Does this mean we can have the full Nurburgring converted to a modern F1
sim? How fun would that be :-)
Some Call Me Tim
Does this mean we can have the full Nurburgring converted to a modern F1
sim? How fun would that be :-)
Some Call Me Tim
>> We can convert the GPL-tracks to F1 2001 now :)
>> No more bad chicanes :)
>> / Andreas - who is sitting with GPL's Kyalami in Zmodeler.
>Does this mean we can have the full Nurburgring converted to a modern F1
>sim? How fun would that be :-)
And yes, there's a screenshot there of the full Ring (track/grass, no
trackside objects) in ZModeler.
Ruud van Gaal
Free car sim: http://www.racer.nl/
Pencil art : http://www.marketgraph.nl/gallery/
> > We can convert the GPL-tracks to F1 2001 now :)
> > No more bad chicanes :)
> > / Andreas - who is sitting with GPL's Kyalami in Zmodeler.
> Does this mean we can have the full Nurburgring converted to a modern F1
> sim? How fun would that be :-)
> Some Call Me Tim
Anyway I won't buy F12002 because of that. :(
--
-- 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...
> But why can't ISI fix those errors, I mean it's ***y obvious and easy to
> do. They could easily buy the rights to the track that somebody created
on
> the net. Or at least take the criticism (if they don't want to buy
> something from <derogative attitude> the fans that buy their game) and fix
> the major errors. It's like having a physic model that is only modeled
> after a 3-wheeled car.
> > We can sit here and complain or we can choose to be responsible for
our
> > own (I almost said pleasure) entertainment, we have the skilled people
out
> > there now who could at least address some of these issues..
> Anyway I won't buy F12002 because of that. :(
> --
> -- 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...
I don't accept that in any other product, why should I with pc software ?
John
I only just recently discovered just how good it is when I did a 35
lap race against the AI at Indy road course. The good thing isn't
particularily the AI, but the driving model. I jacked that
physics-rate up and sweet mother is it good! With a little tinkering
with the setup you can actually get a slight oversteer! Doesn't sound
like much but in F1-2001 I'd be damned if I ever got oversteer. The
kind of oversteer where you balance the throttle and feel your way
with the steeringwheel, if you know what I mean... And it's just so
much slide as to make it believable(from what's on TV). IMHO.
The low-speed push, gone. The high-speed glue, gone(mostly, I guess).
I don't want to beat a dead horse here, but the tracks are still bad,
but I guess it's a matter of not letting it bother you. However, I
think I will tend to avoid the really, really bad ones(as accuracy
goes), Silverstone, Nrburgring, Hockenheim et.c.
If you will, you can of course say that this is what F1-2001 should've
been. But if it's a matter of which is best, F1-2002 takes home grand
prize, no contest.
ROTFL!! ;-)
> > We can convert the GPL-tracks to F1 2001 now :)
> > No more bad chicanes :)
> > / Andreas - who is sitting with GPL's Kyalami in Zmodeler.
> Does this mean we can have the full Nurburgring converted to a modern F1
> sim? How fun would that be :-)
> Some Call Me Tim
A proper simulation attempts to recreate an experience in as much
accurate detail as possible. Rally Masters is fun, but it's no sim.
Rally Trophy is fun, and even convincing, but it's no sim. F1 2001,
once you get around the horrible controller configuration, can be
great fun, but it's no sim.
There are problems in Papyrus tracks too, but they've demonstrated
year in and year out that they're trying to make them as accurate as
possible - from the moment they fixed the awful Talladega in Nascar 1
to redoing the layout every year for Sears Point, they've shown that
they're interested in making the simulation as realistic as possible.
There has been no evolution whatsoever in this department when it
comes to ISI games. Every sim they've done, every single one, has the
same ridiculous flaws in track modelling. It's one thing to say 'oh,
this track isn't quite so bumpy here' or 'the camber isn't quite right
here', i.e. things that people who have driven the track or have
access to GPS information would notice, but it's another when casual
fans of the sport can play the game and go 'wtf were they thinking'.
If you can sit down to watch a race at the Villeneuve circuit then go
and race it in F1 2001 and immediately recognize that the layout is
wrong, that is ridiculous. I wonder sometimes if ISI's track aren't
built by phone. Someone calls them from the circuit and says "ok, the
track is about this long here, then a turn of about this radius, looks
a little bumpy, there's a bit of armco, you got all that" and the
track designer just builds a track based on that vague description.
As far as realism in other areas, I'm still waiting for a single
article by an F1 driver or engineer saying that the brakes don't lock
up above 80km/h. I'd also like to see something showing why the cars
in F12k1 are still receiving incredible amounts of downforce when
sideways or backwards.
Jason
GPL was fine for its day - we now have a new king.
bmw
> IT has the best "feel" of any F1 game to date, the handling is very good
> indeed and the cars slides about in a very satisfying fashion. Basically
> it's a hoot to driver dare I say it as good as GPL (shock horror, the old
> die hards will flame me for that but it's true!)
