rec.autos.simulators

by **FCYTravi** » Tue, 02 Mar 2004 04:46:22

Gee, wow, 22 drivers. I'm so impressed. Not.

Come back and talk to me when F1C can support 40+ car races with almost
no lag on my cable modem like N2K3 does.

I'm not disputing F1C's simulation qualities. But face it, F1C's online
play is nothing short of a disaster. It's not worth running an unstable
20-car race with more dropouts than my local high school with F1C when
I can run a clean, solid 40-car race with N2K3.

--
FCYTravis
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FCYTravis's Profile: http://www.racesimcentral.net/
View this thread: http://www.racesimcentral.net/

_______________________________________________________________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.racesimcentral.net/
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>

by **Jason Moy** » Tue, 02 Mar 2004 04:48:10

On 29 Feb 2004 18:54:01 GMT, FCYTravis

>Yes, a great treat with all of 10 other players. F1C's net code is so
>sad as to be utterly and completely pathetic.

It's not that bad, just don't forget to move the SERVER CAR.

Jason

by **Mitch_** » Tue, 02 Mar 2004 05:07:39

Hehe, I NEVER said it was PERFECT :))

> On 29 Feb 2004 18:54:01 GMT, FCYTravis

> >Yes, a great treat with all of 10 other players. F1C's net code is so
> >sad as to be utterly and completely pathetic.

> It's not that bad, just don't forget to move the SERVER CAR.

> Jason

by **Jason Moy** » Tue, 02 Mar 2004 05:24:23

>Hehe, I NEVER said it was PERFECT :))

=)

I don't see the point really of bickering between the sims. They each
do some things better. N2004 was supposed to have brake wear which
F1C does fairly well, N2003 has better tracks and multi, F1C has
incredible dynamic weather, etc. If you look at what the top
simracers (and real drivers) are driving, it's pretty much
GPL/N2003/F1C with GTR and RBR hopefully being added to that this
year.

If you want to talk NT2004 on the other hand I'm game. =p

Jason

by **Tony Rickar** » Tue, 02 Mar 2004 05:27:57

> Gee, wow, 22 drivers. I'm so impressed. Not.

> Come back and talk to me when F1C can support 40+ car races with almost
> no lag on my cable modem like N2K3 does.

The current open wheel sim with decent on-line support allows for 20
drivers. Which seems a suitable number for this genre. The EA series
couldn't get close to this only recently. So 22 seems pretty good.

I've yet to get F1C working to my tastes, perhaps I haven't taken the time I
don't know. However, unless they are all lying there are guys I would
respect on RAS who are regularly racing F1C and mods on-line. If it was that
***I am sure they would not persevere.

Running such large fields is more of a Nascar requirement. Heck, they're
running bigger fields in F1C than real life F1...how unrealistic!

Cheers
Tony

by **Mitch_** » Tue, 02 Mar 2004 05:28:14

Im obviously an old fuddy duddy :)

I just find it hard to accept that this could be the "best" were going to
get. Papy has shortcomings that I just cna't accept any longer and EA sims
(although they have failings also) are a step in the right direction,
especially the Physics. The Papy tracks are nearly perfectly flat. The
bumps that are there feel as though they were just stuck onto this perfectly
flat track, the grahics and physics seem dated and most importanly it can be
exploited way to easily.

But the Online code is still the best.

I used to play RBI baseball for the orig 8bit nintendo. Ellis Burks could
hit nearly any strike over the fence every at bat. I relate this to Papy's
Nx series now. The guys that understand the games failings and can take
advantage of them have an absolute advantage and it shows. Even in fixed
racing. Were to that point now with Papys GAMES and IMO it's WAY past time
to move to something new that is able to overcome these major shortcomings.
Some of the shortcomings have been around since N1.

Guys seem to take it as though I hate Papy, nothing could be further from
the truth. Part of my attitude/resentment comes from knowing Papy didnt pay
the piper and give us something better with all the hard earned money I gave
them in support. IMO they should have released 2 versions of Nascar with 5
major patches instead of the 7 they did release as NEW..

