Re: F12K Opinions

On Tue, 11 Apr 2000 19:12:58 +0100, "Mike Fellows" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (8 lines)

>Hi there > >Is it just me or is F12K a bit of a let down ??? > >Turning the rear view mirrors off helps to an alarming degree !! >Also I find the sound pretty poor, other than that its OK :-)) >Come on EA Sports, this could be better !!! >

Mike, Yes it is a bit of a let down but that is the game business these days. Crank it out and update it next year for another charge. Actually, if you grab all the add-ons that are out there, it becomes quite nice to drive but still not to race. The AI are pretty poor and have no situationaly awareness about where you are. Other than that, you can have a pretty good time hotlapping. Go to Blackhole Motorsports http://www.bhmotorsports.com/ and get the new cars, AI patches, antispin patch, wet weather patch, ferrari sound patch 2, track signage patches, turn off the mirrors and you get a good preview of what the real races are. Imola was pretty darn good and so was Brasil. Now it's on to Silverstone. GPL spoiled me for the racing AI. Jeff

Mike Fellows <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:8cvpul$66i$[email hidden]... > Hi there > > Is it just me or is F12K a bit of a let down ??? In some ways I suppose. But frankly, I didn't even know the game was due out so it was a complete surprise. Most surprising is that I didn;'t think it sucks like I thought it would. > I am running it on a PIII 800 with a GeForce DDR card and am finding the > frame rates dissapointing to say the least. Perhaps you are dissapointed because you have a P3-800 and excected "better" framerates with everything maxed? > I have tried it at 640 *480 , 800*600, 1024 * 768, none of which reallyset > the race sim world alight. Numbers would be a big help actually. Go to www.fraps.com and download fraps. Then run F1 2000 and then ALT-TAB and startup fraps. Your current framerate will be in the upper left. As I have said before I run 800x600 with most stuff on 22 opponants and am getting 20-25fps in testing and 15-20 fps in races. It would be great if you could try fraps to quantify what your 800mhz rig is giving you. I only have a P2-450 so I would expect far better numbers. > Turning the rear view mirrors off helps to an alarming degree !! > Also I find the sound pretty poor, other than that its OK :-)) After hours of using the game, I like the sound... -- Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes. Please reply to: cisko[AT] ix [dot] netcom [dot] com > Come on EA Sports, this could be better !!! > > Cheers > Mike > >

Alexander Marx <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:8cvtm6$70s94$[email hidden]... > > Is it just me or is F12K a bit of a let down ??? > > <vbg> > > Some folks in this group really like the game, but I think most will agree > that it is indeed a bit of a let down after all the hype. Anyway, be sureto What hype? I just was an add in the latest issue of F1 Racing magazine (great mag BTW). But that was about it. > wear your flame proof underwear if you want to criticise F12K here...those > people seem to take it very personal (dunno why). Only when people make outright false statements. If you want to say something ridiculous like imola is not accurate, then I would have an issue with it. If you (or anyone else) tried the game and didn't like it and return it or whatever, I could really care less. Good for you. -- Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes. Please reply to: cisko[AT] ix [dot] netcom [dot] com

On Tue, 11 Apr 2000 21:12:36 +0200, "Alexander Marx" <[email hidden]> wrote: >> Is it just me or is F12K a bit of a let down ??? > ><vbg> >I think most will agree >that it is indeed a bit of a let down after all the hype What hype? -- * rrev at mindspring dot com *

On Wed, 12 Apr 2000 08:27:15 +1000, "Peter Cook" <[email hidden]> wrote: >I am a bit mistified by the different results from this game. I have a PIII >450 Ge-Force DDR card and I am getting a range of 32 - 50 FPS at Suzuka. Try it with 22 opponents at the start of the race. -- * rrev at mindspring dot com *

Hi there Is it just me or is F12K a bit of a let down ??? I am running it on a PIII 800 with a GeForce DDR card and am finding the frame rates dissapointing to say the least. I have tried it at 640 *480 , 800*600, 1024 * 768, none of which really set the race sim world alight. Turning the rear view mirrors off helps to an alarming degree !! Also I find the sound pretty poor, other than that its OK :-)) Come on EA Sports, this could be better !!! Cheers Mike

