Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
Platforms
PCXboxPlayStationNintendo
Games
ActionStrategyRole Playing GamesSimulatorsSport Games

Game Forum / Simulators / Car Simulators / July 2005

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

NR2003 entry fee $100. How many new guys pay it?

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Joe - 12 Jul 2005 06:42 GMT
I have both NR2003 and NASCAR Simracing.  I am what might be called a casual
player. I have not raced for a while and have been thinking about getting
back into it so I have been poking around the various web sites to see what
files, mods, updates and such I need to be up-to-date. While poking around I
was VERY suprised to see an almost total absence of anything to do with
NASCAR Simracing. I knew the game was something of a dissapointment when
released and the "Official Sim" remained NR2003 but I had figured that NSR
would still have a following if only because NSR was easily available while
NR2003 was scarce. It is obvious that I figured wrong. That got me thinking.

With the price of even a VERY used and beat-up copy of NR2003 approaching
$100 it seems to me that new guys willing to pay that just to try online
racing will be few and far between. If true this cannot be good.
Socius - 12 Jul 2005 23:03 GMT
> I have both NR2003 and NASCAR Simracing.  I am what might be called a casual
> player. I have not raced for a while and have been thinking about getting
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> $100 it seems to me that new guys willing to pay that just to try online
> racing will be few and far between. If true this cannot be good.

Here in Italy I found NR2003 inserted in a game magazine several months
ago, for a very low price. At present, I don't know if it is really
available, but here it is listed for much less than $ 100:

http://www.dvdboxoffice.com/

Regards,

Socius
Joe - 13 Jul 2005 01:53 GMT
Nice price considering the market. Shows that hunting the net can sometimes
pay off.

But since finding such a price for NR2003 requires a hunt while NSR can be
picked up pretty much anywhere for $30 or less still leaves the NR2003
community at a BIG disadvantage in recruiting new members.

> Here in Italy I found NR2003 inserted in a game magazine several months
> ago, for a very low price. At present, I don't know if it is really
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>
> Socius
Darus - 13 Jul 2005 03:20 GMT
There's a reason you can get a "new release" for $30 (and many places
are lower than that) and NR2003 continues to command top dollar. NSR is
a joke and the alleged parade of patches that they promised has fallen
thru and left the users who dropped $50 (like myself) on that turd by
the wayside. I GLADLY just paid $52 for a used copy of NR2003 off Ebay
and thought I got a deal. I see plenty of $75+ auctions going on, but
have to wonder how many ppl. are really buying at those prices....

NR2003 has a solid base of users and until "someone" else can develop a
stock car sim that compares, NR2003 will be on many hard drives. As for
recruiting new members at those prices, you may be right. I suspect
anyone who was interested jumped on board when it came out and in the
following year or so before Papy announced the end of the series.
DodgeBullet40 - 13 Jul 2005 19:53 GMT
I'm glad I decided to hold off on NSR...looks like it was a disaster.  I
almost got taken in by the pre-release hype but then I remembered who was
making it...

> There's a reason you can get a "new release" for $30 (and many places
> are lower than that) and NR2003 continues to command top dollar. NSR is
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> anyone who was interested jumped on board when it came out and in the
> following year or so before Papy announced the end of the series.
Joe - 13 Jul 2005 20:53 GMT
How much money did users drop on such "turds" as NR2002, NR4, etc along the
years-long rocky road that ended with NR2003?

While NR2003 may be way ahead of NSR Papy's lead shrinks when NSR is stacked
up against earlier Papy releases such as NR2002,  NASCAR4, etc. Each of
these had the advantage of being the best available at the time but each of
these still had glaring faults that propted shrill condemnations that sound
remarkably like those now heaped upon NSR.

The seeming eternal wait for EA's promised "parade of patches" does not mean
another patch is not on the way any more than did the equally eternal wait
for a patch from Papy. The appearent impossibility of getting any word at
all from EA about future patches (if any) is remarkably similar to the stony
silence that was Papy's non-reply to the pleadings of its fans. Both Papy
then and EA now seem content to ignore fans and let them stew in their own
jucies wondering if/when a future patch will fix one or another glaring
fault (remember wall-riding?).

Assuming that the one patch EA did release is the only patch and such things
as are still broken will remain broken until "NSR2" hits the market; will
this not also equal Papy's practice of one-patch-per-game? The current
running joke in NSR forums that "EA will be realeasing the next patch as
NSR2 and will sell for $39.95" originated in the Papy forums but with "Papy"
in place of "EA".

Goggle reviews of NR2003, NR2002, NR4, etc and count the number of comments
along the lines of "In the new version Papy FINALLY fixed "this" long
standing fault but "that other trouble" still plagues the sim."

