Racing Sims. Any Interest?
Posted: 31 May 2005, 16:39
Just probing the waters here to see what I fish out! Is anyone here interested in playing any driving sims like EA Nascar SimRacing, Grand Prix Legends and Formula1 Challenge 99-02?
Page 1 of 1
Posted: 31 May 2005, 19:06
why put this in our private forums? some elh might be interested as well...
Posted: 01 Jun 2005, 05:01
Steel wrote:why put this in our private forums? some elh might be interested as well...
Good point. Feel free to move it to another forum. Which forum should it go in?
Posted: 01 Jun 2005, 10:52
how about this one??? 
Posted: 01 Jun 2005, 11:06
This should work fine! Sorry for being "anti-social".Steel wrote:how about this one???
j/kPosted: 01 Jun 2005, 12:55
Bah. I have to many games to play...and honestly, too many migs shoot down. four wheels or wings? hmm. no brainer for me. Turbine engines, wigns, and vulcan cannons all the way.
Posted: 01 Jun 2005, 14:41
I hardly think it can be argued there are too many flight sims. 
Posted: 02 Jun 2005, 05:48
I used to play Geoff Crammonds F1 GP on my Amiga. I had lap records, race records, and had won every race in a season at one point. But I cheated to do it :oops: . I firstly used the best race line cheat, which I later discarded. But the big one was to use autobrakes by removing them as you came off a corner and applying them at the very last minute entering a corner. :lol: Man, you could build some serious lap records like that.
Posted: 02 Jun 2005, 07:53
LOL! Panzer and I did the same thing with GC's World Circuit for the PC! That was back in 93/94.
To be honest, we both still use the aids in F1C because we get so little time practicing it in. We're passable in GPL (no aids at all), and fairly good in NASCAR RS 2003 from Papy and NASCAR Simracing from EA. Haven't played the Papy one since getting the EA one, though. My install got corrupted and I didn't bother reinstalling yet.
To be honest, we both still use the aids in F1C because we get so little time practicing it in. We're passable in GPL (no aids at all), and fairly good in NASCAR RS 2003 from Papy and NASCAR Simracing from EA. Haven't played the Papy one since getting the EA one, though. My install got corrupted and I didn't bother reinstalling yet.
Posted: 02 Jun 2005, 07:58
Concering the use of driving aids, I think the hardest one for me to turn off will be "auto-shifting". You see, I've never driven a manual transmission car in my entire life so I dont even have a "real world" feel of when I should upshift and when I should downshift. In Nascar games, I turn off ALL driving aids except for auto-shifting.
Posted: 04 Jun 2005, 04:03
Basically mate, you want to upshift at the last possible minute. To squeeze as much acceleration out of your gear as possible. But in practise, it's best to shift anywhere between 100-500 rpm before the redline. Which, in a normal car, has an electronic or cetrifugal limiter. In a race car, usually just a red light indicator, so they can exceed the redline temporarily, say in a bend or just before the end of a long straight, to save them from downshifting and potential losing acceleration/torque.
Talking of which, I own a Lexus, which has rear-wheel drive, and traction control. Couldn't understand why, no matter how hard I try even old grannies could beat me off the line. I mean, I know what I'm doing - stage slipping the clutch, whilst keeping the tacho above a certain rpm to stay inside the hi-torque band. Then I remembered the traction control is ON by default - you have to switch it off, otherwise the more power you try to put down, the less is available. The problem was so obvious when I thought about it. Now, we're not saying the IS200 is fast by any means; given that it's a 2 litre straight six @153BHP, it should be faster than 0-60 in 9.2 secs (it can be slightly faster with correct technique, but not much), but it should be better than it is. And you don't do yourself any favours using the traction control. :lol:
To those on the other side of the pond, these figures may seem puny. But things are different over here - fuel is almost 4 times more expensive in some places, and therefore our engine capacities are somewhat smaller. Not to mention the need for big engines, trucks and stuff is unnecessary, so our long haul trucks have smaller engines with turbocharging instead of what we call muscle-car type specs.
Talking of which, I own a Lexus, which has rear-wheel drive, and traction control. Couldn't understand why, no matter how hard I try even old grannies could beat me off the line. I mean, I know what I'm doing - stage slipping the clutch, whilst keeping the tacho above a certain rpm to stay inside the hi-torque band. Then I remembered the traction control is ON by default - you have to switch it off, otherwise the more power you try to put down, the less is available. The problem was so obvious when I thought about it. Now, we're not saying the IS200 is fast by any means; given that it's a 2 litre straight six @153BHP, it should be faster than 0-60 in 9.2 secs (it can be slightly faster with correct technique, but not much), but it should be better than it is. And you don't do yourself any favours using the traction control. :lol:
To those on the other side of the pond, these figures may seem puny. But things are different over here - fuel is almost 4 times more expensive in some places, and therefore our engine capacities are somewhat smaller. Not to mention the need for big engines, trucks and stuff is unnecessary, so our long haul trucks have smaller engines with turbocharging instead of what we call muscle-car type specs.
Posted: 04 Jun 2005, 08:39
nice triple post, K - padding the count? ;)
Posted: 04 Jun 2005, 08:53
Yeah, I guess so, eh?! :lol: :roll:
Posted: 04 Jun 2005, 19:12
fixed that triple thing...
Posted: 05 Jun 2005, 06:51
. . . damn site admin!fixed that triple thing...
- can't live with 'em, can't play without 'em! :lol: