Re: Microsoft might be buying Sierra/Papy

Erm, Steve - why exactly would that mean "good things" for racing sims? CART Precision Racing, anyone? "Steve Jones" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > If it happens this could mean good things for Papy's racing sims. > > http://www.gamepro.com/lofi/article.cfm?article_id=27923

NONONONONONONONO! NOT MORE TALK ABOUT CART! AAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHH! Vintook "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:ZTvY9.4849$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (10 lines)

> Erm, Steve - why exactly would that mean "good things" for racing sims? > CART Precision Racing, anyone? > > "Steve Jones" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > If it happens this could mean good things for Papy's racing sims. > > > > http://www.gamepro.com/lofi/article.cfm?article_id=27923 > >

"Steve Smith" ... > Erm, Steve - why exactly would that mean "good things" for racing sims? > CART Precision Racing, anyone? Sure, CPR wasn't great. But if M$ are to give Papy a lifeline then i can see the sense in that - provided they're allowed to do their own thing without interference from 'upstairs' or buying key team members to work on train sims. __ Si.

MS has put out a lot of excellent racing games. David G Fisher "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:ZTvY9.4849$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (10 lines)

> Erm, Steve - why exactly would that mean "good things" for racing sims? > CART Precision Racing, anyone? > > "Steve Jones" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > If it happens this could mean good things for Papy's racing sims. > > > > http://www.gamepro.com/lofi/article.cfm?article_id=27923 > >

The Ultimate Microsoft Anecdote is what they've done to sales of the new BMW 7-Series. My jaw dropped when I heard BMW boasting that the GUI in the next 7-Series would be "powered by" Windows. Now the votes are in: everybody hates it - the critics, the owners - everybody. Not only is it impossible to decipher, it has a learning curve steeper than the North Face. And once you think you've got it handled, it exhibits all the horrors we FDUs have hated it for since the previous century. One woman complained the (alledgedly) voice-controlled radio would come on for no reason, at top volume. The only way it could be turned off was to pull over, turn off the ignition, wait 10 seconds, then restart the car. I don't want these people making my operating system, I don't want them mucking about with my car, and I sure as hell don't want them messing with my simulations! "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (18 lines)

> MS has put out a lot of excellent racing games. > > David G Fisher > > "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:ZTvY9.4849$[email hidden]... > > Erm, Steve - why exactly would that mean "good things" for racing sims? > > CART Precision Racing, anyone? > > > > "Steve Jones" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:[email hidden]... > > > If it happens this could mean good things for Papy's racing sims. > > > > > > http://www.gamepro.com/lofi/article.cfm?article_id=27923 > > > > > >

Yes and I suspect MS designed every aspect of it! BMW didn't have any say at all... Put the blaim where it belongs please. "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:V6DY9.8164$[email hidden]... > .. I don't want these people > making my operating system, I don't want them mucking about with my car,and > I sure as hell don't want them messing with my simulations!

David G Fisher wrote: > > MS has put out a lot of excellent racing games. CPR? Yeah right!! You would know an excellent racing sim if you caught it screwing your girlfriend!

Steve Smith wrote: > > Erm, Steve - why exactly would that mean "good things" for racing sims? > CART Precision Racing, anyone? Does the name MS Flight Simulator mean anything to you, or MS Train Simulator ? They have a huge and loyal following, even some former regulars from the sim racing scene has moved over to the trains, and guess what, they're highly moddable as well, in fact, they're just about everything we wish our racing sims could be, not to mention that MS knows how to sell stuff, meaning it would stand a chance to survive and evolve Online gaming....well, we have XboX live which I hear is pretty good and I've played more AOE and AOE2 on "The Zone" than I like to remember, CFSx works pretty well too I've been told I'm all for giving MS a shot at it, in fact, I can hardly see a downside to it, after all, all we've seen from Papy the last 4-5 years are Nascar sims and little to no support for 3rd party add on's, if they want to make a MS Race Car Simulator where you buy the main program and then buy all sorts of after market add on's later on....hang on, where have I heard that idea before Of course, this is all just MHO Beers and cheers (uncle) Goy http://www.theuspits.com "A man is only as old as the woman he feels........" --Groucho Marx--

On Sun, 26 Jan 2003 03:20:39 +0100, Goy Larsen <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (16 lines)

> > >Steve Smith wrote: >> >> Erm, Steve - why exactly would that mean "good things" for racing sims? >> CART Precision Racing, anyone? > >Does the name MS Flight Simulator mean anything to you, or MS Train >Simulator ? > >They have a huge and loyal following, even some former regulars from the >sim racing scene has moved over to the trains, and guess what, they're >highly moddable as well, in fact, they're just about everything we wish >our racing sims could be, not to mention that MS knows how to sell >stuff, meaning it would stand a chance to survive and evolve >

I can hardly imagine an online train race... Somehow it would be really dumb, with the things forced to always move on the tracks only. I doubt anyone would want a racing simulation like that. Or a racing simulation where maybe you see all the details of the other cars, but there is no scenery around the track, only several thousand feet away... -- __________ ____---____ Marco Antonio Checa Funcke \_________D /-/---_----' Santiago de Surco, Lima, Peru _H__/_/ http://machf.tripod.com '-_____|( remove the "no_me_j." and "sons.of." parts before replying

Because Microsoft has a history of sucessfully supporting and promoting online gaming? :-) Achim "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:ZTvY9.4849$[email hidden]... > Erm, Steve - why exactly would that mean "good things" for racing sims?

I've been flying MS FS since 1982. The new MS CFS is absolutely terrible. So much for experience/history/reputation. "Goy Larsen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (37 lines)

> > > Steve Smith wrote: > > > > Erm, Steve - why exactly would that mean "good things" for racing sims? > > CART Precision Racing, anyone? > > Does the name MS Flight Simulator mean anything to you, or MS Train > Simulator ? > > They have a huge and loyal following, even some former regulars from the > sim racing scene has moved over to the trains, and guess what, they're > highly moddable as well, in fact, they're just about everything we wish > our racing sims could be, not to mention that MS knows how to sell > stuff, meaning it would stand a chance to survive and evolve > > Online gaming....well, we have XboX live which I hear is pretty good and > I've played more AOE and AOE2 on "The Zone" than I like to remember, > CFSx works pretty well too I've been told > > I'm all for giving MS a shot at it, in fact, I can hardly see a downside > to it, after all, all we've seen from Papy the last 4-5 years are Nascar > sims and little to no support for 3rd party add on's, if they want to > make a MS Race Car Simulator where you buy the main program and then buy > all sorts of after market add on's later on....hang on, where have I > heard that idea before > > Of course, this is all just MHO > > > Beers and cheers > (uncle) Goy > > http://www.theuspits.com > > "A man is only as old as the woman he feels........" > --Groucho Marx--

I also just finished a piece on the Xbox vs. the PS2 for Motor Trend magazine: "Car Games for Car Guys." My conclusion: MS has nothing to offer car guys (I'm talking abt. real-world car guys, not arcade-sim jockeys). Read it in the March issue (I think). I shudder to think how they might handle another road-racing simulation. (BTW, I liked Monster Truck Madness and was unhappy when they walked away from the franchise. I never thought much of Midtown Madness, but MM3 for the Xbox sure looks purty. I liked their offroad bike sim and wondered why they abandoned that, too. I've had MS Train Simulator for a year - it just lays there. I even thought CPR showed some promise, but MS doesn't have any more commitment to what it starts than Anna Nicole Smith...no relation.) "Goy Larsen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (37 lines)

> > > Steve Smith wrote: > > > > Erm, Steve - why exactly would that mean "good things" for racing sims? > > CART Precision Racing, anyone? > > Does the name MS Flight Simulator mean anything to you, or MS Train > Simulator ? > > They have a huge and loyal following, even some former regulars from the > sim racing scene has moved over to the trains, and guess what, they're > highly moddable as well, in fact, they're just about everything we wish > our racing sims could be, not to mention that MS knows how to sell > stuff, meaning it would stand a chance to survive and evolve > > Online gaming....well, we have XboX live which I hear is pretty good and > I've played more AOE and AOE2 on "The Zone" than I like to remember, > CFSx works pretty well too I've been told > > I'm all for giving MS a shot at it, in fact, I can hardly see a downside > to it, after all, all we've seen from Papy the last 4-5 years are Nascar > sims and little to no support for 3rd party add on's, if they want to > make a MS Race Car Simulator where you buy the main program and then buy > all sorts of after market add on's later on....hang on, where have I > heard that idea before > > Of course, this is all just MHO > > > Beers and cheers > (uncle) Goy > > http://www.theuspits.com > > "A man is only as old as the woman he feels........" > --Groucho Marx--

> "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:ZTvY9.4849$[email hidden]... >> Erm, Steve - why exactly would that mean "good things" for racing sims? > "Joachim Trensz" <[email hidden]> wrote in news:b10c4e$tlu7h$1@ID- 99765.news.dfncis.de: > Because Microsoft has a history of sucessfully > supporting and promoting online gaming? :-) > > Achim > >> Well that was one of my biggest gripes with Motorcross Madness 1&2. Here you had this huge online enviroment, the msn gaming zone(or whatever they call it..been so long I have forgotten the exact name.) and they limit the races to 4 or 6 racers. MAN! Could you imagine what a rush a good supercross sim would be at the start? approximentally 30 riders all charging for the same spot? Mayhem, drama...RACING. But with 6 guys...you all just spread out and run hotlaps. dave henrie

No, but at least they worked. "Steve Jones" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Sat, 25 Jan 2003 21:14:29 GMT, "Steve Smith" > <[email hidden]> reckoned: > > >The Ultimate Microsoft Anecdote is what they've done to sales of the newBMW > >7-Series. My jaw dropped when I heard BMW boasting that the GUI in thenext > >7-Series would be "powered by" Windows. Now the votes are in: everybody > >hates it - the critics, the owners - everybody. Not only is itimpossible > >to decipher, it has a learning curve steeper than the North Face. Andonce > >you think you've got it handled, it exhibits all the horrors we FDUs have > >hated it for since the previous century. One woman complained the > >(alledgedly) voice-controlled radio would come on for no reason, at top > >volume. The only way it could be turned off was to pull over, turn offthe > >ignition, wait 10 seconds, then restart the car. I don't want thesepeople > >making my operating system, I don't want them mucking about with my car,and > >I sure as hell don't want them messing with my simulations! > > What a bunch of dickweeds. I suppose you all think Papy doing all > those Nascar sims for years was real innovative?

Steve Smith wrote:

Quoted text (12 lines)

> > I also just finished a piece on the Xbox vs. the PS2 for Motor Trend > magazine: "Car Games for Car Guys." My conclusion: MS has nothing to offer > car guys (I'm talking abt. real-world car guys, not arcade-sim jockeys). > Read it in the March issue (I think). I shudder to think how they might > handle another road-racing simulation. (BTW, I liked Monster Truck Madness > and was unhappy when they walked away from the franchise. I never thought > much of Midtown Madness, but MM3 for the Xbox sure looks purty. I liked > their offroad bike sim and wondered why they abandoned that, too. I've had > MS Train Simulator for a year - it just lays there. I even thought CPR > showed some promise, but MS doesn't have any more commitment to what it > starts than Anna Nicole Smith...no relation.)

I'm sorry but I have to disagree, I'd say that MS commits to anything that makes them money, or draws in customers so that other parts of their company makes money If anyone can make a profit out f a race car simulator of some sorts, it's Bill G and his band of merry men, in fact, I'd say if a company like MS doesn't commit to racing sims soon, the genre will forever be doomed to be made by a small number of enthusiast for a small number of enthusiasts and we can all sit here and cry "Cart, GPL2 or AussieV8's" to our heart's content I'll take the MS FS model any day, it's a decent FS and you can do just about anything with it as far as adding new scenery (tracks) and planes (cars), so even though the latest CFS may not be nothing to write home about, they have had at least 2 before that was fairly well received, how many GPL's have we had so far ? MS knows about making money, if they're seriously looking into the sim racing market, then that's good news as it means they think it's possible to make money from it either directly or indirectly, hell, if they only do it so they can sell more FF racing wheels I don't care, as long as it's decent, not to mention that if MS is willing to take the plunge, other large companies will pay attention and if MS makes money, they might be interested too And personally I'd rather see Papy end up under the MS umbrella and given one or two chances at coming up with a good sim that also makes money, than see them end up as yet another company producing multi platform racing games such as NFS or whatever, MS has teams/partners capable of doing this already, MM and MTM and various XboX titles If they really are interested in picking up a company like Papy, it can only be because they're either part of a package or because they're genuinely interested in making a decent sim, IMHO, outside the Nascar/GPL scene, hardly anyone knows who Papy is so it can't be for their name and reputation as that can't be worth a whole lot in a greater perspective, so it must be the talent and knowledge they're after (still assuming they're actually after Papy), something that would be totally wasted in the "just another racing game for your console" type thing Beers and cheers (uncle) Goy http://www.theuspits.com "A man is only as old as the woman he feels........" --Groucho Marx--

I forget how many drivers could join the Monster Truck races, but looking at the quality of the drivers in them I was glad the number was somewhat limited :-) Achim "Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... ... > Here you had this huge online enviroment, the msn gaming zone(or whatever > they call it..been so long I have forgotten the exact name.) and they > limit the races to 4 or 6 racers. MAN! Could you imagine what a rush a > good supercross sim would be at the start? approximentally 30 riders all > charging for the same spot? Mayhem, drama...RACING...

"Goy Larsen" wrote: > If anyone can make a profit out f a race car simulator of some sorts, > it's Bill G and his band of merry men, in fact, I'd say if a company > like MS doesn't commit to racing sims soon, the genre will forever be > doomed to be made by a small number of enthusiast for a small number of > enthusiasts and we can all sit here and cry "Cart, GPL2 or AussieV8's" > to our heart's content True. What has the Papy/Sierra/Vivendi combo done for non Nascar race sim fans with the GPL engine since we first tasted in the demo 5 years ago? The concept of an engine which could give us a multitude of series disappeared into a Nascar development evolution. Tha fact GPL was historic F1 is almost irrelevent. I grew to like the '67 era because of GPL not the other way around. It could have been pretty much any series that involved braking, varying corners etc. etc. If "MS Drive Simulator" ever existed what better than the N2003 engine used for whatever car racing series you care to start with. Then add expansion pack after expansion pack. Papy developing a configurable engine for an enlarged team of graphic artists, programmers sound enginereers etc. The engine could be further developed with each expansion pack, adding new features which work retrospectively with the other packs. Quality physics, graphics, sound plus proven multiplayer from day 1 along with a reasonably developed AI for single player. From that build just about anything - CART, touring cars, rally, formula ford, transam, Aussie V8s (of course!) cops & robbers, learn to drive school whatever. Who knows - but I wouldn't dismiss it as the death of race sims. Cheers Tony

There were different levels of drivers. The good and best MTM2 drivers were fantastic. No different than there are different levels of drivers in GPL. GPL races tend to be crash fests at the best of times, by drivers with years of experience on the smae tracks, somthing that somehow conveniently gets forgotten by many. To be honest Joachim, I'd bet my right arm that if you took a random sample of GPL drivers and had them compete against a random sample of 4x4 Evo2 drivers (follow up to MTM2) in a new, third sim with a controlled amount of practice time, the 4x4 Evo2 drivers would put the GPL drivers to shame. You could just take the top 20% of both and the results would be the same. Having competed against both, that's my opinion. David G Fisher "Joachim Trensz" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:b1198j$sadb2$[email hidden]... > I forget how many drivers could join the Monster Truck races, but lookingat

Quoted text (10 lines)

> the quality of the drivers in them I was glad the number was somewhat > limited :-) > > Achim > > > "Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > ... > > Here you had this huge online enviroment, the msn gaming zone(or

whatever > > they call it..been so long I have forgotten the exact name.) and they > > limit the races to 4 or 6 racers. MAN! Could you imagine what a rush a > > good supercross sim would be at the start? approximentally 30 ridersall > > charging for the same spot? Mayhem, drama...RACING... > >

