GPL - Avault review = 2 1/2 stars - **1/2

It's called "improving lap times". Of course, he's trying to run over course workers, so what does he know... I almost have to sort of half-way kinda agree with him. So how is this different from nascar2 (one of the games he claims is his favorite). If he's paying that much attention to the track-side objects, maybe that explains his inability do drive. Damn - a positive comment - what do you want to bet that he picked the Ferarri? Music in GPL? The only music I hear in the sim is the sounds of the other cars going by me. Peole with smaller than average brains should not be allowed to review simulators. -- ========================================================= John Simmons - Redneck Techno-Biker (Zerex12) http://www.members.home.net/jms1/index.html John Simmons - Barbarian Diecast Collector http://members.home.net/jsimm/diecast_index.html If you want to send me email, go to either of the URL's shown above & click "Send Me Mail" in the contents frame. =========================================================

I have been waiting to check avaults review for weeks. Of course, the reviewer must've played a different game than the one I am currently obssessing over.... see my comments below. : GPL - Avault review = 2 1/2 stars - **1/2 : A few notable comments: : "After being frustrated with how hard it was to drive the car I : tried running over a few officials, but they might as well not : have even been there. " Well, this comments sets a tone for who is doing this review. Maybe he should think about clicking on his Carmageddon icon instead. : "Gamers need some sort of encouragement that they are doing better; : they don't need to be thrown into a complex driving model that is : going to take weeks to get competent at." Encourage this! It is a simulator, not an arcade game! : "It would have been nice if Sierra would have included a more : arcade-oriented version of the physics model " Ah, I see...oh please. : "Sierra expects the gamer to know how to set up the car for each : track in order to obtain the best track times. The manual has nothing : in it to show people what each setting does and how to go about : setting up a car for a certain track." Did I get the same game here? Doesn't 4wheel Drift cover that stuff? And there ARE default setups if you feel un-technical. I usually whang around in the default setups until I learn the tracks anyway. : "The graphics are good as far as these types of games go, but : they give no sense of awe or wonder. " Excuse me. Even at 640x480 at Zandvoort with 19 AI cars screaming for turn one, my jaw was*** open. This guy was running 1024x760 with a 300mhz and it complaining about framerate while in heavy traffic! : "The car makes a nice roar sound when you give it some gas. " : Try the Ferrari, Skippy. It sounds pretty good. "Nice roar" doesn't even begin to cover it. : " The musical score is spartan at best. I don't really think that it : matters much in this type of game, however. I can say that the music : does nothing to set the mood of the game nor does it give me any : sense of enjoyment just for music's sake. I quickly turned it off. : ( uhhh... did he actually run GPL? ) Must be reviewing a different game. I don't have music in my version. Maybe boneheaded reviewers get a special copy... : "I can still picture most people returning Grand Prix Legends a : few days after they buy it." Even with my machine's wacky problems running GPL, it is the best sim purchase I have ever made. If I ever get this V2 of mine working like it should, it may likely be the only entertainment I need for months. For now, my V1 runs it spectacularly and I am having a blast. Sorry, Avault. You just lost all credibility with me. J. : -- : ( rrevved is at mindspring dot com : ( post in haste, repent at your leisure

I think the reviewer has some good points. He acknowledges the great physics engine, but also points out that it's not for the faint of heart. GPL is for the hard core simmer, and it is not a mass market title. It requires a loaded machine to run decently against a full field of AIs. Despite this, it still runs in that stupid letterbox format. You are on your own when it comes to setups. Steve Smith's book is decent, but it does not do a great job of getting a newbie going with good setups. I love GPL, but I would not recommend it to anyone who has a life (or wants to maintain one) outside of sim racing. Even if people don't return GPL, there will be a lot of copies sitting on shelves gathering dust. (Not mine!) Regards, Krabby

Quoted text (10 lines)

>GPL - Avault review = 2 1/2 stars - **1/2 >Full (incompetent) review: >http://avault.com/reviews/gpl.asp >A few notable comments: >"After being frustrated with how hard it was to drive the car I >tried running over a few officials, but they might as well not >have even been there. "

He's quite right, really. Do you think marshalls are going to stand still waving their flags when a car comes at them. :) They shouldn't be hurt, but seeing them run for cover, would be quite cool. A quite good point. Maybe not arcade orientated, but a less complex/easier to drive phsyics model- with the same options on racing, would have been a welcome edition and enhancement for a large number of users. Again, a valid point. The "engineer" wizard in CPR was a very valid addition to the genre of sims, and i'd like to se such things appear more often. If they can, indeed, but i can't help think he's got some quite valid points. GPL certainly could of benefited with a multiple level of driving "realism". Not dumbing down- but two distinct levels, could have made the title more accessable for a larger audience, and i can't help but wonder how anyone could consider that a "bad" thing. Z.

Chris Miller really has no clue.... Send your letters to: http://avault.com/letters/ -don "To race is to live, everything else is just waiting." - Rudi Caracciola

> GPL - Avault review = 2 1/2 stars - **1/2 > Full (incompetent) review: > http://avault.com/reviews/gpl.asp > A few notable comments: Thanks, now I have a strained back after falling off my chair... ;^) How do they seperate those kids from their playstations for 10 minutes, so they have time to write reviews like that? l8er ronny -- Toys'R'Us '99: "So, would you like a hand gun with that action figure, kiddo?" |\ _,,,---,,_ I want to die like my Grandfather, ZZZzz /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ in his sleep. |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' Not like the people in his car, '---''(_/--' `-'\_) screaming their heads off!

Exactly - so why does he review and rate it as if it was? Cheers! John

Quoted text (9 lines)

>>He acknowledges the great physics engine, but also points out that it's not > for >>the faint of heart. GPL is for the hard core simmer, and it is not a mass >>market title. >Exactly - so why does he review and rate it as if it was? >Cheers! >John

Because is a general 3D *** web site, and it is reviewed as it is likely to be recieved by it's audience? Z.

