GP3: is this a joke or what????

It manages the full 25 fps all the time for me.

I agree with your analysis fully. Add to that the fact that you cannot link TCP/IP, or sucessfully even use a substitute like Kali (we tried). Also add the fact that unless you have a 2 stick, 4 button wheel, you're out of luck (can't use button 5 and up). I only hope, really hope, that this is an old beta and that this stuff was fixed. On Sun, 23 Jul 2000 21:08:40 GMT, "Karl Zosel" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (81 lines)

>01 Warez: >All of you claiming I should wait for the retail version: I suggest YOU wait >(and PAY) and THEN prove me wrong on the following comments. (or start >crying for the money you wasted) > >02 Menu's: >The menu's are rather poor and lack inspiration, but I don't find that very >important. GPL menus are far more stylish (retro look) and F1 2000's are far >more flashy. F1WGP is better too. >The good thing about GP2 was that you could save a race in the middle of a >race. A bad thing was that when u wanted to restart a race, you always had >to go through 5 menu's to get back to bussiness again. >As you might have guessed: They didn't bother to change this. Anyway: this >is not a reason NOT to buy GP3. > >03 Graphics: >F1 2000 looks much better (and so does SCGT, SUPERBIKE, ....) It obvious >they only added more detail to GP2. The graphics engine is still the same, >and its a disaster: if you want an acceptable framerate the game just slows >down, and just like in GP2, you can't trust the estimate framerate indicator >in the graphics panel. Anyway they should have dropped this graphics engine >long ago, because its way behind todays standards. >The only thing I find ok are the scenery (horizon). The Cars all have the >same shape and what really very ANNOYING is that the cars just don't blend >into the rest of the picture. This is very obvious with rain: the cars look >as if they are DRAWN upon the rest of the image, which makes it hard to >enjoy the feel of the game. Its as if you are looking at a bad cartoon. >The pit sequense is still the same: cars flying in the air: would it have >been so hard to draw a jack? The pit crew looks awful, really 1996-ish. The >graphics of this game are bad. > >04 Sound: >In 6th gear it sounds as if you are driving HARD TRUCK 2. Totally worthless, >GP2 was better in this respect. >And the fact that you can only hear your own car is unacceptable too, even >if you can only hear your own car while racing in a real F1. When racing on >a PC you want to feel the ambience of a real race. When you have spinned in >GP3, and you wait for all the other cars to pass, you hear NOTHING AT ALL. >Its really awfull. In this respect GP3 is just a very bad game. >What I hate the most is the awful sample you hear everytime you go to a >lower gear: its a real joke. > >05 Car physics >The same: GP2 level, which by todays standards is VERY BAD. >SCGT, F1 2000, F1WGP, .. are all MUCH MUCH better. And the implementation of >a wet track are done badly too: when you slightly touch your throttle at the >start you will spin like hell, but if you hit your brake full at 300 km/h in >the wet the car will just .. stop... Realism? >Overal the feel is bad: its no fun to race GP3: you never feel u are >fighting a car, although I must admit that I like the tracks. > >06 Artificial intelligence >Just as bad as F1 2000, unfortunately. When you spin all the other cars just >run into you if you are on the racing line. > >Conclusion >If you compare GP2 AND GP3, its obvious that very little effort was made. I >wonder why it took so long to make an upgrade for GP2. All the effort went >into advertising, not programming, thats for sure. >The game is virtually the same, just SLIGHTLY better graphics on an ever >worthless graphics engine. Gameplay and realism are the same (which were ok >by 1996 standards, but not by todays), only rain was added and done badly by >the way. >If you are looking for a nice modern F1 game: buy F1 2000, it looks far >better than GP3 and it simulates far better the overal feel of a F1 race. >If you want a modern F1 sim: wait, or stick to MGPRS, F1 2000, ... > >Note: For those of you who feel we should pay for GP3 just to stimulate >future Racing simulator makers to keep on producing racing sims: think about >this: >IF GP3 becomes a HIT, what lessons will the gaming industry learn from it? >Just look for a name (Crammond) and do a good advertising campagne, and DONT >worry too much about the programming: and the money will come in. >I just hope PAPYRUS WILL NOT DECIDE TO FOLLOW THIS STRATEGY. >But chances are they will... :( > >DONT BUY CRAPPY GAMES: TRY BEFORE YOU BUY > > > >

