Re: Has GPL spoiled you ?

Dave sure is fun. > Same old words from the same old name. Predictable as usual. "Inciteful" is a better word in this context. The phrase "same old" makes me thing of people like Remco, Marty U'ren, John Wallace, and others. They have evidently permanently kill-filed you because they never respond to you anymore. Funny how you don't find yourself "predictable"? hehe > First of all Pat, RC2000 is not "my" sim. I didn't make it, or profit off of > it, so it's just another sim to me. In this news group, for the past year, you have been Mr. RC2000. > I enjoy a number of different sims and have no ridiculous allegiance to any > one developer. I admire what MANY developers have done with various sims. That's a king-size straw man. Who is this fictitious person with a "ridiculous allegiance to any one developer"? I haven't seen any here. Everyone is impatient for GP3 and WSC, whether they like GPL or not. Lots of GPL guys even like RC2000 and F12K - imagine that. > I'm just very tired of being bored by the GPL crowd and watching them give > poor advise to the newcomers who visit this newsgroup. We're all tired and bored, but not at the same things apparently. Commenting that a supposed sim does not model physics to the extent that GPL does, does not constitute "advise" (or advice, for those watching at home).

Quoted text (9 lines)

> >And one other thing, the 'same group of guys' > > who have been ragging on everything that > > is not GPL are in fact a 'whole new group > > of guys'. I don't even recognize most of > > those names. > > The quote above is ridiculous. GPL sold a handful of copies.........2 years > ago. Has there suddenly been a half million new copies of GPL flying off the > shelves?

You've taken leave from your senses again. I've seen a lot of guys on here who have said that they've tried GPL again recently, after not caring for it when released, who are hooked. How did anyone have to sell 500,000 copies of anything for that to happen?

Quoted text (8 lines)

> I read the same names month, after month, after month going on about the GPL > physics. I pulled GPL out of mothballs (played it for a total of maybe 4 > hours in the past year) two weeks ago and did a 1:28 at Monza after a half > hour of half hearted practice. Such an overwhelmingly realistic experience. > I really felt at one with the physics of this "work of art". My 20 year old > neighbor who never had tried GPL before did a 1:29 after an hour. I asked > him afterwards if he felt moved to compose a poem of love for the GPL > physics model. For some reason, he didn't.

How does doing a fast lap make GPL less realistic? 1:28 is not that fast. > Steer left. Steer right. Accelerate. Brake. All the while marveling at the > the boring, dated graphics and the crappy frame rate, no weather effects, no > pitting, average sound, jump through hoops only to be disco'ed multi-player > feature. 1:28. Get the point yet? What sim are you playing? I get the point. Yes, the point is you are hopelessly biased against GPL, and it is your crusade to somehow prove that it's not worthy. > It's........just........a......friggen..........game. > > To say that I'm "single-minded" is kind of funny as now four different > developers in the past two years have asked me to beta test for them. Why > would they do that? I don't know. Same reason I beta test for six different developers? You are going to have to try harder to impress us. > People who are fans of sims like SCGT, MGPRS2, DTR, RC2000, GP500, GP2, > SBK2000, F12000 never seem to have an issue with my posts. Only GPL > groupies. Says it all right there, doesn't it? That's because you don't constantly and incessantly rail against the users of "SCGT, MGPRS2, DTR, RC2000, GP500, GP2, SBK2000, F12000", the way you do at the slightest expression of opinion that GPL might be the best sim available. > I am one of the people on this newsgroup who WELCOMES new sims and insists > on not being NEGATIVE towards the efforts of other developers. Well, excuse me for not recognizing your sainthood. I won't let it happen again.

Quoted text (7 lines)

> I give > newcomers advise which encourages them to look at the positives of various > sims, instead of trying to drag them into the the "cult of GPL". > > Bad Dave. > > David G Fisher

So now we are all cultists? You are so predictable. I think I just saw Janet Reno out in the yard. Best wishes, -- Pat Dotson IMPACT Motorsports http://www.impactmotorsports.com/pd.html

>Same people. Same old words. Oh, the irony! -- Cheers! Graeme Nash

>Such an overwhelmingly realistic experience! > Steer left. Steer right. Accelerate. Brake. As opposed to pushing buttons on a game controller (that's how it feels in other sims) >All the while marveling at the > the boring, dated graphicswho has done it better ? > and the crappy frame ratewho has done it better ? > average soundwho has done it better ? > jump through hoops only to be disco'ed multi-playerwho has done it better ? > feature. 1:28. Get the point yet?You get the point ? There are some good "efforts" of other developers, GPL, however, is not an "effort", it's pure genious. It captures parts of the very essence that , for centuries, has made people risk their lives and become racing drivers (don't try to tell me it's the pitstops). If you don't see that, fine with me .. but because this is rec.autos.simulators and not rec.prettytracksidegraphics.simulators i'm afraid you may have to live for some time with the dominating position that GPL has in this group. And give me one damn reason why I should recommend anything but GPL to some newbie who posts the question "what is the best driving/racing simulator?"... cheers, Alex

In article <zbnG4.800$[email hidden]>, "Jason Fagan" <[email hidden]> writes:

Quoted text (7 lines)

>We need our fellow sim advocates to help us differentiate between games and >sims in situations such as these. GPL is a very serious sim, while titles >such as those (NFS F12K) I have absolutely no use for. Hell GT2 for the PSX >is almost better at the genre than those two games. > >Please, when rating these games save us all the time and money and hassle >and make it clear that they have nothing on GPL physics.

Well, I'd guess that you, being a 'serious sim afficianado', would be able to read a review and draw your own conclusions. I love Gpl too, but it bothers me when GPL fans take what I(and others) perceive as a 'holier-than-thou' attitude. Yes, I like GPL. I think it's a great program. I also like Viper, NFS, SCGT, TOCA2, etc. I even got quite a bit of mileage(no pun intended) out of Screamer 2... Tolerance goes a long way, and some people on BOTH sides need to think about it... My .08(adjusted for inflation) Eldred -- Tiger Stadium R.I.P. 1912-1999 Own Grand Prix Legends? Goto http://gpl.gamestats.com/vroc Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

David G Fisher <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:IfrG4.105196$[email hidden]... > Same people. Same old words. > > David G Fisher LOL! Are you just pissed off that the "GPL Killer" that was RC2000 hardly gets a mention? I don't understand what you've got against folks who state their enjoyment of GPL. People only do it because it's a good sim. As soon as a better one appears the topics will shift. No one is blindly evangelising GPL just because it's GPL. Mark

> >Sorry but I totally disagree, nothing even comes close to GPL in any aspect. Well maybe WSC and GP3 will be great sims but by far i do think N4 will be good even though we dont have much info on it.

I'll jump in on this thread, everyone else has ;-D My view is that GPL has the best physics model around, but until we have the physics engine in Indy sims, dirt track sims, SCCA Trans Am sims, F1 sims ... I need to buy F1-2000, SCGT, Dirt Track racing to get my racing fix! Watching a race (of any kind) on TV then racing the same track on my computer is fun. Driving any car with a realistic physics model is fun - it doesn't have to be perfect just realistic to me. R2K might not have the perfect car-to-track feedback but its fun to race for 30minutes not knowing the road by the back of your hand. It sure is a blast when friends come over anyway! SCGT was the first sports car sim so I could drive cars that I'm used to seeing. It filled that gap. Dirt track racing is really fun using pro-stocks/stocks on the really short ovals :-D F1-2000 seems to model F1 cars pretty good for me. Sure the physics may not be as detailed as GPL, but there is surely room for more than 1 sim on my 27 GB HD :-) Even SODA is still loaded up. In conclusion, yes GPL has spoiled me by making me wish those physics were in all my sims, but it's not going to stop me from playing other games/sims. Jason "I just want to race" Monds Mike Dietz wrote:

Quoted text (8 lines)

> After reading some good reviews on NFS PU and F12000 on this newsgroup > recently I thought I'd try these two titles. Thank God EB has a > return policy. About the only upcoming title even worth a look is > maybe GP3. Dave Noonan's converter has actually made GPL two > simulations. Price of the converter is worth it many times over for > Indy alone. At times I used to miss ICR2 because the thrill of high > speed ovals but the converter made the desire to see ICR3 obsolete. > Thanks again Mr Noonan.

-- Jason Monds http://www.proracingclub.com - Pro Racing Club! (N3, GPL) http://members.home.net/stuff.mondsj/csp - Car Sim Project (Please remove 'no extra spork' when replying)

> This newsgroup is entitled 'rec.autos.simulators' not > 'rec.autos.I.love.GPL.everything.else.sucks' really ? waitaminit, I have to check... cheers, Alex

lol... I totally agree that GPL is king right now. It's the game I play more than all the others combined. My point is that we still should give the other games out there a fair hearing, not condemn them off the bat because they are inferior to GPL. Just my two cents, and you got what you paid for... ...Colin Ace <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:8cd9cj$itf$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > Colin > wrote in message <8cd1sc$7m7$[email hidden]>... > >People, we really need to stop with this "nothing on GPL" bullshit. > >This newsgroup is entitled 'rec.autos.simulators' not > >'rec.autos.I.love.GPL.everything.else.sucks' > > Perhaps we should change the name then, but something less long-winded,

like > "rec.autos.superior.sims.GPL." <g> > It's not as if anyone is prevented from airing a differnt opinion is it,but

Quoted text (7 lines)

> what does it say about GPL if it's loved so much? And, while we're on the > subject, GPL is still king, for reasons which have been given *many* times > before, and although I'd like to see it displaced by better stuff, that > hasn't yet happened. > > >

> It's a waste of time. It's a waste of time trying to hype products that in no way deserve the praise. >The same group of guys with 1,000,001 hours invested > in GPL, say the same things over and over again about >every new sim thatcomes along. Wrong. "They" are gonna say the same things over and over again about every *INFERIOR* sim that comes along, but "they"' are just as well waiting for that superior sim to come All Hail WSC, hail to thee, thane of Newsgroups and Forums! Hail hail WSC, thane of Rumors and Expectations, All hail the West Brothers, thou shalt be king hereafter.... ....or have we eaten on the insane root that takes the reason prisoner ? cheers, Alex

Quoted text (7 lines)

> Colin, > > It's a waste of time. The same group of guys with 1,000,001 hours invested > in GPL, say the same things over and over again about every new sim that > comes along. Supposedly they are serious adults, but they act no different > than the 14 year old brats who use words like "rulez" and "sucks" to > describe sims.

What is a waste of time is arguing with Mr. RC2000. He is no less single-minded than the GPL diehards he takes so much pleasure in constantly, ceaselessy bashing. Facts and reason are of no use to him, and his debating ability doesn't surpass that of a 14 year old quake-head. I've avoided saying "F1 2000 is no GPL", mainly in order not to set him off. The fact is that it's not. It's closer to GPL than most, though, and one of the top three or four sims in terms of physics implementation. The fact is, that I and many others who have spent as much time, and gotten as much enjoyment from GPL as anyone have complimented F1 2000 in a lot of ways. And one other thing, the 'same group of guys' who have been ragging on everything that is not GPL are in fact a 'whole new group of guys'. I don't even recognize most of those names. So there's my semi-annual Mr. RC2000 rant. It won't change anything, but I feel better. -- Pat Dotson IMPACT Motorsports http://www.impactmotorsports.com/pd.html

wrote: > > Same people. Same old words. Good comeback. Very insightful. -- Pat Dotson IMPACT Motorsports http://www.impactmotorsports.com/pd.html

wrote: > > Same people. Same old words. They are words, which contain thought and opinion, with a few facts mixed in. That's a hell of a lot more than you've offered today.

Quoted text (20 lines)

> "Rick Baumhauer" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:NIqG4.3171$[email hidden]... > > Oh, nonsense - remember, the name of the newsgroup is > rec.autos.SIMULATORS, > > *not* rec.autos.games. Since the key word here is SIMULATORS, I see no > > reason why other titles shouldn't be compared to GPL and its value as a > > SIMULATOR. Others may have prettier graphics, or may work with a wider > > range of graphics cards, but in the genre of automotive SIMULATORS, GPL > has > > no equal. Period. > > > > And I wish it wasn't so, quite frankly...............but if GPL was truly > > the last of the great racing sims, we can at least be thankful that this > > work of art made it out the door before the bean counters stifled > everything > > at Sierra. > > > > Rick > > > >

-- Pat Dotson IMPACT Motorsports http://www.impactmotorsports.com/pd.html

People, we really need to stop with this "nothing on GPL" bullshit. This newsgroup is entitled 'rec.autos.simulators' not 'rec.autos.I.love.GPL.everything.else.sucks' F1 2000 and NFSPU are excellent simulations. Just because the physics models are not up to the high standards of GPL does not mean that they are not worthwhile titles. These games have excellent physics models. In many other ways, both these games are superior to GPL. We need to look at the new sims that have been released recently with a more open mind. If we want to knock some titles, try games like Test Drive 5 that have no basis in reality. RO (rant over) ...Colin Jason Fagan <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:zbnG4.800$[email hidden]... > We need our fellow sim advocates to help us differentiate between gamesand > sims in situations such as these. GPL is a very serious sim, while titles > such as those (NFS F12K) I have absolutely no use for. Hell GT2 for thePSX

Quoted text (7 lines)

> is almost better at the genre than those two games. > > Please, when rating these games save us all the time and money and hassle > and make it clear that they have nothing on GPL physics. > > >

After reading some good reviews on NFS PU and F12000 on this newsgroup recently I thought I'd try these two titles. Thank God EB has a return policy. About the only upcoming title even worth a look is maybe GP3. Dave Noonan's converter has actually made GPL two simulations. Price of the converter is worth it many times over for Indy alone. At times I used to miss ICR2 because the thrill of high speed ovals but the converter made the desire to see ICR3 obsolete. Thanks again Mr Noonan.

really ? waitaminit, I have to check... cheers, Alex

Same people. Same old words. David G Fisher rec.autos.SIMULATORS,

Same people. Same old words. David G Fisher

Oh, the irony! -- Cheers! Graeme Nash

We need our fellow sim advocates to help us differentiate between games and sims in situations such as these. GPL is a very serious sim, while titles such as those (NFS F12K) I have absolutely no use for. Hell GT2 for the PSX is almost better at the genre than those two games. Please, when rating these games save us all the time and money and hassle and make it clear that they have nothing on GPL physics.

"Colin" <colin AT yourmiata DOT COM> wrote:

Quoted text (7 lines)

>People, we really need to stop with this "nothing on GPL" bullshit. >This newsgroup is entitled 'rec.autos.simulators' not >'rec.autos.I.love.GPL.everything.else.sucks' >F1 2000 and NFSPU are excellent simulations. Just because the physics >models are not up to the high standards of GPL does not mean that they are >not worthwhile titles. These games have excellent physics models. In many >other ways, both these games are superior to GPL.

Hehe, I don't dare to name those three capital letters, but in what way are the other two superior? Remco >We need to look at the new sims that have been released recently with a more >open mind. If we want to knock some titles, try games like Test Drive 5 >that have no basis in reality. WHAT! Test Drive 5 is the best ever! <g> Remco

Colin > wrote in message <8cd1sc$7m7$[email hidden]>... >People, we really need to stop with this "nothing on GPL" bullshit. >This newsgroup is entitled 'rec.autos.simulators' not >'rec.autos.I.love.GPL.everything.else.sucks' Perhaps we should change the name then, but something less long-winded, like "rec.autos.superior.sims.GPL." <g> It's not as if anyone is prevented from airing a differnt opinion is it, but what does it say about GPL if it's loved so much? And, while we're on the subject, GPL is still king, for reasons which have been given *many* times before, and although I'd like to see it displaced by better stuff, that hasn't yet happened.