Go to the RASCAR website and look at the picture on the main page upper
left. Can you tell me what version of Papy's Nascar that should have been?
I'll bet you'll be shocked when I tell ya. Actually you probably know
already :-)

Mitch

> > And thats the real problem :))

> Why ?

> It's not like it's a bad "generic road course physics set", it's quite
> enjoyable even if it's not dead accurate, furthermore it's not like
> we're stuck with the same physics set for all the mods that will come
> out, the .exe was hacked a long time ago, it's the lack of an anti cheat
> tool and a matching server app that has made it more sensible to stick
> with one of the 4 basic physics set for the time being, work is in
> progress in that area as well btw

> Beers and cheers
> (uncle) Goy
> "goyl at nettx dot no"

> http://www.theuspits.com

> "A man is only as old as the woman he feels........"
> --Groucho Marx--

by **Mitch_** » Tue, 02 Mar 2004 05:34:17

I wont comment on Thuinder much anymore. It still looks good but afetr
spending some time I realized it has major issues. You cant actually spin
the other guy (among other things). This IMO makes it a no sale. Hopefully
05 will be better.

GTR2003 gets my *** pumpin, I cant wait. If it's half as good as GTR02
mod I doubt Ill be running much else.

Mitch

> >Hehe, I NEVER said it was PERFECT :))

> =)

> I don't see the point really of bickering between the sims. They each
> do some things better. N2004 was supposed to have brake wear which
> F1C does fairly well, N2003 has better tracks and multi, F1C has
> incredible dynamic weather, etc. If you look at what the top
> simracers (and real drivers) are driving, it's pretty much
> GPL/N2003/F1C with GTR and RBR hopefully being added to that this
> year.

> If you want to talk NT2004 on the other hand I'm game. =p

> Jason

by **Mitch_** » Tue, 02 Mar 2004 06:01:38

Oh yea, took me awhile to figure out what RBR was. Well if all the other
Rally games are any indication (including CM04) then its going to be nothing
but an arcade game. I hope Im wrong but my hopes have been dashed so many
times on rally sims Ive given up ever getting one. Maybe rallying is just
to difficult to simulate realistically on the current crop of 2d non
feedback PCs?

Mitch

> GPL/N2003/F1C with GTR and RBR hopefully being added to that this
> year.

> Jason

by JP » Tue, 02 Mar 2004 06:04:23

____________________________________________________________________________
___
http://www.uncensored-news.com
<><><><><><><><>

I'd love to see a replay of a "clean, solid" 40 car race as you mention.
Never seen a clean race online with that many cars, in or out of a league
setting.

Care to share a replay ?

- Show quoted text -

by **Eldre** » Tue, 02 Mar 2004 06:35:19

>Go to the RASCAR website and look at the picture on the main page upper
>left. Can you tell me what version of Papy's Nascar that should have been?
>I'll bet you'll be shocked when I tell ya. Actually you probably know
>already :-)

Looks like the 'hi-res' version of Dover in Nascar 1...<g>

Eldred
--
http://www.umich.edu/~epickett
Screamers League
IICC League
GPLRank -6.0 MoGPL rank +267.80
Ch.Rank +52.58 MoC +741.71
Hist. +82.34 MoH:na
N2k3 rank:in progress
Slayer Spektera lvl 72 assassin
Slayer Spectral_K lvl 38 Necro
US East

by **Eldre** » Tue, 02 Mar 2004 06:35:19

Moyer) writes:
>On 29 Feb 2004 18:54:01 GMT, FCYTravis

>>Yes, a great treat with all of 10 other players. F1C's net code is so
>>sad as to be utterly and completely pathetic.

>It's not that bad, just don't forget to move the SERVER CAR.

Now *that* is a stupid ***ing 'feature'...argh! One of these days I'm gonna
walk in the front door of ISI and ask them WHY can't you get rid of an idle car
automatically...?

