F1 2001 Preview by John Bodin

http://irlheat.bhmotorsports.com/F12001/ Thanks John, great work !

http://irlheat.bhmotorsports.com/F12001/ Thanks John, great work !

beautiful. Ali Ismet Ozkan <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:KWEn7.48882$[email hidden]... > http://irlheat.bhmotorsports.com/F12001/ > > Thanks John, great work ! > >

On Wed, 12 Sep 2001 08:22:02 GMT, "Ali Ismet Ozkan" <[email hidden]> wrote: >http://irlheat.bhmotorsports.com/F12001/ > >Thanks John, great work ! "The level of intensity that I experienced during the qualifying session above was demanding in a way that is seldom seen in a PC-based simulation. Based on what I've seen so far, F1 2001 may be perhaps the most realistic, intricate, and immersive racing game ever." Looking promising :)) Andre

"Andre Warringa" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (14 lines)

> > On Wed, 12 Sep 2001 08:22:02 GMT, "Ali Ismet Ozkan" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >http://irlheat.bhmotorsports.com/F12001/ > > > >Thanks John, great work ! > > "The level of intensity that I experienced during the qualifying > session above was demanding in a way that is seldom seen in a PC-based > simulation. Based on what I've seen so far, F1 2001 may be perhaps the > most realistic, intricate, and immersive racing game ever." > > Looking promising :))

IMHO it looks like someone kissing butt because they got an early Beta Doug

You're 100% right, Doug -- yes, F1 2001 is actually a steaming piece of $#!+, but even so, I like it every bit as much as my two favorite sims of all time -- Test Drive 6 and Swamp Buggy Racing. I commend you for exposing me for what I truly am . . . a know-nothing butt-kisser willing to suck up for the sake of a quick freebie. While we're at it, allow me to make your job easier by pointing out yet another example of my shameless butt-kissing antics, further illustrating my overall lack of knowledge and discernment, and further proving that that that sim racing fans are just wasting their time when they read my butt-kissing musings: http://www.sportplanet.com/hg/article.php?page=1&id=26 Yes, as they say, opinions are like @$$#0|&$ . . . then again, I'm sure you already knew that. I post mine in long form, but you are apparently gifted with a greater brevity. Aside from that -- and my obvious butt-kissing tendencies -- we seem to be a lot alike. I will be scheduling my lobotomy tomorrow. Thankfully, that probably won't impact the quality of my reviews . . . >:-[ Hmm . . . now that I've been exposed as the butt-kisser that I am, I might as well scrap the preview of Rally Trophy that I'm working on. So much for my bid to become the next Randy Magruder of racing sim reviews. :-/ -- JB On Wed, 12 Sep 2001 20:29:37 +0100, "Douglas Ellison" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (24 lines)

> >"Andre Warringa" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >news:[email hidden]... >> >> On Wed, 12 Sep 2001 08:22:02 GMT, "Ali Ismet Ozkan" >> <[email hidden]> wrote: >> >> >http://irlheat.bhmotorsports.com/F12001/ >> > >> >Thanks John, great work ! >> >> "The level of intensity that I experienced during the qualifying >> session above was demanding in a way that is seldom seen in a PC-based >> simulation. Based on what I've seen so far, F1 2001 may be perhaps the >> most realistic, intricate, and immersive racing game ever." >> >> Looking promising :)) > >IMHO it looks like someone kissing butt because they got an early Beta > >Doug > > >

Damnit John, I new all that exposure to the Wrong Turn League would go to your head. :) dave henrie "John Bodin" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > You're 100% right, Doug -- yes, F1 2001 is actually a steaming piece > of $#!+, but even so, I like it every bit as much as my two favorite > sims of all time -- Test Drive 6 and Swamp Buggy Racing. I commend > you for exposing me for what I truly am . . . a know-nothing...

"Ali Ismet Ozkan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:KWEn7.48882$[email hidden]... > http://irlheat.bhmotorsports.com/F12001/ > > Thanks John, great work ! Good review. Just a few things though that make me wonder if it can truly replace F1RC as the best F1 sim. "Grand Prix Legends is only other simulation I know of where it's possible to "dance on the edge" while sustaining a four-wheel drift in the same manner you can with F1 2001." "Dancing on the edge" are the exact words I used to describe my experience with the cars in F1RC in a post of mine months ago. The ability to push the car to the very edge, recover it if I go too far (not always of course, which is realistic), and complete controlled slides is what made F1RC my favorite. Many other people have said their experience is the same. Why you weren't able to do this (according to your previous posts) in F1RC is a bit of a mystery to me. I can only guess it has to do with your controller/controller setup, or car setups. Doesn't sound like the graphics are better than in F1RC, but maybe close. Things like driving out of the pits, variable weather, and false starts are already in F1RC. I know, based on real life/F1RC side by side track comparisons, that the F1RC tracks are almost perfect. If the F12001 tracks aren't just as accurate, then that would be disappointing. Guess I'll find out in a few weeks. Looking forward to it. David G Fisher

"John Bodin" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... Hey - you voiced your opinion on it - I voiced mine. Clearly something very touchey here. Doug

Take a look at the word count in my preview, Doug -- that's a LOT of effort to have someone simply dismiss it as mere butt-kissing. Touchy? You bet, chuckles. -- JB On Wed, 12 Sep 2001 23:52:06 +0100, "Douglas Ellison" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (12 lines)

> >"John Bodin" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >news:[email hidden]... > >Hey - you voiced your opinion on it - I voiced mine. > >Clearly something very touchey here. > >Doug > > >

Hehehe... nice retort. Don't let this guy get to you John, your opinions are well respected. Did you advertise this "What makes a sim?"-feature when you'd just wrote it? -Must have missed that. Nice article, as was the preview. Thanks, Jan. =--- "Pay attention when I'm talking to you boy!" -Foghorn Leghorn. "John Bodin" wrote... > <snip>

