GP2 vs F1RS

Hello ALL! I am interesting in your comparison of GP2 and F1RS, especially in physical and driving model and graphical feeling of speed I am fan of GP2, but prefer F1RS now. -- Bye Konstantin Bakanovich

Quoted text (9 lines)

>Hello ALL! >I am interesting in your comparison of GP2 and F1RS, especially >in physical and driving model and graphical feeling of speed >I am fan of GP2, but prefer F1RS now. >-- >Bye >Konstantin Bakanovich

No comparison. While GP2 was good during it's time, it's time is now over. Nothing right now compares to F1RS - it wins in all categories if you have a 3Dfx card. Rob "Dead Meat"

Quoted text (16 lines)

>>Hello ALL! >>I am interesting in your comparison of GP2 and F1RS, especially >>in physical and driving model and graphical feeling of speed >>I am fan of GP2, but prefer F1RS now. >>-- >>Bye >>Konstantin Bakanovich >No comparison. While GP2 was good during it's time, it's time is now >over. Nothing right now compares to F1RS - it wins in all categories >if you have a 3Dfx card. >Rob >"Dead Meat"

I do agree with that, but GP2 is still a good game !!!

>No comparison. While GP2 was good during it's time, it's time is now >over. Nothing right now compares to F1RS - it wins in all categories >if you have a 3Dfx card. It doesn't win in ALL categories, but it makes a compelling case for being the best overall sim right now. Randy Randy Magruder Contributing Reviewer Digital Sportspage http://www.digitalsports.com

I must have played GP2 for several THOUSAND hours!!!! But, sadly (or gladly?), F1RS has replaced GP2 on my machine.......I have a 3DFX Monster 3D and PII 300, I tried to fire up GP2 and go to Monaco, something I've never been able to do with all detail on, and do a quick race. My 2D card is a Matrox Millenium, and even with 64mb 10ns SDRAM and 300mhz, I still couldn't race with all detail in GP2 at Monaco. Just yesterday, I raced a short race at Monaco in F1RS, and it was incredible. That course is so tight, I'm glad I qualified on pole, because I would have had trouble passing.....anyway, the detail and graphics was outstanding! I'm partially through my first full season at 25%, and it's great. I don't ever recall racing a season on GP2....I must have raced the first three or four races of the F1RS season on Sunday afternoon. I'm frantically trying to help my dad upgrade his 486 to a system capable of running F1RS so we can race together over Kali, something I've never been able to do with my dad. (My dad grew up watching F1 in the 60's, Jimmy Clark was his favorite, he has been a F1 fan since...). To make this long story short, get F1RS, and a 3DFX card, and you're set. And if you're thinking that the cost of the 3DFX is not worth it for one game, that's what I thought a year ago when I bought my Monster 3D just to play GLQuake....Now I have four games that I play 3DFX versions of and I don't even play Quake or Quake2 anymore......so many games are now making 3DFX versions, it's worth it. Craig Marcho http://www.cmpu.net/public/marcho/

Hello! In what categories GP2 is better, than F1RS? -- T??! Konstantin Bakanovich

Quoted text (13 lines)

> Hello! > > >No comparison. While GP2 was good during it's time, it's time is now > > >over. Nothing right now compares to F1RS - it wins in all categories > > >if you have a 3Dfx card. > > It doesn't win in ALL categories, but it makes a compelling case for > > being the best overall sim right now. > In what categories GP2 is better, than F1RS? > -- > T??! > Konstantin Bakanovich

GP2 Vs F1RS Here's a rundown : Car physics, dynamics, and handling are better in Gp2 The use of sound and sound in general is better in GP2 The menu system is better in GP2 F1RS has variable weather which is it's best feature Sensation of speed is better in GP2 The replays in GP2 have sound and you don't have to turn it off like F1RS Track accuracy is terrible in F1RS......... Gp2 tracks are more faithful AI is better in GP2 You can control graphics and driver aids in GP2 from***pit......Not F1RS You can get all the latest***pits and editors for GP2 on Net....F1RS is has only just begun in this area The telemetry is about same on both.... The rear mirrors in F1RS are basically useless....too small Even with best setups in F1RS handling is bit sloppy F1RS is very inconsistent in graphics area .....some tracks look great and others look terrible..........eg., Imola, canada,Suzuka GP2 is very consistent .....all tracks look great GP2 works great out of the box and doesn't need patches Gp2 is much more refined In Gp2 you can't rev to 17,500 is less than 1/4 sec like F1RS Cheers

Hello! Please specify. I think dynamics is better in F1RS because of greater differences in speed at low and high points. Handling is same. And what about physics - who know... Only in speed terms. Completely disagree. It possible to drive F1RS without sounds and without looking at speedmeter. Try this in Gp2. 3DFX make its work great in this area. May be. It's not important I think Monako, Belgium,Argentina,Montreal is great in F1RS. Suzuka - yes, it is flat :( In what aspects? Please specify tracks and points at the track. Don' think so. May be 50/50. Not important - in F1RS aids off graphics all on - allways! Hey, GP2 is more than 1,5 years on the market. F1RS is only 1 month an get first utilities already. Rear mirror in GP2 is not very accurate. It is simulator, not arcade game - may be try better setup. Espessially Montreal, Nurnburgring, New Imola, New Silverstoune... ;). Hungary is not very good in GP2. It's your choise - rev or not. -- T??! Konstantin Bakanovich

Hi, Mr. Dot! snip don't think so! You only hear your own car, that's bad... it's faster, can be used with keyboard, but it's akward nevertheless Now, ICR2 has a good menu system... yes! don't think so you get a little better performance if you turn it off, OTOH I don't need 1 lap replays with sound... a few elevations are wrong, but it's not terrible! 1994? 95? i don't think so not needed, cause it flies in the highest graphic setting, and who changes driver aids during a race, do you? Well, it's new, isn't it? No, there is no way to compare telemetry for 2 different setups in F1RS! You missed one of few advantages GP2 has over F1RS... ;^) too realistic...? eeeeeh, sloppy??? I think, compared to the dated graphics of GP2 all tracks look great... No stinking support from Microprose was the reason for no patches! BTW, the biggest patch needed was a non-existant hardware patch: a Pentium III for >25 fps... Yep, joystick control got better but is still not okay.. l8er ronny -- |\ _,,,---,,_ I want to die like my Grandfather, ZZZzz /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ in his sleep. |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' Not like the people in his car, '---''(_/--' `-'\_) screaming their heads off!

