NSR Review By Randy Magruder

In article >, "Steve Smith" > wrote:

[ Gran Turismo series]

>The physics model is
>credible, the AI is about as good as you'd find in the SCCA run-offs (minus
>a few A.J. Allmendingers),
[...]
> and you get to drive hundreds
>of cars on dozens of tracks. For fifty bucks. What's not to like?

Not sure what to make of your SCCA comment. A quip or not?
Anyway, I'd have to say that the AI is perhaps GT's weakest
element. Horrible. Follows the line regardless of your position.
Classic smash into you to make a turn (sometimes it is the worst
choice to be slightly in front coming into the last turn).
Typical console rubber-band AI that slows when you lag and speeds
up when you are ahead. It works for gameplay, but interrupts
suspension of disbelief.

Then, of course, is the lack of any dash or fender work, i.e.
its a HUD type view. I can live with that. Next for many is the
lack of damage. To some a killer, to me not a big issue.

But as Steve said: 700 cars in the latest game, probably
including your personal ride. Good physics (some say great,
others say mediocre - who to believe?). Countless hours of
hot-lapping fun. Latest one has the 'Ring as well as a few other
real tracks.

I bought a PSX for GT, a PS2 for GT3. It was worth it.

Dave wrote:
> In article >, "Steve Smith" > wrote:
>>The physics model is
>>credible, the AI is about as good as you'd find in the SCCA run-offs (minus
>>a few A.J. Allmendingers),
>
>
> Not sure what to make of your SCCA comment. A quip or not?

I thought it was pretty funny (as a Regional driver), considering some
of the "racecraft" displayed year after year with inconsistent (or
generally nonexistant) penalties.

Touring 2 was a mess last year, with lots of red mist, and boneheaded
moves. GT3 featured a "lead change" of which Earnhardt would've been
proud. Ditto SSC, albeit with an actual penalty. GT2 featured a
similar "lead change" gone wrong, allowing 3rd to win.

-jde

Ok, I never got to the SCCA run-offs - maybe those guys are better than the
clowns in GT3. (George Carlin's classic remark: anybody driving slower than
you are is an "idiot"; and anybody driving faster than you are is a
"maniac".) But in my experience in SCCA Regionals and Nationals, club
drivers are very little--if any--better than the AIs in GT3.

"Dave" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, "Steve Smith"
> wrote:
>
> [ Gran Turismo series]
>
> >The physics model is
> >credible, the AI is about as good as you'd find in the SCCA run-offs
(minus
> >a few A.J. Allmendingers),
> [...]
> > and you get to drive hundreds
> >of cars on dozens of tracks. For fifty bucks. What's not to like?
>
> Not sure what to make of your SCCA comment. A quip or not?
> Anyway, I'd have to say that the AI is perhaps GT's weakest
> element. Horrible. Follows the line regardless of your position.
> Classic smash into you to make a turn (sometimes it is the worst
> choice to be slightly in front coming into the last turn).
> Typical console rubber-band AI that slows when you lag and speeds
> up when you are ahead. It works for gameplay, but interrupts
> suspension of disbelief.
>
> Then, of course, is the lack of any dash or fender work, i.e.
> its a HUD type view. I can live with that. Next for many is the
> lack of damage. To some a killer, to me not a big issue.
>
> But as Steve said: 700 cars in the latest game, probably
> including your personal ride. Good physics (some say great,
> others say mediocre - who to believe?). Countless hours of
> hot-lapping fun. Latest one has the 'Ring as well as a few other
> real tracks.
>
> I bought a PSX for GT, a PS2 for GT3. It was worth it.

I don't think of myself as a quipster, more like a bloviator.

"J.D. Ellis" > wrote in message
...
> Dave wrote:
> > In article >, "Steve Smith"
> wrote:
> >>The physics model is
> >>credible, the AI is about as good as you'd find in the SCCA run-offs
(minus
> >>a few A.J. Allmendingers),
> >
> >
> > Not sure what to make of your SCCA comment. A quip or not?
>
> I thought it was pretty funny (as a Regional driver), considering some
> of the "racecraft" displayed year after year with inconsistent (or
> generally nonexistant) penalties.
>
> Touring 2 was a mess last year, with lots of red mist, and boneheaded
> moves. GT3 featured a "lead change" of which Earnhardt would've been
> proud. Ditto SSC, albeit with an actual penalty. GT2 featured a
> similar "lead change" gone wrong, allowing 3rd to win.
>
> -jde
>
>
>
>
>

> wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> not spam wrote:
>> On 18 Feb 2005 03:12:13 -0800, wrote:
>>
>> >A very good review for what is clearly the new benchmark for Nascar
>> >simulations.
>> >
>> >Let's hope EA's reign will be at least as long as Papyrus's was.
>> It will be as long as they keep paying money to keep real competition
>> out. Screw EA. I hate to rain on your parade.
>
> Have you even tried the sim?
>

can't believe this sim is rated so high in this article. At times it is
promising but really it's more like a glorified nascar heat (which was fun
to mess with in its time but it is now 2005). The cts use a generic truck
instead of the four manufacturers. Been tweaking and messing with it over
the last few days. Said the heck with it a few hours ago and ran a long
daytona cts race in N2003. The difference in quality with all the gfx
updates and ai modding is almost a joke.

Only chance for this release is that the modders turn it into something
decent.

My 2 cents..

DC

Hi guys,

Wow, can't believe the size of this thread. It hadn't even occurred to
me to pop in here and see what people were saying. It's nice to know
some people remember me anyway (for better or worse).

Okay, a few comments -- 1st, the first time I drove NSR it was
pre-release and the physics definitely had that ISI icy feel and I
didn't feel like I could 'feel' the car. I did complain...but also I
noticed part of the problem was I still driving the car like I expected
it to drive like NR 2003. I had to sort of 'unlearn' a few of my
NR2003 habits because the physics model is definitely different. The
more time I spent with it, the more hooked I got. As with Grand Prix
Legends and a very few other sims, physics is the king, and when it's
done right, the score shoots up in my book. Maybe too high for some,
but we all have our priorities.

Also, if any of you have the NASCAR 2 manual from Papyrus, you'll see
me in the back credited as a beta tester. So I've been a Papy fan
going back to Indy Car I. I have vivid memories of Papyrus releases
where the rules governing the AI, the flag system, etc came out buggy.
It took Papyrus lots patches and annual revs to get it to where NR2003
was, but somehow the game still scored very highly the whole time. If
this were a console game and it shipped with these problems, I probably
would have knocked it down an entire point because there's no
'patchability' inherent in console games. I try to write reviews with
a bit of the long run in mind, and there's no such thing as a PC game
that doesn't get patched 50 times these days to fix these kinds of
problems. Now, if the shortcomings were in the PHYSICS arena, that's
death to the thing. You don't "patch" a crummy physics model. You
*can* patch things like rules glitches. So that's the way I look at
it. I also biased my review more towards online racing than offline
racing, and some people might disagree with that. At any rate, I do
understand those people who say I rated it too high. I know where they
are coming from, but I do stand by my score. It's been a long time
since I thoroughly got addicted to a NASCAR sim. To be honest, late
nights online with NR2003 I have been known to nod off. Once into a
rhythm, it can be very easy to get 'highway hypnosis' late at night.
For some reason, I'm able to do very long races in NSR and the physics
engine keeps me on my toes, more like the way GPL used to keep me on my
toes online (okay, not nearly as squirrelly, but you get the idea).
'nuff said. I will stand by my review and defend it -- I like the
developers at EA that I've met, but some of them have been on this for
several years, and I haven't given them a pass in all the reviews up to
this point, and I'm not starting now. In fact, their console NASCAR
titles SUCKED this year, and they KNOW I feel that way. So disagree
with me if you want, tell me I'm on mushrooms, but don't tell me that
I'm sucking up to EA, because that dog don't hunt.

Let me clarify about Gran Turismo. I loved GT's *driving* model, but
it was at its best when you used "Simulation tires" (a lot of people
never bothered messing with them or knew they existed) as they took out
some of the ease of going into and out of slides. But GT3 (and now
GT4) *Suck* as racing games. No damage, AI that slams into you
stupidly, cars bouncing off each other and leaning on one another, only
6 cars on the track, the whole "I'll win easily with just one more
upgrade" approach to driving, etc. Just a lousy RACING GAME. But a
great 'driving game. I love just driving laps in it in the various
cars. The actual racing on it is just a necessary evil to get access
to the cool cars and tracks. I had hoped the GT team would actually
address this stuff, but not to be. Oh well, the new Logitech 900
degree wheel is cool.

