N3 - Realistic Expectations
Andrew Britton
We've been told not to expect the GPL physics but an overhauled N2
version. That is acceptable due to the fact that if its going to take a
P4-1ghz machine to produce 30 fps offline then can you imagine what it
will take online.
Racing AI opponents is safe, cheap, and fun (for awhile). Once you've
had a taste of online gaming whether its DeathMatch Half-Life or NROS on
TEN then its very hard to be drawn towards AI opponents.
If Sierra/Papyrus has put together a solid multiplayer product with N3
then it will be a success. There will always be the desires for
flipping, better AI, 43 car field, better graphics, more realism such as
weather, debris, and mishaps in the pits. There will always be physics
desires to separate the Nascar sims from other racing "games". BUT, I
have to believe the ability to race via the internet with at least 20
car fields and do so for free... that will be a hit.
If a huge Counterstrike map can exist with up to 32 individuals running
around spraying bullets, moving in true 3D worlds, including under
water, and up/down elevators then 20 to 30 cars going in circles should
not be TOO much data to handle.
TEN appears to be great for leagues but pickup races are always
fiascos. If you use their free service then you get only Atlanta and
Watkins. I'm not sure what it takes for Half-Life (also a Sierra
product) to have its 32000 servers thru WON but I would have to imagine
that NASCAR & GPL could work as well.
Then again, maybe thats why I only "buy" the games and not write them
:) Anyway, I'll buy it the day it hits the shelf. I'm sure it will
fall short of many expectations in several areas, but with SOLID
multiplayer support then I believe it will be very popular.
We'll see.
Andrew B.
Bill Bollinger
Ed Bain wrote in message <37d809d0...@news.mindspring.com>...
>
>I hope you realize that people who play multiplayer constitute a
>VERY small portion of the overall sales of any game.
>
>You understand that, don't you?
You understand where the future of gaming and particular Sim-Racing is
headed? You should also do the math and analysis of how many people and or
market penatration you need to equal just 250,000 retail sales. I have it
figured on or about 10,000 paying sim-racers. That means those 10,000 sim
racers will equal in total revenue approx 250,000 retail sales. NOT a huge
leap especially considering where we are today. The future is with racing
against real people, NOT AI cars. The problem is the ease of entry and the
quality of play. Right now it takes someone who is willing to tweek their
systems and live in a good area for internet access to have good quality of
play. Therefore, do YOU understand the importance of online racing?
Bill / Amish on TEN
Adam
The number of people looking for good MP games is growing larger and
larger......hence why some ONLINE-ONLY games are VERY VERY popular.
(Everquest, UO, soon to be Q3A)
Time to realize that just cause you don't care about MP, you are slowly
becoming part of the minority, and not the majority.
Ed Bain <em...@bottom.com> wrote in message
news:37d809d0...@news.mindspring.com...
> On Sun, 05 Sep 1999 17:05:26 -0700,
> in msg <37D30546...@san.rr.com>,
> Andrew Britton <abri...@san.rr.com> said :
>
> >The "be all - end all" for N3 will be its multiplayer support.
> >
>
> I doubt that, very seriously.
>
> >
> >Racing AI opponents is safe, cheap, and fun (for awhile). Once you've
> >had a taste of online gaming whether its DeathMatch Half-Life or NROS on
> >TEN then its very hard to be drawn towards AI opponents.
> >
>
> I've had several 'tastes' of MP and I prefer solo play.
>
> >If Sierra/Papyrus has put together a solid multiplayer product with N3
> >then it will be a success.
>
> N3 -will- be a success because of Papyrus' reputation for good sims
> and having the Nascar logo on the box, not whether it provides
> great MP.
>
> I hope you realize that people who play multiplayer constitute a
> VERY small portion of the overall sales of any game.
>
> You understand that, don't you?
>
> --
> * rrevved at mindspring dot com
Ken Hower
> around spraying bullets, moving in true 3D worlds, including under
> water, and up/down elevators then 20 to 30 cars going in circles should
> not be TOO much data to handle.
20 or 30 cars is a LOT of data. 20 racers is about 600 packets a second.
Miss one second of data, and at 200MPH, your car has moved hundreds of
feet..
Racing is probably the most demanding product on servers, routers, etc.
Slow latency= lousy racing.
Regards,
Ken Hower
OSCAR Admin
Cooter
BrittoEd > >The "be all - end all" for N3 will be its multiplayer support.
> >
>
> I doubt that, very seriously.
>
> >
> >Racing AI opponents is safe, cheap, and fun (for awhile). Once you've
> >had a taste of online gaming whether its DeathMatch Half-Life or NROS on
> >TEN then its very hard to be drawn towards AI opponents.
> >
>
> I've had several 'tastes' of MP and I prefer solo play.
>
> >If Sierra/Papyrus has put together a solid multiplayer product with N3
> >then it will be a success.
>
> N3 -will- be a success because of Papyrus' reputation for good sims
> and having the Nascar logo on the box, not whether it provides
> great MP.
>
> I hope you realize that people who play multiplayer constitute a
> VERY small portion of the overall sales of any game.
>
> You understand that, don't you?
> * rrevved at mindspring dot com
If multiplayer and single play are options why would It make a difference to
you?
Multiplayer capability IS the future of gaming, any developer that hasn't
figured that out will be left picking crumbs. Spearheading and on the
cutting edge Is Motorsims who developed AMA Superbike using multiplayer as
the base priority which emphasizes Mplay but will no doubt have single
play/AI mode. If you prefer not to play against human beings that's your
decision. You should try It, you might like It!
Some prefer to play with others and some prefer to play with themselves.
You understand that don't you?
Coot
Andrew Britton
(remember those days) kicked off with N1, that was an INCREDIBLE rush. The
multiplayer experience far exceeds what the AI will do for you.