Thanks Jan. I've never seen Doug make comments like this before, so his "kissing butt" remark kind of took me by surprise. Everyone's entitled to their opinion, but my article was purely based on my OWN opinion of F1 2001, and if I had intended to do any butt-kissing, you can bet it would have sounded a lot more like a propaganda piece. <G> As for the "What makes a sim?" article, I believe it was mentioned here when it was originally posted -- and I know it was mentioned on the front page of the High Gear site for a while. Still, something like that is easy to overlook, so I'm glad you got a chance to catch it -- and I'm glad you enjoyed it, as well! ;-) -- JB On Thu, 13 Sep 2001 01:13:28 +0200, "Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (16 lines)

>Hehehe... nice retort. Don't let this guy get to you John, your opinions are >well respected. > >Did you advertise this "What makes a sim?"-feature when you'd just wrote >it? -Must have missed that. Nice article, as was the preview. > >Thanks, > >Jan. >=--- >"Pay attention when I'm talking to you boy!" -Foghorn Leghorn. > >"John Bodin" wrote... >> <snip> > >

Douglas feel that only Papyrus can make a realistic simulator. David G Fisher "John Bodin" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > You're 100% right, Doug -- yes, F1 2001 is actually a steaming piece > of $#!+, but even so, I like it every bit as much as my two favorite > sims of all time -- Test Drive 6 and Swamp Buggy Racing. I commend > you for exposing me for what I truly am . . . a know-nothing > butt-kisser willing to suck up for the sake of a quick freebie.

OK - want me to be genuinely critical of your article... -Thanks for the 1,342 word essay about your fantasy as a formula one driver - surely suitable for a high school essay - not an impartial review of a forth coming title. -Screenshots as GIF's. Why not JPG's - "PC-based titles that featured intricate physics modeling and advanced 3D accelerated graphics - titles like F1 2000, Grand Prix 3, and F1 Racing Championship. " - I wouldnt consider any of these to model physics intricately - and of those 2 - one certainly did not feature advanced 3D Graphics. - "A higher frequency physics engine allows you to do more sophisticated calculations" - Incorrect - it merely gives you the platform to run those calculations more frequently. - "hardcore F1 fans will be delighted that details like this ( launch control ) have indeed been included" - I can not think of a single hardcore F1 fan who welcomed Launch controll into the world of F1 - let alone into game titles simulating it. - "sustaining a four-wheel drift in the same manner you can with F1 2001. " - A worrying feature - as this is a very rare sight in modern Formula One. If you can 4 wheel drift in F1 2001 like you can in GPL (as you suggest) then there is clearly something fundamentally wrong with the variables they have placed into their physics engine. - "Dynamic weather is also included, allowing you to choose from random, season 2001" - the title is to be released before the last race of the season - how do they intend to predict the weather? - "and my personal best there would have put me ahead of Schumacher's pole speed for the 2000 race" - in which title? - "I am struggling to turn in lap times below the 1:29 mark" - Rather worrying this. Michael Schumachers pole time was more than 10 seconds faster than this - a 1:18.201. You time leaves you some 6 seconds adrift of the 107% rule. Clearly some fundamental innacuracies in either the track or the physics if you find it hard to get even within a mile of the right sort of lap times - let alone the right ball park. -"I found myself thinking how much I enjoyed the smells after a good rain -- then I found myself inhaling deeply in order to take in the clean, cool smells around me " - That's just plain ODD. - "Some track layouts seem similar to their F1CS2K counterparts" - this is appauling news as there were fundamental and chronic errors in the modelling of nearly all the tracks for F1CS2K - which lead me to believe that not a single developer or tester of the title could ever have visited or watched an in car lap of these tracks. - "When it comes to sounds, I'm pretty much tone deaf, so I'm no authority on audio quality. " - Thanks for then giving us nigh on 400 words on your opinions of the sound then. - "I have every faith in ISI/EA, though" - on what basis - their appauling F12000 title - or perhaps the part bug fix that was later released as a full title? -"The Driving School mode now includes more tests at more tracks, and the tests I have tried seem more like real F1 driver's tests. " - WHAT ARE you going on about. No F1 driver has to pass some artificial tests in the real world - so quite what the tests are supposed to be more like - god onlu knows. Now granted - you only had a Beta to play with - and you mention features that are missing / not implemented etc - but that only goes to show how desperate EA are to have this title promoted as early as possible by handing out immature code. Similarly - with the release date a little over 2 weeks away - it's worrying to hear you mention all of the following as being missing - or have elements missing from your beta copy. - Force Feedback (good god - thats rather worrying - clearly there can be little or no time to test this feature once it's introduced before going to press - a rushed job - like F12000 was) - the AI is only fully-implemented for Magny-Cours and Catalunya. - So only 14 more tracks to write the AI for. One a day - including comprehensive full race distance testing. That'll be top quality stuff then. - missing tracks and incomplete AI in my test version, - There are still TRACKS to complete. Fantastic time line they've kept to - clearly the last - and most important phase of development - will have to be rushed - this much is obvious. Your article makes not one single criticism of any element of the title. So are we to believe it to be perfect? Surely you have some criticism to make? The fact that you wax lyrical about this all encompassingly perfect title using what is evidently immature and VERY much Beta code to me is not the sort of article one should expect for an impartial preview. Doug

"Douglas Ellison" <[email hidden]> writes: > -Screenshots as GIF's. Why not JPG's because the lossy compression in JPG masks flaws in the image? > - "I am struggling to turn in lap times below the 1:29 mark" - Rather > worrying this. Michael Schumachers pole time was more than 10 seconds > faster than this - a 1:18.201. You time leaves you some 6 seconds adrift of > the 107% rule. Clearly some fundamental innacuracies in either the track or > the physics if you find it hard to get even within a mile of the right sort > of lap times - let alone the right ball park. or maybe he's just not a very good driver. *ducks* :) -- Gunnar #31 SUCKS#015 Tupperware MC#002 DoD#0x1B DoDRT#003 DoD:CT#4,8 Kibo�: 2 gnus don't kill people. gnus-summary-lower-score kills people.

