Re: PU...why mine is going back to EB

On Mon, 27 Mar 2000 00:12:01 GMT, "Cliff Roman" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (26 lines)

> >Marc Collins <[email hidden]> wrote in message >news:JOwD4.17163$[email hidden]... >> - no tire squeal when skidding or sliding around a corner (another >atrocious >> hold-over from previous titles) > >I hear tire squeal all the time when I am going around corners. Do not know >why you are not hearing it. > > >> - damage model almost unrelated to what you damage (I don't mind having a >> very, very liberal damage model--one where you can practically total the >car >> 5 times over before it gives up, but when I go to the garage and fix the >> damage, I would like to see some relationship to how I drove) > >I think you are missing something here to. If I damage my car pretty bad, >if you go into the garage, you can see your car all banged up. In one race >where I got my roof to Yellow, in the garage it was all caved it to the >point I was wondering how my driver actually continued to sit in the car. > > >I have not had as much fun as I did going through the Factory Driver mode in >a long time in a driving game. >

I agree. I'm not sure what is happening, in his case, but I have great tire sound, and the external sound is like every revved-up 911 I have ever heard. The interior sound volume is too low, in my opinion, but other than that, and the lack of any ability to choose time of day, I can't imagine what they could do to make it more enjoyable. Last night, I re-installed NFS-HS and I have to tell you, it was PURE arcade. -Everything- about it was exaggerated from a real life car. There is simply no comparison in the driving models of these two titles. In my opinion, of course. -- * rrev at mindspring dot com *

Ok, what sense is in this post? I am a fan of the original NFS SE and I still have it. It's a great game, especially on rally mode, but it does not come close to NFS:PU. How can you say it's a slight improvement over NFS 4? I played the demo and it sucked. I mean, it was crap. The car felt like you were floating, in jumps you felt like you were suspened in air, then fell like a rock, and there was virtually no skill involved. In NFS:PU the car feels like it's on the road, the cars slide smoothly, especially the old ones, the feeling of air is incredible, like in the first, pendulum turns work nicely, spin outs are possible, and when you slide around a corner with big slicks, then you can feel the friction and how it pushes the car the other way a bit. The damage I thought was pretty good, if you hit the front, you get bent steering, if you hit the back, where the drivetrain goes to the wheels, you get drivetrain damage. How is that in no way relevant to what you hit? And the dash looks pretty damn good, crisper and clearer than GPL's, with a P3 667mhz and a 32mb GForce SDR running at 1024*768 And if you dont like the hud, turn it off with F5. Okay, okay, well the incar sounds do kinda suck, but you know all the people that edit all the NFS titles that this wont be a problem for people to change it. Yes, and the roads are a bit wide. But the dirt roads and later courses arent all so wide. Hmmm....Im a big rally fan and I liked RC2K. But it seems to have more or an NFS HS physics model, (2 point physics) and how it kinda steers with the center axis, instead of the front wheels like NFS PU. Actually, now, after playing Rallymasters, all other rally games dont seem all that great. Thanks, Alex Marc Collins <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:JOwD4.17163$[email hidden]... > ...and that's why my copy is going back to EB shortly. > > I vowed after buying NFS: HP (IV) that I would never get hoodwinked into > buying another &#&@^^&$* EA NFS title, since all but the first wereserious > disappointments to me. Based on feedback here at r.a.s. I decided to gofor

Quoted text (13 lines)

> number 5. > > First off, I loved the original NFS and enjoy that type of fun, not > ultra-realistic title. > > Second, the idea of the Porsche factory driver and evolution concept > appealed to me. > > Third, I really wanted to like this title and with a few improvements it > would be on my list of favourite fun/non-serious games. > > The problem for me stems largely from one thing: this is basically NFS III > and IV with a bit of window dressing and a very small improvement in

driving > model (physics) department. Yes, they canned-in the TTO (trailingthrottle

Quoted text (13 lines)

> oversteer), but one effect does not make a good driving model. And even > that is overdone compared to the other feel or feedback. > > Before I give my reasons, I just wanted to say that many people will get a > lot of fun out of this title. It is not utter crap like SOS '37 or NASCAR > Revulsion, etc. But if you think that the new Rally Championship is an > awesome arcadish simulator, then you will, like me, want to avoid NFS: PU > because it is just too far down the arcade path to enjoy even as a jump in > and have 10 minutes of light fun. > > Major problems: > > - driving model is a minor improvement over previous NFS titles (use this

as > your guide--if you hated II, III and HS, then you will likely be gravely > disappointed at the lack of improvement...if you liked the previoustitles,

