F1GP2 inside view - YUK! MPS and Papyrus please read!

It's nice to see the return to sound, well thought out opinions! Judging a game by whether you can see the front wheels out of the ***pit is a bit like judging a book by it's cover. As for the idea that Papyrus could produce a better F1 game.. please, give us a break. Geoff Crammond is a F1 nut and as such is going to produce a very realistic, playable game. If Papyrus produced a F1 game, it would look like IndyCar racing with a new paint job, tempremental A.I. and no curbs. If we were really lucky, it might run at 20 fps in SVGA on a P133 and contain more bugs than you could shake a stick at. Fraser

I agree. I think if Papyrus made a Grand PRix style version of Indycar, I would love it. It would run easily on a 486DX2-66 and I'm not sure F1GP will do that. So please Papy, make us a F1GP! Gertjan

Quoted text (46 lines)

>Subject: Re: F1GP2 inside view - YUK! MPS and Papyrus please read! >Date: 8 Nov 1995 14:57:27 GMT >>Hi! >>What did you think of the "cockpit shots" on Microprose's GP2 web page?! >>WHERE HAVE THE FRONT WHEELS GONE?!?! HEY, TUNNEL VISION!!! >>It looks like they've done it AGAIN! The original F1GP omitted this >>crucial aspect, and apart from the improved gfx, it's the same story! >>Even the now mouldy 'StuntCar Racer' had visible front wheels! >>Come on Geoff! >>Not only that, but there's now a STEERING WHEEL in your***pit... I like >>the 'MOMO' touch guys, but if this is animated, it's going to look pretty >>stoopid when using our Thrusty Formula T1 wheels - TWO WHEELS?!?! Papyrus >>got it right by NOT having an animated steering wheel, as they were >>intelligent enough to realize that most true sim fans are going to be >>USING A WHEEL CONTROLLER combo. >>And Papyrus got it right YET AGAIN by having your front wheels visible! >>I mean, they ARE BIG ENOUGH!!! How do you expect us to judge distances >>when we can't even SEE where our front wheels are?!?! It's bad enough >>trying to judge where the car you're overtaking is, but to limit our view >>to this TUNNEL VISION is crazy! It looks pretty bad on my BIG monitor - >>all that space wasted on a HUGE***pit when we should be concentrating >>on what's going on around us!!! >>Microprose, you've taken away the front wheels and stuck on a steering >>wheel that nobody wants! Get real!!! And NO VIRTUAL***PIT??? >>As if these***pit shots weren't bad enough, they finish up on the web >>page by saying "Joystick Recommended". Er, haven't they heard of >>Thrustmaster? Are they implying we chuck our steering wheels away or isn't >>it Thrusty T1 compatible?!?! >>Roll on IndyCar 2, eh? :-) >>For the heroes at Papyrus: WHEN are you going to write a Formula One sim? >>You are the only guys left who can do it! Don't tell me "because F1 isn't >>as popular as IndyCar"... You realize that even WITH it's faults that >>F1GP2 will EASILY outsell Indy 2. It's going to be at the top of the >>charts for a LONG time. PLEASE do it - do it as a Senna tribute! Anything, >>just do it. But it will have to be good... ;-)

If you don't like GP2, don't buy it and back off please. Thank you. If you love the guys at Papyrus, go send them a card on Valentine's Day. Thank you again.

Quoted text (22 lines)

> >Hi! > >What did you think of the "cockpit shots" on Microprose's GP2 web page?! > >WHERE HAVE THE FRONT WHEELS GONE?!?! HEY, TUNNEL VISION!!! > >etc.. etc.. > It's nice to see the return to sound, well thought out opinions! > Judging a game by whether you can see the front wheels out of the >***pit is a bit like judging a book by it's cover. As for the > idea that Papyrus could produce a better F1 game.. please, give > us a break. Geoff Crammond is a F1 nut and as such is going to > produce a very realistic, playable game. If Papyrus produced a > F1 game, it would look like IndyCar racing with a new paint job, > tempremental A.I. and no curbs. If we were really lucky, it might > run at 20 fps in SVGA on a P133 and contain more bugs than you could > shake a stick at. > Fraser >Come off it, you make Papyrus seem like a bunch of hacks, at the moment

they still have the best racing simulation in IndyCar Racing, even Crammond acknowledges this in an interview he did with Pc zone, having said that though apparently the new game engine will do 30fps in SVGA mode and 50fps in VGA. So all us Pc owners with relatively humble machines should be able to play it as well. In anticipation Mash

Quoted text (20 lines)

>>Hi! >>What did you think of the "cockpit shots" on Microprose's GP2 web page?! >>WHERE HAVE THE FRONT WHEELS GONE?!?! HEY, TUNNEL VISION!!! >>etc.. etc.. >It's nice to see the return to sound, well thought out opinions! >Judging a game by whether you can see the front wheels out of the >cockpit is a bit like judging a book by it's cover. As for the >idea that Papyrus could produce a better F1 game.. please, give >us a break. Geoff Crammond is a F1 nut and as such is going to >produce a very realistic, playable game. If Papyrus produced a >F1 game, it would look like IndyCar racing with a new paint job, >tempremental A.I. and no curbs. If we were really lucky, it might >run at 20 fps in SVGA on a P133 and contain more bugs than you could >shake a stick at. >Fraser

I totally agree with you. F1GP is much better than Indycar racing and its incredibly difficult for Geoff to maintain the level of quality from F1GP. Thats prorably why F1GP 2 is so late anyway. .. and I thought the front wheels in Indycar looker stupid. -- - Second place is first of the losers.(Ron Dennis) -

Quoted text (10 lines)

> >Hi! > >What did you think of the "cockpit shots" on Microprose's GP2 web page?! > >WHERE HAVE THE FRONT WHEELS GONE?!?! HEY, TUNNEL VISION!!! > >It looks like they've done it AGAIN! The original F1GP omitted this > >crucial aspect, and apart from the improved gfx, it's the same story! > >Even the now mouldy 'StuntCar Racer' had visible front wheels! > >Come on Geoff!

[skip]

Quoted text (11 lines)

> >For the heroes at Papyrus: WHEN are you going to write a Formula One sim? > >You are the only guys left who can do it! Don't tell me "because F1 isn't > >as popular as IndyCar"... You realize that even WITH it's faults that > >F1GP2 will EASILY outsell Indy 2. It's going to be at the top of the > >charts for a LONG time. PLEASE do it - do it as a Senna tribute! Anything, > >just do it. But it will have to be good... ;-) > I agree. > I think if Papyrus made a Grand PRix style version of Indycar, I would love > it. It would run easily on a 486DX2-66 and I'm not sure F1GP will do that. > So please Papy, make us a F1GP!

