rec.autos.simulators

ea havent renewed their $25m f1 license.

Nic

ea havent renewed their $25m f1 license.

by Nic » Tue, 22 Oct 2002 20:27:29


> Papyrus ?

Now that would be something....

All they need is $25m, lol.

Larr

ea havent renewed their $25m f1 license.

by Larr » Tue, 22 Oct 2002 21:39:11

I'm talking about for the PC.

-Larry



> > Papyrus ?

> The ADD console market has really no interest for serious or non-serious
F1
> racing sims.

> --
> -- Fran?ois Mnard <ymenard>
> -- http://ymenard.cjb.net/
> -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez
> Corporation - helping America into the New World...

Larr

ea havent renewed their $25m f1 license.

by Larr » Tue, 22 Oct 2002 21:40:53

These days, they might give it away :)

Wait, no... That would be CART.

-Larry



Gerry Aitke

ea havent renewed their $25m f1 license.

by Gerry Aitke » Wed, 23 Oct 2002 01:08:40


> I suspect it might also have something to do with the greatly reduced
> following that F1 has. In the UK they have quoted 5 million fewer viewers
> for TV coverage.

Yes, as I predicted some time ago F1 will disappear up it's own arsehole
if it carries on the way it is. True motorsports fans lost interest ages
ago, and now it seems even fans of pop motor racing are finding more
interesting ways to spend their Sunday afternoons.

I'll never watch another GP until it's been radically restructured.
There's no good reason for every team to have to develop their own
chassis, for example.

Cheers

Gerry

Monkey #1,000,00

ea havent renewed their $25m f1 license.

by Monkey #1,000,00 » Wed, 23 Oct 2002 01:32:44

On Mon, 21 Oct 2002 02:36:27 -0400, "David G Fisher"

And why would Ubisoft do that when they have their own publishing
house? Maybe you are thinking of the distributor for your area?

http://www.racesimcentral.net/

F1 Racing Championship
Developer: Ubi Soft
Publisher: Ubi Soft
Rating: 32.9 (786 votes) [Rate this Demo]
Downloads: 21431

The fact is Ubi Soft was in fullk control of this release and they are
solely responsible for not releasing the promised patch. My guess is
that the AI was so bad that they couldn't fix it without spending big
bucks so they said***it, and screwed us also.

Alex 'pez' Porazinsk

ea havent renewed their $25m f1 license.

by Alex 'pez' Porazinsk » Wed, 23 Oct 2002 01:53:14

cart would pay them!

pez


> These days, they might give it away :)

> Wait, no... That would be CART.

> -Larry





> > > Papyrus ?

> > Now that would be something....

> > All they need is $25m, lol.

Schum

ea havent renewed their $25m f1 license.

by Schum » Wed, 23 Oct 2002 02:12:20

The issue was with VideoSystems, who held the license. With no VideoSystem's
authorization, Ubisoft could not (and did not) release THE patch.

Indeed, it is for this (and many other reasons) that UbiSoft is NOT pursuing
the F1 License. Because they are not pursuing the license, they are
subsequently forbidden from using the F1 name or general likeness.

This is why the previews show cars that look more like a cross between IRL
and CART cars. They cannot accurately model the cars without violating
copyrights.

However, not using the license now opens up the game much more. The FIA
licensing is a NIGHTMARE to deal with on every conceivable level, and as
such... they are losing game publishers who are willing to pay for the
license. EA is dropping FIA license because it is too limiting and the FIA
are on glue, UbiSoft dropped FIA license because of the same reasons. Pretty
much any publisher who pursues the FIA license in current negotiating
environments would be complete fools.

Maybe when the FIA (FOA to be exact) wakes up and realizes that they have
been acting like that crazy aunt who hides in the ba***t and makes funny
noises at night when you least expect it... then maybe they'll find game
publishers who are willing to spend money to deal with them.

I say "Bravo Ubi... you show 'em!"

And hence... EA has followed suit and seen the light it seems.

Ubi made a gutsy (and correct imho) call. I'd refrain from criticizing the
call if I were you chaps. They are doing it for YOU... and depending upon
YOU to modify it later. Isn't that what y'all have been asking for over the
years in here?

My 2 cents worth.

