Photo realistic graphics??? give me a brake, or break... you cant afford
the machine that plays it in current form, with all the "eye candy" now
(obviously, as you still complain about GFX, looks dam fine on my machine
BTW), and you THINK you want photo realistic gfx? ROFLMAO.
I would settle for the small things someone already mentioned, like toe in
damage, wall riding bug eliminated by actually having the wall rip the car &
Tires apart like it would in real life if you rode the wall. but even with
these thing you trade off the ability to have a decent race... Hell even now
most of the morons online with all the driving aids and other things still
cant handle any track but Dega... Daytona is a stretch of their abilities,
and don't dare goto a real track like Darlington or Richmond... you know
what I mean too.
I like that the game is somewhat scale -able but I don't see papy or anyone
for that matter ever going hard core, like they got burned on GPL. Which is
a shame, because this Genre of game (NASCAR version) could have really used
the SUPER ***.
> On Mon, 17 Mar 2003 20:17:11 -0500, "Joe Saxon"
> >Boy, not too demanding are we? This game is the best auto racing sim
period
> >and has the best physics and graphics to date and you still feel the need
to
> >ask for better in a patch? Huh.......
> I'd like to see lap times in the sim that are at least within a second
> of real life at each track. As it stands I can shatter lap records on
> my 3rd lap at tracks I haven't driven in over a year. This wouldn't
> be a big deal if it weren't for the speeds at the plate tracks
> reaching near pre-restrictor plate levels. In real life the fastest
> tracks are Atlanta, followed by Michigan and California, then
> Talladega and Daytona. In the sim the fastest tracks are the plate
> tracks, followed by Michigan California and then Atlanta. The grip at
> Atlanta is completely off as I've read numerous reports by drivers who
> say that they keep the gas all the way down for the first few laps on
> new tires because there's so much grip there. I'd like to see Papyrus
> use real telemetry data to model the car behavior at each track since
> that was a big selling point for N2003. It's bad if a casual fan of
> the sport can immediately see that the speeds are off by wide margins.
> The damage model could be much better, I'd like to see fenders rub
> against tires, slight damage around the radiator causing overheating
> problems, etc. I'd like to see the addition of random tire punctures
> when a tire is overheating excessively. Debris on the track would be
> nice as well. Brake wear would be pretty cool too. I don't think
> I've seen a single instance where hitting the wall caused problems
> with the front toe, which happens every damn week in the real sport.
> Just little details any racing fan would pick up on after watching a
> race or two.
> Graphically it's good, so I can't say much about that. It has a very
> GP4 like quality which I consider a good thing, pleasant colors etc.
> Wish things were desaturated a bit as in any PC game but at least the
> colors are pleasant. Not necessarily a graphical addon per se, but
> rain would have been a great addition as well as red flags and such
> plus simply racing in it on the road courses.
> It's the best driving sim ever made. I'm just saying it could be
> better.
> SERIOUS SUGGESTION:
> ----------
> One thing that I don't think would be out-of-line to ask for is the
> ability to edit horsepower, drag, and torque in the track.ini files
> just as we can now edit grip. It would rule to be able to sit down
> with some race footage and get laptimes and corner/straight speeds in
> line with reality by tweaking a few variables. I'm thinking of a
> multiplier like we have for grip now, but for torque, drag, and
> horsepower. It would be cheat-proof since the track.ini is specified
> by the server and not the client.
> We now have:
> track_asphalt_grip = 1.00
> track_concrete_grip = 1.00
> I'd also like to see:
> track_drag = 1.00
> track_hp = 1.00
> track_accel = 1.00
> I don't expect this sort of thing to be implemented, but I don't think
> it's unreasonable either.
> ----------
> Jason