Quoted text (9 lines)

> then you will like this one a lot) > > - the in-car dash display, once again, looks shitty and the gauges don't > match the HUD gauges (I really, really cannot believe that this is still > evident in the series...reminds me of curved pit roads in N3) > > - the in-car sound is so atrocious as to make one question what planet the > designers were on...the rev range of the car, which shows idle to 6,000 or > 7,000 rpm on the tach sounds like idle to about 1,200 rpm. I have driven

a > couple of 911s and have heard plenty more...they and every other Porscheare > not known for their smooth refined engines and they certainly soundnothing > like this game. The out-of-car camera views yield a completely different > engine sound...one that sounds more like idle to about 3,000 > rpm....!?!?!?!?! > > - the FFB, as usual, is only well done where it involves driving over the > wooden planks in the covered bridge...forget much useful road feel evenwhen > you crank it up and turn down all the other effects > > - just like the previous titles, the controller is set-up with non-linear > input and has no option or adjustment...in other words it is set-up for > joysticks, not wheels. I can't turn my wheel more than about 1/3 of theway > either direction without throwing the car into an uncontrollable spin...I > don't want to only use 1/3 of my wheel travel because the game isprogrammed > so badly that no one thought to include a wheel-oriented option andbecause > the cars can turn on a dime when you crank the wheel all the way (to help > the arcaders who can't figure out how to back up and restart after a > crash)...this is probably the most annoying problem in the whole game and, > again, I cannot believe that this was not corrected from past versions > > - no tire squeal when skidding or sliding around a corner (anotheratrocious > hold-over from previous titles) > > - damage model almost unrelated to what you damage (I don't mind having a > very, very liberal damage model--one where you can practically total thecar

Quoted text (9 lines)

> 5 times over before it gives up, but when I go to the garage and fix the > damage, I would like to see some relationship to how I drove) > > - ridiculously wide and unrealistic tracks (the scenery is an improvement > over II through HS, but the actual track designs are similarly > pathetic....all they have to do is look at the original NFS to see well > thought-out tracks) > > On the plus side, the usually EA slickness is there and conceptually I

would > give this title a 10/10--this should be an awesome ball of enjoyment, butI > just can't overlook the gaping flaws in this one. If the original NFScould > have 3D graphics and a slightly updated driving model to reflect thetimes,

Quoted text (9 lines)

> it would still blow this latest effort out of the water by far. When EA > manages to release a future NFS title that can at least match the original > one for quality and attention to detail (in the things that count on this > newsgroup), I will keep it in my collection. > > Marc. > > -- >

**************************************************************************** > Marc Collins > [email hidden] > > Computers will never equal humans until they make mistakes and > blame them on other computers. >**************************************************************************** > > >

On Sun, 26 Mar 2000 23:11:37 GMT, "Marc Collins" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Third, I really wanted to like this title and with a few improvements it >would be on my list of favourite fun/non-serious games. I love this game! I find the "mission" type Factory Driver missions (really the only thing I've been playing) an absolute blast. I don't know how many missions there are, but I'm currently on the one where I have to take an important customer on a test drive in a 996. I must've tried the run where you had to follow the arrows and hit the cones about 8 times before I finally beat the deadline by less than 4/100's of a second. Very exhilarating! Games that make you re-do stuff over and over until you get it right usually get me really pissed off, but since the deadlines are all 4 minutes or less (so far), it's not as frustrating for me as a game that has long missions -the Mechwarrior series for instance. The replays are jaw-droppingly stunning on my middling TNT2. As relaxed as the physics are, the car movement is so *right* in the replays its amazing. I can't remember anything hooking me this hard since MX Madness (which I played in marathon 3 hour online sessions). Realism and cockpits be-damned (I toggle through the views depending on the mission), I'm so diametrically opposed to Marks opinion on this one that can barely convey it. Only 30 bucks at EB, and I wouldn't have been complaining if I paid 50. If you're on the fence about it, and you love stuff like Viper, you need to give this one a shot. Tim

