F1 World Grand Prix

thus spoke: I downloaded it and I deleted it five minutes later. Compared to F1 2000 it is crap. -- Nos

Hi. Has anyone tried this demo? Is it worth the download? I saw it at www.3dfiles.com. -- -- Sven

"Sven" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:8hb5de$snq$[email hidden]... > Hi. > Has anyone tried this demo? Is it worth the download? I saw it at > www.3dfiles.com. I prefer the older Official F1 Racing, but there's not much difference between the two. Apart from the interface.

On Sat, 3 Jun 2000 16:40:34 +0200, "Sven" <[email hidden]> thus spoke: >Hi. >Has anyone tried this demo? Is it worth the download? I saw it at >www.3dfiles.com. I downloaded it and I deleted it five minutes later. Compared to F1 2000 it is crap. -- Nos

That's amazing! I've been tweaking and racing for several hours and I am not sure about it. The graphics are better than F-1 2000, once I found an acceptable combination, and I am still not sure that I've got the best one. There is a lot to adjust, even a choice between "Arcade" and "Simulation" mode. How anyone could make up their mind about this program in five minutes and then admit it is, as I said, amazing. Bill Yowell Nos wrote:

Quoted text (11 lines)

> On Sat, 3 Jun 2000 16:40:34 +0200, "Sven" <[email hidden]> > thus spoke: > > >Hi. > >Has anyone tried this demo? Is it worth the download? I saw it at > >www.3dfiles.com. > > I downloaded it and I deleted it five minutes later. Compared to F1 > 2000 it is crap. > -- > Nos

I wish I'd read that and the Eidos d/l page before I started. File size 66084K. I'd got to 15M before I quit. I'll wait for it on a cover CD. Tony Whitley Nos <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > I downloaded it and I deleted it five minutes later. Compared to F1 > 2000 it is crap. > -- > Nos

[email hidden] (Nos) wrote:

Quoted text (16 lines)

>On Sun, 4 Jun 2000 22:56:46 +1000, "Bruce Kennewell" ><[email hidden]> thus spoke: > >>Nos, you are making the terribly egocentric assumption that everyone has (or >>should have) the same likes and dislikes as you do. We don't. What might >>not appeal to you may be acceptable, even enjoyable, to another.....and vice >>versa. >> >>Show just a smidgin of tolerance, mate. There's no point in verbally >>pounding the bejesus out of a fellow gamer simply because he likes what you >>don't! > >I did no such thing. I simply voiced my opion of a game and then was >attacked for it. I didn't need more than five minutes with FIWGP to >see it's rubbish, IMO. But, I never verbally abused anyone. Must be >that Ozzie to english translation thing.

Why waste so many words on it? Next time just post "It sux!". Adequately informs the reader about the relevance of the opinion. JoH ------- The best way to accelerate a Mac is 9.81 m/s2 -------- --------------------------------------------------------------

On Sat, 03 Jun 2000 16:22:52 -0500, William Yowell <[email hidden]> thus spoke:

Quoted text (7 lines)

>That's amazing! I've been tweaking and racing for several hours and I >am not sure about it. The graphics are better than F-1 2000, once I >found an acceptable combination, and I am still not sure that I've got >the best one. There is a lot to adjust, even a choice between "Arcade" >and "Simulation" mode. How anyone could make up their mind about this >program in five minutes and then admit it is, as I said, amazing. >Bill Yowell

OK, you want me to justify my "crap" comment. First off the front end interface reminds me too much of F1RS, which had a crap front end too. Next I couldn't customize my wheel, everytime I tried to assign the throttle to my acceleration pedal it would lock up. After rebooting three times I gave up. I set the game to full realism and used the default steering wheel set up. Which had put the brake and gas on the same pedal, even though the game recognized my wheel and pedals fine in the front end. Then I drove the sim, graphics looked way more cartoonish than F1 2000 to me. This was on full detail on a P3 @900mhz. Drove the car around for about five minutes. Felt like an arcade game to me so I quit in disgust and deleted the POS and then deleted the downloaded file knowing I would never bother even giving it a second look. Nope, this game is definately "crap". Just like their first version of F1 racing was. There is only one kind of crap and EIDOS knows how to make it. Was that good enough for you or do I have to download it again so that I can justify to *you* calling it "crap"? -- Nos

