Re: r.a.s. usefull to get feedback on GP3? Hmmmm...

> >I have but one thing to say in reply to this... > >CART! CART! CART! CART! CART! CART! CART! CART! ... > >Jan. ;-) CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! and each CART!!!! was typed by hand, by a person!

"Tim Wheatley" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Most people would come here to find out some facts, instead they see this >crap. Well, even reporting the *facts* seems to be too difficult for some. JoH ------- The best way to accelerate a Mac is 9.81 m/s2 -------- --------------------------------------------------------------

It isn't GPL or made by Papyrus, so it is going to be bashed. Period. That's just the way this group is. They did the same thing to RC 2000, the same thing to F1 2000, and they will do the same thing to NASCAR Heat. They wanted it to "suck", so they just pick it apart looking for flaws and exaggerate them to no end. Remember, these are the opinions of admitted thieves you are reading, giving them zero credibility. I'll wait till the game comes out and buy it myself, even if it "sucks", at least I'll be supporting someone that is trying to build a great modern F1 sim - instead of kissing up to a company (Papyrus) that has no intentions of doing so. "Jo Helsen" wrote > Don't think so...

See you in the queue and it don't suck. Regards Miek On Sat, 22 Jul 2000 16:34:27 -0500, "Tracey A Miller" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (19 lines)

>It isn't GPL or made by Papyrus, so it is going to be bashed. Period. >That's just the way this group is. They did the same thing to RC 2000, >the same thing to F1 2000, and they will do the same thing to NASCAR >Heat. > >They wanted it to "suck", so they just pick it apart looking for flaws >and exaggerate them to no end. Remember, these are the opinions of >admitted thieves you are reading, giving them zero credibility. > >I'll wait till the game comes out and buy it myself, even if it >"sucks", at least I'll be supporting someone that is trying to build a >great modern F1 sim - instead of kissing up to a company (Papyrus) >that has no intentions of doing so. > > >"Jo Helsen" wrote >> Don't think so... > >

Don't think so... What impressions have I read over the last few hours? A roundup: - split axis works / no it doesn't - graphics suck / they aren't bad - rain is incredible / MGPRS already did it better (did it have reflections and a dynamical drying line where you drive?) - canned spins are still in / no more canned spins - force feedback doesn't work-sucks / it's great - setup options are exactly like GP2/ no there's also differential - no impression of speed / fast and furious - cars feel like on rails; is what '98 cars should feel like / is unrealistic - HASBRO has a no-patch policy / nevertheless HASBRO put out patches for Falcon4 and Gunship :-) - physics are a small improvement over GP2 / they are actually worse - I can't produce wheelspin / I had wheelspin even in 4th gear! - the sound is exactly like GP2 / the sound is a significant improvement - track is very easy to discern from surroundings / track is difficult to discern Furthermore: - good framerate is suddenly not important anymore? - AI is great, but the whiners aren't interested There's even a post with an overall negative sound that nevertheless contains this quote: "Frame rate, and overall driving experiance are VERY good, FF is excellent as well, AI is far above average compared to the other F1 sims out today" Ok, call me stupid but I don't really get it :-) Conclusion: you can just as well NOT read the impressions here, because in the end, you just choose to believe what you WANT to believe anyway. JoH ------- The best way to accelerate a Mac is 9.81 m/s2 -------- --------------------------------------------------------------

Only to those who can't be bothered or are unable to make their own mind up when presented with individual views. In this case, unfortunately, the game was reviewed by some who perhaps weren't qualified to do so (failed to configure/use it correctly), but I think the overall message is clear. -Even if I hadn't tried it for myself I would have known GP3 wasn't for me. Jan. =--- David G Fisher wrote...

Quoted text (8 lines)

> Jo, > > R.a.s. does the same thing with every sim, which is why it isn't a good > representation of the sim community. It only represents itself. > > David G Fisher > > <snip>

"Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (9 lines)

>Only to those who can't be bothered or are unable to make their own mind up >when presented with individual views. > >In this case, unfortunately, the game was reviewed by some who perhaps >weren't qualified to do so (failed to configure/use it correctly), but I >think the overall message is clear. -Even if I hadn't tried it for myself I >would have known GP3 wasn't for me. > >Jan.

