| GTR and rFacror [message #497218] |
Thu, 03 November 2005 01:18 |
|
I haven't played rFactor yet and only just started on GTR. How do the games
compare?
GTR seem quite good so far. Easier to get up and running compared to GP
Legends. It seems you can spend many hours trying to master the game and
going extra levels of skill.
|
|
|
| Re: GTR and rFacror [message #497219 ] |
Thu, 03 November 2005 02:00 |
|
"Andrew Sword" <exchange.mvp [at] nos.optushome.com.au> wrote in
news:4369575e$0$27300$afc38c87 [at] news.optusnet.com.au:
> I haven't played rFactor yet and only just started on GTR. How do the
> games compare?
>
> GTR seem quite good so far. Easier to get up and running compared to
> GP Legends. It seems you can spend many hours trying to master the
> game and going extra levels of skill.
>
>
>
There is more racing in GTR at this time. But rFactor may have longer
life. It's designed not as a complete sim product but a foundation for
free and possibly for-pay mods. The real strenth of rF has yet to be seen.
GTR, as a solo offline racer is unmatched. Online is not.
dh
|
|
|
| Re: GTR and rFacror [message #497220 ] |
Thu, 03 November 2005 02:13 |
|
My simplest of answers ever......
I haven't run GTR once, since getting rFactor.
:)
Cheers
==--==
"Andrew Sword" <exchange.mvp [at] nos.optushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:4369575e$0$27300$afc38c87 [at] news.optusnet.com.au...
>I haven't played rFactor yet and only just started on GTR. How do the games
>compare?
>
> GTR seem quite good so far. Easier to get up and running compared to GP
> Legends. It seems you can spend many hours trying to master the game and
> going extra levels of skill.
>
|
|
|
| Re: GTR and rFacror [message #497221 ] |
Thu, 03 November 2005 02:25 |
|
Hi Dave
I've got to take a moment to say that I don't agree with this statement
>>It's designed not as a complete sim product but a foundation for
free and possibly for-pay mods. <<
Do you have rFactor?
In it's vanilla state, rFactor is a complete, career based, racing sim.
It contains many "tin-top" cars to drive - all with their own physics
It contains Open-wheel cars as "Trainers" and "FormulaIS"
It contains race weekends as well as Championships for any of the above
I just don't see how that could be called "not complete"
It is true that it is a base for many projects to come (I hope), as that
was the reason for making it completely "open source". So far released;
F3 Mod, V8 Aus Mod, Formula Nippon Mod, -of the top of my head -- I'm sure
there are more.
There have also been a half dozen tracks released already - some better than
others I must say to be fair. But the good ones are really good. These
additional mods and tracks are only the beginning I think..... but at
least they should be considered when deciding whether to buy rFactor or not.
( I say yes, lol - could you have guessed? )
Ok, that's all my dirt kicking for now - heh heh
(gee, it's strange to be disagreeing with one of your posts Dave.... that's
unusual for me)
Cheers
==--==
"Dave Henrie" <daveBITEMEhenrie [at] comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns9702AD0EA7477davehenriecomcastnet [at] 216.196.97.136...
> "Andrew Sword" <exchange.mvp [at] nos.optushome.com.au> wrote in
> news:4369575e$0$27300$afc38c87 [at] news.optusnet.com.au:
>
>> I haven't played rFactor yet and only just started on GTR. How do the
>> games compare?
>>
>> GTR seem quite good so far. Easier to get up and running compared to
>> GP Legends. It seems you can spend many hours trying to master the
>> game and going extra levels of skill.
>>
>>
>>
>
> There is more racing in GTR at this time. But rFactor may have longer
> life. It's designed not as a complete sim product but a foundation for
> free and possibly for-pay mods. The real strenth of rF has yet to be
> seen.
> GTR, as a solo offline racer is unmatched. Online is not.
>
>
> dh
|
|
|
| Re: GTR and rFacror [message #497222 ] |
Thu, 03 November 2005 03:24 |
|
Andrew,
I would suggest GT Legends over either of the above. Very broad single
player game and multi seems up to snuff as well. rFactor I think has a
future with modders, but I would agree with the above sentiment that out of
the box, it doesn't offer much content. GTR is still a great game, with
great cars and tracks, but a generation behind both rFacotr and my personal
choice GTL.
Chad
$tl2.70799 [at] pd7tw3no...
> My simplest of answers ever......
>
> I haven't run GTR once, since getting rFactor.