The guy below hits the nail right on the head, i felt exactly the same way after playing this overhyped piece of junk. I'd never buy it, F1-2000 is going to have to do for now. On Sun, 23 Jul 2000 21:08:40 GMT, "Karl Zosel" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (81 lines)

>01 Warez: >All of you claiming I should wait for the retail version: I suggest YOU wait >(and PAY) and THEN prove me wrong on the following comments. (or start >crying for the money you wasted) > >02 Menu's: >The menu's are rather poor and lack inspiration, but I don't find that very >important. GPL menus are far more stylish (retro look) and F1 2000's are far >more flashy. F1WGP is better too. >The good thing about GP2 was that you could save a race in the middle of a >race. A bad thing was that when u wanted to restart a race, you always had >to go through 5 menu's to get back to bussiness again. >As you might have guessed: They didn't bother to change this. Anyway: this >is not a reason NOT to buy GP3. > >03 Graphics: >F1 2000 looks much better (and so does SCGT, SUPERBIKE, ....) It obvious >they only added more detail to GP2. The graphics engine is still the same, >and its a disaster: if you want an acceptable framerate the game just slows >down, and just like in GP2, you can't trust the estimate framerate indicator >in the graphics panel. Anyway they should have dropped this graphics engine >long ago, because its way behind todays standards. >The only thing I find ok are the scenery (horizon). The Cars all have the >same shape and what really very ANNOYING is that the cars just don't blend >into the rest of the picture. This is very obvious with rain: the cars look >as if they are DRAWN upon the rest of the image, which makes it hard to >enjoy the feel of the game. Its as if you are looking at a bad cartoon. >The pit sequense is still the same: cars flying in the air: would it have >been so hard to draw a jack? The pit crew looks awful, really 1996-ish. The >graphics of this game are bad. > >04 Sound: >In 6th gear it sounds as if you are driving HARD TRUCK 2. Totally worthless, >GP2 was better in this respect. >And the fact that you can only hear your own car is unacceptable too, even >if you can only hear your own car while racing in a real F1. When racing on >a PC you want to feel the ambience of a real race. When you have spinned in >GP3, and you wait for all the other cars to pass, you hear NOTHING AT ALL. >Its really awfull. In this respect GP3 is just a very bad game. >What I hate the most is the awful sample you hear everytime you go to a >lower gear: its a real joke. > >05 Car physics >The same: GP2 level, which by todays standards is VERY BAD. >SCGT, F1 2000, F1WGP, .. are all MUCH MUCH better. And the implementation of >a wet track are done badly too: when you slightly touch your throttle at the >start you will spin like hell, but if you hit your brake full at 300 km/h in >the wet the car will just .. stop... Realism? >Overal the feel is bad: its no fun to race GP3: you never feel u are >fighting a car, although I must admit that I like the tracks. > >06 Artificial intelligence >Just as bad as F1 2000, unfortunately. When you spin all the other cars just >run into you if you are on the racing line. > >Conclusion >If you compare GP2 AND GP3, its obvious that very little effort was made. I >wonder why it took so long to make an upgrade for GP2. All the effort went >into advertising, not programming, thats for sure. >The game is virtually the same, just SLIGHTLY better graphics on an ever >worthless graphics engine. Gameplay and realism are the same (which were ok >by 1996 standards, but not by todays), only rain was added and done badly by >the way. >If you are looking for a nice modern F1 game: buy F1 2000, it looks far >better than GP3 and it simulates far better the overal feel of a F1 race. >If you want a modern F1 sim: wait, or stick to MGPRS, F1 2000, ... > >Note: For those of you who feel we should pay for GP3 just to stimulate >future Racing simulator makers to keep on producing racing sims: think about >this: >IF GP3 becomes a HIT, what lessons will the gaming industry learn from it? >Just look for a name (Crammond) and do a good advertising campagne, and DONT >worry too much about the programming: and the money will come in. >I just hope PAPYRUS WILL NOT DECIDE TO FOLLOW THIS STRATEGY. >But chances are they will... :( > >DONT BUY CRAPPY GAMES: TRY BEFORE YOU BUY > > > >