Quoted text (14 lines)

>> GPL - Avault review = 2 1/2 stars - **1/2 >> Full (incompetent) review: >> http://avault.com/reviews/gpl.asp >> A few notable comments: >Thanks, now I have a strained back after falling off my chair... ;^) >How do they seperate those kids from their playstations for 10 minutes, >so they have time to write reviews like that? >l8er >ronny

Following is the email I recieved from avault after comenting about the review... "Ummmm, there is music in the menu system... So, this is what it's like huh? You can't win no matter what you write, there is gonna be some crack pots who know how to use email that will always complain. Craig" ROTFLMAO!!!! I stand by my belief that this person has no clue.... -don "To race is to live, everything else is just waiting." - Rudi Caracciola

http://www.avault.com/letters/ Us, as the SimRacing community, can't accept to be dissed by such a gamer. Let's ALL post our comments about him. - Fran?ois Mnard <ymenard> Good race at the Brickyard! - Official Mentally retarded guy of r.a.s. - Excuse me for my English (I'm French speaking) - Sponsored by http://www.awpss.com/ on the NROS - "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."--

ymenard wrote This is my letter : PLEASE all do so, we can't accept to be dissed by such gamers. Im just sick and tired of those arcade drivers who have no knowledge of the hard-core market and their needs. ============= First of all, greetings. My letter is to complaint about the review you made about Grand Prix Legends. I can easily represent the whole people by saying that we will boycott your website if changes aren't made to the review. It has some great innacuracies and seriously some points that make me think he NEVER reviewed the game. First of all, let me say that most of the game reviewers aren't hard-core simracers, and this is the market for GPL, as such air sims like Longbow, etc... GPL is a serious simulator that acts and feel like the REAL 1967 Formula 1 cars. Nothing less, nothing more. From all the other simracing titles, GPL is at least 1year if not 2 years ahead of the others, and really put every of them in the dust. That includes old and even current titles such as ColinMcRae Rally, MonacoGP from UbiSoft, any Microsoft racing "game" and even every Papyrus title. It is a big step forward in racing accuracy and virtual simulation. The biggest step EVER. Your reviewer really show he has no knowledge in racing simulations. " The musical score is spartan at best. I don't really think that it matters much in this type of game, however. I can say that the music does nothing to set the mood of the game nor does it give me any sense of enjoyment just for music's sake. I quickly turned it off. HEY ? AVAULT ? Did he really reviewed it ? He's LYING. There's no music in GPL. By saying he quicly turned it off, he's LYING !!! PLEASE, WE WANT A PUBLIC APOLOGY. The reviewer has no idea about what he tested. This pathetic. If Avault doesn't publicly say they are sorry about the harm they did to the hard-core racing community, we are seriously boycotting your website. This is just a stupid reviewer that probably tested it for 15mins. By saying he turned off the music, with DOESN'T EXIST, he is just pathetically "talking shit". "After being frustrated with how hard it was to drive the car I tried running over a few officials, but they might as well not have even been there. " This really represents how "arcadish" his view of racing simulators is. He is telling us he can't master it, so it's crap. It really humiliates us, the racing simulation community that is researching for the real thing always. We won't accept canned physics and unrealistic features. I was shocked by such comments from Avault, a professional *** website. "Gamers need some sort of encouragement that they are doing better; they don't need to be thrown into a complex driving model that is going to take weeks to get competent at." Well, I am sorry, but practice is really the key. Nobody can hop in a real-life racecar and think he can beat the track record. It needs practice, practice and more practice. If he can't master GPL, it's not our fault. But please don't dis GPL because of that. What if a game reviewer came and told "I can't master Quake 1 so it must be crap". It's just immature comments and really humiliates the racing community with such comments. "It would have been nice if Sierra would have included a more arcade-oriented version of the physics model" And another point that represent that the reviewer probably tried it 15 or so minutes. This it the major ADVANTAGE over every other racing title. The game engine is REALISTIC at 100%. This is the approach Papyrus has did since year. They are a racing simulator company, not an arcade *** company. Their goal is to make a realistic virtual reality racing simulator. Not an arcade game. Another point that shows that the reviewer has no knowledge of the racing market and their needs. Another *** to us. "Sierra expects the gamer to know how to set up the car for each track in order to obtain the best track times. The manual has nothing in it to show people what each setting does and how to go about setting up a car for a certain track." WHAT ? Did he really read the manual ? He probably NEVER read it, since there's 50page on how to tweak the car setups for GPL. FIFTY !!!! Each settings is told in great details. So tell me, did he really tested the game correctly ??? If he can't setup a car, it's not my fault. There's plenty of _ARCADE_ games made for that. But PLEASE don't humiliate us, the hard-core simracers in research of the best accuracy that carsetups are worth nothing. If the person doesn't know how to set up his car, he isn't the targeted market for GPL. Still, the default setups are incredibly well done and made by real-life racecar drivers to suit the average driver with a good field of comprehensive and raceable setups. Another ***. Just read rec.autos.simulators and you will see that we are _ALL_ raging against the reviewer. We are really tired of people who hits on realistic simulations just because they are too hard. "The graphics are good as far as these types of games go, but they give no sense of awe or wonder. " Another bad point. All what I wrote are FACTS, and really shows that the reviewer has no knowledge of the racing market. The graphics are top notch in ACCURACY. Sure, "games" like Need4Speed III have great graphics. The designers and artist have no limits of their imagination and can create anything they wan't. But in racing simulations, it's acurracy that counts and another time, Papyrus made the step higher with incredibly REAL-LIFE graphics. Every real-life details that was in 1967 is REALLY there. All of them. The track engine is incredible. No other company can beat them, with banking, evelations, camber on the track, etc.. The other companies can't do that. Papyrus can. The reviewer doesn't know that. "I can still picture most people returning Grand Prix Legends a few days after they buy it." Hahahaha. Please. That's why it's the most praised racing simulation in the HISTORY ? Remember, we had Gp2, Nascar1 and Nascar2 who all had 90% and more ratings from every *** magazine. And how he say that it's ***with 2 and half star ? And it's why it's presently in the top5 in sales ? We need a public apology. It's such ***that I felt bad for himself after I read that. Of course, if you ship him with the newest Jane's Air combat, he will probably say it's ***because it's too difficult for him. Another "gamer" without a knowledge of what's a real racecar and how it should perform. In the future let him review arcade racing games, but let to another the point of reviewing hard-core racing simulators, who has a market and has plenty of people who like them. - Fran?ois Mnard <ymenard> Good race at the Brickyard! - Official Mentally retarded guy of r.a.s. - Excuse me for my English (I'm French speaking) - Sponsored by http://www.awpss.com/ - "People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realise how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."--

Quoted text (7 lines)

> A few notable comments: > " The musical score is spartan at best. I don't really think that it > matters much in this type of game, however. I can say that the music > does nothing to set the mood of the game nor does it give me any > sense of enjoyment just for music's sake. I quickly turned it off. > ( uhhh... did he actually run GPL? )

either you are extremely irresponsible, or the author was made to realize his rediculous err. here is the clip from the "review" regarding MUSICAL SCORE: Musical Score: There is no music in the game so I didn't rate this section. Heck, the game is supposed to be set in the sixties -- they missed their chance to get some really good music in the game to provide a mood. It obviously would have been inappropriate while racing, however. j

Ditto , amen ,etc. And they say there is no passion left in today's world.

no man alive should be forced to face the wrath of ymenard! ; - )