>
> :)
> Cheers
> ==--==
>
> "Andrew Sword" <exchange.mvp [at] nos.optushome.com.au> wrote in message
> news:4369575e$0$27300$afc38c87 [at] news.optusnet.com.au...
>>I haven't played rFactor yet and only just started on GTR. How do the
>>games compare?
>>
>> GTR seem quite good so far. Easier to get up and running compared to GP
>> Legends. It seems you can spend many hours trying to master the game and
>> going extra levels of skill.
>>
>
>
|
|
|
| Re: GTR and rFacror [message #497223 ] |
Thu, 03 November 2005 03:42 |
|
"Dave Henrie" <daveBITEMEhenrie [at] comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns9702AD0EA7477davehenriecomcastnet [at] 216.196.97.136...
> "Andrew Sword" <exchange.mvp [at] nos.optushome.com.au> wrote in
> news:4369575e$0$27300$afc38c87 [at] news.optusnet.com.au:
>
>> I haven't played rFactor yet and only just started on GTR. How do the
>> games compare?
>>
>> GTR seem quite good so far. Easier to get up and running compared to
>> GP Legends. It seems you can spend many hours trying to master the
>> game and going extra levels of skill.
>>
>>
>>
>
> There is more racing in GTR at this time. But rFactor may have longer
> life. It's designed not as a complete sim product but a foundation for
> free and possibly for-pay mods. The real strenth of rF has yet to be
> seen.
> GTR, as a solo offline racer is unmatched. Online is not.
>
>
> dh
I prefer GTL. The physics seem better to me, I like the older cars, and
online and the offline cup are a plus. This "the potential of rFactor has
yet to be seen" statement is starting to gnaw on me. I've seen nothing very
substantial as far as mods go for rFactor, just a bunch of small things that
some are claiming are mods. Compared to GTL, I don't like the way the
rFactor cars feel. The Houston (or whatever that fictitious car's name is)
simply does not feel as good as, say, the Porsche or any of the other cars
in GTL.
To be honest, once I got GTL, rFactor has been taking up space on my hard
drive. I haven't played it in weeks.
Alanb
|
|
|
| Re: GTR and rFacror [message #497225 ] |
Thu, 03 November 2005 06:47 |
|
> I haven't played rFactor yet and only just started on GTR.
> How do the games compare?
There's a difference in the cars that are modeled and the
physics.
GTR version 1.0 (German version, I got mine a year ago),
had an issue where the cars almost always spin 180 degrees
if the car loses stability. It's been mellowed out in the
later versions (I later got USA version which is 1.3, and
patched to 1.4), but it's still there. The cars are OK as
long as you don't lose it, but if you don't catch a spin
quickly enough, it's hard to recover. It's difficult
to get lift throttle oversteer or induced understeer to
work with GTR.
In rFactor and GTLegends, lift throttle oversteer is reasonably
controllable. In GTLegends, induced understeer works well on
a lot of the cars for spin prevention / recovery (turn inwards
instead of countersteering). GTLegends has this weird quirk
that some cars are more unstable under braking with the assists
on instead of off.
Of the 3 games, GTLegends is the easiest to drive with all
assist off, and GTR is the most difficult. A professional driver
made the comment that GTR with some assists on was more
realistic (to him) than with all assists off, but this was a
comment about version 1.0.
The Formula in rFactor seems very close to the F1's in F1C99-02,
and is one of my favorite cars for offline. For online, passing
is difficult in the Formulas unless you can run on big tracks.
Then again, passing is difficult with real life F1 race cars.
|
|
|
| Re: GTR and rFacror [message #497227 ] |
Thu, 03 November 2005 09:15 |
|
One other thing about GTR is the curbing on some tracks.
At Spa, some of the curbs will help turn a car if you go
over them with the inside tires. I don't think this
is realistic.
|
|
|
| Re: GTR and rFacror [message #497230 ] |
Thu, 03 November 2005 12:43 |
|
"Chad Rogers" <chadliz [at] comcast.net> wrote in
news:bNSdnVacXLps6fTeRVn-hA [at] comcast.com:
> ...but I would agree with the above
> sentiment that out of the box, it doesn't offer much content.
Except your choice of:
* Tin tops
with a selection of
- RWD
- FWD
- 4WD
in a variety of
- Low Power
- Medium performance
- High performance
specs
AND
* Open wheelers
in several varieties, including excellent tyre modelling both for
- grooved tyres
- slicks
AND
5 racetracks, four of which have at least 2 distinctly different layouts.