> Is it just me or is F12K a bit of a let down ??? <vbg> Some folks in this group really like the game, but I think most will agree that it is indeed a bit of a let down after all the hype. Anyway, be sure to wear your flame proof underwear if you want to criticise F12K here... those people seem to take it very personal (dunno why). cheers, Alex

Yep, just installed, played, and got disapointed. BTW I use a C500 and a 8Mb Voodoo with lots of settings on or high. ;-) Sound is bad, even at high quality. It is not the screaming V10's you should expect. Force feed back is a bit low quality as well. I like GPL better. GP3? Marc Mike Fellows <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:8cvpul$66i$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> Hi there > > Is it just me or is F12K a bit of a let down ??? > > I am running it on a PIII 800 with a GeForce DDR card and am finding the > frame rates dissapointing to say the least. > I have tried it at 640 *480 , 800*600, 1024 * 768, none of which really

set

Quoted text (9 lines)

> the race sim world alight. > Turning the rear view mirrors off helps to an alarming degree !! > Also I find the sound pretty poor, other than that its OK :-)) > Come on EA Sports, this could be better !!! > > Cheers > Mike > >

"Mike Fellows" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:8cvpul$66i$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> Hi there > > Is it just me or is F12K a bit of a let down ??? > > I am running it on a PIII 800 with a GeForce DDR card and am finding the > frame rates dissapointing to say the least. > I have tried it at 640 *480 , 800*600, 1024 * 768, none of which really

set > the race sim world alight. > Turning the rear view mirrors off helps to an alarming degree !! > Also I find the sound pretty poor, other than that its OK :-)) > Come on EA Sports, this could be better !!! The performance of this game seems very strange to say the least. All the complaints seem to be coming from people with high end systems! Granted, my first reaction was similar after loading the game up, banging everything on full & stuttering down the pit lane in Melbourne like a demented kangaroo. With a bit of tweaking (Cockpit high, specular & environment mapping on, own car high, other cars low, visible cars 6, no detail in mirrors, only grandstands, bridges and, erm, something else (fences?) on, view distance high, everything else medium) I now get 20-25fps @ 800x600 on a Celeron 416 with TNT(1). Mirrors off gives me 3-4fps more (lots more on the grid). FFB makes little or no difference. All I can suggest is play with the settings until you get the balance between looks & speed that suits you - the game below all this really is good fun when you get into it. My only (major) complaint would be how difficult it is to get a clean start :-/ Maybe all this talk of poor framerates is subjective? When you're used to 60+fps anything less is a letdown. When you're used to 25-30 the drop seems very minor. As I'm picking up my GeForce (DDR - Yeah Baby!) this week could somebody using one *who has tweaked the graphics to suit* please tell me what kind of performance I should expect. bod (Trying hard not to take anything personally ; )

In article <[email hidden]>, rrevved <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (7 lines)

>On Wed, 12 Apr 2000 08:27:15 +1000, "Peter Cook" <[email hidden]> > wrote: > >>I am a bit mistified by the different results from this game. I have a PIII >>450 Ge-Force DDR card and I am getting a range of 32 - 50 FPS at Suzuka. > >Try it with 22 opponents at the start of the race.

Yup. I see <10 fps at the start when I try to run at settings which give 20+, sometimes 40+, when hot lapping or all alone on part of a circuit. My best bet is to start the race in no-dash view, then switch the dash on after the first or second turn (but still, alas, leave the mirrors off). C300a/450, 96MB, V3 3000.

hi bod I for one would be MOST interested in your setup both now with the TNT and with GEnforce later Pls keep me posted thnks Leong bod <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (22 lines)

> > "Mike Fellows" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:8cvpul$66i$[email hidden]... > > Hi there > > > > Is it just me or is F12K a bit of a let down ??? > > > > I am running it on a PIII 800 with a GeForce DDR card and am finding the > > frame rates dissapointing to say the least. > > I have tried it at 640 *480 , 800*600, 1024 * 768, none of which really > set > > the race sim world alight. > > Turning the rear view mirrors off helps to an alarming degree !! > > Also I find the sound pretty poor, other than that its OK :-)) > > Come on EA Sports, this could be better !!! > > The performance of this game seems very strange to say the least. All the > complaints seem to be coming from people with high end systems! > Granted, my first reaction was similar after loading the game up, banging > everything on full & stuttering down the pit lane in Melbourne like a > demented kangaroo. > With a bit of tweaking (Cockpit high, specular & environment mapping on,

own > car high, other cars low, visible cars 6, no detail in mirrors, only > grandstands, bridges and, erm, something else (fences?) on, view distance > high, everything else medium) I now get 20-25fps @ 800x600 on a Celeron416