I think Geoff and his crew will make a very hefty F1 game with GP 2. Nevertheless, the animated steering is a joke, it reminds me of Test Drive and it shouldn't be a part of the***pit at all. Two steering wheels, ehh? Joystick recommended... Not seeing the wheels is something you get used to but it is more accurate to see the wheels like you do in ICR. Not seeing the front wheels is excusable, but having an animated steering wheel is not. But as I understand, Geoff, is not willing to make GP 2 like ICR with all the garage options, etc, since he subscribes to the idea that a game shouldn't demand the driver to tinker with setups, etc. That's one of the reasons GP 2 will still be a little gameish as compared to ICR and ICR II. Anyway, I'll bet GP 2 will be great fun. In F1GP you just have to learn the tracks, in ICR that's only the beginning. I hope GP 2 will change that but according to Geoff that's exactly the strength of his F1 game. -- Terje Wold Johansen "I am your inferior superior." Speaking -- -- Dept. of Informatics, University of Oslo, Norway myself! --

Hang on, F1gp only supporting 15fps? I think not. The game can support up to 25 internally or using an editor can go all the way up to 300. And you can run 50fps with a 486DX-50, can Nascar? or Indycar? John. -- +============================================================================+ | free e-mail and usenet, loads of good quality files, including: loads of | | Psion stuff, Loads of Doom 1,2, Heretic, F1GP and Descent stuff, and more! | +============================================================================+

Front wheels in Indicar could look stupid, but this doesn't mean the ARE stupid. In F1GP it is very annoying not being able to understand when you are going to hit a curb. Have you ever seen the white line delimiting the track dizzling away just on the border of the***pit? Well I get the impression of driving with two wheels on the grass. That's not realistic. Anyway, real drivers can see their wheels, so why shouldn't I? (if this is a simulation....). It is also really annoying not being able to see cars you are trying to overtake (or viceversa) when they are at your side. I can't remember how many collisions I made with those invisible cars when we were proceeding at the same speed and I just steered a little bit and hit the damned car. I'd like to be able to turn my head (30 degrees will suffice) and look around. Again, you can do it on a real car. I know it too late for F1GP2, but perhaps someone will put wheels on cars and a neck unders drivers' heads in some future program :-) Now, a suggestion to Papyrus guys. I tryed to play Nascar Racing with the keyboard. The key combinations you can use in Nascar aren't very good. They can't be compared to the only key combination of F1GP.( a-z accelerate/brake , . steer left/right, ALT - SPACE shift down/up). It is also very difficult to keep the car on the track. Perhaps the problem is that the standard setup is really poor and I try to drive a Nascar car like a F1 car. However I suspect that the steering help in F1GP makes the difference. If this is the case, Papyrus should implement something like that. It's no point making the game too difficult to play with the keyboard: are they trying to sell joysticks? :-) Furthermore, it seems to me that the visibility of F1GP tracks is better than Nascar ones (despite the textures). I'm talking about VGA mode, obviously. Cheers Paolo Montrasio

F1GP RULES!!!! F1GP is better even though it's a year behind the technology of indycar.

Quoted text (9 lines)

>> They've done a good job with the look of the car from inside the***pit, >> and the handling feel is there. The AI admittedly needs work, but, the >> AI in NASCAR is much better. The 20 fps is still faster than what F1gp >> could support (15) and NASCAR can theoretically support 30 fps. My >> biggest beef is that it takes a Pentium to hit that number but that is >Hang on, F1gp only supporting 15fps? I think not. The game can support up >to 25 internally or using an editor can go all the way up to 300. And you >can run 50fps with a 486DX-50, can Nascar? or Indycar?

The graphics in IndyCar and Nascar are more complex then in F1GP. Not a good comparison. It's like saying Wolfenstein can get a higher frame rate then DOOM. Kevin

Quoted text (31 lines)

>> >Hi! >> >What did you think of the "cockpit shots" on Microprose's GP2 web page?! >> >WHERE HAVE THE FRONT WHEELS GONE?!?! HEY, TUNNEL VISION!!! >> >etc.. etc.. >> It's nice to see the return to sound, well thought out opinions! >> Judging a game by whether you can see the front wheels out of the >>***pit is a bit like judging a book by it's cover. As for the >> idea that Papyrus could produce a better F1 game.. please, give >> us a break. Geoff Crammond is a F1 nut and as such is going to >> produce a very realistic, playable game. If Papyrus produced a >> F1 game, it would look like IndyCar racing with a new paint job, >> tempremental A.I. and no curbs. If we were really lucky, it might >> run at 20 fps in SVGA on a P133 and contain more bugs than you could >> shake a stick at. >> Fraser >>Come off it, you make Papyrus seem like a bunch of hacks, at the moment >they still have the best racing simulation in IndyCar Racing, even >Crammond acknowledges this in an interview he did with Pc zone, having >said that though apparently the new game engine will do 30fps in SVGA >mode and 50fps in VGA. So all us Pc owners with relatively humble >machines should be able to play it as well. >In anticipation > Mash

Mash, I just happen to have a copy of that particular edition of PC ZONE and to quote ( oh *** i hope i don't get sued) "Reguarding Indycar, I took time out to look at the product and i thought they had done a pretty remarkably good job. I think that the guys at Papyrus are similar to myself and my team in that they are very interested in their subject matter and also strive for quality in their products" GEOFF CRAMMOND opps, nowhere does it say " I think Indycar is the best ". Oh well, I guess it was the September edition. Anyway, for my 2 cents worth, Indycar has exellent graphics, which i wish i could see on a really fast PC (I'm ONLY driving a 486) but for serious gameplay, and after all this is what makes games great, the winner is F1GP by far!!!!. Now if only F1GP2 can take Indycars graphics a few steps furthur, whilst retaining the pure "driveability" of F1GP then we are truly in for a brilliant game. Time to get a 586!!!!!. Also , Mash, did you notice there are no rear view mirrors on the cars in PC ZONE's review. I hope these will eventually be included in the game. Maybe this is why it's release date keeps getting furthur away (PC ZONE said September , Bah!!!), shades of F1GP there, though i think the real reason is that Microproses Virtual Karts had to be released first, and given some "free time", before Microprose releases the Car racing game of the decade F1GP2. For my money, I think i'll wait for F1GP2 and put my Virtual Karts money toward a Pentium.

Quoted text (18 lines)

>Hi! >What did you think of the "cockpit shots" on Microprose's GP2 web page?! >WHERE HAVE THE FRONT WHEELS GONE?!?! HEY, TUNNEL VISION!!! >It looks like they've done it AGAIN! The original F1GP omitted this >crucial aspect, and apart from the improved gfx, it's the same story! >Even the now mouldy 'StuntCar Racer' had visible front wheels! >Come on Geoff! >And Papyrus got it right YET AGAIN by having your front wheels visible! >I mean, they ARE BIG ENOUGH!!! How do you expect us to judge distances >when we can't even SEE where our front wheels are?!?! It's bad enough >trying to judge where the car you're overtaking is, but to limit our view >to this TUNNEL VISION is crazy! It looks pretty bad on my BIG monitor - >all that space wasted on a HUGE***pit when we should be concentrating >on what's going on around us!!!

You do NOT want to see the front wheels. Seeing the front wheels ruins the perspective and is why the track when viewed from the***pit looks so much better in F1GP than indycar. While you can see the wheels when sitting in a F1***pit, they are well into your peripheral vision, say 45 degrees. Therefore, if you put them on the computer screen, it ruins the perspective of the wheels in relation to the track and makes the display look unrealistic. And in terms of your complaint that you need to see the wheels to judge distances, this is completely untrue. You judge where the car is by where the***pit is in relation to the track. How often do you see the F1 drivers looking out of the side of the***pit so that they can line the wheels up with the apex? How often do you need to look at the side of your car when driving along the highway to make sure that it is lined up with the median strip?? You do all of this by looking straight ahead (or, more precisely, where your vehicle is going). Similarly, I can place the car where I want it just as precisely, probably even more so, in F1GP than indycar, despite the lack of wheels in the former. You may be surprised to hear this, but Geoff Crammond does actually know what he is doing.

