Woah Tracey! Calm down! I didn't attack arcade racing games! I merely meant
that we, meaning the visitors of the r.a.s. board, look down upon games like
NASCAR 2000 because they are arcade. This is a board about racing sims. I
could go to any other board to discuss arcade games. Hell, I like arcade games
even. Destruction Derby 2 still kicks ass. Carmageddon2 is loads of fun.
They just aren't the 'sims' discussed on this board usually.... Sorry if you
took it the wrong way Tracey.
Dan Belcher
Team Racing Unlimited
http://simcrashes.cjb.net
Because it isn't made by Crammond or Kaemmer, Shaun. If this demo had
been released as "NASCAR 4 from Sierra" or as a Crammond title demo,
RAS would be falling all over itself trying to come up with better
superlatives to praise it with.
It also made the mistake of not being an open-wheel product, which is
generally considered a fatal flaw here on RAS.
This group has already concluded that nothing that is released in the
next 30 years is going to be comparable to GPL, with the possible
exception of GP3, so EA might as well not even waste their time trying
to create sims.
"Shaun Robinson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
> Explain to me this, if the game is that bad why does it give better
> feedback (body roll, weight distribution, loss of control, and i'msure
> i noticed a draft) than n3. Why it gives a better feel of racing a
> NASCAR (eye candy, but better damage model, pit crew, way better
> graphics (note: this is strongly applying that n3 is n2 but with d3d
> support, and if anyone thinks otherwise you should spend less time
> picking apart games to see what's different)). Oh, and if its so badwhy
> does it not have the god damn curved pit lanes and did i mentionbody
> roll. I can help but notice n3 has vertualy none and in n2000 thecar
> for some reason will roll when you turn the wheel. Also considerthat
> this is the demo and the full version will allow you to change the'game
> options' (in theory sim/arcade) so more realism may come out ofthat.
>
> As a final thought, almost everyone in this newsgroup are incredable
> arogant. How the hell can you praise games series that support 3dcards
> and higher resolutions in new versions. N3 is n2 but i can run at
> 1024x768, its the same shitty physics, the same shitty graphics andthe
> same shitty car models. Gp3 and Gp2, fuck i'm not even going tostart on
> the fact that its five years later and all there is is 3d and higher
> res...
Quoted text (13 lines)
>Because it isn't made by Crammond or Kaemmer, Shaun. If this demo had >been released as "NASCAR 4 from Sierra" or as a Crammond title demo, >RAS would be falling all over itself trying to come up with better >superlatives to praise it with. > >It also made the mistake of not being an open-wheel product, which is >generally considered a fatal flaw here on RAS. > >This group has already concluded that nothing that is released in the >next 30 years is going to be comparable to GPL, with the possible >exception of GP3, so EA might as well not even waste their time trying >to create sims. >Explain to me this, if the game is that bad why does it give better
feedback (body roll, weight distribution, loss of control, and i'm sure
i noticed a draft) than n3. Why it gives a better feel of racing a
NASCAR (eye candy, but better damage model, pit crew, way better
graphics (note: this is strongly applying that n3 is n2 but with d3d
support, and if anyone thinks otherwise you should spend less time
picking apart games to see what's different)). Oh, and if its so bad why
does it not have the god damn curved pit lanes and did i mention body
roll. I can help but notice n3 has vertualy none and in n2000 the car
for some reason will roll when you turn the wheel. Also consider that
this is the demo and the full version will allow you to change the 'game
options' (in theory sim/arcade) so more realism may come out of that.
As a final thought, almost everyone in this newsgroup are incredable
arogant. How the hell can you praise games series that support 3d cards
and higher resolutions in new versions. N3 is n2 but i can run at
1024x768, its the same shitty physics, the same shitty graphics and the
same shitty car models. Gp3 and Gp2, fuck i'm not even going to start on
the fact that its five years later and all there is is 3d and higher
res...
