rec.autos.simulators

Pros:  Graphics and Tracks beat every modern F1 sim hands down.  It's
also nice that someone out there realizes a race car isn't an
indestructible tub with wheels and wings.

Cons: Everything else.  It would be nice if the car were
semi-controllable or at least handled in a convincing if not
completely realistic manner (a'la Rally Trophy).  The menu system is
the worst ever, I'd even give a nod to Madden 2000 in the menu
department.

Summary:  $40 drink coaster.  Someone please create a track converter
or track conversion tutorial.

Jason

-----
GPLRank 24.50
N2002Rank -12.995

The track graphics are quite good but the car textures are pretty poor.
Zoom in close to a car and you'll notice that the car textures aren't
anywhere near as detailed as F1 2002.  That, and the fact that the game
makes virtually no use of modern graphics cards and relies almost solely on
the CPU (barely 30fps if you've got a 2GHz+ CPU) means that I can't agree
that it 'beats every modern F1 sim hands down' in terms of graphics.

P.S. Compare the***pit graphics in the two games.  No comparison
WHATSOEVER.

http://gamespot.com/gamespot/stories/reviews/0,10867,2879976,00.html

almost had me convinced to buy it.  I mean, one of the things they lauded
was the UI:

<<The menu interface is now extremely slick, using simple fonts set against
stylized full-motion video for a look and feel that's similar to the menus
in Gran Turismo 3: A-Spec. Likewise, the in-game graphics have also been
updated with crisper textures and more polygons throughout. This change is
most evident in the cars themselves, which are easily the best looking of
any F1 game to date.>>

I'm continually amazed at how ignorant game zines and e-zines are abt.
sims - not just car sims, but flight sims.  They seem to know the most abt.
stuff that never existed: dragons, monsters, aliens, sorcery, alchemy, magic
potions, and the Lost Dry-Cleaners of Atlantis.

--Steve

"Steve Smith" <
  What do you mean they didn't exist?  I can personally vouch for Nemo the
owner of the Lost Dry-Cleaners of Atlantis...  :)
dave henrie

Jason

-----
GPLRank 24.50
N2002Rank -12.995

The worst thing about GP4 is how much I really want to like this,
despite the sloppy interface and controls, because the tracks are
really that good.  Every subtle change in camber and elevation is
there.  Watching the AI race is actually more entertaining than
playing the game because of the great tracks and weather effects.
There are just little subtle things at each track that I haven't seen
properly modelled in a same, but make a huge difference in the way you
drive.  The last chicane at Magny Cours has a very subtle banking to
it, and the exit flows directly into the final right hand turn.  In F1
2002 the chicane is flat and the exit has a short straight during
which you steer to the left to setup for the final right hander.  The
first lap I ran there in GP4 I ended up driving into the pits because
I was confused and followed the F1 2002 line.  Likewise the 4th-gear
esses require some braking and a drop to 4th gear, in F1 2002 it's 90%
throttle for a moment and no gear change.

I haven't tried the Hungary conversion from GP4 to F1 2002 yet, but I
hope people are considering doing more of them.  Monte Carlo
especially is absolutely stunning.

Jason

-----
GPLRank 24.50
N2002Rank -12.995

For starters, regardless of how I configure my split-axis Sidewinder
wheel, the game wants to use it to navigate the menus.  This means
that I have to depress the throttle halfway to keep the menu
selections from scrolling everywhere.  A pain to the say the least.
Interestingly, sometimes when I start the game it doesn't do this.

Second, when you load game there are 4 or 5 options presented.  The
first one is "Main Menu".  WTF?  Is there something I'm missing here
when the main menu isn't the main menu?  That alone should clue you in
on the UI design philosophy at work here.

F1 2002 surprisingly has a much more useable interface (actually, so
does Madden 2003, which is a great game this year for a change), and
all of the things that matter most in a sim are far superior to any
non-Papy sim on the market:  car handling, car tuning, controllability
(is that word).  Sure, the textures are still a little too saturated
in places (still, ISI shows marked improvement here with each
release), the AI could be better but is at least interesting to race
against, the track models are significantly flawed, and the
wet-weather effects are pathetic (from an immersion standpoint, not
driving), but the core gameplay is incredibly solid.

At this point, ISI is so far ahead in the F1 battle it seems
ridiculous that there are reviews being written that call GP4 the king
of sims.  Crammond hasn't even hit the GPL standard that was set 4
years ago.

Jason

-----
GPLRank 24.50
N2002Rank -12.995

Better than GP4 - but thats not saying much

Doug

Thanks.

Gerry

Electronics Boutique (Century III Pittsburgh)
$40

Jason

-----
GPLRank 24.50
N2002Rank -12.995

....as 95% of the people here have not, as is obvious from the inaccuracy of
95% of the posts about GP4.

--

"Nothing gets closer!" - Crammond

mark

Even if it hides some little hint of gem, it's still mixed up with a ton of
turd.

--
-- Fran?ois Mnard <ymenard>
-- http://www.racesimcentral.net/
-- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez
Corporation - helping America into the New World...