P.S. I forgot to mention that the cockpit view is really piss poor and looks like a kids toy compared to F1 2000. -- Nos

Nos, I wasn't defending the game; I just thought it amazing that you could reach that conclusion in five minutes. After spending some more time with it, I am inclined to think that you are correct, but don't you agree that some of the posters are too quick to judge? Cheers, Bill Yowell Nos wrote:

Quoted text (31 lines)

> On Sat, 03 Jun 2000 16:22:52 -0500, William Yowell > <[email hidden]> thus spoke: > > >That's amazing! I've been tweaking and racing for several hours and I > >am not sure about it. The graphics are better than F-1 2000, once I > >found an acceptable combination, and I am still not sure that I've got > >the best one. There is a lot to adjust, even a choice between "Arcade" > >and "Simulation" mode. How anyone could make up their mind about this > >program in five minutes and then admit it is, as I said, amazing. > >Bill Yowell > > OK, you want me to justify my "crap" comment. First off the front end > interface reminds me too much of F1RS, which had a crap front end too. > Next I couldn't customize my wheel, everytime I tried to assign the > throttle to my acceleration pedal it would lock up. After rebooting > three times I gave up. I set the game to full realism and used the > default steering wheel set up. Which had put the brake and gas on the > same pedal, even though the game recognized my wheel and pedals fine > in the front end. Then I drove the sim, graphics looked way more > cartoonish than F1 2000 to me. This was on full detail on a P3 > @900mhz. Drove the car around for about five minutes. Felt like an > arcade game to me so I quit in disgust and deleted the POS and then > deleted the downloaded file knowing I would never bother even giving > it a second look. Nope, this game is definately "crap". Just like > their first version of F1 racing was. There is only one kind of crap > and EIDOS knows how to make it. Was that good enough for you or do I > have to download it again so that I can justify to *you* calling it > "crap"? > > -- > Nos

> I prefer the older Official F1 Racing, but there's not much difference > between the two. Apart from the interface. >God help F1WGP then, because OF1R really was BAD! Iain

Hi all. Thanks for the answer. I will not download it. I'll wait for GP3. I hope they will release a demo of it :o) -- -- Sven

On Sat, 03 Jun 2000 20:47:31 -0500, William Yowell <[email hidden]> thus spoke: >Nos, I wasn't defending the game; I just thought it amazing that you could >reach that conclusion in five minutes. After spending some more time with >it, I am inclined to think that you are correct, but don't you agree that >some of the posters are too quick to judge? >Cheers, >Bill Yowell Maybe. But, sometimes things are just obvious. -- Nos

On Sat, 03 Jun 2000 20:47:31 -0500, William Yowell Maybe. But, sometimes things are just obvious. -- Nos

On Sun, 4 Jun 2000 22:56:46 +1000, "Bruce Kennewell" <[email hidden]> thus spoke:

Quoted text (8 lines)

>Nos, you are making the terribly egocentric assumption that everyone has (or >should have) the same likes and dislikes as you do. We don't. What might >not appeal to you may be acceptable, even enjoyable, to another.....and vice >versa. > >Show just a smidgin of tolerance, mate. There's no point in verbally >pounding the bejesus out of a fellow gamer simply because he likes what you >don't!

I did no such thing. I simply voiced my opion of a game and then was attacked for it. I didn't need more than five minutes with FIWGP to see it's rubbish, IMO. But, I never verbally abused anyone. Must be that Ozzie to english translation thing. -- Nos

On Sun, 04 Jun 2000 19:09:53 +0200, Jo Helsen <[email hidden]> thus spoke: >Why waste so many words on it? Next time just post "It sux!". Adequately informs >the reader about the relevance of the opinion. Considering I have owned almost every F1 sim in existence I would say my opinion is very relevant. But, you are right, sux would have sufficed in relation to F1WGP. -- Nos

