Do you people think the reason EA distributed F1 2000 in this state (i.e.
unfinished) was that they figured it was the only chance they had to make
any money out of it? In other words, that once GP3 came out, nobody would go
near F1 2000?
> Do you people think the reason EA distributed F1 2000 in this state (i.e.
> unfinished) was that they figured it was the only chance they had to make
> any money out of it? In other words, that once GP3 came out, nobody would go
> near F1 2000?
Isn't a sim a thing with real-life tracks?
F1 2000 isn't!!
The tracks are pure shit.
So much hostility over a game.
Tracks are convincing enough for me. I find F1-2000 very enjoyable to
drive. I can find little difference between hotlapping and the number of
mpgs I have downloaded of real hotlaps on each circuit.
Cheers,
Rod.
> > Isn't a sim a thing with real-life tracks?
> > F1 2000 isn't!!
> > The tracks are pure shit.
> So much hostility over a game.
> Tracks are convincing enough for me. I find F1-2000 very enjoyable to
> drive. I can find little difference between hotlapping and the number of
> mpgs I have downloaded of real hotlaps on each circuit.
Some of the tracks in F1 2000 are good.
I just can't understand why they could NOT make tracks like Spa (the most
important one) and some of the rest JUST AS GOOD. They obviously have the
technology to measure the real tracks and convert them into computer tracks.
I don't know which mpg's you have been watrching, but their version of SPA
is the worst I have ever seen. All the track ellevations are totally wrong.
The Eau Rouge corner is the most important corner of the whole season (thats
what the real drivers say) so its unacceptable that EA messed that whole
section up.
Yeah, of course its JUST a racing game...
Its also JUST your money they're after :)
Spa, Suzuka and Indy are the only 3 I don't have in the boxed season.. so
I can't comment on them.
I feel that the level of track accuracy that people demand on here isn't
absolutely essential for the mass market. Joe Blow is unlikely to even
know. I consider myself an average F1 fan, if it's on TV, I'll watch it.
Every race I want to know the result, several tracks I know reasonably
well. Would I be able to comment on track accuracy on the real thing? Not
likely, all I could do is compare it to other sims that I have raced, or
mpg's that I have seen.
Of the mpgs that I've downloaded, I could virtually pick each turn-in
point, where each brake point was and which gear they were taking the
turn on which I feel is pretty darn good. That kind of accuracy is most
likely to be more than acceptable to 99% of the game purchasing public.
Even if a track is totally wrong, why can't you treat that track as a
'fantasy' track? There are other tracks there that are modelled very
well. No point damning a game because of one poorly modelled track.
Cheers,
Rod.
>> But the product EA had was a 2000 season sim that really isn't
>> competing with gp3 but with Pysnosis F1 and Official F1.
>No way, Dave. As has been debated many times, F12K is the best modern F1
>sim out there, and should be compared with F1RS and MGPRS2. F1 and OF1R were
>pure arcade games and not worth taking OOTB.
Agreed.
Remco
Trust me on this one: I have been a F1 *** for 20 years now, and I have
lots of books, videos about F1 racing. I've been to many tracks myself.
Still I'm not a maniac: I found the tracks in GP2 very very good. There were
some minor flaws, but overal they were good. Compared to the old GP2, the
newer F1 2000 tracks are really very bad, apart from a few.
I must admid that the Spa track is maybe the worst of all, and its such a
nice track IRL.
Well this 99% will NOT buy GPL because its too hard to play. But still GPL
is the best SIM up to date.
Of course Im NOT the average game purchasing guy. And many of us aren't: we
want the real thing, and that's what game-makers speculate on when they
label their game as 'a true sim'.
Imossible! I drive around the tracks I got to know so well with a certain
feel, and even some emotions :)
I can't have it spoiled by EA. I won't race on the F1 2000 SPA track like it
is now. It's painful...
There are other tracks there that are modelled very
I willl admit that F1 2000 has some very good qualities, but as I explained
earlier: what really annyoing is that they have the technology to make
accurate tracks, but they just don't care. Lets' just hope someone finds a
way to edit the tracks, them F1 2000 will be close to perfect
It's not just my opinion, but nevertheless what is your opinion on what is
the best modern F1 sim out there at the moment?
Iain
Your post insinuate that it's best at the moment but also best as in "good
to buy".
While I agree that F1 2000 is the best racing simulation of modern F1 at the
moment (barely over Gp2 since the graphics make it out-dated simply), the
price is not worth the investment and it has major flaws in every aspect of
the game.
--
-- 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.
Oh mmmm no.
If we start like this, we'll never advance in realism. You could release
"track accuracy" in your message by EVERYTHING. Graphics, sound, AI,
multiplayer, etc.. If they do not push them the most they can, then virtual
reality of motorsports is doomed.
Btw, have fun at the pathetic model of the Montreal GP next week. It's so
bad I think I'll burn the F1 2000 cd (yes, I finally bought it, shame on me)
in the microwave ;-P
--
-- 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.