Cheers,
Schumi
http://www.racesimcentral.net/


> On Mon, 21 Oct 2002 02:36:27 -0400, "David G Fisher"

> >No they weren't. Can't remember the publisher's name, but they were in
> >control of the game, not Ubi Soft.

> >David G Fisher

> And why would Ubisoft do that when they have their own publishing
> house? Maybe you are thinking of the distributor for your area?

> http://www.racesimcentral.net/

> F1 Racing Championship
> Developer: Ubi Soft
> Publisher: Ubi Soft
> Rating: 32.9 (786 votes) [Rate this Demo]
> Downloads: 21431

> The fact is Ubi Soft was in fullk control of this release and they are
> solely responsible for not releasing the promised patch. My guess is
> that the AI was so bad that they couldn't fix it without spending big
> bucks so they said***it, and screwed us also.

Tony Rickar

ea havent renewed their $25m f1 license.

by Tony Rickar » Wed, 23 Oct 2002 02:50:15

I was writing hypothetically :-)

Iain Mackenzi

ea havent renewed their $25m f1 license.

by Iain Mackenzi » Wed, 23 Oct 2002 05:05:11

Some common sense at last in the never-ending ras debate over Ubi and the
F1RC patch.  Clearly there was a good reason for Ubi not to release the
patch because their previous history with POD, F1RS and MGPRS2 was good
regarding patches. (and please don't restart the 'yes but they screwed up
every patch of MGPRS debate' - maybe they did, maybe they didn't.)
Take each release as it comes, without bias and prejudice in advance. Let's
wait and see if RS3 is up to scratch before dismissing it.
Iain


> The issue was with VideoSystems, who held the license. With no
VideoSystem's
> authorization, Ubisoft could not (and did not) release THE patch.

> Indeed, it is for this (and many other reasons) that UbiSoft is NOT
pursuing
> the F1 License. Because they are not pursuing the license, they are
> subsequently forbidden from using the F1 name or general likeness.

> This is why the previews show cars that look more like a cross between IRL
> and CART cars. They cannot accurately model the cars without violating
> copyrights.

> However, not using the license now opens up the game much more. The FIA
> licensing is a NIGHTMARE to deal with on every conceivable level, and as
> such... they are losing game publishers who are willing to pay for the
> license. EA is dropping FIA license because it is too limiting and the FIA
> are on glue, UbiSoft dropped FIA license because of the same reasons.
Pretty
> much any publisher who pursues the FIA license in current negotiating
> environments would be complete fools.

> Maybe when the FIA (FOA to be exact) wakes up and realizes that they have
> been acting like that crazy aunt who hides in the ba***t and makes funny
> noises at night when you least expect it... then maybe they'll find game
> publishers who are willing to spend money to deal with them.

> I say "Bravo Ubi... you show 'em!"

> And hence... EA has followed suit and seen the light it seems.

> Ubi made a gutsy (and correct imho) call. I'd refrain from criticizing the
> call if I were you chaps. They are doing it for YOU... and depending upon
> YOU to modify it later. Isn't that what y'all have been asking for over
the
> years in here?

> My 2 cents worth.

> Cheers,
> Schumi
> http://www.racesimcentral.net/



> > On Mon, 21 Oct 2002 02:36:27 -0400, "David G Fisher"

> > >No they weren't. Can't remember the publisher's name, but they were in
> > >control of the game, not Ubi Soft.

> > >David G Fisher

> > And why would Ubisoft do that when they have their own publishing
> > house? Maybe you are thinking of the distributor for your area?

> > http://www.racesimcentral.net/

> > F1 Racing Championship
> > Developer: Ubi Soft
> > Publisher: Ubi Soft
> > Rating: 32.9 (786 votes) [Rate this Demo]
> > Downloads: 21431

> > The fact is Ubi Soft was in fullk control of this release and they are
> > solely responsible for not releasing the promised patch. My guess is
> > that the AI was so bad that they couldn't fix it without spending big
> > bucks so they said***it, and screwed us also.

