Just read this on the F1 Gamers website, not sure if this has been posted
yet or not:
http://www.f1gamers.com/f1/news/9977230361526.htm
"Matt" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:yY2h7.142431$[email hidden]...
| Just read this on the F1 Gamers website, not sure if this has been posted
| yet or not:
| http://www.f1gamers.com/f1/news/9977230361526.htm
|
|
I don't think I believe them anymore :(
In article <yY2h7.142431$[email hidden]>,
[email hidden] says...
> Just read this on the F1 Gamers website, not sure if this has been posted
> yet or not:
> http://www.f1gamers.com/f1/news/9977230361526.htm
LOL.
I can see a whole new long thread about to start. ;)
Cheers,
Rod.
On Thu, 23 Aug 2001 08:15:26 GMT, "Matt"
<[email hidden]> wrote:
>Just read this on the F1 Gamers website, not sure if this has been posted
>yet or not:
>http://www.f1gamers.com/f1/news/9977230361526.htm
The release date for F1RC2 is still November? Well.. first I've lost
faith in Ubi a little, so I won't hold my breath, second it would be a
bit unwise of them to release a patch for F1RC1 2 months before F1RC2
:)
Andre
Well....it depends on what Ubi actually mean when they say "Patch" and
"Sequel"....I mean, they may be talking about the opposite of what we
actually mean.
Is it matter....or anti-matter ?
"Matt" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:yY2h7.142431$[email hidden]...
> Just read this on the F1 Gamers website, not sure if this has been posted
> yet or not:
> http://www.f1gamers.com/f1/news/9977230361526.htm
>
>
Yuuuuuuuup Rod!! Here we go again!! hahahaha
"Rod Prince" wrote:
posted
| > yet or not:
| > http://www.f1gamers.com/f1/news/9977230361526.htm
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.273 / Virus Database: 143 - Release Date: 8/16/2001
Quoted text (9 lines)
| LOL. | | I can see a whole new long thread about to start. ;) | | Cheers, | Rod. | [email hidden] says... | > Just read this on the F1 Gamers website, not sure if this has been"O" I think I see Incubus? It is what is, isnt, not what isnt, is.. :)
"Incubus" wrote:
| Well....it depends on what Ubi actually mean when they say "Patch" and
| "Sequel"....I mean, they may be talking about the opposite of what we
| actually mean.
|
| Is it matter....or anti-matter ?
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.273 / Virus Database: 143 - Release Date: 8/16/2001
Ubisoft is doing this because they know that if they don't release a patch
for F1RC before the "sequel", no one will buy the sequel. As such, they are
doing it for their own sake and not for those who feel ripped because F1RC
was not patched.
Alanb
"Matt" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:yY2h7.142431$[email hidden]...
> Just read this on the F1 Gamers website, not sure if this has been posted
> yet or not:
> http://www.f1gamers.com/f1/news/9977230361526.htm
>
>
Well, Ubisoft are probably no worse than your typical fairly large
publisher. It's not a crime to be 'in it for the money'.
I agree that releasing an F1RC patch has the potential to help F1RC2 sales a
little. I also think the patch was on it's way whether there was a F1RC2 or
not. The length of time the patch has taken (and continues to take) is
probably either down to the difficulty in fixing the AI (afterall the AI
does need a serious overhall) or that Ubisoft haven't been able to free up
enough people from working on F1RC2.
Anyway, that the patch is still on it's way (as Ubisoft have also confirmed
to me by e-mail) is good news.
"Alan Bernardo" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:P2hh7.5922$[email hidden]...
> Ubisoft is doing this because they know that if they don't release a patch
> for F1RC before the "sequel", no one will buy the sequel. As such, theyare
posted
> > yet or not:
> > http://www.f1gamers.com/f1/news/9977230361526.htm
> >
> >
>
>
Quoted text (8 lines)
> doing it for their own sake and not for those who feel ripped because F1RC > was not patched. > > Alanb > > "Matt" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:yY2h7.142431$[email hidden]... > > Just read this on the F1 Gamers website, not sure if this has beenIn article <P2hh7.5922$[email hidden]>,
[email hidden] says...
> Ubisoft is doing this because they know that if they don't release a patch
> for F1RC before the "sequel", no one will buy the sequel. As such, they are
> doing it for their own sake and not for those who feel ripped because F1RC
> was not patched.
OTOH, why would you buy F1RC2 if they only just patched F1RC up to spec?
Cheers,
Rod.
Just saw your reply Rod and [fwiw, not much really,] it seems like
neither version will be any good for online? Its quite odd that other
companies have no problems in this regard...eh? :)
"Rod Prince" wrote:
| OTOH, why would you buy F1RC2 if they only just patched F1RC up to spec?
|
| Cheers,
| Rod.
| > Ubisoft is doing this because they know that if they don't release apatch
| > for F1RC before the "sequel", no one will buy the sequel. As such, theyare
| > doing it for their own sake and not for those who feel ripped becauseF1RC
| > was not patched.
|
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.273 / Virus Database: 143 - Release Date: 8/16/2001
"Rod Prince" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:MPG.15f0900ee8893d369899a2@news-server...
> In article <P2hh7.5922$[email hidden]>,
> [email hidden] says...
>
> > Ubisoft is doing this because they know that if they don't release apatch
> > for F1RC before the "sequel", no one will buy the sequel. As such, theyare
> > doing it for their own sake and not for those who feel ripped becauseF1RC
> > was not patched.
>
> OTOH, why would you buy F1RC2 if they only just patched F1RC up to spec?
>
> Cheers,
> Rod.
Well, it's a perception thing, if you know what I mean. Folks would get
(and are) mighty angry if F1RC is left in its present state. With a patch,
close to the release of F1RC2, I think a lot of people would feel better
about Ubisoft and that would impel sales.
Alanb