Quoted text (37 lines)

>Hi! >What did you think of the "cockpit shots" on Microprose's GP2 web page?! >WHERE HAVE THE FRONT WHEELS GONE?!?! HEY, TUNNEL VISION!!! >It looks like they've done it AGAIN! The original F1GP omitted this >crucial aspect, and apart from the improved gfx, it's the same story! >Even the now mouldy 'StuntCar Racer' had visible front wheels! >Come on Geoff! >Not only that, but there's now a STEERING WHEEL in your***pit... I like >the 'MOMO' touch guys, but if this is animated, it's going to look pretty >stoopid when using our Thrusty Formula T1 wheels - TWO WHEELS?!?! Papyrus >got it right by NOT having an animated steering wheel, as they were >intelligent enough to realize that most true sim fans are going to be >USING A WHEEL CONTROLLER combo. >Hi! >What did you think of the "cockpit shots" on Microprose's GP2 web page?! >WHERE HAVE THE FRONT WHEELS GONE?!?! HEY, TUNNEL VISION!!! >It looks like they've done it AGAIN! The original F1GP omitted this >crucial aspect, and apart from the improved gfx, it's the same story! >Even the now mouldy 'StuntCar Racer' had visible front wheels! >Come on Geoff! >Not only that, but there's now a STEERING WHEEL in your***pit... I like >the 'MOMO' touch guys, but if this is animated, it's going to look pretty >stoopid when using our Thrusty Formula T1 wheels - TWO WHEELS?!?! Papyrus >got it right by NOT having an animated steering wheel, as they were >intelligent enough to realize that most true sim fans are going to be >USING A WHEEL CONTROLLER combo.

It is obvious that two distinct camps are forming here...those for IndyCar and those for F1GP. You really cannot compare the originals as they were of different times. F1GP was the best sim when it came out and IndyCar 'pushed the envelope'. NASCAR Racing pushed it further and it only remains to be seen what improvements have been made. Different teams obviously have different solutions or views of how their sims should be. That is fine and diversity is welcomed. HOWEVER, having just finished watching the Adelaide Grand Prix I hope that F1GP2 is not too realistic. F1 is BORING!!! I turned the telecast off before halfway to watch an old tape of the 1995 Indycar Michigan 500 where the margin was 1/2 a car length after 500 miles instead of 2 laps with the second car smoking like a chimney. At the start of each GP the commentator (ours is Murray Walker) says that Spa I agree that wheels are not absolutely necessary but I do prefer to see them. My choice. They actually turn as I turn my T1 which is pretty neat. I like to see the Goodyear sign rotate and become a blur..My choice. Wing mirrors, on the other hand are essential! The mirrors in IndyCar were not good enough. I know they are not really like that but I need to know when Mario Andretti is alongside me...like how they work in NASCAR Racing. Speaking of realism...is the Mario Andretti driver in everyone else's IndyCar just as bad as in mine? Like everyone else on this newsgroup I can hardly wait for the release of either sim. I can live with their differences and I am sure they both will be worth the wait. Cheers, Craig. ************************************************************** * Canberra, Australia * **************************************************************

Quoted text (10 lines)

> Now, a suggestion to Papyrus guys. I tryed to play Nascar Racing with the > keyboard. The key combinations you can use in Nascar aren't very good. They > can't be compared to the only key combination of F1GP.( a-z accelerate/brake > , . steer left/right, ALT - SPACE shift down/up). It is also very difficult to > keep the car on the track. Perhaps the problem is that the standard setup > is really poor and I try to drive a Nascar car like a F1 car. However I > suspect that the steering help in F1GP makes the difference. If this is > the case, Papyrus should implement something like that. It's no point > making the game too difficult to play with the keyboard: are they trying > to sell joysticks? :-)

First of all, go ahead and change the key setups if you like. But that won't help much, since thepoint of a SIMUlATION is realism. If you turn off steering help in F1gp, the car gets very nervous. And NASCARs are big heavy things with very little downforce, and they really are hard to keep on the road. Frankly, the keyboard is NOT recommended. I personally LIKE the fact that the sim is very accurate and can be hard to drive - it's a challenge. (And I use wheels!) -- Brian Wong Systems Engineering Group (Servers)

no you can't since Nascar uses loads of keys for other stuff, Including A and Z. and <>.

Quoted text (18 lines)

|:~8a.`~888a:::::::::::::::88......88:::::::::::::::;a8~".a888~| |::::~8a.`~888a::::::::::::88......88::::::::::::;a8~".a888~:::| |:::::::~8a.`~888a:::::::::88......88:::::::::;a8~".a888~::::::| |::::::::::~8a.`~888a::::::88......88::::::;a8~".a888~:::::::::| |:::::::::::::~8a.`~888a:::88......88:::;a8~".a888~::::::::::::| |::::::::::::::::~8a.`~888a88......88;a8~".a888~:::::::::::::::| |:::::::::::::::::::~8a.`~888......88~".a888~::::::::::::::::::| |8888888888888888888888888888......8888888888888888888888888888| |.............G O D S A V E T H E Q U E E N !............| |8888888888888888888888888888......8888888888888888888888888888| |::::::::::::::::::a888~".a88......888a."~8;:::::::::::::::::::| |:::::::::::::::a888~".a8~:88......88~888a."~8;::::::::::::::::| |::::::::::::a888~".a8~::::88......88:::~888a."~8;:::::::::::::| |:::::::::a888~".a8~:::::::88......88::::::~888a."~8;::::::::::| |::::::a888~".a8~::::::::::88......88:::::::::~888a."~8;:::::::| |:::a888~".a8~:::::::::::::88......88::::::::::::~888a."~8;::::| |a888~".a8~::::::::::::::::88......88:::::::::::::::~888a."~8;:|

>HOWEVER, having just finished watching the Adelaide Grand Prix I hope >that F1GP2 is not too realistic. F1 is BORING!!! I turned the >telecast off before halfway to watch an old tape of the 1995 Indycar >Michigan 500 where the margin was 1/2 a car length after 500 miles >instead of 2 laps with the second car smoking like a chimney. At the >start of each GP the commentator (ours is Murray Walker) says that Spa Yeah, maybe Indycar is closer....But you have to ask WHY ? And the answer is: the regroupings after accidents etc.. ! This is what I call "artificial suspence". I believe that Ron Dennis, the McLaren teamleader once said: "Indycar is Harlem Globetrotters, Formula One is NBA" and I totally agree with that. When a driver is able to gain a second a lap, he'll just DO it in Formula One, but I'm not so sure it is the right way to go in Indycar. Indycar is TACTICS, Formula One is drivingskill: the ability to drive on the REAL limit for two hours, without crossing the border. Now THAT'S a challenge.... But if you like Indycar, I don't care, really...Each his own ! =~^\/^~=~^\/^~=~^\/^~=~^\/^~=~^\/^~=~^\/^~=~^\/^~=~^\/^~=~^\/^~=~^\/^~ signature requires __,,,,_ fixed-pitch font , _ ___.--'''`--''// ,-_ `-. \`"' ' || \\ \ \\/ / // / ,- `,_ /'` \ || Y | \|/ / // / -.,__ `-, / _.-. .-\,___| _-| / \ \/|_/ | `-._._) `-' f/ | / __/ \__ / |__/ \ `-' | -| \__ \ |-' | __/ /__,-' ) ,' _|' (((__.-'((___..-'((__,' "Tiger run around the tree......" =~^\/^~=~^\/^~=~^\/^~=~^\/^~=~^\/^~=~^\/^~=~^\/^~=~^\/^~=~^\/^~=~^\/^~

Hi Craig! ********************** Then your no real racing fan! remember Indy have those yellow "I get a cheesburger" flags. But I like IndyCar too. BTW: Are there really 2 series next year???? >instead of 2 laps with the second car smoking like a chimney. At the >start of each GP the commentator (ours is Murray Walker) says that Spa Tschuess, Lutz

: Come off it, you make Papyrus seem like a bunch of hacks, at the moment : they still have the best racing simulation in IndyCar Racing, even : Crammond acknowledges this in an interview he did with Pc zone, having : said that though apparently the new game engine will do 30fps in SVGA : mode and 50fps in VGA. So all us Pc owners with relatively humble : machines should be able to play it as well. That's why Papyrus is a company that makes racing simulators and MicroProse is a company that makes racing arcade games. There is no way in hell MP will EVER make a better racing sim than Papyrus. Dave.