Your opinion...I think that F1 Racing Sim absolutely blows GP2 out of the water for feel... Disagree ....the sound in F1 Rs gives me shivers wailing into bus stop and all of a sudden I hear the sound of another right off my shoulder...nah F1 Rs hands down. Agreed but both programs menu's were designed by people more interested in being cute than useful. Points to neither in this category. Thats an understatement...I would go so far as to say that GP2 is not even in the competition due to its lack of weather. Sorry to be so harsh but some of the most brilliant displays of driver brilliance in F1 has come in the Rain or the between. Not on my computer...again coming into Bus Stop or going thru Eau Rouge in F1 Racing Sim is UNPARALLED in ANY sim...still blows me away that they could get the feeling so damn right. If this is not what your seeing check your system. Again bragging about replays in either of these sims is pointless since both do it so poorly. For an example of how to do it right please start up and drive any Papyrus sim. Points to neither.. Ummm I take it you have made personal surveys? Until then thats not an issue..both sims allow people to set unrealistic times...points to neither. See above...also I doubt it...as for one example...no off camber in GP2...oops. Oh you must have a different version than I do...I find the AI in F1 Racing sim to be at least as good and in some ways much better... Truth is I would rather not fidget with that stuff..and since Im usually so busy trying to stay on line I wouldnt be able to hit the button anyway. Useless feature..points to neither. Well now thats really reaching...GP2 is dead. eh...the King is Dead Long live the King. F1 Racing sim is the King...the utilities are coming. I give the edge to GP2 probably only because Im used to it. . Hey that sounds like the description of real mirrors in F1 cars...great they got it right. Sloppy compared to what...GP2...??? Sloppy compared to your experiences in driving the FW-xx for Williams...compared to what. To me it feels excellent....the transition from understeer to oversteer feels absolutely great..being so quick. Ummm really reaching again..... Wait great compared to what...GP2..ok yup. Great compared to F1 Racing sim?....hehehehehe...your not serious...or you dont have F1Racing sim. Guess your right....since Geoff "the Legend" didnt see fit to include Rain...and then convinced everyone that they didnt need it in a realistic simulation of F1. Let me say this again....I dont consider GP2 a simulation of F1 because it doesnt have rain. You MUST have rain to simulate F1. No rain no simulation...nice game...but not a simulation. Actually the driving model in F1 Racing sim is worlds better than GP2.. Thats odd I have heard F1 cars....and actually F1Rs is a bit slow... Pierre Pierre PAPA DOC Legrand Infamous Pink Flamingo Pilot...

. heeft geschreven in bericht ... I don't think so. My car slowly rolls back when I'm on a slope, doesn't happen in GP-2 Yeah... I can't hear a car I'm passing in GP-2.... There's pitradio in F1-RS, ambient sound too. Okay, that's a big advantage GP2 has over F1RS. Nope... ONE of it's best features. HELL NO!!! All drivers state that racing Monza and Hockenheim is like racing in an open topped tunnel (Duh) with green walls. You just look at the trees in Monza and Hockenheim in both GP-2 and F1RS. GP2 keeps individual trees, F1RS they blend into each other due to the speed they are drawn on the screen. GP-2 replay: 5 seconds. Okay, Suzuka is way off, but GP-2 has some terrible tracks as well. Interlagos is NOT accurate. Those CC racers happily keep ramming their car into another car that has come to a stop in front of them. In F1RS, they back off, and drive around them. In GP-2 cars being lapped casually ram you of the road, in F1RS they veer off. So? I don't NEED to control the graphics in F1RS from the***pit because surprise, it runs happily ever after. THAT is a complaint? AFAIK, the first editor for GP-2 wasn't out as soon as the editor for F1RS now is. F1RS is WAY more extensive. I take F1RS mirrors over GP-2 anyday. You can't set you car up correct than. I've been able to improve Interlagos setup gaining me SIX seconds in the way. And I HATE Interlagos, one the most difficult circuits, IMO, to drive, because you can't go flat out in corners where you think you can. There's both under and oversteer in Interlagos, trying to find the ballance is a big challenge and requires days of testing and testing and failing until one moment, you lap 1:18:XXX. I know 1:15 is the f1sim-site record, but I'm edging Hills true pole. No aids. Wonderful feeling. Yeah sure... That is a complaint? Man, ALL games these days DO NOT work out of the box. That's a complaint? It's real life fact. Unless you think Renault engineers are fools...

>GP2 Vs F1RS Here's a rundown : OK Good I like rundowns... Ok thats it! We can stop right here. I'll make it short. Just ditto everything papadoc said. Suffice it to say that mr '.' is a little off in his rundown. Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes.

Just call 1-800-UBI-SOFT. I received mine the next day. -- Kevin (Remove the "x-" prefix from my address in order to reply via email)

I still haven't found F1RS in stores: where did you people buy it at?

Quoted text (16 lines)

> >Hello ALL! > >I am interesting in your comparison of GP2 and F1RS, especially > >in physical and driving model and graphical feeling of speed > >I am fan of GP2, but prefer F1RS now. > >-- > >Bye > >Konstantin Bakanovich > No comparison. While GP2 was good during it's time, it's time is now > over. Nothing right now compares to F1RS - it wins in all categories > if you have a 3Dfx card. > Rob > "Dead Meat"

> > > >No comparison. While GP2 was good during it's time, it's time is now > > > >over. Nothing right now compares to F1RS - it wins in all categories I tend to agree with ths above poster in general, for my money F1RS is the better sim except for the sound which I understand has been fixed now. I have GP2 also and like it, however the following post is rather inaccurate IMO. On what do you base this opinion? Where is the proof? I assume you have driven an F1 car, otherwise what do you base this opinion on? Agreed. But there is now a patch for F1RS's sound. I dont agree, I find no problem with either menu system. True on the feature but I dont agree that it is the best one, graphics and car handling are what appeals to me the most. For one thing the canned spin routine in GP2 is absent which is a major improvement IMO. Maybe, depends on the viewer I would say, I dont have a problem with it. I dont turn sound off in replays, the grossly too short replays of GP2 are worthless AFAIC. How so? I find Monaco for instance to look exactly like what I see on TV, GP2's Monaco is not this good, the same can be said for other tracks also, I know that Suzuka and a couple of others are not as accurate. See above. No way, the AI in F1RS is the best I've seen, it even goes as far as to mimic actual drivers style, GP2s is good too but no way is it superior to F1RS IMO. Minor consideration at best, who uses driver aids anynow? As far a controling graphics from the***pit, I dont see too many real life F1 cars controlling the world from the***pit ;). So how on earth is this a valid argument for which is the best sim? F1RS is already getting support in this area and it certainly wont be long until it is equal to or superior to GP2 in this. Ubi even goes so far as to help in creating options so I dont think it'll be too long until F1RS surpasses GP2 in this either. Agree, GP2 has possibly a little better telemetry. Wrong again, have you ever looked at the mirrors on a real F1 car? They are also far from useless IMO. Wrong again, F1RS cars can be set up to be every bit as good as those in GP2, its just a matter of fiddling to fine tune. Only as far as track accuracy maybe, the graphics are superior in every other way, the sunlight/shadow on the tracks is a great feature, the differing degrees of mist/fog/drizzle/hard rain is as real as it is possible to get. No, all tracks look the same, the graphics are decent but they dont come close to F1RS in looks AFAIC. Considering GP2 was never finished, this argument doesnt hold water. Patches that improve the game are an asset rather than a liability. How so? Explain please. Have you ever heard an F1 engine accellerate? I would say Ubi comes pretty close to matching real world performance, you can fine tune throttle response if you are not happy with it also. Trev

>> The use of sound and sound in general is better in GP2 >Agreed. But there is now a patch for F1RS's sound. I thought the sound patch was only for 3D soundcards. I didn't think it would help my Ensoniq Soundscape or a normal SoundBlaster at all. -- Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes.

