Consolemasters ruin another title (F1 2010)?

[icebreakr 3156]

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 74]

Yup, been watching it since it was reported in the Red River thread. A patch has been announced but I see it going the way all their recent releases have. :rolleyes:

[Richey79 10]

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 .

[Guest]

At least they are consistant. :rolleyes:

[jeza 5416]

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

[EricM 0]

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

[Zipper5 74]

Neither thread is named "Codemasters sucks". ;)

[-DirTyDeeDs--Ziggy- 0]

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 74]

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 151]

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 261]

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 74]

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.

Edited September 30, 2010 by Zipper5

[jblackrupert 14]

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.

Edited September 30, 2010 by jblackrupert

[bangtail 0]

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 1]

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 1]

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 74]

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 0]

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 1]

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 74]

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 956]

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

Edited October 1, 2010 by ProfTournesol

[[frl]myke 14]

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 956]

Myke;1760486']A quote from Codemasters Forum:

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

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

[-)rStrangelove 0]

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 6]

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.