Joe,
Good review. I agree with you totally for the most part. Overall, I
would give it a B simply because the graphics are stunning and the
game is SO fast (3dfx version, that is.) The two things that bother me
most and are almost unexcusable are:
1. The replay. This has been harped on since NFS2 first came out, but
what was EA thinking? The replay system on NFS was perfect -- you
could view a crash right after it happened and then continue the race,
and you could rewind and fast forward. The replay in NFS2 is a joke.
2. No***pit mode for 3dfx. I don't understand this at all. This
alone almost kept me from buying the game. I much prefer the***pit
mode. I have gotten used to racing with the tailcam but I really miss
the***pit. I don't understand why it isn't there.
The only thing that makes this game worth the money is the 3dfx
support because the graphics are so incredible. If I didn't have a
3dfx card and I had bought this game when I already had NFS2, I would
have been sorely disappointed. That is a warning to those of you who
don't have 3dfx and already own NFS2 -- there is NO reason to buy SE.
DON'T DO IT!
As usual, my $.02
Todd Walker
Great indepth review of NFS2SE snipped....
Thanks for the review Joe.
Too bad that EA can't take a hint or listen to any user feedback we sent
on NFS2 and try to remedy the situation with this SE version.
Get a clue EA, we want the COPs back, staged courses and a***pit view.
I would have bought more track and car addons for NFS and a 3dfx patch
would have been just a bonus to a great game.
EA don't waste any more programmers on eye candy and crappy oval tracks sheesh!
There's already a dozen other crappy arcade racers with nothing more than
eyecandy to recommend them, we want more of what made NFS such a great fun
racer, namely the above named features missing in NFS2 and NFS2SE *plus* 3dfx
support.
Disappointed with such a waste of a good engine.
Oh well I will not be buying NFS2SE, hoping for a good TD4 or maybe better NFS3.
Cheers.
--John (who still drives NFS original)
--
--==Note: my real e-mail address is below. Delete the asterisks.==--
Seattle, Washington USA. | http://www.***tex.com/~jsilva
Quoted text (13 lines)
>Need For Speed II SE Review >===================== >Graphics/Visuals and Sound: A- >The graphics and sound in this game are spectacular (assuming you have >a 3dfx, which IMO is required to play this game). They only lose marks >for the lack of a***pit mode when using 3dfx, but to be honest I >don't miss it all that much. The "bumper cam" is positioned such that >it gives you fairly good situational awareness of where your car is. >Some of the scenes - especially on the "natural" tracks like Pacific >Spirit - are spectacular. The sensation of speeds on some tracks is >superb.Yup, it's sad, EA has some strengths (specifically great graphics
programming). But their biggest weakness - their achilles heal,
perhaps - is a complete unwillingness to listen to customers and give
them what they ask for. The features people want in NFS2 have been
made very clear, and were even in an older version of the game - wake
up EA!
Joe
That's another thing I forgot to mention in my review, and would have
taken points off for if I had - accidents were MUCH more realistic and
impressive in NFS1 than in NFS2. Tried racing with traffic on NFS2?
Your car is basically a very fast, nearly unstoppable tank. None of
the metal-crunching, head-spinning head-on collisions of NFS1.
On a related note, I wonder if the bigger problem with NFS2 is pure EA
greed. NFS1 was "sponsered" by Road & Track, who presumably shared
profits made by the game. NFS2 lost the R&T licens, and eradicated
EVERY trace of the original game (cars, tracks, features). It makes me
wonder if the design goal of NFS2 wasn't simply to get away from the
R&T license (which required them to abandon the old cars, tracks, and
features) so that EA could own 100% of the income from NFS2.
Joe
I could not have said it better (see below)!
Another annoying question I have been forced to ask myself after
experiencing the truly awful TD4 Demo:
Why hasn't any game company been able to top NFS(1) and GPII in their
respective fun/sim. categories? 3dfx aside, I haven't seen any graphics
that top NFS for attractiveness and GPII for functionality. And...despite
upgrading to a fancy-schmancy video card and installing a bazillion MB of
drivers and files for DirectX 3 and 5, why can't I achieve the frame rates
on a modern newly-programmed game (that doesn't look any better) that I can
with a couple of old DOS beasts (NFS and GPII)? How is any of this called
progress?!?!
>Disappointed with such a waste of a good engine.
>Oh well I will not be buying NFS2SE, hoping for a good TD4 or maybe better NFS3.
Don't hold your breath for TD4... Download the demo and see for
yourself..
Control is not even NEAR what NFS was, or even NFS2 for that matter.
The only thing that makes it stand out is the 3dfx support, and even
then it's not used to its fullest.. NFS2SE demo looked and played much
better than TD4, IMO.. But check it out for yourself..
Ben
-={ To get my real email address, remove the NOSPAM }=-
SPAMMERS!!! Read this!!!
No spam for me! Unwanted, unsolicited commmercial email
WILL be dealt with.. And, why the hell do you even bother
sending the shit if you don't include your own return address?
Quoted text (11 lines)
>>Disappointed with such a waste of a good engine. >>Oh well I will not be buying NFS2SE, hoping for a good TD4 or maybe better >>NFS3. >Don't hold your breath for TD4... Download the demo and see for >yourself.. >Control is not even NEAR what NFS was, or even NFS2 for that matter. >The only thing that makes it stand out is the 3dfx support, and even >then it's not used to its fullest.. NFS2SE demo looked and played much >better than TD4, IMO.. But check it out for yourself..>This isn't really a bug. You see, when your machine can't handle the
>high speed redrawing, the texture gets updated at slower rate than it
>should be. This was also apparent in NFS1, or in any other racing
>games with detailed road textures.
I don't agree. I think it is caused by the nature of the road texture
itself. It is an accidental "optical illusion" caused by redrawing the
tecture at certain speeds, I agree. But while I've seen somehwat
similar effects in other games, I've seen nothing as bad as the road
out-right stopping/reversing as it does in NFS2. I've also seen some
racers that have better/smoother road textures (Moto Racer) and this
effect doesn't happen at all.
Unfortunately it makes the Australia and Hollywood tracks all but
undrivable for me. And since I wanted a speed road racing game (i.e.,
roads are made out of ashphalt), not a rally game, that leaves only
Canada as a usable track for me. All the other tracks have too many
"wierd" textures like a psuedo-rally game (even the Mexico track has
some of that in that annoying tunnel) so while graphically impressive
I find them unplayable. On the Canada track, with traffic on, I can
occasionally get that "Need for Speed 1 car chase" feeling back, which
is great (although the feeling is broken when you plow through other
cars head-on at 80MPH like the world's strongest tank). But with
essentially one drivable track in the game it's getting old very fast.
Joe
I can't resist adding my sour grapes, I guess that's what they are, but EXCUSE
me if I feel a little pissed off when a game company updates a game like this
within 6 mos of release, and has the nerve to ask me for another $30 for
something I paid full price for once already. The people behind this totally
shameless marketing ploy are complete ***S, plain and simple. A handling
charge is all they should ask for. And of course I should have seen it coming
after they did the same with NFS1.... but it doesn't make it any righter to
do it again. I can't believe no one else seems to think the same way. BTW,
NFS1-SE is now available for like $15 or $20 at CompUSA.
All that said, I kinda like NFS2. But I will never ever buy any stinking
SPECIAL EDITION. Scuse my outburst you all, this is not like me.
Colin Taber