Colin, It's a waste of time. The same group of guys with 1,000,001 hours invested in GPL, say the same things over and over again about every new sim that comes along. Supposedly they are serious adults, but they act no different than the 14 year old brats who use words like "rulez" and "sucks" to describe sims. David G Fisher "Colin" <colin AT yourmiata DOT COM> wrote in message news:8cd1sc$7m7$[email hidden]... > People, we really need to stop with this "nothing on GPL" bullshit. > This newsgroup is entitled 'rec.autos.simulators' not > 'rec.autos.I.love.GPL.everything.else.sucks' > F1 2000 and NFSPU are excellent simulations. Just because the physics > models are not up to the high standards of GPL does not mean that they are > not worthwhile titles. These games have excellent physics models. Inmany > other ways, both these games are superior to GPL. > We need to look at the new sims that have been released recently with amore

Quoted text (12 lines)

> open mind. If we want to knock some titles, try games like Test Drive 5 > that have no basis in reality. > > RO (rant over) > ...Colin > > > Jason Fagan <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:zbnG4.800$[email hidden]... > > We need our fellow sim advocates to help us differentiate between games > and > > sims in situations such as these. GPL is a very serious sim, while

titles > > such as those (NFS F12K) I have absolutely no use for. Hell GT2 for the > PSX > > is almost better at the genre than those two games. > > > > Please, when rating these games save us all the time and money andhassle > > and make it clear that they have nothing on GPL physics. > > > > > > > >

Oh, nonsense - remember, the name of the newsgroup is rec.autos.SIMULATORS, *not* rec.autos.games. Since the key word here is SIMULATORS, I see no reason why other titles shouldn't be compared to GPL and its value as a SIMULATOR. Others may have prettier graphics, or may work with a wider range of graphics cards, but in the genre of automotive SIMULATORS, GPL has no equal. Period. And I wish it wasn't so, quite frankly...............but if GPL was truly the last of the great racing sims, we can at least be thankful that this work of art made it out the door before the bean counters stifled everything at Sierra. Rick

Sorry but I totally disagree, nothing even comes close to GPL in any aspect. "Colin" <colin AT yourmiata DOT COM> wrote in message news:8cd1sc$7m7$[email hidden]... > People, we really need to stop with this "nothing on GPL" bullshit. > This newsgroup is entitled 'rec.autos.simulators' not > 'rec.autos.I.love.GPL.everything.else.sucks' > F1 2000 and NFSPU are excellent simulations. Just because the physics > models are not up to the high standards of GPL does not mean that they are > not worthwhile titles. These games have excellent physics models. Inmany > other ways, both these games are superior to GPL. > We need to look at the new sims that have been released recently with amore

Quoted text (12 lines)

> open mind. If we want to knock some titles, try games like Test Drive 5 > that have no basis in reality. > > RO (rant over) > ...Colin > > > Jason Fagan <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:zbnG4.800$[email hidden]... > > We need our fellow sim advocates to help us differentiate between games > and > > sims in situations such as these. GPL is a very serious sim, while

titles > > such as those (NFS F12K) I have absolutely no use for. Hell GT2 for the > PSX > > is almost better at the genre than those two games. > > > > Please, when rating these games save us all the time and money andhassle > > and make it clear that they have nothing on GPL physics. > > > > > > > >

These games have excellent physics models. In many > other ways, both these games are superior to GPL. Many? There is only one thing that makes F12000 better than GPL. It doesn't consume much ( any ) of my precious time! And i just love it for that! Borut

Same people. Same old words. David G Fisher "Rick Baumhauer" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:NIqG4.3171$[email hidden]... > Oh, nonsense - remember, the name of the newsgroup isrec.autos.SIMULATORS, > *not* rec.autos.games. Since the key word here is SIMULATORS, I see no > reason why other titles shouldn't be compared to GPL and its value as a > SIMULATOR. Others may have prettier graphics, or may work with a wider > range of graphics cards, but in the genre of automotive SIMULATORS, GPLhas > no equal. Period. > > And I wish it wasn't so, quite frankly...............but if GPL was truly > the last of the great racing sims, we can at least be thankful that this > work of art made it out the door before the bean counters stifledeverything > at Sierra. > > Rick > >

Same people. Same old words. David G Fisher "Alexander Marx" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:8cdc84$69fmt$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > > It's a waste of time. > > It's a waste of time trying to hype products that in no way deserve the > praise. > > >The same group of guys with 1,000,001 hours invested > > in GPL, say the same things over and over again about >every new sim

that

Quoted text (19 lines)

> comes along. > > Wrong. > "They" are gonna say the same things over and over again about every > *INFERIOR* sim that comes along, but "they"' are just as well waiting for > that superior sim to come > > All Hail WSC, hail to thee, thane of Newsgroups and Forums! > Hail hail WSC, thane of Rumors and Expectations, > All hail the West Brothers, thou shalt be king hereafter.... > > > ....or have we eaten on the insane root that takes the reason prisoner ? > > > cheers, > Alex > >

Same old words from the same old name. Predictable as usual. First of all Pat, RC2000 is not "my" sim. I didn't make it, or profit off of it, so it's just another sim to me. I enjoy a number of different sims and have no ridiculous allegiance to any one developer. I admire what MANY developers have done with various sims. I'm just very tired of being bored by the GPL crowd and watching them give poor advise to the newcomers who visit this newsgroup. >And one other thing, the 'same group of guys' > who have been ragging on everything that > is not GPL are in fact a 'whole new group > of guys'. I don't even recognize most of > those names. The quote above is ridiculous. GPL sold a handful of copies.........2 years ago. Has there suddenly been a half million new copies of GPL flying off the shelves? I read the same names month, after month, after month going on about the GPL physics. I pulled GPL out of mothballs (played it for a total of maybe 4 hours in the past year) two weeks ago and did a 1:28 at Monza after a half hour of half hearted practice. Such an overwhelmingly realistic experience. I really felt at one with the physics of this "work of art". My 20 year old neighbor who never had tried GPL before did a 1:29 after an hour. I asked him afterwards if he felt moved to compose a poem of love for the GPL physics model. For some reason, he didn't. Steer left. Steer right. Accelerate. Brake. All the while marveling at the the boring, dated graphics and the crappy frame rate, no weather effects, no pitting, average sound, jump through hoops only to be disco'ed multi-player feature. 1:28. Get the point yet? It's........just........a......friggen..........game. To say that I'm "single-minded" is kind of funny as now four different developers in the past two years have asked me to beta test for them. Why would they do that? People who are fans of sims like SCGT, MGPRS2, DTR, RC2000, GP500, GP2, SBK2000, F12000 never seem to have an issue with my posts. Only GPL groupies. Says it all right there, doesn't it? I am one of the people on this newsgroup who WELCOMES new sims and insists on not being NEGATIVE towards the efforts of other developers. I give newcomers advise which encourages them to look at the positives of various sims, instead of trying to drag them into the the "cult of GPL". Bad Dave. David G Fisher "Pat Dotson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > Colin, > > > > It's a waste of time. The same group of guys with 1,000,001 hoursinvested > > in GPL, say the same things over and over again about every new sim that > > comes along. Supposedly they are serious adults, but they act nodifferent

Quoted text (37 lines)

> > than the 14 year old brats who use words like "rulez" and "sucks" to > > describe sims. > > What is a waste of time is arguing with Mr. > RC2000. He is no less single-minded than > the GPL diehards he takes so much pleasure > in constantly, ceaselessy bashing. Facts > and reason are of no use to him, and his > debating ability doesn't surpass that of > a 14 year old quake-head. > > I've avoided saying "F1 2000 is no GPL", > mainly in order not to set him off. The > fact is that it's not. It's closer to > GPL than most, though, and one of the > top three or four sims in terms of > physics implementation. > > The fact is, that I and many others who > have spent as much time, and gotten as > much enjoyment from GPL as anyone have > complimented F1 2000 in a lot of ways. > > And one other thing, the 'same group of guys' > who have been ragging on everything that > is not GPL are in fact a 'whole new group > of guys'. I don't even recognize most of > those names. > > So there's my semi-annual Mr. RC2000 > rant. It won't change anything, but > I feel better. > > -- > Pat Dotson > IMPACT Motorsports > http://www.impactmotorsports.com/pd.html

"Rick Baumhauer" wrote <snip> >GPL has no equal. Period. > > And I wish it wasn't so, quite frankly...............but if GPL was truly > the last of the great racing sims, we can at least be thankful that this > work of art made it out the door before the bean counters stifledeverything > at Sierra. Agreed. My expectations run (optimistically) high that products should at lease evolve, with the odd revolutionary product now & then to be a new milestone. Sure I love GPL - but I want more - more variety of car types, better graphics, better sound, better AI - the wish list could go on & on. In my (longish) exposure to sims there has been a steady progress: 1990 Indy 500 1992 F1GP 1993 Indycar 1994 Nascar 1995 Indycar2 1996 GP2 1996 Nascar2 1998 GPL 2000 has been good for rally sims with RC2000 & the forthcoming Rallymasters proving to be a major step forward for this area. Bike sims - GP500 & SBK2000 also seem to have taken a leap forward Racing sims are due another milestone - hopes get raised and dashed. Optimism takes over. Realistically I never expecetd EA Sports to produce a cutting edge racing sim. However, I really hoped I would be surprised. Expectations are raised and disappointment follows. Resulting in probably harsh treatment by this group - yet this is a reflection of disappointment more than an eager desire to slam anything that isn't GPL. My best purchase has been the GPL track converter - well done Dave Noonan. Yet still I feel disappointed that Papyrus haven't done anything with the GPL engine. yes I know it all comes down to profits - but it doesn't stop us wanting more from GPL. Despite are apparent loyalty we as a group are as fickle as the general public. We love Papyrus & GPL now. Yet if something truly better comes along we will back that product. We wait... Tony

Gosh, David, I wasn't aware that it was so easy to get into the "same old voices" club - a quick search of deja.com turns up my name fewer than 30 times in the last year, and only a few of those relate directly to GPL or my enthusiasm for it. Rick

Rick Baumhauer wrote:

Quoted text (13 lines)

> > Oh, nonsense - remember, the name of the newsgroup is rec.autos.SIMULATORS, > *not* rec.autos.games. Since the key word here is SIMULATORS, I see no > reason why other titles shouldn't be compared to GPL and its value as a > SIMULATOR. Others may have prettier graphics, or may work with a wider > range of graphics cards, but in the genre of automotive SIMULATORS, GPL has > no equal. Period. > > And I wish it wasn't so, quite frankly...............but if GPL was truly > the last of the great racing sims, we can at least be thankful that this > work of art made it out the door before the bean counters stifled everything > at Sierra. >

OTOH, it is not rec.autos.physics.simulators either. Yes, GPL has an awesome physics model, but racing (and autos in general) are about more then physics. I'll take RC2K as an example. There are aspects of the physics model which are maddening, but the _total_ simulation experience is great. You don't have to just put in good times; you have to be able to repair enough of your car to get to the next stage. You have to be strategic in repairs. You have to do tire & gear selection over more then one stage with varying conditions. A serious error can put you out of an entire rally (and ruin the entire season). The graphics are extremely important; they give a feel of realism. Once you have wrecked a few rallys by reckless driving, you start to slow down for that tree because you are white-knuckled for fear of hitting it; you just spent 40 minutes running two stages and are terrified of ruining it all at the end. NFS:HS has an awful physics model, but betting your car against another is, in some way, a far better simulation of a poorly funded race team (where too many wrecks will put you out of the season) then GPL will ever simulate. NFS:PU is immersive and challenging. The cars may not be totally real, but money mangement, etc. are very real, esp. past the golden era (which is too easy, but gives you confidence at the start). In short, GPL is -- without question -- the most accurate at set-up and physics, but simulation can be about the entire experience, which is where GPL fails in some respects. Obvious example: pit-strategy. Oh, I'll nit-pick GPL physics too: Let us say we could model vehicle physics perfectly. Would it make the best sim? Absolutely NOT. In the real car, you can 'feel' the back end sliding out. You can 'measure' the G's you are pulling. Visual cues (for braking, etc) are much better. Your field of vision is much, much wider. To some extent, sims must modify reality to make-up for the inadequacies of the medium: Small screen, only limited visual and very limited steering wheel feedback (with a small dash of sound). So give the physics a rest and look at the entire sim experience. Physics are important, but not the only factor. PMK

Wow! Well done! Both you and your friend must be extremely talented at racing. Sub 1.30 laps at Monza after just a couple of laps.... It's a shame, though, that you seem to be more interested in special graphic effects than actually playing the game. What a waste of valuable talent. Also, it is too bad that you do not have a proper modem or ISDN card. It seems to me that there is something wrong with your hardware, or your ISP. That is the only explanation for disconnects. Multiplayer implementation in GPL is good, just as good as the rest of the game. Jon > I read the same names month, after month, after month going on about theGPL > physics. I pulled GPL out of mothballs (played it for a total of maybe 4 > hours in the past year) two weeks ago and did a 1:28 at Monza after a half > hour of half hearted practice. Such an overwhelmingly realisticexperience. > I really felt at one with the physics of this "work of art". My 20 yearold > neighbor who never had tried GPL before did a 1:29 after an hour. I asked > him afterwards if he felt moved to compose a poem of love for the GPL > physics model. For some reason, he didn't. > > Steer left. Steer right. Accelerate. Brake. All the while marveling at the > the boring, dated graphics and the crappy frame rate, no weather effects,no > pitting, average sound, jump through hoops only to be disco'edmulti-player > feature. 1:28. Get the point yet? > > It's........just........a......friggen..........game. > David G Fisher >

In article <FYrG4.105256$[email hidden]>, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> writes: >I pulled GPL out of mothballs (played it for a total of maybe 4 >hours in the past year) two weeks ago and did a 1:28 at Monza after a half >hour of half hearted practice. Such an overwhelmingly realistic experience. >I really felt at one with the physics of this "work of art". My 20 year old >neighbor who never had tried GPL before did a 1:29 after an hour. You ran a 1:28 after a total of 4 1/2 hours, and your neighbor did a 1:29 after an HOUR?!? That's just depressing... Eldred - who *still* hasn't broken 1:30 in more than a YEAR...<Sigh> -- Tiger Stadium R.I.P. 1912-1999 Own Grand Prix Legends? Goto http://gpl.gamestats.com/vroc Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

David G Fisher wrote:

Quoted text (12 lines)

> > "Pat Dotson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > > The phrase "same old" makes me thing of > > people like Remco, Marty U'ren, John > > Wallace, and others. They have evidently > > permanently kill-filed you because they > > never respond to you anymore. > > Did they tell you that during one of your VROC chats? Thankfully, only a few > more to go. You too soon I hope. Didn't you promise me long ago that you > wouldn't be reading any more of my posts?

No. I noticed all on my own that they don't respond to you, just by looking at this newsgroup. I managed to quit reading your posts for a while, but when you started talking about F12K, I decided to have a look. The funny thing is that you actually made sense in a few of those.

Quoted text (7 lines)

> For anyone who cares, Pat portrayed me as the devil in disguise two years > ago when I committed the unforgivable sin of <gasp> insisting that CPR had > some excellent qualities. I helped quite a few people with setups and > controller issues. Pat couldn't get his controller to work well at all, and > took his frustration out on me in front of this newsgroup. > > Now, he's back to save r.a.s. from me all over again.

"Devil in disguise"? That sounds entertaining. Do you still have a copy of that post - I'd like to read it. If controller settings were the only part of CRP that was lacking, people might still be playing it. It has so many flaws that it's not funny. As far as I remember, the only thing even above average in CPR was the sound. > > In this news group, for the past year, > > you have been Mr. RC2000. > > Your buddy Remco accused me of hyping F12000 just a couple of weeks ago. So > am I Mr. RC2000 or Mr. F12000? Or am I simply guilty of liking too many > sims? I've been more of a "Mr. F12000" than just about anyone lately, but that doesn't change the way you hyped RC 2000 for months on end. > > That's a king-size straw man. Who is this > > fictitious person with a "ridiculous > > allegiance to any one developer"? I > > haven't seen any here. > > No, there's no Papyrus fan club here. Sure there is a Papyrus fan club. They have consistenly made good sims. But your characterization of those people as having a "ridiculous allegiance to... one developer", is plain nuts. Everyone wants GP3 to be better than GPL. Everyone wants WSC to be better than GPL. Everyone even wanted F12K to be better than GPL. So far, nothing has been better than GPL.

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > Commenting that a supposed sim does not > > model physics to the extent that GPL does, > > does not constitute "advise" (or advice, for > > those watching at home). > > They say a hell of a lot more than "a supposed sim does not > model physics to the extent that GPL does". If you've been reading this > newsgroup at all the past few weeks, or even this thread, you've seen that > quite a few people besides myself are sick of what GPL fans have to say.

Quite a few people are sick of what you have to say too, in case you didn't notice. They tend not to go after you personally, though, and try to reason with you, as opposed to the way you insult them for <gasp> thinking that GPL is the most realistic sim. (Note: I intentionally use the word "thinking", as opposed to "having the opinion", because the GPL afficionado can back up his opinions with fact) > Thanks for correcting my spelling. You've proven your briliance to us all. Anytime, pal, though it's not difficult to do when conversing with you.

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > You've taken leave from your senses again. > > > > I've seen a lot of guys on here who have said that > > they've tried GPL again recently, after not > > caring for it when released, who are hooked. > > How did anyone have to sell 500,000 copies of > > anything for that to happen? > > Seem like the same names to me.

Then you haven't been paying attention, have you?

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > How does doing a fast lap make GPL less > > realistic? 1:28 is not that fast. > > Under the conditions I described, yes, it is fast. I don't have a million > laps under my belt like most of the GPL die-hards do. If the physics were as > amazingly realistic as I've been told, then I, and my neighbor, shouldn't > come close to those times. However advanced the physics model is, it's still > not any more realistic than many other racing games I've tried.