Ok, we understand that you want a realistic game, SO DON'T BUY IT FOR CRYING OUT
LOUD. Y OU HAVE TO LOOK AT IT FROM THERE POINT OF VIEW, they are trying to sell
there product percentage of people who play arcade games, and I'm sure they don't
give a crap if you sit there and cut down on there sim, The only thing Nascar 2000
is, is a game that ea sports sells to millions of console gamers i.e. Nintendo 64.
And is popular enough to get sold in a pc version!!!!!
Dan Belcher wrote:
Quoted text (23 lines)
> >Because it isn't made by Crammond or Kaemmer, Shaun. If this demo had > >been released as "NASCAR 4 from Sierra" or as a Crammond title demo, > >RAS would be falling all over itself trying to come up with better > >superlatives to praise it with. > > > >It also made the mistake of not being an open-wheel product, which is > >generally considered a fatal flaw here on RAS. > > > >This group has already concluded that nothing that is released in the > >next 30 years is going to be comparable to GPL, with the possible > >exception of GP3, so EA might as well not even waste their time trying > >to create sims. > > > > We aren't praising NASCAR 2000 because....it's an arcade game. It's got good > graphics and all, but the overall challenge of the game just isn't there for us > people who want the realistic challenge. Also, I think that F1 2000 should be > a good sim. And NASCAR 4. And WSC. Etc. etc. So, at least one person here's > breaking your generalized stereotype. :) > > Dan Belcher > Team Racing Unlimited > http://simcrashes.cjb.net"Tracey Hicks" <[email hidden]> wrote
> Ok, we understand that you want a realistic game, SO DON'T BUY IT FORCRYING OUT
> LOUD.
Tracey.. first of all calm down. We r.a.s. citizens have seen such message
like yours for years. The main point of this newsgroup is to discuss and
exchange news about racing simulations. We do accept that arcade racing
games are talked about, but the main point is that racing games who are made
to simulate racing at the maximum it can will be praised here. Which is why
at the top of the pyramid we have GPL for us, and down very low there is the
whole crop of Stock-car-based EA Sports games. They are fun arcade games (I
would debate on that, but thus is not the point), but that's all. They do
not offer deep gameplay, customisable features or even a game engine that
can handle complex physics or accurate track geometry.
There is newsgroup for people like you that enjoy arcade racing games. Look
in the comp.sys.* hierarchy. But please, you won't change this NG. We will
bitch at every game that attempts to be serious and fail. It is how we are,
whatever you find it good or bad.
Personally, N2k is one of the poorest attempt to a racing game in terms of
gameplay, dynamics of racing and how pathetic their game engine is. Not to
say the other game engines are perfect, but this is as bad as all the
previous EA Nascar titles. Even as an arcade game it doesn't seem like any
fun. But I can see how the casual gamers can enjoy such a thing, especially
console gamers.
--
-- 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.
I dunno how you felt the physics were better, hell I was able to run
wide open around Atlanta without losing any line and the AI does nothing
but knock you around like it's demolition derby. Talking about the
physics, how about when you touch the wall and flip on your hood and
settle there for a second and then magically appear on your wheels with
little damage to the body, especially no aero damage to affect the
handling and speed of the car?
The screen shots of the game looked real nice I just wonder what game
they were using to get those shots, the demo graphics sure as hell
stunk. Felt like it was running on the VoxelSpace engine instead of
polys, very pixelated.