: Hang on, F1gp only supporting 15fps? I think not. The game can support up : to 25 internally or using an editor can go all the way up to 300. And you : can run 50fps with a 486DX-50, can Nascar? or Indycar? What the hell do you wanna see 300 fps for? Your freakin' eyes can only support 30fps (if they're in good condition).

Quoted text (39 lines)

> >Hi! > > > >What did you think of the "cockpit shots" on Microprose's GP2 web page?! > > > >WHERE HAVE THE FRONT WHEELS GONE?!?! HEY, TUNNEL VISION!!! > > > >It looks like they've done it AGAIN! The original F1GP omitted this > >crucial aspect, and apart from the improved gfx, it's the same story! > >Even the now mouldy 'StuntCar Racer' had visible front wheels! > >Come on Geoff! > > > > > >And Papyrus got it right YET AGAIN by having your front wheels visible! > >I mean, they ARE BIG ENOUGH!!! How do you expect us to judge distances > >when we can't even SEE where our front wheels are?!?! It's bad enough > >trying to judge where the car you're overtaking is, but to limit our view > >to this TUNNEL VISION is crazy! It looks pretty bad on my BIG monitor - > >all that space wasted on a HUGE***pit when we should be concentrating > >on what's going on around us!!! > > > > You do NOT want to see the front wheels. Seeing the front wheels ruins > the perspective and is why the track when viewed from the***pit looks > so much better in F1GP than indycar. While you can see the wheels when > sitting in a F1***pit, they are well into your peripheral vision, say > 45 degrees. Therefore, if you put them on the computer screen, it ruins > the perspective of the wheels in relation to the track and makes the > display look unrealistic. And in terms of your complaint that you need to > see the wheels to judge distances, this is completely untrue. You judge > where the car is by where the***pit is in relation to the track. How > often do you see the F1 drivers looking out of the side of the***pit > so that they can line the wheels up with the apex? How often do you need > to look at the side of your car when driving along the highway to make > sure that it is lined up with the median strip?? You do all of this by > looking straight ahead (or, more precisely, where your vehicle is going). > Similarly, I can place the car where I want it just as precisely, > probably even more so, in F1GP than indycar, despite the lack of wheels > in the former. You may be surprised to hear this, but Geoff Crammond does > actually know what he is doing.

For sure, but you've missed my point bigtime, m8. In "normal" situations, of course, peripheral vision is all you need when lapping a course, looking straight ahead at a point in the distance, both in time and physically, is the norm. All you are doing is sticking to the racing line. BUT, in the heat of a race, with constant positional changes and, dare I say it, WHEEL TO WHEEL racing, I would like to know, or at least have SOME idea of where the car I am overtaking IS in relation to my wheels. Do you think that RACING is akin to "driving down the highway", as you put it?! :-) For sure, it's FINE if you're all on your OWN out there, but when there's 24 other guys stacked wheel to wheel on a dirty racetrack, well, things are "a little" different, I assure you! And if you can't even SEE your wheels... How many times when overtaking and attempting to out brake the opposition have you had to GUESS where the car is ALONGSIDE you in F1GP? All I am saying, is that it would be NICE to have a wider field of view for overtaking maneuvers when you NEED it. The way I race, cutting through traffic, I need it alot! Without at least having the outside point of your wheels in view, you will never be ABSOLUTELY SURE how close your wheels are in relation to your opponent in tight situations. You WILL NOT KNOW if the car you are overtaking suddenly swerves in your direction when alongside, if your field of view isn't wide enough, will you? If YOU are happy with this, then while I could simply jink out of the way, and match my distance gap with my opponent, by the time YOU know what has happened, you will either be spinning in the air or have a wheel missing. In racing, I drive on the limit. I drive "wheel to wheel". I don't like leaving it to chance and guesswork. Driving the real thing IS easier than a sim with these extra limitations. Without the feedback, you may as well have as many visual cues as possible! And who says I or F1 drivers have to turn the head at all??? With normal eyesight, obviously a wider view than a monitor, there is MORE than enough peripheral vision to see to the side of me without even moving my EYES! I don't have to turn my HEAD to know whats going on around me! I have GREAT peripheral vision and spacial awareness! But HOW do you expect to at least TRY to SIMULATE that on a SCREEN which isn't ALLOWING for that "VIRTUAL" peripheral vision? Don't you see?! I'm not saying I even have to take my eyes off the CENTER of the screen at all, but the area around the EDGE of the screen should attempt to SIMULATE YOUR PERIPHERAL VISION! With F1GP, your natural peripheral vision is REMOVED! You might have a more realistic view of what is _IN FRONT_ of you, but as far as what is going on _AROUND_ you in the "game world" is concerned... I've got "some" idea what I'm talking about too. I've won a few karting trophies. While looking ahead most of the time, you have to be damn aware of who is racing half an inch away from you! :-) Surely everyone agrees? BTW, I've always preferred F1GP to IndyCar, For sure, even without the wider view. The "gameplay" in ICR for me sucks. I mean, it's hardly realistic when the cars "do the dalek" from side to side, even in NASCAR they do this! :-) You get a much better "race" in F1GP I think. But for pure racing fun, it has got to be NASCAR! "And I was enjoying it as well..."(N. Mansell) Geoff Crammond is one of my programming heroes too. Don't let us down! Even if the wheels are out, I'll love it just the same! Hey, maybe if you can control the "virtual" camera, you can position an "outside" view _inside_ the helmet of your driver (helmet-cam (oo-err)), and _drive_ like that! Yes! Of course! NB: The CAPS in this post aren't meant to be shouting, it's just me emphasizing the words in a joking and friendly way, comic book style. (BOLD text). Cheers, -- ~~_______~~ _______________[__]=[_(-)_]=[__]_______________ V I S O R --

Quoted text (24 lines)

> >Hi! > > > >What did you think of the "cockpit shots" on Microprose's GP2 web page?! > > > >WHERE HAVE THE FRONT WHEELS GONE?!?! HEY, TUNNEL VISION!!! > > > >It looks like they've done it AGAIN! The original F1GP omitted this > >crucial aspect, and apart from the improved gfx, it's the same story! > >Even the now mouldy 'StuntCar Racer' had visible front wheels! > >Come on Geoff! > > > >Not only that, but there's now a STEERING WHEEL in your***pit... I like > >the 'MOMO' touch guys, but if this is animated, it's going to look pretty > >stoopid when using our Thrusty Formula T1 wheels - TWO WHEELS?!?! Papyrus > >got it right by NOT having an animated steering wheel, as they were > >intelligent enough to realize that most true sim fans are going to be > >USING A WHEEL CONTROLLER combo. > > > It is obvious that two distinct camps are forming here...those for > IndyCar and those for F1GP. You really cannot compare the originals > as they were of different times. F1GP was the best sim when it came > out and IndyCar 'pushed the envelope'. NASCAR Racing pushed it > further and it only remains to be seen what improvements have been > made.