>GPL - Avault review = 2 1/2 stars - **1/2 That's hard to believe, from the sie that loves everything (and continually gives any old dreck that EA serves up rediculously high ratings and fawning reviews). Joe

dafney wrote I just feel that the SimRacing community was humiliated by such comments. Of course, He replied to me but I don't feel nessecary to me to post here since it's private. But here's a modified post with my answers to him. I feel each and every one of you have access to this. ========== <Him saying he won't lie and redo the review> So why did you lied and say you turned the music off ? Don't say you played with the words here, because it's a obvious lie. <Him saying that Sierra didn't shipped the strategy book> Hmm... you should have 2 manuals with it. They were all printed at the same time, with the strategy manual even before the helpbook. If you didn't got it, I feel you should at least mention that a strategy manual is included in the full release. <Him saying that the marshalls should be hit when we pass on them, "a la Quake"> Hmm, this ain't Carmageddon or whatever stupid arcade racing title. This is serious racing simulator, focused on the realistic feeling of the car physics. Btw you didn't mentionned about the great online racing you can get with 15 and more drivers ? Hmm... <Him saying he's not an arcade racer but he loves realistic simulations like Nascar2 and 1> So why did you said in the review the car setup menu was too complicated or so... ? It's at 75% the same as in Nascar Racing 2. <Him saying that he can't win since the AI is too fast> Is it, probably you didn't know. The AI adjusts to your racing style, in a new AI way called the Global AI scaling, witch after about 1-2hours on each tracks adjust to your racing style. Still you have to remember that you can't set the AI to a % level like other racing simulations. This ain't a canned AI where you can say "race at 86% of your laptimes". This is racing against realistic driver settings. ================== On this, another email I got from him. <Him saying that Mr.Mnard is quite against him and he didn't mentionned the good points about the review posts here on r.a.s.> Hmm... like 2 good responses on 16 posts ? That's like... 12%. Of course your commenting on such points as the Letterbox screen without knowing that it add-up a peripherical vision you don't have in previous titles. That it's even present in Nascar Racing 2, but there's a 2d-cockpit in place instead (obviously you should know that). That it's a place to put the replay GUI and so. That the only additional thing you would have with full-screen is more sky, since the***pit would be at the bottom of the screen. And that the letterbox black spots will just be replaced by the ***pit in N3 also... Your also saying that the game is too hard to get good at... sorry for you, but many of us are able to win a full GrandPrix at any lenght. As a former race-car driver, I know it may be hard for rookies and less experienced drivers, but this ain't the market Papyrus was aiming for. Also, since you say you obviously have knowledge of racing games, you should alread know there's no music found in them, since the market doesn't care. Won't sell more. Btw, about the sounds, this is _how_ it was at that time. You heard nothing more than the sound of the motor. And the skidding. You could hear muffled engines from the other opponents, but that's all. So what do you want more ? Unrealistic sounds ? This is not what the market for GPL wants. So why just 2 and a half stars for realistic sounds ? I just feel humiliated by such comments on the present best racing simulator EVER. Hard-core racing simulators have a market and shouldn't really be reviewed by average-gamers since they obviously aren't the targeted market. The same goes for hard-core air simulators. I doubt people tell that Jane's Longbow Apache is too hard for them in game reviews ? Nope, since they understand that there's a market for it. It should be the same for racing sims. Im somehow tired to see hard-core racing simulators being dissed because they aren't enough "arcade". Geeze. FYI, here's the URL of a Grand Prix Legends review made by an hard-core simracer : [link lost in import: /:/mine/dsports/pc/grandprixlegends/review.html] And it exactly suits what us, the hard-core simracers, feels about it. Of course, I understand that avault.com is more suited for a 3dgamer point of view, so I will just restrain (as many of us in other parts of the simracing community has decided) myself from checking this website anymore. No more credibility for me. In my opinion, as always. But thanks for at least reading the post. I feel I have the right of my opinion, as a long time avault.com reader. - Fran?ois Mnard <ymenard> Good race at the Brickyard! - Official Mentally retarded guy of r.a.s. - Excuse me for my English (I'm French speaking) - Sponsored by http://www.awpss.com/ - "People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realise how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."--

Even more of a reason to say it was a bad review! Contradicting comments!: 1) "I can say that the music does nothing to set the mood of the game nor does it give me any sense of enjoyment just for music's sake. I quickly turned it off. " 2) "There is no music in the game so I didn't rate this section" So did he NOT play the game, write the article, then take a quick try playing the game, and realized his mistake? If so, that is disgusting for a reviewer to conduct a review this way, AND WHY THE HECK DID HE NOT DELETE THE FIRST SECTION??? (Oh... I read at the APEX that he claimed he didn't receive "Four-Wheel Drift" from Sierra with his review copy. If this is true, shame on Sierra. But he should still make amends to his review to let the readers know that they WILL be getting setup and track help. doktorB http://webhome.idirect.com/~drbryan/gpl

Quoted text (9 lines)

>either you are extremely irresponsible, or the author was made to >realize his rediculous err. here is the clip from the "review" regarding >MUSICAL SCORE: >Musical Score: There is no music in the game so I didn't rate this >section. Heck, the game is supposed to be set in the sixties -- they >missed their chance to get some really good music in the game to >provide a mood. It obviously would have been inappropriate while >racing, however.

I don't really agree with this, I am not the most hard core simster in the world :) but I love GPL, the training cars are just fantastic to learn on without overpowering yourself with the GP cars which I wonder if the reviewer from avault did. I didn't like N2 that much and F1GP-2 was fun but I could never learn to brake or shift myself. With GPL I started out on the Novice Trainer with shifting help on and was enjoying myself very much. I was improving my lap times and wanted to try and shift myself to see if I could get better times. It wasn't easy to shift myself at first but it is totally rewarding now and it didn't take that long to learn. This is the first racing sim I can say that I have a sense of accomplishment in racing. I also LOVE the four wheel drift book(think MOST games of ANY genre should include a manual that good!) Anyway I guess what I am trying to say is although I am not a complete novice at racing sims this is the first sim that made me a better racer and I have to give credit to the inclusion of the trainer cars in GPL for that. I would have given up on the game if I had to start with GP cars but now I am up to the Advanced Trainer looking forward to buzzing around in that GP Ferarri within the next week or so :) I think beginners can get a lot out of this sim if they are willing to stick with the trainers for the first few hours of the sim. I have spent about 8-10 hours on the novice trainers and have just moved to the advanced. Also I don't have the time to sit for 2 hours straight let alone the 8 or 10 some guys have said they do on this newsgroup :) I usually play for about 45mins - 1hour at a time. Thanks for reading and thanks Papy for a great sim! Cyriel

Sorry, back of the class for you m'laddo :-) Because it is a general site and therefore, by definition, visited by a wide cross section of people, you target the review toward the people who are likely to be interested in that product, or at least make mention of the disparity between what fans of the genre will think and what the general public will. By your definition only "auto-sim fanatic monthly" will give GPL a good review, whereas in fact most "general" mags and sites rated it very highly indeed. In other words, the review was written by someone with no clue what he was doing. Ask me to review a flight sim and I'll tell you they're all ***- that's why I would have the decency never to take on the job of doing so. Cheers! John

