Because N4 showed it's GPL heritage to much IMO. It didn't simulate
stock car racing at all. It simulated GPL with stock car graphics, in terms
of handling, etc.
Whereas in N2002, the cars "feel", even without ff, like they weigh almost
two tons, as actual Cup cars do; no hovercraft, no driving on ice feel, etc.
In N4, they felt like the GPL cars; lightweight, twitchy, etc. That's fine
for a 1967 F1 car(though I think it's overdone in GPL F1 mode too), but not
trying to simulate a 2002 stock car, who's power/weight ratio is totally
different. Irregardless of pc limitations, if driving a 1967 F1 car or an
N4 stock car was that difficult, that knife-edge lap after lap, all the
drivers would be dead, not just some. Even the pros don't drive perfect
laps/races every single time, but that's what's required in
N4...........perfect laps with an imperfect physics model.
I like Papy/Sierra stuff as much as anyone. Have every title they've
made, including Indy 500. But I bet if N4 had been released by X
corporation, it would have been slammed hard in reviews.
N2002's the best stock car sim ever made IMO. Heat was good, because it
simulated the feel of driving a stock car well, but failed badly in
simulating a race, on or offline. N4 simulated a race well, but simulated
the feel of driving a stock car badly.
N2002 does both very well.
-John
> On Wed, 20 Feb 2002 08:30:54 -0700, "John Pancoast"
> > Don't blame you; N4 stunk, period, IMO. Already got rid of it on eBay
> >after N2002 came out :)
> >-John
> Why did N4 stink? I never liked N4, allthough I knew it was a great
> (if not the best sim) but I never enjoyed it, no matter how much I
> gave it a try.
> But N2002 is such a blast.. and not only on the 2 roadcourses, I even
> find racing on the ovals damn fun..
> I just can't point my finger to the changes in N2002 that makes it
> actually fun to play..
> Andre