"Goy Larsen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (41 lines)

> I'm sorry but I have to disagree, I'd say that MS commits to anything > that makes them money, or draws in customers so that other parts of > their company makes money > > If anyone can make a profit out f a race car simulator of some sorts, > it's Bill G and his band of merry men, in fact, I'd say if a company > like MS doesn't commit to racing sims soon, the genre will forever be > doomed to be made by a small number of enthusiast for a small number of > enthusiasts and we can all sit here and cry "Cart, GPL2 or AussieV8's" > to our heart's content > > I'll take the MS FS model any day, it's a decent FS and you can do just > about anything with it as far as adding new scenery (tracks) and planes > (cars), so even though the latest CFS may not be nothing to write home > about, they have had at least 2 before that was fairly well received, > how many GPL's have we had so far ? > > MS knows about making money, if they're seriously looking into the sim > racing market, then that's good news as it means they think it's > possible to make money from it either directly or indirectly, hell, if > they only do it so they can sell more FF racing wheels I don't care, as > long as it's decent, not to mention that if MS is willing to take the > plunge, other large companies will pay attention and if MS makes money, > they might be interested too > > And personally I'd rather see Papy end up under the MS umbrella and > given one or two chances at coming up with a good sim that also makes > money, than see them end up as yet another company producing multi > platform racing games such as NFS or whatever, MS has teams/partners > capable of doing this already, MM and MTM and various XboX titles > > If they really are interested in picking up a company like Papy, it can > only be because they're either part of a package or because they're > genuinely interested in making a decent sim, IMHO, outside the > Nascar/GPL scene, hardly anyone knows who Papy is so it can't be for > their name and reputation as that can't be worth a whole lot in a > greater perspective, so it must be the talent and knowledge they're > after (still assuming they're actually after Papy), something that would > be totally wasted in the "just another racing game for your console" > type thing >

You raise the all important question there, Goy. Microsoft wouldn't be specifically acquiring Papyrus, but rather getting them in a package deal that includes the likes of Blizzard, Sierra and Vivendi Universal Interactive. Papyrus would be a *very* small part of the deal. So, the question is, just how much importance would MS place on Papyrus remaining in the Hard Core PC Driving Sim genre? That's a very difficult thing to tell right now. But, as has been pointed out, there is one good sign in that MS has supported niche products for the more hard core segments of the gaming communities. It appears that under Vivendi, Papyrus is not going to be able to remain focused on what it has done better than anyone else for a long time now. So from my point of view, conditions could not be much worse under MS in the future than under Vivendi right now. At the very least, product decisions wouldn't be impacted by the financial woes of the parent corporation. I would also rather Papyrus be owned by a software company than a utility company. Is there another company that would be better suited to own Papyrus? EA? Sony? Maybe, but I'm not so sure. I guess whoever ends up with Papyrus, we all just have to hope that they see the importance of what Papyrus does in the game industry and has the financial ability and desire to allow them the freedom to continue and maybe even expand on their product line. db

"Dave Boyle"

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > I guess whoever ends up with Papyrus, we all just have to hope that > they see the importance of what Papyrus does in the game industry and > has the financial ability and desire to allow them the freedom to > continue and maybe even expand on their product line. > > > db >

It seems everyone is still assuming Papyrus will make another 'hardcore' sim. All their interviews and all the hints point NOT to another modern F1 title, NOT a CART revival, NOT anything to do with a standalone sim. I think we need to get that out of our heads for the time being. Something like Grand Theft Auto or Driver...a story game with driving elements might be closer to what they will attempt. Time will tell cuz Papy never does :) dave henrie

Please don't misunderstand my comments as an assessment made relative to drivers of another sim. They were meant exclusively as a friendly joke about things I saw at the Zone. As for your little bet, I don't know who'd be faster, and honestly, it doesn't matter to me. Achim "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > There were different levels of drivers. The good and best MTM2 driverswere > fantastic. No different than there are different levels of drivers in GPL. > GPL races tend to be crash fests at the best of times, by drivers withyears > of experience on the smae tracks, somthing that somehow conveniently gets > forgotten by many. > > To be honest Joachim, I'd bet my right arm that if you took a randomsample > of GPL drivers and had them compete against a random sample of 4x4 Evo2 > drivers (follow up to MTM2) in a new, third sim with a controlled amountof > practice time, the 4x4 Evo2 drivers would put the GPL drivers to shame.You > could just take the top 20% of both and the results would be the same. > Having competed against both, that's my opinion.

David G Fisher wrote: > > There were different levels of drivers. The good and best MTM2 drivers were > fantastic. No different than there are different levels of drivers in GPL. > GPL races tend to be crash fests at the best of times, by drivers with years > of experience on the smae tracks, somthing that somehow conveniently gets > forgotten by many. You must mean VROC, league racing is not like that. F1 is a bit of a crash feast though, all those drivers with all their years of experience! > To be honest Joachim, I'd bet my right arm that if you took a random sample > of GPL drivers and had them compete against a random sample of 4x4 Evo2 > drivers (follow up to MTM2) in a new, third sim with a controlled amount of > practice time, the 4x4 Evo2 drivers would put the GPL drivers to shame. You > could just take the top 20% of both and the results would be the same. > Having competed against both, that's my opinion. But by your own admission you got bored of GPL after six short weeks, then installed because you weren't interested! Are you basing your appraisal of the quality of GPL drivers on six weeks?! I have a point, Dave, so there's not a chance in hell that you'll answer me!

"Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > It seems everyone is still assuming Papyrus will make another'hardcore' > sim. All their interviews and all the hints point NOT to another modernF1 > title, NOT a CART revival, NOT anything to do with a standalone sim. I > think we need to get that out of our heads for the time being. Something > like Grand Theft Auto or Driver...a story game with driving elements might > be closer to what they will attempt. Time will tell cuz Papy never does Yeah, I won't be surprised no matter what their next project ends up being. Obviously, I *hope* it will be another driving simulation game based on their current physics engine. But the term "multi-platform" isn't exactly inspiring a lot of confidence in me, heheh. Yeah, I know that it doesn't specifically exclude a PC developed racing sim, but it doesn't specifically include one either. I just hope that their next PC game won't be a console to PC port of a GTA clone or something. Not that GTA isn't a good game or shoot'em-ups aren't an entertaining genre, but it is not what Papyrus has done better than everyone else in the world for the last several years. db

Goy Larsen wrote: >>Erm, Steve - why exactly would that mean "good things" for racing sims? >>CART Precision Racing, anyone? > Does the name MS Flight Simulator mean anything to you, or MS Train > Simulator ? Dunno about the latter - (can't imagine more more simulation than forward motion on that one), but Flight Simulator is another MS title that is not originally from MS at all. FS was made by Sublogic (Bruce Artwick), and was only later bought by MS, when it was already a huge sim success. (I still have an original tape for FS1 for Tandy's TRS-80, that's how old this one is..) > I'm all for giving MS a shot at it, in fact, I can hardly see a downside > to it, You will, just wait and see. MS is in it for the money, not the customers, as always; as a company it has never been 'product-oriented' or 'excellence-oriented', always marketing-oriented. In fact, it's just about the exact opposite of the attitude that made Papy create GPL. Regards, Ruud

Steve Jones wrote: > Papy would be designing the game, not MS. Your calling the glass half > empty when you haven't even seen the glass yet. That's because just about every glass MS touches becomes immediately stained. Don't count on Papy having any kind of say about things after being governed by Microsoft. This is the kind of company that eats you up and spits you out afterwards. Bruce Artwick sold them Flight Sim and ended up fighting 'em in a lawsuit afterwards. Halo, originally meant as a Mac game by Bungie, still isn't out on the Mac. Not what the original authors intended at all. People have been complaining for yonks about what Sierra and EA could have done for racing games and then some expect better from, of all things, *Microsoft*? Sheesh... fat chance, I'd say. Regards, Ruud

Goy Larsen wrote: > MS knows about making money, > If they really are interested in picking up a company like Papy, it can > only be because they're either part of a package or because they're > genuinely interested in making a decent sim, Well, I'd say you reasonably summed these two up... And both statements are, I'm afraid, contradictory where MS is concerned. MS *is* about making money and basically nothing else (well, beside world domination, of course). If such a buyout creates a decent racing sim, well, that'll be fine with them. If that creates the biggest load of cr*p and Papy does nothing but turn out mediocre arcade games from then on, that's fine with them too : - - as long as it makes them carloads of money. MS is not in it for excellence in gaming (or in anything, for that matter). MS is, and will always be, in it for the ca$h and the privileges it provides. Regards, Ruud "Dodge this." - Tux

On Mon, 27 Jan 2003 15:52:20 +0100, Ruud Dingemans <[email hidden]> wrote: >FS was made by Sublogic (Bruce Artwick), and was only later bought by >MS, when it was already a huge sim success. Yup, I still have the boxes/5.25" floppies for the Apple ][ versions of Flight Simulator and Jet. Jet was probably my favorite game ever until I became a teenager. Jason

Ruud Dingemans wrote:

Quoted text (12 lines)

> > Goy Larsen wrote: > > > Does the name MS Flight Simulator mean anything to you, or MS Train > > Simulator ? > > Dunno about the latter - (can't imagine more more simulation than > forward motion on that one), but Flight Simulator is another MS title > that is not originally from MS at all. > > FS was made by Sublogic (Bruce Artwick), and was only later bought by > MS, when it was already a huge sim success.

I had FS for my Atari 520ST so I know it's not a MS product and I've played TS briefly, can't remember who made it but I doubt it was made in-house, but you missed the point, if they think it's possible to make money from a Sim, niche product or not, MS has the balls to go for it, as well as the financial backbone

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > I'm all for giving MS a shot at it, in fact, I can hardly see a downside > > to it, > > You will, just wait and see. MS is in it for the money, not the > customers, as always; as a company it has never been 'product-oriented' > or 'excellence-oriented', always marketing-oriented. > > In fact, it's just about the exact opposite of the attitude that made > Papy create GPL.

Excuse me, but anyone who runs a company expects to make money and get a return on their investment, the guys at Papy may be sim racing enthusiasts but Papyrus is still a company that is expected to make money, if it's on the market it means they haven't been making enough money for their owners to consider it worthwhile to hold onto, or they have a cash flow problem and need to sell MS doesn't have a cash flow problem, and if they were to take it over due to a genuine interest in making racing sims, Papyrus would most likely get a substantial budget, enough for one serious attempt, maybe two, at making a product that is financially sound We can only speculate as to what that sim would look like, but if there's a genuine interest in Papy as a company and not as part of a package, then I would expect it to be a sim that looks something like the MS FS, they don't need Papy to make Midtown Madness 3 or whatever If I was into flight sims I could go and buy MS FS or FS PRO right now, if I think it's a cool product there's at least 15-20 add on packs with sceneries and planes I could add to it, how many add on packs can you buy for GPL, or Nascarxxxx even ? FS is a commercial success and MS keeps supporting it and it keeps evolving, if it wasn't for the GPL enthusiasts around the world and a couple of guys at Papy who wanted to play GPL on their new vid cards, you wouldn't have been playing GPL today at all Papyrus is a company, a company is supposed to make money for it's owners, if it wasn't it would be a non profit organization, they need someone to fund their projects and these people expect a return on their money, it doesn't matter if it's Sierra, EA or MS Bill has a shitload of money, if wants to risk some of them by getting into the race sim market with Papy, he gets my vote, at least it'll be based on a financially sound model and he won't have to bail at the first sign of trouble as he has enough money to make a couple of adjustments along the way No, he won't wait forever, at some point in the not too distant future Papy would have to start earning money, unless they have some hidden cash reserves they need to make money from Day 1, how long is it since the last couple of people was axed at Papy ? Someone wasn't happy with the return on their money and people had to leave Beers and cheers (uncle) Goy http://www.theuspits.com "A man is only as old as the woman he feels........" --Groucho Marx--

Ruud Dingemans wrote:

Quoted text (18 lines)

> > Well, I'd say you reasonably summed these two up... And both statements > are, I'm afraid, contradictory where MS is concerned. > > MS *is* about making money and basically nothing else (well, beside > world domination, of course). > > If such a buyout creates a decent racing sim, well, that'll be fine with > them. > > If that creates the biggest load of cr*p and Papy does nothing but turn > out mediocre arcade games from then on, that's fine with them too : > > - - as long as it makes them carloads of money. > > MS is not in it for excellence in gaming (or in anything, for that > matter). MS is, and will always be, in it for the ca$h and the > privileges it provides.

Exactly, and they don't need a company like Papy to make shitty arcade games, Papy doesn't have a "name" you can sell products on, if you hire Sid Meier and tell the world he's going to make your next strategy game based on Civilization, you would get millions of prospective customers even if it's based on a shitty idea, do the same with Papy and you have a few people who bought GPL looking forward to it as long as it's not going to be a Nascar sim and a few more looking forward to the next Nascar sim....and that's it, in Europe hardly anyone knows who Papy is and in the US only a few die hard Nascar fans know who they are, most Aussies prolly don't know either and in Asia.....? Geoff Crammond on the other hand, he's known all over the world for his F1 sims, if I wanted a "name" I'd let Papy sink and sign Geoff, he wouldn't even need to do any work, I'd just buy the rights to his name, "MS presents Geoff Crammond's GP simulator" Money makes the world go round whether you like it or not and a sim racing company has to make money just like every other company, unless of course Bernie E, Ron D or Frank W gets in a philanthropic mood and decides to fund the ultimate F1 sim out of the kindness of their hearts, however, even in that case all we'd get is yet another modern F1 sim I don't like it, but that's how it works Beers and cheers (uncle) Goy http://www.theuspits.com "A man is only as old as the woman he feels........" --Groucho Marx--

I think MS would be interested in Vivendi's games unit more for the potential for XBox, than any PC product that might get released. MS is still at least a full year behind the PS2 in content, and is trying very hard to catch up, and to position themselves for the release of XBox2 in 2004 (a year before Sony is expected to release the PS3). So, pardon me for being a cynic, but I don't think this move, if it happens, will mean anything good for the PC market, much less the sim racing market. MS is going to be very agressive in it's attempt to control the console market, thier recent purchase of Rare studios shows this, but of course I hope I am wrong.

"cheeto" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:FogZ9.407819$[email hidden]... > I think MS would be interested in Vivendi's games unit more for the > potential for XBox, than any PC product that might get released. MS isstill > at least a full year behind the PS2 in content, and is trying very hard to > catch up, and to position themselves for the release of XBox2 in 2004 (a > year before Sony is expected to release the PS3). > So, pardon me for being a cynic, but I don't think this move, if ithappens, > will mean anything good for the PC market, much less the sim racingmarket. > MS is going to be very agressive in it's attempt to control the console > market, thier recent purchase of Rare studios shows this, but of course I > hope I am wrong. Yeah, I imagine you are right about their main focus being on Xbox with this (possible) acquisition. Even so, I see it as a good sign that Microsoft is still producing PC games even with their very aggressive console strategy. If it happens, I'll take more of a neutral wait and see type attitude rather than the somewhat concerned feelings I have right now with Vivendi as parent. That said, I have no idea of the corporate structure/interaction between Vivendi/Sierra/Papyrus or what it would possibly be with Microsoft. But I would have many less doubts with a cash cow like Microsoft at the head rather than a near bankrupt, debt laden cow like Vivendi. db

Dave Boyle wrote:

Quoted text (12 lines)

> > Yeah, I imagine you are right about their main focus being on Xbox with this > (possible) acquisition. Even so, I see it as a good sign that Microsoft is > still producing PC games even with their very aggressive console strategy. > If it happens, I'll take more of a neutral wait and see type attitude rather > than the somewhat concerned feelings I have right now with Vivendi as > parent. > > That said, I have no idea of the corporate structure/interaction between > Vivendi/Sierra/Papyrus or what it would possibly be with Microsoft. But I > would have many less doubts with a cash cow like Microsoft at the head > rather than a near bankrupt, debt laden cow like Vivendi.

