Future of Racing Games article

http://www.gameslice.com/features/racingfuture/index.shtml Ehm, he doesn't mention GPL or upcoming WSC in the entire article? He even reminisces of Jim Clark at Spa '65... /Magnus GPLRank hcp: -0.96

YEAH I NOTICED THAT TOO "Magnus Svensson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > http://www.gameslice.com/features/racingfuture/index.shtml > > Ehm, he doesn't mention GPL or upcoming WSC in the entire article? He > even reminisces of Jim Clark at Spa '65... > > > /Magnus > GPLRank hcp: -0.96

What does that tell you about GPL? Magnus Svensson <[email hidden]> wrote: -<+>- -<+>-http://www.gameslice.com/features/racingfuture/index.shtml -<+>- -<+>-Ehm, he doesn't mention GPL or upcoming WSC in the entire article? He -<+>-even reminisces of Jim Clark at Spa '65... -<+>- -<+>- -<+>-/Magnus -<+>-GPLRank hcp: -0.96 Thanks, Mike Alexander ([email hidden]) Torch Red 1986 C4 "ITIS4FN" Pictures available at http://alexander.dyndns.org My 2nd Baby!!! (Note:remove the no_tickets. to send email)

Magnus Svensson <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > http://www.gameslice.com/features/racingfuture/index.shtml > > Ehm, he doesn't mention GPL or upcoming WSC in the entire article? He > even reminisces of Jim Clark at Spa '65... "Dirt Track Racing's strength is its subject matter. Where else can you get the luscious feel of sliding sideways through the dirt at darn near 1000 miles per hour?" 1000???? Tony Whitley

On Sat, 9 Sep 2000 08:53:33 +0100, "Tony Whitley" <t o n y . w h i t l e y @ n S t P l A w M o r l d . c o m> wrote:

Quoted text (13 lines)

>Magnus Svensson <[email hidden]> wrote in message >news:[email hidden]... >> >> http://www.gameslice.com/features/racingfuture/index.shtml >> >> Ehm, he doesn't mention GPL or upcoming WSC in the entire article? He >> even reminisces of Jim Clark at Spa '65... > >"Dirt Track Racing's strength is its subject matter. Where else can you get >the luscious feel of sliding sideways through the dirt at darn near 1000 >miles per hour?" > >1000????

Yep, with the right setup, those cars are amazingly fast! Andre >Tony Whitley >

On Sat, 09 Sep 2000 05:39:24 GMT, Red 86 Vet <[email hidden]> wrote: >What does that tell you about GPL? It tells me that the man doesn't have a clue what he's talking about. Andre

Quoted text (20 lines)

>Magnus Svensson <[email hidden]> wrote: > >-<+>- >-<+>-http://www.gameslice.com/features/racingfuture/index.shtml >-<+>- >-<+>-Ehm, he doesn't mention GPL or upcoming WSC in the entire article? He >-<+>-even reminisces of Jim Clark at Spa '65... >-<+>- >-<+>- >-<+>-/Magnus >-<+>-GPLRank hcp: -0.96 > >Thanks, > >Mike Alexander ([email hidden]) >Torch Red 1986 C4 "ITIS4FN" >Pictures available at http://alexander.dyndns.org >My 2nd Baby!!! > >(Note:remove the no_tickets. to send email)

Boy aint that pathetic. :-) Now thos DTR cars can go that fast?? hehe. They said NHRA was fast. <g> ------------------------------------ Webmaster Of Sim World 2000 Crashes and great shots Link - http://www.stas.net/simworld2000/ Proud member of RacingSims.com