GEEEEZ Im right there with you on that wish...I mean its a single race and there is NO practice or qualifying meaning I dont get to see the track and dont see it until Im there and F1 Rs thinks its a grand idea to drop on the starting grid while its pissing cats and dogs with slicks....uh oh. That needs to be fixed. Pierre Pierre PAPA DOC Legrand Infamous Pink Flamingo Pilot...

On Wed, 21 Jan 1998 12:20:46 -0800, Laurence Lindstrom

Quoted text (7 lines)

>> In Gp2 you can't rev to 17,500 is less than 1/4 sec like F1RS > Next time you are at an F1 event, get a Saturday pit pass and >hang around the Ferrari pit. When you see Shumacher's car >idling, reach out and hold the throttle link open. You can find >out how long it takes to run the RPMs up, and the pit crew will >get a laugh out of it.

Right before they kill you. :-) Eagle Woman Remove the spam blocker NOSPAM to email me. http://www.nh.ultranet.com/~alison

This is the second time I have read someone stating that it is realistic the way the revs shoot up in F1RS because it is what the F1 cars do in the garage. Am I missing something, or isn't it the case that UNLOADED revving is completely irrelevant and the point is that an F1 car wouldn't do it on the track when it has to accelerate the whole drivetrain plus car mass at the same time? As we see from the in car shots? However, accelerating on the track in F1RS is just like free revving?

Well...having seen them a few times in person...and been in view of the pits...yes thats what they do....instant revs. The modulation is all in the drivers foot....wild eh...hey its just like the F1 RS.<VBG> PAPA DOC Pierre PAPA DOC Legrand Infamous Pink Flamingo Pilot...

We've all driven cars (except Richard of course :-) !!), and these are subject to the same physical laws as the ones being simulated. From that you can get an idea if the car responds more or less in the manner you would expect. I thought it added "3d" sound rather than fixing the samples? You may be in a minority here, since by far the majority of posts I've seen describe problems with the F1RS menus. They are pretty poor IMO. Absent? Replaced by a different type of canned spin IMO. Less intrusive to the driving and not as glaringly obvious, 720s at very low speeds are extremely common. I doubt that would be common with the grip afforded by those tyres. So you never used them? :-) Suzuka and Hungaroring are very poor, and others like Silverstone, Interlagos and the like have their problems as well. Very few of the tracks in F1RS have a "finished" feel to them for me. I really disagree with you here Trev. The AI in F1RS are good in terms of lines, performance, staying on the track etc, but they're kinda poor for racing. I find them much too obliging, and too willing to hop off-line, giving up a position to avoid an accident. That makes them pretty easy. I think so - the lack of overlays is bad in F1RS and a general air of being less user-friendly (although that's my gripe about the menus again!). Patches that are required to _fix_ the game are however a liability, and GP2 didn't require any of these. If GP2 is so fundamentally broken and unfinished there has to be an incredible amount of utter boneheads out there who have bought it and supported it for this long. Having attended more GPs than I care to remember I'd have to say the throttle response in F1RS is pretty accurate, at least in the way the revs pick up in neutral. I believe it's something to do with the engine having less inertia to be overcome (flywheel effect) and so the revs can pick up and fall off incredibly quickly. The cars sound incredible in the pits. I recall hearing Irvine's(?) spare car being revved up in the pits during the Argentinian GP in recent years after a first corner stramash. It was hitting peak revs and falling off about twice per second as they blipped the throttle, and the sound just made your hair stand on end! That said, I think F1RS has a problem with modelling throttle response while _in_ gear, with the revs picking up too quickly. As I mentioned in the Sim Racing News review, I think this is an issue of the sound rather than the engine itself (the engine only appears to be doing that thanks to the sound). Cheers! John

>>On what do you base this opinion? Where is the proof? I assume you have >>driven an F1 car, otherwise what do you base this opinion on? >We've all driven cars (except Richard of course :-) !!), and these are >subject to the same physical laws as the ones being simulated. From >that you can get an idea if the car responds more or less in the >manner you would expect. Agreed. F1RS does act as I would expect. Correct. If you have a 3D sound card you should probably give it a try. The one sound sample I cannot stand is the downshifting sound. If you are using autoshifting it will drive you nuts. Besides, real men/women use manual :-) I don't have a problem with the menu system at all. I do have a problem that the global settings are not managed properly. But that does not have a thing to do with the menu system. I also don't like the fact that you cannot abort a race without letting the race run it's course in accelerated time. I also have been saying the the RESTART command is disabled for me. It is there but does nothing when I select it. It appears that you need F1RS installed on C: for RESTARTS to work. I have it on F: and will keep it there :-) FWIW I found out about F1RS on the C: from UBIsoft (F1master). In real life or in F1RS for you? I don't see 720's in either. Wow. I'm glad I don't know diddly about these track layouts. Even though I have seen every F1 race (OK 90%) in the last 13 years. IMHO, the tracks are *VERY* well done. The blind corners and elevation changes are what I like. Also, I can finially get a feel for going around a hairpin in F1RS. I never got that feeling in WC or GP2. Situational awareness in first rate in this game. I finially know where in the heck I am. I am also finding that I am memorizing the tracks very easily in F1RS. I don't know if it is because I have played World Circuit and GP2, or because the graphics and crisp and clear and I can actually see where I am going. Does it? I find that much better than not knowing you are there and taking you out. IMHO if you have the inside line and you have sufficent position on them, they give up the corner as in real life. I have also seen the AI close the door on me when I didn't have the position for the corner. You sound like you drive like Jean Alesi and would rather take someone out than admit defeat and give up the corner :-) "He should have known he could not pass me there" is a famous Prost quote when he took Senna out in one race. Or perhaps you would prefer if the AI acted like Schumacher in the last race when he purposely bashed into J.V. in the last race of '97? And speaking of Alesi, does anyone think his AI is just a little too strong in this game? I know he is french but come on!!! Alesi being so strong is the only problem I have with the AI :-) Yes we did. It was unfinnished because of lack of rain/weather. But it was the best available at THAT time. I am one bonehead who properly put GP2 in the garbage can :-) How can you tell this? -- Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes.

