Consolemasters ruin another title (F1 2010)?

[IceBreakr]

So much for realistic racing and reliving the good ol' legend:
http://community.codemasters.com/forum/f1-2010-game-1316/431006-confirmed-race-ai-phoney.html

[Zipper5]

Yup, been watching it since it was reported in the Red River thread. A patch (http://community.codemasters.com/forum/f1-2010-game-1316/432050-f1-2010-patch-news.html) has been announced but I see it going the way all their recent releases have. :rolleyes:

[Richey79]

The suspicious mind would further suggest that the reason they went with the unusual, and seemingly late stage, decision to release this only through online download retailers for PCs is because they knew it was a dog's breakfast of smoke and mirrors and said retailers have a no-return policy for downloaded software.

Wonder if they'll try this with Menstrual Monsoon, too, after the high rate of returns for FPDR .

[Foxhound]

At least they are consistant. :rolleyes:

[Jeza]

Ah i was wondering why it becomes a tad too difficult, been playing on steam alot and getting a beating!

[EricM]

One thread to despise CM isn't enough ? Come one guys... be serious.

[Zipper5]

Neither thread is named "Codemasters sucks". ;)

[[DirTyDeeDs]-Ziggy-]

One thread to despise CM isn't enough ? Come one guys... be serious.

are you kidding? a new game = a new thread.
if the game is as described, it deserves all the bad threads it gets.

[Zipper5]

http://community.codemasters.com/forum/f1-2010-game-1316/433338-f1-2010-first-sales-figures.html

FPDR

I don't know why some people are pointing out such ridiculous flaws, design choices and general laziness from the developers, yet others like in the post on the 2nd page make the game look almost infallible. :confused:

[JdB]

Neither thread is named "Codemasters sucks". ;)

But we all know it should be :bounce3:

Well except for some hype-monkeys on the CM payroll.

[DMarkwick]

It seems rather stupid that a game engine designed specifically for racing games is not even suited for racing games. And yet they use it, not only for racing games but for FPS shooters too.

Well, you must look at it this way:
No matter how many people complain on the forums and announce they won't buy another CM game, there are FAR more people buying these products anyway. It simply doesn't matter.

[Zipper5]

Many of their limitations lie in EGO, or whatever the hell they've changed its name to now. It appears to be an unbelievably underpowered engine for being developed in today's day and age. They've definitely prioritized graphical power over functionality, and in the case of DR, even the graphical power isn't that great...

About the "boycott" issue, for lack of a better word - I don't really think I say it thinking that I'm going to cause a radical change or something, but I do believe in every little helps. Word of mouth can work both ways, and if everyone simply spreads around the fact that CM pull this crap, then perhaps one day they will actually have to answer to their crimes. It's a nice thing to hope for, at least, even if it's a little naive. I do think, though, them screwing up a game under the F1 brand is a good step in that direction.

Edit: Baff - VBS != ArmA.

[jblackrupert]

Conmasters can't even keep their story straight about the engine
they led the GRID people on for over a year promising that Dedicated servers
were coming soon and then finally declared that the EGO engine doesn't support it
so they can't add it if they wanted to.

They'll say anything to keep sales going.
It really doesn't matter wether it's an engine limitation or just lazy sloppy work
they won't tell the truth anyways.

DICE was doing the same crap with BC2.
Flip flopping on the reasons behind prone not being in the game.
They went from it being no animations for it were made, the engine doesn't support it and finally prone slowing the gameplay too much.

[BangTail]

All we heard about during the run up was how 'realistic' F1 was going to be and after release we find out that it's yet another case of CM blatantly lying about one of their games.

These companies need to start being held to account for this kind of crap.

[Pulverizer]

It's not like anyone expected a hardcore racing simulation from CM after a decade of console racers (mcrae rally, grid, dirt etc), but faking the AI cars in an official Formula 1 licence game is a new low for sure.

It's almost like they want to piss people off with stuff like the faked cars, slow and cluttered 3D menus etc :D

[Maddmatt]

Yea they ruined it alright...
PC Score: http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/f1-2010
Xbox 360 Score: http://www.metacritic.com/game/xbox-360/f1-2010
PS3 Score: http://www.metacritic.com/game/playstation-3/f1-2010

:rolleyes:

It may not be a super realistic sim but it's still a decent and enjoyable game. Not that I would buy it, only having one class of vehicles in a racing game is boring for me.

For those wanting a proper sim, hopefully rFactor 2 isn't too far off :)

If you want a proper F1 simulator, there's this: http://www.ferrarivirtualacademy.com/game/en/index.jsp
One track, one car, and only hot-lapping so it's not for everyone. A couple more tracks are on the way, for a price.

[Zipper5]

I find the more important score on websites to be the user score. As you can see, it's pretty average. Look at DR's and you'll see it's below 5. But look at Arma 2's, and you'll see it's mostly equal to the review scores. ;)

(This is looking at the PC versions)

[])rStrangelove]

Guys, no worries - ALL THE BUGS WILL BE PATCHED AWAY EVENTUALLY *JOY* :D :D :D


The patch will come at 1.4GB, will cost 40Eur and will be named 'F1 2011' haha

[Pulverizer]

User polls and average user scores on websites only serve to spawn laughable arguments like "Arma2 is more popular than COD:MW2" (when in reality the COD games are easily over a hundred times more popular). They're way too easy to manipulate one way or the other by a small group of people.

If you must have a numerical value describing a game, I'd look for the score given by a reviewer you "know".

[Zipper5]

I prefer reactions from people I know over everything. For example, most people I talked to, even those who don't play BIS' games, thought DR was terrible. Many people I've talked to have said F1 2010 is terrible, too. Then I combine those with reviews from sites I trust, and user scores, to get an overall idea of how the game is. If a demo isn't provided by the developer, as was the case with DR (released much later after release) and is the case with F1 2010, then I go with the idea I have so far.

[ProfTournesol]

Anyway, i prefer that they screw F1 game rather than OFP name :D

[[FRL]Myke]

A quote from Codemasters Forum:


Which was a PC game which can load the entire track into memory [which also wasn't as complex as the track in F1 2010]. Consoles have a limitation on textures you can load into the memory at once, so that's why no viewing other AI. I guess it didn't make sense to dedicate time into only implementing that feature just for PC users.


WTF? CM should have contacted Psygnosis who developed F1 Games in '96, '97 and '98 on Playstation 1 and they were able to simulate AI Cars correctly

[ProfTournesol]

Myke;1760486']A quote from Codemasters Forum:


WTF? CM should have contacted Psygnosis who developed F1 Games in '96, '97 and '98 on Playstation 1 and they were able to simulate AI Cars correctly

At least, that's honest : they don't give a damn about PC games.

[])rStrangelove]

99% of all game companies will go for the quick buck if they know ppl will buy their next game no matter what quality. Thats because their management only pays attention for quarter sales, not the future.

