rec.autos.simulators

F1 2000- Imola seems to be accurate!

Arto Wik

F1 2000- Imola seems to be accurate!

by Arto Wik » Sun, 09 Apr 2000 04:00:00

Today they sent in tv about one and half lap of qualifying from the
on board camera of Barrichello. From the tape I compared section
by section the the real track and the F1 2000 Imola - you can
get the very same "over the helmet" view in the sim. And to
me the modelled Imola was pretty near the real one! Much better
than I had expected after having read some complains in r.a.s...

Arto

Greg Cisk

F1 2000- Imola seems to be accurate!

by Greg Cisk » Sun, 09 Apr 2000 04:00:00


Exactly right it is accurate. Forget about those whiners.

--

Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes.

cisko [AT] ix [DOT] netcom [DOT] com

Iain Mackenzi

F1 2000- Imola seems to be accurate!

by Iain Mackenzi » Mon, 10 Apr 2000 04:00:00

That's what I said in an earlier thread! Very accurate, as was Interlagos.
Iain


Iain Mackenzi

F1 2000- Imola seems to be accurate!

by Iain Mackenzi » Mon, 10 Apr 2000 04:00:00

Total exaggeration as always from you!
Iain
Darren Dunca

F1 2000- Imola seems to be accurate!

by Darren Dunca » Mon, 10 Apr 2000 04:00:00

Rubbish - having lived in Japan, near Suzuka for 9 years I can tell you it
is the closest I've ever seen to accurately modelling the track. So please
remove it from your list..... What part of it are you questioning?

Darren

(I can't comment on the other tracks however but driving around Suzuka is
great)


Davi

F1 2000- Imola seems to be accurate!

by Davi » Mon, 10 Apr 2000 04:00:00

You know what I get a kick out of is people how have only seen most tracks
by way of TV or a different game saying how poorly the tracks are done or
how inaccurate they are.  Actually Papy' s ICR series was very inaccurate
and I know of some other tracks that were way off they did, and since I
have actaully been in a race car and on those tracks I can comment on em.

Dave



> > Still, tracks like Monaco, the A1-Ring, Hockenheim, Montreal, Spa,
Monza,
> > Suzuka and the Nurburgring are extremely poor.

Don Burnett

F1 2000- Imola seems to be accurate!

by Don Burnett » Mon, 10 Apr 2000 04:00:00


Hmmm, maybe, but I am having a blast running them.
If y'all would quit telling me their not realistic, I probably would never
know :)

--
Don Burnette
Dburn in N3 and Legends

ymenar

F1 2000- Imola seems to be accurate!

by ymenar » Mon, 10 Apr 2000 04:00:00


LOL... ignore this, it was a poor attempt by me to create sarcasm after a
couple of guinness pints... 8)

--
-- 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.

Greg Cisk

F1 2000- Imola seems to be accurate!

by Greg Cisk » Mon, 10 Apr 2000 04:00:00


Your confirmation is good enough for me. Thanks!

--

Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes.

cisko [AT] ix [DOT] netcom [DOT] com

> Darren

> (I can't comment on the other tracks however but driving around Suzuka is
> great)



> > Still, tracks like Monaco, the A1-Ring, Hockenheim, Montreal, Spa,
Monza,
> > Suzuka and the Nurburgring are extremely poor.

Greg Cisk

F1 2000- Imola seems to be accurate!

by Greg Cisk » Mon, 10 Apr 2000 04:00:00


Oh sure.

Curious after you *BOUGHT* the game how much time did
you actually give it?
--

Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes.

cisko [AT] ix [DOT] netcom [DOT] com

Greg Cisk

F1 2000- Imola seems to be accurate!

by Greg Cisk » Mon, 10 Apr 2000 04:00:00



> > Btw there is a 1950 track hidden in F1 2000.

> LOL... ignore this, it was a poor attempt by me to create sarcasm after a
> couple of guinness pints... 8)

Drunkenness would explain your bizarre attitude with track renditions.

Maybe if you actually try F1 2000 sober you will see the tracks are
good. Duh.

--

Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes.

cisko [AT] ix [DOT] netcom [DOT] com

ymenar

F1 2000- Imola seems to be accurate!

by ymenar » Mon, 10 Apr 2000 04:00:00

"Greg Cisko" <no.spam.email.for.me> wrote

I said I don't feel the track renditions of some tracks are accurate, that's
all.  Simple as that.  Anything else is irrelevant.  At least I know for
sure that Monaco, Montreal, the A1-Ring, Monza and the Ring are totally
wrong.  Some of them from having been on those tracks, others for having
watched since years television reports on them, etc..

Just compare the SBK2000 Nurburgring to the one in F1 2000...  The one in
SBK2k is correctly accurate, and was reported by MANY other people here.
It's not like Im the only person saying the track aren't accurate at all,
many many others have said that comment.

Good for you if you think they are enough accurate for you.  They aren't for
me.

To answer your question, I've raced it much more than you think in the past
couple of weeks, as I was able to have third and fourth opinions on the
software (with AI and other adjustements) at some people's house.

--
-- 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.

ymenar

F1 2000- Imola seems to be accurate!

by ymenar » Mon, 10 Apr 2000 04:00:00

"Greg Cisko" <no.spam.email.for.me> wrote

Your missing obvious sarcasm Greg.

Duh you.  Your ok to personally judge somebody compared to the other in
terms of how the F1 tracks are in terms of accuracy (ex: trusting Darren
Duncan from what he saw on TV).  I never said Imola wasn't accurate.  Why
are you thinking that?  It is very good.  It's just 1 track out of the whole
season.

Just ask all the other people in this NG, many people find the tracks very
poor.

--
-- 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.

Todd Dr

F1 2000- Imola seems to be accurate!

by Todd Dr » Mon, 10 Apr 2000 04:00:00




> > Nobody complained about Imola, as they did a great job with the

> Oh sure.

> > environmental objects surrounding the track (just look at the great
> ammount
> > of object on the inside of the track layout).  It's the best F1 2000
> track,
> > with Interlagos and Silverstone.

> > Btw there is a 1950 track hidden in F1 2000.

> > Still, tracks like Monaco, the A1-Ring, Hockenheim, Montreal, Spa,
Monza,
> > Suzuka and the Nurburgring are extremely poor.

> Curious after you *BOUGHT* the game how much time did
> you actually give it?

I know this wasn't directed at me but I just had to answer it.  I gave it
about 4 hours.  When I put a Minardi on pole at Australia, at 100%
difficulty, without driving aids, by seconds (not tenths), in my first ever
attempt, I came to the conclusion that this wasn't a sim.

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.