For sure! But I was talking about F1GP_2_, not the old original. But, buying F1GP on the day it came out in the shops (Amiga version!), and still now driving it on the PC, it's got to go down as a classic of classics. NASCAR could/should have been great, but the GFX are WAY too jerky and slow (SVGA) to be truly playable for me. And I use a 16Mb P90. Still, once a decent 3D accel' card comes out... > Different teams obviously have different solutions or views of how > their sims should be. That is fine and diversity is welcomed. Too right. > HOWEVER, having just finished watching the Adelaide Grand Prix I hope > that F1GP2 is not too realistic. F1 is BORING!!! I turned the > telecast off before halfway to watch an old tape of the 1995 Indycar > Michigan 500 where the margin was 1/2 a car length after 500 miles > instead of 2 laps with the second car smoking like a chimney. At the > start of each GP the commentator (ours is Murray Walker) says that Spa Heh, good old Murray. Have you seen the "quotes" web page at: [link lost in import: /:6666/pete/walkerisms.html] It's worth a visit for a few laughs. Wouldn't be the same without him. I sure hope F1 improves with "closer" racing, like you say. If there has been any chance of it this year, you can be sure that ONE of the cars will "blow" before the chequered (Alesi). I just want to see Berger win again. I want to see wheel-to-wheel racing! (I want to see my WHEELS In F1GP2 so I can do exactly that!) > Like everyone else on this newsgroup I can hardly wait for the release > of either sim. I can live with their differences and I am sure they > both will be worth the wait. Too right. Not as if we're going to snub it now, WHATEVER it turns out to be, eh? Not now. And if Geoff's in charge, it's sure to be another classic. I like the sound of MANAGING a team to the top of the championship with the add-on/management sim too. Sounds interesting, and looks a damn sight better than that "Formula One" game! To be honest, I was really moaning to try and get though to Microprose to get their act together. They just seem to have gone downhill lately with their other, unrelated releases and I'm desperately hoping that any bad, bureaucratic mis-management in the house hasn't affected Geoff's team! Have a good one, -- ~~_______~~ _______________[__]=[_(-)_]=[__]_______________ V I S O R --

: : Now, a suggestion to Papyrus guys. I tryed to play Nascar Racing with the : : keyboard. The key combinations you can use in Nascar aren't very good. They : : can't be compared to the only key combination of F1GP.( a-z accelerate/brake : : , . steer left/right, ALT - SPACE shift down/up). It is also very difficult to : You should check the Nascar manual. There is an option to configure ALL the : controls in the game, including the keyboard. Select option/controls/set : controls. From there you can change the key board steering and : acceletation/brake controls to what ever your heart desires; you can even : emulated that other game's key combination if that'll make ya happy. :) I know that menu, but the program ignores me when I press 'A'. It seems to accept only a few keys (number pad, controls, shifts, alts and the keys between the alphanumeric keyboard and the number pad). And it doesn't accept the space bar! (the key I use to shift up gears) Well, perhaps I'm doing something wrong. I'll check it again. Thanks. Paolo

> Formula One is drivingskill: the ability to drive >on the REAL limit for two hours, without crossing the border. Now >THAT'S a challenge.... You are right F1 is driving skill, as well as all racing, Indycar and Nascar. But F1 is also a game of who has the most money wins! In Nascar all teams have pretty much the same amount of money which means more drivers winning and closer competition, something you just dont find in F1 right now. Only a few teams in F1 have the big bucks and they are winning the rest have no money compared to the others and they are the losers. Enjoy all racing!

two lines followed by a H U G E .sig. [munch, chew, swallow] For crying out loud. Are you a 1st year student or something? Stuart. -- From the bedroom of Stuart Booth, Somewhere in Guildford, England...

Stupid 'features' like this are typical of one man projects... I've noticed this in my own work several times... you just can't view your own work with a critical enough eye... you need lots of feedback and teamwork to produce something truly superior ---> though Crammond probably needs less of it than others, he still needs it... Again, see my comment above... Papyrus rocks (not that they are perfect --- fixing bugs typically takes forever where Teamwork is concerned --- yes, I'm talking about A.I.) Tommi Pajari

Quoted text (14 lines)

> >HOWEVER, having just finished watching the Adelaide Grand Prix I hope > >that F1GP2 is not too realistic. F1 is BORING!!! I turned the > >telecast off before halfway to watch an old tape of the 1995 Indycar > >Michigan 500 where the margin was 1/2 a car length after 500 miles > >instead of 2 laps with the second car smoking like a chimney. At the > >start of each GP the commentator (ours is Murray Walker) says that Spa > Yeah, maybe Indycar is closer....But you have to ask WHY ? And the > answer is: the regroupings after accidents etc.. ! > This is what I call "artificial suspence". I believe that Ron Dennis, > the McLaren teamleader once said: "Indycar is Harlem Globetrotters, > Formula One is NBA" and I totally agree with that.

Artificial suspense works better for me than the "real" thing ---> F1GP's are boring to watch (there naturally are exceptions) Another thing why I despise F1: cheating. For example, Schumacher drank 10 liters of water or something so he weighed more so they were allowed to build a lighter car.. now that is despicable... I'm not sure if something like that has happened in Indycar's, but at least I haven't heard of such... I don't call it racing when before a race, you call your lawyers to ask if you can use dirty trick A or mebbe you should stick to trick B? At least in this case, I think the Americans have got it right ---> both Indycar and Nascar represent honest, hard, competitive racing where your skill and cunning and the commitment that you put into your setups/ pit strategy wins races, not money put into lawyers pockets or different engines for qualifying & race (which only the most wealthy racers can afford --- unfair advantage? --- artificial adavantage?) I think you could say: 'When a driver is able to afford a second a lap..' Again, I would like to correct: Indycar is TACTICS and SKILL, Formula is SKILL and MONEY. Yes I do like it... Formula isn't _entirely_ bad either, but I vastly prefer Indycar & Nascar, both as simulations and in RL (tm) Tommi Pajari

Quoted text (11 lines)

>> Formula One is drivingskill: the ability to drive >>on the REAL limit for two hours, without crossing the border. Now >>THAT'S a challenge.... >You are right F1 is driving skill, as well as all racing, Indycar and >Nascar. But F1 is also a game of who has the most money wins! In >Nascar all teams have pretty much the same amount of money which means >more drivers winning and closer competition, something you just dont >find in F1 right now. Only a few teams in F1 have the big bucks and >they are winning the rest have no money compared to the others and >they are the losers. >Enjoy all racing!

I agree on the money-part, but I still don't see the use of pacecars etc.. It is and remains artificial. =~^\/^~=~^\/^~=~^\/^~=~^\/^~=~^\/^~=~^\/^~=~^\/^~=~^\/^~=~^\/^~=~^\/^~ signature requires __,,,,_ fixed-pitch font , _ ___.--'''`--''// ,-_ `-. \`"' ' || \\ \ \\/ / // / ,- `,_ /'` \ || Y | \|/ / // / -.,__ `-, / _.-. .-\,___| _-| / \ \/|_/ | `-._._) `-' f/ | / __/ \__ / |__/ \ `-' | -| \__ \ |-' | __/ /__,-' ) ,' _|' (((__.-'((___..-'((__,' "Tiger run around the tree......" =~^\/^~=~^\/^~=~^\/^~=~^\/^~=~^\/^~=~^\/^~=~^\/^~=~^\/^~=~^\/^~=~^\/^~