[STALKERGB]

Actually I quite like F1 2010, played it round a mates for a bit and it seemed fun enough, maybe not a great game but certainly playable.

[DayGlow]

I think people like to rip on CM for any reason. I don't think F1 2010 is bad. It sits very nicely between arcade racer and a heavy sim. Right where they said it would be. I have no interest in playing a hyper realistic F1 sim as I would like to be able to complete a lap.

They have nailed the experience of driving. Is it fl fidelity? No, but it doesn't have to be. Is it fun? Hell yes.

As for the AI issue, if you read their explanation it does make sense. I can warp to any sector on the track during practice and qualifying. How would you work the AI around that? And how soon people forget the AI in other games. Simbin games, GTR, GTR2, Race 07, etc all have their problems. Their qualifying AI is faked as soon as you accerate time or skip a session. Also there is thir famous inbalance between qual and race times. I could qual in the top 1/3 of an NGT car, but in the race I could lap the GT's because they were so much slower. Then there is the race slowdown issue itself. The longer the race the slower the AI gets because the constant bang into each other damaging their cars to the point the ate significantly slower.

Simbin games are still very good, but the point is that the people that are ragging on F1 aren't comparing it to what is realistically possible. I like the feature to jump to a section so I can practice that area that I am the slowest. I don't care if qualifying AI isn't simulated in real time because no game can do it properly anyways.

[Zipper5]

I don't care if qualifying AI isn't simulated in real time because no game can do it properly anyways.
That's like saying "I don't care if bullet physics aren't simulated properly because no game can make it just like in real life," or "I don't care if dedicated servers aren't included because no game has managed to eliminate lag entirely." I'd rather have something done close to how it is in real life, or to how it should be, rather than not have it at all.

People like to rip on Codemasters because they are liars and cheats who do not appear to care about their customers. It cannot be denied that they have lied to quite a high degree with both Dragon Rising and F1 2010. Sure, many companies lie about their products, but it's rare to see one that does it to the degree CM have done in the span of two game releases.

[Rista]

Didn't GP2 back then in 1996. have properly simulated qualifying? I remember you could speed up the time while you were in the pits and you could see the other cars getting out of pits in fast forward and having their laps timed. You could also go to game menu and accelerate time but it would still take quite some time to finish the session and the better your processor, the faster it was, which tells me it was still properly simulated instead of lap times being made out of thin air.

I could somehow get over faked AI in qualifying if it wasn't for the cheap AI catch up during the race as well which one of the devs promised would NOT be in the game because they "dislike it". If you are ahead of the AI a certain distance, they get engine power multiplier and drive faster, if you are behind them then they are slower. CM explain this as "realism" as when the lead car has a big lead, he is likely to slow down to conserve his car. Which would be fine by itself if it couldn't be explained in this way ONLY when human player is around. So they only push or conserve their car relative to the human player car, wherever it is on the track, and nothing else. The race is completely centered around the player and doesn't even bother simulating the rest of the race properly. A bit like "you can't see it on the screen so it doesn't matter" in Dragon Rising. Combined with the pit stop bug, it completely messes up any kind of pitting strategy in this game.

[[FRL]Myke]

I think people like to rip on CM for any reason. I don't think F1 2010 is bad. It sits very nicely between arcade racer and a heavy sim. Right where they said it would be. I have no interest in playing a hyper realistic F1 sim as I would like to be able to complete a lap.

They have nailed the experience of driving. Is it fl fidelity? No, but it doesn't have to be. Is it fun? Hell yes.

As for the AI issue, if you read their explanation it does make sense. I can warp to any sector on the track during practice and qualifying. How would you work the AI around that? And how soon people forget the AI in other games. Simbin games, GTR, GTR2, Race 07, etc all have their problems. Their qualifying AI is faked as soon as you accerate time or skip a session. Also there is thir famous inbalance between qual and race times. I could qual in the top 1/3 of an NGT car, but in the race I could lap the GT's because they were so much slower. Then there is the race slowdown issue itself. The longer the race the slower the AI gets because the constant bang into each other damaging their cars to the point the ate significantly slower.

Simbin games are still very good, but the point is that the people that are ragging on F1 aren't comparing it to what is realistically possible. I like the feature to jump to a section so I can practice that area that I am the slowest. I don't care if qualifying AI isn't simulated in real time because no game can do it properly anyways.

Also you are one of those who forget that it already has be done properly on consoles 14 years back. So it is possible to do and it is possible to do it on consoles.

I wouldn't care if only in free practice the AI times were faked but Qualifying is a elementary part of the race. They could have made a option to enable real AI times and no "warp to any sector" or enabling warp and then AI times are estimated. This way, everyone could chose what he wants to have.

[DMarkwick]

The Ego game engine is entirely player-centric. That's why it's called Ego :) Nothing outside the immediate player area is regarded as important in any way, apart from a vary basic statistical level, hence the race AI timing guessing problem.

Geoff Crammond has made several hi-fidelity Grand Prix simulations, all with the features missing from this title, and he did it in the 90s, and consoles are better machines than PCs of the 90s. Saying the engine cannot support it because of texture limitations is like saying textures cannot be swapped in & out as needed, which is obvious bollocks. Unless it's not, in which case Ego is worse than I imagine :)

CM = arcade, simple.

[DayGlow]

That's like saying "I don't care if bullet physics aren't simulated properly because no game can make it just like in real life," or "I don't care if dedicated servers aren't included because no game has managed to eliminate lag entirely." I'd rather have something done close to how it is in real life, or to how it should be, rather than not have it at all.

People like to rip on Codemasters because they are liars and cheats who do not appear to care about their customers. It cannot be denied that they have lied to quite a high degree with both Dragon Rising and F1 2010. Sure, many companies lie about their products, but it's rare to see one that does it to the degree CM have done in the span of two game releases.

I've yet to see any outragious results from the AI quilifying. People are bitching about their method of determining times vs the actual times posted. How the AI arrives at it's times will always be part of a computer process that is faking real life. Be it behind the scenes or in real time. My point is that any racing game the program determines the AI speeds. You can ramp up the AI level in a Simbin game so they post times well beyond what is possible in real life and even the physics of driving. Do people complain that the AI is cheating then? Has Simbin lied to people because the AI can outperform even what a race car is physically possible to do?

For me I have found that the AI posted times in qualifying is an accurate representation of the skill level of the AI in the actual race. In other race games there is a real problem with qualifying times being way faster than race times making it very hard to have a good game experience. Either you crank up the AI so the race is competitive, but you will start at the back of the field as they will qualify much faster than you can drive, or have realistic qualifying session, but in the race able to fly pass cars that should be vastly faster (GT vs NGT cars)

[[FRL]Myke]

I've yet to see any outragious results from the AI quilifying. People are bitching about their method of determining times vs the actual times posted. How the AI arrives at it's times will always be part of a computer process that is faking real life. Be it behind the scenes or in real time. My point is that any racing game the program determines the AI speeds. You can ramp up the AI level in a Simbin game so they post times well beyond what is possible in real life and even the physics of driving. Do people complain that the AI is cheating then? Has Simbin lied to people because the AI can outperform even what a race car is physically possible to do?

