rec.autos.simulators

> Reports from some people attending the F1 GP in Australia tell us that F1
> 2000 will be a disappointment.

> --
> -- Fran?ois Mnard <ymenard>
> -- May the Downforce be with you...
> -- http://www.WeRace.net
> -- 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.

> It appears the physics may be better than I thought after all, as is the AI
> perhaps and, as I said before, I do love the color pallet. Much better than
> the bright greens and blues of MGP-RS2. I read it doesn't have weather
> effects, which is disappointing, but nor does GPL which is top5 (not 7,
> sorry).

> If you were a beta tester why don't you let is in on some more....like; how
> does the graphic engine handle a full field of cars on an average pc? how is
> the damage model? how good is the ai really? what sort of car adjustments
> can be made? how cool is the pits/crew implementation?

> It does have one big thing going for it -- it will beat GP3 to market by a
> few month...which is hopefully not because EA is pushing it out the door
> early, which seemed like the case with SCGT.

> So, I leave you with this, drop Rouge Spear out of the top 10 and move GPL
> up...no way was RS even better than the original R6.

> > Why dont you try it before opening your big mouth. It does have realistic
> > physics just to let you know.

> > Art
> > Stealth Racing
> > http://www.***sys.com/stealthracing.html

> > > Not impressive looking at all. Why are those cars floating? and the
> >***pit
> > > views are no good either. This is obviously a game being pushed out the
> > door
> > > early to capture some cash from dear hunter/nascar revolution fans who
> buy
> > > their software from the same place they buy their dogfood and deoderant.
> > If
> > > they would only include some of the more important features like
> realistic
> > > physics (even if it can be turned off) and the real fixings (weather,
> > > saftycar...) I might have been able to over look these odd graphics.
> Well,
> > > at least the colors look good.

> > > I guess we'll all be waiting for GP3. Im also putting money on RS3 in
> late
> > > 2000 as the dark horse to capture the title again. I think the ubisoft
> > model
> > > is a good one with easy/realistic modes (good for sim$ and arcader$), a
> > > career mode, outstanding weather, animated pit crews and easy to edit
> > > graphics built right in the game. Now if they just improve on the
> already
> > > decent physics and graphics we'll see FS steal GP's title again.

> > > Why don't all sims take a leason on that one - I mean, why not build a
> > game
> > > so the true SimAttics can tweak the hell out of it without first
> breaking
> > > all kinds of code. It would give games a far greater life and a broader
> > > audience. And Im not talking about that SHIT hole n3 calls a paint
> shop -
> > > sure, you can edit cars out of the game but you have to jump through
> hoops
> > > to do it. The only reason I can see a company not wanting fans to edit
> > > everything is if they plan on releasing season patches or something, but
> > > what company does that?

> http://www.racesimcentral.net/

> > > > David G Fisher

> Ain't beta testers supposed to keep their yap shut except to the
designers?
> SCGT wasn't really pushed.  It was in makings way before it hit the
market.
> Don't forget they got it when EA bought over Westwood Studios\***
Interactive
> Entertainment which was to release it with the Vipers and Profesional
Sports Car
> rights.  Which later got droped for reasons I don't know of.

> And I think the most of it will be fine.  From everyone that I heard from
they
> physics\controls are really good.  I'm wondering persoanly about the crash
> models since SCGT didn't have any visual damage.

> But I'm gonna get it any way, I've made my decision already.  Hopefuly
it'll be
> atleast good enough to satisfy me.

> DjFIL

> > OK, I am sorry. I do hate it when everyone compares stuff that is not
even
> > out ...vodoo5 and so on, so I shouldn't have spoken so soon. Those where
> > really the first screens I looked at and based my judgement on the
biased
> > GP3 post that dominate this group and my fear of EA being able to put
out a
> > real sim.

> > After looking closer at the pics and reading some of the write-ups and
> > interviews I would have to say I would surely give this game a
chance...EA
> > has produced the NFS series which is one of my favorite arcade racers
and I
> > do love SCGT (even if it does seem a bit incomplete).

> > It appears the physics may be better than I thought after all, as is the
AI
> > perhaps and, as I said before, I do love the color pallet. Much better
than
> > the bright greens and blues of MGP-RS2. I read it doesn't have weather
> > effects, which is disappointing, but nor does GPL which is top5 (not 7,
> > sorry).