Exactly, with MS you have at least have a fighting chance as long as you make a profit, with Vivendi you're going down with the ship Beers and cheers (uncle) Goy http://www.theuspits.com "A man is only as old as the woman he feels........" --Groucho Marx--

"I forget how many drivers could join the Monster Truck races, but looking at the quality of the drivers in them I was glad the number was somewhat limited :-)" Your comment absolutely put down the "quality" of the drivers of another sim. David G Fisher "Joachim Trensz" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:b11m7p$uhsig$[email hidden]... > Please don't misunderstand my comments as an assessment made relative to > drivers of another sim. They were meant exclusively as a friendly jokeabout

Quoted text (13 lines)

> things I saw at the Zone. > > As for your little bet, I don't know who'd be faster, and honestly, it > doesn't matter to me. > > Achim > > > "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > There were different levels of drivers. The good and best MTM2 drivers > were > > fantastic. No different than there are different levels of drivers in

GPL. > > GPL races tend to be crash fests at the best of times, by drivers with > years > > of experience on the smae tracks, somthing that somehow convenientlygets

Quoted text (13 lines)

> > forgotten by many. > > > > To be honest Joachim, I'd bet my right arm that if you took a random > sample > > of GPL drivers and had them compete against a random sample of 4x4 Evo2 > > drivers (follow up to MTM2) in a new, third sim with a controlled amount > of > > practice time, the 4x4 Evo2 drivers would put the GPL drivers to shame. > You > > could just take the top 20% of both and the results would be the same. > > Having competed against both, that's my opinion. > >

"Gerry Aitken" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > David G Fisher wrote: > > To be honest Joachim, I'd bet my right arm that if you took a randomsample > > of GPL drivers and had them compete against a random sample of 4x4 Evo2 > > drivers (follow up to MTM2) in a new, third sim with a controlled amountof > > practice time, the 4x4 Evo2 drivers would put the GPL drivers to shame.You

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > could just take the top 20% of both and the results would be the same. > > Having competed against both, that's my opinion. > > But by your own admission you got bored of GPL after six short weeks, > then installed because you weren't interested! Are you basing your > appraisal of the quality of GPL drivers on six weeks?! > > I have a point, Dave, so there's not a chance in hell that you'll answer > me!

Actually, you don't. First of all, The best way to judge a driver(s) is to see how well they do with a new sim that they have no or little time with. Not after they've had tons of practice with it. Secondly, I've raced with familiar names online with POD, CPR, MTM2, GPL, N2002, LFS, and probably a few others that I forget right now. Finally, I've seen replays of GPL races, and read race reports where it's crash after crash after crash from people who've been racing the same cars on the same tracks for years. Hardly any different from what you see from the general crowd in most online racing games. POD drivers would kick your ass Gerry. David G Fisher

> > Please don't misunderstand my comments as an assessment made relative to > > drivers of another sim. They were meant exclusively as a friendly joke > > about things I saw at the Zone. "David G Fisher" wrote > "I forget how many drivers could join the Monster Truck races, but looking > at the quality of the drivers in them I was glad the number was somewhat > limited :-)" > > Your comment absolutely put down the "quality" of the drivers of another > sim. As Joachim reiterates - based on *his* experience as your comments are based on *your* experience I could show you many GPL league race replays which are most definately not crash fests nor wild sliding unrealistic affairs but it would all get rather boring - time to move on. Cheers Tony

"Tony Rickard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:lNiZ9.2886$[email hidden]... > > > Please don't misunderstand my comments as an assessment made relativeto > > > drivers of another sim. They were meant exclusively as a friendly joke > > > about things I saw at the Zone. > > "David G Fisher" wrote > > "I forget how many drivers could join the Monster Truck races, butlooking

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > at the quality of the drivers in them I was glad the number was somewhat > > limited :-)" > > > > Your comment absolutely put down the "quality" of the drivers of another > > sim. > > As Joachim reiterates - based on *his* experience as your comments are

based on > *your* experience > > I could show you many GPL league race replays which are most definatelynot > crash fests nor wild sliding unrealistic affairs but it would all getrather > boring - time to move on. > > Cheers > Tony Here we go. Joachim put down the MTM drivers with his comments. That's a fact. As for the GPL replays, if what you say they contain is even true, I'd be completely and totally unimpressed. After years of driving the same cars on the same tracks, I would hope the most dedicated GPL drivers who are racing against those they are most familiar with would be able to keep them under some kind of control by now. David G Fisher

David G Fisher wrote: > > As for the GPL replays, if what you say they contain is even true, I'd be > completely and totally unimpressed. After years of driving the same cars on > the same tracks, There are hundreds of tracks, and an engine swapper, you imbecile!

"Gerry Aitken" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > David G Fisher wrote: > > > > As for the GPL replays, if what you say they contain is even true, I'dbe > > completely and totally unimpressed. After years of driving the same carson > > the same tracks, > > There are hundreds of tracks, and an engine swapper, you imbecile! Ooohh. An engine swapper. That makes a huuuge difference. Just logged into VROC, and almost every single track of the 26 listed for racing was a track that shipped with the game years ago. Familiar names were there too. David G Fisher

Goy Larsen wrote: >>MS is not in it for excellence in gaming (or in anything, for that >>matter). MS is, and will always be, in it for the ca$h and the >>privileges it provides. > > Exactly, and they don't need a company like Papy to make shitty arcade > games, Goy, they really wouldn't *care* about Papyrus, as a part of Vivendi. They probably wouldn't even know what it is. They could care less if it makes good or bad sims, as long as it makes them money. Some companies, like Apple or Papy, like to strive for good or even excellent products while making ca$h at the same time. MS does not have that frame of mind. It is, in other words, not product-oriented. Regards, Ruud

"David G Fisher" wrote: > Here we go. No, that was *my* point! Joachim made a joke based on his own experiences on the Zone. You countered that it was very different & Joachim explained it was a joke based on waht he had seen and accepted that the general standard may have been very different. Did it end there? No. > As for the GPL replays, if what you say they contain is even true How trusting... >, I'd be completely and totally unimpressed. Well I said it would be a boring exercise - so we agree on that :). Although they would include replays from 98 and the beginning of 99, so hardly the years of practice you elude to. I am probably getting sucked into a DGF vs Gerry slanging match - so I think I will stop there. Cheers Tony

David G Fisher wrote:

Quoted text (14 lines)

> > "Gerry Aitken" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > David G Fisher wrote: > > > > > > As for the GPL replays, if what you say they contain is even true, I'd > be > > > completely and totally unimpressed. After years of driving the same cars > on > > > the same tracks, > > > > There are hundreds of tracks, and an engine swapper, you imbecile! > > Ooohh. An engine swapper. That makes a huuuge difference.

Yes it does actually: mix and match a combination of 18 chassis, and 18 engines. All you silly little F1 games only ever have one car, one engine, and sixteen of the most boring tracks in the history of motor racing! > Just logged into VROC, and almost every single track of the 26 listed for > racing was a track that shipped with the game years ago. Familiar names were > there too. Most of the leagues I keep track on use 3rd party tracks!! Admit it, david, the world of sim racing loves GPL, and you are just a lonely little opinion in the great scheme of things. Where are all the F1CR and 4x4 evo online leagues, btw? The truth is you only hate GPL because you cannot drive the cars! Realistic physics makes no sense to you. Must be because of all those second-rate racing games you've played with over the years! Anyway, enough on this topic, because you are boring me, and I have bigger fish to fry. Patronizingly yours GDA

Hi Dave, not at all, as it was a comment about people driving the same sim as myself. And I wasn't discrediting anyone based on the fact that they were driving a specific sim, I was plainly referring to personal experiences made at the Zone. Achim "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... ... > Your comment absolutely put down the "quality" of the drivers of another > sim.

"David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>... > POD drivers would kick your ass Gerry. Riiiight... Mark

On Mon, 27 Jan 2003 17:39:38 -0500, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote: >POD drivers would kick your ass Gerry. So why don't you guys just settle this on VROC like men, eh? Jason

Joachim Trensz wrote:

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > Hi Dave, > > not at all, as it was a comment about people driving the same sim as myself. > > And I wasn't discrediting anyone based on the fact that they were driving a > specific sim, I was plainly referring to personal experiences made at the > Zone.

Hehe, Achim, picking on a minority group, shame on you!! ;) Gerry

lol, yes, I don't seem to get it right, no matter what I try <g> Achim "Gerry Aitken" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... ... > Hehe, Achim, picking on a minority group, shame on you!! ;)

Hoss wrote:

Quoted text (8 lines)

>>Don't count on Papy having any kind of say about things after being >>governed by Microsoft. This is the kind of company that eats you up and >>spits you out afterwards. >> >>Bruce Artwick sold them Flight Sim and ended up fighting 'em in a >>lawsuit afterwards. > Well, you either roll with the punches or you get off the bus.

My dear man, when it comes to Microsoft, I got off the bus around ten years ago, when I wised up. They used to make some not-so-bad products and still do (rarely, but still), but their 'swallow-it-or-die, we're here to stifle any competition' business model put me off a long time ago, in an era where you still had something to choose between computers (Commodore/Atari/Amiga/Apple/MSX/etc), not just between Wintel-clones, clones & clones and the odd Mac. Because sadly, that's how far we've come. Regards, Ruud

Joachim Trensz wrote: > > lol, yes, I don't seem to get it right, no matter what I try <g> That's what happens when you argue with someone who's made an art out of hypocrisy! Gerry

I'm all for Microsoft buying Sierra/Papy, but unfortunately we'll be forced to buy a XBOX in order to play any new sims that come from them. Microsoft seems to have a tendency to try to put everything onto their XBOX to create sales. I actually enjoyed NBA Inside Drive a lot (basketball game) on the computer. So what did Microsoft do with their next iteration? They put it exclusively on the XBOX. As you all know the XBOX doesn't support USB steering wheels nor does it support force feedback. I'm not sure how any of you would feel about driving GPL 2 on an XBOX with their joypad? So on one hand it'll be great to put new life in Sierra/Papy, but on the other hand we'll need to buy an XBOX to play anything new.

It also could mean strictly X-Box Games only. Steve Jones wrote: > If it happens this could mean good things for Papy's racing sims. > > http://www.gamepro.com/lofi/article.cfm?article_id=27923 -- Ric Seyler Online Racing: RicSeyler GPL Handicap 6.35 [email hidden] http://www.pcola.gulf.net/~ricseyler -------------------------------------- "Homer no function beer well without." - H.J. Simpson

On Tue, 28 Jan 2003 14:49:43 -0600, Ric Seyler <[email hidden]> wrote: > It also could mean strictly X-Box Games only. Given M$'s past history, IMHO that's a given. -- Richard Bellavance COGNICASE Analyste-programmeur principal T.: 514-732-8000 #4153 20, Place du Commerce F.: 514-732-8021 Verdun, Qc, H3E 1Z6, CANADA -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =----- http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! -----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----

"Jason Moyer" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (8 lines)

> On Mon, 27 Jan 2003 17:39:38 -0500, "David G Fisher" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >POD drivers would kick your ass Gerry. > > So why don't you guys just settle this on VROC like men, eh? > > Jason

I can't believe you typed that. How about we pick a racing sim that I've worshipped for years, and Gerry never plays? If manly reputations are going to be put on the line, and since many people are sneaky, lying, little cheaters who will do anything for an edge (see the White House), then the only fair thing to do is to have us race in a sim that neither of us has any experience in the moment it's released. Remember this? http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&threadm=ak5d2e%24aqn%241% 40news.doit.wisc.edu&rnum=3&prev=/groups%3Fq%3Drec.autos.simulators%2BDavid% 2BG%2BFisher%2BLFS%2B%2Bserver%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26selm%3Dak5d2 e%2524aqn%25241%2540news.doit.wisc.edu%26rnum%3D3 Gerry could of joined in and raced in any of those LFS races in the days immediately after the LFS beta was released. He was pissing at me looooong before then. I joined some LFS servers called "GPL Nutters" actually. Never saw him. Would of been a fair test......if that's what he actually wants. :-o Gerry can say what he wants about me. I couldn't care less. I was a regular competitor with the top drivers in a number of different sims, competed in sposored tournaments and made it to the highest level. If he wants to say I (and others, as I'm the second one in 24 hours) don't race GPL because I'm not good enough than that's fine with me. He's desperate as usual. Maybe he's still annoyed at the news that I beta'd his precious VROC (girlfriend)? David G Fisher

"Gerry Aitken" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> David G Fisher wrote: > > > > "Gerry Aitken" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:[email hidden]... > > > David G Fisher wrote: > > > > > > > > As for the GPL replays, if what you say they contain is even true,

I'd > > be > > > > completely and totally unimpressed. After years of driving the samecars

Quoted text (11 lines)

> > on > > > > the same tracks, > > > > > > There are hundreds of tracks, and an engine swapper, you imbecile! > > > > Ooohh. An engine swapper. That makes a huuuge difference. > > Yes it does actually: mix and match a combination of 18 chassis, and 18 > engines. All you silly little F1 games only ever have one car, one > engine, and sixteen of the most boring tracks in the history of motor > racing!

Not true. > > Just logged into VROC, and almost every single track of the 26 listedfor > > racing was a track that shipped with the game years ago. Familiar nameswere

Quoted text (10 lines)

> > there too. > > Most of the leagues I keep track on use 3rd party tracks!! Admit it, > david, the world of sim racing loves GPL, and you are just a lonely > little opinion in the great scheme of things. Where are all the F1CR and > 4x4 evo online leagues, btw? > > The truth is you only hate GPL because you cannot drive the cars! > Realistic physics makes no sense to you. Must be because of all those > second-rate racing games you've played with over the years!

Hmmm, I race in RASCAR every week. We use N2002 which is much more "realistic" than GPL. I get in and go just like every other racing game. N2003 is even more "realistic" than N2002 supposedly. I'm so scared. David G Fisher

David G Fisher wrote:

Quoted text (33 lines)

> > "Jason Moyer" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > On Mon, 27 Jan 2003 17:39:38 -0500, "David G Fisher" > > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > > >POD drivers would kick your ass Gerry. > > > > So why don't you guys just settle this on VROC like men, eh? > > > > Jason > > I can't believe you typed that. > > How about we pick a racing sim that I've worshipped for years, and Gerry > never plays? > > If manly reputations are going to be put on the line, and since many people > are sneaky, lying, little cheaters who will do anything for an edge (see the > White House), then the only fair thing to do is to have us race in a sim > that neither of us has any experience in the moment it's released. > > Remember this? > http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&threadm=ak5d2e%24aqn%241% > 40news.doit.wisc.edu&rnum=3&prev=/groups%3Fq%3Drec.autos.simulators%2BDavid% > 2BG%2BFisher%2BLFS%2B%2Bserver%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26selm%3Dak5d2 > e%2524aqn%25241%2540news.doit.wisc.edu%26rnum%3D3 > > Gerry could of joined in and raced in any of those LFS races in the days > immediately after the LFS beta was released. He was pissing at me looooong > before then. I joined some LFS servers > called "GPL Nutters" actually. Never saw him. Would of been a fair > test......if that's what he actually wants. :-o

Actually, Dave, I joined your very own LFS server, only for you to immediately close it down and run away!