I repeat, how does the ability to do a fast lap, even without a lot of practice, make GPL less realistic? (waiting for a coherent, and well reasoned answer, which would be completely out of character)

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > I get the point. Yes, the point is you are > > hopelessly biased against GPL, and it is your > > crusade to somehow prove that it's not worthy. > > Who told you? Actually, I've said many, many times that it's an excellent > sim. It simulates the '67 F1 season very well. That's all it does. BTW, > computer sims are not THAT important in the big picture of life, so you'll > just have to trust me when I say that I am not on any "crusade" to destroy > GPL. Thanks for the laugh.

I need to clarify. Your crusade is not to destroy GPL. You've been mildly complimentary toward it in some regards. You crusade is against anyone who thinks it is even remotely more realistic than YOU are willing to give it credit for. I characterize your quest as a "crusade", because of the seemingly limitless time and energy you put into pursuing it. > > I don't know. Same reason I beta test for > > six different developers? You are going > > to have to try harder to impress us. > > I could care less about impressing whoever "us" is. Is "us" the GPL fan > club? "Us" is the same "us" to whom I so blithely demonstrated my "briliance" to earlier. Namely, the readers of this newsgroup. > The reason I mention my beta testing is that developers have told me > that they could care less about what the GPL zealots have to say about sims > (they've heard it all), and tend to avoid r.a.s. all together. Among other > things, they ask for unbiased feedback, which I give them. If one > particular group of people here at r.a.s don't like my opinions, then that's > probably a good thing. It *is* A Good Thing that people here don't like your opinions, because if everyone agreed with you, we might get more sims with excellent qualities like CPR.

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > That's because you don't constantly and incessantly > > rail against the users of "SCGT, MGPRS2, DTR, > > RC2000, GP500, GP2, SBK2000, F12000", the > > way you do at the slightest expression of > > opinion that GPL might be the best sim > > available. > > Cnstantly and incessantly? A slight exaggertion.

A reasonable man could reasonably conclude that 13 posts to this one thread, in the past 12 hours, borders on "constantly and incessantly". > I don't rail against the > others because there is never any reason to. The others don't claim that any of the other sims are as realistic as GPL because they know better. > GPL die hards are so damn > sensitive to what people like me say for some reason, and there's nothing I > can do to control that. Simply not agreeing to their declaration of GPL as > superior to all other sims sends them into a fit. Look now many of you kids > responded to my post in just this thread. You would like to be able to control it though, wouldn't you? I like how you label the reasoned and polite responses the "kids" in this thread gave to you as a "fit".

Quoted text (10 lines)

> > > I give > > > newcomers advise which encourages them to look at the positives of > various > > > sims, instead of trying to drag them into the the "cult of GPL". > > > > So now we are all cultists? You are so > > predictable. > > That was not to be taken literally. Since you are so smart and are able to > correct my spelling, I thought you'd understand.

What I understand is that you are again using inciteful rhetoric to accuse your opponents of being idiots, and then you wonder why they seem "so damn sensitive". > > I think I just saw Janet Reno out in the > > yard. > > I guess she finally escaped from your room? She's not my type, but I do hope > you can convince her to come back to you. It would be far easier to convince her to hop in the sack, than to convince you to listen to reason. -- Pat Dotson IMPACT Motorsports http://www.impactmotorsports.com/pd.html

> Please re-read the thread and see the progression. If no one felt so > sensitive as to have to respond to my harmless post, it would of been one > and done, and saved me some time. > > David G Fisher please re-read also your initial answer to the thread "GPL's dominance of R.A.S." and maybe you'll understand why some may feel a bit offended. I won't do you the favor and put you in my killfile though, it's not THAT easy - your opinions on other sims are valid, and welcome... but please stop these childish provoking attitude against GPL ... what exactly do you want to achieve ?!? cheers, Alex

I'm a little late jumping into this thread, but I must say, AMEN! Well- said, Colin! And, to answer the question myself, I would have to say "not at all" for the most part. If anything, GPL HAS given me a greater appreciation of what GOOD physics modeling should feel like, but it is not the be-all and end-all of driving sims for me. I haven't yet sampled F12K, but I bought the retail version of NFS-PU the day it was released, and it may have been the best $29 I ever spent. As much as I love GPL's amazing physics engine, I don't particularly worship it over all others, and I wouldn't necessarily rank it above other equally-excellent physics models like those found in Viper Racing, DTR, and NFS-PU. In fact, I feel that Viper Racing, DTR, and NFS-PU all do an equally- amazing job of modeling the vehicles that they are intended to model, just as GPL does an amazing job of modeling a 1967-vintage GP racer. It's apples and oranges, as far as I'm concerned. For me, the 1951 Porsche 356 in NFS-PU feels and handles as realistically as I would expect a 356 to handle in real life -- and this is what GPL does with regards to 1967 GP cars, so, maybe GPL has spoiled me in that I pretty much expect things to feel "right" now. Then again, ICR2 and GP2 helped foster those same expectations in me for other driving sims way back in the early 1990s, so maybe I was already spoiled before GPL burst onto the scene. BTW, Colin -- you realize, of course, that if the majority of the other members of the rec.autos.I.love.GPL.everything.else.sucks newsgroup have their way, we will both be smoking turds in purgatory for our trespasses? <G> -- JB In article <8cd1sc$7m7$[email hidden]>, "Colin" <colin AT yourmiata DOT COM> wrote: > People, we really need to stop with this "nothing on GPL" bullshit. > This newsgroup is entitled 'rec.autos.simulators' not > 'rec.autos.I.love.GPL.everything.else.sucks' > F1 2000 and NFSPU are excellent simulations. Just because the physics > models are not up to the high standards of GPL does not mean thatthey are > not worthwhile titles. These games have excellent physics models.In many > other ways, both these games are superior to GPL. > We need to look at the new sims that have been released recently witha more > open mind. If we want to knock some titles, try games like TestDrive 5

Quoted text (8 lines)

> that have no basis in reality. > > RO (rant over) > ...Colin > > Jason Fagan <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:zbnG4.800$[email hidden]... > > We need our fellow sim advocates to help us differentiate between

games > and > > sims in situations such as these. GPL is a very serious sim, whiletitles > > such as those (NFS F12K) I have absolutely no use for. Hell GT2for the > PSX > > is almost better at the genre than those two games. > > > > Please, when rating these games save us all the time and money andhassle > > and make it clear that they have nothing on GPL physics. > > > > > > > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

In article <NIqG4.3171$[email hidden]>, "Rick Baumhauer" <[email hidden]> wrote: > Oh, nonsense - remember, the name of the newsgroup isrec.autos.SIMULATORS, > *not* rec.autos.games. Since the key word here is SIMULATORS, I seeno > reason why other titles shouldn't be compared to GPL and its value asa > SIMULATOR. Others may have prettier graphics, or may work with awider > range of graphics cards, but in the genre of automotive SIMULATORS,GPL has > no equal. Period. Put down the crayon, Rick, and try using a writing instrument with a little finer point. <G> Yes, you're right -- GPL has no equal in the genre of RACING simulators. In terms of AUTOMOTIVE simulators, though, Viper Racing, DTR, and now NFS-PU all do equally-good jobs of simulating the type of vehicles that they attempt to model. GPL may be the best of the bunch when it comes to simulating what it was designed to model, but as it is, when it comes to simulating modern Porsches, Vipers, and Late Model dirt cars, GPL fars WAY short. Yes, I'm sure the GPL physics engine could be adapted to model these types of vehicles, and it would then be the best there is at modeling those types of cars, I'm sure, but at the moment, all it models is open- wheel 1967 GP racers, so there's plenty of room for OTHER types of simulators. Unless, of course, you happen to be so narrow-minded that your ears touch . . . <G> ;-) [NOTE SMILEY AND GRIN <G> ABOVE, INDICATING HUMOROUR INTENTIONS TO THE FINAL REMARK OF MY MINI-DISSERTATION] -- JB > And I wish it wasn't so, quite frankly...............but if GPL wastruly > the last of the great racing sims, we can at least be thankful thatthis > work of art made it out the door before the bean counters stifledeverything > at Sierra. > > Rick > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

Deer Hunter is, unquestionably, the most realistic deer hunting SIMULATION out there -- GPL pales in comparison. I doubt that a 1967 GP car could even withstand a collision with a deer, let alone kill it. Stick Steffan Johannson in a 1970s-vintage F1 car, though, and you might be onto something! </HUMOR> ;-) -- JB In article <a5IG4.365$%[email hidden]>, "Cliff Roman" <[email hidden]> wrote: > David, please do not bring sales figures into this. > > If that is the only thing that counted, then we would all be forcedto say

Quoted text (7 lines)

> that Deer Hunter is the best game out there > > David G Fisher <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:vEBG4.106630$[email hidden]... > > Yes, I'm so pissed off. I take "sim talk" that seriously. > > > > If you'd like, I can show you another forum where RC has been

mentioned > > 20,000 separate times in six months. You can check sales figures ofthe > two > > sims and draw your own conclusions as to how many people in htisworld

Quoted text (16 lines)

> will > > be discussing, and playing, those two sims tomorrow. > > > > David G Fisher > > > > > > "Mark Davison" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:8cdp7g$bls$[email hidden]... > > > > > > David G Fisher <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > news:IfrG4.105196$[email hidden]... > > > > Same people. Same old words. > > > > > > > > David G Fisher > > > > > > LOL! Are you just pissed off that the "GPL Killer" that was

RC2000 > hardly > > > gets a mention? > > > I don't understand what you've got against folks who state their > enjoyment > > > of GPL. People only do it because it's a good sim. As soon as abetter > > one > > > appears the topics will shift. No one is blindly evangelisingGPL just

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > > because it's GPL. > > > > > > Mark > > > > > > > > > >

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

BRAVO, Paul -- well-said! -- JB In article <[email hidden]>, Paul Kierstead <[email hidden]> wrote: > Rick Baumhauer wrote: > > > > Oh, nonsense - remember, the name of the newsgroup isrec.autos.SIMULATORS, > > *not* rec.autos.games. Since the key word here is SIMULATORS, Isee no > > reason why other titles shouldn't be compared to GPL and its valueas a > > SIMULATOR. Others may have prettier graphics, or may work with awider > > range of graphics cards, but in the genre of automotive SIMULATORS,GPL has > > no equal. Period. > > > > And I wish it wasn't so, quite frankly...............but if GPL wastruly > > the last of the great racing sims, we can at least be thankful thatthis > > work of art made it out the door before the bean counters stifledeverything > > at Sierra. > > > > OTOH, it is not rec.autos.physics.simulators either. Yes, GPL has an > awesome physics model, but racing (and autos in general) are aboutmore > then physics. I'll take RC2K as an example. There are aspects of the > physics model which are maddening, but the _total_ simulationexperience > is great. You don't have to just put in good times; you have to beable > to repair enough of your car to get to the next stage. You have to be > strategic in repairs. You have to do tire & gear selection over more > then one stage with varying conditions. A serious error can put youout > of an entire rally (and ruin the entire season). The graphics are > extremely important; they give a feel of realism. Once you havewrecked > a few rallys by reckless driving, you start to slow down for that tree > because you are white-knuckled for fear of hitting it; you just spent40 > minutes running two stages and are terrified of ruining it all at the > end. > > NFS:HS has an awful physics model, but betting your car againstanother > is, in some way, a far better simulation of a poorly funded race team > (where too many wrecks will put you out of the season) then GPL will > ever simulate. NFS:PU is immersive and challenging. The cars may notbe > totally real, but money mangement, etc. are very real, esp. past the > golden era (which is too easy, but gives you confidence at the start). > > In short, GPL is -- without question -- the most accurate at set-upand > physics, but simulation can be about the entire experience, which is > where GPL fails in some respects. Obvious example: pit-strategy. > > Oh, I'll nit-pick GPL physics too: Let us say we could model vehicle > physics perfectly. Would it make the best sim? Absolutely NOT. In the > real car, you can 'feel' the back end sliding out. You can 'measure'the

Quoted text (11 lines)

> G's you are pulling. Visual cues (for braking, etc) are much better. > Your field of vision is much, much wider. To some extent, sims must > modify reality to make-up for the inadequacies of the medium: Small > screen, only limited visual and very limited steering wheel feedback > (with a small dash of sound). > > So give the physics a rest and look at the entire sim experience. > Physics are important, but not the only factor. > > PMK >

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

In article <FYrG4.105256$[email hidden]>, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote: <LIBERAL SNIP> >instead of trying to drag them into the the "cult of GPL". Does this bear any relationship to the "cult of personality"? <G> -- JB Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

Again, I'm going to climb on Colin's bandwagon here so I can pat him on the back. Well-said! -- JB In article <8cg0oc$ir5$[email hidden]>, "Colin" <colin AT yourmiata DOT COM> wrote: > Marc Collins <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:CnvG4.45053$[email hidden]... > > No, they are not excellent simulations. The relatively patheticphysics > > models are exactly why they are not excellent simulations. Add in > pathetic > > steering wheel controller support, pathetic FFB, ludicrouslyunrealistic > > damage modelling, etc. etc. etc., and you have more reasons tosupport the > > claim that they are NOT excellent simulations. > > > > MMmmm. I have to disagree with you Marc. > I take it when you say "relatively pathetic" you mean in comparisonto GPL. > That is the whole point of my post. It is this damaging attitudethat is > all too prevalent in this NG. > > As for the physics being "relatively pathetic" I disagree again.I've been > lucky enough to go through a number of advanced driving courses. Iam a > member of the IAM, I've had time on skid-pads etc. I've also beentaught > how to 360 a car. Funnily enough, in NFS-PU you have to perform thatexact > maneouvre. I executed it exactly as I would in my own car (MX-5,rear-wheel > drive) and it worked perfectly. This is just one indication that the > physics model is pretty close. I can't comment on F1 2000's realismsince I > haven't driven an F1 car but as close as I can get is a Formula Fordcar, > and it's close enough to keep me interested =) > > I also do not agree with your comment about steering wheel support.I have > a TSW and a LWFF. Both work perfectly in the games I mentioned. F12000 > does indeed have "pathetic" FFB. However, I think the FF is NFS-PU is > pretty good. > > The damage modelling is also far from "ludicriously unrealistic". F12000 > models suspension and body-work damage, as well as engine failuresetc. > NFS-PU has excellent graphical damage modelling. The FF reflects thewheel > damage which is pretty cool. The one area where both these sims donot > model damage well is on full frontal collisions with a wall. Asidefrom > that, the damage modelling is acceptable. > > I have a question. If someone told you they were interested in sim-racing, > what would you recommend to them?? Just GPL?? > > Just my two cents and again you get what you pay for, > ...Colin > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

In article <8cdlsu$6802n$[email hidden]>, "Alexander Marx" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >Such an overwhelmingly realistic experience! > > Steer left. Steer right. Accelerate. Brake. > > As opposed to pushing buttons on a game controller (that's how itfeels in

Quoted text (15 lines)

> other sims) > > >All the while marveling at the > > the boring, dated graphics > who has done it better ? > > and the crappy frame rate > who has done it better ? > > average sound > who has done it better ? > > jump through hoops only to be disco'ed multi-player > who has done it better ? > > feature. 1:28. Get the point yet? > You get the point ? > > There are some good "efforts" of other developers, GPL, however, is

not an > "effort", it's pure genious. It captures parts of the very essencethat , > for centuries, has made people risk their lives and become racingdrivers > (don't try to tell me it's the pitstops). If you don't see that, finewith > me .. but because this is rec.autos.simulators and not > rec.prettytracksidegraphics.simulators i'm afraid you may have tolive for > some time with the dominating position that GPL has in this group.And give > me one damn reason why I should recommend anything but GPL to somenewbie > who posts the question "what is the best driving/racing simulator?"... > > cheers, > Alex > > The Factory Driver mode in NFS-PU is pure genius, IMO. I've never really longed to be a GP driver, but I've been a Car and Driver (and Road & Track, and Auto Week, and . . .) for over 20 years now, and I've ALWAYS longed to be a factory driver or an automotive tester, and now, thanks to NFS-PU, I am able to live that experience through my PC. Amazing! And BTW, the trackside graphics in NFS-PU may be "pretty," but I seldom notice because I'm usually too busy DRIVING. GPL's physics model may be the most complete and complex, and GPL is definitely the best driving/racing simulator IF you're interested in racing lightweight, high-horsepower, high-performance, open-wheel race cars. If you're interests lie elsewhere, though, there ARE many other VERY decent sims out there to choose from. Given that, I think it's something of a disservice to simply answer "GPL" when someone asks "what is the best driving/racing simulator?" -- JB Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

On Tue, 04 Apr 2000 19:03:38 -0500, Pat Dotson <[email hidden]> wrote in message <[email hidden]> : >How does doing a fast lap make GPL less >realistic? 1:28 is not that fast. Any idiot can rail ride a lap that "fast".... Cheers, Richard

In article <c0qG4.104606$[email hidden]>, David G Fisher <[email hidden]> writes

Quoted text (10 lines)

>Colin, > >It's a waste of time. The same group of guys with 1,000,001 hours invested >in GPL, say the same things over and over again about every new sim that >comes along. Supposedly they are serious adults, but they act no different >than the 14 year old brats who use words like "rulez" and "sucks" to >describe sims. > >David G Fisher >

Is that the best you could come up with David? Now you're reduced to comparing all GPL fans on this NG to pubescent 14 year olds, just to show how right you must be and how wrong they must be. Dear oh dear! -- Peter Ives - (AKA Ivington) No person's opinions can be said to be more correct than another's, because each is the sole judge of his or her own experience.