Take out opinions and RAS would be lacking in posts (and appeal). After a while each and every one of makes a judgement as to which opinions to take notice of (and there are many here). Bare facts often tell us little. How do you describe graphics and sound? What looks great to one may not appeal to another. Physics models are judged by feel. The bare facts are listed in the specs of the games (plus a load of hype). RAS provides the opinions of how those bare facts translate to gameplay, realism and comparison to other sims of a similar ilk. Unfortunately, at times these opinions become extreme and turn into a defensive justification of an opinion - which quickly become of little use to the community at large. That is human nature. Pretty much everything written on RAS is an opinion. Perhaps IMHO should be an assumption we should add TIAF (This is a fact) when quoting genuine facts. It would appear less (IMHO!) :-) Having said all that opinions ought to be backed up with some form of justification - simply saying it sucks or is crap is not very helpful advice. Although generally the justification will also be subjective. Tony "Bruce Kennewell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (19 lines)

> Your OPINION is only relevant to you. That applies to anyone. Opinions are > subjective. > However, if you set out in a readable fashion a list of FACTS relating to > the game after you had tried it, that list certainly would have been > beneficial to all. > Facts are objective. > -- > Regards, > Bruce Kennewell, > Canberra, Australia. > --------------------------- > > Nos <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > On Sun, 04 Jun 2000 19:09:53 +0200, Jo Helsen > > <[email hidden]> thus spoke: > > > > > > >Why waste so many words on it? Next time just post "It sux!".

Adequately

Quoted text (10 lines)

> informs > > >the reader about the relevance of the opinion. > > > > Considering I have owned almost every F1 sim in existence I would say > > my opinion is very relevant. But, you are right, sux would have > > sufficed in relation to F1WGP. > > -- > > Nos > >

In article <[email hidden]>, William Yowell <[email hidden]> wrote: > That's amazing! I've been tweaking and racing for several hours and I > am not sure about it. The graphics are better than F-1 2000, once I > found an acceptable combination, and I am still not sure that I've got > the best one. There is a lot to adjust, even a choice between "Arcade" > and "Simulation" mode. How anyone could make up their mind about this > program in five minutes and then admit it is, as I said, amazing. That's easy, Bill -- it's not GPL! Given that, I'm amazed it took five whole minutes . . . </SARCASM></IRONY> -- JB

Quoted text (17 lines)

> Bill Yowell > > Nos wrote: > > > On Sat, 3 Jun 2000 16:40:34 +0200, "Sven" <[email hidden]> > > thus spoke: > > > > >Hi. > > >Has anyone tried this demo? Is it worth the download? I saw it at > > >www.3dfiles.com. > > > > I downloaded it and I deleted it five minutes later. Compared to F1 > > 2000 it is crap. > > -- > > Nos > >

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

In article <[email hidden]>, NOMAIL wrote: > P.S. I forgot to mention that the cockpit view is really piss poor and > looks like a kids toy compared to F1 2000. Really? I thought the cockpit view in F1WGP was much better than F1 2000 -- it reminds me a lot of the cockpit view in GPL (or maybe a bit more like the optional "rollbar" cam hacked cockpit view in GPL). The in-cockpit view in F1 2000 just looks TOO close to the ground to me, although it probably is pretty accurate based on the actual height/size of an F1 car. -- JB Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

On Mon, 5 Jun 2000 07:46:37 +1000, "Bruce Kennewell" <[email hidden]> thus spoke: >"Attacked"? Where were you attacked? He simply stated that he was amazed >that a conclusion could be arrived at in five minutes. He wasn't amazed at >the conclusion, only the speed at which it was reached! >Anyway.....sorry for any misunderstanding. OK, I wasn't attacked...more like prodded. But, I never attacked him either. Just backed up my comment about only needing five minutes to judge the game. -- Nos

On Mon, 5 Jun 2000 07:56:20 +1000, "Bruce Kennewell" <[email hidden]> thus spoke: >Your OPINION is only relevant to you. That applies to anyone. Opinions are >subjective. >However, if you set out in a readable fashion a list of FACTS relating to >the game after you had tried it, that list certainly would have been >beneficial to all. >Facts are objective. Someone asked for opinions. Therefore; I posted my opinion. What part of opinion don't you understand? Or is it necessary to state that this is my opinion every time? I also backed it up with facts on my second post. Maybe I should download F1WGP just so that I can scientifically dissect it and prove my "crap" comment even further, but it would be just a waste of my time. It doesn't require more then five minutes to judge. Just like I can listen to Britney Spears music for five minutes and see it's crap I can easily do the same with games of the same ilk. -- Nos