Eldred
--
http://www.racesimcentral.net/~epickett
Screamers League
IICC League
GPLRank -6.0 MoGPL rank +267.80
Ch.Rank +52.58 MoC +741.71
Hist. +82.34 MoH:na
N2k3 rank:in progress
Slayer Spektera lvl 72 assassin
Slayer Spectral_K lvl 38 Necro
US East

by **Mitch_** » Tue, 02 Mar 2004 06:46:24

Not even close :-)

I know its not a great pic <g> but N1 sure never looked anywhere near that
good and I had the fastest CPU available at the time (P-90) and a V1000.

> >Go to the RASCAR website and look at the picture on the main page upper
> >left. Can you tell me what version of Papy's Nascar that should have
been?
> >I'll bet you'll be shocked when I tell ya. Actually you probably know
> >already :-)

> Looks like the 'hi-res' version of Dover in Nascar 1...<g>

> Eldred
> --
> http://www.umich.edu/~epickett
> Screamers League
> IICC League
> GPLRank -6.0 MoGPL rank +267.80
> Ch.Rank +52.58 MoC +741.71
> Hist. +82.34 MoH:na
> N2k3 rank:in progress
> Slayer Spektera lvl 72 assassin
> Slayer Spectral_K lvl 38 Necro
> US East

by **Jason Moy** » Tue, 02 Mar 2004 08:42:04

>Oh yea, took me awhile to figure out what RBR was. Well if all the other
>Rally games are any indication (including CM04) then its going to be nothing
>but an arcade game. I hope Im wrong but my hopes have been dashed so many
>times on rally sims Ive given up ever getting one. Maybe rallying is just
>to difficult to simulate realistically on the current crop of 2d non
>feedback PCs?

Have you seen the feauture list yet Mitch?

http://www.racesimcentral.net/

You should check that out. Even if the physics are ***(i.e. Rally
Trophy) it's going to have more sim features than any rally sim ever,
even Mobil 1.

The stages are going to be full length with dynamic time of day and
weather conditions, narrow roads based on the real rallies, potholes,
etc. The cars have fully functional***pits, engines that are
modelled based on the mechanical workings rather than torque curves,
fully independent suspension with active differentials, etc. There's
no 'reset car' function when you crash, you have to hope spectators
are nearby to roll the car over or you're out and get the helicopter
rescue treatment. It looks pretty mind blowing, even if the physics
are merely passable.

Jason

by **Jason Moy** » Tue, 02 Mar 2004 08:42:54

Yeah, they weren't allowed to have a dedicated server, which I
understand, but it's a shame they didn't include a hack so people
could start up the game, host, and not actually join the race. =/

Jason

by **Jason Moy** » Tue, 02 Mar 2004 08:51:19

>I just find it hard to accept that this could be the "best" were going to
>get. Papy has shortcomings that I just cna't accept any longer and EA sims
>(although they have failings also) are a step in the right direction,
>especially the Physics. The Papy tracks are nearly perfectly flat. The
>bumps that are there feel as though they were just stuck onto this perfectly
>flat track, the grahics and physics seem dated and most importanly it can be
>exploited way to easily.

I dunno, I've driven on professional racing circuits. They aren't
littered with high amplitude oscillations, just a lot of high
frequency bumps. When I see posts about the tracks being too flat, I
wonder if you're comparing them to streets in Pittsburgh or something,
because that's about the only thing I can think of that could be
bumpier.

Surely you don't think the rollercoasters at Monza and Silverstone
represent reality in any way?

Jason

rec.autos.simulators

Trans-Am Mod

Trans-Am Mod

Trans-Am Mod

Trans-Am Mod

Trans-Am Mod

Trans-Am Mod

Trans-Am Mod

Trans-Am Mod

Trans-Am Mod

Trans-Am Mod

Trans-Am Mod

Trans-Am Mod

Trans-Am Mod

Trans-Am Mod

Trans-Am Mod

Trans-Am Mod