Reply to my e-mail(he must have been bombarded). Paul, The music "incident" as it is now being termed was an editing goof on my part. It is text that was supposed to be in my other review of Red Baron 3D. Sorry about that. The music didn't play any part in my overall score anyway. Sierra also forgot to send me the additional book on car setups so what I said was true for what they sent me. As for the other things I'm sorry we disagree, but I call them like I see them. Craig -----Original Message----- Date: Monday, October 26, 1998 2:55 PM Subject: AVault - Letter to Staff >Name: Paul Grave >Message: >I usually use your game reviews as guide to which games are good and which >games are bad. Unfortunately my opinion of reviewers has taken a assive >hit after reading your review of Grand Prix Legnends. >The reviewers states the musical score is 'spartan at best' so he turned it >off, there is NO opition to turn off any musical score because there is NO >music! >Also, your reviewer states (this is almost funny) "The manual has nothing >in it to show people what each setting does". There is a whole manual >dedicated to setting up the car, describing the cars and tracks! >Moving on to the actual ratings, they're a joke, to critise a game because >you can't play it is totally wrong. Yeah, the game is difficult but no >more difficult that Jane's F-15 or Longbow 2, it is a simulator not an >arcade racer and it doesn't pretend to be. >There is no question that this is the best racing simulation ever, there >isn't even a shred of doubt about that.

Quoted text (14 lines)

> >>He acknowledges the great physics engine, but also points out that it's not > > for > >>the faint of heart. GPL is for the hard core simmer, and it is not a mass > >>market title. > >Exactly - so why does he review and rate it as if it was? > >Cheers! > >John > Because is a general 3D *** web site, and it is reviewed as it is likely > to be recieved by it's audience? > Z.

And I'll add, is this game MARKETED towards hard core simmers? I didnt see anything on the box... maybe I should look again. Also, as I made in a post on gpl.gamestats.com, every other sim has an "arcade" mode for beginners, or people that dont want to deal with a harder mode of driving. Brian Short

Brian Short wrote Hmm let see... - Trainee car - Advanced-trainee car - Throttle help - Braking help - Shifting help - Murasama - BRM - Coventry 'Nuff said. - Fran?ois Mnard <ymenard> Good race at the Brickyard! - Official Mentally retarded guy of r.a.s. - Excuse me for my English (I'm French speaking) - Sponsored by http://www.awpss.com/ on the NROS - "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."--

No its not. if the game sucked, then it deserves a bad review. However, it doesnt suck its just quite hard and takes a bit of practice which doesnt mean it deserves a bad review. And aiming at the general public...bah, you can still tell the public that this is a great sim, but its just not for the feint at heart and not whine and snivel about it.

Quoted text (15 lines)

>>Hmm let see... >>- Trainee car >>- Advanced-trainee car >>- Throttle help >>- Braking help >>- Shifting help >>- Murasama >>- BRM >>- Coventry >>'Nuff said. >You can't race with the trainer cars, and you >get your ass kicked using any of the other stuff. Hell, you get your ass

kicked >anyway. >GPL is hard core. That is reason enough for it to get a bad review, if the >review is aimed at the general public. the general public should not buy this >game. >Regards, >Krabby

Krabmeat and I wrote : Yes you can. Hmm and tell me, aren't what I listed HELPS for less experienced drivers, whatever they bring ? Oh and the way you say that you get your arse kicked, isn't this like _other_ games I know like Tie Fighter that doesn't let you move up a level if you use invinsibility and unlimited ammo ? What's the differences ? tell me... TELL ME ????????? So you want to win "out-of-the-box" ? You can't accept the fact of loosing, or at least understand you need to start before with under-powered cars or so ? Funny, Im able with PRACTICE to get easy 1:31's with the Coventry and 1:32's with the BRM. That's enough for almost a top spot in qual with realistic AI. Oh yeah... 2 and a half stars !!! ???? So your saying the general public shouldn't buy Jane's Longbow Apache ? Because it's realistic ? Who are you to say they shouldn't buy it ? And why not.. there's plenty of helps I listed to satisfy the general public. This review was pathetic. If anybody doesn't want to get up and do actions against this website I will do. I don't care what support I get or not, but I will not stop unless they... : 1) Public apology 2) Re-do the review about how it is seriously (just check out Randy's GPL review at [link lost in import: /:/mine/dsports/pc/grandprixlegends/review.html] . Now THAT'S a real review of GPL). Understand that Avault is a BIG *** website and can seriously hurt the sellings of the game with such comments. I mean... 2 and half stars.... That's with Power F1 and so. How humiliating for us to be treated like that. You know... if 1500 people don't buy GPL because they read this.... that's 1500 x ZXY the number of dollars that go to Papyrus that won't be spent in the future on upcoming titles. Just think that it's 1500 x 10$... That's alot of money that won't be spend on N3, and whatever product at Papyrus. Im just saying a number out of my head. It could be more than 1500, and it could be less than 1500. But still, if _WE_ as a racing community, don't get as a group and let them ridiculise us, YOU are making a bad move to Papyrus. Boycott AVAULT.com - Fran?ois Mnard <ymenard> Good race at the Brickyard! - Official Mentally retarded guy of r.a.s. - Excuse me for my English (I'm French speaking) - Sponsored by http://www.awpss.com/ - "People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realise how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."--

<rotfl> Not....why would you be reviewing RedBaron3D? Its nothing but the patched version of RedBaronII that has been reboxed. But it was a bad attempt at a bad recovery..and why would Sierra leave out parts, especially the important manual. I dont buy it....

His only good point B.S. Your lap times and the satisfaction that you are able to get better should be all you need. Practice some, dont spend 5 minutes at the game and try to review it...read the manual, read some suggested literature..get online on newsgroups, forums, etc and ask a few questions...read some websites. Practice some more. Try the trainer. If you cant stay on the track, then racing isnt for you.....however, they should have included in the GUI an AI scaler to reduce the AI better. GPL is 1967...this wasnt setup wizardy. The manual does a good explanation of setups, the setups included are decent. LEARN. Not really. Learn to drive the thing, you cant "dumb" down real life. And hey, there are training cars....you cant learn to run before you walk.

Quoted text (12 lines)

>Hmm let see... >- Trainee car >- Advanced-trainee car >- Throttle help >- Braking help >- Shifting help >- Murasama >- BRM >- Coventry >'Nuff said.

