rec.autos.simulators

F1 2000 realism

Sjoerd de Roes

F1 2000 realism

by Sjoerd de Roes » Tue, 21 Mar 2000 04:00:00

Hi,

It's seems that everyone is comparing the realism of F1 2000 to Grand Prix
Legends. I know there are some problems with the game but comparing the
realism with GPL is just stupid. The cars of the Grand Prix Legends are just
harder to drive. Modern F1 cars are easy to drive. Compare the driving model
to Gp2, MGRS2 or any other recent F1 sim please.

Sjoerd

Olav K. Malm

F1 2000 realism

by Olav K. Malm » Tue, 21 Mar 2000 04:00:00


No, it is not stupid to compare a sim to the best there is. Of course the
cars are different and they should also feel different in a sim. What we
want is a sim where the car is modelled as good as the 67 F1 cars of GPL,
and if they are they would feel like a 2000 F1 car (not that any of us have
tried one, and would know:)

The problem with the sims you mentioned GP2 and MGPRS2 is that since the cars
are not modelled good enough, the cars sometimes spin out without you knowing
why, and not able to analyze either. Every time i crash out in GPL i know
even before I hit the wall why. In GP2 and MGPRS2 you don't sometimes, and
that can't be called "easy to drive", only good-for-it's-time-but-not-good-
enough-now-physics-model.

--
Olav K. Malmin
remove spam when replying

Gregor Vebl

F1 2000 realism

by Gregor Vebl » Tue, 21 Mar 2000 04:00:00


> Hi,

> It's seems that everyone is comparing the realism of F1 2000 to Grand Prix
> Legends. I know there are some problems with the game but comparing the
> realism with GPL is just stupid. The cars of the Grand Prix Legends are just
> harder to drive. Modern F1 cars are easy to drive. Compare the driving model
> to Gp2, MGRS2 or any other recent F1 sim please.

> Sjoerd

While your point is true that the cars behave differently (althogh not
as much as some think), the physics behind the real life cars is always
the same, and Sir Isaac Newton alread took care of how it is described.
There is, contrary to popular opinion, just one way of realism since
there is only one type of (classical) physics, the difference is only in
approximations used to make it work on the (limited) computers that we
have on (or below or beside) our desks today. The difference between
different types of racing is then in the properties of physical objects
(tyre performance, aerodynamic properties, mass, inertia, power). The
physics are always the same.

Some sim approximations are crude due to the lack of attention of
programmers and thus very unrealistic (a lot of titles), some are
excellent in modelling details, like GPL and Viper Racing. Let's hope F1
2000 leans towards the second camp. That's all there is to realism
wishes, noone wants it to drive like GPL. That woulde be unrealistic.

-Gregor

Ryan Mitchle

F1 2000 realism

by Ryan Mitchle » Tue, 21 Mar 2000 04:00:00



Agreed. And it goes beyond a mere "difficulty" difference: aerodynamics,
slicks and a vast number of other factors should make a huge difference to
the feel of the sim. And I'd be interested to know what reference those that
slam (or praise) the game are using. Which of them have driven open wheel
single seaters? The same goes for those that comment on the realism of the
tracks. Have they actually driven on the tracks that they mention?

If there are any racers out there who are doing more than simply comparing
the tracks to their experiences of GP2, MGP, or even live television
coverage, I'd be interested to hear their views (and exactly where they're
coming from).

And it would be disappointing if a game were to get a bad rap simply because
the default controller settings or suchlike are wrong (I think someone has
mentioned the speed sensitivity setting of F1 2000).

Besides, I think that if a game correctly modelled a modern F1 car in
detail, only a handful of people (yes, even on this newsgroup) would be able
to drive it.

Also, I haven't yet seen any posts specifying exactly what they find
unsatisfying about the F1 2000 dynamics, just this kind of general "nothing
like GPL" hand-waving . . .

Detailed, intelligent, testosterone-free follow-ups welcomed.

Ryan

Olav K. Malm

F1 2000 realism

by Olav K. Malm » Tue, 21 Mar 2000 04:00:00




> > It's seems that everyone is comparing the realism of F1 2000 to Grand Prix
> > Legends. I know there are some problems with the game but comparing the
> > realism with GPL is just stupid. The cars of the Grand Prix Legends are
> just
> > harder to drive. Modern F1 cars are easy to drive. Compare the driving
> model
> > to Gp2, MGRS2 or any other recent F1 sim please.