But Jan, we already knew that loooong before the GP3 beta warez was tested, didn't we? :-) JoH ------- The best way to accelerate a Mac is 9.81 m/s2 -------- --------------------------------------------------------------

Yup, have to admit it was kind of immoral of me to DL it as I had little intention of buying GP3 in the first place. It was nice to see my suspicions confirmed, but it would have been much nicer to have been absolutely wrong and have a ground breaking sim to buy and play next week. Ah well, water under the bridge, files deleted, test race for GPL F3 race in 25min. Jan./life goes on. =--- Jo Helsen wrote... > <snip> > > But Jan, we already knew that loooong before the GP3 beta warez wastested, > didn't we? :-) > > JoH > > ------- The best way to accelerate a Mac is 9.81 m/s2 -------- > --------------------------------------------------------------

Most people would come here to find out some facts, instead they see this crap. Jo Helsen <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> Don't think so... > > What impressions have I read over the last few hours? A roundup: > > - split axis works / no it doesn't > - graphics suck / they aren't bad > - rain is incredible / MGPRS already did it better (did it have

reflections and > a dynamical drying line where you drive?) > - canned spins are still in / no more canned spins > - force feedback doesn't work-sucks / it's great > - setup options are exactly like GP2/ no there's also differential > - no impression of speed / fast and furious > - cars feel like on rails; is what '98 cars should feel like / isunrealistic > - HASBRO has a no-patch policy / nevertheless HASBRO put out patches forFalcon4

Quoted text (13 lines)

> and Gunship :-) > - physics are a small improvement over GP2 / they are actually worse > - I can't produce wheelspin / I had wheelspin even in 4th gear! > - the sound is exactly like GP2 / the sound is a significant improvement > - track is very easy to discern from surroundings / track is difficult to > discern > > Furthermore: > > - good framerate is suddenly not important anymore? > - AI is great, but the whiners aren't interested > > There's even a post with an overall negative sound that nevertheless

contains > this quote: > "Frame rate, and overall driving experiance are VERY good, FF is excellentas > well, AI is far above average compared to the other F1 sims out today" > > Ok, call me stupid but I don't really get it :-) > > Conclusion: you can just as well NOT read the impressions here, because inthe

Quoted text (8 lines)

> end, you just choose to believe what you WANT to believe anyway. > > JoH > > > > ------- The best way to accelerate a Mac is 9.81 m/s2 -------- > --------------------------------------------------------------

You are a very wise person. :-) David G Fisher

total rubbish

CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! and each CART!!!! was typed by hand, by a person!

Basically......welcome to RAS.

Jo, R.a.s. does the same thing with every sim, which is why it isn't a good representation of the sim community. It only represents itself. David G Fisher "Jo Helsen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> Don't think so... > > What impressions have I read over the last few hours? A roundup: > > - split axis works / no it doesn't > - graphics suck / they aren't bad > - rain is incredible / MGPRS already did it better (did it have

reflections and > a dynamical drying line where you drive?) > - canned spins are still in / no more canned spins > - force feedback doesn't work-sucks / it's great > - setup options are exactly like GP2/ no there's also differential > - no impression of speed / fast and furious > - cars feel like on rails; is what '98 cars should feel like / isunrealistic > - HASBRO has a no-patch policy / nevertheless HASBRO put out patches forFalcon4

Quoted text (13 lines)

> and Gunship :-) > - physics are a small improvement over GP2 / they are actually worse > - I can't produce wheelspin / I had wheelspin even in 4th gear! > - the sound is exactly like GP2 / the sound is a significant improvement > - track is very easy to discern from surroundings / track is difficult to > discern > > Furthermore: > > - good framerate is suddenly not important anymore? > - AI is great, but the whiners aren't interested > > There's even a post with an overall negative sound that nevertheless

contains > this quote: > "Frame rate, and overall driving experiance are VERY good, FF is excellentas > well, AI is far above average compared to the other F1 sims out today" > > Ok, call me stupid but I don't really get it :-) > > Conclusion: you can just as well NOT read the impressions here, because inthe

Quoted text (8 lines)

> end, you just choose to believe what you WANT to believe anyway. > > JoH > > > > ------- The best way to accelerate a Mac is 9.81 m/s2 -------- > --------------------------------------------------------------

On Sat, 22 Jul 2000 17:02:56 +0200, Jo Helsen <[email hidden]> wrote: >Don't think so... Welcome to the internet! LOL Regards, Brett C. Cammack That's Racing! Motorsports Pompano Beach, FL

You are a very wise person. :-) David G Fisher "Tracey A Miller" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:397a11de$0$66399$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (20 lines)

> It isn't GPL or made by Papyrus, so it is going to be bashed. Period. > That's just the way this group is. They did the same thing to RC 2000, > the same thing to F1 2000, and they will do the same thing to NASCAR > Heat. > > They wanted it to "suck", so they just pick it apart looking for flaws > and exaggerate them to no end. Remember, these are the opinions of > admitted thieves you are reading, giving them zero credibility. > > I'll wait till the game comes out and buy it myself, even if it > "sucks", at least I'll be supporting someone that is trying to build a > great modern F1 sim - instead of kissing up to a company (Papyrus) > that has no intentions of doing so. > > > "Jo Helsen" wrote > > Don't think so... > > >

In article <397a11de$0$66399$[email hidden]>, "Tracey A Miller" <[email hidden]> writes: >It isn't GPL or made by Papyrus, so it is going to be bashed. Period. >That's just the way this group is. They did the same thing to RC 2000, >the same thing to F1 2000, and they will do the same thing to NASCAR >Heat. >People only post that they don't like a game because....they don't like it. Not because of some 'ulterior' motive. If you pay your money, and think you got ripped, I'd have NO problem with you venting about it here. Same if you thought a particular game was "lord/king/god of racing games". >They wanted it to "suck", so they just pick it apart looking for flaws >and exaggerate them to no end. Remember, these are the opinions of >admitted thieves you are reading, giving them zero credibility. Conspiracy theories? > >I'll wait till the game comes out and buy it myself, even if it >"sucks", at least I'll be supporting someone that is trying to build a >great modern F1 sim - instead of kissing up to a company (Papyrus) >that has no intentions of doing so. You would actually spend your money on a game you KNEW was bad beforehand? Just to 'support' a company? Screw that. Why throw away your money? If you have that kind of money to waste, throw some MY way... Eldred -- Tiger Stadium R.I.P. 1912-1999 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett GPL hcp. +70.45 Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

It's not our fault other companies just don't cut it... ;-) Jan. =--- Tel wrote...

Quoted text (10 lines)

> <snip> > heh... you're right. But since when was RAS ever useful to get serious > feedback about any sim out there? And this one isn't even from Papyrus, > so it is doomed by default :)... > > --Tel > > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ > Before you buy.

In article <[email hidden]>, Jo Helsen <[email hidden]> wrote: > Don't think so... ><snip> heh... you're right. But since when was RAS ever useful to get serious feedback about any sim out there? And this one isn't even from Papyrus, so it is doomed by default :)... --Tel Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

Tracey A Miller wrote in message <397a11de$0$66399$[email hidden]>... >It isn't GPL or made by Papyrus, so it is going to be bashed. Period. Well, obviously it isn't GPL, but are you saying that no sim made by Papyrus has been bashed on this group? I'm certain I recall people here bashing the Nascar series, and particularly Nascar Legends. >That's just the way this group is. They did the same thing to RC 2000, Deserved to be bashed for its physics. Do recall, this is not rec.racing.games, this is rec.autos.simulators, and so there is and should be some emphasis on car physics. >the same thing to F1 2000 I hear there are frame rate issues with this game, that it's too hardware-hungry. You see, there are reasons such games get bashed. High standards is not equivalent to closed-mindedness. >They wanted it to "suck", so they just pick it apart looking for flaws >and exaggerate them to no end. Remember, these are the opinions of >admitted thieves you are reading, giving them zero credibility. Why does downloading warez give you zero credibility as a reviewer? (BTW, I've never downloaded warez). I'd like to hear your reasons. Also, are you suggesting that all people who say that RC2000 and F1 2000 suck are "admitted thieves", or are you generalising? >I'll wait till the game comes out and buy it myself, even if it >"sucks", at least I'll be supporting someone that is trying to build a >great modern F1 sim The game sucks but I'll buy it because at least they tried? You must have a lot of games that suck. Bendito;

I admire your commitment... I copied and pasted! Jan. =--- TRUSRS85 wrote... > > CART !!!! CART!!!! <snip> > and each CART!!!! was typed by hand, by a person!