You can't race with the trainer cars, and you get your ass kicked using any of the other stuff. Hell, you get your ass kicked anyway. GPL is hard core. That is reason enough for it to get a bad review, if the review is aimed at the general public. the general public should not buy this game. Regards, Krabby

Yikes, you telling me I ain't in the general public? I bought the sim,and find it fantastic. I think the beef here is that reviewer obviously spent way too little time for an honest review of GPL. Yes, the car is tougher to drive than anything we have seen so far, but it ain't undriveable. With some patience in learning the track, you can get up to speed and have a blast with this sim. Papyrus has set a new standard with GPL, and looks like to me it's leaving the rest in the dust. -- Don Burnette Palmetto Racing Dburn on Ten AOLL Iroc Administrator >You can't race with the trainer cars, and you >get your ass kicked using any of the other stuff. Hell, you get your ass kicked >anyway. >GPL is hard core. That is reason enough for it to get a bad review, if the >review is aimed at the general public. the general public should not buy this >game. >Regards, >Krabby

Well then, lets just take back that Flight Sim of the year award that was given by just about every mag/critic/website to Longbow2. a newbie CANNOT jump in and complete the campaigns. One of the previous Kings of Racing Sims....ICR2. Noway, no how an arcade racer type player could jump in and finish a lap at Portland without plenty of lawnmowing. That's the whole point. If you want a sim, you want a challenge, if you want POD or REDLINE RACER, then go for it. But don't denegrate a product because it acheives EXACTLY what it attempted. Simulating Grand Prix Racing. I suppose Papy could take the exacting physics model of gpl and adapt it to something more in line with this fellow's ability. ... Comming this Xmas... Bumper Car Legends dave henrie

Quoted text (27 lines)

>>>>He acknowledges the great physics engine, but also points out that it's not >>> for >>>>the faint of heart. GPL is for the hard core simmer, and it is not a mass >>>>market title. >>>Exactly - so why does he review and rate it as if it was? >>Because is a general 3D *** web site, and it is reviewed as it is likely >>to be recieved by it's audience? >Sorry, back of the class for you m'laddo :-) >Because it is a general site and therefore, by definition, visited by >a wide cross section of people, you target the review toward the >people who are likely to be interested in that product, or at least >make mention of the disparity between what fans of the genre will >think and what the general public will. >By your definition only "auto-sim fanatic monthly" will give GPL a >good review, whereas in fact most "general" mags and sites rated it >very highly indeed. In other words, the review was written by someone >with no clue what he was doing. Ask me to review a flight sim and I'll >tell you they're all ***- that's why I would have the decency never >to take on the job of doing so. >Cheers! >John

Er,... i would by no means describe the avault as a "general *** site". It's more in the VE3d neck of the woods, than gamecenter, or something else. In any case, any review is but one persons point of view. Z.

>Because is a general 3D *** web site, and it is reviewed as it is likely >to be recieved by it's audience? >Z. Avault, gagames and the rest are 3D *** sites first and foremost. These are NOT sim racing afficionados and are so coming from the "general" opinion. This is pretty consistent to magazines that have no "sim racing expert" on the staff to review the game. M

Quoted text (9 lines)

>ymenard wrote >>http://www.avault.com/letters/ >>Us, as the SimRacing community, can't accept to be dissed by such a gamer. >>Let's ALL post our comments about him. >This is my letter : PLEASE all do so, we can't accept to be dissed by such >gamers. Im just sick and tired of those arcade drivers who have no >knowledge of the hard-core market and their needs.

Well if they change the review in the face of this letter *I* will boycott their site. "We don't like what you said about our favourite game so unless you say it's great we'll throw our toys out of the pram" You're entitled to your opinion, they're entitled to theirs. Live with it. M

I wonder how Jan's F-15 managed a 5star review? That is mostcertainly a sim, so why GPL wasn't treated the same way is beyond me.

You just did, or is a "general 3D *** site" and a "general *** site" such a different proposition? Not in my book, but you may split hairs differently than me. At worst it should be one person's view of how the buying public are likely to view a product - simply stating your own opinion is not only arrogant but damaging a software company's sales by an incompetent and lazy approach. Look at Digital Sports to see how differing products like NFS3 and GPL can not only be reviewed in depth by a mainstream, "general (3D) *** site", but reviewed in depth and on their own merits to their own markets. Avault's review was, and remains, a joke. Cheers! John

Quoted text (13 lines)

>Path: >>>Because is a general 3D *** web site, and it is reviewed as it is likely >>>to be recieved by it's audience? >>Er,... i would by no means describe the avault as a "general *** site". >You just did, or is a "general 3D *** site" and a "general *** >site" such a different proposition? Not in my book, but you may split >hairs differently than me.

They are distinctly different. 3D *** sites cater for the crowd of people who spend all too much money on hardware and on the latest kit for their comp's. :) Digital Sports is not the same niche at all. I find myself in agreement with what the avault review said: If you're timid of full on sims, stay away. Z.

There's no difference as far as the game itself is concerned other than flashier graphics. A sim is still a sim and an arcade racer is not. The only difference is that their "hook" is that they review only sports sims - beyond that there is no difference (except of course for the difference in quality and accuracy of review). ? I find myself in agreement with You're reaching there, that is paraphrasing taken to the extreme. The review says nothing of the sort. Cheers! John

Quoted text (7 lines)

>>They are distinctly different. 3D *** sites cater for the crowd of people >>who spend all too much money on hardware and on the latest kit for their >>comp's. :) >There's no difference as far as the game itself is concerned other >than flashier graphics. A sim is still a sim and an arcade racer is >not.

Excuse me, there is a huge difference about what that portion of the market looks for in a game...... er: "Simulation fanatics will probably love this game -- I just don't think that anyone else with a lower level of enthusiasm will get much out of it. " ". If you have read this far, you can tell that I think the game is too difficult. This doesn't mean that it won't appeal to *** racing simulation fans, but it will require the patience of a saint in order to become good." "I can't recommend this game to the majority of people out there. If you like difficult, ultra-realistic driving games, then by all means rush out and buy it. If not, you will find yourself growing more and more frustrated as you play and it takes hours in order to produce even mediocre track times." Nothing of the sort. Ho-hum. Z.

> "Simulation fanatics will probably love this game -- I just don't think that > anyone else with a lower level of enthusiasm will get much out of it. " Then it must be a good game, deserving of more that 2 1/2 stars, right? After all, it's good enough to satisfy simulation fanatics.

Quoted text (8 lines)

>Path: >> "Simulation fanatics will probably love this game -- I just don't think that >> anyone else with a lower level of enthusiasm will get much out of it. " >Then it must be a good game, deserving of more that 2 1/2 stars, right? >After all, it's good enough to satisfy simulation fanatics.

Michael, why? On the critea, which was assessing the suitablity of this game for all users, not self-styled "***" users. GPL is accessable only to the ***, so by this standard of review, it is a failure. Z.

Quoted text (13 lines)

> >Path: > >> "Simulation fanatics will probably love this game -- I just don't think that > >> anyone else with a lower level of enthusiasm will get much out of it. " > >Then it must be a good game, deserving of more that 2 1/2 stars, right? > >After all, it's good enough to satisfy simulation fanatics. > Michael, why? > On the critea, which was assessing the suitablity of this game for all users, > not self-styled "***" users.

