Re: F1 2003( F1 CC)

so go on, let us in on where you got it from!

It is a great improvement and i cant wait for the mods to follow AD

Where'd you get it from? "Aidee" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:bd74sn$v10$[email hidden]... > It is a great improvement and i cant wait for the mods to follow > > AD > >

Tolja! "Aidee" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:bd74sn$v10$[email hidden]... > It is a great improvement and i cant wait for the mods to follow > > AD > >

"Aidee" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:bd74sn$v10$[email hidden]... > It is a great improvement and i cant wait for the mods to follow To what degree have they addressed Graphics Netcode Sound Physics Interface Replays Doug

On Mon, 23 Jun 2003 19:30:56 +0100, "Doug Ellison" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (8 lines)

> >"Aidee" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >news:bd74sn$v10$[email hidden]... >> It is a great improvement and i cant wait for the mods to follow > >To what degree have they addressed > >Graphics

Is good. Although you might want to use FSAA. Even with 1280x1024 without FSAA it was jagcity all over. Much better with 1024x768 and 2xFSAA. >Netcode So far I'm not too impressed, but there are so many settings, it might improve. It still pauses when someone joins the session, though...(seems sound related, btw) >Sound Is good. >Physics I'm not sure about this one. Too often I lose the back in a slow corner, and too often the car keeps sliding even if you might expect the energy is washed off. Also the same anoying slow response to the controls is present. (Select the topdown view, and steer from lock to lock, you'll notice a 0.5 sec delay.) >Interface basically the same as F1 2002. No problem setting up my Logitech FF (the original) though. There also is TV view in practice, although you can't scroll back AFAIK. (Didn't read the manual) >Replays Improved, but still not there. For example, no possibility to select an offset in the replay, you've to FFW or FRW to the spot you want to view. About the AI: Still way too much accidents. I tried the reconlap and formationlap (option available in PLR file), but that's useless. The 5 times I tried to drive to the grid, I was knocked off by the AI 4 times. The time I _did_ manage to arive to the grid, I even could complete the formation lap! But the track was wet, and drying.....so half of the grid decided to pit! (and where DQed), but since they didn't return to the grid the red lights never went on... So far, after about 15 races, I never had the feeling I was in the same race as the AI. About the performance: I've an AMD 2200+, GeForce 3 Ti200, 512 Mb RAM. With a full field, settings on 11, 1024x768x32 2xFSAA the framerate is smooth for me. Remco

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > >Netcode > > So far I'm not too impressed, but there are so many settings, it might > improve. It still pauses when someone joins the session, > though...(seems sound related, btw) >

The pausing is still there, which surprised me. When you have people coming and going, it can mess up what might have been a good time. The netcode itself, I would have to say, is way better. Before, with F1 2002, three people was sometimes the limit (cable here). Now, however, I've raced online with six with absolutely no lag. Alanb

Quoted text (49 lines)

> >Sound > > Is good. > > >Physics > > I'm not sure about this one. Too often I lose the back in a slow > corner, and too often the car keeps sliding even if you might expect > the energy is washed off. Also the same anoying slow response to the > controls is present. (Select the topdown view, and steer from lock to > lock, you'll notice a 0.5 sec delay.) > > >Interface > > basically the same as F1 2002. No problem setting up my Logitech FF > (the original) though. There also is TV view in practice, although you > can't scroll back AFAIK. (Didn't read the manual) > > >Replays > > Improved, but still not there. For example, no possibility to select > an offset in the replay, you've to FFW or FRW to the spot you want to > view. > > About the AI: > > Still way too much accidents. I tried the reconlap and formationlap > (option available in PLR file), but that's useless. The 5 times I > tried to drive to the grid, I was knocked off by the AI 4 times. The > time I _did_ manage to arive to the grid, I even could complete the > formation lap! > > But the track was wet, and drying.....so half of the grid decided to > pit! (and where DQed), but since they didn't return to the grid the > red lights never went on... > > So far, after about 15 races, I never had the feeling I was in the > same race as the AI. > > About the performance: > > I've an AMD 2200+, GeForce 3 Ti200, 512 Mb RAM. With a full field, > settings on 11, 1024x768x32 2xFSAA the framerate is smooth for me. > > > Remco > > >

>"Doug Ellison" <[email hidden]> wrote > To what degree have they addressed Tracks looks to be as bad as before (which completely takes out any possible immersion). Multiplayer is about 4 years behind what Papyrus does. -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- http://ymenard.cjb.net/ -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez Corporation - helping America into the New World...

