I just bought it and i would love to rave about it.....unfortunately i
can't get it to work....i have an Monster 3DII video card and while i
have sound i don't get any video. Is anyone else having this
problem??? it must be a video driver problem but i can't find
anywhere to update my drivers......any help out there????
Jason.
> I just bought it and i would love to rave about it.....unfortunately i
> can't get it to work....i have an Monster 3DII video card and while i
> have sound i don't get any video. Is anyone else having this
> problem??? it must be a video driver problem but i can't find
> anywhere to update my drivers......any help out there????
Wrong.
They put that option in for the sim fans that feel that they know what's
real and no one else has a clue.
Gravity, acceleration, etc., are all accurate. While the brakes on a rally
car are incredibally strong, they were set extra strong in order to no make
the game impossible for 99% of the people who purchase it. That's the only
setting that needs to be changed.
> >Physics (What else <g>).
> The physics are not really bad, but they are far away from GPL (yeah,
> GPL...<g>). I don't think that even tyrecontact is modelled. It's a
> FAR model, where the behaviour is linked to the current surface. For
> me it's a big spoiler...
> >The forcefeedback is incredible and really can make you somewhat tired
after a
> >segment or 6..
> I am not impressed with the FF...seems to me that the effects is
> purely steered by the surface, not on what the car is doing..
The cars perform exactly the way the real life rally cars behave. Drivent
that '67 F1 yet?
Like I said above.......wrong. The reason the ff is so good is because the
forces on the tires are modeled correctly. You wouldn't even feel weight
transfer if it was modeled the way you described.
David G Fisher
David G Fisher
> I bought it about 2 weeks ago...Fantastic game! (Once you get it
working...)
> There are a few minor bugs with starting the game etc., but there are
enough
> people around to help you through these.
> The forcefeedback is incredible and really can make you somewhat tired
after a
> segment or 6.. The eye candy is VERY sweet too! I've already gotten 2
new
> cavities since I bought it! :0) It's very challenging (downright HARD
at
> times!) and has a good damage model (I always seem to lose 2nd gear!? then
1st
> etc..etc..etc..). While the track side obstacles may be too 'solid' as
compared
> to real life, it's one of the best games I've played! Buy it!
> My POV,
> Mike
> > Incite PC *** magazine http://www.racesimcentral.net/ gives the PC
version of
> > Mobil 1 Rally Championship its highest rating of 5 stars in the April
2000
> > issue. The review is also online. If it's that good, why aren't folks
> > raving about it or even talking about it in this newsgroup? I want to
buy
> > it based on the review, but I have also followed this newsgroup for
about a
> > year now, and know that if the game were worth getting, folks would be
> > discussing it.
> > The only troubling part of the Incite review is at the end where they
stack
> > it up against the competition, and that competition is:
> > NFS: High Stakes
> > Sega Rally
> > Motocross Madness
> > Test Drive Off Road 3
> > So is this game arcade, or closer to something I know like Sports Car
GT?
> > <remove 7of9 for e-mail replies>
> > --
> > Bill Jones e-mail addresses:
> > (860) 701-1201 WWW: http://www.racesimcentral.net/
--
Wayne M. Grenon
Team Grenon Motorsports
http://members.xoom.com/teamgrenon/
RDOS 81 Team Grenon.com Pontiac
NEORA-STC 81 Team Grenon.com Pontiac
BGNS 9 Mike's Hard Lemonade Monte Carlo
> (By "do-it-yourself," I mean releasing patches that encouraged purchasers
to
> adjust all the parameters themselves to "get it right" for their own
tastes.
> In one sense, I suppose that's to be lauded--it does show a commitment to
> the product. But, I feel [IMO only], it's also an admission of defeat on
> the progrrammers' part.)
> --DK
> >Physics (What else <g>).
> The physics are not really bad, but they are far away from GPL (yeah,
> GPL...<g>). I don't think that even tyrecontact is modelled. It's a
> FAR model, where the behaviour is linked to the current surface. For
> me it's a big spoiler...