Tracey Hicks wrote:
Quoted text (47 lines)
> > Hey, I have to agree with you completely, I posted something earlier > explaining how Nascar Revolution (the mother and father Sim of Nascar > 2000) was equally as good as NASCAR 3. The physics and graphics are > better in this game, but NASCAR 3 contains more realistic things like > the in car with readable guages and lights, more upgradable features > (patches and car files) and paint shop to create your car. So i > beleive if the people of this newsgroup would not complain so much > about new releases or old ones for that matter, and focused on the > benefits of the game, and things that you can do to make it better. > CLICK THIS TO EMAIL ME > > Shaun Robinson wrote: > > > Explain to me this, if the game is that bad why does it give better > > feedback (body roll, weight distribution, loss of control, and i'm > > sure > > i noticed a draft) than n3. Why it gives a better feel of racing a > > NASCAR (eye candy, but better damage model, pit crew, way better > > graphics (note: this is strongly applying that n3 is n2 but with d3d > > > > support, and if anyone thinks otherwise you should spend less time > > picking apart games to see what's different)). Oh, and if its so bad > > why > > does it not have the god damn curved pit lanes and did i mention > > body > > roll. I can help but notice n3 has vertualy none and in n2000 the > > car > > for some reason will roll when you turn the wheel. Also consider > > that > > this is the demo and the full version will allow you to change the > > 'game > > options' (in theory sim/arcade) so more realism may come out of > > that. > > > > As a final thought, almost everyone in this newsgroup are incredable > > > > arogant. How the hell can you praise games series that support 3d > > cards > > and higher resolutions in new versions. N3 is n2 but i can run at > > 1024x768, its the same shitty physics, the same shitty graphics and > > the > > same shitty car models. Gp3 and Gp2, fuck i'm not even going to > > start on > > the fact that its five years later and all there is is 3d and higher > > > > res...And that's exactly what it looks and plays like, a PC port of the
Playstation arcade game with the same pixelated graphics and unrealistic
physics. Doubt it will sell millions though...
Tracey Hicks wrote:
Quoted text (33 lines)
> > Ok, we understand that you want a realistic game, SO DON'T BUY IT FOR CRYING OUT > LOUD. Y OU HAVE TO LOOK AT IT FROM THERE POINT OF VIEW, they are trying to sell > there product percentage of people who play arcade games, and I'm sure they don't > give a crap if you sit there and cut down on there sim, The only thing Nascar 2000 > is, is a game that ea sports sells to millions of console gamers i.e. Nintendo 64. > And is popular enough to get sold in a pc version!!!!! > > Dan Belcher wrote: > > > >Because it isn't made by Crammond or Kaemmer, Shaun. If this demo had > > >been released as "NASCAR 4 from Sierra" or as a Crammond title demo, > > >RAS would be falling all over itself trying to come up with better > > >superlatives to praise it with. > > > > > >It also made the mistake of not being an open-wheel product, which is > > >generally considered a fatal flaw here on RAS. > > > > > >This group has already concluded that nothing that is released in the > > >next 30 years is going to be comparable to GPL, with the possible > > >exception of GP3, so EA might as well not even waste their time trying > > >to create sims. > > > > > > > We aren't praising NASCAR 2000 because....it's an arcade game. It's got good > > graphics and all, but the overall challenge of the game just isn't there for us > > people who want the realistic challenge. Also, I think that F1 2000 should be > > a good sim. And NASCAR 4. And WSC. Etc. etc. So, at least one person here's > > breaking your generalized stereotype. :) > > > > Dan Belcher > > Team Racing Unlimited > > http://simcrashes.cjb.netMoezilla wrote:
>
> I dunno how you felt the physics were better, hell I was able to run
> wide open around Atlanta
Atlanta is a restricter plate race isn't? There's the super speedways
but i thought nascar plated atlanta because the track was too fast.
without losing any line and the AI does nothing
> but knock you around like it's demolition derby. Talking about the
> physics, how about when you touch the wall and flip on your hood and
> settle there for a second and then magically appear on your wheels with
> little damage to the body, especially no aero damage to affect the
> handling and speed of the car?
Thank you for pointing that out. I missed that while i was appreciating
the suspension movement. Almost not related but the cars are jumping off
the track around the corners right? I think mine get air born, defiantly
not right (realistic).
> The screen shots of the game looked real nice I just wonder what game
> they were using to get those shots, the demo graphics sure as hell
> stunk. Felt like it was running on the VoxelSpace engine instead of
> polys, very pixelated.