I have but one thing to say in reply to this... CART! CART! CART! CART! CART! CART! CART! CART! ... Jan. ;-) =--- Tracey A Miller wrote... > <snip> > I'll wait till the game comes out and buy it myself, > even if it "sucks", at least I'll be supporting > someone that is trying to build a great modern F1 sim > - instead of kissing up to a company (Papyrus) that > has no intentions of doing so.

>It isn't GPL or made by Papyrus, so it is going to be bashed. Period. That statement shows that you have an even more blinkered attitude than the people you're trying to criticise. -- Cheers! Graeme Nash

On Sat, 22 Jul 2000 16:34:27 -0500, "Tracey A Miller" <[email hidden]> wrote: >I'll wait till the game comes out and buy it myself, even if it >"sucks", at least I'll be supporting someone that is trying to build a >great modern F1 sim - instead of kissing up to a company (Papyrus) >that has no intentions of doing so. Once you have formed the ability to read and cultivated a desire to seek out information, go and read the recnt interview with Dave Kaemeer. Papyrus would love to do an F1 sim - but ask Bernie how much he wants to charge people for that pleasure. John

total rubbish

Every honest opinion has worth. Why do we all have to agree? :)

On Sun, 23 Jul 2000 00:22:26 +0100, Graeme Nash <[email hidden]> wrote: > >>It isn't GPL or made by Papyrus, so it is going to be bashed. Period. > >That statement shows that you have an even more blinkered attitude than >the people you're trying to criticise. Amen Graeme... Andre > >-- >Cheers! >Graeme Nash

Would I be wrong to assume you want a Formula 1 sim ? ;) -- Ian Parker "Ambition is a poor excuse for not having sense enough to be lazy." <email invalid due to spam> TRUSRS85 <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > > >I have but one thing to say in reply to this... > > > >CART! CART! CART! CART! CART! CART! CART! CART! ... > > > >Jan. ;-) > > CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! > CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART > !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! > CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! > CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART > !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! > CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! > CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART > !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! > CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! > CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART > !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! > CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! > CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART > !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! > CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! > CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART > !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! > CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! > CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART > !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! > CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! > CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART > !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! > CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! > CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART > !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! > CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! > CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! CART !!!! CART!!!! > > and each CART!!!! was typed by hand, by a person!

"Tracey A Miller" <[email hidden]> writes: > It isn't GPL or made by Papyrus, so it is going to be bashed. Period. > That's just the way this group is. They did the same thing to RC 2000, > the same thing to F1 2000, and they will do the same thing to NASCAR > Heat. Who are "they"? You are as much part of "this group" as everyone else posting here, so "we" would be the proper term. Besides that, you have to be quite narrow-minded to lump all posters in a newsgroup together and accuse them of prejudices. _ Mats Lofkvist Really don't mind if you sit this one out. [email hidden] My words but a whisper, your deafness a SHOUT.

Jo Helsen <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> Don't think so... > > What impressions have I read over the last few hours? A roundup: > > - split axis works / no it doesn't > - graphics suck / they aren't bad > - rain is incredible / MGPRS already did it better (did it have

reflections and > a dynamical drying line where you drive?) > - canned spins are still in / no more canned spins > - force feedback doesn't work-sucks / it's great > - setup options are exactly like GP2/ no there's also differential > - no impression of speed / fast and furious > - cars feel like on rails; is what '98 cars should feel like / isunrealistic > - HASBRO has a no-patch policy / nevertheless HASBRO put out patches forFalcon4

Quoted text (13 lines)

> and Gunship :-) > - physics are a small improvement over GP2 / they are actually worse > - I can't produce wheelspin / I had wheelspin even in 4th gear! > - the sound is exactly like GP2 / the sound is a significant improvement > - track is very easy to discern from surroundings / track is difficult to > discern > > Furthermore: > > - good framerate is suddenly not important anymore? > - AI is great, but the whiners aren't interested > > There's even a post with an overall negative sound that nevertheless

contains > this quote: > "Frame rate, and overall driving experiance are VERY good, FF is excellentas > well, AI is far above average compared to the other F1 sims out today" > > Ok, call me stupid but I don't really get it :-) > > Conclusion: you can just as well NOT read the impressions here, because inthe > end, you just choose to believe what you WANT to believe anyway. > > JoH Basically......welcome to RAS.

