rec.autos.simulators

wasnt there a post with comment from ISI on physics?

Alex 'pez' Porazinsk

wasnt there a post with comment from ISI on physics?

by Alex 'pez' Porazinsk » Wed, 31 Jul 2002 03:15:24

im looking for something i saw quoted here a while back saying something
along the lines of 'we tried to put the real numbers in, but the cars were
impossible to drive' regarding f1 2002.

any know what im on about?

pez

MadDAW

wasnt there a post with comment from ISI on physics?

by MadDAW » Wed, 31 Jul 2002 03:23:47

I remember something on that line, but as far who it was or were it is I
have no idea. At least you know your not crazy. :)

MadDAWG

Alex 'pez' Porazinsk

wasnt there a post with comment from ISI on physics?

by Alex 'pez' Porazinsk » Wed, 31 Jul 2002 03:59:20

phew!

pez


Dave Henri

wasnt there a post with comment from ISI on physics?

by Dave Henri » Wed, 31 Jul 2002 08:16:47



   James Hawkins the producer of the F1 titles said it during a fairly
recent interview.   I don't know if he was referring to the PC or Console
title.  But that is not to be unexpected.  You base your physics on a
limited number of calculations.   Since you can't include all the zillions
of parameters that effect a car's movement, you have to fudge certain
things.  I'd be willing to bet that a good deal of programming a sim is
spent just throwing in almost random numbers to try acheive a time or an
effect that replicates what takes place in that paticular sim.  We all know
asphalt doesn't have the same level of grip at every track in the world, so
items like that have to be adjusted sometimes to make up for other
calculations that, if left alone, would produce non-beleivable lap times.
  Perhaps one of the 3 or 4 Fizzics guys would like to comment on this.
dave henrie

Jan Verschuere

wasnt there a post with comment from ISI on physics?

by Jan Verschuere » Wed, 31 Jul 2002 08:58:46

Don't think it was ISI... there was a post about a guy from EA Sports (one
of the people behind NFS: Hot Pursuit) saying something to that effect a
good while back IIRC.

Jan.
=---

KMH

wasnt there a post with comment from ISI on physics?

by KMH » Thu, 01 Aug 2002 03:00:00



http://makeashorterlink.com/?K26041461
I think this is the thread you are looling for.  It's from May 2002.  I
found it by searching Google Groups (groups.google.com).  It was a long
link, so I made it shorter.

Alex 'pez' Porazinsk

wasnt there a post with comment from ISI on physics?

by Alex 'pez' Porazinsk » Thu, 01 Aug 2002 04:54:49

cheers! thats the one.

pez




> > im looking for something i saw quoted here a while back saying something
> > along the lines of 'we tried to put the real numbers in, but the cars
were
> > impossible to drive' regarding f1 2002.

> > any know what im on about?

> http://makeashorterlink.com/?K26041461
> I think this is the thread you are looling for.  It's from May 2002.  I
> found it by searching Google Groups (groups.google.com).  It was a long
> link, so I made it shorter.

Jan Verschuere

wasnt there a post with comment from ISI on physics?

by Jan Verschuere » Thu, 01 Aug 2002 05:45:41

Again, notice the person giving the comment is neither related to ISI nor
involved with F1 2002, or any sim for that matter.

Jan.
=---

Alex 'pez' Porazinsk

wasnt there a post with comment from ISI on physics?

by Alex 'pez' Porazinsk » Thu, 01 Aug 2002 08:05:02

what, you think id take something like that out of context? im a papyrus
N2002 online admin for heavens sake!

:)

dont worry, i love f1 2002, just wish my controller would be a little kinder
to me with it.

btw, im Welsh, i love f1, i cant watch nascar on tv, looks too slow.

pez


Jan Verschuere

wasnt there a post with comment from ISI on physics?

by Jan Verschuere » Thu, 01 Aug 2002 08:49:39

I don't see what being an online admin would have to do with it, but anyway.

You started this thread with the assumption the comment was made by someone
involved with ISI, in the context of F1 2002. I then contradict this by
stating it was someone from EA Sports NFS Hot Pursuit team, to which you
don't react. Another poster directs you to the intended message, where the
origin of the quote is referred to correctly. To which you reply "yup,
that's the one" without further comment. That is lifting it out of context
as you're relying on the reader to follow a link from an earlier post and
understanding it contradicts your premise. I therefore felt it necessary to
add the qualifier.

I have a hard time believing that. I find it pretty callous you shouldn't
take more care false information doesn't get circulated after your personal
curiosity is satisfied. Gives the impression you just use RAS as your
walking encyclopedia and do your "real" posting somewhere else.

I will be installing an giving F1 2k2 a workout when I'm on holiday next
week. I'll be happy to try and assist in solving your controller troubles
then.

Irrelevant, but I agree the camera angles do make Nascar races look
pedestrian at times. Nothing is further from the truth, obviously, but it
does give that impression. I'll take the 45min recaps on Eurosport over most
F1 races any day, though.

Jan.
=---

Joe Marque

wasnt there a post with comment from ISI on physics?

by Joe Marque » Thu, 01 Aug 2002 08:57:02

This is like that telephone game where you start a rumor at one end of a
line of 20 people and by the last person the content of the original message
completely changes.

This was an EA Canada guy who may have made a comment at a college about not
using real world numbers.  Now it's a post by ISI on physics.  Some day it
will be a class action suit against ISI after they admitted there is no
physics model and they never had an F1 license. ;0)

--
Joe Marques


Ruud van Ga

wasnt there a post with comment from ISI on physics?

by Ruud van Ga » Thu, 01 Aug 2002 19:01:49

On Tue, 30 Jul 2002 23:57:02 GMT, "Joe Marques"


>This is like that telephone game where you start a rumor at one end of a
>line of 20 people and by the last person the content of the original message
>completely changes.

>This was an EA Canada guy who may have made a comment at a college about not
>using real world numbers.  Now it's a post by ISI on physics.  Some day it
>will be a class action suit against ISI after they admitted there is no
>physics model and they never had an F1 license. ;0)

And too think it sounded like bullshit at the start. ;-)
100x normal gravity; completely unnecessary and even gets you in deep
trouble once you try to figure out what formula will work with G=981
m/s^2. :) (and not explode)

Ruud van Gaal
Free car sim: http://www.racer.nl/
Pencil art  : http://www.marketgraph.nl/gallery/

Alex 'pez' Porazinsk

wasnt there a post with comment from ISI on physics?

by Alex 'pez' Porazinsk » Fri, 02 Aug 2002 01:42:24

RELAX buddy!

pez


Jan Verschuere

wasnt there a post with comment from ISI on physics?

by Jan Verschuere » Fri, 02 Aug 2002 01:57:26

Take that comment and shove it, friend.

Jan.
=---

Alex 'pez' Porazinsk

wasnt there a post with comment from ISI on physics?

by Alex 'pez' Porazinsk » Fri, 02 Aug 2002 02:53:03

Friendly bunch of people in here it seems.

pez



rec.autos.simulators is a usenet newsgroup formed in December, 1993. As this group was always unmoderated there may be some spam or off topic articles included. Some links do point back to racesimcentral.net as we could not validate the original address. Please report any pages that you believe warrant deletion from this archive (include the link in your email). RaceSimCentral.net is in no way responsible and does not endorse any of the content herein.