...and that's why my copy is going back to EB shortly. I vowed after buying NFS: HP (IV) that I would never get hoodwinked into buying another &#&@^^&$* EA NFS title, since all but the first were serious disappointments to me. Based on feedback here at r.a.s. I decided to go for number 5. First off, I loved the original NFS and enjoy that type of fun, not ultra-realistic title. Second, the idea of the Porsche factory driver and evolution concept appealed to me. Third, I really wanted to like this title and with a few improvements it would be on my list of favourite fun/non-serious games. The problem for me stems largely from one thing: this is basically NFS III and IV with a bit of window dressing and a very small improvement in driving model (physics) department. Yes, they canned-in the TTO (trailing throttle oversteer), but one effect does not make a good driving model. And even that is overdone compared to the other feel or feedback. Before I give my reasons, I just wanted to say that many people will get a lot of fun out of this title. It is not utter crap like SOS '37 or NASCAR Revulsion, etc. But if you think that the new Rally Championship is an awesome arcadish simulator, then you will, like me, want to avoid NFS: PU because it is just too far down the arcade path to enjoy even as a jump in and have 10 minutes of light fun. Major problems: - driving model is a minor improvement over previous NFS titles (use this as your guide--if you hated II, III and HS, then you will likely be gravely disappointed at the lack of improvement...if you liked the previous titles, then you will like this one a lot) - the in-car dash display, once again, looks shitty and the gauges don't match the HUD gauges (I really, really cannot believe that this is still evident in the series...reminds me of curved pit roads in N3) - the in-car sound is so atrocious as to make one question what planet the designers were on...the rev range of the car, which shows idle to 6,000 or 7,000 rpm on the tach sounds like idle to about 1,200 rpm. I have driven a couple of 911s and have heard plenty more...they and every other Porsche are not known for their smooth refined engines and they certainly sound nothing like this game. The out-of-car camera views yield a completely different engine sound...one that sounds more like idle to about 3,000 rpm....!?!?!?!?! - the FFB, as usual, is only well done where it involves driving over the wooden planks in the covered bridge...forget much useful road feel even when you crank it up and turn down all the other effects - just like the previous titles, the controller is set-up with non-linear input and has no option or adjustment...in other words it is set-up for joysticks, not wheels. I can't turn my wheel more than about 1/3 of the way either direction without throwing the car into an uncontrollable spin...I don't want to only use 1/3 of my wheel travel because the game is programmed so badly that no one thought to include a wheel-oriented option and because the cars can turn on a dime when you crank the wheel all the way (to help the arcaders who can't figure out how to back up and restart after a crash)...this is probably the most annoying problem in the whole game and, again, I cannot believe that this was not corrected from past versions - no tire squeal when skidding or sliding around a corner (another atrocious hold-over from previous titles) - damage model almost unrelated to what you damage (I don't mind having a very, very liberal damage model--one where you can practically total the car 5 times over before it gives up, but when I go to the garage and fix the damage, I would like to see some relationship to how I drove) - ridiculously wide and unrealistic tracks (the scenery is an improvement over II through HS, but the actual track designs are similarly pathetic....all they have to do is look at the original NFS to see well thought-out tracks) On the plus side, the usually EA slickness is there and conceptually I would give this title a 10/10--this should be an awesome ball of enjoyment, but I just can't overlook the gaping flaws in this one. If the original NFS could have 3D graphics and a slightly updated driving model to reflect the times, it would still blow this latest effort out of the water by far. When EA manages to release a future NFS title that can at least match the original one for quality and attention to detail (in the things that count on this newsgroup), I will keep it in my collection. Marc. -- **************************************************************************** Marc Collins [email hidden] Computers will never equal humans until they make mistakes and blame them on other computers. ****************************************************************************

Marc Collins <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:JOwD4.17163$[email hidden]... > - no tire squeal when skidding or sliding around a corner (anotheratrocious > hold-over from previous titles) I hear tire squeal all the time when I am going around corners. Do not know why you are not hearing it. > - damage model almost unrelated to what you damage (I don't mind having a > very, very liberal damage model--one where you can practically total thecar > 5 times over before it gives up, but when I go to the garage and fix the > damage, I would like to see some relationship to how I drove) I think you are missing something here to. If I damage my car pretty bad, if you go into the garage, you can see your car all banged up. In one race where I got my roof to Yellow, in the garage it was all caved it to the point I was wondering how my driver actually continued to sit in the car. I have not had as much fun as I did going through the Factory Driver mode in a long time in a driving game.

