Nascar3 or Nascar 2000..which is a better game?

I was looking to get one of them for my nephew as a gift. He has Nascar2 now and likes it. The PC has a Voodoo 3 3000, so I'd like to get them to an upgraded version with 3D accel. I think both of them support Glide and DirectX. Which is better in the game play dept? How about the graphics? Any other comments are welcome. Thanks! -- Remove the "NOT" for email replies

"Scott" <[email hidden]> wrote > I was looking to get one of them for my nephew as a gift. He has Nascar2 > now and likes it. The PC has a Voodoo 3 3000, so I'd like to get them toan > upgraded version with 3D accel. I think both of them support Glide and > DirectX. Which is better in the game play dept? Has to be N3, without a doubt. Especially since he likes N2, which was made by the same company, Papyrus/Sierra Sports. Gameplay is as good as N2, with free multiplayer racing. > How about the graphics? Some would say N2000, but I would say N3. Nascar Racing 3 has a bright color pallette with distinct zones of color. There is some nice effects, and the track accuracy in terms of track architecture and object placement is much better. N2000 is dark, grainy. Feels more like Quake 2 than a real Nascar track. Especially with a Voodoo3 3k, which is the perfect card for N3. But if you can wait a month, Papyrus will release a product called "Nascar Acceleration pack", which is Nascar Racing 3 + Nascar Racing 3 Expansion pack + Nascar Legends for I think 49$. You can't go wrong with that! -- -- 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.

Nascar 3 is the only choice, and 99% of the the ppl on this ng will tell you the same thing.

In article <8b6a4f$ktb$[email hidden]>, "Kirk Lane" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > So, Mark, all you've really done is embarassed yourself and provenyourself > to (apparently) be the only idiot here fervently praising this crapthat > isn't even worth the CD it's written on. > Hey now, flattery wont get you anywhere :) Oh, I dont know.. if N2k isnt really much better in Veteran Mode than in Rookie Mode I dont know what I'll do. Probably chalk it up to experience, and wait for the F1 games to finally get here. I hate to wait. MR Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

N3 is a good but overrated sequel to N2. NASCAR 2000 is its equal, but not for the know it all's that base judgement on a demo.. Rookie Mode only, with no setups changes possible (not even manual transmission). The graphics are soooo much better in N2k thats its not even funny. Still, when it comes to biased opinions, ras is your place to be! The person who said objectively (cough) that graphics were better in N3 really puts the 'ass' in 'ras'. All this wisdom about N2k, and from a demo with limited physics (Rookie Mode) and no setup changes possible! Morons! MR "http://blitzsports.com/racing/N2k" NASCAR 2000 Competitions Page Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

In article <KDoB4.533$[email hidden]>, "Cliff Roman" <[email hidden]> wrote: > You mean Nascar 2000, the game that makes it look like stock carshave neon > colored paint jobs? You mean the game that took the Atlanta track and > totally crucified it for the demo? You mean Nascar 2000, the gamethat made > it seem like stock cars bounce up on down on their shocks likebasketballs? Neon colored paint jobs? I havent heard or seen that in the demo, but theres opne driver (real life) who had a 'chrome' paint job on his car for a while. Theres a gamma slider in the graphics menu, but if you're seeing neon, I guess that wouldnt help. About the crucifiction of Atlanta (in NASCAR 2000, not in the Civil War) the easiest way to judge would be comparing the track in the game to television coverage. Thats something I havent done. As a 'piece of work' the Atlanta track in N2k is fantastic, and it would be a shame if they didnt copy the real track accurately. I dont have any VHS tapes with Atlanta races on them, so I dunno. You say crucify?? What, is Atlanta really a quarter mile dirt track? :) The cars bouncing on the suspension is from four things: tracks/corners that arent ALL billiard table smooth (you dont have waves in the track in N3, just like you dont in GPL), not slowing down enough (if you lift of the gas or tap the brakes you dont get as much suspension movement), not being able to change the setups (obvious! in the DTR demo we couldnt change setups either, but when the full ver came out we could drive the car drastically around the track, all because of the setups). Changing suspension settings would modify that behavior, wouldnt you think? And lastly, the physics are set to their LEAST realistic level in the demo and cant be changed. In the N3 demo you could drive the car at its most realistic setting (felt good), but we dont have that in the NASCAR 2000 demo. Not only that, but N2k is meant to be the most sim-like of the NASCAR titles EA is distributing, so I'm thinking the difference between the physics (not changeable) in the demo and the final version is as different as say, 'Rookie' and 'Veteran' mean different things. But even in Rookie Mode, N2k is the master of games that fall between arcade and sim (like Toca2, etc.) in the physics, so why not assume Veteran mode will be much more realistic. Thats what they've said.. MR > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