For me I have found that the AI posted times in qualifying is an accurate representation of the skill level of the AI in the actual race. In other race games there is a real problem with qualifying times being way faster than race times making it very hard to have a good game experience. Either you crank up the AI so the race is competitive, but you will start at the back of the field as they will qualify much faster than you can drive, or have realistic qualifying session, but in the race able to fly pass cars that should be vastly faster (GT vs NGT cars)

I agree that at the very end it is computer calculated times. But it is one thing if times are more or less randomly generated based on a database or if AI driver actually go out of pit, follow the track (including making mistakes which is part of the AI routines), influenced by other AI or player drivers ontrack.

Again, this has be done 14 years ago on consoles of that time so there is absolutely no logical reason why it couldn't be done on todays consoles, not even speaking of PC here.

And about the thing of AI qualifying much faster than you....well, the cars are different, perform differently on each race track, handle differently with differing tires and so on. afaik F1 2010 has a career mode, so well, thats how a career usually starts, starting in back of the grid. Your skill should determine if you get a better contract offered or not.

At the very end, everything comes down to program a proper AI. F1 2010 has none.

[DayGlow]

Myke;1760692']I agree that at the very end it is computer calculated times. But it is one thing if times are more or less randomly generated based on a database or if AI driver actually go out of pit, follow the track (including making mistakes which is part of the AI routines), influenced by other AI or player drivers ontrack.

Again, this has be done 14 years ago on consoles of that time so there is absolutely no logical reason why it couldn't be done on todays consoles, not even speaking of PC here.

And about the thing of AI qualifying much faster than you....well, the cars are different, perform differently on each race track, handle differently with differing tires and so on. afaik F1 2010 has a career mode, so well, thats how a career usually starts, starting in back of the grid. Your skill should determine if you get a better contract offered or not.

At the very end, everything comes down to program a proper AI. F1 2010 has none.

In the end I accept their explanation that they choose the feature of being able to warp to different parts of the track over having the AI running at realtime around the track. In the end it's a design compramise to the features they want. Some agree with it and others don't. Every game has them. In the end my approach at looking at is, 'does it adversly affect my gameplay experience?'. No it doesn't. I find qualifying a challange and as you mention depending on my constructor team and AI skill level setting I realistically qualify in the field. From there the AI is consistent from the qualifying to the race. As an added bonus you can skip or fastforward the qualifying session without adverse effects. To play a Simbin game if you do, it will really throw out any logical qualifying time of the AI.

I would love to hear someone logically explain how this compramises the gameplay of the game other than that they don't like it.

[Zipper5]

A couple months from now everyone will know the pre-scripted patterns of the other faked cars, making the singleplayer an utterly dull and predictable experience.

There's one way. There will be zero longevity to the game.

[Flash Thunder]

A couple months from now everyone will know the pre-scripted patterns of the other faked cars, making the singleplayer an utterly dull and predictable experience.

There's one way. There will be zero longevity to the game.

LMAO.

CM would pull something like that, EGO=Tricks and thats it. :D

[Pulverizer]

They're saying the AI isn't faked in the race, though.

http://community.codemasters.com/forum/f1-2010-game-1316/433396-ai-issues-response.html

Race AI
As none of the above feature restrictions are relevant in the race itself, we DO NOT use any other systems in the race other than the AI cars all physically driving the race just as the player does. Other factors also contribute to the AI lap times and the variation in their race pace. These include race start behaviours, their ultimate race pace which takes into account elements such as fuel and tyre degradation, weather, conserving / cooling engines etc, their in and out laps in the pit stop phase and their finishing pace.

[Zipper5]

They also said they'd give continuous free DLC and support for DR. Hell, they claim that RR is an OFP game. I don't really value CM's word any more. :rolleyes:

[Hans Ludwig]

A couple months from now everyone will know the pre-scripted patterns of the other faked cars, making the singleplayer an utterly dull and predictable experience.

There's one way. There will be zero longevity to the game.

They aren't in the business of building games with "longevity." They are interested in feeding console kiddies with pure crap.

The best way to sum this all up is to say that console/Codemasters fan boys must be the same people that argue Abstract art is, um, an art. We all know Abstract artist take all of 10 minutes to throw paint onto a canvas and put a hefty price tag on it.

[DayGlow]

So why don't you jump on that gravy train then?

[Zipper5]

Some of us want games with a bit more substance. BIS' games and Valve's are the only ones that have kept me coming back time and time again. The others I finish, play the MP for a few weeks if it has it and it's good enough, and then I never touch it again. Others I don't even finish and feel I wasted money on them, as is how I would feel if I had bought F1 2010 or DR uninformed as to all of this, I believe.

[[FRL]Myke]

They're saying the AI isn't faked in the race, though.

http://community.codemasters.com/forum/f1-2010-game-1316/433396-ai-issues-response.html

It isn't?
lEZ6InjuYGk&feature=player_embedded

[Pulverizer]

Obviously Mr Webber did not overtake him magically but stayed behind him, like he should've, so the video only proves a glitch in the timings, not faked AI cars.

[Zipper5]

Well, that's pretty pathetic...

[[FRL]Myke]

Obviously Mr Webber did not overtake him magically but stayed behind him, like he should've, so the video only proves a glitch in the timings, not faked AI cars.

Oh, i'm sorry. Somehow i thought that timings were one of the most important points in a racing situation. Dumb me, my apologies.

So then the bug is that times are displayed at all. Finally it is enough info if i have any cars in front of me which i obviously can see by looking out of the cockpit.

[Rista]

Myke;1760844']It isn't?
lEZ6InjuYGk&feature=player_embedded

They're saying it's an error with the timer that resets when AI cars cross the finish line. Really want to believe them but wouldn't be surprised by anything really.

I like how they are talking about "the AI variation of pace" and trying to explain it in a realistic and complex way when you can see from the config files the rubber band/catch up AI is clearly there and doesn't seem that complex at all.

[Zipper5]

I look forward to seeing someone delve into the actual configs of the game itself and finding a fool-proof answer as to the AI being faked or not. I'll hedge my bets at the moment on it being faked.

Edit: Lol, just saw your post Rista. You got any links?

[Pulverizer]

Yes, everyone gets you hate CM and will always believe they're guilty of anything until proven innocent. No need to reiterate it every 30 seconds.

[Zipper5]

Their recent reputation doesn't support anything other than that does it, Pulverizer?

Besides, if you read what I said, you'll see I'm looking for an answer as to whether it is actually faked or not by looking at the actual coding of the game. I am simply betting it is faked, as far too many factors point to that.

Edit: Lol, watch the end of Part 2 of that video and you'll see an example of the supposed fake AI.