You think that the 996 mission is nice, wait until you become chief test driver . The first mission is taking a GT1 through the rounds. That is the hardest damn car to do a 360 in. You have to nail the gas at exactly the right moment to make it go around at all, trying to do it within the cones is next to imposible so far, but I'm having a blast with it. -Pav Tim O. <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (36 lines)

> On Sun, 26 Mar 2000 23:11:37 GMT, "Marc Collins" > <[email hidden]> wrote: > > >Third, I really wanted to like this title and with a few improvements it > >would be on my list of favourite fun/non-serious games. > > I love this game! > I find the "mission" type Factory Driver missions (really the only > thing I've been playing) an absolute blast. > I don't know how many missions there are, but I'm currently on the one > where I have to take an important customer on a test drive in a 996. > > I must've tried the run where you had to follow the arrows and hit the > cones about 8 times before I finally beat the deadline by less than > 4/100's of a second. Very exhilarating! > Games that make you re-do stuff over and over until you get it right > usually get me really pissed off, but since the deadlines are all 4 > minutes or less (so far), it's not as frustrating for me as a game > that has long missions -the Mechwarrior series for instance. > > The replays are jaw-droppingly stunning on my middling TNT2. > As relaxed as the physics are, the car movement is so *right* in the > replays its amazing. > I can't remember anything hooking me this hard since MX Madness > (which I played in marathon 3 hour online sessions). > > Realism and cockpits be-damned (I toggle through the views depending > on the mission), I'm so diametrically opposed to Marks opinion on this > one that can barely convey it. > > Only 30 bucks at EB, and I wouldn't have been complaining if I paid > 50. If you're on the fence about it, and you love stuff like Viper, > you need to give this one a shot. > > Tim >

I guess no game can satisfy everyone. I love Porsche 200, and yours is the first negative post I read about it. You are very critical, which is good, and you have some good points, but all in all Porsche 2000 is a very satisfying game for me, and I'm sure lots of people will love it, and it will receive good reviews all in all. Andre

That mission sucked! :) Especially since I normally drive in Automatic mode and had to manually shift for that one. Once I realized though that they give you alot of time, I just took my time with the reverse section of it and that allowed me to get by it. I love this Factory Driver stuff, I hope they release some kind of new "missions" for it. So someone said Viper is alot like this? that is one that I never did try.

Quoted text (19 lines)

> After some practise it's not too hard anymore. Drive up to the cones, > turn the wheel right and pull handbrake, no gas and brake, and after > 180 degrees release the handbrake and turn the wheel the other side. > Make sure you have enough speed to do this. > And if you think this mission is difficult, one much more difficult is > coming up... You have to drive forward, make a 180 turn within some > cones, drive backward, make another 180 within some cones again > (that's the most difficult part), slalom around some cones and make > another 360. > Took me about 30 tries :) > Andre > On Sun, 26 Mar 2000 21:46:35 -0500, "John Pavlicek" > >You think that the 996 mission is nice, wait until you become chief test > >driver . The first mission is taking a GT1 through the rounds. That is

the > >hardest damn car to do a 360 in. You have to nail the gas at exactly the > >right moment to make it go around at all, trying to do it within the cones > >is next to imposible so far, but I'm having a blast with it. > >-Pav

Quoted text (12 lines)

>That mission sucked! :) >Especially since I normally drive in Automatic mode and had to manually >shift for that one. >Once I realized though that they give you alot of time, I just took my time >with the reverse section of it and that allowed me to get by it. >I love this Factory Driver stuff, I hope they release some kind of new >"missions" for it. >So someone said Viper is alot like this? that is one that I never did try.

Cliff, Viper has a career mode, but it isn't a mission based mode. You race, earn money buy parts, upgrade car. The attraction to Viper, in my opinion, is the excellent physics modeling, Force Feedback, and AI. If you haven't tried Viper you are missing out on a fine sim, that is probably second only to GPL in driving realism.

Quoted text (26 lines)

>> After some practise it's not too hard anymore. Drive up to the cones, >> turn the wheel right and pull handbrake, no gas and brake, and after >> 180 degrees release the handbrake and turn the wheel the other side. >> Make sure you have enough speed to do this. >> And if you think this mission is difficult, one much more difficult is >> coming up... You have to drive forward, make a 180 turn within some >> cones, drive backward, make another 180 within some cones again >> (that's the most difficult part), slalom around some cones and make >> another 360. >> Took me about 30 tries :) >> Andre >> On Sun, 26 Mar 2000 21:46:35 -0500, "John Pavlicek" >> >You think that the 996 mission is nice, wait until you become chief test >> >driver . The first mission is taking a GT1 through the rounds. That is >the >> >hardest damn car to do a 360 in. You have to nail the gas at exactly the >> >right moment to make it go around at all, trying to do it within the >cones >> >is next to imposible so far, but I'm having a blast with it. >> >-Pav