Gentlemen! You can't fight here! This is the war room! "Gerry Aitken" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (8 lines)

> Joachim Trensz wrote: > > > > lol, yes, I don't seem to get it right, no matter what I try <g> > > That's what happens when you argue with someone who's made an art out of > hypocrisy! > > Gerry

"Gerry Aitken" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (19 lines)

> David G Fisher wrote: > > > > "Jason Moyer" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:[email hidden]... > > > On Mon, 27 Jan 2003 17:39:38 -0500, "David G Fisher" > > > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > > > > >POD drivers would kick your ass Gerry. > > > > > > So why don't you guys just settle this on VROC like men, eh? > > > > > > Jason > > > > I can't believe you typed that. > > > > How about we pick a racing sim that I've worshipped for years, and Gerry > > never plays? > > > > If manly reputations are going to be put on the line, and since many

people > > are sneaky, lying, little cheaters who will do anything for an edge (seethe > > White House), then the only fair thing to do is to have us race in a sim > > that neither of us has any experience in the moment it's released. > > > > Remember this? > >http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&threadm=ak5d2e%24aqn%241% > >40news.doit.wisc.edu&rnum=3&prev=/groups%3Fq%3Drec.autos.simulators%2BDavid% > >2BG%2BFisher%2BLFS%2B%2Bserver%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26selm%3Dak5d2 > > e%2524aqn%25241%2540news.doit.wisc.edu%26rnum%3D3 > > > > Gerry could of joined in and raced in any of those LFS races in the days > > immediately after the LFS beta was released. He was pissing at melooooong > > before then. I joined some LFS servers > > called "GPL Nutters" actually. Never saw him. Would of been a fair > > test......if that's what he actually wants. :-o > > Actually, Dave, I joined your very own LFS server, only for you to > immediately close it down and run away! That's complete and total bullshit. It was there every night for about a week. The times it would be up were announced here. The only time the server was shut down was when it was announced it would be after a long session had already been completed or, everyone's latency spiked through the roof. It was then set up again immediately. Ask George S., Mitch A., ymenard, Doug H., Andreas N. or anyone else that was there. If you signed on at all, it must of been under some fictious name. You're sounding like Mr. Powell now. David G Fisher

nathantw wrote:

Quoted text (13 lines)

> > I'm all for Microsoft buying Sierra/Papy, but unfortunately we'll be > forced to buy a XBOX in order to play any new sims that come from > them. Microsoft seems to have a tendency to try to put everything onto > their XBOX to create sales. I actually enjoyed NBA Inside Drive a lot > (basketball game) on the computer. So what did Microsoft do with their > next iteration? They put it exclusively on the XBOX. As you all know > the XBOX doesn't support USB steering wheels nor does it support force > feedback. I'm not sure how any of you would feel about driving GPL 2 > on an XBOX with their joypad? > > So on one hand it'll be great to put new life in Sierra/Papy, but on > the other hand we'll need to buy an XBOX to play anything new.

If Nigel Nichols can convert my RedLine pedals to work on the XboX I wouldn't mind, in fact it would save me a lot of money in PC upgrades every year :-) Beers and cheers (uncle) Goy http://www.theuspits.com "A man is only as old as the woman he feels........" --Groucho Marx--

Ruud Dingemans wrote: > > Goy, they really wouldn't *care* about Papyrus, as a part of Vivendi. > They probably wouldn't even know what it is. They could care less if it > makes good or bad sims, as long as it makes them money. MS doesn't have to *care* about Papy, they just have to fund the next couple of sims to see if it's possible to make money from racing sims, if not, we've lost anyways > Some companies, like Apple or Papy, like to strive for good or even > excellent products while making ca$h at the same time. MS does not have > that frame of mind. It is, in other words, not product-oriented. MS is about making money, MS understands about making money, if MS were to give racing sims another shot it's because they believe it's money to be made from it, either directly or indirectly, if money can be made from racing sims our hobby has a future That's what matters to me, BG can be the devil reincarnate for all I care, he makes money from filling a need, if the need isn't there he creates it, if he can create a need for racing sims, he'll get my money, and other companies will most likely try to follow his example if they see it's possible to make money Beers and cheers (uncle) Goy http://www.theuspits.com "A man is only as old as the woman he feels........" --Groucho Marx--

"Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in news:S2DZ9.21407 $[email hidden]: > Gentlemen! You can't fight here! This is the war room! Dr. Strangelove?

On Tue, 28 Jan 2003 16:27:45 -0500, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote: >How about we pick a racing sim that I've worshipped for years, and Gerry >never plays? That works too. Really I don't care, I just hate when this drivel seeps into threads I'm actually interested in reading. No offense meant to either of you. Jason

On Tue, 28 Jan 2003 21:59:14 GMT, "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Gentlemen! You can't fight here! This is the war room! Steve, how many times have I told you guys that I don't want no horsing around on the airplane? Jason

On Sat, 25 Jan 2003 06:51:48 -0500, Steve Jones <[email hidden]> wrote: >If it happens this could mean good things for Papy's racing sims. > >http://www.gamepro.com/lofi/article.cfm?article_id=27923 Good things, like, only available on the XBox maybe? The one console without any force-feedback steering wheel support?

> Good things, like, only available on the XBox maybe? The one console > without any force-feedback steering wheel support? Not any more. Thrustmaster have just released a FF Xbox controller which looks very nice. Most upcoming racing games are intending to support FF.

Goy Larsen wrote: >>Goy, they really wouldn't *care* about Papyrus, as a part of Vivendi. > MS is about making money, MS understands about making money, if MS were > to give racing sims another shot it's because they believe it's money to > be made from it, either directly or indirectly, if money can be made > from racing sims our hobby has a future Yeah, but not the future we'd want to, in this case. Problem is, they'll most likely be interested in making money, no matter how crappy the sim. We, on the other hand, will be interested in good Papy sims, not bad ones. But given past experiences, there's a very good chance that's what we'll get. In other words, MS does not care about making good sims. Just money-making ones; and there's a profound difference - more Road Rash, anyone? Regards, Ruud

where can you get info on this ff wheel ? Redmist wrote:

Quoted text (8 lines)

>>Good things, like, only available on the XBox maybe? The one console >>without any force-feedback steering wheel support? > > > Not any more. Thrustmaster have just released a FF Xbox controller which > looks very nice. Most upcoming racing games are intending to support FF. > >

> where can you get info on this ff wheel ? I read about it here www.xboxworld.com.au

I'm only trying to tell everyone that I _am_ not fighting <g> Achim "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:S2DZ9.21407$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (14 lines)

> Gentlemen! You can't fight here! This is the war room! > > "Gerry Aitken" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > Joachim Trensz wrote: > > > > > > lol, yes, I don't seem to get it right, no matter what I try <g> > > > > That's what happens when you argue with someone who's made an art out of > > hypocrisy! > > > > Gerry > >

Hush! Don't make him come back ;-) Achim "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... ... > You're sounding like Mr. Powell now.

But of course! --Pres. Merkin Muffley "Ped Xing" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in news:S2DZ9.21407 > $[email hidden]: > > > Gentlemen! You can't fight here! This is the war room! > > Dr. Strangelove? >

If you read the p.r. carefully, you'll see that this is not anything like FF support - it is "vibrator" support, like the Xbox gamepads already have. Sheesh.... "Redmist" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:b17s80$10dfrb$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > where can you get info on this ff wheel ? > > I read about it here > > www.xboxworld.com.au > > >

It says it has force feedback. "Its new Force mechanism will optimize the force feedback effects generated by Xbox games." It gives you a choice as to what effects you want to use. "In fact, the gamer will have the possibility to choose between Force effects, vibration or no effect by turning the switch button." http://www.xboxworld.com.au/news/leading.php?idNews=190#1 David G Fisher "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:r3PZ9.47157$[email hidden]... > If you read the p.r. carefully, you'll see that this is not anything likeFF

Quoted text (15 lines)

> support - it is "vibrator" support, like the Xbox gamepads already have. > Sheesh.... > > "Redmist" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:b17s80$10dfrb$[email hidden]... > > > where can you get info on this ff wheel ? > > > > I read about it here > > > > www.xboxworld.com.au > > > > > > > >

On Wed, 29 Jan 2003 07:16:57 -0500, "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote: >"In fact, the gamer will have the possibility to choose between Force >effects, vibration or no effect by turning the switch button." Huh, I was under the impression that the MS hardware didn't support normal force feedback. If it does, CAN YOU PLEASE PUT OUT THE GOD DAMNED PRECISION WHEELS MR GATES, thanks. Pity the homemade USB-->Xbox adapters don't really work or the problem would be solved. It would be nice to play the good version of Thunder without the stability aid turned on. Jason

Considering no Xbox games generate any FF effects, where, exactly, would the FF efects be coming from? Or are you naiive enough to think that the developers are going to go back and reverse-engineer FF into Rallisport, Gotham Racing, etc.? Remember, in consoles, there are no patches.... "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > It says it has force feedback. > > "Its new Force mechanism will optimize the force feedback effectsgenerated

Quoted text (14 lines)

> by Xbox games." > > It gives you a choice as to what effects you want to use. > > "In fact, the gamer will have the possibility to choose between Force > effects, vibration or no effect by turning the switch button." > > http://www.xboxworld.com.au/news/leading.php?idNews=190#1 > > David G Fisher > > "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:r3PZ9.47157$[email hidden]... > > If you read the p.r. carefully, you'll see that this is not anything

like

Quoted text (18 lines)

> FF > > support - it is "vibrator" support, like the Xbox gamepads already have. > > Sheesh.... > > > > "Redmist" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:b17s80$10dfrb$[email hidden]... > > > > where can you get info on this ff wheel ? > > > > > > I read about it here > > > > > > www.xboxworld.com.au > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

There ain't none. At best, this might be considered "psuedo" FF for the proprioceptically-challenged. And considering FF has been so unsuccessful in the U.S. that Guillemot doesn't even bother importing the promising-looking Ferrari FF wheel for the PC, I wouldn't expect to see anything better for the Xbox than TM's execrable NASCAR Pro Victory wheel (a truly uselsss piece of h/w) on this side of the pond. "Jason Moyer" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (17 lines)

> On Wed, 29 Jan 2003 07:16:57 -0500, "David G Fisher" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >"In fact, the gamer will have the possibility to choose between Force > >effects, vibration or no effect by turning the switch button." > > Huh, I was under the impression that the MS hardware didn't support > normal force feedback. > > If it does, CAN YOU PLEASE PUT OUT THE GOD DAMNED PRECISION WHEELS MR > GATES, thanks. > > Pity the homemade USB-->Xbox adapters don't really work or the problem > would be solved. It would be nice to play the good version of Thunder > without the stability aid turned on. > > Jason

On Wed, 29 Jan 2003 13:03:20 GMT, "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Considering no Xbox games generate any FF effects, where, exactly, would the >FF efects be coming from? Or are you naiive enough to think that the >developers are going to go back and reverse-engineer FF into Rallisport, >Gotham Racing, etc.? Remember, in consoles, there are no patches.... Unless it's the xbox. =) Of course, you're right. Jason

Hoss > > Don't be ridiculous. MS makes Wondows, they have various gaming > hardware products avaialble for the PC too. Given that, why the hell > would they stop making games for Windows? Longterm? Because they only get a portion of your money when you buy a computer. MS has to taylor Windows to work with 1000's of psuedo partners(the computer manufactuers) If they integrate much of the computer into the Xbox's future releases, they can control more and more of the overall purchase. By making the middlemen irrelevant, they eliminate another source of cash drainage and competition. I'm not saying it will happen soon, but just wait till the Xbox is running the cable programs and controlling the Big Screen tv's etc. dave henrie

You know, I've read that they are marketing more towards females now... ;o ;D db "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:r3PZ9.47157$[email hidden]... > If you read the p.r. carefully, you'll see that this is not anything likeFF > support - it is "vibrator" support, like the Xbox gamepads already have. > Sheesh.... >

Hoss wrote:

Quoted text (10 lines)

> On Wed, 29 Jan 2003 06:56:46 +0100, Ruud Dingemans <[email hidden]> > reckoned: > > >>- more Road Rash, >>anyone? > > > Sure, that would explain why they publish games like Flightsim and > Trainsim. Your hatred of MS is blinding you to the truth.

With FS2002 you have a point. But Train Simulator is buggy as hell. It's only saving grace is it's the only one in it's genre at present. Which further proves the point that a title don't have to be good, just make plenty of $$$. -- Fester Don't take life too seriously, you won't get out alive.

The hell of it is that game boxes offer the best chance to "get force feedback right". My reasoning is as follows: With the closed architecture of a game box it's possible to give programmers access to the external hardware without any intermediate "layers" of APIs, and thus REDUCE THE LATENCY so that FF could really work properly. As discussed in a thread a few months ago, the simulated car frequency response might be 5 Hz (F1 car), so the motor on the FF wheel needs to be fed good data at (at least) 50Hz...and this means that to get things correct, the car physics model has to be feeding the servo loop for the motor at ~500Hz updates. 1000Hz would be better, and based on experience (with arcade games) would feel better too. In the Windows environment, there is such a proliferation of hardware that I suppose some kind of API scheme is the only way to keep the OS even a little bit stable (but I really don't know anything about that). If you can find one, go play an Atari Hard Drivin or Race Drivin, that is how good FF can be. I've not tried a home wheel yet that was even close. (Thanks again to Steve for letting me try your setup -- best home setup I've tried so far). -- Doug Milliken www.millikenresearch.com On Wed, 29 Jan 2003, Steve Smith wrote:

Quoted text (8 lines)

> There ain't none. At best, this might be considered "psuedo" FF for the > proprioceptically-challenged. > > And considering FF has been so unsuccessful in the U.S. that Guillemot > doesn't even bother importing the promising-looking Ferrari FF wheel for the > PC, I wouldn't expect to see anything better for the Xbox than TM's > execrable NASCAR Pro Victory wheel (a truly uselsss piece of h/w) on this > side of the pond.

.........

Uncle Fester wrote: > > With FS2002 you have a point. But Train Simulator is buggy as hell. > It's only saving grace is it's the only one in it's genre at present. > Which further proves the point that a title don't have to be good, just > make plenty of $$$. Yes, but which company had the balls to give it a shot at least ? The same good be said for tons of other products as well, and look at the FPS genre, it's so crowded in there they can sell just about anything as the customers can't keep track of the products, Iron Storm anyone ? FSxxxx is a decent sim according to people I know who cares about FS, Age of xxxx is a decent RTS, especially in multiplayer, according to me :-), just because it says MS on the box doesn't automatically make it bad I can't believe I'm the one defending MS on this issue, I hate MS on principle because they're Capitalism reincarnated into one company, but that doesn't mean I'm blind to the possibilities, and until we've had a proper world wide revolution and distributed their wealth to the needy, I'll buy their products as long as they're good and they fill my needs Beers and cheers (uncle) Goy http://www.theuspits.com "A man is only as old as the woman he feels........" --Groucho Marx--

Joachim Trensz wrote: > > Hush! Don't make him come back ;-) You have to say his name three times, apparently. :)

FS2002 is okay...for the sim FS2001 shoulda been in the first place...but CFS3 sure ain't. Talk abt. buggy as hell.... "Uncle Fester" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (25 lines)

> Hoss wrote: > > On Wed, 29 Jan 2003 06:56:46 +0100, Ruud Dingemans <[email hidden]> > > reckoned: > > > > > >>- more Road Rash, > >>anyone? > > > > > > Sure, that would explain why they publish games like Flightsim and > > Trainsim. Your hatred of MS is blinding you to the truth. > > > With FS2002 you have a point. But Train Simulator is buggy as hell. > It's only saving grace is it's the only one in it's genre at present. > Which further proves the point that a title don't have to be good, just > make plenty of $$$. > > > -- > > Fester > > Don't take life too seriously, you won't get out alive. >

The PS2 FF is fine. "Doug Milliken" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (34 lines)

> > The hell of it is that game boxes offer the best chance to > "get force feedback right". My reasoning is as follows: > > With the closed architecture of a game box it's possible to give > programmers access to the external hardware without any intermediate > "layers" of APIs, and thus REDUCE THE LATENCY so that FF could really work > properly. As discussed in a thread a few months ago, the simulated car > frequency response might be 5 Hz (F1 car), so the motor on the FF wheel > needs to be fed good data at (at least) 50Hz...and this means that to get > things correct, the car physics model has to be feeding the servo loop for > the motor at ~500Hz updates. 1000Hz would be better, and based on > experience (with arcade games) would feel better too. > > In the Windows environment, there is such a proliferation of hardware that > I suppose some kind of API scheme is the only way to keep the OS even a > little bit stable (but I really don't know anything about that). > > If you can find one, go play an Atari Hard Drivin or Race Drivin, that is > how good FF can be. I've not tried a home wheel yet that was even close. > (Thanks again to Steve for letting me try your setup -- best home setup > I've tried so far). > > -- Doug Milliken > www.millikenresearch.com > > > On Wed, 29 Jan 2003, Steve Smith wrote: > > > There ain't none. At best, this might be considered "psuedo" FF for the > > proprioceptically-challenged. > > > > And considering FF has been so unsuccessful in the U.S. that Guillemot > > doesn't even bother importing the promising-looking Ferrari FF wheel for

the > > PC, I wouldn't expect to see anything better for the Xbox than TM's > > execrable NASCAR Pro Victory wheel (a truly uselsss piece of h/w) onthis > > side of the pond. > > > ......... >

And it could mean the end of everything we treasure. I don't like it. Larry "Steve Jones" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > If it happens this could mean good things for Papy's racing sims. > > http://www.gamepro.com/lofi/article.cfm?article_id=27923

Maybe she forgot to "Activate" it ? Larry "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:V6DY9.8164$[email hidden]... > The Ultimate Microsoft Anecdote is what they've done to sales of the newBMW > 7-Series. My jaw dropped when I heard BMW boasting that the GUI in thenext > 7-Series would be "powered by" Windows. Now the votes are in: everybody > hates it - the critics, the owners - everybody. Not only is it impossible > to decipher, it has a learning curve steeper than the North Face. Andonce > you think you've got it handled, it exhibits all the horrors we FDUs have > hated it for since the previous century. One woman complained the > (alledgedly) voice-controlled radio would come on for no reason, at top > volume. The only way it could be turned off was to pull over, turn offthe > ignition, wait 10 seconds, then restart the car. I don't want thesepeople > making my operating system, I don't want them mucking about with my car,and

Quoted text (11 lines)

> I sure as hell don't want them messing with my simulations! > > "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > MS has put out a lot of excellent racing games. > > > > David G Fisher > > > > "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:ZTvY9.4849$[email hidden]... > > > Erm, Steve - why exactly would that mean "good things" for racing

sims?

