rec.autos.simulators

by **Andre Warrin** » Sat, 25 Mar 2000 04:00:00

If you find the tracks too wide, you just don't drive at the limit...

Andre

On Fri, 24 Mar 2000 02:49:56 GMT, "Charlie B (Hans)"

>which is the reason why NFS PU isnt a realistic sim, the only thing holding
>it back is the arcade like sweeping wiiide tracks.

>>> I believe F1 2000 has it's flaws, but it is the best F1 sim to date...
>>but
>>> you have to give it a chance..

>>> A lot of fun and realistic..

>>It may be fun if you take out any disbelief that this is actually how a F1
>>car handles. You can't powerslide&trailbrake in real-life, it's an
>>impossible thing that only a few have ever mastered in the history of
>modern
>>racing. Everybody knows that, and it's imho a reason why a driver like
>Alex
>>Zanardi failed in F1 compared to the CART series or simply how the F1 cars
>>handled half a century ago. If it's "that" realistic, then tell me why the
>>average driver can constantly trailbrake into the medium and slow corners,
>>then simply powerslide at almost full throttle out of those corners?

>>What about the incredibly bad track modeling? How can you say it's
>>realistic when there is a major flaw like that?

>>--
>>-- Fran?ois Mnard <ymenard>
>>-- May the Downforce be with you...
>>-- http://www.racesimcentral.net/
>>-- People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realise
>>how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world.

by **Studs Ramro** » Sat, 25 Mar 2000 04:00:00

Well said - I remenber people complaining of exactly the same thing when
GP2 came out "oh, it wont run very well on my P120 16Mb RAM"

Nowadays that sort of machine would not be up to many racing sims and we
all probably have at least a Celeron, PII or PIII and only relatively
recentely were we able to run GP2 with all detail.

> On Fri, 24 Mar 2000 00:16:51 -0000, "Chris Wright"

> >The uninstall button...

> >What an absolute disgrace. Luckily I have managed to obtain a refund
for
> >this from a retailer who doesn't normally do such things - they just
> >couldn't cope with my outrage at how bad I think this is.

> >On the box it states a recommended spec as PII 450 with 128MB RAM and
an 8MB
> >Video Card. So how comes it runs abysmally on my PIII 550 128 MB RAM
and
> >GeForce Annihilator Pro?

> >Rest easy Mr Crammond you have little to fear from this travesty of a
game.

> How well do you think Mr. Crammond's sim will run on your system?
> Were you around for the original release of GP2?

> --
> * rrev at mindspring dot com *

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

by **Jan Loebzie** » Sat, 25 Mar 2000 04:00:00

>You even lower the wings from the default on a twisty track like
>Brazil? Well, there goes my setup knowledge :)
>I practiced on Brazil for about an hour, drove 1:24 laps (I'm good, I
>know :) , then I raised my wings, and after a little bit of practice I
>drove 1:17 laps.

Hmmm, I have my wings at the minimum and still have a hard time to get
over 300km/h at the front straight, like the AI does. What's your top
speed with raised wings?

Blaze

by **Stephen Ferguso** » Sat, 25 Mar 2000 04:00:00

The question you have to ask yourself is if you are willing to let your
computer gradually grow into F1-2000. With GP2, I think a lot of us enjoyed
it at minimal graphics detail, and then enjoyed it some more with each
upgrade. GPL is also one of those "mostly familiar but pleasantly new" sims
with each computer upgrade. The basic product has to be good to put up with
this process.

GP2 came out in an era of software graphics, so poor performance can (to
some degree) be excused. SBK2000, GPL and RC2000 have demonstrated that,
with modern 3D hardware, there really is no excuse for having to "grow into"
a sim over the course of a year. On even a "modest" PIII-450, any of these
will run well.

Stephen

by **Jan Loebzie** » Sat, 25 Mar 2000 04:00:00

On Thu, 23 Mar 2000 20:55:17 -0600, "Greg Cisko"

>Usually the reccomended is what you can run with
>smooth framerates.

Since when is that? :-)
Being a flight simmer in the other life, you and I should know that
"recommended" means "minimum", while "minimum" means not
more than "installation should be possible".

This won't change as long there are some people who say they're
happy with 5 fps, the game companies use that as an excuse for
"different perceptions of running well".