Quoted text (7 lines)

> with TNT(1). Mirrors off gives me 3-4fps more (lots more on the grid). FFB > makes little or no difference. > > All I can suggest is play with the settings until you get the balance > between looks & speed that suits you - the game below all this really is > good fun when you get into it. > My only (major) complaint would be how difficult it is to get a clean

start

Quoted text (7 lines)

> :-/ > > Maybe all this talk of poor framerates is subjective? When you're used to > 60+fps anything less is a letdown. > When you're used to 25-30 the drop seems very minor. > As I'm picking up my GeForce (DDR - Yeah Baby!) this week could somebody > using one *who has tweaked the graphics to suit* please tell me what kind

of > performance I should expect. > > bod > (Trying hard not to take anything personally ; ) > >

On Wed, 12 Apr 2000 15:40:20 GMT, Chuck Kandler <[email hidden]> wrote: >Actually, most of the complaints I've seen come from TNT2/GeForce >owners. Seems most of us Voodoo owners are a fairly pleased lot. =-) I have a Voodoo2 on my home system, but it's only a P2 300 - enough for all other racing games, but apparently not for F1 2000. :-(

Iain Mackenzie wrote: > > >>At least it can't go down<< > I've said it before, but I wish you would take your silly comments somewhere > else. > Iain Gimme a break. I responded quite often to his (over the top) comments regarding UbiSoft's sims. But I never had the arrogance to tell him to leave. The position of ng moderator is not available now or in the forseeable future... -- l8er ronny Your mouse has moved. Windows must be restarted for the change to take effect. Reboot now? |\ _,,,---,,_ I want to die like my Grandfather, ZZZzz /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ in his sleep. |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' Not like the people in his car, '---''(_/--' `-'\_) screaming their heads off!

It is strange that the frame rate is so bad. GPL has just as good if not better graphics and a far superior physics engine (than F1 2000) yet it seems to run smoothly on the same machines that are having trouble running F1 2000. Oh while I think about it, I agree all those EA Sports advertising boards round the track really add a touch of realism to the game! Chris In article <8cvpul$66i$[email hidden]>, "Mike Fellows" <[email hidden]> wrote: >I am running it on a PIII 800 with a GeForce DDR card and amfinding the >frame rates dissapointing to say the least. * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network * The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!

"Mike Fellows" <[email hidden]> wrote > Is it just me or is F12K a bit of a let down ??? This newsgroup clearly has a mixed opinion about the title. Let's see how ISI/EA supports the title, and how the third party utilities will help the software. At least it can't go down, but just have a better experience out of it in the future. -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- May the Downforce be with you... -- http://www.WeRace.net -- People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realise how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world.

F12000 runs better on my system than GPL, where the starts are still very bad. Actually, it runs great with all most graphics on high or maximum, sound at maximum, and 15AI. If I want a full field, I turn a few things down. Just mirrors off. 466, 96megs, TNT2 Ultra. There is one setting which turns the starts into a slide show when set at "maximum", but when I turn it down just one notch to "high", it runs smooth. It's the "Texture Mapping Detail" setting. David G Fisher "Chris Bloom" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (19 lines)

> It is strange that the frame rate is so bad. GPL has just as > good if not better graphics and a far superior physics engine > (than F1 2000) yet it seems to run smoothly on the same machines > that are having trouble running F1 2000. > > Oh while I think about it, I agree all those EA Sports > advertising boards round the track really add a touch of realism > to the game! > > Chris > > In article <8cvpul$66i$[email hidden]>, "Mike Fellows" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > >I am running it on a PIII 800 with a GeForce DDR card and am > finding the > >frame rates dissapointing to say the least. > > > * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network

* > The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free! >

With 22 cars and most things switched on, I get about 20-22fps on my Athlon 750 with V3 3000@1024x768. No problems at all here. Iain rrevved <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Wed, 12 Apr 2000 08:27:15 +1000, "Peter Cook" <[email hidden]>wrote: > > >I am a bit mistified by the different results from this game. I have aPIII > >450 Ge-Force DDR card and I am getting a range of 32 - 50 FPS at Suzuka. > > Try it with 22 opponents at the start of the race. > > -- > * rrev at mindspring dot com *