-- * rrev at mindspring dot com *

Marc, some of your points are valid but after experimenting with setups in Evolution Mode which I have completed. I found that the handling and steering could be affected to a large degree. Like you initially I didn't like the steering and braking but once I started playing with the settings in the garage I found a totally different beast. I agree the in car sound could be better and my dash does seem a bit fuzzy although on some friends systems they aren't, so there may be some tweaking in the video display settings for my TNT2 Ultra that I don't have turned on. I do have tire squeal with mine but with the in car view it is subdued. In replays though it is very evident. The visual damage model while racing is very lax but I suspect this is because of the huge system demands this would put on the graphics. This is quite a common problem that is run into when beta testing games. We will tell the coders we want more and they tell us it would make the game almost unplayable so I suspect this may be the reason. On the plus side the handling, braking and engine does go away very quicky with damage. The damage graphics as some one mentioned in the garage does look very good. There could be tweaking done to the damage model as obviously hitting a wall head on at 200 mph and landing on your roof isn't going to let you drive off and still race but this is still an arcade game! They have made great strides with this version IMHO and I own all of them. Yes there were some good points in the orginal but I have to say I think this is their best effort so far. Pete **************************************************************************** > Marc Collins > Computers will never equal humans until they make mistakes and > blame them on other computers. ****************************************************************************

I like everything about this gamulation except the lack of regular traffic, and the huge/wide sweeping arcade tracks.. about the only cool part is the fact that the roads intertwine w. each other. A mid town madness type of world would have made this gamulation top notch imo. It seems like they tried to make that impression using the "old school" style tracks but a few or even alot of off ramps and alleys dont make up for actual city and or highway driving. Its seems ISI has no problem making beautiful looking games without huge amounts of cpu power, I dont see why more traffic would be a problem in a city type world. (even when on high density traffic.) I imagine driving midtown madness w. these cars/physics and the look of this game would be amazing. ISI would probably figure out how to make the turns smooth rather than microsofts crummy jagged crap.

Quoted text (11 lines)

> Marc, some of your points are valid but after experimenting with >setups in Evolution Mode which I have completed. I found that the >handling and steering could be affected to a large degree. Like you >initially I didn't like the steering and braking but once I started playing >with the settings in the garage I found a totally different beast. > I agree the in car sound could be better and my dash does seem a bit >fuzzy although on some friends systems they aren't, so there may be some >tweaking in the video display settings for my TNT2 Ultra that I don't have >turned on. > I do have tire squeal with mine but with the in car view it is subdued. >snip

I mentioned Viper. Viper isn't really the same, but I think if you like Porsche Unleashed, you'll also like Viper... Modern sports cars, mostly open tracks with some tricky decreasing radius turns, and a career mode. Viper's career isn't nearly as cool as the Factory Driver part of Porshe Unleashed, but it's still a steal at the $20 it's selling for now. It's still the LAN game my buddies want to play most when they come over. Our Viper antics (like trying to slowing down to try to knock somebody over the cliff before the guardrail starts in Mesa, and spinning guys into lakes) would send most of the GPL stiff's here into a tantrum. Just kidding! Tim

After some practise it's not too hard anymore. Drive up to the cones, turn the wheel right and pull handbrake, no gas and brake, and after 180 degrees release the handbrake and turn the wheel the other side. Make sure you have enough speed to do this. And if you think this mission is difficult, one much more difficult is coming up... You have to drive forward, make a 180 turn within some cones, drive backward, make another 180 within some cones again (that's the most difficult part), slalom around some cones and make another 360. Took me about 30 tries :) Andre On Sun, 26 Mar 2000 21:46:35 -0500, "John Pavlicek" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (7 lines)

>You think that the 996 mission is nice, wait until you become chief test >driver . The first mission is taking a GT1 through the rounds. That is the >hardest damn car to do a 360 in. You have to nail the gas at exactly the >right moment to make it go around at all, trying to do it within the cones >is next to imposible so far, but I'm having a blast with it. > >-Pav

On Tue, 28 Mar 2000 02:35:22 GMT, "Cliff Roman" <[email hidden]> wrote: >I wish I could get our lan buddies to race. > >None of them will race with us. All we ever play at lans are games like UT, >Q3, Motocross Madness. Uh-oh. I love those too! :-) Motocross Madness is one of my favorite games of all time, and I can't wait until the second one comes out. Tim

I wish I could get our lan buddies to race. None of them will race with us. All we ever play at lans are games like UT, Q3, Motocross Madness. > >So someone said Viper is alot like this? that is one that I never did try.