I sent this "feedback" to GameSlice: ---------------- The following are my views as a software developer - not necessarily a racing sim programmer (or any game for that matter), but as a programmer, nonetheless. I don't think there is any company more dedicated to its user base than Papyrus. It's unfortunate that they're ultimately controlled by the bean- counters at Havas/Sierra, but that is a blessing as well as a curse. If they were left to their own devices, we would see revisions to the "Nascar Racing" sim only once every four or five years (because programmers are a precise and exactibg bunch), and speaking as a developer, that's an ETERNITY in the software market. Even the most dedicated NASCAR fan will find something else to do if their favorite sim is left to stagnate that long. Despite what everyone might think, software development doesn't happen over night. That realization, compounded with the fervant pace of hardware developements (faster CPU's, faster/better video cards) makes the gaming software industry not only a moving target, but one that changes shape, color and density as it travels at break-neck speeds down the consumer highway. It's no wonder that sims are so long in coming, and when you add the "innovation" factor to it, you've tripled the workload. The basic idea is that you're racing automobiles with internal combustion engines around a closed course. The ONLY thing you can truly innovate is the graphical quality, and the realism of the physics. Beyond that, you have to consider your target market. Are your customers true sim'ers, or are they just a bunch of arcade racers in sim clothing? Do they want better online play, or better offline play? Do they want real tracks and car shapes, or do they want a bitchin' physics and graphics models? Where should the manufacturers spend their limited funds? It's easy for us to stand outside the circle and cry about the sad state (and unpromising future) of racing simulators, but consider the other side's point of view. We KNOW what we want today, but the manufacturers have to predict the future and give us what we'll want in that future. Today was obsolete yesterday, and the future is obsolete today. -- ========================================================= Redneck Techno-Biker (Zerex12) http://www.paddedwall.org/john Barbarian Diecast Collector (420+ cars and counting) http://www.paddedwall.org/diecast DeMONS Scheduler for N3 and NL http://www.paddedwall.org/demons If you want to send me email, go to the first URL shown above & click "Send Me Mail" in the contents frame. =========================================================

>I sent this "feedback" to GameSlice Well Said... Well Said ::applause:: :-) ------------------------------------ Webmaster Of Sim World 2000 Crashes and great shots Link - http://www.stas.net/simworld2000/ Proud member of RacingSims.com

It tells me that GPL is an old game and the article is about the FUTURE. Just a thought anyway. -- Todd S. "Red 86 Vet" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > What does that tell you about GPL? > > Magnus Svensson <[email hidden]> wrote: > > -<+>- > -<+>-http://www.gameslice.com/features/racingfuture/index.shtml > -<+>- > -<+>-Ehm, he doesn't mention GPL or upcoming WSC in the entire article? He > -<+>-even reminisces of Jim Clark at Spa '65... > -<+>- > -<+>- > -<+>-/Magnus > -<+>-GPLRank hcp: -0.96 > > Thanks, > > Mike Alexander ([email hidden]) > Torch Red 1986 C4 "ITIS4FN" > Pictures available at http://alexander.dyndns.org > My 2nd Baby!!! > > (Note:remove the no_tickets. to send email)

>"Todd Sorensen" <[email hidden]> wrote > It tells me that GPL is an old game and the article is about the FUTURE. > Just a thought anyway. GPL is the future within the past <vbg> Seriously, he didn't even mentioned WSC, so his credibility goes out the window for me. WSC and the future of racing simulations are just too much related, a perfect blend. -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- May the Downforce be with you... -- http://www.WeRace.net -- 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.

"Tony Whitley" <t o n y . w h i t l e y @ n S t P l A w M o r l d . c o m> wrote > > Ehm, he doesn't mention GPL or upcoming WSC in the entire article? He > > even reminisces of Jim Clark at Spa '65... > > "Dirt Track Racing's strength is its subject matter. Where else can youget > the luscious feel of sliding sideways through the dirt at darn near 1000 > miles per hour?" > > 1000???? > > Tony Whitley Oh yeah Tony...we here in America are always amused by the so called speeds the foreign cars achieve. Just watched the F1 Qualifying at Monza...200 mph on the straight approaching the Parabolica....childs play.... Our British built chassis with Japanese engines and Japanese tires easily top that in the turns... And our dirt track cars..well he was being generous...a 1000 mph in the turns easy...and you should see how many flips they do also... Ol Eddie Irvine is already crying about the big turn at the USGP. Heck every American like Jacques V. knows the speeds the F1 boys will be turning will be waaaay less than the IRL and Champ cars have done. Of course, the F1 cars "might" be able to go faster if they entered that turn going the proper direction. Still I would hate to be in an F1 car if Emerson Fittipaldi was on the low line in the same turn...Ask Al Unser Jr how stout CART cars are...or for that matter, ask Patreek Carpentee-aye(Pat Carpenter to us Yanks) dave henrie

Probably that whoever wrote the article hasn't played it for any serious amount of time. "Red 86 Vet" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > What does that tell you about GPL?

this is another effort by somebody to get sim racers to buy other games.