Totally agree, turning texture to high as essential. Also turning off shadows improves the look a lot. Get rid off the detail in the mirrors but don't switch them off. Switch off smoke and dust as well. All that stuff makes very little difference to the quality of the graphics - still look great! - but helps the fps a lot. Iain David G Fisher <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:UATI4.116976$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> F12000 runs better on my system than GPL, where the starts are still very > bad. Actually, it runs great with all most graphics on high or maximum, > sound at maximum, and 15AI. If I want a full field, I turn a few things > down. Just mirrors off. 466, 96megs, TNT2 Ultra. > > There is one setting which turns the starts into a slide show when set at > "maximum", but when I turn it down just one notch to "high", it runs

smooth.

Quoted text (26 lines)

> It's the "Texture Mapping Detail" setting. > > David G Fisher > > > "Chris Bloom" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > It is strange that the frame rate is so bad. GPL has just as > > good if not better graphics and a far superior physics engine > > (than F1 2000) yet it seems to run smoothly on the same machines > > that are having trouble running F1 2000. > > > > Oh while I think about it, I agree all those EA Sports > > advertising boards round the track really add a touch of realism > > to the game! > > > > Chris > > > > In article <8cvpul$66i$[email hidden]>, "Mike Fellows" > > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >I am running it on a PIII 800 with a GeForce DDR card and am > > finding the > > >frame rates dissapointing to say the least. > > > > > > * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion

Network > * > > The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free! > > >

>>At least it can't go down<<I've said it before, but I wish you would take your silly comments somewhere else. Iain

I am a bit mistified by the different results from this game. I have a PIII 450 Ge-Force DDR card and I am getting a range of 32 - 50 FPS at Suzuka. I would have thought you would be getting at least that sort of frame rate. The response to inputs I get are excellent and if you have the AI level up high (>95%) then the other cars behave better when you are racing with them. While it is not perfect it is better than any other modern F1 Sim to date, that is of course my opinion only, but if fills the gap until GP3 arrives Peter Cook Mike Fellows <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:8cvpul$66i$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> Hi there > > Is it just me or is F12K a bit of a let down ??? > > I am running it on a PIII 800 with a GeForce DDR card and am finding the > frame rates dissapointing to say the least. > I have tried it at 640 *480 , 800*600, 1024 * 768, none of which really

set

Quoted text (9 lines)

> the race sim world alight. > Turning the rear view mirrors off helps to an alarming degree !! > Also I find the sound pretty poor, other than that its OK :-)) > Come on EA Sports, this could be better !!! > > Cheers > Mike > >

"bod" <[email hidden]> wrote: >With a bit of tweaking ... I now get 20-25fps... Actually, the complaints seem to be from people without a tolerance for low frame rates. Joe McGinn _____________________ Radical Entertainment

rrevved wrote:

Quoted text (10 lines)

> > On Wed, 12 Apr 2000 08:27:15 +1000, "Peter Cook" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >I am a bit mistified by the different results from this game. I have a PIII > >450 Ge-Force DDR card and I am getting a range of 32 - 50 FPS at Suzuka. > > Try it with 22 opponents at the start of the race. > > -- > * rrev at mindspring dot com *

Just tried it with Fraps last night. I have a Celeron 466 (not O/C'd)/128MB PC133 RAM/V3 3000. I run with a full field of 22, 1024x768, Cockpit on high, moving wheel on, mirrors off, Bilinear, Specular & racing groove on, smoke on, dust, particles, sky, environment mapping, shadows & skid marks off, fog low, view distance, detail distance, texture distance, driver vehicle detail & other vehicle detail on high, visible vehicles 6, trees off, misc, billboards, buildings, bridges, grandstand & pit lane objects on. With a quick race at Monza, it was a solid 18 on the grid awaiting the start. Thru the first chicanes, it gets a little hairy, dropping to as low as 9. But from there on out it pretty well stays steady in a range from 17-25 fps. Considering what others are getting on much higher spec machines, I'm not really concerned over it's performance. Besides, I still have tweaking room. I know a lot of the drop at the start is due to having smoke on. Sure seems like a lot of the complaints are coming from TNT2/GeForce owners. Seems these are still not the cards to have for driving sims, although they are supposedly excellent at flight sims. One other thought on the sound complaints in F12K. It sure seems fine to me, but I drive in the cockpit view. I've noticed in the replays that the exterior sound really does suck big time. My thought is that maybe a large proportion of these complaints may be coming from those who drive with the arcade view? And those that like it are in the cockpit view? Thoughts anyone? -- Chuck Kandler #70 K&S Racing http://www.fortunecity.com/silverstone/thepits/195 Competitor in the TopGear MGPRS2 league at: http://topgear.dhs.org/ Come on & join the fun! They'll call you names And spit in your face, But legends never die. --Gene Simmons

Joe62 wrote:

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > "bod" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >With a bit of tweaking ... I now get 20-25fps... > > Actually, the complaints seem to be from people without a tolerance > for low frame rates. >

Actually, most of the complaints I've seen come from TNT2/GeForce owners. Seems most of us Voodoo owners are a fairly pleased lot. =-) -- Chuck Kandler #70 K&S Racing http://www.fortunecity.com/silverstone/thepits/195 Competitor in the TopGear MGPRS2 league at: http://topgear.dhs.org/ Come on & join the fun! They'll call you names And spit in your face, But legends never die. --Gene Simmons

that's odd, I have c500 at 567 64 megs and tnt2, best I can get (with lots of things off) is about 16-17 FPS at 800*600, that's according to fraps. Seems a c400 with TNT1 go's quicker! bod <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (22 lines)

> > "Mike Fellows" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:8cvpul$66i$[email hidden]... > > Hi there > > > > Is it just me or is F12K a bit of a let down ??? > > > > I am running it on a PIII 800 with a GeForce DDR card and am finding the > > frame rates dissapointing to say the least. > > I have tried it at 640 *480 , 800*600, 1024 * 768, none of which really > set > > the race sim world alight. > > Turning the rear view mirrors off helps to an alarming degree !! > > Also I find the sound pretty poor, other than that its OK :-)) > > Come on EA Sports, this could be better !!! > > The performance of this game seems very strange to say the least. All the > complaints seem to be coming from people with high end systems! > Granted, my first reaction was similar after loading the game up, banging > everything on full & stuttering down the pit lane in Melbourne like a > demented kangaroo. > With a bit of tweaking (Cockpit high, specular & environment mapping on,

own > car high, other cars low, visible cars 6, no detail in mirrors, only > grandstands, bridges and, erm, something else (fences?) on, view distance > high, everything else medium) I now get 20-25fps @ 800x600 on a Celeron416

Quoted text (7 lines)

> with TNT(1). Mirrors off gives me 3-4fps more (lots more on the grid). FFB > makes little or no difference. > > All I can suggest is play with the settings until you get the balance > between looks & speed that suits you - the game below all this really is > good fun when you get into it. > My only (major) complaint would be how difficult it is to get a clean

start

Quoted text (7 lines)

> :-/ > > Maybe all this talk of poor framerates is subjective? When you're used to > 60+fps anything less is a letdown. > When you're used to 25-30 the drop seems very minor. > As I'm picking up my GeForce (DDR - Yeah Baby!) this week could somebody > using one *who has tweaked the graphics to suit* please tell me what kind

of

Quoted text (7 lines)

> performance I should expect. > > bod > (Trying hard not to take anything personally ; ) > > >

Sorry, but you should read my post properly. I only 'wished' he would take his comments elsewhere. Neither telling people where to go nor arrogance are part of my makeup. Sorry, try someone else! Iain Ronald Stoehr <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Iain Mackenzie wrote: > > > > >>At least it can't go down<< > > I've said it before, but I wish you would take your silly commentssomewhere

Quoted text (20 lines)

> > else. > > Iain > > Gimme a break. I responded quite often to his (over the top) comments > regarding > UbiSoft's sims. But I never had the arrogance to tell him to leave. > > The position of ng moderator is not available now or in the forseeable > future... > > -- > l8er > ronny > > Your mouse has moved. Windows must be restarted for the change > to take effect. Reboot now? > |\ _,,,---,,_ I want to die like my Grandfather, > ZZZzz /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ in his sleep. > |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' Not like the people in his car, > '---''(_/--' `-'\_) screaming their heads off!