Are there any here who doubt that Papy *could* have patched NR2002 to equal
NR2003? Did Papy "screw" us when they chose to call the NR2002 patch NR2003
and sell us the patch for $49.95. Shoving the "screw" a little deeper into
the fans, what possible reason did Papy have for "screwing" us out of
NR2002's  Darrell Waltrip narrated "Track Tours"? The Papy fanbois took the
elimination of the Track Tours as an opportunity to puff themselves up and
present themselves as NASCAR GODS who's exalted expertise rendered the
Waltrip tours an insult to their knowledge and skill but I somehow think
Papy had a different motive for eliminating the Waltrip tours than
worshipful deference to the over-inflated egos of this self-proclaimed
pantheon.

While all of this is little help to the current incarnation of NSR it does
lend some reason for hope that NSR has a future.Whatever NSR's current
shortcomings there are few who would deny that the current code is a
potential Papy beater. There is no need for EA to start from scratch, they
need only make improvements on the code they have.The fact that NR2003 is
selling for so much should be a clue to EA that there are a lot of folks
willing to throw a lot of money at them if the needed improvements are made.
I find it hard to believe that EA paid NASCAR all that money for the name
only to let NSR die after one version and one patch.

It may well be that NSR will never equal NR2003 and that NR2003 will become
the next "Grand Prix Legends" as the best available year after year after
year but I think it is a little too early to place any bets.

> There's a reason you can get a "new release" for $30 (and many places
> are lower than that) and NR2003 continues to command top dollar. NSR is
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> anyone who was interested jumped on board when it came out and in the
> following year or so before Papy announced the end of the series.
Darus - 14 Jul 2005 11:40 GMT
Joe:

You make some valid points. NR2003 is/was a pretty polished product
when released and it was the result of the evolution of the sim from N1
thru NR2002. However, MY biggest gripe with NSR is the fact that they
bought the EXCLUSIVE license for NASCAR, put Papy out of the stock car
sim business, and then announced plans to release a "true to life"
stock car sim. (I now read from the rear of the box of NSR) Phrases
like "realistic physics model", "true to life feeling", "definitive
racing experience" and the mother of all lies "ALL NEW GAME ENGINE".

I don't know if you bought NSR, but I did and I can't seem find any of
those things. The locked/unlocked rear diff issue is a blunder that CAN
be fixed, but prevents online gaming with a mismatch error. The text
files are littered with references to Thunder 04 and 03 and IIRC, F1C.
Multiplayer...well let's not go there. One of the devs of NSR did a Q&A
at OLR I think and said that beta testers were using a game that was
numerous versions past the retail one. WTF is that? Well, where is the
updated code!?!?!?!?

Look at it this way, NSR SHOULD have started at the level that Papy
ended at. EA had the chance to see the progression of the NRxxxx series
and learn what worked and what didn't. They should have then
incorporated all the good things and then added to it. Instead it was 1
step forward (by Papy) and 2 steps back (NSR).
Byron Forbes - 15 Jul 2005 00:48 GMT
> I don't know if you bought NSR, but I did and I can't seem find any of
> those things. The locked/unlocked rear diff issue is a blunder that CAN
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> numerous versions past the retail one. WTF is that? Well, where is the
> updated code!?!?!?!?

   EA, the distributors of GTR, think nothing of flat out lying as they did
in various magazines recently with comments like "Flawless multiplay", etc.
This is a money making outfit - the product only needs to be good enough to
sell, promote and fool the average parent or noob with words like "official"
and "simulator".

   They are a bunch of arseholes, as are most in the racing simulator
business atm.
Darus - 15 Jul 2005 02:49 GMT
I am guessing that you meant NSR, not GTR? My box is clearly marked
"10tacle Studios", not EA. However, you are right that they are a money
making outfit, but then, what business isn't out to make a buck?
Charities? The question is, how much money did they make on this pile
of excrement? Figuring the cost of the NASCAR license is pretty steep,
how many copies of a game would they have to move? Now, judging by the
overall "tone" of most messages posted about NSR, I'd submit that there
weren't many after the initial release in Feb.. Of course, they prob.
made up for it in console version where the 8 y/o's won't care or
notice the difference.
Byron Forbes - 15 Jul 2005 18:19 GMT
   On my GTR box it is clearly marked - "Distributed by Electronic Arts".
It's all the same arseholes.

   Nothing wrong with making a buck - unless your doing it by producing
garbage and packaging that garbage as something other than garbage. Simbin,
EA, 10tacle are a bunch of arseholes taking advantage of a non policed
market.

   The arseholes handling the licensing for Nascar and F1 are exactly the
same - no interest in good products, just money. This will continue until
someone sticks their boot in their arse and keeps it in their arse until
they learn to do as they're told. That's the only way to deal with
disobedient little children.

>I am guessing that you meant NSR, not GTR? My box is clearly marked
> "10tacle Studios", not EA. However, you are right that they are a money
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> made up for it in console version where the 8 y/o's won't care or
> notice the difference.
Darus - 15 Jul 2005 22:26 GMT
I'm not sure where the hate mail for GTR came from, as this WAS a
NSR/NR2003 thread, but I have no problem with GTR. What's yours?