On Fri, 23 Jan 1998 09:18:09 -0600, "Greg Cisko" >Agreed. F1RS does act as I would expect. ...and not as I would, or at least not to the extent of GP2 or ICR2. I do, and it does. As does the engine sound, the plank scraping sound, the "tyres on wet road" sound, the....okay, you get the picture :-) In F1RS. Actually not 720s, it does one complete revolution and then another half revolution. In that case you're right, you don't know the tracks very well. How about the blind corner with elevation change at Hungaroring? Except of course that it doesn't have an elevation change. Suzuka has also been mysteriously flattened. At least Spa is done well, but Suzuka, my favourite track, is utterly ruined. They don't do that in GP2 or ICR2 either. I don't see how it can be construed as a good point that the AI do everything that GP2 offers except actually race you. If you had kept your foot in and gone for the gap the AI would have backed off and given you the turn. That's what makes it too easy. If the _engine_ was hitting peak revs it would mean that all of that drive was being passed to the rear wheels. Since I am not going at a speed relative to the engine speed/gear that could only mean the wheels were spinning and thus I would be spinning also, since I have a lot of steering lock on at the corner I use for testing this (first Lesmo). Since I _don't_ spin yet the engine revs are leaping between full and idle as I pump the throttle, I can only surmise it must be the sound sample rather than the model of the engine. Cheers! John

>How about the blind corner with elevation change at Hungaroring? >Except of course that it doesn't have an elevation change. Suzuka has >also been mysteriously flattened. At least Spa is done well, but >Suzuka, my favourite track, is utterly ruined. I've said it before and I'll say it again. The best F1 track re-creations are on Formula One: Championship Edition for the Playstation, as are the best sounds :) Randy Randy Magruder Contributing Reviewer Digital Sportspage http://www.digitalsports.com

Quoted text (15 lines)

> >> In Gp2 you can't rev to 17,500 is less than 1/4 sec like F1RS > > Next time you are at an F1 event, get a Saturday pit pass and > >hang around the Ferrari pit. When you see Shumacher's car > >idling, reach out and hold the throttle link open. You can find > >out how long it takes to run the RPMs up, and the pit crew will > >get a laugh out of it. > This is the second time I have read someone stating that it is realistic the > way the revs shoot up in F1RS because it is what the F1 cars do in the > garage. Am I missing something, or isn't it the case that UNLOADED revving > is completely irrelevant and the point is that an F1 car wouldn't do it on > the track when it has to accelerate the whole drivetrain plus car mass at > the same time? As we see from the in car shots? However, accelerating on the > track in F1RS is just like free revving?

You have no control in your right foot. Or you should simply set 1st gear to a higher ratio.

> I still haven't found F1RS in stores: where did you people buy it at? Hurstville, Sydney, Australia. Pop in when your in the area :)

IMO. << This is certainly one of the worst and most frustrating points in Gp2. In was also present in Gp1 and was high on my list of expected improvements when Gp2 came out. I was very disapointed to find this 'feature' was retained. I hope that this is finally removed with Gp3 and replaced with a real-to-life spin system. Phillip McNelley

<Snip> Static friction is greater than the friction when two surfaces are moving against each other. When I see the RPM shoot up, it's because my tires are spinning. When this happens, the mass of the car is removed from the equation you describe above. I believe the strength of this sim is in it's vehicle dynamics. It just feels right, like the cars are distant relatives of those that I've driven. GP2's cars were *** and fun, but totally removed from my driving experience. I have no way of knowing which is more accurate. Larry

>I've said it before and I'll say it again. The best F1 track >re-creations are on Formula One: Championship Edition for the >Playstation, as are the best sounds :) Hmm, the tracks in F1RS aren't _THAT_ bad that they would make me put up with that sort of driving model though... ;-) Cheers! John

>Hmm, the tracks in F1RS aren't _THAT_ bad that they would make me put >up with that sort of driving model though... ;-) I agree. I don't know why such a big fuss is made over the tracks in F1RS. To me they seem better than GP2, and fairly representive of the real thing. At least it is close enough where I don't worry about it :-) -- Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes.

On Sun, 25 Jan 1998 00:11:05 -0600, "Greg Cisko"

Quoted text (7 lines)

>>Hmm, the tracks in F1RS aren't _THAT_ bad that they would make me put >>up with that sort of driving model though... ;-) >I agree. I don't know why such a big fuss is made over the tracks in >F1RS. To me they seem better than GP2, and fairly representive >of the real thing. At least it is close enough where I don't worry about >it :-)

Well, I was making a negative point about the Psygnosis effort which shouldn't be construed as a positive comment about the tracks in F1RS! ;-) The tracks in F1RS which are finished are very good, but the effect is spoiled by the likes of Suzuka and Hungaroring which are disaster areas. Suzuka is, IMO, the best track in F1, and I was real disappointed to see it so far from the mark. That said, the _shape_ of the track itself seems fine, so I'm guessing it was an issue of time that they couldn't manage to get the elevation right. I'm still hoping for a patch..... (Hello, Ubi Soft....) Cheers! John

I would guess the requirement to release before the end of the year had something to do with it...Ubisoft is not shy about extremely large patchs so lets not lose hope that they will bring this up to standard. PAPA DOC Pierre PAPA DOC Legrand Infamous Pink Flamingo Pilot...

>disappointed to see it so far from the mark. That said, the _shape_ of >the track itself seems fine, so I'm guessing it was an issue of time Oh I see. I guess I was only taking the shape of the track into account. That is why I didn't understand why you didn't like it. I understand now :) The elevation of many of the other tracks seems awesome though. IMHO much more apparent than GP2. -- Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes.

> While I love the sound of a fine machine, the audio I hear > from F1 TV coverage is a roar of exhaust accompanied by a > buzzing and rattling racket. To me not a purely pleasant sound. Maaate, you've obviously never heard the V12 in the Ferrari 412T2 before. Painfully loud bouncing off the walls in the streets of Adelaide, but very satisfying. Not as good as a Mercedes-Benz W125, but thats another story. -Jono Hill

Quoted text (7 lines)

>>Hmm, the tracks in F1RS aren't _THAT_ bad that they would make me put >>up with that sort of driving model though... ;-) >I agree. I don't know why such a big fuss is made over the tracks in >F1RS. To me they seem better than GP2, and fairly representive >of the real thing. At least it is close enough where I don't worry about >it :-)

Well, I went to the Montreal F1 GP each year since 1989, and all I can say is that it is so unreal that I laugh at it each time I race there (well, its the only track that I am "decent" with some 1:19:xxx times). I posted a long post somewhere in r.a.s. about 4days ago about the Montreal track in F1RS, compared to Gp2. It should be a good base for Ubisoft "I hope". Well you maybe think "So what?". I understand for you, but for me who is living 5mins from the track it is one of the major flaws of the game. Kinda like the Japan F1RS lover who lives just across Suzuka. Sorry for him :-( * Fran?ois Mnard * With great respect, * May the downforce be with you, * Good race at the Brickyard, (-o-) * <ymenard> on NROS, sponsored by * http://www.awpss.com/ * SimRacing director, AWPSS * Official Mentally retarded guy of r.a.s. * Excuse me for my English (I'm French speaking) * Excuse me for my provocative posts and reply's <g> begin 666 ymenard.vcf M0D5'24XZ5D-!4D0-"DXZ3>EN87)D.T9R86[G;VES.TXN#0I&3CIY;65N87)D M3#M#14Q,.U9/24-%.DXO00T*5$5,.TA/344[1D%8.DXO00T*0412.TA/344Z M.SLQ,30V.2!/=FED92U#;&5R;6]N=#M-;VYT<F5A;"U.;W)D.U%U96)E8SM( M3E1!0DQ%.C$Q-#8Y($]V:61EL97)M;VYT/3!$/3!!36]N=')E86PM3F]R M%W<'-SO;2\-"E523#IH='1P.B\O=W=W%W<'-SO;2\-"D5-04E, M.U!2148[24Y415).150Z>6UE;F%R9$!A=W!S<RYC;VT-"D5.1#I60T%21 T* ` end

net> Distribution: : : Well, I went to the Montreal F1 GP each year since 1989, and all I can say : is that it is so unreal that I laugh at it each time I race there (well, its : the only track that I am "decent" with some 1:19:xxx times). I posted a long : post somewhere in r.a.s. about 4days ago about the Montreal track in F1RS, : compared to Gp2. It should be a good base for Ubisoft "I hope". : : Well you maybe think "So what?". I understand for you, but for me who is : living 5mins from the track it is one of the major flaws of the game. Kinda : like the Japan F1RS lover who lives just across Suzuka. Sorry for him :-( : Is the GP2 representation accurate? I have never driven on Montreal's circuit, but the versions in the Playstation Formula 1 game and F1RS seem rather "stretched out", especially in the area of T3-T6 or so. I also agree that realism should take precedence over flashy graphics. I find the environment much more immersive if I know that it is replicating the real world track. I always found the ICR2 tracks fairly accurate (apart from details like artificial walls instead of chicane curbs) and it didn't matter to me if I had to turn some detail off, because under it all was, for example, a Toronto track that looked exactly like the Toronto track that I snuck onto with my car one quiet July evening :) Stephen

Who gives a stuff? You, I and fifty zillion others will never, ever race in a F1 car on an F1 circuit, for Christ's sake!! The accuracy of the reproduction of a track has no bearing at all on whether the sim is enjoyable or not. -- Bruce. (At home)

On Thu, 29 Jan 1998 23:42:04 흝, Bruce Kennewell >Who gives a stuff? >You, I and fifty zillion others will never, ever race in a F1 car on an >F1 circuit, for Christ's sake!! >The accuracy of the reproduction of a track has no bearing at all on >whether the sim is enjoyable or not. For you. I, however, give a stuff, and if I'm racing in a simulation I expect it to be as realistic as is practical - that extends to all aspects of it. Why do you think Papyrus offered the N2 fantasy tracks as a free download but sold their renditons of the real tracks? Licensing money is one issue, customers having more interested in true-to-life circuits being the other. Cheers! John

On Thu, 29 Jan 1998 23:42:04 흝, Bruce Kennewell >Who gives a stuff? >You, I and fifty zillion others will never, ever race in a F1 car on an >F1 circuit, for Christ's sake!! >The accuracy of the reproduction of a track has no bearing at all on >whether the sim is enjoyable or not. Would you be happy with any thing at all as long as it had the right name? I'll assume not, but please correct me if that's a wrong assumption ;-). So at some point the accuracy of the track ceases to match your expectations. If the standard of the track is sufficiently worse than what you deem acceptable then your enjoyment of it will be diminished. That's all anyone is saying. If people have different expectations because they might know the tracks better then isn't that their privilege? BTW - for those who think that describing inaccuracies in the tracks is somehow an attack on your favourite sim of the month, maybe you should consider that it is in some ways a compliment. If the differences in the tracks didn't have any effect on the way the car is driven, no-one at all would be bothered about those differences <g> Cheers, Richard

>On Thu, 29 Jan 1998 23:42:04 흝, Bruce Kennewell <snipped bashing on me only because my last name is Mnard> Well, maybe someday some company will sell him a sim with Talladega with a chicane. Heck it's "looks" like the track, but I will never driver a NASCAR at this track, So I don't care ! <ggg> Well, maybe not him, but ouch I wouldn't want to see r.a.s. flaming them ! (ducking at the big flameball thrown at them!) I just hope UbiSoft is listening, maybe someday in the next version they will fix some of the track accuracy's. Same at thing at Papyrus. All of them. We are just helping them create a better game. I never said "This track s*cks it's plain sh*it". Look at a previous post Bruce I made about all the inaccuracies of the F1RS Montreal track. Well, any person that have ever raced on it agree that there is flaws. I'm just illustrating facts that can make this game better. If we would had shut our mouth on the Cart:PR flaws, NROS flaw, Nascar2 flaws, etc, etc... I don't think some of these games would have been patched. Btw I love F1RS it's my favourite simracing title after N2 and SODA. Even in D3D ;-) (waiting for the Voodoo2 to put with my STB Velocity128 AGP). Customers happy = more $ales in the future. * Fran?ois Mnard * With great respect, * May the downforce be with you, * Good race at the Brickyard, (-o-) * <ymenard> on NROS, sponsored by * http://www.awpss.com/ * SimRacing director, AWPSS * Official Mentally retarded guy of r.a.s. * Excuse me for my English (I'm French speaking) * Excuse me for my provocative posts and reply's <g> begin 666 ymenard.vcf M0D5'24XZ5D-!4D0-"DXZ3>EN87)D.T9R86[G;VES.TXN#0I&3CIY;65N87)D M3#M#14Q,.U9/24-%.DXO00T*5$5,.TA/344[1D%8.DXO00T*0412.TA/344Z M.SLQ,30V.2!/=FED92U#;&5R;6]N=#M-;VYT<F5A;"U.;W)D.U%U96)E8SM( M3E1!0DQ%.C$Q-#8Y($]V:61EL97)M;VYT/3!$/3!!36]N=')E86PM3F]R M%W<'-SO;2\-"E523#IH='1P.B\O=W=W%W<'-SO;2\-"D5-04E, M.U!2148[24Y415).150Z>6UE;F%R9$!A=W!S<RYC;VT-"D5.1#I60T%21 T* ` end

Steve Ferguson wrote I wrote <snip> Gp2 is a great model of the 1994 Montreal track. The only flaw is the Senna Chicane, but the elevation change after is perfect. The track changed many times because of Ayrton Senna's death, so the frontstrech before the pit chicane as been changed a lot since 1994. Btw this year there will not be any change between turn3-6 because of Olivier Panis's crash AFAIK. In the F1 PS game it's accurate but not as in Gp2 (but still better than F1RS). And yes the tracks are streched out between T3 and T6. In real life they take Turn2-5 full speed. They only brake for the upcomming chicane. It's the best modelled part of Gp2 Montreal track. Heheh ! I agree. I would rather have perfect realism that flashy graphics. Kinda why I like SODA so much. Icr2 track were very very accurate for the time the sim was out. And Toronto was one of the best modeled track in Icr2. I am kinda "picky" on track realism. I dream of the Glen without a innerloop wall :-) * Fran?ois Mnard * With great respect, * May the downforce be with you, * Good race at the Brickyard, (-o-) * <ymenard> on NROS, sponsored by * http://www.awpss.com/ * SimRacing director, AWPSS * Official Mentally retarded guy of r.a.s. * Excuse me for my English (I'm French speaking) * Excuse me for my provocative posts and reply's <g> begin 666 ymenard.vcf M0D5'24XZ5D-!4D0-"DXZ3>EN87)D.T9R86[G;VES.TXN#0I&3CIY;65N87)D M3#M#14Q,.U9/24-%.DXO00T*5$5,.TA/344[1D%8.DXO00T*0412.TA/344Z M.SLQ,30V.2!/=FED92U#;&5R;6]N=#M-;VYT<F5A;"U.;W)D.U%U96)E8SM( M3E1!0DQ%.C$Q-#8Y($]V:61EL97)M;VYT/3!$/3!!36]N=')E86PM3F]R M%W<'-SO;2\-"E523#IH='1P.B\O=W=W%W<'-SO;2\-"D5-04E, M.U!2148[24Y415).150Z>6UE;F%R9$!A=W!S<RYC;VT-"D5.1#I60T%21 T* ` end

> Who gives a stuff? Obviously the people voicing their grievences. They have got just as much right as the rest of us. I dont think Im the only one who doesnt give a stuff about all the dribble you right in this newsgroup. Your damn right, thats why we play these games. But it would be nice if the tracks where close to accurate. I dont know Bruce, if all the tracks where ovals or figure eights, I think it would detract from the game! -- Todd A Norbury URL : http:/www.zeta.org.au/~todd Please remove nospam from email address.

(snip) for those who think that describing inaccuracies in the tracks is somehow an attack on your favourite sim of the month,............. (unsnip) No, Richard.......attack away if that is your desire. I'm simply astounded at the nit-picking that goes on. We are talking about, what?.....$80?.....worth of "game", that nit-pickers seem to think should be so accurate in every detail, from the handling of the vehicle if a 1mm adjustment is made to the left-rear camber through the geophysical mapping of a circuit in both elevation and plan!!! This isn't a couple of million dollars worth of, for example, aircraft flight simulator, where a small innacuracy in the system could lead a pilot to land 200 feet short of a runway in real life. This is a SIMULATION.......a GAME!!!! If you want 100% accuracy and correctness in every detail, including vehicle physics/dynamics and geophysical mapping, spend a few tens of thousands of dollars and contract a specialist to create for you a unique SIMULATOR. If you are not prepared to outlay that amount of money, simply ask yourself this question:- Have I got my eighty bucks worth? If the answer is 'yes', then stop being so picky. If the answer is 'no', learn from the experience and complain to the production house. -- Bruce (at work) "Laziness is nothing more than the habit of resting before you get tired." (Jules Renard)

On Fri, 30 Jan 1998 15:46:40 흝, Bruce Kennewell >This is a SIMULATION.......a GAME!!!! The games I am interested in all claim how well they simulate the real world. It is therefore perfectly valid to discuss how well each one achieves this. If you don't like such discussions then simply keep out of them. I'm not 'attacking' anyone or any sim producer and it's not my fault if you read into my posts what is simply not there. The developers who desire to produce realistic sims welcome constructive feedback. How else are they going to judge what is and is not appreciated by the market? It's certainly my experience that the developers respond much better to criticism than those who fawn all over the latest sim only to end up slagging it off when the next one appears. Cheers, Richard

Quoted text (9 lines)

>On Fri, 30 Jan 1998 15:46:40 흝, Bruce Kennewell >>This is a SIMULATION.......a GAME!!!! >The games I am interested in all claim how well they simulate the real >world. It is therefore perfectly valid to discuss how well each one >achieves this. If you don't like such discussions then simply keep out of >them.

Correct! I think what most people do not understand with the type of discussion we have been having, is the net result is we all learn quite a bit about the subject! -- Header intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes.

Quoted text (13 lines)

> >On Fri, 30 Jan 1998 15:46:40 +1100, Bruce Kennewell > >>This is a SIMULATION.......a GAME!!!! > >The games I am interested in all claim how well they simulate the real > >world. It is therefore perfectly valid to discuss how well each one > >achieves this. If you don't like such discussions then simply keep out of > >them. > Correct! I think what most people do not understand with the type > of discussion we have been having, is the net result is we all > learn quite a bit about the subject!

I agree too, but this bring up a point for me (yes I`ve been following this and a few other threads much like it), what is the "best" sim ? 1: F1RS with it`s innacurate (to some extent) tracks 2: GP2 with it`s "riding the rails" (to some extent) driving model (my favourite) 3: CPR with it`s flawed AI 4: CART with what I belive is a traction bug Not that I care wich is actually the best, as I will probably have them all in a short time (missing CPR as it`s not released here yet), but I`m wondering what the rest of you feel is more important in a game that is trying to simulate a "real" thing. Beers and cheers (uncle) Goy

Hi Goy, Good question! For me it is the drive model. Which one conveys the feel of speed -traction and the loss of it- bumps- even sounds I guess influence whether or not I feel Im driving/ racing. Beers & cheers to you too Goy! Aloha, Mike

>I agree too, but this bring up a point for me (yes I`ve been following >this and a few other threads much like it), what is the "best" sim ? Well I have played all the auto sims you mentioned plus many more. *FOR ME* the best is F1RS, buy a huge margin. Small track inaccuracies (if they are really there) do not take anything away from the game to me. Many people feel strongly that the track inaccuracies ruin the game at those tracks for them. That is fine by me as it really doesn't impact my enjoyment for the game at all. -- Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes.