Quoted text (13 lines)

> > > CART Precision Racing, anyone? > > > > > > "Steve Jones" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > news:[email hidden]... > > > > If it happens this could mean good things for Papy's racing sims. > > > > > > > > http://www.gamepro.com/lofi/article.cfm?article_id=27923 > > > > > > > > > > > >

> Considering no Xbox games generate any FF effects, where, exactly, wouldthe > FF efects be coming from? Or are you naiive enough to think that the > developers are going to go back and reverse-engineer FF into Rallisport, > Gotham Racing, etc.? Remember, in consoles, there are no patches.... Well, they're releasing a patch for Unreal Championship via Xbox Live....

Hmmm, true enuf, Johnny, but there are no online racing games for the Xbox yet, are there? Pro Race Driver was to have been the first. Now it looks like Midtown Madness 3 will be the first online *driving* game, but with its free-form format (no defines circuits) it could hardly be called a racing game. At any rate, it's too far down the pike to be considered for a FF retro-upgrade, and I don't know of any other driving games in the pipeline that might benefit. Gran Turismo 4, OTOH.... "Redmist" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:b19jid$10v6r3$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > Considering no Xbox games generate any FF effects, where, exactly, would > the > > FF efects be coming from? Or are you naiive enough to think that the > > developers are going to go back and reverse-engineer FF into Rallisport, > > Gotham Racing, etc.? Remember, in consoles, there are no patches.... > > Well, they're releasing a patch for Unreal Championship via Xbox Live.... > >

Bottom-lime time: when as and if MS buys Vivendi's gaming assets, they could as easily shutter Papy altogether as task them with designing the world's best road-racing simulation. If you were Bill Gates...well, *you* make the call. "Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:HpXZ9.53834$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (13 lines)

> And it could mean the end of everything we treasure. > > I don't like it. > > Larry > > "Steve Jones" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > If it happens this could mean good things for Papy's racing sims. > > > > http://www.gamepro.com/lofi/article.cfm?article_id=27923 > >

"Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in news:g9_Z9.53739$[email hidden]: > Bottom-lime time: when as and if MS buys Vivendi's gaming assets, they > could as easily shutter Papy altogether as task them with designing > the world's best road-racing simulation. If you were Bill > Gates...well, *you* make the call. I wouldn't even bet Bill would be informed IF MS bought Vivendi's games. Too small to register. :) Whose in charge of the Xbox division? dave henrie

Steve Smith wrote: > FS2002 is okay...for the sim FS2001 shoulda been in the first place...but > CFS3 sure ain't. Talk abt. buggy as hell.... Agreed. :-) -- Fester Annoy the IRS: Fill out your tax form using binary

Goy Larsen wrote:

Quoted text (10 lines)

> > Uncle Fester wrote: > >>With FS2002 you have a point. But Train Simulator is buggy as hell. >>It's only saving grace is it's the only one in it's genre at present. >>Which further proves the point that a title don't have to be good, just >>make plenty of $$$. > > > Yes, but which company had the balls to give it a shot at least ?

I'll give them credit for that. However Hoss seemed to be implying that finding fault in any M$ product showed one was blinded by hatred of M$. That was the context of my reply & I stand by it. > I can't believe I'm the one defending MS on this issue, I hate MS on > principle because they're Capitalism reincarnated into one company... SNIP Face it. You're getting old & soft Goy. :-) -- Fester If one synchronized swimmer drowns, do the rest have to drown too?

Hoss wrote: > Sure, that would explain why they publish games like Flightsim and > Trainsim. Your hatred of MS is blinding you to the truth. The truth? Yours or mine? There is no such thing as 'the one truth', there are only approximations of truth, imho. I don't 'hate' Microsoft, I don't even claim all of their products are all bad, I just really really don't like their business model, it's dangerous and we should be on our guard wherever it rears its ugly head. Regards, Ruud "Ceterum censeo Microsoftem esse delendam"

Or didn't realize the "Shut Down" command is in the "Start" menu. "Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:UqXZ9.53836$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (12 lines)

> Maybe she forgot to "Activate" it ? > > Larry > > "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:V6DY9.8164$[email hidden]... > > The Ultimate Microsoft Anecdote is what they've done to sales of the new > BMW > > 7-Series. My jaw dropped when I heard BMW boasting that the GUI in the > next > > 7-Series would be "powered by" Windows. Now the votes are in: everybody > > hates it - the critics, the owners - everybody. Not only is it

impossible > > to decipher, it has a learning curve steeper than the North Face. And > once > > you think you've got it handled, it exhibits all the horrors we FDUshave

Quoted text (35 lines)

> > hated it for since the previous century. One woman complained the > > (alledgedly) voice-controlled radio would come on for no reason, at top > > volume. The only way it could be turned off was to pull over, turn off > the > > ignition, wait 10 seconds, then restart the car. I don't want these > people > > making my operating system, I don't want them mucking about with my car, > and > > I sure as hell don't want them messing with my simulations! > > > > "David G Fisher" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:[email hidden]... > > > MS has put out a lot of excellent racing games. > > > > > > David G Fisher > > > > > > "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > news:ZTvY9.4849$[email hidden]... > > > > Erm, Steve - why exactly would that mean "good things" for racing > sims? > > > > CART Precision Racing, anyone? > > > > > > > > "Steve Jones" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > > > news:[email hidden]... > > > > > If it happens this could mean good things for Papy's racing sims. > > > > > > > > > > http://www.gamepro.com/lofi/article.cfm?article_id=27923 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

Strategy First issued a patch within weeks of SF's release. We're still waiting for the CFS3 patch (never mind the TS patch!). And if European Air War (Strike Fighters' progenitor) is any indication, it'll eventually be twice the game CFS3 is, thanks to the flight sim community (which barely supports the CFS series) and the SF's open architecture (an anathema to MS). Of course, I could be wrong...NOT! "Hoss" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (13 lines)

> On Wed, 29 Jan 2003 20:34:50 GMT, "Steve Smith" > <[email hidden]> reckoned: > > >FS2002 is okay...for the sim FS2001 shoulda been in the first place...but > >CFS3 sure ain't. Talk abt. buggy as hell.... > > It has it's fans still, lots of them in fact, of which I am not one. > But there will be a patch released soon so I may become one yet. > I bought Strike Fighters at around the same time as CFS3 and I find > that far more disappointing than CFS3 and it's not a MS product, as a > comparison. > -- > "Paw, I'm powerful hungry!"

Ruud, <<Ceterum censeo Microsoftem esse delendam>> Okay, I'll bite: translation please. --Steve "Ruud Dingemans" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:b1ag9f$q0i$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (17 lines)

> Hoss wrote: > > > Sure, that would explain why they publish games like Flightsim and > > Trainsim. Your hatred of MS is blinding you to the truth. > > > The truth? Yours or mine? There is no such thing as 'the one truth', > there are only approximations of truth, imho. > > I don't 'hate' Microsoft, I don't even claim all of their products are > all bad, I just really really don't like their business model, it's > dangerous and we should be on our guard wherever it rears its ugly head. > > Regards, Ruud > > "Ceterum censeo Microsoftem esse delendam" >

Hoss wrote:

Quoted text (17 lines)

> On Wed, 29 Jan 2003 10:55:11 -0500, Uncle Fester > <[email hidden]> reckoned: > > > >>With FS2002 you have a point. But Train Simulator is buggy as hell. >>It's only saving grace is it's the only one in it's genre at present. >>Which further proves the point that a title don't have to be good, just >>make plenty of $$$. > > > It's not the only one of it's genre. There are a number of trainsims > on the market. In fact I have one right here called Trainz. And just > how buggy is it? I've never noticed any glaring bugs and it has many > fans. The fact is that it is a niche product and MS was wiling to > bring it to market which proves they are not interested in doing just > arcade games as was implied by the other poster.

Trainz *is* a different genre. It is a model train simulation whereas MSTS is a "real world" train simulation. Hang out on the development forums at Trainsim.com & you'll find out just how buggy it is. It still has a lot of followers however. -- Fester at least I thought I was dancing, 'til somebody stepped on my hand.

On Wed, 29 Jan 2003 08:13:07 -0500, Hoss wrote: > Bollocks. MS also makes Windows for PC's. Or haven't you noticed yet? Bollocks yourself. They own the freaking PC market, haven't you noticed? This is not true of the console market yet, but just you wait... 8-P HAND, uwe -- mail replies to Uwe at schuerkamp dot de ( yahoo address is spambox) Uwe Schuerkamp //////////////////////////// http://www.schuerkamp.de/ Herford, Germany \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ (52.0N/8.5E) GPG Fingerprint: 2E 13 20 22 9A 3F 63 7F 67 6F E9 B1 A8 36 A4 61

And anyway, Microsoft must be destroyed :) (choice of words modernized <g>) Achim "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:Nm8_9.822$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> Ruud, > > <<Ceterum censeo Microsoftem esse delendam>> > > Okay, I'll bite: translation please. > > --Steve

On Thu, 30 Jan 2003 11:51:21 GMT, "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Strategy First issued a patch within weeks of SF's release. We're still >waiting for the CFS3 patch (never mind the TS patch!). And if European Air >War (Strike Fighters' progenitor) is any indication, it'll eventually be >twice the game CFS3 is, thanks to the flight sim community (which barely >supports the CFS series) and the SF's open architecture (an anathema to MS). >Of course, I could be wrong...NOT! I dunno, I bought the Wal-Mart version and it still kicked ass. It wasn't IL-2, but I'm much more of a fan of Korea and early Vietnam (planes are more fun to fly than most WWII-era stuff but dogfighting is still an actual skill). The flight models aren't bad, the weapons systems are awesome, the AI is decent, etc. Not a bad $40 spent by my standards. CSF 2 and 3 don't interest me even a tiny bit. I bought CSF and it was one of the few sims I just could not get into. What I'd really like is Mig Alley 2, but I guess we can't all have our dreams. Mig Alley is still the only flight sim I constantly find myself drawn back to (that and Freespace 1/2, but they hardly count =). Jason

On Thu, 30 Jan 2003 04:38:34 -0500, Hoss <[email hidden]> wrote: >Well, it's possible, but I don't think it will happen that way. Sure >there will be more games avaialble from MS for the XBox but they also >know there are those of use that will not buy any console and they can >make a profit from us too by making PC games too. I dunno, I was just browsing the PC section at EB (while buying some Xbox games) and realized that the last 2 remotely notable games that have come out are NOLF2 and Arx Fatalis. And they've both been out for over 3 months now. Of course, that might be why the local EB took the PC selection and squished it into a little corner in the back of the store to make room for PS2/Xbox stuff. I also went to Best Buy (to buy some more xbox games) and found it kinda funny that the PC section was stocked 1 row deep as if they didn't have enough product to display. Jason

On Wed, 29 Jan 2003 08:13:07 -0500, Hoss <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (8 lines)

>On 28 Jan 2003 12:45:54 -0800, [email hidden] (nathantw) >reckoned: > >>I'm all for Microsoft buying Sierra/Papy, but unfortunately we'll be >>forced to buy a XBOX in order to play any new sims that come from >>them. > >Bollocks. MS also makes Windows for PC's. Or haven't you noticed yet?

But M$ doesn't *make PCs*. How much does an XBOX cost, and how much does Windows cost? Not to mention the upgradability of PCs... -- __________ ____---____ Marco Antonio Checa Funcke \_________D /-/---_----' Santiago de Surco, Lima, Peru _H__/_/ http://machf.tripod.com '-_____|( remove the "no_me_j." and "sons.of." parts before replying

Hoss wrote: >>I don't 'hate' Microsoft, I don't even claim all of their products are >>all bad, I just really really don't like their business model, it's >>dangerous and we should be on our guard wherever it rears its ugly head. > I don't like it either, but I don't see anyone bashing Apple for being > even more monopolistic. Oh, you've just found the right guy to talk to - an Apple user :) And yes, you're wrong - there are plenty of Mac users who know darn well how monopolistic Apple is in its own little world. We know, we use the stuff, ... and still, it's still better than being governed by Microsoft. > dislike Apple even more because they resort to stupid ads that lie and > bash PC's. Um, putting a tall and a small guy together is lying? ;) Oh, and pc's deserve every bashing they get, for being unoriginal boring clones of one of the same design (not even a very good one). (I'm from the era where with Tandy, Apple, Commodore, MSX, Acorn and Philips systems we still actually had several different computers to choose from, not just Wintel x86 clone stuff, and there is a difference. It's sad to see a pc world full of clones nowadays and not much else.) Regards, Ruud

Steve Smith wrote: > <<Ceterum censeo Microsoftem esse delendam>> > > Okay, I'll bite: translation please. Just Google it up Steve, this quote is so old it's actually from way before the Middle Ages ;) Regards, Ruud

