rec.autos.simulators

by **Damien Smit** » Fri, 11 Oct 2002 11:57:49

Rally stages aren't memory tests....

by **mike hard** » Fri, 11 Oct 2002 14:54:58

Nostradamus foretold that on Thu Oct 10 2002, Jason Moyer would write:

> > As far as I have heard,(and I don't have any inside info..just heard here
> >about other reviews that mentioned EA was not making another F1 title) they
> >are done with F1. Nascar will be the new focus for the ISI/Tiburion team.

> ISI has nothing to do with Nascar Thunder other than providing them
> the F1 200x engine. Tiburion did all of the modifications to it.

> If it's true that ISI is done making F1 games, I'd assume they're
> probably done making simulations period. Wonder where the NT2k4
> engine will be knicked from in that case.

> Jason

I don't follow sims or these companies or any of the other particulars but
I called EA support a couple weeks ago w/a problem and yes, who knows what
support ppl know besides their name, but this guy _seemed_ knowledgeable
and he said there is an F1-2003 and that the NASCAR game was using the F1
engine (that's why he said there'd be a new rev). We weren't talking
about F1-2002 because he said something like it was in test/would be in
test and it was usually around late winter/spring when they're released.

Mike
--

------------------------

Help Wanted: Psychic. You know where to apply.

by **Dave Henri** » Fri, 11 Oct 2002 15:06:26

I am not aware of any new F1 products. Ubisoft has their unlicensed
racer coming out which essentially is F1 RS 3 or 4(I forget which number it
would be)
EA has Nascar Thunder
Papyrus has Nascar 2003
MGI is concentrating on consoles I think
ISI ????(their F1 2k2 engine is the core of Nascar Thunder)
Microprose DOA
Maybe somebody can F1-mod NT hehehehe
dave henrie

by **Iain Mackenzi** » Sun, 13 Oct 2002 05:30:58

and about 30% too low at low speeds!

-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----

by **Haqsa** » Sun, 13 Oct 2002 07:56:00

I have heard that from many people and I still don't agree with it.
It's largely a matter of not getting your revs too high, not getting too
aggressive with the throttle, and not trying to change from brake to
throttle in the middle of the turn. Also make sure your controller is
set up properly, there is still a problem with a 50% dead spot with some
controllers and you have to hack the player file to get rid of it. If
you don't get rid of it you will be spinning every time you try to get
back on the throttle. When I check my telemetry my low speed corners
all look fine and I am able to take them at realistic speeds.
Unfortunately my overall lap times still suck because I seem to be the
one guy here who can't do the high speed corners properly. :o(

by **Iain Mackenzi** » Mon, 14 Oct 2002 00:15:03

With me, I do my braking before the corner, but still the back end is way
too keen on swapping with the front. There is no way it should be that
sensitive.
Iain

> I have heard that from many people and I still don't agree with it.
> It's largely a matter of not getting your revs too high, not getting too
> aggressive with the throttle, and not trying to change from brake to
> throttle in the middle of the turn. Also make sure your controller is
> set up properly, there is still a problem with a 50% dead spot with some
> controllers and you have to hack the player file to get rid of it. If
> you don't get rid of it you will be spinning every time you try to get
> back on the throttle. When I check my telemetry my low speed corners
> all look fine and I am able to take them at realistic speeds.
> Unfortunately my overall lap times still suck because I seem to be the
> one guy here who can't do the high speed corners properly. :o(

> > and about 30% too low at low speeds!

-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----

by **Haqsa** » Mon, 14 Oct 2002 06:59:16

Iain, are you using the default setups? Just curious. For a while I
was convinced that the defaults had way too much understeer, but then I
realized that the "track name" setups (as opposed to the "grip" setups)
are pretty well balanced for getting aggressively back on the throttle.
This seems to be realistic too. Today I finally got around to watching
the US GP on tape, and I could see clearly how the Ferrari cars and most
everybody else were nearly lifting the inside front wheel off the ground
coming out of a corner. That means very high front roll stiffness
relative to the rear, which would normally be a very tight setup. Same
thing Porsche 911 drivers have been doing for years - make it a tight
setup and then balance it with power oversteer. That's exactly what you
get with the "track name" setups. So if you are using a very loose
setup, you might want to try going back to the "trackname" setup instead
to see how it compares.

I went and drove the US GP track in F1 2002 after watching the tape of
the real one, and with about an hour's work, starting from the "United
States" setup and making only minor tweaks, I got down to 1:18. Crappy
laptime in absolute terms, but I'm a crappy driver and for me to get to
a 105% level in an hour is not bad. But the point is that when I
checked the telemetry, where I was losing time was not in the low speed
corners. I was losing it in the entry to turn 1 and the exit from the
penultimate turn before you get back on the speedway; in both cases due
to being unable to hit the turn in point accurately. Different problem
entirely. On all of the low speed turns in the back stretch I was as
fast or faster than the benchmark 1:14 lap that is shown in the
telemetry window. So again, these cars have realistic levels of low
speed grip if you learn how to drive them.

All I am doing is making sure I have the proper gear, using low traction
control (full doesn't allow you to get a good drift going), getting back
on the throttle before the apex, and modulating the throttle very
carefully. You have to use enough throttle to balance the car (i.e. to
get enough drift to counter the understeer), but no more than that. The
setup changes I made were mostly just some slight tweaking of tire
pressure and camber, and a slight numerical reduction in gear ratios.
This allowed me to get realistic performance.

The degree of delicacy required with the throttle is realistic too. I
remember someone in here about a year ago who got a ride in a real F1
car, and at the track he was told not to depress the throttle more than
10 mm when starting off in order to avoid spinning. These are hugely
powerful cars and you have to be able to modulate the torque or you are
going to end up backwards. So I think the sensitivity is realistic.

Another question - what do you have your throttle axis sensitivity set
to? It should be 50%, and there should be no dead spots. And again,
make sure you don't have the split axis 50% dead spot bug. Try working
your throttle in the controller view to make sure you are getting full
travel. Anything else will be very difficult to modulate properly. F1
2001 in split axis mode had that bug, and it was impossible for me to
play until I learned the DX Tweak workaround. F1 2002 allows you to fix
it in the .plr file instead of using DXTweak, but it is still
undocumented and therefore there still seem to be a lot of people who
are not aware that they have the problem.

rec.autos.simulators

Any news on F1 2003?

Any news on F1 2003?

Any news on F1 2003?

Any news on F1 2003?

Any news on F1 2003?

Any news on F1 2003?

Any news on F1 2003?

Any news on F1 2003?