Blaze

by **Lorne Glustei** » Sat, 25 Mar 2000 04:00:00

Hi Andre,
I must have done 150 laps before I got the 1:16.526... but I was really
getting into it because the first laps I ever did on the track were around
1:30 (lol) and I slowly got faster (hey there`s one> "slowly got faster") so
it was a lot of fun to keep improving my times. Then I hit a brick wall. Ok,
my best is now a 1:16.434 and I can sometimes do three 1:17`s in a
row....but I cant beat that 1:16.434... and I can tell ya it`s sure not for
lack of trying. I think the problem is that I cant dial in a setup to save
my life :( I guess I`ll need to keep working at it and hope I get lucky, at
least until some kind/fast racers start posting some good setups. To answer
your question, I dont find that much of a difference in lap times when going
down 2 clicks front\rear wing (from default). I can also get 1:17`s after
going down 4 clicks (and I`ve had 1:17`s with full default settings as
well). I can feel the trade off (speed vs grip) in how the car responds, but
it always seems to equal out. Hmmm, maybe I should [raise] the wings from
default like you did and see if I can be a lot quicker through the twisty
bits.... this will be interesting. Anyway, I`m located in Toronto Canada and
I`m on cable. If you (or anyone else) would like to hook up for some online
racing just let me know :)

All the best,
Lorne
lhg [AT] home [DOT] com
P.S. I`m going to paste this reply into a thread I started called:
"F1-2000 - Thoughts - Lap times - Lets race online :)" it would probably be
a better
place to talk in a positive way about F1-2000 ;)

> You even lower the wings from the default on a twisty track like
> Brazil? Well, there goes my setup knowledge :)
> I practiced on Brazil for about an hour, drove 1:24 laps (I'm good, I
> know :) , then I raised my wings, and after a little bit of practice I
> drove 1:17 laps.
> How do you keep the car on the road at those last twisty corners with
> your wings so low?

> Andre

> >Anyone doing laps at Brazil ? ....a 1:16.526 is my best using 2 clicks
less
> >front and rear wing from the default setup. I hear that someone got a
1:14.9
> >and I was just wondering what others are getting..... maybe post some
setup
> >tips and stuff like that. Also if anyone would like to race Brazil online
> >respond to this thread.... maybe we can find a way to get some races
going
> >:)

> >All the best,
> >Lorne

by **rrevve** » Sat, 25 Mar 2000 04:00:00

>GP2 came out in an era of software graphics, so poor performance can (to
>some degree) be excused. SBK2000, GPL and RC2000 have demonstrated that,
>with modern 3D hardware, there really is no excuse for having to "grow into"
>a sim over the course of a year. On even a "modest" PIII-450, any of these
>will run well.

But, Stephen, when GPL was released 2 years ago, there was no such
thing as a PII-450. Everyone had problems running GP2, just like
they had problems running GP2 and, now, F1-2000.

--
* rrev at mindspring dot com *

by **Stephen Ferguso** » Sat, 25 Mar 2000 04:00:00

> On Fri, 24 Mar 2000 16:09:59 +0100, "Stephen Ferguson"

> >GP2 came out in an era of software graphics, so poor performance can (to
> >some degree) be excused. SBK2000, GPL and RC2000 have demonstrated that,
> >with modern 3D hardware, there really is no excuse for having to "grow
into"
> >a sim over the course of a year. On even a "modest" PIII-450, any of
these
> >will run well.

> But, Stephen, when GPL was released 2 years ago, there was no such
> thing as a PII-450. Everyone had problems running GP2, just like
> they had problems running GP2 and, now, F1-2000.

True. I used the PIII-450 as contemporary equipment for SBK2000 and RC2000.
GPL is thrown in as a processor intensive program that runs well thanks to a
3D card. When it came out, the computers of the time with a Rendition card
could run it reasonably well, I believe. Certainly people were getting
frame rates in the mid 20s with a level of decreased graphics detail that
would still be considered "sumptuous" compared to GP2. My main point was
that there's no real reason why F1-2000 should be sluggish.

Stephen

by **rrevve** » Sat, 25 Mar 2000 04:00:00

>> On Fri, 24 Mar 2000 16:09:59 +0100, "Stephen Ferguson"

>> >GP2 came out in an era of software graphics, so poor performance can (to
>> >some degree) be excused. SBK2000, GPL and RC2000 have demonstrated that,
>> >with modern 3D hardware, there really is no excuse for having to "grow
>into"
>> >a sim over the course of a year. On even a "modest" PIII-450, any of
>these
>> >will run well.

>> But, Stephen, when GPL was released 2 years ago, there was no such
>> thing as a PII-450. Everyone had problems running GP2, just like
>> they had problems running GP2 and, now, F1-2000.

>True. I used the PIII-450 as contemporary equipment for SBK2000 and RC2000.
>GPL is thrown in as a processor intensive program that runs well thanks to a
>3D card. When it came out, the computers of the time with a Rendition card
>could run it reasonably well, I believe. Certainly people were getting
>frame rates in the mid 20s with a level of decreased graphics detail that
>would still be considered "sumptuous" compared to GP2. My main point was
>that there's no real reason why F1-2000 should be sluggish.

>Stephen

Then I guess you didn't understand my post. Because of the things I
mentioned to you, there is EVERY reason to understand why F1-2000
runs slowly. They ALL do, when released.

The usenet comments about F12K performance could be copied directly
from those made at the GPL release as well as the GP2 release. Also, if
you think this thing runs slowly, I am going to predict that GP3 will be
MUCH worse.