>I agree too, but this bring up a point for me (yes I`ve been following >this and a few other threads much like it), what is the "best" sim ? I try and avoid 'best' type discussions as it's invariably a personal thing and I'm not sure that it is particularly constructive. However.... To me, driving model is the single most important item for a racing sim. It has to be believable and respond to the inputs (both wheel/pedals & setup changes) in a consistent and rational manner. If the driving model is seriously flawed then nothing else could compensate for it. After that, it is the atmosphere created by the sim - 'suspension of disbelief' is the oft used and apt expression. In some ways this doesn't have to mean utmost realism. For instance, we've been talking about the (mostly) minor track inaccuracies in F1RS - well, they are *way* more accurate than GP2's; and yet GP2 somehow managed (IMHO at least) to convey the right atmosphere for the tracks. F1RS does as well, but GP2 did it by suggestion whilst F1RS does it by stunning grahpics. ICR2/CR is a another good example of this. In the (non-3D) version of Elkhart Lake it does a great job of giving the impression of driving through a heavily wooded landscape without actually trying to draw very many CPU-killing trees close to the track. Atmosphere also includes items such as the drivers you are racing against ('Driver X' wasn't UbiSoft's fault but it kills the atmosphere - thankfully Martin Granberg solved that one for us <g>), the paint schemes of the cars, implementation of the rules of the formula, etc. Finally we have the AI which for me varies greatly depending on how good it is. I tend to spend a lot of time hotlapping and developing setups. So if the AI is so, so it doesn't greatly bother me. But if the AI is very good (SODA, the CCG NASCAR2 AI projects improvements, GP2 when the CCs have had their BHP & grip levels increased) then I can really feel that I am racing against them and it is enjoyable to do so. And as to which one is 'best'? Well, whatever you currently enjoy the most of course <g> Just don't expect everyone else to have exactly the same view ;-) Cheers, Richard

> I try and avoid 'best' type discussions as it's invariably a personal > thing and I'm not sure that it is particularly constructive. However.... Agree, I was just trying to get the discussion going... Couldn't have said it better myself :-) Well I would have put in AI here, as I like to race other cars. I don`t have many opportunities to race humans, this is why I`m so upset about NROS being for the US only (NROS with the TPTCC patch and converted road track would be "heaven" for me) My feelings exactly, when the graphics gets as good as in F1RS, I immediately start noticing things that are incorrect, but with lower quality graphics I don`t expect everything to be perfect as long as it is in the "right neighborhood" because my immagination takes care of the rest Yep, I spent the necessary time in GP1 punching in all the right names and such because it was a series I knew a lot about and it "had" to be right, but in N2 (or SODA), I don`t care because I only know a few names anywy Well I don`t hotlap, but I do practice a lot for things like the TPTCC and in that sense AI isn`t important, but when I take all that time and try to convert it into racing, I get really mad when I get punted off by computer cars (me punting off them is no worry of course :-) when you know there is a bunch of other guys who have gotten through their races and are submitting the results when I`m spitting gravel, so to me AI is maybe THE most important thing To me, GP2 with a TPTCC patch would be the ultimate offline sim I guess (Jan,Jed,David N. are you listening ? :-), but I think it`s the adjustability in Papyrus` sims that makes them good, not the driving model (which I happen to think is wrong, I don`t get the results from the setup adjustment that I expect after reading all those books on the subject) and that is why I chose N2 and TPTCC instead of one of the many others out there, very good ones I might add Beers and cheers (uncle) Goy

>> *FOR ME* the best is F1RS, buy a huge margin. Small track inaccuracies >> (if they are really there) do not take anything away from the game to me. >> Many people feel strongly that the track inaccuracies ruin the game >> at those tracks for them. That is fine by me as it really doesn't impact >> my enjoyment for the game at all. > At all????????????? Nope not at all. Now if the tracks were *WAY* off then that of course would be a problem. But the main problems are really at 2 tracks as far as I know. Hungary & Japan. I drove Hungary and to me it was not off enough to make any type of difference. I haven't done Japan yet (it is next). Remember 14 of the tracks are good as far as I know. Estoril is awesome, the corkscrew reminds me of going backward at Laguna Seca. And that track is very bumpy. After all it isn't like the tracks are as bad a Road & Tracks Grand Prix or anything. Also lets remember we are discussing small elevation changes. Changes which really seem to affect only a small number of people. The basic shape and size of the tracks are there. -- Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes.

Quoted text (9 lines)

> >I agree too, but this bring up a point for me (yes I`ve been following > >this and a few other threads much like it), what is the "best" sim ? > Well I have played all the auto sims you mentioned plus many more. > *FOR ME* the best is F1RS, buy a huge margin. Small track inaccuracies > (if they are really there) do not take anything away from the game to me. > Many people feel strongly that the track inaccuracies ruin the game > at those tracks for them. That is fine by me as it really doesn't impact > my enjoyment for the game at all.

At all?????????????

Yes Estoril is really alot of fun and when you get a cracking lap it feels excellent. But SPA in the fog is my favorite thing in F1 Racing sim....maybe one of the top three things Ive done in a Sim of any kind.......solo. Unbelievable..... PAPA DOC -- >Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes.

On Fri, 30 Jan 1998 15:46:40 +1100, Bruce Kennewell

Quoted text (7 lines)

>No, Richard.......attack away if that is your desire. I'm simply >astounded at the nit-picking that goes on. >We are talking about, what?.....$80?.....worth of "game", that >nit-pickers seem to think should be so accurate in every detail, from >the handling of the vehicle if a 1mm adjustment is made to the left-rear >camber through the geophysical mapping of a circuit in both elevation >and plan!!!

What we are talking about is F1RS simply being able to do what other sim manufacturers have done in the past. Nothing like the exaggerated level you describe above, merely improving on what has been done before. Take the current benchmark as your standard, and then add the improvements you want to make. Et Voila! Accurate tracks aren't an unattainable Utopia, Psygnosis already managed to do them with their "Formula One" title. ICR2 models very well the adjustments in camber and influence on temps, pressures, grip, wear and the like - what is wrong with looking for other sim manufacturers to do the same? Cheers! John

Quoted text (24 lines)

> >> *FOR ME* the best is F1RS, buy a huge margin. Small track inaccuracies > >> (if they are really there) do not take anything away from the game to me. > >> Many people feel strongly that the track inaccuracies ruin the game > >> at those tracks for them. That is fine by me as it really doesn't impact > >> my enjoyment for the game at all. > > At all????????????? > Nope not at all. Now if the tracks were *WAY* off then that of course > would be a problem. But the main problems are really at 2 tracks as > far as I know. Hungary & Japan. I drove Hungary and to me it was not > off enough to make any type of difference. I haven't done Japan yet > (it is next). Remember 14 of the tracks are good as far as I know. > Estoril is awesome, the corkscrew reminds me of going backward > at Laguna Seca. And that track is very bumpy. > After all it isn't like the tracks are as bad a Road & Tracks Grand > Prix or anything. Also lets remember we are discussing small > elevation changes. Changes which really seem to affect only a > small number of people. The basic shape and size of the tracks > are there. > -- > Header address intentionally scrambled to ward off the spamming hordes.

I think that when a *sim* is given the license for something like F1 that the tracks should be at least as good as any previous attempt. Else the "F1" part loses it's meaning. I see this as just 1 more pitiful result of a game being rushed to the shelves for Xmas. And what's worse is that from what I hear, Ubi has no intention of fixing this - especially Japan. I think that those responsible for giving licenses for these sims should insist on set standards before giving the license out. But of course that might mean giving it to someone offering less money, hehehehehe.