That "not much content" argument that so many insist on amazes me, to say
the least...
So, it's more of a showcase of the completeness of rFactor vehicle
simulation than a focussed effort on a single type of racing, but how on
God's green Earth can you claim that that equals a lack of content???
Something is severely wrong in the Land of Logic...
|
|
|
| Re: GTR and rFacror [message #497233 ] |
Thu, 03 November 2005 13:59 |
|
>"Harry" <a [at] b.com> wrote
> That "not much content" argument that so many insist on amazes me, to say
> the least...
SCGT had more cars and tracks from the developpers for the same style of
sim, more than half a decade ago. 5 tracks is really what kills it for me
at the moment, considering there's perhaps 3 "average-to-good" tracks made
by the community.
--
-- François Ménard <ymenard>
-- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez
Corporation - helping America into the New World...
|
|
|
| Re: GTR and rFacror [message #497234 ] |
Thu, 03 November 2005 13:16 |
|
On Thu, 03 Nov 2005 01:25:31 GMT, <MM> wrote:
>
> It is true that it is a base for many projects to come (I hope), as that
> was the reason for making it completely "open source". So far released;
While rF is open-formatted, it most certainly isn't open source or I'd
by busy working on a Linux port right now. ;)
Open Source means that you can get the program's source code and modify
it. I'd rather describe rF as being "open content".
cheers, uwe
--
GPG Fingerprint: 2E 13 20 22 9A 3F 63 7F 67 6F E9 B1 A8 36 A4 61
|
|
|
| Re: GTR and rFacror [message #497244 ] |
Thu, 03 November 2005 20:49 |
|
Harry,
I do find the content in comparison to GTL about 1/4 at most. I don't know
anyone that uses any of the lower HP cars(obviously some may) and in fact
the only car I enjoyed was the open wheel trainer. The fomula cars to me
were a joke and the cockpits in the tin tops were lacking. I won't go into
the tracks except to say that GTL has 25 "real" tracks compared to maybe 10
"fake". GTL has 29 different "real" cars, both low and high HP and some of
the greatest cars ever made in GT racing. To say it's lacking in content is
actually pretty easy for me to say.
Chad
"Harry" <a [at] b.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9703815DD3675abcom [at] 216.196.109.144...
> "Chad Rogers" <chadliz [at] comcast.net> wrote in
> news:bNSdnVacXLps6fTeRVn-hA [at] comcast.com:
>
>> ...but I would agree with the above
>> sentiment that out of the box, it doesn't offer much content.
>
> Except your choice of:
>
> * Tin tops
> with a selection of
> - RWD
> - FWD
> - 4WD
> in a variety of
> - Low Power
> - Medium performance
> - High performance
> specs
>
> AND
>
> * Open wheelers
> in several varieties, including excellent tyre modelling both for
> - grooved tyres
> - slicks
>
> AND
>
> 5 racetracks, four of which have at least 2 distinctly different layouts.
>
> That "not much content" argument that so many insist on amazes me, to say
> the least...
>
> So, it's more of a showcase of the completeness of rFactor vehicle
> simulation than a focussed effort on a single type of racing, but how on
> God's green Earth can you claim that that equals a lack of content???
> Something is severely wrong in the Land of Logic...
|
|
|
| Re: GTR and rFacror [message #497260 ] |
Fri, 04 November 2005 04:31 |
|
How can you tell which cars are FWD vs. RWD? Certainly not by feel the way
you can instantly tell in LFS or real life.
Marc
"Harry" <a [at] b.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9703815DD3675abcom [at] 216.196.109.144...
> "Chad Rogers" <chadliz [at] comcast.net> wrote in
> news:bNSdnVacXLps6fTeRVn-hA [at] comcast.com:
>
>> ...but I would agree with the above
>> sentiment that out of the box, it doesn't offer much content.
>
> Except your choice of:
>
> * Tin tops
> with a selection of
> - RWD
> - FWD
> - 4WD
> in a variety of
> - Low Power
> - Medium performance
> - High performance
> specs
>
> AND
>
> * Open wheelers
> in several varieties, including excellent tyre modelling both for
> - grooved tyres
> - slicks
>
> AND
>
> 5 racetracks, four of which have at least 2 distinctly different layouts.
>
> That "not much content" argument that so many insist on amazes me, to say
> the least...