Nos, you are making the terribly egocentric assumption that everyone has (or should have) the same likes and dislikes as you do. We don't. What might not appeal to you may be acceptable, even enjoyable, to another.....and vice versa. Show just a smidgin of tolerance, mate. There's no point in verbally pounding the bejesus out of a fellow gamer simply because he likes what you don't! -- Regards, Bruce Kennewell, Canberra, Australia. --------------------------- Nos <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Sat, 03 Jun 2000 20:47:31 -0500, William Yowell > <[email hidden]> thus spoke: > > >Nos, I wasn't defending the game; I just thought it amazing that you could > >reach that conclusion in five minutes. After spending some more time with > >it, I am inclined to think that you are correct, but don't you agree that > >some of the posters are too quick to judge? > >Cheers, > >Bill Yowell > > Maybe. But, sometimes things are just obvious. > -- > Nos

On Mon, 05 Jun 2000 05:22:35 GMT, [email hidden] thus spoke: >Really? I thought the cockpit view in F1WGP was much better than F1 >2000 -- it reminds me a lot of the cockpit view in GPL (or maybe a bit >more like the optional "rollbar" cam hacked cockpit view in GPL). The >in-cockpit view in F1 2000 just looks TOO close to the ground to me, >although it probably is pretty accurate based on the actual height/size >of an F1 car. Yes, I think a real F1 car is very close to the ground while sitting in the cockpit. But, I was more specifically talking about the user feedback, readouts etc. -- Nos

> P.S. I forgot to mention that the***pit view is really***poor and > looks like a kids toy compared to F1 2000. Really? I thought the***pit view in F1WGP was much better than F1 2000 -- it reminds me a lot of the***pit view in GPL (or maybe a bit more like the optional "rollbar" cam hacked***pit view in GPL). The in-cockpit view in F1 2000 just looks TOO close to the ground to me, although it probably is pretty accurate based on the actual height/size of an F1 car. -- JB Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

On Mon, 05 Jun 2000 00:51:04 GMT, [email hidden] (Nos) wrote:

Quoted text (18 lines)

>On Mon, 5 Jun 2000 07:56:20 +1000, "Bruce Kennewell" ><[email hidden]> thus spoke: > >>Your OPINION is only relevant to you. That applies to anyone. Opinions are >>subjective. >>However, if you set out in a readable fashion a list of FACTS relating to >>the game after you had tried it, that list certainly would have been >>beneficial to all. >>Facts are objective. > >Someone asked for opinions. Therefore; I posted my opinion. What part >of opinion don't you understand? Or is it necessary to state that this >is my opinion every time? I also backed it up with facts on my second >post. Maybe I should download F1WGP just so that I can scientifically >dissect it and prove my "crap" comment even further, but it would be >just a waste of my time. It doesn't require more then five minutes to >judge. Just like I can listen to Britney Spears music for five minutes >and see it's crap I can easily do the same with games of the same ilk.

Surely if you listen to music often it must have occured to you that sometimes it requires several hearings to appreciate it? Anyway: anyone will respect even a negative opinion, as long as it is backed up by sensible arguments. The whole point was that the opinion was extremely negative and apparently based on a very short investigation. It simply gives the impression that you weren't willing to give it an honest chance. If you don't want to invest that minimal ammount of attention, fine. But then you better not bother to post this kind of "impression" either! JoH

"Attacked"? Where were you attacked? He simply stated that he was amazed that a conclusion could be arrived at in five minutes. He wasn't amazed at the conclusion, only the speed at which it was reached! Anyway.....sorry for any misunderstanding. -- Regards, Bruce Kennewell, Canberra, Australia. --------------------------- Nos <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Sun, 4 Jun 2000 22:56:46 +1000, "Bruce Kennewell" > <[email hidden]> thus spoke: > > >Nos, you are making the terribly egocentric assumption that everyone has (or > >should have) the same likes and dislikes as you do. We don't. What might > >not appeal to you may be acceptable, even enjoyable, to another.....and vice > >versa. > > > >Show just a smidgin of tolerance, mate. There's no point in verbally > >pounding the bejesus out of a fellow gamer simply because he likes what you > >don't! > > I did no such thing. I simply voiced my opion of a game and then was > attacked for it. I didn't need more than five minutes with FIWGP to > see it's rubbish, IMO. But, I never verbally abused anyone. Must be > that Ozzie to english translation thing. > -- > Nos