As for the licensing authorities for F1 and NASCAR not interested in
good products, I guess I'll have to step up and let you in on a dirty
little secret......come closer.....closer now......a little
more......EVERYONE DOES IT!!!!!!!!! If "it" <happens> to be a good
product, it's a bonus. What is important is that it SELLS. And EA being
a marketing powerhouse, they SELL A LOT OF CRAP. No matter if it cars,
VCR's, clothing, rugs, whatever, quality is not the priority any
longer, QUANTITY is. If we want to start a "back in MY day, products
lasted for 100 years" thread, perhaps there is a "Made in the USA"
usenet group out there.

The question now returns to the original topic, (sort of): how many
copies of NSR did they need to sell to justify more work on it and thus
further patches? Judging by how fast the price fell out on NSR at the
big name retailers near me, not a whole lot. Therefore, the "entry
price" of $50+ for NR2003 IS the price that must be paid to gain entry
to the true "King of Ovals".
Byron Forbes - 16 Jul 2005 06:47 GMT
> I'm not sure where the hate mail for GTR came from, as this WAS a
> NSR/NR2003 thread, but I have no problem with GTR. What's yours?

   You must be insane.

> As for the licensing authorities for F1 and NASCAR not interested in
> good products, I guess I'll have to step up and let you in on a dirty
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> lasted for 100 years" thread, perhaps there is a "Made in the USA"
> usenet group out there.

   Thanks for that utterly worthless, pointless lesson in the obvious.

> The question now returns to the original topic, (sort of): how many
> copies of NSR did they need to sell to justify more work on it and thus
> further patches? Judging by how fast the price fell out on NSR at the
> big name retailers near me, not a whole lot. Therefore, the "entry
> price" of $50+ for NR2003 IS the price that must be paid to gain entry
> to the true "King of Ovals".

   What crap! They need to make a certain profit to "justify" patching a
game to make it work properly do they?

   What they need buddy, is a huge boot in their arse that continues to
boot their arse until -

a) it's fixed
b) they learn to not release games that need fundamental finishing in the
first place.
Darus - 16 Jul 2005 19:45 GMT
First off, I ain't your "buddy" in any sense. Second, I'd like to thank
you for your eloquent reply to the GTR question. Rather than post ANY
kind of sensible response about your problems, you accuse of me mental
illness. Nope, sorry, wrong there too. Continuing, no, I didn't say
they needed to make a profit to offer up a patch, I said that they need
to sell product, period. Let's use a simple example (as that is
probably one you could handle). If EA produced 100 copies of NSR, but
only 20 sold, would it make ANY sense (to a reasonable person, leave
yourself out for this one) to patch a product that only 20% of their
target audience purchased, regardless of how "Bad" the product has been
received by the 20 users? NO, of course not. Finally, it's sad to see
that such an intellectual like yourself feels that "arse" kicking is
the best way to resolve a computer software/dev problem. Here's an
idea: How about I put my size 13 Corcoran II Field Boot so far up your
"arse" that you could lick a shine onto the toe? It would accomplish 2
things at once, you'd STFU and I'd have shiny boots! What a deal! Have
a pleasant weekend!
Byron Forbes - 17 Jul 2005 10:42 GMT
> First off, I ain't your "buddy" in any sense. Second, I'd like to thank
> you for your eloquent reply to the GTR question. Rather than post ANY
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
> things at once, you'd STFU and I'd have shiny boots! What a deal! Have
> a pleasant weekend!

   You need to get a bib to catch this stuff b4 it ends up on the net!
Larry - 18 Jul 2005 21:33 GMT
The words GTR are not in my post.

-Larry

> I'm not sure where the hate mail for GTR came from, as this WAS a
> NSR/NR2003 thread, but I have no problem with GTR. What's yours?
[quoted text clipped - 16 lines]
> price" of $50+ for NR2003 IS the price that must be paid to gain entry
> to the true "King of Ovals".
Darus - 18 Jul 2005 21:46 GMT
You're right. You're only post was "I think it's forgotten that Each
version of NRx, once patched, had NO
SHOWSTOPPERS.

You can't say that about any of the EA Games.

-Larry"

and I still have no idea what you are talking about. Thus my reply from
earlier "HUH?" still applies. So now you have TWO posts that make
absolutely no sense.
Larry - 21 Jul 2005 17:14 GMT
In other words, YOU RESPONDED TO THE WRONG PERSON.  I NEVER SAID ANYTHING
ABOUT GTR.

-Larry

> You're right. You're only post was "I think it's forgotten that Each
> version of NRx, once patched, had NO
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> earlier "HUH?" still applies. So now you have TWO posts that make
> absolutely no sense.
Darus - 21 Jul 2005 21:55 GMT
Well, Larry....no as a matter of fact, YOU did. If you take the time to
look at the progression of the thread, it's plain for all to see that
"Byron Forbes" and I traded numerous posts with some of the content
relating to GTR and his "problems" with it.

Example: "Byron Forbes   Jul 15, 1:19 pm

On my GTR box it is clearly marked - "Distributed by Electronic Arts".
It's all the same arseholes......."

You replied with:

"Larry   Jul 15, 4:48 pm

I think it's forgotten that Each version of NRx, once patched, had NO
SHOWSTOPPERS.

You can't say that about any of the EA Games.

-Larry"

Now,  I type out a reply to "Byron Forbes". (Bear in mind that in my
hatred of all things Microsoft, I don't use OE to read usenet posts, I
use Google Groups. It's a little slow, but since I only read R.A.S.,
it's not a big deal). My reply:

"Darus   Jul 15, 5:26 pm

I'm not sure where the hate mail for GTR came from, as this WAS a
NSR/NR2003 thread, but I have no problem with GTR. What's
yours?........"

I then check for for new messages and see that your message about
"SHOWSTOPPERS" and have no idea what you are talking about. I replied
with my succinct post of "HUH?".

As the thread moves along, I understand that you are referring to a
"showstopper" as a <negative> aspect of either NSR or NRxxxx. I take
that term to mean the opposite. Simple misunderstanding.

Mssr. Forbes and I then traded 3 three more posts and then state that
you never referred to GTR in your post. "I" never said that you did.

Hopefully you can see that it was not I that erred by replying to the
wrong post. Your post ended up in the middle of an exchange with Forbes
and I and you ASSUMED that my reply "I'm not sure where the hate mail
for GTR came from..." was intended for you. It was not.
reggie white - 22 Jul 2005 01:36 GMT
you're all losers

> Well, Larry....no as a matter of fact, YOU did. If you take the time to
> look at the progression of the thread, it's plain for all to see that
[quoted text clipped - 43 lines]
> and I and you ASSUMED that my reply "I'm not sure where the hate mail
> for GTR came from..." was intended for you. It was not.
Byron Forbes - 23 Jul 2005 07:24 GMT
   You're a has been NFLer punk!

> you're all losers
Darus - 23 Jul 2005 11:50 GMT
I was going to post something along those lines, but since RW is dead,
I held off.
Byron Forbes - 23 Jul 2005 16:28 GMT
   That rings a bell - what from?

>I was going to post something along those lines, but since RW is dead,
> I held off.
Joe - 15 Jul 2005 17:37 GMT
EA did not kill Papy, NASCAR did.
EA may have bought exclusive license for NASCAR but only because NASCAR
decided to *sell* EA exclusive license. EA may have wished Papy gone but it
was NASCAR who granted that wish.

The balance of your post lists some of the reasons NR2003 is bringing in
such high prices while NSR sits in the bargan bin. I have NSR and have seen
each of these and more. You have no argument from me on your assessment of
NSR.

I think we here can all agree that NR2003 is superior to the current NSR. I
think we can also agree that NSR would already be a Papy beater if only the
darn thing worked like it was supposed to. So the question is, will EA fix
the darn code?

NASCAR demanded a LOT of money for that exclusive license and EA paid it. I
look at what EA did with other licenses they hold for football, baseball,
basketball, etc and I cannot believe EA will abandon NSR after only one
version and one patch. If I am wrong my copy of NS2003 is right beside my
copy of NSR and you will find me online near the end of the pack battling
for 18th place while also trying to stay out of the way of the leaders who
are about to lap me. (I said I liked racing, I never said I was good at
it.(-;)

> Joe:
>
[quoted text clipped - 21 lines]
> incorporated all the good things and then added to it. Instead it was 1
> step forward (by Papy) and 2 steps back (NSR).
Plowboy - 14 Jul 2005 21:31 GMT
JOE, JOE, HELLO?

Each and every "version" of NR that papy put out the door was specifically
eventually patched, most of the patches were for funky systems specs some
were for gameplay, however NSR it is the exact opposite.  They shipped 'out
the door' something that is UTTERLY worthless as not only a sim, but for
multiplayer.  Papyrus might have gotten off easy, in your mind because the
not only built the damn ruler but set the bar higher with every release and
or patch, what can EA honeslty bragg about?  I know this is what you mean
when you post that people popped money out for Papy "turds?"  lol I find
that very funny.

Here's you...
"Uhm, UUUUHHHHM , well it is like a great racing game just like and as great
as 'Need For Speed' but you go around a circular track..."
Zero support.  BTW I have tried most driving games, even EA's Bullshit, and
on the PC, what you playing, Nintendo?

Here's the rest of the sim racing community,
"Need For Speed?"  That is like saying Mongoose Bicycles (in walmart) are
not bad compared to Schwin's at the bicycle shop, for the same dollar price"
BOLOGNA!!!!.