Marc Collins <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:CnvG4.45053$[email hidden]... > No, they are not excellent simulations. The relatively pathetic physics > models are exactly why they are not excellent simulations. Add inpathetic > steering wheel controller support, pathetic FFB, ludicrously unrealistic > damage modelling, etc. etc. etc., and you have more reasons to support the > claim that they are NOT excellent simulations. > MMmmm. I have to disagree with you Marc. I take it when you say "relatively pathetic" you mean in comparison to GPL. That is the whole point of my post. It is this damaging attitude that is all too prevalent in this NG. As for the physics being "relatively pathetic" I disagree again. I've been lucky enough to go through a number of advanced driving courses. I am a member of the IAM, I've had time on skid-pads etc. I've also been taught how to 360 a car. Funnily enough, in NFS-PU you have to perform that exact maneouvre. I executed it exactly as I would in my own car (MX-5, rear-wheel drive) and it worked perfectly. This is just one indication that the physics model is pretty close. I can't comment on F1 2000's realism since I haven't driven an F1 car but as close as I can get is a Formula Ford car, and it's close enough to keep me interested =) I also do not agree with your comment about steering wheel support. I have a TSW and a LWFF. Both work perfectly in the games I mentioned. F1 2000 does indeed have "pathetic" FFB. However, I think the FF is NFS-PU is pretty good. The damage modelling is also far from "ludicriously unrealistic". F1 2000 models suspension and body-work damage, as well as engine failures etc. NFS-PU has excellent graphical damage modelling. The FF reflects the wheel damage which is pretty cool. The one area where both these sims do not model damage well is on full frontal collisions with a wall. Aside from that, the damage modelling is acceptable. I have a question. If someone told you they were interested in sim-racing, what would you recommend to them?? Just GPL?? Just my two cents and again you get what you pay for, ...Colin

Sorry for causing so many hard feelings. Point I was trying to make was are games or simulations that would be considered impressive before the introduction of GPL being overlooked because now anything being compared to GPL seems to be a letdown. On Tue, 4 Apr 2000 10:48:50 -0400, "Jason Fagan" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (10 lines)

>We need our fellow sim advocates to help us differentiate between games and >sims in situations such as these. GPL is a very serious sim, while titles >such as those (NFS F12K) I have absolutely no use for. Hell GT2 for the PSX >is almost better at the genre than those two games. > >Please, when rating these games save us all the time and money and hassle >and make it clear that they have nothing on GPL physics. > > >

Jason Monds wrote: > In conclusion, yes GPL has spoiled me by making me wish those physics were > in all my sims, but it's not going to stop me from playing other > games/sims. Well said, Jason. I agree with you 100%. GPL is by far my favorite sim, but I also enjoy playing SCGT, Nascar Legends, and, now, F1 2000 (I'll enjoy it more when I get some of the frame rate issues sorted out). Dave Ewing -- ***************************************************** David A. Ewing Xilinx Boulder [email hidden] *****************************************************

In article <vEBG4.106630$[email hidden]>, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote: > Yes, I'm so pissed off. I take "sim talk" that seriously. I can tell. > If you'd like, I can show you another forum where RC has beenmentioned > 20,000 separate times in six months. The RC forum? > You can check sales figures of the two > sims and draw your own conclusions as to how many people in htisworld will > be discussing, and playing, those two sims tomorrow. When did sales figures become the measure of quality of a product? I'll be sure to check here at RAS - a newsgroup frequented by fans of quality sims - to find out how many people are disussing RC2000 and GPL. GPL is over 2 years old and people are -still- getting as much out of it (if not more) than they were when it was released. Will RC be held in such high regard on it's second birthday? Who knows? I brought the RC issue up, Dave, not because I wanted to bad mouth it, but to hightlight that you yourself have been known to evangelise a product to a level that I (and others I'm sure) though was OTT. You were RC2000's staunchest fan throughout it's pre release, stating that the various demos were unrepresentative of the final product and refusing to accept criticism levelled at it on those grounds. To accuse the "same old people" of the "same old words" is rich from one such as yourself. Mark Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

>It better be! :) It's an excellent sim. IMO SODA comes right after GPL in >enjoyability. > >Hena SODA is one hell of a good game to be however many years old it is! I played it for about an hour yesterday as a matter of fact. I was perfecting my latest track. It's a desert course where you jump over a canyon four times per lap. It's scary going over some of those jumps from the cockpit view!! ;) Dan Belcher Team Racing Unlimited http://simcrashes.cjb.net

>David, please do not bring sales figures into this. > >If that is the only thing that counted, then we would all be forced to say >that Deer Hunter is the best game out there Agreed. Sales figures are totally unrepresentative on how good a game is. Most people know what rally racing is because they see it on TV all the time. Therefore, when they go to the store, they see the box, they pick it up, read the back, and buy it. But few people have any interest at all in 1960's Grand Prix racing. If GPL was a modern day Formula One sim, I bet it could have outsold RC2000. See the point we're going at, David? Dan Belcher Team Racing Unlimited http://simcrashes.cjb.net

David G Fisher <[email hidden]> schrieb in im Newsbeitrag: VoBG4.106493$[email hidden]... > Brought a tear to my eye. why should I recommend anything but GPL to some newbie who posts the question "what is the best driving/racing simulator?"

No, they are not excellent simulations. The relatively pathetic physics models are exactly why they are not excellent simulations. Add in pathetic steering wheel controller support, pathetic FFB, ludicrously unrealistic damage modelling, etc. etc. etc., and you have more reasons to support the claim that they are NOT excellent simulations. Are they fun games to beat around a bit with? Perhaps. Are they worth the money? Perhaps, if you like that sort of game. Unfortunately, the title of this newsgroup includes the word simulator, which means even relatively decent and fun games (the original NFS, Interstate '76, SCGT before its physics patch, CART:PR because of it's couple of horrid flaws) get short shrift here. Shouldn't be a surprise. As soon a something comes out that surpasses GPL, you'll hear a lot less talk of GPL on this newsgroup. Marc. > F1 2000 and NFSPU are excellent simulations. Just because the physics > models are not up to the high standards of GPL does not mean that they are > not worthwhile titles. These games have excellent physics models. Inmany > other ways, both these games are superior to GPL. > We need to look at the new sims that have been released recently with amore

Quoted text (12 lines)

> open mind. If we want to knock some titles, try games like Test Drive 5 > that have no basis in reality. > > RO (rant over) > ...Colin > > > Jason Fagan <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:zbnG4.800$[email hidden]... > > We need our fellow sim advocates to help us differentiate between games > and > > sims in situations such as these. GPL is a very serious sim, while

titles > > such as those (NFS F12K) I have absolutely no use for. Hell GT2 for the > PSX > > is almost better at the genre than those two games. > > > > Please, when rating these games save us all the time and money andhassle > > and make it clear that they have nothing on GPL physics. > > > > > > > >

Well, here's a new guy with some thoughts as well. I frequently read this newsgroup, just don't post here too often. Where do you get that the GPL lovers constantly bash newer sims? I've seen Pat post very postitive comments on F12000 here recently. Alison Hine, a huge GPL fan, did the same as well. Actually, I was on the fence based on mixed responses on F12000 until I read those two's posts. Now, I will buy it and give it a shot. Nonetheless, GPL without question set new standards when it came out, heck standards that may have been too high for Papy themselves. Yes, by today's standards, the graphics and sound are somewhat dated, but it is still to this day, it is the most realistic racing simulator developed. I personally don't get to spend much time with it. To be proficient and competitive in GPL requires quite a bit of time, and I just don't have it right now to give. I do run it every now and then just for the pleasure of running those old beasts, and enjoy a physics model that is second to none. I only got to dabble with Vroc in the early days, but even then I didn't have any trouble racing online with it. GPL raised the bar on racing simulators, no question. Developers know it. It's good for everyone. I very much look foward to other titles coming out that increase the realism with the physics modeling as well, and would love to see one that gave GPL a run for it's money in the physics department. We, the racing sim consumer, are the ones that will gain from this in the end. -- Don Burnette Dburn in N3 and Legends "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:IfrG4.105196$[email hidden]... > Same people. Same old words. > > David G Fisher > > > "Rick Baumhauer" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:NIqG4.3171$[email hidden]... > > Oh, nonsense - remember, the name of the newsgroup is > rec.autos.SIMULATORS, > > *not* rec.autos.games. Since the key word here is SIMULATORS, I see no > > reason why other titles shouldn't be compared to GPL and its value as a > > SIMULATOR. Others may have prettier graphics, or may work with a wider > > range of graphics cards, but in the genre of automotive SIMULATORS, GPL > has > > no equal. Period. > > > > And I wish it wasn't so, quite frankly...............but if GPL was truly > > the last of the great racing sims, we can at least be thankful that this > > work of art made it out the door before the bean counters stifled > everything > > at Sierra. > > > > Rick > > > > >

I agree with most everything you write below, Pat--indeed it is well-said. But--and having succumbed to this myself a *number* of times <g>, I can't really throw stones--I feel the sort of fire Davey G. drew with his remarks in this thread are *precisely* why he does it, over and over &c., &c. He's got a lot of energy, the lil' tw*t. --DK "Pat Dotson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (16 lines)

> Dave sure is fun. > > > Same old words from the same old name. Predictable as usual. > > "Inciteful" is a better word in this context. > > The phrase "same old" makes me thing of > people like Remco, Marty U'ren, John > Wallace, and others. They have evidently > permanently kill-filed you because they > never respond to you anymore. > > Funny how you don't find yourself > "predictable"? hehe > > > First of all Pat, RC2000 is not "my" sim. I didn't make it, or profit

off of > > it, so it's just another sim to me. > > In this news group, for the past year, > you have been Mr. RC2000. > > > I enjoy a number of different sims and have no ridiculous allegiance toany > > one developer. I admire what MANY developers have done with varioussims.

Quoted text (10 lines)

> > That's a king-size straw man. Who is this > fictitious person with a "ridiculous > allegiance to any one developer"? I > haven't seen any here. Everyone is > impatient for GP3 and WSC, whether they > like GPL or not. Lots of GPL guys even > like RC2000 and F12K - imagine that. > > > I'm just very tired of being bored by the GPL crowd and watching them

give

Quoted text (17 lines)

> > poor advise to the newcomers who visit this newsgroup. > > We're all tired and bored, but not at > the same things apparently. > > Commenting that a supposed sim does not > model physics to the extent that GPL does, > does not constitute "advise" (or advice, for > those watching at home). > > > >And one other thing, the 'same group of guys' > > > who have been ragging on everything that > > > is not GPL are in fact a 'whole new group > > > of guys'. I don't even recognize most of > > > those names. > > > > The quote above is ridiculous. GPL sold a handful of copies.........2

years > > ago. Has there suddenly been a half million new copies of GPL flying offthe

Quoted text (12 lines)

> > shelves? > > You've taken leave from your senses again. > > I've seen a lot of guys on here who have said that > they've tried GPL again recently, after not > caring for it when released, who are hooked. > How did anyone have to sell 500,000 copies of > anything for that to happen? > > > > I read the same names month, after month, after month going on about the

GPL > > physics. I pulled GPL out of mothballs (played it for a total of maybe 4 > > hours in the past year) two weeks ago and did a 1:28 at Monza after ahalf > > hour of half hearted practice. Such an overwhelmingly realisticexperience. > > I really felt at one with the physics of this "work of art". My 20 yearold > > neighbor who never had tried GPL before did a 1:29 after an hour. Iasked

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > him afterwards if he felt moved to compose a poem of love for the GPL > > physics model. For some reason, he didn't. > > How does doing a fast lap make GPL less > realistic? 1:28 is not that fast. > > > Steer left. Steer right. Accelerate. Brake. All the while marveling at

the > > the boring, dated graphics and the crappy frame rate, no weathereffects, no > > pitting, average sound, jump through hoops only to be disco'edmulti-player

Quoted text (12 lines)

> > feature. 1:28. Get the point yet? > > What sim are you playing? > > I get the point. Yes, the point is you are > hopelessly biased against GPL, and it is your > crusade to somehow prove that it's not worthy. > > > It's........just........a......friggen..........game. > > > > To say that I'm "single-minded" is kind of funny as now four different > > developers in the past two years have asked me to beta test for them.

Why

Quoted text (18 lines)

> > would they do that? > > I don't know. Same reason I beta test for > six different developers? You are going > to have to try harder to impress us. > > > People who are fans of sims like SCGT, MGPRS2, DTR, RC2000, GP500, GP2, > > SBK2000, F12000 never seem to have an issue with my posts. Only GPL > > groupies. Says it all right there, doesn't it? > > That's because you don't constantly and incessantly > rail against the users of "SCGT, MGPRS2, DTR, > RC2000, GP500, GP2, SBK2000, F12000", the > way you do at the slightest expression of > opinion that GPL might be the best sim > available. > > > I am one of the people on this newsgroup who WELCOMES new sims and

insists

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > on not being NEGATIVE towards the efforts of other developers. > > Well, excuse me for not recognizing your > sainthood. I won't let it happen again. > > > I give > > newcomers advise which encourages them to look at the positives of

various

Quoted text (18 lines)

> > sims, instead of trying to drag them into the the "cult of GPL". > > > > Bad Dave. > > > > David G Fisher > > So now we are all cultists? You are so > predictable. > > I think I just saw Janet Reno out in the > yard. > > Best wishes, > > -- > Pat Dotson > IMPACT Motorsports > http://www.impactmotorsports.com/pd.html

On Tue, 4 Apr 2000 11:35:52 -0400, "Colin" <colin AT yourmiata DOT COM> wrote:

Quoted text (13 lines)

>People, we really need to stop with this "nothing on GPL" bullshit. >This newsgroup is entitled 'rec.autos.simulators' not >'rec.autos.I.love.GPL.everything.else.sucks' >F1 2000 and NFSPU are excellent simulations. Just because the physics >models are not up to the high standards of GPL does not mean that they are >not worthwhile titles. These games have excellent physics models. In many >other ways, both these games are superior to GPL. >We need to look at the new sims that have been released recently with a more >open mind. If we want to knock some titles, try games like Test Drive 5 >that have no basis in reality. > >RO (rant over) >...Colin

Very well said. Not every sim has to have the physics model of GPL to deliver a satisfying and enjoyable experience. I think some people take one look at a sim and say, "bah, this drives nothing like GPL. Crap! Sheer, utter crap!" which is fine if the only reason you play racing sims is to have the absolute, most true to life driving model possible. However, if you like to play sims more for the experience of high speed, close competition, then some of the other, non GPL "crap," is outstanding, and even more enjoyable than GPL in some cases (IMHO), despite having a "light" physics model. Games like NASCAR 3, SCGT and NFS:PU are some that come to mind. GPL is a good game, but I think some people go overboard in their praise of it. I read one post where someone surmized that, because they could match the lap times of real life F1 drivers while playing GPL, they must therefore be every bit as skilled as real F1 drivers. Geez!!! Gimme a break! Perhaps a better name for the group should be: rec.isleep.with.my.copy.of.gpl. P.S. I bought GPL about a month after it came out, have played it a lot, and really enjoy it. But, it has most definitely NOT spoiled me.

Quoted text (7 lines)

> decent and fun games (the original NFS, Interstate '76, SCGT before its > physics patch, CART:PR because of it's couple of horrid flaws) get short > shrift here. Shouldn't be a surprise. As soon a something comes out that > surpasses GPL, you'll hear a lot less talk of GPL on this newsgroup. > > Marc. >

uh, no..if and when a gpl beater comes out...Then we start queing up all the Concourse de GPL historic posts. Don't worry, even if WSC and GP3 flatten GPL, there will be users here that won't let go...easily :) dave henrie

"Pat Dotson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (11 lines)

> Dave sure is fun. > > > Same old words from the same old name. Predictable as usual. > > "Inciteful" is a better word in this context. > > The phrase "same old" makes me thing of > people like Remco, Marty U'ren, John > Wallace, and others. They have evidently > permanently kill-filed you because they > never respond to you anymore.