On Thu, 30 Jan 2003 23:22:12 -0500, Hoss <[email hidden]> wrote: >Well, what are you complaining for? You just said you went there to >buy some more XBox games. People like you are to blame for the demise >of PC gaming. Enjoy your candy ass arcade XBox games though. Er, yeah, Splinter Cell and Panzer Dragoon are pretty candy ass, as are all 3 of the xbox-versions of the Tony Hawk series. Halo is pretty crap as are NFL/NHL/NBA 2k3. And don't get me started on Fatal Frame, what a crap game that was...there are tons of better horror games on the PC. And really, it's a good thing Jet Set Radio never came out for the PC because it's so horrible. I've sunk thousands of dollars into computer gaming in the past 20 years. I'm the last person who wants to the see PC gaming die, especially when I'm trying to justify spending $2000 on a new PC to be used strictly for gaming so I can relegate my current system to my recording studio. I mean come on, my Ti4400 alone was $300. My x-box was $200 and came with one of my all-time favorite games (JSRF). I bought a high-quality 20" flat screen TV for my x-box/dreamcast for about $140. I don't even want to consider what that's going to get me in terms of monitors. I'm seriously considering buying a PS2 and Gamecube instead of new PC hardware because it will cost me far far less money and I know I'll be able to get good games for both systems. For what a new PC and high-quality 20" monitor would cost, you can buy all 3 major consoles and a 30" HDTV. That is sick. There has been so little of value coming out for the PC that it's genuinely sad. There are basically 3 games I can think of right now that I'm looking forward to, N2002/Deus Ex2/Thief 3 and I wouldn't be surprised if the latter of those didn't comt out until Christmas 2004. Besides all of that, Tiger Woods 2003 is the only good non-text sports game that has come out on the PC since PGA 2000 (and Front Page Sports Baseball 98 before that). I love racing, but I also love baseball/football/basketball/hockey, and the only decent action renditions of those sports are console only. All of that said, I would certainly welcome more conole games being released on the PC. I would love a PC Jet Set Radio game, any kind of racing game with a rewarding career mode (how consoles have the monopoly here is beyond me), PC versions of the Sega Sports series, a PC Panzer Dragoon game, etc. PC games don't sell now quite simply because most of them suck. I'd give my left leg for a good PC game that actually took full advantage of the Geforce 4 and DX8 (not to mention the FX or 9700 and DX9) but apparently it's not happening. Until something changes, I guess it will be another year of playing GPL, N2003, the Simbin mods, Out of the Park 5, Civ 3, and Thief/Deus Ex/NOLF over and over. I'll also buy the 2 or 3 titles of value that PC publishers decide to release this year, assuming any stores decide to stock them. Jason

On Fri, 31 Jan 2003 05:12:25 +0100, Ruud Dingemans <[email hidden]> wrote: >(I'm from the era where with Tandy, Apple, Commodore, MSX, Acorn and >Philips systems we still actually had several different computers to >choose from, not just Wintel x86 clone stuff, and there is a difference. >It's sad to see a pc world full of clones nowadays and not much else.) Ugh. Making me sad and nostalgic here. =( Time to dig out the ti99 and see if it still works... Jason

Of course I'm on drugs! Isn't everybody? Sheesh! "Hoss" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Thu, 30 Jan 2003 17:52:14 GMT, [email hidden] (Jason Moyer) > reckoned: > > >thanks to the flight sim community (which barely > >>supports the CFS series) and the SF's open architecture (an anathema toMS).

Quoted text (43 lines)

> >>Of course, I could be wrong...NOT! > > <this part is to Steve, something I missed in my first response> > > Doesn't support CFS series? Huh? Are you on drugs or what? CFS series > is just as open architecture as the Flight sim series is, same can be > said for Trainsim. There are many mods and planes available for even > CFS3 already. Really, if you are going to dsicsuss this stuff at least > go read something about it first. > > >I dunno, I bought the Wal-Mart version and it still kicked ass. > > Another loser on drugs. It was an abomination of a release, the > second so called final release was an abomination too. It was released > with no sams or aaa on the second release and the Walmart release was > even worse so how can you possibly say the above with a straight face? > Go smoke some more crack! The theatre was pretty much dead and the > pathetic dynamic campaign just spawns the enemy at random. The AI > planes crash into the ground when they run out of fuel instead of > flying home. Doh! And that's now, not the Walmart release. In the > second release you couldn't even land you planes properly because they > would bounce all over ther place like the tarmac was made of indian > rubber. They just released a patch last week so and the game came out > about two months ago. The Walmart release doesn't count as it was not > the official release and should never have happened. It was one of the > most pathetic and unfinished releases this industry has ever seen. The > game is still full of bugs post patch, and that includes crash bugs. > > > It > >wasn't IL-2, but I'm much more of a fan of Korea and early Vietnam > >(planes are more fun to fly than most WWII-era stuff but dogfighting > >is still an actual skill). The flight models aren't bad, the weapons > >systems are awesome, the AI is decent, etc. Not a bad $40 spent by my > >standards. > > Yea, that's why the AI have been known to fire A to A missiles at > ground targets. You think being able to sink a cargo tanker with one > bullet from your cannon is realistic? It ain't even fun. Get off the > drugs now! > > > -- > "Paw, I'm powerful hungry!"

Agreed: Mig Alley had astonishingly good AI, giving it "legs" like GPL. IL-2 will have a similarly long life. "Jason Moyer" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Thu, 30 Jan 2003 11:51:21 GMT, "Steve Smith" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >Strategy First issued a patch within weeks of SF's release. We're still > >waiting for the CFS3 patch (never mind the TS patch!). And if EuropeanAir > >War (Strike Fighters' progenitor) is any indication, it'll eventually be > >twice the game CFS3 is, thanks to the flight sim community (which barely > >supports the CFS series) and the SF's open architecture (an anathema toMS).

Quoted text (18 lines)

> >Of course, I could be wrong...NOT! > > I dunno, I bought the Wal-Mart version and it still kicked ass. It > wasn't IL-2, but I'm much more of a fan of Korea and early Vietnam > (planes are more fun to fly than most WWII-era stuff but dogfighting > is still an actual skill). The flight models aren't bad, the weapons > systems are awesome, the AI is decent, etc. Not a bad $40 spent by my > standards. > > CSF 2 and 3 don't interest me even a tiny bit. I bought CSF and it > was one of the few sims I just could not get into. > > What I'd really like is Mig Alley 2, but I guess we can't all have our > dreams. Mig Alley is still the only flight sim I constantly find > myself drawn back to (that and Freespace 1/2, but they hardly count > =). > > Jason

Hoss <[email hidden]> writes:

Quoted text (10 lines)

> On Fri, 31 Jan 2003 05:21:26 GMT, [email hidden] (Jason Moyer) > reckoned: > > > >Er, yeah, Splinter Cell > > Er, Splinter Cell is a PC game too. In fact that whole series from Red > Storm started on PC's and is where it really shines. And I bet they > play a lot better using a mouse and keboard than using one of those > candyass gamepads.

not splinter cell. sc is a 3rd person Metal Gear-ish thing, but you probably knew that. anyway, gamepads are the way to go for 3rd person stuff, imho. > And I'm not interesrted in games like Tony Hawk. > Now if you had said Uncommon Valor or Falcon 4.0 I might have pricked > my ears up. Falcon 4.0! SP4 should be out in about two weeks too. :) -- Gunnar Cougar#02748 #31 SUCKS#015 Tupperware MC#002 DoD#0x1B DoDRT#003 DoD:CT#4,8 Kibo�: 2 "a poster is a human being or the software equivalent"

And the average street car can do 200mph, if pushed over a cliff. In other words, totally useless in reality. I saw this guy on TechTV's TSS. It took this guy over a year of massaging and research to accomplish this. Larry "Hoss" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Fri, 31 Jan 2003 05:12:25 +0100, Ruud Dingemans <[email hidden]> > reckoned: I saw an article recently where an 18 year old guy was running 34 different OS's on one PC !

On Fri, 31 Jan 2003 12:14:26 GMT, "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Agreed: Mig Alley had astonishingly good AI, giving it "legs" like GPL. >IL-2 will have a similarly long life. That and the dynamic campaign, which I'm really looking forward to in the follow-up to IL-2. Mig Alley was also the first sim I played that really captured the chaos of a huge air war. Jason

"Larry" wrote... > And the average street car can do 200mph, if pushed over a cliff. > > In other words, totally useless in reality. > > I saw this guy on TechTV's TSS. It took this guy over a year of > massaging and research to accomplish this. Massaging? Jan. =---

EAW did it for me. I'd written a book abt. flight sims and the air battles in WW II that had inspired them. They'd had 1,000-bomber raids (with 800 bombers sent off in another direction as a feint), with an escort of 600 fighters, and 400 Jerry fighters would rise up to meet them. EAW was the first sim where the sky was full of planes, contrails, and smoke. I still love it for that. [Speaking of which, SF didn't get the F4 quite right. Phantoms were famous for leaving a trail of smoke across the sky...so much so that the North Vietnamese air defenses didn't need radar to track them. (Likewise, the NVA always knew--on the few occasion when we used it--that armour was coming, because our tanks spewed columns of smoke that could be seen miles away.)] "Jason Moyer" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (13 lines)

> On Fri, 31 Jan 2003 12:14:26 GMT, "Steve Smith" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >Agreed: Mig Alley had astonishingly good AI, giving it "legs" like GPL. > >IL-2 will have a similarly long life. > > That and the dynamic campaign, which I'm really looking forward to in > the follow-up to IL-2. > > Mig Alley was also the first sim I played that really captured the > chaos of a huge air war. > > Jason

Or if launched from the steam catapult of the U.S.S. Theodore Roosevelt. Your point being...? "Larry" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:fyw_9.69697$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (15 lines)

> And the average street car can do 200mph, if pushed over a cliff. > > In other words, totally useless in reality. > > I saw this guy on TechTV's TSS. It took this guy over a year of massaging > and research to accomplish this. > > Larry > > "Hoss" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > On Fri, 31 Jan 2003 05:12:25 +0100, Ruud Dingemans <[email hidden]> > > reckoned: > > I saw an article recently where an 18 year old guy was running 34

different > OS's on one PC ! > >

Not exactly. Google returned only 29 unique useages, seemingly all contributed by one Erik Corry as part of his signature. I'll just chalk it up to "Microsofties Must Die!" "Ruud Dingemans" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:b1cste$63t$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (11 lines)

> Steve Smith wrote: > > > <<Ceterum censeo Microsoftem esse delendam>> > > > > Okay, I'll bite: translation please. > > Just Google it up Steve, this quote is so old it's actually from way > before the Middle Ages ;) > > Regards, Ruud >

On Thu, 30 Jan 2003 23:17:24 -0500, Hoss wrote: > On Thu, 30 Jan 2003 13:45:29 +0100, Uwe hoover Schuerkamp > > OK, let me make myself even clearer. You're a fucking idiot if you > think MS is going to force everyone to buy the Xbox and completely > abandon PC gaming. The sky is falling, the sky is falling! They won't abandon PC gaming while it makes them a buck or two, but man, would they love to own the console market, too! Not just a mere couple of %, no, they weren't MS if they would settle for anything less than 99%. Good thing is will be coming to an end sooner than later. Also, your elaborate choice of words is impressive. Have fun down there. Regards, uwe <plonk> -- mail replies to Uwe at schuerkamp dot de ( yahoo address is spambox) Uwe Schuerkamp //////////////////////////// http://www.schuerkamp.de/ Herford, Germany \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ (52.0N/8.5E) GPG Fingerprint: 2E 13 20 22 9A 3F 63 7F 67 6F E9 B1 A8 36 A4 61

On Fri, 31 Jan 2003 12:52:43 -0500, Dalek <[email hidden]> wrote: ><shrug> I saw the name Tom Clancy in the title and thought it was >something like Rainbow Six. Splinter Cell is basically Thief 1 and 2 set in an NSA environment. Unfortunately it's third person. I kinda wish they had added a first person view to the PC version but it would destroy some of the crucial game elements I guess (firing a gun is realistically awkward, for instance). Jason

Uncle Fester wrote: > > Face it. You're getting old & soft Goy. :-) Old(er) yes, softer no....:-) Beers and cheers (uncle) Goy http://www.theuspits.com "A man is only as old as the woman he feels........" --Groucho Marx--

On Fri, 31 Jan 2003 16:59:24 -0500, Dalek <[email hidden]> wrote: >Yea, I went and read up on it. Maybe I'll download the demo and see >what it's like. Looks interesting from what I read. If the PC version is as good as the xbox version, it's an awesome game. I'm guessing it's going to use the same engine with mouselook and standard PC FPS controls, so it should be nice. It's the first game I've played in awhile where a 5 hour session of playing felt like 30 minutes. The plot/gameplay is really quite nice, I just wish it was first-person. There are places where you really just stop for awhile and try to wrap your head around what's going on. Jason

On Wed, 29 Jan 2003 15:40:57 +1000, "Redmist" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Not any more. Thrustmaster have just released a FF Xbox controller which >looks very nice. Hmmm, tricky since the console has no FF API! Not that I'm doubting it, I'm just wonfering how they'll do it?

On Wed, 29 Jan 2003 11:39:03 GMT, "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote: >If you read the p.r. carefully, you'll see that this is not anything like FF >support - it is "vibrator" support, like the Xbox gamepads already have. Ah, that makes more sense ... I sit about ten feet away from our FF console coder (all three consoles) and he insists that there is no FF api on the XBox at all, only rumble.

On Wed, 29 Jan 2003 08:19:57 -0500, Hoss <[email hidden]> wrote: >Don't be ridiculous. MS makes Wondows, they have various gaming >hardware products avaialble for the PC too. Given that, why the hell >would they stop making games for Windows? Money. There's way more money in console games, especially for the console-maker. Microsoft knows that they need exclusive, marquee titles for the XBox to compete with Sony. This is not theory, it's how they already operate. Halo was to be a Mac and PC game. Microsoft bought Bungie so that they could have Halo exclusive to XBox. The paid $400 million for Rare for the same reason. Rumors are they're snooping around Valve for another exclusive big name game (Half Life). It would, in fact, be unprecendented and illogical for them to buy Papy for any reason *but* for another XBox exclusive.

Joe62 wrote: > > It would, in fact, be unprecendented and illogical for them to buy > Papy for any reason *but* for another XBox exclusive. Why ? Papy isn't a "name" to the general gaming audience, it's not like if a guy who has briefly tried a couple of Arcade racers on his XboX would go all ga ga if he saw the Papy name on a driving title, put the name Geoff Crammond on there and there's a least a chance he knows the name if has owned a PC in the past or at least browsed through the PC games section In most markets of the world, Papy's name and rep means absolutely nothing, to me the only reason for acquiring Papy would be for their knowledge and skills, a lot which would be wasted on a console unless that kind of cross platform programming is really easy to do..... Beers and cheers (uncle) Goy http://www.theuspits.com "A man is only as old as the woman he feels........" --Groucho Marx--

"Goy Larsen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > In most markets of the world, Papy's name and rep means absolutely > nothing, to me the only reason for acquiring Papy would be for their > knowledge and skills, a lot which would be wasted on a console unless > that kind of cross platform programming is really easy to do..... > Actually, I'm thinking that the only real reason to acquire Papyrus is because it comes with Sierra and Blizzard, almost as an afterthought. I imagine Microsoft has done extensive research as to what each division does and it's potential value, so I'm sure they know everything there is to know about Papyrus. But I doubt their plans for Papyrus are more than just a drop in the bucket in the grand scheme of things. From what I understand, you need completely different programmers for each platform. Which is why some games can be vastly different on different platforms. If what I've read is true, Papyrus has already hired console teams. I've never read anything as to whether they still have a full PC dev team intact or not. db

In article <b17q6v$c66$[email hidden]>, Ruud Dingemans <[email hidden]> writes: >In other words, MS does not care about making good sims. Just >money-making ones; and there's a profound difference - more Road Rash, >anyone? I thought Road Rash was quite enjoyable for its time... Eldred -- Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett GPLRank:-0.381 N2002 Rank:+17.59 Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] (Jason Moyer) writes: >Mig Alley was also the first sim I played that really captured the >chaos of a huge air war. You never played Battlehawks 1942, Their Finest Hour, or Secret Weapons of the Luftwaffe? Great games... Eldred -- Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett GPLRank:-0.381 N2002 Rank:+17.59 Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

In article <9Iy_9.11989$[email hidden]>, "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> writes:

Quoted text (17 lines)

>Not exactly. Google returned only 29 unique useages, seemingly all >contributed by one Erik Corry as part of his signature. I'll just chalk it >up to "Microsofties Must Die!" > >"Ruud Dingemans" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >news:b1cste$63t$[email hidden]... >> Steve Smith wrote: >> >> > <<Ceterum censeo Microsoftem esse delendam>> >> > >> > Okay, I'll bite: translation please. >> >> Just Google it up Steve, this quote is so old it's actually from way >> before the Middle Ages ;) >> >> Regards, Ruud >>

http://www.cromwell-intl.com/fun/latin.html Eldred -- Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett GPLRank:-0.381 N2002 Rank:+17.59 Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

In article <[email hidden]>, Goy Larsen <[email hidden]> writes: >> Erm, Steve - why exactly would that mean "good things" for racing sims? >> CART Precision Racing, anyone? > >Does the name MS Flight Simulator mean anything to you, or MS Train >Simulator ? Wait - Train Simulator is more than just a bad joke? I didn't realize anyone took it seriously... Eldred -- Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett GPLRank:-0.381 N2002 Rank:+17.59 Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

Update: the console racing-games story isn't in the March issue of MT. They PAID me for it, so I know they're gonna run it...eventually...but seeing as how it was originally written for the Christmas issue (I handed in the copy in September, before I had seen Sega GT 2002, for example), by the time it finally does appear, the information will be hopelessly out of date. Sorry. "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:S9QY9.12347$[email hidden]... > I also just finished a piece on the Xbox vs. the PS2 for Motor Trend > magazine: "Car Games for Car Guys." My conclusion: MS has nothing tooffer > car guys (I'm talking abt. real-world car guys, not arcade-sim jockeys). > Read it in the March issue (I think). I shudder to think how they might > handle another road-racing simulation. (BTW, I liked Monster TruckMadness > and was unhappy when they walked away from the franchise. I never thought > much of Midtown Madness, but MM3 for the Xbox sure looks purty. I liked > their offroad bike sim and wondered why they abandoned that, too. I'vehad

Quoted text (11 lines)

> MS Train Simulator for a year - it just lays there. I even thought CPR > showed some promise, but MS doesn't have any more commitment to what it > starts than Anna Nicole Smith...no relation.) > > "Goy Larsen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > > > > > Steve Smith wrote: > > > > > > Erm, Steve - why exactly would that mean "good things" for racing

sims?