Joe enlightened us with:
> How much money did users drop on such "turds" as NR2002, NR4, etc
> along the years-long rocky road that ended with NR2003?
[quoted text clipped - 66 lines]
>> came out and in the following year or so before Papy announced the
>> end of the series.
Joe - 15 Jul 2005 08:13 GMT
> JOE, JOE, HELLO?

Hi

> Each and every "version" of NR that papy put out the door was specifically
> eventually patched,

You are correct. I also said as much with "Papy's practice of
one-patch-per-game" I am glad you agree.
By the way, why did you put the quotes around "version"

>most of the patches were for funky systems specs some were for gameplay

You say "most" of the patches were for system specs and "some" were for
gameplay? GOOD FOR YOU! Your grasp of the obvious is impressive!
(By "funky systems specs" I assume you mean correcting code that was causing
lock-ups, desktop drops and the like.)

>, however NSR it is the exact opposite.

You say that each and every version of NR was patched. This is true. It is
also true that each and every version of NSR was patched. How, in your mind,
does this make NSR "the exact opposite"?

>  They shipped 'out the door' something that is UTTERLY worthless as not
> only a sim, but for multiplayer.

An opinion many disagree with. There are few who would not acknowledge that
NR2003 is superior to NSR but your "UTTERLY worthless" characterization of
NSR is simple minded.  (A pattern emerges.)

> Papyrus might have gotten off easy, in your mind because the not only
> built the damn ruler but set the bar higher with every release and or
> patch, what can EA honeslty bragg about?

In my post I said that the volume of complaints thrown at Papy were about
the same as that now leveled at EA and NSR  By what mental process did you
take these statements to mean I think Papy "got off easy"?

I also said that every Papy release "had the advantage of being the best
available at the time" Run this through that mental process of yours and
tell me how you interpret it.

Just where did I imply EA had anything to bragg about?

Are you familier with the term "Straw Man"?

>I know this is what you mean when you post that people popped money out for
>Papy "turds?"  lol I find that very funny.

The name "Plowboy" carries with it a stereotype you do little to dispell.

Pay attention while I explain. The term "turds" was introduced by Darius in
the post I replied to. I repeated his term, *put it in quotes* and applied
it to NR2002, NR4, etc NOT to label these as "turds" but only as a mechanism
to point out that these were, like NSR, also inferior to NR2003. You seem to
be the only one in the thread who did not grasp this. In order to avoid such
misunderstandings in the future I suggest you announce your intention to
participate in a thread before you make any actual comments. That way others
involved in the discussion will know to write at a grade level less likely
to cause you the confusion you display throughout your post.

> Here's you...
> "Uhm, UUUUHHHHM , well it is like a great racing game just like and as
> great as 'Need For Speed' but you go around a circular track..."
> Zero support.  BTW I have tried most driving games, even EA's Bullshit,
> and on the PC, what you playing, Nintendo?

An example of your rapier wit?

In order to be effective, ridicule must be based on and aimed at some
observable aspects of the subject ridiculed. Without this anchor attempts at
ridicule are only pathetic, simple-minded name calling.  There are only a
few posts from me in this thread so you should have no trouble at all
providing us with a cut-and-paste of the anchor on which you tie your
attempt at ridicule. Just where did I say anything remotely similar to your
"Here's you"?

Perhaps you would also grace us with an equally clever "Here's Darius" so
you can gibber and giggle at him for saying:  "Joe You make some valid
points."

> Here's the rest of the sim racing community,
> "Need For Speed?"  That is like saying Mongoose Bicycles (in walmart) are
> not bad compared to Schwin's at the bicycle shop, for the same dollar
> price"
> BOLOGNA!!!!.

Forgive me Plowboy. I did not realize you are the spokesman for "the rest of
the sim racing community"

If you are saying that NSR (Mongoose Bicycles) is "not bad compared to" and
is "the same dollar price" as NR2003 (Schwin) then yes, that is indeed
"BOLOGNA!!!!"
Just where exactly did I ever state otherwise?

> Joe enlightened us with:
>> How much money did users drop on such "turds" as NR2002, NR4, etc
[quoted text clipped - 52 lines]
>> year after year but I think it is a little too early to place any
>> bets.
Larry - 15 Jul 2005 21:48 GMT
I think it's forgotten that Each version of NRx, once patched, had NO
SHOWSTOPPERS.

You can't say that about any of the EA Games.

-Larry

>> JOE, JOE, HELLO?
>
[quoted text clipped - 149 lines]
>>> year after year but I think it is a little too early to place any
>>> bets.
Darus - 15 Jul 2005 22:27 GMT
jason moyer - 19 Jul 2005 21:45 GMT
> I think it's forgotten that Each version of NRx, once patched, had NO
> SHOWSTOPPERS.

I dunno if you'd consider them showstoppers, but the physics bugs in
n2003 that survived the patch are pretty bad.

