rec.autos.simulators

>G

>> Personnally, 6.5/10 is enough:

>> 10, minus 1 for the absence of AI cars sound,
>> minus 1 for poor 3D graphics,
>> minus 0.5 for the 2 years old season (98),
>> minus 0.5 for putting (what's his name?) instead of J, Villeneuve,
>> minus 0.5 for the limited number of views (1) that give you the
>> speed/gear/gas/etc information.

>> I'm eager to see what rating the US magazines will give to the game.
>> Americans aren't sold to F1 racing and should make more objective
>> reviews.

>> >Or Microprose payed for a big ad. inside the magazine and wanted a review
>> >with over 90% of the
>> >game ! Remember: Everybody has a price ! hehe

>> >> > How can you argue with such an un-biased review as that .NOT !
>> >> > So the missing 5% is for the:
>> >> > 1)***Graphics
>> >> > 2)***sound
>> >> > 3)Controller Setup bugs
>> >> > 4)Physics are strange
>> >> > 5)Replays of 20 seconds, max. etc..........
>> >> > The 95% must be for something i've missed.

>> >> Under the table payment to keep the *** business alive?

>> >> --

>On Sat, 29 Jul 2000 20:42:51 +0100, "Graham Triggs"

>>minus 0.5 for having a wrong name because of ludicrous licensing deals, that
>>takes all of about 5 seconds to change? A little harsh there...

>>G

>>> Personnally, 6.5/10 is enough:

>>> 10, minus 1 for the absence of AI cars sound,
>>> minus 1 for poor 3D graphics,
>>> minus 0.5 for the 2 years old season (98),
>>> minus 0.5 for putting (what's his name?) instead of J, Villeneuve,
>>> minus 0.5 for the limited number of views (1) that give you the
>>> speed/gear/gas/etc information.

>>> I'm eager to see what rating the US magazines will give to the game.
>>> Americans aren't sold to F1 racing and should make more objective
>>> reviews.

>>> >Or Microprose payed for a big ad. inside the magazine and wanted a review
>>> >with over 90% of the
>>> >game ! Remember: Everybody has a price ! hehe

>>> >> > How can you argue with such an un-biased review as that .NOT !
>>> >> > So the missing 5% is for the:
>>> >> > 1)***Graphics
>>> >> > 2)***sound
>>> >> > 3)Controller Setup bugs
>>> >> > 4)Physics are strange
>>> >> > 5)Replays of 20 seconds, max. etc..........
>>> >> > The 95% must be for something i've missed.

>>> >> Under the table payment to keep the *** business alive?

>>> >> --

>>Personnally, 6.5/10 is enough:

>>10, minus 1 for the absence of AI cars sound,

>Agree!

>>minus 1 for poor 3D graphics,

>Disagree, strongly.

>>minus 0.5 for the 2 years old season (98),

>Want a current season? Wait 3 days.

>>I'm eager to see what rating the US magazines will give to the game.
>>Americans aren't sold to F1 racing and should make more objective
>>reviews.

>>>Or Microprose payed for a big ad. inside the magazine and wanted a review
>>>with over 90% of the
>>>game ! Remember: Everybody has a price ! hehe

>>>> > How can you argue with such an un-biased review as that .NOT !
>>>> > So the missing 5% is for the:
>>>> > 1)***Graphics
>>>> > 2)***sound
>>>> > 3)Controller Setup bugs
>>>> > 4)Physics are strange
>>>> > 5)Replays of 20 seconds, max. etc..........
>>>> > The 95% must be for something i've missed.

>>>> Under the table payment to keep the *** business alive?

>>>> --

> 70-75%.

> --
> -- 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.

>> >>Radically disagree. Best***pit I have ever seen.

> >That's my biggest gripe - that you can disable it in software
> >mode but not in hardware.

> I couldn't even disable it in software mode for some reason.
> --
> Nos