(snip) Nothing like the exaggerated level you describe above, (unsnip) I don't consider that to be exaggerated in the slightest. Have there not been examples.....many examples.....of people commenting on the accuracy or otherwise of both car handling and of circuits? One instance comes to mind concerning CPR......there was a thread about how the elevation changes were/were not accurately mapped. There has also been comment regarding the elevation accuracy of circuits in GP2 and F1RS. My point is simply that people....some people....do not accept the fact that in every $80 simulation there have to be trade-offs, otherwise that $80 would soon double. These people seem to forget that the simulations are not being issued to us as an act of charity: they are being produced by organisations running to a budget and controlled by accountants and that these organisations have to make a profit in order to bring us the next simulation. They also overlook the fact that whether (for example) the banking on a particular corner should really be 18 degrees instead of 20 is unimportant if the whole package is enjoyable. The 2 degree difference is immaterial from where we sit. (snip) Psygnosis already managed to do them with their "Formula One" title. (unsnip) Fine....and the trade-off was a pathetic AI, non-cockpit driving view and a product that could hardly be grouped in the same class as GP2 or F1RS. That this initial release was not accepted by the sim-racing enthusiast is edvidenced by the fact that they are releasing a v2. Says a lot for the accuracy of the tracks when nobody really wants to class it as a "simulation", doesn't it? (snip) what is wrong with looking for other sim manufacturers to do the same? (unsnip) Nothing.....just don't expect it to be done for the same price, that's all. If....from what we have been privy to so far....GP Legends has everything that is being proposed, then I will buy this simulation even if the price doubles, because I too enjoy authenticity just so long as the whole package offers a worthwhile sim-racing experience. However, if they haven't mapped Spa to the nth. degree, or don't include a moving suspension feature, I won't whinge about the innacuracy of the product. --- Bruce. "I envy people who drink. At least they have something to blame everything on." (Oscar Levant)

On Fri, 30 Jan 1998 16:24:59 -0600, "Greg Cisko" >Well I have played all the auto sims you mentioned plus many more. >*FOR ME* the best is F1RS, buy a huge margin. Small track inaccuracies >(if they are really there) do not take anything away from the game to me. They are there, believe me, the inaccuracies are inaccurate :-) Cheers! John

>Finally we have the AI which for me varies greatly depending on how good >it is. Wow, really going out on a limb there Richard - it varies depending upon how good it is? Really sticking your neck out... :-) Cheers! John

Quoted text (58 lines)

> (snip) > Nothing like the exaggerated > level you describe above, > (unsnip) > I don't consider that to be exaggerated in the slightest. > Have there not been examples.....many examples.....of people commenting on > the accuracy or otherwise of both car handling and of circuits? > One instance comes to mind concerning CPR......there was a thread about how > the elevation changes were/were not accurately mapped. There has also been > comment regarding the elevation accuracy of circuits in GP2 and F1RS. > My point is simply that people....some people....do not accept the fact > that in every $80 simulation there have to be trade-offs, otherwise that > $80 would soon double. These people seem to forget that the simulations > are not being issued to us as an act of charity: they are being produced by > organisations running to a budget and controlled by accountants and that > these organisations have to make a profit in order to bring us the next > simulation. > They also overlook the fact that whether (for example) the banking on a > particular corner should really be 18 degrees instead of 20 is unimportant > if the whole package is enjoyable. The 2 degree difference is immaterial > from where we sit. > (snip) > Psygnosis already managed to do them with their > "Formula One" title. > (unsnip) > Fine....and the trade-off was a pathetic AI, non-cockpit driving view and a > product that could hardly be grouped in the same class as GP2 or F1RS. That > this initial release was not accepted by the sim-racing enthusiast is > edvidenced by the fact that they are releasing a v2. Says a lot for the > accuracy of the tracks when nobody really wants to class it as a > "simulation", doesn't it? > (snip) > what is > wrong with looking for other sim manufacturers to do the same? > (unsnip) > Nothing.....just don't expect it to be done for the same price, that's all. > If....from what we have been privy to so far....GP Legends has everything > that is being proposed, then I will buy this simulation even if the price > doubles, because I too enjoy authenticity just so long as the whole package > offers a worthwhile sim-racing experience. > However, if they haven't mapped Spa to the nth. degree, or don't include a > moving suspension feature, I won't whinge about the innacuracy of the > product. > --- > Bruce. > "I envy people who drink. At least they have something to blame everything > on." > (Oscar Levant)

Points taken on both sides of the fence but I do disagree with you refering to these sims as $80 products. The better these sims are the more they sell - something that should be budgeted for. Of course, such companies need the initial funds but if they do it right they should have no problems getting their money back and then some. If they sell twice as many then the effective price is $160 and the overall return is huge eg GP2 and ICR2. It's a matter of a company having the balls to set out on such a path and having the skill/determination to see it through. For me, track accuracy is a close second to driving model in importance.

> My point is simply that people....some people....do not accept the fact > that in every $80 simulation there have to be trade-offs, otherwise that > $80 would soon double. EXACTLY me too .. and they went to Jordan, and expected most F1 cars to be reasonably similar.whereas Ubi went to the undisputed top (Renault) & got it right. Another thing ... if everyone wants an ULTRA realistic SIM, I'll make it. hee hee. The only problem will be that hour or so wait on the grid. It'll be real time, you can't skip to the beginning of the race - no no no..., you'll have to sit there and wait for all the formalities.

That's not the case at all Bruce, by that argument would you accept a sim with no***pit view? No engine noise? These are also simple compromises, it just depends upon how each individual compromise hits each individual customer. Some people love Psygnosis F1, even without ***pit view, driving model, AI etc - others hated it. Your idea of a compromised product and someone else's may or may not overlap. How about 5deg? 10? 40 then? At _some_ point it becomes a problem for you - it's not a black or white issue, it's just the shade of grey at which each indivdual cries halt. That was a design decision not at all compromised by having banking. No, because the tracks themselves are hel up as a the best yet seen in an F1 sim. I know what BC did to make the tracks and get the designs perfect, and it was elegant yet simple. It wasn't especially difficult ot time consuming, far less so than coding a driving model such as F1RS. Why put all that effort into a product and then fluff something easy like tracks? Likewise. Price is not an issue for me (cover your ears Mike!) if the product is excellent, but I suspect that the casual buyer would be lost and the overall effect would be a loss of revenue due to a lower number of units sold. No, but if they have you'll be happier right? I'm not saying F1RS absolutely stinks for me, far from it - I gave it 85% and a silver award in the SRN review. It's just that it could bave been better, and Suzuka pushes my buttons since it's a track I really like. I have no illusions that others will share my opinion, but I do expect that they accept my right to hold that opinion. By mentioning it perhaps F1RS2 will be done right in this respect. BTW, on that subject I tried Hungaroring again tonight and it's actually pretty fun. The uphill T4 is still a pale shadow of its former self but the track overall is enjoyable. Not so for Suzuka, still couldn't enjoy it at all. From Spoon through to *** is pretty good, but the rest of the lap is way too flat. Still, one more track I can enjoy :-) Cheers! John