> > If you were a beta tester why don't you let is in on some more....like;
how
> > does the graphic engine handle a full field of cars on an average pc?
how is
> > the damage model? how good is the ai really? what sort of car
adjustments
> > can be made? how cool is the pits/crew implementation?

> > It does have one big thing going for it -- it will beat GP3 to market by
a
> > few month...which is hopefully not because EA is pushing it out the door
> > early, which seemed like the case with SCGT.

> > So, I leave you with this, drop Rouge Spear out of the top 10 and move
GPL
> > up...no way was RS even better than the original R6.

> > > Why dont you try it before opening your big mouth. It does have
realistic
> > > physics just to let you know.

> > > Art
> > > Stealth Racing
> > > http://www.***sys.com/stealthracing.html

> > > > Not impressive looking at all. Why are those cars floating? and the
> > >***pit
> > > > views are no good either. This is obviously a game being pushed out
the
> > > door
> > > > early to capture some cash from dear hunter/nascar revolution fans
who
> > buy
> > > > their software from the same place they buy their dogfood and
deoderant.
> > > If
> > > > they would only include some of the more important features like
> > realistic
> > > > physics (even if it can be turned off) and the real fixings
(weather,
> > > > saftycar...) I might have been able to over look these odd graphics.
> > Well,
> > > > at least the colors look good.

> > > > I guess we'll all be waiting for GP3. Im also putting money on RS3
in
> > late
> > > > 2000 as the dark horse to capture the title again. I think the
ubisoft
> > > model
> > > > is a good one with easy/realistic modes (good for sim$ and
arcader$), a
> > > > career mode, outstanding weather, animated pit crews and easy to
edit
> > > > graphics built right in the game. Now if they just improve on the
> > already
> > > > decent physics and graphics we'll see FS steal GP's title again.

> > > > Why don't all sims take a leason on that one - I mean, why not build
a
> > > game
> > > > so the true SimAttics can tweak the hell out of it without first
> > breaking
> > > > all kinds of code. It would give games a far greater life and a
broader
> > > > audience. And Im not talking about that SHIT hole n3 calls a paint
> > shop -
> > > > sure, you can edit cars out of the game but you have to jump through
> > hoops
> > > > to do it. The only reason I can see a company not wanting fans to
edit
> > > > everything is if they plan on releasing season patches or something,
but
> > > > what company does that?

> > http://www.racesimcentral.net/

> > > > > David G Fisher

>Art
>Stealth Racing
>http://www.***sys.com/stealthracing.html

>> First... cause it's simple to point out... another advantage f1 2000 has,
>2000
>> season.  That is a huge push.  To beable to race along with the real
>thing.

>> Ain't beta testers supposed to keep their yap shut except to the
>designers?
>> SCGT wasn't really pushed.  It was in makings way before it hit the
>market.
>> Don't forget they got it when EA bought over Westwood Studios\***
>Interactive
>> Entertainment which was to release it with the Vipers and Profesional
>Sports Car
>> rights.  Which later got droped for reasons I don't know of.

>> And I think the most of it will be fine.  From everyone that I heard from
>they
>> physics\controls are really good.  I'm wondering persoanly about the
crash
>> models since SCGT didn't have any visual damage.

>> But I'm gonna get it any way, I've made my decision already.  Hopefuly
>it'll be
>> atleast good enough to satisfy me.

>> DjFIL

>> > OK, I am sorry. I do hate it when everyone compares stuff that is not
>even
>> > out ...vodoo5 and so on, so I shouldn't have spoken so soon. Those
where
>> > really the first screens I looked at and based my judgement on the
>biased
>> > GP3 post that dominate this group and my fear of EA being able to put
>out a
>> > real sim.

>> > After looking closer at the pics and reading some of the write-ups and
>> > interviews I would have to say I would surely give this game a
>chance...EA
>> > has produced the NFS series which is one of my favorite arcade racers
>and I
>> > do love SCGT (even if it does seem a bit incomplete).

>> > It appears the physics may be better than I thought after all, as is
the
>AI
>> > perhaps and, as I said before, I do love the color pallet. Much better
>than
>> > the bright greens and blues of MGP-RS2. I read it doesn't have weather
>> > effects, which is disappointing, but nor does GPL which is top5 (not 7,
>> > sorry).

>> > If you were a beta tester why don't you let is in on some more....like;
>how
>> > does the graphic engine handle a full field of cars on an average pc?
>how is
>> > the damage model? how good is the ai really? what sort of car
>adjustments
>> > can be made? how cool is the pits/crew implementation?

>> > It does have one big thing going for it -- it will beat GP3 to market
by
>a
>> > few month...which is hopefully not because EA is pushing it out the
door
>> > early, which seemed like the case with SCGT.

>> > So, I leave you with this, drop Rouge Spear out of the top 10 and move
>GPL
>> > up...no way was RS even better than the original R6.

>> > > Why dont you try it before opening your big mouth. It does have
>realistic
>> > > physics just to let you know.

>> > > Art
>> > > Stealth Racing
>> > > http://www.***sys.com/stealthracing.html

>> > > > Not impressive looking at all. Why are those cars floating? and the
>> > >***pit
>> > > > views are no good either. This is obviously a game being pushed out
>the
>> > > door
>> > > > early to capture some cash from dear hunter/nascar revolution fans
>who
>> > buy
>> > > > their software from the same place they buy their dogfood and
>deoderant.
>> > > If
>> > > > they would only include some of the more important features like
>> > realistic
>> > > > physics (even if it can be turned off) and the real fixings
>(weather,
>> > > > saftycar...) I might have been able to over look these odd
graphics.
>> > Well,
>> > > > at least the colors look good.

>> > > > I guess we'll all be waiting for GP3. Im also putting money on RS3
>in
>> > late
>> > > > 2000 as the dark horse to capture the title again. I think the
>ubisoft
>> > > model
>> > > > is a good one with easy/realistic modes (good for sim$ and
>arcader$), a
>> > > > career mode, outstanding weather, animated pit crews and easy to
>edit
>> > > > graphics built right in the game. Now if they just improve on the
>> > already
>> > > > decent physics and graphics we'll see FS steal GP's title again.

>> > > > Why don't all sims take a leason on that one - I mean, why not
build
>a
>> > > game
>> > > > so the true SimAttics can tweak the hell out of it without first
>> > breaking
>> > > > all kinds of code. It would give games a far greater life and a
>broader
>> > > > audience. And Im not talking about that SHIT hole n3 calls a paint
>> > shop -
>> > > > sure, you can edit cars out of the game but you have to jump
through
>> > hoops
>> > > > to do it. The only reason I can see a company not wanting fans to
>edit
>> > > > everything is if they plan on releasing season patches or
something,
>but
>> > > > what company does that?

>> > http://www.racesimcentral.net/

>> > > > > David G Fisher

>> > Why dont you try it before opening your big mouth. It does have realistic
>> > physics just to let you know.

>> Reports from some people attending the F1 GP in Australia tell us that F1
>> 2000 will be a disappointment.

>> --
>> -- Fran?ois Mnard <ymenard>
>> -- May the Downforce be with you...
>> -- http://www.WeRace.net
>> -- 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.

> > I think F1 2000 is looking realy promising, also F1 2000 is being developed
> > by ISI and they've helped us out at editing SCGT a lot and I think they will
> > do the same for F1 2000. And to my believe to be able to edit a sim is more
> > important then having supremely good proportions (this we could fix
> > ourselves if people are having real problems with it.)
> > Expect to see more tracks in F1 2000 cause there are already people busy
> > creating tracks for SCGT and it shouldn't be to hard converting them into F1
> > 2000.

> Laguna Seca, Road Atlanta and Sebring converted to F1 2000. Yes please. :)

> --
> Olav K. Malmin
> remove spam when replying

> Aside from everything else, the overall "realistic look" of the images
> is not up to the standards of GP3 as far as I'm concerned.

> Yes, the carshapes could be more "detailed" and more "accurate" in
> terms of using more polygons and higher res textures (if at all). But
> GP3 seems to make much better use of environmental lighting. The cars
> give much less the impression of coming out of a 3D rendering program.
> Look at the shading of the tires for example.

> Compare:

> http://www.gamespot.co.uk/pc.gamespot/driving/f12k_uk/galleryshot6.html
> http://gp3.gamesmania.de/images/screenshot_gzone_7_high.jpg

> Also everything is much too dark, as if they are racing during a
> partial eclipse. Especially the tracksurface and the tires. Every shot
> rings a bell "this is a game", contrary to for example this GP3 shot,
> that could easily be mistaken for TV coverage:

> http://gp3.gamesmania.de/images/screenshot_gzone_6_high.jpg

> Granted, only one carshape in GP3 leaves room for improvement, but
> looking at these images I know what *I* prefer.

> Which doesn't mean that F12000 s a bad game of course.  :-)

> JoH