> Agreed. And it goes beyond a mere "difficulty" difference: aerodynamics,
> slicks and a vast number of other factors should make a huge difference to
> the feel of the sim. And I'd be interested to know what reference those that
> slam (or praise) the game are using. Which of them have driven open wheel
> single seaters? The same goes for those that comment on the realism of the
> tracks. Have they actually driven on the tracks that they mention?

There are many open-wheel racers here in this newsgroup, sadly my only open
wheel experience is rental-karts :) Some people here have very good knowledge
of the different tracks around the world too.

Always nice to hear stories.

True, but a messy controller setup (never understood that speed-sensivity
thing ;) is only one factor of a bad game.

I think everyone who have some interest in techincal driving would be able
to drive a F1 car. At 30 km/h that is. But remember the crazy amount of
practice you get in a sim, and how many times you can kill yourself. I think
most of us who race GPL on a regular basis have done more laps at many of
the tracks than many of the drivers of that time. Alison Hine said that she
probably had done more laps at Monza than Jim Clark only during beta-testing.
My point is, even if a F1 would be undrivable, many of us would still
practice enough do manage after all. I think even Mr Hot-Lap-King Woeger
spun in the pits the first time he tried GPL.

Good point. But I do think it is a thing that is not that easy to describe.
When I tried GPL the first time, I felt that this was the way to do it. Every
other sim released since haven't given me that feeling again.

Hope this was good enough :)

--
Olav K. Malmin
remove spam when replying

Andreas Kroel

F1 2000 realism

by Andreas Kroel » Tue, 21 Mar 2000 04:00:00


> If there are any racers out there who are doing more than simply comparing
> the tracks to their experiences of GP2, MGP, or even live television
> coverage, I'd be interested to hear their views (and exactly where they're
> coming from).

I have actually driven a car (if you call a Golf a car, that is) around
the A1-Ring. In F1-2000 the bumps are overdone, and some elevations
changes are either exaggerated (there is no such huge hill before the
Rindtkurve) or to small (the climb up to Remuskurve, the braking zone of
the Goesserkurve). Some locations of armco are just plain wrong (after the
Goesserkurve).

Just stating the facts. For me, this is _not_ a reason not to buy F1 2000.
It is actually quite fun and the best current F1 sim, isn't it?
BTW: EA will sell _lots_ of copies. That's what they work for.

Don't think so. Driving is one thing, driving as quick as the real guys
another. OTOH i have never driven an F1, so what do i know.

Greetings,
Andreas

--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Worueber man nicht reden kann, darueber muss man schweigen."(Wittgenstein)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Gregor Vebl

F1 2000 realism

by Gregor Vebl » Tue, 21 Mar 2000 04:00:00


> > Besides, I think that if a game correctly modelled a modern F1 car in
> > detail, only a handful of people (yes, even on this newsgroup) would be able
> > to drive it.

> Don't think so. Driving is one thing, driving as quick as the real guys
> another. OTOH i have never driven an F1, so what do i know.

> Greetings,
> Andreas

I can agree, if anything, a racing car should be easy to drive fast,
much easier than to drive your ordinary car close to the limit. I think
so because if anything a good racing car should be predictable and
controlable, and should speak to the driver of its intentions. Of
course, as in any car, one has to be careful not to overdo it. But to
really reach the limit, as you say Andreas, is where the true skill
comes in.
Thomas JS Brow

F1 2000 realism

by Thomas JS Brow » Tue, 21 Mar 2000 04:00:00

It is my understanding that modern F1 cars are relatively easy to drive
under the limit. Driving at the limit is where they get squirrely, and
since the advent of grooved tires, braking is perhaps the most difficult
thing to master in a modern F1. Anyone notice how many mishaps drivers
are having in the braking zones these days?
James Lars

F1 2000 realism

by James Lars » Tue, 21 Mar 2000 04:00:00

Someone should tell Alex Zanardi that driving an F1 car is easy.

James Larson
Omaha, Nebraska, USA

Zonk

F1 2000 realism

by Zonk » Tue, 21 Mar 2000 04:00:00


>Path:
>> If there are any racers out there who are doing more than simply comparing
>> the tracks to their experiences of GP2, MGP, or even live television
>> coverage, I'd be interested to hear their views (and exactly where they're
>> coming from).