<snip a lot of poo>

Quoted text (11 lines)

> >Your article makes not one single criticism of any element of the title. So >are we to believe it to be perfect? Surely you have some criticism to make? >The fact that you wax lyrical about this all encompassingly perfect title >using what is evidently immature and VERY much Beta code to me is not the >sort of article one should expect for an impartial preview. > >Doug > > >

Who ever said columnist are impartial? You are thinking of journalist. Reviewers are not supposed to be impartial. RB

Apparently DGF's comments about you believing that only Papy can make a realistic simulator is true -- either that, or you simply like sniping. I recognize your names from other posts, but I've never really communicated with you directly, and I never pegged you as one of "those" types. Pity I misjudged you. Try this as an altenative to my original responses: Bite me, fan-boy. -- JB P.S. Kiss my opinion. On Thu, 13 Sep 2001 01:30:40 +0100, "Douglas Ellison" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (101 lines)

>OK - want me to be genuinely critical of your article... > >-Thanks for the 1,342 word essay about your fantasy as a formula one >driver - surely suitable for a high school essay - not an impartial review >of a forth coming title. >-Screenshots as GIF's. Why not JPG's > >- "PC-based titles that featured intricate physics modeling and advanced 3D >accelerated graphics - titles like F1 2000, Grand Prix 3, and F1 Racing >Championship. " - I wouldnt consider any of these to model physics >intricately - and of those 2 - one certainly did not feature advanced 3D >Graphics. > >- "A higher frequency physics engine allows you to do more sophisticated >calculations" - Incorrect - it merely gives you the platform to run those >calculations more frequently. > >- "hardcore F1 fans will be delighted that details like this ( launch >control ) have indeed been included" - I can not think of a single hardcore >F1 fan who welcomed Launch controll into the world of F1 - let alone into >game titles simulating it. > >- "sustaining a four-wheel drift in the same manner you can with F1 2001. >" - A worrying feature - as this is a very rare sight in modern Formula One. >If you can 4 wheel drift in F1 2001 like you can in GPL (as you suggest) >then there is clearly something fundamentally wrong with the variables they >have placed into their physics engine. > >- "Dynamic weather is also included, allowing you to choose from random, >season 2001" - the title is to be released before the last race of the >season - how do they intend to predict the weather? > >- "and my personal best there would have put me ahead of Schumacher's pole >speed for the 2000 race" - in which title? > >- "I am struggling to turn in lap times below the 1:29 mark" - Rather >worrying this. Michael Schumachers pole time was more than 10 seconds >faster than this - a 1:18.201. You time leaves you some 6 seconds adrift of >the 107% rule. Clearly some fundamental innacuracies in either the track or >the physics if you find it hard to get even within a mile of the right sort >of lap times - let alone the right ball park. > >-"I found myself thinking how much I enjoyed the smells after a good rain -- >then I found myself inhaling deeply in order to take in the clean, cool >smells around me " - That's just plain ODD. > >- "Some track layouts seem similar to their F1CS2K counterparts" - this is >appauling news as there were fundamental and chronic errors in the modelling >of nearly all the tracks for F1CS2K - which lead me to believe that not a >single developer or tester of the title could ever have visited or watched >an in car lap of these tracks. > >- "When it comes to sounds, I'm pretty much tone deaf, so I'm no authority >on audio quality. " - Thanks for then giving us nigh on 400 words on your >opinions of the sound then. > >- "I have every faith in ISI/EA, though" - on what basis - their appauling >F12000 title - or perhaps the part bug fix that was later released as a full >title? > >-"The Driving School mode now includes more tests at more tracks, and the >tests I have tried seem more like real F1 driver's tests. " - WHAT ARE you >going on about. No F1 driver has to pass some artificial tests in the real >world - so quite what the tests are supposed to be more like - god onlu >knows. > >Now granted - you only had a Beta to play with - and you mention features >that are missing / not implemented etc - but that only goes to show how >desperate EA are to have this title promoted as early as possible by handing >out immature code. Similarly - with the release date a little over 2 weeks >away - it's worrying to hear you mention all of the following as being >missing - or have elements missing from your beta copy. > >- Force Feedback (good god - thats rather worrying - clearly there can be >little or no time to test this feature once it's introduced before going to >press - a rushed job - like F12000 was) > >- the AI is only fully-implemented for Magny-Cours and Catalunya. - So only >14 more tracks to write the AI for. One a day - including comprehensive >full race distance testing. That'll be top quality stuff then. > >- missing tracks and incomplete AI in my test version, - There are still >TRACKS to complete. Fantastic time line they've kept to - clearly the last - >and most important phase of development - will have to be rushed - this much >is obvious. > > >Your article makes not one single criticism of any element of the title. So >are we to believe it to be perfect? Surely you have some criticism to make? >The fact that you wax lyrical about this all encompassingly perfect title >using what is evidently immature and VERY much Beta code to me is not the >sort of article one should expect for an impartial preview. > >Doug > > > >

FWIW, this was NOT a "review" -- it was a "PREVIEW," intended to give people a detailed, advanced look at what F1 2001 will contain. How can one be critical of what is OBVIOUSLY an early, unifinished beta? I received an early beta copy just recently -- complete with the official EA CD keys, just like their paid beta testers receive -- AFTER the REAL beta testers had moved on to a more complete version. Given what I had to work with, my goal was to give interested parties an idea of what the final product should be like based on what I could see -- I saw no point in dissecting or lambasting an unfinished product for its failings, most (all?) of which may have already been addressed. What I saw was good. The AI was incomplete, and all the tracks weren't present -- I said this up-front, and somehow this counts as praise? It's a strange world in which we live. :-/ -- JB On Wed, 12 Sep 2001 22:06:11 -0400, Razorback <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (18 lines)

><snip a lot of poo> >> >>Your article makes not one single criticism of any element of the title. So >>are we to believe it to be perfect? Surely you have some criticism to make? >>The fact that you wax lyrical about this all encompassingly perfect title >>using what is evidently immature and VERY much Beta code to me is not the >>sort of article one should expect for an impartial preview. >> >>Doug >> >> >> > >Who ever said columnist are impartial? You are thinking of >journalist. Reviewers are not supposed to be impartial. > >RB >

