The wet weather is amazing in as much as it's not just wet it's
dynamic on one side of the track it can be wet and the other can be
dry and then 10 minutes later vice versa it's really cool.
Regards Mike
On Sat, 22 Jul 2000 12:43:31 -0700, "Mitch Alatorre"
<[email hidden]> wrote:
Just visited www.f1-grandprix3.net and see main headline is that the pirated
copy is a 7 week old beta version with many bugs.
Guess I'll find out on Friday when I buy my copy from EB.
The most interesting point though is that Jamedit works with GP3 with only
an update to 16 bit textures needed...looks like the tinkerers brigade are
on the case.!!
Time will tell.
Ian.
It's no beta. It was compiled about a week ago.
Then how come it says "13 July, 2000" inside the gp3readme.txt file? Hmm...
And how much can they do in 7 weeks? Fix bugs, sure, but a complete overhaul
of the physics and graphics engines? Doubtful. Well, you're right, time will
tell.
I have to say that this whole situation reminds me a lot about the immense
hype and sky-high expectations that were generated in anticipation of the
release of Falcon 4.0 in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sims. For over a year,
people said that it would change the world as we know it, pretty much just
on the basis of the prior version alone. When it did come out, there was
massive disappointment. Not so much with what it tried to do, but in its
totally broken bug-laden state (which people forgot was the same case with
that prior 3.0 version - history was repeated). And the whole development
team was laid off before they every fully fixed it. Anyway, I guess it's
human nature to be excited about something that's coming out, and that's
fine, but there were lots of really unjustified critical comments made here
in the past few months, for example, how it would compare against F1 2000,
that it would blow it away, etc., with no facts to back it up. It turns out
that F1 2000 has got really good physics and graphics after all. Well,
hindsight is 20/20, but I'm just glad that I didn't participate in this
frenzy. I'll probably still get it, but at least I know what to expect now.
Names aren't enough in this business.
That's complete bullshit, the complete warez version from class is dated
13/07/2000 so it's not 7 weeks old, but 9 days....
For all of you who have it there is a gp3readme and there's a date in it
I mustsay I am really disappointed by the game, to top all the other
complaitns it doesn't support 3 axis wheels, so don't even think of
tailbraking....NO WAY.
Crammond you let us down this time....
idav <[email hidden]> a �crit dans le message :
8lc0kl$b71$[email hidden]...
> Just visited www.f1-grandprix3.net and see main headline is that thepirated
Quoted text (13 lines)
> copy is a 7 week old beta version with many bugs. > > Guess I'll find out on Friday when I buy my copy from EB. > > The most interesting point though is that Jamedit works with GP3 with only > an update to 16 bit textures needed...looks like the tinkerers brigade are > on the case.!! > > Time will tell. > > Ian. > >The difference between Falcon4 and GP3 is that Falcon4 was just buggy upon
release. Still groundbreaking in terms of a quality flight sim (Dynamic
campaign still the best). GP3 is nothing more than a good game, nothing
really ground breaking (like GPL). The wet weather could be great but we
have to wait for the final to know how that turns out.
Mitch
"Krakus" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:oDge5.203061$[email hidden]...
> Then how come it says "13 July, 2000" inside the gp3readme.txt file?Hmm...
>
> And how much can they do in 7 weeks? Fix bugs, sure, but a completeoverhaul
> of the physics and graphics engines? Doubtful. Well, you're right, timewill
> tell.
>
> I have to say that this whole situation reminds me a lot about the immense
> hype and sky-high expectations that were generated in anticipation of the
> release of Falcon 4.0 in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sims. For over ayear,
here
> in the past few months, for example, how it would compare against F1 2000,
> that it would blow it away, etc., with no facts to back it up. It turnsout
> that F1 2000 has got really good physics and graphics after all. Well,
> hindsight is 20/20, but I'm just glad that I didn't participate in this
> frenzy. I'll probably still get it, but at least I know what to expectnow.
> Names aren't enough in this business.
>
>
>
Quoted text (8 lines)
> people said that it would change the world as we know it, pretty much just > on the basis of the prior version alone. When it did come out, there was > massive disappointment. Not so much with what it tried to do, but in its > totally broken bug-laden state (which people forgot was the same case with > that prior 3.0 version - history was repeated). And the whole development > team was laid off before they every fully fixed it. Anyway, I guess it's > human nature to be excited about something that's coming out, and that's > fine, but there were lots of really unjustified critical comments madeIt's no beta. It was compiled about a week ago.
Class frequently release beta's, are they unable to change text in a TXT
file or something? They frequently patch betas as finals, if you weren't too
busy talking crap you'd know that. ;-)
Txl <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:09je5.709$[email hidden]...
only
> > an update to 16 bit textures needed...looks like the tinkerers brigadeare