In article <oaiB4.87938$[email hidden]>, "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote: > > How do you ASSume that my opinion is based on a simple (and very bad)demo? How do I assume it?? What else is there to base it on? Do you have the warez version of N2k, just like you do F12000? And oh I forgot, > Nascar 2000 has <wow> something like 4player multiplayer racing. How > incredible. GP3 has <wow> something like NO multiplayer racing.. that means its shit, right? But after a zillion posts on ras, I frankly expected something smarter from you. Oh well. Say.. you're the one who dislikes Ubisoft 'on principle' right? Bigot. MR > > -- > -- 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'trealise > how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world. > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

A rethoric auestion, I'm sure? ;-) Jan./ go with N3. =--- Scott <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:8b3mh9$h32$[email hidden]... > <Snip>

<[email hidden]> wrote > The person who said objectively (cough) that graphics were better in N3 > really puts the 'ass' in 'ras'. All this wisdom about N2k, and from a > demo with limited physics (Rookie Mode) and no setup changes possible! Im sure you, with your incredible expertise in this newsgroup (about zero), shows us the great path of wisdom. All hail Mark Rael!!! Long live to the Mark Rael knight who says Ni!!!!!! How do you ASSume that my opinion is based on a simple (and very bad) demo? As a group we've mostly reached the consensus that N2000 is utterly... crap. As for graphics, I think I explained myself enough about track and object architecture, which Papyrus has a much better accuracy. And oh I forgot, Nascar 2000 has <wow> something like 4player multiplayer racing. How incredible. -- -- 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.

<[email hidden]> wrote > > GP3 has <wow> something like NO multiplayer racing.. that means its > shit, right? This shows that you have no knowledge of this newsgroup. I said and resaid that GP3 will NOT be good and will be an extreme dissapointment to hardcore simracers for the ommision of FF and/or multiplayer TCP/IP racing. Knock, knock, McFly? > Oh well. Say.. you're the one who dislikes > Ubisoft 'on principle' right? Bigot. Hmm Bigot? Im French like most of them ;) FYI I worked with Ubisoft. Anybody here knows that. But your clueless. -- -- 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.

A rethoric auestion, I'm sure? ;-) Jan./ go with N3. =---

You mean Nascar 2000, the game that makes it look like stock cars have neon colored paint jobs? You mean the game that took the Atlanta track and totally crucified it for the demo? You mean Nascar 2000, the game that made it seem like stock cars bounce up on down on their shocks like basketballs? You are right, that was the demo. I will give it the semi-benefit of the doubt til the final comes out. <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:8b49a8$k2p$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (19 lines)

> N3 is a good but overrated sequel to N2. NASCAR 2000 is its equal, but > not for the know it all's that base judgement on a demo.. Rookie Mode > only, with no setups changes possible (not even manual transmission). > The graphics are soooo much better in N2k thats its not even funny. > Still, when it comes to biased opinions, ras is your place to be! > > The person who said objectively (cough) that graphics were better in N3 > really puts the 'ass' in 'ras'. All this wisdom about N2k, and from a > demo with limited physics (Rookie Mode) and no setup changes possible! > > Morons! > > MR > "http://blitzsports.com/racing/N2k" > NASCAR 2000 Competitions Page > > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ > Before you buy.