Then how the hell does any game get a good review? And just where does Avault state that that's part of their review criteria? Though I did find this quote: "Original games are compared against other games in their genre and/or class that are currently available in the market. Therefore we may compare *** with Shadow Warrior but not *** and Daggerfall because *** is a 3D/Action game while Daggerfall is an RPG. Also, comparisons of different game engines are not directly compared in the scoring due to different technologies used (Build vs. Quake for example)." I also found the following: "Please note that games are not penalized for not doing the same things other games do. All games are judged for what they allow you to do, not for what they don't (we have to be fair here -- it wouldn't be fair to say that Quake sucks simply because you can't crouch like you can in *** or Shadow Warrior)." It seems to me that the Avault review violates these criteria in spirit, if not necessarily in letter. Noting that the game has a steep learning curve is one thing. So is noting that it will probably require a great deal of practice to master. Complaining about the game not having an arcade mode? His "Intelligence and Difficulty" evaluation ran entirely counter to the stated criteria! His review would have been just as perceptive (and probably more honest) if he had just said, "I can't win this game after two hours, so it sucks." His comments on hardware specs were especially laughable. "I really don't see how a PII 300 with 64 megs of RAM and two Voodoo 2 cards should have any problems running a racing game; it is simply unacceptable." This after saying he immediately set it at 1024x768. I find a comment like this extremely irresponsible. What other racing simulations (not arcade racers) has he played that offer 1024x768 resolution with smooth, fast framerates?

Quoted text (11 lines)

>>Because is a general 3D *** web site, and it is reviewed as it is likely >>to be recieved by it's audience? >>Z. >Avault, gagames and the rest are 3D *** sites first and foremost. These are >NOT sim racing afficionados and are so coming from the "general" opinion. This >is pretty consistent to magazines that have no "sim racing expert" on the >staff to review the game. >M

On C4 Teletext in the UK there are a few pages devoted to ***, with you standard arcade gamers doing the reviews. They didn't go into much detail about anything but GPL wound up with %90. They don't dole out those scores often either. It seems they liked the idea of retro rather than just another modern thing.

>> Avault, gagames and the rest are 3D *** sites first and foremost. These are >> NOT sim racing afficionados and are so coming from the "general" opinion. This >> is pretty consistent to magazines that have no "sim racing expert" on the >> staff to review the game. >I wonder how Jan's F-15 managed a 5star review? That is mostcertainly a >sim, so why GPL wasn't treated the same way is beyond me. Because flying a plane is a lot easier than driving one of these cars on the limit. Also most people think they could drive these cars because they've been driving since they were 17 etc etc and it looks easy. As Damon Hill commented (paraphrased): "There are some people who think in order to go fast you simple put your foot harder on the pedal and whoever has the most guts goes fastest."

Quoted text (11 lines)

>I don't really agree with this, I am not the most hard core simster in >the world :) but I love GPL, the training cars are just fantastic to >learn on without overpowering yourself with the GP cars which I wonder >if the reviewer from avault did. I didn't like N2 that much and >F1GP-2 was fun but I could never learn to brake or shift myself. With >GPL I started out on the Novice Trainer with shifting help on and was >enjoying myself very much. I was improving my lap times and wanted to >try and shift myself to see if I could get better times. It wasn't >easy to shift myself at first but it is totally rewarding now and it >didn't take that long to learn. This is the first racing sim I can >say that I have a sense of accomplishment in racing.

I feel the same way. I've always tried the sims, but found each lacking in one way or another. GPL is the first one to "hook" me. On a somewhat unrelated topic (but similar theme) I've always felt the same way about flight simulators. Always tried them, always gave up on them for one reason or another. Today I tried the WW2 Fighters demo. It is to flight sims what GPL is to auto sims - truly incredible. I highly recommend trying it out. Joe

>Sierra also forgot to send me the additional book on car setups so what I >said was true for what they sent me. !!! What kind of an idiot reviews a game CD and just ASSUMES there will be no manual in the shipping version? Joe

>The music "incident" as it is now being termed was an editing goof on my >part. It is text that was supposed to be in my other review of Red Baron >3D. BTW, the above statement is 100% proof positive that Craig Miller is a liar (and he's no better at lying than he is at reviewing). I quote from the review: "There is no music in the game so I didn't rate this section. Heck, the game is supposed to be set in the sixties -- they missed their chance to get some really good music in the game to provide a mood." The prosecution rests. Joe

ROTFLMAO :-) -- Ian Parker ICQ# 21772592

PC Gamer magazine in the UK is a 3d *** mag, but gave GPL over 90%, so did many other's. Why then, should online reviews have such a massive difference? -- Ian Parker ICQ# 21772592

Quoted text (9 lines)

>dafney wrote ><Him saying that he can't win since the AI is too fast> >Is it, probably you didn't know. The AI adjusts to your racing style, in a >new AI way called the Global AI scaling, witch after about 1-2hours on each >tracks adjust to your racing style. Still you have to remember that you >can't set the AI to a % level like other racing simulations. This ain't a >canned AI where you can say "race at 86% of your laptimes". This is racing >against realistic driver settings.

This "holier than thou" attitude is what is hurting this game's sales and causing all the controversy. Would it really have made the game worse for the hard core simmer if Papy had programmed in easier settings for the AI? By just adding a speed limiter to the AI that could be set with a gauge Papy could have made a game that would have appealed to a lot more people. Either Papy didn't have enough understanding of the market, or they rushed the product out. Papy needs the soft market in order to sell enough of these boxes to continue to be a viable company. We need to step down from our high horses and lobby Papy to make the games more appealing to the average Joe, while not sacrificing the good stuff for hard core simmers. Lest we suceed in this endeavour we are likely to be left racing Motoracer3 or Screamer4.

On Tue, 27 Oct 1998 18:56:06 GMT,

Quoted text (11 lines)

>>> Avault, gagames and the rest are 3D *** sites first and foremost. These are >>> NOT sim racing afficionados and are so coming from the "general" opinion. This >>> is pretty consistent to magazines that have no "sim racing expert" on the >>> staff to review the game. >>I wonder how Jan's F-15 managed a 5star review? That is mostcertainly a >>sim, so why GPL wasn't treated the same way is beyond me. >Because flying a plane is a lot easier than driving one of these cars >on the limit. Also most people think they could drive these cars >because they've been driving since they were 17 etc etc and it looks >easy.

Personally speaking, I think I'll crack 1:05 at Watkins Glen before I ever complete a successful inflight refuelling in Jane's F-15! Martin Nigel Mansell RIP!

Both reviews sports games, both review driving games - where's the gulf? Granted the reviewer did mention that he felt the game could appeal to the hard-core sim fan, but I still feel the review was slanted utterly wrongly given the product being reviewed. Cheers! John

>PC Gamer magazine in the UK is a 3d *** mag, but gave GPL over 90%, so >did many other's. Why then, should online reviews have such a massive >difference? Ian, PC Gamer is most certainly not a 3D *** mag. It is a general *** title, with that whack Future sarky twist. Z.