Quoted text (34 lines)

> > > CART Precision Racing, anyone? > > > > Does the name MS Flight Simulator mean anything to you, or MS Train > > Simulator ? > > > > They have a huge and loyal following, even some former regulars from the > > sim racing scene has moved over to the trains, and guess what, they're > > highly moddable as well, in fact, they're just about everything we wish > > our racing sims could be, not to mention that MS knows how to sell > > stuff, meaning it would stand a chance to survive and evolve > > > > Online gaming....well, we have XboX live which I hear is pretty good and > > I've played more AOE and AOE2 on "The Zone" than I like to remember, > > CFSx works pretty well too I've been told > > > > I'm all for giving MS a shot at it, in fact, I can hardly see a downside > > to it, after all, all we've seen from Papy the last 4-5 years are Nascar > > sims and little to no support for 3rd party add on's, if they want to > > make a MS Race Car Simulator where you buy the main program and then buy > > all sorts of after market add on's later on....hang on, where have I > > heard that idea before > > > > Of course, this is all just MHO > > > > > > Beers and cheers > > (uncle) Goy > > > > http://www.theuspits.com > > > > "A man is only as old as the woman he feels........" > > --Groucho Marx-- > >

[email hidden] > > Wait - Train Simulator is more than just a bad joke? I didn't realize > anyone took it seriously... > > Eldred If it is to be taken seriously then it MUST have Vipers racing across the tracks just before you get to a crossing...right? dave henrie

On 01 Feb 2003 01:09:03 GMT, [email hidden] (EldredP) wrote:

Quoted text (9 lines)

>In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] (Jason >Moyer) writes: > >>Mig Alley was also the first sim I played that really captured the >>chaos of a huge air war. > >You never played Battlehawks 1942, Their Finest Hour, or Secret Weapons of the >Luftwaffe? Great games... >

Yep, great games. I still have them... I loved the B-17 and how you could switch positions throughout it. -- __________ ____---____ Marco Antonio Checa Funcke \_________D /-/---_----' Santiago de Surco, Lima, Peru _H__/_/ http://machf.tripod.com '-_____|( remove the "no_me_j." and "sons.of." parts before replying

Molto thankum, Eldred! "EldredP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > In article <9Iy_9.11989$[email hidden]>, "Steve Smith" > <[email hidden]> writes: > > >Not exactly. Google returned only 29 unique useages, seemingly all > >contributed by one Erik Corry as part of his signature. I'll just chalkit

Quoted text (25 lines)

> >up to "Microsofties Must Die!" > > > >"Ruud Dingemans" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > >news:b1cste$63t$[email hidden]... > >> Steve Smith wrote: > >> > >> > <<Ceterum censeo Microsoftem esse delendam>> > >> > > >> > Okay, I'll bite: translation please. > >> > >> Just Google it up Steve, this quote is so old it's actually from way > >> before the Middle Ages ;) > >> > >> Regards, Ruud > >> > > http://www.cromwell-intl.com/fun/latin.html > > Eldred > -- > Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett > GPLRank:-0.381 > N2002 Rank:+17.59 > > Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats

you > with experience... > Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

In article <[email hidden]>, Dave Henrie <[email hidden]> writes:

Quoted text (7 lines)

>> Wait - Train Simulator is more than just a bad joke? I didn't realize >> anyone took it seriously... >> >> Eldred > >If it is to be taken seriously then it MUST have Vipers racing across >the tracks just before you get to a crossing...right?

Yeah, but you have to stop if a Cadillac Escalade comes along. Don McCorkle

On Fri, 31 Jan 2003 12:13:10 GMT, Steve Smith wrote: > Of course I'm on drugs! Isn't everybody? Sheesh! > > "Hoss" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > [loads of junk not worth repeating here] ignore him, Steve, this guy must be some leftover from MS' latest "grassroots movement" campaign that they organized when they were still under fire from the DoJ. I bet he's enjoying it down there in my killfile with the likes of PAPA DOC ;-> Cheers, hoover -- mail replies to Uwe at schuerkamp dot de ( yahoo address is spambox) Uwe Schuerkamp //////////////////////////// http://www.schuerkamp.de/ Herford, Germany \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ (52.0N/8.5E) GPG Fingerprint: 2E 13 20 22 9A 3F 63 7F 67 6F E9 B1 A8 36 A4 61

Or it could mean we'll be racing on an X-Box. "Steve Jones" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > If it happens this could mean good things for Papy's racing sims. > > http://www.gamepro.com/lofi/article.cfm?article_id=27923

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

Quoted text (7 lines)

> On Sat, 01 Feb 2003 00:07:31 GMT, "Dave Boyle" > <[email hidden]> reckoned: > > > >Actually, I'm thinking that the only real reason to acquire Papyrus is > >because it comes with Sierra and Blizzard, almost as an afterthought. I > >imagine Microsoft has done extensive research as to what each division

does > >and it's potential value, so I'm sure they know everything there is toknow > >about Papyrus. But I doubt their plans for Papyrus are more than just adrop

Quoted text (7 lines)

> >in the bucket in the grand scheme of things. > > I doubt that. I bet they know everything about the history of Papyrus > and their racing sims. MS even produced wargames developed by Atomic > so why wouldn't they take a risk on a hardcore racing game? The fact > is they would. Not saying they will, but I have no problem believing > that they might.

Heheh, I'm probably one of the few people reading this message that happen to agree with what you wrote ;). All I was saying is that I highly doubt that Microsoft is going to pay (a reportedly) $2 Billion in cash for Vivendi Universal's Game Division just so they can get Papyrus to make a hardcore racing sim. If the deal happens, I really wouldn't be surprised at whatever happens to Papyrus. db

[email hidden] (

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > Yeah, but you have to stop if a Cadillac Escalade comes along. > > > Don McCorkle > >

lol

"Ruud Dingemans" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:b1csqc$62a$[email hidden]... --Snipped-- > And yes, you're wrong - there are plenty of Mac users who know darn well > how monopolistic Apple is in its own little world. We know, we use the > stuff, ... and still, it's still better than being governed by Microsoft. So how is being 'governed' by Microsoft worse than being goverened by Apple? Marty

--Snipped-- So how is being 'governed' by Microsoft worse than being goverened by Apple? Marty

Dave Boyle wrote:

Quoted text (16 lines)

> > "Dalek" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > > > I doubt that. I bet they know everything about the history of Papyrus > > and their racing sims. MS even produced wargames developed by Atomic > > so why wouldn't they take a risk on a hardcore racing game? The fact > > is they would. Not saying they will, but I have no problem believing > > that they might. > > Heheh, I'm probably one of the few people reading this message that happen > to agree with what you wrote ;). All I was saying is that I highly doubt > that Microsoft is going to pay (a reportedly) $2 Billion in cash for Vivendi > Universal's Game Division just so they can get Papyrus to make a hardcore > racing sim. If the deal happens, I really wouldn't be surprised at whatever > happens to Papyrus.

Totally agree, I just don't see it as an automatic shut down of the "PC division" at Papy as some seems to think will happen Beers and cheers (uncle) Goy http://www.theuspits.com "A man is only as old as the woman he feels........" --Groucho Marx--

I played the bejesus outta all Larry Holland's brilliant games (prominently featured in my flight-sim book) for Lucasarts, particularly SWoTL, one of the most strategically complex simulations ever. If you chose to increase Me-262 production over the ubiquitous-but-outdated Bf-109 (quality over quantity) you had to remember to increase kerosene (jet fuel) production over avgas! SWoTL also had oil on the windshield from damaged engines...something else Papyrus said they couldn't do (this was 15 years ago - they're just getting around to debris on the N2003 windshields!). P.S. I got an email from Holland some months ago that said he was working on another WW II flight sim. "EldredP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden](Jason > Moyer) writes: > > >Mig Alley was also the first sim I played that really captured the > >chaos of a huge air war. > > You never played Battlehawks 1942, Their Finest Hour, or Secret Weapons ofthe

Quoted text (9 lines)

> Luftwaffe? Great games... > > Eldred > -- > Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett > GPLRank:-0.381 > N2002 Rank:+17.59 > > Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats

you > with experience... > Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

Marty_U wrote:

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > "Ruud Dingemans" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:b1csqc$62a$[email hidden]... > --Snipped-- > > And yes, you're wrong - there are plenty of Mac users who know darn well > > how monopolistic Apple is in its own little world. We know, we use the > > stuff, ... and still, it's still better than being governed by Microsoft. > > So how is being 'governed' by Microsoft worse than being goverened by Apple?

Because MS makes more money than Apple does silly Beers and cheers (uncle) Goy "goyl at nettx dot no" http://www.theuspits.com "A man is only as old as the woman he feels........" --Groucho Marx--

In article <keV_9.15435$[email hidden]>, "Steve Smith" <[email hidden]> writes:

Quoted text (9 lines)

>I played the bejesus outta all Larry Holland's brilliant games (prominently >featured in my flight-sim book) for Lucasarts, particularly SWoTL, one of >the most strategically complex simulations ever. If you chose to increase >Me-262 production over the ubiquitous-but-outdated Bf-109 (quality over >quantity) you had to remember to increase kerosene (jet fuel) production >over avgas! SWoTL also had oil on the windshield from damaged >engines...something else Papyrus said they couldn't do (this was 15 years >ago - they're just getting around to debris on the N2003 windshields!). >

I found that the jets were TOO fast - I would usually stick with the 109's. In the 262, I tended to overshoot my target too much. >P.S. I got an email from Holland some months ago that said he was working >on another WW II flight sim. Cool! I've always preferred WWII combat over modern aerial warfare. Maybe by the time it's out, I'll be able to start buying games again. Any idea who the publisher will be? Eldred -- Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett GPLRank:-0.381 N2002 Rank:+17.59 Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

Hoss wrote: >>choose from, not just Wintel x86 clone stuff, and there is a difference. >>It's sad to see a pc world full of clones nowadays and not much else.) > what they are like. They don't run the games I want to play so they > are a non contender in for me. That's fine. > And the only real dif between a Mac and > a PC is the cpu itself. That's BS ;) there's more to a computer than the cpu, like the os it uses and the level of component integration. > problems. I'll bet anything my current PC is as stable as any Mac and > that's because I know what I'm doing So the user is actually the defining factor in pc stability? Interesting definition - if only knowledgeable users are able to keep a pc going... > to be held buy the hand. And you are accusing PC's of being clones? PC's *are* clones. Clones of a 23-year-old system and all using the came x86 cpu. How many "PC's" are there that DON'T use an x86 type CPU and AREN'T able to run Windows? THAT's how far we've come, and like I said, that's just sad. > How hypocritical of you considering you use a Mac. Actually, currently, we can only run non-clones since Apple (monopolistically, oh yes) kicked the clones out of the Mac market some time ago. That left only the original. I saw an article > recently where an 18 year old guy was running 34 different OS's on one > PC. Let's see you do that on a Mac. Come over any day. I'll show you MacMESS running on MacOS X. Bet it hits even more than 34 OS'es. I could show you OS/2, Windows 2000 or XP running at the same time as well, if my own Mac had more RAM and a faster CPU to run VirtualPC... and oh yeah, the reverse can't be done since OSX doesn't run on pc hardware. > Oh, and OSX can run on a PC too. It could, but it doesn't. > Apple just don't want to release a version that does though. Talk > about monopolistic, eh? Why cater for pc hardware if you are trying to compete with pc's? Note: and supply the *ONLY* generally available system *LEFT* that's *NOT* a pc x86 clone. So don't come up to me and talk about monopolies, kiddo. Regards, Ruud

Dalek wrote: > That's not my point. He called PC's boring clones PC's *are* boring clones, from a technological point of view. They slavishly copy a 23-year-old IBM design, slavishly force themselves to be compatible with an OS from *just one* company, all run the same x86-type CPU, and virtually all run that one OS we all know & love. There virtually aren't any personal computers out there that don't fit that mold any more, apart from Apple's and some workstations, and that's just plain sad. > and yet they can run > many various OS's and the coice of hardware goes way beyond a Mac. True. Nevertheless, they still are all made in the same mold; show me a pc that *cannot* run Windows and *does not* use an x86-type CPU and then we'll have, by comparison, an interesting non-cloned design. > Mac's are for people who like wearing their computer as jewelry. You *can* wear them like that, but you may just as well use them as yer average Unix workstation (MacOS X!) and just do their job. Regards, Ruud "Ceterum censeo Microsoftem esse delendam"

Marty_U wrote: >>And yes, you're wrong - there are plenty of Mac users who know darn well >>how monopolistic Apple is in its own little world. We know, we use the >>stuff, ... and still, it's still better than being governed by Microsoft. > So how is being 'governed' by Microsoft worse than being goverened by Apple? Well, Apple is one of those rare companies that actually cares about how good or original its stuff is. Kinda like Papy. It's product-oriented. Microsoft, OTOH, in the end does not care about quality or originality one bit, as long as it makes money. It's cash-oriented. Regards, Ruud PS. That's definitely not to say Apple supplies paradise on earth, of course. It's just definitely better in some areas (not always the important ones, mind..)

On 02 Feb 2003 00:16:20 GMT, [email hidden] (EldredP) wrote:

Quoted text (16 lines)

>In article <keV_9.15435$[email hidden]>, "Steve Smith" ><[email hidden]> writes: > >>I played the bejesus outta all Larry Holland's brilliant games (prominently >>featured in my flight-sim book) for Lucasarts, particularly SWoTL, one of >>the most strategically complex simulations ever. If you chose to increase >>Me-262 production over the ubiquitous-but-outdated Bf-109 (quality over >>quantity) you had to remember to increase kerosene (jet fuel) production >>over avgas! SWoTL also had oil on the windshield from damaged >>engines...something else Papyrus said they couldn't do (this was 15 years >>ago - they're just getting around to debris on the N2003 windshields!). >> > >I found that the jets were TOO fast - I would usually stick with the 109's. In >the 262, I tended to overshoot my target too much. >

I believe it was really like that during the war... And you can always decrease engine power. Just use maximum power when you have to get away (I've experienced a similar problem even with Red Baron 3D, which features much slower planes).

