Download from www.autosimsport.com
Exclusive! New screenies - Cars and ALL tracks plus tech details on GT
Legends!
A1GP Mod for rFactor!
Legendary Artist Gustavo and GPLEA Profile
GP4 - The 2nd time round
The Cadillac Ranch for SCGT
rFActor WINNERS announced!
Win 2 COPIES of CRC!!!!
PLUS NEWS, Stats, Race-Results, Nekkid Girls and much-much more!
The GP4 stuff looked really good, but has anyone else sampled these
updates and can it really turn GP4 into a worthy contender against the
current crop of sims? One would imagine the PC specs have now caught up
and teh slowdown will be a thing of the past but have the physics really
been overhauled to *that* degree?
As ever ASS can't resist a stab at another sim racing organisation and
this time it is RSC and its public warning system. Regardless of views I
really don't think it has a place in a general sim racing fanzine and
detracts from the overall quality and significant work that goes into it.
Plus the promises of nekkid girls would appear to be an outright lie...
Outraged :)
Tony
> Interesting read as ever, though after the previous edition's "rFactor
> is perfect" review (rather than a more realistic rFactor shows potential
> to be great, which I believe even ISI themselves would concur) I am
> somewhat wary of rave reviews.
> The GP4 stuff looked really good, but has anyone else sampled these
> updates and can it really turn GP4 into a worthy contender against the
> current crop of sims? One would imagine the PC specs have now caught up
> and teh slowdown will be a thing of the past but have the physics really
> been overhauled to *that* degree?
> As ever ASS can't resist a stab at another sim racing organisation and
> this time it is RSC and its public warning system. Regardless of views I
> really don't think it has a place in a general sim racing fanzine and
> detracts from the overall quality and significant work that goes into it.
> Plus the promises of nekkid girls would appear to be an outright lie...
Cheers
Tony
Perhaps you should read it again... I dunno?
> Interesting read as ever, though after the previous edition's "rFactor
> is perfect" review (rather than a more realistic rFactor shows potential
> to be great, which I believe even ISI themselves would concur) I am
> somewhat wary of rave reviews.
> Perhaps you should read it again... I dunno?
Now I am having a blast with rfactor online and I agree with the
reviewers regarding the feel. I am impressed with rFactor but would
concede as a package it is currently a bit light and the rest will come.
My view was the reviewers were so enthusiastic about the feel they let
the other aspects of how the game is packaged up and the discrepencies
in AI pale into insignificance or were so keen to put rfactor on a
pedestal with its modding capability at a time when ASS were in dispute
with another organisation and its approach to modding. I may just be
getting too cynical in my old age :)
Of course it may be none of the above and I may be wrong - I was once in
1976 you know, so it *is* possible :)
It is not a big deal and like I said a lot of hard work has gone into
this magazine. Just some feedback to consider.
Cheers
Tony
The other issue of course was that the review was of a Release Candidate
where not only was the AI quite different to the release version but also
stating big problems was a difficult thing to do as we could not be sure
those problems would exist in the final version. I am largely of the
opinion that we should not do this again.
Addditionally, it may be worth me pointing out that AutoSimSport were never
"in dispute with another organisation" and though you may have got that
impression, it was not the case.
:o)
Jon.
> > Perhaps you should read it again... I dunno?
> I guess my two issues would be the review of the AI and the closing
> thoughts "everything the sim racer wants is catered for".
> Now I am having a blast with rfactor online and I agree with the
> reviewers regarding the feel. I am impressed with rFactor but would
> concede as a package it is currently a bit light and the rest will come.
> My view was the reviewers were so enthusiastic about the feel they let
> the other aspects of how the game is packaged up and the discrepencies
> in AI pale into insignificance or were so keen to put rfactor on a
> pedestal with its modding capability at a time when ASS were in dispute
> with another organisation and its approach to modding. I may just be
> getting too cynical in my old age :)
> Of course it may be none of the above and I may be wrong - I was once in
> 1976 you know, so it *is* possible :)
> It is not a big deal and like I said a lot of hard work has gone into
> this magazine. Just some feedback to consider.
> Cheers
> Tony
> The other issue of course was that the review was of a Release Candidate
> where not only was the AI quite different to the release version but also
> stating big problems was a difficult thing to do as we could not be sure
> those problems would exist in the final version. I am largely of the
> opinion that we should not do this again.
Ok, how about "had previously voiced disagreement with a certain
organisation's approach to modding"? :)
Cheers
Tony
>> Plus the promises of nekkid girls would appear to be an outright lie...
> Page 25
>> Outraged :)
>> Tony
uwe
--
GPG Fingerprint: 2E 13 20 22 9A 3F 63 7F 67 6F E9 B1 A8 36 A4 61
Well, the disagreement to a "certain organisation's" approach to modding was
in an editorial piece so was solely the opinion of our editor and NOT the
opinion of the whole AutoSimSport staff.
It certainly was not my opinion, or Bob's. While I can see that giving
rFactor a good review score based on an assumed dislike of a "certain
organisation's" approach to the community could be alluded to by readers, I
can assure you that this could not be further from the truth.
Of course, I dare say I will end up going through this mill again when the
"certain organisation" release a product and it possibly ends up getting a
high score in an AutoSimSport review, but from my personal perspective I
have no brand preference at all, and political movements in the simracing
community do not influence my opinion of a product whether it be from ISI or
a "certain organisation". :)
Jon.
> > The other issue of course was that the review was of a Release Candidate
> > where not only was the AI quite different to the release version but
also
> > stating big problems was a difficult thing to do as we could not be sure
> > those problems would exist in the final version. I am largely of the
> > opinion that we should not do this again.
> Fair comment.
> > Addditionally, it may be worth me pointing out that AutoSimSport were
never
> > "in dispute with another organisation" and though you may have got that
> > impression, it was not the case.
> Ok, how about "had previously voiced disagreement with a certain
> organisation's approach to modding"? :)
> Cheers
> Tony
> >>Plus the promises of nekkid girls would appear to be an outright lie...
> > Page 25
> Golly! Amongst all those gorgeous GPLEA models my brain must have just
> said "it's not GPL" and moved on :)
>> > AutoSimSport September is Out.
>> > 60+ Page MOD Autumn Specialganza!
>> Interesting read as ever, though after the previous edition's "rFactor
>> is perfect" review (rather than a more realistic rFactor shows potential
>> to be great, which I believe even ISI themselves would concur) I am
>> somewhat wary of rave reviews.
>> The GP4 stuff looked really good, but has anyone else sampled these
>> updates and can it really turn GP4 into a worthy contender against the
>> current crop of sims? One would imagine the PC specs have now caught up
>> and teh slowdown will be a thing of the past but have the physics really
>> been overhauled to *that* degree?
>> As ever ASS can't resist a stab at another sim racing organisation and
>> this time it is RSC and its public warning system. Regardless of views I
>> really don't think it has a place in a general sim racing fanzine and
>> detracts from the overall quality and significant work that goes into it.
>> Plus the promises of nekkid girls would appear to be an outright lie...
> Page 25
As art models go, that one is actually quite good looking.
Jan.
=---
Seriously though, if anybody can come up with all the downloads and
versions needed to install this and run it, I'd give it another go, if
only for the dry line emerging on a damp track. I miss that!