> Tracks looks to be as bad as before (which completely takes out anypossible > immersion). Multiplayer is about 4 years behind what Papyrus does. What's wrong with the tracks?

ymenard wrote: Multiplayer is about 4 years behind what > Papyrus does. It's as good as GPL then ? ;) -- Ian P <email invalid due to spammers>

"frederickson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:noKJa.108617$[email hidden]... > > Tracks looks to be as bad as before (which completely takes out any > possible > > immersion). Multiplayer is about 4 years behind what Papyrus does. > > What's wrong with the tracks? They're generally shockingly innaccurate in F12002 Doug

Doug.....i could drop my copy round to you if you're interested. AD

"Aidee" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:bd74sn$v10$[email hidden]... > It is a great improvement and i cant wait for the mods to follow > > AD In what way???

Probably exactly like he said.. a "copy" "Lue" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:3ef796e0$0$26639$[email hidden]... > so go on, let us in on where you got it from! > >

>"frederickson" <[email hidden]> wrote > What's wrong with the tracks? Everything. Even Geoff Crammond at least knows how to recreate the atmosphere of a F1 GP weekend. The tracks are so bad, for me they make every EA release a complete wank, as I'm unable to immerse myself into racing a Formula One over those fucking bad tracks. I won't detail every track, I guess anybody who's went to those tracks or seen them on TV knows how inaccurate they are. -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- http://ymenard.cjb.net/ -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez Corporation - helping America into the New World...

Can you give one track as an example. I dont watch F1 much but Ive downloaded some onboard videos and I cant point out any major differences between the videos and the game. "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:SMQJa.1802$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (25 lines)

> >"frederickson" <[email hidden]> wrote > > What's wrong with the tracks? > > > Everything. Even Geoff Crammond at least knows how to recreate the > atmosphere of a F1 GP weekend. The tracks are so bad, for me they make > every EA release a complete wank, as I'm unable to immerse myself into > racing a Formula One over those fucking bad tracks. I won't detail every > track, I guess anybody who's went to those tracks or seen them on TV knows > how inaccurate they are. > > > > > > > > -- > -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> > -- http://ymenard.cjb.net/ > -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez > Corporation - helping America into the New World... > > >

Do a Google search on Francois (ymenard) and track accuracy over the last couple of years. You'll find lots of material there. It's been an ongoing debate for a long time! Iain "frederickson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:ovRJa.157711$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (14 lines)

> Can you give one track as an example. I dont watch F1 much but Ive > downloaded some onboard videos and I cant point out any major differences > between the videos and the game. > > "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:SMQJa.1802$[email hidden]... > > >"frederickson" <[email hidden]> wrote > > > What's wrong with the tracks? > > > > > > Everything. Even Geoff Crammond at least knows how to recreate the > > atmosphere of a F1 GP weekend. The tracks are so bad, for me they make > > every EA release a complete wank, as I'm unable to immerse myself into > > racing a Formula One over those fucking bad tracks. I won't detail

every > > track, I guess anybody who's went to those tracks or seen them on TVknows

Quoted text (18 lines)

> > how inaccurate they are. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> > > -- http://ymenard.cjb.net/ > > -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez > > Corporation - helping America into the New World... > > > > > > > >

-----= 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! =-----

"Iain Mackenzie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Do a Google search on Francois (ymenard) and track accuracy over the last > couple of years. You'll find lots of material there. It's been an ongoing > debate for a long time! > Iain There is no debate. The track are disgusting. It's a fact Doug

"Doug Ellison" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:orSJa.43690$[email hidden]... > > "Iain Mackenzie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > Do a Google search on Francois (ymenard) and track accuracy over thelast > > couple of years. You'll find lots of material there. It's been anongoing

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > debate for a long time! > > Iain > > There is no debate. The track are disgusting. It's a fact > > Doug > >

But better tracks from other sims could be converter, it'd be great to see some sort of concerted effort to replace or redo the tracks as I think we're probably stuck with this F1 sim for a long while. As long as the multiplayer and physics code are good the community can do the rest.