-- Todd S. Life - Sexually transmitted, Always fatal "Karl Zosel" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:s9Je5.144986$[email hidden]... > 01 Warez: > All of you claiming I should wait for the retail version: I suggest YOU wait > (and PAY) and THEN prove me wrong on the following comments. (or start > crying for the money you wasted) > > 02 Menu's: > The menu's are rather poor and lack inspiration, but I don't find that very > important. GPL menus are far more stylish (retro look) and F1 2000's are far > more flashy. F1WGP is better too. > The good thing about GP2 was that you could save a race in the middle of a > race. A bad thing was that when u wanted to restart a race, you always had > to go through 5 menu's to get back to bussiness again. > As you might have guessed: They didn't bother to change this. Anyway: this > is not a reason NOT to buy GP3. > > 03 Graphics: > F1 2000 looks much better (and so does SCGT, SUPERBIKE, ....) It obvious > they only added more detail to GP2. The graphics engine is still the same, > and its a disaster: if you want an acceptable framerate the game just slows > down, and just like in GP2, you can't trust the estimate framerate indicator > in the graphics panel. Anyway they should have dropped this graphics engine > long ago, because its way behind todays standards. > The only thing I find ok are the scenery (horizon). The Cars all have the > same shape and what really very ANNOYING is that the cars just don't blend > into the rest of the picture. This is very obvious with rain: the cars look > as if they are DRAWN upon the rest of the image, which makes it hard to > enjoy the feel of the game. Its as if you are looking at a bad cartoon. > The pit sequense is still the same: cars flying in the air: would it have > been so hard to draw a jack? The pit crew looks awful, really 1996-ish. The > graphics of this game are bad. What kind of computer do you have? How are your graphics set? You must be looking at something different than I am if you think F1200 and SCGT have better graphics than GP3. > > 04 Sound: > In 6th gear it sounds as if you are driving HARD TRUCK 2. Totally worthless, > GP2 was better in this respect. > And the fact that you can only hear your own car is unacceptable too, even > if you can only hear your own car while racing in a real F1. When racing on > a PC you want to feel the ambience of a real race. When you have spinned in > GP3, and you wait for all the other cars to pass, you hear NOTHING AT ALL. > Its really awfull. In this respect GP3 is just a very bad game. > What I hate the most is the awful sample you hear everytime you go to a > lower gear: its a real joke. > > 05 Car physics > The same: GP2 level, which by todays standards is VERY BAD. > SCGT, F1 2000, F1WGP, .. are all MUCH MUCH better. And the implementation of > a wet track are done badly too: when you slightly touch your throttle at the > start you will spin like hell, but if you hit your brake full at 300 km/h in > the wet the car will just .. stop... Realism? > Overal the feel is bad: its no fun to race GP3: you never feel u are > fighting a car, although I must admit that I like the tracks. > > 06 Artificial intelligence > Just as bad as F1 2000, unfortunately. When you spin all the other cars just > run into you if you are on the racing line. > > Conclusion > If you compare GP2 AND GP3, its obvious that very little effort was made. I > wonder why it took so long to make an upgrade for GP2. All the effort went > into advertising, not programming, thats for sure. > The game is virtually the same, just SLIGHTLY better graphics on an ever > worthless graphics engine. Gameplay and realism are the same (which were ok > by 1996 standards, but not by todays), only rain was added and done badly by > the way. > If you are looking for a nice modern F1 game: buy F1 2000, it looks far > better than GP3 and it simulates far better the overal feel of a F1 race. > If you want a modern F1 sim: wait, or stick to MGPRS, F1 2000, ... > > Note: For those of you who feel we should pay for GP3 just to stimulate > future Racing simulator makers to keep on producing racing sims: think about > this: > IF GP3 becomes a HIT, what lessons will the gaming industry learn from it? > Just look for a name (Crammond) and do a good advertising campagne, and DONT > worry too much about the programming: and the money will come in. > I just hope PAPYRUS WILL NOT DECIDE TO FOLLOW THIS STRATEGY. > But chances are they will... :( > > DONT BUY CRAPPY GAMES: TRY BEFORE YOU BUY > > > > >