Quoted text (7 lines)

>>P.S. I got an email from Holland some months ago that said he was working >>on another WW II flight sim. > >Cool! I've always preferred WWII combat over modern aerial warfare. Maybe by >the time it's out, I'll be able to start buying games again. Any idea who the >publisher will be? >

'Maybe by then I'll be able to start buying games again'? My God, it's an epidemic! ;-) -- __________ ____---____ Marco Antonio Checa Funcke \_________D /-/---_----' Santiago de Surco, Lima, Peru _H__/_/ http://machf.tripod.com '-_____|( remove the "no_me_j." and "sons.of." parts before replying

Dalek wrote: > Nos, is that you ? Beers and cheers (uncle) Goy "goyl at nettx dot no" http://www.theuspits.com "A man is only as old as the woman he feels........" --Groucho Marx--

Dalek wrote:

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > On Sun, 02 Feb 2003 12:09:42 +0100, Goy Larsen <[email hidden]> > reckoned: > > >Nos, is that you ? > > No comment. :-)

ROFL Beers and cheers (uncle) Goy "goyl at nettx dot no" http://www.theuspits.com "A man is only as old as the woman he feels........" --Groucho Marx--

On Sun, 02 Feb 2003 03:02:39 +0100, Ruud Dingemans <[email hidden]> wrote: >Well, Apple is one of those rare companies that actually cares about how >good or original its stuff is. Apple stopped being anything more than another Microsoft the day Jobs fired Wozniak. The only real difference I can see is that Microsoft has an ultra-conservative marketing campaign and Apple goes for more of the MTV-generation edgy-conservative market. Same shit, different packaging. Jason

In article <[email hidden]>, machf <[email hidden]> writes:

Quoted text (9 lines)

>>I found that the jets were TOO fast - I would usually stick with the 109's. >In >>the 262, I tended to overshoot my target too much. >> >I believe it was really like that during the war... And you can always >decrease >engine power. Just use maximum power when you have to get away (I've >experienced >a similar problem even with Red Baron 3D, which features much slower planes).

Yeah I could, but I was usually too fixated on my target to manipulate the throttle effectively. I did *much* better flying 109's...<g> Eldred -- Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett GPLRank:-0.381 N2002 Rank:+17.59 Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

Dalek wrote: > know a PC is quite capable of running OSX. The basic architecture of a > Mac is the same as a PC except that it uses a Motorola cpu instead of > an AMD or Intel cpu. Sure, right - and those ROMs are basically the same, too.. and the i/o, and the chipsets used, and the proprietary stuff... Heck, if you put an Intel cpu in a Mac, I bet it would run Windows right away. Sure... >>definition - if only knowledgeable users are able to keep a pc going... > I had a friend with a Mac back in '93, I had to provide tech support > to him and set up his internet software even though I was a PC user. Bad example - back then, Internet was pretty hard to set up on *any* machine for the average user. Nowadays, I just type in one single codeword in OS X, and it's up. Can't get much easier than that. >>x86 cpu. How many "PC's" are there that DON'T use an x86 type CPU and >>AREN'T able to run Windows? THAT's how far we've come, and like I said, >>that's just sad. > There is more than one flavour of Windows and i64 is not backwards > compatible. That's gonna be interesting then, eek, no old games will run.. And oh yes, there was a non-Intel PowerPC version of NT, it was very popular and well-supported. (/sarcasm off) >>Actually, currently, we can only run non-clones since Apple >>(monopolistically, oh yes) kicked the clones out of the Mac market some > Yea, that's right. Clones are good for competition so don't know why > you are even knocking clones. Because they're unoriginal, non-innovative, and boring copies (in this case, of something that wasn't too original or innovative itself. And yes, I have one (the 5150 w/cassette port) so I know what I'm talking about here - there are more interesting machines in my antiques collection that are both older, as well as more interesting and original.) >>So don't come up to me and talk about monopolies, kiddo. > > > Stick your Macluser machine up your ass. Such eloquent rhetorics. Woo hoo. Regards, Ruud

Jason Moyer wrote: >>Well, Apple is one of those rare companies that actually cares about how >>good or original its stuff is. > Apple stopped being anything more than another Microsoft the day Jobs > fired Wozniak. Um, Jobs never fired Wozniak. In fact it was Steve J. who got fired (back in 1985, founded NeXT, which begat the WWW, became OS X, the rest is history) The only real difference I can see is that Microsoft > has an ultra-conservative marketing campaign and Apple goes for more > of the MTV-generation edgy-conservative market. True, to some extent. However, it's more than just style, it's finesse and quality care as well. > Same shit, different packaging. Same shit, different packaging, smells and handles better though ;) Regards, Ruud

Dalek wrote: > they are the same. Only a PC is cheaper and runs faster. Yeah, and "We crash faster" of course. Not to mention "catches viruses faster" - a lot faster, I'd say. The last live Mac virus was spotted several years ago. Faster. Yeah. Wooo. > The rest of what you said doesn't warrant a response as it's no > different from what you have already said three times over. Well, same here, mate. Regards, Rudy

On Tue, 04 Feb 2003 07:35:33 -0500, Dalek <[email hidden]> wrote: >Only a PC is cheaper and runs faster. I would imagine a 1gHz RISC chip blows away a 3gHz P4, but I haven't seen much in the way of benchmarks. Jason

OK, enough Mac bashing. Macs can be a very useful tool for kindergarten children.

In article <b1ps79$20h$[email hidden]>, Ruud Dingemans <[email hidden]> writes: >> they are the same. Only a PC is cheaper and runs faster. > >Yeah, and "We crash faster" of course. Not to mention "catches viruses >faster" - a lot faster, I'd say. The last live Mac virus was spotted >several years ago. Faster. Yeah. Wooo. Actually, people who use common sense *rarely* get hit with viruses, even running Windows. The only thing about viruses you can blame on MS is their STUPID default config for MS Outlook. That lets everything under the sun attack your system... :-( And as for Mac viruses, the standard joke is that virus creators don't want to waste their time trying to affect a market that's only about 10% of the total... :-) Eldred -- Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett GPLRank:-0.381 N2002 Rank:+17.59 Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

Dalek wrote:

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > On 05 Feb 2003 07:14:19 GMT, [email hidden] (EldredP) > reckoned: > > >And as for Mac viruses, the standard joke is that virus creators don't want to > >waste their time trying to affect a market that's only about 10% of the > >total... :-) > > Actually that's not a joke, it's the truth.

Yep, same goes for Virus that attacks Netscape and all these other lesser used e-mail programs that have a low market share, if you're going to make a virus it's natural to make it so it has the most chance of spreading Beers and cheers (uncle) Goy "goyl at nettx dot no" http://www.theuspits.com "A man is only as old as the woman he feels........" --Groucho Marx--

Actually, Netscape still has quite a presence in the Corporate world. Netscape has a TON of email servers being used at the corporate level. Not everyone buys into the cost of Exchange Servers. Larry "Goy Larsen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > > Dalek wrote: > > > > On 05 Feb 2003 07:14:19 GMT, [email hidden] (EldredP) > > reckoned: > > > > >And as for Mac viruses, the standard joke is that virus creators don't

want to

Quoted text (19 lines)

> > >waste their time trying to affect a market that's only about 10% of the > > >total... :-) > > > > Actually that's not a joke, it's the truth. > > Yep, same goes for Virus that attacks Netscape and all these other > lesser used e-mail programs that have a low market share, if you're > going to make a virus it's natural to make it so it has the most chance > of spreading > > > Beers and cheers > (uncle) Goy > "goyl at nettx dot no" > > http://www.theuspits.com > > "A man is only as old as the woman he feels........" > --Groucho Marx--

Larry wrote: > > Actually, Netscape still has quite a presence in the Corporate world. > Netscape has a TON of email servers being used at the corporate level. Fair enough, but the total ratio is still overwhelmingly in fav of of a MS product....:-) > Not everyone buys into the cost of Exchange Servers. And thank god for that or it would be a *total* monopoly out there Beers and cheers (uncle) Goy "goyl at nettx dot no" http://www.theuspits.com "A man is only as old as the woman he feels........" --Groucho Marx--

On Wed, 05 Feb 2003 23:18:54 +0100, Goy Larsen <[email hidden]> wrote: >And thank god for that or it would be a *total* monopoly out there Weird, last time I saw stats MS was getting its ass kicked as far as serving data went. I can't imagine anyone running Exchange outside of a small office environment and then only for internal email. Even if Exchange is handling the POP/IMAP stuff (to keep the shirts happy) I'd imagine any semi-large company is using qmail or sendmail for SMTP. As far as other services go, the world is still running on Apache and Netscape Commerce Server. Did MS ever fix the bug in Exchange that prevented it from sending mail to hosts without mx records? I dunno how it survived through version 5, altho I guess MS has a history of blatantly ignoring RFCs. Jason

Jason Moyer wrote:

Quoted text (13 lines)

> > On Wed, 05 Feb 2003 23:18:54 +0100, Goy Larsen > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >And thank god for that or it would be a *total* monopoly out there > > Weird, last time I saw stats MS was getting its ass kicked as far as > serving data went. I can't imagine anyone running Exchange outside of > a small office environment and then only for internal email. Even if > Exchange is handling the POP/IMAP stuff (to keep the shirts happy) I'd > imagine any semi-large company is using qmail or sendmail for SMTP. > As far as other services go, the world is still running on Apache and > Netscape Commerce Server.

Okay...:-), never claimed to know much about servers anyways, I'll just sit quietly over here in the corner from now on Beers and cheers (uncle) Goy "goyl at nettx dot no" http://www.theuspits.com "A man is only as old as the woman he feels........" --Groucho Marx--

On Thu, 06 Feb 2003 00:50:26 +0100, Goy Larsen <[email hidden]> wrote: >Okay...:-), never claimed to know much about servers anyways, I'll just >sit quietly over here in the corner from now on *sends you an e450 and a copy of NCS* Have fun! Jason (NCS actually stands for "piece of shit" and not "netscape commerce srver")

And every other email would be a Virus. Right now it's only every 4th one :) Larry "Goy Larsen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (23 lines)

> > > Larry wrote: > > > > Actually, Netscape still has quite a presence in the Corporate world. > > Netscape has a TON of email servers being used at the corporate level. > > Fair enough, but the total ratio is still overwhelmingly in fav of of a > MS product....:-) > > > Not everyone buys into the cost of Exchange Servers. > > And thank god for that or it would be a *total* monopoly out there > > > Beers and cheers > (uncle) Goy > "goyl at nettx dot no" > > http://www.theuspits.com > > "A man is only as old as the woman he feels........" > --Groucho Marx--

I'm not so sure about that. Toss in the Lotus servers, Linux servers and Netscape servers (plus whatever I missed), and i'm not convinced Exchange is even close to monopoly levels. Larry "Goy Larsen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (17 lines)

> > > Actually, Netscape still has quite a presence in the Corporate world. > > Netscape has a TON of email servers being used at the corporate level. > > Fair enough, but the total ratio is still overwhelmingly in fav of of a > MS product....:-) > > Beers and cheers > (uncle) Goy > "goyl at nettx dot no" > > http://www.theuspits.com > > "A man is only as old as the woman he feels........" > --Groucho Marx--

Damien Smith wrote: > OK, enough Mac bashing. Macs can be a very useful tool for kindergarten > children. Strange thing that these kajagoogoo thingies keep on runnin' though when pc's are failing left, right 'n center whenever there is another virus around huh? (Besides, Macs aren't Macs anymore, Apple makes Unix machines now, we're talking a whole new ballgame there... or rather 'venerable', Unix being around since 1969) Regards, Ruud

EldredP wrote: > running Windows. The only thing about viruses you can blame on MS is their ...happy-go-lucky software designs ;) > And as for Mac viruses, the standard joke is that virus creators don't want to > waste their time trying to affect a market that's only about 10% of the > total... :-) 10 %? Huh, we'd wish. 4% is more likely. Still, about 20+ million people though... Regards, Ruud

Dalek wrote: > PC's. This being a mostly PC-centric group is no place to be bashing a > PC. Agreed. I have both, Macs and PC (even "the" pc), and well, I can only say it's bad enough for those poor Repentium owners already. Regards, Ruud

Goy Larsen wrote: > Fair enough, but the total ratio is still overwhelmingly in fav of of a > MS product....:-) Hey Goy, that should be 8( or :P or maybe :/, not :) > And thank god for that or it would be a *total* monopoly out there Tux sez hi to MS every day, too. Actually, Tux sez "Dodge this." ;) Regards, Ruud

> >Strange thing that these kajagoogoo thingies keep on runnin' though What the hell does "kajagoogoo" mean anyway? I remember an '80's band by that name... Eldred -- Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett GPLRank:-0.381 MonsterRank: +339.873 N2002 Rank:+17.59 Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

Larry wrote: > > I'm not so sure about that. > > Toss in the Lotus servers, Linux servers and Netscape servers (plus whatever > I missed), and i'm not convinced Exchange is even close to monopoly levels. Right...although I was actually talking about the client here, but I don't mind a quick lesson in mail server 1-0-1 :-) Beers and cheers (uncle) Goy "goyl at nettx dot no" "The Pits" http://www.theuspits.com/ "A man is only as old as the woman he feels" --Groucho Marx--

Ruud Dingemans wrote:

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > Goy Larsen wrote: > > > Fair enough, but the total ratio is still overwhelmingly in fav of of a > > MS product....:-) > > Hey Goy, that should be 8( or :P or maybe :/, not :)

Possibly, but I actually like the fact that MS has a strong presence, I just wish there were more products that could keep ut with them so we could have a bit more competition > > And thank god for that or it would be a *total* monopoly out there > > Tux sez hi to MS every day, too. Actually, Tux sez "Dodge this." ;) <woosh> Huh ? Beers and cheers (uncle) Goy "goyl at nettx dot no" "The Pits" http://www.theuspits.com/ "A man is only as old as the woman he feels" --Groucho Marx--

On Sat, 01 Feb 2003 00:07:31 GMT, "Dave Boyle" <[email hidden]> wrote: >From what I understand, you need completely different programmers for each >platform. Not really, though it's closer to the truth for driving sims. But that's because of the different users and game goals, not for technological reasons. We have one team, one code base, developing for three consoles simultaneously (we could do PC too).

On Sat, 01 Feb 2003 00:07:31 GMT, "Dave Boyle" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Actually, I'm thinking that the only real reason to acquire Papyrus is >because it comes with Sierra and Blizzard, almost as an afterthought. Good point.

Dalek wrote: >>(Besides, Macs aren't Macs anymore, Apple makes Unix machines now, we're > Yea, but PC's have had Unix availalbe to it for many years already. I > have four copies of Linux right here now. Um, I should perhaps mention that the Mac's precursor, the Lisa, had a Xenix version yonks before Linux even existed - 1984'ish :) Regards, Ruud PS. It's no GPL though - GNU Public License that is ;)

Goy Larsen wrote:

Quoted text (7 lines)

>>>And thank god for that or it would be a *total* monopoly out there >> >>Tux sez hi to MS every day, too. Actually, Tux sez "Dodge this." ;) > <woosh> > > Huh ?

That was the sound of a penguin flying by (vertically I suppose ;) A bird associated with certain operating systems, to be precise.. Tux is its name. Regards, Ruud

Ruud Dingemans wrote:

Quoted text (15 lines)

> > Goy Larsen wrote: > > >>>And thank god for that or it would be a *total* monopoly out there > >> > >>Tux sez hi to MS every day, too. Actually, Tux sez "Dodge this." ;) > > > <woosh> > > > > Huh ? > > That was the sound of a penguin flying by (vertically I suppose ;) > > A bird associated with certain operating systems, to be precise.. Tux is > its name.

Ah, of course Beers and cheers (uncle) Goy "goyl at nettx dot no" "The Pits" http://www.theuspits.com/ "A man is only as old as the woman he feels" --Groucho Marx--