Your OPINION is only relevant to you. That applies to anyone. Opinions are subjective. However, if you set out in a readable fashion a list of FACTS relating to the game after you had tried it, that list certainly would have been beneficial to all. Facts are objective. -- Regards, Bruce Kennewell, Canberra, Australia. --------------------------- Nos <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Sun, 04 Jun 2000 19:09:53 +0200, Jo Helsen > <[email hidden]> thus spoke: > > > >Why waste so many words on it? Next time just post "It sux!". Adequately informs > >the reader about the relevance of the opinion. > > Considering I have owned almost every F1 sim in existence I would say > my opinion is very relevant. But, you are right, sux would have > sufficed in relation to F1WGP. > -- > Nos

On Mon, 05 Jun 2000 10:19:51 GMT, [email hidden] (Jo Helsen) thus spoke: >Surely if you listen to music often it must have occured to you that >sometimes it requires several hearings to appreciate it? Certainly. But, it only takes me 2 seconds to loisten to Britney Spears and her ilk to known it is shit. Same applies to certain games.

Quoted text (8 lines)

>Anyway: anyone will respect even a negative opinion, as long as it is >backed up by sensible arguments. > >The whole point was that the opinion was extremely negative and >apparently based on a very short investigation. It simply gives the >impression that you weren't willing to give it an honest chance. If >you don't want to invest that minimal ammount of attention, fine. But >then you better not bother to post this kind of "impression" either!

I did give it a minimal amount of time. Five minutes was all it took. Compared to F1 2000 it's the dog's breakfast. And I'll post when and whatever I feel like. -- Nos

On Mon, 5 Jun 2000 22:52:42 +1000, "Bruce Kennewell" <[email hidden]> thus spoke:

Quoted text (7 lines)

>(snip) >What part >of opinion don't you understand? >(unsnip) > >Hey! Ease up on the acid, pally!! >I'm not denigrating your manhood or insulting a family member!

Pally? Mate? You are coming across with aggressive overtones. I take exception to that. -- Nos

Nos wrote:

Quoted text (14 lines)

> > On Mon, 5 Jun 2000 22:52:42 +1000, "Bruce Kennewell" > <[email hidden]> thus spoke: > > >(snip) > >What part > >of opinion don't you understand? > >(unsnip) > > > >Hey! Ease up on the acid, pally!! > >I'm not denigrating your manhood or insulting a family member! > > Pally? Mate? You are coming across with aggressive overtones. I take > exception to that.

Aw cmon Nos, give us a hug mate :-) Beers and cheers (uncle) Goy "Team Mirage" http://www.teammirage.com/ "The Pits" http://www.theuspits.com/ * Spam is for losers who can't get business any other way * "Spamkiller" http://www.spamkiller.com

Bruce Kennewell > > > Your OPINION is only relevant to you. That applies to anyone. Opinions > > > are subjective. > > > However, if you set out in a readable fashion a list of FACTS relating > > > to the game after you had tried it, that list certainly would havebeen > > > beneficial to all. > > > Facts are objective. Tony Rickard > > How do you describe graphics and sound? > > What looks great to one may not appeal to another. > > (unsnip) Bruce Kennewell > Exactly my point! <pedantic mode on> Ah so you meant back up your opinions with reasoned argument rather than facts? <pedantic mode off> :-) Tony

"I'm in the mooooooooooooooooood for lovvvvvvve, Simply becau--". . . ooop . . . wrong thread. SORRY! --DK "Goy Larsen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...> > Aw cmon Nos, give us a hug mate :-) > > > Beers and cheers > (uncle) Goy >