The sales will be there, it will be a financial success, but will I be
playing it every day? Without solid MP... it will be played at times. The
AI experience never gets your hands sweaty or your heart racing fast...
NEVER... why? You "know" that there isn't another person at the other end.
Its also pretty cool when you're part of a racing team, using RogerWilco
during the race is a fun experience. Those AI drivers don't like to chat
much.
Every carset can be tweaked to know which driver is going to run strong or
weak. With multiplayer... it involves more skill.. and luck for that
matter... no CTL-R to start the race over.
Oh yeah, the ability to meet new people and make friends is pretty cool too.
Andrew "bot" B.
Ed Bain wrote:
> On Sun, 05 Sep 1999 17:05:26 -0700,
> in msg <37D30546...@san.rr.com>,
> Andrew Britton <abri...@san.rr.com> said :
>
> >The "be all - end all" for N3 will be its multiplayer support.
> >
>
> I doubt that, very seriously.
>
> >
> >Racing AI opponents is safe, cheap, and fun (for awhile). Once you've
> >had a taste of online gaming whether its DeathMatch Half-Life or NROS on
> >TEN then its very hard to be drawn towards AI opponents.
> >
>
> I've had several 'tastes' of MP and I prefer solo play.
>
> >If Sierra/Papyrus has put together a solid multiplayer product with N3
> >then it will be a success.
>
> N3 -will- be a success because of Papyrus' reputation for good sims
> and having the Nascar logo on the box, not whether it provides
> great MP.
>
> I hope you realize that people who play multiplayer constitute a
> VERY small portion of the overall sales of any game.
>
> You understand that, don't you?
>
> --
Mike White
Jon Van Ginneken wrote in message <5KHA3.171$9b.2...@news.goodnet.com>...
>I don't know about that...racing games also include a prediction of what's
>gonna happen, from what I understand. So missed packets wouldn't really
>hurt it that bad....
>
>Also a bullet travels 3x faster than a racecar, and were talking about life
>or death here. :-)
>
>Jon
>
Jon,
If a bullet is in the wrong position due to latency, or dropped packets,
it's just considered a bad shot if it missed or a lucky shot if it hit.
A car in the wrong position due to latency, or dropped packets is usually
called a wreck.
Ed Bain
Tim (fusion1)
[snip]
>play. Therefore, do YOU understand the importance of online racing?
I'm with Bill and Andrew on this one.
Even though I never got into GPL online (only because I never had the
time to invest to get good offline), there is nothing like a human
opponent. Even a rather arcadish racing game like Motocross Madness is
an absolute blast when you throw in the unpredictability and
competitive drive of other humans.
There is also a certain satisfaction to beating them that is
enormously more gratifying than defeating a computer opponent.
Also important is that it adds to the staying power of a game/sim
exponentially. I haven't played an offline game of MXMadness since a
month after it came out, but I've played online about 3 times a week
from the time I got it.
Had it not had online play, it would basically have been a dust
collector by now. As it is, I got *great* bang for my buck.
I know Ten and NROS offered this stuff, but with N3 it should be more
accessible.
Fast internet connections are becoming more common, making the whole
situation much more feasible.
Cable is available in my area now, and I'm ecstatic. I can't wait to
do some online paint swapping with fellow RAS'ers. :-)
--
Tim (fus...@fast.net)
http://www.users.fast.net/~fusion1
(dirt bikes, rat bikes, rental car abuse...)
Tracey Miller
>
> Ed Bain wrote
> >I hope you realize that people who play multiplayer constitute a
> >VERY small portion of the overall sales of any game.
> >
> >You understand that, don't you?
> Therefore, do YOU understand the importance of online racing?
>
> Bill / Amish on TEN
I think you are both right.
A company could make a lot of money selling a small number of units if
they all signed up to pay for play online service.
But with the cost of labor, hardware, and bandwidth I think the numbers
would need to be higher than 10,000.
A company could also make a lot of money without investing a dime in
online support as long as they sold enough copies - your 250,000 number
would probably turn a nice profit.
So either way the product could be successful, but since Sierra appears
to have no plans for a pay per play service with NASCAR 3, it really
doesn't matter one lick how good the multiplayer is. As long as those
other 240,000 people that have no interest in multiplayer buy the
product, NASCAR 3 will be successful.
The real make or break is whether enough people agree with the reviews
that we have seen so far, that this is more than a patch for NASCAR
1999. A lot of people felt ripped off by NASCAR 1999 and more recently
NASCAR Revolution, so the market may not be as friendly as Sierra seems
to think. Small things like the Brickyard being included, or Jeff
Gordon not being included, will have more effect on N3 sales than our
multiplayer concerns. Not everyone is like us in believing that it is
"no big deal" to have to download a patch from the internet to get
their favorite driver, car make, or track.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
Ben Coleman
reckon the tweaking that's been happening with GPL is just testing for N3)
and it would be a blast. AI will always be more predictable and thus less
fun to race (IMO).
Ben
Tim (fusion1) wrote in message <37d34ee3...@news.fast.net>...
Jon Van Ginneken
gonna happen, from what I understand. So missed packets wouldn't really
hurt it that bad....
Also a bullet travels 3x faster than a racecar, and were talking about life
or death here. :-)
Jon
Ken Hower <Ke...@ten.net> wrote in message
news:7qve9r$4...@chronicle.concentric.net...
Bob Davidson
> Actually, it is not a VERY small number of people who care about MP.
>The number of people looking for good MP games is growing larger and
>larger......hence why some ONLINE-ONLY games are VERY VERY popular.
>(Everquest, UO, soon to be Q3A)
> Time to realize that just cause you don't care about MP, you are slowly
>becoming part of the minority, and not the majority.
>
>
Everything grows "larger and larger": the population, the online gamer
population AND the gaming population in general. However, that doesn't
change the fact that online gamers are a very, very small minority.