JsMlhvQT8gQ

[Pulverizer]

I really don't see why they would bother to make a statement to specifically say that the AI cars aren't faked, if they were. They'd simply refrain from saying one way or the other. Lying so blatantly would only make things worse, inevitably.

[Rista]

I look forward to seeing someone delve into the actual configs of the game itself and finding a fool-proof answer as to the AI being faked or not. I'll hedge my bets at the moment on it being faked.

Edit: Lol, just saw your post Rista. You got any links?

I'll try to find it. There is a catch up config file where you can see the AI cars receive engine power boosts/penalties depending on how far ahead/behind the player they are. That itself doesn't mean the AI is faked like in those videos though. It just means the AI is very cheap and not something you would want or expect in an F1 game even if it's not a hardcore sim.

Their explanation of weird AI lap times during the race is somewhat reasonable. But why are the AI cars timed differently? Why are there no gap times during the race? If the AI lap times are already completely fabricated during the qualifying how can we be sure there is nothing fishy whatsoever about their race lap times?

[Pulverizer]

Edit: Lol, watch the end of Part 2 of that video and you'll see an example of the supposed fake AI.

Nope. That's from qualifying, and it's not what the fake cars issue is about at all. CM has confirmed that the qualifying times of AI are fake due technical reasons:



Practice & Qualifying AI
In practice & qualifying (P&Q) there are two fundamental issues which have meant that we had to make some implementation decisions for the AI in F1 2010. These two issues are our jump-to-sector feature and the fast-forward feature that is available on the car monitor in the garage.

The jump-to-sector feature necessarily simulates teleporting a car instantly to a position while the fast-forward feature allows the player to speed up time. The latter prevents us from simulating the actual AI travelling around the track 100% of the time as we cannot accurately simulate 24 cars where we have accelerated the passage of time by as much as a factor of 30. An F1 car can move at over 200mph. With 30 times speedup, we cannot simulate car physics at 6000+mph without losing some fidelity. F1 cars obviously cannot move this fast. We therefore implemented a system whereby the AI times in such circumstances are calculated based on a ‘football management” style simulation model. Using this model all of the race factors, such as the car, driver, weather, tyres, engine, track conditions, traffic are all taken into account and a lap time is produced. These generated times are well considered and guided by a huge amount of data; they are not randomly generated. Nevertheless they remain simulated approximations using this model.

For P&Q sessions we spent a long time experimenting with flipping back and forth between this simulated system and actual AI physical timing, as the fast-forward is engaged and disengaged, but it lead to the potential for subtle exploits which we were not comfortable with. Therefore all AI times in these P&Q sessions use this simulation method.

[[FRL]Myke]

This is BS. I remember that F1 98 on PS1 from Psygnosis had a skiptime function during the qualifying and the AI timings were also calculated but they remained logical and believable.

It is the same as have be seen with another game that CM f***ed up: todays version can not catch up with games that were developed 10+ years ago.

I followed the release of F1 2010 pretty interested and i even was thinking about to get a PS3 just for this Game (could have got the PC version aswell but this would have needed a big screen) but hey, after reading about the bugs and fakes, i prefer playing F1 98 on my PS1.

[Zipper5]

That "explanation" is definitely bullshit. It makes it out to be that the point of the teleporting is due to the engine limitations. Why is it specific to the qualifying sections? Hell, why is something like that an engine limitation of an engine originally designed to be for racing games? :confused:

It sounds far too fishy...

[])rStrangelove]

Even if it's not BS it means CM simply CHOSE THE WRONG F**KIN ENGINE FOR A F1 SIM.

End of story. No sim, no money from us F1 sim fans. Simple.

And to bring a F1 pilot along and giving him money to lie to us is the biggest crap i've seen in years.

[DayGlow]

Why does it sound fishy? They explain their reasoning, you can agree with it or not, but why would they lie about it? For me its reasonable as I have experienced the qualifying weirdness with accretion in Simbin games. I think that says something when a highly regarded driving sim developer has a game with these very issues because their AI does physical laps that get distorted by accerated time.

But whatever, I'll enjoy the game for what it is, a driving game with a good balance between arcade and sim behavior, with rich visuals, challenging AI to race against and a interesting career mode that you can rise through the ranks if the teams as you improve.

It may have some bugs, but nothing glaring or show stopping. Personally i think if people were as critical if BI as they are of CM this forum would be full of hate towards Arma and all of it's quirks. Thankfully it isn't, and I enjoy playing both games.

[Zipper5]

People seem to forget just how critical people are and have been towards BIS. They don't get off easy either. Given your join date I'd have thought you'd know that the most, having seen OFP's, ArmA's and Arma 2's releases, but I guess I'm mistaken.

But to compare BIS to CM is just wrong. BIS have a great reputation of showing tremendous dedication to their products post-release, and create very special things as a result. Plus, they are in contact with the community all the time, even Marek and Ondrej. There is zero competition in terms of the passion each has for their games.

People are critical of CM, particularly here due to them doing it to the OFP name on top of this, because they lie to their customers, they cut support very quickly leaving games still riddled with issues, and they can't accomplish things with their games that other companies have with much smaller budgets and dev teams 9 years ago.

[DayGlow]

I have been here pretty much from the begining and have seen the rediciously stupid flamewars between OFP and Ghost Recon for example. Myself, I enjoyed both games.

I never bought DR because of the limitations, but I don't blame CM for making a cross platform game with all their limitations. If I was a game dev, I'd make a game for as many markets as I could as well. I'm disapointed that DR wasn't better as I'd love to play another serious mil-sim. I'm hopeful that RR will defy all predictions and is fun to play, but whatever.

My experience with CM has been the original OFP and some of their racing games. Dirt and Dirt 2 have been great fun. Personally i don't give a rats ass if CM uses the OFP name, it has zero effect on BI producing their great games.

Personally I hope for more successful games because that means more good titles to play and competition to stimulate innovation. I think there is anti-CM vibe in this forum and it makes me chuckle, that is all.

[Zipper5]

Of course there's going to be an anti-Codemasters vibe on here after Dragon Rising. What else were you expecting? Many fans of the original OFP won't just welcome a game that completely goes against the reputation the original worked hard for, including myself.

But as I've said before, that's only a small aspect of my disliking of CM. It's much more an issue of morality than of the ruining of a brand's reputation. It simply came to my attention because both issues came wrapped in one package. I won't bother repeating myself again...

Before you look into buying RR, I recommend you consult this (http://zipper5.armaholic.eu/pictures/the_facts.jpg) before-hand, especially if you didn't get DR because of its limitations.

[GoOB]

Personally I hope for more successful games because that means more good titles to play and competition to stimulate innovation. I think there is anti-CM vibe in this forum and it makes me chuckle, that is all.


I usually do not "quote for truth", but in this instance I have to take the opportunity to do so. QFT, DayGlow.