Jeez, what a s**t storm over a game preview! Is there just not enough acrimony in the world of late so that we need to add to it here in our little corner? Let's all lighten up a bit, eh? Anyway - thanks for the peek, JB - one of the few pleasant reads I've had today, and I look forward to the release. Obviously the final will tell the tale, and if it doesn't make the cut, back to EB it will go, as did F12K, F1CS, and GP3. No harm, no foul, better luck next time. What's odd for me about the EA series is that I really enjoyed SCGT, but had no use for either of ISI's F1 derivatives. Hope this one alters that. Couldn't tell enough about F1RC from the demo to bother importing it. Plus the earlier UBI F1 jobs were shite for this guy. Not for everyone obviously, but for me. Good to hear the four tires "talk" to you in F12001 - communication of what's happening at the contact patches when you're on the limit is to me what sets GPL apart from the rest in it's driving experience. And that feel transcends era or vehicle. But what I really wanna know is - how's it compare to the latest version of the Heat champcar in being edgy? That sucker will bite you in the arse in a second and all you can think is "I knew I was a bit hot" as you go spiraling into the weeds. Monster speed, brakes, and grip with zippo for reaction time, but you "always" know why you lost it. Not perfect yet, but doing 45's around Aardvark Park is pretty damn intense. Fun to watch the stiff chassis barely carry the locked inside front through the fall-away T3 as you short shift and ease into the throttle. Straighten the wheel as the corner eases and "chirp", a whiff of smoke and the tire's spinning again. Lovely. Hang in there, SB

On Thu, 13 Sep 2001 04:47:11 GMT, "Steve Blankenship" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (17 lines)

>Jeez, what a s**t storm over a game preview! Is there just not enough acrimony in the world of late so that we need to add to it >here in our little corner? Let's all lighten up a bit, eh? > >Anyway - thanks for the peek, JB - one of the few pleasant reads I've had today, and I look forward to the release. Obviously the >final will tell the tale, and if it doesn't make the cut, back to EB it will go, as did F12K, F1CS, and GP3. No harm, no foul, >better luck next time. What's odd for me about the EA series is that I really enjoyed SCGT, but had no use for either of ISI's F1 >derivatives. Hope this one alters that. Couldn't tell enough about F1RC from the demo to bother importing it. Plus the earlier >UBI F1 jobs were shite for this guy. Not for everyone obviously, but for me. Good to hear the four tires "talk" to you in F12001 - >communication of what's happening at the contact patches when you're on the limit is to me what sets GPL apart from the rest in it's >driving experience. And that feel transcends era or vehicle. > >But what I really wanna know is - how's it compare to the latest version of the Heat champcar in being edgy? That sucker will bite >you in the arse in a second and all you can think is "I knew I was a bit hot" as you go spiraling into the weeds. Monster speed, >brakes, and grip with zippo for reaction time, but you "always" know why you lost it. Not perfect yet, but doing 45's around >Aardvark Park is pretty damn intense. Fun to watch the stiff chassis barely carry the locked inside front through the fall-away T3 >as you short shift and ease into the throttle. Straighten the wheel as the corner eases and "chirp", a whiff of smoke and the >tire's spinning again. Lovely.

You could have just described F1 2001, Steve -- it's VERY similar to what you've described here, and when it bites you, you know WHY you were bit. >Hang in there, Ditto! >SB > >

Well I found the preview easy to read but the beat was a bit slow & it was hard to dance to, so I'll give it a 90 Dick.. :) --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.276 / Virus Database: 145 - Release Date: 9/3/2001

Okay, I am an @$$#0|& and THIS post was obviously uncalled for. Let me start out by saying that I am truly sorry for this post. You did not deserve such a response, Doug. I would also like to say that I knew up-front that I had been provided with a lame, early version of the F1 2001 source code. I tried to convey this clearly going into the preview by stating that what I have is an early beta version. It's not close to the finished product in many ways, but even so, there's enough there to see that there's some good stuff going on with this title already, especially in terms of the physics engine. I wrote the preview to basically describe what people can expect in the next big modern F1 sim that will hit the shelves. In many ways, I feel that F1 2001 combines most of the best attributes from F1CS2K, F1RC, and GP3. EA and ISI have done their homework. As for criticism, there's not much to criticize about F1 2001 at this point. There are tracks missing in my version -- I stated that clearly. The AI isn't finalized -- I also stated that clearly. The sounds aren't finalized, apparently, but what's there seems to be unique and it works well -- and I stated this clearly. Force Feedbck is not implemented in the version that I have -- and I said this up-front. There are a LOT of diehard F1 fans on the High Gear forums who want to know things like whether or not traction control is implemented because they CARE about that detail from a standpoint of realism -- and I mentioned that point specifically to address some of these concerns. The physics ARE finalized, and they feel very, VERY good -- even compared to GPL (check out my GPLRank if you'd like -- I'm a hack, and your handicap is MUCH better than mine, but Mexico is my favorite track and I'm currently faster than you are there). As far as the F1 2001 preview goes, though, I put a lot of effort into making this preview a good advanced look at some of the things that people can expect to see in the final version of F1 2001. You want criticism about the final product? Wait until I get my hands on that, then, and I'll do my best to give it a fair shake on all counts -- and to also point out whatever warts it may have. Until then, I can't criticize an unfinished product that I'm honestly fairly impressed with. At any rate, I spent the evening watching television and getting more and more steamed and depressed about the whole tragic affair in New York and Washington, so I decided to log on to the 'net for a little diversion. When I saw your post, your response really rubbed me the wrong way, especially given the mood I was in, but my response was unwarranted. Please accept my heartfelt apology for that. I'm also sorry you apparently did not find my preview of F1 2001 to be either enjoyable or informative, but I'm more sorry that our difference of opinion on that led to such an inappropriate display of displeasure on my part. There is enough disagreement and difficulty in the world. Racing simulations are games, intended first and foremost to be entertainment vehicles. I am sorry most of all for letting something that should be entertaining become something that is anything but. :-( I am also sorry that there is not an appropriate emoticon to convey shame for one's actions -- I would most certainly use it here and now. Peace be with you, Doug. -- JB On Thu, 13 Sep 2001 03:17:27 GMT, [email hidden] (John Bodin) wrote:

Quoted text (119 lines)

>Apparently DGF's comments about you believing that only Papy can make >a realistic simulator is true -- either that, or you simply like >sniping. I recognize your names from other posts, but I've never >really communicated with you directly, and I never pegged you as one >of "those" types. Pity I misjudged you. > >Try this as an altenative to my original responses: > >Bite me, fan-boy. > >-- JB > >P.S. Kiss my opinion. > >On Thu, 13 Sep 2001 01:30:40 +0100, "Douglas Ellison" ><[email hidden]> wrote: > >>OK - want me to be genuinely critical of your article... >> >>-Thanks for the 1,342 word essay about your fantasy as a formula one >>driver - surely suitable for a high school essay - not an impartial review >>of a forth coming title. > > > >>-Screenshots as GIF's. Why not JPG's >> >>- "PC-based titles that featured intricate physics modeling and advanced 3D >>accelerated graphics - titles like F1 2000, Grand Prix 3, and F1 Racing >>Championship. " - I wouldnt consider any of these to model physics >>intricately - and of those 2 - one certainly did not feature advanced 3D >>Graphics. >> >>- "A higher frequency physics engine allows you to do more sophisticated >>calculations" - Incorrect - it merely gives you the platform to run those >>calculations more frequently. >> >>- "hardcore F1 fans will be delighted that details like this ( launch >>control ) have indeed been included" - I can not think of a single hardcore >>F1 fan who welcomed Launch controll into the world of F1 - let alone into >>game titles simulating it. >> >>- "sustaining a four-wheel drift in the same manner you can with F1 2001. >>" - A worrying feature - as this is a very rare sight in modern Formula One. >>If you can 4 wheel drift in F1 2001 like you can in GPL (as you suggest) >>then there is clearly something fundamentally wrong with the variables they >>have placed into their physics engine. >> >>- "Dynamic weather is also included, allowing you to choose from random, >>season 2001" - the title is to be released before the last race of the >>season - how do they intend to predict the weather? >> >>- "and my personal best there would have put me ahead of Schumacher's pole >>speed for the 2000 race" - in which title? >> >>- "I am struggling to turn in lap times below the 1:29 mark" - Rather >>worrying this. Michael Schumachers pole time was more than 10 seconds >>faster than this - a 1:18.201. You time leaves you some 6 seconds adrift of >>the 107% rule. Clearly some fundamental innacuracies in either the track or >>the physics if you find it hard to get even within a mile of the right sort >>of lap times - let alone the right ball park. >> >>-"I found myself thinking how much I enjoyed the smells after a good rain -- >>then I found myself inhaling deeply in order to take in the clean, cool >>smells around me " - That's just plain ODD. >> >>- "Some track layouts seem similar to their F1CS2K counterparts" - this is >>appauling news as there were fundamental and chronic errors in the modelling >>of nearly all the tracks for F1CS2K - which lead me to believe that not a >>single developer or tester of the title could ever have visited or watched >>an in car lap of these tracks. >> >>- "When it comes to sounds, I'm pretty much tone deaf, so I'm no authority >>on audio quality. " - Thanks for then giving us nigh on 400 words on your >>opinions of the sound then. >> >>- "I have every faith in ISI/EA, though" - on what basis - their appauling >>F12000 title - or perhaps the part bug fix that was later released as a full >>title? >> >>-"The Driving School mode now includes more tests at more tracks, and the >>tests I have tried seem more like real F1 driver's tests. " - WHAT ARE you >>going on about. No F1 driver has to pass some artificial tests in the real >>world - so quite what the tests are supposed to be more like - god onlu >>knows. >> >>Now granted - you only had a Beta to play with - and you mention features >>that are missing / not implemented etc - but that only goes to show how >>desperate EA are to have this title promoted as early as possible by handing >>out immature code. Similarly - with the release date a little over 2 weeks >>away - it's worrying to hear you mention all of the following as being >>missing - or have elements missing from your beta copy. >> >>- Force Feedback (good god - thats rather worrying - clearly there can be >>little or no time to test this feature once it's introduced before going to >>press - a rushed job - like F12000 was) >> >>- the AI is only fully-implemented for Magny-Cours and Catalunya. - So only >>14 more tracks to write the AI for. One a day - including comprehensive >>full race distance testing. That'll be top quality stuff then. >> >>- missing tracks and incomplete AI in my test version, - There are still >>TRACKS to complete. Fantastic time line they've kept to - clearly the last - >>and most important phase of development - will have to be rushed - this much >>is obvious. >> >> >>Your article makes not one single criticism of any element of the title. So >>are we to believe it to be perfect? Surely you have some criticism to make? >>The fact that you wax lyrical about this all encompassingly perfect title >>using what is evidently immature and VERY much Beta code to me is not the >>sort of article one should expect for an impartial preview. >> >>Doug >> >> >> >> >

Thanks John, The only question I have is over the graphics F1RC has spoiled me somewhat, pity about the AI though! Regards Mike On Wed, 12 Sep 2001 08:22:02 GMT, "Ali Ismet Ozkan" <[email hidden]> wrote: >http://irlheat.bhmotorsports.com/F12001/ > >Thanks John, great work ! >

On Thu, 13 Sep 2001 03:25:35 GMT, [email hidden] (John Bodin) wrote: >FWIW, this was NOT a "review" -- it was a "PREVIEW," intended to give >people a detailed, advanced look at what F1 2001 will contain. You are preaching to the converted. :) As a quasi columnist I have been accused of lacking journalistic integrity... something only a JOURNALIST should pretend to have. :) Funny... I initially wrote "hey moron this was a preview not a review" but decided to go with the less abrasive comments I eventually posted. :) RB

"John Bodin" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (13 lines)