I disagree - but to each his own. Yes, the textures are not the best but overall I feel GP3 is easier to look at than F1 2000. I hate the way F1 2000 uses blan textures and a color pallet that causes everything to blur together. If you want to see painted on then take a look at the chase camera in F1 2000 - looks like the old old acrade game where your car is a platic cutout on a stick going back and forth over a moving graphic of a track. I'll give you Superbike because it has the best graphics of any sim out there. AI - well, other than being too agressive and overshooting corners while trying to out brake you I don't think the AI is as bad as you say. Have you really played this game because they do avoid accidents nicely, they just like to cause them with aggressive blocking. Physics - wow, you blew all your credability here because you said GP3 physics are worse than F1WGP - did you play that game because I know you wouldn't say that if you had...4 wheels in the grass - automatic 180. I think GP3 is a good game but there will probably be a lot of people who are really upset because expectations where so high - perhaps yours? I like GP3 better than F1 2000 only because the visablity, ai and weather appeal to me more than F12K's did. GP3 reminds me a lot of MGPRS2 with slightly better physics and graphics. Oh, and I still like MGPRS2 more than F1 2000 - don't know why, just something I didn't like about that game. It was just hard to look at for me but then again, Id rather see astectically pleasing low res textures over poorly implemented 3D glitz. - but thats just me. Karl Zosel <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:s9Je5.144986$[email hidden]... > 01 Warez: > All of you claiming I should wait for the retail version: I suggest YOUwait > (and PAY) and THEN prove me wrong on the following comments. (or start > crying for the money you wasted) > > 02 Menu's: > The menu's are rather poor and lack inspiration, but I don't find thatvery > important. GPL menus are far more stylish (retro look) and F1 2000's arefar

Quoted text (11 lines)

> more flashy. F1WGP is better too. > The good thing about GP2 was that you could save a race in the middle of a > race. A bad thing was that when u wanted to restart a race, you always had > to go through 5 menu's to get back to bussiness again. > As you might have guessed: They didn't bother to change this. Anyway: this > is not a reason NOT to buy GP3. > > 03 Graphics: > F1 2000 looks much better (and so does SCGT, SUPERBIKE, ....) It obvious > they only added more detail to GP2. The graphics engine is still the same, > and its a disaster: if you want an acceptable framerate the game just

slows > down, and just like in GP2, you can't trust the estimate framerateindicator > in the graphics panel. Anyway they should have dropped this graphicsengine > long ago, because its way behind todays standards. > The only thing I find ok are the scenery (horizon). The Cars all have the > same shape and what really very ANNOYING is that the cars just don't blend > into the rest of the picture. This is very obvious with rain: the carslook > as if they are DRAWN upon the rest of the image, which makes it hard to > enjoy the feel of the game. Its as if you are looking at a bad cartoon. > The pit sequense is still the same: cars flying in the air: would it have > been so hard to draw a jack? The pit crew looks awful, really 1996-ish.The > graphics of this game are bad. > > 04 Sound: > In 6th gear it sounds as if you are driving HARD TRUCK 2. Totallyworthless, > GP2 was better in this respect. > And the fact that you can only hear your own car is unacceptable too, even > if you can only hear your own car while racing in a real F1. When racingon > a PC you want to feel the ambience of a real race. When you have spinnedin

Quoted text (8 lines)

> GP3, and you wait for all the other cars to pass, you hear NOTHING AT ALL. > Its really awfull. In this respect GP3 is just a very bad game. > What I hate the most is the awful sample you hear everytime you go to a > lower gear: its a real joke. > > 05 Car physics > The same: GP2 level, which by todays standards is VERY BAD. > SCGT, F1 2000, F1WGP, .. are all MUCH MUCH better. And the implementation

of > a wet track are done badly too: when you slightly touch your throttle atthe > start you will spin like hell, but if you hit your brake full at 300 km/hin > the wet the car will just .. stop... Realism? > Overal the feel is bad: its no fun to race GP3: you never feel u are > fighting a car, although I must admit that I like the tracks. > > 06 Artificial intelligence > Just as bad as F1 2000, unfortunately. When you spin all the other carsjust > run into you if you are on the racing line. > > Conclusion > If you compare GP2 AND GP3, its obvious that very little effort was made.I > wonder why it took so long to make an upgrade for GP2. All the effort went > into advertising, not programming, thats for sure. > The game is virtually the same, just SLIGHTLY better graphics on an ever > worthless graphics engine. Gameplay and realism are the same (which wereok > by 1996 standards, but not by todays), only rain was added and done badlyby

Quoted text (7 lines)

