Racing Legends - PPU compatibility?

lol

--A--

On 01.05.2005 23:16, Andi Cole wrote:
> Oh, Sorry 1st of May, not April!
>

The thing is: Internet is a tremendous resource, but it requires a great
deal of management for anything good to come out of it.

I am absolutely sure RAS, as a group, has the best beta test
capabilities on the planet since we combine sim racing, real racing and
computer knowledge to great extents.

However, this group is also some of the most anarchistic and chaotic
group imaginable, and in order to include RAS in *any* communication
strategy, you'll have to set aside the resources to filter, massage, and
write messages to the group.

And this is a resource development teams don't see worthwhile, because
they're already on the edge budgetwise. And a developer cannot take on
the chore, since the last thing a developer wants is noise, constant and
loud.

But I still firmly believe that the very nature of internet makes RAS
the ultimate beta team. And the very nature of internet makes the same
resource void. Much like us humans, innit? Full of contradictions.

Internet has it's best chance of success when you gather committed
persons, and block out all the noise, like sourceforge.

---A---

On 04.05.2005 22:21, Tony Rickard wrote:
> "Bruce Kennewell" wrote:
>
>
>>"Tony Rickard" wrote:
>>
>>>.... It is not surprising the developers huddle with their private
>>>groups behind their NDAs until they are ready to go public with the
>>>finished article..
>
>
>>What a shame that Messrs West didn't do the same.
>>(They probably wish that they HAD done so!)
>
>
> I guess the point is I believe they are now. Once burnt and all that...
>
>
>

"Mythbusters" is an excellent program, and I am truly confident they'd
get to the bottom of things.

Usually they find a myth to be untrue, so we have two alternatives he
Myth 1: There is no RL, and there is no or next to no development taking
place
Myth 2: RL

:-)

---A---

On 03.05.2005 21:52, Bruce Kennewell wrote:
> I think "Mythbusters" needs to have a go at this one,
>
> Bruce.
>
> "Gregor Veble" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>
>>So far it's a bit wait and see.
>>
>
>
>

"Asgeir Nesoen" > wrote in message
...
> The thing is: Internet is a tremendous resource, but it requires a great
> deal of management for anything good to come out of it.
>
> I am absolutely sure RAS, as a group, has the best beta test capabilities
> on the planet since we combine sim racing, real racing and computer
> knowledge to great extents.
>
> However, this group is also some of the most anarchistic and chaotic group
> imaginable, and in order to include RAS in *any* communication strategy,
> you'll have to set aside the resources to filter, massage, and write
> messages to the group.

I agree with you that the skills within this group would make for a fine
technical beta feedback group. However, this is not the type of group that I
would approach if I were seeking feedback for commercial success. This group
is highly atypical when compared with the typical purchaser of computer
games/sims.

1. The people here tend to be highly technically skilled, whilst most games
require simplicity and ease of use as prime criteria for commercial success.

2. The peple here tend to be of a older mean age group that the typical
gamer or even sim racer. This is purely speculation, but is based on what I
feel is a solid argument. Newsgroups are ancient technology in the Internet
era, and most people using them have been doing so for more than 10 years
(i.e. prior to the web revolution).

3. Eye candy and great marketing, combined with retail penetration is a
better selling point than technical superiority - compare RBR with CMR for
example. I don't know the numbers but expect that CMR has outsold RBR at
least 10 fold - probably more like 100 fold.

The reality is that hard core sim racing is and will remain niche for the
considerable future, thus severely restricting the number of titles
available. Why was there no GPL 2 considering the overwhelming cries from
the sim community? The short answer is that it wasn't commercialy viable,
and the voices heard were the very loud minority.

I expect that many people here earn decent money, or are prepared to spend
considerably more on their hardware in terms of percent of disposable income
compared to the casual gamer, as they conisder sim racing to be a primary
"hobby" more than entertainment. As such, why not spend more on software? I
think that the Wests had a good idea when it came to charging a premium for
their product, as well as additional charges for each new track and/or car.

Maybe the powers that be in the commercial gaming world should be lobbied to
introduce a new business model for racing sims: forget the standard shop
price for sims and charge at least $100 per title and more for additional
tracks and cars. I would even go so far as to suggest charging for online
racing.

