://members.prestige.net/bttw/teammirage/ "The Pits" http://www.theuspits.com/ * Spam is for losers who can't get business any other way * "Spamkiller" http://www.spamkiller.com

On Tue, 09 Jan 2001 05:37:24 GMT, "Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (14 lines)

>> >-no Internet multiplay: "The FIA doesn't know Internet gaming, they >> >don't know what happens to the virtual F1 circus if data is being >> >transmitted during the race, therefor they don't allow it at all." >> > >> >> What?!? WTF does a computer SIM have to do with an actual F1 race??? >> >> Eldred > Two possible explanations. 1: they are worried that a good online sim >will >draw viewers away from the Sunday televised race. 2: In the proper hands, >an Prost could kick a Ferrari's behind during an online race...perhaps the >manufactuers don't want to see the pecking order upset. >dave henrie

i I never read so much crap in my life before - Hope you are not serious, otherwise I recommend you see a doctor. John Lumar

Quoted text (12 lines)

> > >> >-no Internet multiplay: "The FIA doesn't know Internet gaming, they > >> >don't know what happens to the virtual F1 circus if data is being > >> >transmitted during the race, therefor they don't allow it at all." > >> > > >> > >> What?!? WTF does a computer SIM have to do with an actual F1 race??? > >> > >> Eldred > > Two possible explanations. 1: they are worried that a good online sim > >will > >draw viewers away from the Sunday televised race. 2: In the proper

hands, > >an Prost could kick a Ferrari's behind during an online race...perhapsthe

Quoted text (7 lines)

> >manufactuers don't want to see the pecking order upset. > >dave henrie > i > I never read so much crap in my life before - Hope you are not > serious, otherwise I recommend you see a doctor. > > John Lumar

It is well known most "car" sims like the Need for speed series and the Gran Tourismo games for the consoles can't show damaged cars. Same for SCGT, they built a damage model, but had to disable it for licensing reasons. Seems the folks who built the real Porche's and Bimmers and Macs didn't take kindly to a sim that dented thier fancy cars. From that little shred I take the leap of faith that Ron Dennis and the Ferrari boss wouldn't be too happy to see Arrows and Prosts running rings around the top cars. My original theory you may have missed, that Bernie is saving the online license for his own product...Even if he doesn't have anything in the works at this time...He sure wouldn't give away something that could make bucks for him down the line... Sorry you think it's crap...I may not be serious but I'm not above exploring a few possibilities...got any other ideas why the last 3 major F1 titles have had VERY constrained multiplayer capabilities? dave henrie

F1 2000 and F12KCS both have internet play. I don't rember anything constrictive about either title's multiplay. I agree with Cisko that the ban is probably bogus. I would guess that the license simply costs a LOT of money. David G Fisher "Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:QUM86.269910$[email hidden]... > Sorry you think it's crap...I may not be serious but I'm not aboveexploring > a > few possibilities...got any other ideas why the last 3 major F1 titleshave > had VERY constrained multiplayer capabilities? > dave henrie > >

In article <[email hidden]>, Serial # 19781010 <[email hidden]> writes:

Quoted text (22 lines)

>On Tue, 09 Jan 2001 05:37:24 GMT, "Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> >wrote: > >>> >-no Internet multiplay: "The FIA doesn't know Internet gaming, they >>> >don't know what happens to the virtual F1 circus if data is being >>> >transmitted during the race, therefor they don't allow it at all." >>> > >>> >>> What?!? WTF does a computer SIM have to do with an actual F1 race??? >>> >>> Eldred >> Two possible explanations. 1: they are worried that a good online sim >>will >>draw viewers away from the Sunday televised race. 2: In the proper hands, >>an Prost could kick a Ferrari's behind during an online race...perhaps the >>manufactuers don't want to see the pecking order upset. >>dave henrie > i >I never read so much crap in my life before - Hope you are not >serious, otherwise I recommend you see a doctor. > >John Lumar

Ok, John - what's YOUR explanation? Eldred -- Tiger Stadium R.I.P. 1912-1999 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett GPL F1 hcp. +28.80...F2 +151.26...F3 hcp. +373.73 Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.