-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Formula One: Championship Edition - PSM3 Review
- Thread starter Mmmkay
- Start date
PjotrStroganov
Member
Sarcasm is a strange but wonderful thing.:lol
Kleegamefan
K. LEE GAIDEN
AlphaSnake said:
Where is Gigadent these days?
Kleegamefan
K. LEE GAIDEN
chespace said:
:lol :lol :lol
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
Sho Nuff said:
Sarcasm?
AlphaSnake
...and that, kids, was the first time I sucked a dick for crack
Kleegamefan said:
We believe he is SiameseDreamer, but we coud be wrong.
Shinobi said:
Yeh, its not 100% excitement all the time. I just get cranky sometimes when people start saying what should and should not be discussed on a message board. Or who can or can not discuss a topic. I do get where you are coming from though, the lynch mob forming for Jeff's Zelda review was very silly. I loved that game but I can see where he was coming from in his review.
It's a big stretch to say the magazines have a 360 agenda as well, that is some real crazy talk. I do think the 4.7/10 review was written by someone who is bothered by more than just what he wrote about in the review. Maybe the reviewer is mad at the switch to V8s or doesn't like that a single company has the rights to the F1 licence. Something set the reviewer off I just wonder what it was.
My biggest complaint is when someone reviews a driving game with the driving aids on, especieally stability control. Not because its hardcore to play with them off. It's that the physics never feels right with them on. It leaves a feeling of being disconnected to the road. GT, Forza both play better with stability control off.
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
Zaphod said:
Exactly why these reviews don't hold water.
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
Gek54 said:
Yeah a racing game should be knocked 3 or 4 WHOLE points just for not having force feedback. :rollmy****ingeyes:
Gek54 said:
hey man, you are worse than me. 30fps is ok as long as there is a good physics engine under the hood.
what I still havent figured out is whether this game is a F1 sim game with a driving/racing aspect, or a true F1 racing sim.
looks like its the first case, but I reserve final judgment until I try the final game myself.
plagiarize
Banned
so it's like this.
they made a great F1 sim for hardcore racing nuts.
they then realised they wanted to sell the game to more than 20 people, and so they made a bunch of driving aids to make the game more accessible.
they figured that most people would need the aids and so turned them on by default.
problem is, the aids make the game crap.
the fact is, that as such the game should be marked down for that. now that doesn't change that it's a great F1 sim... but look at Gran Turismo. there's a hardcore driving sim there too, but the game is fully fun and accessible if you don't want to get into all of the tweaking.
they tried to make this game accessible to people like me who don't know about gear ratios and tyre pressure and what that actually does, and in that they completely failed.
so really, this is a sim vs fun argument.
i'm not going to pretend i know anything about how F1 cars handle (though i have followed the sport for years, i've never driven one).
if you love the sport, here's a hardcore sim for you, but it's not for everyone, and so the reviews should reflect that.
i mean, if i make a perfect traffic helecopter sim, and because it's a perfect sim every game site gives it 10/10, then i'm going to have millions of pissed off gamers that bought a game that bored the crap out of them. the magazines are going to have thousands of pissed off readers too.
the reviewers are just giving their honest impressions of the game, and that's good because it ISN'T for everyone. you'll have the hardcore people that write positive reviews and get the message to the right people... but if 95% of gamers aren't going to like your game, then guess what? it probably shouldn't get great scores across the board.
this game isn't just marketed to the hardcore. it isn't just designed for the hardcore... and as much as the hardcore may like it, you've got to be upfront that it's crap if you aren't a total gear head and play with the aids turned on (which are there for one reason and one reason only... to make the game accessible to such people).
they made a great F1 sim for hardcore racing nuts.
they then realised they wanted to sell the game to more than 20 people, and so they made a bunch of driving aids to make the game more accessible.
they figured that most people would need the aids and so turned them on by default.
problem is, the aids make the game crap.
the fact is, that as such the game should be marked down for that. now that doesn't change that it's a great F1 sim... but look at Gran Turismo. there's a hardcore driving sim there too, but the game is fully fun and accessible if you don't want to get into all of the tweaking.
they tried to make this game accessible to people like me who don't know about gear ratios and tyre pressure and what that actually does, and in that they completely failed.
so really, this is a sim vs fun argument.
i'm not going to pretend i know anything about how F1 cars handle (though i have followed the sport for years, i've never driven one).
if you love the sport, here's a hardcore sim for you, but it's not for everyone, and so the reviews should reflect that.
i mean, if i make a perfect traffic helecopter sim, and because it's a perfect sim every game site gives it 10/10, then i'm going to have millions of pissed off gamers that bought a game that bored the crap out of them. the magazines are going to have thousands of pissed off readers too.
the reviewers are just giving their honest impressions of the game, and that's good because it ISN'T for everyone. you'll have the hardcore people that write positive reviews and get the message to the right people... but if 95% of gamers aren't going to like your game, then guess what? it probably shouldn't get great scores across the board.
this game isn't just marketed to the hardcore. it isn't just designed for the hardcore... and as much as the hardcore may like it, you've got to be upfront that it's crap if you aren't a total gear head and play with the aids turned on (which are there for one reason and one reason only... to make the game accessible to such people).