(snip) How do you describe graphics and sound? What looks great to one may not appeal to another. (unsnip) Exactly my point! -- Regards, Bruce Kennewell, Canberra, Australia. --------------------------- Tony Rickard <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:M8B_4.6378$[email hidden]... > Take out opinions and RAS would be lacking in posts (and appeal). After a > while each and every one of makes a judgement as to which opinions to take > notice of (and there are many here). > > Bare facts often tell us little. How do you describe graphics and sound? > What looks great to one may not appeal to another. Physics models are judged > by feel. The bare facts are listed in the specs of the games (plus a load of > hype). RAS provides the opinions of how those bare facts translate to > gameplay, realism and comparison to other sims of a similar ilk. > > Unfortunately, at times these opinions become extreme and turn into a > defensive justification of an opinion - which quickly become of little use > to the community at large. That is human nature. > > Pretty much everything written on RAS is an opinion. Perhaps IMHO should be > an assumption we should add TIAF (This is a fact) when quoting genuine > facts. It would appear less (IMHO!) :-) > > Having said all that opinions ought to be backed up with some form of > justification - simply saying it sucks or is crap is not very helpful > advice. Although generally the justification will also be subjective. > > Tony > > "Bruce Kennewell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > Your OPINION is only relevant to you. That applies to anyone. Opinions are > > subjective. > > However, if you set out in a readable fashion a list of FACTS relating to > > the game after you had tried it, that list certainly would have been > > beneficial to all. > > Facts are objective. > > -- > > Regards, > > Bruce Kennewell, > > Canberra, Australia. > > --------------------------- > > > > Nos <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:[email hidden]... > > > On Sun, 04 Jun 2000 19:09:53 +0200, Jo Helsen > > > <[email hidden]> thus spoke: > > > > > > > > > >Why waste so many words on it? Next time just post "It sux!". > Adequately > > informs > > > >the reader about the relevance of the opinion. > > > > > > Considering I have owned almost every F1 sim in existence I would say > > > my opinion is very relevant. But, you are right, sux would have > > > sufficed in relation to F1WGP. > > > -- > > > Nos > > > > > >

(snip) What part of opinion don't you understand? (unsnip) Hey! Ease up on the acid, pally!! I'm not denigrating your manhood or insulting a family member! -- Regards, Bruce Kennewell, Canberra, Australia. --------------------------- Nos <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > On Mon, 5 Jun 2000 07:56:20 +1000, "Bruce Kennewell" > <[email hidden]> thus spoke: > > >Your OPINION is only relevant to you. That applies to anyone. Opinions are > >subjective. > >However, if you set out in a readable fashion a list of FACTS relating to > >the game after you had tried it, that list certainly would have been > >beneficial to all. > >Facts are objective. > > Someone asked for opinions. Therefore; I posted my opinion. What part > of opinion don't you understand? Or is it necessary to state that this > is my opinion every time? I also backed it up with facts on my second > post. Maybe I should download F1WGP just so that I can scientifically > dissect it and prove my "crap" comment even further, but it would be > just a waste of my time. It doesn't require more then five minutes to > judge. Just like I can listen to Britney Spears music for five minutes > and see it's crap I can easily do the same with games of the same ilk. > -- > Nos

spoke: More like, beers, steers and ***s. :-) -- Nos

On Mon, 05 Jun 2000 16:00:33 +0200, Goy Larsen <[email hidden]> thus spoke: >Aw cmon Nos, give us a hug mate :-) > > >Beers and cheers More like, beers, steers and queers. :-) -- Nos

Blimey - have I stumbled on the wrong newsgroup? "Nos" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (13 lines)

> On Mon, 05 Jun 2000 16:00:33 +0200, Goy Larsen <[email hidden]> thus > spoke: > > > >Aw cmon Nos, give us a hug mate :-) > > > > > >Beers and cheers > > More like, beers, steers and queers. :-) > > -- > Nos

In article <[email hidden]>, NOMAIL wrote: > On Mon, 05 Jun 2000 05:22:35 GMT, [email hidden] thus spoke: > > >Really? I thought the cockpit view in F1WGP was much better than F1 > >2000 -- it reminds me a lot of the cockpit view in GPL (or maybe abit > >more like the optional "rollbar" cam hacked cockpit view in GPL).The > >in-cockpit view in F1 2000 just looks TOO close to the ground to me, > >although it probably is pretty accurate based on the actualheight/size

Quoted text (7 lines)

> >of an F1 car. > > Yes, I think a real F1 car is very close to the ground while sitting > in the cockpit. But, I was more specifically talking about the user > feedback, readouts etc. > -- > Nos

AH! I agree that the readouts in F1 2000 are MUCH better than those in F1WGP, but I find the "arcade"-style overlays tolerable, given the better view of the road ahead. -- JB Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.