Quoted text (17 lines)

> I mentioned Viper. Viper isn't really the same, but I think if you > like Porsche Unleashed, you'll also like Viper... > Modern sports cars, mostly open tracks with some tricky decreasing > radius turns, and a career mode. > Viper's career isn't nearly as cool as the Factory Driver part of > Porshe Unleashed, but it's still a steal at the $20 it's selling for > now. > It's still the LAN game my buddies want to play most when they come > over. Our Viper antics (like trying to slowing down to try to knock > somebody over the cliff before the guardrail starts in Mesa, and > spinning guys into lakes) would send most of the GPL stiff's here into > a tantrum. > Just kidding! > Tim

>The problem for me stems largely from one thing: this is basically NFS III >and IV with a bit of window dressing and a very small improvement in driving >model (physics) department. Huh? Um, no. The driving model is completely different. And very realistic for an arcade game. I couldn't disagree more. This is the one for fans of the original NFS, who were disappointed by the too arcady NFS 2, 3 and 4. I agree the FF could be much better. It is better than most arcade games though, and certainly better than NFS4. Then you haven't learned how to drive these cars. It's the weight transfer effects - the very thing that has changed so much about the physics - that allow you to fully utilize the wheel, throttle, and brakes. Huh? My version has excellent tire squeal, that slowly ramps up as the wheels lose grip. It's perfectly implemented. The damage model is arcadish, but it doesn't really detract from the game. ????!!!!! The track designs are superb, the best thing about the game. A bit wide, but that allows you to fully explore the driving model, and maintain speed around many corners (if they are taken right). An again, they are tracks that will finally appeal to fans of the original game, after too many years of plain-jain circuit tracks. In my opinion they have done just that, and in fact exceded it. Joe McGinn _____________________ Radical Entertainment

I disagree. Midtown Madness pushed the envolope of environment complexity and the expense of graphical features like smooth curves. NFS-PU-style graphics with MM-style environment is NOT possible on current PC technology. Joe McGinn _____________________ Radical Entertainment

That is a fun game. 8 person tag can be a blast. Monster Truck Madness II King of the Hill is also alot of fun Tim O. <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Tue, 28 Mar 2000 02:35:22 GMT, "Cliff Roman" <[email hidden]> > wrote: > > >I wish I could get our lan buddies to race. > > > >None of them will race with us. All we ever play at lans are games likeUT,

Quoted text (8 lines)

> >Q3, Motocross Madness. > > Uh-oh. I love those too! :-) > Motocross Madness is one of my favorite games of all time, and I can't > wait until the second one comes out. > > Tim >

Id definetly have to disagree with you.

Id definetly have to disagree with you.

Quoted text (8 lines)

>I disagree. Midtown Madness pushed the envolope of environment >complexity and the expense of graphical features like smooth curves. >NFS-PU-style graphics with MM-style environment is NOT possible on >current PC technology. > >Joe McGinn >_____________________ >Radical Entertainment

Does anyone Know when Motocross Madness 2 is due out ????

On 31 Mar 2000 11:37:36 GMT, [email hidden] (Loosay2) wrote: >Does anyone Know when Motocross Madness 2 is due out ???? Last estimate I heard was summer. Tim

Last estimate I heard was summer. Tim

According to Computer *** World - June 2000

Yes it's June! -Jani Kankaanp��- "Tim O." <[email hidden]> kirjoitti viestiss� news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (8 lines)

> On 31 Mar 2000 11:37:36 GMT, [email hidden] (Loosay2) wrote: > > >Does anyone Know when Motocross Madness 2 is due out ???? > > Last estimate I heard was summer. > > Tim >

According to Computer Gaming World - June 2000 Loosay2 <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Does anyone Know when Motocross Madness 2 is due out ????

Well then you'd be wrong. But that's ok, I forgive you. ;-) "Charlie B (Hans)" <[email hidden]> wrote: > Id definetly have to disagree with you. > >>NFS-PU-style graphics with MM-style environment is NOT possible on >>current PC technology. Joe McGinn _____________________ Radical Entertainment

"Cliff Roman" <[email hidden]> wrote: >I think that Need for Speed - Motor City will be there Maybe. I don't expect it to have a Midtown Madness style city. Joe McGinn _____________________ Radical Entertainment