If that was even slightly true then where's all the discussion about how great Nascar 3 is, or Nascar Legends? So there certainly isn't a Papy bias here. Maybe it might look to you that there's a GPL bias, but did it never occur to you (not even once) that maybe so many people thought it was great because it actually was? Are you so arrogant you can't even consider this...?

On Sun, 23 Jul 2000 00:40:06 +0100, Senninha <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (16 lines)

>On Sat, 22 Jul 2000 16:34:27 -0500, "Tracey A Miller" ><[email hidden]> wrote: > >>I'll wait till the game comes out and buy it myself, even if it >>"sucks", at least I'll be supporting someone that is trying to build a >>great modern F1 sim - instead of kissing up to a company (Papyrus) >>that has no intentions of doing so. > >Once you have formed the ability to read and cultivated a desire to >seek out information, go and read the recnt interview with Dave >Kaemeer. > >Papyrus would love to do an F1 sim - but ask Bernie how much he wants >to charge people for that pleasure. > >John

Here's where I feel that even gurus like Mr. Kaemmer don't yet see the light. Why for gods sake would anyone crawl up to Bernie and pay him big bucks for a freaking license to use names or whatever? That's the one sole point that MGPRS2 did reasonably right: *Make it editable*. Open standards, no cryptic file formats, whatever, make it easy for dedicated people to form a hacking community bent on improving *your* product which gets *you* money. Just release a decent racing simulation with pluggable physics engines, and it could simulate *all* kinds of eras of modern racing. 60's, turbos, high-downforce riding on rails, you name it. Document the interface and use a standard like png or 3do (it's not standard, but well known by now), throw in up-to-par multiplayer ability like GPL has and watch the community grow. Open-source it or license out the source to have third parties port it to other platforms. Heck, just to keep bernies lawyers off your butt put all the "extra editors" that people came up with over an "extensive period of beta testing" on a second CD just to be safe (of course you'd make sure that different eras are one-click-installable as the windows crowd seems to prefer ;-). With the internet permeating every aspect of people's lives more and more every day such a thing is bound to work out, maybe not immediately (just like GPL), but it will in the intermediate to long - term. Uwe -- Uwe Schuerkamp //////////////////////////// http://www.schuerkamp.de/ Herford, Germany \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ (52.0N/8.5E) Ever wondered what's wrong with the world? http://bnetwork.com/ PGP Fingerprint: 2E 13 20 22 9A 3F 63 7F 67 6F E9 B1 A8 36 A4 61

On 23 Jul 2000 17:57:17 GMT, EldredP <[email hidden]> wrote: > >You would actually spend your money on a game you KNEW was bad beforehand? >Just to 'support' a company? Screw that. Why throw away your money? If you >have that kind of money to waste, throw some MY way... > >Eldred Eldred, I like you more and more by the minute ;-) Uwe -- Uwe Schuerkamp //////////////////////////// http://www.schuerkamp.de/ Herford, Germany \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ (52.0N/8.5E) Ever wondered what's wrong with the world? http://bnetwork.com/ PGP Fingerprint: 2E 13 20 22 9A 3F 63 7F 67 6F E9 B1 A8 36 A4 61

On Sun, 23 Jul 2000 12:00:56 GMT Tel <[email hidden]> wrote: % In article <[email hidden]>, % Jo Helsen <[email hidden]> wrote: % > Don't think so... % > % <snip> % heh... you're right. But since when was RAS ever useful to get serious % feedback about any sim out there? And this one isn't even from Papyrus, % so it is doomed by default :)... Maybe there is a reason beyond r.a.s. being controlled by Papyrus employees that Papy sims get the support they do here. It could just be that Papy makes better overall sims than other companies. We like what we like and more times than not Papy does it right. -- **************************** Michael E. Carver ************************* Upside out, or inside down...False alarm the only game in town. [email hidden] http://www.teleport.com/~mcarver =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<[ /./. [- < ]>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=