> the way. > If you are looking for a nice modern F1 game: buy F1 2000, it looks far > better than GP3 and it simulates far better the overal feel of a F1 race. > If you want a modern F1 sim: wait, or stick to MGPRS, F1 2000, ... > > Note: For those of you who feel we should pay for GP3 just to stimulate > future Racing simulator makers to keep on producing racing sims: think

about > this: > IF GP3 becomes a HIT, what lessons will the gaming industry learn from it? > Just look for a name (Crammond) and do a good advertising campagne, andDONT

Quoted text (10 lines)

> worry too much about the programming: and the money will come in. > I just hope PAPYRUS WILL NOT DECIDE TO FOLLOW THIS STRATEGY. > But chances are they will... :( > > DONT BUY CRAPPY GAMES: TRY BEFORE YOU BUY > > > > >

01 Warez: All of you claiming I should wait for the retail version: I suggest YOU wait (and PAY) and THEN prove me wrong on the following comments. (or start crying for the money you wasted) 02 Menu's: The menu's are rather poor and lack inspiration, but I don't find that very important. GPL menus are far more stylish (retro look) and F1 2000's are far more flashy. F1WGP is better too. The good thing about GP2 was that you could save a race in the middle of a race. A bad thing was that when u wanted to restart a race, you always had to go through 5 menu's to get back to bussiness again. As you might have guessed: They didn't bother to change this. Anyway: this is not a reason NOT to buy GP3. 03 Graphics: F1 2000 looks much better (and so does SCGT, SUPERBIKE, ....) It obvious they only added more detail to GP2. The graphics engine is still the same, and its a disaster: if you want an acceptable framerate the game just slows down, and just like in GP2, you can't trust the estimate framerate indicator in the graphics panel. Anyway they should have dropped this graphics engine long ago, because its way behind todays standards. The only thing I find ok are the scenery (horizon). The Cars all have the same shape and what really very ANNOYING is that the cars just don't blend into the rest of the picture. This is very obvious with rain: the cars look as if they are DRAWN upon the rest of the image, which makes it hard to enjoy the feel of the game. Its as if you are looking at a bad cartoon. The pit sequense is still the same: cars flying in the air: would it have been so hard to draw a jack? The pit crew looks awful, really 1996-ish. The graphics of this game are bad. 04 Sound: In 6th gear it sounds as if you are driving HARD TRUCK 2. Totally worthless, GP2 was better in this respect. And the fact that you can only hear your own car is unacceptable too, even if you can only hear your own car while racing in a real F1. When racing on a PC you want to feel the ambience of a real race. When you have spinned in GP3, and you wait for all the other cars to pass, you hear NOTHING AT ALL. Its really awfull. In this respect GP3 is just a very bad game. What I hate the most is the awful sample you hear everytime you go to a lower gear: its a real joke. 05 Car physics The same: GP2 level, which by todays standards is VERY BAD. SCGT, F1 2000, F1WGP, .. are all MUCH MUCH better. And the implementation of a wet track are done badly too: when you slightly touch your throttle at the start you will spin like hell, but if you hit your brake full at 300 km/h in the wet the car will just .. stop... Realism? Overal the feel is bad: its no fun to race GP3: you never feel u are fighting a car, although I must admit that I like the tracks. 06 Artificial intelligence Just as bad as F1 2000, unfortunately. When you spin all the other cars just run into you if you are on the racing line. Conclusion If you compare GP2 AND GP3, its obvious that very little effort was made. I wonder why it took so long to make an upgrade for GP2. All the effort went into advertising, not programming, thats for sure. The game is virtually the same, just SLIGHTLY better graphics on an ever worthless graphics engine. Gameplay and realism are the same (which were ok by 1996 standards, but not by todays), only rain was added and done badly by the way. If you are looking for a nice modern F1 game: buy F1 2000, it looks far better than GP3 and it simulates far better the overal feel of a F1 race. If you want a modern F1 sim: wait, or stick to MGPRS, F1 2000, ... Note: For those of you who feel we should pay for GP3 just to stimulate future Racing simulator makers to keep on producing racing sims: think about this: IF GP3 becomes a HIT, what lessons will the gaming industry learn from it? Just look for a name (Crammond) and do a good advertising campagne, and DONT worry too much about the programming: and the money will come in. I just hope PAPYRUS WILL NOT DECIDE TO FOLLOW THIS STRATEGY. But chances are they will... :( DONT BUY CRAPPY GAMES: TRY BEFORE YOU BUY

It manages the full 25 fps all the time for me.