Quoted text (16 lines)

>Path: >>Excuse me, there is a huge difference about what that portion of the market >>looks for in a game...... >Both reviews sports games, both review driving games - where's the >gulf? >Granted the reviewer did mention that he felt the game could appeal to >the hard-core sim fan, but I still feel the review was slanted utterly >wrongly given the product being reviewed. >Cheers! >John

John, i feel perhaps i've neglected to quite stress my point. We've got a situation where a simulation is being reviewed by a site which main caters for the mroe arcade oprientated market. The review is quite fair in that respect. However, iw ould point your attention to all the arcade racers out there which are slammed by the simulation crowd. We are simply having the reverse in this situation here. While they both may be about driving cars, there really are quite seperate and distinct markets, and the players of those i'd feel won't cross over. Z.

Quoted text (15 lines)

>>The music "incident" as it is now being termed was an editing goof on my >>part. It is text that was supposed to be in my other review of Red Baron >>3D. >BTW, the above statement is 100% proof positive that Craig Miller is a >liar (and he's no better at lying than he is at reviewing). I quote >from the review: >"There is no music in the game so I didn't rate this section. Heck, >the game is supposed to be set in the sixties -- they missed their >chance to get some really good music in the game to provide a mood." >The prosecution rests. >Joe

???????? That's on the altered version. All the same it's a strange goof. Does he have some pre-written sentences for all circumstances in all categories he pastes together for each game? Odd.

>>"There is no music in the game so I didn't rate this section. Heck, >>the game is supposed to be set in the sixties -- they missed their >>chance to get some really good music in the game to provide a mood." >All the same it's a strange goof. Does he have some pre-written >sentences for all circumstances in all categories he pastes together >for each game? Odd. I don't think so ... since the statement about the lack of music refers SPECIFICALLY to the 60s, it really can't be talking about any other game than GPL. Joe

Quoted text (13 lines)

> >>"There is no music in the game so I didn't rate this section. Heck, > >>the game is supposed to be set in the sixties -- they missed their > >>chance to get some really good music in the game to provide a mood." > >All the same it's a strange goof. Does he have some pre-written > >sentences for all circumstances in all categories he pastes together > >for each game? Odd. > I don't think so ... since the statement about the lack of music > refers SPECIFICALLY to the 60s, it really can't be talking about any > other game than GPL. > Joe

Joe, The statement you're quoting is from the updated version of the review. The original review mentioned music, but not music from the sixties. Trips

>The statement you're quoting is from the updated version of the review. >The original review mentioned music, but not music from the sixties. So in other words, the first review APPEARED incompetent (but may have just been mistaken) but we know for SURE the revision is incompetent. Thanks for clearing that up! ;-) Joe

Blonde ***'s with nothing between their ears, big***and big lips and great asses get great reviews and are liked by the majority of the male population. Doesnt mean they are the best women...just the most popular. Sims should never be judged by how popular they are gonna be to the wide market but instead how well they have achieved the goal of simulating their particular subject. The judgement of how popular they are gonna be is left to the market. The reviewers job is to be knowledgable enough to rate how the developers have done in regards to the simulation of the subject. Craig Miller is about as clueless as anyone I have ever had the displeasure of reading in this regard. Craig should just stay the course in reviewing action games and leave off judging simulations. Its not an easy thing to do a review. You must be an expert in the field or at the very least extremely well read, you must be a fan of the field in that you are keeping up with developments, and you also must be a good enough gamer to be able to play the game well. Rating simulations is best left to grognards who love the stuff. Its far easier for the grognard to state that the developer did not make the sim easy enough to encourage entry level play than it is for the casual reviewer to attempt to understand the nuances of a complex sim. As a flight simmer Im lucky to have the likes of Rob Kim, Tom Chick, KC Basham and others to depend on for reviews. Unfortunately car sims have only just now reached the level of fidelity that demands a reviewer on their level so there is a definite shortage of reviewers with brains as evidenced by the Avault review. Grand Prix Legends is that in spads....to me its the very best simulation I have ever had on my PC....scary thought since Im primarily a Flight simmer. But the truth is Sierra and Papy kicked some with this sim. Also the argument that he is just expressing his opinion is just wrong. Its bad journalism in the extreme. Not that I have any problem with his article being published...but if Avault wants to retain some credibility then the editors better start doing their jobs. There is nothing wrong with them putting out bad reviews...but I would think they would take my critique and instead of being offended be glad that someone has the time to tell them they did wrong. Its not often in the world of business that you get too many second chances and credibility is a hard thing to regain. PAPA DOC

+AD4-Because flying a plane is a lot easier than driving one of these cars +AD4-on the limit. Also most people think they could drive these cars +AD4-because they've been driving since they were 17 etc etc and it looks +AD4-easy. Spoken like someone who's not played F-15. -dobe-

If you sneeze/blink/twitch in a fighter jet at 35,000 feet ---> you may lose some altitude, turn to the left or right, or lose your target. If you sneeze/blink/twitch in a 1967 Formula 1 car at 150mph trying to hold a line in a decreasing radius turn ---> you skid off the track and die. Any questions? +ADw-3635c79c.1414810+AEA-news.demon.co.uk+AD4-...

Ah well now lets not get into comparing each. I think you might have lots more to consider than you realize. While I will agree that when flying alone in daylight, fine weather, everything is easy enough...(though if you not a pilot you might have some problems) if you add weather, night, others intent of making small pieces out of you and your 15 million dollar jet....well lets just say that you probably are paying real close attention to whats going on. One of the biggest problems facing the fighter pilot was information overload....he just cant concentrate hard enough on all items that absolutely demand attention. Therefore he dies.... To me both are extremely similar in that they demand absolute attention. Pilots who dont pay attention, die...simply put. I think you would find that both types of individuals are extremely similar, the pilot and the driver of the top of the line probably if it were not a matter of learning the systems, step right into both vehicles and do extremely well. Both have the uncannay knack for paying attention to the things that count and not being distracted by the things that dont. PAPA DOC

Quoted text (23 lines)

>If you sneeze/blink/twitch in a fighter jet at 35,000 feet ---> you may lose >some altitude, turn to the left or right, or lose your target. >If you sneeze/blink/twitch in a 1967 Formula 1 car at 150mph trying to hold >a line in a decreasing radius turn ---> you skid off the track and die. >Any questions? >+ADw-3635c79c.1414810+AEA-news.demon.co.uk+AD4-... >>+AD4-Because flying a plane is a lot easier than driving one of these cars >>+AD4-on the limit. Also most people think they could drive these cars >>+AD4-because they've been driving since they were 17 etc etc and it looks >>+AD4-easy. >> Spoken like someone who's not played F-15. >> -dobe-

Pierre PAPA DOC Legrand Pink Flamingo Pilot... http://home.earthlink.net/~plegrand/PINKFLAMINGO.htm

>One of the biggest problems facing the fighter pilot was information >overload....he just cant concentrate hard enough on all items that >absolutely demand attention. Therefore he dies.... Presuming of course that he is actually being soht at - the example I gave was FS98, and being jumped by Fokkers is unlikely over 1990's San Fransico! Cheers! John