I played F1 2010 at a mates house today and I actually really liked it, much how I enjoyed DIRT 2. I admit that Codemasters have let themselves slip in more ways than one, but they still do manage to produce good titles. DIRT 2 and F1 2010 are both good examples of this. Just because they are not simulations does not mean that they lack merit... They may not be interesting to many in these forums, but that does not detract from the fact that they are generally decent games.

The fact that Codemasters have let go of more simulation oriented games (like the first iterations of Colin McRae rally, TOCA series etc.) is more the blame of the market... And really, so is their lack of post-release updates - The trend is evident in almost every single company out there, and it is likely to continue. The wider the market for computer games grow, the greater the extent of capital invested... The greater the drive for increased profits will become. And with a drive for profit, one can expect a diminishing amount of post-release maintenance. Because sadly, many games companies do not understand that there can be great value in treating their games, and thusly their customers with respect and dignity by striving to maintain both the game, and the relations the customers have with the products of the company, and by extension of that, the company itself.

[Zipper5]

I recognize it's not a simulator. What I find hard to accept is the possibility that it lacks conventional AI entirely, fakes lap times, and has many bugs that will probably not get fixed given their current reputation in that field. The sales of F1 2010 have passed those of HALO: Reach, so I doubt they see any need for change, or any need to implement long-term support for the game. They probably view it best to get on with F1 2011. :rolleyes:

[jblackrupert]

A couple months from now everyone will know the pre-scripted patterns of the other faked cars, making the singleplayer an utterly dull and predictable experience.

There's one way. There will be zero longevity to the game.


Play a few rounds of GRID and the scripted car behaviour is blatantly obvious.

[Pulverizer]

I recognize it's not a simulator. What I find hard to accept is the possibility that it lacks conventional AI entirely, fakes lap times, and has many bugs that will probably not get fixed given their current reputation in that field. The sales of F1 2010 have passed those of HALO: Reach, so I doubt they see any need for change, or any need to implement long-term support for the game. They probably view it best to get on with F1 2011. :rolleyes:

What if it was perfect in every way and you simply couldn't come up with anything at all to complain about it. Would that make you happy? Would you buy it? :rolleyes:

[Zipper5]

I wouldn't have cared at all about the game, would have just let it come and go, and I wouldn't have bought it. I decided to stop buying CM products after what they did with DR.

[Flash Thunder]

What if it was perfect in every way and you simply couldn't come up with anything at all to complain about it. Would that make you happy? Would you buy it? :rolleyes:

anything with the CM name on it now gets an auto fail rating.

Rated

F

for Failure

;)

[jblackrupert]

What if it was perfect in every way and you simply couldn't come up with anything at all to complain about it. Would that make you happy? Would you buy it? :rolleyes:

Nope. Won't give conmasters another penny for anything.

[IceBreakr]

Coddies prepared a PR, ehmm well an answer to the player accusations :)
http://community.codemasters.com/forum/f1-2010-game-1316/433396-ai-issues-response.html

[4 IN 1]

What if it was perfect in every way and you simply couldn't come up with anything at all to complain about it. Would that make you happy? Would you buy it? :rolleyes:
Why would I ever needed/bothered to? Go get GT5, thats all you need:p

[Pulverizer]

GT5 hasn't even been released yet, not to mention it's a PS3 exclusive. I don't support pre-industrial era primitive gaming devices that hold back the evolution of video games.

[4 IN 1]

GT5 hasn't even been released yet, not to mention it's a PS3 exclusive. I don't support pre-industrial era primitive gaming devices that hold back the evolution of video games.
My sister happens to have a PS3 which she used it as "a blu-ray player that can play games on it" most of the time:p therefore I still cannot be bother with this "F1" game, besides the greatest F1 era had gone for a good 15 years, that reason alone is enought for me not to buy the game.

[Von_Paulus]

u0BBTXpeGQs
FPDR

[mrcash2009]

I have to say I was keeping my eye on this, I have Richard burns Rally and nothing has come close in terms of simulation/physics. Granted this is different sport area but I was really hoping they would nail the simulator side of it.

Anyway, I started to watch the forums as it rolled out and pretty swiftly I saw the reality of it and realised it wasn't ever going to be how I would have thought, so I will leave it be.

One thing very early on that got me suspicious was the fact that Black Hole Motorsports haven't even bothered to list it, and that for anyone into race sims is a telling sign:

http://www.bhmotorsports.com/sim

[DayGlow]

u0BBTXpeGQs
FPDR

It's on their known bug list being an issue with how the AI resets onto the track after they crash off.

Still I find it interesting how people really look for AI holes in this title when they are present in every racing game, hell every game with an AI simply because it is still not possible to model human behavior in a convincing fashion on a computer.

I especially love the comments from people saying that the AI is fake here and will go back to racing rFactor/GTR2/Race 07, or whatever, yet have no problem with the AI glitches in those games? If the same effort is made in those games you will be able to expose all sorts of AI problems. Hell those games have waypoint files for the tracks so the AI knows how to drive around them, does that mean their AI is fake?

My point is simply that people are really trying to put down F1 2010 by showing how the AI is 'faked' when it is faked in every game ever made since that is what AI is. Have people shown glitches and issues with the AI? Absolutely. Do these things need to be fixed? Of course.

As I said earlier, does the design decisions made by CM around their game effect my enjoyment of it? For me it doesn't. I've come from being an avid Simbin racing fan that has dealt with the frustration of their AI glitches and spent many hours tweaking .ini files and downloading mods to get around them. I accept that at this stage in computer gaming AI is still very artificial and will not approach a human level of interaction.

[Pulverizer]

If the player can use flashbacks to correct their mistakes, it's only fair that the AI is allowed some too :p

That's probably just a glitch in the replay though. The cars would've crashed if it happened in real time.


One thing very early on that got me suspicious was the fact that Black Hole Motorsports haven't even bothered to list it, and that for anyone into race sims is a telling sign:

http://www.bhmotorsports.com/sim

Yes, it must be really difficult to make on that list, seeing how it's populated by such hardcore racing sims as SEGA Rally, CMR, Dirt, GRID, Tough Trucks and FlatOut.

[Celery]

Still I find it interesting how people really look for AI holes in this title when they are present in every racing game, hell every game with an AI simply because it is still not possible to model human behavior in a convincing fashion on a computer.

A 10 year old F1 game (Grand Prix 3) surpasses F1 2010 in nearly every aspect. Even the first Grand Prix from 1992 has more believable AI. There's something to think about.

[Zipper5]

A 10 year old OFP surpasses the current state of Red River in many aspects. Something else to think about.

Seems Codemasters are quite content with being extremely behind the times. :rolleyes:

[Pulverizer]

Then, it's not like there aren't 10 year old games that model tank or air combat, or strategic AI way better than Arma2:OA.

[Zipper5]

Name one that did all of them better than OA.

[Rista]

Then, it's not like there aren't 10 year old games that model tank or air combat, or strategic AI way better than Arma2:OA.
That's comparing apples and oranges though. GP and F1 2010 are both Formula 1 games that can be directly compared.

I didn't play the original GP much but I did play both GP2 and GP3 a lot and was involved with editing carsets, AI performance files etc. While you could argue that AI is "fake" in every single game as it doesn't use 100% the same rules as human player does, the AI in those games was much more believable and fair. There was no rubber banding or any of the cheap catch up tricks back then. The AI driver cars wouldn't suddenly receive engine power boosts once they were xxx meters behind the player. The race just wasn't centered around the player like it is in F1 2010.

[mrcash2009]

Yes, it must be really difficult to make on that list, seeing how it's populated by such hardcore racing sims as SEGA Rally, CMR, Dirt, GRID, Tough Trucks and FlatOut. Dig a little deeper before throwing sarcasm in the mix. BTW even if it does list some not so hardcore sims even more reason to my point.

:wave-finger: :)

[Pulverizer]

If Dirt and GRID are there, I'm sure it's just a matter of time before they list F1 2010.


That's comparing apples and oranges though. GP and F1 2010 are both Formula 1 games that can be directly compared.

Kinda like Steel Beasts, Falcon 4.0 and OA are all 3D first person war games.

[DM]

Kinda like Steel Beasts, Falcon 4.0 and OA are all 3D first person war games.

In the same way your sisters/female cousins are all females, and as such are viable sexual partners... Right? RIGHT?

Disclaimer: I do not follow the above "lifestyle" choice, purely using it to point out the flaw in his argument...

Go broad enough in your definition and anything can happen (usually terribad things).

In this case, Steel Beasts has no infantry or aviation aspects -> it is a pure Armour Sim, and Falcon has no infantry and vehicle aspects -> it is a pure flight sim. So once again, they fall into the apples and oranges category...

[Big Dawg KS]

In the same way your sisters/female cousins are all females, and as such are viable sexual partners... Right? RIGHT?

Ah, so I guess it depends what part of the world you're from. :rolleyes:

[vektorboson]

The AI driver cars wouldn't suddenly receive engine power boosts once they were xxx meters behind the player. The race just wasn't centered around the player like it is in F1 2010.
I guess CM was influenced by Nintendo's F-Zero instead of the Microprose F1-sims...

[[FRL]Myke]

New Gameplay vid of F1 2010 shows proof that AI is lapping correctly and does not cheat. Again awesome graphics and ultrarealistic vehicle physics at it's best:

NUU_F9TvXco

[Pulverizer]

In the same way your sisters/female cousins are all females, and as such are viable sexual partners... Right? RIGHT?

Technically it is possible to reproduce with them, so I don't quite see the analogy.

Also, Steel Beasts has infantry you can move around, and Falcon features all sorts of armour and infantry too. So Falcon is not a pure aviation sim and SB is not a pure tank sim. In both, you can have infantry fighting infantry, and infantry fighting armour.

[DM]

Also, Steel Beasts has infantry you can move around, and Falcon features all sorts of armour and infantry too. So Falcon is not a pure aviation sim and SB is not a pure tank sim. In both, you can have infantry fighting infantry, and infantry fighting armour.

Yes, but you can't play as them, so does it really count? Just like the other analogy, it might be sort of possible, but you wouldnt want to do it...

[oyman]

In the same way your sisters/female cousins are all females, and as such are viable sexual partners... Right? RIGHT?


wincest

[Max Power]

I've never seen such an obvious contortion of logic to make a point. Is Pulverizer trolling, or actually struggling to make a point? It's hard to choose. The sky and the ground are the same thing because they are both made of matter. Therefore they are both blue, right Pulverizer? Only the ground is nothing special because the sky was made of matter before the ground....

[JdB]

I've never seen such an obvious contortion of logic to make a point. Is Pulverizer trolling, or actually struggling to make a point? It's hard to choose. The sky and the ground are the same thing because they are both made of matter. Therefore they are both blue, right Pulverizer? Only the ground is nothing special because the sky was made of matter before the ground....

No, just someone that you can fool all the time. Ripped off once, and begging for seconds.

One minute of digging (all of this was before the release of DR, so you'd think he now knows how to value things from CMs press and PR releases, and what they eventually turn out to be, non-existent):

[1] (http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?p=1194917&highlight=dragon+rising#post1194917)
[2] (http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?p=1224901#post1224901)
[3] (http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?p=1216417#post1216417)
[4] (http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?p=1196657#post1196657)
[5] (http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?p=1195753#post1195753)
[6] (http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?p=1195507#post1195507)
[7] (http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?p=1195214#post1195214)

[RasdenFasden]

Myke;1762136']New Gameplay vid of F1 2010 shows proof that AI is lapping correctly and does not cheat. Again awesome graphics and ultrarealistic vehicle physics at it's best:

NUU_F9TvXco


YOU'RE GONNA PLAY POOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOLE POSITION!

Om84Zc4-KcQ

[Von_Paulus]

No, just someone that you can fool all the time. Ripped off once, and begging for seconds.

One minute of digging (all of this was before the release of DR, so you'd think he now knows how to value things from CMs press and PR releases, and what they eventually turn out to be, non-existent):

[1] (http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?p=1194917&highlight=dragon+rising#post1194917)
[2] (http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?p=1224901#post1224901)
[3] (http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?p=1216417#post1216417)
[4] (http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?p=1196657#post1196657)
[5] (http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?p=1195753#post1195753)
[6] (http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?p=1195507#post1195507)
[7] (http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?p=1195214#post1195214)
Here is another dancing banana. :yay:
Seriously, in a certain way, we've all, for sometimes, biased opinions. It's human.
But to consistently defend Codemasters trash in this forum seems... awkward, to say the least. Maybe perverse is a better word.

[rstratton]

Myke;1762136']ultrarealistic vehicle physics at it's best:


i hope that is sarcasm. really i think its a pretty good game. not full simulation/not to arcadish.

[GoOB]

But to consistently defend Codemasters trash in this forum seems... awkward, to say the least. Maybe perverse is a better word.

The same can be said of the fact that Codemasters and their dealings are so popular to discuss here - But I guess fanboyism is cool, as long as you're on the right side :)

[Max Power]

The same can be said of the fact that Codemasters and their dealings are so popular to discuss here - But I guess fanboyism is cool, as long as you're on the right side :)

I don't think you know what a fanboi is, to be frank.

[GoOB]

I don't think you know what a fanboi is, to be frank.

Oh I do, and I am not saying threads like these tick all the boxes - Far from it, perhaps. There's just a very irrational need on these forums to cling on to Codemasters and their failures. Rehashing the same arguments over and over. I too was pissed that they drudged the OFP name through the dust, but when threads related to Codemasters continue to be popular, in one instance, more popular than a whole lot of other threads... Well, eh - As said, it's awkward, at least to me.

[])rStrangelove]

Tbh i dont think this thread would have turned out differently if F1 2010 would've been made by any other developer. The fact that CM did it just puts more oil into the fire.