>"GBB" <[email hidden]> wrote > But better tracks from other sims could be converter, it'd be great to see > some sort of concerted effort to replace or redo the tracks as I thinkwe're > probably stuck with this F1 sim for a long while. Indeed, I just feel it's a shame that a company like ISI, who clearly know that their tracks are of quality of a sim released in 1996, decided to drop the ball on their budget for such important aspect of the game. They have done it for the last 3 title of theirs, now. But then again even F1RC wasn't perfect (but having such quality tracks in an ISI title would be incredible). > As long as the multiplayer and physics code are good the community can do > the rest. I'm not so sure about the multiplayer, Papyrus spoiled us so much that it can't be compared. -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- http://ymenard.cjb.net/ -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez Corporation - helping America into the New World...

On Tue, 24 Jun 2003 05:40:36 GMT, "frederickson" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Can you give one track as an example. I dont watch F1 much but Ive >downloaded some onboard videos and I cant point out any major differences >between the videos and the game. Entire sections of Silverstone that are downhill in real life go uphill in the game and vice versa. The esses at Magny Cours and the final chicane are about as wrong as you can get while still resembling the real track in any way. The first set isn't too bad (should be a hair tighter) but the second set in real life are tighter with a rather noticeable elevation change, and the chicane towards the end has a bit of camber to help you through it and dumps you out in a straight line for the pits (whereas in F12k2 you have to fight to just get the car left to make the immediately following right hander). There is no modelling of camber that I can see on any track anywhere. They are flat as boards except for huge dips and rises (alternately known as "polygon ramps") that don't exist in reality. The bump modelling at Priory at Silvertsone which throw even the GTR cars up in the air if hit the wrong way are laughable and remind me of what a badly converted track from ICR2 would probably feel like in GPL or N2003. Eau Rouge is much less narrow/bent than it is in reality. Montreal is just wrong. Period. I'm sure if pressed Francois would go into more detail. =) The elevation changes at Monza between the second Lesmos and Variant Ascari (i.e. the Vialone Chicane, whatever they call it now) are interesting but bare little resemblance to reality. Hockenheim and Nurburgring were way off, but since the course changes they attempted to model occurred after the game was released that's understandable. Aside from those points, the ideal line through most corners involves putting 2 wheels on the grass, which is a huge no no in any racing car. In reality going beyond the edges of the curbing heavily unsettles the car causing you to slow dramatically and fight to keep it straight. This isn't much of a track modelling problem per se, and isn't a problem in GTR (because of the suspension model) or the 1995 mod (because of the aero model), but it makes the tracks feel horrible when the ideal lines are so wrong and when you can blow a turn and literally drive half a straight with 2 or 4 wheels on the grass without losing much time. Apparently the new suspension and aero modelling makes curb cutting a risky venture in F1C (yay). Honestly, if you want to know what's wrong with the tracks, play GP4 and then go back to F1 2002. It will be like racing entirely different courses, the latter of which aren't the accurate ones. FWIW, if anyone cares, I could always post in-car shots (er, above car? whatever that half-in car cam is called just above the driver's head) of the same corners of each track from each sim for a comparison. Jason

On Tue, 24 Jun 2003 11:35:46 +0000 (UTC), "GBB" <[email hidden]> wrote: >But better tracks from other sims could be converter, it'd be great to see >some sort of concerted effort to replace or redo the tracks as I think we're >probably stuck with this F1 sim for a long while. > >As long as the multiplayer and physics code are good the community can do >the rest. If the physics are as good as advertised, I'd be incredibly pleased to see a GP4 --> F1C track converter. It would nip both the horrible tracks and oversaturated textures in the bud at the same time. Jason

> If the physics are as good as advertised, I'd be incredibly pleased to > see a GP4 --> F1C track converter. It would nip both the horrible > tracks and oversaturated textures in the bud at the same time. If you despise the oversaturated textures so much, check out SLN's track updates. He tries to match the colours to what they look like on TV which is completely silly IMO but I'm sure you'd like them - they're as dull as dishwater.