- RF tire temps on road courses
- trick setups on superspeedways
- low drag/grip levels in cup/bgn physics
Plowboy - 20 Jul 2005 22:12 GMT
hell, there are bugs in the NASA simulator, Ill bet you, but the frikken
machine can at least do what it is supposed to be able to do, test the skill
of the pilots in a set criteria of realism, you cant do what NSR says or
implies that you and or up to what, 20 other drivers can race with the
nascar rules and physics...  yada yada, does it even come close (hell I
wouldnt nitpick a tire bug, but shazam man, open difs, and the flag bugs, I
mean bad bugs, not the little "need a human' there to decide the penalties
merrrits, that and you cannot undo (server commands) like you do in NRXX...

again all about degree of nits to pick...

jason moyer enlightened us with:
>> I think it's forgotten that Each version of NRx, once patched, had NO
>> SHOWSTOPPERS.
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> - trick setups on superspeedways
> - low drag/grip levels in cup/bgn physics
jason moyer - 21 Jul 2005 16:04 GMT
Oh, I agree.  I wouldn't spend $30 on NSR after playing the demo.  I
have no idea how the open diff bug slipped through beta testing when I
noticed it within 3 laps at Kansas in the demo.
Larry - 21 Jul 2005 17:14 GMT
And it's not a show-stopper, which is obvious since NR2003 is the most
successful SIM that's been released.

-Larry

>> I think it's forgotten that Each version of NRx, once patched, had NO
>> SHOWSTOPPERS.
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> - trick setups on superspeedways
> - low drag/grip levels in cup/bgn physics
jason moyer - 22 Jul 2005 16:05 GMT
> And it's not a show-stopper, which is obvious since NR2003 is the most
> successful SIM that's been released.

In what way is n2003 the most successful?
Plowboy - 19 Jul 2005 22:23 GMT
Joe,

Ok, I forgot about this argument I started with you, LOL...

Joe enlightened us with:
>> JOE, JOE, HELLO?
>
> Hi
>
>> Each and every "version" of NR that papy put out the door was
>> specifically eventually patched,

FWIW, even back to NR04, When the patch was done, the GD game worked, to the
reasonable ability of the game & the rules and the representation it was
attempting to make. Black flags, passing under yellow wrecks, spotters, pit
road violations, driving conditions all that taken into account.   This is
so unlike what EA produced.  IMHO they spent more time racing a car at the
track than they did writing the code and testing the game?  the only
solution is a complete code rewrite.  Not my fault, but it is true, wont
work as established, of the rules in place before the beta was even out for
private testing, only a bout 1 in 3 are done even close.   in fact that is
probably exactly why they quit fixing it, I think they have realized it is
beyond fixing...  sorry.  my guess is, that if they continue with this game,
next
release of any kind will be NSR2006.  They proven this with their other
titles.  what more proof do ya need?
last projection was at A minimum 3 patches away from a usable product...
papy's stuff was usable, might have had a glitch in scoring, or drawing the
cars or collisions (depending on your view of how important those are) but
the concept of the game, gameplay and online play were proven to run since
the 1st version (you ever hear of the online beta testing referred to as
Nascar Racing's Hawaii?) then came the1st place even have multiplayer (TEN
gaming) then one of the 1st few games to freely host open lobbies for
customers.

> You are correct. I also said as much with "Papy's practice of
> one-patch-per-game" I am glad you agree.
> By the way, why did you put the quotes around "version"

Because my point was like Madden football for christ's sake, or everything
else EA produces, they dont fix sh.t, they re release with what the
community already does on its own on this Papyrus tittle.  for cryin out
loud, if madden or tiger woods could not even keep score if you kicked a
field goal, or sacked the qb, or if sinking a 5 over par shot on the green
from the fringe more or less crashed the game for you, you would be livid!!!
you dont think a bullshit black flag by passing a car that has crashed into
the wall at full speed with 12 other cars, is a unbeliveable serious bug?

sh.t man, I mean, give some credit where credit is due, the fact that at one
track the pace car might act up, or if you followed too close to another car
as he pitted and gave you a BF, are workable & avoidable bugs, but oly way
to not get a BF while racing NSR is to sit in the pits, sorry....   IMHO.

>> most of the patches were for funky systems specs some were for
>> gameplay
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> (By "funky systems specs" I assume you mean correcting code that was
> causing lock-ups, desktop drops and the like.)

No, just one example for you, and admittely worse back then than now, bu not
unlike now there were 2 competing (3 if you count Microsoft's
dirctx) graffix card languages used to draw games to the monitors, of them
each were new, they supported and half of the 'specs' for each, there was
one standard (remember the OPENGL?) and one MFG of cards (voodoo) decide to
build their own custom language.   They were not fully used, documented, let
alone debugged, plus you had MS monkeying with everything, Back then, you
didn't necessarily have the latest and greatest everytime a game came along,
for crying out loud my 1st 3 pc's cost about 3 grand each without even a OS
on my 1st 2.  Toss into the mix the adware and crap 90% of the gaming
population have with their pc's it is a wonder some games can even run!