[Max Power]

Oh I do, and I am not saying threads like these tick all the boxes - Far from it, perhaps. There's just a very irrational need on these forums to cling on to Codemasters and their failures. Rehashing the same arguments over and over. I too was pissed that they drudged the OFP name through the dust, but when threads related to Codemasters continue to be popular, in one instance, more popular than a whole lot of other threads... Well, eh - As said, it's awkward, at least to me.

It's not the failures, but the lies, I think...

LOL. I love your explanation your use of the term there. "I realize it wasn't an appropriate use of the term, I'm just vaguely annoyed and really really really really wanted to use that word".

[Maddmatt]

All the recent race sims suck in there own way and can be criticised just as badly as F1 2010. The rFactor based sims that are so popular have pretty terrible AI that have extremely simplified physics to the point where they don't even react properly to being hit. They don't even kick up smoke or make skidmarks. They all take off perfectly from the starting line in a way no human can.

I still think F1 2010 looks like a decent game, it's certainly an improvement over trash like Grid, Dirt, and their Operation Flashpoint ripoff.
Still, they'd better address those bugs.

[NoRailgunner]

])rStrangelove I dont think so - there are some people here that jump on everything CM is doing. Even if you repeat that CM is targeting at the mainstream consumer market. CM is and will be forever a red rag to them.

Maybe most of the gamers today don't want simulations/learn something and prefer the easier + accessible games with super eyecandy-sfx?

[Max Power]

])rStrangelove I dont think so - there are some people here that jump on everything CM is doing. Even if you repeat that CM is targeting at the mainstream consumer market. CM is and will be forever a red rag to them.

Maybe most of the gamers today don't want simulations/learn something and prefer the easier + accessible games with super eyecandy-sfx?

It's not the graphics that is the problem. It's CM saying that the races are 0% scripted and yet the lap times don't make any sense and don't even correspond to the times the cars seem to finish graphically... and that the qualifying times do seem to be scripted. So if the race times aren't dependent on the time the AI took to run the race, what are they dependent on? By invoking the casual gamer, are you saying that console gamers prefer race games where their AI opponents lap times don't correspond to the time they actually ran there race, invalidating the player's hard work on the track? I've never even heard of anything like this happening in a race game before.

[Von_Paulus]

The same can be said of the fact that Codemasters and their dealings are so popular to discuss here - But I guess fanboyism is cool, as long as you're on the right side :)
To be honest, I find quite natural, that Codemasters "dealings" are popular here.
There's an history after all. I don't understand why people dismiss that. Unfortunately to deny history seems to be common nowadays.

I've liked the Dizzy, the Colin Mcrae and the TOCA series. In my opinion they stop producing/publishing quality games, only trash. I'm a fanboy of quality, support and honesty. If to be on the "right side" means that, than sure, I like to be on the right side. I guess you find this.. awkward, don't you?

[Pulverizer]

No, just someone that you can fool all the time. Ripped off once, and begging for seconds.
Click if you love to hear about Pulverizer! (answering silly personal attacks etc):
For the record (once again), I wasn't all that dissappointed by DR. Definitely not ripped-off. I didn't order it before seeing in-game videos, so I had a pretty good idea what to expect before purchase. Sure it sucked that it didn't have proper modding support and dedicated servers, and played and looked like a console game and so forth. But it also had some cool stuff like flashlights, thermal imaging and laser pointers, and ran at a rock-solid 60 fps without any CTDs or game breaking bugs. All in all, it was a decent outdoors shooter akin to the old Delta Force and Ghost Recon games me thinks.

After that, I've bought one CM game, Dirt2 for 15 euros, and think it's good value for money actually. Except for GFWL, the horrible 3D menus, lack of custom race options, and having to unlock crap and hear stupid game "characters" talking, it's quite fun. Especially multiplayer with friends.

I was thinking about getting F1 2010 on Steam holiday sales or whenever it's closer to 20 euros (not gonna pay 45euros for a F1 game, lol). But after seeing reports about fake AI and all sorts of bugs, I'm waiting until/if those things get addressed.

[Big Dawg KS]

Oh I do, and I am not saying threads like these tick all the boxes - Far from it, perhaps. There's just a very irrational need on these forums to cling on to Codemasters and their failures. Rehashing the same arguments over and over. I too was pissed that they drudged the OFP name through the dust, but when threads related to Codemasters continue to be popular, in one instance, more popular than a whole lot of other threads... Well, eh - As said, it's awkward, at least to me.

Yea, I think some people visit these forums just to post in the CM bashing threads... you guys need to just get over it. We all know they fail hard, so stop giving them the attention they don't deserve.

[Zipper5]

Pulverizer, twice in that post you say things that would easily, in that combination you encountered them, would turn most people off the game, but not you. Are you sadistic or something? :confused:

I wasn't all that dissappointed by DR. Definitely not ripped-off.

Sure it sucked that it didn't have proper modding support and dedicated servers, and played and looked like a console game and so forth.

I've bought one CM game, Dirt2 for 15 euros, and think it's good value for money actually.

Except for GFWL, the horrible 3D menus, lack of custom race options, and having to unlock crap and hear stupid game "characters" talking
It's like you don't feel ripped off when recognizing you're being ripped off... What?

[Pulverizer]

Er... what? I see a fuck ton of things to criticize in Arma2:OA as well and don't feel ripped-off. I don't demand perfection from video games because I've yet to see a perfect video game.

[Zipper5]

I see a fuck ton of things to criticize in Arma2:OA as well and don't feel ripped-off.
You keep bringing BIS' games into this but you don't seem to grasp the fact that BIS fixes them, Codemasters don't. Or does that not matter to you whatsoever?

[Pulverizer]

BIS has a tendency to release things half-cooked so of course they also have to release patches for a longer time. DR works fine, Dirt2 works fine... they don't require patching as far as I'm concerned.

[Zipper5]

You call cars that rocket off of rocks, AI that can't shoot you without wasting 3 magazines, and a helicopter's rotors that just disappear after 3 shots, a game that "works fine"? Hell, what about the fact the latest patch can melt graphics cards?

BIS had similar issues with their games, but they've long since been fixed. They're still there in DR and they aren't being fixed.

[Pulverizer]

I refuse to argue with someone who sees there are no issues in BIS games. Just go take a look at the fucking bug tracker :rolleyes:

[Maddmatt]

Just because a game has issues does not mean you can't get your moneys worth of entertainment from it.
As if anyone would still be playing DR by the time a patch came out to fix all that anyway :p

[BangTail]

BIS has a tendency to release things half-cooked so of course they also have to release patches for a longer time. DR works fine, Dirt2 works fine... they don't require patching as far as I'm concerned.

Now you're comparing Dirt 2 to ArmA 2?

The scope of ArmA 2 is what necessitates patches. It's so open ended and non linear that half the things that need fixing aren't even discovered until after launch. It has been this way since the early days of OFP.