>
> So, it's more of a showcase of the completeness of rFactor vehicle
> simulation than a focussed effort on a single type of racing, but how on
> God's green Earth can you claim that that equals a lack of content???
> Something is severely wrong in the Land of Logic...
|
|
|
| Re: GTR and rFacror [message #497261 ] |
Fri, 04 November 2005 04:36 |
|
"Marc Collins" <marc_collins [at] sympatico.ca> wrote in
news:xCAaf.10348$LF3.839740 [at] news20.bellglobal.com:
>
> How can you tell which cars are FWD vs. RWD? Certainly not by feel
> the way you can instantly tell in LFS or real life.
>
> Marc
>
the only FWD car is the Rhez. And even that was changed to AWD for the
Rhez mod...WHY they would do that? lol.
Most cars are 2wd with an upgrade option for 4. The Aussie V8s that use
the AWD Howston as a base are only 2wd rear drivers.
dh
|
|
|
| Re: GTR and rFacror [message #502993 ] |
Fri, 04 November 2005 22:10 |
|
>>I'd rather describe rF as being "open content"<<
Agreed Uwe - my statement of "open-source" should be changed to
"mod-friendly"
Cheers
==--==
"Uwe Schürkamp" <hoover [at] hoover.dyndns.org> wrote in message
news:slrndmjvt2.3cu.hoover [at] hoover.dyndns.org...
> On Thu, 03 Nov 2005 01:25:31 GMT, <MM> wrote:
>>
>> It is true that it is a base for many projects to come (I hope), as that
>> was the reason for making it completely "open source". So far released;
>
> While rF is open-formatted, it most certainly isn't open source or I'd
> by busy working on a Linux port right now. ;)
>
> Open Source means that you can get the program's source code and modify
> it. I'd rather describe rF as being "open content".
>
> cheers, uwe
>
> --
> GPG Fingerprint: 2E 13 20 22 9A 3F 63 7F 67 6F E9 B1 A8 36 A4 61
|
|
|
| Re: GTR and rFacror [message #503006 ] |
Sat, 05 November 2005 22:42 |
|
Keep dreaming! That should be any day know. Most of us will be in leagues
with GTR2 or GTL by the time all of that happens.
"Byron Forbes" <caramel [at] chocolate.com.au> wrote in message
news:436c1a60$0$13318$61c65585 [at] un-2park-reader-01.sydney.pipenetworks.com.au...
>
> "Harry" <a [at] b.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns9703815DD3675abcom [at] 216.196.109.144...
>> "Chad Rogers" <chadliz [at] comcast.net> wrote in
>> news:bNSdnVacXLps6fTeRVn-hA [at] comcast.com:
>>
>>> ...but I would agree with the above
>>> sentiment that out of the box, it doesn't offer much content.
>>
>> Except your choice of:
>>
>> * Tin tops
>> with a selection of
>> - RWD
>> - FWD
>> - 4WD
>> in a variety of
>> - Low Power
>> - Medium performance
>> - High performance
>> specs
>>
>> AND
>>
>> * Open wheelers
>> in several varieties, including excellent tyre modelling both for
>> - grooved tyres
>> - slicks
>>
>> AND
>>
>> 5 racetracks, four of which have at least 2 distinctly different layouts.
>>
>> That "not much content" argument that so many insist on amazes me, to say
>> the least...
>>
>> So, it's more of a showcase of the completeness of rFactor vehicle
>> simulation than a focussed effort on a single type of racing, but how on
>> God's green Earth can you claim that that equals a lack of content???
>> Something is severely wrong in the Land of Logic...
>
> Not to mention that the track churnout is starting to get into full
> swing.
>
> Once rFactor gets a good F1 mod, a good Le Mans/Trans Am Mod and and
> Aussie V8 Mod, there will be no other sim! :)
>
|
|
|
| Re: GTR and rFacror [message #503007 ] |
Sat, 05 November 2005 22:44 |
|
Because they are overpowered and have too much downforce, feel like an
arcade game to me as well as most of the folks who have run them. More so
running them on the little tracks that come with the game.
"Byron Forbes" <caramel [at] chocolate.com.au> wrote in message
news:436c1c2e$0$13321$61c65585 [at] un-2park-reader-01.sydney.pipenetworks.com.au...
>
> "Chad Rogers" <chadliz [at] comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:tfSdnZnCbolO9PfeRVn-jg [at] comcast.com...