Face the facts, of the droves of people that buy computer games only a
small group care enough about them to actually go online and play.
BD
John Bodin
>>gonna happen, from what I understand. So missed packets wouldn't really
>>hurt it that bad....
>>
>>Also a bullet travels 3x faster than a racecar, and were talking about
life
>>or death here. :-)
>>
>>Jon
>>
>
>
>
>If a bullet is in the wrong position due to latency, or dropped packets,
>it's just considered a bad shot if it missed or a lucky shot if it hit.
>
>A car in the wrong position due to latency, or dropped packets is usually
>called a wreck.
LOL! ROTFPP!
Bruce Kennewell
whilst completely true, is not recognised by the tiny number of sim buyers
who (a) frequent this group and (b) use on-line play.
Ed Bain <em...@bottom.com> wrote in message
news:37d809d0...@news.mindspring.com...
> On Sun, 05 Sep 1999 17:05:26 -0700,
> in msg <37D30546...@san.rr.com>,
> Andrew Britton <abri...@san.rr.com> said :
>
> >The "be all - end all" for N3 will be its multiplayer support.
> >
>
> I doubt that, very seriously.
>
> >
> >Racing AI opponents is safe, cheap, and fun (for awhile). Once you've
> >had a taste of online gaming whether its DeathMatch Half-Life or NROS on
> >TEN then its very hard to be drawn towards AI opponents.
> >
>
> I've had several 'tastes' of MP and I prefer solo play.
>
> >If Sierra/Papyrus has put together a solid multiplayer product with N3
> >then it will be a success.
>
> N3 -will- be a success because of Papyrus' reputation for good sims
> and having the Nascar logo on the box, not whether it provides
> great MP.
>
> I hope you realize that people who play multiplayer constitute a
> VERY small portion of the overall sales of any game.
>
> You understand that, don't you?
>
> --
> * rrevved at mindspring dot com
-----------== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
http://www.newsfeeds.com The Largest Usenet Servers in the World!
------== Over 73,000 Newsgroups - Including Dedicated Binaries Servers ==-----
Bruce Kennewell
yet the percentage of those who buy to play on-line still remains small in
comparison to those who play off-line.
The majority of retail customers who seriously game on-line is miniscule.
One of the most popular on-line simulation genres for many years has been
the combat flight sim (Warbirds and Air Warrior in particular) yet the
numbers who regularly take part are insignificant in comparison to the total
sales of such simulations.
There is a misconception held by dedicated "on-line" people who converse
regularly here that their interest represents those of the majority of
simmers. I assure you that is not the case: the majority of retail
customers don't know and don't care. They simply want to be entertained by
what they have just bought; to get their money's worth from it before being
attracted to something newer and brighter and possibly more entertaining.
It's as simple as that, mate.
Bill Bollinger <bric...@racingforfun.com> wrote in message
news:7qv6mv$81i$1...@ash.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
>
> Ed Bain wrote in message <37d809d0...@news.mindspring.com>...
> >
> >I hope you realize that people who play multiplayer constitute a
> >VERY small portion of the overall sales of any game.
> >
> >You understand that, don't you?
>
>
> You understand where the future of gaming and particular Sim-Racing is
> headed? You should also do the math and analysis of how many people and
or
> market penatration you need to equal just 250,000 retail sales. I have it
> figured on or about 10,000 paying sim-racers. That means those 10,000 sim
> racers will equal in total revenue approx 250,000 retail sales. NOT a
huge
> leap especially considering where we are today. The future is with racing
> against real people, NOT AI cars. The problem is the ease of entry and
the
> quality of play. Right now it takes someone who is willing to tweek their
> systems and live in a good area for internet access to have good quality
of
> play. Therefore, do YOU understand the importance of online racing?
>
>
> Bill / Amish on TEN
>
>
>
>
>
>
Bruce Kennewell
Whilst growing, the on-line fraternity is still a tiny minority of the total
who buy simulations (or any other multi-gaming software).
Adam <nos...@nospam.com> wrote in message news:GrGA3.4683$mo.200164@viper...
> Actually, it is not a VERY small number of people who care about MP.
> The number of people looking for good MP games is growing larger and
> larger......hence why some ONLINE-ONLY games are VERY VERY popular.
> (Everquest, UO, soon to be Q3A)
> Time to realize that just cause you don't care about MP, you are
slowly
> becoming part of the minority, and not the majority.
>
>
> Ed Bain <em...@bottom.com> wrote in message
> news:37d809d0...@news.mindspring.com...
> > On Sun, 05 Sep 1999 17:05:26 -0700,
> > in msg <37D30546...@san.rr.com>,
> > Andrew Britton <abri...@san.rr.com> said :
> >
> > >The "be all - end all" for N3 will be its multiplayer support.
> > >
> >
> > I doubt that, very seriously.
> >
> > >
> > >Racing AI opponents is safe, cheap, and fun (for awhile). Once you've
> > >had a taste of online gaming whether its DeathMatch Half-Life or NROS
on
> > >TEN then its very hard to be drawn towards AI opponents.
> > >
> >
> > I've had several 'tastes' of MP and I prefer solo play.
> >
> > >If Sierra/Papyrus has put together a solid multiplayer product with N3
> > >then it will be a success.
> >
> > N3 -will- be a success because of Papyrus' reputation for good sims
> > and having the Nascar logo on the box, not whether it provides
> > great MP.
> >
> > I hope you realize that people who play multiplayer constitute a
> > VERY small portion of the overall sales of any game.
> >
> > You understand that, don't you?
> >
> > --
> > * rrevved at mindspring dot com
>
>
Ed Bain
in msg <pbHA3.502$e4....@news1.iquest.net>,
"Cooter" <coo...@shinybeast.net> said :
>
>BrittoEd > >The "be all - end all" for N3 will be its multiplayer support.
>> >
>>
>> I doubt that, very seriously.
>>
>> >
>> >Racing AI opponents is safe, cheap, and fun (for awhile). Once you've
>> >had a taste of online gaming whether its DeathMatch Half-Life or NROS on
>> >TEN then its very hard to be drawn towards AI opponents.
>> >
>>
>> I've had several 'tastes' of MP and I prefer solo play.
>>
>> >If Sierra/Papyrus has put together a solid multiplayer product with N3
>> >then it will be a success.
>>
>> N3 -will- be a success because of Papyrus' reputation for good sims
>> and having the Nascar logo on the box, not whether it provides
>> great MP.
>>
>> I hope you realize that people who play multiplayer constitute a
>> VERY small portion of the overall sales of any game.
>>
>> You understand that, don't you?
>
>
>If multiplayer and single play are options why would It make a difference to
>you?
If N3, or any other game had great MP, it wouldn't matter to me -at all-.
I would be glad for those people who like MP.
In case it was lost on you, I was challenging the pimp from TEN's
allegations that N3 wouldn't be successful without great MP.
Of course, he hasn't a clue.
What he -should- have said, is that TEN won't be successful if
games don't have great MP.
Or, he could have said that 10% of the people who will lay down
their cash for N3 might be disappointed if N3 doesn't have good MP.
>If you prefer not to play against human beings that's your
>decision. You should try It, you might like It!
>
I have, many times, in lots of genres.
I didn't like it.
>Some prefer to play with others and some prefer to play with themselves.
>You understand that don't you?
>
You, Cooter, are the posterboy / stereotype for 90% of the
gamers that are online today.
*plonk*
--
* rrevved at mindspring dot com
* unit.26 s.p.u.t.u.m.
* http://www.cabal.net
Ed Bain
in msg <tlDTN8gJigwnFJ...@4ax.com>,
Bob Davidson <bo...@mindspring.com> said :
>Everything grows "larger and larger": the population, the online gamer
>population AND the gaming population in general. However, that doesn't
>change the fact that online gamers are a very, very small minority.
>Face the facts, of the droves of people that buy computer games only a
>small group care enough about them to actually go online and play.
AMEN.
Steve
is getting stronger everyday, mostly because of faster computers, better
internet access and having internet support right out of the box. To be
honest you sound like your one of these people who plays a game online,
loses and quits playing. If you don't like to lose to people then yes
Mulitplayer gaming is not for you, because no matter how good you are there
is always someone who is better.
Games like Everquest, ultiama online, are online only games, and they do
very well in sales along side your "singleplayer" games. If you don't like
Muiltiplayer gaming, then don't get AMA superbike, don't get Nascar3,
instead of getting those games get ExtrameG by acclaim, its a racing game
with zero multiplayer support and sense you like playing with yourself,
should suit you very well. Or better yet get that racing game that was made
by Jeff Gardon it has no muiltiplayer player support either, and will suit
you as well also.
Bruce Kennewell <bru...@tpg.com.au> wrote in message
news:37d3...@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
> Bill, that spiel has been punted around here for the past 3 years (at
least)
> yet the percentage of those who buy to play on-line still remains small in
> comparison to those who play off-line.
>
> The majority of retail customers who seriously game on-line is miniscule.
> One of the most popular on-line simulation genres for many years has been
> the combat flight sim (Warbirds and Air Warrior in particular) yet the
> numbers who regularly take part are insignificant in comparison to the
total
> sales of such simulations.
>
> There is a misconception held by dedicated "on-line" people who converse
> regularly here that their interest represents those of the majority of
> simmers. I assure you that is not the case: the majority of retail
> customers don't know and don't care. They simply want to be entertained
by
> what they have just bought; to get their money's worth from it before
being
> attracted to something newer and brighter and possibly more entertaining.
>
> It's as simple as that, mate.
>
> Bill Bollinger <bric...@racingforfun.com> wrote in message
> news:7qv6mv$81i$1...@ash.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
> >
> > Ed Bain wrote in message <37d809d0...@news.mindspring.com>...
> > >
> > >I hope you realize that people who play multiplayer constitute a
> > >VERY small portion of the overall sales of any game.
> > >
> > >You understand that, don't you?
> >
> >
> > You understand where the future of gaming and particular Sim-Racing is
> > headed? You should also do the math and analysis of how many people and
> or
> > market penatration you need to equal just 250,000 retail sales. I have
it
> > figured on or about 10,000 paying sim-racers. That means those 10,000
sim
> > racers will equal in total revenue approx 250,000 retail sales. NOT a
> huge
> > leap especially considering where we are today. The future is with
racing
> > against real people, NOT AI cars. The problem is the ease of entry and
> the
> > quality of play. Right now it takes someone who is willing to tweek
their
> > systems and live in a good area for internet access to have good quality
> of
> > play. Therefore, do YOU understand the importance of online racing?
> >
> >
> > Bill / Amish on TEN
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
Michael E. Carver
% Bill, that spiel has been punted around here for the past 3 years (at least)
% yet the percentage of those who buy to play on-line still remains small in
% comparison to those who play off-line.
This is changing even as we speak and will continue to change at an ever
increasing rate. Get ready for the future and stop living in the past
(in computer/Internet language the past is now).
As computer games are increasingly released with built in and easy to
use online play (Motorsims and Papyrus) the move will begin. If I
undertand things correctly N3 will be even easier to get started racing
online out of the box than GPL ever was.
Remember what they said just a short while ago about online shopping and
e-commerce? Well, that jinni is out of its bottle. The online gaming
jinni has been released and won't be put back into its bottle.
--
**************************** Michael E. Carver *************************
Upside out, or inside down...False alarm the only game in town.
mca...@teleport.com http://www.teleport.com/~mcarver
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=<[ /./. [- < ]>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Joe
>You understand where the future of gaming and particular Sim-Racing is
>headed?