>To me both are extremely similar in that they demand absolute >attention. Pilots who dont pay attention, die...simply put. Not entirely true. Military pilots have long characterized their lives as "long hours of boredom punctuated by moments of sheer terror". Most missions consist of flying both into and out of military territory, some of which is over friendly territory. Depending upon the situation in the theater, there can be either a lot or a little relatively down time where basically you're just flying the plane and regularly checking the status of things. The closest equivalent in racing would be going down a straight uncontested and relaxing your fists and enjoying the absence of heavy lateral G's. For the most part, though, a racer is going to be in the equivalent of a long sustained dog fight for a couple of hours, whereas most aircraft missions are designed to get in, mix it up, and get out as fast as possible, and then, of course, you have CAP missions have a lot of flying around in lazy circles while you or your backseater keep checking the radar to make sure no one is entering your zone. Randy Randy Magruder http://members.home.com/rmagruder

Hold up here.....in a high threat war. Lets take the 1973 Arab Israeli war....do you think that the pilots were whistling to work. Only to remember that when it happened....that "Hey they are trying to kill me..." Or for another example do you think the British fighters defending the homeland were singing tunes whilst climbing to altitude to defend the homeland...???? Of course not. The guys who get bored while flying Cap die....the guys who let their mind wander die....cause the enemy has a *** habit of showing up where they are not supposed to be. This is all pretty funny...is your intention to say that Racers have it more difficult than someone who has people "intent" on making him die..? I think it might be a considerably smaller field at Indy if the Racers understood that not only was their craft gonna remain dangerous but now someone was gonna stand on the sidelines and actively attempt to***their day up permanently. I still believe that both types are very similar. PAPA DOC Pierre PAPA DOC Legrand Pink Flamingo Pilot... http://home.earthlink.net/~plegrand/PINKFLAMINGO.htm

> This is all pretty funny...is your intention to say that Racers have > it more difficult than someone who has people "intent" on making him > die..? I think it might be a considerably smaller field at Indy if the I don't think anyone is saying that it's easier to win a dogfight in F15 than to complete a clean lap in GPL. It is probably true, though, that it is more likely that someone who has played all other flight sims available could successfully take-off, fly around the airbase, strafe the tower, and land a plane on the first try in F15, than a person who has played all other racing sims could drive a clean lap around Nurburgring in GPL on their first try without crashing. That probably makes GPL a bit harder for a beginner to get started with, simply because it's less intuitive to drive a car in a sim environment than to fly a plane - the cues are more subtle. GPL and F15 are probably equally difficult to master in heavy combat, but, with no other distractions, the act of simply flying the plane is surely easier than driving the car. -- Pat Dotson IMPACT Motorsports http://www.impactmotorsports.com/pd.html

>Hold up here.....in a high threat war. Lets take the 1973 Arab Israeli >war....do you think that the pilots were whistling to work. Given that Israel is about the size of Maryland...NO. Do you read many books by aviators? Or are you just guessing? I've read a lot of books written by pilots during the Vietnam and Gulf Wars, and while saying they are "bored" would be stretching it when flying a fighter plane, it would be fair to say there are some fairly significant dead spots of basically transit time. Obviously the pucker factor increases at various times, but its not like the guys are up there pulling heavy G's from the time they take off to the time they land. A lot depends upon just how much time they have to sit there making a long trip to or back from a mission. In the case of an Israeli fighter pilot, they are only minutes from their base to the enemy territory so certainly there aren't those long dead times for them. You are erroneously equating difficulty with fear or battle adrenalin. Sitting and solving a calculus problem in a library can be difficult even with no fear or adrenalin. Difficult can also be physical, as in difficulty controlling the vehicle due to heavy G forces. Difficult can also refer to attentiveness and focus. I won't let you try to use "difficult" as a one-size-fits-all adjective to put words in my mouth here. There is no one global description that is going to fit every pilot and every mission. Some missions have long periods of relative inactivity built into them and those periods are certainly not "difficult" by several possible definitions. Others are scramble under pressure with only moments to deal with the threat. Again, you're talking fear vs. difficulty. The two might affect one another, but they are not co-equal. I believe that most of the time they are very different. Randy Randy Magruder [link lost in import]

Yea I have glanced at a few....<G> Sorry you misunderstand the problem. Its not about fear...though that plays a small part in both professions. Im talking about sheer overload...once the pilot reaches the battle area he is one extremely busy person....probably the old pilots were busy waaay before the battle area (which is why they got to be old pilots)....the pilot like the racer is concentrating extremely *** the task at hand...he is busy monitoring systems, watching the sky, threats, wingman, watching the sky, and his controller. He is concentrating every bit as hard if not harder than the typical racer. I say harder NOT because the pilot is somehow superior but because his tasks are so spread out ....the racer doesnt have near the systems or worries the pilot does...so they are both concentrating hard. This also translates into the sims....I have been in matches online that lasted over 2 hours and to say that I wasnt concentrating is not to understand how much I like winning. A BVR fight in a sim is a extremely engrossing extremely hard juggling act....just as going around SPA is extremely hard...and very much a act of concentration. Sorry but they disagree with you....they, both Racers and Pilots think they have lots in common. Both their duties and their abilities...vis a vis mental concentration and focus. PAPA DOC

>Sorry but they disagree with you....they, both Racers and Pilots think >they have lots in common. Both their duties and their abilities...vis a >vis mental concentration and focus. "they"? As if you've heard from every pilot, and if you asked them to break down in detail what is the same and what is different I'm confident you'd find that they are pretty much in line with what I'm saying. You keep trying to make sweeping generalizations and it just doesn't work. I've already said I agree that they have some things in common, but they also have some aspects that are very different. Randy Randy Magruder http://members.home.com/rmagruder

A certain Car Magazine (may have been car & driver) did a story on the similarities, interviewing both pilots and drivers. Thats one source...also personal experiences with friends who had experiences in both fields....and stories from others in the flight sim group. That probably doesnt qualify as ALL of them...but a sufficient number to put more weight behind it than your opinion. Sorry. Also my point is when they are in a combat zone they are just as heavily tasked as a Racer...if not more so....well probably to be honest they are MORE heavily tasked. Actually way more tasked than a racer... PAPA DOC Pierre PAPA DOC Legrand Pink Flamingo Pilot... http://home.earthlink.net/~plegrand/PINKFLAMINGO.htm

>A certain Car Magazine (may have been car & driver) did a story on the >similarities, interviewing both pilots and drivers. Thats one >source...also personal experiences with friends who had experiences in >both fields....and stories from others in the flight sim group. That >probably doesnt qualify as ALL of them...but a sufficient number to >put more weight behind it than your opinion. Sorry. Here's news for you....my opinion is also based upon more than what I personally think. Hope you aren't too disappointed. Aha! "when they are in a combat zone". Hello? Please go back and read my messages and you'll find I stated basically the same thing...nothing like arguing with someone who isn't reading what you write. Randy Magruder http://members.home.com/rmagruder