ArmA 2 is by no means perfect but comparing it to a generic arcade racing game just proves that you have absolutely no objectivity whatsoever.

[SAbre4809]

If anyones interested, or played the Grand Prix series, heres a really interesting interview. Gp3 and 4 still out do F1 2010 in many many areas. http://www.meanmachinesmag.co.uk/media_view/233/geoff-crammond-interview-rg.php

[Von_Paulus]

I'm a Retro Gamer subscriber, and read that interview a couple of months ago.
It's a pity that Crammond for now is not thinking in doing another F1 racing sim/game.

[Pulverizer]

Now you're comparing Dirt 2 to ArmA 2?

No. Don't take things out of context.

[Big Dawg KS]

I refuse to argue with someone who sees there are no issues in BIS games. Just go take a look at the fucking bug tracker :rolleyes:

Are you implying that CM's games are immune?

[BangTail]

No. Don't take things out of context.

I didn't.

You drew a direct comparison.

[Zipper5]

I refuse to argue with someone who sees there are no issues in BIS games. Just go take a look at the fucking bug tracker :rolleyes:
When have I ever said there aren't issues? I hate how convoys still don't work, I hate how rocks can sometimes kill you, and I hate how difficult it can sometimes be to make an AI not use his RPG on infantry. The game has issues, but as I've said before, and I'll say it again -

They. Get. Fixed.

Eventually...

Codemasters do not fix their games, and that is one of the many places I take issue with them and their ethics. Got it, yet?

[Pulverizer]

When have I ever said there aren't issues?
Today, 3:20 PM?

BIS had similar issues with their games, but they've long since been fixed.

:D

[Zipper5]

Did I say they all get fixed? I said similar issues to vehicles bouncing off rocks, AI not being able to hit anything, or helicopters, or even armored vehicles, dying from simple gunshots.

[GoOB]

To be honest, I find quite natural, that Codemasters "dealings" are popular here.
There's an history after all. I don't understand why people dismiss that. Unfortunately to deny history seems to be common nowadays.

I've liked the Dizzy, the Colin Mcrae and the TOCA series. In my opinion they stop producing/publishing quality games, only trash. I'm a fanboy of quality, support and honesty. If to be on the "right side" means that, than sure, I like to be on the right side. I guess you find this.. awkward, don't you?

I haven't dismissed the history between BIS and Codemasters... I just think it's time to move on - That doesn't mean that I expect people to start buying Codemasters games or praising them on this forum... It just means I had thought we'd be over rehashing the fact that they made a travesty of the OFP name and that they cheat people, that their forums are full of twelve year old kids and so on and so forth.

You're the one who claimed that "defending Codemasters" on this forum felt "awkward" or "perverse" - I simply stated that I find bashing Codemasters habitually similarly awkward, or really, unbecoming of this mostly mature community. I understand that people do not appreciate the business practices Codemeasters have come to embody or the games they produce, but why the need to constantly bring it up? There are two gargantuan 4000 post threads dedicated to more or less immature comments on a game, and a company that none of us appreciate. This I find awkward, and indeed unbecoming of the community, at least as I see it.

But look at me, here I am, pouring gasoline on the embers of a thread similar to those I wince at.

[Zipper5]

A combination of the desecration of a brand name with a large hardcore fanbase behind it, and disgusting business practices, will always cause large amounts of anger, especially if they have the audacity to make a sequel worse in almost every possible way (even in pre-alpha form), and then repeat the same "mistakes" with a completely different brand.

For me I look at it that even if this happens to be the most "popular" thread about the game (or games), then at least people will hopefully be encouraged to not stand for stunts that Codemasters and other developers/publishers are perfectly content on perpetrating nowadays. It's the only way the game industry will start improving rather than deteriorating; by showing them we don't want to be charged $40 for these mass-produced, shiny, play-and-forget write-offs.

[Von_Paulus]

I haven't dismissed the history between BIS and Codemasters... I just think it's time to move on
I think that the community as a whole didn't even stop by it. But everytime that the name Codemasters come out, there will be bashing. That's only natural, when Codemasters persistently still cheat on people (not just the AI).
There exist now two threads, only because they announced an FPDR sequel and they launched the F1 2010. It's just coincidence. Otherwise you wouldn't have one.



You're the one who claimed that "defending Codemasters" on this forum felt "awkward" or "perverse"
I said consistently defend, not just defend. If it was just a mere defense, I wouldn't call awkward or perverse. Maybe both are too stronger words, and for that I apologize to Pulverizer.

[Pulverizer]

No offense taken. I am awkward and extremely perverse :o

[Von_Paulus]

No offense taken. I am awkward and extremely perverse :o
Eheheh.
Sometimes we just let carry away ourselves behind a keyboard and a monitor and don't measure correctly the words we write. That's not usual with me. Sorry m8.
But please stop defending that console publisher.;)

[DayGlow]

A combination of the desecration of a brand name with a large hardcore fanbase behind it, and disgusting business practices, will always cause large amounts of anger, especially if they have the audacity to make a sequel worse in almost every possible way (even in pre-alpha form), and then repeat the same "mistakes" with a completely different brand.

For me I look at it that even if this happens to be the most "popular" thread about the game (or games), then at least people will hopefully be encouraged to not stand for stunts that Codemasters and other developers/publishers are perfectly content on perpetrating nowadays. It's the only way the game industry will start improving rather than deteriorating; by showing them we don't want to be charged $40 for these mass-produced, shiny, play-and-forget write-offs.


You know what did after the CM and BI split? I bought Arma and enjoyed it. Who cares what CM does with their own property (OFP name). The fact that DR isn't a game for me has zero impact in my enjoyment of BI's games.

Now with f1 2010, who cares if it's made by CM. I look at how it plays and campares to it's contemporaries. I don't see any glaring flaws outside of difficulties all racing sims share. People complain about their design decision about AI qualifying times, well as pointed out it's contemporaries have the same issues with consistent AI timing when accerating or skipping sessions.

As for on track AI from what I've seen it's competent. It knows I'm there and doesn't crash into me for stupid reasons. It races well.

Really what I have seen is a real lack in consistent objective criticism of the title. It is emotionally driven for the most part.

[ziiip]

Sadly it's an arcade shit with Formula 1 coating. When you hit the concrete wall at 200 and your car deforms 0% you know its time to facepalm.

[Zipper5]

You were expecting something other than lies from Codemasters? :rolleyes:

[SteveJA360]

Sadly it's an arcade shit with Formula 1 coating. When you hit the concrete wall at 200 and your car deforms 0% you know its time to facepalm.

Yeah i really do hope someone comes out with a proper F1 sim.

[Von_Paulus]

Yeah i really do hope someone comes out with a proper F1 sim.

Maybe only when Geoff Crammond, decides to make a new Grand Prix.

[ziiip]

You were expecting something other than lies from Codemasters? :rolleyes:

They didn't lie about it. ;) But it's such a loss...all the great content is there.