There will probably be *some* more penetration into the multiplayer
genre, with "community based" online games like the upcoming AMA
Superbike. But as long as it's simple match-making (like GPL or N3)
there will still be a large offline-racer market. The pickup races are
usually lame, it's hard to find a good race. And many people don't
have the time - or the ability to commit to gaming at specific dates
and times - to join a league.
I think the AMA Superbike system is the way to go. Both leagues and
pickup races, but with the pickup races including a rating system so
you can find races at your own level of ability (without the trouble
of joining a league).
Joe McGinn
==========================================
Staff Writer for the Sports Gaming Network
http://www.sports-gaming.com/
==========================================
Joe
>How so Bruce, where do you get your facts from anyway? Mulitplayer gaming
>is getting stronger everyday...
I constantly hear this, usually from online-gaming fans. But the sales
numbers don't really back it up. It's getting a little bigger, but no
where near the point of approaching the strength of the offline-gaming
market.
>... mostly because of faster computers, better
>internet access and having internet support right out of the box.
That's a myth. It's not connection speed that's limiting multiplayer
gaming, it's the [so far] lack of imagination put into the games
themselves. First-person shooters are a perfect example - hardly a one
of them has evolved beyond plain deathmatch (or minor variations of it
based on team play). Racing games just have simple match-making
Internet play. Both those limited genres are probably saturated
already - that is, everyone interested in that style of gameplay is
already playing it.
The secret to expanding the multiplayer market is to make the
multiplayer experience more interesting (i.e., like Everquest - not my
cup of tea, but it's innovative in it's own way).
Michael Barlow
There fore there is no future in NASCAR racing! <G>
Mike
Joe wrote:
>
> "Bill Bollinger" <bric...@racingforfun.com> wrote:
>
> >You understand where the future of gaming and particular Sim-Racing is
> >headed?
>
> There will probably be *some* more penetration into the multiplayer
> genre, with "community based" online games like the upcoming AMA
> Superbike. But as long as it's simple match-making (like GPL or N3)
> there will still be a large offline-racer market. The pickup races are
> usually lame, it's hard to find a good race. And many people don't
> have the time - or the ability to commit to gaming at specific dates
> and times - to join a league.
>
> I think the AMA Superbike system is the way to go. Both leagues and
> pickup races, but with the pickup races including a rating system so
> you can find races at your own level of ability (without the trouble
> of joining a league).
>
> Joe McGinn
> ==========================================
> Staff Writer for the Sports Gaming Network
> http://www.sports-gaming.com/
> ==========================================
--
=========================================
Mike Barlow of Barlow Racing©
=========================================
Racing online with the help of......
Race Communications Association
http://members.xoom.com/RCA/toc.html
Holodyne Engineering
Ke...@fife-n-drum.org
Mystic Music
Fre...@eznet.net
(have Your !!Name/Address!! placed here)
ymenard
> I think the AMA Superbike system is the way to go. Both leagues and
> pickup races, but with the pickup races including a rating system so
> you can find races at your own level of ability (without the trouble
> of joining a league).
Exactly like pickup races on the NROS. It is still at the moment the best
online racing service we can find, whatever people will say. We're
9000people there who have races and paid for it, without any publicity, no
adds, nothing. Just think with a mass-market penetration that N3 will make,
how it could grow up.
--
-- François Ménard <ymenard>
-- May the Downforce be with you...
"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realise
how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."
Steve
Joe <NOSPAMm...@home.com> wrote in message
news:37d60587...@news.rdc1.bc.wave.home.com...
> "Steve" <s...@cdc.net> wrote:
>
...
>
> I constantly hear this, usually from online-gaming fans. But the sales
> numbers don't really back it up. It's getting a little bigger, but no
> where near the point of approaching the strength of the offline-gaming
> market.
Just like I told Bruce, where did you get your Numbers? How do you know
that the offine market is so much bigger then the online market or are you
just gussing here?
>
> >... mostly because of faster computers, better
> >internet access and having internet support right out of the box.
>
> That's a myth. It's not connection speed that's limiting multiplayer
> gaming, it's the [so far] lack of imagination put into the games
> themselves. First-person shooters are a perfect example - hardly a one
> of them has evolved beyond plain deathmatch (or minor variations of it
> based on team play). Racing games just have simple match-making
> Internet play. Both those limited genres are probably saturated
> already - that is, everyone interested in that style of gameplay is
> already playing it.
>
Oh I don't know about that Joe, I'm sure someone with ADSL, or Cable will
have a much better time playing internet games then someone with a 56k
connection...just makes sense don't you think?
> The secret to expanding the multiplayer market is to make the
> multiplayer experience more interesting (i.e., like Everquest - not my
> cup of tea, but it's innovative in it's own way).
>
True and just looking over AMA superbike's web site I would have to say
its heading in that direction.
Ed Bain
in msg <3356A95E03A0EA2E.722C785C...@lp.airnews.net>,
"Steve" <s...@cdc.net> said :
>
>Joe <NOSPAMm...@home.com> wrote in message
>news:37d60587...@news.rdc1.bc.wave.home.com...
>> "Steve" <s...@cdc.net> wrote:
>>
>> I constantly hear this, usually from online-gaming fans. But the sales
>> numbers don't really back it up. It's getting a little bigger, but no
>> where near the point of approaching the strength of the offline-gaming
>> market.
>
>Just like I told Bruce, where did you get your Numbers? How do you know
>that the offine market is so much bigger then the online market or are you
>just gussing here?
>
The data is posted occasionally by PCDATA. Avault covers it every 4 or 5
months. It is usually a 15-20% online player to single-player ratio. You
might be able to find it in their archives.
Let's get back to the original poster's claims.
The TEN jerk said:
"The "be all - end all" for N3 will be its multiplayer support."
"If Sierra/Papyrus has put together a solid multiplayer product with N3
then it will be a success. "
I am not saying that great MP is a bad thing, or that the users of MP
are not increasing, or that this ng doesn't have a higher pecentage of
MP players.