"Iain Mackenzie" <[email hidden]> wrote > >>At least it can't go down<< > I've said it before, but I wish you would take your silly commentssomewhere > else. What the heck is wrong with that I just said? I personally do not like at all F1 2000, and I simply said that the future can't make the title go worse than it is presently. Only good things can happen to the title now, but it's up to ISI and their support. Oh and the third party utilities (who already taken steps to make the game better). -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- May the Downforce be with you... -- http://www.WeRace.net -- People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realise how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world.

"Joe62" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > "bod" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >With a bit of tweaking ... I now get 20-25fps... > > Actually, the complaints seem to be from people without a tolerance > for low frame rates. LOL, stuck with an old-ass TNT card I have had to build up a tolerance for low framerates. There's not many recent games that can top 30fps on my system so 20-25 ain't bad going. Like I said, I figured the complaints were coming from people who have been 'spoiled' by high fps with everything on full in other games. Turn a few options down & things get a lot better. EA have been very forward thinking in producing a game that requires a 2ghz cpu & Voodoo 8 to get the most out of it ; ) bod

Joe McGinn wrote:

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > On Wed, 12 Apr 2000 15:40:20 GMT, Chuck Kandler <[email hidden]> > wrote: > >Actually, most of the complaints I've seen come from TNT2/GeForce > >owners. Seems most of us Voodoo owners are a fairly pleased lot. =-) > > I have a Voodoo2 on my home system, but it's only a P2 300 - enough > for all other racing games, but apparently not for F1 2000. :-(

Yeah, a friend of mine only has a 300a. I advised him to wait until he got more HP. I'd say a 400 with a Voodoo3 as a *bare minimum*. -- Chuck Kandler #70 K&S Racing http://www.fortunecity.com/silverstone/thepits/195 Competitor in the TopGear MGPRS2 league at: http://topgear.dhs.org/ Come on & join the fun! They'll call you names And spit in your face, But legends never die. --Gene Simmons

Strange for someone who in another post wrote "F1 2000 is the best title at the moment"! If these are the comments on what you think is the 'best', then I hate to think what you say about the others! Sure, we're all looking forward to GP3, but it's not here yet, we don't know if it will be the biz or not, and F12K is here, now! Iain ymenard <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:ds4J4.77891$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (9 lines)

> "Iain Mackenzie" <[email hidden]> wrote > > >>At least it can't go down<< > > I've said it before, but I wish you would take your silly comments > somewhere > > else. > > > What the heck is wrong with that I just said? I personally do not like at > all F1 2000, and I simply said that the future can't make the title go

worse > than it is presently. > > Only good things can happen to the title now, but it's up to ISI and their > support. Oh and the third party utilities (who already taken steps tomake

Quoted text (11 lines)

> the game better). > > > > > > -- > -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> > -- May the Downforce be with you... > -- http://www.WeRace.net > -- People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't

realise > how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world. > > >

Hi Ymenard, FWIW, i totally agree with you on F1 2K.. It is far to easy to drive and has more bad points than good as far as i am concerned.. I don't like the way the ai drive, the multi-player coding may be ok for anyone with cable, but for the rest of us it is bad.. You can't qualify on-line with other players and i think that the 3d engine leaves a lot to be desired.. All in my opinion of course. It reminds me of a Play Station or Nintendo64 arcade game, even though i believe the console version has at least got telemetry included.. :) Having said that, i still believe it is the best we have available at the moment for F1 sims, but without good internet play and having poor ai, it simply becomes a hotlapper's toy, and hotlapping does not interest me in the least.. Cheers, Ron > > >>At least it can't go down<< > > I've said it before, but I wish you would take your silly comments > somewhere > > else. > What the heck is wrong with that I just said? I personally do not like at > all F1 2000, and I simply said that the future can't make the title go worse > than it is presently. > Only good things can happen to the title now, but it's up to ISI and their > support. Oh and the third party utilities (who already taken steps to make

Quoted text (7 lines)

> the game better). > -- > -- Fran?ois Mnard <ymenard> > -- May the Downforce be with you... > -- http://www.WeRace.net > -- People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't

realise > how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world.

I agree. For me, Gp2 is better or Monaco GP2 if you have a steering wheel. Mike Fellows a crit :