: Hey, maybe if you can control the "virtual" camera, you can position an : "outside" view _inside_ the helmet of your driver (helmet-cam (oo-err)), : and _drive_ like that! Yes! Of course! In F1GP you can't see the revs gauge if you use the external vision. I think that if I had it I'd prefer driving in that way to have a wider vision field. I hope you can have a couple of indicators (revs and hopefully fuel) in the external vision in F1GP2. Otherwise it is here only for replays. I think that the missing of peripheral vision and wheels is a major failure in a simulation game. In all the flight similuators programs I tried you could always look around you by switching view. This could be too much for a racing game but it would be great if you could have three overlapping views like this: a | b | / | / |/ car --> |\ | \ | \ c | d View 1: from a to c, View 2: from b to d, View 3 (wider) from b to c Obviously you need some way to switch from one view to another in a snap without leaving the controls (a sensor on the neck? :-) An alternative would be implementing some sort of full-screen fish-eye view like what you have in NASCAR mirrors. I don't even want to think about using three monitors to get a wider vision :-) Anyway, someone should implement a good peripheral vision system sooner or later. If it's the realism what sells race games, well this is realism. Paolo

: : Hey, maybe if you can control the "virtual" camera, you can position an : : "outside" view _inside_ the helmet of your driver (helmet-cam (oo-err)), : : and _drive_ like that! Yes! Of course! : In F1GP you can't see the revs gauge if you use the external vision. I think : that if I had it I'd prefer driving in that way to have a wider vision field. : I hope you can have a couple of indicators (revs and hopefully fuel) : in the external vision in F1GP2. Otherwise it is here only for replays. [snip re. peripheral vision] Surely you don't drive looking at the rev limiter? You need to be able to drive and change gear by listening to the revs, then your problem is solved! :-) On the subject of peripheral vision, there is a great deal to be said for a developing a system such that we can gain a better feel for the surrounding drivers' actions earlier... Thomas - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 91 Thief Lane YORK YO1 3HT, UK "God preserve us from religious nutters"

Quoted text (104 lines)

> > >Hi! > > >What did you think of the "cockpit shots" on Microprose's GP2 web page?! > > >WHERE HAVE THE FRONT WHEELS GONE?!?! HEY, TUNNEL VISION!!! > > >It looks like they've done it AGAIN! The original F1GP omitted this > > >crucial aspect, and apart from the improved gfx, it's the same story! > > >Even the now mouldy 'StuntCar Racer' had visible front wheels! > > >Come on Geoff! > > >And Papyrus got it right YET AGAIN by having your front wheels visible! > > >I mean, they ARE BIG ENOUGH!!! How do you expect us to judge distances > > >when we can't even SEE where our front wheels are?!?! It's bad enough > > >trying to judge where the car you're overtaking is, but to limit our view > > >to this TUNNEL VISION is crazy! It looks pretty bad on my BIG monitor - > > >all that space wasted on a HUGE***pit when we should be concentrating > > >on what's going on around us!!! > > You do NOT want to see the front wheels. Seeing the front wheels ruins > > the perspective and is why the track when viewed from the***pit looks > > so much better in F1GP than indycar. While you can see the wheels when > > sitting in a F1***pit, they are well into your peripheral vision, say > > 45 degrees. Therefore, if you put them on the computer screen, it ruins > > the perspective of the wheels in relation to the track and makes the > > display look unrealistic. And in terms of your complaint that you need to > > see the wheels to judge distances, this is completely untrue. You judge > > where the car is by where the***pit is in relation to the track. How > > often do you see the F1 drivers looking out of the side of the***pit > > so that they can line the wheels up with the apex? How often do you need > > to look at the side of your car when driving along the highway to make > > sure that it is lined up with the median strip?? You do all of this by > > looking straight ahead (or, more precisely, where your vehicle is going). > > Similarly, I can place the car where I want it just as precisely, > > probably even more so, in F1GP than indycar, despite the lack of wheels > > in the former. You may be surprised to hear this, but Geoff Crammond does > > actually know what he is doing. >For sure, but you've missed my point bigtime, m8. In "normal" situations, >of course, peripheral vision is all you need when lapping a course, >looking straight ahead at a point in the distance, both in time and >physically, is the norm. All you are doing is sticking to the racing line. >BUT, in the heat of a race, with constant positional changes and, dare >I say it, WHEEL TO WHEEL racing, I would like to know, or at least have >SOME idea of where the car I am overtaking IS in relation to my wheels. >Do you think that RACING is akin to "driving down the highway", as you >put it?! :-) For sure, it's FINE if you're all on your OWN out there, >but when there's 24 other guys stacked wheel to wheel on a dirty >racetrack, well, things are "a little" different, I assure you! >And if you can't even SEE your wheels... >How many times when overtaking and attempting to out brake the opposition >have you had to GUESS where the car is ALONGSIDE you in F1GP? All I am >saying, is that it would be NICE to have a wider field of view for >overtaking maneuvers when you NEED it. The way I race, cutting through >traffic, I need it alot! >Without at least having the outside point of your wheels in view, you >will never be ABSOLUTELY SURE how close your wheels are in relation to >your opponent in tight situations. You WILL NOT KNOW if the car you are >overtaking suddenly swerves in your direction when alongside, if your field >of view isn't wide enough, will you? If YOU are happy with this, then while >I could simply jink out of the way, and match my distance gap with my >opponent, by the time YOU know what has happened, you will either be >spinning in the air or have a wheel missing. In racing, I drive on the limit. >I drive "wheel to wheel". I don't like leaving it to chance and guesswork. >Driving the real thing IS easier than a sim with these extra limitations. >Without the feedback, you may as well have as many visual cues as possible! >And who says I or F1 drivers have to turn the head at all??? With normal >eyesight, obviously a wider view than a monitor, there is MORE than enough >peripheral vision to see to the side of me without even moving my EYES! >I don't have to turn my HEAD to know whats going on around me! I have >GREAT peripheral vision and spacial awareness! But HOW do you expect to at >least TRY to SIMULATE that on a SCREEN which isn't ALLOWING for that >"VIRTUAL" peripheral vision? Don't you see?! I'm not saying I even have to >take my eyes off the CENTER of the screen at all, but the area around the EDGE >of the screen should attempt to SIMULATE YOUR PERIPHERAL VISION! With F1GP, >your natural peripheral vision is REMOVED! You might have a more realistic >view of what is _IN FRONT_ of you, but as far as what is going on _AROUND_ you >in the "game world" is concerned... >I've got "some" idea what I'm talking about too. I've won a few karting >trophies. While looking ahead most of the time, you have to be damn aware >of who is racing half an inch away from you! :-) Surely everyone agrees? >BTW, I've always preferred F1GP to IndyCar, For sure, even without the wider >view. The "gameplay" in ICR for me sucks. I mean, it's hardly realistic when >the cars "do the dalek" from side to side, even in NASCAR they do this! :-) >You get a much better "race" in F1GP I think. But for pure racing fun, it >has got to be NASCAR! "And I was enjoying it as well..."(N. Mansell) >Geoff Crammond is one of my programming heroes too. Don't let us down! >Even if the wheels are out, I'll love it just the same! >Hey, maybe if you can control the "virtual" camera, you can position an >"outside" view _inside_ the helmet of your driver (helmet-cam (oo-err)), >and _drive_ like that! Yes! Of course! >NB: The CAPS in this post aren't meant to be shouting, it's just me >emphasizing the words in a joking and friendly way, comic book style. >(BOLD text). >Cheers,

Here here. It's good to see that at least one person in this newsgroup can put together a well structured and INTERESTING posting on GP2. On the subject of GP2 in general, I've kept quiet since posting my preview/observations on the ECTS demo of GP2 that I played. However, I think I should mention that the most e***ment around the pending release of a new game is in the waiting (eg. Christmas when you were small). I must admit I would like lot's of little (, some big ,) "features" in a GP Sim, but the main thing about GP2 is that it's already (, according to the magizine reviews and my preview of the demo,) a big step up from GP1 (widely regarded as the best racing sim ... allegedly ;-) ) and O.K., it's been a long time coming, but how many of you have really got 100% bored of playing GP1 ? Not many I shouldn't think. So please, let's just keep quite about the release date and wait until someone has actually bought it, rushed home, played it a bit and then posted their joyful news here. -- ------------- | /"""\ MATT!| | | | | W | | | \_/ | | | Any resemblence of this picture to | \___/ / | any persons, fictional or not, is | | / | purely coincidental. -------------

MG> It's good to see that at least one person in this newsgroup can put MG> together a well structured and INTERESTING posting on GP2. But did you REALLY need to requote the whole ***y thing?!! B-) Cheers! --- * RM 1.3 U0414 * If this were a proper tagline, it might be funny.

>I know that menu, but the program ignores me when I press 'A'. It seems >to accept only a few keys (number pad, controls, shifts, alts and the >keys between the alphanumeric keyboard and the number pad). And it >doesn't accept the space bar! (the key I use to shift up gears) >Well, perhaps I'm doing something wrong. I'll check it again. >Thanks. You can only utilize keys which are not "hard-coded" for other features in the game. 'A' is used to accelerate time, and thus can't be used. Space bar toggles tire changes in the F5 pit radio view and thus can't be used. ---Jim Sokoloff, Papyrus

: : In F1GP you can't see the revs gauge if you use the external vision. I think : : that if I had it I'd prefer driving in that way to have a wider vision field. : : I hope you can have a couple of indicators (revs and hopefully fuel) : : in the external vision in F1GP2. Otherwise it is here only for replays. : [snip re. peripheral vision] : Surely you don't drive looking at the rev limiter? You need to be : able to drive and change gear by listening to the revs, then your : problem is solved! :-) The PC speaker sound is too loud for me. Perhaps with a sound card it's better. I drive with sound switched off and look at the revs indicator to change gear. By the way, I switch at about 12,500. Which is the best level to switch? Usually engine power drops slightly at the upper rev limit, so I think it's better not pushing it up to 14,000 even if you can't blow the engine. (13,000 is already in the red area). Paolo

: > [...] : You can only utilize keys which are not "hard-coded" for other features in : the game. 'A' is used to accelerate time, and thus can't be used. Space bar : toggles tire changes in the F5 pit radio view and thus can't be used. : ---Jim Sokoloff, Papyrus Too bad. If someone should hardcode something, that should be the end-user, not the developer. :-) Well, I'll get used to the arrow keys. Thanks for you help Paolo

Soooo whats it like then compared to F1GP1 - I have seen some screen shots in SVGA - What system u using & how wekk does the game run in SVGA Regards Robert

Soooooo wheres the DEMO ??? pleazzzzzzzzzzzzzz Robert

: Front wheels in Indicar could look stupid, but this doesn't mean : the ARE stupid. In F1GP it is very annoying not being able to understand when : you are going to hit a curb. Have you ever seen the white line delimiting : the track dizzling away just on the border of the***pit? Well I get : the impression of driving with two wheels on the grass. That's not : realistic. Actually, it's very realistic. In an open-wheel car (or any car), you don't look at your wheels to determine your track position. By the time you get there, it's too late. Your eyes should be focused much further down the track. If you use your wheel location as an input to your driving, you are being "reactive" rather than "proactive". You must commit to a corner (entry, apex, and exit points) long before your tires actually reach them if you're going to be fast. : Anyway, real drivers can see their wheels, so why shouldn't I? (if this : is a simulation....). Only if they look towards them. A race driver does not, in his normal field of vision, notice his front tires. He is looking much further ahead. : It is also really annoying not being able to see : cars you are trying to overtake (or viceversa) when they are at your side. : I can't remember how many collisions I made with those invisible cars when : we were proceeding at the same speed and I just steered a little bit and hit : the damned car. Agreed. No current sim offers a decent version of peripheral vision. : I'd like to be able to turn my head (30 degrees will suffice) and look : around. Again, you can do it on a real car. Yes, but how would you implement that in a sim where the car is moving at 200 MPH? Perhaps with a VR helmet, but I can't see it being workable from a joystick or keyboard. : I know it too late for F1GP2, but perhaps someone will put : wheels on cars and a neck unders drivers' heads in some future program :-) Hey, if you want necks, no problem... :-) : Now, a suggestion to Papyrus guys. I tryed to play Nascar Racing with the : keyboard. The key combinations you can use in Nascar aren't very good. They : can't be compared to the only key combination of F1GP.( a-z accelerate/brake : , . steer left/right, ALT - SPACE shift down/up). It is also very difficult to : keep the car on the track. Perhaps the problem is that the standard setup : is really poor and I try to drive a Nascar car like a F1 car. However I : suspect that the steering help in F1GP makes the difference. If this is : the case, Papyrus should implement something like that. It's no point : making the game too difficult to play with the keyboard: are they trying : to sell joysticks? :-) Furthermore, it seems to me that the visibility : of F1GP tracks is better than Nascar ones (despite the textures). : I'm talking about VGA mode, obviously. Well at least MPS got the keyboard, steering help, and track view right... Regards, --Brian Ferguson | "When I'm racing, I'm alive. | LFRS '95-96 --Newmarket, ON, CAN | Everything else is just | Uranus-Nissan --

I liked this game on the amiga (circa 1987). it was difficult to drive however do you had to learn the tracks. i drove using the mouse to steer and two fingers for changing gears, left and right mouse buttons for acc/brake. excellent stuff. the driver perspective changed as you turned the wheel which was disconcerting at first, but is true to life. Go drive around a tight corner and check were you're looking! or take a tight corner in indycar and check which side of the screen you're trying to look aroun! For me this was the best control system ever, but it was also the first driving game i'd played so perhaps has too much nostalgia value. brian _________________________________________________________ Harrier Storage Solutions Legato NetWorker 42 Ivanhoe Road, Finchampstead AMASS, Baydel Berkshire, RG40 4QQ EuroLogic, Banyan http://www.harrier.com HP, IBM, Sun, DEC Uk Phone 1734 328 282 SG, NT, Novell Fax 731 130 _________________________________________________________

I know that menu, but the program ignores me when I press 'A'. <<< 'A' is reserved to invoke accelerated time. We don't allow you to configure conflicting controls. Rick Genter Technical Lead, IndyCar Racing II Papyrus Design Group, Inc.

Sheesh, all that whining about the "need" to see your front wheels. Just drive in front, and intimidate the shit out of the people you are about to lap! That way you will not need to see your wheels!