I've also been using the NaturalPoint Track IR device on the PC and
that totally rocks. And of course I'm trying out games like GTR, Live
for Speed, and whatever else is out there these days....so there ya're.

FOr those that know me, good to see ya again, sorry I've been
incommunicado for awhile ... raising kids and a long commute do that to
one...

Cheers,

Randy

LNWD 10 year reunion planned?

Terry


"rmagruder" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Hi guys,
>
> Wow, can't believe the size of this thread. It hadn't even occurred to
> me to pop in here and see what people were saying. It's nice to know
> some people remember me anyway (for better or worse).
>
> Okay, a few comments -- 1st, the first time I drove NSR it was
> pre-release and the physics definitely had that ISI icy feel and I
> didn't feel like I could 'feel' the car. I did complain...but also I
> noticed part of the problem was I still driving the car like I expected
> it to drive like NR 2003. I had to sort of 'unlearn' a few of my
> NR2003 habits because the physics model is definitely different. The
> more time I spent with it, the more hooked I got. As with Grand Prix
> Legends and a very few other sims, physics is the king, and when it's
> done right, the score shoots up in my book. Maybe too high for some,
> but we all have our priorities.
>
> Also, if any of you have the NASCAR 2 manual from Papyrus, you'll see
> me in the back credited as a beta tester. So I've been a Papy fan
> going back to Indy Car I. I have vivid memories of Papyrus releases
> where the rules governing the AI, the flag system, etc came out buggy.
> It took Papyrus lots patches and annual revs to get it to where NR2003
> was, but somehow the game still scored very highly the whole time. If
> this were a console game and it shipped with these problems, I probably
> would have knocked it down an entire point because there's no
> 'patchability' inherent in console games. I try to write reviews with
> a bit of the long run in mind, and there's no such thing as a PC game
> that doesn't get patched 50 times these days to fix these kinds of
> problems. Now, if the shortcomings were in the PHYSICS arena, that's
> death to the thing. You don't "patch" a crummy physics model. You
> *can* patch things like rules glitches. So that's the way I look at
> it. I also biased my review more towards online racing than offline
> racing, and some people might disagree with that. At any rate, I do
> understand those people who say I rated it too high. I know where they
> are coming from, but I do stand by my score. It's been a long time
> since I thoroughly got addicted to a NASCAR sim. To be honest, late
> nights online with NR2003 I have been known to nod off. Once into a
> rhythm, it can be very easy to get 'highway hypnosis' late at night.
> For some reason, I'm able to do very long races in NSR and the physics
> engine keeps me on my toes, more like the way GPL used to keep me on my
> toes online (okay, not nearly as squirrelly, but you get the idea).
> 'nuff said. I will stand by my review and defend it -- I like the
> developers at EA that I've met, but some of them have been on this for
> several years, and I haven't given them a pass in all the reviews up to
> this point, and I'm not starting now. In fact, their console NASCAR
> titles SUCKED this year, and they KNOW I feel that way. So disagree
> with me if you want, tell me I'm on mushrooms, but don't tell me that
> I'm sucking up to EA, because that dog don't hunt.
>
> Let me clarify about Gran Turismo. I loved GT's *driving* model, but
> it was at its best when you used "Simulation tires" (a lot of people
> never bothered messing with them or knew they existed) as they took out
> some of the ease of going into and out of slides. But GT3 (and now
> GT4) *Suck* as racing games. No damage, AI that slams into you
> stupidly, cars bouncing off each other and leaning on one another, only
> 6 cars on the track, the whole "I'll win easily with just one more
> upgrade" approach to driving, etc. Just a lousy RACING GAME. But a
> great 'driving game. I love just driving laps in it in the various
> cars. The actual racing on it is just a necessary evil to get access
> to the cool cars and tracks. I had hoped the GT team would actually
> address this stuff, but not to be. Oh well, the new Logitech 900
> degree wheel is cool.
>
> I've also been using the NaturalPoint Track IR device on the PC and
> that totally rocks. And of course I'm trying out games like GTR, Live
> for Speed, and whatever else is out there these days....so there ya're.
>
> FOr those that know me, good to see ya again, sorry I've been
> incommunicado for awhile ... raising kids and a long commute do that to
> one...
>
> Cheers,
>
> Randy
>

LOL! Actually Dave S and are I doing some racing online together with
NSR.