Wanna bet?

--
* rrev at mindspring dot com *

by **GraDe** » Sat, 25 Mar 2000 04:00:00

Anyone wo follows this forum knows I've given F1 2000 a hard time for a long
while now. GP3 is the game I'm after,

but heck, from what I heard about the warez versions if wasn't just F1 stlye
Andretti racing so I bought it this morning. To tell the truth, it might
ahve a few niggle flaws (I assure you EA always patch a game) but its one of
the best modern day F1 racers we have right now.

I've got A PII350 65MB RAM and 16MB Voodoo Banshee card.

Runs very well for me. It was a little sluggish at first but I sorted it.
Get rid of all the miror detail, it seems slow it down alot and yo won't
notice a diffeence wih them off anyway.

Then just Set the high box to low or none if you don't mind not having a
horizon.

It looks perfect and runs great, even on my machine!

If you need more speed turn off the biliniar thing, it doesn't make a
difference unless you are using that view over teh drives head, in which
case it might look a little pixilated, otehr than that it fine, but I don't
need that.

I know we are quick to udge EA Sports acing titles, (Although i like the
other sports, I HATE ea sports racing titles) but if you give this a good
try, ge used to it without aids on, and mess about with the graphics setup,
I can't see why this is so bad. Its the best we have right now.

But I still say roll on GP3.

by **Ian Wrigh** » Sat, 25 Mar 2000 04:00:00

Am I missing something? Where is the Glide support? OpenGL? Personally, I
found all Direct3D games I've tried look and run terrible.

F1 2000 has bad FPS and is fuzzy on my PIII 550., 16MB Voodoo Banshee
HOW CAN THIS BEEEEEEEE

in conclusion, EA Sports are evil bastards, I want my money back

Ian

by **Hotd** » Sat, 25 Mar 2000 04:00:00

Yeh but what Steven is saying is that F1_2000 runs like a dog compared
to say SBK 2000 which is just as new a release as F1 2000, and SBK
2000 blows F1 2000 away in the graphics area alone, never mind the AI
which sucks in F1 2000 and isnt worth wasting the CPU cycles on at
all.

Unless you have seen SBK 2000 in 1024x768 on a Celeron 466 running you
wouldnt know, buts its smooth, very smooth maybe 30 FPS on Monza all
the way around with a full field of 25 bikes.

Oh and did I mention that SBK 2000 looks maybe 50% better than F1 2000
at 1024x768 :).

Also the SBK 2000 AI is great to race against, rreved you should grab
this title, you will like it I bet, unless you dont like bikes of
course. Dont be put of with how hard GP500 was to control SBK 2000 has
easier options for newbies to bike sims.

Hotdog

Did you give up on flightsims BTW ??.

by **jam3** » Sat, 25 Mar 2000 04:00:00

One thing I found was the game runs faster on my machine at
1024x768, faster that 640x480. P3 500 TNT2 128MB. Runs great.

I love it. It's not perfect, but is it fun? Yes! But hey I'm a
Nigel Mansell fan too.

Also the AI behave differenty in practive/qualify than in race.
In practice they will pull over to let you by, which some take
as poor AI behavior. They don't do that in the race. Anybody
else notice that?

It't funny, I'm sure I'll get flamed for saying I like the game.
I've been reading USENET for 10 years, stopped last few because
people now are much more rude. I remember when
rec.autos.sport.f1 used to be great.

It's too bad.

Joe

* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!

by **ymenar** » Sat, 25 Mar 2000 04:00:00

Yes Barton.. yes Mister "Extrapolation".

Have you ever heard the term literary writing? Why did you extrapolate it
to the extreme way, just for the pleasure of bashing at somebody's message?
Anybody can clearly see the point that Im trying to reach. Why couldn't
you? Would I have satisfied your life if I wrote "almost impossible"? I
chosen to only write impossible since for me.. "almost impossible" is too
large, not enough specific. So I guess for you idioms don't exist, since
they have irrelevant connotations to their actual word-for-word meaning.

--
-- Fran?ois Mnard <ymenard>
-- May the Downforce be with you...
-- http://www.WeRace.net
-- People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realise
how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world.

by **Barton Brow** » Sat, 25 Mar 2000 04:00:00

> ahem.

Gesundheit! Sorry, one dink at a time.

BB

rec.autos.simulators

An F1 2000 feature you really must try...

An F1 2000 feature you really must try...

An F1 2000 feature you really must try...

An F1 2000 feature you really must try...

An F1 2000 feature you really must try...

An F1 2000 feature you really must try...

An F1 2000 feature you really must try...

An F1 2000 feature you really must try...

An F1 2000 feature you really must try...

An F1 2000 feature you really must try...

An F1 2000 feature you really must try...

An F1 2000 feature you really must try...

An F1 2000 feature you really must try...

An F1 2000 feature you really must try...

An F1 2000 feature you really must try...

An F1 2000 feature you really must try...