On Tue, 24 Jun 2003 14:14:12 GMT, [email hidden] (Jason Moyer) wrote: >FWIW, if anyone cares, I could always post in-car shots (er, above >car? whatever that half-in car cam is called just above the driver's >head) of the same corners of each track from each sim for a >comparison. http://www.digitalwank.com/~jmoyer/F12K2vsGP4/ Just a few corners, hardly the biggest offenders, but when you realize that every section of every track is at least this different it kinda kills the atmosphere of driving these circuits. As horrible as they are, the tracks are still the star of the show as much as the cars are. Jason

Quoted text (12 lines)

> >FWIW, if anyone cares, I could always post in-car shots (er, above > >car? whatever that half-in car cam is called just above the driver's > >head) of the same corners of each track from each sim for a > >comparison. > > http://www.digitalwank.com/~jmoyer/F12K2vsGP4/ > > Just a few corners, hardly the biggest offenders, but when you realize > that every section of every track is at least this different it kinda > kills the atmosphere of driving these circuits. As horrible as they > are, the tracks are still the star of the show as much as the cars > are.

Yeah, GP4 proves that not even accurate tracks can save a poor racing simulation.

"ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:cOYJa.2112$[email hidden]... > >"GBB" <[email hidden]> wrote > > But better tracks from other sims could be converter, it'd be great tosee

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > some sort of concerted effort to replace or redo the tracks as I think > we're > > probably stuck with this F1 sim for a long while. > > > Indeed, I just feel it's a shame that a company like ISI, who clearly know > that their tracks are of quality of a sim released in 1996, decided to

drop > the ball on their budget for such important aspect of the game. They have > done it for the last 3 title of theirs, now. But then again even F1RC > wasn't perfect (but having such quality tracks in an ISI title would be > incredible). > From what ][udson has been saying on High Gear, ISI attempt to persuade EA to let them redo the tracks but they only went for new textures, their hands seem to be tied by a big evil corporation. F1RC's weren't perfect but they were very good, I just wish some could convert them but apparently it's not likely. GP4's are possible and would be a massive improvement but they're too flat. What would be best imo would be to take the track geometry from GP4 and redo them from scratch based on that. It'd be a big undertaking but there is so much effort being put into mods for what is a flawed sim, we should be sorting out the flaws first. If I had the 3DS Max expertise I'd give at least one a go, sadly I don't. > > As long as the multiplayer and physics code are good the community cando > > the rest. > > > I'm not so sure about the multiplayer, Papyrus spoiled us so much that it > can't be compared. > I haven't tried it yet but I've heard apart from the pausing when people enter problem it is a lot better, still doubt it's anywhere near papy quality though.

On Wed, 25 Jun 2003 01:12:14 +1000, "Redmist" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Yeah, GP4 proves that not even accurate tracks can save a poor racing >simulation. I dunno, even with it's simple physics model it manages to recreate F1 in a much more convincing way than any ISI sim prior to the latest (which I haven't played yet, so the jury's still out imho). I'm not going to say it's Papy-quality or anything, far from it, and I'd rank it behind something like GTR or one of the more convincing F1 mods (the 1995 mod is still my favorite, very edgy grip and unforgiving curb/grass handling). On the other hand, the physics in the as-shipped F1 cars in previous ISI titles have been laughable. Fun, maybe even challenging, but laughable. Jason

Everything is up for debate. "Doug Ellison" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:orSJa.43690$[email hidden]... > > "Iain Mackenzie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > Do a Google search on Francois (ymenard) and track accuracy over thelast > > couple of years. You'll find lots of material there. It's been anongoing

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > debate for a long time! > > Iain > > There is no debate. The track are disgusting. It's a fact > > Doug > >

jmoyer@c > > http://www.digitalwank.com/~jmoyer/F12K2vsGP4/ > > Jason Hey! What were you doing following me at Magny Cours?(left colum 2nd pict.) dave henrie

>"Jason Moyer" <[email hidden]> wrote > Just a few corners, hardly the biggest offenders, but when you realize > that every section of every track is at least this different it kinda > kills the atmosphere of driving these circuits. Exactly. How can any of them beg to say they have accurate tracks, when in a way or another, each and every detail is thrown on on the track (a tree, the colour of a tyre wall, the height of the catch fence, support roads onto the track, simple object geometry, etc.) without any reason or research. They just throw in stuff so the tracks don't look graphically empty. I mean, how hard can it be to simply research a little (if I take per example the page you linked) to find out what kind of start/finish line there is at Magny-Cours. You plug in a tape of the race, and each lap you will see it!!!! At least F1RC had a constancy, and let's never forget the amazing complexity of AMA Superbike. -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- http://ymenard.cjb.net/ -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez Corporation - helping America into the New World...