>I have actually driven a car (if you call a Golf a car, that is) around
>the A1-Ring. In F1-2000 the bumps are overdone, and some elevations
>changes are either exaggerated (there is no such huge hill before the
>Rindtkurve) or to small (the climb up to Remuskurve, the braking zone of
>the Goesserkurve). Some locations of armco are just plain wrong (after the
>Goesserkurve).

>Just stating the facts. For me, this is _not_ a reason not to buy F1 2000.
>It is actually quite fun and the best current F1 sim, isn't it?
>BTW: EA will sell _lots_ of copies. That's what they work for.

>> Besides, I think that if a game correctly modelled a modern F1 car in
>> detail, only a handful of people (yes, even on this newsgroup) would be able
>> to drive it.

>Don't think so. Driving is one thing, driving as quick as the real guys
>another. OTOH i have never driven an F1, so what do i know.

-agreed. There's also the g-force/fitness issue- if these were beign
simulated, sure- but physical fitness is not a requirement in sims.

Z.

Please remove my_pants when replying.

Gregor Vebl

F1 2000 realism

by Gregor Vebl » Tue, 21 Mar 2000 04:00:00


> It is my understanding that modern F1 cars are relatively easy to drive
> under the limit. Driving at the limit is where they get squirrely, and
> since the advent of grooved tires, braking is perhaps the most difficult
> thing to master in a modern F1. Anyone notice how many mishaps drivers
> are having in the braking zones these days?

Not as many as I had in GPL.
Gregor Vebl

F1 2000 realism

by Gregor Vebl » Tue, 21 Mar 2000 04:00:00


> Someone should tell Alex Zanardi that driving an F1 car is easy.

> James Larson
> Omaha, Nebraska, USA

This still doesn't say it is hard (he did manage to drive it, didn't
he?), but very hard to drive very fast.
Stephen Ferguso

F1 2000 realism

by Stephen Ferguso » Tue, 21 Mar 2000 04:00:00



> > Besides, I think that if a game correctly modelled a modern F1 car in
> > detail, only a handful of people (yes, even on this newsgroup) would be
able
> > to drive it.

> Don't think so. Driving is one thing, driving as quick as the real guys
> another. OTOH i have never driven an F1, so what do i know.

The ability of average Joes to pay their money and go driving in somewhat
modern F1 cars at the various "F1 experience" track-lapping companies shows
that most people, with a little instruction, could get an F1 car into gear,
move out of the pit lane and motor sedately around the track.  With a small
amount of teaching (assuming the pupil is not completely out of their
element in day-to-day driving) most could also start lapping at speeds that
could be considered "brisk".  The transition from "brisk" to "fast" is the
final difference.  I don't think that a F1 car, in the controlled
environment of a racetrack, is such a monster.  There are many road-legal
cars with capabilities not far below the F1 (think Caterham, Porsche) and
yet most of us would not claim to be unable to drive one.

Stephen

Ryan Mitchle

F1 2000 realism

by Ryan Mitchle » Tue, 21 Mar 2000 04:00:00



I have heard stories of current F1 drivers nearly losing control when their
feet have nudged the accelerator too hard going over bumps. That doesn't
sound particularly easy to drive to me. I know that a competitor in some
non-F1 form of motorsport (rallying or superbike) got a chance to test an F1
car, and he planted it in the wall while attempting to corner. He reported
that he was simply trying to accelerate out of the corner, but that the car
just spun before he even thought that he was doing anything wrong (OTOH, Max
Biaggi test-drove a Ferrari F1 and was reportedly about a second off
Schumachers lap record during the course of the day).

I know that Martin Brundle mentioned when he was driving the 2-seater
McLaren that it seemed a lot easier to drive than the cars he used to race
with.

Ryan

Jo Hels

F1 2000 realism

by Jo Hels » Tue, 21 Mar 2000 04:00:00

Still waiting for a sim that correctly implements String Theory. Now
THAT would be an accurate sim <G>

JoH


rec.autos.simulators is a usenet newsgroup formed in December, 1993. As this group was always unmoderated there may be some spam or off topic articles included. Some links do point back to racesimcentral.net as we could not validate the original address. Please report any pages that you believe warrant deletion from this archive (include the link in your email). RaceSimCentral.net is in no way responsible and does not endorse any of the content herein.