Did they tell you that during one of your VROC chats? Thankfully, only a few more to go. You too soon I hope. Didn't you promise me long ago that you wouldn't be reading any more of my posts? For anyone who cares, Pat portrayed me as the devil in disguise two years ago when I committed the unforgivable sin of <gasp> insisting that CPR had some excellent qualities. I helped quite a few people with setups and controller issues. Pat couldn't get his controller to work well at all, and took his frustration out on me in front of this newsgroup. Now, he's back to save r.a.s. from me all over again. > Funny how you don't find yourself > "predictable"? hehe > > > First of all Pat, RC2000 is not "my" sim. I didn't make it, or profitoff of > > it, so it's just another sim to me. > > In this news group, for the past year, > you have been Mr. RC2000. Your buddy Remco accused me of hyping F12000 just a couple of weeks ago. So am I Mr. RC2000 or Mr. F12000? Or am I simply guilty of liking too many sims? > > I enjoy a number of different sims and have no ridiculous allegiance toany > > one developer. I admire what MANY developers have done with varioussims. > > That's a king-size straw man. Who is this > fictitious person with a "ridiculous > allegiance to any one developer"? I > haven't seen any here. No, there's no Papyrus fan club here. >Everyone is > impatient for GP3 and WSC, whether they > like GPL or not. Lots of GPL guys even > like RC2000 and F12K - imagine that. > > > I'm just very tired of being bored by the GPL crowd and watching themgive

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > poor advise to the newcomers who visit this newsgroup. > > We're all tired and bored, but not at > the same things apparently. > > Commenting that a supposed sim does not > model physics to the extent that GPL does, > does not constitute "advise" (or advice, for > those watching at home).

They say a hell of a lot more than "a supposed sim does not model physics to the extent that GPL does". If you've been reading this newsgroup at all the past few weeks, or even this thread, you've seen that quite a few people besides myself are sick of what GPL fans have to say. Thanks for correcting my spelling. You've proven your briliance to us all.

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > >And one other thing, the 'same group of guys' > > > who have been ragging on everything that > > > is not GPL are in fact a 'whole new group > > > of guys'. I don't even recognize most of > > > those names. > > > > The quote above is ridiculous. GPL sold a handful of copies.........2

years > > ago. Has there suddenly been a half million new copies of GPL flying offthe

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > shelves? > > You've taken leave from your senses again. > > I've seen a lot of guys on here who have said that > they've tried GPL again recently, after not > caring for it when released, who are hooked. > How did anyone have to sell 500,000 copies of > anything for that to happen?

Seem like the same names to me. > > I read the same names month, after month, after month going on about theGPL > > physics. I pulled GPL out of mothballs (played it for a total of maybe 4 > > hours in the past year) two weeks ago and did a 1:28 at Monza after ahalf > > hour of half hearted practice. Such an overwhelmingly realisticexperience. > > I really felt at one with the physics of this "work of art". My 20 yearold > > neighbor who never had tried GPL before did a 1:29 after an hour. Iasked > > him afterwards if he felt moved to compose a poem of love for the GPL > > physics model. For some reason, he didn't. > > How does doing a fast lap make GPL less > realistic? 1:28 is not that fast. Under the conditions I described, yes, it is fast. I don't have a million laps under my belt like most of the GPL die-hards do. If the physics were as amazingly realistic as I've been told, then I, and my neighbor, shouldn't come close to those times. However advanced the physics model is, it's still not any more realistic than many other racing games I've tried. > > Steer left. Steer right. Accelerate. Brake. All the while marveling atthe > > the boring, dated graphics and the crappy frame rate, no weathereffects, no > > pitting, average sound, jump through hoops only to be disco'edmulti-player

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > feature. 1:28. Get the point yet? > > What sim are you playing? > > I get the point. Yes, the point is you are > hopelessly biased against GPL, and it is your > crusade to somehow prove that it's not worthy.

Who told you? Actually, I've said many, many times that it's an excellent sim. It simulates the '67 F1 season very well. That's all it does. BTW, computer sims are not THAT important in the big picture of life, so you'll just have to trust me when I say that I am not on any "crusade" to destroy GPL. Thanks for the laugh. > > It's........just........a......friggen..........game. > > > > To say that I'm "single-minded" is kind of funny as now four different > > developers in the past two years have asked me to beta test for them.Why > > would they do that? > > I don't know. Same reason I beta test for > six different developers? You are going > to have to try harder to impress us. I could care less about impressing whoever "us" is. Is "us" the GPL fan club? The reason I mention my beta testing is that developers have told me that they could care less about what the GPL zealots have to say about sims (they've heard it all), and tend to avoid r.a.s. all together. Among other things, they ask for unbiased feedback, which I give them. If one particular group of people here at r.a.s don't like my opinions, then that's probably a good thing.

Quoted text (10 lines)

> > People who are fans of sims like SCGT, MGPRS2, DTR, RC2000, GP500, GP2, > > SBK2000, F12000 never seem to have an issue with my posts. Only GPL > > groupies. Says it all right there, doesn't it? > > That's because you don't constantly and incessantly > rail against the users of "SCGT, MGPRS2, DTR, > RC2000, GP500, GP2, SBK2000, F12000", the > way you do at the slightest expression of > opinion that GPL might be the best sim > available.

Cnstantly and incessantly? A slight exaggertion. I don't rail against the others because there is never any reason to. GPL die hards are so damn sensitive to what people like me say for some reason, and there's nothing I can do to control that. Simply not agreeing to their declaration of GPL as superior to all other sims sends them into a fit. Look now many of you kids responded to my post in just this thread. > > I am one of the people on this newsgroup who WELCOMES new sims andinsists > > on not being NEGATIVE towards the efforts of other developers. > > Well, excuse me for not recognizing your > sainthood. I won't let it happen again. Thanks. > > I give > > newcomers advise which encourages them to look at the positives ofvarious

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > sims, instead of trying to drag them into the the "cult of GPL". > > > > Bad Dave. > > > > David G Fisher > > So now we are all cultists? You are so > predictable.

That was not to be taken literally. Since you are so smart and are able to correct my spelling, I thought you'd understand. > I think I just saw Janet Reno out in the > yard. I guess she finally escaped from your room? She's not my type, but I do hope you can convince her to come back to you. > Best wishes, > > -- > Pat Dotson > IMPACT Motorsports > http://www.impactmotorsports.com/pd.html David G Fisher

"Alexander Marx" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:8cdlsu$6802n$[email hidden]... > There are some good "efforts" of other developers, GPL, however, is not an > "effort", it's pure genious. It captures parts of the very essence that , > for centuries, has made people risk their lives and become racing drivers Brought a tear to my eye. David G Fisher

"Jon Andersen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:xktG4.722$[email hidden]... > Wow! > > Well done! Both you and your friend must be extremely talented at racing. > Sub 1.30 laps at Monza after just a couple of laps.... > > It's a shame, though, that you seem to be more interested in specialgraphic > effects than actually playing the game. What a waste of valuable talent. No. The difference between myself and people like you is I would never jump to the conclusion that the 1:28 was any indication whatsoever as to how talented a racer I was. It's just a game. Physics model, schmysics model. > Also, it is too bad that you do not have a proper modem or ISDN card. It > seems to me that there is something wrong with your hardware, or your ISP. > That is the only explanation for disconnects. Multiplayer implementationin > GPL is good, just as good as the rest of the game. > > Jon Heard that before. Funny thing is, I have been racing online for three years now, and GPL is the only sim/game which was a problem. A huge problem. BTW, even Alison Hine recently commented on this newsgroup that she'd like Papyrus to do a GPL patch, and in it address the disconnection problems. David G Fisher

"David Karr" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:8ce16o$djt$[email hidden]... > I agree with most everything you write below, Pat--indeed it is well-said. > > But--and having succumbed to this myself a *number* of times <g>, I can't > really throw stones--I feel the sort of fire Davey G. drew with hisremarks > in this thread are *precisely* why he does it, over and over &c., &c. > > He's got a lot of energy, the lil' tw*t. > > --DK Still talking about me, Davey K? With all the posts you repond to each day, each filled with such incredible wit, I'd say that you are the Davey at r.a.s. with all the energy. David G Fisher

Yes, I'm so pissed off. I take "sim talk" that seriously. If you'd like, I can show you another forum where RC has been mentioned 20,000 separate times in six months. You can check sales figures of the two sims and draw your own conclusions as to how many people in htis world will be discussing, and playing, those two sims tomorrow. David G Fisher "Mark Davison" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:8cdp7g$bls$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (11 lines)

> > David G Fisher <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:IfrG4.105196$[email hidden]... > > Same people. Same old words. > > > > David G Fisher > > LOL! Are you just pissed off that the "GPL Killer" that was RC2000 hardly > gets a mention? > I don't understand what you've got against folks who state their enjoyment > of GPL. People only do it because it's a good sim. As soon as a better

one > appears the topics will shift. No one is blindly evangelising GPL just > because it's GPL. > > Mark > >

I agree 100% with everything you've said in this post. David G Fisher "Paul Kierstead" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Rick Baumhauer wrote: > > > > Oh, nonsense - remember, the name of the newsgroup isrec.autos.SIMULATORS, > > *not* rec.autos.games. Since the key word here is SIMULATORS, I see no > > reason why other titles shouldn't be compared to GPL and its value as a > > SIMULATOR. Others may have prettier graphics, or may work with a wider > > range of graphics cards, but in the genre of automotive SIMULATORS, GPLhas > > no equal. Period. > > > > And I wish it wasn't so, quite frankly...............but if GPL wastruly > > the last of the great racing sims, we can at least be thankful that this > > work of art made it out the door before the bean counters stifledeverything

Quoted text (42 lines)

> > at Sierra. > > > > OTOH, it is not rec.autos.physics.simulators either. Yes, GPL has an > awesome physics model, but racing (and autos in general) are about more > then physics. I'll take RC2K as an example. There are aspects of the > physics model which are maddening, but the _total_ simulation experience > is great. You don't have to just put in good times; you have to be able > to repair enough of your car to get to the next stage. You have to be > strategic in repairs. You have to do tire & gear selection over more > then one stage with varying conditions. A serious error can put you out > of an entire rally (and ruin the entire season). The graphics are > extremely important; they give a feel of realism. Once you have wrecked > a few rallys by reckless driving, you start to slow down for that tree > because you are white-knuckled for fear of hitting it; you just spent 40 > minutes running two stages and are terrified of ruining it all at the > end. > > NFS:HS has an awful physics model, but betting your car against another > is, in some way, a far better simulation of a poorly funded race team > (where too many wrecks will put you out of the season) then GPL will > ever simulate. NFS:PU is immersive and challenging. The cars may not be > totally real, but money mangement, etc. are very real, esp. past the > golden era (which is too easy, but gives you confidence at the start). > > In short, GPL is -- without question -- the most accurate at set-up and > physics, but simulation can be about the entire experience, which is > where GPL fails in some respects. Obvious example: pit-strategy. > > Oh, I'll nit-pick GPL physics too: Let us say we could model vehicle > physics perfectly. Would it make the best sim? Absolutely NOT. In the > real car, you can 'feel' the back end sliding out. You can 'measure' the > G's you are pulling. Visual cues (for braking, etc) are much better. > Your field of vision is much, much wider. To some extent, sims must > modify reality to make-up for the inadequacies of the medium: Small > screen, only limited visual and very limited steering wheel feedback > (with a small dash of sound). > > So give the physics a rest and look at the entire sim experience. > Physics are important, but not the only factor. > > PMK

"Intimidator" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Tue, 4 Apr 2000 11:35:52 -0400, "Colin" <colin AT yourmiata DOT > COM> wrote: >Perhaps a > better name for the group should be: rec.isleep.with.my.copy.of.gpl. No, most of them have two copies now since it has recently been re-released.. :-) > P.S. I bought GPL about a month after it came out, have played it a > lot, and really enjoy it. But, it has most definitely NOT spoiled me. For awhile, I enjoyed it a lot too. David G Fisher

Indeed David, indeed. You are becoming really boring. Andre On Tue, 04 Apr 2000 19:20:21 GMT, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Same people. Same old words. > >David G Fisher > >

"David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> writes: [snip]

Quoted text (9 lines)

> "Pat Dotson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > How does doing a fast lap make GPL less > > realistic? 1:28 is not that fast. > > Under the conditions I described, yes, it is fast. I don't have a million > laps under my belt like most of the GPL die-hards do. If the physics were as > amazingly realistic as I've been told, then I, and my neighbor, shouldn't > come close to those times. However advanced the physics model is, it's still > not any more realistic than many other racing games I've tried.

[pins] Huh? I would expect a realistic physics model to make it easier to learn for an experienced driver since 'real' knowledge would apply to a higher degree. 'Realistic' do not imply 'hard' (and 'hard' of course don't imply 'realistic'). You can count me in as one of the 'new' users of GPL, I tried it for the first time last summer. I like it most for the feeling of driving something that really reacts to the track and the driver, and in a way that feels realistic. Imo this feeling comes from the combination of a nice physics model and the fact that the cars modelled have soft springs and no downforce, making them really move on the suspension. I have never tried anything coming close to the feeling of driving the Nurburgring in GPL with a force feedback wheel. GPL or even the GPL physics is far from perfect, though. Possible improvements could include better AI (e.g. AI that don't assume the car in front is driving exactly as they would), better sound (how about car sounds that react to throttle position?), adjustable field of view and max frame rate (36 fps just ain't enough, with 72 I might be happy), a physics model that is more stable with less than the max frame rate, ride height and toe in affecting drag, etc, etc. GPL just happens to be the only car sim so far good enough to get _me_ really hooked. In my book 1:28 at Monza without lots of training is damn fast, btw. _ Mats Lofkvist [email hidden]

"David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (11 lines)

> >"Pat Dotson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >> The phrase "same old" makes me thing of >> people like Remco, Marty U'ren, John >> Wallace, and others. They have evidently >> permanently kill-filed you because they >> never respond to you anymore. > >Did they tell you that during one of your VROC chats? Thankfully, only a few >more to go. You too soon I hope. Didn't you promise me long ago that you >wouldn't be reading any more of my posts?

Sorry Dave, I still read your postings..... <g> >> In this news group, for the past year, >> you have been Mr. RC2000. > >Your buddy Remco accused me of hyping F12000 just a couple of weeks ago. So >am I Mr. RC2000 or Mr. F12000? Or am I simply guilty of liking too many >sims? Last year was 1999, now it's 2000 <g> BTW, I did "accuse" you from hyping F1-2000, and I also answered your post where you asked for prove.... not that's very important.... I do wonder why you never answer my questions when they are detailed, various questions about the physics of RC2000 comes to mind... Kisses, Remco

Paul Kierstead <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (12 lines)

> I'll take RC2K as an example. There are aspects of the >physics model which are maddening, but the _total_ simulation experience >is great. You don't have to just put in good times; you have to be able >to repair enough of your car to get to the next stage. You have to be >strategic in repairs. You have to do tire & gear selection over more >then one stage with varying conditions. A serious error can put you out >of an entire rally (and ruin the entire season). The graphics are >extremely important; they give a feel of realism. Once you have wrecked >a few rallys by reckless driving, you start to slow down for that tree >because you are white-knuckled for fear of hitting it; you just spent 40 >minutes running two stages and are terrified of ruining it all at the >end.

It's only a pitty that the damage model of RC2000 is random...now, take the mediocre physics, the random damagemodel, and the best graphics in a racing game to date. What do you get? A mediocre sim with pretty graphics.... >NFS:HS has an awful physics model, but betting your car against another >is, in some way, a far better simulation of a poorly funded race team >(where too many wrecks will put you out of the season) then GPL will >ever simulate. NFS:PU is immersive and challenging. The cars may not be >totally real, but money mangement, etc. are very real, esp. past the >golden era (which is too easy, but gives you confidence at the start). The NFS series has many good points, but the racing part never could impres me. For example, I never had to outbrake someone.... I just reached the Golden Era in NFS:PU, and so far it was a bit dull. Good physics, nice graphics and sound, but no suspense...(dull tracks, slow AI). >In short, GPL is -- without question -- the most accurate at set-up and >physics, but simulation can be about the entire experience, which is >where GPL fails in some respects. Obvious example: pit-strategy. It's often discussed here, there was no pit-strategy in the 60ties. They came in for repairs, and in GPL that option is missed with full distance races.

Quoted text (8 lines)

>Oh, I'll nit-pick GPL physics too: Let us say we could model vehicle >physics perfectly. Would it make the best sim? Absolutely NOT. In the >real car, you can 'feel' the back end sliding out. You can 'measure' the >G's you are pulling. Visual cues (for braking, etc) are much better. >Your field of vision is much, much wider. To some extent, sims must >modify reality to make-up for the inadequacies of the medium: Small >screen, only limited visual and very limited steering wheel feedback >(with a small dash of sound).