I am just saying that to think that N3 will -fail- without great MP, is ridiculous.
Michael P. Mabrey
raced on TEN........ I guess your opinions and ideas are much more valuable
and closer to fact than anybody elses. I guess from now on I should only
read your posts and forget about everybody else's, since they are of no
value to anybody.
Ed Bain wrote in message <37d7515a...@news.mindspring.com>...
>On Mon, 6 Sep 1999 18:32:00 -0400,
>in msg <3356A95E03A0EA2E.722C785C...@lp.airnews.net>,
Mike White
ymenard wrote in message <_DZA3.28523$aX6....@news20.bellglobal.com>...
>Michael P. Mabrey <mab...@castles.com> wrote
>> I guess this shows everybody how you feel about everybody that has ever
>> raced on TEN........ I guess your opinions and ideas are much more
>valuable
>> and closer to fact than anybody elses. I guess from now on I should only
>> read your posts and forget about everybody else's, since they are of no
>> value to anybody.
>
>
Personally I don't think it was a nice reply and very unlike the Mike Mabrey
we've come to know.
The original message contained "The TEN jerk"... creating a "hostile"
thread.
This reply did nothing more than fan the flame.
Some threads are best left without a response.
Michael Barlow
>
> Hey Mike nice reply :)
>
> informed r.a.s.ers about the NROS, and always try to reply when Mike Barlow
> puts down the NROS for VROC. I guess we will have to wait until an official
> answer by SIERRA to stop speculating about all the possibilities, but I will
> know a little sooner when I'll have the chance to try N3 multiplayer. I
> really don't want bad news, but I suppose it's what will happen :(
>
> Is it hard to work when you don't know about your immediate future for your
> job ?
I never put down the NROS for VROC. NROS and VROC are two different
things, NROS is a racing series where as VROC is a place to connect to
to race GPL. I correct the miss interpretations people make about GPL
or GSB as well as mention my experiences on both TEN and VROC. But not
NROS for VROC. I have made strong opinions about TEN and GSB. But not
the NROS for VROC... I will make strong opinions about oval racing and
road racing. But not NROS for VROC.
Sean Higgins
--
Sean Higgins
"HigPup"
"Hollywood" for R6 "Hollywood__NWO" for ZONE
http://home.sprintmail.com/~higgy/hsts2/ HSTS, Powered by ATI Rage 128
http://www.atitech.ca ATI Technologies
ymenard wrote in message ...
>Michael Barlow <mik...@rochester.rr.com> wrote
>>>
>>> I never put down the NROS for VROC.
>
>I guess I missed the sarcasm I wanted to show in my message, sorry it was
>sarcasm :)
>
><slaps himself for not putting a <sarcasm> tag in the message>
>
>My fault Mike, you can flame me you know :)
>
>
>
>
Don Wilshe
>Personally I don't think it was a nice reply and very unlike the Mike
Mabrey
>we've come to know.
>
>The original message contained "The TEN jerk"... creating a "hostile"
>thread. This reply did nothing more than fan the flame.
Mike and Y:
I think we have to cut MikeM some slack here. He is on a burning ship and
fighting a firestorm of concerns from NASCAR drivers. I like MikeM for the
old days. Find a job, MikeM and be Happy...
DW
Michael P. Mabrey
Well, not first ever but first in a very long time. I used to be a
regular 'lurker' in RAS for several years (how else would I know about you
being the "Official Mentally Retarded Guy Of RAS" and the "Self-appointed
President of RAS"?......hehe) Even then, I hardly ever posted (never felt
the need for adding to the "me too" or "you're an @##" posts.) I've only
recently returned to regularly reading RAS, although I did stop in from time
to time. I stopped because my personal interest lay in NASCAR racing and
this group was about everything but NASCAR for quite a while. With N3
coming out very soon it only seemed natural to return to make sure that I
kept up with all the N3 information and concerns possible.
As for NROS versus VROC, I don't feel the need for an us versus them
menatilty. I love NASCAR racing and that's where my interest is. But I'm
certainly not going to fault, degrade, or insult someone else just because
they enjoy a different form of racing. That is ludicrous (that means
rediculous for you GPLers....j/k <G>)
Personally, I hope that everybody ends up happy with whatever racing
simulation they are into. I hope that all the different disciplines can
look at each other as comrades instead of opposition. We all love racing in
one form or another and are actually after the same ultimate goal. To have
simulated racing, be it online or offline, be the absolute best that it can
be. The online crowd wants to see it grow into something on a grand scale,
no matter which style of racing it is.
Oh well, I've written too much already and started to ramble. I'll just
slink back into the shadows again.
Mike Mabrey
ymenard wrote in message <_DZA3.28523$aX6....@news20.bellglobal.com>...
>
Michael P. Mabrey
that, I apologize. It just gets me a little upset when people get into the
"us versus them" mindset. It's really unnecessary. Sorry.
Mike Mabrey
Mike White wrote in message <7r1pog$386$1...@fir.prod.itd.earthlink.net>...
>
>Personally I don't think it was a nice reply and very unlike the Mike
Mabrey
>we've come to know.
>
>The original message contained "The TEN jerk"... creating a "hostile"
>thread.
>This reply did nothing more than fan the flame.
>
Andrew Britton
oxymoron
ymenard
> I guess this shows everybody how you feel about everybody that has ever
> raced on TEN........ I guess your opinions and ideas are much more
valuable
> and closer to fact than anybody elses. I guess from now on I should only
> read your posts and forget about everybody else's, since they are of no
> value to anybody.