Terry wrote:

> LNWD 10 year reunion planned?
>
> Terry
>
>
> "rmagruder" > wrote in message
> oups.com...
> > Hi guys,
> >
> > Wow, can't believe the size of this thread. It hadn't even
> > occurred to me to pop in here and see what people were saying.
> > It's nice to know some people remember me anyway (for better or
> > worse).
> >
> > Okay, a few comments -- 1st, the first time I drove NSR it was
> > pre-release and the physics definitely had that ISI icy feel and I
> > didn't feel like I could 'feel' the car. I did complain...but
> > also I noticed part of the problem was I still driving the car like
> > I expected it to drive like NR 2003. I had to sort of 'unlearn' a
> > few of my NR2003 habits because the physics model is definitely
> > different. The more time I spent with it, the more hooked I got.
> > As with Grand Prix Legends and a very few other sims, physics is
> > the king, and when it's done right, the score shoots up in my book.
> > Maybe too high for some, but we all have our priorities.
> >
> > Also, if any of you have the NASCAR 2 manual from Papyrus, you'll
> > see me in the back credited as a beta tester. So I've been a Papy
> > fan going back to Indy Car I. I have vivid memories of Papyrus
> > releases where the rules governing the AI, the flag system, etc
> > came out buggy. It took Papyrus lots patches and annual revs to
> > get it to where NR2003 was, but somehow the game still scored very
> > highly the whole time. If this were a console game and it shipped
> > with these problems, I probably would have knocked it down an
> > entire point because there's no 'patchability' inherent in console
> > games. I try to write reviews with a bit of the long run in mind,
> > and there's no such thing as a PC game that doesn't get patched 50
> > times these days to fix these kinds of problems. Now, if the
> > shortcomings were in the PHYSICS arena, that's death to the thing.
> > You don't "patch" a crummy physics model. You can patch things
> > like rules glitches. So that's the way I look at it. I also
> > biased my review more towards online racing than offline racing,
> > and some people might disagree with that. At any rate, I do
> > understand those people who say I rated it too high. I know where
> > they are coming from, but I do stand by my score. It's been a long
> > time since I thoroughly got addicted to a NASCAR sim. To be
> > honest, late nights online with NR2003 I have been known to nod
> > off. Once into a rhythm, it can be very easy to get 'highway
> > hypnosis' late at night. For some reason, I'm able to do very long
> > races in NSR and the physics engine keeps me on my toes, more like
> > the way GPL used to keep me on my toes online (okay, not nearly as
> > squirrelly, but you get the idea). 'nuff said. I will stand by my
> > review and defend it -- I like the developers at EA that I've met,
> > but some of them have been on this for several years, and I haven't
> > given them a pass in all the reviews up to this point, and I'm not
> > starting now. In fact, their console NASCAR titles SUCKED this
> > year, and they KNOW I feel that way. So disagree with me if you
> > want, tell me I'm on mushrooms, but don't tell me that I'm sucking
> > up to EA, because that dog don't hunt.
> >
> > Let me clarify about Gran Turismo. I loved GT's driving model, but
> > it was at its best when you used "Simulation tires" (a lot of people
> > never bothered messing with them or knew they existed) as they took
> > out some of the ease of going into and out of slides. But GT3 (and
> > now GT4) Suck as racing games. No damage, AI that slams into you
> > stupidly, cars bouncing off each other and leaning on one another,
> > only 6 cars on the track, the whole "I'll win easily with just one
> > more upgrade" approach to driving, etc. Just a lousy RACING GAME.
> > But a great 'driving game. I love just driving laps in it in the
> > various cars. The actual racing on it is just a necessary evil to
> > get access to the cool cars and tracks. I had hoped the GT team
> > would actually address this stuff, but not to be. Oh well, the new
> > Logitech 900 degree wheel is cool.
> >
> > I've also been using the NaturalPoint Track IR device on the PC and
> > that totally rocks. And of course I'm trying out games like GTR,
> > Live for Speed, and whatever else is out there these days....so
> > there ya're.
> >
> > FOr those that know me, good to see ya again, sorry I've been
> > incommunicado for awhile ... raising kids and a long commute do
> > that to one...
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Randy
> >