> On the subject of peripheral vision, there is a great deal to be said > for a developing a system such that we can gain a better feel for > the surrounding drivers' actions earlier... > Thomas Does anyone remember Ferrari F1 by Electronic Arts (?). That did use a helmet-cam type of view. You turned the wheels and your view moved with them. I actually found this much more difficult to drive ! The game itself was maybe not so great - but another interesting feature was the 'time'. You had to make sure your cars left the factory in time to get to the race and testing had to be done in the time between races! Rob -- "Why care about the weather it always ends in dark " Big Country "East of Eden"

Yes, I remember EA's Ferrari F1 and still think its _content_ is the BEST of any PC auto racing game ever released. I would still be playing it if one could only use joystick buttons for shifting :) Loved that Fiorano test track, flames coming out of the exhausts, travel, calender etc. etc. If EA made a sequel for it today, would happily pay $100 for it :) Hunter Havens

I agree totally: if someone could just combine the racing-athmosphere of F1GP, the technical accuracy of Indycar and the race-surroundings -athmosphere of Ferrari F1, then there wouldn't be ANYTHING left to desire ! =~^\/^~=~^\/^~=~^\/^~=~^\/^~=~^\/^~=~^\/^~=~^\/^~=~^\/^~=~^\/^~=~^\/^~ signature requires __,,,,_ fixed-pitch font , _ ___.--'''`--''// ,-_ `-. \`"' ' || \\ \ \\/ / // / ,- `,_ /'` \ || Y | \|/ / // / -.,__ `-, / _.-. .-\,___| _-| / \ \/|_/ | `-._._) `-' f/ | / __/ \__ / |__/ \ `-' | -| \__ \ |-' | __/ /__,-' ) ,' _|' (((__.-'((___..-'((__,' "Tiger run around the tree......" =~^\/^~=~^\/^~=~^\/^~=~^\/^~=~^\/^~=~^\/^~=~^\/^~=~^\/^~=~^\/^~=~^\/^~

> Soooooo wheres the DEMO ??? pleazzzzzzzzzzzzzz > Robert As I said in my orignal posting, the demo was made for the ECTS Show in London (Sep '95) and appeared on the Microprose stand. They will NOT be releasing it to the public :-( -- ------------- | /"""\ MATT!| | | | | W | | | \_/ | | | Any resemblence of this picture to | \___/ / | any persons, fictional or not, is | | / | purely coincidental. -------------

Quoted text (14 lines)

>>the following: >>>Well at least MPS got the keyboard, steering help, >>I think the steering on Indy and NAS was just right - it meant it >>wasn't just an arcade game, but was a simulation. >>-TFW >But at least you can play F1GP on a notebook (for those long, boring >flights). ICR with the keyboard is just a tedious, tire scrubbing >exercise in futility. Personally, I'll take the "artificial" steering >if it allows me this flexibility. When I am back at home, I turn the >steering help off and use a stick.

I've been observed on a very long flight (15 hours) with a joystick connected to a notebook computer... running ICR. (Ddin't have F1p then.) -- Brian Wong Systems Engineering Group (Servers)

Quoted text (8 lines)

>the following: >>Well at least MPS got the keyboard, steering help, >I think the steering on Indy and NAS was just right - it meant it >wasn't just an arcade game, but was a simulation. >-TFW

But at least you can play F1GP on a notebook (for those long, boring flights). ICR with the keyboard is just a tedious, tire scrubbing exercise in futility. Personally, I'll take the "artificial" steering if it allows me this flexibility. When I am back at home, I turn the steering help off and use a stick. -- Stephen Ferguson

: : : In F1GP you can't see the revs gauge if you use the external vision. : : [snip re. peripheral vision] : : Surely you don't drive looking at the rev limiter? You need to be : : able to drive and change gear by listening to the revs, then your : : problem is solved! :-) : The PC speaker sound is too loud for me. Perhaps with a sound card it's : better. I drive with sound switched off and look at the revs : indicator to change gear. By the way, I switch at about 12,500. Which is : the best level to switch? Usually engine power drops slightly : at the upper rev limit, so I think it's better not pushing it up to : 14,000 even if you can't blow the engine. (13,000 is already in the red : area). I have found (of course, I'm not the quickest driver :-) ), that 12,750 is about optimum. To better enable me to grab exact shift points, I always run with GPperf enabled. (GPperf V2 or later provides a dash-mounted LED display of 3 configurable rev points, two yellow and one red). I set the two yellow LEDs to come on together at 12,500 and the red to come on at 12,700. The LEDs are very visible without having to look directly at them. In the lower gears, I shift when the yellows come on (reaction time will result in an actual shift point near 12,750. In fifth, and on some tracks, fourth, I shift when I see the red. I'd be very interested in anyone else's use for this feature. BTW, you can get GPperf (and the other _must have_ goodies) from Dave Gymer's excellent site at http://www.mal.com/~dgymer/f1gp/ Regards, --Brian Ferguson | "When I'm racing, I'm alive. | LFRS '95-96 --Newmarket, ON, CAN | Everything else is just | Uranus-Nissan --

> : I'd like to be able to turn my head (30 degrees will suffice) and look > : around. Again, you can do it on a real car. > Yes, but how would you implement that in a sim where the car is moving > at 200 MPH? Perhaps with a VR helmet, but I can't see it being workable > from a joystick or keyboard. Have you ever tried turning your head at 200MPH? I suspect that you'd find the buffeting was not at all comfortable. It is also a completely useless thing to do in the context of a racing game, where the purpose is to concentrate ahead and drive fast, not admire the pretty flowers by the trackside. Also, you mention lack of peripheral vision, but again, this is something you don't get an awful lot of when you're strapped into a racing helmet! If you want realism, then don't forget progressively covering the screen with oily gunk as you race ;-) If you ask me, they got the keyboard wrong. Playable, but not ideal IMHO. I used to play Revs on the humble Beeb, and that had excellent keys - once you were used to them. I hate having to play the game with an auto gearbox, but the naff manual control for gear changes in F1GP really bugs me (get on the grass and try to get into 2nd or 3rd gear without going into a spin... This is because you can't change up a gear unless you've got the accelerator pedal on the floor. Revs was much better, in its use of "change up" and "change down" gear keys, so you could select a gear without having to use the throttle. Sortof like a real car, really). I'm not saying MPS should replace the keyset, just offer a way of configuring it that will allow me to program in the Revs keys! Actually, the only real thing I've seen that is wrong with F1GP2 is that I don't have a copy of it yet! Arrrrgh! ;-) -- Whatever it was I just said was probably just personal opinion rather than the official view of my employer.

going into a spin... << Em, EXTREMELY easy. It's extremely UNusual to spin after you're on the grass unless you want to (if you spend time to practice and become good). you've got the accelerator pedal on the floor. Yes you can...... Just go into the settings and disable the gear/throttle linkage (which is there to make the game easier for people as it's more intuitive, less realistic). Read the manual maybe? <G> Cheers! John -- oooO _ _ Oooo John Wallace, Edinburgh (Scotland) ( ) / ) ( \ ( ) CompuServe : 100347,3560 \_)(___) (___)(_/ oooO Oooo

Quoted text (9 lines)

> > : I'd like to be able to turn my head (30 degrees will suffice) and look > > : around. Again, you can do it on a real car. > > Yes, but how would you implement that in a sim where the car is moving > > at 200 MPH? Perhaps with a VR helmet, but I can't see it being workable > > from a joystick or keyboard. > Have you ever tried turning your head at 200MPH? > I suspect that you'd find the buffeting was not at all comfortable.

Doesn't make any difference if you did - you'd just see a big blur. Try taking a motorbike ride at 150mph - your vision just telescopes to a box the distance, and everything else is just a blur, and the blur is worse the closer things are. Something like a trackside wall or verge is impossible to make out deatils. I'm sure I've seen the same thing from film taken on F1 mounted cameras racing down the main straight... -- John - "Nice computer, but I couldn't eat a whole one....."

: Try taking a motorbike ride at 150mph - your vision just telescopes to : a box the distance, and everything else is just a blur, and the blur is : worse the closer things are. Something like a trackside wall or verge : is impossible to make out deatils. I'm sure I've seen the same thing : from film taken on F1 mounted cameras racing down the main straight... For mere mortals, this is undoubtedly true; however, F1 drivers are believed to rely a lot on peripheral vision - Gilles Villeneuve, in particular, trained his vision with eye exercises to improve his abilities. Whether GV could see as much in his mirrors as you can in Indycar2 is somewhat doubtful, however! :-) [Who hasn't ridden a motorbike at 150mph, but has driven a Ferrari at 165mph (legally) - so there :-)]