"elrikk
Yes you can. But you should make sure the game.gdb file has an
entry for LeMans. It should be under SeasonSSM.
dave henrie
"elrikk
Yes you can. But you should make sure the game.gdb file has an
entry for LeMans. It should be under SeasonSSM.
dave henrie
<PLONK>
> >By the way, who is this dameon Terd? To many Dameon's is the reason I no
> >longer race online.
> And why do you think I would ruin your online racing? Don't make
> assumptions about my behavoir in online racing just because of what I
> posted here. In fact I rarely race online because the AI can drive
> better than 90% of you chumps.
If I turn out not to be mistaken, I reckon you could cut him some
slack...
Mark
Reading, UK
Thanks again, seems to work fine. Now I can free up some disk space by
uninstalling F1 2001 and its mods. ( to make room for the comming mods for
F1 2002 )
Will it never end ? ;o)
Elrikk
For pure fun, highly tuned gameplay and polished racing? The PS2 wins
hands-down with GT3, Midnight Club, and NFS Hot Pursuit 2.
It's great, but only as on the PC only in a small number of titles.
GT3 and NFS are very good with the wheel. GT3 in particular.
For pure simulation the PC wins. For graphics, sound, and gameplay the
PS2 wins. (In THEORY the PC should win in graphics - in practice this
is rarely the case IME, not in racing games anyway).
You generalize too much. PC has the best Nascar and F1 sims, for sure.
But there is no PC arcade/sim hybrid racer that can touch GT3.
Similarly, with NFS HP2 the PC version is the watered-down, untuned
game that Black Box handed off to another developer several months
ago. The PS2 version is vastly superior.
Not on GT3. The FF is of high quality.
> >I'll say it's just, hmm "different gameplay". Of course, that gameplay
of
> >GT3 is immensely larger but it's still not much. Once you raced those
slow
> >cars without modifications at simple tracks, will you really want to come
> >back?
> Yes, as a devout player (well past) of PC sims and now GT3, I'll go with
the
> "different". Not clearly better. GT3 is a blast. But I do get tired of
> endlessely racing the monotonous Test Circuit. And the knock-em sock-em
AI
> that adjusts to your speed.
> And actually, I do like racing the slow cars. After a while, it is too
easy
> to win with over-powered fast cars. I find it fun to race against very
> closely matched vehicles where one mistake may cost you all your energy.
> Again, too bad about the slow-down/catchup AI.
> But give me more real tracks, more cars on track, half-decent AI. Oh, and
a
> dash view wouldn't hurt.
> Playability is more than just repeating a circuit in search of the magical
> 100% score.
> OTOH, it does have:
> Great cars (too bad not as many as GT2!)
> Very good sound.
> Pretty imaginative courses . Ditto the GT2 comment, and add some shorter
ones
> like Autumn/Mini!
> And once in a while, a real gripping race. Try a 78 lapper where you win
by
> less than a second.
> The PC needs a game/sim like this, but with the above enhancements.
> From what I think was your original post, it wasn't clear if you have GT3.
> While I might have focused on the negatives, I suggest that you run, not
walk
> to the store and pick it up. It is almost reason enough to buy a PS2
alone.
> If you already have a PS2, and are enough of a sim fan to post here, you
want
> this game. And at $19.95 it is the bargain of the year. Yes, it is far
from
> the last word in *racing* realism. But the graphics, sound, and *driving*
> realism are top notch (well, almost on the last). If only there was a PC
> equivalent...
> [btw, I used to waste countless hours on GPL, F1GP2, F1RS, SCGT...]
> >It's not a fair point at all. Just a stupid and obviosuly biased
> >comment from another stupid journalist.
> Uh. Steve was a GPL beta tester *and* wrote the manual (the thick
> one, not the skimpy one describing menus and such). If there's any
> bias there, I'd expect it to lie with Kaemmer's sims.
> As far as being stupid, I dunno about that. 4 Wheel Drift is still my
> #1 toilet reading choice, rivaled only by the newer Bill James books.
> Jason
Jason
"Bollocks" is not a cogent argument.
> >>Bollocks again mate.
> >"Bollocks" is not a cogent argument.
> Then I will quantify it with BALLS. ;-)