that i haven't seen anyone mention yet.
If you get into a crash and lose your front or rear wing (or both) you
can still fly around the track without losing much time at all, in
fact if you do lose a wing during a race it's better to just stay out
and keep racing until your next scheduled stop rather than pitting and
wasting time fixing the lost wing!
The missing wings have so little effect on your downforce that it's
ridiculous, at Imola in practice i did 15 laps with the fastest being
lap at around a 1:28:00 when i accidentaly ran into the rear of a
slower car at turn #1, i lost my front wing, however i stayed out and
kept practicing and 3 laps later i did a 1:27:00 lap, so i got a full
second faster with no front wing! that's just plain bad physics, talk
about a total lack of realism. I will admit the game is somewhat fun,
bad graphics and all, but it's way too easy, it's feels far more like
an arcade racer than a true sim, even with all driving aids turned
off, it's just not challenging and not realistic at all.
BTW, to those defending GP3 by saying that those of us who complain
about the realism have no idea what we're talking about because we've
never driven an F1 car, read the following interview with John Cooke,
he's a man who has 30 years experience racing in Formula cars and he
talked about GP3's lack of a realism while being interviewed about
WSC, read the comments from "jc" at the bottom of the page i'm linking
to and for that matter the whole interview from page 1, it's about WSC
but they talk about GP3 quite a bit as well througout the interview:
http://www.racesimcentral.net/