> There is enough disagreement and difficulty in the world. Racing > simulations are games, intended first and foremost to be entertainment > vehicles. I am sorry most of all for letting something that should be > entertaining become something that is anything but. > > :-( > > I am also sorry that there is not an appropriate emoticon to convey > shame for one's actions -- I would most certainly use it here and now. > > Peace be with you, Doug. > > -- JB

I think we were both suffering from excessive agression bottled up about recent events. In hindsight- quite a good preview actually - was in interface as bloated and clunky as 2K and CS2K? Thoughts with those involved Doug

Glad to hear that, JB - And for anyone worried that driving modern cars will be boring compared to GPL's funmobiles, you can stop worrying NOW. Online will be a challenge though, (just as it is in real life) as reaction times are severely compressed relative to the older, slower, wingless cars. Just hitting your turn-in point consistently is a challenge; traffic will be.....special! I suspect we'll soon see who's got the reflexes for 21st century simracing. ;-) SB "John Bodin" <[email hidden]> wrote... > You could have just described F1 2001, Steve -- it's VERY similar to > what you've described here, and when it bites you, you know WHY you > were bit.

Dave Henrie wrote in message ... > Here is a question for you John. Has ISI finally come up with a way to >limit my viewable setups to ONLY those I have for each indivual track? Why >I have to sort through dozens of spa/monza/hock/etc setups just to find the >3 or 4 I have for Spain eludes me. >dave henrie The flipside to this is that in a system like GPL where you must copy the setup from another track, your setups are not updated when the original of that setup is changed. This can be an inconvenience if you want to try your latest setup from one track on a different one. I seem to end up with several versions of each setup in each folder. Granted, it's a housekeeping issue more than anything else and is also probably more applicable to GPL than modern F1 since my setups in GPL are very similar for each track. Ben

On Thu, 13 Sep 2001 16:02:33 +0100, "Douglas Ellison" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (27 lines)

> >"John Bodin" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >news:[email hidden]... > >> There is enough disagreement and difficulty in the world. Racing >> simulations are games, intended first and foremost to be entertainment >> vehicles. I am sorry most of all for letting something that should be >> entertaining become something that is anything but. >> >> :-( >> >> I am also sorry that there is not an appropriate emoticon to convey >> shame for one's actions -- I would most certainly use it here and now. >> >> Peace be with you, Doug. >> >> -- JB > >I think we were both suffering from excessive agression bottled up about >recent events. > >In hindsight- quite a good preview actually - was in interface as bloated >and clunky as 2K and CS2K? > >Thoughts with those involved > >Doug

Thanks for being so understanding, Doug, and, again, my apologies. I did neglect to address the game interface -- an oversight on my part, unfortunately. The overall "look and feel" of the menu system is similar to previous offerings from ISI, so it might be safe to say that it's suffering from some of the same issues as 2K and CS2K, with some slight improvements. IMO, though, I can find SOME shortcomings with EVERYONE's menu system, be it Papy, MGI, Ubisoft, Microprose, or ISI, so I just usually learn how to wade through the dodgy parts in order to get to the racing part. Overall, all the different variations of menu systems "work," but some are less intuitive than others. I've been playing F1CS2K for so long the menus in F1 2001 seemed nicely intuitive, but if you're not a long-time fan of ISI sims, then you're probably going to feel differently about the design. Aside from the menus, one good point I failed to address: There are more setup options than in 2K and CS2K, indicating a more sophisticated physics engine underneath. The car physics files are also MUCH more detailed than they were in 2K and CS2K, further indicating more sophisticated physics modeling. A bad point to go with the new setup options: Setups from 2K and CS2K will NOT work with F1 2001 . . . yet another reason why I've been so slow, I think (all my good setups from the previous ISI titles are useless in F1 2001, so I've been forced to start from scratch, and I'm no crew chief). I also failed to mention the new "Instant Replay" feature, which lets you access an instant replay function during a race using a "Ctrl-Alt-R" keystroke -- you set the amount of instant replay time in the main menu, then during a race, you can instantly call up an instant replay on the fly; after the replay, you're returned to the cockpit and can continue from there. Nice touch, IMO -- preferrably something to be used while sitting in a sand trap after an "off," though. ;-) My gut feeling as a physics phreak (and a GPL fan) is that in lieu of a modern F1 sim from Papy, F1 2001 may be the best modern F1 sim yet. The graphics engine is also very, VERY good in terms of frame rate, and this is one area where 2K and CS2K were very weak, so that's a VERY good thing. Hope this helps fill in some of the blanks to some degree. Sorry I didn't address all this stuff originally. Take care! -- JB

Here is a question for you John. Has ISI finally come up with a way to limit my viewable setups to ONLY those I have for each indivual track? Why I have to sort through dozens of spa/monza/hock/etc setups just to find the 3 or 4 I have for Spain eludes me. dave henrie "John Bodin" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (83 lines)

