>I'd like to know your experience with F1. I have played both and while
>GP2 has a small number of bugs that displease those who are really into
>sim'ing the real thing, F1 has many bugs that are obvious to anyone.
Well, the obvious difference that stands out is the way GP2's tracks
are scrunched up, flattened out versions of the real things. Notice
no banking in Brazil? (I haven't checked all the tracks yet, but it
seems Crammond's engine doesn't do track banking...). Anyway, the
main things that make F1 more fun for me are:
a) Tracks which are the spitting images of the real thing, and more up
to date to boot
b) Don't have to turn off detail to get a good frame rate
c) Cars are modelled after actual team performance unlike GP2 where
grabbing a Ligier is as good as grabbing a Williams
d) Higher speeds in the corners (part of what happens when you scrunch
the hell out of the tracks).
I spent a lot of time with GP2 working on setups and lap times, but
overall I like the look and feel of driving the cars and tracks in F1
more. Granted, F1 sacrifices a lot of sim features such as car setup,
damage realism, and some other stuff, but overall I think its a great
product. As far as the bugs go..yes F1 has a few serious bugs, the
biggest among them being the crappy AI (I can't believe they try to
highlight the AI as a great feature in this game -- there is none),
but in terms of doing lap after lap improving times, I still love F1
better.
You may be right. However, if I don't find GP2 tracks particularly
realistic to drive, it doesn't really matter to me as much if there
are fewer bugs....it just means that the sim is flawlessly inaccurate
<G>
Randy