On Tue, 24 Jun 2003 20:52:25 -0400, "ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote: >I mean, how hard can it be to simply research a little (if I take per >example the page you linked) to find out what kind of start/finish line >there is at Magny-Cours. You plug in a tape of the race, and each lap you >will see it!!!! The track models in F1C, fwiw, seem to be the same as F1 2002 accuracy wise, but the colors are much more accurate now. Jason

> I dunno, even with it's simple physics model it manages to recreate F1 > in a much more convincing way than any ISI sim prior to the latest > (which I haven't played yet, so the jury's still out imho). That's a fair point. If you're prepared to accept that the physics are fairly simplistic, GP4 is a decent GP weekend simulation. The actual cornering speeds, braking distances etc are far more authentic than F1 2002. I'm a real nuts and bots type sim-racer so I don't really find the cars in GP4 fun to drive though. I like the wet weather track effects though....

> >I mean, how hard can it be to simply research a little (if I take per > >example the page you linked) to find out what kind of start/finish line > >there is at Magny-Cours. You plug in a tape of the race, and each lapyou > >will see it!!!! > > The track models in F1C, fwiw, seem to be the same as F1 2002 accuracy > wise, but the colors are much more accurate now. Yeah, they're a bit of a motley crew, ISI - there's some real geniuses in their team but a few lame ducks as well....

"Redmist" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:bdb2l0$qskg6$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (12 lines)

> > >I mean, how hard can it be to simply research a little (if I take per > > >example the page you linked) to find out what kind of start/finish line > > >there is at Magny-Cours. You plug in a tape of the race, and each lap > you > > >will see it!!!! > > > > The track models in F1C, fwiw, seem to be the same as F1 2002 accuracy > > wise, but the colors are much more accurate now. > > Yeah, they're a bit of a motley crew, ISI - there's some real geniuses in > their team but a few lame ducks as well.... >

As has been described in interviews, EA wouldn't allow the ISI team to fix the tracks even if they wanted too. It sounds really dumb but they wanted too. It think the mod community should step up to the plate and fix all the errors, but that's just me.

> As has been described in interviews, EA wouldn't allow the ISI team to fix > the tracks even if they wanted too. It sounds really dumb but they wanted > too. It think the mod community should step up to the plate and fix allthe > errors, but that's just me. Well, somebody converted The Hungaroring over from GP4 and it's quite a good drive albeit a little slow in the fps department. AFAICT this will be the last F1 game from ISI so it would be worthwhile getting some modellers to do some work on the tracks. I'm told that lofting a track is a very tricky process though and takes ages to get right. I'm sure there's nothing illegal about converting tracks over from GP4 - as long as no profits are made. AFAIK, the Netkar addon tracks are converted GP4 tracks.

"Redmist" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:bdbj2c$rbnha$[email hidden]... > > As has been described in interviews, EA wouldn't allow the ISI team tofix > > the tracks even if they wanted too. It sounds really dumb but theywanted > > too. It think the mod community should step up to the plate and fix all > the > > errors, but that's just me. > > Well, somebody converted The Hungaroring over from GP4 and it's quite agood > drive albeit a little slow in the fps department. AFAICT this will be the > last F1 game from ISI so it would be worthwhile getting some modellers todo > some work on the tracks. I'm told that lofting a track is a very tricky > process though and takes ages to get right. I'm sure there's nothing > illegal about converting tracks over from GP4 - as long as no profits are > made. AFAIK, the Netkar addon tracks are converted GP4 tracks. > > There would be copyright issues involved, although it's probably the sort of thing that as long as you're not profiting by it you'd just get a threatening letter from Hasbro if they found out and took offence. An alternative would be a converter like Dave Noonan's for NR2002/3 that doesn't distribute any copyrighted material, that might be difficult though.

> There would be copyright issues involved, although it's probably the sortof > thing that as long as you're not profiting by it you'd just get a > threatening letter from Hasbro if they found out and took offence. copyright doesnt matter unless you make money from it

"frederickson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:6DiKa.171039$[email hidden]... > > > There would be copyright issues involved, although it's probably thesort

Quoted text (7 lines)

> of > > thing that as long as you're not profiting by it you'd just get a > > threatening letter from Hasbro if they found out and took offence. > > copyright doesnt matter unless you make money from it > >

It still does, remember a few years ago when the US Pits had to stop their daytona project? It doesn't just matter about money.