Hey Mike nice reply :)
First r.a.s post ever ? Your lurking here from time-to-time ? I've always
informed r.a.s.ers about the NROS, and always try to reply when Mike Barlow
puts down the NROS for VROC. I guess we will have to wait until an official
answer by SIERRA to stop speculating about all the possibilities, but I will
know a little sooner when I'll have the chance to try N3 multiplayer. I
really don't want bad news, but I suppose it's what will happen :(
Is it hard to work when you don't know about your immediate future for your
job ?
Joe
>Avault covers it every 4 or 5
>months. It is usually a 15-20% online player to single-player ratio.
And that is in ONLINE surveys, that are natually biased in *favor* of
online gaming.
Joe
>Joe <NOSPAMm...@home.com> wrote
>> I think the AMA Superbike system is the way to go. Both leagues and
>> pickup races, but with the pickup races including a rating system so
>> you can find races at your own level of ability (without the trouble
>> of joining a league).
>
>Exactly like pickup races on the NROS.
That's the for-pay Nascar online racing system? Unfortunately AMA will
also be based on a paying subscription, which will limit the numbers
or participants no matter how low the subscription rate.
ymenard
I guess I missed the sarcasm I wanted to show in my message, sorry it was
sarcasm :)
<slaps himself for not putting a <sarcasm> tag in the message>
My fault Mike, you can flame me you know :)
rolan...@yahoo.com
abri...@san.rr.com wrote:
> I understand the math. Would N2 be as popular without TEN? When
Hawaii
> (remember those days) kicked off with N1, that was an INCREDIBLE
rush. The
> multiplayer experience far exceeds what the AI will do for you.
>
> The sales will be there, it will be a financial success, but will I be
> playing it every day? Without solid MP... it will be played at
times. The
> AI experience never gets your hands sweaty or your heart racing
fast...
> NEVER... why? You "know" that there isn't another person at the
other end.
>
> Its also pretty cool when you're part of a racing team, using
RogerWilco
> during the race is a fun experience. Those AI drivers don't like to
chat
> much.
>
> Every carset can be tweaked to know which driver is going to run
strong or
> weak. With multiplayer... it involves more skill.. and luck for that
> matter... no CTL-R to start the race over.
>
> Oh yeah, the ability to meet new people and make friends is pretty
cool too.
>
> Andrew "bot" B.
>
My feelings exactly Andrew! I played N2 offline just every now and
then before the NROS went live, but after racing online with real
opponents, I never looked back. I had never had so muc fun in all my
life (playing a video game). Online against real opponents makes all
the difference in the world.
And for those of you who don't think online gaming is the future, all I
can say is either you haven't ever played online, or you got your ass
kicked miserably. Will it make or break Nascar3? You see they
included it didn't they?
Ralo
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
Ed Bain
in msg <7r1l17$14...@enews2.newsguy.com>,
"Michael P. Mabrey" <mab...@castles.com> said :
>I guess this shows everybody how you feel about everybody that has ever
>raced on TEN........
Uhh.. why would you say that? I was commenting on a jerk at TEN,
not the users of TEN, and certainly not 'everybody that has ever
raced on TEN'. Did you major in hyperbole, or are you just an asshole?
I was giving my opinion on the jerk at TEN's belief that N3 will fail
unless it has great MP. He is incorrect, and I said so.
Oh, and thanks for snipping my entire post. That really helps the
reader understand what we're talking about, and has the added
effect of speaking volumes for your honesty.
One more thing...
*plonk*
> I guess your opinions and ideas are much more valuable
>and closer to fact than anybody elses. I guess from now on I should only
>read your posts and forget about everybody else's, since they are of no
>value to anybody.
>
>Ed Bain wrote in message <37d7515a...@news.mindspring.com>...
>>On Mon, 6 Sep 1999 18:32:00 -0400,
>>in msg <3356A95E03A0EA2E.722C785C...@lp.airnews.net>,
>>Let's get back to the original poster's claims.
>>
>>The TEN jerk said:
>
>
Andre Warringa
are you talking about?
Andre
On Mon, 06 Sep 1999 22:50:57 -0700, Andrew Britton
<abri...@san.rr.com> wrote:
>
>
>oxymoron
Tim (fusion1)
>Sometimes, I simply don't get a post. Maybe it's me, but Andrew, what
>are you talking about?
It's a reference to the NASCAR -realistic expectations thread.
Read it and learn how *not* to act.
Another potentially compelling thread undermined by a game of computer
dork Match Wits. <bg>
Tim
Woodie 83
"ymenard" <yves....@sympatico.ca> writes:
(SNIP)
>Exactly like pickup races on the NROS. It is still at the moment the best
>online racing service we can find, whatever people will say. We're
>9000people there who have races and paid for it, without any publicity, no
>adds, nothing. Just think with a mass-market penetration that N3 will make,
>how it could grow up.
You keep throwing around this 9,000 number, that's one of the main things that
drove me away from TEN. What you really have is 1,000 honest guys, and 2,000
jerks who have four accounts each. I really liked the rankings, and worked
hard to get to #800 with a 38 LPI despite the horrid start. Then I realized
that the vast majority ahead of me had started over and or used seperate
accounts for pick-up racing. Just before the NROS started, many people were
losing races purposly to get in certain divisions. Ruined it for me.
The only differences I see between TEN and VROC style are rankings and cost. I
have very little trouble with warping on either, and I find chat to be moronic.
Once I realized that the rankings were bogus, the cost seemed silly.
Don McCorkle
Libertarian Motorsports
Andre Warringa
Andre
On Tue, 07 Sep 1999 14:40:38 GMT, fus...@fast.net (Tim (fusion1))
wrote:
Bill Bollinger
>
> Bill, that spiel has been punted around here for the past 3 years (at least)
Bruce, what about LEADING retail games like Quake2, Tribes and Everquest
to name just a few. The FUTURE is almost here, and the future is in
online gaming against real people. Online racing makes racing against
feel like taking batting practice against a pitching machine vs. against
a real life pitcher in a real game. They both use the same skills, but
they give you entirely two different feelings and results. Online
Racing is the future, not just something to say.... "Well given that
only 1/5 of all purchases are currently going online, therefore we need
not focus our resources in that direction".