> 04 Sound: > In 6th gear it sounds as if you are driving HARD TRUCK 2. Totallyworthless, > GP2 was better in this respect. > And the fact that you can only hear your own car is unacceptable too, even > if you can only hear your own car while racing in a real F1. When racingon > a PC you want to feel the ambience of a real race. When you have spinnedin > GP3, and you wait for all the other cars to pass, you hear NOTHING AT ALL. > Its really awfull. In this respect GP3 is just a very bad game. > What I hate the most is the awful sample you hear everytime you go to a > lower gear: its a real joke. I must say that of all the criticism I've read of this game, this is the only point that will prevent me from buying this game. You should be able to hear your competitors cars (even if not realistic), because our driving experience is so limited. In a sim you need all the "clues" you can get to compensate for what's missing from the driving experience.

LOL! No, I mean with Processor Occupancy always below 100% of course! :)

On Sun, 23 Jul 2000 22:47:51 GMT, "Simon Brown" <[email hidden]> wrote: >It manages the full 25 fps all the time for me. On my 386 I also have 25fps all the time! (Only one lap on Monza takes 15 minutes real time) Andre

On Sun, 23 Jul 2000 21:08:40 GMT, "Karl Zosel" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (82 lines)

>01 Warez: >All of you claiming I should wait for the retail version: I suggest YOU wait >(and PAY) and THEN prove me wrong on the following comments. (or start >crying for the money you wasted) > >02 Menu's: >The menu's are rather poor and lack inspiration, but I don't find that very >important. GPL menus are far more stylish (retro look) and F1 2000's are far >more flashy. F1WGP is better too. >The good thing about GP2 was that you could save a race in the middle of a >race. A bad thing was that when u wanted to restart a race, you always had >to go through 5 menu's to get back to bussiness again. >As you might have guessed: They didn't bother to change this. Anyway: this >is not a reason NOT to buy GP3. > >03 Graphics: >F1 2000 looks much better (and so does SCGT, SUPERBIKE, ....) It obvious >they only added more detail to GP2. The graphics engine is still the same, >and its a disaster: if you want an acceptable framerate the game just slows >down, and just like in GP2, you can't trust the estimate framerate indicator >in the graphics panel. Anyway they should have dropped this graphics engine >long ago, because its way behind todays standards. >The only thing I find ok are the scenery (horizon). The Cars all have the >same shape and what really very ANNOYING is that the cars just don't blend >into the rest of the picture. This is very obvious with rain: the cars look >as if they are DRAWN upon the rest of the image, which makes it hard to >enjoy the feel of the game. Its as if you are looking at a bad cartoon. >The pit sequense is still the same: cars flying in the air: would it have >been so hard to draw a jack? The pit crew looks awful, really 1996-ish. The >graphics of this game are bad. > >04 Sound: >In 6th gear it sounds as if you are driving HARD TRUCK 2. Totally worthless, >GP2 was better in this respect. >And the fact that you can only hear your own car is unacceptable too, even >if you can only hear your own car while racing in a real F1. When racing on >a PC you want to feel the ambience of a real race. When you have spinned in >GP3, and you wait for all the other cars to pass, you hear NOTHING AT ALL. >Its really awfull. In this respect GP3 is just a very bad game. >What I hate the most is the awful sample you hear everytime you go to a >lower gear: its a real joke. > >05 Car physics >The same: GP2 level, which by todays standards is VERY BAD. >SCGT, F1 2000, F1WGP, .. are all MUCH MUCH better. And the implementation of >a wet track are done badly too: when you slightly touch your throttle at the >start you will spin like hell, but if you hit your brake full at 300 km/h in >the wet the car will just .. stop... Realism? >Overal the feel is bad: its no fun to race GP3: you never feel u are >fighting a car, although I must admit that I like the tracks. > >06 Artificial intelligence >Just as bad as F1 2000, unfortunately. When you spin all the other cars just >run into you if you are on the racing line. > >Conclusion >If you compare GP2 AND GP3, its obvious that very little effort was made. I >wonder why it took so long to make an upgrade for GP2. All the effort went >into advertising, not programming, thats for sure. >The game is virtually the same, just SLIGHTLY better graphics on an ever >worthless graphics engine. Gameplay and realism are the same (which were ok >by 1996 standards, but not by todays), only rain was added and done badly by >the way. >If you are looking for a nice modern F1 game: buy F1 2000, it looks far >better than GP3 and it simulates far better the overal feel of a F1 race. >If you want a modern F1 sim: wait, or stick to MGPRS, F1 2000, ... > >Note: For those of you who feel we should pay for GP3 just to stimulate >future Racing simulator makers to keep on producing racing sims: think about >this: >IF GP3 becomes a HIT, what lessons will the gaming industry learn from it? >Just look for a name (Crammond) and do a good advertising campagne, and DONT >worry too much about the programming: and the money will come in. >I just hope PAPYRUS WILL NOT DECIDE TO FOLLOW THIS STRATEGY. >But chances are they will... :( > >DONT BUY CRAPPY GAMES: TRY BEFORE YOU BUY > > > > >They are unlikely to admit that its not up to standard after they've paid for it