Oh and some MS's History for you...  this doesn't even include the long list
of DOS you could buy in the same time frames...
1983Microsoft Windows was announced November, 1983 and sells for $100.00.
1985Microsoft Windows 1.0 is introduced in November, 1985 and is initially
sold for $100.00.
1987Microsoft Windows 2.0 was released December 9, 1987 and is initially
sold for $100.00.
1987Microsoft Windows/386 or Windows 386 is introduced December 9, 1987 and
is initially sold for $100.00.
1988Microsoft Windows/286 or Windows 286 is introduced June, 1988 and is
initially sold for $100.00.
1990Microsoft Windows 3.0 was released May, 22 1990. Microsoft Windows 3.0
full version was priced at $149.95 and the upgrade version was priced at
$79.95.
1991Microsoft Windows 3.0 or Windows 3.0a with multimedia was released
October, 1991.
1992Microsoft Windows 3.1 was released April, 1992 and sells more than 1
Million copies within the first two months of its release.
1992Microsoft Windows for Workgroups 3.1 was released October, 1992.
1993Microsoft Windows NT 3.1 was released August, 1993.
1993The number of licensed users of Microsoft Windows now totals more then
25 Million.
1994Microsoft Windows for Workgroups 3.11 was released February, 1994

So now today, what are we on, like direct x revision version 23, since
inception?

In this argument....  I think it is not fair in reality to hold everyone to
a higher standard than you hold your own arguments, at least I can be
relative and correct when I said in the 1st 2 versions windows itself
compromised most of the problems, or DOS versions, but you prolly don't know
that since you prolly been gaming since what, win98 (sorry it is a guess)?
do you know my 1st PC with any version of windows, was my 2nd or 3rd PC?
and that the version I had was version 2.0 that POS operating system
wouldn't
run Nascar, but 3.1 did finally so who's fault?  I don't think it was Papy's
sorry...

>> , however NSR it is the exact opposite.
>
> You say that each and every version of NR was patched. This is true.
> It is also true that each and every version of NSR was patched. How,
> in your mind, does this make NSR "the exact opposite"?

NSR has not been patched other than to say "technically" it has because they
said so, they fixed what, how a couple things are drawn?  did they fix
multiplayer?  Fix the flags (offline) or anything? no!!!!

   did they attempt to yet? no.  did they make the game usable with the
patch as it is?  no, so how you call it a patch?  you do because it was
called a patch.  sh.t, the aftermarket cars and stuff that used to be found
online like the US-Pits would be called Patches 'technically' by your
definition.  yet I don't have to have the patch to go online NsR AFAIK.

>>  They shipped 'out the door' something that is UTTERLY worthless as
>> not only a sim, but for multiplayer.
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> worthless" characterization of NSR is simple minded.  (A pattern
> emerges.)

Not worthless as what?  I mean technically my 1st non PC computer (circa
1977 which is a TANDY 1000) is not WORHTLESS, I mean I could use it, if
nothing else as a boat anchor...    You cannot race online UNLESS you
equivocally deny any and all standards that are out for gameplay, at that
point, I say fine, you don't care it doesn't matter, but I hate it.  BTW I
liked some of NSR, do I bother to race it?  No, not where there are much
better alternatives to the POS.

>> Papyrus might have gotten off easy, in your mind because the not only
>> built the damn ruler but set the bar higher with every release and or
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> best available at the time" Run this through that mental process of
> yours and tell me how you interpret it.

Look, I had to make an assumption cause you and I aren't siskell and or
ebert
on TV, arguing across the aisle in real time, I also used that 'analogy and
statement' to impart some information to you as to why I might say it is
thumbs up or down, to me it is down, I've documented my side although thinly
here in this thread, as I could prolly write a thick book nobody wants to
read about why I say what I say...

> Just where did I imply EA had anything to bragg about?
>
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> The name "Plowboy" carries with it a stereotype you do little to
> dispell.

I finish this diviersion below...

> Pay attention while I explain. The term "turds" was introduced by
> Darius in the post I replied to. I repeated his term, *put it in
[quoted text clipped - 15 lines]
>
> An example of your rapier wit?

I thought it was funny as I think your comebacks are witty, shame you get so
pissy about it, after all it is just an arguement about an opinion.

> In order to be effective, ridicule must be based on and aimed at some
> observable aspects of the subject ridiculed.

You have no idea what Plowboy means....  But FYI, as I have grown up on the
farm, even as a kid, I have had to learn more than the quickest way across
town to earn my pay.  Im not only the financial planner, Tax Advisor, the
bread winner, I am the mechanic, the beta tester, Market Research Analysist,
sh.t scooper, I have more experience at more facits in life and work in a 12
hour day than anything short of the military (been there done that too).  On
the farm, I am all that, & the laborer & now that I am a little older, the
CEO.  So well,  it is funny how you bring all this up earlier and again now
in your diatribe against me?