Tim




>
> And this is a resource development teams don't see worthwhile, because
> they're already on the edge budgetwise. And a developer cannot take on the
> chore, since the last thing a developer wants is noise, constant and loud.
>
> But I still firmly believe that the very nature of internet makes RAS the
> ultimate beta team. And the very nature of internet makes the same
> resource void. Much like us humans, innit? Full of contradictions.
>
> Internet has it's best chance of success when you gather committed
> persons, and block out all the noise, like sourceforge.
>
> ---A---
>
> On 04.05.2005 22:21, Tony Rickard wrote:
>> "Bruce Kennewell" wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"Tony Rickard" wrote:
>>>
>>>>.... It is not surprising the developers huddle with their private
>>>>groups behind their NDAs until they are ready to go public with the
>>>>finished article..
>>
>>
>>>What a shame that Messrs West didn't do the same.
>>>(They probably wish that they HAD done so!)
>>
>>
>> I guess the point is I believe they are now. Once burnt and all that...
>>
>>

"Maybe the powers that be in the commercial gaming world should be lobbied
to
introduce a new business model for racing sims: forget the standard shop
price for sims and charge at least $100 per title and more for additional
tracks and cars. I would even go so far as to suggest charging for online
racing."

Big risk for little payoff. Reality is why bother. The niche is small and
very hard to win over. it is much easier to make a mass market arcade title
for a console. Even if it does poorly it will still outsell a pure sim in
volume.

But with that said you basically just stated what FIRSTRACING is planning to
do, charge for online racing. So far the concept has had a cold reception
at best.

"Tim Epstein" > wrote in message
. uk...
>
> "Asgeir Nesoen" > wrote in message
> ...
>> The thing is: Internet is a tremendous resource, but it requires a great
>> deal of management for anything good to come out of it.
>>
>> I am absolutely sure RAS, as a group, has the best beta test capabilities
>> on the planet since we combine sim racing, real racing and computer
>> knowledge to great extents.
>>
>> However, this group is also some of the most anarchistic and chaotic
>> group imaginable, and in order to include RAS in *any* communication
>> strategy, you'll have to set aside the resources to filter, massage, and
>> write messages to the group.
>
> I agree with you that the skills within this group would make for a fine
> technical beta feedback group. However, this is not the type of group that
> I would approach if I were seeking feedback for commercial success. This
> group is highly atypical when compared with the typical purchaser of
> computer games/sims.
>
> 1. The people here tend to be highly technically skilled, whilst most
> games require simplicity and ease of use as prime criteria for commercial
> success.
>
> 2. The peple here tend to be of a older mean age group that the typical
> gamer or even sim racer. This is purely speculation, but is based on what
> I feel is a solid argument. Newsgroups are ancient technology in the
> Internet era, and most people using them have been doing so for more than
> 10 years (i.e. prior to the web revolution).
>
> 3. Eye candy and great marketing, combined with retail penetration is a
> better selling point than technical superiority - compare RBR with CMR for
> example. I don't know the numbers but expect that CMR has outsold RBR at
> least 10 fold - probably more like 100 fold.
>
> The reality is that hard core sim racing is and will remain niche for the
> considerable future, thus severely restricting the number of titles
> available. Why was there no GPL 2 considering the overwhelming cries from
> the sim community? The short answer is that it wasn't commercialy viable,
> and the voices heard were the very loud minority.
>
> I expect that many people here earn decent money, or are prepared to spend
> considerably more on their hardware in terms of percent of disposable
> income compared to the casual gamer, as they conisder sim racing to be a
> primary "hobby" more than entertainment. As such, why not spend more on
> software? I think that the Wests had a good idea when it came to charging
> a premium for their product, as well as additional charges for each new
> track and/or car.
>
> Maybe the powers that be in the commercial gaming world should be lobbied
> to introduce a new business model for racing sims: forget the standard
> shop price for sims and charge at least $100 per title and more for
> additional tracks and cars. I would even go so far as to suggest charging
> for online racing.
>
> Tim
>
>
>
>
>>
>> And this is a resource development teams don't see worthwhile, because
>> they're already on the edge budgetwise. And a developer cannot take on
>> the chore, since the last thing a developer wants is noise, constant and
>> loud.
>>
>> But I still firmly believe that the very nature of internet makes RAS the
>> ultimate beta team. And the very nature of internet makes the same
>> resource void. Much like us humans, innit? Full of contradictions.
>>
>> Internet has it's best chance of success when you gather committed
>> persons, and block out all the noise, like sourceforge.
>>
>> ---A---
>>
>> On 04.05.2005 22:21, Tony Rickard wrote:
>>> "Bruce Kennewell" wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>"Tony Rickard" wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>.... It is not surprising the developers huddle with their private
>>>>>groups behind their NDAs until they are ready to go public with the
>>>>>finished article..
>>>
>>>
>>>>What a shame that Messrs West didn't do the same.
>>>>(They probably wish that they HAD done so!)
>>>
>>>
>>> I guess the point is I believe they are now. Once burnt and all that...
>>>
>>>
>