>> Harry,
>>
>> I do find the content in comparison to GTL about 1/4 at most. I don't
>> know anyone that uses any of the lower HP cars(obviously some may) and in
>> fact the only car I enjoyed was the open wheel trainer. The fomula cars
>> to me were a joke and the cockpits in the tin tops were lacking. I won't
>> go into the tracks except to say that GTL has 25 "real" tracks compared
>> to maybe 10 "fake". GTL has 29 different "real" cars, both low and high
>> HP and some of the greatest cars ever made in GT racing. To say it's
>> lacking in content is actually pretty easy for me to say.
>>
>
> Why are the formula cars a joke? - seem fine to me.
>
|
|
|
| Re: GTR and rFacror [message #503008 ] |
Sat, 05 November 2005 22:45 |
|
My point was that you wouldn't be to tell whether a car was FWD or RWD from
the in-game handling. This is not the case with GPL where the rear drive
and weight bias is very evident. It is also not the case with GTR or GTL or
LFS. You can tell what wheels are driving the car in LFS blind folded and
with no sound (in case the engine "note" gives it away) within about 10
metres. rFactor is a big mystery...at least with the out-of-the-box
settings.
Marc
"Dave Henrie" <daveBITEMEhenrie [at] comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns9703C76F472ADdavehenriecomcastnet [at] 216.196.97.136...
> "Marc Collins" <marc_collins [at] sympatico.ca> wrote in
> news:xCAaf.10348$LF3.839740 [at] news20.bellglobal.com:
>
>>
>> How can you tell which cars are FWD vs. RWD? Certainly not by feel
>> the way you can instantly tell in LFS or real life.
>>
>> Marc
>>
>
> the only FWD car is the Rhez. And even that was changed to AWD for the
> Rhez mod...WHY they would do that? lol.
> Most cars are 2wd with an upgrade option for 4. The Aussie V8s that use
> the AWD Howston as a base are only 2wd rear drivers.
> dh
|
|
|
| Re: GTR and rFacror [message #503009 ] |
Sat, 05 November 2005 23:04 |
|
> Because they are overpowered and have too much downforce, feel like an arcade game to me as well as most of the folks
> who have run them. More so running them on the little tracks that come with the game.
F1 race cars are just fast, and very popular in Europe.
http://jeffareid.net/cgi-bin/spaf1.wmv
Formula's in rFactor seem about right to me:
http://jeffareid.net/cgi-bin/rfrf1tgp.wmv
http://jeffareid.net/cgi-bin/rfrf1sh.wmv
|
|
|
| Re: GTR and rFacror [message #503010 ] |
Sat, 05 November 2005 23:06 |
|
> My point was that you wouldn't be to tell whether a car was FWD or RWD from the in-game handling.
You must have forgot to turn off assists.
> You can tell what wheels are driving the car in LFS blind folded
> within about 10 metres.
Easy test, if you're facing backwards after 10 meters, it must be a
RWD car in LFS.
|
|
|
| Re: GTR and rFacror [message #503011 ] |
Sun, 06 November 2005 01:02 |
|
"Marc Collins" <marc_collins [at] sympatico.ca> wrote in
news:QJ9bf.15446$J14.616040 [at] news20.bellglobal.com:
> My point was that you wouldn't be to tell whether a car was FWD or RWD
> from the in-game handling. This is not the case with GPL where the
> rear drive and weight bias is very evident. It is also not the case
> with GTR or GTL or LFS. You can tell what wheels are driving the car
> in LFS blind folded and with no sound (in case the engine "note" gives
> it away) within about 10 metres. rFactor is a big mystery...at least
> with the out-of-the-box settings.
>
> Marc
So when I break the rear end loose, and floor the accelerator to bring
it back inline, that isn't telling me I have FWD? The default car is so
underpowered you can't drive it like a supertouring car, but once you get
some power, you can pretty much burn up the fronts in a few laps using them
to pull you through the turns.
dh
|
|
|
| Re: GTR and rFacror [message #503017 ] |
Sun, 06 November 2005 04:34 |
|
Chad Rogers wrote:
> Keep dreaming! That should be any day know. Most of us will be in leagues
> with GTR2 or GTL by the time all of that happens.
>
It's not a dream. When GTL will probably have few, if any, quality
mods, rFactor will have morphed into a sim where you can run just about
any type of car you choose. Considering the tools haven't even been
released yet for rFactor, I wouldn't call the development of rFactor
mods anemic. Once the tools are available and development can move at a
higher pace, you will see rFactor grow.