As a finally thought, i am in no way praising this game. I'm totally pro
GPL, with a monza pb of 1:27.65 and many wins on vroc. I believe every
game is and is going to be inferior to GPL for a significant amount of
time. I place great hopes upon the West bros. to bless us with WSC. As
for GP3, after watching the video i have no idea what to think. The
graphics reek of GP2, and some physics have a bit light shed upon them.
So far i'm not excited, but the thought of ISI doing their crappie
physics of putting the weight on the tire then being able to turn that
was in SCGT really makes me hesitant on getting F1 2000. Here's hoping
that my sim needs will be met...
Atlanta is not a plate track, only Tally and Daytona are.
Quoted text (33 lines)
> > I dunno how you felt the physics were better, hell I was able to run > > wide open around Atlanta > Atlanta is a restricter plate race isn't? There's the super speedways > but i thought nascar plated atlanta because the track was too fast. > without losing any line and the AI does nothing > > but knock you around like it's demolition derby. Talking about the > > physics, how about when you touch the wall and flip on your hood and > > settle there for a second and then magically appear on your wheels with > > little damage to the body, especially no aero damage to affect the > > handling and speed of the car? > Thank you for pointing that out. I missed that while i was appreciating > the suspension movement. Almost not related but the cars are jumping off > the track around the corners right? I think mine get air born, defiantly > not right (realistic). > > The screen shots of the game looked real nice I just wonder what game > > they were using to get those shots, the demo graphics sure as hell > > stunk. Felt like it was running on the VoxelSpace engine instead of > > polys, very pixelated. > As a finally thought, i am in no way praising this game. I'm totally pro > GPL, with a monza pb of 1:27.65 and many wins on vroc. I believe every > game is and is going to be inferior to GPL for a significant amount of > time. I place great hopes upon the West bros. to bless us with WSC. As > for GP3, after watching the video i have no idea what to think. The > graphics reek of GP2, and some physics have a bit light shed upon them. > So far i'm not e***d, but the thought of ISI doing their crappie > physics of putting the weight on the tire then being able to turn that > was in SCGT really makes me hesitant on getting F1 2000. Here's hoping > that my sim needs will be met...> Ok, we understand that you want a realistic game, SO DON'T BUY IT FOR CRYING OUT
> LOUD. Y OU HAVE TO LOOK AT IT FROM THERE POINT OF VIEW, they are trying to sell
Don't worry, most here won't buy it, but we can still talk about it, ey?
--
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!
For what it's worth, I agree that (IMO) N2K is not as bad as a lot of the
posts here make it out to be. I've tried some truly bad demos recently
(Ford Racing anyone?) and N2K is in a completely different category.
I like N3, but I'm having some graphic problems (see my post titled N3
graphic anomalies if you think you can help) and when running N2000 it was a
relief for me to be able to follow an AI car and not have the car's polygon
vibrating. With that said, I'll agree that the N2000 graphics appear
grainy, even at 1024x768.
I believe they went a bit overboard, but I like the fact that the cars in
N2000 bounce a bit. N3 seems a bit too smooth. These tracks aren't pool
tables, after all.
In the N2000 demo it sounded like my car's engine was missing, but also
wondered if the car is just loosing traction when it bounces.
I believe I heard sound reflections off the walls in N2000, which apparently
are not supported in N3 for my SBlive.
Another negative for N2000, I don't like the "stuff" that flies off the car
in front of you if you touch it.
I'm not dismissing N2K yet. I will play the demo some more and wait for
reviews of the final product before deciding if there's a place for it on my
harddrive.
Is it possible to change to an outside view in
Nascar 200 demo or is the in car view my only
choice.
bill
In article <gBHv4.85047
not as bad as a lot of the
truly bad demos recently
completely different category.
(see my post titled N3
and when running N2000 it was a
and not have the car's polygon
N2000 graphics appear
the fact that the cars in
These tracks aren't pool
engine was missing, but also
walls in N2000, which apparently
the "stuff" that flies off the car
demo some more and wait for
there's a place for it on my
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
The default key for toggling between different views is 'V'. If you go to
the technical menu, select controller options, I think you can reassign the
view change key to something else.