Bill / Amish on TEN
Ed Bain
in msg <37D521...@concentric.net>,
Bill Bollinger <hos...@concentric.net> said :
Bill, no one thinks that good MP shouldn't be in a product. I certainly
don't feel that way. I just don't agree with the TEN hype-master
that N3 will not be successful or will FAIL without it.
That's what began this entire thread.
Can you dig it?
Bruce Kennewell
Probably ISP problems.
So this reply is directed to Steve...........
Steve, I have had involvement in the retail of software, both serious and
fun, for the past seven years and, apart from statistical marketing surveys
done by ourselves, we have similar data carried out world-wide by
developers, publishers, distributors and retailers (which makes me grit my
teeth sometimes when some publishers can't even be bothered to use the data
or commission their own survey!)
The number of people gaming on-line is certainly increasing, no doubt about
that. But so is the number of people buying computers, period.
It would be pointless bandwidth for me to repeat those points that I've
made, suffice to say this: Any software developer working on a game that
has the capability to be played on-line and who does NOT include such a
facility with his package needs his head read. BUT....and it's a big
"but"............he MUST also recognise the fact that the majority of
gaming-software buyers play off-line and therefore cater to what is a major
part of his market. And that is a fact that will continue for an
indeterminate time.
BK
Joe <NOSPAMm...@home.com> wrote in message
news:37d60587...@news.rdc1.bc.wave.home.com...
> "Steve" <s...@cdc.net> wrote:
>
> >How so Bruce, where do you get your facts from anyway? Mulitplayer
gaming
> >is getting stronger everyday...
>
> I constantly hear this, usually from online-gaming fans. But the sales
> numbers don't really back it up. It's getting a little bigger, but no
> where near the point of approaching the strength of the offline-gaming
> market.
>
> >... mostly because of faster computers, better
> >internet access and having internet support right out of the box.
>
> That's a myth. It's not connection speed that's limiting multiplayer
> gaming, it's the [so far] lack of imagination put into the games
> themselves. First-person shooters are a perfect example - hardly a one
> of them has evolved beyond plain deathmatch (or minor variations of it
> based on team play). Racing games just have simple match-making
> Internet play. Both those limited genres are probably saturated
> already - that is, everyone interested in that style of gameplay is
> already playing it.
>
> The secret to expanding the multiplayer market is to make the
> multiplayer experience more interesting (i.e., like Everquest - not my
> cup of tea, but it's innovative in it's own way).
>
> Joe McGinn
> ==========================================
> Staff Writer for the Sports Gaming Network
> http://www.sports-gaming.com/
> ==========================================
-----------== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
http://www.newsfeeds.com The Largest Usenet Servers in the World!
------== Over 73,000 Newsgroups - Including Dedicated Binaries Servers ==-----
Larry
-Larry
Andrew Britton <abri...@san.rr.com> wrote in message
news:37D30546...@san.rr.com...
> The "be all - end all" for N3 will be its multiplayer support.
>
> We've been told not to expect the GPL physics but an overhauled N2
> version. That is acceptable due to the fact that if its going to take a
> P4-1ghz machine to produce 30 fps offline then can you imagine what it
> will take online.
>
> Racing AI opponents is safe, cheap, and fun (for awhile). Once you've
> had a taste of online gaming whether its DeathMatch Half-Life or NROS on
> TEN then its very hard to be drawn towards AI opponents.
>
> If Sierra/Papyrus has put together a solid multiplayer product with N3
> then it will be a success. There will always be the desires for
> flipping, better AI, 43 car field, better graphics, more realism such as
> weather, debris, and mishaps in the pits. There will always be physics
> desires to separate the Nascar sims from other racing "games". BUT, I
> have to believe the ability to race via the internet with at least 20
> car fields and do so for free... that will be a hit.
>
> If a huge Counterstrike map can exist with up to 32 individuals running
> around spraying bullets, moving in true 3D worlds, including under
> water, and up/down elevators then 20 to 30 cars going in circles should
> not be TOO much data to handle.
>
> TEN appears to be great for leagues but pickup races are always
> fiascos. If you use their free service then you get only Atlanta and
> Watkins. I'm not sure what it takes for Half-Life (also a Sierra
> product) to have its 32000 servers thru WON but I would have to imagine
> that NASCAR & GPL could work as well.
>
> Then again, maybe thats why I only "buy" the games and not write them
> :) Anyway, I'll buy it the day it hits the shelf. I'm sure it will
> fall short of many expectations in several areas, but with SOLID
> multiplayer support then I believe it will be very popular.
>
> We'll see.
>
> Andrew B.
>
>
Larry
I guess maybe it isn't, or we wouldn't be kicked off of TEN/Pogo on the
14th of October :(
-Larry
Bill Bollinger <bric...@racingforfun.com> wrote in message
news:7qv6mv$81i$1...@ash.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
>
> Ed Bain wrote in message <37d809d0...@news.mindspring.com>...
> >
> >I hope you realize that people who play multiplayer constitute a
> >VERY small portion of the overall sales of any game.
> >
> >You understand that, don't you?
>
>
> You understand where the future of gaming and particular Sim-Racing is
> headed? You should also do the math and analysis of how many people and
or
> market penatration you need to equal just 250,000 retail sales. I have it
> figured on or about 10,000 paying sim-racers. That means those 10,000 sim
> racers will equal in total revenue approx 250,000 retail sales. NOT a
huge
> leap especially considering where we are today. The future is with racing
> against real people, NOT AI cars. The problem is the ease of entry and
the
> quality of play. Right now it takes someone who is willing to tweek their
> systems and live in a good area for internet access to have good quality
of
> play. Therefore, do YOU understand the importance of online racing?