Hmmm, isn't this the same for all racing-games? The fact that you call this "nit-picking GPL physics" would suggest you're not open minded about this... >So give the physics a rest and look at the entire sim experience. >Physics are important, but not the only factor. With this I agree. And IMO it's the balance what makes GPL King of the bunch, not the physics alone...but hey, I'm a GPL zealot, what opinion did you expect? <g> Remco, who is still waiting for a GPL beater...

Jason Monds wrote in message <[email hidden]>... >but there is surely room for more than 1 sim on my 27 GB HD :-) Even >SODA is still loaded up. It better be! :) It's an excellent sim. IMO SODA comes right after GPL in enjoyability. Hena

You guys should definitely check out the two "Monstrous thought provoking sim vs arcade" thread by Le Professeur of a few days ago. It does an extensive investigation into the different aspects that are important to judge the quality of a "sim". Hard work, though.. <G> JoH On Wed, 05 Apr 2000 07:11:31 GMT, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote: >I agree 100% with everything you've said in this post. > >David G Fisher

Brought a tear to my eye. David G Fisher

Do yourself a favor and put me on your kill-file then. David G Fisher

Quoted text (11 lines)

> Indeed David, indeed. You are becoming really boring. > Andre > >Same people. Same old words. > >David G Fisher

BRAVO, Paul -- well-said! -- JB > > Oh, nonsense - remember, the name of the newsgroup is rec.autos.SIMULATORS, Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

Bruce, I fear you were too subtle there.

Yep; too subtle. But it was nice from here. DK

I was just pointing out what I believe is the real motivation for your crusade. Ah, you poor thing. You once were obnoxious. Now you've become simply boring. Goodbye. "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:xABG4.106628$[email hidden]... [snipped same o l d stuff] > David G Fisher

Not to mention that said RC2000 forum is dominated by people trading, er . . ."skins," and demands for new patches. --DK "Mark D" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:8cf6ep$ffd$[email hidden]... > In article <vEBG4.106630$[email hidden]>,[snippee doo] > > If you'd like, I can show you another forum where RC has been > mentioned > > 20,000 separate times in six months. > > The RC forum? >[snippee dooray]

> I pulled GPL out of mothballs (played it for a total of maybe 4 > hours in the past year) two weeks ago and did a 1:28 at Monza after a half > hour of half hearted practice. Such an overwhelmingly realisticexperience. > I really felt at one with the physics of this "work of art". My 20 yearold > neighbor who never had tried GPL before did a 1:29 after an hour. G. Huttu, W. Woeger, R. Ehnstroem, L. Grandis, K. Furlan and other fast guys be a men enough and admit that this is very impressive. Even for you! Those two guys would kick your butts if only GPL was good enough to put some of their time in it. I blame Papy for making a lame arcade game that leaves all that racing talent those two ( and there are probably more people like them ) possess unused. Borut

Of course there will be lots of those, but in total volume and in proportion of posts I will bet on a steady decline. GPL is such a classic, some people will still be talking about it 10 years from now, but overall, it will slip away (gracefully, I hope). Just my opinion of the future! Marc. "Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > > > decent and fun games (the original NFS, Interstate '76, SCGT before its > > physics patch, CART:PR because of it's couple of horrid flaws) get short > > shrift here. Shouldn't be a surprise. As soon a something comes outthat

Quoted text (10 lines)

> > surpasses GPL, you'll hear a lot less talk of GPL on this newsgroup. > > > > Marc. > > > uh, no..if and when a gpl beater comes out...Then we start queing up > all the > Concourse de GPL historic posts. Don't worry, even if WSC and GP3 > flatten GPL, > there will be users here that won't let go...easily :) > dave henrie

David, please do not bring sales figures into this. If that is the only thing that counted, then we would all be forced to say that Deer Hunter is the best game out there David G Fisher <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:vEBG4.106630$[email hidden]... > Yes, I'm so pissed off. I take "sim talk" that seriously. > > If you'd like, I can show you another forum where RC has been mentioned > 20,000 separate times in six months. You can check sales figures of thetwo > sims and draw your own conclusions as to how many people in htis worldwill

Quoted text (15 lines)

> be discussing, and playing, those two sims tomorrow. > > David G Fisher > > > "Mark Davison" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:8cdp7g$bls$[email hidden]... > > > > David G Fisher <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:IfrG4.105196$[email hidden]... > > > Same people. Same old words. > > > > > > David G Fisher > > > > LOL! Are you just pissed off that the "GPL Killer" that was RC2000

hardly > > gets a mention? > > I don't understand what you've got against folks who state theirenjoyment

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > of GPL. People only do it because it's a good sim. As soon as a better > one > > appears the topics will shift. No one is blindly evangelising GPL just > > because it's GPL. > > > > Mark > > > > >

You made the comment that I'm "pissed off that the "GPL Killer" that was RC2000 hardly gets a mention? (at r.a.s.)" What I tried to show you in my follow up post below is that at HG http://forums.simracingnews.com/cgi-bin/Ultimate.cgi , a person can choose to talk about almost any sim available today, just like they can at r.a.s. Check the totals of RC and then compare it to the others. It isn't even close. R.a.s. is where the small amount of GPL fans hang out and talk about their sim. Do I get "pissed off" that it isn't talked about so much at this forum? Why the hell would I? It's being talked about and run on computers elsewhere in an amount that dwarfs GPL. David G Fisher "Mark D" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:8cf6ep$ffd$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (39 lines)

> In article <vEBG4.106630$[email hidden]>, > "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > Yes, I'm so pissed off. I take "sim talk" that seriously. > > I can tell. > > > If you'd like, I can show you another forum where RC has been > mentioned > > 20,000 separate times in six months. > > The RC forum? > > > You can check sales figures of the two > > sims and draw your own conclusions as to how many people in htis > world will > > be discussing, and playing, those two sims tomorrow. > > When did sales figures become the measure of quality of a product? > I'll be sure to check here at RAS - a newsgroup frequented by fans of > quality sims - to find out how many people are disussing RC2000 and GPL. > > GPL is over 2 years old and people are -still- getting as much out of > it (if not more) than they were when it was released. Will RC be held > in such high regard on it's second birthday? Who knows? > > I brought the RC issue up, Dave, not because I wanted to bad mouth it, > but to hightlight that you yourself have been known to evangelise a > product to a level that I (and others I'm sure) though was OTT. You > were RC2000's staunchest fan throughout it's pre release, stating that > the various demos were unrepresentative of the final product and > refusing to accept criticism levelled at it on those grounds. > To accuse the "same old people" of the "same old words" is rich from > one such as yourself. > > Mark > > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ > Before you buy.

I have no idea what you mean. David G Fisher "Bruce Kennewell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Excuse I butting in, David, but didn't you say here.... > > >No. The difference between myself and people like you is I would neverjump

Quoted text (20 lines)

> >to the conclusion that the 1:28 was any indication whatsoever as to how > >talented a racer I was. It's just a game. Physics model, schmysics model. > > .........that it's just a game? > > Just curious that you'd shift positions so quickly on something like that. > > -- > Regards, > Bruce Kennewell, > Canberra, Australia. > --------------------------- > > David G Fisher <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:vEBG4.106630$[email hidden]... > > Yes, I'm so pissed off. I take "sim talk" that seriously. > > > > >

You need to re-read the thread below. Mark said I'm pissed about the amount of RC related posts here at r.a.s. I told him that's ridiculous because at other forums, and due to the amount of copies sold, it's obvious people all over the world are talking about RC today. Unless the thousands who have bought RC are under a gag order? David G Fisher "Cliff Roman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:a5IG4.365$%[email hidden]...

Quoted text (36 lines)

> David, please do not bring sales figures into this. > > If that is the only thing that counted, then we would all be forced to say > that Deer Hunter is the best game out there > > > > David G Fisher <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:vEBG4.106630$[email hidden]... > > Yes, I'm so pissed off. I take "sim talk" that seriously. > > > > If you'd like, I can show you another forum where RC has been mentioned > > 20,000 separate times in six months. You can check sales figures of the > two > > sims and draw your own conclusions as to how many people in htis world > will > > be discussing, and playing, those two sims tomorrow. > > > > David G Fisher > > > > > > "Mark Davison" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:8cdp7g$bls$[email hidden]... > > > > > > David G Fisher <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > news:IfrG4.105196$[email hidden]... > > > > Same people. Same old words. > > > > > > > > David G Fisher > > > > > > LOL! Are you just pissed off that the "GPL Killer" that was RC2000 > hardly > > > gets a mention? > > > I don't understand what you've got against folks who state their > enjoyment > > > of GPL. People only do it because it's a good sim. As soon as a

better > > one > > > appears the topics will shift. No one is blindly evangelising GPLjust

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > > because it's GPL. > > > > > > Mark > > > > > > > > > >

Matt, Re-read this thread. I posted a short, contrary opinion to the originator of this thread, and which agreed with Colin. Big deal. Others did too. Your friends jumped all over me. Who's on a mission? I could care less who likes what. I simply agree strongly with htis quote from Colin. "People, we really need to stop with this "nothing on GPL" bullshit. This newsgroup is entitled 'rec.autos.simulators' not 'rec.autos.I.love.GPL.everything.else.sucks' " There have been a lot of posts lately by people who are fed up with the GPL fan club. I actually stayed away from those threads. Please re-read the thread and see the progression. If no one felt so sensitive as to have to respond to my harmless post, it would of been one and done, and saved me some time. David G Fisher "Matthew B.Knutsen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:_fKG4.1220$[email hidden]... > David, > Why am I not allowed to enjoy GPL? > Why can't I talk about it if I enjoy it? What IF I like it better than any > other sim? > It's like telling me "you idiot, can't you see that driving an souped-upold > Mini for fun is for morons?" > > I like it, period. I buy most of the other sims, like them too. But forsome > reason nothing has captured the limited time I can spend as a computergamee

Quoted text (10 lines)

> more than GPL. Sorry. > And at the way you are posting here, I'm beginning to feel guilty. I > actually feel like the ostracized person here....along with a few others, > I'm sure. > To me, it seems ras has been dominated by F1 2000 posts lately, so quite > frankly, I can't see why you are letting this get to you. Let people enjoy > it, let them talk about it. It's not your fault that they/I haven't gotten > hooked by RC2000 or whatever. > > My comparison; No matter how much people would want me to drive a

Mercedes,

Quoted text (39 lines)

> I wouldn't. I simply don't like it. No thanks. > (expecting flames here) > > Oh, and I'm really excited about WSC. Looks and sounds like a dream come > true. Why? Because that is a form of racing I really enjoy. > (more flames expected) > > Matt > > > David G Fisher <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:vEBG4.106630$[email hidden]... > > Yes, I'm so pissed off. I take "sim talk" that seriously. > > > > If you'd like, I can show you another forum where RC has been mentioned > > 20,000 separate times in six months. You can check sales figures of the > two > > sims and draw your own conclusions as to how many people in htis world > will > > be discussing, and playing, those two sims tomorrow. > > > > David G Fisher > > > > > > "Mark Davison" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:8cdp7g$bls$[email hidden]... > > > > > > David G Fisher <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > news:IfrG4.105196$[email hidden]... > > > > Same people. Same old words. > > > > > > > > David G Fisher > > > > > > LOL! Are you just pissed off that the "GPL Killer" that was RC2000 > hardly > > > gets a mention? > > > I don't understand what you've got against folks who state their > enjoyment > > > of GPL. People only do it because it's a good sim. As soon as a

better > > one > > > appears the topics will shift. No one is blindly evangelising GPLjust

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > > because it's GPL. > > > > > > Mark > > > > > > > > > >

Christmas has come early. David G Fisher P.S. You were never funny. "David Karr" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:8cfb5d$jko$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (15 lines)

> I was just pointing out what I believe is the real motivation for your > crusade. > > Ah, you poor thing. > You once were obnoxious. > Now you've become simply boring. > Goodbye. > > "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:xABG4.106628$[email hidden]... > [snipped same o l d stuff] > > David G Fisher > > >

Do yourself a favor and put me on your kill-file then. David G Fisher "Andre Warringa" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (13 lines)

> Indeed David, indeed. You are becoming really boring. > > Andre > > On Tue, 04 Apr 2000 19:20:21 GMT, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> > wrote: > > >Same people. Same old words. > > > >David G Fisher > > > > >

David, Why am I not allowed to enjoy GPL? Why can't I talk about it if I enjoy it? What IF I like it better than any other sim? It's like telling me "you idiot, can't you see that driving an souped-up old Mini for fun is for morons?" I like it, period. I buy most of the other sims, like them too. But for some reason nothing has captured the limited time I can spend as a computer gamee more than GPL. Sorry. And at the way you are posting here, I'm beginning to feel guilty. I actually feel like the ostracized person here....along with a few others, I'm sure. To me, it seems ras has been dominated by F1 2000 posts lately, so quite frankly, I can't see why you are letting this get to you. Let people enjoy it, let them talk about it. It's not your fault that they/I haven't gotten hooked by RC2000 or whatever. My comparison; No matter how much people would want me to drive a Mercedes, I wouldn't. I simply don't like it. No thanks. (expecting flames here) Oh, and I'm really excited about WSC. Looks and sounds like a dream come true. Why? Because that is a form of racing I really enjoy. (more flames expected) Matt David G Fisher <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:vEBG4.106630$[email hidden]... > Yes, I'm so pissed off. I take "sim talk" that seriously. > > If you'd like, I can show you another forum where RC has been mentioned > 20,000 separate times in six months. You can check sales figures of thetwo > sims and draw your own conclusions as to how many people in htis worldwill

Quoted text (15 lines)

> be discussing, and playing, those two sims tomorrow. > > David G Fisher > > > "Mark Davison" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:8cdp7g$bls$[email hidden]... > > > > David G Fisher <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:IfrG4.105196$[email hidden]... > > > Same people. Same old words. > > > > > > David G Fisher > > > > LOL! Are you just pissed off that the "GPL Killer" that was RC2000

hardly > > gets a mention? > > I don't understand what you've got against folks who state theirenjoyment

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > of GPL. People only do it because it's a good sim. As soon as a better > one > > appears the topics will shift. No one is blindly evangelising GPL just > > because it's GPL. > > > > Mark > > > > >

No, that just means Deer Hunter is the best hunting game in it's price range, and low priced hunting titles are very popular. You can't use sales figures in apples to oranges comparisons, but when comparing two apples (two $40 sims, e.g.) sales figures are a good indicator. "Cliff Roman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:a5IG4.365$%[email hidden]...