> On Thu, 13 Sep 2001 16:02:33 +0100, "Douglas Ellison" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > > >"John Bodin" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > >news:[email hidden]... > > > >> There is enough disagreement and difficulty in the world. Racing > >> simulations are games, intended first and foremost to be entertainment > >> vehicles. I am sorry most of all for letting something that should be > >> entertaining become something that is anything but. > >> > >> :-( > >> > >> I am also sorry that there is not an appropriate emoticon to convey > >> shame for one's actions -- I would most certainly use it here and now. > >> > >> Peace be with you, Doug. > >> > >> -- JB > > > >I think we were both suffering from excessive agression bottled up about > >recent events. > > > >In hindsight- quite a good preview actually - was in interface as bloated > >and clunky as 2K and CS2K? > > > >Thoughts with those involved > > > >Doug > > Thanks for being so understanding, Doug, and, again, my apologies. > > I did neglect to address the game interface -- an oversight on my > part, unfortunately. The overall "look and feel" of the menu system > is similar to previous offerings from ISI, so it might be safe to say > that it's suffering from some of the same issues as 2K and CS2K, with > some slight improvements. IMO, though, I can find SOME shortcomings > with EVERYONE's menu system, be it Papy, MGI, Ubisoft, Microprose, or > ISI, so I just usually learn how to wade through the dodgy parts in > order to get to the racing part. Overall, all the different > variations of menu systems "work," but some are less intuitive than > others. I've been playing F1CS2K for so long the menus in F1 2001 > seemed nicely intuitive, but if you're not a long-time fan of ISI > sims, then you're probably going to feel differently about the design. > > Aside from the menus, one good point I failed to address: There are > more setup options than in 2K and CS2K, indicating a more > sophisticated physics engine underneath. The car physics files are > also MUCH more detailed than they were in 2K and CS2K, further > indicating more sophisticated physics modeling. > > A bad point to go with the new setup options: Setups from 2K and CS2K > will NOT work with F1 2001 . . . yet another reason why I've been so > slow, I think (all my good setups from the previous ISI titles are > useless in F1 2001, so I've been forced to start from scratch, and I'm > no crew chief). > > I also failed to mention the new "Instant Replay" feature, which lets > you access an instant replay function during a race using a > "Ctrl-Alt-R" keystroke -- you set the amount of instant replay time in > the main menu, then during a race, you can instantly call up an > instant replay on the fly; after the replay, you're returned to the > cockpit and can continue from there. Nice touch, IMO -- preferrably > something to be used while sitting in a sand trap after an "off," > though. > > ;-) > > My gut feeling as a physics phreak (and a GPL fan) is that in lieu of > a modern F1 sim from Papy, F1 2001 may be the best modern F1 sim yet. > > > The graphics engine is also very, VERY good in terms of frame rate, > and this is one area where 2K and CS2K were very weak, so that's a > VERY good thing. > > Hope this helps fill in some of the blanks to some degree. Sorry I > didn't address all this stuff originally. > > Take care! > > -- JB

John, why don't you notify him of the lack of space between his ears. That insult still works. JB John Bodin <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (63 lines)

> You're 100% right, Doug -- yes, F1 2001 is actually a steaming piece > of $#!+, but even so, I like it every bit as much as my two favorite > sims of all time -- Test Drive 6 and Swamp Buggy Racing. I commend > you for exposing me for what I truly am . . . a know-nothing > butt-kisser willing to suck up for the sake of a quick freebie. > > While we're at it, allow me to make your job easier by pointing out > yet another example of my shameless butt-kissing antics, further > illustrating my overall lack of knowledge and discernment, and further > proving that that that sim racing fans are just wasting their time > when they read my butt-kissing musings: > > http://www.sportplanet.com/hg/article.php?page=1&id=26 > > Yes, as they say, opinions are like @$$#0|&$ . . . then again, I'm > sure you already knew that. I post mine in long form, but you are > apparently gifted with a greater brevity. Aside from that -- and my > obvious butt-kissing tendencies -- we seem to be a lot alike. > > I will be scheduling my lobotomy tomorrow. > > Thankfully, that probably won't impact the quality of my reviews . . . > > >:-[ > > Hmm . . . now that I've been exposed as the butt-kisser that I am, I > might as well scrap the preview of Rally Trophy that I'm working on. > > So much for my bid to become the next Randy Magruder of racing sim > reviews. > > :-/ > > -- JB > > On Wed, 12 Sep 2001 20:29:37 +0100, "Douglas Ellison" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > > > >"Andre Warringa" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > >news:[email hidden]... > >> > >> On Wed, 12 Sep 2001 08:22:02 GMT, "Ali Ismet Ozkan" > >> <[email hidden]> wrote: > >> > >> >http://irlheat.bhmotorsports.com/F12001/ > >> > > >> >Thanks John, great work ! > >> > >> "The level of intensity that I experienced during the qualifying > >> session above was demanding in a way that is seldom seen in a PC-based > >> simulation. Based on what I've seen so far, F1 2001 may be perhaps the > >> most realistic, intricate, and immersive racing game ever." > >> > >> Looking promising :)) > > > >IMHO it looks like someone kissing butt because they got an early Beta > > > >Doug > > > > > > >

Agreed. The setup browser also needs a sort function. The setups seem to be randomly ordered. :( Dave Henrie <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:Xwbo7.5054$[email hidden]... > Here is a question for you John. Has ISI finally come up with a way to > limit my viewable setups to ONLY those I have for each indivual track?Why > I have to sort through dozens of spa/monza/hock/etc setups just to findthe > 3 or 4 I have for Spain eludes me. > dave henrie

That IS a great retort, but I hate to become a one-trick pony. Plus, I typically save that one for special people . . . -- JB On Thu, 13 Sep 2001 21:49:48 -0400, "Jesse Black" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (72 lines)

>John, why don't you notify him of the lack of space between his ears. That >insult still works. > >JB > >John Bodin <[email hidden]> wrote in message >news:[email hidden]... >> You're 100% right, Doug -- yes, F1 2001 is actually a steaming piece >> of $#!+, but even so, I like it every bit as much as my two favorite >> sims of all time -- Test Drive 6 and Swamp Buggy Racing. I commend >> you for exposing me for what I truly am . . . a know-nothing >> butt-kisser willing to suck up for the sake of a quick freebie. >> >> While we're at it, allow me to make your job easier by pointing out >> yet another example of my shameless butt-kissing antics, further >> illustrating my overall lack of knowledge and discernment, and further >> proving that that that sim racing fans are just wasting their time >> when they read my butt-kissing musings: >> >> http://www.sportplanet.com/hg/article.php?page=1&id=26 >> >> Yes, as they say, opinions are like @$$#0|&$ . . . then again, I'm >> sure you already knew that. I post mine in long form, but you are >> apparently gifted with a greater brevity. Aside from that -- and my >> obvious butt-kissing tendencies -- we seem to be a lot alike. >> >> I will be scheduling my lobotomy tomorrow. >> >> Thankfully, that probably won't impact the quality of my reviews . . . >> >> >:-[ >> >> Hmm . . . now that I've been exposed as the butt-kisser that I am, I >> might as well scrap the preview of Rally Trophy that I'm working on. >> >> So much for my bid to become the next Randy Magruder of racing sim >> reviews. >> >> :-/ >> >> -- JB >> >> On Wed, 12 Sep 2001 20:29:37 +0100, "Douglas Ellison" >> <[email hidden]> wrote: >> >> > >> >"Andre Warringa" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >> >news:[email hidden]... >> >> >> >> On Wed, 12 Sep 2001 08:22:02 GMT, "Ali Ismet Ozkan" >> >> <[email hidden]> wrote: >> >> >> >> >http://irlheat.bhmotorsports.com/F12001/ >> >> > >> >> >Thanks John, great work ! >> >> >> >> "The level of intensity that I experienced during the qualifying >> >> session above was demanding in a way that is seldom seen in a PC-based >> >> simulation. Based on what I've seen so far, F1 2001 may be perhaps the >> >> most realistic, intricate, and immersive racing game ever." >> >> >> >> Looking promising :)) >> > >> >IMHO it looks like someone kissing butt because they got an early Beta >> > >> >Doug >> > >> > >> > >> > >