I feel sorry for the fans, they'll all be looking one way and the cars will be coming the other <G> -- Ian P <email invalid due to spam> Dave Henrie <[email hidden]> wrote > Ol Eddie Irvine is already crying about the big turn at the USGP. Heck > every American like Jacques V. knows the speeds the F1 boys will be turning > will be waaaay less than the IRL and Champ cars have done. Of course, the > F1 cars "might" be able to go faster if they entered that turn going the > proper direction.

On Sat, 09 Sep 2000 14:40:36 GMT, [email hidden] (John Simmons) wrote: >I sent this "feedback" to GameSlice:[snip} Very well written stuff. Great. >Today was obsolete yesterday, and the future is obsolete today. Words of wisdom... Must be, it makes my head hurt. ;) /Magnus

Dave Henrie <[email hidden]> wrote > Oh yeah Tony...we here in America are always amused by the so called > speeds the foreign cars achieve. Just watched the F1 Qualifying at > Monza...200 mph on the straight approaching the Parabolica....child's > play....If I assume for a moment you don't have your tongue in your cheek... 200mph when you have to slow down for the corners is a different thing to zooming round a banked oval continuously at over 200mph - although you do have more spectacular crashes. > Our British built chassis with Japanese engines and Japanese tires > easily top that in the turns... And our dirt track cars..well he wasbeing > generous...a 1000 mph in the turns easy...and you should see how manyflips > they do also...I know everything is bigger, better and faster in the US of A, but exceeding the speed of sound in a car, round a turn, on dirt? I don't think so. Tony Whitley

Dave Henrie <[email hidden]> wrote > Oh yeah Tony...we here in America are always amused by the so called > speeds the foreign cars achieve. Just watched the F1 Qualifying at > Monza...200 mph on the straight approaching the Parabolica....child's > play....If I assume for a moment you don't have your tongue in your cheek... 200mph when you have to slow down for the corners is a different thing to zooming round a banked oval continuously at over 200mph - although you do have more spectacular crashes. > Our British built chassis with Japanese engines and Japanese tires > easily top that in the turns... And our dirt track cars..well he wasbeing > generous...a 1000 mph in the turns easy...and you should see how manyflips > they do also...I know everything is bigger, better and faster in the US of A, but exceeding the speed of sound in a car, round a turn, on dirt? I don't think so. Tony Whitley

(please excuse my newsreader for the double post)

> > Tony Whitley > Oh yeah Tony...we here in America are always amused by the so called > speeds the foreign cars achieve. Just watched the F1 Qualifying at > Monza...200 mph on the straight approaching the Parabolica....childs > play.... Our British built chassis with Japanese engines and Japanesetires > easily top that in the turns British built chassis, built for a purpose. Don't see too many Reynards winning GP's do we. I'd love to see a Champ car run at Monaco. It would probably be lapped by a Prost or Minardi. Horses for courses my friend........ MS...

> I know everything is bigger, better and faster in the US of A, butexceeding > the speed of sound in a car, round a turn, on dirt? I don't think so. LOL. What can one say about breaking the sound barrier anyway apart from Noble 1 Breedlove 0 <G> MS > Tony Whitley > > > >

On Mon, 11 Sep 2000 17:02:05 +0100, "Mark.seery" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (9 lines)

>> I know everything is bigger, better and faster in the US of A, but >exceeding >> the speed of sound in a car, round a turn, on dirt? I don't think so. > > >LOL. > >What can one say about breaking the sound barrier anyway apart from Noble 1 >Breedlove 0 <G>

I am a big fan of LSR and even contributed to the Thrust SSC project despite it being on the other side of the pond. I heard rumours that the Budweiser "car" broke the sound barrier some years earlier, though it was not an official run and did not count. No matter, my hat is off to Richard Noble and his crew. ~daxe

note to Tony...YES! tongue was FIRMLY planted in cheek "Mark.seery" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:0o7v5.7863$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (12 lines)