Quoted text (36 lines)

> David, please do not bring sales figures into this. > > If that is the only thing that counted, then we would all be forced to say > that Deer Hunter is the best game out there > > > > David G Fisher <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:vEBG4.106630$[email hidden]... > > Yes, I'm so pissed off. I take "sim talk" that seriously. > > > > If you'd like, I can show you another forum where RC has been mentioned > > 20,000 separate times in six months. You can check sales figures of the > two > > sims and draw your own conclusions as to how many people in htis world > will > > be discussing, and playing, those two sims tomorrow. > > > > David G Fisher > > > > > > "Mark Davison" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:8cdp7g$bls$[email hidden]... > > > > > > David G Fisher <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > news:IfrG4.105196$[email hidden]... > > > > Same people. Same old words. > > > > > > > > David G Fisher > > > > > > LOL! Are you just pissed off that the "GPL Killer" that was RC2000 > hardly > > > gets a mention? > > > I don't understand what you've got against folks who state their > enjoyment > > > of GPL. People only do it because it's a good sim. As soon as a

better > > one > > > appears the topics will shift. No one is blindly evangelising GPLjust

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > > because it's GPL. > > > > > > Mark > > > > > > > > > >

Nah, sometimes I even enjoy your continuing whining and complaining, and reading your completely pointless posts actually can be funny sometimes. But lately you only repeat yourself, again and again, which is a shame. The only thing you can write about lately is complaining about the GPL community. Start writing about car sims for a change. Tell us everything about the real life physics of RC2000. If you don't like it here, do yourself a favor and don't come here anymore then. Andre On Wed, 05 Apr 2000 17:43:39 GMT, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (20 lines)

>Do yourself a favor and put me on your kill-file then. > >David G Fisher > > >"Andre Warringa" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >news:[email hidden]... >> Indeed David, indeed. You are becoming really boring. >> >> Andre >> >> On Tue, 04 Apr 2000 19:20:21 GMT, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> >> wrote: >> >> >Same people. Same old words. >> > >> >David G Fisher >> > >> > >>

Its still not a very good indicator. Most people buy from perception without knowing how good a game really is. A good example of this are the EA Sports games. People see all the "If its in the game, its in the game" commercials and assume that those are the games to buy. Does not mean it is the best sim. How many people bought GPL? How many people bought a game such as.. oh.. Nascar Revolution. I bet more people bought Nascar Revolution and we all know that is not a better product Tracey Miller <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:e5MG4.269$[email hidden]... > No, that just means Deer Hunter is the best hunting game in it's price > range, and low priced hunting titles are very popular. You can't use sales > figures in apples to oranges comparisons, but when comparing two apples(two

Quoted text (8 lines)

> $40 sims, e.g.) sales figures are a good indicator. > > > "Cliff Roman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:a5IG4.365$%[email hidden]... > > David, please do not bring sales figures into this. > > > > If that is the only thing that counted, then we would all be forced to

say

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > that Deer Hunter is the best game out there > > > > > > > > David G Fisher <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:vEBG4.106630$[email hidden]... > > > Yes, I'm so pissed off. I take "sim talk" that seriously. > > > > > > If you'd like, I can show you another forum where RC has been

mentioned > > > 20,000 separate times in six months. You can check sales figures ofthe

Quoted text (37 lines)

> > two > > > sims and draw your own conclusions as to how many people in htis world > > will > > > be discussing, and playing, those two sims tomorrow. > > > > > > David G Fisher > > > > > > > > > "Mark Davison" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > news:8cdp7g$bls$[email hidden]... > > > > > > > > David G Fisher <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > > news:IfrG4.105196$[email hidden]... > > > > > Same people. Same old words. > > > > > > > > > > David G Fisher > > > > > > > > LOL! Are you just pissed off that the "GPL Killer" that was RC2000 > > hardly > > > > gets a mention? > > > > I don't understand what you've got against folks who state their > > enjoyment > > > > of GPL. People only do it because it's a good sim. As soon as a > better > > > one > > > > appears the topics will shift. No one is blindly evangelising GPL > just > > > > because it's GPL. > > > > > > > > Mark > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

Ok. The ability to do fast laps in GPL has nothing to do with talent. Greger Huttu, Wolfgang Woeger, Jussi Junnilainen and the other guys that are extremely fast on every track are just blessed with a tremendous amount of luck. Not. Jon > No. The difference between myself and people like you is I would neverjump > to the conclusion that the 1:28 was any indication whatsoever as to how > talented a racer I was. It's just a game. Physics model, schmysics model. > David G Fisher >

"Cliff Roman" wrote > Its still not a very good indicator. Most people buy from perception > without knowing how good a game really is. A good example of this are the > EA Sports games. People see all the "If its in the game, its in the game" > commercials and assume that those are the games to buy. Does not mean itis > the best sim. How many people bought GPL? How many people bought a game > such as.. oh.. Nascar Revolution. I bet more people bought Nascar > Revolution and we all know that is not a better product I think you might lose that bet, NASCAR Revolution was one of the biggest flops of all time, even the casual gamers didn't like it. Most people buy games based on word of mouth or positive reviews. By the time a game is on the shelf the reviewers have already had their say and the "warez kids" are spreading their opinion. GPL didn't sell because it got bad reviews, in magazines, on websites, and word of mouth. Terms like "hard", "difficult", and "steep learning curve" scared too many people away - not to mention the late 60's era. NASCAR Revolution didn't sell because terms like "bugs", "pauses", "choppy frame rate" scared people away. The game was almost unplayable until the 2nd or 3rd patch, but by that time the damage had been done. Hard core "sim freaks" were never going to buy it anyway, but it might have found a "gamer" audience if it hadn't been so full of bugs.

Is that all you can say ?? Aren't you at least going to try and disagree with him ? No? didn't think so. -- Ian Parker [email hidden] [email hidden] == David G Fisher <[email hidden]> wrote > Same people. Same old words. > > David G Fisher

[email hidden] wrote:

Quoted text (12 lines)

> > Deer Hunter is, unquestionably, the most realistic deer hunting > SIMULATION out there -- GPL pales in comparison. I doubt that a 1967 > GP car could even withstand a collision with a deer, let alone kill > it. Stick Steffan Johannson in a 1970s-vintage F1 car, though, and you > might be onto something! > > </HUMOR> > > ;-) > > -- JB

ROFL. Ohhh...that is good. PMK

I wish there was a place that we could go to see actual sales figures that were kept by a private seperate company. We would all probably be surprised how little of these games are sold Tracey Miller <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:ttOG4.288$[email hidden]... > > "Cliff Roman" wrote > > Its still not a very good indicator. Most people buy from perception > > without knowing how good a game really is. A good example of this arethe > > EA Sports games. People see all the "If its in the game, its in thegame" > > commercials and assume that those are the games to buy. Does not meanit > is > > the best sim. How many people bought GPL? How many people bought agame

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > such as.. oh.. Nascar Revolution. I bet more people bought Nascar > > Revolution and we all know that is not a better product > > I think you might lose that bet, NASCAR Revolution was one of the biggest > flops of all time, even the casual gamers didn't like it. > > Most people buy games based on word of mouth or positive reviews. By the > time a game is on the shelf the reviewers have already had their say and

the

Quoted text (9 lines)

> "warez kids" are spreading their opinion. > > GPL didn't sell because it got bad reviews, in magazines, on websites, and > word of mouth. Terms like "hard", "difficult", and "steep learning curve" > scared too many people away - not to mention the late 60's era. > > NASCAR Revolution didn't sell because terms like "bugs", "pauses", "choppy > frame rate" scared people away. The game was almost unplayable until the > 2nd or 3rd patch, but by that time the damage had been done. Hard core

"sim > freaks" were never going to buy it anyway, but it might have found a"gamer" > audience if it hadn't been so full of bugs. > > > >

Haha But have you tried riding a deer through Monza? It will take you a lot of practice before you can get that 1:30 time :) <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:8cgag0$pn7$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (69 lines)

> Deer Hunter is, unquestionably, the most realistic deer hunting > SIMULATION out there -- GPL pales in comparison. I doubt that a 1967 > GP car could even withstand a collision with a deer, let alone kill > it. Stick Steffan Johannson in a 1970s-vintage F1 car, though, and you > might be onto something! > > </HUMOR> > > ;-) > > -- JB > > In article <a5IG4.365$%[email hidden]>, > "Cliff Roman" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > David, please do not bring sales figures into this. > > > > If that is the only thing that counted, then we would all be forced > to say > > that Deer Hunter is the best game out there > > > > David G Fisher <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:vEBG4.106630$[email hidden]... > > > Yes, I'm so pissed off. I take "sim talk" that seriously. > > > > > > If you'd like, I can show you another forum where RC has been > mentioned > > > 20,000 separate times in six months. You can check sales figures of > the > > two > > > sims and draw your own conclusions as to how many people in htis > world > > will > > > be discussing, and playing, those two sims tomorrow. > > > > > > David G Fisher > > > > > > > > > "Mark Davison" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > news:8cdp7g$bls$[email hidden]... > > > > > > > > David G Fisher <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > > news:IfrG4.105196$[email hidden]... > > > > > Same people. Same old words. > > > > > > > > > > David G Fisher > > > > > > > > LOL! Are you just pissed off that the "GPL Killer" that was > RC2000 > > hardly > > > > gets a mention? > > > > I don't understand what you've got against folks who state their > > enjoyment > > > > of GPL. People only do it because it's a good sim. As soon as a > better > > > one > > > > appears the topics will shift. No one is blindly evangelising > GPL just > > > > because it's GPL. > > > > > > > > Mark > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ > Before you buy.

<[email hidden]> wrote in message news:8ci7p0$s6k$[email hidden]... > NFS:PU most DEFINITELY falls into the "looks like a duck..." category, > Stephen -- I'm sure you'll get a lot of enjoyment out of it based on > your "duck" criteria! Quack quack... might have to find time to visit the software shops this weekend. > My biggest gripe, though, is that the AI in the "beginner" stages (when > you get to drive the really COOL '50s cars) is VERY pathetic. The > driving experience makes up for it, though, but I'd like to have a > little competition once in a while. Hopefully and AI tweak is in the > works. Damn. The experience would be so much better if they really made you work for your wins in the early cars. The old 356s, even the muscular Carreras with their novel camshafts driven off solid intermediate shafts (instead of chains), needed a lot of work from the driver to maintain speed. If your competition isn't up to the challenge, where's the motivation to wring everything you can out of that little boxer motor? Stephen

NFS:PU most DEFINITELY falls into the "looks like a duck..." category, Stephen -- I'm sure you'll get a lot of enjoyment out of it based on your "duck" criteria! My biggest gripe, though, is that the AI in the "beginner" stages (when you get to drive the really COOL '50s cars) is VERY pathetic. The driving experience makes up for it, though, but I'd like to have a little competition once in a while. Hopefully and AI tweak is in the works. Come to think of it, I just realized that the AI in NFS:PU has the OPPOSITE problem of the AI in GPL (too slow versus too fast). Maybe EA looked at the big complaints about GPL and took heed, perhaps. At any rate, KUDOS to the folks responsible for the physics modeling in NFS:PU! -- JB In article <8chffk$6cutt$[email hidden]>, "Stephen Ferguson" <[email hidden]> wrote: > GPL has definitely not spoiled me, as I can enjoy other sims. It isvery > satisfying to get a good lap in GPL, but I can get the samesatisfaction > from GP2, N2 or RC2000. This has all been hashed out in "LeProfesseur's" > thread (and wasn't it fun to actually be "cited" in his summaryarticle, > sort of like being in a peer-reviewed journal article...). I'llstate my > position once more; I program "sims" of biological systems for myreal-world > research. The measure of success for these sims is whether they canbe > validated against experimentally obtained empirical data. That is,if it > looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then itis, > for my purposes, a duck. GPL looks, sounds and behaves like a decent > simulation of 1967 GP cars, therefore my disbelief is suspended and Ican > enjoy the experience of pretending to drive such a beast. GP2, withthe > fury of its wheelspin, where a careful touch on the throttle isrewarded, > its motion over the curbs, where the little judders and squawks giveone the > feeling of an extremely stiff car relying on its tires for somesuspension > action, its decent (for the time of release) sound, the ability tocatch > little slides but just ride helplessly after a certain point, alsoallowed > me to believe that I was piloting a modern F1 car. Sure there werelittle > inconsistencies, but not enough to ruin the experience. Same with the > others I mentioned. > > As I come from a background governed by the "scientific method",whereby a > hypothesis can never be proven to be 100% corrent, only shown to be > supported by observations, rather than that of pure mathematics,where there > are absolute truths, I am willing to rely on the "if it feels good,it is > good" mentality. I also don't care how I get that result. > > It sound like NFS:PU is a must have for me as well, my passion for old > Porsches notwithstanding. It sounds like another "looks like aduck..." > sim, with a bit of a "story" that one can get into. > > Stephen > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

David G Fisher wrote:

Quoted text (29 lines)

> "Jon Andersen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:xktG4.722$[email hidden]... > > Wow! > > > > Well done! Both you and your friend must be extremely talented at racing. > > Sub 1.30 laps at Monza after just a couple of laps.... > > > > It's a shame, though, that you seem to be more interested in special > graphic > > effects than actually playing the game. What a waste of valuable talent. > > No. The difference between myself and people like you is I would never jump > to the conclusion that the 1:28 was any indication whatsoever as to how > talented a racer I was. It's just a game. Physics model, schmysics model. > > > Also, it is too bad that you do not have a proper modem or ISDN card. It > > seems to me that there is something wrong with your hardware, or your ISP. > > That is the only explanation for disconnects. Multiplayer implementation > in > > GPL is good, just as good as the rest of the game. > > > > Jon > > Heard that before. Funny thing is, I have been racing online for three years > now, and GPL is the only sim/game which was a problem. A huge problem. BTW, > even Alison Hine recently commented on this newsgroup that she'd like > Papyrus to do a GPL patch, and in it address the disconnection problems. > > David G Fisher

This is big bullshit David!!!! You definitely have something wrong with your conn-settings: GPL via VROC simply rocks! And concerning your 1.28: I'm impressed and you shouldn't under estimate your virtual racing capabilities. I have this "game" (I do not want to disturb you anymore with calling it a sim) almost one year and still can't manage a 1.30 lap (admitted I don't have enough time to practise). Please tell me how you did this by just applying throttle, braking & steering? It's just the input I add to the game as well and still can't do it the way you do. Please fix your connection-settings and join an online league (for a couple of hours), i'll tell you it's a blast and beats every other (racing-)sim currently available. -- Jan Hovius

Oh....okay, here's what I was getting at:- In the first snip you state that "it's just a game". In the second snip you state that you "take 'sim talk' seriously". I was simply curious as to how, in less than 24 hours, you can move from treating something as a game to treating something as a sim, and seriously to boot. -- Regards, Bruce Kennewell, Canberra, Australia. --------------------------- David G Fisher <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:NxKG4.106998$[email hidden]... > I have no idea what you mean.

What I cannot understand is why the chap is so angry about GPL and those who prefer it to anything else (available at this time). Have we done something to peeve him......apart from buying and enjoying a computer game, of course? I don't recall ever seeing his name on my list of whom to leave out of my will; I certainly haven't beaten him to a car-parking spot that I know of and I definitely have not crashed into him with my trolley in a crowded supermarket aisle. So just who did? C'mon....own up! -- Regards, Bruce Kennewell, Canberra, Australia. --------------------------- Peter Ives <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > In article <c0qG4.104606$[email hidden]>, David G > Fisher <[email hidden]> writes > >Colin, > > > >It's a waste of time. The same group of guys with 1,000,001 hours invested > >in GPL, say the same things over and over again about every new sim that > >comes along. Supposedly they are serious adults, but they act no different > >than the 14 year old brats who use words like "rulez" and "sucks" to > >describe sims. > > > >David G Fisher > > > > Is that the best you could come up with David? Now you're reduced to > comparing all GPL fans on this NG to pubescent 14 year olds, just to > show how right you must be and how wrong they must be. Dear oh dear! > -- > Peter Ives - (AKA Ivington) > > No person's opinions can be said to be > more correct than another's, because each is > the sole judge of his or her own experience.

Actually, that depends -- if try it during the bowhunting or muzzle- loader season they move at a more leisurely pace, but during the semi- automatic season, sub-1:30s are more do-able! <G> -- JB In article <J7QG4.378$%[email hidden]>, "Cliff Roman" <[email hidden]> wrote: > Haha > > But have you tried riding a deer through Monza? It will take you alot of > practice before you can get that 1:30 time :) > > <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:8cgag0$pn7$[email hidden]... > > Deer Hunter is, unquestionably, the most realistic deer hunting > > SIMULATION out there -- GPL pales in comparison. I doubt that a1967 > > GP car could even withstand a collision with a deer, let alone kill > > it. Stick Steffan Johannson in a 1970s-vintage F1 car, though, andyou

Quoted text (13 lines)

> > might be onto something! > > > > </HUMOR> > > > > ;-) > > > > -- JB > > > > In article <a5IG4.365$%[email hidden]>, > > "Cliff Roman" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > David, please do not bring sales figures into this. > > > > > > If that is the only thing that counted, then we would all be

forced

Quoted text (10 lines)

> > to say > > > that Deer Hunter is the best game out there > > > > > > David G Fisher <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > news:vEBG4.106630$[email hidden]... > > > > Yes, I'm so pissed off. I take "sim talk" that seriously. > > > > > > > > If you'd like, I can show you another forum where RC has been > > mentioned > > > > 20,000 separate times in six months. You can check sales

figures of

Quoted text (24 lines)

> > the > > > two > > > > sims and draw your own conclusions as to how many people in htis > > world > > > will > > > > be discussing, and playing, those two sims tomorrow. > > > > > > > > David G Fisher > > > > > > > > > > > > "Mark Davison" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > > news:8cdp7g$bls$[email hidden]... > > > > > > > > > > David G Fisher <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > > > news:IfrG4.105196$[email hidden]... > > > > > > Same people. Same old words. > > > > > > > > > > > > David G Fisher > > > > > > > > > > LOL! Are you just pissed off that the "GPL Killer" that was > > RC2000 > > > hardly > > > > > gets a mention? > > > > > I don't understand what you've got against folks who state

their > > > enjoyment > > > > > of GPL. People only do it because it's a good sim. As soonas a

Quoted text (18 lines)

> > better > > > > one > > > > > appears the topics will shift. No one is blindly evangelising > > GPL just > > > > > because it's GPL. > > > > > > > > > > Mark > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ > > Before you buy. > >