----------------------------------------------------
Andrew Kao
To send me email, pls remove "nojunk_" in my email
address.
----------------------------------------------------
>>The mere
>> fact that the game developers have resorted to a "do-it-yourself" approach
>> to correcting some pretty formidable problems regarding gravity, accel-
>and
>> braking-grip, inertia has really been disappointing to me.
>> (By "do-it-yourself," I mean releasing patches that encouraged purchasers
>to
>> adjust all the parameters themselves to "get it right" for their own
>tastes.
>> In one sense, I suppose that's to be lauded--it does show a commitment to
>> the product. But, I feel [IMO only], it's also an admission of defeat on
>> the progrrammers' part.)
>Wrong.
>They put that option in for the sim fans that feel that they know what's
>real and no one else has a clue.
>Gravity, acceleration, etc., are all accurate. While the brakes on a rally
>car are incredibally strong, they were set extra strong in order to no make
>the game impossible for 99% of the people who purchase it. That's the only
>setting that needs to be changed.
Remco
>> >Physics (What else <g>).
>> The physics are not really bad, but they are far away from GPL (yeah,
>> GPL...<g>). I don't think that even tyrecontact is modelled. It's a
>> FAR model, where the behaviour is linked to the current surface. For
>> me it's a big spoiler...
>> >The forcefeedback is incredible and really can make you somewhat tired
>after a
>> >segment or 6..
>> I am not impressed with the FF...seems to me that the effects is
>> purely steered by the surface, not on what the car is doing..
>Wrong.
I never said that GPL does model the 1967 cars well, I only refer to
the way they model general physics.
Well, prove it...you can say "Wrong" as much as you like, but so far I
didn't find those amazing physics you obviously have found...The FF I
found was some vibration on the road, and less resistance when a
surface get more slippery... I didn't feel weight shift, but I don't
think that's linked to the tyre model anyway...
Remco
<snip>
---------------------------------------------
Remove "NOSPAM" before using my email-address
JensSchumi homepage at http://members.xoom.com/JensSchu/
Racing simulation, esp. GPL
Logitech Wingman FF optimization
Classic cars, esp. Morris Minor
Radio controlled airplanes
If for nothing else, I give Magnetic Fields credit for sticking with the
product and updating it. They don't have to, as it would probably sell a
lot based on the reputation they have built in sales of their previous
efforts. But by patching it, they are trying to keep the customers of their
franchise happy, which means more purchases down the road.
I hated the game at first, but after finally getting my hands on a wheel,
instead of a joystick, I have a lot of fun with it. It also looks great,
which doesn't hurt.
Stephen
> David G Fisher
Sorry to make you vomit David but again GPL: Only 2 patches, the first wasn't
really a patch: It was the FFF (first F stands for 'Fantastic') implementation
and the second was a 'real' patch because (as I read somewhere) a stupid bug
made it in the final 1.1 release causing slow-downs on some systems. That's all
there is on updates in almost 2 years time.
I know this isn't a way of measuring the quality of the sim itself it does tell
you however how dedicated the developers (Keammer et al) were whilst creating
this proggie!
--
Jan Hovius
Ok, I'll be honest, I loved RC2000, had lots of fun with it while it
lasted. So there.
Andre
>> A new and maybe "ultimate" patch is coming soon and will correct the bugs as
>> well as improve internet play and controller/steering issues.
>> David G Fisher
>So that's, let's count ... 2, 3, 4, no 5 patches in 5 months time!!!!!!!
>Sorry to make you vomit David but again GPL: Only 2 patches, the first wasn't
>really a patch: It was the FFF (first F stands for 'Fantastic') implementation
>and the second was a 'real' patch because (as I read somewhere) a stupid bug
>made it in the final 1.1 release causing slow-downs on some systems. That's all
>there is on updates in almost 2 years time.
>I know this isn't a way of measuring the quality of the sim itself it does tell
>you however how dedicated the developers (Keammer et al) were whilst creating
>this proggie!
Z.
Please remove my_pants when replying.