> > > > Tony Whitley > > Oh yeah Tony...we here in America are always amused by the so called > > speeds the foreign cars achieve. Just watched the F1 Qualifying at > > Monza...200 mph on the straight approaching the Parabolica....childs > > play.... Our British built chassis with Japanese engines and Japanese > tires > > easily top that in the turns > > British built chassis, built for a purpose. Don't see too many Reynards > winning GP's do we. > I'd love to see a Champ car run at Monaco. It would probably be lapped by

a > Prost or Minardi. > and similarly...you couldn't take off enough drag/downforce on an F1 car to Qualify at Indy...Take Paul Tracey's Q run at Michigan this year...the Average lap speed was 235+. You gotta figure he was hitting close to 250(that mph not wheenie kph) on the straights...AND...that was with a high drag low grip Hanford Device rear wing. Take that Hanford thingie off and the Honda/Reynard package could probably sustain a lap in excess of 245mph. At Indy...who knows....the F1 cars would have to drop the nose, loose the barge boards, cut-off those Mclaren Steamship exhaust pipes. etc etc. :) dave henrie

I have some video footage of the Budweiser attempt. The mad lunatics actually bolted a sidewinder missile to the car to give it an extra 1G of acceleration. The driver said it was akin to sitting inside a time bomb. Daxe, you are right about the claim to have broken the sound barrier but no sonic boom was reported to be heard by anybody and also, as you say, the record would not have stood because the course was only laid out as 5/8 of a mile. I seem to remember that it was only a one way trip and if memory serves correctly, they never turned the car around. Must have been a terrifying ride though when the driver punched in that missile MS "daxe" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (11 lines)

> On Mon, 11 Sep 2000 17:02:05 +0100, "Mark.seery" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >> I know everything is bigger, better and faster in the US of A, but > >exceeding > >> the speed of sound in a car, round a turn, on dirt? I don't think so. > > > > > >LOL. > > > >What can one say about breaking the sound barrier anyway apart from Noble

1

Quoted text (11 lines)

> >Breedlove 0 <G> > > I am a big fan of LSR and even contributed to the Thrust SSC project > despite it being on the other side of the pond. > > I heard rumours that the Budweiser "car" broke the sound barrier some > years earlier, though it was not an official run and did not count. > > No matter, my hat is off to Richard Noble and his crew. > > ~daxe

"ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (9 lines)

>>"Todd Sorensen" <[email hidden]> wrote >> It tells me that GPL is an old game and the article is about the FUTURE. >> Just a thought anyway. > >GPL is the future within the past <vbg> > >Seriously, he didn't even mentioned WSC, so his credibility goes out the >window for me. WSC and the future of racing simulations are just too much >related, a perfect blend.

Forget credibility for a moment--it's an opinion piece. Mark has a point. If you look at Grand Prix Legends, NASCAR Racing 3, and Grand Prix 3, there is very little gameplay outside of the race. Need for Speed 5 and NASCAR Heat have scenarios, which a lot of people seem to like. Dirt Track Racing has a career mode, complete with sponsorships. But gameplay doesn't have to be contrived. Take NASCAR. At the Winston, the cars race three heats, with the starting order of the middle heat usually reversed. How about a qualifying run that includes a pit stop? How about proper qualifying at the Daytona 500, or a Busch clash? Here are some more ideas to fill out NASCAR gameplay: * rule changes! let's see: this year they changed the Ford and Chevy, shrunk the restrictor plate, handed out rear shocks, changed the tires, and made Loudon a restrictor-plate race * qualifying engines * two days of qualifying, with variable weather * rain-shortened races * more than 43 (preferably licensed) drivers, so that not everyone makes the field * a career mode with realistic provisionals and the chance to miss a race and the ability to run multiple seasons * sponsorship * sponsors can come and go, like they have for Johnny Benson this year * NASCAR might sponsor you for a race or two, like Alan Kulwicki in the Army car * your sponsor keeps track of TV time; e.g., giving you a bonus for leading a lap on ABC * conflicting contingency programs * silly season, with the chance to jump ship for a good ride, like Yates, Hendrick, or Roush * a variety of better spotters And finally, no NASCAR game has explained to my satisfaction why the hell they let a crazy driver like me behind the wheel of a Winston Cup car in the first place. Design a couple of paths through the game: you're Tom Cruise and you've been racing Indy cars, or you're Richard Petty's nephew. How about a career mode where I can pay my dues in CTS or BGN, or even ASA? Ever wonder why game engines haven't caught on for racing games like they have for first-person shooters? The engine is still the game. Grand Prix Legends is Quake--a healthy evolutionary step in technology, with the same old gameplay. We're still oohing and ahhing about decent physics the way people admired true 3D in Quake. -- Jon Willeke <[email hidden]>