In article <8b49a8$k2p$[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...

Quoted text (12 lines)

>N3 is a good but overrated sequel to N2. NASCAR 2000 is its equal, but >not for the know it all's that base judgement on a demo.. Rookie Mode >only, with no setups changes possible (not even manual transmission). >The graphics are soooo much better in N2k thats its not even funny. >Still, when it comes to biased opinions, ras is your place to be! > >The person who said objectively (cough) that graphics were better in N3 >really puts the 'ass' in 'ras'. All this wisdom about N2k, and from a >demo with limited physics (Rookie Mode) and no setup changes possible! > >Morons! >

First, you really make us want to try it by insulting everyone here. Second, if I looked at the demo (and I haven't, and won't), and I couldn't see the game at its best, I certainly wouldn't buy it based on what I *couldn't* do in the demo. Lastly, don't take it so personally that nobody seems to agree with your opinions of the game. You like it, that's fine, but you and the other guy that actually bought the game certainly don't comprise the majhority of people in the newsgroup. If you don't like it here, go start your own fuckin newsgroup... -- ========================================================= Redneck Techno-Biker (Zerex12) http://www.members.home.net/jms1/index.html Barbarian Diecast Collector (420+ cars and counting) http://members.home.net/jsimm/diecast_index.html DeMONS Scheduler for N3 and NL http://www.paddedwall.org/demons If you want to send me email, go to the first URL shown above & click "Send Me Mail" in the contents frame. =========================================================

Uhhhh, have you ever been to a Winston Cup race in person? The paintjobs DO look like neon!! TV doesn't do justice to how bright and brilliant the paintjobs really are. "Cliff Roman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:KDoB4.533$[email hidden]... > You mean Nascar 2000, the game that makes it look like stock cars haveneon > colored paint jobs?

Hmm...well, the demo SHOULD be good or people aren't going to buy the game (look at GPL!! I admit it, the demo reeks compared to the full version!!!) Considering the number of scathing reviews of N2K by RESPECTED people on RAS who didn't show up just now to promote their decidedly lame website on the game (WHAT THE HECK IS WITH THAT TOP GRAPHIC? Looks like someone doped up on LSD and duct-taped themself to the rear bumper of Tony Stewart's car!!!!) I am not going to waste my time downloading the demo, and instead I shall take a peek at some screenshots just to see what kind of crap this really is...dang that demo is 25.1MB... HOLY CRAP!!!!!! Man I would think that even EA could do better than THAT!!! I like someone's description of a M1 Abrams mating a VW Rabbit and the result being the dash...fits it quite well... The person who said that the N3 graphics are better than N2K's...is CORRECT!!! It looks as pixelated as N3 in software mode on my Rendition computer!!! The cars look hideous - the car not four carlengths away is already unreadable - the object images are equally nasty, the gauges look like the ultra-cheap 'Performance Gauges' they sell in Autozone right next to the fuzzy dice and snake oil (don't get me wrong I love Autozone but there is some stupid stuff there...heck I'd get a job there if they'd hire kids under 18 and still in high school) I have to say that N1 in VGA mode looked better than that on a 2MB S3 video card! One car is blocked by the poorly drawn and just plain wrong-looking A-pillar but it seems to be floating somewhat above the track...the others are all so far away that they are totally pixelated... A picture of the interface where you choose your driver shows a very, VERY poorly drawn interpretation of Rusty Wallace's car...just large bright colors, no dimmer 'detail' lines (like hoodlines and body creases) About the only advantage it has over Papy's cars is that it actually has a Taurus-like frontend on it (it does actually say Taurus but it's poorly drawn and it isn't even the new style). So, Mark, all you've really done is embarassed yourself and proven yourself to (apparently) be the only idiot here fervently praising this crap that isn't even worth the CD it's written on. -- Kirk Lane [email hidden] [email hidden] ICQ: 28171652 BRT #187 "Yeah you won't find me I'm going MIA Tonight I'm leaving Going MIA Getting lost in you again Is better than being known" -Foo Fighters, "MIA"