Me thinks you are living the stereo type protrayed by hollywood there, you
and put out there that plowboy is "well goooo ooooo leeeeee seargeant, I
didnt know pushing on the gas pedal would make the jeep run over your
foot!!!!"  where in fact everything you have put out on this topic makes me
think Gomer Pyle.  "NSR is just great, if you dont speed in the pits, dont
want to run in any organized online events, turn off all the rules and
flags... yada yada.."   the list runs on and on with you.

> attempts at ridicule are only pathetic, simple-minded name calling. There
> are only a few posts from me in this thread so you should have
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> Darius" so you can gibber and giggle at him for saying:  "Joe You
> make some valid points."

Hell, maybe he thought you had some?  I didnt didnt mean I dont like you
btw, I didnt like your opinion but sh.t man, I dont like all of my friends'
opinions of  everything, sh.t.
>> Here's the rest of the sim racing community,
>> "Need For Speed?"  That is like saying Mongoose Bicycles (in
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> Forgive me Plowboy. I did not realize you are the spokesman for "the
>rest of the sim racing community"

well again, I been online long time, I personally think most were, maybe
most of my online generation is gone from here....

> If you are saying that NSR (Mongoose Bicycles) is "not bad compared
> to" and is "the same dollar price" as NR2003 (Schwin) then yes, that
> is indeed "BOLOGNA!!!!"

> Just where exactly did I ever state otherwise?

Would that be where you said NR4 & NR02 were exactly like NsR (version 1)?

OOOOKKKKAAAAAYYYYYY then.

last thing:

    By any chance do you own a car?  does the 1999 version of the honda
accord seem to be so radically different than the version made in 96?  how
about 2005?  are they not 2 or 4 door front wheel drive automobiles?  with
some mentality, How dare honda not make a complete and different car every
year?  hmmmm....  but, if no, why buy it?

More to the point here as I see it:
Lets compare the HONDA (papyrus's product) to the Yugo (NSR's product) or
even say, the 74 Pinto?  Which would you want to own, even when both were
built the same year (and there was a year they both were new models with the
timespan difference we're talking about here with NR4, 02, & 03 and NSR?
Yet we'd have to modify this to say they cost the same price at the dealer
(unlike the real comparison of the honda vs yugo, & Pinto (especially if you
took away the tarrifs from imports....  HMMMMMM?)

ANSWER THE QUESTION????
John Simmons - 14 Jul 2005 10:22 GMT
> I have both NR2003 and NASCAR Simracing.  I am what might be called a casual
> player. I have not raced for a while and have been thinking about getting
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> $100 it seems to me that new guys willing to pay that just to try online
> racing will be few and far between. If true this cannot be good.

I use NR2K3, and have never tried that other game. A number of folks are
doing LFS and/or GTR.  With FIRST stepping on it's own dick, a lot of
people are waiting for rFactor (August? September?).

rFactor mods are already under construction for the 1970 grand national
mod, and there may even be an aero88 mod for it as well.  There will
most certainly be a modern stockcar mod for it, too.  On top of that,
various grand am, trans-am, open-wheel, and other mods are being
planned.  Look for a lot of 3rd-party support from The Pits.
jason moyer - 14 Jul 2005 13:39 GMT
I wonder if people are going to still be gaga about rFactor after it's
been out 3 months and everyone sees the same problems all of ISI's
other sims had.  I wish them well with this new engine, but I've had
the same criticisms of each successive release since SCGT.  Playing the
MP demo, I hope the code isn't optimized because it reminds me of
SCGT/F1-2000 in that the framerate is way too low for something with
that graphical quality.
Dave Henrie - 14 Jul 2005 13:59 GMT
"jason moyer" <jmoyer@pair.com> wrote in news:1121344767.775973.220980
@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com:

> I wonder if people are going to still be gaga about rFactor after it's
> been out 3 months and everyone sees the same problems all of ISI's
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> SCGT/F1-2000 in that the framerate is way too low for something with
> that graphical quality.

  Framerate issues are not something I've seen complaints about yet.  
Realize in the demo, a portion of the physics engine and a portion of the
graphics engine are disabled.  So the drag on your system will probably
increase with the final product.  Next, fps are 'usually' better in online
situations than offline, so if you run offline with a large pack, then even
more fps will drain away.  
  I'd start googling for fps improvements from the older titles and see if
you can find something to help your system.  Hanje's site is pretty
thorough.

dave henrie
jason moyer - 15 Jul 2005 02:53 GMT
>    I'd start googling for fps improvements from the older titles and see if
> you can find something to help your system.  Hanje's site is pretty
> thorough.

For comparison, I can run the v8 mod at any track with a full field and
it never dips below 50 fps.
Andrew MacPherson - 14 Jul 2005 21:11 GMT
> I wonder if people are going to still be gaga about rFactor
> after it's been out 3 months

Life is a triumph of hope over experience. The journey is what
matters, not the destination.

Andrew "fortune cookie" McP
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2009 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.