"schooner" > wrote in message
news2Jee.27241$0X6.16704@edtnps90...
>> "Tim Epstein" > wrote in message
>> . uk...
> >
>> "Maybe the powers that be in the commercial gaming world should be
lobbied
>>to
>> introduce a new business model for racing sims: forget the standard shop
>> price for sims and charge at least $100 per title and more for additional
>> tracks and cars. I would even go so far as to suggest charging for online
>> racing."
>
> Big risk for little payoff. Reality is why bother. The niche is small
and
> very hard to win over. it is much easier to make a mass market arcade
title
> for a console. Even if it does poorly it will still outsell a pure sim in
> volume.
>
> But with that said you basically just stated what FIRSTRACING is planning
to
> do, charge for online racing. So far the concept has had a cold reception
> at best.

Niche size hasn't deterred a number of dedicated sim developers in the past,
though the big publishers like Sony, MS and EA have tended to steer clear of
it. The thing is that right now the guys who want to play in the sim market
are trying to find a business model that works better than what they've used
before. You either go at it by reducing development/marketing/distribution
expenses ala LFS or NetKar Pro, cutting out the publisher ala ISI/rFactor
(no more EA), cutting or amortizing dev costs through engine licensing (ISI
again, with the likes of SimBin and EA/Tiburon on the other side of the
deal), or you try to recoup through other ways, pay to play being just one
possibility. FWIW, monthly fees don't seem to have held Everquest sales
back too much. And First are not the only ones looking at that model; the
latest RaceMore service for GTR is a first step in that direction too. And
I may be wrong, but the virtual car companies and showrooms for rFactor just
positively smell of extra-cost add-ons. Similar to the expansion packs
talked about on the West Racing site for Racing Legends.

Can't say I'm too thrilled about the idea of having to choose which
service(s) to give my limited discretionary toy funds to, but no-charge
online racing is not going away anyway. The thing for people to remember
about pay to play is that for it to be saleable for the providers, it has to
offer added value to the consumers (us). Meaning it has to be more and/or
better than what you can and have gotten for free, or rather as part of the
deal with your one-time purchase price. For example, SimBin's Diego Sartori
just noted the other day on RSC that the only things RaceMore might charge
for would be over and above the current offerings. Added value.

Bottom line, if you want more than you've gotten from online racing in the
past, you have to be willing to ante up. If you don't, there will still be
options for you - and they will keep the new niche players in check
pricewise through competition.

Heck; I just now see RBR has been added to VROC. No charge... ;-)

SB

It's also produced by an Aussie company (Beyond) and filmed by an Aussie
team.
(We're not only good at cricket! )

I think they (Jamie and Adam) would find that no such sim exists or is in
development and THEN they'd do what they always try to do....prove that it
COULD happen.
At which point they'd approach Electronic Arts.

AAAAAAARRGH!

Bruce.

"Asgeir Nesoen" > wrote in message
...

> "Mythbusters" is an excellent program, ....

And if you don't have the intelligence to realize that no programmer doesn't
"re-use" code in some way even if it's a different language or engine then I
have to wonder how you manage to breathe. I'd be willing to bet a month's
pay that there's code in N2003 that was in Indy 500 or code in NSR that was
in the original Revolution.

I wish the West's the best of luck but I, for one, am not holding my breath.

"." > wrote in message
...
> If you havnt got the intelligence to differentiate between one product and
> a totally new product then I wonder how you manage to breathe.
>
> "Bruce Kennewell" > wrote in message
> ...
>> It is certainly more than three years since the terms "West brothers" and
>> "simulation" were seen together in the same sentence in RAS.
>>
>> Cretin!
>>
>> Bruce.
>>
>> "." > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> Anything that annoys the prat Kennewell gets my support. 3 Years idiot
>>> get
>>> your facts right.
>>
>>
>
>

Asgeir Nesoen wrote:
> "Mythbusters" is an excellent program, and I am truly confident they'd
> get to the bottom of things.

....and when all else fails, they'd blow up a Lotus transporter with
Buster and a bushel of Westie Bears inside!

-jde