AndrewS <[email hidden]> schreef in berichtnieuws EeMe5.1370$[email hidden]... > > 04 Sound: > > In 6th gear it sounds as if you are driving HARD TRUCK 2. Totally > worthless, > > GP2 was better in this respect. > > And the fact that you can only hear your own car is unacceptable too,even > > if you can only hear your own car while racing in a real F1. When racing > on > > a PC you want to feel the ambience of a real race. When you have spinned > in > > GP3, and you wait for all the other cars to pass, you hear NOTHING ATALL.

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > Its really awfull. In this respect GP3 is just a very bad game. > > What I hate the most is the awful sample you hear everytime you go to a > > lower gear: its a real joke. > > I must say that of all the criticism I've read of this game, this is the > only point that will prevent me from buying this game. You should be able > to hear your competitors cars (even if not realistic), because our driving > experience is so limited. In a sim you need all the "clues" you can get

to > compensate for what's missing from the driving experience. Thats just what I think..

Thats just what I think..

So does F1 2000. What is your point exactly? --

On Sun, 23 Jul 2000 21:08:40 GMT, "Karl Zosel" <[email hidden]> wrote: >02 Menu's: >The menu's are rather poor and lack inspiration, but I don't find that very >important. GPL menus are far more stylish (retro look) and F1 2000's are far >more flashy. F1WGP is better too. Nothing, and I do mean nothing tops the horrible slow and assinine menu system in F1RS. Nuff' said. >SCGT, F1 2000, F1WGP, .. are all MUCH MUCH better. And the implementation of >a wet track are done badly too: when you slightly touch your throttle at the >start you will spin like hell, but if you hit your brake full at 300 km/h in >the wet the car will just .. stop... Realism? Yes, to a certain extent. Remember that at 300 km/h the car weighs about four times it's own weight because of the downforce. I trust the braking distance is longer however? >06 Artificial intelligence >Just as bad as F1 2000, unfortunately. When you spin all the other cars just >run into you if you are on the racing line. And how does this differ from real life? <g> Besides, occasional stupid moves from AI drivers is a refreshing change. I'm hard pressed to belief they implemented the AI worse than GP2.

So does F1 2000. What is your point exactly? -- [email hidden] "Simon Brown" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:rCKe5.14022$[email hidden]... > It manages the full 25 fps all the time for me. > >

In article <zU3f5.3992$9%[email hidden]>, "Greg Cisko" <[email hidden]> writes:

Quoted text (12 lines)

>So does F1 2000. What is your point exactly? > >-- > >[email hidden] > > >"Simon Brown" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >news:rCKe5.14022$[email hidden]... >> It manages the full 25 fps all the time for me. >> >>

How do you check fps in F1 2K again? Is it in the program, or do you have to use Fraps? Eldred -- Tiger Stadium R.I.P. 1912-1999 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett GPL hcp. +69.95 Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

FRAPS. -- [email hidden] "EldredP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > In article <zU3f5.3992$9%[email hidden]>, "Greg Cisko" > <[email hidden]> writes: > > >So does F1 2000. What is your point exactly? > > > >-- > > > >[email hidden] > > > > > >"Simon Brown" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > >news:rCKe5.14022$[email hidden]... > >> It manages the full 25 fps all the time for me. > >> > >> > > How do you check fps in F1 2K again? Is it in the program, or do you have to > use Fraps? > > Eldred > -- > Tiger Stadium R.I.P. 1912-1999 > Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett > GPL hcp. +69.95 > > Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you > with experience... > Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.