"frederickson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:6DiKa.171039$[email hidden]... > > > There would be copyright issues involved, although it's probably thesort

Quoted text (7 lines)

> of > > thing that as long as you're not profiting by it you'd just get a > > threatening letter from Hasbro if they found out and took offence. > > copyright doesnt matter unless you make money from it > >

Yes it does, distributing converted tracks without permission (and you'll never get that from Hasbro) in essence and law is the same as distributing a warez game. Netkar is a very small project at the moment I so they can get away with it. But if someone converted GP4's tracks and they were used as a community wide replacement for the ISI monstrosities Hasbro would most likely find out and force them to be taken off the internet.

"Stuart Becktell"

Quoted text (8 lines)

>> copyright doesnt matter unless you make money from it >> >> > > It still does, remember a few years ago when the US Pits had to stop > their daytona project? It doesn't just matter about money. > >

US Copyright laws come into play even if you personally don't make any money. If the company PERCEIVES that your efforts will deny them money, then you are violating the copyright laws. So even tho all your work may be for free, if you impact, however slightly, the sales of a Copyrighted product you are in violation. But it gets better. Papyrus didn't hold the copyright to Daytona. Daytona licensed it to SEGA. Sega complained to Daytona that the licensing fees they paid were being underminded by a private project...the Daytona lawyers contacted the Papyrus lawyers who HAD to act. Why? Because at some point Papyrus wanted to be included in a licensing deal for Daytona and if they failed to act like a good faith partner, Daytona would have little reason to work with them in the future. Codemaster already squelched one IRL Heat mod because it would negatively impact future sales of a sim they were developing. Two other current users outside the US have attemped an IRL mod and I'm curious how long it will take before they attract attention. So using Codemasters tracks without permission is just begging a bored Corporate lawyer to let the dogs loose. A private user is not likely gonna attract attention, but if a mod group that depends on the goodwill of developers gets involved. Then the nasty legal beagals can stop all mod releated work by that group. dave henrie

On Wed, 25 Jun 2003 20:34:29 -0700, The Laughing Gnome <[email hidden]> wrote: >Hmm, you a real F1 race driver or something? I mean, you must know >what you are talking about, right? F1 2002 you could drive ridiculous lines that bore no resemblance to reality. Hanging all 4 tires over a curb was the preferred line in many many corners, or taking a 45 to 90 degree turn flat out.. Perhaps F1C isn't perfect in this regard, but it's certainly believable based on watching the way the real cars respond. Watch qualifying from Melbourne this year for instance, you'll see a.) drivers who cut the curbs too far pulling completely out of the throttle to gather the car back in and totally knackering their laps and b.) braking before the fast left/right complex midway through the lap. In addition to that, anyone with any sort of physics background who knows how wings work would immediately see that they didn't behave in a realistic manner in previous ISI sims. A wing in a plane that is traveling sideways is not going to generate lift, and I would expect the same thing to happen in a car. As of the angle of attack increases, there should be a significant dropoff in downforce/grip, something that was never modelled by ISI very well before. In the past you could basically lean on the wings, throwing the car sideways or cornering with ridiculous lateral G's at high speeds without much of a downforce penalty. That's thankfully been remedied. Jason

On Wed, 25 Jun 2003 12:48:20 +1000, "Redmist" <[email hidden]> wrote: >I like the wet weather track effects though.... Yeah, one thing GP4 still has over F1C is the "surprise! the track is wet" effect. I've lost many a GP4 car when unexpectedly hitting a wet patch before a high speed turn. The way a drying track is modelled is awesome too, with the cars actually carving out a dry groove as the session progreses. Jason

On Wed, 25 Jun 2003 20:32:31 -0700, The Laughing Gnome <[email hidden]> wrote: >Yea, but its got all those bumps to make up for it. Name one other F1 >sim that does bumps as well. Yeah, having the cars go airborne through Priory because of the boulder-sized bumps gives it a much more authentic feel... Jason

Didn't mean the debate over whether the tracks in F12K2 were accurate, just meant the whole subject of track accuracy in all sims has been done to death over the last couple of years here. Track accuracy is more important to some than others. Iain "Doug Ellison" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:orSJa.43690$[email hidden]... > > "Iain Mackenzie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > Do a Google search on Francois (ymenard) and track accuracy over thelast > > couple of years. You'll find lots of material there. It's been anongoing

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > debate for a long time! > > Iain > > There is no debate. The track are disgusting. It's a fact > > Doug > >

-----= 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! =-----