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
plagiarize said:
Plag, the darn aids are right in the options menu. You can even turn them off and on during your race.
The damn reviewers should have just turned them off (it only takes 5 ****ing seconds to do this) and play the game. And then mention in the review that most people should turn the aids off and review the game accordingly.
plagiarize
Banned
i don't think you understood my post.mckmas8808 said:
the aids are in the game for a reason.
that reason is because they want to sell this game to a wider audience than just a hardcore F1 racing sim would.
the game succeeds as a hardcore F1 racing sim (i played it with the aids off and it was too hard for me, i have no problem admitting), but it utterly fails in terms of being accessible to that wider audience. so yes, a minority (the hardcore f1 fans) of the people that this game is aimed at will love it, and some reviews will come from that minority of people.
that minority of people aren't wrong when they praise it as a great F1 racing sim, but they are a minority.
if the game didn't have the aids and such in, that'd be one thing, because then they'd only be aiming at the hardcore. but they are there. and they make the game suck, so for me, someone who just isn't up to the task of playing a simulation of that accuracy (but who enjoys things like Gran Turismo) it's either way too hard, or if i turn on the aids, utter crap.
Ynos Yrros
Banned
Great post. You missed something though. Those 2 reviews (Edge and PSM3) don't tell that it's game that's for hardcore - they said it isn't. The reviewer didn't go into option screen, he doesn't mention the fact that you can tune everything up. He said that it's one of the worst F1 games ever released, and bashes the handling all around.plagiarize said:
If the game would get a 4.5 score, but it would be saying that it's boring but will definately appeal to the hardcore audience, then no one would have a problem. For now the review seems as if author played 2 quick races with all the aids turned up on max.
plagiarize
Banned
you'll get reviews from the hardcore people though. heck, the demo is there and the word of mouth is there. i'm confident that the message will reach the right people. the cvg review (or whatever mag that 7 out of 10 one came from) did make that point pretty well from the quotes i read... so it's not being missed by everyone.Ynos Yrros said:
if i was assigned to review this, i honestly couldn't tell you if it was a good hardcore racing sim or not. it's totally beyond my understanding of driving and the sport.
Ynos Yrros
Banned
Yup, that's why I complimented your postplagiarize said:
. It's just 2 reviews,that read like one review.plagiarize said:
Point is, you make F1 simple, you make it accessible, you end up making it boring. It's an issue with the sport itself (which is NOT just about racing as much as a flight simulator is NOT just about flying), not the quality of the simulation. Do you think Geoff Crammond's GP was good because casual gamers liked it? Studio Liverpool at least attempts to bring to the masses a sub-genre traditionally aimed to the hardocre audience while still keeping the sim part intact. If you dont like it, go play Mario Kart, but don't call it garbage.
plagiarize
Banned
i'm saying it's two different things.TTP said:
GT appeals to both... this ATTEMPTS to appeal to both, and fails to appeal to the wider audience it strives for.
if it didn't attempt to appeal to the wider audience, then i'd say, sure, don't mark a game down for what it isn't trying to do, but the fact is that in this case it is trying to appeal to wide audience or those aids wouldn't even exist.
you've pointed out yourself that there are F1 games that casual gamers liked, so it isn't impossible.
i don't know if crammond's GP was aiming for a hardcore audience as well as a wider one, if so then it obviously failed there, but in that case it effects less people.
i don't make fun of people that play hardcore sims, so i'd appreciate it if you didn't look down your nose at a game or a gamer because the wider audience enjoyed it.
Gek54 said:
If there's one thing I'll agree with Gek on here is lack of rumble (or FFB but I don't have a wheel setup at home right now in my current situation -- only at work) and the 30fps/blurring issue. It knocks the game down a couple notches. Lack of feedback from your tires makes you more disconnected from the road, and 30fps does hurt the sense of speed even if the over-the-top blurring compensates for some of it.
The AI is very aggressive on hard and really forces you to stay glued to your lines, which is very good. And it's equally as frustrating when they clip your tire and spin you out or take you out of the race -- but I suppose it happens in real life too.
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
TTP said:
Exactly! They should review it for what it does do right. They should put in the review that all gamers need to turn the aids off to enjoy the game and if you don't the game will probably suck.