> The AI is the best yet in any racing game, the other cars actually try to
> avoid hitting you! The most annoying thing that I hate the most in racing
> games is poor AI punting you off so you end up re-starting over and over
> again just to get a good race. So far I been able race tooth and nail with
> the AI and not get punted off by them, the only accidents I've had have been
> my own stupid fault which is how it should be (perhaps some would say this
> is not an accurate simulation of Rubens Barricello!). One of the nicest
> things is a throw back to old indycar racing where you can set the
> comparative speed of the AI to match your own pace which I think is great
> because everyone can set it so they can race at their own pace (we're not
> all Greger Hutus!) head to head with the AI.
> In fact it's just plain fun which is exactly what you want out of a racing
> game.
> The circuits and cars are lovely to look at and very detailed but I'm not
> sure they are exactly accurate, but who cares if the wings on the Jordan are
> not he same as in real life and some of the cambers are not the same. I
> haven't been round any of the circuits in real life so I can't compare them
> and I don't really care as long as they are fun to drive. However Monaco is
> far to narrow to be fun (surly it's not his bad in reality)
> The replay feature is not as good as GPL (who's is!) but it does record full
> hot laps OK. I've not used the telemetry so far but it looks pretty damm
> cool and very comprehensive and you can connect directly to the web to
> compare times which is a really nice feature.
> The FF is the about best yet in any racing game and you can really feel
> what's going on with the car and the rumble strips etc give nice effects.
> The weather again is the best yet implemented in any racing game and they
> way it changes from wet to dry is just superb as you seek out drying lines
> or you see how long you can stay out on slick on a slightly damp track. you
> can even have one part of the circuit wet with the others still dry! The
> cars also handles very well in the wet and it's still very driveable.
> I haven't tried it multiplayer yet so I won't comment on much on that aside
> from the fact a lot of people so far have complained that it's ***using a
> modem. They should have read the box as it states that modem play is only
> good for two players. You just can't really expect a game with this high
> level of detail and physics to work over a crappy old 56k connection,
> Broadband or LAN is the only way to go folks.
> It's not perfect, we'll always find something to moan about but it is the
> best F1 game we've had so far. It's got some really nice touches and it
> looks great and it even runs faster that F12001 which is odd but
> commendable. But the thing for me is the way it drives which is what it's
> all about and this game not only feels right but is just so much fun to
> drive as so far in only a few days I've had some of the best races I've ever
> had a pc against AI.
> Now if only someone would make Monaco a little wider?
> Some Call Me Tim (having a hoot)
We're talking about F1 here. Where the track is an absolute. Every inch of
it is analysed, the line is perfected to the inch by the teams and drivers.
ISI makes that impossible to recreate. We cannot compare ourselves
seriously (except for the "they turn left and it's a left turn in our sim
also"). It's almost that far fetched.
We've made great leaps since the days of Grand Prix Unlimited (the early
90's title that featured a crude track editor). Developers have to continue
towards track realism. Someday, I truly think that track modeling will
become a standard where developers will be able to share the common
specifications of the track dimensions. Such discussion will become useless
:-D
Yeah, the people clearly asked Papyrus for more realistic tracks. I think
only in N3 did we see tracks that were enough well modeled that we could say
they are almost exactly the same as in real-life (with the exceptions of
Sears Point). But indeed like you wrote, they adjusted their line of fire
and with each title (N1, N2, NR99, N3, N4, NR2002) the tracks have become
better and better. Substantial leaps.
--
-- Fran?ois Mnard <ymenard>
-- http://www.ymenard.8m.com/
-- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez
Corporation - helping America into the New World...
Of course.....that very much depends on whether you are in a part of the UK
that can get anything better than a "string and two cans"<G>
I'm outside of any major towns....although not in the wilds of the
countryside.....about 5 miles from Worcester.....I've got ISDN which is the
best on offer....no one with cable will venture to our village (hell...the
gas companies haven't thought it worthwhile to pipe gas here!!!).
Nothing I see anywhere says that BT is moving to provide DSL in the near
future...so I'm stuck really...satellite is the only option...and that's too
expensive...especially as it wouldn't IMHO be anywhere close to good enough
for online ***.
As to not expecting with the graphics etc to hope a 56k modem or isdn would
cope....I have f12k and it's nice...but the latest cars/tracks graphics of
GP Legends are equal IMHO and I have no probs running in large online fields
of cars.
Just sloppy programming of the online in f12k imho...although maybe papy are
the only ones (or randy and his guys specifically) that can seem to provide
anywhere near a good online option for simracers.
cheers
Smiffy
Agree, N2002 is a better sim in every way compared to GPL.
Andre
And how about driving the ring in a modern F1 car in Monsoon conditions? Now
that would be a challenge!
Some Call Me Tim
> Well-said Tim. There are a few that will NEVER be happy and that is
> fine. EA has produced an excellent sim. that will undoubtedly sell
> well.
> GPL was fine for its day - we now have a new king.
1. ***replays.
2.***poor online play.
Has your brain been replaced with a rabbit dropping?
"Gerry Aitken" wrote
Not particularly good, but I have seen worse ;)
I had a few online races last night and the online play was rock solid.
Admittedly I'm on ISDN (64k so I joined as a 56k modem user) and from
reports here analogue play is crap.
A rabbit dropping would be too large to occupy the space taken by *my* brain
;) That may explain why I'm easily pleased <G>
--
Ian P
<email invalid due to spam>