-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.racesimcentral.net/ - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----==  Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
Dave Henri

ea havent renewed their $25m f1 license.

by Dave Henri » Wed, 23 Oct 2002 05:45:35


   Iain don't try and confuse us by introducing reason into a discussion.
If we want to shoot down a product before we've even seen a demo, then
by-golly that's our perogitive!!
   Now then...if you REALLY want to help, try and find some way to slow down
all those DANG YELLOW CORVETTES in the LeMans Mods...Everywhere I go it's
Corvette city...
:)
dave henrie

Alex 'pez' Porazinsk

ea havent renewed their $25m f1 license.

by Alex 'pez' Porazinsk » Wed, 23 Oct 2002 05:48:29

just as long as you arent one of the 'FIA banned online play' guys, ill say
'cool'

pez


> The issue was with VideoSystems, who held the license. With no
VideoSystem's
> authorization, Ubisoft could not (and did not) release THE patch.

> Indeed, it is for this (and many other reasons) that UbiSoft is NOT
pursuing
> the F1 License. Because they are not pursuing the license, they are
> subsequently forbidden from using the F1 name or general likeness.

> This is why the previews show cars that look more like a cross between IRL
> and CART cars. They cannot accurately model the cars without violating
> copyrights.

> However, not using the license now opens up the game much more. The FIA
> licensing is a NIGHTMARE to deal with on every conceivable level, and as
> such... they are losing game publishers who are willing to pay for the
> license. EA is dropping FIA license because it is too limiting and the FIA
> are on glue, UbiSoft dropped FIA license because of the same reasons.
Pretty
> much any publisher who pursues the FIA license in current negotiating
> environments would be complete fools.

> Maybe when the FIA (FOA to be exact) wakes up and realizes that they have
> been acting like that crazy aunt who hides in the ba***t and makes funny
> noises at night when you least expect it... then maybe they'll find game
> publishers who are willing to spend money to deal with them.

> I say "Bravo Ubi... you show 'em!"

> And hence... EA has followed suit and seen the light it seems.

> Ubi made a gutsy (and correct imho) call. I'd refrain from criticizing the
> call if I were you chaps. They are doing it for YOU... and depending upon
> YOU to modify it later. Isn't that what y'all have been asking for over
the
> years in here?

> My 2 cents worth.

> Cheers,
> Schumi
> http://www.racesimcentral.net/



> > On Mon, 21 Oct 2002 02:36:27 -0400, "David G Fisher"

> > >No they weren't. Can't remember the publisher's name, but they were in
> > >control of the game, not Ubi Soft.

> > >David G Fisher

> > And why would Ubisoft do that when they have their own publishing
> > house? Maybe you are thinking of the distributor for your area?

> > http://www.racesimcentral.net/

> > F1 Racing Championship
> > Developer: Ubi Soft
> > Publisher: Ubi Soft
> > Rating: 32.9 (786 votes) [Rate this Demo]
> > Downloads: 21431

> > The fact is Ubi Soft was in fullk control of this release and they are
> > solely responsible for not releasing the promised patch. My guess is
> > that the AI was so bad that they couldn't fix it without spending big
> > bucks so they said***it, and screwed us also.

Haqsa

ea havent renewed their $25m f1 license.

by Haqsa » Wed, 23 Oct 2002 06:41:44

Wreck 'em??


Monkey #1,000,00

ea havent renewed their $25m f1 license.

by Monkey #1,000,00 » Wed, 23 Oct 2002 13:12:20


clacked on the keyboard:

OK, I stand corrected, Ubi is not responsible. They could have made a
nice post here telling people that. I will give the new game
consideration then if what you say is true.

They already did that with MGPRS. I didn't see tons of support for it.
Although it did get everything it needed to make it an authetic F1 sim
from 3rd parties. I like it for it's time.

Iain Mackenzi

ea havent renewed their $25m f1 license.

by Iain Mackenzi » Thu, 24 Oct 2002 01:16:58

Oooops, sorry Dave. you're right of course!!!

-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----==  Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----

Nic

ea havent renewed their $25m f1 license.

by Nic » Thu, 24 Oct 2002 07:27:44

Easy on CART guys, its better than the IRL... and F1... and NASCAR...

"Let War Commence"


> cart would pay them!

> pez



> > These days, they might give it away :)

> > Wait, no... That would be CART.

> > -Larry





> > > > Papyrus ?

> > > Now that would be something....

> > > All they need is $25m, lol.


rec.autos.simulators is a usenet newsgroup formed in December, 1993. As this group was always unmoderated there may be some spam or off topic articles included. Some links do point back to racesimcentral.net as we could not validate the original address. Please report any pages that you believe warrant deletion from this archive (include the link in your email). RaceSimCentral.net is in no way responsible and does not endorse any of the content herein.