the only bad thing, (and it stinks) is the textures used for crowds.. are
they blind? it looks crap!
> -Tim
Gunner
> Please 'splain !
> -Larry
> > > Thunder is ***compared with N2002 ... no even in the same league!
> > Okay, here's my .0000000001c worth:
> > I doubt EA was attempting to get compared to NR2002 (though they
> > should've KNOWN they would!); much like Heat wasn't aiming for NR4. Now,
> to
> > ME (since I really suck as a simracer) gameplay is more important - not
> true
> > reality. I enjoy Heat for GAMEPLAY and enjoyment, I enjoy N4 when I want
> to
> > try to get BETTER. I never got NR2002 (the ONLY Papy NASCAR product I
> > missed), but I'd expect NT to compare more favorably to Heat than
NR2002.
> > Therefore I foresee 2 camps: 1) those that "just want to have fun"
and
> > 2) those that feel ANYTHING less than NR2002/GPL is "pure crap/toaster
> > material/landfill/fill-in-expletive-here".
> > Those in camp 1 will feel NT is an excellent successor to Heat and a
> > decent aside to NR2002.
> > Those in camp 2 will avoid it like the plague (or buy it knowing
full
> > well they won't like it and *** anyway).
> > Personally I feel Heat had a place and Thunder HAS a place - just
> don't
> > attempt to fit it into a niche it was never intended for.
> > I'm waiting on NR2003; but I'm expecting to buy NT mostly because of
> the
> > Truck add-on.
> > Gunner