Not in the beta version I have, Dave. :-( THIS is one of my biggest pet peeves, but I think either EA or ISI was looking for a familiar "look-and-feel" for the menu system, for better or (in this case) for worse. Keep in mind that this could change in the final version, but don't hold your breath. -- JB On Thu, 13 Sep 2001 23:43:51 GMT, "Dave Henrie" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (92 lines)

> Here is a question for you John. Has ISI finally come up with a way to >limit my viewable setups to ONLY those I have for each indivual track? Why >I have to sort through dozens of spa/monza/hock/etc setups just to find the >3 or 4 I have for Spain eludes me. >dave henrie >"John Bodin" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >news:[email hidden]... >> On Thu, 13 Sep 2001 16:02:33 +0100, "Douglas Ellison" >> <[email hidden]> wrote: >> >> > >> >"John Bodin" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >> >news:[email hidden]... >> > >> >> There is enough disagreement and difficulty in the world. Racing >> >> simulations are games, intended first and foremost to be entertainment >> >> vehicles. I am sorry most of all for letting something that should be >> >> entertaining become something that is anything but. >> >> >> >> :-( >> >> >> >> I am also sorry that there is not an appropriate emoticon to convey >> >> shame for one's actions -- I would most certainly use it here and now. >> >> >> >> Peace be with you, Doug. >> >> >> >> -- JB >> > >> >I think we were both suffering from excessive agression bottled up about >> >recent events. >> > >> >In hindsight- quite a good preview actually - was in interface as bloated >> >and clunky as 2K and CS2K? >> > >> >Thoughts with those involved >> > >> >Doug >> >> Thanks for being so understanding, Doug, and, again, my apologies. >> >> I did neglect to address the game interface -- an oversight on my >> part, unfortunately. The overall "look and feel" of the menu system >> is similar to previous offerings from ISI, so it might be safe to say >> that it's suffering from some of the same issues as 2K and CS2K, with >> some slight improvements. IMO, though, I can find SOME shortcomings >> with EVERYONE's menu system, be it Papy, MGI, Ubisoft, Microprose, or >> ISI, so I just usually learn how to wade through the dodgy parts in >> order to get to the racing part. Overall, all the different >> variations of menu systems "work," but some are less intuitive than >> others. I've been playing F1CS2K for so long the menus in F1 2001 >> seemed nicely intuitive, but if you're not a long-time fan of ISI >> sims, then you're probably going to feel differently about the design. >> >> Aside from the menus, one good point I failed to address: There are >> more setup options than in 2K and CS2K, indicating a more >> sophisticated physics engine underneath. The car physics files are >> also MUCH more detailed than they were in 2K and CS2K, further >> indicating more sophisticated physics modeling. >> >> A bad point to go with the new setup options: Setups from 2K and CS2K >> will NOT work with F1 2001 . . . yet another reason why I've been so >> slow, I think (all my good setups from the previous ISI titles are >> useless in F1 2001, so I've been forced to start from scratch, and I'm >> no crew chief). >> >> I also failed to mention the new "Instant Replay" feature, which lets >> you access an instant replay function during a race using a >> "Ctrl-Alt-R" keystroke -- you set the amount of instant replay time in >> the main menu, then during a race, you can instantly call up an >> instant replay on the fly; after the replay, you're returned to the >> cockpit and can continue from there. Nice touch, IMO -- preferrably >> something to be used while sitting in a sand trap after an "off," >> though. >> >> ;-) >> >> My gut feeling as a physics phreak (and a GPL fan) is that in lieu of >> a modern F1 sim from Papy, F1 2001 may be the best modern F1 sim yet. >> >> >> The graphics engine is also very, VERY good in terms of frame rate, >> and this is one area where 2K and CS2K were very weak, so that's a >> VERY good thing. >> >> Hope this helps fill in some of the blanks to some degree. Sorry I >> didn't address all this stuff originally. >> >> Take care! >> >> -- JB > >

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] (John Bodin) writes:

Quoted text (15 lines)

>>But what I really wanna know is - how's it compare to the latest version of >the Heat champcar in being edgy? That sucker will bite >>you in the arse in a second and all you can think is "I knew I was a bit >hot" as you go spiraling into the weeds. Monster speed, >>brakes, and grip with zippo for reaction time, but you "always" know why you >lost it. Not perfect yet, but doing 45's around >>Aardvark Park is pretty damn intense. Fun to watch the stiff chassis barely >carry the locked inside front through the fall-away T3 >>as you short shift and ease into the throttle. Straighten the wheel as the >corner eases and "chirp", a whiff of smoke and the >>tire's spinning again. Lovely. > >You could have just described F1 2001, Steve -- it's VERY similar to >what you've described here, and when it bites you, you know WHY you >were bit.

Really? F1 2000 would catch me out all the time.... I'd be sliding backwards towards the fence thinking, "What the...?" Eldred -- Dale Earnhardt, Sr. R.I.P. 1951-2001 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett F1 hcp. +16.36...Monster +360.54... Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.