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

GPL has definitely not spoiled me, as I can enjoy other sims. It is very satisfying to get a good lap in GPL, but I can get the same satisfaction from GP2, N2 or RC2000. This has all been hashed out in "Le Professeur's" thread (and wasn't it fun to actually be "cited" in his summary article, sort of like being in a peer-reviewed journal article...). I'll state my position once more; I program "sims" of biological systems for my real-world research. The measure of success for these sims is whether they can be validated against experimentally obtained empirical data. That is, if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it is, for my purposes, a duck. GPL looks, sounds and behaves like a decent simulation of 1967 GP cars, therefore my disbelief is suspended and I can enjoy the experience of pretending to drive such a beast. GP2, with the fury of its wheelspin, where a careful touch on the throttle is rewarded, its motion over the curbs, where the little judders and squawks give one the feeling of an extremely stiff car relying on its tires for some suspension action, its decent (for the time of release) sound, the ability to catch little slides but just ride helplessly after a certain point, also allowed me to believe that I was piloting a modern F1 car. Sure there were little inconsistencies, but not enough to ruin the experience. Same with the others I mentioned. As I come from a background governed by the "scientific method", whereby a hypothesis can never be proven to be 100% corrent, only shown to be supported by observations, rather than that of pure mathematics, where there are absolute truths, I am willing to rely on the "if it feels good, it is good" mentality. I also don't care how I get that result. It sound like NFS:PU is a must have for me as well, my passion for old Porsches notwithstanding. It sounds like another "looks like a duck..." sim, with a bit of a "story" that one can get into. Stephen

Bruce, I fear you were too subtle there. "Bruce Kennewell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Excuse I butting in, David, but didn't you say here.... > > >No. The difference between myself and people like you is I would neverjump

Quoted text (12 lines)

> >to the conclusion that the 1:28 was any indication whatsoever as to how > >talented a racer I was. It's just a game. Physics model, schmysics model. > > .........that it's just a game? > > Just curious that you'd shift positions so quickly on something like that. > > -- > Regards, > Bruce Kennewell, > Canberra, Australia. > ---------------------------

Yep; too subtle. But it was nice from here. DK "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:NxKG4.106998$[email hidden]... > I have no idea what you mean. >

LOL! I once rode a deer for a bit . . . ut that's not an appropriate story here. --DK "Cliff Roman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:J7QG4.378$%[email hidden]... > Haha > > But have you tried riding a deer through Monza? It will take you a lot of > practice before you can get that 1:30 time :) >

Matthew, Davey G. will probably tell you his original post was level-headed & reasonable, but that it was then jumped on by the GPL brigade. If you look at it, however, you will see that whereas the Colin's message simply asked the the GPL folks give other sims a chance (Somethign with which I agree; but which I'd also say is being done), Davey G. chimed in with words like this: "Supposedly they are serious adults, but they act no different than the 14 year old brats who use words like "rulez" and "sucks" to describe sims." The difference between Colin's post and David's is immense and sad. --DK "Matthew B.Knutsen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:_fKG4.1220$[email hidden]... > David, > Why am I not allowed to enjoy GPL? > Why can't I talk about it if I enjoy it? What IF I like it better than any > other sim? > It's like telling me "you idiot, can't you see that driving an souped-upold > Mini for fun is for morons?" > > I like it, period. I buy most of the other sims, like them too. But forsome > reason nothing has captured the limited time I can spend as a computergamee

Quoted text (10 lines)

> more than GPL. Sorry. > And at the way you are posting here, I'm beginning to feel guilty. I > actually feel like the ostracized person here....along with a few others, > I'm sure. > To me, it seems ras has been dominated by F1 2000 posts lately, so quite > frankly, I can't see why you are letting this get to you. Let people enjoy > it, let them talk about it. It's not your fault that they/I haven't gotten > hooked by RC2000 or whatever. > > My comparison; No matter how much people would want me to drive a

Mercedes,

Quoted text (39 lines)

> I wouldn't. I simply don't like it. No thanks. > (expecting flames here) > > Oh, and I'm really excited about WSC. Looks and sounds like a dream come > true. Why? Because that is a form of racing I really enjoy. > (more flames expected) > > Matt > > > David G Fisher <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:vEBG4.106630$[email hidden]... > > Yes, I'm so pissed off. I take "sim talk" that seriously. > > > > If you'd like, I can show you another forum where RC has been mentioned > > 20,000 separate times in six months. You can check sales figures of the > two > > sims and draw your own conclusions as to how many people in htis world > will > > be discussing, and playing, those two sims tomorrow. > > > > David G Fisher > > > > > > "Mark Davison" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:8cdp7g$bls$[email hidden]... > > > > > > David G Fisher <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > news:IfrG4.105196$[email hidden]... > > > > Same people. Same old words. > > > > > > > > David G Fisher > > > > > > LOL! Are you just pissed off that the "GPL Killer" that was RC2000 > hardly > > > gets a mention? > > > I don't understand what you've got against folks who state their > enjoyment > > > of GPL. People only do it because it's a good sim. As soon as a

better > > one > > > appears the topics will shift. No one is blindly evangelising GPLjust

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > > because it's GPL. > > > > > > Mark > > > > > > > > > >

Excuse I butting in, David, but didn't you say here.... >No. The difference between myself and people like you is I would never jump >to the conclusion that the 1:28 was any indication whatsoever as to how >talented a racer I was. It's just a game. Physics model, schmysics model. .........that it's just a game? Just curious that you'd shift positions so quickly on something like that. -- Regards, Bruce Kennewell, Canberra, Australia. --------------------------- David G Fisher <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:vEBG4.106630$[email hidden]... > Yes, I'm so pissed off. I take "sim talk" that seriously. >

Andre Warringa <[email hidden]> wrote: >Nah, sometimes I even enjoy your continuing whining and complaining, >and reading your completely pointless posts actually can be funny >sometimes. Hmmm, I've to admit I often disagree with the way David is expressing himself, (he generalize too much IMO), I wouldn't say his posts are pointless. You even might say that David is more open minded then most, if only he could accept that others like to compare... Remco

Hey, move over! My turn.... Remco [email hidden] wrote: >Again, I'm going to climb on Colin's bandwagon here so I can pat him on >the back. > >Well-said!

Try a mid 1980's car MS

Quoted text (66 lines)

> Deer Hunter is, unquestionably, the most realistic deer hunting > SIMULATION out there -- GPL pales in comparison. I doubt that a 1967 > GP car could even withstand a collision with a deer, let alone kill > it. Stick Steffan Johannson in a 1970s-vintage F1 car, though, and you > might be onto something! > </HUMOR> > ;-) > -- JB > > David, please do not bring sales figures into this. > > If that is the only thing that counted, then we would all be forced > to say > > that Deer Hunter is the best game out there > > > Yes, I'm so pissed off. I take "sim talk" that seriously. > > > If you'd like, I can show you another forum where RC has been > mentioned > > > 20,000 separate times in six months. You can check sales figures of > the > > two > > > sims and draw your own conclusions as to how many people in htis > world > > will > > > be discussing, and playing, those two sims tomorrow. > > > David G Fisher > > > > > Same people. Same old words. > > > > > David G Fisher > > > > LOL! Are you just pissed off that the "GPL Killer" that was > RC2000 > > hardly > > > > gets a mention? > > > > I don't understand what you've got against folks who state their > > enjoyment > > > > of GPL. People only do it because it's a good sim. As soon as a > better > > > one > > > > appears the topics will shift. No one is blindly evangelising > GPL just > > > > because it's GPL. > > > > Mark > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ > Before you buy.

1:27.54, thanks to some extra toe out at the front end, and an H&K MP5... [email hidden] wrote in message <8ch2re$kac$[email hidden]>...

Quoted text (14 lines)

>Actually, that depends -- if try it during the bowhunting or muzzle- >loader season they move at a more leisurely pace, but during the semi- >automatic season, sub-1:30s are more do-able! <G> > >-- JB > >In article <J7QG4.378$%[email hidden]>, > "Cliff Roman" <[email hidden]> wrote: >> Haha >> >> But have you tried riding a deer through Monza? It will take you a >lot of >> practice before you can get that 1:30 time :) >>

<snipped>

I didn't say ALL his posts were pointless, but all his posts in this thread are. As most people noticed his 'same people, same old words' replies are quite ironic, since all David can write about lately is his view on the RAS community. Let him explain your RC2000 physics questions instead :) Andre On Thu, 06 Apr 2000 11:51:38 GMT, [email hidden] (Remco Moedt) wrote:

Quoted text (13 lines)

>Andre Warringa <[email hidden]> wrote: > >>Nah, sometimes I even enjoy your continuing whining and complaining, >>and reading your completely pointless posts actually can be funny >>sometimes. > >Hmmm, I've to admit I often disagree with the way David is expressing >himself, (he generalize too much IMO), I wouldn't say his posts are >pointless. You even might say that David is more open minded then >most, if only he could accept that others like to compare... > >Remco >

Sorry. I was accused of being "pissed off" by Marc which is silly. I sarcastically agreed with him when I said I was upset and "take sim talk seriously". I'm as hard core about sim racing as anyone, but I have a little too much perspective on life to get upset about this hobby. As for Dave and his comments that I didn't pick up on your subtly, well, it turns out he didn't pick up on mine. David G Fisher "Bruce Kennewell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (21 lines)

> Oh....okay, here's what I was getting at:- > > In the first snip you state that "it's just a game". > In the second snip you state that you "take 'sim talk' seriously". > > I was simply curious as to how, in less than 24 hours, you can move from > treating something as a game to treating something as a sim, and seriously > to boot. > > -- > Regards, > Bruce Kennewell, > Canberra, Australia. > --------------------------- > > David G Fisher <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:NxKG4.106998$[email hidden]... > > I have no idea what you mean. > > >

> If you'd like, I can show you another forum where RC has been mentioned > 20,000 separate times in six months. You can check sales figures of thetwo > sims and draw your own conclusions as to how many people in htis worldwill > be discussing, and playing, those two sims tomorrow. Ford Poplar and Ferrari Dino. You can check sales figures of the two manufacturers and draw your own conclusions as to how many in this world will be polished with love and driven with pride tomorrow. Sales numbers mean nothing in terms of defining quality of product! MS

Quoted text (14 lines)

> > David G Fisher > > > "Mark Davison" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:8cdp7g$bls$[email hidden]... > > > > David G Fisher <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:IfrG4.105196$[email hidden]... > > > Same people. Same old words. > > > > > > David G Fisher > > > > LOL! Are you just pissed off that the "GPL Killer" that was RC2000

hardly > > gets a mention? > > I don't understand what you've got against folks who state theirenjoyment

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > of GPL. People only do it because it's a good sim. As soon as a better > one > > appears the topics will shift. No one is blindly evangelising GPL just > > because it's GPL. > > > > Mark > > > > >

Try a mid 1980's car MS <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:8cgag0$pn7$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (69 lines)

> Deer Hunter is, unquestionably, the most realistic deer hunting > SIMULATION out there -- GPL pales in comparison. I doubt that a 1967 > GP car could even withstand a collision with a deer, let alone kill > it. Stick Steffan Johannson in a 1970s-vintage F1 car, though, and you > might be onto something! > > </HUMOR> > > ;-) > > -- JB > > In article <a5IG4.365$%[email hidden]>, > "Cliff Roman" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > David, please do not bring sales figures into this. > > > > If that is the only thing that counted, then we would all be forced > to say > > that Deer Hunter is the best game out there > > > > David G Fisher <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:vEBG4.106630$[email hidden]... > > > Yes, I'm so pissed off. I take "sim talk" that seriously. > > > > > > If you'd like, I can show you another forum where RC has been > mentioned > > > 20,000 separate times in six months. You can check sales figures of > the > > two > > > sims and draw your own conclusions as to how many people in htis > world > > will > > > be discussing, and playing, those two sims tomorrow. > > > > > > David G Fisher > > > > > > > > > "Mark Davison" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > news:8cdp7g$bls$[email hidden]... > > > > > > > > David G Fisher <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > > news:IfrG4.105196$[email hidden]... > > > > > Same people. Same old words. > > > > > > > > > > David G Fisher > > > > > > > > LOL! Are you just pissed off that the "GPL Killer" that was > RC2000 > > hardly > > > > gets a mention? > > > > I don't understand what you've got against folks who state their > > enjoyment > > > > of GPL. People only do it because it's a good sim. As soon as a > better > > > one > > > > appears the topics will shift. No one is blindly evangelising > GPL just > > > > because it's GPL. > > > > > > > > Mark > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ > Before you buy.

"Remco Moedt" <[email hidden]> wrote > Hmmm, I've to admit I often disagree with the way David is expressing > himself, (he generalize too much IMO), I wouldn't say his posts are > pointless. You even might say that David is more open minded then > most, if only he could accept that others like to compare... I have no problem with David at all, and have great fun in discussing with him our visions of the racing simulation world. Even if I disagree, it doesn't mean it's a bad thing at all! But I have chosen to not say a word in this thread. Oops now I just did ;) -- -- 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.

"Stephen Ferguson" <[email hidden]> wrote > GPL has definitely not spoiled me, as I can enjoy other sims. It is very > satisfying to get a good lap in GPL, but I can get the same satisfaction > from GP2, N2 or RC2000. This has all been hashed out in "Le Professeur's" > thread (and wasn't it fun to actually be "cited" in his summary article, > sort of like being in a peer-reviewed journal article...). Good point. Darn I said I wouldn't write a thing in this thead.. oh well ;) Personally, here are the only racing simulation where I get satisfaction from either having a good lap or racing online : - GPL - N3 - RC2000 - GP2 - AMA SBK <ymenard ducks> - Icr2 on road tracks Everything else that I tried and reviewed "hard-corely" doesn't give my any satisfaction at all, for many reason. Those titles above are the only one where I will mind-set myself in a serious racing mood, where external factors and inner-psyche are irrelevant ;) -- -- 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.

>"Sales numbers mean nothing in terms of defining quality of product!" I never said it did. David G Fisher "Mark Seery" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:8cj0pi$2c11$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (35 lines)

> > > If you'd like, I can show you another forum where RC has been mentioned > > 20,000 separate times in six months. You can check sales figures of the > two > > sims and draw your own conclusions as to how many people in htis world > will > > be discussing, and playing, those two sims tomorrow. > > Ford Poplar and Ferrari Dino. > You can check sales figures of the two manufacturers and draw your own > conclusions as to how many in this world will be polished with love and > driven with pride tomorrow. > > Sales numbers mean nothing in terms of defining quality of product! > > MS > > > > David G Fisher > > > > > > "Mark Davison" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:8cdp7g$bls$[email hidden]... > > > > > > David G Fisher <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > news:IfrG4.105196$[email hidden]... > > > > Same people. Same old words. > > > > > > > > David G Fisher > > > > > > LOL! Are you just pissed off that the "GPL Killer" that was RC2000 > hardly > > > gets a mention? > > > I don't understand what you've got against folks who state their > enjoyment > > > of GPL. People only do it because it's a good sim. As soon as a

better > > one > > > appears the topics will shift. No one is blindly evangelising GPLjust

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > > because it's GPL. > > > > > > Mark > > > > > > > > > >

Yes.....unequivocally, YES. -- Regards, Bruce Kennewell, Canberra, Australia. --------------------------- <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Point I was trying to make > was are games or simulations that would be considered impressive > before the introduction of GPL being overlooked because now anything > being compared to GPL seems to be a letdown.

"Stephen Ferguson" <[email hidden]> writes: > If your competition isn't up to the challenge, where's the > motivation to wring everything you can out of that little boxer > motor? Online, I guess. -- [asbjxrn] [lLd25z*%ds1-100/sLlSdI%ds2-O/sSl1l2*PlL0<l]sl 21172310731916131628237117 3237142523312SSSLllxq

Roger that....no worries. -- Regards, Bruce Kennewell, Canberra, Australia. --------------------------- David G Fisher <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:qW3H4.107984$[email hidden]... > Sorry. > > I was accused of being "pissed off" by Marc which is silly. I sarcastically > agreed with him when I said I was upset and "take sim talk seriously". I'm > as hard core about sim racing as anyone, but I have a little too much > perspective on life to get upset about this hobby. > > As for Dave and his comments that I didn't pick up on your subtly, well, it > turns out he didn't pick up on mine. > > David G Fisher > > "Bruce Kennewell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > Oh....okay, here's what I was getting at:- > > > > In the first snip you state that "it's just a game". > > In the second snip you state that you "take 'sim talk' seriously". > > > > I was simply curious as to how, in less than 24 hours, you can move from > > treating something as a game to treating something as a sim, and seriously > > to boot. > > > > -- > > Regards, > > Bruce Kennewell, > > Canberra, Australia. > > --------------------------- > > > > David G Fisher <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:NxKG4.106998$[email hidden]... > > > I have no idea what you mean. > > > > > > >

In article <8cgbd8$qnu$[email hidden]>, [email hidden] writes: >>instead of trying to drag them into the the "cult of GPL". > >Does this bear any relationship to the "cult of personality"? > Good song!<g> Eldred -- Tiger Stadium R.I.P. 1912-1999 Own Grand Prix Legends? Goto http://gpl.gamestats.com/vroc Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.