And then give it a decent to good score. Something like a 7.0 or something.
chespace said:
Yeah. You should basically avoid rushing into the pack at the first turn and just try to stay close to it until the cars spread around the track and you can take them one by one. This is not NASCAR indeed.
mckmas8808 said:
Yep. I think 7 is a fair score. The EDGE 7, not the IGN 7 or GS one.
Sim Racer...
Online...
11 Players...
>5.0?
This reviewer and his review are a ****ing joke but hell it's not like us PS3 fans aren't use to this shit by now....
*cough*nytimeresistancereview*cough*
Weird thing is I wasn't really thinking of buying this game 'new' until these last two reviews hit the street and started people talking about the game.
If I can afford the game: I look forward to taking part in grueling 'sim' F1 races against some of my fellow gaffers.
Online...
11 Players...
>5.0?
This reviewer and his review are a ****ing joke but hell it's not like us PS3 fans aren't use to this shit by now....
*cough*nytimeresistancereview*cough*
Weird thing is I wasn't really thinking of buying this game 'new' until these last two reviews hit the street and started people talking about the game.
If I can afford the game: I look forward to taking part in grueling 'sim' F1 races against some of my fellow gaffers.
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
MickeyKnox
Member
Holy ****ing shit.mckmas8808 said:
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
MickeyKnox said:
Yeah I said the samething. Definetly after this pic.
Looks so damn real.
MightyHedgehog
Member
Everything except for the pixelated folks populating the flat ramp of a grandstand.mckmas8808 said:
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
MightyHedgehog said:
Yeah pretty much. But I understand. Don't spend a lot of power on the crowd when the cars could use it.
AlphaSnake
...and that, kids, was the first time I sucked a dick for crack
mckmas8808 said:
Because when you're doing 230MPH down a stretch, the last thing on your mind is the crowd details.
I'd rather them save those polygons for the things that matter. And yes, F1 does indeed look as gorgeous as those pics.
The rain really screams Next-Gen but everything else is not that much of a leap from PS2 games. I still don't see why it can't be running at 60FPS. The RSX alone should be able to handle it at 60FPS and the developer has already gone on record to say that they used several SPUs in addition to the RSX for graphics.
DarkJediKnight
Member
bishoptl said:
WHAT!
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
Z3F said:
WHAT?!
F1 06 PS2
F1 PS3
Other than the rain and the differences in resolution, the changes are not that great. I don't remember if the PS2 games had motion blur, but I guess that would be another difference even though some people hate the motion blur. On the TV, the differences are even smaller than your screenshots would indicate. Like I said before, I really can't see why they didn't hit 60FPS with such visuals.
MickeyKnox
Member
I'm sorry but if you think that this:Z3F said:
looks as good as this:
then you need to get your eyes checked.
Hell, I'm sure even Dragona could tell you that there is a difference.
Reread what I said again. My point wasn't that the PS3 game looked the same as the PS2 game. It's that the differences are not big enough to see why the PS3 version couldn't be running at 60FPS. Also, some of the ugliest PS2 shots were posted while some of the prettiest PS2 shots were posted.
This shot shows a much smaller difference between the 2 versions than the ones above. In motion, the game or at least the demo, looks even less improved over its PS2 counterpart, unlike some of the other 30FPS next-gen racers.
This shot shows a much smaller difference between the 2 versions than the ones above. In motion, the game or at least the demo, looks even less improved over its PS2 counterpart, unlike some of the other 30FPS next-gen racers.
Ynos Yrros
Banned
:lolZ3F said:
You couldn't be more obvious. Other than GT: HD, F1 is the best looking next-gen racing game.
plagiarize
Banned
I think that's motorstorm personally... thanks to a combination of the lighting, partical effects, level geometry and level of destruction of the cars and other things such as how the cars get dirtier over time.Ynos Yrros said:
GT:HD and F1 look great in screen shots, but they don't imho look better than motorstorm overall in actual live gameplay.
that rain is awesome though.
Ynos Yrros
Banned
MotorStorm represents diffrent style, it's not that realistic. Though I only played the PSN demo (same with F1).plagiarize said:
I also think that both GT: HD and F1 look way better in gameplay than they do on screenshots, seeing those effects alive and moving is priceless.
plagiarize
Banned
oh, they all look better in motion than in screenshots, i just think of all of them it's motorstorm that benefits the most from seeing it in motion. the crashes, terrain effects, particle effects, et al just can't be shown in screenshots, where as most (though not all) of what makes F1 and GT:HD look good can be see in screenshots.Ynos Yrros said:
motorstorm looks just as real to me, if not more so if we're just talking the visuals, though obviously the gameplay and physics are exagerrated... i wouldn't really consider that to be graphics.
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
Z3F said:
This is a joke right? Have you really played the demo?