I have both, and I like GTL.. but it gets about 1/5th the run time of
rFactor at this time. I really dislike the feel of the interface layout
in GTL, which is a minor complaint all things considered. I suspect
I'll get into GTL more as I unlock more cars that are more interesting
to drive. Even so, I'll only be running GTL when I feel like driving
those vehicles. With rFactor, I'll be able to run numerous types of
vehicles... and probably the same ones available in GTL with the same
tracks. If that happens, what would compel me to run GTL over rFactor?
--
Scott B. Husted
http://www.Husted.cc
|
|
|
| Re: GTR and rFacror [message #503020 ] |
Sun, 06 November 2005 07:47 |
|
Um, I have a pretty good idea what a formula one car is. They are actually
pretty popular all over the world. I didn't watch the video's, but my
opinion of them being overfast and overdownforced(if that's a word) is not
just mine.
"Jeff Reid" <jeffareid [at] hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:E%9bf.13272$bo.1476 [at] fed1read01...
>> Because they are overpowered and have too much downforce, feel like an
>> arcade game to me as well as most of the folks who have run them. More
>> so running them on the little tracks that come with the game.
>
> F1 race cars are just fast, and very popular in Europe.
>
> http://jeffareid.net/cgi-bin/spaf1.wmv
>
> Formula's in rFactor seem about right to me:
>
> http://jeffareid.net/cgi-bin/rfrf1tgp.wmv
>
> http://jeffareid.net/cgi-bin/rfrf1sh.wmv
>
>
>
>
>
|
|
|
| Re: GTR and rFacror [message #503021 ] |
Sun, 06 November 2005 07:49 |
|
Scott,
I am all for rFactor having some content to run with. I bought it and never
use it, I'd love to have a reason to. If all of those mods are done(and
done well) I will be happy as will all of the community. I just don't see
it happening anytime soon.
"Scott B. Husted" <sbhusted [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
news:lLGcnaheBbci5PDeUSdV9g [at] ptd.net...
> Chad Rogers wrote:
>> Keep dreaming! That should be any day know. Most of us will be in
>> leagues with GTR2 or GTL by the time all of that happens.
>>
>
> It's not a dream. When GTL will probably have few, if any, quality mods,
> rFactor will have morphed into a sim where you can run just about any type
> of car you choose. Considering the tools haven't even been released yet
> for rFactor, I wouldn't call the development of rFactor mods anemic. Once
> the tools are available and development can move at a higher pace, you
> will see rFactor grow.
>
> I have both, and I like GTL.. but it gets about 1/5th the run time of
> rFactor at this time. I really dislike the feel of the interface layout
> in GTL, which is a minor complaint all things considered. I suspect I'll
> get into GTL more as I unlock more cars that are more interesting to
> drive. Even so, I'll only be running GTL when I feel like driving those
> vehicles. With rFactor, I'll be able to run numerous types of vehicles...
> and probably the same ones available in GTL with the same tracks. If
> that happens, what would compel me to run GTL over rFactor?
>
> --
> Scott B. Husted
> http://www.Husted.cc
|
|
|
| Re: GTR and rFacror [message #503024 ] |
Sun, 06 November 2005 12:11 |
|
> Um, I have a pretty good idea what a formula one car is. They are actually pretty popular all over the world. I
> didn't watch the video's, but my opinion of them being overfast and overdownforced(if that's a word) is not just mine.
If you don't like speed, maybe you should play Live For Slow.
|
|
|
| Re: GTR and rFacror [message #503032 ] |
Sun, 06 November 2005 21:21 |
|
Where did I ever say I didn't like speed? I like realism and the rFactor
"formula" cars aren't realistic.
"Jeff Reid" <jeffareid [at] hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Vwlbf.18726$bo.5834 [at] fed1read01...
>> Um, I have a pretty good idea what a formula one car is. They are
>> actually pretty popular all over the world. I didn't watch the video's,
>> but my opinion of them being overfast and overdownforced(if that's a
>> word) is not just mine.
>
> If you don't like speed, maybe you should play Live For Slow.
>
>
|
|
|
| Re: GTR and rFacror [message #503037 ] |
Mon, 07 November 2005 01:51 |
|
> Where did I ever say I didn't like speed? I like realism and the rFactor "formula" cars aren't realistic.
They seem realistic for F1 cars.
|
|
|
